The key to understanding why the whole debate is doubtable and nationalistic from the beginning, is to understand that general mathematics is a universal science.
You cannot invent mathematics.
(Remark: This should also be true with physics, these physics inventors haven't even their free energy device running so well it could power their cell phone.)
Basic mathematics like pythagorean theorem is discovered, and Pythagoras didn't invent it, he discovered that just some basic relationships but he wrote down a universal formula..
(And I think he also managed to geometrically proof the theorem. I'm not sure)
So even if you find some of these so called pythagorean relationships and use the numbers in your construction - then if you don't write down a formula you have no theorem at all. And however sometimes a library burnes down and papyrus with the theorem is lost.
But again mathematics is universial, so if a theorem is truely universal it can be rediscovered. And this is what's happening, some pupils and students have the capability to rediscover mathematical principles using just their education they received to a certain point, with having never heard about before. Brilliant!
The real genius idea is after discovering a numerical relationship to write down a "general" formula, this is what he did.
Discoveries are made sometime, and sometime they are forgotten. It is possible that Pythagoras is just a "late" inventor, but understand the indian minister you need to understand that he is a hindu nationalist, and as any nationalist, he believes in the superiority of his "peer group".
This reveals an inferiority complex nationalistic indians are worried that their country was and is a develloping country - aside from their huge steps in science and engineering.
They just have too put their name on everything and claim everything, it's just sad, because these people will not stop there, where science and philosophy would return to a more rational debate.
Actually, there are some "theorists" (like Gold) that pronounced & defended the abiotic theory of oil creation. Which directly goes into that direction, that only some of the oil is created from biological "residue".
Thus stating that due to this process oil reserves would be able to renew theirselves, as complex hydrocarbons are chemically produced without the help of bacteria with the earths crust, and therefore denying the existence of a "real" peak oil and that oil reserves are infinite according to their theorie as they renew their self.
Basically, it means that even without bacteria you can reform hydrogen, carbon and oxygene in succeeding chemical reactions to produce hydrocarbons (more complex than just methane) About the abiotic methane creation we know from cosmologists. Also looking at the saturn moon titan, were it seems that there are indeed huge amounts of abiotic created methane that concentrates in forms of seas.
Sorry to devide the answer into more than one part, but the scifi-solution you mentioned (off world) I'd like to argument against it.
Where: Titan Why: Titans atmosphere and sea are liquid methane CH4 not because of life
Problem: Adding matter to earth - yes, we have an addition of matter to the earth (comets, meteorites) - yes, we have a loss of mass (atmosphere)
At the moment the increase or decrease rate I think is at an equilibrium.
The solution to space mine(minerals) or prospect(hydrocarbons) would actually add matter to the earth and if the earth will increase mass so will our orbit around the sun decrease. I judge this effect not to be desired. It will get hot hot hot!
Yes, I don't give a thought to the transfer of kinetic energy from titan to the earth.
The argumentation wasn't about biofuels or their feasebility. It was just about why it is safe to assume that oil reserves are limited.
The thought you indirectly implied with hinting at biofuels, so to substitute part of the oil consumption - with biofuel - so that oil reserves will last longer.
Biofuels will be a part of the energy mix for propulsion of the future yes, but only a part.
a.) yes, at some point in time biofuels may/will become economical enough to compete with petrol. Some still are, depending on where you use them (ethanol production in brazil for example).
b.) Till today the advantage of using fossil fuels is that it is "free" energy. As you just need to get it out of the earth but you don't need to put resources(usable land area) into just to create it.
The production of biofuels however is limited as they compete with food (except jatropha which is poisonous) but also with cultivating land.
c.) I indeed see the ethical problem in using food to drive a car, however I do also think that it can be solved if the priority is on the food production for humans and that biofuel production is only secondary.
Looking into the energy markets, electrical propulsion is the most likely the biggest part of the "mix" solution. Because you can harvest the (renewable-)energy for it it on very small areas.
Also some areas that are ideal for solar for example are barren dry land or deserts
"oil production": Yes, term oil production is actually wrong.
You should use authentification and encryption NOW!
On your remote switch* or we will see many islamists detonating in their training camps, instead detonating at a market square.
Actually then the term suicide bomber would be appropriate - because it's not essentially suicide but essentially it's murder, suicide is just a byproduct
*Suicide bombers have their paket often equiped with a fail over switch if the bomber rethinks pressing the button, it will be pressed remotely.
