India does not have "imaginary" enemies. Pakistan is a really shitty enemy to have, and they also have nuclear weapons.
A hungry tiger in a confined space is a very real enemy, a pakistani not so much. The slights are imagined, the dispute is over some backwater mountain region none of the countries actually want, except because their neighbor does. No indian and no pakistani is born hating their neighbor, that hate is taught.
As for poverty India has seen a huge increase in wealth over the last few decades as they've become more Western friendly (instead of allied with the Soviets, vs. Pakistan and America) and more capitalist.
This block vs. block world view really has got to fucking go. It is a political diversion meant to take your mind of the very real problems at home. Stop buying into the hyperbole and start voting according the problems you want solved, not some fat millionaire who can't seem to land that last oil lease contract. Whenever a politician tells you that [some ethinic group | country | region] is a danger to you, you need to do some serious Source criticism
PS: It is not the amount of dollars available that makes for a stable country, it is the (lack of) divide between rich and poor. The greater the gap, the larger risk of violent upheaval - you know the kind where they roll out the guillotines.
Getting kids into coding is like getting them interested in meat packing or textiles -- industries which are career dead ends. No business hires domestic programmers anywhere, especially when a call to Tata can get guaranteed results for a fraction of what a full time employee would cost, not to mention the other benefits (smaller payroll tax, less building space needed, one less employee that you have to worry about suing at a drop of a hat.)
You really, really, really need to get out and experience the world around you some more. That whole sentence pretty much summarizes the world view one would have if the only source of interaction is through news headlines. It basically says "hello, my name is AC, i have no fucking clue - although I think I do"
Nobody is taking away money allocated to providing clean drinking water to make missiles
As if the money didn't all come from the same bag? The Indian government is taking in money, allocating it to "defense" and building first strike weapons to bomb an imaginary enemy; all while ignoring that a large part of their population is living in poverty. The fact that there are reasonably well educated people here that are OK with this shit speaks volumes.
Besides, as rightly pointed out by a comment below, what logic says that India should stop worrying about its defence till all Indians are shitting in toilets?
The common sense kind of logic? Anyways, the MIRV missiles here are decidedly not for defense, as the (very short) article also states. MIRV is a first strike weapon, meant to more thoroughly vaporize an area containing another nations nuclear armaments - there would be no reason to do this unless you're striking first. First strike == aggression != defense
"what do you mean my front door is the wrong version?" - "we decided that round was the new square, so all subsequent doors need to be round too!" "but my door was installed prior to that decision" - "yes, but we found it inconvenient for us to create compatible houses - purchase a round door or fix it yourself"
This is not about the DRM or the protection of their content, this is about the massive victory it is to have W3C buckle and accept the bleak world view that Big Media pushes: "everyone is a thief unless we preemptively shackle them". Never mind that the HTML standard has nothing to do with their content, nor is it the right place to define what happens to their content; it is all about winning the argument to be able to build on it further.
If W3C were to scrap the plans for HTML5 DRM the content providers would simply cling on to proprietary plugins and we'd be no better off than we are already.
So what? You act as though the internet needs Big Media to survive, when in fact it is the other way around. If Big Media feels the need to develop and maintain proprietary plugins in order to provide their content, fine with me - it's an added cost to them for no bother to me. Their business model is not viable, and it is now our job to keep it afloat? Why is that exactly? What is it the Big Media corporations provide that is so very unique that we're willing to protect it to this degree?
You're right, "major" was a bad word. It should have been more on the line of "larger than most would imagine".
The point of the article was that since the workforce in the hospital is too maliciously ignorant to actually care for their patients enough to wash/sanitize their hands, camera surveillance has been implemented to try and enforce it. This has nothing to do with micromanagement, as the AC suggests - it is all about the workforce not caring enough about their patients, people who are already in a weakened state, to properly follow protocol because "wah wah wah, my hands hurt when I do it".
This is not some new and unproven theory, it has been established fact for 150+ years that unclean tools cause infection. So the natural response is: shut the fuck up and do as you're told.
It still doesn't excuse his behavior, micro managers like this are an everyday thing across all industries and they invariably demoralize staff and hold back companies. So here he's been allowed to put cameras in the toilets and monitor staff for 'cleanliness', which inevitably means he monitors them for frequency of toilet breaks.
