I find it curious that the higher you go in the hierarchy, the less drug testing is done, until it disappears completely.
Managers and partners of large firms are not tested, while the rank and file are. Or some places have randoms that never touch senior employees.
Even in federal jobs, the elected officials (you know, the ones that have the most power) are never tested.
It's fucking insane.
I would like to organize a march on Washington, consisting of everyone who has ever been denied a job, fired, or lost benefits due to a drug test. Our peaceful protest would walk directly into the House of Representatives and force each and every one of those bastards to submit to a drug test on the spot.
So in the first part of your rebuttal you confirm, in no uncertain terms, leaving zero doubt, that Obama was an ineffectual president.
Then you try to create some plausible link between presidents separated by over a decade, all in some misguided attempt to bolste the appearance of your selected party.
Look dude, put down the pom-poms. These people you're putting faith in, they're screwing you. Teh have your head so messed up that you completely let them off the hook for being ineffective, blame dead people for their actions, and blind yourself to the harm ther did to our society all in the name of supporting business interests.
Don't be a worthless political zombie. If you're not in the top 1% of wealth holders, the government is not working for you. Helping them out by carrying their water, making excuses for them, and stirring up shit with other misguided idiots on the "other side" of the "political spectrum" doesn't help anyone. At best it reveals you as intellectually compromised. At worst you might actually trick some poor soul into believing in one of our so called political parties and create another zombie.
Not to be insulting, but you're exactly the last thing America needs. Wake up and smell the exploitation brother. You got mindfucked by great ideology, used by sociopathic power mongers. Get some distance and clarity.
You missed the point, or read what you wanted to read. Or, more likely, you have suspended your logic and intelligence because you are looking at a "religious document." Don't worry, you're not alone. Most people do it. Thank goodness theologians don't. Familiarity breeds contempt and all.
Jesus said that to one very specific person. Notice that he did not tell that to every person who followed him this, nor did he require it for everyone that followed him. You can note this from a variety of reasons, not the least of which is when he told some of his followers to buy swords to defend themselves.
So, logically we are left with the question "why did he tell this one guy that?" The answer is obvious from the text and from the context of what Jesus says about himself and his positions, and also from the reaction of the guy Jesus told that to. Namely that Jesus knew that this person loved money and wealth above all things. For this one person, he recommended putting away his one true love, said give it up completely, and instead give that same level of love and devotion to all mankind.
Of course, the guy said no. He was a money grubbing idiot who cared first for his wealth, and everything and everyone else second, third, or last by comparison. Lots of people put things above their love for all mankind. Its the default position we are raised into. Jesus just pointed out to that guy that he would be "serving two masters" if he didn't give up his love for money and possessions first.
Applying that one request, given to only one person in the entire new testament bible, to every Christian everywhere and everywhen is inconsistent. Jesus didn't do it, so way would you think it is logical to tell everyone that is what he really meant?
I imagine that not only customer facing personnel will be replaced by kiosks, but food preparation, waste disposal, cleaning, and restocking will become automated as well. Accompanying this, I can see a wave of new positions available for robotics, IT, and kiosk repair technicians. I can see a busy McDonalds location staffed by as little as 2 people, there mainly for emergencies and "turning the machines off and then on again" as necessary.
Its hard not to perceive the future of fast food locations. There will be an app that allows you to order on the way to the location. You pay from your phone and a robot prepares your meal just in time for your arrival. Timing this is trivial because you share your location with them. Forecasting the next 15-30 minutes of business through the app makes for fresher food and drastically more efficient order fulfillment. A dedicated lane for app-placed orders ensures quick in-and-out drive through service. Customers are served better, orders are machine precise, profits are higher, and the only people that lose are low income workers.
Customer service rep positions are replaced with machine repair and maintenance positions. The law of unintended consequences is preserved and the inevitable slide towards machine replacement for most human tasks is moved forward. Everyone wins, except of course for the people that the higher minimum wage laws and Affordable Care Act were designed to help. They have been priced out the job market. They are just too expensive to keep on board.
Maybe the Facebook news team didn't suppress any conservative stories. Maybe they just elevated other stories over all others. The effect may have been the same, but if that is the case he's technically not lying.
Not that equivocation of that level is commendable. Quite the opposite actually.
You misunderstand. Not a war for, but like all of the other government declared wars, a war against. So a war on prohibition would result in the removal of laws against prostitution and drugs.
Similarly, a war on war would mean defunding military efforts abroad, transferring those funds to diplomatic measures, etc.
I would attribute it to them rifling through their prepared sound byte laden scripted responses to see which one will sound like they are trying to answer the question rather than just stumping, evading, or lying.
