given our justice system, who knows what he actually comitted, and if they just needed warm bodies to fill the jails that day, or whatever incompietant brutes they hired for the police forced decided someone needed to be convicted of the crime to keep the numbers making them look effective.
no, not really.
A whole laundry list of politicians made it that way going back to the beginning, there was a massive combined effort to styme popular vote. In fact, this nation never really was a real democracy.
so is every religeon. I find the evangelicals that elected bush to be a far more dangerous cult than the mormons.
Reagan, again, with the 700 club, not a "church" per se, but a dangerous group more loyal to themselves than American Values. They wrecked havoc.
social darwinist police pls go. There is the diffrence between science, and the opinion of one scientist and scientific consensus, of which was proven against mr watson's political views along time.
please keep your unfounded bigotry, misapplication of statistics, and wild conspiracy theories and "what ifs", and recycled propaganda from the last age of kings to your blog.
Except your missing the fact that the opinions of a scientist are not equal to science.
Your treating science as a religeon, something men in lab coats say and you unquestioningly believe.
Science is a method. Its not believing unquestioningly what scientists say. Science has standards for ascertaining truths based on observation. Watson's claims are not backed by science, but by his own personal prejudices and political views. That alone is good reason to kick someone out of the scientific community.
He made biased claims based on his political views, not scientific research. He then hung his scientific credibility on them.
He didn't tell the truth, he flat out lied, using his position of academic credibility to forward lies based on his political biases. Thats fucking terrible. Your terrible too for not being able to distinguish opinion of a scientist, and scientific work.
As opposed to what?
You make it sound like there is this giant leftist conspiracy when out and out the new-right, third position,. and the right have made it damn clear they want to do even worse to the left, and the left is guilty of no more than protecting themselves.
The "mob" you reffer to is the body of top scientists, and if he's not guilty of racism, he's guilty of supporting ideas proven scientificly false. At very least he's promoting bad science. Just because he won a noble prize in one field of science does not make him expert in all others. Many other scientists went on to support things of dubious merit after doing real science.
Its not entrapment if they can prove its "in your nature", i.e. you generally do the type of crime that the government got you to commit. Which is a little unnerving, because "your nature" is very subjective, and often viewed through some pretty harsh and very flawed lenses based on stereotypes.
I think we need to stop using terms like "left" and "right", because they are utterly confusing on what they mean.
Baiscly three big forces exist
Socialists(we the people)
classical liberal/capitalist(business owners)
Third position(proggresivies and fascists, self-appointed experts that know how to live your life better than you)
hardly. Most of the real "crazies" are "centrists". Before you say anything, centrists have killed more people in history than anyone else. Don't let the moderation falicy fool you either. Even the terms "far left", and "far right" are centrist weasel words that distorts the viewpoints of their political enemies, who they are more than happy to have targted with arrest, or worse. Even the "left" and "right" are worthless buzzwords
If that sounds too insane for you, type "third position" into wikipedia. Oh my oh my.
As far as "far left" goes, I would also like to hear your definition of "far left".
Americans spend the most time at work, and get the least done in the hours they are at work.
We need to mandate the 40 hour week again.
Before anyone says "but muh business", business worked just fine before regulations were laxed. The resulting "growth" after undoing regulations has done nothing but drive the wage gap between the top and the bottom.
You really believe that you wouldn't find sufficient people to trade working to earn money for simply taking what they want if there is no law enforcement in place?
not what I said but OK. I said that people wouldn't respect absentee property laws in absence of police.
You have never seen what's going down in places like New York when there's a city wide blackout?
looting and riots?
People DO break "randomly" into houses even WITH law enforcement in place. How much worse do you think it would be without?
your making a fairly bad assumptions. My argument is the police are mostly for show, and to protect the property of those wealthy enough to affect political intrest. They can't and won't protect yours. There will be just as much theft without the police as with it, not more.
