"The truth is that the Space Shuttle is a marvel of engineering"
I think the Space Shuttle is a marvel of Congressional pork barreling, Air Force mission creep, barely held together by the heroic efforts of some sharp engineers, working under hostile management.
Marvel of how not to do engineering if you ask me.
And, oh yeah, for the love of GOD, DON'T investigate other causes of the problem, because it's very important for us to think that it's purely a choice to be fat.
Right.
"Take a moment to train yourself..." Please. You've got to be kidding me.
Re:People are Obese regarless of Income or Geograp
on
Obesity Contagious?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
See, jokes are funny. That's why they call them "jokes".
It's not a question of being fair, it's a question of being productive. It's not as if the energy that North America imports is being "wasted", it's being turned into products and services that are sold around the world.
Yes, it would absolutely be a good idea for North America to be more energy independent. It would absolutely be good to reduce emissions. It is not productive to demonize America.
It depends. If I've got an injured child in the car, and I have to get to the hospital, I'm going to look both ways and gun it. If I'm just heading to the grocery store, I'll chill out.
Similarly, if I have to throw a massive monkey wrench into the economies that make us all able to eat, I'm going to make damn sure I'll solve the problem before I throw that wrench.
If you normalize energy consumption against gross national product, the US does not use a disproportionate amount of energy per unit economic output. The only reason the US has the largest energy utilization, is because it has the largest economy.
It doesn't benefit anybody for the US to shrink the economy.
When China and India become the largest economies, they will be the largest energy consumers. Doesn't it make sense to implement conservation strategies into those developing infrastructures?
Why shouldn't they make money? Particularly since uncensored Google is (as you mention) 90% available? If people see value in the Chinese Google site, it will be used. If they don't, it won't.
Just because Google is making money doesn't make this "evil".
Wow. Who taught your cousin to use a firearm? That's pretty young to equip somebody with deadly force. And I can't think of any other mechanism a small child could use to force anybody to do anything. So, either your cousin is strapped with a nine, or else nobody's forcing you to do anything and you need to grow a spine.
So you value "freedom from control" over "good design". Fair enough. However, assuming that only "suckers" have a different value system is pretty stupid.
Nobody's going to come to your house and take away your computer, dude. Take a deep breath.
The way those rights are expressed are "Congress shall make no law..." and "...shall not be abridged." By phrasing them in the negative, it broadens the rights.
The rights expressed in the Bill of Rights were intended to be interpreted as EXTREMELY broad, and the powers granted to government to be EXTREMELY narrow. Unfortunately, nobody who now rules this country thinks that way.
Like most tools in the kitchen, microwaves are good at some things, and lousy at other things. Knowing how to cook with a microwave is just as much of an art form as knowing how to use a saute pan.
Can you live wiithout one? Absolutely. You can also live without indoor plumbing.
"Google legitimizing political censorship" What? How do you figure?
"people using it are not even aware of what is being censored" Google says they're going to label redacted data as such. Now, if you mean that "You can't read the thing that's being censored to see why it's being censored", well, take that up with the Chinese government.
Google is not going to increase the propaganda powers of the Chinese government. I simply can't fathom why you'd think the Chinese people are so gullible.
Right, because historically, oppressed peoples have had access to world-spanning information networks. Totally plausible.
I don't see how Google's entry into China makes the lot of Chinese people worse. Worst case scenario: Google.ca is useless. Best case scenario: It enables the populace to free themselves.
I'm still trying to figure out why Google is evil here.
"Suppose your country forced Google/Yahoo/Wikipedia/your local ISP to censor what you see. Would you shrug and say "oh, at least we are getting some information" and then let things be?"
No, I'd probably use something else, which is what the Chinese people can do, because you already said that they have access to many other search engines.
I think that the Chinese people need to change the Chinese government, and that Google needs to comply with Chinese law if they want to do business in China. I think Google doing business in China is better for the Chinese people than Google not doing business in China. I think Google's search capabilities will outstrip the Chinese government's censorship capabilities. I think this is a step towards a free Chinese people.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, you can have your huggy bunny utopia...until your neighbor decides to take it from you, and you don't have any way to contest the matter.
So, never mind this research, YOU know the answer. Very well argued.
"The truth is that the Space Shuttle is a marvel of engineering"
I think the Space Shuttle is a marvel of Congressional pork barreling, Air Force mission creep, barely held together by the heroic efforts of some sharp engineers, working under hostile management.
Marvel of how not to do engineering if you ask me.
You forgot the hugs and bunnies.
Your utopia sounds great. Too bad it'll never, ever happen.
