Actually, I met my current GF on tinder, a little over 1.5 years ago. Had it not been for the photos each of us had, we likely would have passed by each other outside the pubs.
She may be your girlfriend now but you boned her on the first date, didn't you?
While I agree with most of it, I have a small nit to pick with your comment.
The only reason the US Military uses 5.56x45 instead of 7.62x54 (the old.308 Springfield cartridge that got your (great)grandfather through World War II)
.308 is.308 Winchester, not Springfield. 30-06 was Springfield. The dimensions of those cartridges is 7.62x51mm for.308 and 7.62x63 for 30-06.
South Africa would be a great place to get some experience, perhaps Nigeria, Somalia, Ghana, or Senegal will help you understand it.
You raise a valid point. In those places where black people are the overwhelming majority, institutional racism against non-blacks (and even against non-native born blacks) happens.
In my original post on this subject, I didn't clarify that I was talking about in western society and I should have.
Yeah the difference is you're weaponizing the phrases of racism in order to otherize your opposition while being immune to such claims yourself.
Not a single person who says racism requires institutions of power is doing so to bring greater specification to a matter saturated in ambiguity, they are, and you are, making the discussion worse by trying to silence your opposition by ad hominem.
That's not what I did, at all. In my original post, I conceded that racism can be present in the behavior and actions of individuals.
Racism can happen anywhere. Minorities cannot engage in institutional racism.
I originally posted this in reply to another comment but it applies to yours as well, so I'll duplicate it here:
Yes, an individual cop may hassle you because you're white. His partner may turn and look away because he assumes the worst of you too. Even under the worse of circumstances, you're not going to face two racist black cops who can kill you at will and with impunity because the majority of society will assume that you were a dangerous criminal because of the color of your skin. If they arrest you on a bogus charge, you will not face a prosecutor and judge who are predisposed to assume that you're guilty because of the color of your skin. You're most likely not going to face a jury pool that is made up of people who not only are not members of your racial group but harbor preconceived notions about you based on the color of your skin. The trial will not be covered by news media who make their money by playing to black-held stereotypes about white criminality.
Bet you live in the West or North or The Great Canadia.
Pennsylvania.
It must be nice to live in your sheltered little lily white world where black people are as rare as unicorns and you can set them up on a pedestal.
No... I'm black. In America.
But the rest of us live in actual reality, the one where black people are people are actual, real people in our lives - meaning that they are burdened with the same buckets of prejudices and racism and shitty attitudes and beliefs that every other fucking human being on this planet has.
I have never denied that there are racist black people. My first post on this topic conceded that there are. My point is that there aren't enough black people in this society to engage in institutional racism.
Yes, an individual cop may hassle you because you're white. His partner may turn and look away because he assumes the worst of you too. Even under the worse of circumstances, you're not going to face two racist black cops who can kill you at will and with impunity because the majority of society will assume that you were a dangerous criminal because of the color of your skin. If they arrest you on a bogus charge, you will not face a prosecutor and judge who are predisposed to assume that you're guilty because of the color of your skin. You're most likely not going to face a jury pool that is made up of people who not only are not members of your racial group but harbor preconceived notions about you based on the color of your skin. The trial will not be covered by news media who make their money by playing to black-held stereotypes about white criminality.
I have been hearing talk of a cashless America since the 1980s. I have thought it was a bad idea from the first time I heard it. I think that the mounting evidence that it will be abused is why there seems to be such a sudden change in the way people are responding.
I have been opposed to the idea since I first heard it in high school.
It's a bad idea.
What has changed to make the rank and file technorati sing my tune, I'd guess USA PATRIOT Act, NDAA, CALEA abuses and Snowden, just to name a few.
I grew up in a family of Democrats during the Reagan era, so I never learned that the government was to be trusted. Then, as an adult, I was a Republican during the Clinton era, so I watched government abuses happen in real-time.
Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama are just different sides of the same die. Whomever is next will likely be the same. We can't trust any political system with powers than can be abused, because they will be. The only thing that might change is that congress will either authorize it or exempt the perpetrators from sanction so instead of them being "abuses", they'll just be "the law".
In the US, child pornography is deemed to be legally obscene and exempt from first amendment protection. Oddly enough, the ACLU doesn't see it that way but the courts have been consistent in this interpretation.
