I can attest that minimum wage earners *work* about 4x harder than they do here.
Sorry, where is "here" and "there"? You make no mention of which of the country you are in right now, or where you originated from. It makes it hard to follow your argument.
If by 'lost' you mean 'won' then yes you are right.
4 cities in the top 10 worldwide for liveability. Maybe your definition of winning needs to be reconsidered?
Have you read their writings? When I see a modern argument against the right of gun ownership that is half as well reasoned as their arguments for gun ownership, I will reconsider my opinion.
Well every other modern western democracy seems to have figured out how to control gun violence better than yours. But you probably don't consider that reasonable...
So any properly-functioning shark detector is going to be sounding the alarm multiple times per day, at least. That's not going to make people feel safer about getting into the water.
I don't think the shark detector is not going to be hard wired to a WW2-era klaxxon on the beach.
This system will most likely try and reduce the need for expensive spotter planes or RIB patrols which currently do the job of the initial spotting. How that is dealt with will still be a matter for manned beach patrols
In an ideal world the solution would be education
That is happening too. The area I wakeboard on is a known Bull Shark nest, yet no-one runs out of the water screaming hysterically when a fish is sighted. Most people brought up around water here know how to deal with these situations. the Shark detector will simply make detection cheaper more reliable (hopefully).
Who cares?
Seriously, the "founding fathers", while extremely smart and wise for their time were not omnipotent super-beings that know everything for all eternity.
It is possible, just maybe, that people in the future will have better ideas about how to run the place, and we can take these 18th century ideals with just a little grain of salt.
If it turns out that liberal gun ownership is causing more harm than good to society, then we should, as intelligent humans, be able to make decisions based on the evidence. Not just lock ourselves into the so-called wisdom from 200 years ago.
Obvious difference, which has been demonstrated the million of times this tired old argument gets reared:
1. A car's primary purpose is not to kill
2. Even so, cars are still heavily regulated
3. If it's ok to regulate cars, why not guns?
Actually, serious drone pilots and gun folks have something in common: They follow a simple rule of "Don't be an asshole!" I don't fly my RC critters anywhere which would bother other folks. Gun folks don't shoot in any areas that could put other folks in danger.
Except for all the gun folk that actually shoot people dead you mean?
Except for those ones, the rest are ok...
You are engaging in "slippery slope" arguments.You may as well argue that we should not allow people to defend themselves with guns because someone might interpret that as a right to shoot anyone they want.
That isn't slippery slope, that has already happened in the US, and happens repeatedly almost every week.
How does this get insightful? My mother has Dementia. She was a normal, social person, and still has a strong network of family and friends, but old age is an unstoppable force.
So no, Dementia has nothing to do with being a social retard (otherwise most IT people would already have it right?)
Internal propaganda keeps telling to the Russian audience of 150 million people that Russia does not participate, and that all the weapons, heavy flamethrowers, drones and tanks, are merely bought at military surplus stores.
What are you, some kind of communist? Expecting companies to act in the interests of the general good, guided by morality...
It happens in smaller countries where the capitalists might know someone they're trying to fuck over, hence still use their conscience in the decision making process.
It's the monkeysphere. The US is it too vast a country, so it's too easy for one individual to fuck over another with no consequences.
The real joke is that the Americans haven't beaten anyone since WW2. Which just goes to show, there's more to winning wars than bringing the biggest gun.
Also see this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Compare with the GDP (PPP) list and tell us all why The US ranks at 109, while *every* other similarly wealthy democracy is at the top?
, but please explain this table with any of the countries instead of Mexico, they are all widely considered developed by the UN.
Did you even read that link? Lithuania? Panama? Belarus? These are the places you think the US should be compared to? The richest country in the world compares itself to fucking Latvia?
Development is generally tied to wealth, and democracy and personal freedoms. Take out the crack-pot dictatorships, and this list is who you should be comparing yourself to. Once you get out of the top 30, "development" tends to drop off.
If the US has to get down to number 66 to feel better about itself, there's something wrong.
Mexico is widely considered to be a developed country,
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha... by whom exactly?
Have you ever been there? By "developed" we're talking US, Canada, UK, all of North West Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan etc.
I've been to all those countries, and I've been to Mexico. One of those things is so completely unlike the others it's not funny (your claim is though)
Because everyone is stupid when it comes to security until something security related happens to them.
Not so much stupid as lazy. And a big part of the problem is that most of the time, security people are the boy crying wolf.
How many times have we heard about vulnerabilities that had no impact? If we react to every single warning we'd never get anything done. So maybe the correct path is to ignore security people most of the time. The real trick however, is knowing when to pay attention and act.
Slashdot Mirror
I can attest that minimum wage earners *work* about 4x harder than they do here.
Sorry, where is "here" and "there"? You make no mention of which of the country you are in right now, or where you originated from. It makes it hard to follow your argument.
If by 'lost' you mean 'won' then yes you are right.
4 cities in the top 10 worldwide for liveability. Maybe your definition of winning needs to be reconsidered?
Have you read their writings? When I see a modern argument against the right of gun ownership that is half as well reasoned as their arguments for gun ownership, I will reconsider my opinion.
