Um, yeah. It's China.... If you say things that the government doesn't like, they lock you up. (If they find out and get around to it - for run of the mill stuff, they will have people with the drive and efficiency of your average telephone sanitizer on the job.)
You seem to be under the impression that sort of behavior is exclusive to the Chinese government.
No, dink, it's a common shortening of the name for a country; specifically, the United States of America.
You're thinking of North America, or maybe South America, or possibly the quasi-continent in-between known as Central America, but there is no continent that is known as just "America."
Of course, we all know that nobody on the internet is dense and uninformed enough to actually believe in the amiguity you're referring to, so it pretty much goes without saying that your comment is pure troll and nothing else. The real question is, why? What was your purpose behind leaving such an obviously stupid and pointless comment? For the attention?
Well, congrats, you got it: We all now know how stupidly uptight and unreasonable you can be. Bet your parents are real proud.
Most news sites enforce some standard of ideological purity in order to keep the trollage levels down, so the comments turn into an effective echo chamber. Especially the US sites, with their liberals-vs-conservatives political divide.
While I've never seen a news site that blatantly does so, I have noticed people tend to self-segregate; you won't see a lot of pro-Obamacare comments on Foxnews.com, nor will there be very many people supporting gun rights on HuffPo.
This is why I've made it a hobby to go to sites like that and provide a counterpoint to the choir... reactions are hilarious. It's a bit like sticking your finger in an ant mound: the next thing you know, a thousand of the little bastards are crawling all over you.
Someone is - the person who made the comment. Grasping at straws to have someone, anyone whose ass you can pin to the wall is irresponsible and a violation of their right to not be held responsible for the actions of others.
People like you are why Jesus was crucified. Yea, that's right, I went there; suck it, Pharisee.
The second part (if true) is, frankly, jaw dropping and goes a long way (along with our oversized military spending) to explaining how we got into the mess we're in today. Literally five decades worth of congresses and presidents would have utterly failed in their duty to spend the nation's capital wisely (not to mention the people in genuine need who most likely will have suffered in such a scenario).
Pork barrel politics, man; everybody wants to get them a piece of the pie, and damn the rest of society.
I'd like to think there's a way out of this mess without hurting the people with the most to lose, but the more thought I put into it the more I realize just how far up Shit Creek we've gotten since dropping the oars over the side. Seems the only way the system can be fixed at this point is to tear it completely apart and start over from scratch... which is going to hurt.
Anecdotally, my parents sent me to a child psychologist when I was about 8, presumably because I wasn't handling their divorce the way they expected (I wasn't bothered by it because I knew everyone would be happier that way, which is apparently considered quite an odd attitude for a kid that age)... While I question the validity of sending a rather well-adjusted kid to such a professional, it was nice to have someone outside the family I could talk to about stuff.
I will say, though, the increasing prevalence in diagnosing children with previously unheard of conditions does seem to be an excuse to avoid taking responsibility by doping the poor little buggers out of their brains. Considering that most of the mass killings in recent history has been performed by people who have prescriptions for mood-altering drugs like Zoloft, it's fair to question the validity of today's mental health diagnosis, as well as the system in general.
For the amount of money we spent on one year of so-called stimulus, we could have built ~300 new gen 4 nuclear reactors, converting the country to 80% nuclear power (the remaining being hydro in areas where it already exists).
Wanna get really pissed off? The Federal Reserve has been spending $85,000,000,000 a month in 'quantitative easing,' AKA propping up low inter-bank interest rates.
That's OK, but spending $80 billion a year on foodstamps? Fuck those lazy poor people, they just need to work harder.
If that doesn't piss you off, there's something wrong with ya. Like being a congressperson.
I believe my mistake was in not being specific when I said "social programs."
I actually meant to limit the scope of my bitching to a subset of the larger social welfare program - specifically, programs like TANF, SNAP, WIC, and anything else that specifically deals with providing basic necessities (outside medical care) for day-to-day survival.
I don't even want to get into SS and medicare... I think it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that both programs have become lumbering, unwieldy behemoths.
so another recession or better yet a depression, is a good start?
Some people are blithering idiots. They see "government worker" and automatically assume that we're talking about some overpaid Senate page who has a Mercedes for each day of the week, paid for by Congressional blowjobs or something.
The reality is that most people who work for the government are just as underpaid and over-worked as the rest of us.
