Forgive me, but sometimes I don't understand why it's fine to judge someone based on if they support the NRA or Planned Parenthood or Trump, that we can discriminate and harass them legally, but if we judge someone based or skin color or sexual orientation or religion, it's automatically wrong. Isn't it wrong to judge anyone? Isn't every person their own person? Sounds like there should be many more protected groups or no protected groups.
It's not that hard, actually: the examples you mention (supporting the NRA or Planned Parenthood or Trump) are all choices that a person makes. Race, gender, (often) religion, not so much. You can judge people on their choices all day long, but not on how they're born.
Wow, did you pick the wrong place to pose this (completely legitimate) question. The only crowd that hates Facebook more than/. is reddit. It may be a tie.
You completely missed the most important part of that quote:
"Starship Troopers [the novel] has been decried as promoting fascism and being racist"
The novel and the movie are very different in this regard. Verhoeven took an unironic novel about fascism and turned it into a satire.
In fairness, this is handled differently in different states, and is likely different where you live than the parent.
For example: I have a retired aunt who owns a house in LA that she bought in the 60's. There's no way she could pay the taxes if they were assessed on the current value, rather than purchased value (plus some other formula that I'm not familiar with- I'm sure they've gone up in 50 years). I on the other hand live in Texas, where my property taxes go up 10% every year (and would be more if not capped at 10% annually), based on skyrocketing property values here- which benefit me not at all as long as I'm not selling my house.
I haven't read the book, but I thought from the movie that it was totally obvious that the increased drag from losing the 'convertible top' on the module increased drag, slowing his ascent. Is the explanation in the book different?
Or do you find someplace else where things are more stable?
I've found that the best option tends to be the last one in virtually all cases. Don't burn bridges, just say "sorry it didn't work out" and move on.
That's exactly what women are doing... and that's exactly the problem.
If you accept the premise that in a healthy workplace is one that generally reflects the population in general (a controversial proposition, I understand) then anything that creates a barrier for part of that population to be there- by their choice or not- is a problem.
A bill has been introduced in the Texas Legislature to make it illegal for anyone except a 'professional reporter' (whatever that means now) to record police activity within 25 feet:
http://www.chron.com/news/poli...
Instead they punted and decided to destroy a classic movie.
While I agree with you that the second Abrams Trek was not wonderful, it didn't "destroy" anything: the 1982 Wrath of Khan hasn't gone anywhere, it's still right there on DVD or the streaming media or your choice for your viewing pleasure anytime you choose.
I hate it when people assert that some new interpretation of a work they love has somehow overwritten or invalidated that earlier work.
There's no legitimate reason why cheap, lightweight cars like the Honda CRX (better fuel economy than a modern Prius... in 1988!) are effectively no longer allowed to be made.
There's a perfectly legitimate reason, it's the added cost and weight of additional safety equipment and standards since 1988. Most mandated by the government, but some driven by market forces as well. I suppose you can argue whether the government should be dictating safety standards for automobiles, but as we've doubled the people/miles while halving the number of road deaths on highways in that span of time, I'm not sure why you would.
Another issue with a broad consensus in the electorate that's soundly ignored by the political establishment is non-interventionism. People are sick of interventionism, be they left, right, or center. The establishment ignores the electorate on this issue because of a combination of perceived economic interest, bureaucratic inertia in the national security apparatus, and entangling alliances set up after WW2 specifically to prevent an American retrenchment.
You forgot the very large campaign contributions from the military-industrial complex. I believe that either Martin Marietta or Northrup Grumman is the #1 contributor to political campaign funds.
Dell employee here. We've never even come close to losing money in one quarter, ever. We just don't make enough profit to make Wall Street happy. Big, big difference.
Slashdot Mirror
Forgive me, but sometimes I don't understand why it's fine to judge someone based on if they support the NRA or Planned Parenthood or Trump, that we can discriminate and harass them legally, but if we judge someone based or skin color or sexual orientation or religion, it's automatically wrong. Isn't it wrong to judge anyone? Isn't every person their own person? Sounds like there should be many more protected groups or no protected groups.
It's not that hard, actually: the examples you mention (supporting the NRA or Planned Parenthood or Trump) are all choices that a person makes. Race, gender, (often) religion, not so much. You can judge people on their choices all day long, but not on how they're born.