Its 2015 and its clear, this generation doesn't take nationlist sides when it comes to freedom. Nations might celebrate eachothers critics, but we the people celebrate them all, the further the mudslinging contest goes, the less legitimacy and of the states have.
tribalism is a long standing network of families which has existed for a very long time, which is highly based on tradition, and bloodlines.
while I agree that after a while ancapitsan might devolve into such, it will initially differ as that property arrangements will be based on the invidual's actions instead of bloodlines.
Also capitalists make the distinction of libertarians supporting a government to enforce property laws, and ancaps do not. Socialists do not make the distinction between libertarian socialist and Anarchist, the former being invented as a synonym for when the latter became too hot to handle, and needed to convey the message without getting lost in terminology wars.
As far as libertarian capitalism, with a strong government to enforce property rights, you'll see a continuation of capitalism as it exists, without devolving into tribalism.(albiet with a fairly large police and military to serve the ever growing need to protect property rights)
As for proggresivism and the rest of the third position, its putting a bullet on a gunshot wound. Trying to make an ever expanding system of buerocracy to fix the mistakes caused by capitalism will only serve the to expand buerocracy, and with it. You'll be asking capitalists to solve problems created by capitalism.
Hence the phrase, "the expanding buerocracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding buerocracy".
With Windows, it is just creating an OU, creating a GPO, and pushing it out. With Linux, this is a lot more difficult and requires more third party add-ons.
yeah, thats easier than writing a udev rule, or chmoding/bin/mount 0700, right?
its actually fairly easy to block USB flash drives in linux, and there are lots of really good ways of doing this, probably easier than windows, and the USB subsystem generally doesn't suck. Linux also doesn't automaticly mount far less run anything on a flash drive by default, which makes it a far lower security risk in default setups.
as far "forrests of 1000 boxes", there are endless options from auto-run scripts with ssh + RSA keys, to scp, but most large shops will use Blade Logic anyway, on any platform. You can also use OpenLDAP, kerberbos, or half a dozen other setups.
Linux is also extremely flexible too, and scales far better than windows. If you run a really large shop, where its "forrests" of boxes, windows scales fucking terribly.
But yeah, in linux, the money is going to quality sys admins, rather than Steve Balmers pockets. I think thats something most of us can get behind. For the sketpical CEO, I'll throw in your Linux/UNIX neckbeards are far brighter and better at what we do than some certificate chaser with an MCSE. Thats always been the case. The MCSE skill level is something you'd see slightly less than plumbers and electricians, compared to a linux sysad who is most likely at least a small time programmer in shell scripting, mabey python, and might . An MCSE won't fetch nearly the price of a Linux sysad, but you get what you pay for.
That said, if you look at the top100 websites, they all run linux with a handful of FreeBSD machines. There is a reason for that. The reason is windows is not for proffesional outfits. Running windows makes your organization look like chumps. Windows looks good on paper, because there is no shortage of money they have in advertising, and PR, and spamming internet forums with debates. People who work with technology know its crap.
If that was true, why could companies capitalize on Open Source. Seems to me it has giant marketing value which wouldn't matter unless people care.
Truth is FOSS apps work better. Truth hurts the 5-year-old mentality of "DERP OPAN SOORES", who generally lost out and no one gives a fuck about them, any more than anyone in FOSS gives a fuck about some loudmouth with an anger fork.
Ok, let's use a fictitious country since Somalia might have a negative connotation
you don't say, its also bad because its not directly comparable. You can compare it to its neighboring states that do have a government, or somolia when it used to have a western style government it wasn't any better.
What remains is that you need to hire security (and I mean 24/7 security, since nobody would give a shit about anyone breaking into your place)
no, not really. Most of the damn security police, and military(but not all), is for complete show, and most people don't randomly break into other people's houses. The need for security is soley invented by the state to soley to support the security industries they've created soley to keep the populace in check, not from eachother, but from ever-re-thinking capitalism. Speaking of which,
On the rest, I tend to agree with you, I don't like capitalism either. That said, the state is a function of capitalist, hence the need to protect 'private property'. While I do agree with public spaces, and public services, the state is a capitalist machination and exists for no other reason than to further it.