Bullshit. First of all this has nothing to do with toilet breaks, and you assuming that it has just shows you have no clue. This is about washing your hands before you put them on the next patient, a major cause of death by the way - you're more likely to be ill leaving the hospital than entering it.
Second, when the workers have shown such gross negligence as to actually infect more patients than they manage to cure, you're damn right it's OK to start filming them. This is not about leadership incompetence, it is about the apathy of the workforce. If these people working in hospitals took their fucking oath seriously, you know the one with "do no harm", we wouldn't be having this issue to begin with.
TL:DR; If you're a doctor/nurse, shut the fuck up and start washing your hands (or use gloves). It's been over a 150 years since it was shown that unclean tools cause infections, stop being such a fucking dickwad and start acting like an adult.
1. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up 2. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up 3. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up 4. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up 5. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up
This company ("Better Place") was a shell engineered to fail from the beginning to suck up federal electric vehicle dollars.
What federal dollars? Why the fuck would the feds fund battery swap stations in Denmark? (Better Place filed for bankruptcy Sunday afternoon here). Better Place gambled on electrical cars being much more popular than they turned out to be, as the CEO said "it was all about timing".
So now we have a network of swapping stations and nobody to run them. Filing for bankruptcy now was smart, that way the stations can be re-sold to someone else and the losses gets shoveled onto the investors - as opposed to having to close some of them down and sell them off as scrap, making even bigger holes in the grid.
For the future of electric cars, this was the best of the worst outcomes.
It's the same north of Germany. We see a lot of cable copper theft, I don't think anyone cares about the graffiti - this sounds like someone tried to find an angle for the story but knew jack shit about the situation. A camera on a stick is equally good at spotting thieves and vandals.
You are beating around the bush. Regardless of where the idea came from, do you object to the idea of loving your neighbor?
You're acting dense in order to sell a message. The origin of the idea matters here, because it is not one idea, it is multiple ideas, most of them concerning an otherworldly entity - one we have no need of. The message would be equally valid had it not been packaged.
If the sentence had been purely "love thy neighbor - next chapter", I would be fine with it. All the dogma surrounding it is what is causing us problems in the first place.
That is what I said, in the previous post - it sums up my opinion on it well enough.
If people truly lived by that, much of our body of laws, would be redundant and unnecessary.
Of course, just like if everybody had no arms there would be no fist fights. As I've been pointing out, there is no need for packaging it in religious dogma, the idea can easily be argued without.
I also object to your notion that "love your neighbor" is equivalent to "love god, then love your neighbor" - that relation can only be true in the single case of god=0, in all other cases the solutions diverge.
Do you have any objection to things like that just because they happen to be written in the book you consider a myth?
Yes I do. Because "things like that" are also a lot of garbage concerning a ficticious entity. If the sentence had been purely "love thy neighbor - next chapter", I would be fine with it. All the dogma surrounding it is what is causing us problems in the first place.
I think the answer that Jesus gave in Luke 10:27 concerning human behavior is much better, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself."
That is what you said (after having invoked both Hitler and Mohammed in the same post). My fundamental problem with this is wanting to be guided by a static text rather than interaction with your fellow humans. Problems arise when you choose to do that, people start believing that "the next life" is better, and waste the one they have here. What the sentence is actually saying is "As long as your ruling priesthood does not want you to do anything else, you can be good to your neighbor", and that is a major gaping loophole - before you know it you have a crusade on your hands. Fresh examples abound in current news.
That it spends more space dealing with a ficticious entity than with the actual true value of the sentence - to love your neighbor. Basically what I have been saying, just without this major concern for pleasing something a bunch of tribesmen invented thousands of years ago. Religion is like civilization's first stage booster rocket, it's spent and it's time to jettison the dead weight.
Hands carry weapons, hands are weapons --- we should outlaw the use of hands. There is a line, and I think they chose a pretty good starting point for their line with this.
The sad part is, as a former email admin, having to tell the CEO of your employer that such an email (which he pulled out of his quarantine folder) is a scam (and then still having to provide similar examples to prove it as such) is pretty effing sad sometimes.