FWIW, I worked for the government once; only time in my life I had to be on food stamps because I didn't get paid enough to feed and shelter my family.
Everyone in the lapdog press is running around crying Oh No'es but NOTHING bad is happening.
Well, nothing bad other than millions of Americans suddenly becoming essentially unemployed, even if temporarily, for which I can see no possible negative effect./sarc
Pay them to build a bridge to nowhere. Then they'll be employed, and things will be just like they were before.
Yea, ok... OR, and stick with me here: we could pay them to fix and/or replace our aging infrastructure; that way, they'll be employed, and things will be better than they were before!
Oh, wait, this is American bureaucracy we're talking about - making things better hasn't been on the table for a long, long time.
Everyone in the lapdog press is running around crying Oh No'es but NOTHING bad is happening.
Well, nothing bad other than millions of Americans suddenly becoming essentially unemployed, even if temporarily, for which I can see no possible negative effect./sarc
Yes, well, unless grocery stores and gas stations have suddenly started to accept IOU's in lieu of payment, that does them fuck-all worth of good right now, doesn't it?
House came together in a moment of rare bipartisanship to pass a bill, by a vote of 407 to 0, approving back pay for furloughed government workers.
President Obama has expressed his support for the measure.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid supports the measure, but said Saturday that if furloughed workers are guaranteed back pay, there’s no reason to keep them out of work.
They should be working, since they will be getting back pay. Why does Obama keep them home?
Which I why I suggest we fully fund WIC and defund our foreign wars.
We could start with small things like not buying tanks the military does not want and then move onto bigger things like not buying F-35s.
Here here!
That's what pisses me off about people who rag on social programs: the cost to run them is but a drop in an endless sea compared to what we spend killing foreigners, propping up dinosaur corporations, scratching banker's backs, etc.
But they're the only programs politicians ever really manage to cut. WTF, America?
Hopefully these teahadists are not going to go that far. Even that seems too much.
I guess you missed the speech Obama gave yesterday, in which he stated that he would only be willing to negotiate if the Republicans conceded completely and unilaterally? Compromise is a 2-way street, but both sides have put up "one way" signs and refuse to so much as discuss anything, let alone come to an agreement.
Everyone in the lapdog press is running around crying Oh No'es but NOTHING bad is happening.
Well, nothing bad other than millions of Americans suddenly becoming essentially unemployed, even if temporarily, for which I can see no possible negative effect./sarc
Interestingly enough, I haven't caused any accidents yet. Go figure....
Like to dance with the devil, do we?
Key operatives in your statement: "I" and "yet."
Nope, I'm just a good enough driver to keep my eye on the road at all times and use technology to my advantage instead of letting it distract me.
Well, that's good (albeit making statements like that, you'd be wise to find some wood to knock on), but in my experience that makes you an exception to the rule.
Isn't your rant the same thing that they said about radios, GPS devices, etc.... You forget that people eventually adapt and learn how to use new technology safely.
The NHTSA states that 80% of accidents and 16% of highway deaths are the result of distracted drivers
Did you miss the point in the Wiki that distracted driving can be anything from drinking, eating, checking on your kid in the rear view mirror, watching that cute girl on the side of the road, etc... (see the article you linked to).
Nope; did you miss the rest of the paragraph, after the part I quoted?
The National Safety Council (NSC) estimates that 1.6 million (25%) of crashes annually are due to cell phone use, and another 1 million (18%) traffic accidents are due to texting while driving. These numbers equate to one accident every 24 seconds attributed to distracted driving by cell phone use. The NSC also reported that speaking on a cell phone while driving reduces focus on the road and the act of driving by 37%, irrespective of hands-free cell phone operation.
If someone is a bad driver, they are going to be a bad driver no matter what they have in the car to distract them.
Not untrue.
The point of technology is to provide solutions that reduces this distraction to a minimum level.
Not true - the point is to sell people cars. GM, Ford, et. al. could give a shit less what you do with it, so long as you give them money.
That aside, any technology in an automobile that is not directly related to driving inherently increases distraction, by mere virtue of the fact that the devices do not relate directly to driving. Of course, that's not to say that all technologies are equally distracting; a radio is less of a distraction than a satnav, and both are far, far less distracting than, say, an 'infotainment' system* that puts Google searches on your dashboard would be.
