Strawman argument == fail. Address ME not your imaginary pro-abortion scapegoat.
Also now you're changing the original poster's message. He said BABIES not unborn fetuses, and that was the point I was addressing. Killing of babies is not allowed now and would not be allowed under a One Child Per Couple policy.
Murder would still be illegal Mr.. Just because you impose a "one child per family" limit does not mean parents would be allowed to go throwing unwanted babies in dumpsters.
Of course we don't have to impose this policy. We could just let Mother Nature solve the overpopulation problem and believe me, her approach is far less pleasant (starvation, black plague, etc).
But if the US, EU, AU, and Asian communities enacted a 1 child per family policy like China has done, their respective populations would drop to 1/10th present levels by 2110. i.e. From ~3 billion to 300 million. That alone would solve our pollution problem, and yes it would be humane (no need to kill anybody).
I've heard that even if mankind disappeared tomorrow and therefore our CO2 output dropped to zero, greenhouse warming would still be happening because it's already been set in motion. It's now being pushed forward by water vapor, CO2 from volcanoes, and other factors that represent 95% of the "push" behind the change. (shrug) As for "conspiracy" I don't buy that nonsense, but it's pretty obvious the Housing Boom was caused by an inadvertent mistake by the Clinton administration, specifically the HUD. They passed a regulation that made it illegal to deny a mortgage application even if the citizen was too poor to pay it back. Hence a run-away boom.
So yes we can blame the Democrats, or at least the ones who were in the white house in 1997.
>>>not many people are down for spending the money to invest
Not quite true. The U.S. Government spent almost a billion dollars to fund a solar panel factory in California. Unfortunately it went bankrupt because the chinese undersold them. Likewise the outlawing of incandescent bulbs (soon) resulted in the factory closing here, and the new CFL factory opening in china.
If we are moving towards a green economy, it will be China/India and other cheap labor areas that benefit. Meanwhile here at home the USG will throw-away a ton of money on solar and other factories that eventually die out. Yeah I know you probably think I'm being pessimistic.
I prefer to use the word "realist" and "observant". I can SEE the powershift from America to Asia.
>>>wholly inaccurate in your portrayal of the argument presented by global-warming proponents.
Not really. I remember three years ago when Washington and Philadelphia had an unusually warm and almost snow-free winter, and NBC, ABC, et cetera had their reporters discussing how this is clear evidence that global warming is happening." And no it wasn't just an off-the-cuff remark, but repeated day after day, with an "in depth report" on the warm winter during one of those days.
So wholly inaccurate? Nope. Very accurate, because that's what actually happens. If we have a warm winter this year, just pay attention. The anchors on the National TV will be discussing how this demonstrates global warming is real, just as they did three winters ago.
That was random but you raise a good point. US and EU factories are being shipped to China/India because their labor works for 1/10th as much.
But then we can't buy direct from those countries because of artificial barriers, so instead we have to pay the inflated US/EU prices. NOT a free market. - Therefore we should require all Chinese/Indian workers to have safety standards comparable (but not equal) to US and EU workers, else we will block those goods from "bad" factories entering our shores.
Yes that means iPhone (from Foxconn) would not be allowed to enter. Or most other cellphones. They can either increase their standards to protect their workers from harm, or else not sell product.
If the dispatcher needs more info, they can always text back.
Besides with cellphone GPS, it pretty much provides everything that might be needed. "I'm being held hostage by a shooter at UVA!" plus the GPS will tell the dispatcher where to send police. IMHO it makes logical sense to tap the new techniques that texting and built-in cameras provide.
That should make me one of the safest customers. Right? They certainly don't need to worry about me wrecking since I'm not driving, or chopping my finger off with a saw since I'm not working. I just sit and avoid risk.
(1) is not true because there's no limit to how many fiber optics can be laid. Simply lay more until the capacity exceeds the usage. AND:
(2) is not true because if customers start getting $200/month bills, they WILL lower their internet usage to bring it back down to a reasonable level, just as they limit their long distance calling or electricity or gasoline usage. Economic science has proven that raising prices does result in reduced consumption.
It was a question: "Why can't the Linux community just develop a new operating system ? i.e. Stop using Unix?" Posters could simply answer the question politely, without resorting to "you're stupid" or "troll" insults as I see children do.
If the people in Utah are happy, what does it matter what the other 49 states think of them? That's what freedom is all about.
Of course if Utah came begging for a bailout, like what Greece and Ireland did in the EU, then I suggest we tell them "too bad" and let them figure it out by themselves. Same goes for California, New York, or any other state that overspent beyond their means. But overall I think Utah has been well-behaved and limited spending, and therefore doesn't deserve the criticism you aim at them.
Really? I've heard tea partiers & Libertarians claim they want to bring the budget under control, but not Orrin Hatch or other Republi-crats. The party now is still the same out-of-control spending party under George Duh Bush. Very little has changed.
In fact I just read the Republicans are pushing for yet *another* war, but this time against Iran. Congressman Ron Paul responded by calling them, "Sick" and "speeding us faster towards bankruptcy."
