You honestly believe religious people are hive minds. That billions of people are all just mindless drones, without rich inner lives and thoughts and dreams and ambitions. That Muslims living in NYC can stop terrorism if only they willed it hard enough. Amazing.
You are so full of hate, nothing I could ever say would get through to you. With a mindset like that, you'd be a jihadi had you not been lucky enough to be born in better circumstances.
How can you have absolute power when people follow religious leaders, not you? And that claim to answer to a higher authority than you? Dictators suppress and eradicate religion because it's a threat to their power, it's in the nature of a dictator not an atheist.
Bullshit. You have no understanding of history. These atheists targeted religion even when it was no threat to them, because they hated it, just as you hate it.
For example, how do you explain Plutarco Calles, A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT, who banned even such harmless things as vows of chastity?
You can't just handwave this shit away. I get that you HATE to think that assholes have done horrible things to further your beliefs. In your mind, your beliefs are perfect, and its only all the other beliefs that cause problems. But history doesn't bear that out, and things will never get better if we don't acknowledge historic fact.
So when these atheist dictators banned religion and went around killing those who practiced it, that was just ONE BIG COINCIDENCE and had nothing to do with their atheism?
Riiiiight. Just grow up, and realize that religion, atheism, whatever... none of those things kill. Assholes who think their way is the only way... they kill. Assholes with your mindset, only with more power and less morals.
Also Atheism is not an organized institution like religions are, so there's no one that can speak "for" atheists, that's like someone who would speak "for" people who love sunsets.
You realize Catholicism isn't the only religion, right? Most religions don't have a central authority. Any Islamic scholar can issue a fatwa. But the fact that 99.9% of Muslims oppose terrorism doesn't seem to be swaying the terrorists. Because, again, religions aren't hive minds. Members don't really have much influence over each other, and they have even less influence over people who have already proven themselves willing to kill.
You realize Muslim people aren't a hivemind, right? The people blowing themselves up aren't the ones issuing this fatwa. I presume you're an atheist... are you a "fucking hypocrite" for opposing mass murder, given the actions of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot?
So how about we ignore the loud idiots on both sides, and just listen to the scientific community? Their consensus is available to anyone who cares to read it.
Oh, but I doubt you'd agree to that. Because, like most deniers, you probably think all the scientists in the world are in a great, globe-spanning conspiracy. You'll choose to ignore the 99.99% of scientists, and listen only to the guy who's saying what you want to hear. Who cares that he's on BP's payroll?
The submitter may not think its worth it, but I've been happy with my online subscription. I like the periodic long form articles going in depth on topics that I often find interesting, the opinion articles where they actually invite several people with different view points to present their own argument (without just yelling at each other), and the general news coverage which usually doesn't get too caught up in the petty cable news fodder. (The "missing white girl of the week" stories.)
Plus I am absolutely addicted to their Numberplay feature.
But more important than any specific site, I think its important to pay for news. Research isn't free, and if we don't pay for it, who will? Remember -- who ever pays for it gets to decide what goes in. I don't want that to be the government, nor do I want it to be some rich "benefactor" with an agenda to push. Sure, we can get stuff like the Snowden leaks for free, but we need journalists like those at the Guardian to pore over the data and find the juicy bits. I don't trust random bloggers to do so, because the signal would get lost in the noise, and most of us don't have time to do it ourselves.
In the Biblical quote, its a metaphor for our imperfect knowledge, in contrast to how we will be in Heaven.
In the Phillip K Dick novel, the main character hopes that all of the high tech government scanners watching him can understand him (see cleary, rather than darkly), because he can't understand himself.
In the New Yorker article title (which was used for the Slashdot title), it makes no fucking sense and is just intended to reference the Phillip K Dick novel.
They could have had an interesting tie-in to the title by bringing up that the information you get from such an app probably wouldn't be a good representation of what a person is like. But I didn't see anything like that in the article.
You understand that when people talk about "carbon pollution", they mean carbon dioxide, right? You clearly do, since you say as much at the end of your post. So why are you talking as if anyone is concerned about free carbon particles floating around? We all know we're talking about CO2.
Anything is a pollutant when large quantities are somewhere they shouldn't be. Having lots of carbon in the atmosphere is bad. You can deny the science until you're blue in the face, but you're no different from the creationists.
Mind you, I don't really care one way or the other about the pipeline.
I realize we have to flog Sarah Palin at every opportunity we get
Do we? I haven't mentioned her, or heard her mentioned, or even thought about her in years.
In any case, I'm aware that Sarah Palin's role in the bridge was very limited. But that's kind of the point, isn't it? She got blasted over it because she was on a national stage. Meanwhile, Ted Stevens never caught much, if any, flak for it. He would have died in office, had it not been for some unrelated criminal charges. The same will be true for Senator Wicker. This won't hurt him in the slightest.
Difference being that Palin was a national candidate, whereas Senator Wicker likely has no ambitions beyond his current position. Robbing the nation to provide pork to your constituents back home plays much better when those constituents are the only ones with a say in whether or not you keep your job.