* I absolutely fucking hate the word 'infotainment.' Sounds too much like reptilian, er, I mean, marketing-speak.
As an example, current technology allows you to text and read texts using voice through the car system. This will reduce the potential distraction of cell phones.
So, are we pretending that all those studies showing that hands-free is no less dangerous than hands on, or have we not payed attention to any news for the past half decade?
Most cars also now have avoidance and lane change warning systems.
No, some cars do - mostly brand new, expensive high-end ones. I.e., the kind of car the vast majority of drivers do not own. Besides, said systems are not perfect, nor should they be a replacement for drivers who pay attention. Personally, I find such technology irresponsible, as it will inevitably lead to lazy people relying on it instead of not being shitty drivers. We'd be better off with fully automated driving, as much as I
Interestingly enough, I haven't caused any accidents yet. Go figure....
Like to dance with the devil, do we?
Key operatives in your statement: "I" and "yet."
Isn't your rant the same thing that they said about radios, GPS devices, etc.... You forget that people eventually adapt and learn how to use new technology safely.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, yeah. It's China.... If you say things that the government doesn't like, they lock you up. (If they find out and get around to it - for run of the mill stuff, they will have people with the drive and efficiency of your average telephone sanitizer on the job.)
You seem to be under the impression that sort of behavior is exclusive to the Chinese government.
They don't have freedom of the press.
Neither does 'Murica, apparently:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/06/politics/06cnd-leak.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/209539/fox-news-reporter-who-wont-reveal-sources-threatened-with-jail/
America is not a country, it's a continent.
No, dink, it's a common shortening of the name for a country; specifically, the United States of America.
You're thinking of North America, or maybe South America, or possibly the quasi-continent in-between known as Central America, but there is no continent that is known as just "America."
Of course, we all know that nobody on the internet is dense and uninformed enough to actually believe in the amiguity you're referring to, so it pretty much goes without saying that your comment is pure troll and nothing else. The real question is, why? What was your purpose behind leaving such an obviously stupid and pointless comment? For the attention?
Well, congrats, you got it: We all now know how stupidly uptight and unreasonable you can be. Bet your parents are real proud.
Most news sites enforce some standard of ideological purity in order to keep the trollage levels down, so the comments turn into an effective echo chamber. Especially the US sites, with their liberals-vs-conservatives political divide.
While I've never seen a news site that blatantly does so, I have noticed people tend to self-segregate; you won't see a lot of pro-Obamacare comments on Foxnews.com, nor will there be very many people supporting gun rights on HuffPo.
This is why I've made it a hobby to go to sites like that and provide a counterpoint to the choir... reactions are hilarious. It's a bit like sticking your finger in an ant mound: the next thing you know, a thousand of the little bastards are crawling all over you.
Not everything that's posted on the Internet is the truth.
Blasphemy!!!!
Quick, someone grab a CAT-o-5-tails and give this lad the whippin' his motherboard shoulda!
Someone ought be [responsible]
Someone is - the person who made the comment. Grasping at straws to have someone, anyone whose ass you can pin to the wall is irresponsible and a violation of their right to not be held responsible for the actions of others.
People like you are why Jesus was crucified. Yea, that's right, I went there; suck it, Pharisee.
http://www.ladailypost.com/content/brief-history-psychotropic-drugs-prescribed-mass-murderers
Hey, my bad for not being clear to begin with.
The second part (if true) is, frankly, jaw dropping and goes a long way (along with our oversized military spending) to explaining how we got into the mess we're in today. Literally five decades worth of congresses and presidents would have utterly failed in their duty to spend the nation's capital wisely (not to mention the people in genuine need who most likely will have suffered in such a scenario).
Pork barrel politics, man; everybody wants to get them a piece of the pie, and damn the rest of society.
I'd like to think there's a way out of this mess without hurting the people with the most to lose, but the more thought I put into it the more I realize just how far up Shit Creek we've gotten since dropping the oars over the side. Seems the only way the system can be fixed at this point is to tear it completely apart and start over from scratch... which is going to hurt.
I don't know about therapy in general, but I did find some interesting material about pseudoscience in mental health.
Anecdotally, my parents sent me to a child psychologist when I was about 8, presumably because I wasn't handling their divorce the way they expected (I wasn't bothered by it because I knew everyone would be happier that way, which is apparently considered quite an odd attitude for a kid that age)... While I question the validity of sending a rather well-adjusted kid to such a professional, it was nice to have someone outside the family I could talk to about stuff.
