He also listened to Nobel-winning economists who told him stagflation was fine for the working man, given nobody, Carter, Ford "WIN whip Inflation Now", nor Richard "Wage and Price Control" Nixon could seem to halt it. Then Reagan did.
Governments seem good so long as they do what you think they should be doing. This is just might makes right in a democracy.
Many European governments outlaw "hate speech", not learning the lessons of history, but repeating the mistakes. It doesn't matter how many cheer...for now. It's wrong. Why? Go ask gramma before she dies.
in particular, 'solar radiation management (SRM),'
Don't do it! We know ice ages can come on in as little as a few years. All it takes is one extra cool summer where the snow pack doesn't fully melt and so much energy gets reflected back into space the next winter is severe and even more snow builds up. It's a local attractor in chaos theory, or a stable local minimum on the energy gradiant space.
With warming, moving in from the sea over 100-300 years: irritation but nobody dies, and lives continue to improve anyway thanks to technology.
Accidentally inducing an ice ace, billions die in a few years and much of society collapses, dictatorships, and lives of those who remain stop improving and start degrading.
There was discussion as to whether Amber Alerts should even be used for custody cases. It jades people for when the much rarer but much more serious cases of creep kidnappings occur.
The builder (designer?) of the boat was on her when she sank, I wonder if he considered this? Or did the thought of damaging the boat further never cross his mind?
Neither. He was all qq because his beautiful fiance was banging some street yokel from steerage.
This is what a free nation is supposed to be about -- people can go do their own thing, and if they screw up, then they screw up, no skin off your ass.
Also, if the right used the left's environmental laws to get in the way, fit punishment for building it in the first place. From a meme control point of view, that's all it's about anyway. Any "actual application" to reality is irrelevant as far as power exchanges go.
This. The real problem is misuse, not use for finding terrorists. As long as there is one secret room in one of these multiying billion-dollar data centers, it's all for naught.
Let us listen in on the Republicans, or Democrats, and see their strategy. Then we can preemptively counter it with trial balloons, dirty tricks, astroturfing, and so on. This crap is bad enough without the power to make any of the opponents' plans stillborn or DOA.
Let's check up on candidate X. No alarms go off. See his calls, and calls of those he calls -- ooh, he's talking to someone rich, or a PAC. How can we discredit them?
Of course, Snowden claimed he could listen directly to their phone with no alarms going off, but even without, it's a dangerous power.
"They can't do that" is toothless if it's just a manual requirement for forms and permission, instead of uncorruptible logging and alarms going off in 50 managers' offices.
Let's not forget the larger historical context. The right to keep and bear arms isn't about hunting, or defending your house per se, or walking around alleys in Atlanta at 3 AM.
It's about providing a final check on government grown out of control. Dictatorships outlaw guns to prevent this. Ergo if The People reserve this right to themselves, they can not only prevent it but reverse it.
Smart guns would interfere with this process on a battlefield, and thus should be unconstitutional as a mandate, should any politician suggest such in the future.
Soon even Panama's expanding canal for "Superpanamax" ships won't be the only one. China is building an even bigger one next door for even larger ships.
Meanwhile environmentalists in the US fight deepening harbors for even just the Superpanamax ships. The center of empire has shifted. It's all over. China has learned the lesson of history -- keep the trade routes open.
You are working from the assumption Panama stumbled across this, rather than spies knowing it ahead of time.
How to take advantage of knowledge only a spy could know is a grand strategy game. In WWII, the allies had planes "stumble" over German ships they knew about from cracked codes, that they really needed to take out, but didn't wanna show their hand at deep knowledge.
People who wanted influence would work their own people in there. They are much more determined than a bunch of people who just imagine it will remain independent. Something, by the way, history sbould give them absolutely no confidence in.
The Soviet Union had to spend 50% of its entire budget just to put up a facade of keeping up with the US -- and while almost entirely neglecting a navy comparatively.
China didn't do squat either, until the past 10 years when they actually introduced the freedom of private enterprise. This proves there's a hell of a lot more to freedom than just freedom of speech.
Get off your political narrative and look at actual reality, at actual measurements of well-being. Socialized countries are as dependent on invention as anywhere else, and can't give it out for free until other, better countries invent it first.
One needs a link to the firehose to click on the firehose. It's not on the front page. Out of sight, out of mind. Apparently I have 15 firehose points.
It's an interesting question -- would the state be required to provide the decryption of a block of data, or just the block of data? How about data that isn't really encrypted, but just in some normal binary data encoding that would require some expert to figure out and extract the text and pictures?
Is the state required to turn over every interpretation of that block of data?
My point is political narratives stir up rage in people telling them how rotten things are and how they are getting ripped off, when the quality and length of their lives continues to increase year by year, largely due to the protection of rights and otherwise letting people be free to live their lives.
Most people around the world today, and everybody through human history, would love to be "ripped off" in the way certain political narratives bleat.
Well, that's fine, but I keep pointing out I'm less concerned with whether Google knows I might want to buy Depends than that the NSA might be able to spy on political opponents to whoever holds their ear. "Make sure you fill out the warrant form, agent #4821 out of 17436." isn't much protection for a G. Gordon Liddy type.
Slashdot Mirror
He bought into the shortage gloom-and-doom of the 1970s. Unfortunately a lot of people did back then even though. it was famously disproven in repeated 10 year experiment bets.
He also listened to Nobel-winning economists who told him stagflation was fine for the working man, given nobody, Carter, Ford "WIN whip Inflation Now", nor Richard "Wage and Price Control" Nixon could seem to halt it. Then Reagan did.
And the hostage rescue failed miserably.
