There is also the problem that many Americans are inherently selfish.
I dunno... I've found that Americans are fairly generous, actually. Except the ones who actually have stuff. And the more stuff they get, the less generous they become.
No, it's really not. Because there are entrenched interests in keeping the status quo. Don't believe me? Then explain why ballot initiatives in several states to make marijuana legal have not yet resulted in open consumption.
Perhaps it's because the federal government simply comes in and does things their own way, regardless of the political will of the citizens. But the DEA has to justify their budget somehow, so they can just say, "Well, we're just doing our job. If you don't like it, change the federal laws." Which is a shit-ton harder to do, and they know it.
the schools cater to the lowest denominator in the classroom, handicapping the rest of the class
That doesn't explain the prevalence of Honors classes, AP classes, etc.
The problem is that there isn't a single problem but a whole rash of much larger, much more subtle problems. There's the problem of anti-intellectualism in American society. There's the problem of school funding being tied directly with property taxes (creating separate-but-unequal education that only reinforces class division). There's the problem of parents not giving a damn about their kid's future. There's the problem of those same parents having to work three jobs to make ends meet, making them too tired when they get home to give a shit about if their kids did their homework.
And there's the problem of people thinking there's just one problem, and if we could just fix that problem! then everything would be alright.
If standardized tests are so bad, why do educators constantly use them [...]
Because it's easier.
It's an easy metric for administrators to determine which teachers are "good" or "bad."
It's easier for bean-counters to establish which schools are poor performers so they can punish them by withholding funding (thanks, No Child Left Behind!)
People like simple answers to complicated problems. Parents want to be told the reason their kids are failing is because of a teacher, or a textbook, or the administration, or because their district isn't getting as much funding.
They don't want to be told that their kids are failing because they don't take any interest in their children's homework, or because our society admonishes smart kids (we even have a whole vocabulary for making fun of smart kids--geek, nerd, braniac, etc.) but rewards athletes for their great "contributions" to society.
Any answer that turns the mirror back on the questioner is BAD. Any answer that removes personal responsibility from the equation is GOOD.
We don't need to waste more time on the many who amount to nothing, but we do need to nurture the intelligent and motivated, for it is they who move society forward.
HAHAHA!
And whom do you think comprise the dregs of society? The ones who pull a country down with their poor health and crappy/missing work ethic? If you don't nurture them while they're young, they'll simply become a burden to the rest of society when they get older, requiring more social services, more police, more prisons (and thus, more of your taxes).
Ever watch the Olympics? You know how they measure the long jump? They take the distance from the back foot. Not the front foot. Society is measured not by the happiness of its best members, but by the misery that is tolerated from its worst.
American kids are F***'d up. Because... ...absentee/lackadaisical parenting Because... ...parents are too busy working Because... ...the American Dream requires a pipe and funny tobacco Because... ...the middle class existence is being inexorably eradicated by the very-wealthy Because... ...the very-wealthy are a bunch of selfish shits that think 99% of the population are there for their own personal entertainment.
I'm shocked to hear that Seinfeld's apartment is considered good in New York, because it looked positively tiny to me.
Having seen & lived in my share of NYC apartments, I would say Jerry's place was moderately large for a one-bed. A place like that would probably run $2000/mo. If you cut the living room and kitchen in half, it would be a more accurate portrayal, but it's not ridiculous.
The single most ludicrously outlandish apartment on television has to be the one shared by the girls in Friends with the enormous living room windows, private deck (not porch, mind you, but full-on DECK), two-bedrooms, giant kitchen... that's $3500-$4000/mo. easy. No way is someone working at a coffee shop living in a place that gigantic.
Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to shoddy engineering.
Never attribute to shoddy engineering that which you can attribute to malignant marketing.
You could probably build a thousand dolls with the hair that gets pulled out from the heads of engineers being told what features will ship--regardless of their completeness or tested reliability.
Driver support for both XP and Win2k3 64-bit is spotty at best.
No, actually, it's not. But this is a common misconception of those who haven't used it.
There are a number of application incompatibilities, too.
No, actually, there aren't. Common misconception of those who went ahead and installed Vista instead of trying XP64 because they drank the MS Kool-Aid about "compatibility" and "features" and are now regretting their decision after recognizing Vista for the monumental pile of dog feces that it is.
The name Kafka now gets invoked whenever someone doesn't immediately get what he/she wants.
