Plenty of ex-cons get a second chance in the construction industry, for example. There are places that will hire ex-cons, but not many because they have chosen to demonstrate that they are toxic humans and only a fool or someone who can absorb what some of them will rip off will hire them.
We may WANT someone ELSE to hire an ex-com but unless it were a victimless crime such as (some) drug crimes I certainly wouldn't risk it. I can get solid workers who are motivated and have a good track record, so why risk when I don't have to?
"Once they wont be able to get off from something besides the real deal, they are bound to stop and suddenly turn into normal, heterosexual human beings."
Given the billion-odd dollars (and counting) paid out by the Catholic Church in pedo damage control, I'd say repression drives people with such inclinations to jobs where they can exercise power in secret.
"the fault of someone for being larger than average. "
Dear Hambeasts: Cry me a river. The vast majority of fat fucks got there voluntarily. One reason there are probably so many of them is that it doesn't carry much social stigma, though it should.
If you don't respect yourself enough to manage your weight, I don't respect you or your deliberate infliction of your disgusting bloated carcass on others who use public transportation. May your diet kill you ASAP. If this hurts your feelings, have a consolation donut.
Of course it's about overflow, and those of us who take care not to be grossly fat fucks shouldn't have to be victims of the hambeast in the next seat.
No sympathy here. If you don't fit an airline seat, cargo net your fat disgusting ass to a pallet and go air freight.
"His blog was hosted in the Cloud! A super place where data is impervious to destruction and can never be lost!"
Excellent post!
Guess what, kiddies? You don't OWN the Cloud so you don't get to say shit about how it runs. What you host on the Cloud isn't a matter of your imaginary "rights" outside the TOS you ignore when you put your content on teh shiny intarweb.
Suck on that when you consider surrendering your data to people who Don't Need You.
I don't want the focus to be on manned flight, because it takes funding we could use for remote-manned systems. People don't "explore" space by being present, they are merely closer to the equipment they use for exploration.
We need robots to do everything if the tiny number of people we will eventually be able to send to and maintain in space are to be an effective use of manpower, so perfect the machines before sending the crew. There is urgency and benefit to exploring space, but none to sending people before machines.
Large lead-acid batteries (or Optima batteries if servicing is a concern) are cheap compared to most UPS batteries, inverters are old, proven technology, and systems using them are easy to set up.
The idea that manned missions (don't call sending humans "exploration" we can do that longer, better, and more often with remotely operated systems) are what to do before perfecting machines that man will _require_ anyway is silly.
Let's compare space exploration to the other high-tech human pastime, which is war. It is cheaper and safer to remove humans to safe operating locations and send UAVs on air missions. UAVs have long loiter time, and no big deal if one is destroyed. Operators can swap out at home station, and if one is ill or dies it doesn't affect the mission. Likewise, bomb disposal with robots allows seeing and manipulating unfriendly devices with fewer deathy outcomes.
Space is an utterly hostile environment. Robots and remotely operated vehicles are more useful to humans NOW than is space exploration in its current state, and the better robots we build to explore space the better robots we will have on Earth. If we want to lead in tech, robots are one way to do that.
Don't confuse "putting humans in space to the deprecation or exclusion of other methods" with "exploring" it.
We need to perfect robots for terrestrial and off-world use far more than we need to send meat tourists (who still need physical barrier protection and robotic assistance to function) into space.
The Alabamans want to save their pork, plain and simple.
Their efforts should be attacked as being pure pork-barrel politics and characterized as a deliberate attempt to save a bad program purely for the money.
Re:And the zombification of our children continues
on
The Wi-Fi On the Bus
·
· Score: 1
"This is just so typical. Let's not teach children to behave, have patience. imagination, read books, or anything else. Let's just DISTRACT/ENTERTAIN them."
If the choice is between being a bullying beast and a zombie, zombify the little fuckers so they leave the smart kids alone! BTW stop pretending that "teaching" them to behave is a fucking option without the ability to IMPOSE discipline which is what builds SELF discipline!
Getting them to sit down and shut up is a great accomplishment, and the smart kids can use the net access to their benefit.
I didn't say Johnson was UN-educated, but that his education was obviously limited as to what it covered. Being a teacher with a BS degree doesn't speak to any awareness of foreign affairs, and neither did his performance in office.