Well every other modern western democracy seems to have figured out how to control gun violence better than yours. But you probably don't consider that reasonable...
No true Scotsman etc...
So any properly-functioning shark detector is going to be sounding the alarm multiple times per day, at least. That's not going to make people feel safer about getting into the water.
I don't think the shark detector is not going to be hard wired to a WW2-era klaxxon on the beach.
This system will most likely try and reduce the need for expensive spotter planes or RIB patrols which currently do the job of the initial spotting. How that is dealt with will still be a matter for manned beach patrols
In an ideal world the solution would be education
That is happening too. The area I wakeboard on is a known Bull Shark nest, yet no-one runs out of the water screaming hysterically when a fish is sighted. Most people brought up around water here know how to deal with these situations. the Shark detector will simply make detection cheaper more reliable (hopefully).
As the founding fathers warned,
Who cares?
Seriously, the "founding fathers", while extremely smart and wise for their time were not omnipotent super-beings that know everything for all eternity.
It is possible, just maybe, that people in the future will have better ideas about how to run the place, and we can take these 18th century ideals with just a little grain of salt.
If it turns out that liberal gun ownership is causing more harm than good to society, then we should, as intelligent humans, be able to make decisions based on the evidence. Not just lock ourselves into the so-called wisdom from 200 years ago.
The judge decided to use witness testimony over factual hard evidence that the drone was over 250 feet in the air
You call an easily editable plain text file, supplied by the plantiff "factual hard evidence"?
Good thing our judges aren't so gullible.
Obvious difference, which has been demonstrated the million of times this tired old argument gets reared:
1. A car's primary purpose is not to kill
2. Even so, cars are still heavily regulated
3. If it's ok to regulate cars, why not guns?
If the law says firing a gun within the city is illegal then it should be illegal regardless of other criminality in the vicinity.
What if the King of England is invading?
Actually, serious drone pilots and gun folks have something in common: They follow a simple rule of "Don't be an asshole!" I don't fly my RC critters anywhere which would bother other folks. Gun folks don't shoot in any areas that could put other folks in danger.
Except for all the gun folk that actually shoot people dead you mean? Except for those ones, the rest are ok...
You are engaging in "slippery slope" arguments.You may as well argue that we should not allow people to defend themselves with guns because someone might interpret that as a right to shoot anyone they want.
That isn't slippery slope, that has already happened in the US, and happens repeatedly almost every week.
and are also against weaponized drones.
So they support the regulation of weapons? Interesting...
How does this get insightful? My mother has Dementia. She was a normal, social person, and still has a strong network of family and friends, but old age is an unstoppable force.
So no, Dementia has nothing to do with being a social retard (otherwise most IT people would already have it right?)
Internal propaganda keeps telling to the Russian audience of 150 million people that Russia does not participate, and that all the weapons, heavy flamethrowers, drones and tanks, are merely bought at military surplus stores.
And this is different from the US how?
What are you, some kind of communist? Expecting companies to act in the interests of the general good, guided by morality...
It happens in smaller countries where the capitalists might know someone they're trying to fuck over, hence still use their conscience in the decision making process.
It's the monkeysphere. The US is it too vast a country, so it's too easy for one individual to fuck over another with no consequences.
That was point I was going to get to, but was trying to be tactful...
Can you 3D print them? If the answer isn't 3D printing then we don't care for your opinion around here.
But, but... 3D Printing!!!
What was the joke in WW2?
The real joke is that the Americans haven't beaten anyone since WW2. Which just goes to show, there's more to winning wars than bringing the biggest gun.
Seriously though, in a defensive encounter the last thing on my mind is "Oh no, my gun is getting lighter."
Just out of interest, how many "defensive encounters" have you had when you needed more than 7 rounds?
Also see this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Compare with the GDP (PPP) list and tell us all why The US ranks at 109, while *every* other similarly wealthy democracy is at the top?
, but please explain this table with any of the countries instead of Mexico, they are all widely considered developed by the UN.
Did you even read that link? Lithuania? Panama? Belarus? These are the places you think the US should be compared to? The richest country in the world compares itself to fucking Latvia?
Development is generally tied to wealth, and democracy and personal freedoms. Take out the crack-pot dictatorships, and this list is who you should be comparing yourself to. Once you get out of the top 30, "development" tends to drop off.
If the US has to get down to number 66 to feel better about itself, there's something wrong.
Define developed?
Mexico is widely considered to be a developed country,
Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha... by whom exactly?
Have you ever been there? By "developed" we're talking US, Canada, UK, all of North West Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan etc.
I've been to all those countries, and I've been to Mexico. One of those things is so completely unlike the others it's not funny (your claim is though)
I think I'll stick primarily with good old fashioned cash. It isn't as readily hacked,
Except by any bum with a knife at your throat.
Because everyone is stupid when it comes to security until something security related happens to them.
Not so much stupid as lazy. And a big part of the problem is that most of the time, security people are the boy crying wolf.
How many times have we heard about vulnerabilities that had no impact? If we react to every single warning we'd never get anything done. So maybe the correct path is to ignore security people most of the time. The real trick however, is knowing when to pay attention and act.