“The surveillance and denunciation system is so rigorous,” Fontaine writes, “that family intimacy is almost nonexistent.”
Family intimacy is almost nonexistent.
Aside from the slave labor camps and the staggering body counts, I can think of no more devastating an indictment of totalitarian government than that sentence. Something broke inside me when I read it.
I certainly wasn’t intimate with anybody in Cuba—and I don’t mean physically any more than Fontaine did. I had to lie by omission every minute of every hour of every day just like the Cubans. A person could get used to this sort of thing, I suppose, but that does not make it less alienating. That’s the counterintuitive thing about totalitarian systems. They herd people into Borg-like collectives, yet every individual is savagely atomized.
A great example of the free market at work. Google does something that helps them relative to other advertisers. This competition leads to a better product for Gmail users.
Nope, Arielle Schesinger is a real person. The other commenters also check out.
Now, I can't guarantee that in addition to their normal work, they didn't also decide together in private to create this page as a joke. But that is almost getting into conspiracy theory territory...
"real examples academic writing in the critical theory style go on at great length and detail" "The very first thing you'd do in this kind of academic research is to assemble a bibliography,"
This is a blog post, not a formal article! The point is to be easy to write and read (as much as is possible in their framework) so as to encourage discussion.
This debate cannot take into account that, in the case of woman as subaltern, no ingredients for the constitution of the itinerary of the trace of a sexed subject can be gathered to locate the possibility of dissemination.
When it was revealed that the NSA spies on everyone and everything, there was some outrage in the US, but unfortunately not enough to change anything.
Hopefully Canada is different, and now that Canadian citizens know rather than suspect what there government is doing, they will get together and force their government stop collaborating with the NSA.
Well then, so life could have evolved slightly later, perhaps when CMB temperature was around 200K and the planetary body's heat led to an extra 100K of temperature. I'm making up numbers here, but there must be a point where "too hot" becomes "too cold", and at this point the temperature is right for life (as we know it).
It could just be that on average cancer is detected earlier now than in 1970. So everyone still lives the same amount of time, but the arbitrary 5-year clock starts ticking earlier.
Did you know that the average annual growth in GDP under Reagan was less than it was under Jimmy Carter? That doesn't figure in to your Reagan hagiography, does it?
So government policies have immediate measurable effects on the economy...
Of course "living in the Reagan years America" was good, especially compared to the years after his trickle-down insanity kicked in.
"All well-informed transit professionals that were contacted for their opinions spoke strongly against the concept of free fares for large systems, suggesting some minimal fare needs to be in place to discourage vagrancy, rowdiness and a degradation of service. "
The British monarchy is a great "face of the nation" when every woman in the world tunes in to watch Kate and William's royal wedding.
But not so great when Prince Harry is photographed at a party wearing a Nazi costume.
Figurehead monarchy can be good PR but also bad PR. It's good for national solidarity but bad for the idea that everyone is equal. European countries have pro- and anti-monarchist camps and I can see both sides of the argument.
The advantage of hereditary monarchy is not in the heir being "raised to rule" - the people teaching the heir were hardly experts in political philosophy.
Rather, it's in the knowledge that one specific person will be the next ruler, so the elites don't start a civil war every generation to decide the next ruler.
These days, when most people are committed to democracy and transitions of power are orderly and blood-free, that one advantage disappears.
(For the record, I think the modern viability of democracy is ultimately a result of improved technology and communications allowing for complicated formal political systems to be spread, understood, and followed. The Founding Fathers worried that democracy would not scale beyond the level of the Greek city-state, where all citizens could hold meetings and discussions with each other. Luckily for them and us, the printing press and more widespread literacy overcame this limitation.)
or have quite a number of difficult and important theorems been proven in the last couple decades? Fermat's last theorem, the Poincare conjecture, now lots of progress on this conjecture? What have mathematicians been doing right recently?
In a sea full of amino acids, you can perhaps expect proteins and life to evolve. But the quantity of proteins transmitted by a few bacteria is miniscule, and if the bacteria died, the amount wouldn't increase. No life could evolve except in the immediate vicinity of those bacteria, and the chances of that are extremely low.
Major powers these days can already kill anyone on the other side without suffering any deaths themselves (except against other major powers). But they don't. When was the last time the US nuked Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Somalia? Clearly there are other limitations involved.
You think defense attorneys are any more honest? They are equally willing to cheat and lie, they just work for a different client.
What this would accomplish is encouraging talented lawyers to become defense attorneys rather than prosecutors. And this would be good for society, in a "Better ten guilty men go free than one innocent man is convicted" sense.
Slashdot Mirror
That's because they were burning witches in immense quantities.
Or if you don't want to watch an hour long video, read the following essay about Cuba.
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/welcome-cuba
"almost 100% loss of manufacturing capacity and so also jobs"
Incorrect. US manufacturing capacity has increased greatly in the past few decades, not decreased.
However, it has also become much more automated, so it employs less people.
