Oh, excuse me. I missed the Vietnam war and the Cold War. It was a different time with different challenges. No generation gets a picture perfect setting for life. Life is unfair and how you deal with it is what matters not the lame excuse you can come up with to blame prior generations.
If that is the only response then to me that makes millennials sound too spoiled and selfish to understand what they have and too resentful to appreciate the challenges and triumphs of a different time.
And the reason tuition rates are going up is because of the increase in the money supply in the higher education system, which itself is entirely caused by the increased availability and ease of acquiring of student loans. And, I know an easy fix: Make it possible to go bankrupt on these loans just like any other unsecured loan. If you do that, watch how basically overnight, lenders will start scrutinizing borrowers more, and borrowers will be thinking harder about borrowing to begin with in light of higher interest and/or collateral.
To expand on this, increasing the demand and availability of higher education will increase cost in addition to the deregulation the student loan market in 2005.
2005 was the year that bankruptcy was no longer an option for student loan giving those lenders a free for all. Why wouldn't you loan to students if the government guarantee a return and the lendee cannot bankrupt out of it? It creates no incentive for lenders to scrutinize who they lend to because they have no risk.
I wonder if there is a correlation to that deregulation and the demand for useless degrees. Certainly diploma mills became more common.
Is that why younger generations are aptly nicknamed "the entitled generation". No other generation has had so many opportunities in such a peaceful world. Every objective measure is markedly better. Seriously, I am an older millennial and I don't get this whole "woes of the younger generation".
Sure college is expensive but that means it is also widely more available. The economy took a hit but what do you expect? Shit happens and there is a concern for the environment. Regulating industry to protect the environment means many people have to forgo that commodity unless you think slash and burning forest for an oak-wood stove is a good idea. Sometimes a generation is unlucky. I would rather be the generation dealing with the Great Recession than WW1/2 or the Great depression. Comparatively speaking, wtf is to complain about?
The only thing plaguing young folks is the same idealism and disenfranchisement every generation goes through when the worst they have to worry about is high school drama.
What your missing is the higher costs of college compared to decades past. Yes, back in the good 'ole days college was cheap enough that you could pay as you go and still graduate moderately on time. However, because costs have run out of control (you can argue whose fault that is) it would take a very long time to do that. If you are trying for a master's or phd it would be nearly impossible because of the timeliness required from start to finish.
For me, I went to college in the mid-late 2000's. I had a job every semester and even if I doubled my income during that time the dent in my loan debt would be negligible. I would still owe tens of thousands of dollars today. Although, I would be close to paying them off instead of needing a few more years. But honestly, after almost a decade of paying on them (always more than minimum sometimes double/triple) what is a few more years?
lol, I don't know which is more ridiculous. Trump being under Putin's thumb for a piss fetish or because of money. If it was money, what is to stop Trump from saying "Not going to pay. You can shove it."? What is Russia going to do? Seize his assets in Russia? Make a fit? Send their money collectors? Try and assassinate Trump? Do you think Russia would risk war over a few million dollars? What can Russia honestly do against POTUS? Embarrass him. Oh noes! How retarded are you?
Not allowed to know or was it politically worthless? Just ask Romney what releasing his tax returns did for him. Sure, it's important but then again blame the democrats for framing the conversation as "Everything is sexist. Everything is racist. Everything is homophobic. Everything is xenophobic."
This tripe again? The only thing that can destroy the alliance at this point in time is alliance members not fulfilling their agreements. Only 5 member nations meet the defense spending requirement goals. Those other nations are doing more to undermine the alliance than Putin could ever dream of doing. Who in their right mind would want to stay in an alliance with members that are too cowardly to defend themselves and too ashamed to defend liberty?
What the fuck is the alliance defending if Europe is too cowardly and ashamed to stand up for the liberty's and freedoms the alliance was meant to protect? What the fuck is the alliance for if Europe is destabilizing itself with shit policies? Europe has been flirting with authoritarian tyranny at the expense of liberty while expecting others to pay for their defense, security, and economic stability. Same with Canada.
The Alliance is not there to protect cowardice for the sake of cowardice and shame. But rather the western tradition of freedom, liberty, and democracy. If those values are lost to Europe and Canada then the alliance has already died.
