The 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps' message is so simple and appealing, I've been finding it hard to articulate a reply. Your post does a fine job of countering the argument.
I'd like to remind Ms Flowers that the women's mag industry values wealth over character in potential husbands, and places a premium on physique on playmates for the female's sexual-awakening-years.
It's the way of biology and thousand's of years of evolution, and a few years' liberation.
Ok, point taken. However, the colonists didn't fight in a European fashion but often employed guerrilla tactics as required to take on a stronger force. At least, that's what the school books claim.
So, bad example. My point is, the colonists didn't taken on the British in the manner they counted on. They innovated and jerry-rigged. They skirmished and ran. They did, up to a point, what they had to.
The tactics and actions of Al Qaeda and the Iraqi insurgents are gross beyond words. However, as bad as they are, we cannot allow ourselves to compromise our standards. We've been rounding up young men and torturing them to get information. We cast a wide net, under the excuse that we're not fighting a legimate force (it's true, we're not, but that's beside the point). It reminds me of the witch hunts where the test was to subject the victum to a horror that they were unlikely to survive because only a witch could survive it!
BTW, thanks for (politely) calling me on my example. I presented a convenient guess as fact. Kudos.
I was born and raised in California. When I was a young adult, I moved overseas for 10 years. When I returned about 6 years ago, one of the first things to strike me was Americans' tolerance for mediocrity, both in products and services. Just as long as they can get a ton of stuff that work good enough without having to read the manual.
That tolerance, coupled with a pervasive belief that America has the best of everything, from political systems to health care to consumer products (many Americans hate it when I give counter examples--really rocks their world view), suggests a fertile ground for technological stagnation.
Tell me to piss off if you like. I couldn't give a toss.
He told me he saw first-hand the difference we've made in that country, and there's no way anyone can convince him that the war was wrong.
Great. Then I'm sure he can't wait to get started in Sudan, Liberia, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Burma, North Korea, Cambodia, Kurdistan, Iran, Angola, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Tibet, etc.
Oh yeah, and what about the indigenous tribes in the Amazon basin? Now which side to take, the tribes, whose ways of life are being destroyed by outsiders? Or the ranchers, who are exercising their right to capitalize on natural resources? Do we decide now, in a whingy asshat sort of way, or send in a few commando units and have them report back?
True, most IT nerds aren't particularly qualified to judge
I have to disagree with you here. IT nerds are trained in analysis, obtain information from a variety of sources, regularly manage complexity, must view systems from different perspectives, and understand that systems must compromise amongst competing criteria.
Not only are IT nerds qualified, they are very interested in politics, as manifested by the number of posted articles on politics, economics, and social justice. Where there attitudes line up with the attitudes of the mainstream or any group or individual is another story.
Handguns are designed to kill and maim homo sapiens. That is their primary purpose. Target practice is just a way to become more effective at killing. Hunters use rifles for accurracy.
A screw driver can be used to kill, but it is designed to turn screws. I can think of nothing a handgun can do, besides killing/maiming a person, that some other tool cannot do more effectively.
When have we NOT held that public nudity and swearing in public are a bad thing? Especially on the broadcast airwaves? When have we EVER allowed it?
Yeah, and our generation was the first one to discovers sex!
Try the 1920s and early 30s (pre WWII). While perhaps public nudity wasn't exactly allowed, the youth of the 20s and 30s really knew how to party. Everything goes in cycles and it is naive to assume that everything before us was conservative and that we are asymptotically moving to a more permissive society.
It's neither open source nor free (as in beer), but Oracle Calendar works great as a client on both Windows and unix platforms. As a bonus, I believe it interacts gracefully with Exchange servers, but I'm not an admin, so what do I know?
Once your name is on a shit list somewhere it's unlikely to ever come off. Do we really want law enforcement being able to collect names solely based on an 'investigation'? Do you think they have trouble fabricating probable cause? They don't and while I'm sure most cops are honest decent people, when push comes to shove in a court room, even the honest cops will back the dirty.
BTW, I wouldn't use the Dec. of Ind. example too much. Many signers signed well into the war. Space was left for those who were playing 'wait and see'. (Can't say I blame them, really. A British prison in the colonies? No thank you.) So, in fact is was AC for many.
