The Bible says: You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also;
I'm not a big fan of the Bible, but in this case it is absolutely correct. Pragmatically speaking, revenge and escalation do nothing to solve the problem. In fact, they tend to exacerbate it.
Morally, I also agree with it. The only thing in this world I can control is myself. If I hit back I am also a violent man, and one who seeks revenge and my jaw will still hurt in the morning. I will have gained nothing.
Speaking pragmatically, "timeouts" and "stern talking tos" are oh-so effective, as we've seen with this crop of youth.
The scientific papers on corporal punishment/spanking tend to range from "doesn't hurt or harm the child unless you do it a lot" on the justification side, to "causes significant harm" on the con side. As such, I see no justification for it.
Beyond that, I'd note that juvenile crime has been consistently declining since 1994, thus effectively proving that you were talking out of your ass the whole time.
It's true of most deeply partisan people, no matter what their stance. The Michael Moores and the Michael Savages of the world both like to pretend that one cannot guess their opinion, but the reality is it is possible to quickly determine if somebody is strongly partisan, and if so, to which party they affiliate.
Often it's possible to do this even if the person's only action was to ask questions, giving no statements at all.
It's an unfortunate reality that those partisans nearly always react as you did, claiming there was no possible way to deduce their partisanship, and that the other person must simply be bigoted. You react that way because it is far simpler to accuse me of being judgmental and being an idiot than it is to admit that you've, effectively, drank the Kool-Aid.
Say what you like about me in the future, my discourse with you has allowed me to firmly establish that at least for a few years, there is no point discussing anything with you.
Perhaps in the future you will grow more moderate, recognizing the problems inherent with unflinching party faith. Perhaps you will grow more extreme, continuing your quest to "win" the government, no matter what the cost.
But one thing I'm sure of, it's that there is no point in attempting discourse with you, at least not over the Internet where you can simply brand people "idiot" because they've picked up on your partisan tells.
As for the rest of what you wrote, it's incoherent drivel.
Implicit in your response is your belief that if I do not actively fight for my rights, that you have the right to usurp them.
Additionally implicit is your belief that if 51% of my neighbors disagree with me on some issue, that I should be ignored entirely.
You may take issue with me because I have painted you as a fascist extremist, but the problem is not with my vision of you. The problem is that I'm right. In your world democracy is nothing more than a tool by which powerful people get what they want from the masses, instead of the exact opposite.
It's an unfortunate reality that you aren't completely wrong, but you should be.
Wakko didn't say Karl Rove was evil for disagreeing with him. He said he was evil for manipulating people using one issue, to achieve goals that did not help those people, without ever intending to help on the original issue. I'd argue that he was also evil in that he swore to uphold the constitution, but actually worked very hard to do the exact opposite.
I know that most right-wingers, like yourself, assume that all those who disagree with you are America-hating, idiotic fucks, but the fact is you're wrong.
If you spent less time masturbating to Hannity, Malkin, Savage and O'Reilly, you'd recognize that a majority of Americans do not want one party to dominate, do not want to force ideologies on others, or anything of the sort.
Most Americans want to raise their family, make sure their kids get a decent education and have life a little better than they had it.
It's kind of refreshing to see a Republican just come out and admit that they're fascist.
People call the modern GOP fascist all the time, but it's rare to see one of you actually come out and claim proudly that yes, you are fascist and that you're proud of it.
One more note: I really wish that politicians of all sorts would stop using moral equivalence to justify their actions.
It's sickening how often I see somebody justifying bad actions by saying that the other side has done the same thing, or as is the case in your post, that the other side might want to do the same thing.
This moral equivalence argument has become so common that you even followed it up by calling me a hypocrite for not granting the argument against a pure hypothetical.
Two wrongs don't make a right. They never will.
Again, this is not a party-specific complaint, but the fact that you would make these comments, seemingly sincerely, goes a long way to showing how many people view democracy as nothing more than an "us versus them" game in which one side wins and the other must lose.
