One of the things I very enjoyed about college was meeting people from other countries, and learning a little about them. Something that struck me was despite what TV, my liberal professors, and fellow American students were telling me, other cultures and perspectives really do exist, and few of them actually follow the school of thought that is being popularized in the U.S. We tend to take a very parochial, Euro-centric view of the world. So, while multi-culurism is preached, what is really meant is just the one that agrees with Euro-liberalism. There are other ideas, many that are in direct conflict with ours.
For example, China. China is a very conservative country, that has a value system going back thousands of years. They have withstood several invasions, and their culture proved stronger, ultimately subverting their would be conquerers. They are very proud of this. They view the West insistence that only their values matter and are correct as a profound intrusion and disgustingly arrogant. They value family. We no longer do. They value structure and order; we clearly do not. They see the collective as important, we seem fixated celebrating the rebel. They think the majority should set the tone of commerce and culture. We have....well, read the news. Most of all, they teach their kids to love their country. For some reason, we have made it cool to be self loathing
The net result is that they think of us as the enemy. As an extension, the believe war will come because the leftist philosophies of the lest simply cannot leave others alone. If you stop and think about it, this is the main driving force behind Muslim aggression and other little rebellions around the world. They do not follow the party line, and deeply understand that they are being threatened.
So, I guess I am trying to say is that the world is a tough place. There are competing ideas and ways people want to organize their societies. The views that many on these forums hold as unchallenged and sacrosanct create enemies and alienate people. Is your world view really so limited that you are surprised by this?I
When I first saw unreal engine, I thought this was going to be a science story about a new reality distortion machine that created a mass hallucination about a certain recent FBI ruling. Sadly, this turned out not to be the case.
Despite bias and tastes, both Trump and Sanders are true outsiders bot beholden to the machine, and either one has a real chance of shaking up the system. I do not agree at all with Sanders, but I do believe he is sincere. If Justice existed, and Sanders became the president, I would honestly support him. I can live with honest opposition. You can argue and debate, and have synthesis for real policy change. To me, this would be a step-up. I would like to imagine that the intellectually honest people in the forum could be the same way about trump. Either one would be a step-up.
Now, we are likely to get someone who is now shown to be literally above the law. Things will only grow worse from there.
Except J. Edgar Hoover generally used his abuse of power for the good of the country. I know many have this feeling it was otherwise, mostly because this is what Hollywood teachers. He is famous for purging communists who were infiltrating the country, which actually was happening. There were many of these in Hollywood, much like today. They resent that. Also, he had societal rules like, no killing children in movies. Also, bad guys must be brought to justice at the end. I suppose you can celebrate having more grit in movies...much in the same way you can celebrate the resulting urban decay by moving to Detroit etc.
He also combated organized crime, Nazi infiltration, and well, making the FBI. The FBI was originally meant to be a police force filled with intelligent people, who used the most modern science and methods, to catch the worst criminals. Now, we have Hillary selling favors and state secrets, and they seem disinterested.
1. you never actually defended the claim of treason, or stated what it was. However, hilariously, you were moved up for making a pro-liberal statement, without any defense, again. Bias much?
2. A tactic of communists, American Liberals, or the quite stupid, is to set up a straw man example, and then continue to attack it, instead of never actually addressing the core issue If your flawed hypothesis was correct, and all republicans were evil, why does this excuse a Liberal from behaving the same way? Hillary did commit those crimes. If you were as moral and true as you (falsely) believe yourself to be, then you would demand that she be purged from the ideology because she is acting like those "evil" other guys. But, since you are not very moral, true, or remotely intellectually honest, you will excuse any behavior, no matter how vile or in contradiction to your so called values, as long as she wears the same sports jersey.
This is what I find disgusting.It is not the ideology itself, but the weak, self-serving sycophants who seem drawn to it these days, but really do not believe in it.