How the fuck do you keep the man with the most powerful military behind him under your thumb? Why would Trump oblige Putin when Trump has the stronger military and economy? Because of a piss fetish? How retarded are you?
While I generally agree, each site and person has their own definition of acceptable behavior. Perhaps I should have worded the post a little different. I do not expect civility online. Nor do I look for it online (save business related matters). Any media or social interaction I have online is not something I expect respect from nor demand. My candor and civility will be a reflection of your interaction with me.
I don't go online looking for great interactions because interacting with people is generally a shitty thing especially online. Anonymity, while an enabler of shit behavior, is an important corner stone to freedom and liberty. Just ask the authors of the Federalist Papers why they used pseudonyms.
Depends on how you look at it. If you don't like the current politicians it would be a win if they find another job. If you elected that politician to obstruct then their job is to do nothing.
It doesn't need to be fixed any more than in prior elections.
Does that make Hillary a Russian troll for being so hateable and sabotaging her own campaign by having so many skeletons in the closet?
Whenever I hear about Russian propaganda (a nation that does not value free speech and historically has stifled it) affecting the narrative in a nation like the US. I have to wonder how that is any different to any yellow journalism, corporate propaganda, commercial salesmanship or any other dishonest party trying to sell me bullshit that is against my own interests. I would think that a people that are subjected to every retarded idea under the sun will have some mechanism to to either find the signal in the noise when pressed or ignore it. After all, if you value free speech everything will be said and you as the individual must decide. I think that is a good thing.
I think there is a certain level of pessimism I refuse to take part of when people say 'Russian propaganda works better than any other form of yellow journalism' because I like to think that individuals are better able to decide for themselves than any other purveyor of "truth" (tm). Whether that purveyor is the government, news outlets, or a salesman.
Civility is left for the real world or at least that is how it should be. I don't come to the internet to necessarily be civil. I may or may not. Incivility is on the internet precisely because I cannot be uncivil IRL. Sometimes it is fun to troll an idiot.
Sadly, it seems that the uncivil nature of the internet is creeping into the meat space. If there is ever a place for civility it is IRL. Civility online, while nice, is not necessary and any forced behavior online would be to the detriment of the internet and the users. (excluding harassment, doxxing, threats, etc. )
The same could be said for the other international partners of the ISS. Why are the other nations not leading the charge to maintain this profound achievement? Roscosmos, JAXA, ESA, and CSA could all pick up the tab to keep it operational and looking at the costs NASA has paid quite a fair share.
The more you try to "stifle" them the more you legitimize them because they have something to say that the government won't let them say. You galvanize support and you create martyrs.
Innocent until proven guilty. Yes, you have to wait until actions that are illegal besides "saying stupid shit". How far are you going to outlaw "saying stupid shit"? How many innocent individuals are you willing to oppress to feel safer from mean words?
Restraint in the face of necessity is as bad as reckless action in a crisis.
Yes, and what it took to get that right and others was dangerous.
But what was it? You characterize, but do not identify.
War. I didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious.
Living in a society that do not value those rights are even more dangerous than living in a society with protections for the freedoms of individuals.
One would think so, after all, a society exists to protect individuals, so one with any other conditions is more dangerous by default. Are you sure you said what you meant?
Individual freedoms and protections by the state are a fairly recent thing. It is more common that states organize and protect a small ruling class. For example a crown or religion via monarchy or theocracy respectively. Individuals have historically been oppressed "for the good of society". Society that favors individualism tend to have more freedom and liberty than those that feel justified in limiting the rights of individuals "for the good of society". A society that can justify any tyranny is inherently a dangerous place because oppression can come without warning or cause and the individual can have little or no recourse of action to protect against state aggression. Just because you have a benevolent dictator now does not mean that they will always be benevolent.
Rights are one of the few absolutes that society should always defend in whole all the time.
Rights are not absolutes, but instead, like all things, subject to moderation and consideration.
Yes, they are absolute and inalienable. They do not come from the state and they are not to be compromised in any irrational way. For example; It is rational to outlaw death threats because any rational person would feel justified in defending themselves from such a threat and that kind of threat can lead to physical violence.
If society forgets anything, it is doomed to repeat it. People will likely suffer and die because of it. And forgetting includes being mistaken about lessons learned, like the limits of rights.