>>>Otherwise, that statement would be considered incredibly stupid. If it was serious, perhaps Linux related threads aren't your cup of tea.
Newbies reading this are probably thinking, "Why would I ever want to use Linux, if I will be labeled 'stupid' by its users? "I think I'll stick with Windows (or Mac) OS."
Anyway I really did think Linux was a branch of Unix ("Unix like" says wikipedia). That makes me ignorant of the details, not stupid. If I was stupid I would not have two college degrees, or an above-average IQ, would I?
>>>Notice that it keeps blinking even though you are not using the Internet?
No. I have DSL and when my computer stops, so too does the modem. I mean it's still on but there's nothing being transmitted. It stop blinking. .
>>>Nationalise the network hardware... Works for the power grid.
Not true in the U.S. With just a few minor exceptions (Hoover Dam), the entire electric grid is privately owned not nationalized. Although it is heavily regulated to prevent abuse by natural monopolies.
>>>packets have to be dropped then -- how do we choose which packets to drop?
I already answered this: Don't drop packets. Instead: (1) Install faster servers so there's no need to drop. -or- (2) Raise prices higher to discourage users from being hogs. (Same thing that raising gas prices or electric prices does.) Maybe users would download SD movies instead of HD in order to limit their consumption & monthly bill.
>>>"Has forbidden" what exactly, using which powers, on which continent, under whose dim scrutiny of the passive voice?
You sure do ramble. Let me boil it down for you:
- 30 years ago county desired CATV for its citizens. - It contacted Comcast. - Comcast said, "Okay we'll roll-out the cables, but we want exclusive rights." - County agreed, thereby creating a government-protected monopoly (i.e. no choice for customer).
>>>The Telecommunications Bill of 1996 made exclusive licenses illegal.
I don't believe you, especially since states like Michigan and cities like Baltimore are still signing exclusive franchise agreements with Comcast (i.e. govt-granted monopolies). That fact alone negates your fallacious claim, but such a bill would also be unconstitutional, because Congress has no authority to interfere with state or local governance.
Slashdot Mirror
Strawman argument == fail. Address ME not your imaginary pro-abortion scapegoat.
Also now you're changing the original poster's message. He said BABIES not unborn fetuses, and that was the point I was addressing. Killing of babies is not allowed now and would not be allowed under a One Child Per Couple policy.
>>>killing less valuable babies
Murder would still be illegal Mr.. Just because you impose a "one child per family" limit does not mean parents would be allowed to go throwing unwanted babies in dumpsters.
Of course we don't have to impose this policy. We could just let Mother Nature solve the overpopulation problem and believe me, her approach is far less pleasant (starvation, black plague, etc).
Yes and that's what "dkleinsc" was making fun of. Television sensationalism and other pundits.
>>>We need to lose about 3 billion people
You've been unfairly marked troll.
But if the US, EU, AU, and Asian communities enacted a 1 child per family policy like China has done, their respective populations would drop to 1/10th present levels by 2110. i.e. From ~3 billion to 300 million. That alone would solve our pollution problem, and yes it would be humane (no need to kill anybody).
I've heard that even if mankind disappeared tomorrow and therefore our CO2 output dropped to zero, greenhouse warming would still be happening because it's already been set in motion. It's now being pushed forward by water vapor, CO2 from volcanoes, and other factors that represent 95% of the "push" behind the change.
(shrug)
As for "conspiracy" I don't buy that nonsense, but it's pretty obvious the Housing Boom was caused by an inadvertent mistake by the Clinton administration, specifically the HUD. They passed a regulation that made it illegal to deny a mortgage application even if the citizen was too poor to pay it back. Hence a run-away boom.
So yes we can blame the Democrats, or at least the ones who were in the white house in 1997.
>>>not many people are down for spending the money to invest
Not quite true. The U.S. Government spent almost a billion dollars to fund a solar panel factory in California. Unfortunately it went bankrupt because the chinese undersold them. Likewise the outlawing of incandescent bulbs (soon) resulted in the factory closing here, and the new CFL factory opening in china.
If we are moving towards a green economy, it will be China/India and other cheap labor areas that benefit. Meanwhile here at home the USG will throw-away a ton of money on solar and other factories that eventually die out. Yeah I know you probably think I'm being pessimistic.
I prefer to use the word "realist" and "observant". I can SEE the powershift from America to Asia.
>>>wholly inaccurate in your portrayal of the argument presented by global-warming proponents.
Not really. I remember three years ago when Washington and Philadelphia had an unusually warm and almost snow-free winter, and NBC, ABC, et cetera had their reporters discussing how this is clear evidence that global warming is happening." And no it wasn't just an off-the-cuff remark, but repeated day after day, with an "in depth report" on the warm winter during one of those days.
So wholly inaccurate? Nope. Very accurate, because that's what actually happens. If we have a warm winter this year, just pay attention. The anchors on the National TV will be discussing how this demonstrates global warming is real, just as they did three winters ago.
