Unfortunately for you, and those that hold a somewhat (and seemingly) reasonable viewpoint, the term has been co-opted by the political left and used as a battle cry to remove any reason to have any sort of civil conversation about their proposed policies. Add in a dose of "patriarchy" and "cis gendered" and you end up with the inter-sectional idiocy being foisted upon college students.
I've seen enough cries of "racism" in my lifetime that basically shows that anyone using it generically for "I don't like that view" is an idiot. Just recently one went something like this
"He's a White Supremacist"
"Dude, I'm Japanese"
The Cry has become null and void, because crying "racism" is simply a shortcut for a complete and utter lack of critical thought.
Talent only gets you so far. Gumption is a much more valued trait and makes up for lack of talent in a lot of cases. Don't train you kids in a skill without training them to have that grit that gets shit done. Not everyone has it, but you can learn it.
I wouldn't want to live in a world where adults acted with pure empathy all the time.
Somewhere between all and none is a balance for being useful. A purely empathetic person would be constantly conflicted emotionally. Appeal to emotion is fraught with all sorts of potential evil.
The last mile cable monopoly is actually government regulated and sponsored monopoly called "Franchise Agreements". There is little or more likely, no "choice" for consumers.
Broadband is broken, we have known this for YEARS.
The problem is that we have GOVERNMENT regulation preventing competition (Franchise Agreements) and until we figure out a way to get out of them, and allow for more competition over the last mile, we're going to be stuck with ever increasing government rules and regulations trying to fix the problem of government's own making.
My solution, is fairly simple, yet radical. The Local Municipality owns and operates the LAST mile itself (like a road), then the problem will remain. There are ways to bring competition to the marketplace, allowing consumers to choose who their provider, rather than the one size fits all approach government tends to bring.
I don't think this is the case. It is more like $10K to show how woefully inadequate printer security is, so you have to buy a whole new printer that is up to last years standards, that are already obsolete.
Saw an interesting post about hanging chads. Basically said that it was unlikely to be problem in the numbers being reported, unless someone was stuffing the ballot with bulk punched cards. Not that the chads were impossible, but rather that in the numbers that were reported was higher than statistically probable.
I have no idea why we're not looking at paper ballots as an option. Fully Digital Voting is ripe for exploitation on a massive scale, the kind that would keep a dictator elected for life.
Decentralized paper ballots are less prone to wide scale exploitation. Because it is "hard" doesn't seem like a good answer IMHO.
I'll give you a fine example of Tyranny of the majority, in a purely democratic legal vote. Gay Marriage.
The majority, in every single vote on a statewide referendum was voted against gay marriage, or in the affirmative for marriage to be defined as a man and woman only. Even in highly red states like California. The majority in every case voted one way.
The only reason we have gay marriage now, this day, is not because of the majority vote, but rather because of a court that said it violated the Constitution of the United States. (Good, Bad, or Indifferent).
It is called Mob Rule because the mob is easily influenced, and eventually, laws are ignored and once laws are ignored for the purposes of controlling the mob, which ends in tyranny. There are some really good essays and books written from the 19th century on the topic. We have largely been isolated from tyrannical democracies because there are so few real democracies having been replaced by representative governments.
I have heard people on left complain that those in certain communities are more likely to be targeted and arrested and convicted.
That is an excuse, right there. People who live in high crime areas, commit higher numbers of crimes. It is "cause and effect". How can one stop crime, if you're so fucking sensitive about the race of the perpetrators that you make excuses as to why society can't arrest the criminals because of their race, ignoring the victims are also of the same race.
The "targeted" part of your comment is racially charged, and part of exactly what I was suggesting, it is the worst form of racism, because it prevents proper policing and enables criminality in high crime areas.
cycle that takes a long time to break, and isn't easily broken.
It is easily broken, if all the NAACP, Black Lives Matters, Race Baiting leftwing pimps started to raise their expectations of their respective communities, and stopped with their inciting hatred of those trying to make their communities safer.
Look, I'm not a big fan of cops. But I am less of a fan of crime. And being Libertarian, I am not a fan of things like the "war on drugs" which is highly problematic on all sorts of levels. But at some point, we're going to have to have higher expectations before we solve the crime problem in high crime areas. Just like we should have higher expectations of police. NEITHER goal is unreasonable.
Technically, it isn't fake news, its Racist, and therefore not PC enough to utter. Everyone calling it that will be fired from their jobs momentarily. Neil DeGrasse Tyson is unavailable for comment.