Also, as they are quite wealthy, their give-a-fuck-ometer is pegged at 0 for empathetic interest in the actual issues that affect us plebs. They need to have things scripted, vetted, and memorized so they don't sound like themselves when they answer questions in public.
Also, in the name of fairness, justice, safety, and having an impairment-free government, we should randomly test all of our elected officials. Any positive test results in immediate termination from office. I bet you any amount of money you can think of that if we were to test our elected members of congress right now, many of them would test positive for illegal substances.
You just said "because everything I have ever observed is based on cause and effect, I can only imagine a creator that is constrained by the same rules of cause and effect."
That's like saying "We can simulate higher base number systems here inside the computer, but everyone knows that everything, everywhere, and everywhen is only made from ones and zeros."
It's a form of apologetics for believers of the great sky aliens.
They have cleared a place in their heart for the non-existent aliens to live. They preach that when we discover the magical sky creature aliens it will unite humanity, and usher in a new era of cooperation and prosperity. War will pass away and we will ascend to take our place with the beings of light that traverse the universe at a whim, wield mighty forces without repercussions, and posses no malice. They proselytize with equations and probability, talk of certainties and timelines for contact.
Bullshit.
There are no aliens. None have been observed, ever. There is no life on other planets. It doesn't exist. Quit tickling the "God believing" part of your brain with alien fantasies. Its counterproductive and idiotic. It makes you look like a True Believer and that reeks of religion.
Instead, try reality on for size. In all of the universe, with all of its innumerable galaxies, stars, and planets, this is the only one with life on it. Just this one simple blue orb in all of the infinitely vast sterility of space. Populated and peopled with incredibly complex and delicate expressions of the fundamental properties of elements and forces that make up matter. A mathematical impossibility, in spite of the vastness of space. The only example of its kind and the only one that ever will be.
And you dumbfucks are shitting all over it. Thanks.
I love Peter Watts idea that intelligence is common throughout the universe, but self-conscious intelligence is not, and is also counterproductive to survival. It is plausible that intelligent life without self-consciousness would not communicate in ways that are recognizable to us. They could be everywhere.
Another plausible idea is that intelligent life enters a race to master themselves as they master manipulating energy dense technologies. Losing means extinction. Winning means transforming beyond their inherited genetics, instincts, reflexes, and culture to a new stability of structure that eliminates the problems that would cause self-annihilation. The end result is a species so advanced meat-bags like us no longer appear intelligent and therefore have no interest for them.
Another permutation along this line would be that communicating with species that haven't progressed far enough to not kill themselves is dangerous for both civilizations and is therefore verboten.
Finally, I am not convinced that we understand all of the limitations that should be applied to Drake's equation. Sure there may be other life out there, but I am of the mind that it is incredibly rare, or non-existent. If it does exist I am torn between parallel evolution and radical difference. Regardless, I believe in the idea of Pan-spermia, but only in the sense that it is the right path for humanity to follow. Start spreading DNA based life everywhere we can. Drop it on to comets; Rain it down on Mars and Europa; seed it into the gas giants. Fire it into deep space. If there is alien life wherever DNA lands, lets see if it can keep up with our home grown varieties. Maybe get some hybrid vigor. Just quit treating the universe like some pristine reserve where life can't be set free.
The fact that our climate models are incapable of proving whether or not this is true, or even whether or not it comes true at some point, should give you pause when considering the veracity of our current models.
If that information is what is on the drive you can bet your bottom dollar that if he gives up the password the drive would be proven to contain nothing but the foulest CP ever. No one would lament that he was placed in general population the night before his trial and his cell mates, violent men serving life sentences without the chance of parole, who were brutally sexually abused as children, had somehow been misinformed that he was child rapist.
A stretch, I know, but a system where this is even remotely plausible has too much power.
and his identity is being concealed by the government which makes it hard for people to rally around him.
Odd that. Generally the first thing the police do when someone is accused of any CP violation is to release their information to the public, preferable before any of the evidence has been reviewed and definitely before there has been a trial of any kind. Strange that they would make the decision to not completely destroy this person's reputation as they have done with every other individual previously.
Apropos of how complicated this is, there is a story currently circulating about a San Fransisco police officer who had his phone searched due to a sexual assault accusation. He was not charged with sexual assault, just investigated. However in the process of the investigation, numerous racist sounding texts were noticed on his phone. These texts were then released to the public. Yep. That's right. Information from his private text messages, completely unrelated to the investigation, was released to the public.
