Yes, I know, I know. The crazy Libertarian talk. But that is, what happened — a combination of government regulating the cost of tickets, while imposing heavy taxes and building highways, where automobiles — both passenger and goods-carrying — could travel for less and less.
Another good reason is how women are treated in mostly male fields.
So, you are trying to explain the entire disparity with mistreatment by males. I don't buy it...
there must be some reason more women go to college than men right
That may be because of the numerous programs like the one being described in TFA. That such programs are deemed necessary, reflects badly on the fair sex...
Re:Haven't used FreeBSD in years.
on
FreeBSD 9.3 Released
·
· Score: 4, Informative
There is a FreeBSD/arm project. Whether it will work on your particular hardware — and recognize all of the peripherals you care for, that's another topic...
It is a "Tier 2" — so there are no official builds for it, for example.
It is a "Tier 1" for NetBSD, so you may have better luck there. They even distinguish between "ARM evaluation boards" (evbarm) and "StrongARM based Windows CE PDA machines" (hpcarm). I'm sure, OpenBSD is similar in this regard, but I'm tired of copy-pasting links...
There's a "skills gap" present in Math aptitude tests that appears in countries where the status of women is worse
This may be partially explained by the mistreatment. However, there is a giant elephant in the room of "sex equality": sports. The all-female teams are invariably weaker, than the all-male ones — and compete separately. Co-ed teams are required to have a certain number of women (2 players for a 6-member volleyball team, for example). Soccer World Cup just ended — did you see a single female player there? Are you going to attribute it entirely to sexism?
It is not all about muscles either — women aren't any better at chess, than they are at at swimming or running. It is so bad, the international chess body(ies) had to create a separate title: Chess Woman Grandmaster (CWG) — because so few of them could become actual, non-gendered, Chess Grandmasters (CG). Indeed, only one percent of CGs are female.
Sure, there are individual women, who are stronger and smarter than an average male. But the strongest man is stronger, and the smartest — smarter, than the strongest and smartest woman, respectively. We just don't look or smell as good. And we can't give birth...
Sure, there are arguments politely trying to explain away this disparity. But they fail.
some areas of business are just natural monopolies
"Natural monopolies" — a pro-government excuse like "market failure". If Tokyo has competing subway lines, why can't New York City have any?
Regulation is required anytime you have a monopoly, no matter how it got there.
The primary focus of the "regulation" is to try to ensure the presence of healthy competition — which is by far the best regulator there can be. No government-created monopolies (like AT&T's) and no duopolies either, please (as there were with cell-phone service in the 90ies).
Thus, it does matter, "how it got there" — if it was government-orchestrated in the first place (as AT&T was), for example, it may need to be forcibly split-up. If it grew up on its own (like Microsoft), it just needs to be watched so that it does not use its monopoly position to against competition.
What market strategy gave the world Comcast and similar monoplies in the first place?
It was not a market strategy. It was a government's decision to only allow one cable-TV company to serve a particular area. Much like the previous decision to only allow AT&T to provide telephone service... In exchange to getting this government-enforced monopoly, the companies were expected to "behave", but, as any monopoly would, did not...
My point was, however, that monopolies suck. In that I was in agreement with bigsexyjoe. What he didn't understand, however — judging by a link to pro-big government blog in his signature — is that the government, being the largest monopoly, sucks the most. With Comcast, at least, you can cancel your service, after all. Now try canceling your Social Security membership...
Contrast this with the heavily regulated and much superior services in most of Western Europe.
If you know something about the broadband in Europe — and their customer-satisfaction — you failed to share the link(s).
IT's conclusions are exactly at odds with yours. nice job
That Washingon Post's conclusions would be in line with the agenda of bigger and stronger government, is not surprising in the least. My point remains, that, once again, the computer models' predictions of the future are demonstrated to be faulty. As in "incorrect" — if not outright bogus. On just about anything, that has already happened.
Yet, we are expected to agree to spend billions (and even trillions) of dollars on avoiding, what these models predict for the years, that haven't arrived yet.
Along with the "general welfare" clause — another loophole unfortunately left in the Constitution by its framers (the slave-owning gang of White men, you know) — this lets the President do anything — legally.