Since in the US, for better or worse, there are two political parties. It is somewhat comical for you to take a high horse, and say you have voted for the second or third most popular. Funnier, that you rule out libertarian and no-names, when by your own admission, you voted for at least one no-name. It is easy to claim unbiased, harder to actually be that way. Even harder to be self-critical, which you are apparently not.
In any case, after all the comments and down-modding, there is still not one logical, referenced/defended comment that counters the initial assertion: that Hillary is more Slitherian than any of those listed. A rational person may not like Trump. However, only an irrational person can examine Ms. Clinton and pretend she does not have serious flaws. Flaws so great, that if she had an R by her name, instead of a D, most on these forums would be calling for prison, impeachment, or worse. The fact that you and others can not be that self-critical, means that for you politics is just a bad religion, and not grounded in any values or coherent thought. If it was, your ideology demands her rejection.
But, like authors of bad fan fiction, you defend anyone and anything that claims to be linked to the "cause", even if they are antithetical to the cause. What makes this even more sad is that Liberalism, as an ideology is very quite nobel. However, the modern idiots claiming to practice it are seldom actually doing so.
Again, no evidence. Just a flat out bald, stupid, incorrect statement filled with hyperbole. But, it says all liberal's are cool, so it must be correct, right?
THE NEW APPLE: Think Monolithic
Here is to the trendy ones
The hipsters
The corporate lawyers
The sandbox ecosystem, all doing what they are told
The ones who think monolithically. The ones who in the name of fashion, do what they are told.
You can trope them. You can parrot them. Or, just go along with them
The one thing you can't do is, ignore them
Because they are the new power
While some may see them as the progressive ones, we know different
Because they are the ones who now limit the world, and you had better go with the flow. THINK MONOLITHIC
Are we talking about Maverick Top Gun or someone more like Cougar? I mean, Mav may have dad issues, but he is a natural. The other guy barely had any lines.
Siri: I think you may to see hot naked girls with bananas and cream. Shall I show you?
Me: Umm, no Siri, I have no idea why would ever think I would want to see that.
Girlfriend: Glares and glares and glares
A point that most people are missing is that the countries that are most nationalist, most economically self centered, and most limit immigration are by far the most successful in the modern world. We need to look no further than China. China makes only one sided trade deals that heavily favor the country. They have tariffs. They force tech transfer of any company that does business there.
They severely limit immigration. Although several sources claim it is growing by leaps and bounds, those measures are only by percentage. In total, China has about a half million immigrants living in a country of 1.5 billion. This is like saying I hate vegetables, and I ate one carrot last week, and now I ate two carrots this week, so I had a 100% increase in vegetable intake. In reality, anyway you look at it, not many vegetables are eaten.
History shows that only when countries have a sense of self and purpose do they do economically well. This is true of China, Korea, Britain in the past, and any other rising nation. The common people of the West fundamentally understand this, even if their leaders do not. The wealth gap is growing. The great pushback is happening in response. The smarter people in many nations simply understand that despite what they are told by the "elites" countries become more successful as a result.
I think this article loses sight of a very important distinction about what actually happened when Apple removed the floppy drive. First, there were a few generations of machines that had both floppy and CD-rom drives together. During that time, computers were getting exponentially more powerful every year, and files were starting not to fit on the floppy drive, outside of Word documents. The CD was a superior technology, and it was evident to most people. Also, that whole internet thing was starting to happen, and files could be moved that way. (the i in iMac is for internet). Apple noticed that the floppy drive was not being used by many people at all.
So in response, Apple made the then bold decision to remove the floppy disc. They did this in a new revolutionary model of the mac dubbed the iMac. It was cute, bondi blue machine. It was $1299, and replaced the mac 5500 which was about $2000. See, by not having the floppy disc and a few other things, the cost was REDUCED and part of the savings was passed on the consumer.
For those determined and still in love with the floppy disc, there were able to purchase an external floppy drive that connected through that then new fangled USB port. The consumer was able to take some of their cost savings and make a choice. A good thing, choice.
