Prohibit gambling by gambling addicts, I think is what you meant.
No, I meant, that if we think, some people aren't capable of taking responsibility for their lives and require sustained government handouts, then these same people (at least) should also be prevented from gambling what little they have away.
"Environmental factors" such as nutrition during developing years can have incredibly large impacts.
Aha, so I should be forced to feed someone else's child?.. How "liberal"... But what is the impact of nutrition, and what kind of nutrition exactly is it, that the rich can afford, but the poor can not — in this country? Countless millions of Chinese, for example, eat far worse than the American poor, yet they still manage to develop the industry to make modest money and the frugality to save it. Those few, who come to this country often manage to build enough wealth to buy a business and own a house — in the first generation. I walk through a "chinatown" often — I've never seen a single Asian beggar, have you?
Investing money in your population is not wrong, just like investing money in your own employees is not wrong.
Well, excellent! Now that I knocked you from the moralistic high horse of the "we need to be compassionate to the less fortunate", you switch to the economics. If it is not the (forced) charity, but investment, then it should be discussed as such. Let's see the proposal and the expected ROI, shall we?
I can't speak for anybody else but the bugs found in the beta copy of Safari on Windows work on the production copy on OSX [emphasys mine -mi] as well (same code base for alot [sic] of stuff).
Safari is the browser on OSX. It is also based on Konqueror — and KDE is at version 3.5.6 at the moment — hardly a beta. The guy did not test Konqueror for the same bugs, but I would not be at all surprised, if they were there too...
Casting everyone's economic situation as the result of their own free will is just moralistic fluffing for the successful.
What else is there, but the free will, khm? Who won the lottery? Are we not all created equal (save for the penis and breasts sizes)?
I'm willing to accept the impact of "environmental factors" as 10%. Ok, make it 20%... But the rest is squarely with the person — and if we deny that, we should be prohibiting gambling.
Seriously, what's the excuse for an able-bodied native-born American to be poor? Their parents weren't sent to labor camps never to be seen again. Their farm was not confiscated. They weren't abducted as a child and weren't subsequently forced to fight in the jungle... They were never enslaved. WTF?
Really, just because someone's parents, neighbors, or history is/are fucked up is no reason to deny that person access to medical care, for example.
The only reason, a service provider or merchant would deny service or sale is when the would-be customer can't pay for it. This applies to restaurants, auto dealerships, supermarkets, and — yes — hospitals. Nobody comes to a supermarket to load up on free food — when they do, they are justly prosecuted for shoplifting. But, somehow, visiting a hospital for free is Ok — maybe, the neighbors weren't nice to the guy, so he never got a profession? (We still want to let him gamble, though...)
I'm just not so inexperienced with poverty to believe that this is a majority, nor so given to sweeping generalizations as to make moral pronouncements of, essentially, "they have it coming" about millions of other people.
But you are comfortable confiscating from "the rich" (at gun-point — via IRS) to help out these unfortunate ones — without even knowing, how many of them are in the dire straits due to their own faults?..
Nobody owes you free health care. Nobody owes you shelter. Nobody owes you food. Our Republic's founding documents are quite clear — all you are guaranteed is pursuit of happiness without the government's interference.
If you can't afford it — it is your own problem, not mine. Now, if you ask nicely (perhaps, your past was, indeed, fucked up, I may be able to help you out — charities existed in this country long before food-stamps and MedicAid. But since Mr. Frank and his fellow illiberals come asking with guns and prisons (IRS) on your behalf, then I'll be dodging their requests as much as the guns and prisons can be avoided.
I, unlike millions of Americans, presently have the option
Are you — along with Mr. Frank — telling me, that "millions" of natively born and raised Americans have somebody but themselves (and, maybe, their own parents) to blame for not being able to afford anything they darn please by adulthood?
Millions of (would be) immigrants dream of coming to this country — legally and otherwise. And when they do, most of them manage to not only prosper, but to help out their extended families back at home — all without the tremendous headstart afforded by having grown up here, knowing the language, the customs, and the culture.
But Mr. Frank's ilk of illiberals are happy to score votes by saying, that the failures aren't really your fault. It is racism. It is poor education. It is "corporate greed". Everybody is at fault, but you, poor sap. Because you aren't an adult capable of controlling your own life in this free country.
Except, when it comes to entertainment, that is...
Want to bet? Give it a few more years and coding will be a thing of the past, you HACKER you. Get against the wall, right next to the terrorists.