Is there a limit to a fair trial? I don't think you have thought through the "limits of rights" if you can honestly answer that question and come to the conclusion that there is a limit to the "fairness" a trial may have during criminal prosecutions. Do you think the right of fair trial is worth dying for? Is it worth killing for? Rights are the extreme. Any limit will be extreme.
Better to consider what you are willing to live with instead.
Sounds like you are a coward even if you weren't an anonymous coward. Throughout history people considered tyranny livable. Sounds like you don't mind a boot on your face because you can live with it.
IOW, the mainstream positions of the German government (and others) are so weak and vapid they have to censor anything they disregard as hate speech? Very telling.
Maybe their position wouldn't be so weak and vapid if they didn't ignore reality. Maybe there is something wrong with your position if the only reasonable response is government intervention via censorship and a Ministry of Truth.
Yes, and what it took to get that right and others was dangerous. Living in a society that do not value those rights are even more dangerous than living in a society with protections for the freedoms of individuals.
Rights are one of the few absolutes that society should always defend in whole all the time. Many people have died to get those rights and many more will die if society forgets sacrifices were necessary for freedoms we take advantage of.
If you aren't willing to die for your rights then anyone strong enough or popular enough will take them away.
Big shocker. You sound upset that the losing side isn't filling it with their own people. That is what happens when the other side wins.
When Obama appointed Tom Wheeler, a lobbyist for telecommunications, to the FCC there was concern about regulatory capture and his possible favoring of companies he lobbied for. In the end, he did ok by most standards and ruled against those companies a few times. It is better to judge the actions of people than by any superficial metric that changes faster than a fart in the wind.
I like a number of his people. Mattis and Gorsuch are such examples.
That is because the congress gave so much power to the POTUS. If you are scared about what the president can do, the president is too powerful.
A reason to vote for Trump was because he was hated by both sides of the political elite that the congress may actually do its job by counter-balancing the power of the president so that this doesn't happen.
Democracy can lead to tyranny from the majority. The will of the people isn't some great and boundless thing that is the end all be all of civics. Like any human endeavor it can be corrupted and abused in a tyrannical way. "All the people" will never agree unanimously and if there is disagreement hostilities can follow through resentment. That is why representative government is the better alternative because it has what is good about democracy while guarding against what is bad. It isn't perfect but nothing is.
You mention compromise but yet are unwilling to let the 'other side' have their day when you say "That's why Brexit and Trump are such disasters". Trump has barely had time in office and brexit is still in the planning phase. The only thing that is "disastrous" is the reaction from the losing side. I have seen how the remain camp has acted since the referendum and it isn't something to be proud of. Just like how the democrats acted after the election.
So far, I have seen anti-democratic sentiment from remainers and democrats in the form of "revote until I win", "Trump not my president", "ignore the law" and advocating for coup d'etat so that they don't have to accept the results. It isn't a democracy if you always get your way by ignoring the other side. Accepting defeat is part of democracy.
I tried to switching to Linux but went back to windows on my main machine because gaming. If I spend money on the latest graphics card I want to be able to use all the new features. With Linux, I always had to fiddle to get things to work, which is fun and dandy sometimes but after work I just want to play a game that runs/looks well with minimal fiddling.
Many of the Linux drivers were a generation or two behind so they couldn't take advantage of a lot of new feature. I like Linux, still use it on my secondary machine but there is still one dominate OS for gaming and it isn't Linux. I am no more a hostage to windows than a victim of Linux being perpetually behind the times.
OpenGL had a hiatus of development and support until recently (few years). The new stuff is good and look forward to more support but too many games I play would be unplayable. Especially when I want the most performance out of my hardware (looking at you wine).
Categorizing GMO and "organic", improving the metrics, and characterizing related potential risks are long and involved subjects.
I have had my fair share of time dedicated to this topic. And as I have said it is primarily based on pseudo-science that as a voting demographic tend toward the D.
I think the phrase, 'don't throw rocks in a glass house' comes to mind. Each party denies science they just disagree which science they dislike. Except vaccines. Some reason that has bipartisan denial.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, excuse me. I missed the Vietnam war and the Cold War. It was a different time with different challenges. No generation gets a picture perfect setting for life. Life is unfair and how you deal with it is what matters not the lame excuse you can come up with to blame prior generations.