Wasn't that program actually started under the Bush administration?
Well, yes but that's misleading.
So that Obama and Holder ended up taking all manner of shit from the Rabid Right--including a massive anti-Holder PR campaign by the NRA--for continuing to do what their guy had started?
This is the misleading part. The operation that became Fast and Furious began under the Bush administration as Wide Receiver but the program was vastly different under the Obama administration.
There was nearly seven times more guns allowed to walk during the Obama administration than under Bush. The Bush administration ended Wide Receiver in 2007 when they had issues with inadequate tracking. None of the Bush era guns have been used in homicides in the US. The Bush era program notified Mexican law enforcement of guns that they expected would cross the border, that didn't happen under Obama.
Whether you choose to chalk it up to incompetence or malice, there were many differences between Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious that show the Obama administration's operation was a wholly different beast.
Slashdot Mirror
"The sting of rebuke is the truth" - Benjamin Franklin
For you to react with such butthurt tells me that I was right.
LK
Actually, I met my current GF on tinder, a little over 1.5 years ago. Had it not been for the photos each of us had, we likely would have passed by each other outside the pubs.
She may be your girlfriend now but you boned her on the first date, didn't you?
LK
To again state the obvious, a lot of /.ers are too young to have had machines like this.
LK
I love the mental gymnastics Americans perform in order to justify why they are entitled to carry a weapon that kills people.
Mental gymnastics?
Because I want to is all the reason I need.
LK
There is an outfit selling 80% Glock-clone lowers now too... which will turn out to be a FAR better firearm.
I'm seriously considering buying one of these. I wasn't aware of them before I saw your post.
I estimate that for around $500, one could build their own Glock clone. That's not bad at all.
LK
1986, but close enough for government work.
While I agree with most of it, I have a small nit to pick with your comment.
The only reason the US Military uses 5.56x45 instead of 7.62x54 (the old .308 Springfield cartridge that got your (great)grandfather through World War II)
.308 is .308 Winchester, not Springfield. .308 and 7.62x63 for 30-06.
30-06 was Springfield.
The dimensions of those cartridges is 7.62x51mm for
Otherwise, your analysis is spot on.
LK
My problem with Beta wasn't that it was different, it was that it was different and not better.
I don't have a problem with change when that change is positive.
I've been here for at least 17 years and I have seen numerous changes. Beta was an unmitigated disaster.
LK
South Africa would be a great place to get some experience, perhaps Nigeria, Somalia, Ghana, or Senegal will help you understand it.
You raise a valid point. In those places where black people are the overwhelming majority, institutional racism against non-blacks (and even against non-native born blacks) happens.
In my original post on this subject, I didn't clarify that I was talking about in western society and I should have.
LK
Yeah the difference is you're weaponizing the phrases of racism in order to otherize your opposition while being immune to such claims yourself.
Not a single person who says racism requires institutions of power is doing so to bring greater specification to a matter saturated in ambiguity, they are, and you are, making the discussion worse by trying to silence your opposition by ad hominem.
That's not what I did, at all. In my original post, I conceded that racism can be present in the behavior and actions of individuals.
Racism can happen anywhere. Minorities cannot engage in institutional racism.
So what's my moral imperative?
That's not for me to determine.
LK
I originally posted this in reply to another comment but it applies to yours as well, so I'll duplicate it here:
Yes, an individual cop may hassle you because you're white. His partner may turn and look away because he assumes the worst of you too. Even under the worse of circumstances, you're not going to face two racist black cops who can kill you at will and with impunity because the majority of society will assume that you were a dangerous criminal because of the color of your skin. If they arrest you on a bogus charge, you will not face a prosecutor and judge who are predisposed to assume that you're guilty because of the color of your skin. You're most likely not going to face a jury pool that is made up of people who not only are not members of your racial group but harbor preconceived notions about you based on the color of your skin. The trial will not be covered by news media who make their money by playing to black-held stereotypes about white criminality.
Bet you live in the West or North or The Great Canadia.
Pennsylvania.
It must be nice to live in your sheltered little lily white world where black people are as rare as unicorns and you can set them up on a pedestal.
No... I'm black. In America.