Why, yes, I do want to bet, that this will not happen — that computer hackers will not be equated to terrorists by this country's government. What are you putting up? Let's interpret your "few more years" as 5.
If his opinion on adults' ability to police themselves extended into non-entertainment areas of life...
If he grew the understanding, that we are likewise capable of saving for retirement, finding job, choosing health-care options, etcetera, I would even have forgiven his copious amounts of non-help in the case of my grandmother's immigration to the US.
In most areas removing humans will cause wild fauna to reappear within a decade or two...
And Chernobyl is in a particularly forested region — even in the year of the disaster wild boars could be observed from a helicopter, according to my father. The pilots were preparing for a hunt on the way back — after dropping him off...
If the humans are gone, the animals will flourish. Their life-span is not long enough for radiation-caused cancers — hunters are far more devastating than any disease.
My post was to remind, that no government is a friend of privacy.
You forgot about the infamous Clipper chip, and how Clinton's administration tried to make encryption, which did not provide for government's ability to decrypt illegal. From Clinton's 1993 directive:
I do not intend to prevent the private sector from developing, or the government from approving, other microcircuits or algorithms that are equally effective in assuring both privacy and a secure key-escrow system [emphasys mine -mi].
Pelosi's trip was know ahead of time. No one in the administration is considering invoking the Logan Act.
So? No one in Congress is considering impeachment, for example, either. But various illiberals wouldn't shut up about it...
Just out of curiosity, you must be some sort of lawyer, or an expert on constitutional law, yes? I mean, you wouldn't just repeat something like a parrot without looking into it or thinking about it, right?
Oh, boy... If you are not surprised to find experts on copyrights, patents, and licensing here, how could you possibly be surprised to meet someone, who appears to be a constitutional law expert?
... . Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution.
You are quoting a 1975 conclusion of the (Nixon's) US Department of State. Hardly a legally binding decision... Then — like today — prosecuting the other Party's members for violating the Act would've resulted in the same calls to barricades among the same comrades, that I mentioned already...
Democrats, making life easier for America's enemies (Castro, Assad) for decades. Uh-oh, a flaimbait, is not it?
Nahw. She just said publicly the road to peace lay through Damascus. Not like she gave the tyrant state credibility or anything.
Yes, she did give the tyrant state credibility. A law-maker is not supposed to make (or pretend to make) State-visits. If it was not such an incredibly hot-potato ("Repuke-nazis prosecuting the Democratic leader — to the barricades, comrades!"), she would've been justly prosecuted under the Logan Act of 1799:
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without
authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any
correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or
agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States,
or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or
imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
And let me pre-empt any attempts to weasel out of this felony charge by disputing the Act's "legislative intent". The act is named after a certain pacifist Dr. Logan (a legislator), who — in 1798 — tried to relay to France, that, essentially, the road to peace lay through Paris.
What Pelosi did has been a felony for over two centuries...
I would be quite surprised if the Democrats don't start busting out the contempt charges real fucking soon, with the way justice officials seem to be making a habit of lying to congress.
Perhaps, you are in for a surprise:-) But even if what you so rudely predict does happen, this administration will simply join the previous one in the long list of administrations, whose officials have been held in contempt of Congress.
The claims, that something particularly outrageous has been happening during the last 6 years only, will remain just as ridiculous, as they are today.
While blasting the current administration as the enemy of privacy, it is useful to remember the attempts of the previous one — whom most illiberals want back — to saddle us with those two nice little thingies called Carnivore (currently known as "DCS1000"), and Clipper...
No government is a friend of privacy of its citizens. They think, their job is more important, and they are sure, they will not abuse the possibilities. And there is little reason to doubt their sincerety — they are just wrong, and we must defend ourselves, but we should not single anyone out — they all want our privacy, for it often makes their job easier.
This is not unlike a geek wanting to, for example, break out of their employer's firewall. The geek knows, they will not abuse the freedom nor expose the employer's network to viruses, etc., but the employer is justly concerned...
The tactic of ignoring laws and judgments that do not fit the executive agenda has worked for 6 years now
Come, come. 6 years? Ever heard the official term Contempt of Congress? This administration is yet to have an official to be so condemned (in six years!), but the list is long, and even the previous administration is on it.
It could not even support a dual-head setup. If that's what he means by "NVIDIA engineers actively maintain and improve", then it is simply sabotage:
Why don't we fix the dual-head setup, boss?
