If republican politicians had the foresight and long-term thinking or caring you're talking about, they wouldn't have let Bush slash taxes while fighting two wars. Cheney said "Deficits don't matter." They didn't... to him anyway. He'd be out of office and possibly living in another country or dead by the time they did. That's the type of thinking that's going on here.
McCain didn't tank his own campaign to save a party that 8 years prior decided he was insane thanks to a negative campaign by Bush.
So yeah, don't take PayPal and then complain because YOU didn't follow the rules.
These aren't rules handed down on stone tablets, they're company policy. Something being in the TOS isn't a good justification. The motivation for these rules isn't "Because otherwise chaos will rule, and justice will be defeated." It's all about PR for paypal. They censor erotica not because erotica is immoral, but because some knuckle dragging religious schmucks will organize a lot of bad PR for paypal if paypal did and their churches found out about it.
That's why they're protesting the rules, not the enforcement of the rules. They can and hopefully will get paypal to change paypal's rules.
In the future, I would stick with a car metaphor. Mention sex, rape, or sexism, and most slashdotters are going to be too hung up on the first part to get your point. Maybe say "It's possible to prevent all car accidents by bad drivers by destroying all cars..."
Having not read the books myself or seen the movies, I could be mistaken here, but I heard there's not actually much if any sex in it. I thought the vampirism was some type of overly dramatic metaphor for sex. Sex being scary to the target audience. Which, considering it's supposed to be for teenage girls is less silly than that may sound at first.
Anyway, your proposal is insufficient to eliminate the threat, we need to nuke it from orbit to be sure.
This sounds like he has a patented method for screening for these cells. If it's a fancy microscope or artificial chemical that he developed, good for him. More likely it is a method of culturing cells using generic culture methods, and he is just going to try to prevent anyone else from doing anything with those cells. If that's the case, there are bigger ethical problems than funding.
But the fact is the federal government WILL threaten the states and will get their way. They will declare a no-fly zone over Texas for the TSA.
Ignoring what legally could happen for a minute, you think they would declare Texas a no-fly zone because of pat-down procedures? I realize we do and should view all government as authoritarian, power-hungry animals. When their authority is challenged, their first response is to declare war no matter what it's about, but I suspect they'd realize they had better retreat for the moment if Texas called them on this. Laying siege to an entire state would be terrible PR and would invite some other government officials, like Texas congressmen, to come along and clip TSA's balls off.
That's only an option if you're convinced the whole project was a waste of time. If you're not sure you were an idiot to begin that research, it might be better just to shelve it for the moment and maybe come back to it when you have a different idea or new tool to investigate it with.
When you cut staff with such broad strokes, you're going to be cutting valuable ones and at the same time retaining crappy ones. Unless you're going on a case-by-case basis carefully, you're going to make mistakes. There's no perfect single metric for any job of a good employee. It's much easier to pretend there is, and say "Your number isn't high enough, so you're fired." If you don't care about the long-term health of a company or organization, that's the way to go. Gotta reduce expenses, everyone below this number gone, give myself part of their salaries in consulting fees, and done!
Regardless of the privacy issues involved in GPS use, GPS jamming is not an acceptable solution.
I don't think other people's right to use GPS to navigate should automatically trump my right to privacy. If the government is tracking me without a warrant, I'd say I'm definitely morally in the clear by using a GPS jammer, even if that means the guy next to me can't find the nearest McDonalds. That would be stupid of me to do, since I would have just given them an excuse to arrest me, but as far as moral justification goes, no, GPS jamming could be an acceptable solution to privacy violations.
Redirect a GPS equipped armored car to your secret criminal location and land it safely.
(In a Wells Fargo truck)
Mike: Hey, uh, Bob, WHERE THE HELL are we going?
Bob: GPS says the bank is just up ahead.
Mike: The GPS says the bank is in that abandoned looking warehouse?
Bob: It also says that we should throw our guns out the window now.
Mike: (unholstering) What did we do before these things were invented?
Another problem with the y chromesome is that it's not fully redundant with the x chromesome. There are plenty of important genes on the x chromesome that are not duplicated on the y chromesome. There are some diseases which mainly show up in men because females can be heterozygous for it, have one faulty copy but one good copy and be okay. Men on the other hand are hemizygous for genes on the x chromosome. If we get a faulty copy, that's it. We have the disease.
A human has right to live. A pigeon does not have that right -- if one believes otherwise, one has to prevent pigeons from being killed by predators.