I will say, though, the increasing prevalence in diagnosing children with previously unheard of conditions does seem to be an excuse to avoid taking responsibility by doping the poor little buggers out of their brains. Considering that most of the mass killings in recent history has been performed by people who have prescriptions for mood-altering drugs like Zoloft, it's fair to question the validity of today's mental health diagnosis, as well as the system in general.
For the amount of money we spent on one year of so-called stimulus, we could have built ~300 new gen 4 nuclear reactors, converting the country to 80% nuclear power (the remaining being hydro in areas where it already exists).
Wanna get really pissed off? The Federal Reserve has been spending $85,000,000,000 a month in 'quantitative easing,' AKA propping up low inter-bank interest rates.
That's OK, but spending $80 billion a year on foodstamps? Fuck those lazy poor people, they just need to work harder.
If that doesn't piss you off, there's something wrong with ya. Like being a congressperson.
So... recall elections, then?
I'm all for it.
I believe my mistake was in not being specific when I said "social programs."
I actually meant to limit the scope of my bitching to a subset of the larger social welfare program - specifically, programs like TANF, SNAP, WIC, and anything else that specifically deals with providing basic necessities (outside medical care) for day-to-day survival.
I don't even want to get into SS and medicare... I think it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that both programs have become lumbering, unwieldy behemoths.
so another recession or better yet a depression, is a good start?
Some people are blithering idiots. They see "government worker" and automatically assume that we're talking about some overpaid Senate page who has a Mercedes for each day of the week, paid for by Congressional blowjobs or something.
The reality is that most people who work for the government are just as underpaid and over-worked as the rest of us.
FWIW, I worked for the government once; only time in my life I had to be on food stamps because I didn't get paid enough to feed and shelter my family.
Everyone in the lapdog press is running around crying Oh No'es but NOTHING bad is happening.
Well, nothing bad other than millions of Americans suddenly becoming essentially unemployed, even if temporarily, for which I can see no possible negative effect. /sarc
Pay them to build a bridge to nowhere. Then they'll be employed, and things will be just like they were before.
Yea, ok... OR, and stick with me here: we could pay them to fix and/or replace our aging infrastructure; that way, they'll be employed, and things will be better than they were before!
Oh, wait, this is American bureaucracy we're talking about - making things better hasn't been on the table for a long, long time.
Everyone in the lapdog press is running around crying Oh No'es but NOTHING bad is happening.
Well, nothing bad other than millions of Americans suddenly becoming essentially unemployed, even if temporarily, for which I can see no possible negative effect. /sarc
Apparently you haven't heard!
They are all going to get paid
Yes, well, unless grocery stores and gas stations have suddenly started to accept IOU's in lieu of payment, that does them fuck-all worth of good right now, doesn't it?
House came together in a moment of rare bipartisanship to pass a bill, by a vote of 407 to 0, approving back pay for furloughed government workers.
President Obama has expressed his support for the measure.
Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid supports the measure, but said Saturday that if furloughed workers are guaranteed back pay, there’s no reason to keep them out of work.
They should be working, since they will be getting back pay.
Why does Obama keep them home?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antideficiency_Act
Now, how this applies to, say, air traffic controllers, but not worthless-ass congresspeople and their equally-worthless staffers is beyond me.
A shame, since the other 10% weren't there.
I thought it was, "What do you have when 90% of a federal agency's bureaucrats are buried up to their necks in sand?"
Which I why I suggest we fully fund WIC and defund our foreign wars.
We could start with small things like not buying tanks the military does not want and then move onto bigger things like not buying F-35s.
Here here!
That's what pisses me off about people who rag on social programs: the cost to run them is but a drop in an endless sea compared to what we spend killing foreigners, propping up dinosaur corporations, scratching banker's backs, etc.
But they're the only programs politicians ever really manage to cut. WTF, America?
So why are these folks being hospitalized?
Alarmism, for the most part. New parents and old folks are some of the worst when it comes to over-reacting.
Hopefully these teahadists are not going to go that far. Even that seems too much.
I guess you missed the speech Obama gave yesterday, in which he stated that he would only be willing to negotiate if the Republicans conceded completely and unilaterally? Compromise is a 2-way street, but both sides have put up "one way" signs and refuse to so much as discuss anything, let alone come to an agreement.
