"to be ran on encrypted data" seems like solid grammar to me. Imperfect tense, right?
"which allows mathematical operations to be ran on encrytped data" is not proper grammar. "ran" is past tense only. "to be" is future. It should be "to be run on encrypted data."
the USA and UK invade Iraq on the fraudulent proposition that Saddam had a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction -- and look how that turned out.
Indeed. So the fact that he was a butcher and a tyrant isn't enough to justify removing him from power?
Typical bloody pacifist. Do nothing, just because you're too lazy to step up and do *something*. Right.
Obviously it isn't enough to invade Saudi Arabia, another sharia law country that has a long list of human rights violations.
If rice cakes are gross then you better not like rice krispies treats.
There's a HUGE difference between rice cakes and rice krispie treats, same as there's a huge difference between puffed rice (gross) and dishes made with rice.
In that case, the restaurants must be doing something wrong, because I find the tofu tasteless and pretty much textureless. About the only exception is veggie burgers.
Why not just cut back on fossil fuel burning? Oh no's, can't have that, can we?
You first. Start by recycling that power burning collection of polymers and rare earths you use to post things. Takes a lot of Chinese coal to make those.
Didn't think so.
The rare earths will be recycled (we already do this because we are not producing enough to meet demand). Recycling of all electronics is mandatory, and we pay an environment tax to subsidize it, same as we do with tires.
My modes of transport are, in preference, walk, bicycle, bus. We're planning to switch over to electric buses (powered by hydro) in the next decade (we've been testing them since 2008). The goal is an all-electric fleet.
Everyone has a recycling box (no sorting needed, so as to encourage use), that is picked up weekly and brought to sorting centers. If it can be recycled, I recycle it. We already do cap and trade (the goal being that as technology reduces pollution people will implement the technology instead of trading carbon credits). We even have municipal leaf pickup in the fall for composting, giving away the results the next spring.
We have several gas recovery fields that collect the methane from trash dumps for sale to natural gas companies. They run at a profit.
I think that, to the extent currently possible, I'm doing better than average.
Why not just cut back on fossil fuel burning? Oh no's, can't have that, can we?
Actually, no we cannot cut back all that much. Unless you are figuring on systematically reducing the world's population, or hell, just starving them to death. You see, petro-chemicals are used extensively to create fertilizer, and if you stop doing that with oil people are going to starve. Of course we can all just go back to horse and buggy, whale oil lamps and the supportable population of the world we can support with that technology, but somehow I don't figure that the third world is going to accept going backwards further....
Best we can hope for is to cut down *some* on fossil fuel use by developing other energy sources. Fusion comes to mind as a promising solution..... But that's decades out....Just figure that CO2 emissions are here to stay for your lifetime, because even if you are a baby, they are....
If we don't cut back population over the long term. we'll all starve to death. And let's be honest, oil is not an infinite resource. Even ignoring global warming, there comes a time when the well goes dry.
NEW population forecasts from the United Nations point to a new world order in 2050. The number of people will grow from 7.3 billion to 9.7 billion in 2050, 100m more than was estimated in the UN's last report two years ago. More than half of this growth comes from Africa, where the population is set to double to 2.5 billion. Nigeria's population will reach 413m, overtaking America as the world's third most-populous country. Congo and Ethiopia will swell to more than 195m and 188m repectively, more than twice their current numbers. India will surpass China as the world's most populous country in 2022, six years earlier than was previously forecast. China's population will peak at 1.4 billion in 2028; India's four decades later at 1.75 billion. Changes in fertility make long-term projections hard, but by 2100 the planet’s population will be rising past 11.2 billion. It will also be much older. The median age of 30 will rise to 36 in 2050 and 42 in 2100—the median age of Europeans today. A quarter of Europe's people are already aged 60 or more; by 2050 deaths will outnumber births by 32m. The UN warns that only migration will prevent the region's population from shrinking further.
