They are the way they are due to systemic, endemic racism in America.
Sure there is racism and racial disparities, but there are also lots of predominantly white low achieving schools. Racism is far from the whole answer.
There was a study done about reading skills in later grades in various European countries. This is complicated somewhat by the variety of languages involved, but Norway came out on top, and AFAIK Norwegian is not much different from other Germanic languages. The interesting part is that in Norway they don't even start teaching reading until kids are 7 - later than any of the other countries.
Sometimes I think this whole "my kid learned to read at 4" stuff is like making a seal balance a ball on the end of its nose. I don't think there's anything wrong with teaching a kid that young to read if they can do it, but does it really improve their abilities later in life? The idea that it does is an unproven assumption.
... some areas had demographics where the students were taught by their parents they couldn't expect to do more than flip burgers at McGhetto, or if they were lucky, become managers. Other schools, with similar quality teaching, had parents who taught their kids that they could make something of their life, with an education.
I tell my kids the latter, but is it lying if you tell them something that only used to be true?
But you'll still want some charging stations for people who forgot or couldn't charge their car the previous night, or find that on some particular day they have to do a lot more driving than usual. Otherwise they'll (rightly) fear getting stranded whenever things don't go exactly according to plan.
It doesn't stop parties from being sued for libel, but does create an appropriate barrier that helps prevent such suits from suppressing news reporting. The basic principle is that a private person (i.e. someone who wouldn't otherwise be in the news) can sue for a false and defamatory report which was made without due diligence. But a public person (e.g. politician, celebrity, CEO of major corporation, or anyone else who might normally appear in the news) must actually prove not just poor reporting but actual malice. Otherwise news outlets would be scared of reporting real news because they might be mistaken, even though they've checked carefully.
I don't think the First Amendment was intended to protect a right for the press to spy on people whose children were the victims of horrible crimes in the hope of getting a sensational front page article or two out of them.
It wasn't intended to do that, and it doesn't. Such actions can be prosecuted under laws which have nothing to do with restricting freedom of the press. I find it hard to believe that there aren't such laws in the UK. This whole thing sounds like an excuse to control the press when there are other ways of dealing with such flagrant problems.
Despite your hyperbolic tone, I agree with you. Here in the US when the president makes an appearance we now have "free speech zones", which is odd because I remember when the entire country was a free speech zone. The British approach is apparently to outlaw words that cause the PM "distress". To that the appropriate response is that they're supposed to cause distress! Quoting the American president Harry Truman on the pressures of office: "if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen".
This is how the victims chose to be free from slander
Really? And here I thought it was Commons that voted on this. I didn't realize there was a special parliamentary procedure to have the victims vote. Not, of course, that any politician would have a personal interest in creating a tool that could intimidate the "unauthorized" press.
BTW, how many of those people were libeled by independent blogs, which are being threatened, and how many by major news outlets, which are not?
Democratic governments only expand throughout their lifetimes, in terms of... power over the people, never significantly or permanently relinquishing that power...
And I thought the US had relinquished the power to capture fugitive slaves. Silly me.
freedom preceded government
Please cite the appropriate anthropological studies of hunter-gatherer societies to back that claim, otherwise you're just spouting ignorant "Enlightenment" era notions of "noble savages". While not all bad by any means, hunter-gatherer societies often require what most people in our society would consider stifling conformance for the sake of survival.
Without asserting a special "right" to employ coercion as a business model, no government would exist. Coercion, of course, is the polar opposite of freedom...
Does that include the government's right to coerce murderers into prison? Not being a murderer myself, I find that enhances my right not to be murdered.
Because if you have them in everyone's driveway, you have to upgrade your electricity distribution pretty drastically.
Not if you mostly charge when people are asleep, when electricity demand is otherwise lowest. And "mostly" is all you need, as you're talking about averages. Average commuting distance in the US is only 32 miles round trip. Charging a Tesla Model S for that range requires 9kWh of AC. That's 1kW over a 9 hour period, or 4.2% of the peak capacity of a house with very modest electrical service (100A).
The fake noise suggestion was meant tongue-in-cheek, but you never know. My complete inability to predict what people will buy explains my wise decision to never go into consumer marketing. As for "drunk rednecks", if you get 'em drunk enough they won't know.
I've never understood why jet cars aren't more popular though. They make anything w/ pistons look like a joke, and they look and sound awesome.
To play devil's advocate, I can think of one other problem w/ charging stations at work. You want to minimize electricity consumption during peak demand, which is usually daytime w/ heavy AC use, or perhaps early evening. Ergo charging at home is better, but you still want a backup in case you forget to charge or need to drive much further than usual on some day. Hence the need for fast charge stations.
