Been arrested (for something I very much did and was guilty of).
Every time I've been stopped by the police, whether it's "fair" or not, I've been polite, respectful, and calm. ANY OTHER RESPONSE AND YOU'RE AN IDIOT. Maybe you think you're entitled to mouth off?
What's the most amusing is that your entire post/rage is about shit you're imagining. Do you have any idea how delusional that is?
"But jails also profit more directly from limiting in-person visits. While on-site video visits are usually free, the companies providing the system generally offer a paid off-site video-calling service, too. And jails get a hefty percentage of that money."
Jails are expensive.
I'm sorry, but if you're such a malcontent that the US (or state) government has to house you at $34000/year because you can't stop breaking the law, I don't really give a flying shit if you or your loved-ones feel a little put-upon or exploited by the upcharges.
(shrug)
As per Jim Carey's character in Liar, Liar: "stop breaking the law, loser"
"In retrospect, most conservatives see George W. Bush as a big mistake." That would be a fact smelling distinctly of 'pulled from your ass'. But nice effort.
Who - precisely has he 'screwed over' that 'doesn't kowtow'? I haven't seen a single person actually kowtowing. Or is this just more hyperbolic "facts I wish were true because it would validate my worldview"?
How's he going to be remembered? Probably as the president that 50% of the public, 100% of the intelligentsia, and the media all hated despite: - the US economy is roaring - minority unemployment is at all time historic lows - withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement - a ridiculous wealth-redistribution scheme based primarily on white guilt - fulfilled his campaign promises - recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital - something every president for the last 50 years has promised, and has been the defacto truth for at least a generation - brought DPRK to the negotiating table for the first time in 20+ years (too early to say there's any substantive agreement; Clinton thought he had made a great deal too but was getting ass-fucked) - got NATO allies to actually start (approaching) their agreed-upon share of defense spending, lol - admitted he was wrong on Afghanistan and stopped disastrous withdrawal.
And people will wonder why the intransigent 51% were so irreconcilable.
China currently produces 2x the CO2 as the US. (While producing barely 2/3 the GDP, too) They should be subject to (at least) 2x the penalties and restrictions. Are they? No?
Then the climate accords are political hypocrisy, not problem-solving.
I get your point, but I think the President's point is that: we're not the world CO2 police.
It's a bullshit, political issue allowing massive numbers of white-guilt liberals to expiate themselves by "doing something"...
NOTHING we say is going to change the public's gullibility on this, nor the Left's insistence that everything is the West's (and mainly America's) fault. Nothing. You could have reams of data showing the cheating, how the Tokyo, then Copenhagen, then Paris accords are nothing more than fancy posturing and vapid promises, whose only real intent is a massive justificatory wealth-transfer and nobody will change their mind. CERTAINLY not a few pages of numbers from US satellites.
Look at the new rounds of the Paris accords: essentially, the poor countries are complaining that the free handouts aren't coming fast enough, while simultaneously insisting that Developed nations' requirement for things like documentation and transparency are 'unreasonable'.
...they've proved they're not capable of conforming to the most basic of human behaviors.
I like the idea of using gravity. Take them to the top of a 10 story building, push them off. Let the crows and coyotes clean up the mess.
- it's free - it's simple - it's foolproof enough (if they survive, just bring them up and do it again) - it's environmentally friendly - we have some assurance that their last few seconds on earth may at least a little approximate the fear, terror, and misery they inflicted on someone else.
The only reason "life in prison" (which I believe is something around $35,000/year/person today in the federal system) is cheaper is because of the incessant and nearly ceaseless casework allowed to plainly-guilty individuals to appeal constantly up to the last minute.
The death penalty has actually been applied to death-row inmates at a rate of far less than 1 in 1000. It's a bit disingenuous to say that a punishment is a deterrent when there's a less than 0.1% chance of it being applied EVEN if the subject is caught AND FOUND GUILTY.
As far as cost? Gravity's free. Take them up to the top of a 10-story building. Push them off. Let crows and coyotes clean up what's left. You help the environment, too. Plus, then we get to know their last few seconds might have approached the terror, fear, and misery they inflicted on their victims.