This is not a partisan criticism. Democracy is not supposed to be a game in which small groups manipulate large ones into serving their needs.
I understand that there will always be people who play that way, but that doesn't make it right, not even if I agree with their goals. Unfortunately, there will always be people who believe that they have a right (or perhaps a duty) to manipulate and control others to meet their agenda.
I know this will always happen, no matter what system of control is in place and who is in power. But please, don't call this process democracy.
This is a man who had a well-known dream of creating a permanent Republican electoral majority and who really perfected the use of wedge issues to obtain and hold power.
The contention that we should be respectful towards him is absurd. He spent decades working as hard as he could to ensure that everyone's interests were not represented equally or fairly, and helping to destroy the middle ground, to make the "us versus them" vision of politics more deeply entrenched.
Sure, there have been power plays for a long time; Machiavelli wasn't born yesterday, nor was he the originator of all his described tactics. But that said, the fact that something is old does not make it desirable or excusable.
As such, I say "FUCK YOU" to Mr. Rove, and I sincerely hope that one of those dove's that he's planning on killing drops a turd right in his eye.
And a "FUCK YOU" to you too, you righteous asshole. This is a man who perfected the modern use of hate as a political lever. He shall reap what he was sown.
If you've ever worked in Asia, you know that the big challenge is always making sure that your contractors aren't cutting corners. You need oversight to make sure the right parts are used, that the right checks are being done, and that your quality will remain acceptable.
The knockoffs forfeit all of this oversight to save money. They use the cheapest parts and assembly methods, and because they're knockoffs, they don't need to waste money on QC at all.
The same assembly line is perfectly capable of making both great stuff and crap. But more to the point, the knockoffs usually aren't run out of the *same* assembly plant. They're usually run out of a different, cheaper one. One that doesn't bother with any of the expenses that western companies insist on.
Your contention is silly at best. It was only moderated up because it contained a DRM rant, and/. loves those.
Wii offered a new experience... something more active and visceral. And I like that. I've played button-based games for close to three decades. They're fun, but I long ago realized that my enjoyment was no proportionate to the number of pixels on the screen.
The idea of playing Madden in higher resolution holds some appeal, sure. But playing it in the same resolution, but with sports-like movements sounds a lot cooler to me.
And besides, it's not like a Wii is a huge bargain: 1x Wii - $250 3x Controllers - $120 1x Nunchuk - $20 2x Classic Controllers - $40 2x Rechargers - $60 1x Component Cable - $20 ---- and you're over $500 before you even buy some games. Do that, and you're bumping on $1,000 on the first day.
I've long thought that the real solution to all this guide data nonsense was for somebody to start a company and make a deal with TMS to license the data. I guess somebody else had the same idea.
I found a few deficit graphs, but they're pretty awful because they ignore "unbudgeted" spending, such as for the past few years of Iraq/Afghanistan. As such, you look at a graph like:
And you might get the idea that George has been improving his bad behaviour in the past few years, when the reality is that the graph is just misleading.
In this graph, he illustrates what the budget would look like if various Bush policies were revoked (military spending, tax cuts, etc.) and returned to Clinton-era policies. The result is that while the post-9/11 economic problems would have caused a little red ink, we'd be firmly in the black right now, instead of setting new records for red.
I really wish I could say there was some party that tended to actually cut the debt when they have reigns. Unfortunately, the best anybody seems to do is to slow the rate of growth.
I actually think the Clinton years were good not just because of the economy, but also because you had a Democratic president and a Republican congress that was concentrated on giving the impression that they were against wasteful spending.
While there was still plenty of pork in the barrel, the combination meant that Republicans had to go light on pork, because Clinton would squash it, and Clinton had to be reasonable with what he asked for, because Republicans wouldn't deliver otherwise.
The GOPers know that I'm right, know that I've cited facts to back it up, so they just mod it down as troll instead of even attempting to respond.
