Marriage is part of the bargain right now. Society protects couples with children - and those who may one day have children - by giving preferential treatment to couples who are married.
If you adulterate marriage in the manner you propose such protection may go away - harm done.
You don't actually think that unmarried couples with children are treated as well by our institutions as married couples with children are, do you?
If you don't buy any of that, how about we adjust the previous scenario, so that instead of having a child, the previously mentioned (new and inexperienced) couple ends up fighting all the time because they can't stand living with the stupidity in the dorms? Lets say that this results in scars in their relationship, which never fully heal. Then four years later they have a child, who learns to hate the world because his house is full of hatred.
These are risks. Not what will absolutely happen. It seemed as though you couldn't figure out why marriage has anything to do with the government. Now you have reasons why it does, even if you don't agree with them or how they work - eliminating it will change more than just who gets a piece of paper and who gives it out.
Do you still think it's as simple an issue as you did?
Well, for example, you could have people who decide to be roommates in college declare that they're married to get the married housing (and declare their divorce at the end of the year), which is often nicer than normal dormroom living.
This, in turn, could lead to a couple who is actually married and with a child having to live in the normal dorms - possibly exposing their child to the alcohol and drugs that often accompany young and immature non-parental college students. Then later, that scarred child could grow up a self-distructive sociopath.
That's one possible example of how it could affect other people, and how that could result in a danger to society. This is only hypothetical, of course, but it does show the point.
There are many government programs that are for families (including education, btw). Now I'm not going to argue it here, because I don't think you'd believe me, but sexual deviation has a negative effect upon growth and development. I don't believe that the government would want to sanction same-sex marriages because it would mean approving of their chance to have families (you can't convince me that I'm wrong here, but I'm not the one you'd have to; this is a question of the government's view). Of course, that's not the only reason, but it is one that is immediately obvious to me.
By the way, to some degree the government does decide fitness for marriage. You can't marry if you're underage without parental consent, and you can't marry any relative as genetically close (or closer) than a first cousin. To take your argument to the extreme, after gay marriages, what's next? Can any kind of fetishist marry? NAMBLA weddings? Corpse/human weddings? Human/blow-up doll weddings? 10,000 person bigamy cults?
People are always talking about the "conservative media," and that the education system is conservative controlled. Obviously if we rooted out these two main sources of Right-wingers - those who seek to indoctrinate the young, and those who seek to indoctrinate the ignorant, maybe we can get things at least to be equal - having as many on the left as on the right.
Do you agree with all of this?
Because it's entirely backwards. There are significantly more liberals in education and the media than conservatives, and there are more liberals than conservatives in general. I hope this changes soon. I find indoctrination disgusting; how can people make informed decisions if they're given input from only one side?
Maybe it seems like the left is shifting because it's being augmented on the right side.
I suppose most people think that the world is slowly going mad - that is, slowly going towards believing things that they don't. But not everyone can be correct.
I should also mention, I suppose, that most ultra-rich megacorps are already ultra-conservative. If they change into think-tanks that are conservative, nothing changes.
Any Joe can start a college and start handing out degrees, but nobody considers it worth anything until it's accredited. It won't be accredited until the government decides that it should be, so the government has to have a policy on education. Besides the need to hold a standard for education, what people learn is none of the governments business, of course.
If you think that marriage should be none of the governments business, are you saying that it shouldn't be a government sanctioned activity? Good luck convincing everyone.
I tend to blame the news more than the soccer moms for the problem. If, instead of saying stuff like "Politician X failed to live up to his promise today by..."
They said, "In our opinion, these are the significant things that Politician X did today...let us stress, however, that this is a mere 7.48% of his discisions for today. Our comprehensive analysis can be found on our website."
Has it occurred to you that "newsperson voice" is a voice designed to convey confidence? As if they're absolutely convinced that what they're saying is the absolute truth? I'd rather they were more clear about how sure of their facts they are. Best way to make this happen is to ensure that nobody gets famous in news, because with no knowledge of who you are there can be no power in it, and it would be only about dissemination of the truth. Make it a guild where you have to take an oath to anonynomy, the way doctors do to not harm. And make them have to wear a mask and voice disguise to do reports. Maybe also have some sort of standard of training for fact-checking and for witnessing. Like in Stranger in a Strange Land.
