What happens when a person designs and builds a series of parts that are separately useful as something other than a "gun", but when combined in the right way does build a functioning "gun"? In other words, an disassembled gun is not a gun.
Please describe how any law can prevent this? If you outlaw guns, fine, but they better be fully working versions, and not the disassembled blob of misc. parts.
Google. They manage huge amounts of data, know how to do it, have had relatively few (if any) data breaches, etc.
But then again, they got out of the Health Care business when they realized what a cluster fuck it really was. My guess, Obama, Reid and Pelosi have no idea what the hell they were doing, crafted legislation as if they were experts, and have left us holding the bag of an unworkable system which was designed to get us to a single payer system, which each one of them said they preferred.
This is the problem with politics, nobody cares what people say they are doing, only want they appear to be doing. In this case they appear to be "giving health care insurance to everyone (they aren't but that is besides the point) while saying they want a single payer system. It was Broken by Design. It should be repealed and those people should NEVER be allow anywhere near health care system ever again. However, they will get a pass for "trying" (noisy way of doing nothing) to fix health care system that they think is broken. Unfortunately for us, they have to break it some more before they can try to "fix" it with single payer.
Indeed, because I believed my statement was proving that these were self evident. Too many people don't believe them to be self evident, and think nothing of repealing bits and pieces because they offend someone's sensibilities.
It isn't incompetence. It is lack of planning and the long held belief that Auto Systems need to be proprietary for the sole purpose of being a differential in the buying equation. How can FORD compete on features of the "Sync" if Toyota and Chevy also have the same "Sync" (they don't using that as example). Chevy offers OnStar, FORD and Toyota don't.
They don't want to standardize on modular systems because then that takes away from the "distinguishing feature" that they use to sell cars.
Here's a thought for the car manufacturers, how about you standardize a few of the common items in the car, say by offering a standardized size screen for "in dash" infotainment systems? Or perhaps two or three standard sizes? 4", 7", and 10". Then we can take that 10 year old car you don't support very well, and allow us to put a state of the art new Android or Windows (ewww) (because Apple would never go for something like this), system in with all the new features.
I'm not the only one that would appreciate this. And it would be a huge consideration the next time I make a buying decision. Right now, I look at all of that as "Obsolete in three years, no thanks" options; actually harming your brand in my eyes.
The Bill of Rights doesn't give you freedoms. It defines what Freedoms you have, preexisting apart from Government, specifically the Federal Government. This is not a trivial difference.
Actually, laws against causing harm are already on the books. Both Civil and Criminal complaints. And if you're talking about Corporations, I'm all for holding both the officers (CxO) and the Board of directors personally responsible for corporate malfeasance in criminal court, as well as the Corporate death penalty for gross violations. If you want ethical behavior from Corporations you must hold those that run them ethically responsible. Creating more laws won't solve the problem of ethics in amoral corporations. Only people can have ethics, collectives cannot have ethics except in the form of the people that lead them.
I'm going to address only ONE point you made, because it is the crux of the issue.
How dare the government require restaurants to label their products for their content!
You have it wrong. The ingredients of food in restaurants is not dependent upon requiring product labels. Labels do NOTHING for most people because like most government regulations the average person doesn't give a flying fuck what is in a Big Mac. And in fact, adding labels doesn't change anyone's behavior or buying patterns. IT is meaningless noise.
The only thing such a "regulation" does, is allow people feel good in an elitist way. You go on to "prove" my point with a great Strawman argument
I think cocaine would make a great additive to fast food. Best of all, no need to label it as included.
Do you really believe that labeling restaurant food keeps cocaine out of it? I didn't realize that Big Macs contained cocaine before the government required restaurant labels. Because this is exactly my point. YOU believe YOU are doing the public good by supporting Labels when labels didn't actually change anything.
And as a person who does have dietary restrictions, I generally don't eat in restaurants, because there is such poor quality control, that even if the ingredients are listed, it doesn't include cross contamination that happens in restaurants. Labels do nothing to prevent this, which is really more of an issue than Calorie Counts on Big Macs.
