It's a practical duopoly on political power in this country. If you want them to be able to "do whatever they like," that needs to be fixed, most likely through RCV. Otherwise, they need to be kept on a tight leash, and held accountable to the people as if they were a part of the government.
I didn't say it was impossible. I said you basically can't win. You can argue that John Oliver is lazy, but it's hard to win a defamation case even when you do lie, while Murray appears to just being using his lawyers for SLAPP purposes.
Unlike in Britain, the US has extremely strong free speech protections, especially if you can afford a decent lawyer (which Oliver/HBO/TW can). You basically can't win a defamation case in the US, therefore Robert E. Murray doesn't have a legitimate case.
I don't have a teacher, so I don't have to worry about that, although I find a fidget cube more convenient. IMO, pens and pencils aren't particularly good fidgets, as they lack the mass to have really good balance, although pen clicking can be satisfying, but tends to be annoying to others. Drumsticks, on the other hand, work great for the same kinds of motions. I did once see a bullet pen, with bolt action to extend the tip, and it's a great fidget toy, but they are in the same price range as other fidget toys, anyway. Also, AFAIK most fidget spinners do not require batteries. They just use ball bearings, so they can continue spinning roughly as long as a yo-yo.
They were stim toys, which autistics and a decent subsection of nerds, and drummers, have been into for quite a while, in various ways. There was also a bit of a popularization of that kind with stress balls back in the day.
Or enough people have them that current sales figures can no longer be sustained. Fidget spinners are a stim toy, and stim toys serve a fairly practical purpose (although they may be supplanted by something else, such as fidget cubes). But you don't continually need more, and presumably, the vast majority of fidget spinners are not yet broken. So, logically, once a large enough portion of the population buys them, sales will level out.
Every time a new class of product arrives or is popularized, you see the same articles written by people who have apparently never seen adoption trends before.
Okay, you're an idiot, but the point is, countries like Venezuela are used in stupid arguments so America doesn't adopt Scandinavian policies, even though they meet the reality of the "American dream" by just about every single metric.
1) You aren't describing universal healthcare, you are describing Obama/Romney/Nixoncare.
2) The level of abstraction from violence is important in assessing whether or not something is authoritarian, or how authoritarian something is. Yes, anything enforced by the state is eventually tied back to the state's monopoly on violence, but there's an enormous gap between having to pay modest taxes, not doing so having a possibility of eventually resulting in prison time after exhausting a number of legal processes, and summary mass executions. There is a spectrum from anarchy to authoritarianism, and those are all minor elements. If we fucking trained our cops to do their damn jobs like other countries and ended civil forfeiture, and implemented all of the things I mentioned, we would have a net movement away from authoritarianism.
What I meant by 'popular' was models that people will openly claim to advocate. Capitalism, democratic socialism, mixed markets, socialism, and even communism. Virtually nobody, and especially not economists, openly claims to advocate for fascism, cronyism, or oligarchy, but that's what authoritarian governments tend to have as economic models.
I said "universal healthcare." Universal healthcare is not authoritarian, and the cries of 'socialism' in America are always about things like universal healthcare, infrastructure, public education, unions, and social safety nets. None of those are authoritarian, and they tend to increase the effective freedom of societies.
No, this is the point where you use basic political science definitions and point out that the thing that shitty governments tend to have in common far more than economic leanings is being authoritarian. Venezeula isn't shitty because they have universal healthcare, they are shitty because they have a dictator, and with a dictator, you tend to not actually fall within the ideals of any popular economic model.
And nothing will come of it, save perhaps a slap on the wrist, and maybe some other contractors taking a bit of their turf until THEY are caught defrauding the government.
It's probably because it's an easy way to succinctly explain who they are to the general public, who isn't typically familiar with government contractors. Lots of people know who Snowden is, not so many know BAH.
I think what Putin is saying is "if you don't want to get hacked, don't be hacking others." We've got plenty of evidence of the US engaging in far more sophisticated hacking than anything Russia is accused of.
