I really think that the Brits will come through this okay- They are a very tough people. I think that if you are so inclined it would be nice to say a prayer for our friends in Britain.
--
yeah, you know, piss up a tree to make yourself feel better instead of having a real measurable effect on actually improving the world.
considering what it costs to implement, maintain and police the roadways; we cyclists and pedestrians who behave more responsibly shouldnt be forced to pay for all this insfrastructure you all are "wasting".
see? pay-per-mile is actually a "free market user-pays" initiative...
Imagine all the 'hard' work teachers, parents and guidance counselors put into brainwashing every kid that he/she must go to University."
Jobs should keep his mouth shut. Its not reasonable (normal, or frankly, directly dependant on his single person) that Apple is what it is today. Serendipity. Timing. *OTHER* People (ahem) for instance.
Jobs is not the mesiah. He is not the ubermensch. He is not a guru visionary.
It is a fluke that he was able to overcome the barriers setup by the plutocracy and end up leading apple (and filthy rich). It is not wise or practical for him to give such advice.
What would be better? For millions to fail and end up hungry or for them to put in their time, hard work and dedication to end up better selves.
This "it worked for me and Im great -- its the way to go" conceit is sickening. And the poster should shake of his sycophant leanings and realize that the world should not be lead by egos but by considered and learned.
Im not overly educated myself -- nor am i prostrate in deference to those i consider better credentialed -- but I realize that simply "dropping out" is just that. To drop out. And unless your goals are humble (which, frankly, I would *ALSO* agree are worthy) then dont plan to become Steve Jobs by dropping out. Not that Im suggesting Steve Jobs is some kind of role model. He's obviously not. He sounds like a unmitigated egotist.
Lighting doesnt strike twice. Mr. Job's ego cannot will it so.
So what your are saying is that we should give up important civil rights to catch some frauds?
When did anonymitiy and flimsy-identifying methods become civil rights? What the government is concerned with is properly identifying someone.
The world is a big place, gone are the days when you need personal, face-to-face relationships to get by.
You cannot expect the gov. to continue to allow rife fraud simply because a few nutters read too much dystopian SciFi. I agree with the parent, the question is not the card, but the database/data itself.
Who gets to use it? Why? How? When? This is not a revolutionary change at all. You have tax bills, drivers license, healthcards etc etc etc. Its stupid. A single ID card that proves a person's identity (like an 'internal passport') is a Good Thing.
If the surrounding laws are written to allow unfettered access by nosey cops and capitalist-data-miners then I would be against *THAT IMPLEMENTATION*.
I have no prima facia objection to the cards themselves, that objection is slippery-slope rhetoric.
...and 3M stopped making Teflon 5 years ago because (wait for it...) they wisely anticipate the MASSIVE lawsuits that are going to come pumping down the line on this matter very shortly.
These protesters are right. Teflon and the like (perfluorochemicals) are accumulating in the food chain.
They are known to cause cancer and supress the immune system.
Linux Labor Union. I was drawn to Linux-based operating systems because of the freedom and diversity
Unions are about bringing freedom and democracy to your workplace.
why would I join an organization that promotes a skill-set monoculture, restrictions on my work and others', and then charges me for it?
Why do you suggest this? A Labour Union can be just as vibrant a group of labour as non-union.
The purpose of a union is to bring labour a bit of leverage with capital.
Before you quote mccarthy inspired anti-labour rhetoric, have a look at the robber barrons of the late 20th century and get back to me about how your mad skillz makes you indispensable.
such a device would almost certianly use GNU/linux. It can be cut down to virtually nothing in size, and is already network centric. Based on what your describing, the value is in the hardware, If I were looking to build such a device, I would use commodity software to keep things simple.
why not volunteer to leverage the vast catalogue, support and knowledge as opposed to paying for something?
No, blame man for messing with nature rather than accepting that he is part of it.
This is the flaw in your outlook.
