I knew someone would say that. The government has the power to do so by its very nature, and that combined with the fact that all the information would be gathered for a single source (the government) makes the government's use of drones far different from a private citizen's use of drones.
Americans seem to have this stupid notion that they get 100% freedom and privacy 100% of the time anywhere they go while they do whatever it is they please.
I'm not seeing it.
I hate to break it to americans but as soon as you leave your home and out in public you no longer have privacy.
What? Where are all these Americans who supposedly think that you have privacy even when in public? I'd be happy if more than a select few existed, but many people seem to only care for security.
But really, the government is not entitled to have ubiquitous surveillance, so this whole thing is meaningless.
but when the police department does it, it's evil?
The government has the power to ruin people's lives, so the implications are far different. Furthermore, the information would be available to the entire government, not just a single person.
And unmanned drones are different from helicopters (and I don't think helicopters should be spying on anyone, either) in that they can be used en masse far more easily.
but realistically you're not that important or interesting to begin with.
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. As long as the government doesn't abuse me, all is well!
The fact that people seem to equate knowing raw facts with intelligence. I don't mind that people try to correct errors such as that, but to say that making such an error somehow harms his credibility seems rather absurd to me.
Note that people talking about the proper way to educate children should at least be able to spell common contractions properly. It cuts into your credibility no end....
In a nation of Jeopardy! geniuses, that may well be true.
there's no reason why you can't have Religion, Math and Science in the same school
True. I just wouldn't want to waste my time with something I believe is nonsensical and inconsequential.
Everyone is forced into groups (sometimes with sociopaths), everyone is taught at the same rate (either forcing lowest common denominator, or causing a skill gap to form), and everyone is given false information on their future (being told a path leads to a job, but not giving them a useful network.)
And all the rote memorization. Teaching people some algebra and such by grade 5 isn't going to help; in fact, I think it would probably make the problem of people memorizing but not understanding even worse.
3) Every day should have a gym component where kids are FORCED to participate,
And hopefully homeschooling remains an option so people will be able to avoid useless garbage like this. Are you going to have a year-long class on shoe tying as well?
As far as someone being bored to tears because coursework is too easy, that is just proof that an above-average mind can still be a lazy mind.
If you ask someone to do useless things, of course they're likely going to be bored. Call them "lazy" or what have you, but forcing someone to do useless things and not even giving them anything in return sometimes doesn't work out.
Maybe you are the minority, and the laws voted in please the majority.
What if slavery pleased the majority? What if the banning of certain religions pleased the majority? The fact that something pleases the majority doesn't mean it's good. Maybe the majority can be a bit tyrannical?
YES! See It is easy for me to move from one state to another if I do not like the way the government is running (for example I am leaving New York for better things)
What if you have no money to move? Why should you have to move just because your state's government is corrupt? Tyranny is tyranny no matter where it is.
What you speak of is unlike any other property right I've ever seen; IP laws seek to control what other people can do with their own property and are typically followed by censorship.
Slashdot Mirror
Um... so do private citizens and corporations.
I knew someone would say that. The government has the power to do so by its very nature, and that combined with the fact that all the information would be gathered for a single source (the government) makes the government's use of drones far different from a private citizen's use of drones.
Corporations might be a bit similar, though.
For spying on individual people, I can't see where they would be very useful or efficient (certainly not as much as an unmanned drone).
Americans seem to have this stupid notion that they get 100% freedom and privacy 100% of the time anywhere they go while they do whatever it is they please.
I'm not seeing it.
I hate to break it to americans but as soon as you leave your home and out in public you no longer have privacy.
What? Where are all these Americans who supposedly think that you have privacy even when in public? I'd be happy if more than a select few existed, but many people seem to only care for security.
But really, the government is not entitled to have ubiquitous surveillance, so this whole thing is meaningless.
but when the police department does it, it's evil?
The government has the power to ruin people's lives, so the implications are far different. Furthermore, the information would be available to the entire government, not just a single person.