It's as though they're fully aware that they're causing a catastrophe, but they're so wrapped up in the pointless "us versus them" warfare that they can't see they're destroying themselves as well.
Oh well, thanks GOP moderators, for reproving that you are incapable of making a cogent argument, and that you prefer suppression of speech to engagement and discussion. Bunch of fascist idiots.
In those primaries Republicans went out and voted for these folks. They did so out of a large field.
So yes, Republicans went out, and a majority of them said "we think that these oil company neoconservatives are the best choice to represent Republican values."
This was not a "lesser evil" versus the Democrats, as you contend. You do so only because, like most GOPers, you have an aversion to truth, and a desire to rewrite history.
A typical Republican answer to all of this is that it's not such a big deal, because the economy as a whole is growing, and as such, one should view the debt as a percentage of GDP.
When one does that, it becomes even more clear that the GOP is the big spender of the political parties.
As for the rest of your claims, I'd simply note that since 2000 the debt has grown by 3.5 trillion dollars. For perspective, total federal tax revenues in 2000 were just about 2 trillion dollars.
The Republicans are huge spenders. I know they claim otherwise, but the facts neatly disprove those claims.
Yes, but from that point of view, it's a far sight better than a spoiler vote for a Democrat,
This is only true if you're an idiotic fuck who listens to what the Republican party says, instead of watching what they do.
They increase spending at rates that vastly outpace that of democrats, and they increase deficit spending at a ludicrous rate.
I know some short-sighted people will point out "but they cut my taxes ever so slightly", and that's lovely... but it's only lovely if it's done in the context of something that at least remotely resembles a balanced budget and reasonable spending.
When done while paired with GOP spending, it is simply creating an inevitable catastrophe, and helping to destroy the value of the dollar.
Incorrect, as this may well throw the election to the Democrats.
I fail to see how this is a worse result than handing it to the GOP.
While the GOP pays lip service to Libertarian principles, anybody who has paid attention can clearly see that the GOP tends to spend significantly more money, expand government, and add government power, all at rates that outpace Democrats.
As such, I see it as a feature, not a bug, that a vote for a Libertarian could get a Democrat instead of a GOPer.
How on earth do you track individual power consumption? Putting a meter on each system is hardly practical. I suppose you get away with one on each rack, but many customers (the vast majority in the one data center I worked in) don't rent whole racks.
PDUs that can track per-outlet power distribution, and spew the data over serial or SNMP are widely available, and deployed widely.
The problem is also solved for larger (per-rack) situations.
You can still sell them, but they should include a fairly large disclaimer to the effect of "This is not a CD."
This is not a CD, it's a MegaDisc! MegaDisc gives you the hot new music video, footage from the concert Live in Moscow, and behind the scenes footage showing you a day in the life of the artist!
So don't settle for a CD, when you can have a MegaDisc!
Slashdot Mirror
The Bible says: You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also;
I'm not a big fan of the Bible, but in this case it is absolutely correct. Pragmatically speaking, revenge and escalation do nothing to solve the problem. In fact, they tend to exacerbate it.
Morally, I also agree with it. The only thing in this world I can control is myself. If I hit back I am also a violent man, and one who seeks revenge and my jaw will still hurt in the morning. I will have gained nothing.
Speaking pragmatically, "timeouts" and "stern talking tos" are oh-so effective, as we've seen with this crop of youth.
The scientific papers on corporal punishment/spanking tend to range from "doesn't hurt or harm the child unless you do it a lot" on the justification side, to "causes significant harm" on the con side. As such, I see no justification for it.
Beyond that, I'd note that juvenile crime has been consistently declining since 1994, thus effectively proving that you were talking out of your ass the whole time.
You just don't realize how many tells you have.
It's true of most deeply partisan people, no matter what their stance. The Michael Moores and the Michael Savages of the world both like to pretend that one cannot guess their opinion, but the reality is it is possible to quickly determine if somebody is strongly partisan, and if so, to which party they affiliate.
