Used to be just terrible for Linux support; they restricted access by MAC address (not even WEP encryption), and you had to download a little piece of software when you first connected that would do the registration for you. Depending on whether you used Windows, Apple, or Linux, you would get a different executable...unfortunately, the Linux one was libc5. Installing the libc5 libraries didn't work, so every semester, I had to make a trip to IT (which closed at 4pm) to get them to manually enter my MAC address.
This past year, they changed to an entirely web-based MAC registering portal, which works fine on Linux. Unfotunately, it doesn't actually register the MAC address reliably...but at least it works...
Ummm, how can you think the 2nd amendment is one of the biggest things wrong with the US when your post pretty much concludes that the 2nd amendment is the last line of defense against these sorts of governmental depredations? Based on your arguments, citizens ought to be able to own and operate (completely privately!) such weapons as might be necessary to hold back an errant military. Weapons to disable and destroy tanks, and aircraft, and personal body armor...
So what exactly did you mean by saying the 2nd amendment (in your opinion) is one of the biggest things wrong with the US?
I purchased a used ThinkPad X30 off eBay before a 3-month backpacking trip through Europe. My criteria was;
* Cheap, so it would not break my heart if it were stolen * Old, so it's not an attractive theft target * Rugged, so it wouldn't break easily * Small and light, because it's on my back * Runs Linux (obviously)
I've dropped this laptop multiple times from hip- and shoulder-height, even while it has been running. The abuse this thing has put up with is absolutely unbelievable.
The only thing I can say is, put a piece of paper in between the keyboard and the screen (just a 8.5x11 sheet, or a paper towel or something). It will help keep the screen from getting impact damage when it does get dropped or slammed, and it will help keep finger grease off. This applies to any laptop.
If I killed it now, I'd either replace it with another X30, or get an X60. X30s only have USB1, which is a considerable annoyance for me (you can't watch DVDs, external HDs are super slow, etcetera).
Caveat emptor: none of the X series have CD or DVD drives! I got an external drive for mine, and it works fine on the rare occasion that I need it.
Actually, I run barefoot, and there's a large number of people who run marathons barefoot. Some people even run ultra-marathons barefoot, others run trails barefoot, etcetera. It's not "extreme" or "fringe," although these folks do seem to be remarkably friendly and helpful online.
Barefoot walking and running is actually extremely beneficial for your feet, ankles, knees, legs, and back. Many barefoot runners have discovered that wearing shoes is actually far more damaging and painful than running barefoot.
The Japanese declaration of war was transmitted 30 minutes before the attack, and took several hours to reach affected people, as you said. However, the U.S. Navy withheld Japanese radio intercepts which gave the time of the attack. Kimmel and Short were caught by surprise, but other people in the Navy (and, presumably, FDR) definitely knew about the attack.
But enough of this. You are rather more well educated than I on these matters. I have slowly improved my knowledge of history, but it's a work in progress. Any suggestions?
You are coming from an unusual perspective. You have made two statements in your last two posts on this topic that are very curious to me, but it might be tactless to point them out on a public forum. My email address is trost.osler@gmail.com; please email me, as I would love to continue this conversation via email.
(This is a properly-formatted version of the previous post)
RE: the point about Hitler in WWI... ouch. That was very bad error on my part, and rather invalidates the whole post. Thanks for taking the time to take it apart anyway.
I am aware of the German offensives in 1918, but my understanding of them is that they used up the last and the best of the German military. They were spent, at that point, just at the point of the arrival of American troops. The Germans were in no position to seriously threaten America. Obviously, I wasn't there. However, to think that the Germans would have been able to solidify their holdings and eventually bridge their empire to America is rather ludicrous -- they would have a hard enough time keeping a hold on their territories.
We lost a lot of soldiers to someone else's cause. It may have been a "good cause", but it wasn't our cause, and deception and propaganda was used to involve us in that war. If it had been our cause, deception and propaganda would not have been necessary.
I am aware of the United States' assistance to the Allied powers in WWI. I do not know how much that actually contributed to the stalement and eventual defeat of Germany. I do know that it made German attacks on our ships an inevitability.
Regarding the Philippines; why were we there in the first place? The Philippine islands are not part of the 50 United States, and our involvement there seems to be a textbook case of United States imperialism. We acquired the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War (no more justified than the current Iraq war), and subsequently fought the Philippine revolutionaries for 15 years.
The United States ended up using the Philippines to goad the Japanese into a fight. One of our actions was to bring long-range strategic bombers into the Philippines, from which the only target was Japan (and Japanese-held China). The Japanese couldn't afford not to invade the Philippines.
Our capability to smash the Japanese was limited at the beginning of WWII. However, three things stand out concerning the attack on Pearl Harbor. The first is FDR's relieving of Admiral Richardson in February, 1941, over Richardson's refusal to keep the Pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor. The second is the failure of Washington D.C. to communicate the Japanese declaration of war to Pearl Harbor. A third is FDR's "Vacant Seas" order that forbade Admiral Kimmel's reconnaisance of the Prokofiev Seamount, from which the Japanese attack was launched. Thus, I believe it to be a reasonable conclusion that we were purposefully drawn into a war without investigating possible alternatives.
And now we have China, a strong, overbearing dictatorship with eyes on global domination, a goal which includes conquering both Taiwan and Japan...
I didn't know that bit about Truman. Considering the American involvement in WWII, I don't really see how we could have avoided the Korean war, although we could have done a lot less damage.
