Just because this time the usual thinkofthechildren-killer argument struck again (apparently terrorists don't just cut it anymore) doesn't make it any better. Freedom is or is not.
We have the option to decide between liberty and controlled environment. At least now we still have that choice. Freedom entails also that some will abuse this freedom, and the more freedom we want to enjoy, the harder it will be to find those that abuse it. It is easy to catch perpetrators of any kind in a police state. No doubt about this. Unfortunately police states also tend to come with a slew of laws that dictate what you can and cannot do. Personally, I'd not consider this an improvement.
Freedom means responsibility. That's hard for some, I know. Living in a nanny state where your don't get to decide anything and everything is decided for you depends on how benevolent your daddy is. And if history teaches us anything, then that police states usually make abusive parents.
If it's criminal when I think that it's nobody's business what my business is, then I'm gladly a criminal. If you have already created a prison for my mind, you can as well lock up my body.
Then I guess we should all be really glad water doesn't remember how we mistreat it by abusing it to flush down our shit. Just imagine what potentially potentised diarrheatical effect this would have on all of us!
That's not exactly what they say. What they say is that 1/10th of a dose does not have 1/10th of the effect, as would be expected, but way more than 1/10th.
It's still a far cry from the homeopathetic claim that 1/10th of a dose has ten times the effect.
Theory: see above Practice: Planners will see where people go to escape the "planned" routes and turn through-roads into dead ends and what cannot be corked up gets slowed down with speed limits around walking speed and speed bumps with the size of mountains.
Oh don't worry, governments will react. People use residential areas for through-traffic? No problem, let's make a 10mph speed limit with 4-way-stops at every intersection, huge speed bumps every other yards and whatever else is necessary to make using them as inconvenient as possible.
You don't think that they will actually solve the problem, do you?
And if there's no law against flying my drone near an airport I damn well may do it.
Net result: Because some asshats did just that, we now have laws concerning drones that pretty much make them useless. So keep using the backstreets, it's your right, right? At least until you use one in front of some politician's home, then you'll suddenly see them being regulated as fuck.
The fallacy is to assume someone is right axiomatically because he "should" know, not that you value anyone's argument equally no matter his background. If Stephen Hawking said that at the center of a black hole is a little green man holding a pink teapot, I'd want to hear his proof. Likewise if you said it. The difference is probably that in the former case I'd do it out of genuine curiosity how he comes to the conclusion, in your case I'd do it because I really need a good laugh.
That is the difference.
The ONLY thing "authority" changes is whether hearing someone's proof for an outlandish claim is probably not just a waste of time. Not that you should believe him simply on faith. EVERYONE has to prove his claim. If my doctor said I have cancer I'll probably want him to show me how he comes to the conclusion. If some faith healer tells me I have cancer I'll probably tell him to go to hell.
Hmm... 250k plus invitations to all security conferences to speak there, vs. having to deal with the mob, and a couple three-letter agencies that are not only pissed at me but also have a good reason to lock me up...
Neither action would keep the person alive. I fail to see the benefit.
My dad is old. And it's likely that at some point in the near future he will die. I sure hope it's still some decades out, but statistics is not on my side. I honestly don't know whether I would want to talk with him and KNOW it's going to be the last time. What do you say to someone you know will die? Instead, I try to make every time we talk pleasant enough that I could rest easily if in retrospect I had to realize that this was the last thing I said to my old dad.
I don't know these systems. But I know some systems in Europe and can only say that the ones that are affordable and reasonably well staffed and on time are not exactly the privatized ones.
Losing my best person because someone came and made a better offer with my projects failing milestones left and right because of it IS a surefire way to see my ass fired. Out of a cannon.
Careful what you wish for. You don't even want to know what kind of weird fetishes people have, and YOU would be the one that has to make them possible.
I guess it would be the first programming job where a shower is a basic requirement to keep the people sane.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because this time the usual thinkofthechildren-killer argument struck again (apparently terrorists don't just cut it anymore) doesn't make it any better. Freedom is or is not.
We have the option to decide between liberty and controlled environment. At least now we still have that choice. Freedom entails also that some will abuse this freedom, and the more freedom we want to enjoy, the harder it will be to find those that abuse it. It is easy to catch perpetrators of any kind in a police state. No doubt about this. Unfortunately police states also tend to come with a slew of laws that dictate what you can and cannot do. Personally, I'd not consider this an improvement.
