I'm not from the US. But given Obama promised to close gitmo in his first campaign for President, I'm assuming there's a very good reason why he hasn't done it. Again, I don't know what that reason is. Perhaps someone in Congress can enlighten us.
Well, IANAL, so I can't comment on the various legal complexities. All I know is if he'd been a Russian agent and spilled Russian secrets like this, he'd have found Polonium or Dioxins floating in his soup the next time he went to a Happy Eater. Given the publicity in this case, I very much doubt he'd have been taken to Gitmo.
Ridiculous hyperbole does not do your argument any favours at all. The US has independent courts, jury trials and plenty of activist lawyers any number of whom would absolutely love to make a name for themselves defending this guy. The simple fact of the matter is that Snowden has farted at the US and then run away. He's just a run-of-the-mill traitor in my view, exposing secrets to bolster his ego: "Hey look at me everyone, I worked at the NSA!".
None of these things would have been commercial successes without the business guys and technologists taking them over and exploiting them for profit. There are a few examples of successful scientists and engineers also becoming successful in business, but that's the exception, not the rule.
I don't think oil, gas and coal are subsidised, no. Taxing something less is not the same as subsidising it. Unless you're starting out from the basic assumption that the State owns 100% of production and is benevolent enough to let us keep some of it. Which if you ask me, is not a very Libertarian world view.
You can demand higher and higher pay but unless you also achieve higher and higher productivity, the capital will go elsewhere. Detroit would be a prime example.
Nothing is hidden from you. You have Google. When I wanted to understand what Yang-Mills theory was, I went to Wikipedia. Finding that impossible to understand without knowing what a Gauge Theory was I hit another link. This continued on for some time and now I'm Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University.
Indeed. It's also interesting to note that Einstein's original papers are eminently readable to the Layman, compared to the kind of papers we see in journals today. Perhaps that's due to the complexity of the mathematics now advanced at the bleeding edge, or perhaps it's because journals try to be even more economical with space than they used to be. I don't know.
There are many ways to be clever. Understanding math is just one of them. There are many people I know who are engineers, very good at math, but who's writing is terrible (I don't mean handwriting, I mean use of language in written form).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not from the US. But given Obama promised to close gitmo in his first campaign for President, I'm assuming there's a very good reason why he hasn't done it. Again, I don't know what that reason is. Perhaps someone in Congress can enlighten us.
Well, IANAL, so I can't comment on the various legal complexities. All I know is if he'd been a Russian agent and spilled Russian secrets like this, he'd have found Polonium or Dioxins floating in his soup the next time he went to a Happy Eater. Given the publicity in this case, I very much doubt he'd have been taken to Gitmo.
+1. He's a vainglorious fool, not a Freedom Fighter.
You've been watching too many Bourne movies.
Ridiculous hyperbole does not do your argument any favours at all. The US has independent courts, jury trials and plenty of activist lawyers any number of whom would absolutely love to make a name for themselves defending this guy. The simple fact of the matter is that Snowden has farted at the US and then run away. He's just a run-of-the-mill traitor in my view, exposing secrets to bolster his ego: "Hey look at me everyone, I worked at the NSA!".
None of these things would have been commercial successes without the business guys and technologists taking them over and exploiting them for profit. There are a few examples of successful scientists and engineers also becoming successful in business, but that's the exception, not the rule.
Copy/paste gets me every time.
I'm not sure why you're taking it so personally. Nobody's good at everything.
You're the one being an elitist snob. Buying a book on Amazon is so beneath you and anyone who cares about price and convenience is just so plebian.
Didn't Spinoza work long days grinding lenses to keep a roof over his head? Why are musicians, journalists and writers so damned precious these days?
I don't think I said that, no.
I don't think oil, gas and coal are subsidised, no. Taxing something less is not the same as subsidising it. Unless you're starting out from the basic assumption that the State owns 100% of production and is benevolent enough to let us keep some of it. Which if you ask me, is not a very Libertarian world view.
^ brilliant Ruprecht. Should be +1 all the way. So much love for the shop keeper and not much for the poor old consumer.
You can demand higher and higher pay but unless you also achieve higher and higher productivity, the capital will go elsewhere. Detroit would be a prime example.
No they didn't. The middle class used to be doctors, lawyers and other professionals. Not shop keepers.
I think there's something fundamental you're missing here.
They do communicate effectively, verbally and can get their thoughts down on paper. They just won't be winning the Booker any time soon.
I'll buy the same book more cheaply at Amazon if I can, thank you. I value my pay cheque.
They're not middle class though, are they? I think that's the point.
"Clean energy" jobs require subsidy. 3 other people need jobs elsewhere to pay the taxes for them.
Nothing is hidden from you. You have Google. When I wanted to understand what Yang-Mills theory was, I went to Wikipedia. Finding that impossible to understand without knowing what a Gauge Theory was I hit another link. This continued on for some time and now I'm Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University.
There's no edit button.
+1 for making good use of the word Weltanschaung.
Indeed. It's also interesting to note that Einstein's original papers are eminently readable to the Layman, compared to the kind of papers we see in journals today. Perhaps that's due to the complexity of the mathematics now advanced at the bleeding edge, or perhaps it's because journals try to be even more economical with space than they used to be. I don't know.
There are many ways to be clever. Understanding math is just one of them. There are many people I know who are engineers, very good at math, but who's writing is terrible (I don't mean handwriting, I mean use of language in written form).