No, that's intentionally stretching an argument to absurd lengths. You can acknowledge someone or something has a right, and not be obligated to take any action on that right. If I believe animals have the right to life, it's perfectly consistent to say I will try to prevent people from taking that right and that's all I'll do. You acknowledge people have a right to life, that doesn't mean you have to go and prevent anyone from dying of anything.
If you're more comfortable with it, you could rephrase it. We say that humans have a right to not be killed by other people. I suspect the animal rights activists think the same thing about animals.
Having said that, yeah, there are a lot of moronic animal rights activists, and I'd love to see some of them out in the forests wasting their time trying to prevent little squirrels from being eaten by hawks rather than protesting medical research.
why couldn't a bullet hit one of the animal huggers?
Doesn't look like they were using bullets, for one thing. For another, if the hunters had any sense, they wouldn't make a martyr out of the animal rights activists.
Seems like that while the shots themselves could not have hit any drivers and injured anyone directly, a bunch of angry men with guns by the freeway shooting at a flying RC helicopter OVER the freeway is going to distract some drivers and probably cause some accidents.
Also, you say gun control proponents are generally ignorant of guns, but what does understanding the range on birdshot have to do with banning assault rifles? I haven't heard of the gun control lobby trying to ban birdshot, not that I've been paying attention.
I think there's a big distinction between "This is how it is and that's good and just" and "This is how it is, unfortunately, and you'd be dangerously naive to think otherwise" that you're missing. Pentium was not saying it was the victim's fault.
I don't know, but the government is trying to get the power to spy on everything you do online or on phones RIGHT NOW. Lets worry about 1984 happening today, and deal with their attempts at GATTACA when it comes to it.
For the moment, I'm more worried about mercury being dumped in the river by companies than the government driving uranium around, crashing, and poisoning me.
The nanny state has gone mad and the enforcers have lost their minds due to abusive power....
Were it only so simple. I'd say lost their mind due to money coming from business interests. This infographic shows that the federal spending is even more messed up than the FDA guidelines: 78% of subsidies to meat and dairy, 0.3% to fruits and vegetables.
I blame big business buying government, not just big government acting alone. Curing this problem will take more than pruning back overreaching government regulations, it will require neutering a powerful meat and dairy industry, reclaiming various regulatory agencies, and coming up with effective ways of stopping special interests from putting junk food in cafeterias.
This story has set the conservative blogosphere alight over "obama's nanny state" and what have you while overlooking one huge glaring problem here...
They are taking the word of a four year old kid to be god's-own-truth.
er... I'd say there's more than that one problem there. I'd say the bigger problem would be the connection between this incident and "nanny state." There are at least 10 decision making groups between the moron stealing the little girl's lunch and the white house. Kind of like saying I got mugged one time, so this is a heinous example of the pope trying to steal my money.
Isn't a better treatment for ADHD just having actual parents who are home and not so exhausted that they are unable to be effective parents?
In my case, no. While there is rampant hypocrisy on the pro-adderall side, as you correctly point out, lets not swing too far in the other direction and imply these drugs are without any merit. ADD and ADHD are also diagnosed at the drop of a hat these days, but lets not act like there is solid proof that it is the modern day equivalent of "Female Hysteria."
I have ADD. Which, come to think of it, I wasn't supposed to cruise slashdot for as long as I have, so you'll have to take my word for it.
If rates of the precursor were not limited, then lower priced generic drugs would be produced destroying the advantage of overproducing the expensive medication. It is the artificial scarcity that allows for this strategy to be profitable.
If it weren't the DEA setting a quota, the artificial scarcity would come from somewhere else. Like a few pharmecutical companies controlling 100% of the precursor market through corporate shenanigans, patents, lobbyists, and regulatory capture, and then claiming they can't profitably sell the precursor at anything that would be considered reasonable.
The pharmecutical corporations are charging what they want because they're greedy, not because the government is involved. Were the government not involved, the corporations would still be greedy and ripping people off, their scheme would just be slightly different.
Describe to me an alternative system without any central planning. Keep in mind that there is a strong interests for individual "competitors" to collude and become the central planners themselves if none is provided. They'll also try to do that if one IS provided (through regulatory capture), so you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. Unless everyone else makes sure the regulated don't become the regulators, and we seem incapable of that, you may as well bend over and take it from each powerful industry.
Slashdot Mirror
If republican politicians had the foresight and long-term thinking or caring you're talking about, they wouldn't have let Bush slash taxes while fighting two wars. Cheney said "Deficits don't matter." They didn't... to him anyway. He'd be out of office and possibly living in another country or dead by the time they did. That's the type of thinking that's going on here.