Re your point 1: right, so girlfriends/wives desperately looking for bailbondsmen won't be able to easily find one. That CERTAINLY helps their lives already made shitty by their man in jail.
FAR better for them that he stays in there, right? (Hint: I'm talking about the benefit to people who need it, I'm not campaigning against some invented social injustice.)
I'm not the one that made it about race (or gender).
SJWs (like yourself) who see everything through their grievance filters maybe should try to learn that not everything is about racism (or sexism)?
"Today, weâ(TM)re announcing a new policy to prohibit ads that promote bail bond services from our platforms. Studies show that for-profit bail bond providers make most of their revenue from communities of color and low income neighborhoods when they are at their most vulnerable, including through opaque financing offers that can keep people in debt for months or years."
You do understand that bail bondsmen actually provide a critical service, essentially allowing people to afford bail that otherwise couldn't (for those who aren't intending to flee), and would have to stay in jail for their inability to pay? And the reason people of color and low income people are "most victimized"(?) by this service is BECAUSE THEY COMMIT MOST OF THE CRIME, far out of proportion to their demographic representation.
"According to Gina Clayton, executive director of the Essie Justice Group, "This is the largest step any corporation has taken on behalf of the millions of women who have loved ones in jails across this country. Google's new policy is a call to action for all those in the private sector who profit off of mass incarceration. It is time to say âno more.â(TM)"
So this is only for women? Isn't that astonishingly heteronormative and sexist?
How is preventing people from getting out on bond HELPING ANYONE?
You don't really understand what virtue SIGNALING is, do you?
Virtue: fine. Good, in fact. Virtue signaling: the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue. It's shallow and reprehensible, particularly when it's used passive-aggressively.
Is that the same "systemic" thing "preventing" women from becoming programmers?
Because last time I checked, by the same method of analysis (ie simple demographic comparison) "something" is "preventing" women from becoming ditch diggers, trash haulers, and construction workers.
The simple fact is that there is a dogmatic push to lay accolades on women and minorities having anything to do with science fiction.
If there's filtering going on, ACTUALLY keeping them out of the field, that needs to stop. But what I strongly suspect - like sexism, racism, etc today - is that people are reacting to the way it was more than the way it IS.
I personally feel handing someone an award preferentially because she has a vagina is as sexist and stupid as NOT handing it to her for the same reason. I think to assert that somehow the canon of Science Fiction literature is corrupted by the fact that it's mostly male and white is a sort of Stalinist revisionism. Yes, women shouldn't have been kept out (if they even were; I don't recall any ACTUAL evidence to that fact, imo) but that doesn't make the greats any less great, or mean we have to have X years of opposing bias to 'counterweight' the canon.
How about we just enjoy books that we enjoy, and not give a shit about the chromosomal makeup of the author at all?
...but really, I've had enough about trying to protect stupid people from their stupidity.
"...tricking vulnerable individuals into sending large amounts of money in order to collect bogus lottery winnings..."
If "fake Mark Zuckerberg" cons you out of your cash, tough shit.
Look at it this way, for the bulk of human history, if you were that stupid you'd be dead and eaten by a tiger or a bear or fallen off a mountain. Now you just lost some money. Call it a win for you.
No, but my wife said that while she would support me if I pursued a graduate degree, that support was conditional on it NOT being at the U of MN.
I'm fairly conservative in principles, but my contrarian gut-reaction against the overwhelming political correctness tide there after four years left me both a reactionary and an outright troll. Neither of which is where I liked being, personality wise.
Slashdot Mirror
Been arrested (for something I very much did and was guilty of).
Every time I've been stopped by the police, whether it's "fair" or not, I've been polite, respectful, and calm. ANY OTHER RESPONSE AND YOU'RE AN IDIOT. Maybe you think you're entitled to mouth off?
What's the most amusing is that your entire post/rage is about shit you're imagining. Do you have any idea how delusional that is?
Then again, AC, maybe you do.
32 bits is all any universe will ever need.
Modded down to oblivion.
Anyone surprised?
"But jails also profit more directly from limiting in-person visits. While on-site video visits are usually free, the companies providing the system generally offer a paid off-site video-calling service, too. And jails get a hefty percentage of that money."
Jails are expensive.