That some of the Executives hesitate, is a sign, that other things still sort-of work in this country. The Constitution does not, unfortunately...
you being an idiot and driving your car over a pedestrian infringes on their right to the pursuit of happiness
Sure. And any such idiots ought to be punished — and have their right to drive a car suspended. But this has nothing to do with the preventive prohibition — which is what the license requirement amounts to.
You see, when it comes to behaviors that put others at significant risk
Risky driving — or drone-flying — can be prohibited. People engaging in it may lose their right to drive (or fly drones) at all — or be punished otherwise — that's fine and normal. What I do not approve of, however, is the preemptive requirement to have a government's permission to do anything.
why only punish the ones who were unlucky enough to have the negative outcome actually happen
Because determining, what's really risky and what is not, is only a little bit easier, than detecting a murderer before he kills...
Similarly, Amazon flying drones over residential neighborhoods sounds pretty risky to me
It does, huh? You don't mind the thousands-pounds piloted aircraft flying above your all day, you don't mind the trucks driving around all day (delivering the same stuff), it is the light drones, that keep you awake at night?
not sure this ban is such a bad thing until we can prove suitable precautions are being taken
That, right there, is the key to our disagreement. You want everybody, who wish to fly a drone, to prove, they've "taken precautions". I don't believe, you ought to have the power to impose such a requirement. The burden of proof ought to be on you.
Now, that was philosophical. Now comes the more practical. Amazon being the 800-pound gorilla, can afford to argue with the government — they can not be ignored. They even managed to get the USPS to offer Sunday delivery — though now it seems available to all.
But the FAA simply killed other attempts to use drones — such as for the delivery of flowers. The barrier to entry — to start competing with the incumbent behemoths — was upped, and we the consumers are losing. No wonder, Amazon aren't suing to overturn the FAA's decision — any favorable overcome would apply to all. They are merely asking for exception — for themselves. Crony capitalism much?
They need to ask permission because the FAA specifically banned such behavior last month.
Gone are the days, when pursuit of happiness was understood as a natural right granted to each human being not by their government, but by the Creator.
Today one must get a permission to drive a car, carry a weapon, perform in costume, or, indeed, to fly a drone.
And this prohibition does not even come from Congress directly — having usurped so much control over our lives over the last century, they are simply unable to deal with the minutiae and are forced to delegate more and more of the rule-making to the Executive-run agencies — such as the FAA.
Sure. Because the honest and straight-shooting New York Times and MSNBC would publish — indeed, revel in — every piece of bad news...
As long a Republican can be blamed for it — justly or otherwise — of course...
Iraq, for example, was a "quagmire" in 2003 — when the enemy was defeated and on the run. And so it was in 2006, when only minor insurrections remained. But it is not a quagmire today — with the enemy having recaptured vast swaths of the country — the same sophisticated publication is advising us on how to avoid the disaster, not admitting, is has already happened — with the Nobel Peace Prize winner at the helm and a direct result of his decisions and orders.
Right, cause cheap/free VR certainly isn't of interest to the slashdot crowd.
Are you saying, VR pr0n is already available? Nope, not yet...
Seriously, though, it may be "of interest", but not so much interest, that it merits a mention every two weeks. Hardly news — neither for nerds nor for others.
Well, it does happen every day here and there. But there are a lot of people, who never manage to — throughout their whole lives... And I'm not even sure about myself, unfortunately.
Racism, which you proposed to ban earlier is exactly that — a thought... To avoid such semantic problems in the future, do try to use more precise terms.
And in civilised countries racist actions are already banned.
And the Blacks only seem to be worse off over the decades. It is not anybody's "racist action", that causes residents of government housing projects (affectionately known as "ghettos") to pee in the stairwells...
Black racism consists of the assumption that they are criminal, violent and or stupid. Theses are not the assumptions about Asians or Jews.
I'm not exactly sure, what beef American Blacks have with the Asians, but, being myself a European Jew, I do know, what anti-semites claim: we are, supposedly, thieves and cheaters (whom nobody should be hiring, of course), constantly scheming to undermine the nations we happen to live in for the sake of Israel (thus should not be hired into government either). Oh, and we use the blood of Christian babies to make matzos...
Are you going to sincerely claim, such accusations don't affect "employment opportunities"?