RE: the point about Hitler in WWI... ouch. That was very bad error on my part, and rather invalidates the whole post. Thanks for taking the time to take it apart anyway.
I am aware of the German offensives in 1918, but my understanding of them is that they used up the last and the best of the German military. They were spent, at that point, just at the point of the arrival of American troops. The Germans were in no position to seriously threaten America. Obviously, I wasn't there. However, to think that the Germans would have been able to solidify their holdings and eventually bridge their empire to America is rather ludicrous -- they would have a hard enough time keeping a hold on their territories.
We lost a lot of soldiers to someone else's cause. It may have been a "good cause", but it wasn't our cause, and deception and propaganda was used to involve us in that war. If it had been our cause, deception and propaganda would not have been necessary.
I am aware of the United States' assistance to the Allied powers in WWI. I do not know how much that actually contributed to the stalement and eventual defeat of Germany. I do know that it made German attacks on our ships an inevitability.
Regarding the Philippines; why were we there in the first place? The Philippine islands are not part of the 50 United States, and our involvement there seems to be a textbook case of United States imperialism. We acquired the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War (no more justified than the current Iraq war), and subsequently fought the Philippine revolutionaries for 15 years.
The United States ended up using the Philippines to goad the Japanese into a fight. One of our actions was to bring long-range strategic bombers into the Philippines, from which the only target was Japan (and Japanese-held China). The Japanese couldn't afford not to invade the Philippines.
Our capability to smash the Japanese was limited at the beginning of WWII. However, three things stand out concerning the attack on Pearl Harbor. The first is FDR's relieving of Admiral Richardson in February, 1941, over Richardson's refusal to keep the Pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor. The second is the failure of Washington D.C. to communicate the Japanese declaration of war to Pearl Harbor. A third is FDR's "Vacant Seas" order that forbade Admiral Kimmel's reconnaisance of the Prokofiev Seamount, from which the Japanese attack was launched. Thus, I believe it to be a reasonable conclusion that we were purposefully drawn into a war without investigating possible alternatives.
And now we have China, a strong, overbearing dictatorship with eyes on global domination, a goal which includes conquering both Taiwan and Japan...
I didn't know that bit about Truman. Considering the American involvement in WWII, I don't really see how we could have avoided the Korean war, although we could have done a lot less damage.
Two things: trench warfare, and the naval blockage. Germany lost the enormous bulk of their troops on the Eastern front, but by 1917, their advances on the Western front were halted to a trench warfare stalemate. They did attempt an advance in the spring of 1918, but it was with the last of their best.
Your comment would be correct, except for one thing; the last war we (America) fought to preserve our liberties was the War of 1812.
Civil war? "Preservation of the Union" i.e. Federal encroachment on State's rights
WWI? Lies and bullshit. Hitler was stopped cold in a stalemate by the time we came in.
WWII? Lies and bullshit. The Russians beat Hitler before we arrived, and if FDR hadn't personally allowed the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, we would have smacked them down like a bug.
Vietname war? Please...
Korean war? Oh man we fought communism so well, too bad we're a socialist country now, wups.
Of course I'm missing a whole bunch, but those are the big ones. Unless we are actually fighting off an INVASION, then going to war damages our rights. End of story.
If there were a real risk of Muslim terrorists taking over the world, then I would be fighting in the armed services. But there's not. We still don't even know who did 9/11. Nothing that would hold up in court, anyway, and you'd think we should have something more than "OSAMA DID IT NAH NAH NAH NAH" as a reason to go to war. With Iraq.
I read about the Bhopal disaster. I also read about the Indian government's wasteful spending of the settlement that did occur, and the extradition order for the president of Union Carbide that was never brought to a conclusion.
Fact: Union Carbide made a settlement. This settlement was a pittance, but for the record, the Indian government failed to actually transfer the money to the affected people. They spent it. Fact: The Indian government deliberately obstructed and wasted Union Carbide's settlement money.
Fact: The CEO of Union Carbide at the time (Warren Anderson) failed to appear in Indian court for his trial. He has been declared a fugitive from justice. The Indian government issued an extradition order. The U.S. government never delivered Warren Anderson. Fact: The U.S. government deliberately obstructed justice. Fact: It is the U.S. government's duty to respond to an extradition order. The idea of an Indian bounty hunter securing Warren Anderson for trial is ludicrous.
The Bhopal disaster is a shining example of the problem of government. Accidents happen. Union Carbide was behond negligent in their handling of the disaster (shutting off the warning sirens to avoid causing panic, for example). But the Indian and US governments have stopped any aid or justice in this situation. Union Carbide was at fault, but to ignore the governments' roles in the disaster and the continuing problems resulting from it is blind naivety.
Fact: Governments are, by far, the #1 polluter in the world.
I also have an infrequent habit of writing down dreams.
I've written down a dream, and then experienced it some time later.
So yeah, I've had that. Except not in a vague sort of way, but rather in a very direct, "I know I've dreamed this," sort of way. It's always a 2-5 second slice, and I never really remember before or after. The dream can involve people and places I've never known, but when it shows up in my reality, it's perfect to every (observable) detail.
The first time a dream became reality, I was teaching a VB (ech) class to two people. The hotel had redone the carpet between the time of my dream and the time of reality, but my dream had the new carpet. I dreamed the people, their clothes, their attitude, the computer setup, my material, what I was saying... trust me, that was a bit of a shock.
Why isn't there a gradient of species today between various species? Even, say between man and ape. There seem to be places where man and ape have coexisted for many thousands of years, but there is no apparent species gradient.