Because we want people to use "nvidia" driver instead.
What do we care — we give it away for free anyway?
Because we drop support for older cards from our official driver, thus pushing people to upgrade them.
The nv-driver was my only option on FreeBSD/amd64, yet it would not drive the second monitor, so I changed the card for a Radeon. The open-source driver for ATI, at least, supports dual head and plenty of other features found on the hardware.
TV stations who have no idea where the line is drawn.
Come, come... Let's be reasonable here. No idea?
Of course, they had an idea. It is a very simple "rule of thumb" — which words would you not like to hear from your 5-year old? If any word is there at all, then "fuck" would be on the list...
I do agree with you, that the rules have to be set before hand, and if the court found, the pre-set rules were to vague, then so be it. But to pretend, like you do, that the innocent TV-stations "have no idea" is, mildly speaking, insincere...
It's a little disingenuous to demand links when you yourself didn't bother to provide any in the original post.
I posted facts, which raised no doubts. Not even from you. Someone stating, the sky is blue, for another example, needs to post no links either.
It's also more than a little ridiculous to compare Chile to Cuba. Chile is an enormous country compared to Cuba (756,950 sq km vs. 110,860 sq km), and has tremendous mineral wealth
Oh, please... So, it is the size (a lot of it — hardly habitable mountains, BTW), and the mineral wealth, huh? Right... There are countries without any of that (Taiwan, Israel to name a couple), which are doing much better than Cuba anyway — not that Cuba's own nickel (which you mysteriously dismiss) and oil (which you forget) are anything to sneeze at. It could also have excellent tourism industry, instead of (or in addition to) its current shady sex-tourism. The also have copper (yes, the same copper), cobalt, iron...
No, dear, there is no escaping the fact, that Castro's government — and the Communist governments in general — are not only bloody, but also horrendously inefficient and incompetent. It wouldn't have survived without USSR's support, and this willingness of the Russian empire to support anyone sufficiently loyal (for the sake of empire-building itself) was the point of my original posting in this thread.
And why not, exactly? Oh, because they might sue? Come dear, this site talks about government oppression (and the need to oppose it) constantly. Resisting the evil **AAs is considered civil disobedience (automatically noble, of course). But you can't list the few sites, who — verifiably, one assumes — have agreed to accept something in exchange for better reviews?
Sorry. No Pulitzer prize for this piece of investigative journalism...
Why is why the generate enemies all over the world - especially when the US sides with one side in a conflict against another.
In addition to the dissed side customarily hating us for siding with its opponent, it is because cultures hate competition — especially, if they are losing it. So they pull out crappy non-arguments like: "yeah, but you are so consumerist"...
Unable to mount military attacks, they resort to propaganda, and some — to occasional terrorism. Come on — haven't you ever played Civilization?
and I'm no Fidel supporter (hell, I'm living in Europe for a reason), but I have to say that one of the things I miss about Cuba is healthcare and the fact that my children were healthy and NOT addicted consumerists...
So, we are supposed to believe your hazy recollections of Cuba's USSR-assisted past, over the earlier poster's current information, that comes from their mother, who — unlike you and your children — live in Cuba today...
Well, what else can be expected from someone, who thinks "consumerism" is a disease, that can be treated in a hospital?
I'm sure, you were happier in your youth in Cuba, than you are in your middle age — and saddled with "consumerist" children — in Europe. But location has nothing to do with it...
Slashdot Mirror
No, I meant, that if we think, some people aren't capable of taking responsibility for their lives and require sustained government handouts, then these same people (at least) should also be prevented from gambling what little they have away.
Aha, so I should be forced to feed someone else's child?.. How "liberal"... But what is the impact of nutrition, and what kind of nutrition exactly is it, that the rich can afford, but the poor can not — in this country? Countless millions of Chinese, for example, eat far worse than the American poor, yet they still manage to develop the industry to make modest money and the frugality to save it. Those few, who come to this country often manage to build enough wealth to buy a business and own a house — in the first generation. I walk through a "chinatown" often — I've never seen a single Asian beggar, have you?
Well, excellent! Now that I knocked you from the moralistic high horse of the "we need to be compassionate to the less fortunate", you switch to the economics. If it is not the (forced) charity, but investment, then it should be discussed as such. Let's see the proposal and the expected ROI, shall we?
RTFA:
Safari is the browser on OSX. It is also based on Konqueror — and KDE is at version 3.5.6 at the moment — hardly a beta. The guy did not test Konqueror for the same bugs, but I would not be at all surprised, if they were there too...