So, we're going to synthesize even more products from oil (at who knows what contribution to the CO2 problem) to temporarily sequester the CO2... temporary because any molecule that is a better "fit" for the molecular cage will displace the CO2. Plus all the energy implementing the sequestration process by injecting it into the ground... Sort of like fracking...
Why not just cut back on fossil fuel burning? Oh no's, can't have that, can we?
It should be easy to stop an initiative that is clearly unconstitutional,
How many times was the constitution amended by proposals that seemed to many to be controversial, even unconstitutional, at the time? Or we don't have to go that far - look at the whole gay marriage thing. Before the Supremes ruled, DOMA was the law of the land It was similarly clearly unconstitutional, as was Proposition 8. However, at the time (and even today) there are plenty of people who don't agree with same-sex marriage, and see it as the state acting unconstitutionally by violating the Constitution's "establishment clause".
Let him gather the signatures. It is his right, no matter how stupid most of us think the proposal is. If we do otherwise, WE become the ones practicing discrimination as well as suppressing his constitutional right to freedom of speech. Not so cool. Do you really want an administrative bureaucrat (instead of the courts) to decide what proposed laws should be put to the vote, and what laws shouldn't? This would be no different from that stupid clerk who refused to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples.
> Yet legal experts say the state’s attorney general can’t block it.
He doesn't need to. The 14th amendment has been incorporated by the SCOTUS. The FBI heavy cavalry will ride in, mounted on federal civil rights violation statues and stop it just like they stopped negro-hanging parties in the 1950s.
Proposing to amend a law via peaceful means is not a violation of anyone's civil rights, unlike hanging them.
The lawyer Matt McLaughlin probably wants to end up on a rope in Nuremberg, sent there by a court composed on american, british, french and russian judges? That would be his 15mins of fame.
No, he just sought to capitalize on people's stupidity and ignorant beliefs. It's important that haters be able to do that so we can spot them, and engage in debate with other people who, absent debate, might be swayed to his side.
If this were to pass, it would be contested, and surely shot down. That's the way it's supposed to work. So let him talk, same as all those stores that put up "gay-free-zone" signs after the court ruled against the baker who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex couple. People have a right to know that their money is being spent supporting a merchant who is homophobic, and take their custom elsewhere.
You can claim it, same as someone can claim the moon is made of cheese.
We ascribe value to things, events, etc. To say that we can't say that one thing has more value than another is bogus.
You do it yourself when you yourself write "the comment is worth 0, the research is worth 100." Where do you pull this arbitrary value for the value of the research from? Opinion. Others have different opinions, and you cannot demonstrate in this case that yours is a more valid appraisal than anyone else's.
Also, multiplication is just repetitive addition. Adding zero to zero 1000 times still results in zero.
actually, now that i think of it, math might not even need a place in it at all. it's strictly a greater than statement.
"Greater than" is a mathematical comparison. So is "equals", so is "less than." So sad.
And so are some atheists, like Mao & Stalin who killed more than all the religious people in all of history. What's your point other than hating on a mostly-innocent group because of a few?
I would make the same point for anyone hating on mostly-innocent muslims because of a few.So what's your point? But more to the point. There are some really rotten apples in both the christian and muslim cultures. Denying that many christians have been just as bad in the past, and there are those who are quite capable today of wanting to kill people who don't follow their rules, would be stupid.
If you blame all Christians for that, why not blame all atheists? Or maybe we could realize that the whole blame game is silly and just stop with the bigotry?
For starters, because I never said that all christians are to blame. So why not learn to read, clean up your act, and stop insinuating such things? Your tactics are those of scoundrels and cowards.
I personally don't get the whole SJW thing, are SJWs only female?
To play the "unjustly oppressed minority" you have to appear to have fewer rights than your "oppressors." Political correctness doesn't allow for a fact-based discussion, because some facts are "unmentionable", and if you mention them, you're automatically the oppressor.
As an example, women have outnumbered men in obtaining degrees for quite some time, but somehow today SJWs still argue that they're oppressed today in that area due to historical reasons.