So, what if there are things on that drive that are not CP, but that would be damaging to him if known? All the prosecutor needs to do is say its CP. The judge then incarcerates him until he gives in or is beaten to death by any of the double-Y chromosome inmates that learn what he is charged with. If he gives in and there's no CP, but possibly something else, he's still screwed.
That is too simple a solution for our criminal justice system to not abuse it.
He shouldn't say a thing. He shouldn't have to. Do not talk to the police. Do not self incriminate before a judge or jury.
If they don't have a case by now he should be let go.
This creates a dangerous precedent where the mere accusation of a certain crime can land you in jail indefinitely. That's a wonderful superpower that would be impossible for governments to abuse, even on a relatively short timeline. It's a short step from there to let the other prisoners know your mark is in for child porn, have the grapevine/telephone-game-effect make it into child rape. A single dose of jailhouse justice from someone with nothing to lose and that guy is dead. No government should have that power. No set of circumstances we create as a set of self governing free people should lead to that result, or even make it possible.
The social media sites need to start giving more visibility to a poster's reputation... not just the number of digits in their UID, but something that visibly shows the depth of their posting history, general consensus of the validity of their old posts, etc. I think the visibility for new/unproven members is fine the way it is, but a comment should readily show when the poster is new, or has an astroturfy history.
Sounds like creative way to describe a locked-in, echo-chamber discussion circle-jerk, moderated by single-viewpoint commissars. Just label any old dissenting opinion as astroturf, undermine the "validity of their old posts" in the rating system, etc.
If you want more diversity of opinion you will have to accept the responsibility of reading someone's post history for yourself, or taking their comments at face value and evaluating them on their own merits, and possibly eating a bit of troll fodder with your brain food. Its a messy problem. Unfortunately, attempts to clean it invariably end up with "cleansing," a totally different issue with problems of its own.
Perfect cover for Congress to vote themselves wage increases: they're doing it for the people! Absolutely brilliant!
So if the minimum wage goes from $7.50 per hour to $15.00 per hour that would mean doubling the salaries of Congress people. Congress people get substantially richer, and congress does it by spending other people's money for them.
Slashdot Mirror
I find it curious that the higher you go in the hierarchy, the less drug testing is done, until it disappears completely.
Managers and partners of large firms are not tested, while the rank and file are. Or some places have randoms that never touch senior employees.
Even in federal jobs, the elected officials (you know, the ones that have the most power) are never tested.
It's fucking insane.
I would like to organize a march on Washington, consisting of everyone who has ever been denied a job, fired, or lost benefits due to a drug test. Our peaceful protest would walk directly into the House of Representatives and force each and every one of those bastards to submit to a drug test on the spot.
I guarantee many of them would fail.
So in the first part of your rebuttal you confirm, in no uncertain terms, leaving zero doubt, that Obama was an ineffectual president.
Then you try to create some plausible link between presidents separated by over a decade, all in some misguided attempt to bolste the appearance of your selected party.
Look dude, put down the pom-poms. These people you're putting faith in, they're screwing you. Teh have your head so messed up that you completely let them off the hook for being ineffective, blame dead people for their actions, and blind yourself to the harm ther did to our society all in the name of supporting business interests.
Don't be a worthless political zombie. If you're not in the top 1% of wealth holders, the government is not working for you. Helping them out by carrying their water, making excuses for them, and stirring up shit with other misguided idiots on the "other side" of the "political spectrum" doesn't help anyone. At best it reveals you as intellectually compromised. At worst you might actually trick some poor soul into believing in one of our so called political parties and create another zombie.
Not to be insulting, but you're exactly the last thing America needs. Wake up and smell the exploitation brother. You got mindfucked by great ideology, used by sociopathic power mongers. Get some distance and clarity.
Or like affirmative action hires don't discriminate against applicants that are better qualified...
You missed the point, or read what you wanted to read. Or, more likely, you have suspended your logic and intelligence because you are looking at a "religious document." Don't worry, you're not alone. Most people do it. Thank goodness theologians don't. Familiarity breeds contempt and all.
Jesus said that to one very specific person. Notice that he did not tell that to every person who followed him this, nor did he require it for everyone that followed him. You can note this from a variety of reasons, not the least of which is when he told some of his followers to buy swords to defend themselves.
So, logically we are left with the question "why did he tell this one guy that?" The answer is obvious from the text and from the context of what Jesus says about himself and his positions, and also from the reaction of the guy Jesus told that to. Namely that Jesus knew that this person loved money and wealth above all things. For this one person, he recommended putting away his one true love, said give it up completely, and instead give that same level of love and devotion to all mankind.
Of course, the guy said no. He was a money grubbing idiot who cared first for his wealth, and everything and everyone else second, third, or last by comparison. Lots of people put things above their love for all mankind. Its the default position we are raised into. Jesus just pointed out to that guy that he would be "serving two masters" if he didn't give up his love for money and possessions first.