And yes, HOW dare the government "REQUIRE" labeling of ingredients and nutritional information on restaurants. It doesn't solve any real problem while making do-gooders like yourself feel better for their own inadequacies. But hey, if you like the ingredients list of a Big Mac, Large Fries and a Diet Coke(because you don't want to get fat) by all means buy it. But I rather doubt the food label changed your mind on that choice.
Well, it is quite simple. False Dichotomy makes people choose the "lessor of two evils" rather than picking the person that will represent them the best. Do you really think that Harry Reid or Mitch McConnell are the best those states have to offer?
Every year we see polling data that indicates that most people hate everyone in Congress and want "none of the above". I do have a none of the above fix for this problem, and it is simple. Put "None of the Above" on the ballot, and if that gets 50%+1 votes, ALL of the people listed can never run for any office ever again.
Lets get all the douchebags out of office permanently.
Do not feed the trolls. People like this are being fed a line of crap from HuffPo and MSNBC about the TeaParty and how awful it is, and just parrot the rantings of the lunatic fringe of the left. They don't actually have any facts, just repeat "TeaParty bad" and "Koch Brothers evil" crap. Meanwhile these are the people who support "Orwellian style" security measures.
Actually, handing credit to people who cannot prove who they are is a big big problem, and quite frankly, is the total lack of due diligence I think Credit Companies ought to be doing, but don't. The fact that they end up charging the rest of us for their incompetence and arrogance is criminal IMHO.
It is like the difference between iOS and Android, especially keyboards. I can't stand the stock iOS keyboard. I sucks as far as I am concerned. With Android, if I don't like the keyboard, I can put a different one on. With iOS, not so much. One is a better design, because it has the capability of being more. Not every user cares, but those that do can change it.
You mean like requiring restaurants to provide calorie and other nutritional information for their menus? And warning labels on products, warning against idiots using them in idiotic ways? And any other sort of regulation that actually doesn't do anything other than make people feel good about protecting the idiots out there that don't actually (or can't actually) read the various things that are now regulated?
We are now at a point where there are so many regulations, that many times they are contradictory or duplicated or otherwise have become meaningless noise that people filter out anyway. AND removing these over regulations is impossible, so instead of solving any problems we are just building more of them into the system.
Too many times people say "There ought to be a law" and not enough people saying "why?"
We live in a democratic Republic. You vote. You vote for people who represent you. Those people create laws. That makes it a Democratic Republic. We don't vote on every piece of legislation, as that would be and is impractical.
Of, by and for the people is a phrase from the Constitution setting up the Representative Government we have, and the three branches of that governance. The phrase is there for a reminder of WHO the government is supposed to serve.
Now, as yourself this. Does government server "we the people"? or does it serve its own purposes?
This is also a place where customizations settings can come from. If you design well, your design becomes more flexible, and users will start using things in ways that you couldn't imagine before starting the project.
To document something well, you have to know it very well. Once you know a system that well, YOU often don't need the documentation, because it is in your head. Much of documentation isn't for yourself, it is for whomever follows you.
Laws that prevent the free flow of money don't stop people from money laundering. It just makes it more expensive, and more lucrative. You just have to manage to stay out of jurisdictions that worry about such things. Money routes around blockages because it is a failure in the system.
Economic functions like the Internet, money routes around errors. We make governmental rules expecting economic functions to behave the way we "want" them to, and they don't behave like we want, they behave like they see broken bits and routes around it.
The moment you realize that the system functions exactly this way (eventually), you'll figure out why central planning doesn't work right, and why it fails. The best we can do is devise laws that punish people for criminal behavior (lying, cheating, stealing), and stop making it a crime to buy something with money.
The predictions that I've seen come true, are based on these premises.
Personally, I start with the premise that the sites are already insecure. From there, I only provide information needed. I also create a unique email address for each site, so that if they are compromised, only my account on that site is compromised and nothing else is at risk. My private email address remains only for personal communication.
To compromise my life would require the NSA, and I already figure that has happened, but that I am not interesting enough to act on it.... yet.
Universal Health Care doesn't work everywhere. I have relatives in France, and while HealthCare there IS Universal, it is Universally Bad. Most people try to avoid the system as much as possible because of how bad it is. AND it is going bankrupt.
... national insurance system has been running deficits since 1985 — it currently stands at $13.5 billion.