Perhaps, but not in this case. Kafka's name is usually brought up to describe situations where bureaucracy has run amok and replaced reason with rules that are blindly followed, much to the protagonist's (and the reader's) frustration.
Hey, now. The only reason we even have classic cars is because they have so much steel that they can sit rotting in barns or fields for decades and still be restored. Modern cars won't last half as long with all the plastic and thinner sheet metal.
The "bigger picture," however, is that you will last longer in a modern car.
Read up on at-will employment law. The long-and-short of it is: yes, Virginia, they can fire your ass for any reason they like.
Of course, they might not say it's because you're black. Or disabled. Or gay. But they can just as easily make up any "acceptable" excuse to work around employment law (e.g., "Oh, Bill just wasn't fitting in with our corporate culture..." or "The Company was disappointed with Sue's attitude...")
For fun, google rescission health insurance and notice how the search results don't change much. That's because the health insurance industry is one of the worst and most shameless practitioners of rescission.
If they simply replaced all of the HFCS in everything that seems to have it nowadays, with pure cane sugar (not that processed white shit), then there wouldn't be half the problems there are now with weight issues.
I used to think this, too. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. Not that HFCS isn't terrible, but that the "pure" cane sugar is some panacea of health. Sugars wreak havoc on your liver, and are directly responsible for what's called metabolic syndrome. Not just HFCS, which (deservedly) gets plenty of bad press, but all fructose--doesn't matter if it comes from cane or corn. The only reason fruits get a pass is because they're wrapped in fiber, which naturally satiates the appetite.
Slashdot Mirror
There is also the problem that many Americans are inherently selfish.
I dunno... I've found that Americans are fairly generous, actually. Except the ones who actually have stuff. And the more stuff they get, the less generous they become.
How about a car analogy?
Driving kills.
Air bags save lives.
HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE? (Hint: try using your brain.)
How can you resell something that you never bought?
The software boxes didn't magically appear on his shelves.
everybody benefits from having educated people around
This is absolutely not true.
The exceptionally privileged benefit enormously from an ignorant, malleable public.
It's that simple.
No, it's really not. Because there are entrenched interests in keeping the status quo. Don't believe me? Then explain why ballot initiatives in several states to make marijuana legal have not yet resulted in open consumption.
Perhaps it's because the federal government simply comes in and does things their own way, regardless of the political will of the citizens. But the DEA has to justify their budget somehow, so they can just say, "Well, we're just doing our job. If you don't like it, change the federal laws." Which is a shit-ton harder to do, and they know it.
the schools cater to the lowest denominator in the classroom, handicapping the rest of the class
That doesn't explain the prevalence of Honors classes, AP classes, etc.
The problem is that there isn't a single problem but a whole rash of much larger, much more subtle problems. There's the problem of anti-intellectualism in American society. There's the problem of school funding being tied directly with property taxes (creating separate-but-unequal education that only reinforces class division). There's the problem of parents not giving a damn about their kid's future. There's the problem of those same parents having to work three jobs to make ends meet, making them too tired when they get home to give a shit about if their kids did their homework.
And there's the problem of people thinking there's just one problem, and if we could just fix that problem! then everything would be alright.
If standardized tests are so bad, why do educators constantly use them [...]
Because it's easier.
People like simple answers to complicated problems. Parents want to be told the reason their kids are failing is because of a teacher, or a textbook, or the administration, or because their district isn't getting as much funding.
They don't want to be told that their kids are failing because they don't take any interest in their children's homework, or because our society admonishes smart kids (we even have a whole vocabulary for making fun of smart kids--geek, nerd, braniac, etc.) but rewards athletes for their great "contributions" to society.
Any answer that turns the mirror back on the questioner is BAD. Any answer that removes personal responsibility from the equation is GOOD.
We don't need to waste more time on the many who amount to nothing, but we do need to nurture the intelligent and motivated, for it is they who move society forward.
HAHAHA!
And whom do you think comprise the dregs of society? The ones who pull a country down with their poor health and crappy/missing work ethic? If you don't nurture them while they're young, they'll simply become a burden to the rest of society when they get older, requiring more social services, more police, more prisons (and thus, more of your taxes).
Ever watch the Olympics? You know how they measure the long jump? They take the distance from the back foot. Not the front foot. Society is measured not by the happiness of its best members, but by the misery that is tolerated from its worst.