Applying that one request, given to only one person in the entire new testament bible, to every Christian everywhere and everywhen is inconsistent. Jesus didn't do it, so way would you think it is logical to tell everyone that is what he really meant?
It's going to be wars all the way down!
A war on a war on a war on a war on a war on a war on recursion!
You have a way with words sir. I salute you. Also your sig is excellent.
I imagine that not only customer facing personnel will be replaced by kiosks, but food preparation, waste disposal, cleaning, and restocking will become automated as well. Accompanying this, I can see a wave of new positions available for robotics, IT, and kiosk repair technicians. I can see a busy McDonalds location staffed by as little as 2 people, there mainly for emergencies and "turning the machines off and then on again" as necessary.
Its hard not to perceive the future of fast food locations. There will be an app that allows you to order on the way to the location. You pay from your phone and a robot prepares your meal just in time for your arrival. Timing this is trivial because you share your location with them. Forecasting the next 15-30 minutes of business through the app makes for fresher food and drastically more efficient order fulfillment. A dedicated lane for app-placed orders ensures quick in-and-out drive through service. Customers are served better, orders are machine precise, profits are higher, and the only people that lose are low income workers.
Customer service rep positions are replaced with machine repair and maintenance positions. The law of unintended consequences is preserved and the inevitable slide towards machine replacement for most human tasks is moved forward. Everyone wins, except of course for the people that the higher minimum wage laws and Affordable Care Act were designed to help. They have been priced out the job market. They are just too expensive to keep on board.
Return to the restroom and adjust your skirt, your bias is showing.
Maybe the Facebook news team didn't suppress any conservative stories. Maybe they just elevated other stories over all others. The effect may have been the same, but if that is the case he's technically not lying.
Not that equivocation of that level is commendable. Quite the opposite actually.
You misunderstand. Not a war for, but like all of the other government declared wars, a war against. So a war on prohibition would result in the removal of laws against prostitution and drugs.
Similarly, a war on war would mean defunding military efforts abroad, transferring those funds to diplomatic measures, etc.
I would attribute it to them rifling through their prepared sound byte laden scripted responses to see which one will sound like they are trying to answer the question rather than just stumping, evading, or lying.
Also, as they are quite wealthy, their give-a-fuck-ometer is pegged at 0 for empathetic interest in the actual issues that affect us plebs. They need to have things scripted, vetted, and memorized so they don't sound like themselves when they answer questions in public.
Also, in the name of fairness, justice, safety, and having an impairment-free government, we should randomly test all of our elected officials. Any positive test results in immediate termination from office. I bet you any amount of money you can think of that if we were to test our elected members of congress right now, many of them would test positive for illegal substances.
I vote for a war on Prohibition. Or how about a War on War.
Awesome post. Wish I had mod points. Very succinctly put.
They got their trophy. It's a Darwin Award.
You just said "because everything I have ever observed is based on cause and effect, I can only imagine a creator that is constrained by the same rules of cause and effect."
That's like saying "We can simulate higher base number systems here inside the computer, but everyone knows that everything, everywhere, and everywhen is only made from ones and zeros."
I prefer my own quote:
It's empty, but that just because we haven't finished growing into it yet.
It's a form of apologetics for believers of the great sky aliens.
They have cleared a place in their heart for the non-existent aliens to live. They preach that when we discover the magical sky creature aliens it will unite humanity, and usher in a new era of cooperation and prosperity. War will pass away and we will ascend to take our place with the beings of light that traverse the universe at a whim, wield mighty forces without repercussions, and posses no malice. They proselytize with equations and probability, talk of certainties and timelines for contact.
Bullshit.
There are no aliens. None have been observed, ever. There is no life on other planets. It doesn't exist. Quit tickling the "God believing" part of your brain with alien fantasies. Its counterproductive and idiotic. It makes you look like a True Believer and that reeks of religion.
Instead, try reality on for size. In all of the universe, with all of its innumerable galaxies, stars, and planets, this is the only one with life on it. Just this one simple blue orb in all of the infinitely vast sterility of space. Populated and peopled with incredibly complex and delicate expressions of the fundamental properties of elements and forces that make up matter. A mathematical impossibility, in spite of the vastness of space. The only example of its kind and the only one that ever will be.
And you dumbfucks are shitting all over it. Thanks.
I love Peter Watts idea that intelligence is common throughout the universe, but self-conscious intelligence is not, and is also counterproductive to survival. It is plausible that intelligent life without self-consciousness would not communicate in ways that are recognizable to us. They could be everywhere.