Heck if the price every gets truly ridiculous then you start looking off-world.
Unlikely to happen, the abiotic theory in the creation of oil by Gold is mostly viewed as disproven, because it lead to deep drilling efforts, these got not much oil out of it but showed that even there bacteria (extremophiles) were present so deep inside the earth.
If you would now jump off your seat and say again that this is proof that we just must dig deeper. This can be disproven to be sustainable by logic, meaning yes there is little oil, but again "little" not the amounts needed.
The steps to disprove: a.) The creation of oil needs at least plant life (the biomass of plant life is enormous), while it may not need the life itself(chemical proccession is possible) but life (our known carbon based life) accumulates water and carbon, and these things can recombine to hydrocarbons (under the influence of heat and pressure)
This means to create oil reservoirs you need and accumulation of the right components and life has the ability to accumulate.
hydrocarbons == oil
If those elements would have been scattered there would be no such oil "stashes" found in the earths crust.
b.) the past view of the O2 content over the last billion of years - some 650 million years ago the O2 concentration began to rise,
deduction: that this must be initial starting point in develloping of plant life. This is our ground zero for oil creation inside the earth
If you accept the assumption that 99% of the oil resources are based on reprocessed biological matter. The next deduction is, that: There is only a limited amount of oil because of the limited time span of life on earth.
Evidence can be seen, when you look at all discoveries of oil reservoirs, they have two huge peaks(40s and 50s), and many small peaks, but the trend is going downwards, even with the invention of new techniques.
Also discovery doesn't mean production, so basically the reservoirs that are in production now(yes fracked and tar sands) were found some 40-20 years ago, (tar sands are known even longer before) and fracking is also sucking the last drops from known deposits.
Deduction: Digging deeper means just going longer back into the earths biological history And this also means that you are just going back to that point when the "tank" (meaning all that biological matter that was conserved and did not decompose) was started to be filled.
Meaning: The deeper you dig the less you will find.
The other evidence proving the reality of peak oil is that this oil is used for rougly 130yrs. at industrial scale.
These resources were never drained before. So even that right now hydrocarbons are formed in the earth crust. The rate of oil creation by this process can deduced to be very slow.
Taking into account the long time for creation, the total consumed amount and the growing hardships that prospectors face since the 60s it can be logically deduced that there is a limited amount of oil, and if you start to drain it, the creation rate of new oil due to biological processes does virtually not even cover for about 0-point-0-somehting percent of the whole oil production. This means it is logical and safe to assume that peak oil (production) is very real.
And if you look into the future consumption of China and India which I did not, it looks just more severe.
perhaps some managers took engineering classes and started to re-project peak oil and realized:
That peak oil will still be there, just a bit later. And that when you have cheap oil at hand and you make yourself highly depended on such a resource, where we have seen everything from extreme low to painfully high within a very short time.
That not looking on efficiency and substitution you wouldn't be prepared for the future, when such choices would be made by many companies+people that would increase the demand on renewables to a stretch where markets simply cannot deliver any more. When markets cannot deliver anymore prices go skyrocketing making that late choice for renewables really painfull.
(we saw this in 2007/2008 when market demand for renewables was so high, that the demand could not be satisfied any more)
Windows Vista - not somehting it could do WIndows 7 - not something it could do
WindowsXP - can do Windows2000 - can do
That's part of the answer why winnt5/5.1 are actually widley used, they are used in realtime equipment, along with their low memory and cpu footprint (winxp can be tuned very good).
And hopefully nobody dares to connect Win2ksp4 or winxpsp3 on these appliances to the pure-internet nor to any intranet consisting of more than one not connected computer.
But WinXP and 2k are very good & smooth OSes (Microsoft did much on XP to optimise it to the performance level of 2k) for these types, and many people with these needs, are not very pleased with win7.
But PREEMPT is funny that it is mentioned now, I can remember some 2.4.X kernel, or was it even 2.2.16/18ish ? when I patched the Preempt scheduler into and needed to make manually a new patch from the previous patched kernel source because one version later the patch failed.
Later the option was present in the menuconfig as experimental.
But, ask yourself what does it mean in becoming like "gods", you don't follow rules, you make rules, and thus are fully responsible for your own actions.
