The person who came up with this is at MIT, which explains a lot.
The problem is, someone from MIT doesn't know the difference between theory and practice. In theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice, they are not.
Yeah, these are the same powers liberals fear in Trump, and will spend the next odd years "questioning and denying the legitimacy of his powers since before he took office". You know, kinda like they are doing now.
Don't act like your side is better than the other side, they both fucking suck.
Minimization is the opposite of hyperbole. There are two extremes held by liberals, almost at the same time, for every position Trump takes. Here, I'll give you my latest discovery....
Trumpism: "Make America Great Again"
Liberal: "America was never great!!!" (Minimization) Same LIberal, five minutes later: "America was always great!!!!" (Hyperbole)
A liberal can hold both views at the same time, without even knowing it. The views come out depending on topic. In each case above, if it is something they don't like "Never Great!!!", if it is something they do like "Always Great!!!"
Once you realize that their opinions are fully dependent on the cause they are supposedly supporting, it all starts to make sense. A professor berates and verbally abuses Trump's Daughter on a plane... meh. A professor says they don't support Abortion and "TEHY MUST BE FIRED!!!!" (sic)
First off, "Russian Hacking the Election" is so fucking broad it is borderline meaningless.
1) What "hack" did they commit that interfered with the US Elections? Don't tell me to go read the news, I know what the supposed "Russian" hacks were, I am asking if you do. We're talking about DNC Hacks, Phishing of Podesta Emails and maybe one other event, covered by WikiLeaks. If you're talking about some nebulous boogieman hacks of undefined unverified classified and otherwise unknown events, then no, it wasn't the Russians.
2) Assange (of WikiLeaks) has done something extraordinary here about this particular case. He has said that it was NOT a state sponsored event, that both were "inside" jobs. This means that either Assange is lying or Obama is full of shit. I don't believe a word that comes out of Obama's mouth, he's fucking embarrassed that his legacy is dead, killed by incompetence of the DNC and Hillary and is lashing out to try to save any semblance of whatever it is he is trying to save.
3) In the hints given by Assagne, and other events, it leads one to suspect that it was DNC staffer Seth Rich who actually leaked the DNC material .
4) There is absolutely no evidence presented to the public to support the "It was the Russians!!!" hysteria being presented by all the willing participants in this charade. This is right up there with Obama and Clinton's other great failure... "It was an Internet Video!!!!!" bullshit for Libya.
Given the penchant to blame everyone else for his complete and utter failures it is clear that Obama is simply being a spoiled brat having a temper tantrum, and burning the bridges as he is retreating off to retirement. All of this says way more about Obama than it does anyone else.
It is like a steakhouse where each item on the plate is a separate food, and saying "Steak is only 5% of the food we sell". No, you sell steak, and everything else on the plate is part of the Steak Dinner. They aren't there for the Mash Potatoes or the Ice Tea you're drinking.
I am sure that some of those "homeless" people are making serious kinds of money, that can only "fail" if they need/want to live in the Bay Area. I know that making 200K a year is borderline "poverty" level if you want to live there, mostly because of the serious housing costs.
Its a bitch to earn that much money and be stuck in so much debt that you can never leave. Hotel California indeed.
The problem isn't the ants (IoT). The ants provide valuable services to the nature of the Savannah. The problem isn't the elephant (Internet domain). The problem is that there are people telling the ants to attack that elephant over there ---->
You want to solve that "people" problem... and good luck. The internet has made that person more or less anonymous. And unless you're suggesting tracking every person every day on everything they do on the internet, it isn't easily solvable.
In the days of old, when I was just a "newbie" on/. there was this thing called "Slashdot Effect". All you needed to take down a server, was put a article up on Slashdot and it would be Offline for a day or so. This is more or less the same thing.
Redistribution to promote equality of economic outcomes
Equality of Outcomes is fundamentally unequal in application. Which is why it is inherently evil. To do so, is to view the world as success is evil, and failure is good. This is why we set up a tax code to punish those that work and are successful and reward failure. Guess what happens when you do this over a long period of time? Guess what kind of world that leaves?