Another plausible idea is that intelligent life enters a race to master themselves as they master manipulating energy dense technologies. Losing means extinction. Winning means transforming beyond their inherited genetics, instincts, reflexes, and culture to a new stability of structure that eliminates the problems that would cause self-annihilation. The end result is a species so advanced meat-bags like us no longer appear intelligent and therefore have no interest for them.
Another permutation along this line would be that communicating with species that haven't progressed far enough to not kill themselves is dangerous for both civilizations and is therefore verboten.
Finally, I am not convinced that we understand all of the limitations that should be applied to Drake's equation. Sure there may be other life out there, but I am of the mind that it is incredibly rare, or non-existent. If it does exist I am torn between parallel evolution and radical difference. Regardless, I believe in the idea of Pan-spermia, but only in the sense that it is the right path for humanity to follow. Start spreading DNA based life everywhere we can. Drop it on to comets; Rain it down on Mars and Europa; seed it into the gas giants. Fire it into deep space. If there is alien life wherever DNA lands, lets see if it can keep up with our home grown varieties. Maybe get some hybrid vigor. Just quit treating the universe like some pristine reserve where life can't be set free.
The fact that our climate models are incapable of proving whether or not this is true, or even whether or not it comes true at some point, should give you pause when considering the veracity of our current models.
If that information is what is on the drive you can bet your bottom dollar that if he gives up the password the drive would be proven to contain nothing but the foulest CP ever. No one would lament that he was placed in general population the night before his trial and his cell mates, violent men serving life sentences without the chance of parole, who were brutally sexually abused as children, had somehow been misinformed that he was child rapist.
A stretch, I know, but a system where this is even remotely plausible has too much power.
and his identity is being concealed by the government which makes it hard for people to rally around him.
Odd that. Generally the first thing the police do when someone is accused of any CP violation is to release their information to the public, preferable before any of the evidence has been reviewed and definitely before there has been a trial of any kind. Strange that they would make the decision to not completely destroy this person's reputation as they have done with every other individual previously.
Apropos of how complicated this is, there is a story currently circulating about a San Fransisco police officer who had his phone searched due to a sexual assault accusation. He was not charged with sexual assault, just investigated. However in the process of the investigation, numerous racist sounding texts were noticed on his phone. These texts were then released to the public. Yep. That's right. Information from his private text messages, completely unrelated to the investigation, was released to the public.
Check out the article here: http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/26/...
So, what if there are things on that drive that are not CP, but that would be damaging to him if known? All the prosecutor needs to do is say its CP. The judge then incarcerates him until he gives in or is beaten to death by any of the double-Y chromosome inmates that learn what he is charged with. If he gives in and there's no CP, but possibly something else, he's still screwed.
That is too simple a solution for our criminal justice system to not abuse it.
Exceptionally well put. Thank you; if I had mod points... etc.
He shouldn't say a thing. He shouldn't have to. Do not talk to the police. Do not self incriminate before a judge or jury.
If they don't have a case by now he should be let go.
This creates a dangerous precedent where the mere accusation of a certain crime can land you in jail indefinitely. That's a wonderful superpower that would be impossible for governments to abuse, even on a relatively short timeline. It's a short step from there to let the other prisoners know your mark is in for child porn, have the grapevine/telephone-game-effect make it into child rape. A single dose of jailhouse justice from someone with nothing to lose and that guy is dead. No government should have that power. No set of circumstances we create as a set of self governing free people should lead to that result, or even make it possible.
The social media sites need to start giving more visibility to a poster's reputation... not just the number of digits in their UID, but something that visibly shows the depth of their posting history, general consensus of the validity of their old posts, etc. I think the visibility for new/unproven members is fine the way it is, but a comment should readily show when the poster is new, or has an astroturfy history.
Sounds like creative way to describe a locked-in, echo-chamber discussion circle-jerk, moderated by single-viewpoint commissars. Just label any old dissenting opinion as astroturf, undermine the "validity of their old posts" in the rating system, etc.
If you want more diversity of opinion you will have to accept the responsibility of reading someone's post history for yourself, or taking their comments at face value and evaluating them on their own merits, and possibly eating a bit of troll fodder with your brain food. Its a messy problem. Unfortunately, attempts to clean it invariably end up with "cleansing," a totally different issue with problems of its own.
Perfect cover for Congress to vote themselves wage increases: they're doing it for the people! Absolutely brilliant!
So if the minimum wage goes from $7.50 per hour to $15.00 per hour that would mean doubling the salaries of Congress people. Congress people get substantially richer, and congress does it by spending other people's money for them.