It would be easier and more in depth if you would lay out your arguments or thoughts why one should not be able to treat law as a kind of programming lanuage (ok, it might fail the turing test).
His boss, kicked "us" out of the executive lounge - where we had free finger food and funny games* all day - and there was nothing else to do, than to praise him and follow his rules - not to eat the apple from the special tree (tree of awareness).
We voilated his only rule and became aware due to eating the apple from the tree of awareness.
God realized that now at least four entities (god, adam, eve, satan a.k.a Snake Plisken) with awareness existed.
And so he said when people are aware of theirselves they don't need a caring god, they can live on their own with *any help* from daddy.
This is why HE/God/His boss can't/won't fix it. Because our sin is awareness so mankind is fully responsible for it's own actions
And as we are responsible for our actions, we should try to act accordingly.
And not hope, that the CO2 content conserved over hundreds of millions of years excavated and reintroduced into the atmosphere over a term of ~150yrs. will have really no effect on the climate.
*(adam & eve games)
*(in the start at some point in time god went arsonist on some olive trees)
Basically, Law and a Programming Language should basically be the same, from the basic definition they are, but sometimes law is interpreted (this is good and bad both at the same time)
a.) in human interaction law specifies rules & processes for man b.) in machine operation a programming language specifies rules & processes for machines
And in both domains people try to (ab)use the specified rules to behave in a way, which was not forseen/intended by the rule maker.
I judge this as an exploit of type priviledge escalation.
But we should start hacking law, FBI has a head start!
Actually, this is only partially true, north korea is very very complex and the judgement brought to you depends on your status in the hierachy of the system.
(pff.. comunism.. everyone is equal, except that the kims are more equal than others and the politcal elite and the military..)
If you are part of the "elite" and not doing public display of disobedience you will not be searched or the guards will see nothing, or what's actually mostly the case if your hierachy status is too low, they will have an open hand (bribery) - if you are not even elite, you will need much money,
If you fail all these you are going to labour camp, and there your have a high chance of being executed.
If you are from military and doing these searches you don't want to handcuff a son of the elite, because that would be your death sentence.
NK to the outside wants to be seen as a perfect "democratic" totalitrian system (there are elections!!, however no more than one of everything) - where there is no way around than for all to vote for Kim ***** because (sarcasmtag_on) he is the perfect leader and it's certianly true that everybody knows that... those who didn't know, well they were *executed*(sarcasmtag_off)
North Korea is at somewhat place three or so as the most corrupt countries, this might sound crazy however, if you gain a deeper understanding of NK and their people, you will recognize most of them are "normal" under extraordinary circumstances. NK is extremely eliterian, if you are in PyongYang you are part of the elite, there are other biggerish cities that also are elitarian.
If you are working in the military you are part of the "elite".. think of a 1000 steps hierachy if you are not below 800 you are "elite" and in NK you will do much to keep that status or to rise up.
Actually due to close ties with China, people in North Korea (official DPRK) have access to android phones and even tablets, just look at the talk from Will Scott which he gave on this years 31c3 at Hamburg.
The distinguishing is not the "door", it's the "effect".
If you block a door to a casino or block the door to ER, that's the difference. One is discomfort, the other is dirty intent.
We are talking here about that some people are not being able to play a game, and they react in these childish, also insulting ways.(example.. see yourself kid).
Router are physical -> yes they are, but they did what they always do, nothing else.
Sorry Babs, too late, I admitted my mistake earlier, and reversed my verdict.
However you haven't refuted basic claims, you just replaced them by making basic claims yourself.
Also actually you reached singularity by connecting, money to religion using "faith" and commenting on something that revolved around online gaming and the inability to "exercise" that.
Also, it's the inability for one single day, and people react like crazy kids, not taking a deep breath of fresh air or being able to relax.
Slashdot Mirror
The key to understanding why the whole debate is doubtable and nationalistic from the beginning, is to understand that general mathematics is a universal science.
You cannot invent mathematics.
(Remark: This should also be true with physics, these physics inventors haven't even their free energy device running so well it could power their cell phone.)
Basic mathematics like pythagorean theorem is discovered,
and Pythagoras didn't invent it, he discovered that just some basic relationships but he wrote down a universal formula..