Do we also rape the rapists?
The pirates may never in their life think of anything worth copyrighting, you know...
You did not quite develop this philosophy yet...
I'm willing to accept the impact of "environmental factors" as 10%. Ok, make it 20%... But the rest is squarely with the person — and if we deny that, we should be prohibiting gambling.
Seriously, what's the excuse for an able-bodied native-born American to be poor? Their parents weren't sent to labor camps never to be seen again. Their farm was not confiscated. They weren't abducted as a child and weren't subsequently forced to fight in the jungle... They were never enslaved. WTF?
The only reason, a service provider or merchant would deny service or sale is when the would-be customer can't pay for it. This applies to restaurants, auto dealerships, supermarkets, and — yes — hospitals. Nobody comes to a supermarket to load up on free food — when they do, they are justly prosecuted for shoplifting. But, somehow, visiting a hospital for free is Ok — maybe, the neighbors weren't nice to the guy, so he never got a profession? (We still want to let him gamble, though...)
But you are comfortable confiscating from "the rich" (at gun-point — via IRS) to help out these unfortunate ones — without even knowing, how many of them are in the dire straits due to their own faults?..
Nobody owes you free health care. Nobody owes you shelter. Nobody owes you food. Our Republic's founding documents are quite clear — all you are guaranteed is pursuit of happiness without the government's interference.
If you can't afford it — it is your own problem, not mine. Now, if you ask nicely (perhaps, your past was, indeed, fucked up, I may be able to help you out — charities existed in this country long before food-stamps and MedicAid. But since Mr. Frank and his fellow illiberals come asking with guns and prisons (IRS) on your behalf, then I'll be dodging their requests as much as the guns and prisons can be avoided.
You are too old!
Are you — along with Mr. Frank — telling me, that "millions" of natively born and raised Americans have somebody but themselves (and, maybe, their own parents) to blame for not being able to afford anything they darn please by adulthood?
Millions of (would be) immigrants dream of coming to this country — legally and otherwise. And when they do, most of them manage to not only prosper, but to help out their extended families back at home — all without the tremendous headstart afforded by having grown up here, knowing the language, the customs, and the culture.
But Mr. Frank's ilk of illiberals are happy to score votes by saying, that the failures aren't really your fault. It is racism. It is poor education. It is "corporate greed". Everybody is at fault, but you, poor sap. Because you aren't an adult capable of controlling your own life in this free country.
Except, when it comes to entertainment, that is...
Why, yes, I do want to bet, that this will not happen — that computer hackers will not be equated to terrorists by this country's government. What are you putting up? Let's interpret your "few more years" as 5.
Are you in or out?
If his opinion on adults' ability to police themselves extended into non-entertainment areas of life...
If he grew the understanding, that we are likewise capable of saving for retirement, finding job, choosing health-care options, etcetera, I would even have forgiven his copious amounts of non-help in the case of my grandmother's immigration to the US.
In most areas removing humans will cause wild fauna to reappear within a decade or two...
And Chernobyl is in a particularly forested region — even in the year of the disaster wild boars could be observed from a helicopter, according to my father. The pilots were preparing for a hunt on the way back — after dropping him off...
If the humans are gone, the animals will flourish. Their life-span is not long enough for radiation-caused cancers — hunters are far more devastating than any disease.
I'll try room 12A, thank you very much.
So? No one in Congress is considering impeachment, for example, either. But various illiberals wouldn't shut up about it...
Oh, boy... If you are not surprised to find experts on copyrights, patents, and licensing here, how could you possibly be surprised to meet someone, who appears to be a constitutional law expert?
You are quoting a 1975 conclusion of the (Nixon's) US Department of State. Hardly a legally binding decision... Then — like today — prosecuting the other Party's members for violating the Act would've resulted in the same calls to barricades among the same comrades, that I mentioned already...
Democrats, making life easier for America's enemies (Castro, Assad) for decades. Uh-oh, a flaimbait, is not it?
Yes, she did give the tyrant state credibility. A law-maker is not supposed to make (or pretend to make) State-visits. If it was not such an incredibly hot-potato ("Repuke-nazis prosecuting the Democratic leader — to the barricades, comrades!"), she would've been justly prosecuted under the Logan Act of 1799:
And let me pre-empt any attempts to weasel out of this felony charge by disputing the Act's "legislative intent". The act is named after a certain pacifist Dr. Logan (a legislator), who — in 1798 — tried to relay to France, that, essentially, the road to peace lay through Paris.