Man is both a part of nature, and not a part. We have developed beyond the confines of nature.
for instance, your computer. If you put it in a bucket of soil in the garden will it grow a new computer? No. It is the assembly, down to the most intimate and amazing detail. It does not exist 'in nature'.
our roads, cities, chemicals, fabrics, etc etc etc are all extra-nature. They are not a part of the natural world. Sure, they exist from raw naturally occuring materials, but they are distinctly not-natural.
So. Back to extinction. What we humans are doing to nature is on a physical and time-scale far beyond the history of the planet.
We are not changing the world in a way that the rest of the natural world can grok. All the plants and animals that had co-evolved with us for millenia have suddenly found themselves outside of the planet's future.
We are terra-forming the planet without concern to preserve our co-dependant natural world. This is both immoral and self-destructive. It is hubris like yours (frankly), the "humans are simply nature, what we are doing is natural, dont worry" is seductive but untrue.
When humanity is gone from the world, i know we nature will recover. From the simplest surviving bacteria, nature will once again rule the earth when we are gone. HOWEVER, to simply shrug off the loss of our biodiversity through human-activity induced extinction is a tragedy.
We should have more respect for the plants and animals that we have depended on and co-existed with for millennia. They have unquantifiable value.
We have discoverd ourselves unchained (almost) by the natural world. It is now our moral responsibility to preserve the nature we have fundementally discovered ourselves no longer dependant on.
Millenia from now -- if we last that long -- this will be viewed as a time of untold crime.
Just because some particular life has evolved away (become extinct) doesn't mean that it can't come back given the right conditions
I have two problems with this.
1) It suggests that HUMANS arnt responsible for mass modern extinction, just 'changes in the holes'. Thats nonsense. We are destroying the natural world, in such a way that we are removing these niches that plants and animals formerly occupied.
2) once a plant is gone it doesnt 'rematerialize'. Its genetic advantages are lost forever. in the case of this flower, it didnt just 're-appear in a jiffy' to fill the old niche. it A) probably existed all along or B) formerly dormant seeds germinated and multiplied.
What didnt happen is one plant, sensing the niche vacant, didnt 'give birth' to the SAME species as had been extinct.
Its the same flower. not a newly created flower the same as the old one (?) or someshiat.
I notice you don't refer to the long delays for urgent care and the rationing
The delays are reasonable. And the rationing, well it does not exist. The care is given as available.
BTW, this is not the same with american HMOs do, as you describe.
We're rich, and we live well because of it (even our poor are the envy of the world), but you want no part of that? Ok. Long as you're happy.
Your rich. Yes. So are we. Whats your point? America is rich for a few reasons:
1) USofAmerica is -- by design -- the refuge of the international plutocracy. You live an an undisputably corrupt warmongering nation. 2) Virgin territory. Your geography, along with Canada's, means we had untold amounts of low value land and natural resources. We are both still cutting virgin forests for timber -- this is unlike the rest of the 'west'. Killing them indians and taking their land made us instantly wealthy. 3) America has never hosted a modern war. But has had the good fortune to build profit and industry to supply WWI, WWII, Korea-US War, Vietnam-US War etc etc etc.
America is *presently* wealthy because it is immoral. Short and simple. *THAT* is what I will have no part of. USofA is unsustainable and not to be emulated.
A high standard of living can only come from high levels of production.
Absolutely not. Sufficient production to meet the stated needs can produce the desired standards if distributed correctly.
If you don't make stuff, you don't have stuff.
Absolutely irrelevant. Having stuff != quality life.
A government which by means of high taxes discourages production, also discourages wealth creation.
Wealth != products. Wealth != money. "High Taxes " (which Canada does not have btw) is does does not discourage "production". Private Capital, in an effort to remain private *may* move to a geography with lower taxes -- but this is a result of an INSUFFICIENTLY regulated market/too-free-trade.
The federal government is running a Surplus. Has been for years. Frankly, we lead the G8 in fiscal responsibility. The medical system is a provincial matter -- and some provinces run deficits -- but nothing earth shattering...
We pay for our health-care just fine. No worries.
As for "entire net worth to private investors and still be unable to pay off its medical bills." -- it simply does not compute.