If that is the only response then to me that makes millennials sound too spoiled and selfish to understand what they have and too resentful to appreciate the challenges and triumphs of a different time.
And the reason tuition rates are going up is because of the increase in the money supply in the higher education system, which itself is entirely caused by the increased availability and ease of acquiring of student loans. And, I know an easy fix: Make it possible to go bankrupt on these loans just like any other unsecured loan. If you do that, watch how basically overnight, lenders will start scrutinizing borrowers more, and borrowers will be thinking harder about borrowing to begin with in light of higher interest and/or collateral.
To expand on this, increasing the demand and availability of higher education will increase cost in addition to the deregulation the student loan market in 2005.
2005 was the year that bankruptcy was no longer an option for student loan giving those lenders a free for all. Why wouldn't you loan to students if the government guarantee a return and the lendee cannot bankrupt out of it? It creates no incentive for lenders to scrutinize who they lend to because they have no risk.
I wonder if there is a correlation to that deregulation and the demand for useless degrees. Certainly diploma mills became more common.
Is that why younger generations are aptly nicknamed "the entitled generation". No other generation has had so many opportunities in such a peaceful world. Every objective measure is markedly better. Seriously, I am an older millennial and I don't get this whole "woes of the younger generation".
Sure college is expensive but that means it is also widely more available. The economy took a hit but what do you expect? Shit happens and there is a concern for the environment. Regulating industry to protect the environment means many people have to forgo that commodity unless you think slash and burning forest for an oak-wood stove is a good idea. Sometimes a generation is unlucky. I would rather be the generation dealing with the Great Recession than WW1/2 or the Great depression. Comparatively speaking, wtf is to complain about?
The only thing plaguing young folks is the same idealism and disenfranchisement every generation goes through when the worst they have to worry about is high school drama.
What your missing is the higher costs of college compared to decades past. Yes, back in the good 'ole days college was cheap enough that you could pay as you go and still graduate moderately on time. However, because costs have run out of control (you can argue whose fault that is) it would take a very long time to do that. If you are trying for a master's or phd it would be nearly impossible because of the timeliness required from start to finish.
For me, I went to college in the mid-late 2000's. I had a job every semester and even if I doubled my income during that time the dent in my loan debt would be negligible. I would still owe tens of thousands of dollars today. Although, I would be close to paying them off instead of needing a few more years. But honestly, after almost a decade of paying on them (always more than minimum sometimes double/triple) what is a few more years?
Not saying it was aliens. But it was aliens. It's always aliens.
lol, I don't know which is more ridiculous. Trump being under Putin's thumb for a piss fetish or because of money. If it was money, what is to stop Trump from saying "Not going to pay. You can shove it."? What is Russia going to do? Seize his assets in Russia? Make a fit? Send their money collectors? Try and assassinate Trump? Do you think Russia would risk war over a few million dollars? What can Russia honestly do against POTUS? Embarrass him. Oh noes! How retarded are you?
Not allowed to know or was it politically worthless? Just ask Romney what releasing his tax returns did for him. Sure, it's important but then again blame the democrats for framing the conversation as "Everything is sexist. Everything is racist. Everything is homophobic. Everything is xenophobic."
Seriously, how retarded are you?
This tripe again? The only thing that can destroy the alliance at this point in time is alliance members not fulfilling their agreements. Only 5 member nations meet the defense spending requirement goals. Those other nations are doing more to undermine the alliance than Putin could ever dream of doing. Who in their right mind would want to stay in an alliance with members that are too cowardly to defend themselves and too ashamed to defend liberty?
What the fuck is the alliance defending if Europe is too cowardly and ashamed to stand up for the liberty's and freedoms the alliance was meant to protect? What the fuck is the alliance for if Europe is destabilizing itself with shit policies? Europe has been flirting with authoritarian tyranny at the expense of liberty while expecting others to pay for their defense, security, and economic stability. Same with Canada.
The Alliance is not there to protect cowardice for the sake of cowardice and shame. But rather the western tradition of freedom, liberty, and democracy. If those values are lost to Europe and Canada then the alliance has already died.
How the fuck do you keep the man with the most powerful military behind him under your thumb? Why would Trump oblige Putin when Trump has the stronger military and economy? Because of a piss fetish? How retarded are you?