"Ensatina eschscholtzi" appears to be a species in the midst of evolution. However, it rather proves the point; both subspecies in question are "salamanders." Given time, enough changes and species splits could occur such that something completely different would arise. However, you'd then have several hundred species in gradient, or so I would think.
Can you shed some light on this?
(For the sake of the discussion, here's my viewpoint; Creationist for logical and philosophical reasons, but happy to change given a decent explanation not based on faith. I already know the Bible isn't quite the "perfect word of God", so it's not a crisis of faith for me to accept the evolutionary mechanism.)
Thanks for your offer. I hope I've worded my question clearly.
I also completely agree, as I have much the same problem with my own beliefs.
From a purely personal point of view, a proper benevolent dictatorship run by honest, dedicated, good people would be ideal. A program for the arts, a program to help struggling people get a foot up, a program to educate the poor, a flat and low tax, and so on. A delicate balance between providing nourishment for the beautiful and weak, while not collecting so much as to create weakness.
I am fortunate enough to have a good family, and we are pretty close. My father pays, I chip in as needed/wanted, my brothers and I help with running the business, and they earn a little here and there to help support things. In my opinion, that's how an ideal government would function.
Or is that the socialist ideal?:) I've had a continual low-level dream of that sort of thing, but haven't seen how it could work in reality on anything larger than a casual family level (and only barely there!).
It is interesting to argue with a modern liberal, who is reasonably well-grounded in his (her? sorry) arguments.
All of what you say is true, especially that part about "public education is one of those things that simply will not be sufficiently funded without government support."
I cannot in good conscience argue with your positions, as the logic is clean, and properly backed with both history and scientific studies.
There are a couple minor nitpicks I have, most especially with you interpretation of my comments on wage slavery. I am a wage slave, and I see wage slaves by the thousands all around me. America is plagued with wage slavery. Moving on...
The principle problem with your argument is that is based on a faulty premise. You believe that government will do a good job educating our children.
I hold firmly that they have not, do not, and will not. History supports my position. Almost every government on our planet eventually ends up with the likes of Nero, Stalin, Hitler, or Pol Pot at the head. This happens for a variety of different reasons. However, a general, long-term ignorance in the base population concerning simple economic and political theory is the usual root cause. Hitler didn't suddenly appear on the political scene. The machinations that put him in power started years before he was born. Our Hitler isn't in power yet, but the machinations have certainly started.
I know I cannot trust my government to provide an education to my children that will give my children the mental tools to radically improve our government when it starts going out of control.
Once that argument is made, the only possible item on the agenda is how to make it possible for private and home education to function and freely, openly, and popularly as possible.
You trust your government with your children's minds. I also trust my government, but only to betray my life and my children's lives for Caesar's best interests.
If you want welfare, you need the taxes to pay for it. That is absolute.
I hold that without taxes and economic restrictions (minimum wage, sales tax, currency inflation, and so on), those people now on welfare will find it startlingly easy to support themselves.
I can describe the general effects of true deregulation on housing, banking, food, and so on, but it has all been described by others. I will simply say that true deregulation leads directly to higher quality for those able to pay, and more availability for those who can't.
Briefly, let me describe housing. In my current home state of Rhode Island, we have strict housing controls. When you go and rent an apartment, you are pretty much guaranteed a baseline quality, and so on. Unfortunately, single-room apartments start at $600/month in Providence. In North Attleboro, and outlying city 30 minutes away, apartments start at $400. How in the world can a minimum wager earning $270/week (before taxes) support that? But without housing controls, housing would be available at much cheaper rates.
Would it be as safe? Would it have the same quality? NO! But at least it would be *available*. And *that* is why housing controls, food regulations, minimum wages, and all the other programs to 'help the disadvantaged' are so incredibly destructive; they price basic needs and services completely out of the reach of marginal earners. Without this basic foothold, they can't start the climb.
So, no welfare + no taxes = teh monies!
Of course, almost the entire population has been taught the (false) reasoning behind a mammoth welfare state. People believe in their education implicitly, and have an instant, negative gut reaction to anything that challenges this false belief.
Your ears are closed to what I say, but I'll try anyway.
The magical part about humans is that we are all (well, most of us) born with the ability to work, and a certain level of intelligence.
I understand that without education, that intelligence is wasted.
However, your story is flawed. You give me a rigged problem, and tell me to "fix it now and prove you're right." Well, let me ask you, why is our man stuck in the sugar mine? Is he stuck because he can't own property? Is he stuck because income tax takes away any savings he might be able to accumulate? Is he stuck because the job doesn't pay enough to make ends meet?
Let's assume that last; the sugar mines are owned by greedy corporate bastards, and the miners are paid barely enough to live. Even if they are technically "free," the reality is that they are wage slaves.
Funny thing, people moved to America to escape that bullshit. Because in a free, low-regulation society, the type of scenario you describe does not exist, or if it does, never lasts long. Disagree? Prove me wrong. Every time a situation like you describe exists, the whole structure is held up from the top through the use of authoritarian force.
American slaves? They were forced. Do not try to tell me how their plight disproves my thesis, because their society was most certainly not free.
The poor in America are rich not because of government welfare, but because our grandfathers and their fathers lived in a freer society; a society where anyone could work and enjoy the fruits of their labor. A society where you could keep and spend your profit as you saw fit, and never see it siphoned off to feed some maniac's war in Random Dirtbowl, Middle East. They created so much wealth that we have been able to ride on their shirt-tails for decades and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet.
It sounds utopian, but that's why so many millions of people voluntarily moved here in the past.
