Think of it like this, if you drop a sheet of paper of a building, you can't tell every flutter it'll make, but you know damn well its going to hit the ground.
When the outcome of your computer model is a forgone conclusion, it's no wonder that the results support your pet theory.
It's not like we just wave a magic wand and 'tighten our belts'. There are real financial and human costs involved. When the cost of energy goes us, everything goes up. Do you really want to pay more for gas for your car? Airline tickets? Heating your house? Shipping costs? (and what isn't trucked these days...)When the factories that produce the goods that we all love (motherboards, hard drive, RAM and other less-essential items) are forced to install expensive equipment that may or may not affect a problem that may or may not exist, who is going to pay for it? Do you really think that those costs are not going to be passed on to the consumer?
If we have learned anything from the past ten years, it is this: when profits go down, people get laid off. Like it or not, it's a fact. This is the human cost I am talking about. Is it worth people losing their jobs over a problem we're not even sure exists?
Your so-called 'facts' are crap, only existing in your own little mind. Outlaw birth control? Cathlocism? Legally-mandated church attendance? Nobody's proposing that, idiot.
Anybody who is interested in freedoms, rights or just the ability to make thier own decisions has fled from the left long ago. The democratic left ensures our liberties??? HA. Gel real. It's the so-called 'democratic' left that takes OVER HALF of what I make to support their little social experiments. What if I disagree? Tough. Try not paying the tribute demanded, and everything of value the I own will be siezed, including property belonging to my wife and my children's toys. How's that for benevolence?
'Compassionate message of the democratic left'?? BULLSHIT. Steel gaunlet in a velvet glove would be more accurate.
>Confusing the two is like calling every martial-arts student a 'ninja.'
Actually, your analgy fits. A martial-arts student is studying to improve his life. A ninja is a luser who thinks running around in black pajamas is kewl.
1. I watched an evening documentary a few weeks ago that placed deactivated handguns where children could easily find them, left them unsupervised and watched to see what would happen. The results were hardly surprising. From the kindergarten kids who had a class teaching them not to touch guns to the teenager who had lost a good friend because of a shooting, the results were the same. They picked up the gun and started 'play' shooting, pointing it at other kids, etc. I realized that these kids were just modelling what they had seen. They never saw people using guns safely and responsibly, just as an instrument of violence. My theory is that kids learn more by what the SEE and less by what they HEAR. At least, that explains why my kids don't listen to me.
2. You are entirly correct in your critcism of ratings boards. But what is the alternative? None at all would be completly irrisponsible, despite bleatings to the contrary. At least a ratings board provides an avenue for complaint, someplace to write to and say 'You guys screwed up on this show - get it right next time'. Unless we as a society are going to allow parents to stay at home to provide 24x7 care, and allow then unrestricted access to the media for previewing, some kind of rating system is mandatory.
I can confirm this. I worked as a network admin at a (unionized) post-secondary educational institution. I got my 2% per year raise annually, just for showing up every day. I worked hard, put in crazy hours, just to get the job done. I got 2% per year. I found and implemented new technologies to improve our network. I got 2% per year. In my department there were two guys who basically screwed around all day. They got 2% per year.
A union removes any and all flexibililty that a manager needs to promote and reward good staff and correct bad ones. A unionized shop is horribly inefficient because employees are rewarded according to how long they have stagnated, not according to the benefits they bring to the organization.
Unions are a nice safe place for people with enough gumption to stay off welfare, but not enough to really take care of themselves.
Should children also be prevented from buying sweets because they should eat vegetables instead? Or should they be allowed to learn that vegetables are better for you than sweets?
Once again, the childless speak up with valuable parenting advice...
Look - a child has no concept of how his actions today will affect his life down the road. Some adults don't either. Learning this is part of growing up and learning the self-discipline to apply this principle takes a long time. Given the choice, a child will eat candy (or whatever his favorite food is) for every meal. That is why parents must create and enforce rules like 'no candy between meals', 'brush your teeth' and 'don't look at that stuff' - while the child learns why the rules exist.
What does this have to do with filtering? Glad you asked. Simple really - porn is harmful to kids (perpetuates the myth that sex is a purely physical act, that sex is only about gratifying yourself, that sex outside the bounds of marriage is OK) - but it is mixed in with a lot of great stuff on the Internet that we want our kids looking at. So we have to filter. No, filters are not %100 perfect, and they will not stop someone who is determined to get to their precious porn. But they are better than nothing. Seatbelts are dangerous in a few unique situations (car underwater, etc.) but that doesn't mean that we throw them out entirely.
Slashdot Mirror
When the outcome of your computer model is a forgone conclusion, it's no wonder that the results support your pet theory.
