It was asymmetric. Looking in one sides dirty laundry hamper and not the others isn't an unbiased exercise.
This is just a dressed-up way of saying "but Trump does bad things too!"
It's not like it was any secret to anyone that Hillary was going to come with a mountain of dirty laundry. The smart thing to do would have been to nominate a better candidate.
You want someone to blame? Try the voters in the primary election. And of course, the DNC, who colluded to get the absolute worst candidate possible nominated.
This whole thing about "Russian hackers" is just a way to deflect attention from how badly Hillary's campaign and the DNC screwed up. And you idiots are letting them get away with it.
But as the last election proved, if anyone can blow a sure thing it's the Democrats...
Actually historically the Incumbent party looses the Presidency when the incumbent is not running. The GOP was also in control of Congress, the Senate as well as a large number of State legislative bodies and even a larger chunk of Governors. By all accounts it should have been a easy win for the GOP until they almost blew it by nominating Trump.
Both parties managed to nominate the absolute worst candidate they possibly could. No matter who won, we would be saying that the other party blew a chance for a "sure thing."
How the fuck would this survey include state and local taxes, exactly, when they vary so incredibly widely across localities?
By doing actual work, presumably.
If you want results that mean something, then you'll have to find a way to get actual data. The survey, as it is, is completely worthless for trying to draw the conclusion that is being made in the summary.
We have a $600 Billion per year deficit as of 2016. You definitely aren't taxed more than the benefits that are doled out.
That only logically follows if the "you" that you are referring to means "all Americans." It's certainly possible that the benefit that someone gets is worth less than the amount that they pay in taxes, as long as other people get far more benefit than what they are paying in.
The headline is referring to the total amount of student loan debt, which isn't totally related to the per-person amount of debt at graduation -- for instance, if more people are going to school and taking out loans; or if people are taking longer to repay their loans, the total amount of debt will increase even without the initial per-person amount increasing.
Of course, the way that the headline and summary were written were obviously going to cause confusion. Too bad that apparently stories are posted by retarded baboons here on Slashdot.
Did you object to the the same thing being done to Bush?
If not, then you are the racist, since you have a double standard for how we treat people of different races.
I did not object, and I was a registered Republican at the time. And no, that's not racism.
Of course it is. A fairly minor incident of it, to be sure, but racism all the same.
To be clear, what is racist isn't the comparison of Bush to a chimpanzee. What is racist is the attitude that a white president and a black president need to be treated differently.
I think the accusations of right wing racism during Obama's Presidency had more to do with the memes giving the President and First Lady various chimpanzee photoshop treatments.
Did you object to the the same thing being done to Bush?
If not, then you are the racist, since you have a double standard for how we treat people of different races.
Kodi works very well as a media player for media that is on your local network. If you have a collection of DVDs that you've ripped, you can put them on a NAS box and then use Kodi on all your devices to access them. That's my own use case.
I am not discussing suppressing votes or not. I am discussing the subsidy of broadband, and according to your statement, opposition to that subsidy is motivated by the same thing as suppression of the Black vote.
You're trying to weasel out now and pretend that you weren't pulling the racism card. But it was pretty damn obvious in your initial post. if you don't want to be known as somebody who points fingers and yells "RACIST" every time someone disagrees with you, then you need to stop doing it.
I believe the actual motivation behind this move is the same one that is behind making it more difficult for poor and disenfranchised people to vote - even though there is no evidence of significant voting fraud in the USA: Poor folks and minorities might vote Democratic. Suppression of the Black vote has historically been an important part of Republican strategy, this [washingtonpost.com] is just one of many reports on that issue. Having gerrymandered them into the most odd-shaped electoral districts, it becomes time to make sure they can't get news online or participate in democratic discourse.
You're making the claim that the real motivation behind not wanting the government to provide broadband is RACISM!!!! This is the same crap we get all the time. Sure, you'll pretend that you didn't mean me, personally, but this comes down to you claiming the reason for a position that you don't like is because of racism instead of honestly addressing real concerns.
I'm sure you're reasonably well-off, Bruce. You're welcome to pay for broadband for all your neighbors if you wish to do so.
You don't get to tell me that I have to do so. And you certainly don't get to call me a racist, or claim that I'm trying to oppress people, if I don't agree with you.
Well, now you're making a very different argument than the original "companies should not profit from products that might kill people." But I'll bite anyway. There are plenty of products that, though used correctly, can under some circumstances cause injury or death.
A very obvious one is medication. There are many medications that can have serious side effects, including death, when taken exactly as prescribed. We continue to use them because the benefits outweigh the risks.
You mentioned chainsaws. It is true that the majority of chainsaw accidents happen because of operator error. However, that doesn't mean that all of them do. The only way to completely eliminate the possibility of harm is to not use a chainsaw. But again, we continue to use them because the benefits are big enough.