A great example of the free market at work. Google does something that helps them relative to other advertisers. This competition leads to a better product for Gmail users.
Washington State is lucky enough to have lots of cheap hydroelectric power. Most states don't.
Nope, Arielle Schesinger is a real person. The other commenters also check out.
Now, I can't guarantee that in addition to their normal work, they didn't also decide together in private to create this page as a joke. But that is almost getting into conspiracy theory territory...
"real examples academic writing in the critical theory style go on at great length and detail"
"The very first thing you'd do in this kind of academic research is to assemble a bibliography,"
This is a blog post, not a formal article! The point is to be easy to write and read (as much as is possible in their framework) so as to encourage discussion.
This debate cannot take into account that, in the case of woman as subaltern, no ingredients for the constitution of the itinerary of the trace of a sexed subject can be gathered to locate the possibility of dissemination.
but surprise isn't the issue here.
When it was revealed that the NSA spies on everyone and everything, there was some outrage in the US, but unfortunately not enough to change anything.
Hopefully Canada is different, and now that Canadian citizens know rather than suspect what there government is doing, they will get together and force their government stop collaborating with the NSA.
Well then, so life could have evolved slightly later, perhaps when CMB temperature was around 200K and the planetary body's heat led to an extra 100K of temperature. I'm making up numbers here, but there must be a point where "too hot" becomes "too cold", and at this point the temperature is right for life (as we know it).
Do you need human beings in order to bring back material for Earth-based scientists to analyze?
It could just be that on average cancer is detected earlier now than in 1970. So everyone still lives the same amount of time, but the arbitrary 5-year clock starts ticking earlier.
You contradict yourself.
Did you know that the average annual growth in GDP under Reagan was less than it was under Jimmy Carter? That doesn't figure in to your Reagan hagiography, does it?
So government policies have immediate measurable effects on the economy...
Of course "living in the Reagan years America" was good, especially compared to the years after his trickle-down insanity kicked in.
...except when they take many years to "kick in"?
Rumor has it that self-driving vehicles currently work extremely well in normal weather conditions, but not yet in unusual weather, particularly snow.
You wouldn't get to test that much in Silicon Valley. But you definitely would in Sweden.
So it will be interesting to see how this works out. If there are no problems, we're that much closer to being able to use self-driving cars anywhere.
So this algorithm can figure out what your political viewpoint is, as well as the viewpoint of a news article.
This could be used to show you articles which contradict your viewpoint - or articles which reinforce your viewpoint.
I think the latter is more likely in practice. It's more profitable.
That's what she said...
The part where they feed them green jelly beans.
http://xkcd.com/882/
Why didn't they cut his spinal cord? No more pain.
"All well-informed transit professionals that were contacted for their opinions spoke strongly against the concept of free fares for large systems, suggesting some minimal fare needs to be in place to discourage vagrancy, rowdiness and a degradation of service. "
For a full discussion of both sides of the argument:
http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/as-u.s.-transit-fares-increase-europe-starts-to-make-it-free
The British monarchy is a great "face of the nation" when every woman in the world tunes in to watch Kate and William's royal wedding.
But not so great when Prince Harry is photographed at a party wearing a Nazi costume.
Figurehead monarchy can be good PR but also bad PR. It's good for national solidarity but bad for the idea that everyone is equal. European countries have pro- and anti-monarchist camps and I can see both sides of the argument.
The advantage of hereditary monarchy is not in the heir being "raised to rule" - the people teaching the heir were hardly experts in political philosophy.
Rather, it's in the knowledge that one specific person will be the next ruler, so the elites don't start a civil war every generation to decide the next ruler.
These days, when most people are committed to democracy and transitions of power are orderly and blood-free, that one advantage disappears.
(For the record, I think the modern viability of democracy is ultimately a result of improved technology and communications allowing for complicated formal political systems to be spread, understood, and followed. The Founding Fathers worried that democracy would not scale beyond the level of the Greek city-state, where all citizens could hold meetings and discussions with each other. Luckily for them and us, the printing press and more widespread literacy overcame this limitation.)
except for all the others.
or have quite a number of difficult and important theorems been proven in the last couple decades? Fermat's last theorem, the Poincare conjecture, now lots of progress on this conjecture? What have mathematicians been doing right recently?
In a sea full of amino acids, you can perhaps expect proteins and life to evolve. But the quantity of proteins transmitted by a few bacteria is miniscule, and if the bacteria died, the amount wouldn't increase. No life could evolve except in the immediate vicinity of those bacteria, and the chances of that are extremely low.
Major powers these days can already kill anyone on the other side without suffering any deaths themselves (except against other major powers). But they don't. When was the last time the US nuked Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Somalia? Clearly there are other limitations involved.
You think defense attorneys are any more honest? They are equally willing to cheat and lie, they just work for a different client.
What this would accomplish is encouraging talented lawyers to become defense attorneys rather than prosecutors. And this would be good for society, in a "Better ten guilty men go free than one innocent man is convicted" sense.