Slashdot Mirror
comitted
given our justice system, who knows what he actually comitted, and if they just needed warm bodies to fill the jails that day, or whatever incompietant brutes they hired for the police forced decided someone needed to be convicted of the crime to keep the numbers making them look effective.
no, not really. A whole laundry list of politicians made it that way going back to the beginning, there was a massive combined effort to styme popular vote. In fact, this nation never really was a real democracy.
Few people are more stupid and gullible than they are.
I agree. The only people worse off the top of my head are a similar group know as "The Republicans"
so is every religeon. I find the evangelicals that elected bush to be a far more dangerous cult than the mormons. Reagan, again, with the 700 club, not a "church" per se, but a dangerous group more loyal to themselves than American Values. They wrecked havoc.
a crime, has he been arrested?
please keep your unfounded bigotry, misapplication of statistics, and wild conspiracy theories and "what ifs", and recycled propaganda from the last age of kings to your blog.
Your treating science as a religeon, something men in lab coats say and you unquestioningly believe.
Science is a method. Its not believing unquestioningly what scientists say. Science has standards for ascertaining truths based on observation. Watson's claims are not backed by science, but by his own personal prejudices and political views. That alone is good reason to kick someone out of the scientific community.
somehow I don't think he's actualy selling it because he needs the money.
He sought the truth, as best any one human can
He made biased claims based on his political views, not scientific research. He then hung his scientific credibility on them.
He didn't tell the truth, he flat out lied, using his position of academic credibility to forward lies based on his political biases. Thats fucking terrible. Your terrible too for not being able to distinguish opinion of a scientist, and scientific work.
As opposed to what? You make it sound like there is this giant leftist conspiracy when out and out the new-right, third position,. and the right have made it damn clear they want to do even worse to the left, and the left is guilty of no more than protecting themselves. The "mob" you reffer to is the body of top scientists, and if he's not guilty of racism, he's guilty of supporting ideas proven scientificly false. At very least he's promoting bad science. Just because he won a noble prize in one field of science does not make him expert in all others. Many other scientists went on to support things of dubious merit after doing real science.
Its not entrapment if they can prove its "in your nature", i.e. you generally do the type of crime that the government got you to commit. Which is a little unnerving, because "your nature" is very subjective, and often viewed through some pretty harsh and very flawed lenses based on stereotypes.
more or less the FBI bribed him, or perhaps coerced him.
Noble Savage is a litterary device by utopiasts, hardly the enviromentalists.
I think we need to stop using terms like "left" and "right", because they are utterly confusing on what they mean. Baiscly three big forces exist Socialists(we the people) classical liberal/capitalist(business owners) Third position(proggresivies and fascists, self-appointed experts that know how to live your life better than you)
If that sounds too insane for you, type "third position" into wikipedia. Oh my oh my.
As far as "far left" goes, I would also like to hear your definition of "far left".
We need to mandate the 40 hour week again.
Before anyone says "but muh business", business worked just fine before regulations were laxed. The resulting "growth" after undoing regulations has done nothing but drive the wage gap between the top and the bottom.
Its like someone doesn't learn lessons, not just from history, but from the present
When do we start adding UK to the list of unfree states.
You really believe that you wouldn't find sufficient people to trade working to earn money for simply taking what they want if there is no law enforcement in place?
not what I said but OK. I said that people wouldn't respect absentee property laws in absence of police.
You have never seen what's going down in places like New York when there's a city wide blackout?
looting and riots?
People DO break "randomly" into houses even WITH law enforcement in place. How much worse do you think it would be without?
your making a fairly bad assumptions. My argument is the police are mostly for show, and to protect the property of those wealthy enough to affect political intrest. They can't and won't protect yours. There will be just as much theft without the police as with it, not more.
