Nye claims no one is living in Antarctica, because of its climate. However, as my post states (which you did not read), no one *can* live there. No one can set up a mining colony, or start building permanent homes. No one. At all. International treaties prohibit it.
I also mention that the North has many many people in it. People living in complete darkness for months of the year. People living at -50C for months of the year. People living where there is no way to get food, for much of the year. The North has all of the "problems" that Nye stated about the South Pole. Yet?
People live there. Many, many, many people.
And your response? Why, to ignore this information.
First.. Antarctica? People don't live there because of *treaties*.
Can you mine in Antarctica, without the international community stopping you? What about setting up a mining community?
You know there's loads of fish there, yes? What else do the penguins eat?
No, the reason people don't live in Antarctica -- is because there are no jobs, nor the possibility of a job (even self employed) there.
Look at the *North* Pole. There are resources. And there are loads of people living there. For research, for hunting, for fishing, and for mining/resources.
This is more like Mars.
If there is work there (and riches to be made!), people will go. Typically young men, which (according to everything -- including insurance company stats and rates for drivers) are more prone to taking risk. And who will follow? Why, the ladies! Hoping to land a man who struck it rich!
People will go. People travelled to the Yukon, where (guess what) you can't grow food, you have to import everything, and may as well be the South Pole before gold was discovered.
Nye? Make a real comparison. Not one where international treaties prevent resource exploitation.
Now that no one wants cableTV any more, cable companies are left with massive infrastructure for a smaller customer base. For example, equipment to distribute TV signals over the wire, to replace TV commercials (cable companies do that in Canada, at least), and to pay for the product itself.
Compliance with FCC regs for TV rebroadcasting, blackouts for specific areas, endless TV-only 'things to manage, support, and do'. Heck, even 'public access channels'.
With a constant reduction in sales on that side, there's going to be overcapacity in manpower and tech/infrastructure for quite some time.
Thing is, bandwidth is cheap, cheap, CHEAP! So is providing it. Just acting as a pipe though, doesn't allow for them to gouge you on 100 other things. It doesn't provide the same profit. Realistically, they could provide gigabit speeds for $20 per month, and STILL make a profit -- but, that profit would be very slim compared to all those packages and the rape that comes with them.
In a competitive world, you'd (supposedly) have companies competing... but that doesn't happen most of the time with TV or Internet in most markets.
So, I suspect internet is now subsudizing TV. And these complaints are just more blather and bullshit. They've probably also signed poorly crafted deals, where they perhaps pay $x per month for each channel, with a minor change per subscriber. A plus in the old days, a minus now.
And of course most of these clowns are ALSO content providers. Which means they have to support all their specialty channels, but now with fewer and fewer people.
Here's the amusing thing though.
They think "HEEEY, they don't buy what we're selling.. well, we'll MAKE them buy it, but charging them more for something COMPLETELY UNRELATED!"
Internet != TV. Yet they think raising the price on Internet is the way to go.
No!
Raise the price on TV/CABLE if it is more expensive. Then people paying for a failing service, will leave.. oh wait.
So I guess they decided to tax others to support their failing TV business.
Thing is -- different usages build different areas of muscles. And the brain learns different types of movements.
When growing up, one summer I used to bike 40km to work at age 16. 80km round trip. I'd work a physical job for a full shift, and return. And growing up in the country, overall I was in fairly good shape. Lots and lots of outdoor/physical chores.
And clearly, one is in excellent shape when doing the above 5 days a week.
Anyhow, I took up water skying. For the first week, I could barely *stand* after a mere 15 minutes. My legs would shake. Part of my leg muscles were not even used in bicycling, walking, and whatever else I did.
People talk about 'swimmer's bodies' and all that, but there is truth to it. Different activities use different muscles, and using a pen/pencil is the same sort of thing. And then, on top of that, the brain needs to learn the specific / fine motions akin to that specific action.
I'm positive that gross hand/eye coordination is improved with playing games. And typing. But, if you've never typed? All the video game playing in the world, won't provide you with the strength and coordination to make all those repetitive typing movements. Your body still needs training.
What on Earth are you talking about? I said nothing about indoor versus outdoor. Nada. Zip. Zero.
You're so far out in left field, that I suggest you go and read up on the topic -- in depth. Sunlight and blue sky are paramount EARLY in the morning. As in, as close to waking as possible.
