Oh come on. I know it's hip to hate on chain restaurants, but suggesting Papa John's isn't pizza and getting +4 informative? That's ridiculous.
Papa Johns is one of the better nationwide chains of pizza. Pizza hut, dominos even after they did the makeover, little ceasars, they're not as tasty. And I say that grudgingly as someone who thinks the CEO is an asshole.
I'd guess that the unions would push for giving the officer discretion at the time for what is recorded and what is not. Perhaps they'll claim it's for the privacy of the accused as well. The accused that they have arrested, fingerprinted, strip searched, and published the mugshots for.
The police suggest that citizens in public places have no expectation of privacy from drug searches, pat downs, or whatever else, while simultaneously suggesting that officers in public places have an expectation of privacy from citizens taking their picture. It's not like astounding hypocrisy isn't the norm for some law-enforcement types.
Officer: "Well, we're in a high speed chase with the plaintiff in the stolen car... right about now we perform a pit maneuver, forcing the suspect off the road, he attempts to make a run for it at which point the arresting officer tackled him and brought him to the ground, I run over to assist... and at this point I really needed to use the restroom so I did and the camera cuts out. When the video resumes twenty minutes later (I drank a LOT of coffee), the plaintiff has clearly bashed his head against the ground numerous times until he was comatose. I would have prevented him were I not urinating. For twenty minutes."
If there had to be a person with a vendetta against a major producer of technology and by proxy, an open source operating system that in my view is really improving the mobile experience over what apple and MS would have given us, we should be grateful it was such a fucking moron that he may have sabotaged himself. By opening his big stupid mouth, he lessened the chances that we'd be stuck in the future choosing between an overpriced iphone and whatever windows and nokia have to offer.
I'd have to double check, but I think according to the timeline the affair started after he quit the Army. Anyway, why is it illegal for a member of the Army to have an affair? Something being illegal doesn't make it unethical in my book either.
What do ethics have to do with this case? The guy was the director of the CIA. His marriage vows aren't relevant. I don't care about his marital status or how many women he sleeps with who aren't his wife.
This strikes me as merely juicy, inconsequential gossip, unless there's evidence she got information she wasn't supposed to have because of her relationship.
All this time, I thought the Red team was our enemy... they were really just trying to help us keep the flag more secure? Now I feel bad about killing them, t-bagging them, and calling them racist names.
A more recent example than asprin would be Taxol/Paclitaxel. Discovered in 1967 from the bark of the Pacific yew tree, and useful in treating cancer.
Anyway, stories such as these are to inform if you're interested. News for nerds and all that. You don't give a shit, that's fine. No one was expecting you to get off your couch and start helping search for the cure for cancer as a result of this story. So go back to whatever it was you were doing. Maybe reading about apple suing samsung or something exciting like that. The biology community apologizes for this not being as interesting as you would hope. We'll get back to searching the ends of the earth for the cure to cancer. We probably won't bother slapping you around if we find anything useful though. Just maybe think about supporting funding for the NIH or cancer research. As miraculous as taxol is (saved my mother's life, breast cancer), the side effects are tough. You really want us searching the oceans and rainforests for better drugs before you develop cancer yourself.
Maybe because it goes the other way in reality: the government funds the basic research, and then gives to private industries, often for next to nothing, who then sell it if it's profitable. Example: taxol.
Look at it this way: most of the bragging about government achievements is done by politicians who signed off on it telling you why they should be re-elected or elected to higher offices. Big pharma spends way more on taking credit for medical breakthroughs (or just as often, trying to tell you something that's just repackaging is actually a medical breakthrough.) Who do you think gets credit in that tug of war? It's not the government-funded scientists either way.
Clinton remarking he was generally in favor of it is a long ways away from Gore actually agreeing to do it. Former presidents generally are reluctant to speak out against current presidents. I think it's the height of cognitive dissonance to suggest that Gore would have done the exact mistakes that Bush made, including listening to the neocons on Iraq. If you want to make yourself feel better about not supporting Gore, you need not pretend he would have gone to Iraq in the exact manner as Bush. You can tell yourself, and reasonably too, that Gore might have made other, bigger mistakes.