Or the whole "get girls to code" thing. Learning to code is one of the most accessible activities today - almost everyone has access to one or more computers, and there are perfectly good computers put beside the curb every garbage day because they're obsolete (even though we learned on machines that were way more primitive). Trying to judge if there is equal opportunity by equal outcomes is flawed, because we have proven by brain scans that there are differences between the brains of men and women, so it's not surprising that the two sexes have different interests. Quite the opposite, it would be surprising if they didn't. However, this goes against the SJW narrative that the disparity in outcomes somehow "proves" that women are suppressed.
The whole SJW narrative is based on the leaders using existing inequities for personal promotion. This was true in the heyday of Germaine Greer (who is a TERF, among other things, so while demanding that there be equality between the sexes, clearly doesn't believe it herself). It's still true today with the SJWs who use feminism, as well as the drama surrounding gamergate and other issues to make money from speaking engagements and crowdfunding (eg: Anita Sarkeesian). It's more like an organized religion than a social movement.
Feminism too often isn't about supporting equal rights for men and women, but about equal or superior outcomes, political correctness, and victimhood.
Is there discrimination against women? Of course, same as there is discrimination against men in many areas - especially in advertising media, where men are mostly portrayed as inept dummies who, when they screw up, their wives save the day. This has been the case since the '70s, where it became politically incorrect to portray women as inept dummies who, when they screwed up, the husband stepped in to save the day. Neither one is right - they're both toxic to the way they portray both sexes. However, like SJWs, just follow the money...
Of course, it's politically incorrect for me to point any of this out, but I'm fed up with the battle of the sexes and those who promote it rather than seeking a truce and finding common ground. And there is a LOT of common ground. Times have changed. My daughters don't need any feminists to tell them they are oppressed - they simply wouldn't put up with it, without the help of SJWs or White Knights.
Having lived on both sides of the divide, both sides have grievances, and both sides need to clean up their act. And be a little less dependent on political correctness to make their arguments for them:-)
Democrats of all people should know that morals and ethics are relative, as relativism is a fundamental tenet of leftism.
Democrats and liberals have an obligation to stand behind the tweet, because it was absolutely in line with democrat and liberal ideals.
Flawed logic. There is no reason for people anyone to act like we were dropped on our head multiple times as a baby and lack any common sense or perspective, and have to defend a tweet that has to hide behind extreme political correctness.
As long as you are unwilling to see them as anything but one dimensional evil murderers, and instead see them as rational people with motivations, goals, and a cause they feel it's right to dedicate their lives to
The problem is that they feel it's a cause they should devote YOUR life to, by killing you. Why should you or I die to further THEIR cause?
My only issue with that is that I don't necessarily really know that ISIS is about irrational bloodthirsty marketing campaigns.
Just look at all the videos they post showing beheadings. They LOVE their bloodthirsty marketing campaign - it gets them recruits from the wacko population and inspires fear and outrage in their enemies.
KAMPALA, Uganda — Last March, three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about “curing” homosexuals have been widely discredited in the United States, arrived here in Uganda’s capital to give a series of talks.
The theme of the event, according to Stephen Langa, its Ugandan organizer, was “the gay agenda — that whole hidden and dark agenda” — and the threat homosexuals posed to Bible-based values and the traditional African family.
For three days, according to participants and audio recordings, thousands of Ugandans, including police officers, teachers and national politicians, listened raptly to the Americans, who were presented as experts on homosexuality. The visitors discussed how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how “the gay movement is an evil institution” whose goal is “to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.”
Now the three Americans are finding themselves on the defensive, saying they had no intention of helping stoke the kind of anger that could lead to what came next: a bill to impose a death sentence for homosexual behavior.
Uganda is set to pass new anti-gay legislation with provisions calling for the execution of gay people under some circumstances. The rumor of the death penalty clause being removed seems grossly exaggerated. Dr. Warren Throckmorton, who has followed the legislation closely, indicates that some Western media are erroneously reporting that the death penalty clause has been removed. He writes that "the bill is the same bill it has always been. It cannot be amended until the committee report is presented to the floor of the Parliament." Even with the amendment the legislation remains a gross travesty of justice.