Canada literally taxes people to death, levying high taxes
if you add what americans pay PRIVATELY for their health care to their tax bill - wait for it -- they become the most taxed people on earth.
canadians arent taxed much really, consider what we recieve in return.
amoung other things, universal healthcare of dubious quality and value
nonsense. The care is excellent. I refer you to the 100% coverage, illness rates, infant mortality rates and life expectancy. Anactodal testimony that the system 'has too many waits' is mcdonalds-mall-shopping mindset where it isnt necessary. guess what: sometimes you have to wait. in the end, the only result is you couldnt cope with not being able to demand instant attention... which is really what the immature/uneducated are using as motivation to insult CHC.
For what my father paid in that share of his taxes earmarked for national health care, his life could have been saved ten times over. Instead, an operable, discovered abdominal aortic aneurism was left untreated until it ruptured, killing him.
Im sorry for your loss. But unfortunatley, some people die. Blaming your father on CHC is dubious. One person's loss isnt reason to consider the system broken. We are dealing with a massive system. Its got to be flexible but efficient.
In the end, its still provides excellent care. There is no disputing this.
But, why is it that Canada punishes traditional marriage and home ownership with its tax code?
For welfare bums, perhaps. But certainly not for hardworking breadwinners: mothers and fathers struggling to put a roof over their kids' heads.
Get off the fraser institute/reform mailing list. Youve fallen off the deep end. Those "welfare bums" you speak of are the middle class pal. Fostering the middle class -- or the general welfare -- is should be the sole goal of government.
Is your alternative the american-style gap between rich and poor and its accompanying chaos? no thanks.
Almost all of industrialized world has a social welfare system similar to Canada. Japan, australia, europe etc etc etc. *THIS* is why we have high standards of living -- by definition.
America has a high standard of living because of its massive income... being at the top of the financial shitpile has its advantages (like being able to spend yourself onto the point of respecable OL-index), but their system is *NOT* a model to emulate.
It *WILL* not work for anyone but the super rich. And, really, unless your superwealthy (ie: not middle class) than your self-interest is not served by wanting the changes you think you do.
Its american jingo rhetoric infecting your politics pal. its time for some perspective. Take a trip to europe. read some foriegn papers.
It appears to me that O'Gara is just being overly provocative to get readers....I can tell you that my mere mentioning of any of this will result in incredibly hateful attempted postings on this forum and on my moderated blog. What is wrong with these people?
Pot. Kettle. Kettle, this is Pot.
If anything is going to kill Linux and the open-source movement, Ahem, that should read "If anything is going to kill GNU/Linux and the Free Software movement, it's the presence of certifiable lunatics in the ranks representing the users,.... or, anyone gives a crap what self-fallating bloviators say. Oh, btw, nice attempt at guilt-by-association.
GNU/Linux has many interested parties, from fan-boys, to professional geeks, marketing nutters, and other marketroids like yourself. Why on earth would you think that this constitutes a "implosion of the community"? Other than your looking for page-impressions with overly provacative headlines. Please, unless you consider yourself an empty headed nim-whit member of the semi-literate masses, ignore this man.
IN short, suck it Dvorak. Your a fool's fool. It might win you kudos in a room full of stuffed shirted shiney-pants, but I havnt time to hand-hold people around your worthless baying.
Slashdot Mirror
I really think that the Brits will come through this okay- They are a very tough people. I think that if you are so inclined it would be nice to say a prayer for our friends in Britain.
--
yeah, you know, piss up a tree to make yourself feel better instead of having a real measurable effect on actually improving the world.
Untrue. Driving should be discouraged by having ot pay for it directly. Fuel charges dont capture high-mileage fuel-efficient vehicles.
Driving is bad for MANY reasons other than air pollution.
The Iraqi homeland defending, freedom fighters seem to have no problem giving us fits...
There, I de-jingo-ized it for you.
something to look into:
Most toll roads are built to lesser engineering standards (medians, onramps, widths etc) than Government-owned roads.
This may be why the speed is lower.
per-mile pricing is a good thing.
considering what it costs to implement, maintain and police the roadways; we cyclists and pedestrians who behave more responsibly shouldnt be forced to pay for all this insfrastructure you all are "wasting".
see? pay-per-mile is actually a "free market user-pays" initiative...