Governments seem good so long as they do what you think they should be doing. This is just might makes right in a democracy.
Many European governments outlaw "hate speech", not learning the lessons of history, but repeating the mistakes. It doesn't matter how many cheer...for now. It's wrong. Why? Go ask gramma before she dies.
Don't do it! We know ice ages can come on in as little as a few years. All it takes is one extra cool summer where the snow pack doesn't fully melt and so much energy gets reflected back into space the next winter is severe and even more snow builds up. It's a local attractor in chaos theory, or a stable local minimum on the energy gradiant space.
With warming, moving in from the sea over 100-300 years: irritation but nobody dies, and lives continue to improve anyway thanks to technology.
Accidentally inducing an ice ace, billions die in a few years and much of society collapses, dictatorships, and lives of those who remain stop improving and start degrading.
Don't do it.
This kind of thing should be handled through social ostracism, not laws. Politicians leading mobs to silence people is nothing honorable.
"Siri, cut out this tumor, please."
"Alright, I will cut ot two more pieces."
There was discussion as to whether Amber Alerts should even be used for custody cases. It jades people for when the much rarer but much more serious cases of creep kidnappings occur.
I don't know why, he was sloppy. Well, I guess they could train him in the details but his heart was in the right place.
Neither. He was all qq because his beautiful fiance was banging some street yokel from steerage.
This is what a free nation is supposed to be about -- people can go do their own thing, and if they screw up, then they screw up, no skin off your ass.
Also, if the right used the left's environmental laws to get in the way, fit punishment for building it in the first place. From a meme control point of view, that's all it's about anyway. Any "actual application" to reality is irrelevant as far as power exchanges go.
This. The real problem is misuse, not use for finding terrorists. As long as there is one secret room in one of these multiying billion-dollar data centers, it's all for naught.
Let us listen in on the Republicans, or Democrats, and see their strategy. Then we can preemptively counter it with trial balloons, dirty tricks, astroturfing, and so on. This crap is bad enough without the power to make any of the opponents' plans stillborn or DOA.
Let's check up on candidate X. No alarms go off. See his calls, and calls of those he calls -- ooh, he's talking to someone rich, or a PAC. How can we discredit them?
Of course, Snowden claimed he could listen directly to their phone with no alarms going off, but even without, it's a dangerous power.
"They can't do that" is toothless if it's just a manual requirement for forms and permission, instead of uncorruptible logging and alarms going off in 50 managers' offices.
Let's not forget the larger historical context. The right to keep and bear arms isn't about hunting, or defending your house per se, or walking around alleys in Atlanta at 3 AM.
It's about providing a final check on government grown out of control. Dictatorships outlaw guns to prevent this. Ergo if The People reserve this right to themselves, they can not only prevent it but reverse it.
Smart guns would interfere with this process on a battlefield, and thus should be unconstitutional as a mandate, should any politician suggest such in the future.
Soon even Panama's expanding canal for "Superpanamax" ships won't be the only one. China is building an even bigger one next door for even larger ships.
Meanwhile environmentalists in the US fight deepening harbors for even just the Superpanamax ships. The center of empire has shifted. It's all over. China has learned the lesson of history -- keep the trade routes open.
You are working from the assumption Panama stumbled across this, rather than spies knowing it ahead of time.
How to take advantage of knowledge only a spy could know is a grand strategy game. In WWII, the allies had planes "stumble" over German ships they knew about from cracked codes, that they really needed to take out, but didn't wanna show their hand at deep knowledge.
People who wanted influence would work their own people in there. They are much more determined than a bunch of people who just imagine it will remain independent. Something, by the way, history sbould give them absolutely no confidence in.
Doctor Wut?
Correction: The stations are specifically designed for dog owners, just like bacon-flavored chews. See also TV shows to educate babies.
The Soviet Union had to spend 50% of its entire budget just to put up a facade of keeping up with the US -- and while almost entirely neglecting a navy comparatively.
China didn't do squat either, until the past 10 years when they actually introduced the freedom of private enterprise. This proves there's a hell of a lot more to freedom than just freedom of speech.
Get off your political narrative and look at actual reality, at actual measurements of well-being. Socialized countries are as dependent on invention as anywhere else, and can't give it out for free until other, better countries invent it first.
7-11 noticed they could just make a bigger cup and people would buy it, in a process without end.
Racism and LGBTism, all in one succinct post. You must be so proud of yourself.
One needs a link to the firehose to click on the firehose. It's not on the front page. Out of sight, out of mind. Apparently I have 15 firehose points.
It is regular TV -- 3-4 commercials in multiple breaks. I can...and do, get that already on my normal TV and would rather fast forward thru them.
Selling means its dying because of this and they wanna get money out of it from some sucker.
It's an interesting question -- would the state be required to provide the decryption of a block of data, or just the block of data? How about data that isn't really encrypted, but just in some normal binary data encoding that would require some expert to figure out and extract the text and pictures?
Is the state required to turn over every interpretation of that block of data?
My point is political narratives stir up rage in people telling them how rotten things are and how they are getting ripped off, when the quality and length of their lives continues to increase year by year, largely due to the protection of rights and otherwise letting people be free to live their lives.
Most people around the world today, and everybody through human history, would love to be "ripped off" in the way certain political narratives bleat.
Try actual measurements of economic well-being someday. These "scraps" are better than kings used to have, aside from concubines.
Well, that's fine, but I keep pointing out I'm less concerned with whether Google knows I might want to buy Depends than that the NSA might be able to spy on political opponents to whoever holds their ear. "Make sure you fill out the warrant form, agent #4821 out of 17436." isn't much protection for a G. Gordon Liddy type.