The US government has nukes because it started building a stockpile before the world came together to make a non-proliferation pact. It has been reducing its stockpile steadily. Meanwhile, it tells other countries that they can't have nukes because they signed an agreement saying that they would not have nukes.
And that's a good thing. The survival of human civilization is more important than your kindergarten sense of fairness.
I don't Blizzard is trying to steal the designers work, so much as hoping for a runaway success that they can then hire to their team. I'm sure they're kicking themselves every single day for letting Guinsoo and IceFrog go to Riot and Valve. They had caught lightning in a bottle and let it go, and now they're praying for a second chance.
Employers can stay in the general area, no one is trying to chase them out. The locals just want to have a few remaining reservations where they can live.
These are probably the morons that blew off school or didn't bother to determine whether their student loans would be a good investment.
Disgusting. You know nothing about them, but you are rationalizing that they must deserve their poverty. You'll join them soon enough, as outsourcing and automation make more and more labor redundant. In the meantime, tell me, how does it taste to lick the shit off your masters' boots? Have you yet convinced yourself that it tastes like chocolate?
No, you're not. You're a racist AC, probably visiting from Stormfront. But if there's one thing people love, it's for an anonymous "black" guy to tell them that their racism is justified.
You could use your same "logic" to argue against the FDA. It's a private business selling the food and the medicine, and the government isn't to blame if its poisonous.
But we're much better off when we come together as a country and put some safety measures in place. That's what government is for. Doing things that would be impossible for loosely organized individuals, but which are beneficial to the public.
Two months isn't a real drop dead date. They'd certainly like it to be done by then, but it's not like everything gonna go down in flames if the insurers only get estimated payments, with adjustments coming in a couple quarters.
It'll be "good enough". Accenture built the California site, which works fine, and the insurers really want it to work, so they'll accept less than perfect.
Of course, the summary is designed to make everyone say "THERE'S NO CHANCE!!" It's kind of insulting in its blatant demagogy, but I've come to expect that here.
Some people don't encrypt their phones, but the police should still need a warrant to search them. The police don't get to search your house just because you forgot to lock your doors.
Not to mention that any honest reading of the Constitution would acknowledge that the data on a smartphone (or other computer) is the modern equivalent of one's "papers".
Slashdot Mirror
You honestly believe religious people are hive minds. That billions of people are all just mindless drones, without rich inner lives and thoughts and dreams and ambitions. That Muslims living in NYC can stop terrorism if only they willed it hard enough. Amazing.
You are so full of hate, nothing I could ever say would get through to you. With a mindset like that, you'd be a jihadi had you not been lucky enough to be born in better circumstances.
How can you have absolute power when people follow religious leaders, not you? And that claim to answer to a higher authority than you? Dictators suppress and eradicate religion because it's a threat to their power, it's in the nature of a dictator not an atheist.
Bullshit. You have no understanding of history. These atheists targeted religion even when it was no threat to them, because they hated it, just as you hate it.
For example, how do you explain Plutarco Calles, A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT, who banned even such harmless things as vows of chastity?
You can't just handwave this shit away. I get that you HATE to think that assholes have done horrible things to further your beliefs. In your mind, your beliefs are perfect, and its only all the other beliefs that cause problems. But history doesn't bear that out, and things will never get better if we don't acknowledge historic fact.
So when these atheist dictators banned religion and went around killing those who practiced it, that was just ONE BIG COINCIDENCE and had nothing to do with their atheism?
Riiiiight. Just grow up, and realize that religion, atheism, whatever... none of those things kill. Assholes who think their way is the only way... they kill. Assholes with your mindset, only with more power and less morals.
Also Atheism is not an organized institution like religions are, so there's no one that can speak "for" atheists, that's like someone who would speak "for" people who love sunsets.
You realize Catholicism isn't the only religion, right? Most religions don't have a central authority. Any Islamic scholar can issue a fatwa. But the fact that 99.9% of Muslims oppose terrorism doesn't seem to be swaying the terrorists. Because, again, religions aren't hive minds. Members don't really have much influence over each other, and they have even less influence over people who have already proven themselves willing to kill.
You realize Muslim people aren't a hivemind, right? The people blowing themselves up aren't the ones issuing this fatwa. I presume you're an atheist... are you a "fucking hypocrite" for opposing mass murder, given the actions of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot?
So how about we ignore the loud idiots on both sides, and just listen to the scientific community? Their consensus is available to anyone who cares to read it.
Oh, but I doubt you'd agree to that. Because, like most deniers, you probably think all the scientists in the world are in a great, globe-spanning conspiracy. You'll choose to ignore the 99.99% of scientists, and listen only to the guy who's saying what you want to hear. Who cares that he's on BP's payroll?
The submitter may not think its worth it, but I've been happy with my online subscription. I like the periodic long form articles going in depth on topics that I often find interesting, the opinion articles where they actually invite several people with different view points to present their own argument (without just yelling at each other), and the general news coverage which usually doesn't get too caught up in the petty cable news fodder. (The "missing white girl of the week" stories.)
Plus I am absolutely addicted to their Numberplay feature.