There does need to be a standard for how safe autonomous vehicles need to be before we allow them on the roads. But setting that standard at "they need to never cause a death" is not only unrealistic, it is totally inconsistent with how our society deals with other potentially dangerous products.
1) Maybe the cop has sat behind cars that just sit there when the light changes because the driver is busy on their phone.
If he was citing those who were causing a traffic obstruction, I would have no objection to it.
2) If said person suddenly notices that the light has changed and hits the gas w/out checking to see that the way is clear, it does become a safety issue.
The same is true for someone who is not texting and doesn't check that the way is clear. If they cause an accident (or the cop sees them doing that), then sure, give them a ticket for it.
There is a safety concern, though - they are in charge of a vehicle on the public road, and have to react to their surroundings in order to prevent accidents.
There is no realistic situation where somebody stopped at a stoplight needs to "react to their surroundings in order to prevent accidents." I defy you to find one documented case where somebody texting or using their phone while stopped at a stoplight was at fault for an accident.
There was a cop in Atlanta I think that made a point of getting people stopped at lights or stop signs that were texting. He got droves of them. Most people believe it's only while you're moving but that's not the case.
That may be the law, but that cop was a jerk. There's no real safety concern with people texting while stopped at a stoplight. Singling that out for special enforcement -- that's just jackass behavior of someone with a little power and an axe to grind.
Arciszewski also says that PHP is actually "the first" programming language to support a "modern" cryptography library in its core, despite Erlang and Go including similar libraries, which he claims are not as powerful and up-to-date as PHP's upcoming Libsodium implementation.
So it's the first to support a modern cryptography library, as long as you define "modern" to mean "the one that we're using."
It's easy to be first to do something if you place enough arbitrary restrictions on what that something is.
Slashdot Mirror
It was asymmetric. Looking in one sides dirty laundry hamper and not the others isn't an unbiased exercise.
This is just a dressed-up way of saying "but Trump does bad things too!"
It's not like it was any secret to anyone that Hillary was going to come with a mountain of dirty laundry. The smart thing to do would have been to nominate a better candidate.
You want someone to blame? Try the voters in the primary election. And of course, the DNC, who colluded to get the absolute worst candidate possible nominated.
This whole thing about "Russian hackers" is just a way to deflect attention from how badly Hillary's campaign and the DNC screwed up. And you idiots are letting them get away with it.
But as the last election proved, if anyone can blow a sure thing it's the Democrats...
Actually historically the Incumbent party looses the Presidency when the incumbent is not running. The GOP was also in control of Congress, the Senate as well as a large number of State legislative bodies and even a larger chunk of Governors. By all accounts it should have been a easy win for the GOP until they almost blew it by nominating Trump.
Both parties managed to nominate the absolute worst candidate they possibly could. No matter who won, we would be saying that the other party blew a chance for a "sure thing."
I stopped watching TV 20+ years ago. Don't miss it. If I'm interested in a TV series, I got iTunes, Netflix or Hulu.
Wait, you stopped watching TV 20 years ago, and replaced it with watching TV?
But faster connections than DSL are. The government even states that.
The government says a lot of crap; doesn't make it true.
Those are not necessities.
Neither is gigabit internet.
How the fuck would this survey include state and local taxes, exactly, when they vary so incredibly widely across localities?
By doing actual work, presumably.
If you want results that mean something, then you'll have to find a way to get actual data. The survey, as it is, is completely worthless for trying to draw the conclusion that is being made in the summary.
We have a $600 Billion per year deficit as of 2016. You definitely aren't taxed more than the benefits that are doled out.
That only logically follows if the "you" that you are referring to means "all Americans." It's certainly possible that the benefit that someone gets is worth less than the amount that they pay in taxes, as long as other people get far more benefit than what they are paying in.
The headline is referring to the total amount of student loan debt, which isn't totally related to the per-person amount of debt at graduation -- for instance, if more people are going to school and taking out loans; or if people are taking longer to repay their loans, the total amount of debt will increase even without the initial per-person amount increasing.
Of course, the way that the headline and summary were written were obviously going to cause confusion. Too bad that apparently stories are posted by retarded baboons here on Slashdot.
Did you object to the the same thing being done to Bush?
If not, then you are the racist, since you have a double standard for how we treat people of different races.
I did not object, and I was a registered Republican at the time. And no, that's not racism.
Of course it is. A fairly minor incident of it, to be sure, but racism all the same.
To be clear, what is racist isn't the comparison of Bush to a chimpanzee. What is racist is the attitude that a white president and a black president need to be treated differently.
I think the accusations of right wing racism during Obama's Presidency had more to do with the memes giving the President and First Lady various chimpanzee photoshop treatments.
Did you object to the the same thing being done to Bush?