Now contrast this with the removal of the headphone port. Those who are extreme Apple apologists or who do not think it through blithely state that this is an example of Apple just knowing better than us, like before. But, unlike before, there is NO cost savings for us. In fact, the cost of peripherals etc actually goes up. In addition, the new port and the head port are not available at the same time, like floppies and cds were before. There is no transition period, or the ability to demonstrate how the new media is superior. There is no way the consumer, comparing the two, can say, "you know, I never use that silly headphone port. I am so done with it."
Being a silly consumer, I really have seen no clear advantages that the system offers. I find the current level of head phones pretty good. I listen to music outside, which is pretty noisy. So, any crisp new nuance possibly given by the new interface seems like it would be meaningless in the real world. The old headphone jack is physically robust. I heard mention on these forums the new port is less sturdy. All I know is that my iPhone is pretty @!#$$ expensive, and I would hate to have it bricked due to a flimsy port failing.
So, this is a deep departure from the Apple of old, into what I am increasingly seeing as the Apple of new. The old Apple would anticipate what the customer wants based upon what the customer is doing. The new apple seems fascinated with control. Oh, and making computers and devices that are ever slimmer because upper management has a Fetish, not because it makes it better.
So, it doesn't strike anyone else as funny/sad that as a group, these artists claim to be among the most liberal people on earth? They have made such huge fortunes writing so many songs about how love is all you need, and how we should all just share more. They preach about this at concerts, and wag their fingers at others who dare live by a profit motive. Yet, these "egalitarians" make about 1000 times the common man. Worse, they bitch if art is made more free and accessible.
None of your statements are taken by fact by anything approaching a reputable source. I am sure there is a blogger in a basement somewhere who spewed what you wrote. Even Alex Jones would say your comments are from Crazy Town.
So, my dear slashdot, you modded a guy up for stating random, historically dishonest things supported by nothing....because it sounded strong and pro-liberal?
Game.
Set.
Match.
Accusing others is a cute way to deflect criticism instead of actually living up to the question. Even if you were right, it still does not discount anything I said, which is all true, and verifiable...even using your biased media. Again, it is sad that you can not own up to it. You are such a poor, deluded, shell of a person, you can not even recognize any faults by any candidate in your cult, I mean political party.
And BTW, Reagan did not pay Iran to kidnap Americans. He paid to get them back. Perhaps read something other than a blog.
Accusing others is a cute way to deflect criticism instead of actually living up to the question. Even if you were right, it still does not discount anything I said, which is all true, and verifiable...even using your biased media. Again, it is sad that you can not own up to it. You are such a poor, deluded, shell of a person, you can not even recognize any faults by any candidate in your cult, I mean political party.
Although I am sure it is fun party conversation in the pathetic echo chamber that you exist in, but in reality, none of the presidents, democrat or republican are guilty of crimes against humanity. That is a very strong accusation and reflects a very twisted view of reality. History is replete with real human tragedy, and the fact that you think someone who disagrees with you about tax policy is on that level highlights the depths of your sheer will to live in ignorance.
Hillary did set up illegal servers. She did sell favors for campaign money to those who actually do commit crimes against humanity, and you are ok with it since you play for the same team.
Of the 3 listed, only Hillary has actually committed felony level crimes, and due to her guile and family power, will get away with it. She has sold state secrets and favors for campaign money, and then erased the evidence on private servers. She perjured herself about having no secret clearance emails on several occasions. She also let a US ambassador and several soldiers die, because it was politically favorable to do so in the midst of an election. If she had the influence of the average forum user, she would have been in prison with no questions asked. She personifies Slitherian, and not the good aspects of it either.