Oh that is just not right. And here I thought my boss was a moron for suggesting that adding an if-then-else was too complex a solution, he would like 2 separate methods instead. I bow my head in sympathy, having been trumped - you played the ace of idiots.
In the case of the people making the decision of what is right and what is wrong, it would be OK with you if the majority decided there is nothing wrong with declaring certain people as second-class citizens and snuffing them or making them slaves?
Well that is what happens when you put religious nut-jobs into power, history teaches us this. What we really don't know anything about yet is wether an educated population would elect to do things differently, my bet is that it would. It is for certain though, that religion and capitalism is not the answer - both dogmas have tried and failed, we now have more devastating wars than ever, for the exact same stupid reasons as always.
In the beginning, Hitler was duly elected by the majority of Germans
Congratulations on invoking Hitler in a thread, how massively inappropriate. Hitler never was elected with a majority, in fact his government was never a majority in parlaiment at all. I'll let you Google it out what happened - you'd be surprised when you learn the answer (spoiler: it involves thugs and vicious beatings).
In countries where the majority supports the Islamic culture
Bear in mind i said educated population. Support for a regime built on any religious text does not qualify as educated.
I think the answer that Jesus gave in Luke 10:27 concerning [*snip* blablabla]
Quoting someone, anyone, does not lend their words nor yours any more credibility. If you cannot argue an idea on it's merit alone, shut up. If you cannot apply the scientific method to a statement of fact, it is worthless. End.
And the fact that these scams keep happening demonstrates that there is money in it because some people fall for it
And a really low barrier of entry into the market. All it takes is a carefully worded email and a public search on people to send it to, and you're good. You don't need to worry about court fees or anything, since you plan on dropping the case before any papers are filed.
Slashdot Mirror
Or they don't shout it from the roof tops everytime they take a longer than usual piss. Not everyone have a need to be heard like Nnaemeka.
Why yes, yes it is - run kitten, run.
India does not have "imaginary" enemies. Pakistan is a really shitty enemy to have, and they also have nuclear weapons.
A hungry tiger in a confined space is a very real enemy, a pakistani not so much. The slights are imagined, the dispute is over some backwater mountain region none of the countries actually want, except because their neighbor does. No indian and no pakistani is born hating their neighbor, that hate is taught.
As for poverty India has seen a huge increase in wealth over the last few decades as they've become more Western friendly (instead of allied with the Soviets, vs. Pakistan and America) and more capitalist.
This block vs. block world view really has got to fucking go. It is a political diversion meant to take your mind of the very real problems at home. Stop buying into the hyperbole and start voting according the problems you want solved, not some fat millionaire who can't seem to land that last oil lease contract. Whenever a politician tells you that [some ethinic group | country | region] is a danger to you, you need to do some serious Source criticism
PS: It is not the amount of dollars available that makes for a stable country, it is the (lack of) divide between rich and poor. The greater the gap, the larger risk of violent upheaval - you know the kind where they roll out the guillotines.
I'm not going to let you get away with that nonsense. First strike does not equal aggression.
Fortunate for me that I don't need your permission to apply common sense to an issue.
Getting kids into coding is like getting them interested in meat packing or textiles -- industries which are career dead ends. No business hires domestic programmers anywhere, especially when a call to Tata can get guaranteed results for a fraction of what a full time employee would cost, not to mention the other benefits (smaller payroll tax, less building space needed, one less employee that you have to worry about suing at a drop of a hat.)
You really, really, really need to get out and experience the world around you some more. That whole sentence pretty much summarizes the world view one would have if the only source of interaction is through news headlines. It basically says "hello, my name is AC, i have no fucking clue - although I think I do"
I love how ACs come out of the woodwork to spout their "wisdom".
Look through history, people have said "this thing is fine"
Yeah, and "they" have also said that about alot of other stuff and bad stuff has yet to happen for it.
Nobody is taking away money allocated to providing clean drinking water to make missiles
As if the money didn't all come from the same bag? The Indian government is taking in money, allocating it to "defense" and building first strike weapons to bomb an imaginary enemy; all while ignoring that a large part of their population is living in poverty. The fact that there are reasonably well educated people here that are OK with this shit speaks volumes.