Of course, if all you read is HuffPo you have a different view of the world.
And actually, my view is that Insurance should be for CATASTROPHIC care, like Car Insurance. Meaning you take care of the Oil, WiperBlades, Brakes, regular Maint stuff, and only use insurance for accidents. Doctor Visits, Prescriptions, basic tests, minor expenses should not be covered by insurance. ONCE the marketplace is engaged again, you'll see competition lower the price and improve over all quality, by giving people the means to find what works best for them.
I'd also like to see universal pricing by Health Care providers, such as Hospitals and Clinics. One price for everyone, no discounts for being in one insurance rather than another. The idea of "negotiated pricing" is a huge part of the problem.
I would love to see Emergency Rooms be able to turn people away if they were deemed to not be an "emergency", and sent to a clinic / free health care center. I recently had an "accident" (to be covered by insurance, see above) with my eye. I sat in the Emergency room for two hours because wait caused by people in there because of "flu like symptoms" and the like.
Finally, I would love to see incentives by government rather than demands. We are slowly turning into a state where government runs people, rather than the other way around. Remember, this Republic was supposed to be Of, By and For the People but lately it seems to exist for itself.
Okay, this is what I've done. IF you use FB, please feel free to copy / modify / use it. ----
Facebook has a problem. I'm trying to amplify it a bit.
It seems that Facebook doesn't like this particular webbrowser extension http://socialfixer.com/
So they have banned people for posting links to it and such. If you think that Facebook shouldn't ban people for posting links to Browser Extensions, please share. FYI, this extension does not harm Facebook, and doesn't use any feature or service offered by Facebook. They are just upset that you can change how Facebook looks and behaves.
Slashdot Mirror
But you are freaking out about a chunk of plastic.
BUT IT IS A GUN OMG FML LMNOP!!!!!
What happens when a person designs and builds a series of parts that are separately useful as something other than a "gun", but when combined in the right way does build a functioning "gun"? In other words, an disassembled gun is not a gun.
Please describe how any law can prevent this? If you outlaw guns, fine, but they better be fully working versions, and not the disassembled blob of misc. parts.
Or Saudi Arabia. So much for being the Messiah and bringing the world together in a Kum By Ya moment.
Google. They manage huge amounts of data, know how to do it, have had relatively few (if any) data breaches, etc.
But then again, they got out of the Health Care business when they realized what a cluster fuck it really was. My guess, Obama, Reid and Pelosi have no idea what the hell they were doing, crafted legislation as if they were experts, and have left us holding the bag of an unworkable system which was designed to get us to a single payer system, which each one of them said they preferred.
This is the problem with politics, nobody cares what people say they are doing, only want they appear to be doing. In this case they appear to be "giving health care insurance to everyone (they aren't but that is besides the point) while saying they want a single payer system. It was Broken by Design. It should be repealed and those people should NEVER be allow anywhere near health care system ever again. However, they will get a pass for "trying" (noisy way of doing nothing) to fix health care system that they think is broken. Unfortunately for us, they have to break it some more before they can try to "fix" it with single payer.
Indeed, because I believed my statement was proving that these were self evident. Too many people don't believe them to be self evident, and think nothing of repealing bits and pieces because they offend someone's sensibilities.
It isn't incompetence. It is lack of planning and the long held belief that Auto Systems need to be proprietary for the sole purpose of being a differential in the buying equation. How can FORD compete on features of the "Sync" if Toyota and Chevy also have the same "Sync" (they don't using that as example). Chevy offers OnStar, FORD and Toyota don't.
They don't want to standardize on modular systems because then that takes away from the "distinguishing feature" that they use to sell cars.
Here's a thought for the car manufacturers, how about you standardize a few of the common items in the car, say by offering a standardized size screen for "in dash" infotainment systems? Or perhaps two or three standard sizes? 4", 7", and 10". Then we can take that 10 year old car you don't support very well, and allow us to put a state of the art new Android or Windows (ewww) (because Apple would never go for something like this), system in with all the new features.
I'm not the only one that would appreciate this. And it would be a huge consideration the next time I make a buying decision. Right now, I look at all of that as "Obsolete in three years, no thanks" options; actually harming your brand in my eyes.