In a classically liberal society, the only people without money are the ones who spend it all on booze and drugs. Anybody can work, and there's enough money changing hands to support the few who can't out of church and family coffers.
Education is a non-issue.
Yes, I see things through rose-colored glasses. But, that was the American dream. It still is my dream. And right now, it is only a dream, but don't blame the dream for not being reality. Blame yourself for not seeing the truth of how these things work.
I just thought I'd clarify that one statement; I do indeed consider public schools to be a blight. Their past history, especially in other nations, makes them suspect. In current use, they seem to be the principle cause in the declining literacy rate and 'blind patriotism' that seems to pervade everywhere.
Now, what about parents? Parents are the ones who are supposed to be teaching their children to think independently, and question authority, and so on. But they don't, and as long as the tax and greenback situation is such that often both parents must work to eat, then I truely can't blame them.
And television? I'll concede a point on that one, but I don't know how to deal with that.
Do you really think that we live under a "constitutionally-bound Republican government"? That's uncomfortably naive.
Those poor and downtrodden are there because we have abandoned classical liberalism. We have abandoned the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution is there a provision for welfare. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any allowance for unbacked currency, social security, medicare, income tax, minimum wage, government housing, sales tax, public schools, or any of the other blights that soil our nation. Not only that, any power not explicitly granted to the federal government is reserved for the people. Period, no exceptions.
(By "We", I speak as an American. There are a few of us left.)
Our founding fathers were neither blind nor stupid. Almost everything I listed above was well-known in their time, albeit under different names. They understood that including such social programs could only result in disaster, as it has today.
So, if you want to see what anything OTHER than classical liberalism does to a country, I recommend you descend from your ivory tower and walk among the ghettos and homeless shelters of your local city sometime. Watch in awe as the sheer evil cruelty of our government is written in anguish across the faces of our poor.
Online dating sites are mostly scams. You'll have better luck asking friends if they know someone who might be interested, or even Starbucks.
You have to put a lot of effort into online dating sites, and there's not much reward. Look for a site that shows when someone last logged in!
Spend a few bucks and get a professional-quality picture of yourself. Obviously, don't misrepresent yourself. You want something that stands out from the 1,800 other cam shots.
Two things -- you have to be around girls, and you have to have the balls to talk to them.
As far as being around girls... learn to dance. Ballroom dance. Lots and lots of girls, and you'll get lots of confidence in those tricky things like, "will you dance this with me?" Plus, if it's a good school, they'll have recommendations for decent places to go and actually dance and/or meet people. Oh yeah, and there's absolutely no competition. None.
BTW, dance is not gay. Yes, you can learn to wiggle your hips. Girls (some (many? all?)) love it, so don't discount it.
Confidence...that's a real tough one. Watch how others interact with girls, and see what you like and don't like. Lose the panicky feeling when you approach a girl. Best advice: talk to lots of women!
Oh yeah, and be upfront. If you want to "be friends," ok, but if you a "girlfriend," make sure there's no confusion.
Being in love is an amazing, spectacular experience. As high as it goes, there can also be an unbelievable low. Just don't do that suicide thing when you hit bottom!:)
Never confuse "lust" with "love." The two are very, very different. Yes, you can have "love at first sight," but usually, it's lust. Lust wears off somewhere between 3 minutes and 3 months. The lucky ones manage not to have kids/get married in those 3 months. Count on needing to know someone for at least 9-12 months before you have any chance of really knowing them enough to make a judgement call concerning kids or marriage.
I don't like to recommend books, but "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" is a good book about dating, why it sucks, and how to do it better. Much better. Also, "How to Make Someone Love You in 90 Minutes" is an excellent book. Scary effective, and it's an interesting introductory text to NLP and related ideas. Finally, on the totally tacky end, the Fleshlight people (google it) have an interesting little manual covering the basic "howto" of these things they give you after you buy their product. I can't really vouch for that last one as I'm still a virgin, but it seems effective. The one girl I got to 2nd base with was plenty happy. (The fleshlight people are discreet, as advertised.)
I've looked at controlling the heat with programmable thermostats and so on, but it's either a) too much work, or b) too expensive.
Enter phidgets (www.phidgets.com). I've never used them, but they look like just the thing. I discovered them on an carputer forum (mp3car.com) a few weeks ago.
Cheap, USB, linux-compatible. What more could you wish for?
Temperature sensors and everything.
I'm going to leave the manual thermostat at 45-50 degrees, and add a relay (phidgets have relay controls!) to the thermostat circuit to turn the furnace on and off.
Bonus points for adding a bluetooth listener to turn the furnace on when I walk in the door in the evening.
Slashdot Mirror
Used to be just terrible for Linux support; they restricted access by MAC address (not even WEP encryption), and you had to download a little piece of software when you first connected that would do the registration for you. Depending on whether you used Windows, Apple, or Linux, you would get a different executable...unfortunately, the Linux one was libc5. Installing the libc5 libraries didn't work, so every semester, I had to make a trip to IT (which closed at 4pm) to get them to manually enter my MAC address.
This past year, they changed to an entirely web-based MAC registering portal, which works fine on Linux. Unfotunately, it doesn't actually register the MAC address reliably...but at least it works...
Ummm, how can you think the 2nd amendment is one of the biggest things wrong with the US when your post pretty much concludes that the 2nd amendment is the last line of defense against these sorts of governmental depredations? Based on your arguments, citizens ought to be able to own and operate (completely privately!) such weapons as might be necessary to hold back an errant military. Weapons to disable and destroy tanks, and aircraft, and personal body armor...