The "intellectual" fuel for this grotesque law came from Christian fundamentalists in the United States. According to The New York Times:
Much of Africa's anti-homosexuality movement is supported by American evangelicals, the Rev. Kapya Kaoma of Zambia wrote in 2009, who are keen to export the American "culture war" to new ground. Indeed, American evangelical Christians played a role in stirring the anti-homosexual sentiment that culminated in the initial legislation in Uganda.
California proposal to legalize killing gays hard to stop
A California initiative proposal is testing the limits of free speech. Lawyer Matt McLaughlin wants to authorize the killing of gays and lesbians. Yet legal experts say the state’s attorney general can’t block it.
McLaughlin’s plan refers to “buggery” or “sodomy” as “a monstrous evil that Almighty God, giver of freedom and liberty, commands us to suppress on pain of our utter destruction even as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.” Under the proposal, “... any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification (would) be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method.”
Anyone transmitting “sodomistic propaganda” to a minor would be fined $1 million per offense, and/or imprisoned up to 10 years, and/or expelled from California for up to life. It would ban lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, or those who espouse sodomistic propaganda, or who belong to any group that does, from serving in publ
With the world’s first teraflop many-core processor, NVIDIA® Tesla computing solutions enable the necessary transition to energy efficient parallel computing power. With thousands of CUDA cores per processor , Tesla scales to solve the world’s most important computing challenges—quickly and accurately.
One example Tesla K40: 2880 CUDA cores. That's a LOT of cores.
Yeah, but 'free' video-over-ip is a clear conflict of interest.
For example, Comcast plans to start offering it's own video service and that won't count towards your 300GB cap. Surely you can see that this places Netflix and other streaming services at an unquestionable disadvantage.
So, you no longer believe that Content is King?
Just how much TV are you watching if a 300GB cap isn't enough? Also, it's not like you can't use your bandwidth up to 300GB to watch Netflix or whatever, so you can have the best of both worlds.
What in the world does what you posted have to do with the comment I replied to or my reply? Oh, right, NOTHING.
The original poster wrote: "Sorry dude but nobody alive today in the US experienced slavery."
I replied with a link that showed the US has an estimated 60,000 people living in it as slaves right now (human trafficking, women being promised jobs as "dancers" and being forced int prostitution and drugs, etc.)
This has nothing to do with capitalism - slavery has existed under every type of economic model.
And this is why we should treat the people who have drug addictions as having a treatable illness, and not as criminals. Addictions pretty much rob people of the ability to exercise free choice. I guess it doesn't matter if it's a monkey on your back or a gun to your head...
Actually, some people who come from other countries have indeed experienced slavery. It's pretty much everywhere, even in the western world.
These numbers might seem high, but the UN estimate of 27 to 30 million is still an awful lot of people. White slaves DO exist. And India, with 14 million, easily beats out China with 3.2 million and Russia with 1 million. Strange how the world's largest democracy is also has the world's largest population of slaves. Even on a per capita basis, India is far worse than Russia and China.
Sure. I'm glad to know what the intention of the rule is, but isn't it still likely that the easiest way for manufacturers to comply will be total lockdown?
Doesn't matter - in American Republic, NSA still roots YOU.
And if you do something suspicious, they ROUTE you to Gitmo Beach.
So, be careful because your router could route YOU!
Slashdot Mirror
"to be ran on encrypted data" seems like solid grammar to me. Imperfect tense, right?
"which allows mathematical operations to be ran on encrytped data" is not proper grammar. "ran" is past tense only. "to be" is future. It should be "to be run on encrypted data."
the USA and UK invade Iraq on the fraudulent proposition that Saddam had a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction -- and look how that turned out.