I like it, but I don't think it's an either/or kind of thing. Why not both? I take charging at home as a given. I can imagine workplaces having some parking spot/"slow" charge stations, especially if they can toot themselves as green or something. But what if all the spots are taken, or you switch jobs to someplace that doesn't have them, or you forgot to charge at home last night, or just wound up driving a lot further than you usually do and don't want to get stuck? I think they'll always be a need for some fast charge stations.
The only problem is that they just won't be popular on the drag strip because they don't have the chest thumping, soul warming throaty roar of 8000HP engine.
That can easily be overcome in an era when you can download ring tones and multi-kW sound systems are cheap.
The traction control, though, is in the "Fucking awesome" category of a well done electric dragster. Less than an inch of wheel slip before the pad sticks again.
No wasting time on gear shifts either. In all fairness though drag racers are the only people that have good reason to slip the tires - heating them up increases traction before the start of a race.
But 14 times the size of Rhode Island! More to the point, Estonia is many times bigger than many of our major metropolitan areas (including the surrounding suburbs), and with a population of 1.3M it has fewer people than many of them too. In the US electric car infrastructure should be concentrated in metropolitan areas.
Despite Tesla's desire to show their cars and the current infrastructure are suitable for interstate travel, most people are going to be interested in them for commuting and travel within their area. Even the quick charge stations are a lot slower than filling your car with gas. The "perfect time for a meal break" won't cut it if you're trying to make serious time. Most electric cars will probably be bought by people who can afford more than one car, or by somebody who's spouse/partner/[future-politically-correct-reference] has a conventional car (I'm seriously considering doing that when my car dies, which will be before my wife's). Ergo a charging infrastructure within a metropolitan area should be fine.I you're on I-80 in the middle of Wyoming, use petroleum distillates.
Rental cars might be a good market too. When I fly somewhere on business and rent a car, I rarely take it that far. Most few day business trips could easily be handled by a single charge. Maybe companies could call themselves green because they require their employees to rent electric cars.
Lastly government could play a role here (yes, I'm an evil statist). All those white strippo cars with "official government use only" signs could probably be electric, since they rarely make long trips. Best of all: those little local postal delivery trucks with the right-hand drive are a perfect candidate. They typically drive three doors down, stop the engine, deliver mail to a few houses, and start up again. I'd be surprised if the starters last more than six months. They also travel a short and well defined route every day.
Yes, and better than the second time too. Now they're actually a country (or so they claim) and not just a chillier part of the British Empire.
The big concern is Quebec, which is thought to possess an enormous strategic reserve of maple syrup. The best strategy is to get the Québécois on our side by promising them independence from the anglophones.
"Justices do not campaign. They are appointed..." by people who receive bribes (oops, I meant "free speech" campaign contributions) and revolving door jobs (oops again, I meant highly merited post-political positions).
So do jaywalkers and people who drive 5 MPH over the posted limit. What's your point, that "breaking the law" justifies any fine or punishment? How about $1M for the next minor infraction you commit.
Justice David Souter, in the court's majority opinion, said the punitive damages award should be brought into line with $287 million in compensatory damages awarded
So spilling millions of dollars of crude oil into the ocean in a grossly negligent act, destroying the local environment and wrecking people's livelihoods is not a big, but file sharing? There's a threat to the Republic!
My point exactly - if I'm going to be spied on I'd rather have it be done by some outfit that has no real interest in me and no real power over me. I also "trust" them in the sense that I doubt they're going to mess w/ my bank account or something (unless they're doing charity and want to make a deposit).
If you have interesting tastes in websites and have high security I am sure they would consider using that as leverage to get you to act as an agent for them.
True, but I have no security clearance and the most interesting website I read is Slashdot. Now that's sad.
Which doctors? To practice in the US you have to do a residency in the US or Canada. The fact that there are so many foreign born/educated doctors is the US is because being a doctor here is so lucrative that some are willing to overcome that ridiculous barrier to entry. I guess it's necessary because in places like Europe and Japan they still bleed people and don't wash their hands after dissecting corpses. Or so the AMA would have you believe. There is no equivalent barrier for IT or most engineering.
Slashdot Mirror
They are the way they are due to systemic, endemic racism in America.
Sure there is racism and racial disparities, but there are also lots of predominantly white low achieving schools. Racism is far from the whole answer.
There was a study done about reading skills in later grades in various European countries. This is complicated somewhat by the variety of languages involved, but Norway came out on top, and AFAIK Norwegian is not much different from other Germanic languages. The interesting part is that in Norway they don't even start teaching reading until kids are 7 - later than any of the other countries.