Those are all good questions. But those questions are all one sided. Without asking the question of the other half of the equation, "what is the cost of crime", we're never going to fix anything correctly.
Keep in mind, the communities that most affected by crime are ALSO the communities that have the same profile as the criminals in that community. IF we are okay with subjecting them to high crime out of fear of offending people for "Racial Profiling", that is pretty damn racist IMHO. It is racism of low expectations, and racism of ignorance.
The political left is being racist when they ignore and excuse crime in certain communities, out of fear of appearing racist, because it is saying they have that as an expectation. It is a sick twisted way of appearing "not racist" while actually being the worse kind of racist.
Pedantic Jerk here, but we don't live in a Constitutional democracy, we live in a Constitutional Republic. This is a common issue, I understand, but the distinction is important, even if it is ignored. See Electoral College for a prime example of the difference.
The alternative is democracy, which is the last step towards tyranny, as the majority will always vote to oppress the minority.
People with slightly more than half a brain don't use measurements that don't matter. The Hindenburg was HUGE how did it fly????? (for example).
And she was "more popular" is also a non-sequitor, because she didn't get 50% of the vote. She was very popular where it where it mattered less, and less so where it mattered more. It also doesn't count votes that would have changed, people who would have voted that didn't because they are R in California (for example). The resources spent campaigning would have gone elsewhere, changing the votes in both places.
So, in conclusion, it is meaningless sour grapes by people who can't believe she lost to probably someone who was equally bad as an option. I "wasted" my vote for voting for neither of them.
You're right, The opinions of a few Californians, New Yorkers and a few other states should decide who the president of the US should be. Fuck everyone else. I live in California, and it is bad enough that stupid leftists are running this state into the ground, only caring for illegal aliens, criminals stupid liberal projects (HSR) and the "oppressed", while normal every day people of all colors and stripes are ignored.
And it shows, from the shithole San Francisco has become to failing infrastructure of nearly collapsing dams, to the people fleeing the state in record numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately for you, and those that hold a somewhat (and seemingly) reasonable viewpoint, the term has been co-opted by the political left and used as a battle cry to remove any reason to have any sort of civil conversation about their proposed policies. Add in a dose of "patriarchy" and "cis gendered" and you end up with the inter-sectional idiocy being foisted upon college students.
I've seen enough cries of "racism" in my lifetime that basically shows that anyone using it generically for "I don't like that view" is an idiot. Just recently one went something like this
"He's a White Supremacist"
"Dude, I'm Japanese"
The Cry has become null and void, because crying "racism" is simply a shortcut for a complete and utter lack of critical thought.
Talent only gets you so far. Gumption is a much more valued trait and makes up for lack of talent in a lot of cases. Don't train you kids in a skill without training them to have that grit that gets shit done. Not everyone has it, but you can learn it.
(US Flag)(airplane)(airplane)(airplane) -> (enemy flag)(mushroom)(mushroom)
I feel like there is a missing snake and a few badgers in there.
Net Neutrality as mandated by the GOVERNMENT isn't "competition" of the free market. Quit pretending it is.
For once anyways.
KARA, and she is a robot - https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I wouldn't want to live in a world where adults acted with pure empathy all the time.
Somewhere between all and none is a balance for being useful. A purely empathetic person would be constantly conflicted emotionally. Appeal to emotion is fraught with all sorts of potential evil.
Are they "official" names for neighborhoods?
Hey look, a homophobic comment from a progressive/liberal.
I advocate something similar or even the same (depending on your details)!
What free market?
The last mile cable monopoly is actually government regulated and sponsored monopoly called "Franchise Agreements". There is little or more likely, no "choice" for consumers.
Broadband is broken, we have known this for YEARS.
The problem is that we have GOVERNMENT regulation preventing competition (Franchise Agreements) and until we figure out a way to get out of them, and allow for more competition over the last mile, we're going to be stuck with ever increasing government rules and regulations trying to fix the problem of government's own making.
My solution, is fairly simple, yet radical. The Local Municipality owns and operates the LAST mile itself (like a road), then the problem will remain. There are ways to bring competition to the marketplace, allowing consumers to choose who their provider, rather than the one size fits all approach government tends to bring.
I don't think this is the case. It is more like $10K to show how woefully inadequate printer security is, so you have to buy a whole new printer that is up to last years standards, that are already obsolete.
Saw an interesting post about hanging chads. Basically said that it was unlikely to be problem in the numbers being reported, unless someone was stuffing the ballot with bulk punched cards. Not that the chads were impossible, but rather that in the numbers that were reported was higher than statistically probable.