Which means they don't suffer the same disadvantages in the employment market that blacks do.
Nonsense. Of course, the disadvantages are the same — or worse. In Russia, for example, there were official limits on how many Jews can enter universities, how many could live outside specially-set areas. Certain trades were closed off completely. Yet, somehow, that didn't prevent the Jews from doing well back then. USSR dispensed with the official racism of the Tsars, but the sentiment remained: my own father, for example, had to go to a different city's university — in the late 1960ies — because Kyiv State University was famous for anti-Semitic admission officers. Yet, that didn't prevent him from succeeding — even he remained sufficiently bitter to move his family to the US upon the first opportunity.
Post-Soviet Russia today remains anti-Semitic (though the other ex-Soviet republics no so much), but Jews manage to strive anyway: there are industrialists (of Russian kind) and politicians in addition to the customary lawyers, doctors, and engineers. Perhaps, that's because nobody tried to be condescending to them — the way American Illiberals are towards Blacks...
That statement was asserted (by you) out of context.
This was a good opportunity for you to provide the surrounding context, but you missed it for some reason...
Which is an altogether different matter.
Is it different? When the same person believes, "the unfit" should be either encouraged to not procreate or simply prohibited from procreating, goes on and establishes a network of abortion clinics, can it really be denied, that the belief and the act are rather connected to each other? Of course, they are...
They were not at all a small operation. That makes your counterpoints a red herring.
Ok, who were the milkmen?
You skipped the whole HMO thing even though it is the most on-target example.
The health insurance in this country is so screwed-up, it does not make a good example for anything other than itself.
Then you could get a discount if you drove a sedan with a smaller engine. Now that 'discount' has turned into a hefty surcharge on cars with a smaller engine than what we used to consider a regular car had.
I don't really see a difference here. The prices for everything are going up — because of the inflation, costs of regulations, and rising taxes — it sucks, but it is not a conspiracy to defraud us (not on the part of the insurers).
I smell frog soup.
Oh, yes, of course. But we aren't being boiled by the "corporations". It is the politicians — who've assumed so much control over us, that Congress can't even deal with it all, which forces them to offload their responsibilities to the giant (and unelected) government bureaucracies. It is bad and is getting worse — but private auto-insurers aren't the problem...
Slashdot Mirror
Yep. The classic case of:
Seems like you are confirming what I said, even though you begin with a rhetorical disbelief of hearing it again...
Yes, I know, I know. The crazy Libertarian talk. But that is, what happened — a combination of government regulating the cost of tickets, while imposing heavy taxes and building highways, where automobiles — both passenger and goods-carrying — could travel for less and less.
And then Amtrak took over all passenger rail-travel, and has never shown a profit since — losing money on the most idiotic things — while, demanding the passengers "carry identification at all times"...
So, you are trying to explain the entire disparity with mistreatment by males. I don't buy it...
That may be because of the numerous programs like the one being described in TFA. That such programs are deemed necessary, reflects badly on the fair sex...
It is a "Tier 2" — so there are no official builds for it, for example.
It is a "Tier 1" for NetBSD, so you may have better luck there. They even distinguish between "ARM evaluation boards" (evbarm) and "StrongARM based Windows CE PDA machines" (hpcarm). I'm sure, OpenBSD is similar in this regard, but I'm tired of copy-pasting links...
There is no alternative, with a license compatible with BSD.
This may be partially explained by the mistreatment. However, there is a giant elephant in the room of "sex equality": sports. The all-female teams are invariably weaker, than the all-male ones — and compete separately. Co-ed teams are required to have a certain number of women (2 players for a 6-member volleyball team, for example). Soccer World Cup just ended — did you see a single female player there? Are you going to attribute it entirely to sexism?
It is not all about muscles either — women aren't any better at chess, than they are at at swimming or running. It is so bad, the international chess body(ies) had to create a separate title: Chess Woman Grandmaster (CWG) — because so few of them could become actual, non-gendered, Chess Grandmasters (CG). Indeed, only one percent of CGs are female.
Sure, there are individual women, who are stronger and smarter than an average male. But the strongest man is stronger, and the smartest — smarter, than the strongest and smartest woman, respectively. We just don't look or smell as good. And we can't give birth...
Sure, there are arguments politely trying to explain away this disparity. But they fail.