Anyone you know who is a reporter you could just call "the reporter," or "the" for short. Like in Starship Titanic.
I'm thinking it's the lower quality landlines couples with the fact that therey's 1.2B of them. The US would probably have a more cell phones if it had more people.
They use it to clean circuit boards right after they put all the components on them.
Where can you get it?
Good question. I've heard that some plants that use it to clean circuit boards will sometimes sell off water they don't need...or maybe you can rent lab time at one such plant? Don't know.
This is over the entire course of usage for my site.
It's a personal one, and I'm a computer guy...my guess is that about half of my visitors have computer-related interests, and that about half are from Slashdot. I'm getting 21.5% Mozilla, and 1.84% Konqueror (no one using Safari has yet visited). My guess is that Konqueror/Safari use is statistically negligible.
Re:While we clang our cymbals....
on
China Goes Nuclear
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
As long as they keep sending their best and brightest to get their PhDs in the US, and a good portion of those continue to want to stay, we'll probably continue to have a good technological advantage.
Windows is designed like most ocean going cruise ships... massive, takes a lot of work to run, and it's pretty, and it's not engineered with ruggedness in mind. If anyone on board or off board pokes a hole in it, everybody gets wet. Also, by default, it's loading hatches (ports) are always open, allowing pirates to come aboard and poke holes. The designers also don't consider themselves responsible for anything you put on the boat, even though it doesn't come with a lot built-in.
Linux, on the other hand, is built more like the Titanic. It's the kind of OS that requires monumental stupidity to sink - just as the Titanic required such. All the sections are compartmentalized from the others, and if one part goes under, others remain.
The crew is more alert as well - in general, roughly twice as alert, in my experience. As soon as they find a leak, they patch it. They also purposefully build in other people's stuff and work with the people who made it to deal with patches.
Without vigilance, at some point you're probably going to be underwater with either vessel. But looking at the characteristics, it's a lot easier to find yourself swimming if you charter a Windows boat.
I think you have pretty clearly shown his point, easter1916. The US has a lot fewer people per acre than either of these two countries.
Having said that, though, shouldn't there be pockets of good internet service in big cities?
It would be worth it to me to move to a heavily populated area if I got 100MB/s internet access in return without paying $1000 a month. However, I have not heard of any heavily populated area in which any service provider offers such a thing, which makes me think that the US really doesn't have any excuse.
Obviously you've never tried to make big documents with Word.
Writing a book with pictures in Word is extremely difficult. It randomly moves stuff around, changes fonts, and deletes sections of the code when you exceed somewhere around 2MB file size (or 10 pages...I'm not really sure about the limit).
The interface isn't the whole problem either. Exporting to rtf format creates files that don't actually meet the rtf specification (which has been defined by Microsoft, by the way), so have errors (even when read by Microsoft's rtf importer), and html output is even worse.
Latex has more features than Word without any of these problems. Also, given the original "find a bug and win money" challenge, I think I can say it is probably one of the most stable pieces of software on the planet, and it has an extension mechanism built in (Word does too, by the way - several of them).
There are some things that Microsoft makes that beat the competition, but I don't think that Word is one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, that'll work great until someone says
"R M forward slash R F enter"
There was a UserFriendly comic about that...
Marriage is part of the bargain right now. Society protects couples with children - and those who may one day have children - by giving preferential treatment to couples who are married.
If you adulterate marriage in the manner you propose such protection may go away - harm done.
You don't actually think that unmarried couples with children are treated as well by our institutions as married couples with children are, do you?
If you don't buy any of that, how about we adjust the previous scenario, so that instead of having a child, the previously mentioned (new and inexperienced) couple ends up fighting all the time because they can't stand living with the stupidity in the dorms? Lets say that this results in scars in their relationship, which never fully heal. Then four years later they have a child, who learns to hate the world because his house is full of hatred.
These are risks. Not what will absolutely happen. It seemed as though you couldn't figure out why marriage has anything to do with the government. Now you have reasons why it does, even if you don't agree with them or how they work - eliminating it will change more than just who gets a piece of paper and who gives it out.