The Bill of Rights doesn't give you freedoms. It defines what Freedoms you have, preexisting apart from Government, specifically the Federal Government. This is not a trivial difference.
Clinton appointment.
Yeah, because the (D) would NEVER expand upon (R) ideas of bigger more intrusive government at all (or visa-versa) ..../sarcasm.
Dude, my brother is gay. You're a typical liberal spouting off like you know better than everyone else, when the reality is you're just a Douchebag.
Actually, laws against causing harm are already on the books. Both Civil and Criminal complaints. And if you're talking about Corporations, I'm all for holding both the officers (CxO) and the Board of directors personally responsible for corporate malfeasance in criminal court, as well as the Corporate death penalty for gross violations. If you want ethical behavior from Corporations you must hold those that run them ethically responsible. Creating more laws won't solve the problem of ethics in amoral corporations. Only people can have ethics, collectives cannot have ethics except in the form of the people that lead them.
I'm going to address only ONE point you made, because it is the crux of the issue.
How dare the government require restaurants to label their products for their content!
You have it wrong. The ingredients of food in restaurants is not dependent upon requiring product labels. Labels do NOTHING for most people because like most government regulations the average person doesn't give a flying fuck what is in a Big Mac. And in fact, adding labels doesn't change anyone's behavior or buying patterns. IT is meaningless noise.
The only thing such a "regulation" does, is allow people feel good in an elitist way. You go on to "prove" my point with a great Strawman argument
I think cocaine would make a great additive to fast food. Best of all, no need to label it as included.
Do you really believe that labeling restaurant food keeps cocaine out of it? I didn't realize that Big Macs contained cocaine before the government required restaurant labels. Because this is exactly my point. YOU believe YOU are doing the public good by supporting Labels when labels didn't actually change anything.
And as a person who does have dietary restrictions, I generally don't eat in restaurants, because there is such poor quality control, that even if the ingredients are listed, it doesn't include cross contamination that happens in restaurants. Labels do nothing to prevent this, which is really more of an issue than Calorie Counts on Big Macs.
And yes, HOW dare the government "REQUIRE" labeling of ingredients and nutritional information on restaurants. It doesn't solve any real problem while making do-gooders like yourself feel better for their own inadequacies. But hey, if you like the ingredients list of a Big Mac, Large Fries and a Diet Coke(because you don't want to get fat) by all means buy it. But I rather doubt the food label changed your mind on that choice.
Well, it is quite simple. False Dichotomy makes people choose the "lessor of two evils" rather than picking the person that will represent them the best. Do you really think that Harry Reid or Mitch McConnell are the best those states have to offer?
Every year we see polling data that indicates that most people hate everyone in Congress and want "none of the above". I do have a none of the above fix for this problem, and it is simple. Put "None of the Above" on the ballot, and if that gets 50%+1 votes, ALL of the people listed can never run for any office ever again.
Lets get all the douchebags out of office permanently.
Do not feed the trolls. People like this are being fed a line of crap from HuffPo and MSNBC about the TeaParty and how awful it is, and just parrot the rantings of the lunatic fringe of the left. They don't actually have any facts, just repeat "TeaParty bad" and "Koch Brothers evil" crap. Meanwhile these are the people who support "Orwellian style" security measures.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l02E4cj4Vvo#t=102
Actually, handing credit to people who cannot prove who they are is a big big problem, and quite frankly, is the total lack of due diligence I think Credit Companies ought to be doing, but don't. The fact that they end up charging the rest of us for their incompetence and arrogance is criminal IMHO.
My point exactly.
It is like the difference between iOS and Android, especially keyboards. I can't stand the stock iOS keyboard. I sucks as far as I am concerned. With Android, if I don't like the keyboard, I can put a different one on. With iOS, not so much. One is a better design, because it has the capability of being more. Not every user cares, but those that do can change it.
You mean like requiring restaurants to provide calorie and other nutritional information for their menus? And warning labels on products, warning against idiots using them in idiotic ways? And any other sort of regulation that actually doesn't do anything other than make people feel good about protecting the idiots out there that don't actually (or can't actually) read the various things that are now regulated?