I could be wrong here, and IANAP, but I think his/her clothes and body absorb photons. The additional energy excites the electrons of his/her many atoms into higher energy states. When the electrons jump back to the lower energy state, an brand new, fresh out of the box photon is emitted.
So, technically, the original post is correct. But s/he's probably still infringing.
Re:Excellent review of the book
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
...the ideal approach to the problem is to continue working on pet. eng. research while slowly decreasing the research activities over the next 15 - 20 years
Agreed. Certainly, your knowledge of the field is far, far greater than mine. Plus, I appreciate that you seek a reasonable evaluation and solution to the problem. However, let me emphasize that, despite the fact that the book's premise, specifically that we have already discovered 90% of the world's reserves, is open to dispute (and I clearly don't have the knowledge to argue one way or the other), the point that problems will start once demand exceeds available reserves and production capacity is salient and provocative. It is plausible that this date will arrive in advance of actual depletion of reserves, or improvements in extraction tech.
The time to change the world's infrastructure is in advance of the problems. Eg, if we had taken tough measures such as insisting on good MPG for new cars during the fat '90s, when we had the excess economic capacity to absorb the costs, we would be much better off now. Currently, we are facing economic slowdown, inflation, an aging population, and the poisonous fruits of war. Leadership is required, and the current momentum is in the wrong direction (specifically, more power to oil companies, more dependence on oil, no decent mass transit, treatment of symptoms rather that the fundamental problem). Perhaps Carter was right after all.
Ok, ok, I included the Carter bit to 'put the cat among the pigeons'. I'm incorrigible.
Re:High Prices are Required
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
You make a great point. Ideally, the time to make a radical change in energy sources was during the fat '90s, when we could absorb the costs without much sacrifice.
But instead, we busily and stupidly went about increasing our dependence on oil. I suspect history will conclude we're experiencing the first pains of the transition, war and inflation. (Mere conjecture, I know.)
Slashdot Mirror
I thought I was losing my mind.
Yes. And those of us that are fortunate enough to have the bootstraps should ensure a "fair go" (as the Australians put it) for everybody.
But for some people to win, someone's gotta lose. It's the great White Way.
BTW, I'm a WASP, so I know.
Thank you for your thoughtful post.
The 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps' message is so simple and appealing, I've been finding it hard to articulate a reply. Your post does a fine job of countering the argument.
I'd like to remind Ms Flowers that the women's mag industry values wealth over character in potential husbands, and places a premium on physique on playmates for the female's sexual-awakening-years.
It's the way of biology and thousand's of years of evolution, and a few years' liberation.In a word, yes.
Exactly! Nice one.
Ok, point taken. However, the colonists didn't fight in a European fashion but often employed guerrilla tactics as required to take on a stronger force. At least, that's what the school books claim.
So, bad example. My point is, the colonists didn't taken on the British in the manner they counted on. They innovated and jerry-rigged. They skirmished and ran. They did, up to a point, what they had to.
The tactics and actions of Al Qaeda and the Iraqi insurgents are gross beyond words. However, as bad as they are, we cannot allow ourselves to compromise our standards. We've been rounding up young men and torturing them to get information. We cast a wide net, under the excuse that we're not fighting a legimate force (it's true, we're not, but that's beside the point). It reminds me of the witch hunts where the test was to subject the victum to a horror that they were unlikely to survive because only a witch could survive it!
BTW, thanks for (politely) calling me on my example. I presented a convenient guess as fact. Kudos.
Why have the government do it when the corporate sector has been doing a great job telling us what's proper for a decade or two now?
It's a good thing we donned uniforms for the American Revolution so that we can take this stand on illegal combatants now without a hint of hypocrisy.
I was born and raised in California. When I was a young adult, I moved overseas for 10 years. When I returned about 6 years ago, one of the first things to strike me was Americans' tolerance for mediocrity, both in products and services. Just as long as they can get a ton of stuff that work good enough without having to read the manual.
That tolerance, coupled with a pervasive belief that America has the best of everything, from political systems to health care to consumer products (many Americans hate it when I give counter examples--really rocks their world view), suggests a fertile ground for technological stagnation.
Tell me to piss off if you like. I couldn't give a toss.
Thank you for your thoughtful analysis.
I was going to argue, but then I realized you're joking! (Or trolling.)