American kids are F***'d up.
...absentee/lackadaisical parenting
...parents are too busy working
...the American Dream requires a pipe and funny tobacco
...the middle class existence is being inexorably eradicated by the very-wealthy
...the very-wealthy are a bunch of selfish shits that think 99% of the population are there for their own personal entertainment.
Because...
Because...
Because...
Because...
Because...
Really, the mod's should be ashamed of themselves.
I'm shocked to hear that Seinfeld's apartment is considered good in New York, because it looked positively tiny to me.
Having seen & lived in my share of NYC apartments, I would say Jerry's place was moderately large for a one-bed. A place like that would probably run $2000/mo. If you cut the living room and kitchen in half, it would be a more accurate portrayal, but it's not ridiculous.
The single most ludicrously outlandish apartment on television has to be the one shared by the girls in Friends with the enormous living room windows, private deck (not porch, mind you, but full-on DECK), two-bedrooms, giant kitchen... that's $3500-$4000/mo. easy. No way is someone working at a coffee shop living in a place that gigantic.
Never attribute to shoddy engineering that which you can attribute to malignant marketing.
You could probably build a thousand dolls with the hair that gets pulled out from the heads of engineers being told what features will ship--regardless of their completeness or tested reliability.
Ever tried using those?
Using XP64 at home and at work.
Driver support for both XP and Win2k3 64-bit is spotty at best.
No, actually, it's not. But this is a common misconception of those who haven't used it.
There are a number of application incompatibilities, too.
No, actually, there aren't. Common misconception of those who went ahead and installed Vista instead of trying XP64 because they drank the MS Kool-Aid about "compatibility" and "features" and are now regretting their decision after recognizing Vista for the monumental pile of dog feces that it is.
See also: Win7 fans.
The name Kafka now gets invoked whenever someone doesn't immediately get what he/she wants.
Perhaps, but not in this case. Kafka's name is usually brought up to describe situations where bureaucracy has run amok and replaced reason with rules that are blindly followed, much to the protagonist's (and the reader's) frustration.
So in this case, the analogy is apt.
plus the allure of being able to use >3.5GB of RAM is nice
You have options.
Using a single batch file, rename a series of files so that their filenames start with the number of the iteration. For example:
test.txt -> 1_test.text
runme.bat -> 2_runme.bat
No thanks. I'll take my Big Black Box of Death over this modular monstrosity any day of the week (and for half the price).
That's what I get for not reading the article and going straight to the video.
lugging 2000 pounds of useless steel with you
Hey, now. The only reason we even have classic cars is because they have so much steel that they can sit rotting in barns or fields for decades and still be restored. Modern cars won't last half as long with all the plastic and thinner sheet metal.
The "bigger picture," however, is that you will last longer in a modern car.
the idea was to compare 50 years of the IIHS 1959 to 2009
They could have done it LAST YEAR.
Official answer: it depends.
Read up on at-will employment law. The long-and-short of it is: yes, Virginia, they can fire your ass for any reason they like.
Of course, they might not say it's because you're black. Or disabled. Or gay. But they can just as easily make up any "acceptable" excuse to work around employment law (e.g., "Oh, Bill just wasn't fitting in with our corporate culture..." or "The Company was disappointed with Sue's attitude...")
Google RESCISSION.
For fun, google rescission health insurance and notice how the search results don't change much. That's because the health insurance industry is one of the worst and most shameless practitioners of rescission.
If they simply replaced all of the HFCS in everything that seems to have it nowadays, with pure cane sugar (not that processed white shit), then there wouldn't be half the problems there are now with weight issues.
I used to think this, too. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. Not that HFCS isn't terrible, but that the "pure" cane sugar is some panacea of health. Sugars wreak havoc on your liver, and are directly responsible for what's called metabolic syndrome. Not just HFCS, which (deservedly) gets plenty of bad press, but all fructose--doesn't matter if it comes from cane or corn. The only reason fruits get a pass is because they're wrapped in fiber, which naturally satiates the appetite.
This is coming from a former soda-junkie.
Easier said than done if you're living paycheck-to-paycheck. Like 60% of Americans.
They're not over at Pixar/Ghibli telling them what to put in their movies, they just slap their names on the boxes
To be fair, Disney has had a direct hand in the casting for voice-over dubbing of the Ghibli classics. Most to rather surprisingly good effect.