McCain didn't tank his own campaign to save a party that 8 years prior decided he was insane thanks to a negative campaign by Bush.
I can't believe it took nearly half an hour before someone pointed that out.
So yeah, don't take PayPal and then complain because YOU didn't follow the rules.
These aren't rules handed down on stone tablets, they're company policy. Something being in the TOS isn't a good justification. The motivation for these rules isn't "Because otherwise chaos will rule, and justice will be defeated." It's all about PR for paypal. They censor erotica not because erotica is immoral, but because some knuckle dragging religious schmucks will organize a lot of bad PR for paypal if paypal did and their churches found out about it.
That's why they're protesting the rules, not the enforcement of the rules. They can and hopefully will get paypal to change paypal's rules.
In the future, I would stick with a car metaphor. Mention sex, rape, or sexism, and most slashdotters are going to be too hung up on the first part to get your point. Maybe say "It's possible to prevent all car accidents by bad drivers by destroying all cars..."
The bible and twilight vs paypal... not sure who I want to win in that one.
Having not read the books myself or seen the movies, I could be mistaken here, but I heard there's not actually much if any sex in it. I thought the vampirism was some type of overly dramatic metaphor for sex. Sex being scary to the target audience. Which, considering it's supposed to be for teenage girls is less silly than that may sound at first.
Anyway, your proposal is insufficient to eliminate the threat, we need to nuke it from orbit to be sure.
This sounds like he has a patented method for screening for these cells. If it's a fancy microscope or artificial chemical that he developed, good for him. More likely it is a method of culturing cells using generic culture methods, and he is just going to try to prevent anyone else from doing anything with those cells. If that's the case, there are bigger ethical problems than funding.
But the fact is the federal government WILL threaten the states and will get their way. They will declare a no-fly zone over Texas for the TSA.
Ignoring what legally could happen for a minute, you think they would declare Texas a no-fly zone because of pat-down procedures? I realize we do and should view all government as authoritarian, power-hungry animals. When their authority is challenged, their first response is to declare war no matter what it's about, but I suspect they'd realize they had better retreat for the moment if Texas called them on this. Laying siege to an entire state would be terrible PR and would invite some other government officials, like Texas congressmen, to come along and clip TSA's balls off.
That's only an option if you're convinced the whole project was a waste of time. If you're not sure you were an idiot to begin that research, it might be better just to shelve it for the moment and maybe come back to it when you have a different idea or new tool to investigate it with.
When you cut staff with such broad strokes, you're going to be cutting valuable ones and at the same time retaining crappy ones. Unless you're going on a case-by-case basis carefully, you're going to make mistakes. There's no perfect single metric for any job of a good employee. It's much easier to pretend there is, and say "Your number isn't high enough, so you're fired." If you don't care about the long-term health of a company or organization, that's the way to go. Gotta reduce expenses, everyone below this number gone, give myself part of their salaries in consulting fees, and done!
While true, I wouldn't expect that defense to hold up in secret military tribunal...
Regardless of the privacy issues involved in GPS use, GPS jamming is not an acceptable solution.
I don't think other people's right to use GPS to navigate should automatically trump my right to privacy. If the government is tracking me without a warrant, I'd say I'm definitely morally in the clear by using a GPS jammer, even if that means the guy next to me can't find the nearest McDonalds. That would be stupid of me to do, since I would have just given them an excuse to arrest me, but as far as moral justification goes, no, GPS jamming could be an acceptable solution to privacy violations.
Redirect a GPS equipped armored car to your secret criminal location and land it safely.
(In a Wells Fargo truck)
Mike: Hey, uh, Bob, WHERE THE HELL are we going?
Bob: GPS says the bank is just up ahead.
Mike: The GPS says the bank is in that abandoned looking warehouse?
Bob: It also says that we should throw our guns out the window now.
Mike: (unholstering) What did we do before these things were invented?
Another problem with the y chromesome is that it's not fully redundant with the x chromesome. There are plenty of important genes on the x chromesome that are not duplicated on the y chromesome. There are some diseases which mainly show up in men because females can be heterozygous for it, have one faulty copy but one good copy and be okay. Men on the other hand are hemizygous for genes on the x chromosome. If we get a faulty copy, that's it. We have the disease.
A human has right to live. A pigeon does not have that right -- if one believes otherwise, one has to prevent pigeons from being killed by predators.