While I generally agree, each site and person has their own definition of acceptable behavior. Perhaps I should have worded the post a little different. I do not expect civility online. Nor do I look for it online (save business related matters). Any media or social interaction I have online is not something I expect respect from nor demand. My candor and civility will be a reflection of your interaction with me.
I don't go online looking for great interactions because interacting with people is generally a shitty thing especially online. Anonymity, while an enabler of shit behavior, is an important corner stone to freedom and liberty. Just ask the authors of the Federalist Papers why they used pseudonyms.
Depends on how you look at it. If you don't like the current politicians it would be a win if they find another job. If you elected that politician to obstruct then their job is to do nothing.
It doesn't need to be fixed any more than in prior elections.
The Republicans inability to govern in the White House and Congress is a grave concern for every American.
Inaction by the government when there is widespread disagreement is a feature not a bug.
Jokes on you. The trolls are letting you troll them to troll you so they can troll you more while they wait for their script to finish.
stated goals of disrupting the US
Does that make Hillary a Russian troll for being so hateable and sabotaging her own campaign by having so many skeletons in the closet?
Whenever I hear about Russian propaganda (a nation that does not value free speech and historically has stifled it) affecting the narrative in a nation like the US. I have to wonder how that is any different to any yellow journalism, corporate propaganda, commercial salesmanship or any other dishonest party trying to sell me bullshit that is against my own interests. I would think that a people that are subjected to every retarded idea under the sun will have some mechanism to to either find the signal in the noise when pressed or ignore it. After all, if you value free speech everything will be said and you as the individual must decide. I think that is a good thing.
I think there is a certain level of pessimism I refuse to take part of when people say 'Russian propaganda works better than any other form of yellow journalism' because I like to think that individuals are better able to decide for themselves than any other purveyor of "truth" (tm). Whether that purveyor is the government, news outlets, or a salesman.
Civility is left for the real world or at least that is how it should be. I don't come to the internet to necessarily be civil. I may or may not. Incivility is on the internet precisely because I cannot be uncivil IRL. Sometimes it is fun to troll an idiot.
Sadly, it seems that the uncivil nature of the internet is creeping into the meat space. If there is ever a place for civility it is IRL. Civility online, while nice, is not necessary and any forced behavior online would be to the detriment of the internet and the users. (excluding harassment, doxxing, threats, etc. )
The same could be said for the other international partners of the ISS. Why are the other nations not leading the charge to maintain this profound achievement? Roscosmos, JAXA, ESA, and CSA could all pick up the tab to keep it operational and looking at the costs NASA has paid quite a fair share.
That explains the odd behavior of my llama for all these years.
Does that mean morals are derived from nature? Yay nihilism.
Commit hate speech? You mean say stupid shit?
The more you try to "stifle" them the more you legitimize them because they have something to say that the government won't let them say. You galvanize support and you create martyrs.
Innocent until proven guilty. Yes, you have to wait until actions that are illegal besides "saying stupid shit". How far are you going to outlaw "saying stupid shit"? How many innocent individuals are you willing to oppress to feel safer from mean words?
Restraint in the face of necessity is as bad as reckless action in a crisis.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Yes, and what it took to get that right and others was dangerous.
But what was it? You characterize, but do not identify.
War. I didn't think it was necessary to state the obvious.
Living in a society that do not value those rights are even more dangerous than living in a society with protections for the freedoms of individuals.
One would think so, after all, a society exists to protect individuals, so one with any other conditions is more dangerous by default.
Are you sure you said what you meant?
Individual freedoms and protections by the state are a fairly recent thing. It is more common that states organize and protect a small ruling class. For example a crown or religion via monarchy or theocracy respectively. Individuals have historically been oppressed "for the good of society". Society that favors individualism tend to have more freedom and liberty than those that feel justified in limiting the rights of individuals "for the good of society". A society that can justify any tyranny is inherently a dangerous place because oppression can come without warning or cause and the individual can have little or no recourse of action to protect against state aggression. Just because you have a benevolent dictator now does not mean that they will always be benevolent.
Rights are one of the few absolutes that society should always defend in whole all the time.
Rights are not absolutes, but instead, like all things, subject to moderation and consideration.
Yes, they are absolute and inalienable. They do not come from the state and they are not to be compromised in any irrational way. For example; It is rational to outlaw death threats because any rational person would feel justified in defending themselves from such a threat and that kind of threat can lead to physical violence.