I am just....so sickened by this reflexive liberal bias in these forums. Most of you don't even adhere to the thoughts and beliefs with your own, fucking, ideology. You claim to be for free expression, but only when it agrees with you. You claim to care about women's issues, as long as it does not get in the way of winning an election. You say you are for fairness, then only hire people with the same ideology. You claim you love intellectual challenge, then only read from sources that have the same view, and shower pure, unadulterated and irrational hatred on anyone who deigns to poke a hole in your sacrosanct belief. You turn a blind eye to the sins of anyone who claims to be playing for your team, no matter what they do. You are exactly why the country's founders thought most people are too stupid, too lazy, and too ignorant to vote, because frankly, you are.
It's interesting. About twice as many people die from alcohol related issues than guns in the U.S. Per year, yet, the "socially responsible" people who have jumped in the anti-gun bad wagon do not utter one, single peep about this. They do not refuse to make emoji about the topic, and in fact, some seem to be there. Funny how that works. It almost as if there is a large group of people who want to appear to care about things, than really care. Almost...
With that level of understanding of technology, my guess is that you are a millennial. Let me help you out, pumpkin
1. Robots won't stop teen from coming into the store and spray painting penises on the all the terminals.
You may want to read about image recognition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... For noticing changes to a surface, this is actually an easy thing for the computer to do these days. Picking a signature out of random mosaic is pretty hard, but if you add something to a known pattern? Not so much.
2. Robots won't notice the homeless guy....
Again, see the image recognition ideas above. For the average guy on these forums, not very hard to program in a routine that shows the an unchanging image state in a booth for time X. Also, they have this little thing called electronic noses, which could find a tuna smell quite readily if that is really a concern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
3. Won't stop pooping on table: Not only would the nose find it, but the computer would have even called the cops before he finished dropping his load.
Btw, your pimple faced unmotivated Millennial friend is probably not going to bother to do anything about tuna man, since like, that would take effort. Can't have that.
4. Robot would not know how to deal with the destructive....
Actually, the robot would know. It would call the police, or deploy a non lethal countermeasure without any prejudice. IN fact, judging by the various destructive riots and "protests" given savages in the last few years, it is the police and government who does not know who to deal with people destroying the stuff of other people.
Let me go as far to say is that YOU are the reason Skynet eventually evolves.
After a mishap with an iPhone, my wife decided to punish me by making me have a windows phone, until it was time to renew a phone contract.
Unless you have had the "joy" of using one of these phones, you can't imagine how bad it was. Its interface was truly awful. For things that you would want to do often, it was buried under submenus. It was filled with MS advertising or large buttons for services that one may never want. Then, it gets worse from there.
I would use the thing to listen to youtube while walking my dog. Or, at least I wanted to. The thing was, the helpful little guy would always try to find me a wireless network to attach to. ANY wireless network. It would ask me constantly if I wanted to join them. Like a Fratboy from hell, NO was never really an answer. Then, there was those special moments when it tried to attach to wireless network, it would get tangled with itself, then crash youtube. It would say the video you were just watching was in an unplayable format. No way you could see it...unless of course you hard reset the phone.
Another gem occurred when it wanted me to sign up for some windows service, which I think was akin to iTunes. I only think this because i did not succeed. Midway through the process, it crashed. It said I could call them to finish. I never did.
One day, I was so angry at the phone, that my daughter accidentally dropped it from our second story loft. It hit the tile floor and got smashed to pieces. My wife was angry, so I offered to chastise my child. This involved taking her for icecream later, and talking about how much I hated the toaster....
At the end of the day, I was punished again by being regulated to a "dumb" flip phone which only really worked for calls, which I like. I ended up getting a new iPhone 3 months later. And somewhere along the way, our toaster got killed and we got a new one of those too. Life is now placid in a windows free environment and my daughter got a lot of ice-cream.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the things I very enjoyed about college was meeting people from other countries, and learning a little about them. Something that struck me was despite what TV, my liberal professors, and fellow American students were telling me, other cultures and perspectives really do exist, and few of them actually follow the school of thought that is being popularized in the U.S. We tend to take a very parochial, Euro-centric view of the world. So, while multi-culurism is preached, what is really meant is just the one that agrees with Euro-liberalism. There are other ideas, many that are in direct conflict with ours.