(And I think he also managed to geometrically proof the theorem. I'm not sure)
So even if you find some of these so called pythagorean relationships and use the numbers in your construction - then if you don't write down a formula you have no theorem at all. And however sometimes a library burnes down and papyrus with the theorem is lost.
But again mathematics is universial, so if a theorem is truely universal it can be rediscovered. And this is what's happening, some pupils and students have the capability to rediscover mathematical principles using just their education they received to a certain point, with having never heard about before. Brilliant!
The real genius idea is after discovering a numerical relationship to write down a "general" formula, this is what he did.
Discoveries are made sometime, and sometime they are forgotten. It is possible that Pythagoras is just a "late" inventor, but understand the indian minister you need to understand that he is a hindu nationalist, and as any nationalist, he believes in the superiority of his "peer group".
This reveals an inferiority complex nationalistic indians are worried that their country was and is a develloping country - aside from their huge steps in science and engineering.
They just have too put their name on everything and claim everything, it's just sad, because these people will not stop there, where science and philosophy would return to a more rational debate.
The basic reaction that such hydrocarbons can be created exists.
But it cannot lead to the conclusion that because of this oil would be renewable.
Actually, there are some "theorists" (like Gold) that pronounced & defended the abiotic theory of oil creation. Which directly goes into that direction, that only some of the oil is created from biological "residue".
Thus stating that due to this process oil reserves would be able to renew theirselves, as complex hydrocarbons are chemically produced without the help of bacteria with the earths crust, and therefore denying the existence of a "real" peak oil and that oil reserves are infinite according to their theorie as they renew their self.
Basically, it means that even without bacteria you can reform hydrogen, carbon and oxygene in succeeding chemical reactions to produce hydrocarbons (more complex than just methane) About the abiotic methane creation we know from cosmologists. Also looking at the saturn moon titan, were it seems that there are indeed huge amounts of abiotic created methane that concentrates in forms of seas.
Algae are a good point, they can be cultivated on a much smaller space, and also test appliances are beyond the stadium of just being an experiment.
Sorry to devide the answer into more than one part,
but the scifi-solution you mentioned (off world) I'd like to argument against it.
Where: Titan
Why: Titans atmosphere and sea are liquid methane CH4 not because of life
Problem:
Adding matter to earth
- yes, we have an addition of matter to the earth (comets, meteorites)
- yes, we have a loss of mass (atmosphere)
At the moment the increase or decrease rate I think is at an equilibrium.
The solution to space mine(minerals) or prospect(hydrocarbons) would actually add matter to the earth and if the earth will increase mass so will our orbit around the sun decrease. I judge this effect not to be desired. It will get hot hot hot!
Yes, I don't give a thought to the transfer of kinetic energy from titan to the earth.
The argumentation wasn't about biofuels or their feasebility. It was just about why it is safe to assume that oil reserves are limited.
The thought you indirectly implied with hinting at biofuels, so to substitute part of the oil consumption - with biofuel - so that oil reserves will last longer.
Biofuels will be a part of the energy mix for propulsion of the future yes, but only a part.
a.) yes, at some point in time biofuels may/will become economical enough to compete with petrol. Some still are,
depending on where you use them (ethanol production in brazil for example).
b.) Till today the advantage of using fossil fuels is that it is "free" energy. As you just need to get it out of the earth but you don't need to put resources(usable land area) into just to create it.
The production of biofuels however is limited as they compete with food (except jatropha which is poisonous) but also with cultivating land.
c.) I indeed see the ethical problem in using food to drive a car,
however I do also think that it can be solved if the priority is on the food production for humans and that biofuel production is only secondary.
Looking into the energy markets, electrical propulsion is the most likely the biggest part of the "mix" solution. Because you can harvest the (renewable-)energy for it it on very small areas.
Also some areas that are ideal for solar for example are barren dry land or deserts
"oil production": Yes, term oil production is actually wrong.
You should use authentification and encryption NOW!
On your remote switch* or we will see many islamists detonating in their training camps, instead detonating at a market square.
Actually then the term suicide bomber would be appropriate - because it's not essentially suicide but essentially it's murder, suicide is just a byproduct
*Suicide bombers have their paket often equiped with a fail over switch if the bomber rethinks pressing the button, it will be pressed remotely.
Heck if the price every gets truly ridiculous then you start looking off-world.