Face it - there are no good guys in this fight.
Everyone in the lapdog press is running around crying Oh No'es but NOTHING bad is happening.
Well, nothing bad other than millions of Americans suddenly becoming essentially unemployed, even if temporarily, for which I can see no possible negative effect. /sarc
Interestingly enough, I haven't caused any accidents yet. Go figure....
Like to dance with the devil, do we?
Key operatives in your statement: "I" and "yet."
Nope, I'm just a good enough driver to keep my eye on the road at all times and use technology to my advantage instead of letting it distract me.
Well, that's good (albeit making statements like that, you'd be wise to find some wood to knock on), but in my experience that makes you an exception to the rule.
Isn't your rant the same thing that they said about radios, GPS devices, etc.... You forget that people eventually adapt and learn how to use new technology safely.
Not according to the NHTSA, who I'm more inclined to believe than some random Slashdotter.
From the article:
The NHTSA states that 80% of accidents and 16% of highway deaths are the result of distracted drivers
Did you miss the point in the Wiki that distracted driving can be anything from drinking, eating, checking on your kid in the rear view mirror, watching that cute girl on the side of the road, etc... (see the article you linked to).
Nope; did you miss the rest of the paragraph, after the part I quoted?
The National Safety Council (NSC) estimates that 1.6 million (25%) of crashes annually are due to cell phone use, and another 1 million (18%) traffic accidents are due to texting while driving. These numbers equate to one accident every 24 seconds attributed to distracted driving by cell phone use. The NSC also reported that speaking on a cell phone while driving reduces focus on the road and the act of driving by 37%, irrespective of hands-free cell phone operation.
If someone is a bad driver, they are going to be a bad driver no matter what they have in the car to distract them.
Not untrue.
The point of technology is to provide solutions that reduces this distraction to a minimum level.
Not true - the point is to sell people cars. GM, Ford, et. al. could give a shit less what you do with it, so long as you give them money.
That aside, any technology in an automobile that is not directly related to driving inherently increases distraction, by mere virtue of the fact that the devices do not relate directly to driving. Of course, that's not to say that all technologies are equally distracting; a radio is less of a distraction than a satnav, and both are far, far less distracting than, say, an 'infotainment' system* that puts Google searches on your dashboard would be.
* I absolutely fucking hate the word 'infotainment.' Sounds too much like reptilian, er, I mean, marketing-speak.
As an example, current technology allows you to text and read texts using voice through the car system. This will reduce the potential distraction of cell phones.
So, are we pretending that all those studies showing that hands-free is no less dangerous than hands on, or have we not payed attention to any news for the past half decade?
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=hands+free+distracted+driving
Most cars also now have avoidance and lane change warning systems.
No, some cars do - mostly brand new, expensive high-end ones. I.e., the kind of car the vast majority of drivers do not own. Besides, said systems are not perfect, nor should they be a replacement for drivers who pay attention. Personally, I find such technology irresponsible, as it will inevitably lead to lazy people relying on it instead of not being shitty drivers. We'd be better off with fully automated driving, as much as I
Hey, it could happen! For example, they might, someday, hire someone who has a basic understanding of English...
Little bit hobby, lotta bit old piece of shit that has to be wiped and redone constantly just to keep it alive.
I do love specious ambiguity, don't you?
In other news, a mad scientist could eventually put big fucking rockets on one side of the moon and launch it into the sun.
Humans could eventually evolve into beings of pure energy.
Slashdot editors could eventually get their shit together and finally understand what "to edit" actually means.
Now, where's my million dollars?
l'll get excited about an open source ECU, I'd rather drivers not be entertained at all
This.
I'd much rather be able to set up my own air/fuel ratio curves and transmission shift points than have Google integrated into my dash.
Interestingly enough, I haven't caused any accidents yet. Go figure....
Like to dance with the devil, do we?
Key operatives in your statement: "I" and "yet."
Isn't your rant the same thing that they said about radios, GPS devices, etc.... You forget that people eventually adapt and learn how to use new technology safely.
Not according to the NHTSA, who I'm more inclined to believe than some random Slashdotter.
From the article:
The NHTSA states that 80% of accidents and 16% of highway deaths are the result of distracted drivers
You forget that most people are selfish, irresponsible jerks with their heads nested firmly in their rectums.