So what exactly did you mean by saying the 2nd amendment (in your opinion) is one of the biggest things wrong with the US?
I purchased a used ThinkPad X30 off eBay before a 3-month backpacking trip through Europe. My criteria was;
* Cheap, so it would not break my heart if it were stolen
* Old, so it's not an attractive theft target
* Rugged, so it wouldn't break easily
* Small and light, because it's on my back
* Runs Linux (obviously)
I've dropped this laptop multiple times from hip- and shoulder-height, even while it has been running. The abuse this thing has put up with is absolutely unbelievable.
The only thing I can say is, put a piece of paper in between the keyboard and the screen (just a 8.5x11 sheet, or a paper towel or something). It will help keep the screen from getting impact damage when it does get dropped or slammed, and it will help keep finger grease off. This applies to any laptop.
If I killed it now, I'd either replace it with another X30, or get an X60. X30s only have USB1, which is a considerable annoyance for me (you can't watch DVDs, external HDs are super slow, etcetera).
Caveat emptor: none of the X series have CD or DVD drives! I got an external drive for mine, and it works fine on the rare occasion that I need it.
Chris cej102937
Actually, I run barefoot, and there's a large number of people who run marathons barefoot. Some people even run ultra-marathons barefoot, others run trails barefoot, etcetera. It's not "extreme" or "fringe," although these folks do seem to be remarkably friendly and helpful online.
Barefoot walking and running is actually extremely beneficial for your feet, ankles, knees, legs, and back. Many barefoot runners have discovered that wearing shoes is actually far more damaging and painful than running barefoot.
Chris
B-17 bombers in the Philippines before Pearl Harbor (B-17s did have the capability to hit the southern parts of Japan from the Philippines):r ce#1941-42
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Far_East_Air_Fo
The Japanese declaration of war was transmitted 30 minutes before the attack, and took several hours to reach affected people, as you said. However, the U.S. Navy withheld Japanese radio intercepts which gave the time of the attack. Kimmel and Short were caught by surprise, but other people in the Navy (and, presumably, FDR) definitely knew about the attack.
But enough of this. You are rather more well educated than I on these matters. I have slowly improved my knowledge of history, but it's a work in progress. Any suggestions?
You are coming from an unusual perspective. You have made two statements in your last two posts on this topic that are very curious to me, but it might be tactless to point them out on a public forum. My email address is trost.osler@gmail.com; please email me, as I would love to continue this conversation via email.
C
(This is a properly-formatted version of the previous post)
... ouch. That was very bad error on my part, and rather invalidates the whole post. Thanks for taking the time to take it apart anyway.
RE: the point about Hitler in WWI
I am aware of the German offensives in 1918, but my understanding of them is that they used up the last and the best of the German military. They were spent, at that point, just at the point of the arrival of American troops. The Germans were in no position to seriously threaten America. Obviously, I wasn't there. However, to think that the Germans would have been able to solidify their holdings and eventually bridge their empire to America is rather ludicrous -- they would have a hard enough time keeping a hold on their territories.
We lost a lot of soldiers to someone else's cause. It may have been a "good cause", but it wasn't our cause, and deception and propaganda was used to involve us in that war. If it had been our cause, deception and propaganda would not have been necessary.
I am aware of the United States' assistance to the Allied powers in WWI. I do not know how much that actually contributed to the stalement and eventual defeat of Germany. I do know that it made German attacks on our ships an inevitability.
Regarding the Philippines; why were we there in the first place? The Philippine islands are not part of the 50 United States, and our involvement there seems to be a textbook case of United States imperialism. We acquired the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War (no more justified than the current Iraq war), and subsequently fought the Philippine revolutionaries for 15 years.
The United States ended up using the Philippines to goad the Japanese into a fight. One of our actions was to bring long-range strategic bombers into the Philippines, from which the only target was Japan (and Japanese-held China). The Japanese couldn't afford not to invade the Philippines.
Our capability to smash the Japanese was limited at the beginning of WWII. However, three things stand out concerning the attack on Pearl Harbor. The first is FDR's relieving of Admiral Richardson in February, 1941, over Richardson's refusal to keep the Pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor. The second is the failure of Washington D.C. to communicate the Japanese declaration of war to Pearl Harbor. A third is FDR's "Vacant Seas" order that forbade Admiral Kimmel's reconnaisance of the Prokofiev Seamount, from which the Japanese attack was launched. Thus, I believe it to be a reasonable conclusion that we were purposefully drawn into a war without investigating possible alternatives.
And now we have China, a strong, overbearing dictatorship with eyes on global domination, a goal which includes conquering both Taiwan and Japan...
I didn't know that bit about Truman. Considering the American involvement in WWII, I don't really see how we could have avoided the Korean war, although we could have done a lot less damage.
RE: the point about Hitler in WWI ... ouch. That was very bad error on my part, and rather invalidates the whole post. Thanks for taking the time to take it apart anyway.
I am aware of the German offensives in 1918, but my understanding of them is that they used up the last and the best of the German military. They were spent, at that point, just at the point of the arrival of American troops. The Germans were in no position to seriously threaten America. Obviously, I wasn't there. However, to think that the Germans would have been able to solidify their holdings and eventually bridge their empire to America is rather ludicrous -- they would have a hard enough time keeping a hold on their territories.
We lost a lot of soldiers to someone else's cause. It may have been a "good cause", but it wasn't our cause, and deception and propaganda was used to involve us in that war. If it had been our cause, deception and propaganda would not have been necessary.