"Natural monopolies" — a pro-government excuse like "market failure". If Tokyo has competing subway lines, why can't New York City have any?
The primary focus of the "regulation" is to try to ensure the presence of healthy competition — which is by far the best regulator there can be. No government-created monopolies (like AT&T's) and no duopolies either, please (as there were with cell-phone service in the 90ies).
Thus, it does matter, "how it got there" — if it was government-orchestrated in the first place (as AT&T was), for example, it may need to be forcibly split-up. If it grew up on its own (like Microsoft), it just needs to be watched so that it does not use its monopoly position to against competition.
It was not a market strategy. It was a government's decision to only allow one cable-TV company to serve a particular area. Much like the previous decision to only allow AT&T to provide telephone service... In exchange to getting this government-enforced monopoly, the companies were expected to "behave", but, as any monopoly would, did not...
My point was, however, that monopolies suck. In that I was in agreement with bigsexyjoe. What he didn't understand, however — judging by a link to pro-big government blog in his signature — is that the government, being the largest monopoly, sucks the most. With Comcast, at least, you can cancel your service, after all. Now try canceling your Social Security membership...
If you know something about the broadband in Europe — and their customer-satisfaction — you failed to share the link(s).
Now, now. Let's not change the topic of the conversation to government — the biggest and unwieldiest monopolist there is...
That Washingon Post's conclusions would be in line with the agenda of bigger and stronger government, is not surprising in the least. My point remains, that, once again, the computer models' predictions of the future are demonstrated to be faulty. As in "incorrect" — if not outright bogus. On just about anything, that has already happened.
Yet, we are expected to agree to spend billions (and even trillions) of dollars on avoiding, what these models predict for the years, that haven't arrived yet.
Indeed. With creative interpretation this law (singular) can be found to prohibit even growing food for your own consumption... Or anything else the Executive pleases.
Along with the "general welfare" clause — another loophole unfortunately left in the Constitution by its framers (the slave-owning gang of White men, you know) — this lets the President do anything — legally.
That some of the Executives hesitate, is a sign, that other things still sort-of work in this country. The Constitution does not, unfortunately...
Volume vs. spread — hair-splitting. The submitter's write-up makes no distinction either.
My point was, an important piece of data was omitted. Which, in my not so humble opinion, constitutes a lie by omission.
And an important piece it is. You may not like the source I offered, but, whoever the messenger is, the facts are undeniable. Contrary to predictions of the computer models, the ice sheet in Antarctica is expanding — not shrinking. Mind you, these are the same models, on whose — now demonstrably faulty — predictions we are supposed to dramatically alter our way of life and government.
For someone criticizing another poster's sources, offering a link to a blog run by by Communist Illiberals, is truly rich. I'll give you that...
Conveniently omitted from the report is a mention of Antarctic ice — which continues to set a record after a record.
Happiness was never a right. Pursuit of it was.
Yes, as long as you were legally a person.
That a personhood was unjustly denied to some was a travesty, but it has nothing to do with my argument.
Sure. And any such idiots ought to be punished — and have their right to drive a car suspended. But this has nothing to do with the preventive prohibition — which is what the license requirement amounts to.
Risky driving — or drone-flying — can be prohibited. People engaging in it may lose their right to drive (or fly drones) at all — or be punished otherwise — that's fine and normal. What I do not approve of, however, is the preemptive requirement to have a government's permission to do anything.
Because determining, what's really risky and what is not, is only a little bit easier, than detecting a murderer before he kills...
It does, huh? You don't mind the thousands-pounds piloted aircraft flying above your all day, you don't mind the trucks driving around all day (delivering the same stuff), it is the light drones, that keep you awake at night?
That, right there, is the key to our disagreement. You want everybody, who wish to fly a drone, to prove, they've "taken precautions". I don't believe, you ought to have the power to impose such a requirement. The burden of proof ought to be on you.
Now, that was philosophical. Now comes the more practical. Amazon being the 800-pound gorilla, can afford to argue with the government — they can not be ignored. They even managed to get the USPS to offer Sunday delivery — though now it seems available to all.