Indeed. So the fact that he was a butcher and a tyrant isn't enough to justify removing him from power? Typical bloody pacifist. Do nothing, just because you're too lazy to step up and do *something*. Right.
Obviously it isn't enough to invade Saudi Arabia, another sharia law country that has a long list of human rights violations.
If rice cakes are gross then you better not like rice krispies treats.
There's a HUGE difference between rice cakes and rice krispie treats, same as there's a huge difference between puffed rice (gross) and dishes made with rice.
In that case, the restaurants must be doing something wrong, because I find the tofu tasteless and pretty much textureless. About the only exception is veggie burgers.
There's also the soy/estrogen thing. I still remember getting sore moobs from trying soy protein powder.
I can get behind that :-)
Why not just cut back on fossil fuel burning? Oh no's, can't have that, can we?
You first. Start by recycling that power burning collection of polymers and rare earths you use to post things. Takes a lot of Chinese coal to make those.
Didn't think so.
The rare earths will be recycled (we already do this because we are not producing enough to meet demand). Recycling of all electronics is mandatory, and we pay an environment tax to subsidize it, same as we do with tires.
My modes of transport are, in preference, walk, bicycle, bus. We're planning to switch over to electric buses (powered by hydro) in the next decade (we've been testing them since 2008). The goal is an all-electric fleet.
Everyone has a recycling box (no sorting needed, so as to encourage use), that is picked up weekly and brought to sorting centers. If it can be recycled, I recycle it. We already do cap and trade (the goal being that as technology reduces pollution people will implement the technology instead of trading carbon credits). We even have municipal leaf pickup in the fall for composting, giving away the results the next spring.
We have several gas recovery fields that collect the methane from trash dumps for sale to natural gas companies. They run at a profit.
I think that, to the extent currently possible, I'm doing better than average.
Why not just cut back on fossil fuel burning? Oh no's, can't have that, can we?
Actually, no we cannot cut back all that much. Unless you are figuring on systematically reducing the world's population, or hell, just starving them to death. You see, petro-chemicals are used extensively to create fertilizer, and if you stop doing that with oil people are going to starve. Of course we can all just go back to horse and buggy, whale oil lamps and the supportable population of the world we can support with that technology, but somehow I don't figure that the third world is going to accept going backwards further....
Best we can hope for is to cut down *some* on fossil fuel use by developing other energy sources. Fusion comes to mind as a promising solution..... But that's decades out....Just figure that CO2 emissions are here to stay for your lifetime, because even if you are a baby, they are....
If we don't cut back population over the long term. we'll all starve to death. And let's be honest, oil is not an infinite resource. Even ignoring global warming, there comes a time when the well goes dry.
And the problem is not that far away 2050 projections:
NEW population forecasts from the United Nations point to a new world order in 2050. The number of people will grow from 7.3 billion to 9.7 billion in 2050, 100m more than was estimated in the UN's last report two years ago. More than half of this growth comes from Africa, where the population is set to double to 2.5 billion. Nigeria's population will reach 413m, overtaking America as the world's third most-populous country. Congo and Ethiopia will swell to more than 195m and 188m repectively, more than twice their current numbers. India will surpass China as the world's most populous country in 2022, six years earlier than was previously forecast. China's population will peak at 1.4 billion in 2028; India's four decades later at 1.75 billion. Changes in fertility make long-term projections hard, but by 2100 the planet’s population will be rising past 11.2 billion. It will also be much older. The median age of 30 will rise to 36 in 2050 and 42 in 2100—the median age of Europeans today. A quarter of Europe's people are already aged 60 or more; by 2050 deaths will outnumber births by 32m. The UN warns that only migration will prevent the region's population from shrinking further.
sushi, raw fish, and tofu were once considered obscure products.
Sorry, but tofu is still gross - right up there with rice cakes.
>> encrytped
Someone, please buy the Dice interns a spellchecker for Christmas this year.