And they told us there wasn't going to be an XP Service Pack 3. They just changed the name! Oh yeah, and jacked up the price a couple hundred bucks.
And, oh yeah, for the love of GOD, DON'T investigate other causes of the problem, because it's very important for us to think that it's purely a choice to be fat.
Right.
"Take a moment to train yourself..." Please. You've got to be kidding me.
See, jokes are funny. That's why they call them "jokes".
It's not a question of being fair, it's a question of being productive. It's not as if the energy that North America imports is being "wasted", it's being turned into products and services that are sold around the world.
Yes, it would absolutely be a good idea for North America to be more energy independent. It would absolutely be good to reduce emissions. It is not productive to demonize America.
"Do you risk an accident or play it safe?"
It depends. If I've got an injured child in the car, and I have to get to the hospital, I'm going to look both ways and gun it. If I'm just heading to the grocery store, I'll chill out.
Similarly, if I have to throw a massive monkey wrench into the economies that make us all able to eat, I'm going to make damn sure I'll solve the problem before I throw that wrench.
If you normalize energy consumption against gross national product, the US does not use a disproportionate amount of energy per unit economic output. The only reason the US has the largest energy utilization, is because it has the largest economy.
It doesn't benefit anybody for the US to shrink the economy.
When China and India become the largest economies, they will be the largest energy consumers. Doesn't it make sense to implement conservation strategies into those developing infrastructures?
Why shouldn't they make money? Particularly since uncensored Google is (as you mention) 90% available? If people see value in the Chinese Google site, it will be used. If they don't, it won't.
Just because Google is making money doesn't make this "evil".
Wow. Who taught your cousin to use a firearm? That's pretty young to equip somebody with deadly force. And I can't think of any other mechanism a small child could use to force anybody to do anything. So, either your cousin is strapped with a nine, or else nobody's forcing you to do anything and you need to grow a spine.
Do you know what "hypocrite" means?
You are remarkably bad at punctuation.
You might also note that it was Columbia and Challenger that were destroyed. Discovery is just fine.
"hasn't been any less open"
Come on! You had an option for at least a quintuple negative there, and you totally blew it.
"(they don't say anything about whether the Political Officer is usually armed)"
Wow! They don't say anything about whether or not the Political Officer sodomizes babies before eating them, either! What a shocking revelation!
"Companies are people and teams. Not people. Countries are people. Not presidents. Parties. Committees. "
Uh, what? You want to run that by me again?
So you value "freedom from control" over "good design". Fair enough. However, assuming that only "suckers" have a different value system is pretty stupid.
Nobody's going to come to your house and take away your computer, dude. Take a deep breath.
The way those rights are expressed are "Congress shall make no law..." and "...shall not be abridged." By phrasing them in the negative, it broadens the rights.
The rights expressed in the Bill of Rights were intended to be interpreted as EXTREMELY broad, and the powers granted to government to be EXTREMELY narrow. Unfortunately, nobody who now rules this country thinks that way.
Like most tools in the kitchen, microwaves are good at some things, and lousy at other things. Knowing how to cook with a microwave is just as much of an art form as knowing how to use a saute pan.
Can you live wiithout one? Absolutely. You can also live without indoor plumbing.
I can't read Chinese. I have no idea what that says.
Do you really think that a Chinese person who has access to the Internet doesn't know that the Government is censoring it?
"Google legitimizing political censorship" What? How do you figure?
"people using it are not even aware of what is being censored" Google says they're going to label redacted data as such. Now, if you mean that "You can't read the thing that's being censored to see why it's being censored", well, take that up with the Chinese government.
Google is not going to increase the propaganda powers of the Chinese government. I simply can't fathom why you'd think the Chinese people are so gullible.
Right, because historically, oppressed peoples have had access to world-spanning information networks. Totally plausible.
I don't see how Google's entry into China makes the lot of Chinese people worse. Worst case scenario: Google.ca is useless. Best case scenario: It enables the populace to free themselves.
I'm still trying to figure out why Google is evil here.
I'd prefer him to not be a robber baron.
"Suppose your country forced Google/Yahoo/Wikipedia/your local ISP to censor what you see. Would you shrug and say "oh, at least we are getting some information" and then let things be?"
No, I'd probably use something else, which is what the Chinese people can do, because you already said that they have access to many other search engines.
I think that the Chinese people need to change the Chinese government, and that Google needs to comply with Chinese law if they want to do business in China. I think Google doing business in China is better for the Chinese people than Google not doing business in China. I think Google's search capabilities will outstrip the Chinese government's censorship capabilities. I think this is a step towards a free Chinese people.
So, again...what's your problem?