I am aware of the United States' assistance to the Allied powers in WWI. I do not know how much that actually contributed to the stalement and eventual defeat of Germany. I do know that it made German attacks on our ships an inevitability.
Regarding the Philippines; why were we there in the first place? The Philippine islands are not part of the 50 United States, and our involvement there seems to be a textbook case of United States imperialism. We acquired the Philippines as a result of the Spanish-American War (no more justified than the current Iraq war), and subsequently fought the Philippine revolutionaries for 15 years.
The United States ended up using the Philippines to goad the Japanese into a fight. One of our actions was to bring long-range strategic bombers into the Philippines, from which the only target was Japan (and Japanese-held China). The Japanese couldn't afford not to invade the Philippines.
Our capability to smash the Japanese was limited at the beginning of WWII. However, three things stand out concerning the attack on Pearl Harbor. The first is FDR's relieving of Admiral Richardson in February, 1941, over Richardson's refusal to keep the Pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor. The second is the failure of Washington D.C. to communicate the Japanese declaration of war to Pearl Harbor. A third is FDR's "Vacant Seas" order that forbade Admiral Kimmel's reconnaisance of the Prokofiev Seamount, from which the Japanese attack was launched. Thus, I believe it to be a reasonable conclusion that we were purposefully drawn into a war without investigating possible alternatives.
And now we have China, a strong, overbearing dictatorship with eyes on global domination, a goal which includes conquering both Taiwan and Japan...
I didn't know that bit about Truman. Considering the American involvement in WWII, I don't really see how we could have avoided the Korean war, although we could have done a lot less damage.
Two things: trench warfare, and the naval blockage. Germany lost the enormous bulk of their troops on the Eastern front, but by 1917, their advances on the Western front were halted to a trench warfare stalemate. They did attempt an advance in the spring of 1918, but it was with the last of their best.
Our troops showed up in the summer of 1918.
For a decent summary of this, consult the (in)famous wikipedia; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I
Your comment would be correct, except for one thing; the last war we (America) fought to preserve our liberties was the War of 1812.
Civil war? "Preservation of the Union" i.e. Federal encroachment on State's rights
WWI? Lies and bullshit. Hitler was stopped cold in a stalemate by the time we came in.
WWII? Lies and bullshit. The Russians beat Hitler before we arrived, and if FDR hadn't personally allowed the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, we would have smacked them down like a bug.
Vietname war? Please...
Korean war? Oh man we fought communism so well, too bad we're a socialist country now, wups.
Of course I'm missing a whole bunch, but those are the big ones. Unless we are actually fighting off an INVASION, then going to war damages our rights. End of story.
If there were a real risk of Muslim terrorists taking over the world, then I would be fighting in the armed services. But there's not. We still don't even know who did 9/11. Nothing that would hold up in court, anyway, and you'd think we should have something more than "OSAMA DID IT NAH NAH NAH NAH" as a reason to go to war. With Iraq.
I read about the Bhopal disaster. I also read about the Indian government's wasteful spending of the settlement that did occur, and the extradition order for the president of Union Carbide that was never brought to a conclusion.
Fact: Union Carbide made a settlement. This settlement was a pittance, but for the record, the Indian government failed to actually transfer the money to the affected people. They spent it. Fact: The Indian government deliberately obstructed and wasted Union Carbide's settlement money.
Fact: The CEO of Union Carbide at the time (Warren Anderson) failed to appear in Indian court for his trial. He has been declared a fugitive from justice. The Indian government issued an extradition order. The U.S. government never delivered Warren Anderson. Fact: The U.S. government deliberately obstructed justice. Fact: It is the U.S. government's duty to respond to an extradition order. The idea of an Indian bounty hunter securing Warren Anderson for trial is ludicrous.
The Bhopal disaster is a shining example of the problem of government. Accidents happen. Union Carbide was behond negligent in their handling of the disaster (shutting off the warning sirens to avoid causing panic, for example). But the Indian and US governments have stopped any aid or justice in this situation. Union Carbide was at fault, but to ignore the governments' roles in the disaster and the continuing problems resulting from it is blind naivety.
Fact: Governments are, by far, the #1 polluter in the world.
Dude, the Google software IS the NSA microphone-tapping software!
Yes, I have had this feeling, several times.
... trust me, that was a bit of a shock.
I also have an infrequent habit of writing down dreams.
I've written down a dream, and then experienced it some time later.
So yeah, I've had that. Except not in a vague sort of way, but rather in a very direct, "I know I've dreamed this," sort of way. It's always a 2-5 second slice, and I never really remember before or after. The dream can involve people and places I've never known, but when it shows up in my reality, it's perfect to every (observable) detail.
The first time a dream became reality, I was teaching a VB (ech) class to two people. The hotel had redone the carpet between the time of my dream and the time of reality, but my dream had the new carpet. I dreamed the people, their clothes, their attitude, the computer setup, my material, what I was saying
cej102937
What kind of education prepares you for that work?
Just curious.
Chris
Thanks for posting -- I do have a quick question;
Why isn't there a gradient of species today between various species? Even, say between man and ape. There seem to be places where man and ape have coexisted for many thousands of years, but there is no apparent species gradient.
"Ensatina eschscholtzi" appears to be a species in the midst of evolution. However, it rather proves the point; both subspecies in question are "salamanders." Given time, enough changes and species splits could occur such that something completely different would arise. However, you'd then have several hundred species in gradient, or so I would think.
Can you shed some light on this?