You can find dozens of studies to this effect with a simply google search. It's why people say smartphones are BAD at night. Why lights are bad at night. Why you should sleep in the dark. Why red light is better than other light, if you need light late at night. The list goes on and on, but you're out in left field blathering on about people being inside or outside, or economic impact.
It's *timing*. Did I mention timing? Also, it's the TIMING.
And FYI, yes being inside isn't good enough... so go and READ instead of blathering on here.
You've responded to me, yet I don't see how your comment applies to what I've said in my post. I didn't advocate changing anything, or modifying anything.
My comment about "if we keep it" was meant to stress that we shouldn't *change* it so that there is more light at night. That's the post I was responding to..
In terms of "go to bed when the sun is shining", all I said is that it's supposedly good to have sunlight + the blue sky in the morning. To sync things up. This doesn't mean you have to watch the sun rise, or anything silly like that. Only that the sun HAS risen by the time most people go to work.
Everyone speaks of circadian rhythms, and how important they are. Part of that? Is sunlight, blue skies in the morning. *That* supposedly syncs things up.
So while I really don't care that much about the time zone changing, if people are going to want 'more sun at night', that's really the wrong reason to do it today. If we keep it, it should be so that the sun appears in the morning. That way, when the majority of people are in transit to work?
They get sunlight, blue skies in their eyes.
But really, all this blather about it hurting animals and man? Welp, certainly if it 'hurts' man, greater suicides, deaths due to all the reasons I've read about -- then I say this...
Are we going to start receiving hazard pay, every time we travel to a new timezone for work? Because that's the same, yes? Even 1 hour off, hurts humans! Can *kill*! If it can kill, then traveling for work is sort of like taking up smoking, because the boss demands it -- yes?
Yet why aren't scientists and others warning, screaming, yelling at the top of their lungs how DANGEROUS time zone travel is?
Welp, I can only conclude that there is no agenda of people wanting to kill off DST, and coming up with silly excuses to do so.
People want DST gone? Fine, I'll listen. People want to claim it's killing, harming people? THEN IT APPLIES IN ALL CASES, have some damned sense!
I'd imagine every CFO, and finance type that reads financial rags professionally -- not as a layman (such as the poster above, and you), knows that many regions in the world don't have reporting requirements like US firms / markets do.
China is just one.
I don't need something 'more concrete' to state what I stated.. but, I find it incredibly amusing that when my initial comment was about the sheer numbers of people that use Android devices, Apple fanbois run and shout and start blathering on about profits.
In terms of search? Google pays everyone to add them as a search as a default. Browsers, apps in cars, you name it. It'd be remarkable if Google didn't pay someone for that.
As if profits mean that somehow the iphone must therefore be technically superior. Wow, what a great argument for technical superiority, or user choice. Not numbers of units sold. Not types of phones used. Nope, profit.
If you look at the high end Android smartphone market, it too eclipses iphone sales. People *prefer* Android.
Apple hardware is very much is second place... by a VERY long margin.
Android is a resounding success, and people buying Android devices are -- guess what? Choosing NOT to buy Apple products.
Obviously there is going to be some back and forth of ideas, but if someone at Google thinks that Android needs to 'be more like Apple', well.. the sales very much don't warrant that. If people wanted a 'notch', they'd buy an Apple device...
Literally, we don't need more coding languages than we have fingers on the hand. There's simply no need. It's just plain silly.
The only real POINT of a vast majority of these languages is:
- develop your own coding language - push and grow that language, with loads of PR - gain recognition, and fame... and, a better life (money, job, etc) - sell books
Every year or so, I'll notice a 'new up and coming language'. And, as a consultant I constantly watch job boards for contract work -- even if working. You need to ALWAYS look for the next job.
More than once, I've noticed job postings for jobs that DO NOT EXIST. Literally, non-existent, fake jobs -- pointing at fake companies. The first few times it happens, you don't notice it as it is often months or at least weeks apart. However, after a while you notice the same types of postings, the same 'fakeness'.
And then you notice that invariably? These fake job postings are touting the 'next big language'.
Job requirement... "NEW LANGUAGE $y required!"
Yup. Now, when people run scripts over job postings, they see a large uptick in the language! And new coders? See such posts and think "Ah, I should learn $y!"
I'm utterly convinced that 90% of the new languages are created entirely for monetization. Nothing is being 'solved'.
Because, there are SO FUCKING MANY OF THEM, that it's ABSURD.
If even.00001% was put into fixing existing languages, we'd be in a bloody utopia.
Someone here said that they were sick of 'rust' fanbois. Guess what. There aren't any.