What Pelosi did has been a felony for over two centuries...
Perhaps, you are in for a surprise :-) But even if what you so rudely predict does happen, this administration will simply join the previous one in the long list of administrations, whose officials have been held in contempt of Congress.
The claims, that something particularly outrageous has been happening during the last 6 years only, will remain just as ridiculous, as they are today.
While blasting the current administration as the enemy of privacy, it is useful to remember the attempts of the previous one — whom most illiberals want back — to saddle us with those two nice little thingies called Carnivore (currently known as "DCS1000"), and Clipper...
No government is a friend of privacy of its citizens. They think, their job is more important, and they are sure, they will not abuse the possibilities. And there is little reason to doubt their sincerety — they are just wrong, and we must defend ourselves, but we should not single anyone out — they all want our privacy, for it often makes their job easier.
This is not unlike a geek wanting to, for example, break out of their employer's firewall. The geek knows, they will not abuse the freedom nor expose the employer's network to viruses, etc., but the employer is justly concerned...
Come, come. 6 years? Ever heard the official term Contempt of Congress? This administration is yet to have an official to be so condemned (in six years!), but the list is long, and even the previous administration is on it.
Nice term... So, depending on the base, the same thing could also be called relatively shitty, or relatively mediocre? Indeed, it can...
Everything is relative, is not it? So why say it?
It could not even support a dual-head setup. If that's what he means by "NVIDIA engineers actively maintain and improve", then it is simply sabotage:
The nv-driver was my only option on FreeBSD/amd64, yet it would not drive the second monitor, so I changed the card for a Radeon. The open-source driver for ATI, at least, supports dual head and plenty of other features found on the hardware.
Come, come... Let's be reasonable here. No idea?
Of course, they had an idea. It is a very simple "rule of thumb" — which words would you not like to hear from your 5-year old? If any word is there at all, then "fuck" would be on the list...
I do agree with you, that the rules have to be set before hand, and if the court found, the pre-set rules were to vague, then so be it. But to pretend, like you do, that the innocent TV-stations "have no idea" is, mildly speaking, insincere...
I posted facts, which raised no doubts. Not even from you. Someone stating, the sky is blue, for another example, needs to post no links either.
Oh, please... So, it is the size (a lot of it — hardly habitable mountains, BTW), and the mineral wealth, huh? Right... There are countries without any of that (Taiwan, Israel to name a couple), which are doing much better than Cuba anyway — not that Cuba's own nickel (which you mysteriously dismiss) and oil (which you forget) are anything to sneeze at. It could also have excellent tourism industry, instead of (or in addition to) its current shady sex-tourism. The also have copper (yes, the same copper), cobalt, iron...
No, dear, there is no escaping the fact, that Castro's government — and the Communist governments in general — are not only bloody, but also horrendously inefficient and incompetent. It wouldn't have survived without USSR's support, and this willingness of the Russian empire to support anyone sufficiently loyal (for the sake of empire-building itself) was the point of my original posting in this thread.
And why not, exactly? Oh, because they might sue? Come dear, this site talks about government oppression (and the need to oppose it) constantly. Resisting the evil **AAs is considered civil disobedience (automatically noble, of course). But you can't list the few sites, who — verifiably, one assumes — have agreed to accept something in exchange for better reviews?
Sorry. No Pulitzer prize for this piece of investigative journalism...
So, sincere belief in the justice of one's actions, justifies the actions to those, who don't share the belief? Of course not...
You say, you respect Castro for sincerely believing, yet you don't seem to share the belief... That's a major flaw in your logic.
In addition to the dissed side customarily hating us for siding with its opponent, it is because cultures hate competition — especially, if they are losing it. So they pull out crappy non-arguments like: "yeah, but you are so consumerist"...
Unable to mount military attacks, they resort to propaganda, and some — to occasional terrorism. Come on — haven't you ever played Civilization?
So, we are supposed to believe your hazy recollections of Cuba's USSR-assisted past, over the earlier poster's current information, that comes from their mother, who — unlike you and your children — live in Cuba today...
Well, what else can be expected from someone, who thinks "consumerism" is a disease, that can be treated in a hospital?
I'm sure, you were happier in your youth in Cuba, than you are in your middle age — and saddled with "consumerist" children — in Europe. But location has nothing to do with it...