(For the sake of the discussion, here's my viewpoint; Creationist for logical and philosophical reasons, but happy to change given a decent explanation not based on faith. I already know the Bible isn't quite the "perfect word of God", so it's not a crisis of faith for me to accept the evolutionary mechanism.)
Thanks for your offer. I hope I've worded my question clearly.
Chris
cej102937
I see. And I understand.
:) I've had a continual low-level dream of that sort of thing, but haven't seen how it could work in reality on anything larger than a casual family level (and only barely there!).
I also completely agree, as I have much the same problem with my own beliefs.
From a purely personal point of view, a proper benevolent dictatorship run by honest, dedicated, good people would be ideal. A program for the arts, a program to help struggling people get a foot up, a program to educate the poor, a flat and low tax, and so on. A delicate balance between providing nourishment for the beautiful and weak, while not collecting so much as to create weakness.
I am fortunate enough to have a good family, and we are pretty close. My father pays, I chip in as needed/wanted, my brothers and I help with running the business, and they earn a little here and there to help support things. In my opinion, that's how an ideal government would function.
Or is that the socialist ideal?
Thank you.
C
It is interesting to argue with a modern liberal, who is reasonably well-grounded in his (her? sorry) arguments.
All of what you say is true, especially that part about "public education is one of those things that simply will not be sufficiently funded without government support."
I cannot in good conscience argue with your positions, as the logic is clean, and properly backed with both history and scientific studies.
There are a couple minor nitpicks I have, most especially with you interpretation of my comments on wage slavery. I am a wage slave, and I see wage slaves by the thousands all around me. America is plagued with wage slavery. Moving on...
The principle problem with your argument is that is based on a faulty premise. You believe that government will do a good job educating our children.
I hold firmly that they have not, do not, and will not. History supports my position. Almost every government on our planet eventually ends up with the likes of Nero, Stalin, Hitler, or Pol Pot at the head. This happens for a variety of different reasons. However, a general, long-term ignorance in the base population concerning simple economic and political theory is the usual root cause. Hitler didn't suddenly appear on the political scene. The machinations that put him in power started years before he was born. Our Hitler isn't in power yet, but the machinations have certainly started.
I know I cannot trust my government to provide an education to my children that will give my children the mental tools to radically improve our government when it starts going out of control.
Once that argument is made, the only possible item on the agenda is how to make it possible for private and home education to function and freely, openly, and popularly as possible.
You trust your government with your children's minds. I also trust my government, but only to betray my life and my children's lives for Caesar's best interests.
C
You can't get rid of taxes and keep the programs.
If you want welfare, you need the taxes to pay for it. That is absolute.
I hold that without taxes and economic restrictions (minimum wage, sales tax, currency inflation, and so on), those people now on welfare will find it startlingly easy to support themselves.
I can describe the general effects of true deregulation on housing, banking, food, and so on, but it has all been described by others. I will simply say that true deregulation leads directly to higher quality for those able to pay, and more availability for those who can't.
Briefly, let me describe housing. In my current home state of Rhode Island, we have strict housing controls. When you go and rent an apartment, you are pretty much guaranteed a baseline quality, and so on. Unfortunately, single-room apartments start at $600/month in Providence. In North Attleboro, and outlying city 30 minutes away, apartments start at $400. How in the world can a minimum wager earning $270/week (before taxes) support that? But without housing controls, housing would be available at much cheaper rates.
Would it be as safe? Would it have the same quality? NO! But at least it would be *available*. And *that* is why housing controls, food regulations, minimum wages, and all the other programs to 'help the disadvantaged' are so incredibly destructive; they price basic needs and services completely out of the reach of marginal earners. Without this basic foothold, they can't start the climb.
So, no welfare + no taxes = teh monies!
Of course, almost the entire population has been taught the (false) reasoning behind a mammoth welfare state. People believe in their education implicitly, and have an instant, negative gut reaction to anything that challenges this false belief.
Thus I don asbestos underwear!
C
Your ears are closed to what I say, but I'll try anyway.
The magical part about humans is that we are all (well, most of us) born with the ability to work, and a certain level of intelligence.
I understand that without education, that intelligence is wasted.
However, your story is flawed. You give me a rigged problem, and tell me to "fix it now and prove you're right." Well, let me ask you, why is our man stuck in the sugar mine? Is he stuck because he can't own property? Is he stuck because income tax takes away any savings he might be able to accumulate? Is he stuck because the job doesn't pay enough to make ends meet?
Let's assume that last; the sugar mines are owned by greedy corporate bastards, and the miners are paid barely enough to live. Even if they are technically "free," the reality is that they are wage slaves.
Funny thing, people moved to America to escape that bullshit. Because in a free, low-regulation society, the type of scenario you describe does not exist, or if it does, never lasts long. Disagree? Prove me wrong. Every time a situation like you describe exists, the whole structure is held up from the top through the use of authoritarian force.
American slaves? They were forced. Do not try to tell me how their plight disproves my thesis, because their society was most certainly not free.
The poor in America are rich not because of government welfare, but because our grandfathers and their fathers lived in a freer society; a society where anyone could work and enjoy the fruits of their labor. A society where you could keep and spend your profit as you saw fit, and never see it siphoned off to feed some maniac's war in Random Dirtbowl, Middle East. They created so much wealth that we have been able to ride on their shirt-tails for decades and still be the wealthiest nation on the planet.
It sounds utopian, but that's why so many millions of people voluntarily moved here in the past.
In a classically liberal society, the only people without money are the ones who spend it all on booze and drugs. Anybody can work, and there's enough money changing hands to support the few who can't out of church and family coffers.