Wow, did you pick the wrong place to pose this (completely legitimate) question. The only crowd that hates Facebook more than /. is reddit. It may be a tie.
Pretty, but very small pyramid, or large, but ugly- something in the 'barn wood and corrugated metal" oeuvre. Your choice!
You completely missed the most important part of that quote: "Starship Troopers [the novel] has been decried as promoting fascism and being racist" The novel and the movie are very different in this regard. Verhoeven took an unironic novel about fascism and turned it into a satire.
She only changed her tune when the majority of Americans started favoring gay marriage
...Isn't this exactly the way a representative of the people should act?
The irony is that racism and race-baiting for votes are equally distasteful strategies.
False equivalence. Race-baiting for votes is indeed bad, but it never got anyone lynched.
I don't guess there's any point in asking him how he got such a punchable face.
I like how you lumped Facebook and cybercriminals together there. Cybercriminals aren't *that* bad.
In fairness, this is handled differently in different states, and is likely different where you live than the parent. For example: I have a retired aunt who owns a house in LA that she bought in the 60's. There's no way she could pay the taxes if they were assessed on the current value, rather than purchased value (plus some other formula that I'm not familiar with- I'm sure they've gone up in 50 years). I on the other hand live in Texas, where my property taxes go up 10% every year (and would be more if not capped at 10% annually), based on skyrocketing property values here- which benefit me not at all as long as I'm not selling my house.
Where's that dang edit button already? I didn't mean to imply that the increased drag was caused by increased drag. :)
I haven't read the book, but I thought from the movie that it was totally obvious that the increased drag from losing the 'convertible top' on the module increased drag, slowing his ascent. Is the explanation in the book different?
Or do you find someplace else where things are more stable?
I've found that the best option tends to be the last one in virtually all cases. Don't burn bridges, just say "sorry it didn't work out" and move on.
That's exactly what women are doing... and that's exactly the problem.
If you accept the premise that in a healthy workplace is one that generally reflects the population in general (a controversial proposition, I understand) then anything that creates a barrier for part of that population to be there- by their choice or not- is a problem.
Nice improvement adding the transcript, please to keep.
Texas is located right in the crotch of the bible belt.
We actually prefer "buckle of the bible belt."
A bill has been introduced in the Texas Legislature to make it illegal for anyone except a 'professional reporter' (whatever that means now) to record police activity within 25 feet: http://www.chron.com/news/poli...
...that it's not actually the Yamato? What are they doing with it down there?
Instead they punted and decided to destroy a classic movie.
While I agree with you that the second Abrams Trek was not wonderful, it didn't "destroy" anything: the 1982 Wrath of Khan hasn't gone anywhere, it's still right there on DVD or the streaming media or your choice for your viewing pleasure anytime you choose. I hate it when people assert that some new interpretation of a work they love has somehow overwritten or invalidated that earlier work.
There's a perfectly legitimate reason, it's the added cost and weight of additional safety equipment and standards since 1988. Most mandated by the government, but some driven by market forces as well. I suppose you can argue whether the government should be dictating safety standards for automobiles, but as we've doubled the people/miles while halving the number of road deaths on highways in that span of time, I'm not sure why you would.
many of the highly rated comments are really just wisecracks which might be funny, but don't add anything to the discussion.
I read the comments here and elsewhere largely for the wisecracks. Saying that they don't add anything to the discussion is highly debatable.
Another issue with a broad consensus in the electorate that's soundly ignored by the political establishment is non-interventionism. People are sick of interventionism, be they left, right, or center. The establishment ignores the electorate on this issue because of a combination of perceived economic interest, bureaucratic inertia in the national security apparatus, and entangling alliances set up after WW2 specifically to prevent an American retrenchment.
You forgot the very large campaign contributions from the military-industrial complex. I believe that either Martin Marietta or Northrup Grumman is the #1 contributor to political campaign funds.
Film at 11.
...But is the film as good as the book?
We have one. It's called 'education.'
Household brands names are rarely born over night.
I have one word of rebuttal for you: Kardashian.
You're... not talking about Star Trek, are you?
Dell employee here. We've never even come close to losing money in one quarter, ever. We just don't make enough profit to make Wall Street happy. Big, big difference.