I think a reasonable counterpoint is that you'll have abuses both ways no matter what. A few ridiculous abuses don't prove the whole system is broken. You have counterexamples that would suggest it's not strong enough: look at the iphone clones from china, or any app store being full of ripoffs of popular games.
Looking at the shitty minecraft clones cashing on on the app store, I almost would cheer Notch on if he had patented "a program where blocks can be moved around to build structures" or something similar.
Either way, you'll get greedy people doing things as they shouldn't no matter what you do.
TSA exists to make it look like the government is protecting us from something we irrationally fear. Terrorists won't succeed in a 9/11 attack again. They got lucky, and relied on the fact that before that, most people would comply with hijackers, assuming the hijackers would let them go. TSA doesn't seem to have significantly improved bomb-detection, airports have made some changes to design that would help prevent bombs, but TSA isn't needed for that
And the TSA cost 8 billion in 2011. So, no where near a trillion.
Such as what? Begging them permission to send them food they can't manage to get themselves? I seem to recall Dear Leader turning down aid on more than one occasion because it would have been admitting in some small way that North Korea was imperfect.
Also, "actively pissing NK" off? They're in a constant state of being convinced the genetically inferior rest of the world is attacking them, no matter what we do. Their country is based on paranoia and xenophobia as much as it is based on love/fear of the government. They're still in a war with South Korea. It's a bit like saying "Don't make that rabid, frothing at the mouth dog angry!" Playing nice absolutely does not get you anywhere with NK.
Hell, I would honestly prefer that money just be given directly to the weapons contractors, halliburton, and whoever else is currently maintaining the war on terror. That would be more efficient, would involve fewer dead bodies, would create less hostility against the US that will no doubt cause more terrorists years later than it eliminates now, and wouldn't involve suspending as many rights.
Getting rid of TSA alone, that's worth a trillion dollars in tax money to me.
I'd rather still that money be given to research, but lets be somewhat realistic here....
I remember hearing that DNA polymerase runs so fast along DNA that if it were a train, and the base pairs were railroad ties, it would be moving something like a thousand miles an hour. And it would be duplicating the train tracks nearly perfectly as it did so.
Unions are the only thing that defends the middle class from the rich shareholders that demand ever increasing dividends.
Which is probably why Hessian called them parasites. Well, that and the fact that Hessian is an asshole who has clearly swallowed way too much GOP propaganda about "job creators."
I would also wonder about unions. I've heard that at least for auto workers, they've either been dismantled or never existed in the south, hence some foreign car manufacturers opening up factories there. Doesn't seem like Foxconn's model would be likely to work it's... er... "magic" when the workers are organized and demand things like "not being forced into working."
The state is mirroring the idiotic people who vote for them and pay their wages. The "Think of the children" crowd is the source of crap like this.
I'm not saying this to excuse the government, just saying voting out the offending politicians/government agents is a bandaid solution. To really solve the problem, you need to educate the voters, the "Oh mi gawd, the government isn't protecting our children from every conceivable danger!" people that it's parents who must protect children from things like magnets. Until that happens, nonsense like this will always happen again and again.
However, for a society to work, we need to have rules. Just like it's bad logic to say, "I'm bigger than you, therefore I'm going to take your stuff," it's bad logic to say, "I know how to steal and publish these secrets, so I will."
Seems like that's exactly what's going on here. "We're the government, we run things, we determine what the public needs to know and what it doesn't." Society may work with rules dictating what it can know and what it can't, but most of us hold transparency and knowledge about what our government is doing much higher than the government does itself. I'd rather risk the public knowing too much than too many secrets being held. When are we going to punish the military brass for keeping too many things secret from us?
I don't see any of Julian Assange's defenders stepping up to dox themselves on the internet, and reveal some of the stuff they've had on their hard drives over the years.
Hmm... what's in this folder labeled 'Windows CABs'? Looks like a bunch of pictures. Click. Wait a second... is that a goat?
Yeah, we're civilians. We have a right to privacy. We pay for the military, not vice versa. And the military keeping secrets from the citiznery is much more dangerous than vice versa as well: they're much better armed. A military coup is much more of a threat than a civilian uprising in my book.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh come on. I know it's hip to hate on chain restaurants, but suggesting Papa John's isn't pizza and getting +4 informative? That's ridiculous.