But the rest of us live in actual reality, the one where black people are people are actual, real people in our lives - meaning that they are burdened with the same buckets of prejudices and racism and shitty attitudes and beliefs that every other fucking human being on this planet has.
I have never denied that there are racist black people. My first post on this topic conceded that there are. My point is that there aren't enough black people in this society to engage in institutional racism.
Yes, an individual cop may hassle you because you're white. His partner may turn and look away because he assumes the worst of you too. Even under the worse of circumstances, you're not going to face two racist black cops who can kill you at will and with impunity because the majority of society will assume that you were a dangerous criminal because of the color of your skin. If they arrest you on a bogus charge, you will not face a prosecutor and judge who are predisposed to assume that you're guilty because of the color of your skin. You're most likely not going to face a jury pool that is made up of people who not only are not members of your racial group but harbor preconceived notions about you based on the color of your skin. The trial will not be covered by news media who make their money by playing to black-held stereotypes about white criminality.
LK
Again, where is the evidence of racism?
In the western world, black people do not make up enough of the population to engage in institutional racism.
And in what way does that equate to institutional racism?
I'm in the western hemisphere.
LK
All indications are that it was a suicide. He even announced on Twitter that he would be committing suicide.
LK
Individual black people can be racists. What black people cannot do, at this stage in history, is engage in institutional racism against others.
There is a difference.
LK
I have been hearing talk of a cashless America since the 1980s. I have thought it was a bad idea from the first time I heard it. I think that the mounting evidence that it will be abused is why there seems to be such a sudden change in the way people are responding.
I have been opposed to the idea since I first heard it in high school.
It's a bad idea.
What has changed to make the rank and file technorati sing my tune, I'd guess USA PATRIOT Act, NDAA, CALEA abuses and Snowden, just to name a few.
I grew up in a family of Democrats during the Reagan era, so I never learned that the government was to be trusted. Then, as an adult, I was a Republican during the Clinton era, so I watched government abuses happen in real-time.
Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama are just different sides of the same die. Whomever is next will likely be the same. We can't trust any political system with powers than can be abused, because they will be. The only thing that might change is that congress will either authorize it or exempt the perpetrators from sanction so instead of them being "abuses", they'll just be "the law".
Don't trust any of them.
LK
In the best of circumstances, it merely takes 50.01% of the people to decide for 100% of the people.
In most circumstances, it takes a very motivated and vocal 20% or less to decide.
I think it's better to prevent the construction of any mechanism that can be abused because ultimately, it will be abused.
LK
you left out the best part.
track and control and TAX every aspect. Just like the mafia, they want a piece of all the action
Precisely this!
No cash means that every transaction can be taxed.
Your grandma gives you $10.00 for your birthday? Gift Tax.
You want to pitch in with some friends for pizza, so you all contribute $10.00 and place an order? Transaction tax before the sales tax.
LK
I know some really good self-taught programmers but many of them suffer from shortcomings due to not understanding the underlying mechanics.
Using arrays when hashes would be better and things like that.
LK
In the US, child pornography is deemed to be legally obscene and exempt from first amendment protection. Oddly enough, the ACLU doesn't see it that way but the courts have been consistent in this interpretation.
LK
Wasn't that program actually started under the Bush administration?
Well, yes but that's misleading.
So that Obama and Holder ended up taking all manner of shit from the Rabid Right--including a massive anti-Holder PR campaign by the NRA--for continuing to do what their guy had started?
This is the misleading part. The operation that became Fast and Furious began under the Bush administration as Wide Receiver but the program was vastly different under the Obama administration.
There was nearly seven times more guns allowed to walk during the Obama administration than under Bush. The Bush administration ended Wide Receiver in 2007 when they had issues with inadequate tracking. None of the Bush era guns have been used in homicides in the US. The Bush era program notified Mexican law enforcement of guns that they expected would cross the border, that didn't happen under Obama.
Whether you choose to chalk it up to incompetence or malice, there were many differences between Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious that show the Obama administration's operation was a wholly different beast.
LK
[snip] Compromise was tried. [snip]
When? I don't remember that. What did the NRA compromise on?
You haven't been paying attention. The NRA supported the Lautenberg amendment.
LK