Westmoreland wasn't fitted for his job either, being more suited by education and experience to nation-state war. Westmoreland doesn't excuse Johnson, and neither does the _choice_ by Johnson to focus on Great Society programs and fuck up in Viet Nam, which cost him a second term.
"Most Christians in Texas who are aware of the situation think these people are ridiculously extreme, but it's nearly impossible to get rid of them."
Of course it's impossible for Christians to repudiate what other Christians who are much more dedicated than they are do, especially when the propagation of their joint belief system benefits from the results!
"It's up to the rest of society to fight their corner equally well, in the interests of balance; unfortunately only the fanatics seem to have the energy to do this..."
The "rest of society" lack the balls to attack religion, as they should be doing if they favored reason over superstition.
Unfortunately, they risk the wrath of (j)ihadists by doing so.
"You're an idiot and have never been to America if you think that."
Nice try, brave AC.
I am an American and am well aware of how the rest of the country behaves. The world sees our country as primitives because of what most of us do and influence our government to do. The so-called Left isn't any better than the right, having thrown its professed principles under the proverbial bus to elect a Chicago machine politician.
Religion was never a voice of conscience during the Nazi and Soviet ascension to power, and the Vatican in particular was impressively silent on both. Of course, the Vatican had its reasons not to bother the Nazis (and to rescue Nazis after WWII, see Operation Ratline for great lulz!) and not to excommunicate Communists.
BTW, labeling both Nazis and Communists as "Progressives" is standard Christian rightist terminology used to attack Progressives, onlookers take note!
Slashdot Mirror
Plenty of ex-cons get a second chance in the construction industry, for example. There are places that will hire ex-cons, but not many because they have chosen to demonstrate that they are toxic humans and only a fool or someone who can absorb what some of them will rip off will hire them.
We may WANT someone ELSE to hire an ex-com but unless it were a victimless crime such as (some) drug crimes I certainly wouldn't risk it. I can get solid workers who are motivated and have a good track record, so why risk when I don't have to?
You like 'em, hire 'em and have a blast.
"Once they wont be able to get off from something besides the real deal, they are bound to stop and suddenly turn into normal, heterosexual human beings."
Given the billion-odd dollars (and counting) paid out by the Catholic Church in pedo damage control, I'd say repression drives people with such inclinations to jobs where they can exercise power in secret.
"It's their choice" so I blame them for their CHOICE.
"the fault of someone for being larger than average. "
Dear Hambeasts:
Cry me a river. The vast majority of fat fucks got there voluntarily. One reason there are probably so many of them is that it doesn't carry much social stigma, though it should.
If you don't respect yourself enough to manage your weight, I don't respect you or your deliberate infliction of your disgusting bloated carcass on others who use public transportation. May your diet kill you ASAP. If this hurts your feelings, have a consolation donut.
Of course it's about overflow, and those of us who take care not to be grossly fat fucks shouldn't have to be victims of the hambeast in the next seat.
No sympathy here. If you don't fit an airline seat, cargo net your fat disgusting ass to a pallet and go air freight.
"His blog was hosted in the Cloud! A super place where data is impervious to destruction and can never be lost!"
Excellent post!
Guess what, kiddies? You don't OWN the Cloud so you don't get to say shit about how it runs. What you host on the Cloud isn't a matter of your imaginary "rights" outside the TOS you ignore when you put your content on teh shiny intarweb.
Suck on that when you consider surrendering your data to people who Don't Need You.
People have the insanely naive, stupid idea that when they have someone else host their content that they will still have control over that content.
You voluntarily surrender everything when you have someone else host your shit
The good side is that when they nuke it your poor planning becomes an example to others.
"Setting up a Climate Service today would be akin to setting up an Astrology Service. They would probably both give equally good advice."
Both ideas are brilliant!
What's your sign?
I don't want the focus to be on manned flight, because it takes funding we could use for remote-manned systems. People don't "explore" space by being present, they are merely closer to the equipment they use for exploration.
We need robots to do everything if the tiny number of people we will eventually be able to send to and maintain in space are to be an effective use of manpower, so perfect the machines before sending the crew. There is urgency and benefit to exploring space, but none to sending people before machines.
"I was laughing at the old APC UPS which did 10 minutes before I had to power down."
I grab those and connect them to car batteries, both as battery tenders in my shop and for UPS use.
"I can smell the curry from here."
Shmuck detected.