For example, China. China is a very conservative country, that has a value system going back thousands of years. They have withstood several invasions, and their culture proved stronger, ultimately subverting their would be conquerers. They are very proud of this. They view the West insistence that only their values matter and are correct as a profound intrusion and disgustingly arrogant. They value family. We no longer do. They value structure and order; we clearly do not. They see the collective as important, we seem fixated celebrating the rebel. They think the majority should set the tone of commerce and culture. We have....well, read the news. Most of all, they teach their kids to love their country. For some reason, we have made it cool to be self loathing
The net result is that they think of us as the enemy. As an extension, the believe war will come because the leftist philosophies of the lest simply cannot leave others alone. If you stop and think about it, this is the main driving force behind Muslim aggression and other little rebellions around the world. They do not follow the party line, and deeply understand that they are being threatened.
So, I guess I am trying to say is that the world is a tough place. There are competing ideas and ways people want to organize their societies. The views that many on these forums hold as unchallenged and sacrosanct create enemies and alienate people. Is your world view really so limited that you are surprised by this?I
When I first saw unreal engine, I thought this was going to be a science story about a new reality distortion machine that created a mass hallucination about a certain recent FBI ruling. Sadly, this turned out not to be the case.
Well, I did say intellectually honest people....
Despite bias and tastes, both Trump and Sanders are true outsiders bot beholden to the machine, and either one has a real chance of shaking up the system. I do not agree at all with Sanders, but I do believe he is sincere. If Justice existed, and Sanders became the president, I would honestly support him. I can live with honest opposition. You can argue and debate, and have synthesis for real policy change. To me, this would be a step-up. I would like to imagine that the intellectually honest people in the forum could be the same way about trump. Either one would be a step-up.
Now, we are likely to get someone who is now shown to be literally above the law. Things will only grow worse from there.
Since exposing secrets is apparently not a crime anymore, Snowden and other people who did this are free to come home, right?
Except J. Edgar Hoover generally used his abuse of power for the good of the country. I know many have this feeling it was otherwise, mostly because this is what Hollywood teachers. He is famous for purging communists who were infiltrating the country, which actually was happening. There were many of these in Hollywood, much like today. They resent that. Also, he had societal rules like, no killing children in movies. Also, bad guys must be brought to justice at the end. I suppose you can celebrate having more grit in movies...much in the same way you can celebrate the resulting urban decay by moving to Detroit etc.
He also combated organized crime, Nazi infiltration, and well, making the FBI. The FBI was originally meant to be a police force filled with intelligent people, who used the most modern science and methods, to catch the worst criminals. Now, we have Hillary selling favors and state secrets, and they seem disinterested.
1. you never actually defended the claim of treason, or stated what it was. However, hilariously, you were moved up for making a pro-liberal statement, without any defense, again. Bias much?
2. A tactic of communists, American Liberals, or the quite stupid, is to set up a straw man example, and then continue to attack it, instead of never actually addressing the core issue If your flawed hypothesis was correct, and all republicans were evil, why does this excuse a Liberal from behaving the same way? Hillary did commit those crimes. If you were as moral and true as you (falsely) believe yourself to be, then you would demand that she be purged from the ideology because she is acting like those "evil" other guys. But, since you are not very moral, true, or remotely intellectually honest, you will excuse any behavior, no matter how vile or in contradiction to your so called values, as long as she wears the same sports jersey.
This is what I find disgusting.It is not the ideology itself, but the weak, self-serving sycophants who seem drawn to it these days, but really do not believe in it.
Since in the US, for better or worse, there are two political parties. It is somewhat comical for you to take a high horse, and say you have voted for the second or third most popular. Funnier, that you rule out libertarian and no-names, when by your own admission, you voted for at least one no-name. It is easy to claim unbiased, harder to actually be that way. Even harder to be self-critical, which you are apparently not.