Except that every single claim I made is well documented. There just aren't studies on autistics not getting laid because 1) it's not something easy to study directly and 2) it has limited academic value.
Yeah, but surely we'll have 128-bit processors by then, and then we've got like 5 nonillion years to come up with another solution or two to get us to the heat death of the universe.
Not bothering to pull up a study, especially since those aren't things likely to be directly addressed, as they are very unacademic, but I will address them point by point:
Celibacy: Difficulty forming close knit bonds, hyper and hyposensitivity, and difficulty acting in socially appropriate manners are all impediments to having sex. Hyperfocus on special interests often lead to failures in self-care, which is generally unattractive, and means that more immediate needs than sex are ignored.
Meth: High rates of comorbidity of autism with ADHD, which is often treated with amphetamines.
Running around naked outside: Why is that not normal behavior? Because of the social rules involved, which is something autistics are more likely to ignore.
Sleeping for 10 hours: Atypical, for sure, but forcing yourself to sleep for 10 hours would not be, and it's possible that Einstein was exerting himself to the extent that he didn't have trouble sleeping. The brain is power hungry, and Einstein used his brain a bit.
Not eating beans: Autistics are well documented as having limited diets or avoiding certain foods.
Tit-for-tat is an effective strategy. The problem is that you are assuming that Russia declared the 'war.' The US has been caught writing sophisticated malware to damage nuclear infrastructure. We have 'reasonable confidence' of Russia sending out phishing emails.
I agree, we shouldn't be supportive of meddling in elections just because it works in our favor. That means that Clinton, and a good chunk of the US intelligence agencies, should be stopped.
Leaking dirty laundry, yes. Leaving the world's infrastructure incredibly vulnerable, not so much. So, probably stop the hacking game, but provide asylum to whistleblowers.
Slashdot Mirror
You think the Ruskies haven't already infiltrated the NSA and the rest of our spies already? How cute.
It's a practical duopoly on political power in this country. If you want them to be able to "do whatever they like," that needs to be fixed, most likely through RCV. Otherwise, they need to be kept on a tight leash, and held accountable to the people as if they were a part of the government.
And that's how you know they're liars. The more sensible Russian agenda would be anti-Clinton, not pro-Trump. Trump is an unpredictable element.
The UK has the strongest libel laws in the world.
I didn't say it was impossible. I said you basically can't win. You can argue that John Oliver is lazy, but it's hard to win a defamation case even when you do lie, while Murray appears to just being using his lawyers for SLAPP purposes.
Unlike in Britain, the US has extremely strong free speech protections, especially if you can afford a decent lawyer (which Oliver/HBO/TW can). You basically can't win a defamation case in the US, therefore Robert E. Murray doesn't have a legitimate case.
You say that as if we weren't already doing that.to them, and plenty of other countries.
I don't have a teacher, so I don't have to worry about that, although I find a fidget cube more convenient. IMO, pens and pencils aren't particularly good fidgets, as they lack the mass to have really good balance, although pen clicking can be satisfying, but tends to be annoying to others. Drumsticks, on the other hand, work great for the same kinds of motions. I did once see a bullet pen, with bolt action to extend the tip, and it's a great fidget toy, but they are in the same price range as other fidget toys, anyway. Also, AFAIK most fidget spinners do not require batteries. They just use ball bearings, so they can continue spinning roughly as long as a yo-yo.
They were stim toys, which autistics and a decent subsection of nerds, and drummers, have been into for quite a while, in various ways. There was also a bit of a popularization of that kind with stress balls back in the day.
Or enough people have them that current sales figures can no longer be sustained. Fidget spinners are a stim toy, and stim toys serve a fairly practical purpose (although they may be supplanted by something else, such as fidget cubes). But you don't continually need more, and presumably, the vast majority of fidget spinners are not yet broken. So, logically, once a large enough portion of the population buys them, sales will level out.
Every time a new class of product arrives or is popularized, you see the same articles written by people who have apparently never seen adoption trends before.