But the FAA simply killed other attempts to use drones — such as for the delivery of flowers. The barrier to entry — to start competing with the incumbent behemoths — was upped, and we the consumers are losing. No wonder, Amazon aren't suing to overturn the FAA's decision — any favorable overcome would apply to all. They are merely asking for exception — for themselves. Crony capitalism much?
Gone are the days, when pursuit of happiness was understood as a natural right granted to each human being not by their government, but by the Creator.
Today one must get a permission to drive a car, carry a weapon, perform in costume, or, indeed, to fly a drone.
And this prohibition does not even come from Congress directly — having usurped so much control over our lives over the last century, they are simply unable to deal with the minutiae and are forced to delegate more and more of the rule-making to the Executive-run agencies — such as the FAA.
Sure. Because the honest and straight-shooting New York Times and MSNBC would publish — indeed, revel in — every piece of bad news...
As long a Republican can be blamed for it — justly or otherwise — of course...
Iraq, for example, was a "quagmire" in 2003 — when the enemy was defeated and on the run. And so it was in 2006, when only minor insurrections remained. But it is not a quagmire today — with the enemy having recaptured vast swaths of the country — the same sophisticated publication is advising us on how to avoid the disaster, not admitting, is has already happened — with the Nobel Peace Prize winner at the helm and a direct result of his decisions and orders.
Are you saying, VR pr0n is already available? Nope, not yet...
Seriously, though, it may be "of interest", but not so much interest, that it merits a mention every two weeks. Hardly news — neither for nerds nor for others.
I thought, my karma entitled me to disabled advertising...
Far less so than Russia. Instead of detaining the accused and bringing him in, they would've simply poisoned the man.
Well, it does happen every day here and there. But there are a lot of people, who never manage to — throughout their whole lives... And I'm not even sure about myself, unfortunately.
Thank you. Your racism will make me stronger.
Racism, which you proposed to ban earlier is exactly that — a thought... To avoid such semantic problems in the future, do try to use more precise terms.
And the Blacks only seem to be worse off over the decades. It is not anybody's "racist action", that causes residents of government housing projects (affectionately known as "ghettos") to pee in the stairwells...
I'm not exactly sure, what beef American Blacks have with the Asians, but, being myself a European Jew, I do know, what anti-semites claim: we are, supposedly, thieves and cheaters (whom nobody should be hiring, of course), constantly scheming to undermine the nations we happen to live in for the sake of Israel (thus should not be hired into government either). Oh, and we use the blood of Christian babies to make matzos...
Are you going to sincerely claim, such accusations don't affect "employment opportunities"?
Nonsense. Of course, the disadvantages are the same — or worse. In Russia, for example, there were official limits on how many Jews can enter universities, how many could live outside specially-set areas. Certain trades were closed off completely. Yet, somehow, that didn't prevent the Jews from doing well back then. USSR dispensed with the official racism of the Tsars, but the sentiment remained: my own father, for example, had to go to a different city's university — in the late 1960ies — because Kyiv State University was famous for anti-Semitic admission officers. Yet, that didn't prevent him from succeeding — even he remained sufficiently bitter to move his family to the US upon the first opportunity.
Post-Soviet Russia today remains anti-Semitic (though the other ex-Soviet republics no so much), but Jews manage to strive anyway: there are industrialists (of Russian kind) and politicians in addition to the customary lawyers, doctors, and engineers. Perhaps, that's because nobody tried to be condescending to them — the way American Illiberals are towards Blacks...
This was a good opportunity for you to provide the surrounding context, but you missed it for some reason...
Is it different? When the same person believes, "the unfit" should be either encouraged to not procreate or simply prohibited from procreating, goes on and establishes a network of abortion clinics, can it really be denied, that the belief and the act are rather connected to each other? Of course, they are...
Ok, who were the milkmen?
The health insurance in this country is so screwed-up, it does not make a good example for anything other than itself.
I don't really see a difference here. The prices for everything are going up — because of the inflation, costs of regulations, and rising taxes — it sucks, but it is not a conspiracy to defraud us (not on the part of the insurers).
Oh, yes, of course. But we aren't being boiled by the "corporations". It is the politicians — who've assumed so much control over us, that Congress can't even deal with it all, which forces them to offload their responsibilities to the giant (and unelected) government bureaucracies. It is bad and is getting worse — but private auto-insurers aren't the problem...