There is no way to make outcomes equal or even equalize them.
They're cheerfully in favor of government as long as it does what they want it to do.
Nice Strawman, but I'll bite. I am a Libertarian, maybe not like any you have ever (never) met.
Here is my take of Government. I has ONE purpose, to protect the rights of the individual from the mob. If you look at the Bill of Rights, those are mostly (if not all) Individual Rights not Granted by government, pre-existing government, which are to be protected by government. In the backwards Statist view (socialism, communism, fascism etc) the rights of the Individual are set aside for the rights of groups. Different groups in each case, but groups none-the-less. Mob Rule. My mob is more important than your mob.
Mobs are now being made by skin color, religion, sexuality, ethnicity and so on. My skin is darker (or lighter) than yours, I am more important than you. My religion (or lack thereof) is more important than yours. And so on.
Mobs are being made now by class (upper, middle, low income), by work type (College Educated vs Blue Collar).
And your comment about "states rights" verses "national" ones is evidence that you have a statist view. Rights start at a person, not a community, not a county, not a state, not a nation. I should decide how I should live my life, more than someone that I have never met living in a different kind a community than I live in. My way isn't right, or wrong, neither is their way. But a lot of statists seem to think that people in Los Angeles and NYC should be able to dictate how a person is Wyoming should live.
SO, MY kind of government isn't the one size fits all approach that far too many statists believe. If you don't like your community, you can move to one that better suits you. But can you move to another country when this one becomes an intolerable tyranny of political correctness that is offensive to every core value that it claims it upholds.
I am a Libertarian. I support LIBERTY, even when it seems to go against my own personal self interests. Why? Because tyranny is always going to be worse for me (and you). Any government big enough to give you everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have. I support a government that is capable of defending liberty, and no bigger.
And yet, people continue to judge him for things he hasn't yet done, while ignoring the crimes happening under Obama. They like their version of tyrant better than the other tyrant over there ---->
International Tyranny is way better than national tyranny right?
As opposed to "I did not send or receive any classified emails. There is no classified Emails" ? Or how about "Sniper Fire" Or....
The problem isn't with Donald, or even Hillary, it is with the American People who dismiss Yuge Character Flaws in favor of sweet lies that they want to hear.
As Bad as a lot of people think Trump is, a nearly equal number of people thought the same of Hillary. Enough so, that Trump won when there was "no possible way" he could. Except that Hillary was probably the only candidate that COULD lose to Trump. And for everyone that keeps discounting Trump, please continue to do so, as I am sure you did before he ran, after he announced, after he won the (R) nomination and.... well you still haven't learned your lesson. I know, it is really hard to take him seriously, but he is actually counting on that.;)
It isn't conspicuous consumption, it is literally wealth that the IRS cannot tax. Those one of a kind pieces are designed for one purpose, to hide and appreciate wealth. How do you appraise one of a kind pieces that have never seen an auction or sale? How does one "tax" something that has no face value that is anywhere near what it is actually worth?
The Old Money is laughing at people like you, because you don't see it the way they do. They stuffed their mattresses with money, except it isn't stuffed with money, and it isn't in mattresses. That 25 Million dollar painting, is handed down from generation to generation and isn't included in the estate taxes. Those same taxes the average American has no idea how to avoid.
I've found that people mocking others in ignorance are kind of arrogant shitheads.
Well, asking an expert for an answer, and then dismissing that answer because it doesn't suit you makes you more of an asshole (IMHO). The original poster is entirely correct. I liken it to how to eat an elephant. You see an elephant, and figure you can eat a pound or two a day and it takes a couple years. I look at the Elephant and send my herd of trained ants to eat it, and it is gone in a couple days. It is a perspective that most people (like yourself) have no clue about. You see an ant, and think "it can't eat an elephant", and "I can kill it with my finger", both of which is true, but you are not thinking about the billion or so cousins.
It is why firebombing ant hills is only temporary. They will come back, and you can't stop them. Welcome to our botnet.