I have no idea why we're not looking at paper ballots as an option. Fully Digital Voting is ripe for exploitation on a massive scale, the kind that would keep a dictator elected for life.
Decentralized paper ballots are less prone to wide scale exploitation. Because it is "hard" doesn't seem like a good answer IMHO.
Open Borders are a good idea. But getting a liberal pushing for open borders to admit is is like pulling teeth.
Whooosh. --- joke going over your head.
I'll give you a fine example of Tyranny of the majority, in a purely democratic legal vote. Gay Marriage.
The majority, in every single vote on a statewide referendum was voted against gay marriage, or in the affirmative for marriage to be defined as a man and woman only. Even in highly red states like California. The majority in every case voted one way.
The only reason we have gay marriage now, this day, is not because of the majority vote, but rather because of a court that said it violated the Constitution of the United States. (Good, Bad, or Indifferent).
It is called Mob Rule because the mob is easily influenced, and eventually, laws are ignored and once laws are ignored for the purposes of controlling the mob, which ends in tyranny. There are some really good essays and books written from the 19th century on the topic. We have largely been isolated from tyrannical democracies because there are so few real democracies having been replaced by representative governments.
But here is a recent essay on the topic. http://www.democraticaudit.com...
I have heard people on left complain that those in certain communities are more likely to be targeted and arrested and convicted.
That is an excuse, right there. People who live in high crime areas, commit higher numbers of crimes. It is "cause and effect". How can one stop crime, if you're so fucking sensitive about the race of the perpetrators that you make excuses as to why society can't arrest the criminals because of their race, ignoring the victims are also of the same race.
The "targeted" part of your comment is racially charged, and part of exactly what I was suggesting, it is the worst form of racism, because it prevents proper policing and enables criminality in high crime areas.
cycle that takes a long time to break, and isn't easily broken.
It is easily broken, if all the NAACP, Black Lives Matters, Race Baiting leftwing pimps started to raise their expectations of their respective communities, and stopped with their inciting hatred of those trying to make their communities safer.
Look, I'm not a big fan of cops. But I am less of a fan of crime. And being Libertarian, I am not a fan of things like the "war on drugs" which is highly problematic on all sorts of levels. But at some point, we're going to have to have higher expectations before we solve the crime problem in high crime areas. Just like we should have higher expectations of police. NEITHER goal is unreasonable.
Technically, it isn't fake news, its Racist, and therefore not PC enough to utter. Everyone calling it that will be fired from their jobs momentarily. Neil DeGrasse Tyson is unavailable for comment.
Those are all good questions. But those questions are all one sided. Without asking the question of the other half of the equation, "what is the cost of crime", we're never going to fix anything correctly.
Keep in mind, the communities that most affected by crime are ALSO the communities that have the same profile as the criminals in that community. IF we are okay with subjecting them to high crime out of fear of offending people for "Racial Profiling", that is pretty damn racist IMHO. It is racism of low expectations, and racism of ignorance.
The political left is being racist when they ignore and excuse crime in certain communities, out of fear of appearing racist, because it is saying they have that as an expectation. It is a sick twisted way of appearing "not racist" while actually being the worse kind of racist.
Constitutional democracy
Pedantic Jerk here, but we don't live in a Constitutional democracy, we live in a Constitutional Republic. This is a common issue, I understand, but the distinction is important, even if it is ignored. See Electoral College for a prime example of the difference.
The alternative is democracy, which is the last step towards tyranny, as the majority will always vote to oppress the minority.
People with slightly more than half a brain don't use measurements that don't matter. The Hindenburg was HUGE how did it fly????? (for example).
And she was "more popular" is also a non-sequitor, because she didn't get 50% of the vote. She was very popular where it where it mattered less, and less so where it mattered more. It also doesn't count votes that would have changed, people who would have voted that didn't because they are R in California (for example). The resources spent campaigning would have gone elsewhere, changing the votes in both places.
So, in conclusion, it is meaningless sour grapes by people who can't believe she lost to probably someone who was equally bad as an option. I "wasted" my vote for voting for neither of them.
You're right, The opinions of a few Californians, New Yorkers and a few other states should decide who the president of the US should be. Fuck everyone else. I live in California, and it is bad enough that stupid leftists are running this state into the ground, only caring for illegal aliens, criminals stupid liberal projects (HSR) and the "oppressed", while normal every day people of all colors and stripes are ignored.
And it shows, from the shithole San Francisco has become to failing infrastructure of nearly collapsing dams, to the people fleeing the state in record numbers.