We are now at a point where there are so many regulations, that many times they are contradictory or duplicated or otherwise have become meaningless noise that people filter out anyway. AND removing these over regulations is impossible, so instead of solving any problems we are just building more of them into the system.
Too many times people say "There ought to be a law" and not enough people saying "why?"
We live in a democratic Republic. You vote. You vote for people who represent you. Those people create laws. That makes it a Democratic Republic. We don't vote on every piece of legislation, as that would be and is impractical.
Of, by and for the people is a phrase from the Constitution setting up the Representative Government we have, and the three branches of that governance. The phrase is there for a reminder of WHO the government is supposed to serve.
Now, as yourself this. Does government server "we the people"? or does it serve its own purposes?
I call this "pick a lane".
This is also a place where customizations settings can come from. If you design well, your design becomes more flexible, and users will start using things in ways that you couldn't imagine before starting the project.
Documentation isn't hard. It is time consuming.
To document something well, you have to know it very well. Once you know a system that well, YOU often don't need the documentation, because it is in your head. Much of documentation isn't for yourself, it is for whomever follows you.
Laws that prevent the free flow of money don't stop people from money laundering. It just makes it more expensive, and more lucrative. You just have to manage to stay out of jurisdictions that worry about such things. Money routes around blockages because it is a failure in the system.
Economic functions like the Internet, money routes around errors. We make governmental rules expecting economic functions to behave the way we "want" them to, and they don't behave like we want, they behave like they see broken bits and routes around it.
The moment you realize that the system functions exactly this way (eventually), you'll figure out why central planning doesn't work right, and why it fails. The best we can do is devise laws that punish people for criminal behavior (lying, cheating, stealing), and stop making it a crime to buy something with money.
The predictions that I've seen come true, are based on these premises.
Personally, I start with the premise that the sites are already insecure. From there, I only provide information needed. I also create a unique email address for each site, so that if they are compromised, only my account on that site is compromised and nothing else is at risk. My private email address remains only for personal communication.
To compromise my life would require the NSA, and I already figure that has happened, but that I am not interesting enough to act on it .... yet.
Universal Health Care doesn't work everywhere. I have relatives in France, and while HealthCare there IS Universal, it is Universally Bad. Most people try to avoid the system as much as possible because of how bad it is. AND it is going bankrupt.
... national insurance system has been running deficits since 1985 — it currently stands at $13.5 billion.
http://blogs.wsj.com/informedreader/2007/06/29/is-french-health-care-really-better/
Of course, if all you read is HuffPo you have a different view of the world.
And actually, my view is that Insurance should be for CATASTROPHIC care, like Car Insurance. Meaning you take care of the Oil, WiperBlades, Brakes, regular Maint stuff, and only use insurance for accidents. Doctor Visits, Prescriptions, basic tests, minor expenses should not be covered by insurance. ONCE the marketplace is engaged again, you'll see competition lower the price and improve over all quality, by giving people the means to find what works best for them.
I'd also like to see universal pricing by Health Care providers, such as Hospitals and Clinics. One price for everyone, no discounts for being in one insurance rather than another. The idea of "negotiated pricing" is a huge part of the problem.
I would love to see Emergency Rooms be able to turn people away if they were deemed to not be an "emergency", and sent to a clinic / free health care center. I recently had an "accident" (to be covered by insurance, see above) with my eye. I sat in the Emergency room for two hours because wait caused by people in there because of "flu like symptoms" and the like.
Finally, I would love to see incentives by government rather than demands. We are slowly turning into a state where government runs people, rather than the other way around. Remember, this Republic was supposed to be Of, By and For the People but lately it seems to exist for itself.
Okay, this is what I've done. IF you use FB, please feel free to copy / modify / use it.
----
Facebook has a problem. I'm trying to amplify it a bit.
It seems that Facebook doesn't like this particular webbrowser extension http://socialfixer.com/
So they have banned people for posting links to it and such. If you think that Facebook shouldn't ban people for posting links to Browser Extensions, please share. FYI, this extension does not harm Facebook, and doesn't use any feature or service offered by Facebook. They are just upset that you can change how Facebook looks and behaves.
So, please "reshare"