And unmanned drones are different from helicopters (and I don't think helicopters should be spying on anyone, either) in that they can be used en masse far more easily.
but realistically you're not that important or interesting to begin with.
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. As long as the government doesn't abuse me, all is well!
I'd say it's worse, yes. I doubt satellites would be very useful for spying purposes.
It's pretty bad already, so let's make it worse!
The fact that people seem to equate knowing raw facts with intelligence. I don't mind that people try to correct errors such as that, but to say that making such an error somehow harms his credibility seems rather absurd to me.
Note that people talking about the proper way to educate children should at least be able to spell common contractions properly. It cuts into your credibility no end....
In a nation of Jeopardy! geniuses, that may well be true.
there's no reason why you can't have Religion, Math and Science in the same school
True. I just wouldn't want to waste my time with something I believe is nonsensical and inconsequential.
Everyone is forced into groups (sometimes with sociopaths), everyone is taught at the same rate (either forcing lowest common denominator, or causing a skill gap to form), and everyone is given false information on their future (being told a path leads to a job, but not giving them a useful network.)
And all the rote memorization. Teaching people some algebra and such by grade 5 isn't going to help; in fact, I think it would probably make the problem of people memorizing but not understanding even worse.
Religion promotes ethics
Are you serious? What sort of ethics are we talking about?
And you can promote ethics without including religion.
From the looks of it, that's what his proposed list is intended to do.
3) Every day should have a gym component where kids are FORCED to participate,
And hopefully homeschooling remains an option so people will be able to avoid useless garbage like this. Are you going to have a year-long class on shoe tying as well?
High school (and life for that matter) is what you decide to get out of it.
I feel public schools in the US are actually garbage. You can try to get a good education out of them, but you likely won't succeed.
You typically must follow arbitrary, nonsensical rules and complete useless assignments to do well.
We've moved so far past having any real privacy anymore, who cares?
Let's just install cameras in your bedroom, then. We've moved so far past having any real privacy, after all.
Prioritizing learning over sports would thus lead to improved learning.
Not in US public schools it wouldn't. There is little learning to be had, but plenty of rote memorization.
As far as someone being bored to tears because coursework is too easy, that is just proof that an above-average mind can still be a lazy mind.
If you ask someone to do useless things, of course they're likely going to be bored. Call them "lazy" or what have you, but forcing someone to do useless things and not even giving them anything in return sometimes doesn't work out.
Society will always be a "one-sized-fits-most" proposition.
And I think this sort of nonsense is probably one reason why our education system is as terrible as it is.
considering the increasing academic rigor that comes with the higher grades.
Those are some amazing letters you have there! Too bad they're useless.
To be more precise, copying without permission is rape.
but instead rip the bits and saved them to watch later, yes you've stolen their content
Sounds like you copied it instead. It doesn't matter what they intended the bits to be used for.
But renting a movie from blockbuster store, making a copy of it at home, and returning the rental is a form of theft, however you wish to put it.
But you haven't stolen anything.
DRM enforces licensing, it doesn't and can't stop you from stealing.
Of course it can't. How could DRM stop you from physically stealing an item? That doesn't seem likely.
Tyranny has multiple meanings.
Maybe you are the minority, and the laws voted in please the majority.
What if slavery pleased the majority? What if the banning of certain religions pleased the majority? The fact that something pleases the majority doesn't mean it's good. Maybe the majority can be a bit tyrannical?
YES! See It is easy for me to move from one state to another if I do not like the way the government is running (for example I am leaving New York for better things)
What if you have no money to move? Why should you have to move just because your state's government is corrupt? Tyranny is tyranny no matter where it is.
there's the fact that it's private property.
No, it isn't. The authors aren't involved at all.
But even if what you were trying to say was true, there would still be nothing that makes any of it objectively wrong (that I know of, at least).
Ok, idiot. Intellectual Property is... oh, a property right, isn't it?
What you speak of is unlike any other property right I've ever seen; IP laws seek to control what other people can do with their own property and are typically followed by censorship.
Yeah... some.