No, that's intentionally stretching an argument to absurd lengths. You can acknowledge someone or something has a right, and not be obligated to take any action on that right. If I believe animals have the right to life, it's perfectly consistent to say I will try to prevent people from taking that right and that's all I'll do. You acknowledge people have a right to life, that doesn't mean you have to go and prevent anyone from dying of anything.
If you're more comfortable with it, you could rephrase it. We say that humans have a right to not be killed by other people. I suspect the animal rights activists think the same thing about animals.
Having said that, yeah, there are a lot of moronic animal rights activists, and I'd love to see some of them out in the forests wasting their time trying to prevent little squirrels from being eaten by hawks rather than protesting medical research.
why couldn't a bullet hit one of the animal huggers?
Doesn't look like they were using bullets, for one thing. For another, if the hunters had any sense, they wouldn't make a martyr out of the animal rights activists.
Seems like that while the shots themselves could not have hit any drivers and injured anyone directly, a bunch of angry men with guns by the freeway shooting at a flying RC helicopter OVER the freeway is going to distract some drivers and probably cause some accidents.
Also, you say gun control proponents are generally ignorant of guns, but what does understanding the range on birdshot have to do with banning assault rifles? I haven't heard of the gun control lobby trying to ban birdshot, not that I've been paying attention.
I think there's a big distinction between "This is how it is and that's good and just" and "This is how it is, unfortunately, and you'd be dangerously naive to think otherwise" that you're missing. Pentium was not saying it was the victim's fault.
I don't know, but the government is trying to get the power to spy on everything you do online or on phones RIGHT NOW. Lets worry about 1984 happening today, and deal with their attempts at GATTACA when it comes to it.
Only about as toxic as lead according to the second google hit. I guess uranium hexafluoride is more toxic, but I couldn't find any comparisons that I understood.
For the moment, I'm more worried about mercury being dumped in the river by companies than the government driving uranium around, crashing, and poisoning me.
The nanny state has gone mad and the enforcers have lost their minds due to abusive power....
Were it only so simple. I'd say lost their mind due to money coming from business interests. This infographic shows that the federal spending is even more messed up than the FDA guidelines: 78% of subsidies to meat and dairy, 0.3% to fruits and vegetables.
I blame big business buying government, not just big government acting alone. Curing this problem will take more than pruning back overreaching government regulations, it will require neutering a powerful meat and dairy industry, reclaiming various regulatory agencies, and coming up with effective ways of stopping special interests from putting junk food in cafeterias.
This story has set the conservative blogosphere alight over "obama's nanny state" and what have you while overlooking one huge glaring problem here... They are taking the word of a four year old kid to be god's-own-truth.
er... I'd say there's more than that one problem there. I'd say the bigger problem would be the connection between this incident and "nanny state." There are at least 10 decision making groups between the moron stealing the little girl's lunch and the white house. Kind of like saying I got mugged one time, so this is a heinous example of the pope trying to steal my money.
Isn't a better treatment for ADHD just having actual parents who are home and not so exhausted that they are unable to be effective parents?
In my case, no. While there is rampant hypocrisy on the pro-adderall side, as you correctly point out, lets not swing too far in the other direction and imply these drugs are without any merit. ADD and ADHD are also diagnosed at the drop of a hat these days, but lets not act like there is solid proof that it is the modern day equivalent of "Female Hysteria."
I have ADD. Which, come to think of it, I wasn't supposed to cruise slashdot for as long as I have, so you'll have to take my word for it.
If rates of the precursor were not limited, then lower priced generic drugs would be produced destroying the advantage of overproducing the expensive medication. It is the artificial scarcity that allows for this strategy to be profitable.
If it weren't the DEA setting a quota, the artificial scarcity would come from somewhere else. Like a few pharmecutical companies controlling 100% of the precursor market through corporate shenanigans, patents, lobbyists, and regulatory capture, and then claiming they can't profitably sell the precursor at anything that would be considered reasonable.
The pharmecutical corporations are charging what they want because they're greedy, not because the government is involved. Were the government not involved, the corporations would still be greedy and ripping people off, their scheme would just be slightly different.
Describe to me an alternative system without any central planning. Keep in mind that there is a strong interests for individual "competitors" to collude and become the central planners themselves if none is provided. They'll also try to do that if one IS provided (through regulatory capture), so you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. Unless everyone else makes sure the regulated don't become the regulators, and we seem incapable of that, you may as well bend over and take it from each powerful industry.