Manufacturers won't learn anything until it hits them in the pocketbook. And since the IoT devices are a dime a dozen, made by thousands of different fly by night operations in China, that is highly unlikely. Cutting corners is how they make a $24.99 device that does something that eliminates you walking across the room to do.
We have a system of supposed checks n balances, and a proper Search Warrant in a murder investigation. I am not sure what anyone is complaining about (no, I am not saying you are complaining). The whole "Grab everything" excuse is acceptable here, in this case. It may not be worthy in other cases, but in this one, I have no problem with.
I am not so much for the legalization of drugs, but the decriminalization of them. Portugal is a great example of something we could be doing differently.
You're thinking is is almost right. The infrastructure is where the problem actually lies. What is needed is a way to avoid the last mile issue being the monopoly/oligarchy model that we've been running for the last 30+ years or so. Stop viewing the last mile as a "Franchise agreement" and start treating it like a road, where anyone can deliver the packages (FedEx, UPS, USPS...).
My solution is municipal owned Fiber Plant, brought back to a COLO facility where you have the choice of providers to bring content/services to the end user, and let the competition happen there.
The problem is that the Government went into business of being an ISP. What they should have done, which wouldn't violate the ISP's rights, is not provide any service at all, just provide the infrastructure. Building out Fiber to a COLO facility where the various ISPs would wage commercial war with each other.
The problem wasn't that the idea was flawed, only execution of it. Too many people are stuck thinking government is the solution to every problem, and then misdiagnose what the problem is, and thus leaving government to be the creator and solution of far too many problems. Government is the best place to manage infrastructure, if we just left it there, a lot of other Government created problems go away (Net Neutrality, I am looking right at you)
I read a similar story some 30 years ago, except the roles were reversed. The white man declined a black man's heart. That was just as racist as this post is. No more, no less.
Slashdot Mirror
The person who came up with this is at MIT, which explains a lot.
The problem is, someone from MIT doesn't know the difference between theory and practice. In theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice, they are not.
Ryan is wrong, but for the right reasons.
They should be broadcast, for all to see ... on the Comedy Channel .
Here is the actual list of all his golfing .... http://obamagolfcounter.com/
It is pretty long list.
Yeah, these are the same powers liberals fear in Trump, and will spend the next odd years "questioning and denying the legitimacy of his powers since before he took office". You know, kinda like they are doing now.
Don't act like your side is better than the other side, they both fucking suck.
Minimization is the opposite of hyperbole. There are two extremes held by liberals, almost at the same time, for every position Trump takes. Here, I'll give you my latest discovery ....
Trumpism: "Make America Great Again"
Liberal: "America was never great!!!" (Minimization)
Same LIberal, five minutes later: "America was always great!!!!" (Hyperbole)
A liberal can hold both views at the same time, without even knowing it. The views come out depending on topic. In each case above, if it is something they don't like "Never Great!!!", if it is something they do like "Always Great!!!"
Once you realize that their opinions are fully dependent on the cause they are supposedly supporting, it all starts to make sense. A professor berates and verbally abuses Trump's Daughter on a plane ... meh. A professor says they don't support Abortion and "TEHY MUST BE FIRED!!!!" (sic)
First off, "Russian Hacking the Election" is so fucking broad it is borderline meaningless.
1) What "hack" did they commit that interfered with the US Elections? Don't tell me to go read the news, I know what the supposed "Russian" hacks were, I am asking if you do. We're talking about DNC Hacks, Phishing of Podesta Emails and maybe one other event, covered by WikiLeaks. If you're talking about some nebulous boogieman hacks of undefined unverified classified and otherwise unknown events, then no, it wasn't the Russians.
2) Assange (of WikiLeaks) has done something extraordinary here about this particular case. He has said that it was NOT a state sponsored event, that both were "inside" jobs. This means that either Assange is lying or Obama is full of shit. I don't believe a word that comes out of Obama's mouth, he's fucking embarrassed that his legacy is dead, killed by incompetence of the DNC and Hillary and is lashing out to try to save any semblance of whatever it is he is trying to save.
3) In the hints given by Assagne, and other events, it leads one to suspect that it was DNC staffer Seth Rich who actually leaked the DNC material .