Passing another vehicle on the road is perfect example. You have to accelerate to pass the car that is in front of you. A legal move
In case you didnt know (it appears you dont), it is *STILL* illegal to speed when passing.
You cannot exceed the posted limit for any reason -- including "i am passing".
Speed limiters? Congestion charge?
The faster you drive, the more fuel you burn per-km (generally).
Yes, because as we all know, "various Democratic Senators and Congressmen could" have a large say in Japan, Britain, Canada, France (et al).
Nice try at "big spending liberals are just wasting $ *again*" spin.
or... stop wasting so much damned energy.
read:
cars
shopping malls of usless junk
fashion
professional sports
etc
etc
etc
just par down our needs to existential, non tangible ones (life, love, art) and a sustainable existence.
chuck all the rest of the production/consumer-driven culture and never mind "more power systems".
Imagine all the 'hard' work teachers, parents and guidance counselors put into brainwashing every kid that he/she must go to University."
Jobs should keep his mouth shut. Its not reasonable (normal, or frankly, directly dependant on his single person) that Apple is what it is today. Serendipity. Timing. *OTHER* People (ahem) for instance.
Jobs is not the mesiah. He is not the ubermensch. He is not a guru visionary.
It is a fluke that he was able to overcome the barriers setup by the plutocracy and end up leading apple (and filthy rich). It is not wise or practical for him to give such advice.
What would be better? For millions to fail and end up hungry or for them to put in their time, hard work and dedication to end up better selves.
This "it worked for me and Im great -- its the way to go" conceit is sickening. And the poster should shake of his sycophant leanings and realize that the world should not be lead by egos but by considered and learned.
Im not overly educated myself -- nor am i prostrate in deference to those i consider better credentialed -- but I realize that simply "dropping out" is just that. To drop out. And unless your goals are humble (which, frankly, I would *ALSO* agree are worthy) then dont plan to become Steve Jobs by dropping out. Not that Im suggesting Steve Jobs is some kind of role model. He's obviously not. He sounds like a unmitigated egotist.
Lighting doesnt strike twice. Mr. Job's ego cannot will it so.
So what your are saying is that we should give up important civil rights to catch some frauds?
When did anonymitiy and flimsy-identifying methods become civil rights? What the government is concerned with is properly identifying someone.
The world is a big place, gone are the days when you need personal, face-to-face relationships to get by.
You cannot expect the gov. to continue to allow rife fraud simply because a few nutters read too much dystopian SciFi. I agree with the parent, the question is not the card, but the database/data itself.
Who gets to use it? Why? How? When? This is not a revolutionary change at all. You have tax bills, drivers license, healthcards etc etc etc. Its stupid. A single ID card that proves a person's identity (like an 'internal passport') is a Good Thing.
If the surrounding laws are written to allow unfettered access by nosey cops and capitalist-data-miners then I would be against *THAT IMPLEMENTATION*.
I have no prima facia objection to the cards themselves, that objection is slippery-slope rhetoric.
...and 3M stopped making Teflon 5 years ago because (wait for it...) they wisely anticipate the MASSIVE lawsuits that are going to come pumping down the line on this matter very shortly.
e nied.htm
These protesters are right. Teflon and the like (perfluorochemicals) are accumulating in the food chain.
They are known to cause cancer and supress the immune system.
See this New York Times article:
http://www.health-report.co.uk/teflon_poisoning_d
Linux Labor Union. I was drawn to Linux-based operating systems because of the freedom and diversity
Unions are about bringing freedom and democracy to your workplace.
why would I join an organization that promotes a skill-set monoculture, restrictions on my work and others', and then charges me for it?
Why do you suggest this? A Labour Union can be just as vibrant a group of labour as non-union.
The purpose of a union is to bring labour a bit of leverage with capital.