It's all automated bots on twitter, facebook, and more creating that false sense of 'fan'.
The dev model used to be "Steve will yell at you, fire you, berate you, or otherwise ensure that you didn't fuck up constantly".
That's over with, good or bad.
The new dev model clearly isn't up to snuff, so just pausing -- stopping new development, won't work. The entire development model must be fixed, and quite honestly some people don't produce, or produce well, without someone looking over their shoulder and yelling.
NOTE: if you take objection to that statement, then you're likely 'part of the non-producers'. Good devs exist, a whole boat load of them, but it only takes one dev claiming to properly test, follow coding guidelines, and 'being a prick' to sour a whole team.
It's easy to manually edit photos, if you have your own photo lab and know how...
And we're not talking about adding someone into the scene, or anything large scale -- just adding a bit of length to the top of the 1. I bet his high school / whatever had a photo lab, and I bet he took the pic in black and white even.
Well... we're talking late 1970s here. TVs surely could have lots of variance. Most even had vhold and lots of other such knob adjustments, and I think the set I played the 2600 on first, even had tubes!
I agree it doesn't seem likely -- but, I don't think it's even remotely impossible for a set to get a sync on an off signal here...
Also -- many of such obsessive types MEAN WELL. They see short term, not long term, and it PAINS them that those that they know are guilty, might get off. Even for a second. Their risk assessments are also way out of wack, seeing small issues as MAJOR HOLY HELL! issues, where the entire planet will explode because one person got away.
In such a scenario, tossing the bill of rights, ignoring or destroying individual rights is 100% secondary to the fact that someone GOT AWAY WITH IT! In their mind, they're helping... because the system is utterly and completely broken if even one person gets away stealing a cookie crumb.
Lots of exaggeration above, but the personality type is valid.
Interestingly, I've heard that cops which have served in the military, and seen first hand what a dictatorship can be like -- often forge a different opinion on rights...
In the old days, people didn't use the phone or mail to communicate illegal intent or ideas. At least not even the dumbest of crooks.
Which left voice. In person.
Yet astonishingly, people were caught for all manner of illegal acts. Again and again, courts were full of crooks in trial -- and yes, prisons had people in them.
Now fast forward. Suddenly, it's only possible to catch crooks with encryption. Eh? What? Say again?
It's all about dollars. About the big buckaroo. About how much you spend on law enforcement, how much you pay/spend in resources for informants, how many undercover cops you have. In short, it's about exchanging liberty and freedom for cost.
I don't see the issue. Human life isn't any more magical than.. life.
I get mice in the house, I kill them. And before you get all weepy eyed, and city-dweller outraged, read up on the hantavirus... and it is 100% confirmed in this area. Live capture and release would make me a monster, anyone with the hantavirus has more than a 50% chance of death.
My point? I kill mice. And an unborn fetus has fewer neurons, less brain power, is less 'aware' than a mouse for many, many months after conception.
Lots of people eat meat, too.. you may or may not, but my point is that if I'm going to kill a cow to eat, why should I care about someone killing a baby that won't be cared for properly?
All of this pro-life.. ALL of it, every single bit, is founded on the concept that "human babies are special". I kill the babies of other animals all the time, I kill things to eat, and so there is zero difference killing a fetus.
The only way you can logically deviate from this argument, is if you somehow assign 'specialness' to a human fetus.
So, what's so special? A soul? A divine prerogative? It's cuter? You don't like people fucking and making mistakes?
I'll give you a counter here. Let's say you close down all abortion. That means that the people that are least able to control themselves? Are going to have more kids, with less self-control.
Yet, if you allow abortion? People with zero self control no longer multiply without abandon. Meaning, the species may have a hope in hell of having restraint.
Slashdot Mirror
Countries?
Where did I mention a country?
Countries don't tend to do oil exploration. Or search for resources, typically that's private enterprise.
What is it with all these troll like responses? I mention companies setting up mining towns, and you respond with "countries".
Hello Mr "I don't read" walterbyrd.
Nye claims no one is living in Antarctica, because of its climate. However, as my post states (which you did not read), no one *can* live there. No one can set up a mining colony, or start building permanent homes. No one. At all. International treaties prohibit it.
I also mention that the North has many many people in it. People living in complete darkness for months of the year. People living at -50C for months of the year. People living where there is no way to get food, for much of the year. The North has all of the "problems" that Nye stated about the South Pole. Yet?
People live there. Many, many, many people.