In any case, after all the comments and down-modding, there is still not one logical, referenced/defended comment that counters the initial assertion: that Hillary is more Slitherian than any of those listed. A rational person may not like Trump. However, only an irrational person can examine Ms. Clinton and pretend she does not have serious flaws. Flaws so great, that if she had an R by her name, instead of a D, most on these forums would be calling for prison, impeachment, or worse. The fact that you and others can not be that self-critical, means that for you politics is just a bad religion, and not grounded in any values or coherent thought. If it was, your ideology demands her rejection.
But, like authors of bad fan fiction, you defend anyone and anything that claims to be linked to the "cause", even if they are antithetical to the cause. What makes this even more sad is that Liberalism, as an ideology is very quite nobel. However, the modern idiots claiming to practice it are seldom actually doing so.
Again, no evidence. Just a flat out bald, stupid, incorrect statement filled with hyperbole. But, it says all liberal's are cool, so it must be correct, right?
Except, you never listed them. Saying poop doesn't stink, doesn't mean poop doesn't stink. Yours are no different.
So apple went from think different to this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
THE NEW APPLE: Think Monolithic
Here is to the trendy ones
The hipsters
The corporate lawyers
The sandbox ecosystem, all doing what they are told
The ones who think monolithically. The ones who in the name of fashion, do what they are told.
You can trope them. You can parrot them. Or, just go along with them
The one thing you can't do is, ignore them
Because they are the new power
While some may see them as the progressive ones, we know different
Because they are the ones who now limit the world, and you had better go with the flow.
THINK MONOLITHIC
I miss Apple.
According to the Oxford English dictionary, decimate meaning to kill 1/10 is something of an urban legend. You can read it for yourself here.
http://blog.oxforddictionaries...
Are we talking about Maverick Top Gun or someone more like Cougar? I mean, Mav may have dad issues, but he is a natural. The other guy barely had any lines.
so you are saying in IOS 10 I get to enjoy this:
Siri: I think you may to see hot naked girls with bananas and cream. Shall I show you?
Me: Umm, no Siri, I have no idea why would ever think I would want to see that.
Girlfriend: Glares and glares and glares
A point that most people are missing is that the countries that are most nationalist, most economically self centered, and most limit immigration are by far the most successful in the modern world. We need to look no further than China. China makes only one sided trade deals that heavily favor the country. They have tariffs. They force tech transfer of any company that does business there.
They severely limit immigration. Although several sources claim it is growing by leaps and bounds, those measures are only by percentage. In total, China has about a half million immigrants living in a country of 1.5 billion. This is like saying I hate vegetables, and I ate one carrot last week, and now I ate two carrots this week, so I had a 100% increase in vegetable intake. In reality, anyway you look at it, not many vegetables are eaten.
History shows that only when countries have a sense of self and purpose do they do economically well. This is true of China, Korea, Britain in the past, and any other rising nation. The common people of the West fundamentally understand this, even if their leaders do not. The wealth gap is growing. The great pushback is happening in response. The smarter people in many nations simply understand that despite what they are told by the "elites" countries become more successful as a result.
I think this article loses sight of a very important distinction about what actually happened when Apple removed the floppy drive. First, there were a few generations of machines that had both floppy and CD-rom drives together. During that time, computers were getting exponentially more powerful every year, and files were starting not to fit on the floppy drive, outside of Word documents. The CD was a superior technology, and it was evident to most people. Also, that whole internet thing was starting to happen, and files could be moved that way. (the i in iMac is for internet). Apple noticed that the floppy drive was not being used by many people at all.
So in response, Apple made the then bold decision to remove the floppy disc. They did this in a new revolutionary model of the mac dubbed the iMac. It was cute, bondi blue machine. It was $1299, and replaced the mac 5500 which was about $2000. See, by not having the floppy disc and a few other things, the cost was REDUCED and part of the savings was passed on the consumer.