Do you still think it's as simple an issue as you did?
Well, for example, you could have people who decide to be roommates in college declare that they're married to get the married housing (and declare their divorce at the end of the year), which is often nicer than normal dormroom living.
This, in turn, could lead to a couple who is actually married and with a child having to live in the normal dorms - possibly exposing their child to the alcohol and drugs that often accompany young and immature non-parental college students. Then later, that scarred child could grow up a self-distructive sociopath.
That's one possible example of how it could affect other people, and how that could result in a danger to society. This is only hypothetical, of course, but it does show the point.
There are many government programs that are for families (including education, btw). Now I'm not going to argue it here, because I don't think you'd believe me, but sexual deviation has a negative effect upon growth and development. I don't believe that the government would want to sanction same-sex marriages because it would mean approving of their chance to have families (you can't convince me that I'm wrong here, but I'm not the one you'd have to; this is a question of the government's view). Of course, that's not the only reason, but it is one that is immediately obvious to me.
By the way, to some degree the government does decide fitness for marriage. You can't marry if you're underage without parental consent, and you can't marry any relative as genetically close (or closer) than a first cousin. To take your argument to the extreme, after gay marriages, what's next? Can any kind of fetishist marry?
NAMBLA weddings? Corpse/human weddings? Human/blow-up doll weddings? 10,000 person bigamy cults?
I thought most states divided the electoral by district...
That's another problem, I think. If you're in a state where your opinion differs from the people around you, your vote doesn't count.
Further, nobody is going to try to curry your favor, because your vote doesn't count.
And what's wrong with going to the major population centers? Are the states that much different from each other now that it matters?
Yes...I'm sure that's true.
People are always talking about the "conservative media," and that the education system is conservative controlled. Obviously if we rooted out these two main sources of Right-wingers - those who seek to indoctrinate the young, and those who seek to indoctrinate the ignorant, maybe we can get things at least to be equal - having as many on the left as on the right.
Do you agree with all of this?
Because it's entirely backwards. There are significantly more liberals in education and the media than conservatives, and there are more liberals than conservatives in general. I hope this changes soon. I find indoctrination disgusting; how can people make informed decisions if they're given input from only one side?
Maybe it seems like the left is shifting because it's being augmented on the right side.
I suppose most people think that the world is slowly going mad - that is, slowly going towards believing things that they don't. But not everyone can be correct.
I should also mention, I suppose, that most ultra-rich megacorps are already ultra-conservative. If they change into think-tanks that are conservative, nothing changes.
Any Joe can start a college and start handing out degrees, but nobody considers it worth anything until it's accredited. It won't be accredited until the government decides that it should be, so the government has to have a policy on education. Besides the need to hold a standard for education, what people learn is none of the governments business, of course.
If you think that marriage should be none of the governments business, are you saying that it shouldn't be a government sanctioned activity? Good luck convincing everyone.
More specifically, how do you feel about the electoral college system, which is the underlying cause of only having two parties?
Would you favor a voting system that makes it easy for a new party to spring up?
You know how it goes.
You look for a love song, and eDonkey latches onto that word and gives you files like
"People Germans Love.mp3"
Sometimes you do want to be able to have outbound connections.
You want a system he can't crack? Just cut the outgoing cable.
Haha...very funny.
I couldn't even download it, much less run it as root.
Where is it really?
I only trust good sources. Like random people I meet on Shashdot.
I think it's clear that he should strap it to himself and go to a heavily populated area and demand that beautiful women "show him them boobies."
I tend to blame the news more than the soccer moms for the problem. If, instead of saying stuff like "Politician X failed to live up to his promise today by ..."
They said, "In our opinion, these are the significant things that Politician X did today...let us stress, however, that this is a mere 7.48% of his discisions for today. Our comprehensive analysis can be found on our website."