And your response? Why, to ignore this information.
Great response.
What an absurd comparison.
First.. Antarctica? People don't live there because of *treaties*.
Can you mine in Antarctica, without the international community stopping you? What about setting up a mining community?
You know there's loads of fish there, yes? What else do the penguins eat?
No, the reason people don't live in Antarctica -- is because there are no jobs, nor the possibility of a job (even self employed) there.
Look at the *North* Pole. There are resources. And there are loads of people living there. For research, for hunting, for fishing, and for mining/resources.
This is more like Mars.
If there is work there (and riches to be made!), people will go. Typically young men, which (according to everything -- including insurance company stats and rates for drivers) are more prone to taking risk. And who will follow? Why, the ladies! Hoping to land a man who struck it rich!
People will go. People travelled to the Yukon, where (guess what) you can't grow food, you have to import everything, and may as well be the South Pole before gold was discovered.
Nye? Make a real comparison. Not one where international treaties prevent resource exploitation.
It's the other way around, actually.
Now that no one wants cableTV any more, cable companies are left with massive infrastructure for a smaller customer base. For example, equipment to distribute TV signals over the wire, to replace TV commercials (cable companies do that in Canada, at least), and to pay for the product itself.
Compliance with FCC regs for TV rebroadcasting, blackouts for specific areas, endless TV-only 'things to manage, support, and do'. Heck, even 'public access channels'.
With a constant reduction in sales on that side, there's going to be overcapacity in manpower and tech/infrastructure for quite some time.
Thing is, bandwidth is cheap, cheap, CHEAP! So is providing it. Just acting as a pipe though, doesn't allow for them to gouge you on 100 other things. It doesn't provide the same profit. Realistically, they could provide gigabit speeds for $20 per month, and STILL make a profit -- but, that profit would be very slim compared to all those packages and the rape that comes with them.
In a competitive world, you'd (supposedly) have companies competing... but that doesn't happen most of the time with TV or Internet in most markets.
So, I suspect internet is now subsudizing TV. And these complaints are just more blather and bullshit. They've probably also signed poorly crafted deals, where they perhaps pay $x per month for each channel, with a minor change per subscriber. A plus in the old days, a minus now.
And of course most of these clowns are ALSO content providers. Which means they have to support all their specialty channels, but now with fewer and fewer people.
Here's the amusing thing though.
They think "HEEEY, they don't buy what we're selling.. well, we'll MAKE them buy it, but charging them more for something COMPLETELY UNRELATED!"
Internet != TV. Yet they think raising the price on Internet is the way to go.
No!
Raise the price on TV/CABLE if it is more expensive. Then people paying for a failing service, will leave.. oh wait.
So I guess they decided to tax others to support their failing TV business.
So the companies with their own search engines ranked first? Wow, a shocker!
Better to divide by zero, than divide infinity. At least my brain won't explode.
Imagine if 20 countries decided to summon him. Or 100.
It's not even a demand of any sort. Just a request.
It would be silly for him to go to the UK. I think the fact that he sent anyone, was a nice gesture.
NOTE: I hate facebook, but let's be real here.
Thing is -- different usages build different areas of muscles. And the brain learns different types of movements.
When growing up, one summer I used to bike 40km to work at age 16. 80km round trip. I'd work a physical job for a full shift, and return. And growing up in the country, overall I was in fairly good shape. Lots and lots of outdoor/physical chores.
And clearly, one is in excellent shape when doing the above 5 days a week.
Anyhow, I took up water skying. For the first week, I could barely *stand* after a mere 15 minutes. My legs would shake. Part of my leg muscles were not even used in bicycling, walking, and whatever else I did.
People talk about 'swimmer's bodies' and all that, but there is truth to it. Different activities use different muscles, and using a pen/pencil is the same sort of thing. And then, on top of that, the brain needs to learn the specific / fine motions akin to that specific action.
I'm positive that gross hand/eye coordination is improved with playing games. And typing. But, if you've never typed? All the video game playing in the world, won't provide you with the strength and coordination to make all those repetitive typing movements. Your body still needs training.
What on Earth are you talking about? I said nothing about indoor versus outdoor. Nada. Zip. Zero.
You're so far out in left field, that I suggest you go and read up on the topic -- in depth. Sunlight and blue sky are paramount EARLY in the morning. As in, as close to waking as possible.
You can find dozens of studies to this effect with a simply google search. It's why people say smartphones are BAD at night. Why lights are bad at night. Why you should sleep in the dark. Why red light is better than other light, if you need light late at night. The list goes on and on, but you're out in left field blathering on about people being inside or outside, or economic impact.