I'm sorry, but if you're such a malcontent that the US (or state) government has to house you at $34000/year because you can't stop breaking the law, I don't really give a flying shit if you or your loved-ones feel a little put-upon or exploited by the upcharges.
(shrug)
As per Jim Carey's character in Liar, Liar: "stop breaking the law, loser"
"In retrospect, most conservatives see George W. Bush as a big mistake."
That would be a fact smelling distinctly of 'pulled from your ass'. But nice effort.
Who - precisely has he 'screwed over' that 'doesn't kowtow'? I haven't seen a single person actually kowtowing. Or is this just more hyperbolic "facts I wish were true because it would validate my worldview"?
How's he going to be remembered?
Probably as the president that 50% of the public, 100% of the intelligentsia, and the media all hated despite:
- the US economy is roaring
- minority unemployment is at all time historic lows
- withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement - a ridiculous wealth-redistribution scheme based primarily on white guilt
- fulfilled his campaign promises
- recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital - something every president for the last 50 years has promised, and has been the defacto truth for at least a generation
- brought DPRK to the negotiating table for the first time in 20+ years (too early to say there's any substantive agreement; Clinton thought he had made a great deal too but was getting ass-fucked)
- got NATO allies to actually start (approaching) their agreed-upon share of defense spending, lol
- admitted he was wrong on Afghanistan and stopped disastrous withdrawal.
And people will wonder why the intransigent 51% were so irreconcilable.
See? More stupid.
"The number of plants doesn't matter, it's how much coal you burn in them"
O rly?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
China currently produces 2x the CO2 as the US. (While producing barely 2/3 the GDP, too)
They should be subject to (at least) 2x the penalties and restrictions.
Are they? No?
Then the climate accords are political hypocrisy, not problem-solving.
I get your point, but I think the President's point is that: we're not the world CO2 police.
It's a bullshit, political issue allowing massive numbers of white-guilt liberals to expiate themselves by "doing something"...
NOTHING we say is going to change the public's gullibility on this, nor the Left's insistence that everything is the West's (and mainly America's) fault. Nothing. You could have reams of data showing the cheating, how the Tokyo, then Copenhagen, then Paris accords are nothing more than fancy posturing and vapid promises, whose only real intent is a massive justificatory wealth-transfer and nobody will change their mind. CERTAINLY not a few pages of numbers from US satellites.
Look at the new rounds of the Paris accords: essentially, the poor countries are complaining that the free handouts aren't coming fast enough, while simultaneously insisting that Developed nations' requirement for things like documentation and transparency are 'unreasonable'.
Counts as humor on slashdot.
Of course, if one had said this about the previous president, one would "clearly" be a racist.
You can keep repeating it, it won't make your comments any less stupid. Feel free.
You're essentially saying advertising is pointless: I mean, anyone can just google for what they want, right? Why have *any* ads then?
What you haven't actually addressed is the speciousness of the SJW claim that somehow Bail Bondsmen *hurt* people, that Google is asserting.
...they've proved they're not capable of conforming to the most basic of human behaviors.
I like the idea of using gravity. Take them to the top of a 10 story building, push them off. Let the crows and coyotes clean up the mess.
- it's free
- it's simple
- it's foolproof enough (if they survive, just bring them up and do it again)
- it's environmentally friendly
- we have some assurance that their last few seconds on earth may at least a little approximate the fear, terror, and misery they inflicted on someone else.
The only reason "life in prison" (which I believe is something around $35,000/year/person today in the federal system) is cheaper is because of the incessant and nearly ceaseless casework allowed to plainly-guilty individuals to appeal constantly up to the last minute.
The death penalty has actually been applied to death-row inmates at a rate of far less than 1 in 1000. It's a bit disingenuous to say that a punishment is a deterrent when there's a less than 0.1% chance of it being applied EVEN if the subject is caught AND FOUND GUILTY.
As far as cost? Gravity's free. Take them up to the top of a 10-story building. Push them off. Let crows and coyotes clean up what's left. You help the environment, too. Plus, then we get to know their last few seconds might have approached the terror, fear, and misery they inflicted on their victims.
I'd say that the recognition that the EU sees Apple as a cow from which many Euros can be milked might have more to do with this.
There are LOTS of places they could build this.