They also need a grammar checker:
to be ran on encrytped data
So, we're going to synthesize even more products from oil (at who knows what contribution to the CO2 problem) to temporarily sequester the CO2 ... temporary because any molecule that is a better "fit" for the molecular cage will displace the CO2. Plus all the energy implementing the sequestration process by injecting it into the ground... Sort of like fracking ...
Why not just cut back on fossil fuel burning? Oh no's, can't have that, can we?
It should be easy to stop an initiative that is clearly unconstitutional,
How many times was the constitution amended by proposals that seemed to many to be controversial, even unconstitutional, at the time? Or we don't have to go that far - look at the whole gay marriage thing. Before the Supremes ruled, DOMA was the law of the land It was similarly clearly unconstitutional, as was Proposition 8. However, at the time (and even today) there are plenty of people who don't agree with same-sex marriage, and see it as the state acting unconstitutionally by violating the Constitution's "establishment clause".
Let him gather the signatures. It is his right, no matter how stupid most of us think the proposal is. If we do otherwise, WE become the ones practicing discrimination as well as suppressing his constitutional right to freedom of speech. Not so cool. Do you really want an administrative bureaucrat (instead of the courts) to decide what proposed laws should be put to the vote, and what laws shouldn't? This would be no different from that stupid clerk who refused to sign marriage licenses for same-sex couples.
> Yet legal experts say the state’s attorney general can’t block it.
He doesn't need to. The 14th amendment has been incorporated by the SCOTUS. The FBI heavy cavalry will ride in, mounted on federal civil rights violation statues and stop it just like they stopped negro-hanging parties in the 1950s.
Proposing to amend a law via peaceful means is not a violation of anyone's civil rights, unlike hanging them.
The lawyer Matt McLaughlin probably wants to end up on a rope in Nuremberg, sent there by a court composed on american, british, french and russian judges? That would be his 15mins of fame.
No, he just sought to capitalize on people's stupidity and ignorant beliefs. It's important that haters be able to do that so we can spot them, and engage in debate with other people who, absent debate, might be swayed to his side.
If this were to pass, it would be contested, and surely shot down. That's the way it's supposed to work. So let him talk, same as all those stores that put up "gay-free-zone" signs after the court ruled against the baker who refused to bake a cake for a same-sex couple. People have a right to know that their money is being spent supporting a merchant who is homophobic, and take their custom elsewhere.
You can claim it, same as someone can claim the moon is made of cheese.
We ascribe value to things, events, etc. To say that we can't say that one thing has more value than another is bogus.
You do it yourself when you yourself write "the comment is worth 0, the research is worth 100." Where do you pull this arbitrary value for the value of the research from? Opinion. Others have different opinions, and you cannot demonstrate in this case that yours is a more valid appraisal than anyone else's.
Also, multiplication is just repetitive addition. Adding zero to zero 1000 times still results in zero.
actually, now that i think of it, math might not even need a place in it at all. it's strictly a greater than statement.
"Greater than" is a mathematical comparison. So is "equals", so is "less than." So sad.
And so are some atheists, like Mao & Stalin who killed more than all the religious people in all of history. What's your point other than hating on a mostly-innocent group because of a few?
I would make the same point for anyone hating on mostly-innocent muslims because of a few.So what's your point? But more to the point. There are some really rotten apples in both the christian and muslim cultures. Denying that many christians have been just as bad in the past, and there are those who are quite capable today of wanting to kill people who don't follow their rules, would be stupid.
If you blame all Christians for that, why not blame all atheists? Or maybe we could realize that the whole blame game is silly and just stop with the bigotry?
For starters, because I never said that all christians are to blame. So why not learn to read, clean up your act, and stop insinuating such things? Your tactics are those of scoundrels and cowards.
Well, the lesbian ones sure might ...
I personally don't get the whole SJW thing, are SJWs only female?
To play the "unjustly oppressed minority" you have to appear to have fewer rights than your "oppressors." Political correctness doesn't allow for a fact-based discussion, because some facts are "unmentionable", and if you mention them, you're automatically the oppressor.