If society forgets anything, it is doomed to repeat it. People will likely suffer and die because of it. And forgetting includes being mistaken about lessons learned, like the limits of rights.
Is there a limit to a fair trial? I don't think you have thought through the "limits of rights" if you can honestly answer that question and come to the conclusion that there is a limit to the "fairness" a trial may have during criminal prosecutions. Do you think the right of fair trial is worth dying for? Is it worth killing for? Rights are the extreme. Any limit will be extreme.
Better to consider what you are willing to live with instead.
Sounds like you are a coward even if you weren't an anonymous coward. Throughout history people considered tyranny livable. Sounds like you don't mind a boot on your face because you can live with it.
IOW, the mainstream positions of the German government (and others) are so weak and vapid they have to censor anything they disregard as hate speech? Very telling.
Maybe their position wouldn't be so weak and vapid if they didn't ignore reality. Maybe there is something wrong with your position if the only reasonable response is government intervention via censorship and a Ministry of Truth.
Speech can be dangerous.
Yes, and what it took to get that right and others was dangerous. Living in a society that do not value those rights are even more dangerous than living in a society with protections for the freedoms of individuals.
Rights are one of the few absolutes that society should always defend in whole all the time. Many people have died to get those rights and many more will die if society forgets sacrifices were necessary for freedoms we take advantage of.
If you aren't willing to die for your rights then anyone strong enough or popular enough will take them away.
Big shocker. You sound upset that the losing side isn't filling it with their own people. That is what happens when the other side wins.
When Obama appointed Tom Wheeler, a lobbyist for telecommunications, to the FCC there was concern about regulatory capture and his possible favoring of companies he lobbied for. In the end, he did ok by most standards and ruled against those companies a few times. It is better to judge the actions of people than by any superficial metric that changes faster than a fart in the wind.
I like a number of his people. Mattis and Gorsuch are such examples.
That is because the congress gave so much power to the POTUS. If you are scared about what the president can do, the president is too powerful.
A reason to vote for Trump was because he was hated by both sides of the political elite that the congress may actually do its job by counter-balancing the power of the president so that this doesn't happen.
Democracy can lead to tyranny from the majority. The will of the people isn't some great and boundless thing that is the end all be all of civics. Like any human endeavor it can be corrupted and abused in a tyrannical way. "All the people" will never agree unanimously and if there is disagreement hostilities can follow through resentment. That is why representative government is the better alternative because it has what is good about democracy while guarding against what is bad. It isn't perfect but nothing is.
You mention compromise but yet are unwilling to let the 'other side' have their day when you say "That's why Brexit and Trump are such disasters". Trump has barely had time in office and brexit is still in the planning phase. The only thing that is "disastrous" is the reaction from the losing side. I have seen how the remain camp has acted since the referendum and it isn't something to be proud of. Just like how the democrats acted after the election.
So far, I have seen anti-democratic sentiment from remainers and democrats in the form of "revote until I win", "Trump not my president", "ignore the law" and advocating for coup d'etat so that they don't have to accept the results. It isn't a democracy if you always get your way by ignoring the other side. Accepting defeat is part of democracy.
I tried to switching to Linux but went back to windows on my main machine because gaming. If I spend money on the latest graphics card I want to be able to use all the new features. With Linux, I always had to fiddle to get things to work, which is fun and dandy sometimes but after work I just want to play a game that runs/looks well with minimal fiddling.
Many of the Linux drivers were a generation or two behind so they couldn't take advantage of a lot of new feature. I like Linux, still use it on my secondary machine but there is still one dominate OS for gaming and it isn't Linux. I am no more a hostage to windows than a victim of Linux being perpetually behind the times.
OpenGL had a hiatus of development and support until recently (few years). The new stuff is good and look forward to more support but too many games I play would be unplayable. Especially when I want the most performance out of my hardware (looking at you wine).
Categorizing GMO and "organic", improving the metrics, and characterizing related potential risks are long and involved subjects.
I have had my fair share of time dedicated to this topic. And as I have said it is primarily based on pseudo-science that as a voting demographic tend toward the D.
I think the phrase, 'don't throw rocks in a glass house' comes to mind. Each party denies science they just disagree which science they dislike. Except vaccines. Some reason that has bipartisan denial.