Without any kind of government persecution, but you're right. There are even exceptions for that, though, when it comes to endangering people or even just being a public nuisance. Heck, copyright is a restriction of free speech.
If you stand up at a city council meeting and just start making fart noises and won't stop, they are going to throw you out, and good riddance. What they can't do is throw you in jail for it.
Goddam, have you ever used a gun before? The reason guns took over the world is that their so simple even an idiot can use them. This same asshole would have never figured out how to build a bomb, and if he did, probably would have killed himself doing it.
Truck attacks are indeed extremely dangerous. Do you think we should do nothing to prevent Truck attacks? Trucks at least are harder to use than guns, more expensive, and are harder to get into schools.
I dunno, the only Republicans who seem to care about Russia are the civil servants and a handful of Senators on the intelligence committee, and it's their job to care. That's not enough to make even one splinter party.
Consciousness seems like no great shakes. Most of our best thinking is done unconsciously. For the most part our consciousness is left playing catch up.
Particles *can* help us figure out how we might have free will. In other words, how could it be that our actions are determined or unpredictable. Some will argue that humans are too large scale for quantum uncertainty to have any effect. Any electrical engineer will tell you, however, that if you amplify a signal enough, you also amplify noise, and the human brain is a very powerful amplifier of tiny signals. It is said that the eye can detect a single photon, that the nose can detect a handful of molecules. How finely balanced are the signals in our brains when we cannot decide between two choices, both equally good? But in the end, we *do* decide.
Such decisions, if they are truly free and unpredictable, cannot be consciously motivated. By their nature they cannot be motivated at all.
I don't think anyone believes RAH was a Nazi sympathizer, but the system of government in SST is fatally flawed. Anyone can enlist in a service, but not anyone can complete service. Severe corporal punishment, and even capital punishment, can be enforced with the thinnest veneer of a trial that has no independence from the chain of command. Despite the promise of universal enlistment, the government has strong control over who gets the franchise.
There are other services than the military, but in a time of constant interstellar war, the military must be bigger and more prestigious than the other services, which means the government will be predominantly run by military and ex-military people. I don't have to point out that such governments aren't futuristic near utopias, but are among the most common form of governments throughout history.
In SST, the success of the government does not seem to rest so much on its form, as on the goodness and incorruptibility of the people running it. That bizarre assumption is so obviously contrary to human experience, and so destructive when relied upon in practice, that the book may be as much a satire as the movie.
That's just ignorance of history. Almost all presidents have stretched their powers. It's simple idiocy to expect any president to rein in their own powers. That's the role of congress and the courts, and the American people.
The question to ask is not whether a president issues too many executive orders. Ask how will he behave should the order be struck down in the courts? A similar question: how would he behave should he lose an election? How far would he go to win an election? If investigated, how far will he go to stop the investigation?
With Trump we already know the answers to some of these questions, and those answers are not encouraging.
Imagine Obama losing to Romney in 2012, but he declares the election a fraud. It would have torn the country apart, because Obama's fans would have believed him. We all know he would not have done that, but Trump has already shown that he's likely to do it in 2020, and was already laying the groundwork in 2016.
CNN is garbage and has been for years, along with every other US news channel. CNN international was good as of a year or two ago, because it competes with real news organizations like the BBC. I don't know if it still is good, and I don't know why the US can't have decent domestic news. It's almost as if intelligent, hard-nosed reporters are blacklisted from TV.
Everyone has a race and sex, and we all have some attitude toward religion. We're all part of all of the protected classes, so your comment doesn't make any sense.
President Trump is a good example of this. He doesn't push for the shutdown or silencing of media organizations that he questions the reporting of.
It's insane that your post get modded insightful. Have you already forgotten his campaign to get football players fired? His threats to Jeff Bezos? His threat to expel Muslims? His incitement of his crowds to violence against reporters and protestors?
And his criticisms of the press are mostly lies, almost as damaging as the threats. He claims they don't cover terrorism that never happened. Or don't cover terrorism that they did cover. That they are "cutting away form him" when they aren't. That they are enemies of the people. That Russian election interference was made up. That the investigation into collusion into Russia is first not happening, then later a witchhunt. That there's no merit to claims he is a sexual predator, that they're all in the tank for Clinton.
That's for Republicans in Congress to work out, not the USPS. I suppose since Trump was treated "better than anyone ever in the history of China", during his recent visit, he's not going to press too hard. Well played, China, well played.
Slashdot Mirror
Without any kind of government persecution, but you're right. There are even exceptions for that, though, when it comes to endangering people or even just being a public nuisance. Heck, copyright is a restriction of free speech.
If you stand up at a city council meeting and just start making fart noises and won't stop, they are going to throw you out, and good riddance. What they can't do is throw you in jail for it.