For those determined and still in love with the floppy disc, there were able to purchase an external floppy drive that connected through that then new fangled USB port. The consumer was able to take some of their cost savings and make a choice. A good thing, choice.
Now contrast this with the removal of the headphone port. Those who are extreme Apple apologists or who do not think it through blithely state that this is an example of Apple just knowing better than us, like before. But, unlike before, there is NO cost savings for us. In fact, the cost of peripherals etc actually goes up. In addition, the new port and the head port are not available at the same time, like floppies and cds were before. There is no transition period, or the ability to demonstrate how the new media is superior. There is no way the consumer, comparing the two, can say, "you know, I never use that silly headphone port. I am so done with it."
Being a silly consumer, I really have seen no clear advantages that the system offers. I find the current level of head phones pretty good. I listen to music outside, which is pretty noisy. So, any crisp new nuance possibly given by the new interface seems like it would be meaningless in the real world. The old headphone jack is physically robust. I heard mention on these forums the new port is less sturdy. All I know is that my iPhone is pretty @!#$$ expensive, and I would hate to have it bricked due to a flimsy port failing.
So, this is a deep departure from the Apple of old, into what I am increasingly seeing as the Apple of new. The old Apple would anticipate what the customer wants based upon what the customer is doing. The new apple seems fascinated with control. Oh, and making computers and devices that are ever slimmer because upper management has a Fetish, not because it makes it better.
So, it doesn't strike anyone else as funny/sad that as a group, these artists claim to be among the most liberal people on earth? They have made such huge fortunes writing so many songs about how love is all you need, and how we should all just share more. They preach about this at concerts, and wag their fingers at others who dare live by a profit motive. Yet, these "egalitarians" make about 1000 times the common man. Worse, they bitch if art is made more free and accessible.
Wouldn't a better and far more accurate joke be:
Hillary would just hire someone to cover it up
Reflexive liberal bias is still reflexive.
None of your statements are taken by fact by anything approaching a reputable source. I am sure there is a blogger in a basement somewhere who spewed what you wrote. Even Alex Jones would say your comments are from Crazy Town.
So, my dear slashdot, you modded a guy up for stating random, historically dishonest things supported by nothing....because it sounded strong and pro-liberal?
Game.
Set.
Match.
Accusing others is a cute way to deflect criticism instead of actually living up to the question. Even if you were right, it still does not discount anything I said, which is all true, and verifiable...even using your biased media. Again, it is sad that you can not own up to it. You are such a poor, deluded, shell of a person, you can not even recognize any faults by any candidate in your cult, I mean political party.
And BTW, Reagan did not pay Iran to kidnap Americans. He paid to get them back. Perhaps read something other than a blog.
Accusing others is a cute way to deflect criticism instead of actually living up to the question. Even if you were right, it still does not discount anything I said, which is all true, and verifiable...even using your biased media. Again, it is sad that you can not own up to it. You are such a poor, deluded, shell of a person, you can not even recognize any faults by any candidate in your cult, I mean political party.
Although I am sure it is fun party conversation in the pathetic echo chamber that you exist in, but in reality, none of the presidents, democrat or republican are guilty of crimes against humanity. That is a very strong accusation and reflects a very twisted view of reality. History is replete with real human tragedy, and the fact that you think someone who disagrees with you about tax policy is on that level highlights the depths of your sheer will to live in ignorance.
Hillary did set up illegal servers. She did sell favors for campaign money to those who actually do commit crimes against humanity, and you are ok with it since you play for the same team.
Of the 3 listed, only Hillary has actually committed felony level crimes, and due to her guile and family power, will get away with it. She has sold state secrets and favors for campaign money, and then erased the evidence on private servers. She perjured herself about having no secret clearance emails on several occasions. She also let a US ambassador and several soldiers die, because it was politically favorable to do so in the midst of an election. If she had the influence of the average forum user, she would have been in prison with no questions asked. She personifies Slitherian, and not the good aspects of it either.