Re your point 1: right, so girlfriends/wives desperately looking for bailbondsmen won't be able to easily find one. That CERTAINLY helps their lives already made shitty by their man in jail.
FAR better for them that he stays in there, right?
(Hint: I'm talking about the benefit to people who need it, I'm not campaigning against some invented social injustice.)
I'm not the one that made it about race (or gender).
SJWs (like yourself) who see everything through their grievance filters maybe should try to learn that not everything is about racism (or sexism)?
"Today, weâ(TM)re announcing a new policy to prohibit ads that promote bail bond services from our platforms. Studies show that for-profit bail bond providers make most of their revenue from communities of color and low income neighborhoods when they are at their most vulnerable, including through opaque financing offers that can keep people in debt for months or years."
You do understand that bail bondsmen actually provide a critical service, essentially allowing people to afford bail that otherwise couldn't (for those who aren't intending to flee), and would have to stay in jail for their inability to pay?
And the reason people of color and low income people are "most victimized"(?) by this service is BECAUSE THEY COMMIT MOST OF THE CRIME, far out of proportion to their demographic representation.
"According to Gina Clayton, executive director of the Essie Justice Group, "This is the largest step any corporation has taken on behalf of the millions of women who have loved ones in jails across this country. Google's new policy is a call to action for all those in the private sector who profit off of mass incarceration. It is time to say âno more.â(TM)"
So this is only for women? Isn't that astonishingly heteronormative and sexist?
How is preventing people from getting out on bond HELPING ANYONE?
Who the fuck ANSWERS these calls? Much less, who ACTUALLY GIVES THEM $$ in enough numbers to justify the effort/expense?
I mean, we've *always* hung up on them instantly.
Enjoy using Yandex instead of google then.
Um, 500 million is...nothing? You're saying they collected an average of what, about 1.5 calls per American in all of 2017?
Who gives a shit?
Reading comprehension fail?
You don't really understand what virtue SIGNALING is, do you?
Virtue: fine. Good, in fact.
Virtue signaling: the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue. It's shallow and reprehensible, particularly when it's used passive-aggressively.
And virtue-signaling is even cheaper.
If you do something out of self-interest, ALWAYS cloak it in the mantle of righteousness for the possible saps who are gullible enough to buy it.
Is that the same "systemic" thing "preventing" women from becoming programmers?
Because last time I checked, by the same method of analysis (ie simple demographic comparison) "something" is "preventing" women from becoming ditch diggers, trash haulers, and construction workers.
The simple fact is that there is a dogmatic push to lay accolades on women and minorities having anything to do with science fiction.
If there's filtering going on, ACTUALLY keeping them out of the field, that needs to stop.
But what I strongly suspect - like sexism, racism, etc today - is that people are reacting to the way it was more than the way it IS.
I personally feel handing someone an award preferentially because she has a vagina is as sexist and stupid as NOT handing it to her for the same reason. I think to assert that somehow the canon of Science Fiction literature is corrupted by the fact that it's mostly male and white is a sort of Stalinist revisionism. Yes, women shouldn't have been kept out (if they even were; I don't recall any ACTUAL evidence to that fact, imo) but that doesn't make the greats any less great, or mean we have to have X years of opposing bias to 'counterweight' the canon.
How about we just enjoy books that we enjoy, and not give a shit about the chromosomal makeup of the author at all?
Protecting yourself IS YOUR PROBLEM.
Seriously, I can't think of a more fundamental lesson from Darwin.
I frankly don't want to live in a society of gullible sheep.
...but really, I've had enough about trying to protect stupid people from their stupidity.
"...tricking vulnerable individuals into sending large amounts of money in order to collect bogus lottery winnings..."
If "fake Mark Zuckerberg" cons you out of your cash, tough shit.
Look at it this way, for the bulk of human history, if you were that stupid you'd be dead and eaten by a tiger or a bear or fallen off a mountain. Now you just lost some money. Call it a win for you.
No, but my wife said that while she would support me if I pursued a graduate degree, that support was conditional on it NOT being at the U of MN.
I'm fairly conservative in principles, but my contrarian gut-reaction against the overwhelming political correctness tide there after four years left me both a reactionary and an outright troll. Neither of which is where I liked being, personality wise.