Goddam, have you ever used a gun before? The reason guns took over the world is that their so simple even an idiot can use them. This same asshole would have never figured out how to build a bomb, and if he did, probably would have killed himself doing it.
Truck attacks are indeed extremely dangerous. Do you think we should do nothing to prevent Truck attacks? Trucks at least are harder to use than guns, more expensive, and are harder to get into schools.
No, but they're a large minority and at the moment they're the only ones with motivation to speak up.
I dunno, the only Republicans who seem to care about Russia are the civil servants and a handful of Senators on the intelligence committee, and it's their job to care. That's not enough to make even one splinter party.
You think animals don't know humans exist?
Every war in the US history has been run by politicians.
We sure wouldn't want to create any divisiveness with foreign powers who want to manipulate our elections.
Consciousness seems like no great shakes. Most of our best thinking is done unconsciously. For the most part our consciousness is left playing catch up.
Particles *can* help us figure out how we might have free will. In other words, how could it be that our actions are determined or unpredictable. Some will argue that humans are too large scale for quantum uncertainty to have any effect. Any electrical engineer will tell you, however, that if you amplify a signal enough, you also amplify noise, and the human brain is a very powerful amplifier of tiny signals. It is said that the eye can detect a single photon, that the nose can detect a handful of molecules. How finely balanced are the signals in our brains when we cannot decide between two choices, both equally good? But in the end, we *do* decide.
Such decisions, if they are truly free and unpredictable, cannot be consciously motivated. By their nature they cannot be motivated at all.
... with some assumptions about how that infinite universe is formed.
Is Betteridge's law always right?
We'll have the answers for you at 11.
I don't think anyone believes RAH was a Nazi sympathizer, but the system of government in SST is fatally flawed. Anyone can enlist in a service, but not anyone can complete service. Severe corporal punishment, and even capital punishment, can be enforced with the thinnest veneer of a trial that has no independence from the chain of command. Despite the promise of universal enlistment, the government has strong control over who gets the franchise.
There are other services than the military, but in a time of constant interstellar war, the military must be bigger and more prestigious than the other services, which means the government will be predominantly run by military and ex-military people. I don't have to point out that such governments aren't futuristic near utopias, but are among the most common form of governments throughout history.
In SST, the success of the government does not seem to rest so much on its form, as on the goodness and incorruptibility of the people running it. That bizarre assumption is so obviously contrary to human experience, and so destructive when relied upon in practice, that the book may be as much a satire as the movie.
That's just ignorance of history. Almost all presidents have stretched their powers. It's simple idiocy to expect any president to rein in their own powers. That's the role of congress and the courts, and the American people.
The question to ask is not whether a president issues too many executive orders. Ask how will he behave should the order be struck down in the courts? A similar question: how would he behave should he lose an election? How far would he go to win an election? If investigated, how far will he go to stop the investigation?
With Trump we already know the answers to some of these questions, and those answers are not encouraging.
Imagine Obama losing to Romney in 2012, but he declares the election a fraud. It would have torn the country apart, because Obama's fans would have believed him. We all know he would not have done that, but Trump has already shown that he's likely to do it in 2020, and was already laying the groundwork in 2016.
Don't you have to complete your enlistment to obtain political power? If so, then anyone can enlist but only those who conform are enfranchised.
hence the popularity of Trump.
CNN is garbage and has been for years, along with every other US news channel. CNN international was good as of a year or two ago, because it competes with real news organizations like the BBC. I don't know if it still is good, and I don't know why the US can't have decent domestic news. It's almost as if intelligent, hard-nosed reporters are blacklisted from TV.
Try not having sex with your wife and see what it does to your marriage.
That equation is wrong. He didn't get it.
So? Do you believe Google has the right to set the tone of the workplace?
It's up to Google to determine which actions are cause for firing, not you.
Everyone has a race and sex, and we all have some attitude toward religion. We're all part of all of the protected classes, so your comment doesn't make any sense.
President Trump is a good example of this. He doesn't push for the shutdown or silencing of media organizations that he questions the reporting of.
It's insane that your post get modded insightful. Have you already forgotten his campaign to get football players fired? His threats to Jeff Bezos? His threat to expel Muslims? His incitement of his crowds to violence against reporters and protestors?
And his criticisms of the press are mostly lies, almost as damaging as the threats. He claims they don't cover terrorism that never happened. Or don't cover terrorism that they did cover. That they are "cutting away form him" when they aren't. That they are enemies of the people. That Russian election interference was made up. That the investigation into collusion into Russia is first not happening, then later a witchhunt. That there's no merit to claims he is a sexual predator, that they're all in the tank for Clinton.
It's not like he proposed a plan of his own.
That's for Republicans in Congress to work out, not the USPS. I suppose since Trump was treated "better than anyone ever in the history of China", during his recent visit, he's not going to press too hard. Well played, China, well played.
That would work, but it's not on offer here.