It's *timing*. Did I mention timing? Also, it's the TIMING.
And FYI, yes being inside isn't good enough... so go and READ instead of blathering on here.
Why? Really? My post says precisely why. Circadian rhythms.
You've responded to me, yet I don't see how your comment applies to what I've said in my post. I didn't advocate changing anything, or modifying anything.
My comment about "if we keep it" was meant to stress that we shouldn't *change* it so that there is more light at night. That's the post I was responding to..
In terms of "go to bed when the sun is shining", all I said is that it's supposedly good to have sunlight + the blue sky in the morning. To sync things up. This doesn't mean you have to watch the sun rise, or anything silly like that. Only that the sun HAS risen by the time most people go to work.
Everyone speaks of circadian rhythms, and how important they are. Part of that? Is sunlight, blue skies in the morning. *That* supposedly syncs things up.
So while I really don't care that much about the time zone changing, if people are going to want 'more sun at night', that's really the wrong reason to do it today. If we keep it, it should be so that the sun appears in the morning. That way, when the majority of people are in transit to work?
They get sunlight, blue skies in their eyes.
But really, all this blather about it hurting animals and man? Welp, certainly if it 'hurts' man, greater suicides, deaths due to all the reasons I've read about -- then I say this...
Are we going to start receiving hazard pay, every time we travel to a new timezone for work? Because that's the same, yes? Even 1 hour off, hurts humans! Can *kill*! If it can kill, then traveling for work is sort of like taking up smoking, because the boss demands it -- yes?
Yet why aren't scientists and others warning, screaming, yelling at the top of their lungs how DANGEROUS time zone travel is?
Welp, I can only conclude that there is no agenda of people wanting to kill off DST, and coming up with silly excuses to do so.
People want DST gone? Fine, I'll listen. People want to claim it's killing, harming people? THEN IT APPLIES IN ALL CASES, have some damned sense!
I'd imagine every CFO, and finance type that reads financial rags professionally -- not as a layman (such as the poster above, and you), knows that many regions in the world don't have reporting requirements like US firms / markets do.
China is just one.
I don't need something 'more concrete' to state what I stated.. but, I find it incredibly amusing that when my initial comment was about the sheer numbers of people that use Android devices, Apple fanbois run and shout and start blathering on about profits.
In terms of search? Google pays everyone to add them as a search as a default. Browsers, apps in cars, you name it. It'd be remarkable if Google didn't pay someone for that.
As if profits mean that somehow the iphone must therefore be technically superior. Wow, what a great argument for technical superiority, or user choice. Not numbers of units sold. Not types of phones used. Nope, profit.
If you look at the high end Android smartphone market, it too eclipses iphone sales. People *prefer* Android.
Get over it.
Well, quite a few smartphone manufacturers don't actually provide revenue/profit information. Chinese companies? Nope.
What you're reading are glorified press releases, otherwise you'd see that mentioned clearly.
Apple is very much in second place, if you look at the profits of the ENTIRE Android ecosystem. Everyone that makes Android devices.
And you need to do that, because we're discussing 'phone usage/purchase' numbers' not 'single company profits'.
It's the same reason that the PC market has far larger profits than Apple. Because it's so huge. Massive.
Apple hardware is very much is second place... by a VERY long margin.
Android is a resounding success, and people buying Android devices are -- guess what? Choosing NOT to buy Apple products.
Obviously there is going to be some back and forth of ideas, but if someone at Google thinks that Android needs to 'be more like Apple', well.. the sales very much don't warrant that. If people wanted a 'notch', they'd buy an Apple device...
It's whatever happens when political types get involved in making technical decisions.
Absolute absurdity.
Literally, we don't need more coding languages than we have fingers on the hand. There's simply no need. It's just plain silly.
The only real POINT of a vast majority of these languages is:
- develop your own coding language
- push and grow that language, with loads of PR
- gain recognition, and fame... and, a better life (money, job, etc)
- sell books
Every year or so, I'll notice a 'new up and coming language'. And, as a consultant I constantly watch job boards for contract work -- even if working. You need to ALWAYS look for the next job.
More than once, I've noticed job postings for jobs that DO NOT EXIST. Literally, non-existent, fake jobs -- pointing at fake companies. The first few times it happens, you don't notice it as it is often months or at least weeks apart. However, after a while you notice the same types of postings, the same 'fakeness'.