Before you quote mccarthy inspired anti-labour rhetoric, have a look at the robber barrons of the late 20th century and get back to me about how your mad skillz makes you indispensable.
such a device would almost certianly use GNU/linux. It can be cut down to virtually nothing in size, and is already network centric. Based on what your describing, the value is in the hardware, If I were looking to build such a device, I would use commodity software to keep things simple.
why not volunteer to leverage the vast catalogue, support and knowledge as opposed to paying for something?
Yes. Because Nudity and Sexuality is teh immoral.
Welcome to the Morally Infant USA!
No, blame man for messing with nature rather than accepting that he is part of it.
This is the flaw in your outlook.
Man is both a part of nature, and not a part. We have developed beyond the confines of nature.
for instance, your computer. If you put it in a bucket of soil in the garden will it grow a new computer? No. It is the assembly, down to the most intimate and amazing detail. It does not exist 'in nature'.
our roads, cities, chemicals, fabrics, etc etc etc are all extra-nature. They are not a part of the natural world. Sure, they exist from raw naturally occuring materials, but they are distinctly not-natural.
So. Back to extinction. What we humans are doing to nature is on a physical and time-scale far beyond the history of the planet.
We are not changing the world in a way that the rest of the natural world can grok. All the plants and animals that had co-evolved with us for millenia have suddenly found themselves outside of the planet's future.
We are terra-forming the planet without concern to preserve our co-dependant natural world. This is both immoral and self-destructive. It is hubris like yours (frankly), the "humans are simply nature, what we are doing is natural, dont worry" is seductive but untrue.
When humanity is gone from the world, i know we nature will recover. From the simplest surviving bacteria, nature will once again rule the earth when we are gone. HOWEVER, to simply shrug off the loss of our biodiversity through human-activity induced extinction is a tragedy.
We should have more respect for the plants and animals that we have depended on and co-existed with for millennia. They have unquantifiable value.
We have discoverd ourselves unchained (almost) by the natural world. It is now our moral responsibility to preserve the nature we have fundementally discovered ourselves no longer dependant on.
Millenia from now -- if we last that long -- this will be viewed as a time of untold crime.
Just because some particular life has evolved away (become extinct) doesn't mean that it can't come back given the right conditions
I have two problems with this.
1) It suggests that HUMANS arnt responsible for mass modern extinction, just 'changes in the holes'. Thats nonsense. We are destroying the natural world, in such a way that we are removing these niches that plants and animals formerly occupied.
2) once a plant is gone it doesnt 'rematerialize'. Its genetic advantages are lost forever. in the case of this flower, it didnt just 're-appear in a jiffy' to fill the old niche. it A) probably existed all along or B) formerly dormant seeds germinated and multiplied.
What didnt happen is one plant, sensing the niche vacant, didnt 'give birth' to the SAME species as had been extinct.
Its the same flower. not a newly created flower the same as the old one (?) or someshiat.
I notice you don't refer to the long delays for urgent care and the rationing
The delays are reasonable. And the rationing, well it does not exist. The care is given as available.
BTW, this is not the same with american HMOs do, as you describe.
We're rich, and we live well because of it (even our poor are the envy of the world), but you want no part of that? Ok. Long as you're happy.
Your rich. Yes. So are we. Whats your point?
America is rich for a few reasons:
1) USofAmerica is -- by design -- the refuge of the international plutocracy. You live an an undisputably corrupt warmongering nation.
2) Virgin territory. Your geography, along with Canada's, means we had untold amounts of low value land and natural resources. We are both still cutting virgin forests for timber -- this is unlike the rest of the 'west'. Killing them indians and taking their land made us instantly wealthy.
3) America has never hosted a modern war. But has had the good fortune to build profit and industry to supply WWI, WWII, Korea-US War, Vietnam-US War etc etc etc.
America is *presently* wealthy because it is immoral. Short and simple. *THAT* is what I will have no part of. USofA is unsustainable and not to be emulated.
A high standard of living can only come from high levels of production.
Absolutely not. Sufficient production to meet the stated needs can produce the desired standards if distributed correctly.
If you don't make stuff, you don't have stuff.
Absolutely irrelevant. Having stuff != quality life.
A government which by means of high taxes discourages production, also discourages wealth creation.