Unlikely to happen, the abiotic theory in the creation of oil by Gold is mostly viewed as disproven, because it lead to deep drilling efforts, these got not much oil out of it but showed that even there bacteria (extremophiles) were present so deep inside the earth.
If you would now jump off your seat and say again that this is proof that we just must dig deeper. This can be disproven to be sustainable by logic, meaning yes there is little oil, but again "little" not the amounts needed.
The steps to disprove:
a.) The creation of oil needs at least plant life (the biomass of plant life is enormous), while it may not need the life itself(chemical proccession is possible) but life (our known carbon based life) accumulates water and carbon,
and these things can recombine to hydrocarbons (under the influence of heat and pressure)
This means to create oil reservoirs you need and accumulation of the right components and life has the ability to accumulate.
hydrocarbons == oil
If those elements would have been scattered there would be no such oil "stashes" found in the earths crust.
b.) the past view of the O2 content over the last billion of years
- some 650 million years ago the O2 concentration began to rise,
deduction: that this must be initial starting point in develloping of plant life. This is our ground zero for oil creation inside the earth
If you accept the assumption that 99% of the oil resources are based on reprocessed biological matter. The next deduction is, that: There is only a limited amount of oil because of the limited time span of life on earth.
Evidence can be seen, when you look at all discoveries of oil reservoirs, they have two huge peaks(40s and 50s), and many small peaks, but the trend is going downwards, even with the invention of new techniques.
Also discovery doesn't mean production, so basically the reservoirs that are in production now(yes fracked and tar sands) were found some 40-20 years ago, (tar sands are known even longer before) and fracking is also sucking the last drops from known deposits.
Deduction: Digging deeper means just going longer back into the earths biological history And this also means that you are just going back to that point when the "tank" (meaning all that biological matter that was conserved and did not decompose) was started to be filled.
Meaning: The deeper you dig the less you will find.
The other evidence proving the reality of peak oil is that this oil is used for rougly 130yrs. at industrial scale.
These resources were never drained before. So even that right now hydrocarbons are formed in the earth crust. The rate of oil creation by this process can deduced to be very slow.
Taking into account the long time for creation, the total consumed amount and the growing hardships that prospectors face since the 60s it can be logically deduced that there is a limited amount of oil, and if you start to drain it, the creation rate of new oil due to biological processes does virtually not even cover for about 0-point-0-somehting percent of the whole oil production. This means it is logical and safe to assume that peak oil (production) is very real.
And if you look into the future consumption of China and India which I did not, it looks just more severe.
Yes, your conclusion is basically what my argumentation is based uppon.
And I'm sure that you are just funny, go back to sleep kid.
perhaps some managers took engineering classes and started to re-project peak oil and realized:
That peak oil will still be there, just a bit later. And that when you have cheap oil at hand and you make yourself highly depended on such a resource, where we have seen everything from extreme low to painfully high within a very short time.
That not looking on efficiency and substitution you wouldn't be prepared for the future, when such choices would be made by many companies+people that would increase the demand on renewables to a stretch where markets simply cannot deliver any more. When markets cannot deliver anymore prices go skyrocketing making that late choice for renewables really painfull.
(we saw this in 2007/2008 when market demand for renewables was so high, that the demand could not be satisfied any more)
Windows Vista - not somehting it could do
WIndows 7 - not something it could do
WindowsXP - can do
Windows2000 - can do
That's part of the answer why winnt5/5.1 are actually widley used, they are used in realtime equipment, along with their low memory and cpu footprint (winxp can be tuned very good).
And hopefully nobody dares to connect Win2ksp4 or winxpsp3 on these appliances to the pure-internet nor to any intranet consisting of more than one not connected computer.
But WinXP and 2k are very good & smooth OSes (Microsoft did much on XP to optimise it to the performance level of 2k) for these types, and many people with these needs, are not very pleased with win7.
But PREEMPT is funny that it is mentioned now, I can remember some 2.4.X kernel, or was it even 2.2.16/18ish ? when I patched the Preempt scheduler into and needed to make manually a new patch from the previous patched kernel source because one version later the patch failed.
Later the option was present in the menuconfig as experimental.
Really was preempt forgotten so fast ??
But, ask yourself what does it mean in becoming like "gods", you don't follow rules, you make rules, and thus are fully responsible for your own actions.
It would be easier and more in depth if you would lay out your arguments or thoughts why one should not be able to treat law as a kind of programming lanuage (ok, it might fail the turing test).