Papa Johns is one of the better nationwide chains of pizza. Pizza hut, dominos even after they did the makeover, little ceasars, they're not as tasty. And I say that grudgingly as someone who thinks the CEO is an asshole.
Slashdot: news for nerds and also pizza elitists.
I'd guess that the unions would push for giving the officer discretion at the time for what is recorded and what is not. Perhaps they'll claim it's for the privacy of the accused as well. The accused that they have arrested, fingerprinted, strip searched, and published the mugshots for.
The police suggest that citizens in public places have no expectation of privacy from drug searches, pat downs, or whatever else, while simultaneously suggesting that officers in public places have an expectation of privacy from citizens taking their picture. It's not like astounding hypocrisy isn't the norm for some law-enforcement types.
I don't know.
Lawyer: "What are we seeing?"
Officer: "Well, we're in a high speed chase with the plaintiff in the stolen car... right about now we perform a pit maneuver, forcing the suspect off the road, he attempts to make a run for it at which point the arresting officer tackled him and brought him to the ground, I run over to assist... and at this point I really needed to use the restroom so I did and the camera cuts out. When the video resumes twenty minutes later (I drank a LOT of coffee), the plaintiff has clearly bashed his head against the ground numerous times until he was comatose. I would have prevented him were I not urinating. For twenty minutes."
If there had to be a person with a vendetta against a major producer of technology and by proxy, an open source operating system that in my view is really improving the mobile experience over what apple and MS would have given us, we should be grateful it was such a fucking moron that he may have sabotaged himself. By opening his big stupid mouth, he lessened the chances that we'd be stuck in the future choosing between an overpriced iphone and whatever windows and nokia have to offer.
I'd have to double check, but I think according to the timeline the affair started after he quit the Army. Anyway, why is it illegal for a member of the Army to have an affair? Something being illegal doesn't make it unethical in my book either.
What do ethics have to do with this case? The guy was the director of the CIA. His marriage vows aren't relevant. I don't care about his marital status or how many women he sleeps with who aren't his wife.
This strikes me as merely juicy, inconsequential gossip, unless there's evidence she got information she wasn't supposed to have because of her relationship.
They still have to release Ricochet 2, Opposing force 2, and Blue shift 2 before they're completely out of 2's. There are probably others.
All this time, I thought the Red team was our enemy... they were really just trying to help us keep the flag more secure? Now I feel bad about killing them, t-bagging them, and calling them racist names.
A more recent example than asprin would be Taxol/Paclitaxel. Discovered in 1967 from the bark of the Pacific yew tree, and useful in treating cancer.
Anyway, stories such as these are to inform if you're interested. News for nerds and all that. You don't give a shit, that's fine. No one was expecting you to get off your couch and start helping search for the cure for cancer as a result of this story. So go back to whatever it was you were doing. Maybe reading about apple suing samsung or something exciting like that. The biology community apologizes for this not being as interesting as you would hope. We'll get back to searching the ends of the earth for the cure to cancer. We probably won't bother slapping you around if we find anything useful though. Just maybe think about supporting funding for the NIH or cancer research. As miraculous as taxol is (saved my mother's life, breast cancer), the side effects are tough. You really want us searching the oceans and rainforests for better drugs before you develop cancer yourself.
Relevant poster, not sure who made it first
Maybe because it goes the other way in reality: the government funds the basic research, and then gives to private industries, often for next to nothing, who then sell it if it's profitable. Example: taxol.
Look at it this way: most of the bragging about government achievements is done by politicians who signed off on it telling you why they should be re-elected or elected to higher offices. Big pharma spends way more on taking credit for medical breakthroughs (or just as often, trying to tell you something that's just repackaging is actually a medical breakthrough.) Who do you think gets credit in that tug of war? It's not the government-funded scientists either way.
Clinton remarking he was generally in favor of it is a long ways away from Gore actually agreeing to do it. Former presidents generally are reluctant to speak out against current presidents. I think it's the height of cognitive dissonance to suggest that Gore would have done the exact mistakes that Bush made, including listening to the neocons on Iraq. If you want to make yourself feel better about not supporting Gore, you need not pretend he would have gone to Iraq in the exact manner as Bush. You can tell yourself, and reasonably too, that Gore might have made other, bigger mistakes.