Wealth != products. Wealth != money. "High Taxes " (which Canada does not have btw) is does does not discourage "production". Private Capital, in an effort to remain private *may* move to a geography with lower taxes -- but this is a result of an INSUFFICIENTLY regulated market/too-free-trade.
The federal government is running a Surplus. Has been for years. Frankly, we lead the G8 in fiscal responsibility. The medical system is a provincial matter -- and some provinces run deficits -- but nothing earth shattering...
We pay for our health-care just fine. No worries.
As for "entire net worth to private investors and still be unable to pay off its medical bills." -- it simply does not compute.
Canada literally taxes people to death, levying high taxes
if you add what americans pay PRIVATELY for their health care to their tax bill - wait for it -- they become the most taxed people on earth.
canadians arent taxed much really, consider what we recieve in return.
amoung other things, universal healthcare of dubious quality and value
nonsense. The care is excellent. I refer you to the 100% coverage, illness rates, infant mortality rates and life expectancy. Anactodal testimony that the system 'has too many waits' is mcdonalds-mall-shopping mindset where it isnt necessary. guess what: sometimes you have to wait. in the end, the only result is you couldnt cope with not being able to demand instant attention... which is really what the immature/uneducated are using as motivation to insult CHC.
For what my father paid in that share of his taxes earmarked for national health care, his life could have been saved ten times over. Instead, an operable, discovered abdominal aortic aneurism was left untreated until it ruptured, killing him.
Im sorry for your loss. But unfortunatley, some people die. Blaming your father on CHC is dubious. One person's loss isnt reason to consider the system broken. We are dealing with a massive system. Its got to be flexible but efficient.
In the end, its still provides excellent care. There is no disputing this.
But, why is it that Canada punishes traditional marriage and home ownership with its tax code?
For welfare bums, perhaps. But certainly not for hardworking breadwinners: mothers and fathers struggling to put a roof over their kids' heads.
Get off the fraser institute/reform mailing list. Youve fallen off the deep end. Those "welfare bums" you speak of are the middle class pal. Fostering the middle class -- or the general welfare -- is should be the sole goal of government.
Is your alternative the american-style gap between rich and poor and its accompanying chaos? no thanks.
Almost all of industrialized world has a social welfare system similar to Canada. Japan, australia, europe etc etc etc. *THIS* is why we have high standards of living -- by definition.
America has a high standard of living because of its massive income... being at the top of the financial shitpile has its advantages (like being able to spend yourself onto the point of respecable OL-index), but their system is *NOT* a model to emulate.
It *WILL* not work for anyone but the super rich. And, really, unless your superwealthy (ie: not middle class) than your self-interest is not served by wanting the changes you think you do.
Its american jingo rhetoric infecting your politics pal. its time for some perspective. Take a trip to europe. read some foriegn papers.
It appears to me that O'Gara is just being overly provocative to get readers....I can tell you that my mere mentioning of any of this will result in incredibly hateful attempted postings on this forum and on my moderated blog. What is wrong with these people?
Pot. Kettle. Kettle, this is Pot.
If anything is going to kill Linux and the open-source movement, Ahem, that should read "If anything is going to kill GNU/Linux and the Free Software movement, it's the presence of certifiable lunatics in the ranks representing the users,.... or, anyone gives a crap what self-fallating bloviators say. Oh, btw, nice attempt at guilt-by-association.
GNU/Linux has many interested parties, from fan-boys, to professional geeks, marketing nutters, and other marketroids like yourself. Why on earth would you think that this constitutes a "implosion of the community"? Other than your looking for page-impressions with overly provacative headlines. Please, unless you consider yourself an empty headed nim-whit member of the semi-literate masses, ignore this man.
IN short, suck it Dvorak. Your a fool's fool. It might win you kudos in a room full of stuffed shirted shiney-pants, but I havnt time to hand-hold people around your worthless baying.
Those loosers are nothing compared to the time we all went from 31337 d00d.
yes.
/. editors .
i on 05.17.05 and again on 07.12.06. Damned lazy
PERFECT!
Its dadaism in all its beauty. Why doultnt you want to go? Too busy watching TV?