Often it's possible to do this even if the person's only action was to ask questions, giving no statements at all.
It's an unfortunate reality that those partisans nearly always react as you did, claiming there was no possible way to deduce their partisanship, and that the other person must simply be bigoted. You react that way because it is far simpler to accuse me of being judgmental and being an idiot than it is to admit that you've, effectively, drank the Kool-Aid.
Say what you like about me in the future, my discourse with you has allowed me to firmly establish that at least for a few years, there is no point discussing anything with you.
Perhaps in the future you will grow more moderate, recognizing the problems inherent with unflinching party faith. Perhaps you will grow more extreme, continuing your quest to "win" the government, no matter what the cost.
But one thing I'm sure of, it's that there is no point in attempting discourse with you, at least not over the Internet where you can simply brand people "idiot" because they've picked up on your partisan tells.
As for the rest of what you wrote, it's incoherent drivel.
Implicit in your response is your belief that if I do not actively fight for my rights, that you have the right to usurp them.
Additionally implicit is your belief that if 51% of my neighbors disagree with me on some issue, that I should be ignored entirely.
You may take issue with me because I have painted you as a fascist extremist, but the problem is not with my vision of you. The problem is that I'm right. In your world democracy is nothing more than a tool by which powerful people get what they want from the masses, instead of the exact opposite.
It's an unfortunate reality that you aren't completely wrong, but you should be.
Wakko didn't say Karl Rove was evil for disagreeing with him. He said he was evil for manipulating people using one issue, to achieve goals that did not help those people, without ever intending to help on the original issue. I'd argue that he was also evil in that he swore to uphold the constitution, but actually worked very hard to do the exact opposite.
I know that most right-wingers, like yourself, assume that all those who disagree with you are America-hating, idiotic fucks, but the fact is you're wrong.
If you spent less time masturbating to Hannity, Malkin, Savage and O'Reilly, you'd recognize that a majority of Americans do not want one party to dominate, do not want to force ideologies on others, or anything of the sort.
Most Americans want to raise their family, make sure their kids get a decent education and have life a little better than they had it.
It's kind of refreshing to see a Republican just come out and admit that they're fascist.
People call the modern GOP fascist all the time, but it's rare to see one of you actually come out and claim proudly that yes, you are fascist and that you're proud of it.
Personally, I see no source of pride.
Electoral ads against Bush in 2000 suggested he wanted to roll back the clock to slavery. And that's not hyperbole. Those were the ads.
Please show me an ad, sponsored by a major Democratic group, that says this. I'd like to see it.
One more note: I really wish that politicians of all sorts would stop using moral equivalence to justify their actions.
It's sickening how often I see somebody justifying bad actions by saying that the other side has done the same thing, or as is the case in your post, that the other side might want to do the same thing.
This moral equivalence argument has become so common that you even followed it up by calling me a hypocrite for not granting the argument against a pure hypothetical.
Two wrongs don't make a right. They never will.
Again, this is not a party-specific complaint, but the fact that you would make these comments, seemingly sincerely, goes a long way to showing how many people view democracy as nothing more than an "us versus them" game in which one side wins and the other must lose.
That's called democracy.
This is not a partisan criticism. Democracy is not supposed to be a game in which small groups manipulate large ones into serving their needs.
I understand that there will always be people who play that way, but that doesn't make it right, not even if I agree with their goals. Unfortunately, there will always be people who believe that they have a right (or perhaps a duty) to manipulate and control others to meet their agenda.
I know this will always happen, no matter what system of control is in place and who is in power. But please, don't call this process democracy.
This is a man who had a well-known dream of creating a permanent Republican electoral majority and who really perfected the use of wedge issues to obtain and hold power.