Besides, as rightly pointed out by a comment below, what logic says that India should stop worrying about its defence till all Indians are shitting in toilets?
The common sense kind of logic? Anyways, the MIRV missiles here are decidedly not for defense, as the (very short) article also states. MIRV is a first strike weapon, meant to more thoroughly vaporize an area containing another nations nuclear armaments - there would be no reason to do this unless you're striking first. First strike == aggression != defense
"what do you mean my front door is the wrong version?"
- "we decided that round was the new square, so all subsequent doors need to be round too!"
"but my door was installed prior to that decision"
- "yes, but we found it inconvenient for us to create compatible houses - purchase a round door or fix it yourself"
This is not about the DRM or the protection of their content, this is about the massive victory it is to have W3C buckle and accept the bleak world view that Big Media pushes: "everyone is a thief unless we preemptively shackle them". Never mind that the HTML standard has nothing to do with their content, nor is it the right place to define what happens to their content; it is all about winning the argument to be able to build on it further.
If W3C were to scrap the plans for HTML5 DRM the content providers would simply cling on to proprietary plugins and we'd be no better off than we are already.
So what? You act as though the internet needs Big Media to survive, when in fact it is the other way around. If Big Media feels the need to develop and maintain proprietary plugins in order to provide their content, fine with me - it's an added cost to them for no bother to me. Their business model is not viable, and it is now our job to keep it afloat? Why is that exactly? What is it the Big Media corporations provide that is so very unique that we're willing to protect it to this degree?
You're right, "major" was a bad word. It should have been more on the line of "larger than most would imagine".
The point of the article was that since the workforce in the hospital is too maliciously ignorant to actually care for their patients enough to wash/sanitize their hands, camera surveillance has been implemented to try and enforce it. This has nothing to do with micromanagement, as the AC suggests - it is all about the workforce not caring enough about their patients, people who are already in a weakened state, to properly follow protocol because "wah wah wah, my hands hurt when I do it".
This is not some new and unproven theory, it has been established fact for 150+ years that unclean tools cause infection. So the natural response is: shut the fuck up and do as you're told.
It still doesn't excuse his behavior, micro managers like this are an everyday thing across all industries and they invariably demoralize staff and hold back companies. So here he's been allowed to put cameras in the toilets and monitor staff for 'cleanliness', which inevitably means he monitors them for frequency of toilet breaks.
Bullshit. First of all this has nothing to do with toilet breaks, and you assuming that it has just shows you have no clue. This is about washing your hands before you put them on the next patient, a major cause of death by the way - you're more likely to be ill leaving the hospital than entering it.
Second, when the workers have shown such gross negligence as to actually infect more patients than they manage to cure, you're damn right it's OK to start filming them. This is not about leadership incompetence, it is about the apathy of the workforce. If these people working in hospitals took their fucking oath seriously, you know the one with "do no harm", we wouldn't be having this issue to begin with.
TL:DR; If you're a doctor/nurse, shut the fuck up and start washing your hands (or use gloves). It's been over a 150 years since it was shown that unclean tools cause infections, stop being such a fucking dickwad and start acting like an adult.
1. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up
2. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up
3. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up
4. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up
5. You're free to do whatever the fuck you want, just don't call us when shit blows up
Accept IOUs like they always do.
This company ("Better Place") was a shell engineered to fail from the beginning to suck up federal electric vehicle dollars.
What federal dollars? Why the fuck would the feds fund battery swap stations in Denmark? (Better Place filed for bankruptcy Sunday afternoon here). Better Place gambled on electrical cars being much more popular than they turned out to be, as the CEO said "it was all about timing".
So now we have a network of swapping stations and nobody to run them. Filing for bankruptcy now was smart, that way the stations can be re-sold to someone else and the losses gets shoveled onto the investors - as opposed to having to close some of them down and sell them off as scrap, making even bigger holes in the grid.
For the future of electric cars, this was the best of the worst outcomes.
It's the same north of Germany. We see a lot of cable copper theft, I don't think anyone cares about the graffiti - this sounds like someone tried to find an angle for the story but knew jack shit about the situation. A camera on a stick is equally good at spotting thieves and vandals.
You are beating around the bush. Regardless of where the idea came from, do you object to the idea of loving your neighbor?