Freedom means responsibility. That's hard for some, I know. Living in a nanny state where your don't get to decide anything and everything is decided for you depends on how benevolent your daddy is. And if history teaches us anything, then that police states usually make abusive parents.
If it's criminal when I think that it's nobody's business what my business is, then I'm gladly a criminal. If you have already created a prison for my mind, you can as well lock up my body.
Smart devices are for dumb people.
Then I guess we should all be really glad water doesn't remember how we mistreat it by abusing it to flush down our shit. Just imagine what potentially potentised diarrheatical effect this would have on all of us!
That's not exactly what they say. What they say is that 1/10th of a dose does not have 1/10th of the effect, as would be expected, but way more than 1/10th.
It's still a far cry from the homeopathetic claim that 1/10th of a dose has ten times the effect.
So your parents never tried to convince you of Santa and the Easter Bunny being real?
Theory: see above
Practice: Planners will see where people go to escape the "planned" routes and turn through-roads into dead ends and what cannot be corked up gets slowed down with speed limits around walking speed and speed bumps with the size of mountains.
Oh don't worry, governments will react. People use residential areas for through-traffic? No problem, let's make a 10mph speed limit with 4-way-stops at every intersection, huge speed bumps every other yards and whatever else is necessary to make using them as inconvenient as possible.
You don't think that they will actually solve the problem, do you?
And if there's no law against flying my drone near an airport I damn well may do it.
Net result: Because some asshats did just that, we now have laws concerning drones that pretty much make them useless. So keep using the backstreets, it's your right, right? At least until you use one in front of some politician's home, then you'll suddenly see them being regulated as fuck.
Thanks, asshole.
The fallacy is to assume someone is right axiomatically because he "should" know, not that you value anyone's argument equally no matter his background. If Stephen Hawking said that at the center of a black hole is a little green man holding a pink teapot, I'd want to hear his proof. Likewise if you said it. The difference is probably that in the former case I'd do it out of genuine curiosity how he comes to the conclusion, in your case I'd do it because I really need a good laugh.
That is the difference.
The ONLY thing "authority" changes is whether hearing someone's proof for an outlandish claim is probably not just a waste of time. Not that you should believe him simply on faith. EVERYONE has to prove his claim. If my doctor said I have cancer I'll probably want him to show me how he comes to the conclusion. If some faith healer tells me I have cancer I'll probably tell him to go to hell.
Nope, they're as far as I can tell the target audience. At least I know no kids that are boring enough to watch "Kids TV".
Psychologists all over the world agree that kids need fairy tales.
Back in my age we called it "argument from authority". And even then we knew that it's bullshit.
Makes me feel like I'd be wrong in this country.
Hmm... 250k plus invitations to all security conferences to speak there, vs. having to deal with the mob, and a couple three-letter agencies that are not only pissed at me but also have a good reason to lock me up...
I can't help it but the decision seems easy.
Unfortunately it's way more interesting for them (and reaches a lot more people, too) to ask for your mail address to keep you informed...
You can ride the subway in New York via the internet now?
Did I miss an important development in telepresence technology?
Neither action would keep the person alive. I fail to see the benefit.
My dad is old. And it's likely that at some point in the near future he will die. I sure hope it's still some decades out, but statistics is not on my side. I honestly don't know whether I would want to talk with him and KNOW it's going to be the last time. What do you say to someone you know will die? Instead, I try to make every time we talk pleasant enough that I could rest easily if in retrospect I had to realize that this was the last thing I said to my old dad.
Then switch off yours. Why the urge to dictate what others can do?
The main difference would be that you worry without anything you can do a day later.
I don't know these systems. But I know some systems in Europe and can only say that the ones that are affordable and reasonably well staffed and on time are not exactly the privatized ones.
The problem: Where is the ad revenue in that?
Losing my best person because someone came and made a better offer with my projects failing milestones left and right because of it IS a surefire way to see my ass fired. Out of a cannon.
Careful what you wish for. You don't even want to know what kind of weird fetishes people have, and YOU would be the one that has to make them possible.
I guess it would be the first programming job where a shower is a basic requirement to keep the people sane.
The world just ain't the same since we lost our Jobs...