That was random but you raise a good point. US and EU factories are being shipped to China/India because their labor works for 1/10th as much.
But then we can't buy direct from those countries because of artificial barriers, so instead we have to pay the inflated US/EU prices. NOT a free market. - Therefore we should require all Chinese/Indian workers to have safety standards comparable (but not equal) to US and EU workers, else we will block those goods from "bad" factories entering our shores.
Yes that means iPhone (from Foxconn) would not be allowed to enter. Or most other cellphones.
They can either increase their standards to protect their workers from harm, or else not sell product.
ANY girl in a remote area is desperate.
No need to visit China - just to Appalachia (like west virginia).
I agree with the spokesman that it's not theft if they bought the designs legally.
I only weigh 130-140 pounds and avoid fat/sugar as much as possible.
My arteries are getting clogged much, much slower than 99% of other Americans.
If the dispatcher needs more info, they can always text back.
Besides with cellphone GPS, it pretty much provides everything that might be needed. "I'm being held hostage by a shooter at UVA!" plus the GPS will tell the dispatcher where to send police. IMHO it makes logical sense to tap the new techniques that texting and built-in cameras provide.
That should make me one of the safest customers.
Right?
They certainly don't need to worry about me wrecking since I'm not driving, or chopping my finger off with a saw since I'm not working. I just sit and avoid risk.
I disagree.
(1) is not true because there's no limit to how many fiber optics can be laid. Simply lay more until the capacity exceeds the usage. AND:
(2) is not true because if customers start getting $200/month bills, they WILL lower their internet usage to bring it back down to a reasonable level, just as they limit their long distance calling or electricity or gasoline usage. Economic science has proven that raising prices does result in reduced consumption.
No they were approved by George Bush's former transportation secretary who is now on the Corporate Board of said company.
In other words he put Profit first and didn't give a frak if the machines' xrays caused skin cancer.
>>>However, making comments
It was a question: "Why can't the Linux community just develop a new operating system ? i.e. Stop using Unix?" Posters could simply answer the question politely, without resorting to "you're stupid" or "troll" insults as I see children do.
Why can't the Linux community just develop a new operating system?
i.e. Stop using unix?
If the people in Utah are happy, what does it matter what the other 49 states think of them?
That's what freedom is all about.
Of course if Utah came begging for a bailout, like what Greece and Ireland did in the EU, then I suggest we tell them "too bad" and let them figure it out by themselves. Same goes for California, New York, or any other state that overspent beyond their means. But overall I think Utah has been well-behaved and limited spending, and therefore doesn't deserve the criticism you aim at them.
Really? I've heard tea partiers & Libertarians claim they want to bring the budget under control, but not Orrin Hatch or other Republi-crats. The party now is still the same out-of-control spending party under George Duh Bush. Very little has changed.
In fact I just read the Republicans are pushing for yet *another* war, but this time against Iran.
Congressman Ron Paul responded by calling them, "Sick" and "speeding us faster towards bankruptcy."
Dumb laws and dumb servants block progress towards new ideas.
>>>Otherwise, that statement would be considered incredibly stupid. If it was serious, perhaps Linux related threads aren't your cup of tea.
Newbies reading this are probably thinking,
"Why would I ever want to use Linux, if I will be labeled 'stupid' by its users?
"I think I'll stick with Windows (or Mac) OS."
Anyway I really did think Linux was a branch of Unix ("Unix like" says wikipedia). That makes me ignorant of the details, not stupid. If I was stupid I would not have two college degrees, or an above-average IQ, would I?
>>>Notice that it keeps blinking even though you are not using the Internet?
No. I have DSL and when my computer stops, so too does the modem. I mean it's still on but there's nothing being transmitted. It stop blinking.
.
>>>Nationalise the network hardware... Works for the power grid.
Not true in the U.S. With just a few minor exceptions (Hoover Dam), the entire electric grid is privately owned not nationalized. Although it is heavily regulated to prevent abuse by natural monopolies.
>>>packets have to be dropped then -- how do we choose which packets to drop?
I already answered this: Don't drop packets. Instead:
(1) Install faster servers so there's no need to drop.
-or-
(2) Raise prices higher to discourage users from being hogs. (Same thing that raising gas prices or electric prices does.) Maybe users would download SD movies instead of HD in order to limit their consumption & monthly bill.
>>>"Has forbidden" what exactly, using which powers, on which continent, under whose dim scrutiny of the passive voice?
You sure do ramble. Let me boil it down for you:
- 30 years ago county desired CATV for its citizens.
- It contacted Comcast.
- Comcast said, "Okay we'll roll-out the cables, but we want exclusive rights."
- County agreed, thereby creating a government-protected monopoly (i.e. no choice for customer).
End of tale.
>>>The Telecommunications Bill of 1996 made exclusive licenses illegal.
I don't believe you, especially since states like Michigan and cities like Baltimore are still signing exclusive franchise agreements with Comcast (i.e. govt-granted monopolies). That fact alone negates your fallacious claim, but such a bill would also be unconstitutional, because Congress has no authority to interfere with state or local governance.