Such people are crazy if they think that legislation will actually make accountants or lawyers obsolete.
I think a reasonable counterpoint is that you'll have abuses both ways no matter what. A few ridiculous abuses don't prove the whole system is broken. You have counterexamples that would suggest it's not strong enough: look at the iphone clones from china, or any app store being full of ripoffs of popular games.
Looking at the shitty minecraft clones cashing on on the app store, I almost would cheer Notch on if he had patented "a program where blocks can be moved around to build structures" or something similar.
Either way, you'll get greedy people doing things as they shouldn't no matter what you do.
And yet, if you're from the US, they're still a lot lower than they are elsewhere.
And the TSA cost 8 billion in 2011. So, no where near a trillion.
I wasn't saying it did.
Such as what? Begging them permission to send them food they can't manage to get themselves? I seem to recall Dear Leader turning down aid on more than one occasion because it would have been admitting in some small way that North Korea was imperfect.
Also, "actively pissing NK" off? They're in a constant state of being convinced the genetically inferior rest of the world is attacking them, no matter what we do. Their country is based on paranoia and xenophobia as much as it is based on love/fear of the government. They're still in a war with South Korea. It's a bit like saying "Don't make that rabid, frothing at the mouth dog angry!" Playing nice absolutely does not get you anywhere with NK.
Hell, I would honestly prefer that money just be given directly to the weapons contractors, halliburton, and whoever else is currently maintaining the war on terror. That would be more efficient, would involve fewer dead bodies, would create less hostility against the US that will no doubt cause more terrorists years later than it eliminates now, and wouldn't involve suspending as many rights.
Getting rid of TSA alone, that's worth a trillion dollars in tax money to me.
I'd rather still that money be given to research, but lets be somewhat realistic here....
Sounds a little like "wannabe hipsters." They do stuff when it gets popular to do so.
I remember hearing that DNA polymerase runs so fast along DNA that if it were a train, and the base pairs were railroad ties, it would be moving something like a thousand miles an hour. And it would be duplicating the train tracks nearly perfectly as it did so.
Unions are the only thing that defends the middle class from the rich shareholders that demand ever increasing dividends.
Which is probably why Hessian called them parasites. Well, that and the fact that Hessian is an asshole who has clearly swallowed way too much GOP propaganda about "job creators."
I would also wonder about unions. I've heard that at least for auto workers, they've either been dismantled or never existed in the south, hence some foreign car manufacturers opening up factories there. Doesn't seem like Foxconn's model would be likely to work it's... er... "magic" when the workers are organized and demand things like "not being forced into working."
The state is mirroring the idiotic people who vote for them and pay their wages. The "Think of the children" crowd is the source of crap like this.
I'm not saying this to excuse the government, just saying voting out the offending politicians/government agents is a bandaid solution. To really solve the problem, you need to educate the voters, the "Oh mi gawd, the government isn't protecting our children from every conceivable danger!" people that it's parents who must protect children from things like magnets. Until that happens, nonsense like this will always happen again and again.
Which is why I said "Obviously that's not a valid reason to suspend punishment..."
However, for a society to work, we need to have rules. Just like it's bad logic to say, "I'm bigger than you, therefore I'm going to take your stuff," it's bad logic to say, "I know how to steal and publish these secrets, so I will."
Seems like that's exactly what's going on here. "We're the government, we run things, we determine what the public needs to know and what it doesn't." Society may work with rules dictating what it can know and what it can't, but most of us hold transparency and knowledge about what our government is doing much higher than the government does itself. I'd rather risk the public knowing too much than too many secrets being held. When are we going to punish the military brass for keeping too many things secret from us?
I don't see any of Julian Assange's defenders stepping up to dox themselves on the internet, and reveal some of the stuff they've had on their hard drives over the years. Hmm... what's in this folder labeled 'Windows CABs'? Looks like a bunch of pictures. Click. Wait a second... is that a goat?
Yeah, we're civilians. We have a right to privacy. We pay for the military, not vice versa. And the military keeping secrets from the citiznery is much more dangerous than vice versa as well: they're much better armed. A military coup is much more of a threat than a civilian uprising in my book.