As an example, women have outnumbered men in obtaining degrees for quite some time, but somehow today SJWs still argue that they're oppressed today in that area due to historical reasons.
Or the whole "get girls to code" thing. Learning to code is one of the most accessible activities today - almost everyone has access to one or more computers, and there are perfectly good computers put beside the curb every garbage day because they're obsolete (even though we learned on machines that were way more primitive). Trying to judge if there is equal opportunity by equal outcomes is flawed, because we have proven by brain scans that there are differences between the brains of men and women, so it's not surprising that the two sexes have different interests. Quite the opposite, it would be surprising if they didn't. However, this goes against the SJW narrative that the disparity in outcomes somehow "proves" that women are suppressed.
The whole SJW narrative is based on the leaders using existing inequities for personal promotion. This was true in the heyday of Germaine Greer (who is a TERF, among other things, so while demanding that there be equality between the sexes, clearly doesn't believe it herself). It's still true today with the SJWs who use feminism, as well as the drama surrounding gamergate and other issues to make money from speaking engagements and crowdfunding (eg: Anita Sarkeesian). It's more like an organized religion than a social movement.
Feminism too often isn't about supporting equal rights for men and women, but about equal or superior outcomes, political correctness, and victimhood.
Is there discrimination against women? Of course, same as there is discrimination against men in many areas - especially in advertising media, where men are mostly portrayed as inept dummies who, when they screw up, their wives save the day. This has been the case since the '70s, where it became politically incorrect to portray women as inept dummies who, when they screwed up, the husband stepped in to save the day. Neither one is right - they're both toxic to the way they portray both sexes. However, like SJWs, just follow the money ...
Of course, it's politically incorrect for me to point any of this out, but I'm fed up with the battle of the sexes and those who promote it rather than seeking a truce and finding common ground. And there is a LOT of common ground. Times have changed. My daughters don't need any feminists to tell them they are oppressed - they simply wouldn't put up with it, without the help of SJWs or White Knights.
Having lived on both sides of the divide, both sides have grievances, and both sides need to clean up their act. And be a little less dependent on political correctness to make their arguments for them :-)
Democrats of all people should know that morals and ethics are relative, as relativism is a fundamental tenet of leftism.
Democrats and liberals have an obligation to stand behind the tweet, because it was absolutely in line with democrat and liberal ideals.
Flawed logic. There is no reason for people anyone to act like we were dropped on our head multiple times as a baby and lack any common sense or perspective, and have to defend a tweet that has to hide behind extreme political correctness.
As long as you are unwilling to see them as anything but one dimensional evil murderers, and instead see them as rational people with motivations, goals, and a cause they feel it's right to dedicate their lives to
The problem is that they feel it's a cause they should devote YOUR life to, by killing you. Why should you or I die to further THEIR cause?
My only issue with that is that I don't necessarily really know that ISIS is about irrational bloodthirsty marketing campaigns.
Just look at all the videos they post showing beheadings. They LOVE their bloodthirsty marketing campaign - it gets them recruits from the wacko population and inspires fear and outrage in their enemies.
Some Christians certainly are evil
KAMPALA, Uganda — Last March, three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about “curing” homosexuals have been widely discredited in the United States, arrived here in Uganda’s capital to give a series of talks.
The theme of the event, according to Stephen Langa, its Ugandan organizer, was “the gay agenda — that whole hidden and dark agenda” — and the threat homosexuals posed to Bible-based values and the traditional African family.
For three days, according to participants and audio recordings, thousands of Ugandans, including police officers, teachers and national politicians, listened raptly to the Americans, who were presented as experts on homosexuality. The visitors discussed how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how “the gay movement is an evil institution” whose goal is “to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.”
Now the three Americans are finding themselves on the defensive, saying they had no intention of helping stoke the kind of anger that could lead to what came next: a bill to impose a death sentence for homosexual behavior.
This was just business as usual, nothing new.