Okay, you're an idiot, but the point is, countries like Venezuela are used in stupid arguments so America doesn't adopt Scandinavian policies, even though they meet the reality of the "American dream" by just about every single metric.
1) You aren't describing universal healthcare, you are describing Obama/Romney/Nixoncare.
2) The level of abstraction from violence is important in assessing whether or not something is authoritarian, or how authoritarian something is. Yes, anything enforced by the state is eventually tied back to the state's monopoly on violence, but there's an enormous gap between having to pay modest taxes, not doing so having a possibility of eventually resulting in prison time after exhausting a number of legal processes, and summary mass executions. There is a spectrum from anarchy to authoritarianism, and those are all minor elements. If we fucking trained our cops to do their damn jobs like other countries and ended civil forfeiture, and implemented all of the things I mentioned, we would have a net movement away from authoritarianism.
What I meant by 'popular' was models that people will openly claim to advocate. Capitalism, democratic socialism, mixed markets, socialism, and even communism. Virtually nobody, and especially not economists, openly claims to advocate for fascism, cronyism, or oligarchy, but that's what authoritarian governments tend to have as economic models.
I said "universal healthcare." Universal healthcare is not authoritarian, and the cries of 'socialism' in America are always about things like universal healthcare, infrastructure, public education, unions, and social safety nets. None of those are authoritarian, and they tend to increase the effective freedom of societies.
No, this is the point where you use basic political science definitions and point out that the thing that shitty governments tend to have in common far more than economic leanings is being authoritarian. Venezeula isn't shitty because they have universal healthcare, they are shitty because they have a dictator, and with a dictator, you tend to not actually fall within the ideals of any popular economic model.
And nothing will come of it, save perhaps a slap on the wrist, and maybe some other contractors taking a bit of their turf until THEY are caught defrauding the government.
It's probably because it's an easy way to succinctly explain who they are to the general public, who isn't typically familiar with government contractors. Lots of people know who Snowden is, not so many know BAH.
I think what Putin is saying is "if you don't want to get hacked, don't be hacking others." We've got plenty of evidence of the US engaging in far more sophisticated hacking than anything Russia is accused of.
Except that every single claim I made is well documented. There just aren't studies on autistics not getting laid because 1) it's not something easy to study directly and 2) it has limited academic value.
Yeah, but surely we'll have 128-bit processors by then, and then we've got like 5 nonillion years to come up with another solution or two to get us to the heat death of the universe.
I'm okay with more rational behavior, but that has little overlap with what is normal.
Not bothering to pull up a study, especially since those aren't things likely to be directly addressed, as they are very unacademic, but I will address them point by point:
Celibacy: Difficulty forming close knit bonds, hyper and hyposensitivity, and difficulty acting in socially appropriate manners are all impediments to having sex. Hyperfocus on special interests often lead to failures in self-care, which is generally unattractive, and means that more immediate needs than sex are ignored.
Meth: High rates of comorbidity of autism with ADHD, which is often treated with amphetamines.
Running around naked outside: Why is that not normal behavior? Because of the social rules involved, which is something autistics are more likely to ignore.
Sleeping for 10 hours: Atypical, for sure, but forcing yourself to sleep for 10 hours would not be, and it's possible that Einstein was exerting himself to the extent that he didn't have trouble sleeping. The brain is power hungry, and Einstein used his brain a bit.
Not eating beans: Autistics are well documented as having limited diets or avoiding certain foods.
Tit-for-tat is an effective strategy. The problem is that you are assuming that Russia declared the 'war.' The US has been caught writing sophisticated malware to damage nuclear infrastructure. We have 'reasonable confidence' of Russia sending out phishing emails.
I agree, we shouldn't be supportive of meddling in elections just because it works in our favor. That means that Clinton, and a good chunk of the US intelligence agencies, should be stopped.
Leaking dirty laundry, yes. Leaving the world's infrastructure incredibly vulnerable, not so much. So, probably stop the hacking game, but provide asylum to whistleblowers.