It's not like we just wave a magic wand and 'tighten our belts'. There are real financial and human costs involved. When the cost of energy goes us, everything goes up. Do you really want to pay more for gas for your car? Airline tickets? Heating your house? Shipping costs? (and what isn't trucked these days ...)When the factories that produce the goods that we all love (motherboards, hard drive, RAM and other less-essential items) are forced to install expensive equipment that may or may not affect a problem that may or may not exist, who is going to pay for it? Do you really think that those costs are not going to be passed on to the consumer?
If we have learned anything from the past ten years, it is this: when profits go down, people get laid off. Like it or not, it's a fact. This is the human cost I am talking about. Is it worth people losing their jobs over a problem we're not even sure exists?
... just don't call them 'nuclear'.
Guilty as charged - next cretin please.
BTW - the workd I wrote was 'gauntlet', and the workd I meant was 'gauntlet'. If had meant the workd 'fist', I would have wrote the workd 'fist'.
Your so-called 'facts' are crap, only existing in your own little mind. Outlaw birth control? Cathlocism? Legally-mandated church attendance? Nobody's proposing that, idiot.
Anybody who is interested in freedoms, rights or just the ability to make thier own decisions has fled from the left long ago. The democratic left ensures our liberties??? HA. Gel real. It's the so-called 'democratic' left that takes OVER HALF of what I make to support their little social experiments. What if I disagree? Tough. Try not paying the tribute demanded, and everything of value the I own will be siezed, including property belonging to my wife and my children's toys. How's that for benevolence?
'Compassionate message of the democratic left'?? BULLSHIT. Steel gaunlet in a velvet glove would be more accurate.
Minesweeper Consultant and Solitare Expert
Actually, your analgy fits. A martial-arts student is studying to improve his life. A ninja is a luser who thinks running around in black pajamas is kewl.
1. I watched an evening documentary a few weeks ago that placed deactivated handguns where children could easily find them, left them unsupervised and watched to see what would happen. The results were hardly surprising. From the kindergarten kids who had a class teaching them not to touch guns to the teenager who had lost a good friend because of a shooting, the results were the same. They picked up the gun and started 'play' shooting, pointing it at other kids, etc. I realized that these kids were just modelling what they had seen. They never saw people using guns safely and responsibly, just as an instrument of violence. My theory is that kids learn more by what the SEE and less by what they HEAR. At least, that explains why my kids don't listen to me.
2. You are entirly correct in your critcism of ratings boards. But what is the alternative? None at all would be completly irrisponsible, despite bleatings to the contrary. At least a ratings board provides an avenue for complaint, someplace to write to and say 'You guys screwed up on this show - get it right next time'. Unless we as a society are going to allow parents to stay at home to provide 24x7 care, and allow then unrestricted access to the media for previewing, some kind of rating system is mandatory.
Sure - but how long until you get a copy of Windows2000?
God does not play dice with the universe
- someone a lot smarter than anyone here
I can confirm this. I worked as a network admin at a (unionized) post-secondary educational institution. I got my 2% per year raise annually, just for showing up every day. I worked hard, put in crazy hours, just to get the job done. I got 2% per year. I found and implemented new technologies to improve our network. I got 2% per year. In my department there were two guys who basically screwed around all day. They got 2% per year.
A union removes any and all flexibililty that a manager needs to promote and reward good staff and correct bad ones. A unionized shop is horribly inefficient because employees are rewarded according to how long they have stagnated, not according to the benefits they bring to the organization.
Unions are a nice safe place for people with enough gumption to stay off welfare, but not enough to really take care of themselves.
Should children also be prevented from buying sweets because they should eat vegetables instead? Or should they be allowed to learn that vegetables are better for you than sweets?
Once again, the childless speak up with valuable parenting advice ...
Look - a child has no concept of how his actions today will affect his life down the road. Some adults don't either. Learning this is part of growing up and learning the self-discipline to apply this principle takes a long time. Given the choice, a child will eat candy (or whatever his favorite food is) for every meal. That is why parents must create and enforce rules like 'no candy between meals', 'brush your teeth' and 'don't look at that stuff' - while the child learns why the rules exist.
What does this have to do with filtering? Glad you asked. Simple really - porn is harmful to kids (perpetuates the myth that sex is a purely physical act, that sex is only about gratifying yourself, that sex outside the bounds of marriage is OK) - but it is mixed in with a lot of great stuff on the Internet that we want our kids looking at. So we have to filter. No, filters are not %100 perfect, and they will not stop someone who is determined to get to their precious porn. But they are better than nothing. Seatbelts are dangerous in a few unique situations (car underwater, etc.) but that doesn't mean that we throw them out entirely.
A Jon Katz article that I can actually agree with???
I think I'm going to be sick
Gotta go home for the rest of the day ...
Jon Katz is an idiot