But more important than any specific site, I think its important to pay for news. Research isn't free, and if we don't pay for it, who will? Remember -- who ever pays for it gets to decide what goes in. I don't want that to be the government, nor do I want it to be some rich "benefactor" with an agenda to push. Sure, we can get stuff like the Snowden leaks for free, but we need journalists like those at the Guardian to pore over the data and find the juicy bits. I don't trust random bloggers to do so, because the signal would get lost in the noise, and most of us don't have time to do it ourselves.
In the Biblical quote, its a metaphor for our imperfect knowledge, in contrast to how we will be in Heaven.
In the Phillip K Dick novel, the main character hopes that all of the high tech government scanners watching him can understand him (see cleary, rather than darkly), because he can't understand himself.
In the New Yorker article title (which was used for the Slashdot title), it makes no fucking sense and is just intended to reference the Phillip K Dick novel.
They could have had an interesting tie-in to the title by bringing up that the information you get from such an app probably wouldn't be a good representation of what a person is like. But I didn't see anything like that in the article.
You understand that when people talk about "carbon pollution", they mean carbon dioxide, right? You clearly do, since you say as much at the end of your post. So why are you talking as if anyone is concerned about free carbon particles floating around? We all know we're talking about CO2.
Anything is a pollutant when large quantities are somewhere they shouldn't be. Having lots of carbon in the atmosphere is bad. You can deny the science until you're blue in the face, but you're no different from the creationists.
Mind you, I don't really care one way or the other about the pipeline.
I realize we have to flog Sarah Palin at every opportunity we get
Do we? I haven't mentioned her, or heard her mentioned, or even thought about her in years.
In any case, I'm aware that Sarah Palin's role in the bridge was very limited. But that's kind of the point, isn't it? She got blasted over it because she was on a national stage. Meanwhile, Ted Stevens never caught much, if any, flak for it. He would have died in office, had it not been for some unrelated criminal charges. The same will be true for Senator Wicker. This won't hurt him in the slightest.
Difference being that Palin was a national candidate, whereas Senator Wicker likely has no ambitions beyond his current position. Robbing the nation to provide pork to your constituents back home plays much better when those constituents are the only ones with a say in whether or not you keep your job.
And make sure to set up a speaker to broadcast your proposal in FSK ascii characters.
Good. That's the sort of thing the NSA should be doing. Providing a dossier on the expected positions of other countries in a major summit.
Oh get off it.
The US government has nukes because it started building a stockpile before the world came together to make a non-proliferation pact. It has been reducing its stockpile steadily. Meanwhile, it tells other countries that they can't have nukes because they signed an agreement saying that they would not have nukes.
And that's a good thing. The survival of human civilization is more important than your kindergarten sense of fairness.
I don't Blizzard is trying to steal the designers work, so much as hoping for a runaway success that they can then hire to their team. I'm sure they're kicking themselves every single day for letting Guinsoo and IceFrog go to Riot and Valve. They had caught lightning in a bottle and let it go, and now they're praying for a second chance.
Employers can stay in the general area, no one is trying to chase them out. The locals just want to have a few remaining reservations where they can live.
>
These are probably the morons that blew off school or didn't bother to determine whether their student loans would be a good investment.
Disgusting. You know nothing about them, but you are rationalizing that they must deserve their poverty. You'll join them soon enough, as outsourcing and automation make more and more labor redundant. In the meantime, tell me, how does it taste to lick the shit off your masters' boots? Have you yet convinced yourself that it tastes like chocolate?
Uhh, how do you explain senior discounts? Or the AARP? Heck, how about Social Security and Medicare?
If there's a law against giving special offers based on a person's age, they're certainly doing a shit job enforcing it.
I'm black
No, you're not. You're a racist AC, probably visiting from Stormfront. But if there's one thing people love, it's for an anonymous "black" guy to tell them that their racism is justified.
This is low, even by Slashdot standards.
You could use your same "logic" to argue against the FDA. It's a private business selling the food and the medicine, and the government isn't to blame if its poisonous.
But we're much better off when we come together as a country and put some safety measures in place. That's what government is for. Doing things that would be impossible for loosely organized individuals, but which are beneficial to the public.
Two months isn't a real drop dead date. They'd certainly like it to be done by then, but it's not like everything gonna go down in flames if the insurers only get estimated payments, with adjustments coming in a couple quarters.
It'll be "good enough". Accenture built the California site, which works fine, and the insurers really want it to work, so they'll accept less than perfect.
Of course, the summary is designed to make everyone say "THERE'S NO CHANCE!!" It's kind of insulting in its blatant demagogy, but I've come to expect that here.
Not really, no. Who would even read their posting? Who would even care?
Maybe in some Taliban-controlled country it could be a problem, but I doubt they're buying much internet porn over there.
Some people don't encrypt their phones, but the police should still need a warrant to search them. The police don't get to search your house just because you forgot to lock your doors.
Not to mention that any honest reading of the Constitution would acknowledge that the data on a smartphone (or other computer) is the modern equivalent of one's "papers".