The contention that we should be respectful towards him is absurd. He spent decades working as hard as he could to ensure that everyone's interests were not represented equally or fairly, and helping to destroy the middle ground, to make the "us versus them" vision of politics more deeply entrenched.
Sure, there have been power plays for a long time; Machiavelli wasn't born yesterday, nor was he the originator of all his described tactics. But that said, the fact that something is old does not make it desirable or excusable.
As such, I say "FUCK YOU" to Mr. Rove, and I sincerely hope that one of those dove's that he's planning on killing drops a turd right in his eye.
And a "FUCK YOU" to you too, you righteous asshole. This is a man who perfected the modern use of hate as a political lever. He shall reap what he was sown.
I did nearly the same thing, except I checked off 'Masturbation' instead of 'Other'.
Nice hand, sir.
A company is trying to go after someone responsible for theft of corporate secrets (a felony, BTW).
Misappropriation of trade secrets is not necessarily a felony.
And last I checked, companies aren't responsible for finding and convicting criminal offenders.
If you've ever worked in Asia, you know that the big challenge is always making sure that your contractors aren't cutting corners. You need oversight to make sure the right parts are used, that the right checks are being done, and that your quality will remain acceptable.
/. loves those.
The knockoffs forfeit all of this oversight to save money. They use the cheapest parts and assembly methods, and because they're knockoffs, they don't need to waste money on QC at all.
The same assembly line is perfectly capable of making both great stuff and crap. But more to the point, the knockoffs usually aren't run out of the *same* assembly plant. They're usually run out of a different, cheaper one. One that doesn't bother with any of the expenses that western companies insist on.
Your contention is silly at best. It was only moderated up because it contained a DRM rant, and
Now the quality argument has been eroded away as well, since yes, the copies are made in cheap sweatshops in China. Guess what? SO ARE THE ORIGINALS!
Quality is not primarily determined by the location or pay of the assembly plant floor.
I can afford a PS3, but I bought a Wii instead.
Wii offered a new experience... something more active and visceral. And I like that. I've played button-based games for close to three decades. They're fun, but I long ago realized that my enjoyment was no proportionate to the number of pixels on the screen.
The idea of playing Madden in higher resolution holds some appeal, sure. But playing it in the same resolution, but with sports-like movements sounds a lot cooler to me.
And besides, it's not like a Wii is a huge bargain:
1x Wii - $250
3x Controllers - $120
1x Nunchuk - $20
2x Classic Controllers - $40
2x Rechargers - $60
1x Component Cable - $20
----
and you're over $500 before you even buy some games. Do that, and you're bumping on $1,000 on the first day.
Glad to see somebody is giving it a shot.
I've long thought that the real solution to all this guide data nonsense was for somebody to start a company and make a deal with TMS to license the data. I guess somebody else had the same idea.
Best luck to them!
Moderators: Interesting and Insightful are not synonyms for Inaccurate and Invented.
I found a few deficit graphs, but they're pretty awful because they ignore "unbudgeted" spending, such as for the past few years of Iraq/Afghanistan. As such, you look at a graph like:
i ty4.jpg
http://www.uuforum.org/Images/deficit.gif
And you might get the idea that George has been improving his bad behaviour in the past few years, when the reality is that the graph is just misleading.
Angry Bear did an interesting graph here:
http://angrybear.blogspot.com/deficit_responsibil
In this graph, he illustrates what the budget would look like if various Bush policies were revoked (military spending, tax cuts, etc.) and returned to Clinton-era policies. The result is that while the post-9/11 economic problems would have caused a little red ink, we'd be firmly in the black right now, instead of setting new records for red.
I really wish I could say there was some party that tended to actually cut the debt when they have reigns. Unfortunately, the best anybody seems to do is to slow the rate of growth.
I actually think the Clinton years were good not just because of the economy, but also because you had a Democratic president and a Republican congress that was concentrated on giving the impression that they were against wasteful spending.