Large lead-acid batteries (or Optima batteries if servicing is a concern) are cheap compared to most UPS batteries, inverters are old, proven technology, and systems using them are easy to set up.
China benefitted from US and European tech in its rise to power.
Should the US not do the same thing? It did during the Industrial Revolution.
We don't need to be ahead of China in everything, because we don't need to fight China now that EUSian colonialism in Asia is dead.
The idea that manned missions (don't call sending humans "exploration" we can do that longer, better, and more often with remotely operated systems) are what to do before perfecting machines that man will _require_ anyway is silly.
Let's compare space exploration to the other high-tech human pastime, which is war. It is cheaper and safer to remove humans to safe operating locations and send UAVs on air missions. UAVs have long loiter time, and no big deal if one is destroyed. Operators can swap out at home station, and if one is ill or dies it doesn't affect the mission. Likewise, bomb disposal with robots allows seeing and manipulating unfriendly devices with fewer deathy outcomes.
Space is an utterly hostile environment. Robots and remotely operated vehicles are more useful to humans NOW than is space exploration in its current state, and the better robots we build to explore space the better robots we will have on Earth. If we want to lead in tech, robots are one way to do that.
Don't confuse "putting humans in space to the deprecation or exclusion of other methods" with "exploring" it.
We need to perfect robots for terrestrial and off-world use far more than we need to send meat tourists (who still need physical barrier protection and robotic assistance to function) into space.
The Alabamans want to save their pork, plain and simple.
Their efforts should be attacked as being pure pork-barrel politics and characterized as a deliberate attempt to save a bad program purely for the money.
"This is just so typical. Let's not teach children to behave, have patience. imagination, read books, or anything else. Let's just DISTRACT/ENTERTAIN them."
If the choice is between being a bullying beast and a zombie, zombify the little fuckers so they leave the smart kids alone!
BTW stop pretending that "teaching" them to behave is a fucking option without the ability to IMPOSE discipline which is what builds SELF discipline!
Getting them to sit down and shut up is a great accomplishment, and the smart kids can use the net access to their benefit.
"But why did you hope iPad would be what you wanted in the first place?"
So we could have a geek-friendly device yet become Cool People by owning an Apple product.
I didn't say Johnson was UN-educated, but that his education was obviously limited as to what it covered. Being a teacher with a BS degree doesn't speak to any awareness of foreign affairs, and neither did his performance in office.
Westmoreland wasn't fitted for his job either, being more suited by education and experience to nation-state war. Westmoreland doesn't excuse Johnson, and neither does the _choice_ by Johnson to focus on Great Society programs and fuck up in Viet Nam, which cost him a second term.
"Most Christians in Texas who are aware of the situation think these people are ridiculously extreme, but it's nearly impossible to get rid of them."
Of course it's impossible for Christians to repudiate what other Christians who are much more dedicated than they are do, especially when the propagation of their joint belief system benefits from the results!
"It's up to the rest of society to fight their corner equally well, in the interests of balance; unfortunately only the fanatics seem to have the energy to do this..."
The "rest of society" lack the balls to attack religion, as they should be doing if they favored reason over superstition.
Unfortunately, they risk the wrath of (j)ihadists by doing so.
Wholesale initial rejection is reasonable because it can allow eventual idea-sorting after the ideas prove worthwhile.
Let proponents defend what they adocate against fiercely hostile debate, or they should piss off.
"As rational people of science, don't we want to listen to arguments before drawing conclusions?"
There are no arguments for religion other than faith, which is no argument.
"You're an idiot and have never been to America if you think that."
Nice try, brave AC.
I am an American and am well aware of how the rest of the country behaves. The world sees our country as primitives because of what most of us do and influence our government to do. The so-called Left isn't any better than the right, having thrown its professed principles under the proverbial bus to elect a Chicago machine politician.
Religion was never a voice of conscience during the Nazi and Soviet ascension to power, and the Vatican in particular was impressively silent on both.
Of course, the Vatican had its reasons not to bother the Nazis (and to rescue Nazis after WWII, see Operation Ratline for great lulz!) and not to excommunicate Communists.
BTW, labeling both Nazis and Communists as "Progressives" is standard Christian rightist terminology used to attack Progressives, onlookers take note!
"Christians can enforce their beliefs only upon those who voluntarily accept such enforcement."
Until they write laws and become those who administer those laws:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dominionism
http://www.monergism.com/directory/link_category/Theonomy/