Sometimes I think this whole "my kid learned to read at 4" stuff is like making a seal balance a ball on the end of its nose. I don't think there's anything wrong with teaching a kid that young to read if they can do it, but does it really improve their abilities later in life? The idea that it does is an unproven assumption.
... some areas had demographics where the students were taught by their parents they couldn't expect to do more than flip burgers at McGhetto, or if they were lucky, become managers. Other schools, with similar quality teaching, had parents who taught their kids that they could make something of their life, with an education.
I tell my kids the latter, but is it lying if you tell them something that only used to be true?
The near excessive use of hypertext in this article is precisely how HTML was envisioned to be.
It's beautiful. /sniff
Sir Tim thanks you, but says it would be even better if you threw him another 200 kilo-quid, like HM Liz2 did.
But you'll still want some charging stations for people who forgot or couldn't charge their car the previous night, or find that on some particular day they have to do a lot more driving than usual. Otherwise they'll (rightly) fear getting stranded whenever things don't go exactly according to plan.
It would help if you looked at the facts instead of guessing: http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=830
I think it's overly broad
It doesn't stop parties from being sued for libel, but does create an appropriate barrier that helps prevent such suits from suppressing news reporting. The basic principle is that a private person (i.e. someone who wouldn't otherwise be in the news) can sue for a false and defamatory report which was made without due diligence. But a public person (e.g. politician, celebrity, CEO of major corporation, or anyone else who might normally appear in the news) must actually prove not just poor reporting but actual malice. Otherwise news outlets would be scared of reporting real news because they might be mistaken, even though they've checked carefully.
I don't think the First Amendment was intended to protect a right for the press to spy on people whose children were the victims of horrible crimes in the hope of getting a sensational front page article or two out of them.
It wasn't intended to do that, and it doesn't. Such actions can be prosecuted under laws which have nothing to do with restricting freedom of the press. I find it hard to believe that there aren't such laws in the UK. This whole thing sounds like an excuse to control the press when there are other ways of dealing with such flagrant problems.
It would be a lot easier if you published a link to the story: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/16/activist-shocked-conviction-cameron-protest
Despite your hyperbolic tone, I agree with you. Here in the US when the president makes an appearance we now have "free speech zones", which is odd because I remember when the entire country was a free speech zone. The British approach is apparently to outlaw words that cause the PM "distress". To that the appropriate response is that they're supposed to cause distress! Quoting the American president Harry Truman on the pressures of office: "if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen".
This is how the victims chose to be free from slander
Really? And here I thought it was Commons that voted on this. I didn't realize there was a special parliamentary procedure to have the victims vote. Not, of course, that any politician would have a personal interest in creating a tool that could intimidate the "unauthorized" press.
BTW, how many of those people were libeled by independent blogs, which are being threatened, and how many by major news outlets, which are not?
Democratic governments only expand throughout their lifetimes, in terms of ... power over the people, never significantly or permanently relinquishing that power ...
And I thought the US had relinquished the power to capture fugitive slaves. Silly me.
freedom preceded government
Please cite the appropriate anthropological studies of hunter-gatherer societies to back that claim, otherwise you're just spouting ignorant "Enlightenment" era notions of "noble savages". While not all bad by any means, hunter-gatherer societies often require what most people in our society would consider stifling conformance for the sake of survival.
Without asserting a special "right" to employ coercion as a business model, no government would exist. Coercion, of course, is the polar opposite of freedom ...
Does that include the government's right to coerce murderers into prison? Not being a murderer myself, I find that enhances my right not to be murdered.
Because if you have them in everyone's driveway, you have to upgrade your electricity distribution pretty drastically.
Not if you mostly charge when people are asleep, when electricity demand is otherwise lowest. And "mostly" is all you need, as you're talking about averages. Average commuting distance in the US is only 32 miles round trip. Charging a Tesla Model S for that range requires 9kWh of AC. That's 1kW over a 9 hour period, or 4.2% of the peak capacity of a house with very modest electrical service (100A).
The fake noise suggestion was meant tongue-in-cheek, but you never know. My complete inability to predict what people will buy explains my wise decision to never go into consumer marketing. As for "drunk rednecks", if you get 'em drunk enough they won't know.
I've never understood why jet cars aren't more popular though. They make anything w/ pistons look like a joke, and they look and sound awesome.
To play devil's advocate, I can think of one other problem w/ charging stations at work. You want to minimize electricity consumption during peak demand, which is usually daytime w/ heavy AC use, or perhaps early evening. Ergo charging at home is better, but you still want a backup in case you forget to charge or need to drive much further than usual on some day. Hence the need for fast charge stations.