While there was still plenty of pork in the barrel, the combination meant that Republicans had to go light on pork, because Clinton would squash it, and Clinton had to be reasonable with what he asked for, because Republicans wouldn't deliver otherwise.
The moderation on this post is great.
The GOPers know that I'm right, know that I've cited facts to back it up, so they just mod it down as troll instead of even attempting to respond.
It's as though they're fully aware that they're causing a catastrophe, but they're so wrapped up in the pointless "us versus them" warfare that they can't see they're destroying themselves as well.
Oh well, thanks GOP moderators, for reproving that you are incapable of making a cogent argument, and that you prefer suppression of speech to engagement and discussion. Bunch of fascist idiots.
There are things called primaries.
In those primaries Republicans went out and voted for these folks. They did so out of a large field.
So yes, Republicans went out, and a majority of them said "we think that these oil company neoconservatives are the best choice to represent Republican values."
This was not a "lesser evil" versus the Democrats, as you contend. You do so only because, like most GOPers, you have an aversion to truth, and a desire to rewrite history.
Please don't interpret this as a defense of the Republican Party, but you have made this claim twice now without citing a source to back it up.
m age001.jpg
g
m age002.jpg
Here is a graph of the national debt by year, with the Presidents helpfully color coded.
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/USDebt_files/i
It shows that under Republican rule the debt not only tends to increase, but so does the rate of growth of the debt.
If you view the graphic in log scale, it flattens some of the current spending, but it also clearly shows that the debt grows faster under GOP rule.
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/us_debt_log.pn
A typical Republican answer to all of this is that it's not such a big deal, because the economy as a whole is growing, and as such, one should view the debt as a percentage of GDP.
http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/USDebt_files/i
When one does that, it becomes even more clear that the GOP is the big spender of the political parties.
As for the rest of your claims, I'd simply note that since 2000 the debt has grown by 3.5 trillion dollars. For perspective, total federal tax revenues in 2000 were just about 2 trillion dollars.
The Republicans are huge spenders. I know they claim otherwise, but the facts neatly disprove those claims.
Don't mistake the current crop of oil-industry idiots for the majority of Republicans.
It required a majority of Republicans to support these guys, and they did it several times in a row.
As such, I think it's you who is deceiving yourself.
Yes, but from that point of view, it's a far sight better than a spoiler vote for a Democrat,
This is only true if you're an idiotic fuck who listens to what the Republican party says, instead of watching what they do.
They increase spending at rates that vastly outpace that of democrats, and they increase deficit spending at a ludicrous rate.
I know some short-sighted people will point out "but they cut my taxes ever so slightly", and that's lovely... but it's only lovely if it's done in the context of something that at least remotely resembles a balanced budget and reasonable spending.
When done while paired with GOP spending, it is simply creating an inevitable catastrophe, and helping to destroy the value of the dollar.
Only a fool would love that outcome.
Incorrect, as this may well throw the election to the Democrats.
I fail to see how this is a worse result than handing it to the GOP.
While the GOP pays lip service to Libertarian principles, anybody who has paid attention can clearly see that the GOP tends to spend significantly more money, expand government, and add government power, all at rates that outpace Democrats.
As such, I see it as a feature, not a bug, that a vote for a Libertarian could get a Democrat instead of a GOPer.
How on earth do you track individual power consumption? Putting a meter on each system is hardly practical. I suppose you get away with one on each rack, but many customers (the vast majority in the one data center I worked in) don't rent whole racks.
PDUs that can track per-outlet power distribution, and spew the data over serial or SNMP are widely available, and deployed widely.
The problem is also solved for larger (per-rack) situations.
You can still sell them, but they should include a fairly large disclaimer to the effect of "This is not a CD."
This is not a CD, it's a MegaDisc! MegaDisc gives you the hot new music video, footage from the concert Live in Moscow, and behind the scenes footage showing you a day in the life of the artist!
So don't settle for a CD, when you can have a MegaDisc!