4) There is absolutely no evidence presented to the public to support the "It was the Russians!!!" hysteria being presented by all the willing participants in this charade. This is right up there with Obama and Clinton's other great failure ... "It was an Internet Video!!!!!" bullshit for Libya.
Given the penchant to blame everyone else for his complete and utter failures it is clear that Obama is simply being a spoiled brat having a temper tantrum, and burning the bridges as he is retreating off to retirement. All of this says way more about Obama than it does anyone else.
It is like a steakhouse where each item on the plate is a separate food, and saying "Steak is only 5% of the food we sell". No, you sell steak, and everything else on the plate is part of the Steak Dinner. They aren't there for the Mash Potatoes or the Ice Tea you're drinking.
I am sure that some of those "homeless" people are making serious kinds of money, that can only "fail" if they need/want to live in the Bay Area. I know that making 200K a year is borderline "poverty" level if you want to live there, mostly because of the serious housing costs.
Its a bitch to earn that much money and be stuck in so much debt that you can never leave. Hotel California indeed.
The problem isn't the ants (IoT). The ants provide valuable services to the nature of the Savannah. The problem isn't the elephant (Internet domain). The problem is that there are people telling the ants to attack that elephant over there ---->
You want to solve that "people" problem ... and good luck. The internet has made that person more or less anonymous. And unless you're suggesting tracking every person every day on everything they do on the internet, it isn't easily solvable.
In the days of old, when I was just a "newbie" on /. there was this thing called "Slashdot Effect". All you needed to take down a server, was put a article up on Slashdot and it would be Offline for a day or so. This is more or less the same thing.
Redistribution to promote equality of economic outcomes
Equality of Outcomes is fundamentally unequal in application. Which is why it is inherently evil. To do so, is to view the world as success is evil, and failure is good. This is why we set up a tax code to punish those that work and are successful and reward failure. Guess what happens when you do this over a long period of time? Guess what kind of world that leaves?
There is no way to make outcomes equal or even equalize them.
Ah yes, the "no true Scottsman" argument.
They're cheerfully in favor of government as long as it does what they want it to do.
Nice Strawman, but I'll bite. I am a Libertarian, maybe not like any you have ever (never) met.
Here is my take of Government. I has ONE purpose, to protect the rights of the individual from the mob. If you look at the Bill of Rights, those are mostly (if not all) Individual Rights not Granted by government, pre-existing government, which are to be protected by government. In the backwards Statist view (socialism, communism, fascism etc) the rights of the Individual are set aside for the rights of groups. Different groups in each case, but groups none-the-less. Mob Rule. My mob is more important than your mob.
Mobs are now being made by skin color, religion, sexuality, ethnicity and so on. My skin is darker (or lighter) than yours, I am more important than you. My religion (or lack thereof) is more important than yours. And so on.
Mobs are being made now by class (upper, middle, low income), by work type (College Educated vs Blue Collar).
And your comment about "states rights" verses "national" ones is evidence that you have a statist view. Rights start at a person, not a community, not a county, not a state, not a nation. I should decide how I should live my life, more than someone that I have never met living in a different kind a community than I live in. My way isn't right, or wrong, neither is their way. But a lot of statists seem to think that people in Los Angeles and NYC should be able to dictate how a person is Wyoming should live.
SO, MY kind of government isn't the one size fits all approach that far too many statists believe. If you don't like your community, you can move to one that better suits you. But can you move to another country when this one becomes an intolerable tyranny of political correctness that is offensive to every core value that it claims it upholds.
I am a Libertarian. I support LIBERTY, even when it seems to go against my own personal self interests. Why? Because tyranny is always going to be worse for me (and you). Any government big enough to give you everything you need, is big enough to take everything you have. I support a government that is capable of defending liberty, and no bigger.
Does that answer your strawman?
He's just today's face.
And yet, people continue to judge him for things he hasn't yet done, while ignoring the crimes happening under Obama. They like their version of tyrant better than the other tyrant over there ---->
International Tyranny is way better than national tyranny right?