Dawn, don't get your hopes up, he is not a natural born citizen of the U.S. so he can't run for presidency.
However, it's a nice phantasy, than really change would happen.
Adam & Eve - the executive version:
His boss, kicked "us" out of the executive lounge - where we had free finger food and funny games* all day - and there was nothing else to do, than to praise him and follow his rules - not to eat the apple from the special tree (tree of awareness).
We voilated his only rule and became aware due to eating the apple from the tree of awareness.
God realized that now at least four entities (god, adam, eve, satan a.k.a Snake Plisken) with awareness existed.
And so he said when people are aware of theirselves they don't need a caring god, they can live on their own with *any help* from daddy.
This is why HE/God/His boss can't/won't fix it. Because our sin is awareness so mankind is fully responsible for it's own actions
And as we are responsible for our actions, we should try to act accordingly.
And not hope, that the CO2 content conserved over hundreds of millions of years excavated and reintroduced into the atmosphere over a term of ~150yrs. will have really no effect on the climate.
*(adam & eve games)
*(in the start at some point in time god went arsonist on some olive trees)
Basically, Law and a Programming Language should basically be the same, from the basic definition they are, but sometimes law is interpreted (this is good and bad both at the same time)
a.) in human interaction law specifies rules & processes for man
b.) in machine operation a programming language specifies rules & processes for machines
And in both domains people try to (ab)use the specified rules to behave in a way, which was not forseen/intended by the rule maker.
I judge this as an exploit of type priviledge escalation.
But we should start hacking law, FBI has a head start!
Actually, this is only partially true, north korea is very very complex and the judgement brought to you depends on your status in the hierachy of the system.
(pff.. comunism .. everyone is equal, except that the kims are more equal than others and the politcal elite and the military ..)
If you are part of the "elite" and not doing public display of disobedience you will not be searched or the guards will see nothing, or what's actually mostly the case if your hierachy status is too low, they will have an open hand (bribery) - if you are not even elite, you will need much money,
If you fail all these you are going to labour camp, and there your have a high chance of being executed.
If you are from military and doing these searches you don't want to handcuff a son of the elite, because that would be your death sentence.
NK to the outside wants to be seen as a perfect "democratic" totalitrian system (there are elections!!, however no more than one of everything) - where there is no way around than for all to vote for Kim ***** because (sarcasmtag_on) he is the perfect leader and it's certianly true that everybody knows that ... those who didn't know, well they were *executed*(sarcasmtag_off)
North Korea is at somewhat place three or so as the most corrupt countries, this might sound crazy however, if you
gain a deeper understanding of NK and their people, you will recognize most of them are "normal" under extraordinary circumstances. NK is extremely eliterian, if you are in PyongYang you are part of the elite, there are other biggerish cities that also are elitarian.
If you are working in the military you are part of the "elite" .. think of a 1000 steps hierachy if you are not below 800 you are "elite" and in NK you will do much to keep that status or to rise up.
Actually due to close ties with China, people in North Korea (official DPRK) have access to android phones and even tablets,
just look at the talk from Will Scott which he gave on this years 31c3 at Hamburg.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yeah, you are right,
it was like lighting a match near open napalm, and many caught on fire ;)
Hi,
you simply don't get it.
The distinguishing is not the "door", it's the "effect".
If you block a door to a casino or block the door to ER, that's the difference. One is discomfort, the other is dirty intent.
We are talking here about that some people are not being able to play a game, and they react in these childish, also insulting ways.(example .. see yourself kid).
Router are physical -> yes they are, but they did what they always do, nothing else.
Sorry Babs, too late, I admitted my mistake earlier, and reversed my verdict.
However you haven't refuted basic claims, you just replaced them by making basic claims yourself.
Also actually you reached singularity by connecting, money to religion using "faith" and commenting on something that revolved around online gaming and the inability to "exercise" that.
Also, it's the inability for one single day, and people react like crazy kids, not taking a deep breath of fresh air or being able to relax.
If you would have read all posts .. you could see that I actually admited my misstake and revised my point of view.
But, I wrote espressivly why I did that.
In contrast putting argumentation on a non argument is tideous work, so this is the way of minimum restistance.
Any points, why they are assholes, and perhaps why their doing is wrong ?
I suspect argumentation isn't your strongest skill ?