Education is a non-issue.
Yes, I see things through rose-colored glasses. But, that was the American dream. It still is my dream. And right now, it is only a dream, but don't blame the dream for not being reality. Blame yourself for not seeing the truth of how these things work.
C
Gulp, good points.
I just thought I'd clarify that one statement; I do indeed consider public schools to be a blight. Their past history, especially in other nations, makes them suspect. In current use, they seem to be the principle cause in the declining literacy rate and 'blind patriotism' that seems to pervade everywhere.
Now, what about parents? Parents are the ones who are supposed to be teaching their children to think independently, and question authority, and so on. But they don't, and as long as the tax and greenback situation is such that often both parents must work to eat, then I truely can't blame them.
And television? I'll concede a point on that one, but I don't know how to deal with that.
C
Agreed.
And I didn't think of grain and farm subsidies when I wrote my previous email. Lots of things.
Actually, pretty much everything our government does outside of chasing down and prosecuting murdurers, rapists, and thieves.
It's intimidating to think how far ahead our nation would be if that were all our government did...
C
Do you really think that we live under a "constitutionally-bound Republican government"? That's uncomfortably naive.
Those poor and downtrodden are there because we have abandoned classical liberalism. We have abandoned the Constitution. Nowhere in the Constitution is there a provision for welfare. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any allowance for unbacked currency, social security, medicare, income tax, minimum wage, government housing, sales tax, public schools, or any of the other blights that soil our nation. Not only that, any power not explicitly granted to the federal government is reserved for the people. Period, no exceptions.
(By "We", I speak as an American. There are a few of us left.)
Our founding fathers were neither blind nor stupid. Almost everything I listed above was well-known in their time, albeit under different names. They understood that including such social programs could only result in disaster, as it has today.
So, if you want to see what anything OTHER than classical liberalism does to a country, I recommend you descend from your ivory tower and walk among the ghettos and homeless shelters of your local city sometime. Watch in awe as the sheer evil cruelty of our government is written in anguish across the faces of our poor.
Land of the feet and home of the slave, indeed.
C
Online dating sites are mostly scams. You'll have better luck asking friends if they know someone who might be interested, or even Starbucks.
You have to put a lot of effort into online dating sites, and there's not much reward. Look for a site that shows when someone last logged in!
Spend a few bucks and get a professional-quality picture of yourself. Obviously, don't misrepresent yourself. You want something that stands out from the 1,800 other cam shots.
cej102937
Two things -- you have to be around girls, and you have to have the balls to talk to them.
... learn to dance. Ballroom dance. Lots and lots of girls, and you'll get lots of confidence in those tricky things like, "will you dance this with me?" Plus, if it's a good school, they'll have recommendations for decent places to go and actually dance and/or meet people. Oh yeah, and there's absolutely no competition. None.
:)
1 74958-0551820?v=glance&n=283155
As far as being around girls
BTW, dance is not gay. Yes, you can learn to wiggle your hips. Girls (some (many? all?)) love it, so don't discount it.
Confidence...that's a real tough one. Watch how others interact with girls, and see what you like and don't like. Lose the panicky feeling when you approach a girl. Best advice: talk to lots of women!
Oh yeah, and be upfront. If you want to "be friends," ok, but if you a "girlfriend," make sure there's no confusion.
Being in love is an amazing, spectacular experience. As high as it goes, there can also be an unbelievable low. Just don't do that suicide thing when you hit bottom!
Never confuse "lust" with "love." The two are very, very different. Yes, you can have "love at first sight," but usually, it's lust. Lust wears off somewhere between 3 minutes and 3 months. The lucky ones manage not to have kids/get married in those 3 months. Count on needing to know someone for at least 9-12 months before you have any chance of really knowing them enough to make a judgement call concerning kids or marriage.
I don't like to recommend books, but "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" is a good book about dating, why it sucks, and how to do it better. Much better. Also, "How to Make Someone Love You in 90 Minutes" is an excellent book. Scary effective, and it's an interesting introductory text to NLP and related ideas. Finally, on the totally tacky end, the Fleshlight people (google it) have an interesting little manual covering the basic "howto" of these things they give you after you buy their product. I can't really vouch for that last one as I'm still a virgin, but it seems effective. The one girl I got to 2nd base with was plenty happy. (The fleshlight people are discreet, as advertised.)
I Kissed Dating Goodbye
http://www.joshharris.com/ikdg/ikdgmain.htm
How to Make Someone Love You...
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/076112862X/103-2
Enjoy!
It's much harder to get out of a relationship than to get into one. Pick wisely.
cej102937
I've looked at controlling the heat with programmable thermostats and so on, but it's either a) too much work, or b) too expensive.
Enter phidgets (www.phidgets.com). I've never used them, but they look like just the thing. I discovered them on an carputer forum (mp3car.com) a few weeks ago.
Cheap, USB, linux-compatible. What more could you wish for?
Temperature sensors and everything.
I'm going to leave the manual thermostat at 45-50 degrees, and add a relay (phidgets have relay controls!) to the thermostat circuit to turn the furnace on and off.
Bonus points for adding a bluetooth listener to turn the furnace on when I walk in the door in the evening.
cej102937
I'm not 21 yet. I opened a stock trading account a little over a year ago (I was 19), and I must have slipped under the wire.
I tried opening a commodities trading account a little later, and they denied it because I was under 21, 'because of the Patriot act.'
What the fuck?
I guess I'll be celebrating double when I turn 21...
Chris J - cej102937