As opposed to "I did not send or receive any classified emails. There is no classified Emails" ? ....
Or how about "Sniper Fire"
Or
The problem isn't with Donald, or even Hillary, it is with the American People who dismiss Yuge Character Flaws in favor of sweet lies that they want to hear.
As Bad as a lot of people think Trump is, a nearly equal number of people thought the same of Hillary. Enough so, that Trump won when there was "no possible way" he could. Except that Hillary was probably the only candidate that COULD lose to Trump. And for everyone that keeps discounting Trump, please continue to do so, as I am sure you did before he ran, after he announced, after he won the (R) nomination and .... well you still haven't learned your lesson. I know, it is really hard to take him seriously, but he is actually counting on that. ;)
It isn't conspicuous consumption, it is literally wealth that the IRS cannot tax. Those one of a kind pieces are designed for one purpose, to hide and appreciate wealth. How do you appraise one of a kind pieces that have never seen an auction or sale? How does one "tax" something that has no face value that is anywhere near what it is actually worth?
The Old Money is laughing at people like you, because you don't see it the way they do. They stuffed their mattresses with money, except it isn't stuffed with money, and it isn't in mattresses. That 25 Million dollar painting, is handed down from generation to generation and isn't included in the estate taxes. Those same taxes the average American has no idea how to avoid.
I've found that people mocking others in ignorance are kind of arrogant shitheads.
Well, asking an expert for an answer, and then dismissing that answer because it doesn't suit you makes you more of an asshole (IMHO). The original poster is entirely correct. I liken it to how to eat an elephant. You see an elephant, and figure you can eat a pound or two a day and it takes a couple years. I look at the Elephant and send my herd of trained ants to eat it, and it is gone in a couple days. It is a perspective that most people (like yourself) have no clue about. You see an ant, and think "it can't eat an elephant", and "I can kill it with my finger", both of which is true, but you are not thinking about the billion or so cousins.
It is why firebombing ant hills is only temporary. They will come back, and you can't stop them. Welcome to our botnet.
Manufacturers won't learn anything until it hits them in the pocketbook. And since the IoT devices are a dime a dozen, made by thousands of different fly by night operations in China, that is highly unlikely. Cutting corners is how they make a $24.99 device that does something that eliminates you walking across the room to do.
We have a system of supposed checks n balances, and a proper Search Warrant in a murder investigation. I am not sure what anyone is complaining about (no, I am not saying you are complaining). The whole "Grab everything" excuse is acceptable here, in this case. It may not be worthy in other cases, but in this one, I have no problem with.
Stop, drop, and roll!
I can confirm that this doesn't always work. Sometimes it lights the pine needles on the ground on fire.
I am not so much for the legalization of drugs, but the decriminalization of them. Portugal is a great example of something we could be doing differently.
He was gay! That makes him a special Snowflake.
You're thinking is is almost right. The infrastructure is where the problem actually lies. What is needed is a way to avoid the last mile issue being the monopoly /oligarchy model that we've been running for the last 30+ years or so. Stop viewing the last mile as a "Franchise agreement" and start treating it like a road, where anyone can deliver the packages (FedEx, UPS, USPS ...).
My solution is municipal owned Fiber Plant, brought back to a COLO facility where you have the choice of providers to bring content/services to the end user, and let the competition happen there.
The problem is that the Government went into business of being an ISP. What they should have done, which wouldn't violate the ISP's rights, is not provide any service at all, just provide the infrastructure. Building out Fiber to a COLO facility where the various ISPs would wage commercial war with each other.
The problem wasn't that the idea was flawed, only execution of it. Too many people are stuck thinking government is the solution to every problem, and then misdiagnose what the problem is, and thus leaving government to be the creator and solution of far too many problems. Government is the best place to manage infrastructure, if we just left it there, a lot of other Government created problems go away (Net Neutrality, I am looking right at you)
I read a similar story some 30 years ago, except the roles were reversed. The white man declined a black man's heart. That was just as racist as this post is. No more, no less.
But ... has Netcraft Confirmed it?