If not, then you are the racist, since you have a double standard for how we treat people of different races.
Kodi works very well as a media player for media that is on your local network. If you have a collection of DVDs that you've ripped, you can put them on a NAS box and then use Kodi on all your devices to access them. That's my own use case.
Seriously, lets blame the baby boomers for this. It's ALWAYS their fault. Just look at the dumbass from their age group they elected.
But don't they get credit for the dumbass from their age group that they didn't elect?
I am not discussing suppressing votes or not. I am discussing the subsidy of broadband, and according to your statement, opposition to that subsidy is motivated by the same thing as suppression of the Black vote.
You're trying to weasel out now and pretend that you weren't pulling the racism card. But it was pretty damn obvious in your initial post. if you don't want to be known as somebody who points fingers and yells "RACIST" every time someone disagrees with you, then you need to stop doing it.
Here's what you said:
I believe the actual motivation behind this move is the same one that is behind making it more difficult for poor and disenfranchised people to vote - even though there is no evidence of significant voting fraud in the USA: Poor folks and minorities might vote Democratic. Suppression of the Black vote has historically been an important part of Republican strategy, this [washingtonpost.com] is just one of many reports on that issue. Having gerrymandered them into the most odd-shaped electoral districts, it becomes time to make sure they can't get news online or participate in democratic discourse.
You're making the claim that the real motivation behind not wanting the government to provide broadband is RACISM!!!! This is the same crap we get all the time. Sure, you'll pretend that you didn't mean me, personally, but this comes down to you claiming the reason for a position that you don't like is because of racism instead of honestly addressing real concerns.
I'm sure you're reasonably well-off, Bruce. You're welcome to pay for broadband for all your neighbors if you wish to do so.
You don't get to tell me that I have to do so. And you certainly don't get to call me a racist, or claim that I'm trying to oppress people, if I don't agree with you.
Well, now you're making a very different argument than the original "companies should not profit from products that might kill people." But I'll bite anyway. There are plenty of products that, though used correctly, can under some circumstances cause injury or death.
A very obvious one is medication. There are many medications that can have serious side effects, including death, when taken exactly as prescribed. We continue to use them because the benefits outweigh the risks.
You mentioned chainsaws. It is true that the majority of chainsaw accidents happen because of operator error. However, that doesn't mean that all of them do. The only way to completely eliminate the possibility of harm is to not use a chainsaw. But again, we continue to use them because the benefits are big enough.
There does need to be a standard for how safe autonomous vehicles need to be before we allow them on the roads. But setting that standard at "they need to never cause a death" is not only unrealistic, it is totally inconsistent with how our society deals with other potentially dangerous products.
I concede that companies should not profit from products that might kill people. That is all that I concede.
You might as well just say that companies shouldn't be allowed to sell anything. Read the safety labels on anything you buy these days.
Slashdot is... going down the toilet?
Nah, that happened long ago.
Now it's coming back up.
There are people who were texting at a light and let their car careen into the one in front of them.
That's an example of a person texting at a light while not stopped.
1) Maybe the cop has sat behind cars that just sit there when the light changes because the driver is busy on their phone.
If he was citing those who were causing a traffic obstruction, I would have no objection to it.
2) If said person suddenly notices that the light has changed and hits the gas w/out checking to see that the way is clear, it does become a safety issue.
The same is true for someone who is not texting and doesn't check that the way is clear. If they cause an accident (or the cop sees them doing that), then sure, give them a ticket for it.
There is a safety concern, though - they are in charge of a vehicle on the public road, and have to react to their surroundings in order to prevent accidents.
There is no realistic situation where somebody stopped at a stoplight needs to "react to their surroundings in order to prevent accidents." I defy you to find one documented case where somebody texting or using their phone while stopped at a stoplight was at fault for an accident.
There was a cop in Atlanta I think that made a point of getting people stopped at lights or stop signs that were texting. He got droves of them. Most people believe it's only while you're moving but that's not the case.
That may be the law, but that cop was a jerk. There's no real safety concern with people texting while stopped at a stoplight. Singling that out for special enforcement -- that's just jackass behavior of someone with a little power and an axe to grind.
in other words, it doesn't help diversify the field with women, older people, and people of color.
While there are some good reasons to dislike "code on a whiteboard" interviews, this is not one of them.
I'm pretty sure that they have nothing to worry about. They'll have plenty of opportunity to keep spying on the American people under Trump.
Arciszewski also says that PHP is actually "the first" programming language to support a "modern" cryptography library in its core, despite Erlang and Go including similar libraries, which he claims are not as powerful and up-to-date as PHP's upcoming Libsodium implementation.
So it's the first to support a modern cryptography library, as long as you define "modern" to mean "the one that we're using."
It's easy to be first to do something if you place enough arbitrary restrictions on what that something is.