I am just....so sickened by this reflexive liberal bias in these forums. Most of you don't even adhere to the thoughts and beliefs with your own, fucking, ideology. You claim to be for free expression, but only when it agrees with you. You claim to care about women's issues, as long as it does not get in the way of winning an election. You say you are for fairness, then only hire people with the same ideology. You claim you love intellectual challenge, then only read from sources that have the same view, and shower pure, unadulterated and irrational hatred on anyone who deigns to poke a hole in your sacrosanct belief. You turn a blind eye to the sins of anyone who claims to be playing for your team, no matter what they do. You are exactly why the country's founders thought most people are too stupid, too lazy, and too ignorant to vote, because frankly, you are.
It's interesting. About twice as many people die from alcohol related issues than guns in the U.S. Per year, yet, the "socially responsible" people who have jumped in the anti-gun bad wagon do not utter one, single peep about this. They do not refuse to make emoji about the topic, and in fact, some seem to be there. Funny how that works. It almost as if there is a large group of people who want to appear to care about things, than really care. Almost...
Before I forget, here are the links proving what I said: http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fac...
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_...
With that level of understanding of technology, my guess is that you are a millennial. Let me help you out, pumpkin
1. Robots won't stop teen from coming into the store and spray painting penises on the all the terminals.
You may want to read about image recognition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... For noticing changes to a surface, this is actually an easy thing for the computer to do these days. Picking a signature out of random mosaic is pretty hard, but if you add something to a known pattern? Not so much.
2. Robots won't notice the homeless guy.... Again, see the image recognition ideas above. For the average guy on these forums, not very hard to program in a routine that shows the an unchanging image state in a booth for time X. Also, they have this little thing called electronic noses, which could find a tuna smell quite readily if that is really a concern. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
3. Won't stop pooping on table: Not only would the nose find it, but the computer would have even called the cops before he finished dropping his load.
Btw, your pimple faced unmotivated Millennial friend is probably not going to bother to do anything about tuna man, since like, that would take effort. Can't have that.
4. Robot would not know how to deal with the destructive....
Actually, the robot would know. It would call the police, or deploy a non lethal countermeasure without any prejudice. IN fact, judging by the various destructive riots and "protests" given savages in the last few years, it is the police and government who does not know who to deal with people destroying the stuff of other people.
Let me go as far to say is that YOU are the reason Skynet eventually evolves.
After a mishap with an iPhone, my wife decided to punish me by making me have a windows phone, until it was time to renew a phone contract.
Unless you have had the "joy" of using one of these phones, you can't imagine how bad it was. Its interface was truly awful. For things that you would want to do often, it was buried under submenus. It was filled with MS advertising or large buttons for services that one may never want. Then, it gets worse from there.
I would use the thing to listen to youtube while walking my dog. Or, at least I wanted to. The thing was, the helpful little guy would always try to find me a wireless network to attach to. ANY wireless network. It would ask me constantly if I wanted to join them. Like a Fratboy from hell, NO was never really an answer. Then, there was those special moments when it tried to attach to wireless network, it would get tangled with itself, then crash youtube. It would say the video you were just watching was in an unplayable format. No way you could see it...unless of course you hard reset the phone.
Another gem occurred when it wanted me to sign up for some windows service, which I think was akin to iTunes. I only think this because i did not succeed. Midway through the process, it crashed. It said I could call them to finish. I never did.
One day, I was so angry at the phone, that my daughter accidentally dropped it from our second story loft. It hit the tile floor and got smashed to pieces. My wife was angry, so I offered to chastise my child. This involved taking her for icecream later, and talking about how much I hated the toaster....
At the end of the day, I was punished again by being regulated to a "dumb" flip phone which only really worked for calls, which I like. I ended up getting a new iPhone 3 months later. And somewhere along the way, our toaster got killed and we got a new one of those too. Life is now placid in a windows free environment and my daughter got a lot of ice-cream.