You're acting dense in order to sell a message. The origin of the idea matters here, because it is not one idea, it is multiple ideas, most of them concerning an otherworldly entity - one we have no need of. The message would be equally valid had it not been packaged.
If the sentence had been purely "love thy neighbor - next chapter", I would be fine with it. All the dogma surrounding it is what is causing us problems in the first place.
That is what I said, in the previous post - it sums up my opinion on it well enough.
If people truly lived by that, much of our body of laws, would be redundant and unnecessary.
Of course, just like if everybody had no arms there would be no fist fights. As I've been pointing out, there is no need for packaging it in religious dogma, the idea can easily be argued without.
I also object to your notion that "love your neighbor" is equivalent to "love god, then love your neighbor" - that relation can only be true in the single case of god=0, in all other cases the solutions diverge.
Can you step away for just a moment from religion
You're not really letting me.
Do you have any objection to things like that just because they happen to be written in the book you consider a myth?
Yes I do. Because "things like that" are also a lot of garbage concerning a ficticious entity. If the sentence had been purely "love thy neighbor - next chapter", I would be fine with it. All the dogma surrounding it is what is causing us problems in the first place.
I think the answer that Jesus gave in Luke 10:27 concerning human behavior is much better, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself."
That is what you said (after having invoked both Hitler and Mohammed in the same post). My fundamental problem with this is wanting to be guided by a static text rather than interaction with your fellow humans. Problems arise when you choose to do that, people start believing that "the next life" is better, and waste the one they have here. What the sentence is actually saying is "As long as your ruling priesthood does not want you to do anything else, you can be good to your neighbor", and that is a major gaping loophole - before you know it you have a crusade on your hands. Fresh examples abound in current news.
So what objection do you have the golden rule?
That it spends more space dealing with a ficticious entity than with the actual true value of the sentence - to love your neighbor. Basically what I have been saying, just without this major concern for pleasing something a bunch of tribesmen invented thousands of years ago. Religion is like civilization's first stage booster rocket, it's spent and it's time to jettison the dead weight.
To be fair you need lead in order to start making gold from it. Baby steps!
Hands carry weapons, hands are weapons --- we should outlaw the use of hands. There is a line, and I think they chose a pretty good starting point for their line with this.
The sad part is, as a former email admin, having to tell the CEO of your employer that such an email (which he pulled out of his quarantine folder) is a scam (and then still having to provide similar examples to prove it as such) is pretty effing sad sometimes.
Oh that is just not right. And here I thought my boss was a moron for suggesting that adding an if-then-else was too complex a solution, he would like 2 separate methods instead. I bow my head in sympathy, having been trumped - you played the ace of idiots.
In the case of the people making the decision of what is right and what is wrong, it would be OK with you if the majority decided there is nothing wrong with declaring certain people as second-class citizens and snuffing them or making them slaves?
Well that is what happens when you put religious nut-jobs into power, history teaches us this. What we really don't know anything about yet is wether an educated population would elect to do things differently, my bet is that it would. It is for certain though, that religion and capitalism is not the answer - both dogmas have tried and failed, we now have more devastating wars than ever, for the exact same stupid reasons as always.
In the beginning, Hitler was duly elected by the majority of Germans
Congratulations on invoking Hitler in a thread, how massively inappropriate. Hitler never was elected with a majority, in fact his government was never a majority in parlaiment at all. I'll let you Google it out what happened - you'd be surprised when you learn the answer (spoiler: it involves thugs and vicious beatings).
In countries where the majority supports the Islamic culture
Bear in mind i said educated population. Support for a regime built on any religious text does not qualify as educated.
I think the answer that Jesus gave in Luke 10:27 concerning [*snip* blablabla]
Quoting someone, anyone, does not lend their words nor yours any more credibility. If you cannot argue an idea on it's merit alone, shut up. If you cannot apply the scientific method to a statement of fact, it is worthless. End.
And the fact that these scams keep happening demonstrates that there is money in it because some people fall for it
And a really low barrier of entry into the market. All it takes is a carefully worded email and a public search on people to send it to, and you're good. You don't need to worry about court fees or anything, since you plan on dropping the case before any papers are filed.