I like it, but I don't think it's an either/or kind of thing. Why not both? I take charging at home as a given. I can imagine workplaces having some parking spot/"slow" charge stations, especially if they can toot themselves as green or something. But what if all the spots are taken, or you switch jobs to someplace that doesn't have them, or you forgot to charge at home last night, or just wound up driving a lot further than you usually do and don't want to get stuck? I think they'll always be a need for some fast charge stations.
Fake noise is stupid.
Not if it brings in the fans. You think dragsters pay for themselves?
The only problem is that they just won't be popular on the drag strip because they don't have the chest thumping, soul warming throaty roar of 8000HP engine.
That can easily be overcome in an era when you can download ring tones and multi-kW sound systems are cheap.
The traction control, though, is in the "Fucking awesome" category of a well done electric dragster. Less than an inch of wheel slip before the pad sticks again.
No wasting time on gear shifts either. In all fairness though drag racers are the only people that have good reason to slip the tires - heating them up increases traction before the start of a race.
That's almost as big as West Virginia!
But 14 times the size of Rhode Island! More to the point, Estonia is many times bigger than many of our major metropolitan areas (including the surrounding suburbs), and with a population of 1.3M it has fewer people than many of them too. In the US electric car infrastructure should be concentrated in metropolitan areas.
Despite Tesla's desire to show their cars and the current infrastructure are suitable for interstate travel, most people are going to be interested in them for commuting and travel within their area. Even the quick charge stations are a lot slower than filling your car with gas. The "perfect time for a meal break" won't cut it if you're trying to make serious time. Most electric cars will probably be bought by people who can afford more than one car, or by somebody who's spouse/partner/[future-politically-correct-reference] has a conventional car (I'm seriously considering doing that when my car dies, which will be before my wife's). Ergo a charging infrastructure within a metropolitan area should be fine.I you're on I-80 in the middle of Wyoming, use petroleum distillates.
Rental cars might be a good market too. When I fly somewhere on business and rent a car, I rarely take it that far. Most few day business trips could easily be handled by a single charge. Maybe companies could call themselves green because they require their employees to rent electric cars.
Lastly government could play a role here (yes, I'm an evil statist). All those white strippo cars with "official government use only" signs could probably be electric, since they rarely make long trips. Best of all: those little local postal delivery trucks with the right-hand drive are a perfect candidate. They typically drive three doors down, stop the engine, deliver mail to a few houses, and start up again. I'd be surprised if the starters last more than six months. They also travel a short and well defined route every day.
Yes, and better than the second time too. Now they're actually a country (or so they claim) and not just a chillier part of the British Empire.
The big concern is Quebec, which is thought to possess an enormous strategic reserve of maple syrup. The best strategy is to get the Québécois on our side by promising them independence from the anglophones.
She was tried by a jury of her peers ...
So was Socrates. What's your point?
"Justices do not campaign. They are appointed ..." by people who receive bribes (oops, I meant "free speech" campaign contributions) and revolving door jobs (oops again, I meant highly merited post-political positions).
That's why we're going to have to invade Canada (again).
She broke the law.
So do jaywalkers and people who drive 5 MPH over the posted limit. What's your point, that "breaking the law" justifies any fine or punishment? How about $1M for the next minor infraction you commit.
Justice David Souter, in the court's majority opinion, said the punitive damages award should be brought into line with $287 million in compensatory damages awarded
So spilling millions of dollars of crude oil into the ocean in a grossly negligent act, destroying the local environment and wrecking people's livelihoods is not a big, but file sharing? There's a threat to the Republic!
You know Kaspersky is best buds with FSB.
My point exactly - if I'm going to be spied on I'd rather have it be done by some outfit that has no real interest in me and no real power over me. I also "trust" them in the sense that I doubt they're going to mess w/ my bank account or something (unless they're doing charity and want to make a deposit).
If you have interesting tastes in websites and have high security I am sure they would consider using that as leverage to get you to act as an agent for them.
True, but I have no security clearance and the most interesting website I read is Slashdot. Now that's sad.
Which doctors? To practice in the US you have to do a residency in the US or Canada. The fact that there are so many foreign born/educated doctors is the US is because being a doctor here is so lucrative that some are willing to overcome that ridiculous barrier to entry. I guess it's necessary because in places like Europe and Japan they still bleed people and don't wash their hands after dissecting corpses. Or so the AMA would have you believe. There is no equivalent barrier for IT or most engineering.