Then, the kettle called the pot black.
Great. Then I'm sure he can't wait to get started in Sudan, Liberia, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Burma, North Korea, Cambodia, Kurdistan, Iran, Angola, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Tibet, etc.
Oh yeah, and what about the indigenous tribes in the Amazon basin? Now which side to take, the tribes, whose ways of life are being destroyed by outsiders? Or the ranchers, who are exercising their right to capitalize on natural resources? Do we decide now, in a whingy asshat sort of way, or send in a few commando units and have them report back?
I have to disagree with you here. IT nerds are trained in analysis, obtain information from a variety of sources, regularly manage complexity, must view systems from different perspectives, and understand that systems must compromise amongst competing criteria.
Not only are IT nerds qualified, they are very interested in politics, as manifested by the number of posted articles on politics, economics, and social justice. Where there attitudes line up with the attitudes of the mainstream or any group or individual is another story.
Otherwise, good point.
Handguns are designed to kill and maim homo sapiens. That is their primary purpose. Target practice is just a way to become more effective at killing. Hunters use rifles for accurracy.
A screw driver can be used to kill, but it is designed to turn screws. I can think of nothing a handgun can do, besides killing/maiming a person, that some other tool cannot do more effectively.
I know what you mean. Just take the one in office right now: the poster boy for the no-self-serving-weasels-in-office movement.
Yeah, and our generation was the first one to discovers sex!
Try the 1920s and early 30s (pre WWII). While perhaps public nudity wasn't exactly allowed, the youth of the 20s and 30s really knew how to party. Everything goes in cycles and it is naive to assume that everything before us was conservative and that we are asymptotically moving to a more permissive society.
It's neither open source nor free (as in beer), but Oracle Calendar works great as a client on both Windows and unix platforms. As a bonus, I believe it interacts gracefully with Exchange servers, but I'm not an admin, so what do I know?
Once your name is on a shit list somewhere it's unlikely to ever come off. Do we really want law enforcement being able to collect names solely based on an 'investigation'? Do you think they have trouble fabricating probable cause? They don't and while I'm sure most cops are honest decent people, when push comes to shove in a court room, even the honest cops will back the dirty.
BTW, I wouldn't use the Dec. of Ind. example too much. Many signers signed well into the war. Space was left for those who were playing 'wait and see'. (Can't say I blame them, really. A British prison in the colonies? No thank you.) So, in fact is was AC for many.
I suggest you (re-)read 1984.
This is a courtesy message. Really.
Try this out. Police cordon off the anti-war rally and start collecting names as people go home.
I could be wrong here, and IANAP, but I think his/her clothes and body absorb photons. The additional energy excites the electrons of his/her many atoms into higher energy states. When the electrons jump back to the lower energy state, an brand new, fresh out of the box photon is emitted.
So, technically, the original post is correct. But s/he's probably still infringing.
Agreed. Certainly, your knowledge of the field is far, far greater than mine. Plus, I appreciate that you seek a reasonable evaluation and solution to the problem. However, let me emphasize that, despite the fact that the book's premise, specifically that we have already discovered 90% of the world's reserves, is open to dispute (and I clearly don't have the knowledge to argue one way or the other), the point that problems will start once demand exceeds available reserves and production capacity is salient and provocative. It is plausible that this date will arrive in advance of actual depletion of reserves, or improvements in extraction tech.
The time to change the world's infrastructure is in advance of the problems. Eg, if we had taken tough measures such as insisting on good MPG for new cars during the fat '90s, when we had the excess economic capacity to absorb the costs, we would be much better off now. Currently, we are facing economic slowdown, inflation, an aging population, and the poisonous fruits of war. Leadership is required, and the current momentum is in the wrong direction (specifically, more power to oil companies, more dependence on oil, no decent mass transit, treatment of symptoms rather that the fundamental problem). Perhaps Carter was right after all.
Ok, ok, I included the Carter bit to 'put the cat among the pigeons'. I'm incorrigible.
You make a great point. Ideally, the time to make a radical change in energy sources was during the fat '90s, when we could absorb the costs without much sacrifice.
But instead, we busily and stupidly went about increasing our dependence on oil. I suspect history will conclude we're experiencing the first pains of the transition, war and inflation. (Mere conjecture, I know.)