Uganda is set to pass new anti-gay legislation with provisions calling for the execution of gay people under some circumstances. The rumor of the death penalty clause being removed seems grossly exaggerated. Dr. Warren Throckmorton, who has followed the legislation closely, indicates that some Western media are erroneously reporting that the death penalty clause has been removed. He writes that "the bill is the same bill it has always been. It cannot be amended until the committee report is presented to the floor of the Parliament." Even with the amendment the legislation remains a gross travesty of justice.
The "intellectual" fuel for this grotesque law came from Christian fundamentalists in the United States. According to The New York Times:
Much of Africa's anti-homosexuality movement is supported by American evangelicals, the Rev. Kapya Kaoma of Zambia wrote in 2009, who are keen to export the American "culture war" to new ground. Indeed, American evangelical Christians played a role in stirring the anti-homosexual sentiment that culminated in the initial legislation in Uganda.
Of course, it's also right at home in the US as well. Earlier this yesr:
California proposal to legalize killing gays hard to stop
A California initiative proposal is testing the limits of free speech. Lawyer Matt McLaughlin wants to authorize the killing of gays and lesbians. Yet legal experts say the state’s attorney general can’t block it.
McLaughlin’s plan refers to “buggery” or “sodomy” as “a monstrous evil that Almighty God, giver of freedom and liberty, commands us to suppress on pain of our utter destruction even as he overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah.” Under the proposal, “... any person who willingly touches another person of the same gender for purposes of sexual gratification (would) be put to death by bullets to the head or by any other convenient method.”
Anyone transmitting “sodomistic propaganda” to a minor would be fined $1 million per offense, and/or imprisoned up to 10 years, and/or expelled from California for up to life. It would ban lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, or those who espouse sodomistic propaganda, or who belong to any group that does, from serving in publ
Q: What is NVIDIA Tesla?
With the world’s first teraflop many-core processor, NVIDIA® Tesla computing solutions enable the necessary transition to energy efficient parallel computing power. With thousands of CUDA cores per processor , Tesla scales to solve the world’s most important computing challenges—quickly and accurately.
One example Tesla K40: 2880 CUDA cores. That's a LOT of cores.
Yeah, but 'free' video-over-ip is a clear conflict of interest.
For example, Comcast plans to start offering it's own video service and that won't count towards your 300GB cap. Surely you can see that this places Netflix and other streaming services at an unquestionable disadvantage.
So, you no longer believe that Content is King?
Just how much TV are you watching if a 300GB cap isn't enough? Also, it's not like you can't use your bandwidth up to 300GB to watch Netflix or whatever, so you can have the best of both worlds.
What in the world does what you posted have to do with the comment I replied to or my reply? Oh, right, NOTHING.
The original poster wrote: "Sorry dude but nobody alive today in the US experienced slavery."
I replied with a link that showed the US has an estimated 60,000 people living in it as slaves right now (human trafficking, women being promised jobs as "dancers" and being forced int prostitution and drugs, etc.)
This has nothing to do with capitalism - slavery has existed under every type of economic model.
And this is why we should treat the people who have drug addictions as having a treatable illness, and not as criminals. Addictions pretty much rob people of the ability to exercise free choice. I guess it doesn't matter if it's a monkey on your back or a gun to your head ...
Actually, some people who come from other countries have indeed experienced slavery. It's pretty much everywhere, even in the western world.
These numbers might seem high, but the UN estimate of 27 to 30 million is still an awful lot of people. White slaves DO exist. And India, with 14 million, easily beats out China with 3.2 million and Russia with 1 million. Strange how the world's largest democracy is also has the world's largest population of slaves. Even on a per capita basis, India is far worse than Russia and China.
Sure. I'm glad to know what the intention of the rule is, but isn't it still likely that the easiest way for manufacturers to comply will be total lockdown?
Doesn't matter - in American Republic, NSA still roots YOU.
And if you do something suspicious, they ROUTE you to Gitmo Beach.
So, be careful because your router could route YOU!