And then you notice that invariably? These fake job postings are touting the 'next big language'.
Job requirement... "NEW LANGUAGE $y required!"
Yup. Now, when people run scripts over job postings, they see a large uptick in the language! And new coders? See such posts and think "Ah, I should learn $y!"
I'm utterly convinced that 90% of the new languages are created entirely for monetization. Nothing is being 'solved'.
Because, there are SO FUCKING MANY OF THEM, that it's ABSURD.
If even .00001% was put into fixing existing languages, we'd be in a bloody utopia.
Someone here said that they were sick of 'rust' fanbois. Guess what. There aren't any.
It's all automated bots on twitter, facebook, and more creating that false sense of 'fan'.
The dev model used to be "Steve will yell at you, fire you, berate you, or otherwise ensure that you didn't fuck up constantly".
That's over with, good or bad.
The new dev model clearly isn't up to snuff, so just pausing -- stopping new development, won't work. The entire development model must be fixed, and quite honestly some people don't produce, or produce well, without someone looking over their shoulder and yelling.
NOTE: if you take objection to that statement, then you're likely 'part of the non-producers'. Good devs exist, a whole boat load of them, but it only takes one dev claiming to properly test, follow coding guidelines, and 'being a prick' to sour a whole team.
Sure, the CRT yes. But, I mean vacuum tubes as opposed to semiconductors....
It's easy to manually edit photos, if you have your own photo lab and know how...
And we're not talking about adding someone into the scene, or anything large scale -- just adding a bit of length to the top of the 1. I bet his high school / whatever had a photo lab, and I bet he took the pic in black and white even.
Well... we're talking late 1970s here. TVs surely could have lots of variance. Most even had vhold and lots of other such knob adjustments, and I think the set I played the 2600 on first, even had tubes!
I agree it doesn't seem likely -- but, I don't think it's even remotely impossible for a set to get a sync on an off signal here...
Also -- many of such obsessive types MEAN WELL. They see short term, not long term, and it PAINS them that those that they know are guilty, might get off. Even for a second. Their risk assessments are also way out of wack, seeing small issues as MAJOR HOLY HELL! issues, where the entire planet will explode because one person got away.
In such a scenario, tossing the bill of rights, ignoring or destroying individual rights is 100% secondary to the fact that someone GOT AWAY WITH IT! In their mind, they're helping... because the system is utterly and completely broken if even one person gets away stealing a cookie crumb.
Lots of exaggeration above, but the personality type is valid.
Interestingly, I've heard that cops which have served in the military, and seen first hand what a dictatorship can be like -- often forge a different opinion on rights...
In the old days, people didn't use the phone or mail to communicate illegal intent or ideas. At least not even the dumbest of crooks.
Which left voice. In person.
Yet astonishingly, people were caught for all manner of illegal acts. Again and again, courts were full of crooks in trial -- and yes, prisons had people in them.
Now fast forward. Suddenly, it's only possible to catch crooks with encryption. Eh? What? Say again?
It's all about dollars. About the big buckaroo. About how much you spend on law enforcement, how much you pay/spend in resources for informants, how many undercover cops you have. In short, it's about exchanging liberty and freedom for cost.
Nothing else. Nothing else at all.
I don't see the issue. Human life isn't any more magical than .. life.
I get mice in the house, I kill them. And before you get all weepy eyed, and city-dweller outraged, read up on the hantavirus... and it is 100% confirmed in this area. Live capture and release would make me a monster, anyone with the hantavirus has more than a 50% chance of death.
My point? I kill mice. And an unborn fetus has fewer neurons, less brain power, is less 'aware' than a mouse for many, many months after conception.
Lots of people eat meat, too.. you may or may not, but my point is that if I'm going to kill a cow to eat, why should I care about someone killing a baby that won't be cared for properly?
All of this pro-life.. ALL of it, every single bit, is founded on the concept that "human babies are special". I kill the babies of other animals all the time, I kill things to eat, and so there is zero difference killing a fetus.
The only way you can logically deviate from this argument, is if you somehow assign 'specialness' to a human fetus.
So, what's so special? A soul? A divine prerogative? It's cuter? You don't like people fucking and making mistakes?
I'll give you a counter here. Let's say you close down all abortion. That means that the people that are least able to control themselves? Are going to have more kids, with less self-control.
Yet, if you allow abortion? People with zero self control no longer multiply without abandon. Meaning, the species may have a hope in hell of having restraint.