Its not the US vs Russia vs China vs Iran anymore
Its the collective people vs the state.
the irony is biting. have fun calling the kettle black, pot.
while I agree that after a while ancapitsan might devolve into such, it will initially differ as that property arrangements will be based on the invidual's actions instead of bloodlines.
Also capitalists make the distinction of libertarians supporting a government to enforce property laws, and ancaps do not. Socialists do not make the distinction between libertarian socialist and Anarchist, the former being invented as a synonym for when the latter became too hot to handle, and needed to convey the message without getting lost in terminology wars.
As far as libertarian capitalism, with a strong government to enforce property rights, you'll see a continuation of capitalism as it exists, without devolving into tribalism.(albiet with a fairly large police and military to serve the ever growing need to protect property rights)
As for proggresivism and the rest of the third position, its putting a bullet on a gunshot wound. Trying to make an ever expanding system of buerocracy to fix the mistakes caused by capitalism will only serve the to expand buerocracy, and with it. You'll be asking capitalists to solve problems created by capitalism.
Hence the phrase, "the expanding buerocracy expands to meet the needs of the expanding buerocracy".
With Windows, it is just creating an OU, creating a GPO, and pushing it out. With Linux, this is a lot more difficult and requires more third party add-ons.
yeah, thats easier than writing a udev rule, or chmoding /bin/mount 0700, right?
its actually fairly easy to block USB flash drives in linux, and there are lots of really good ways of doing this, probably easier than windows, and the USB subsystem generally doesn't suck. Linux also doesn't automaticly mount far less run anything on a flash drive by default, which makes it a far lower security risk in default setups.
as far "forrests of 1000 boxes", there are endless options from auto-run scripts with ssh + RSA keys, to scp, but most large shops will use Blade Logic anyway, on any platform. You can also use OpenLDAP, kerberbos, or half a dozen other setups.
Linux is also extremely flexible too, and scales far better than windows. If you run a really large shop, where its "forrests" of boxes, windows scales fucking terribly.
But yeah, in linux, the money is going to quality sys admins, rather than Steve Balmers pockets. I think thats something most of us can get behind. For the sketpical CEO, I'll throw in your Linux/UNIX neckbeards are far brighter and better at what we do than some certificate chaser with an MCSE. Thats always been the case. The MCSE skill level is something you'd see slightly less than plumbers and electricians, compared to a linux sysad who is most likely at least a small time programmer in shell scripting, mabey python, and might . An MCSE won't fetch nearly the price of a Linux sysad, but you get what you pay for.
That said, if you look at the top100 websites, they all run linux with a handful of FreeBSD machines. There is a reason for that. The reason is windows is not for proffesional outfits. Running windows makes your organization look like chumps. Windows looks good on paper, because there is no shortage of money they have in advertising, and PR, and spamming internet forums with debates. People who work with technology know its crap.
Truth is FOSS apps work better. Truth hurts the 5-year-old mentality of "DERP OPAN SOORES", who generally lost out and no one gives a fuck about them, any more than anyone in FOSS gives a fuck about some loudmouth with an anger fork.
I know right, I mean we should let edge networks decide policy on the internet, who are these silly little congresscritters anyway.
Ok, let's use a fictitious country since Somalia might have a negative connotation
you don't say, its also bad because its not directly comparable. You can compare it to its neighboring states that do have a government, or somolia when it used to have a western style government it wasn't any better.
What remains is that you need to hire security (and I mean 24/7 security, since nobody would give a shit about anyone breaking into your place)
no, not really. Most of the damn security police, and military(but not all), is for complete show, and most people don't randomly break into other people's houses. The need for security is soley invented by the state to soley to support the security industries they've created soley to keep the populace in check, not from eachother, but from ever-re-thinking capitalism. Speaking of which, On the rest, I tend to agree with you, I don't like capitalism either. That said, the state is a function of capitalist, hence the need to protect 'private property'. While I do agree with public spaces, and public services, the state is a capitalist machination and exists for no other reason than to further it.