Has it occurred to you that "newsperson voice" is a voice designed to convey confidence? As if they're absolutely convinced that what they're saying is the absolute truth? I'd rather they were more clear about how sure of their facts they are. Best way to make this happen is to ensure that nobody gets famous in news, because with no knowledge of who you are there can be no power in it, and it would be only about dissemination of the truth. Make it a guild where you have to take an oath to anonynomy, the way doctors do to not harm. And make them have to wear a mask and voice disguise to do reports. Maybe also have some sort of standard of training for fact-checking and for witnessing. Like in Stranger in a Strange Land.
Anyone you know who is a reporter you could just call "the reporter," or "the" for short. Like in Starship Titanic.
So how about making browsers have a standard ABI for plugins so that what you say is technically possible?
I'm thinking it's the lower quality landlines couples with the fact that therey's 1.2B of them. The US would probably have a more cell phones if it had more people.
Ultrapure water.
They use it to clean circuit boards right after they put all the components on them.
Where can you get it?
Good question. I've heard that some plants that use it to clean circuit boards will sometimes sell off water they don't need...or maybe you can rent lab time at one such plant? Don't know.
This is over the entire course of usage for my site.
It's a personal one, and I'm a computer guy...my guess is that about half of my visitors have computer-related interests, and that about half are from Slashdot. I'm getting 21.5% Mozilla, and 1.84% Konqueror (no one using Safari has yet visited). My guess is that Konqueror/Safari use is statistically negligible.
Here's my stats page.
As long as they keep sending their best and brightest to get their PhDs in the US, and a good portion of those continue to want to stay, we'll probably continue to have a good technological advantage.
Windows is designed like most ocean going cruise ships... massive, takes a lot of work to run, and it's pretty, and it's not engineered with ruggedness in mind. If anyone on board or off board pokes a hole in it, everybody gets wet. Also, by default, it's loading hatches (ports) are always open, allowing pirates to come aboard and poke holes. The designers also don't consider themselves responsible for anything you put on the boat, even though it doesn't come with a lot built-in.
Linux, on the other hand, is built more like the Titanic. It's the kind of OS that requires monumental stupidity to sink - just as the Titanic required such. All the sections are compartmentalized from the others, and if one part goes under, others remain.
The crew is more alert as well - in general, roughly twice as alert, in my experience. As soon as they find a leak, they patch it. They also purposefully build in other people's stuff and work with the people who made it to deal with patches.
Without vigilance, at some point you're probably going to be underwater with either vessel. But looking at the characteristics, it's a lot easier to find yourself swimming if you charter a Windows boat.
I think you have pretty clearly shown his point, easter1916. The US has a lot fewer people per acre than either of these two countries.
Having said that, though, shouldn't there be pockets of good internet service in big cities?
It would be worth it to me to move to a heavily populated area if I got 100MB/s internet access in return without paying $1000 a month. However, I have not heard of any heavily populated area in which any service provider offers such a thing, which makes me think that the US really doesn't have any excuse.
Or even worse:
-Don't get the tools from earth every environment you go to.
You don't find out about that problem 'till the very end of the game.
Thanks for the corrections.
Yeah, I'm only distributing those two. Those two were the only ones I found in freeware locations.
Actually, this has been proven using a direct proof. It will halt every time, given enough time.
Actually, I've got a lot of my old inform (the name of the interpreter) favorites up on my site (all of these are freeware now afaik).
I signed the applet myself. If you accept write permission, then you can save the state of the game to your hard drive and restore from it.
Obviously you've never tried to make big documents with Word.
Writing a book with pictures in Word is extremely difficult. It randomly moves stuff around, changes fonts, and deletes sections of the code when you exceed somewhere around 2MB file size (or 10 pages...I'm not really sure about the limit).
The interface isn't the whole problem either. Exporting to rtf format creates files that don't actually meet the rtf specification (which has been defined by Microsoft, by the way), so have errors (even when read by Microsoft's rtf importer), and html output is even worse.
Latex has more features than Word without any of these problems. Also, given the original "find a bug and win money" challenge, I think I can say it is probably one of the most stable pieces of software on the planet, and it has an extension mechanism built in (Word does too, by the way - several of them).
There are some things that Microsoft makes that beat the competition, but I don't think that Word is one of them.
Presumably molecules leap Planck distances to get from one point to another though, right?
Your definition could use some precision, I think.