And we'd all have breathed a huge sigh of relief, and gone on to use an actual OO language like Smalltalk instead.
Oh well. You go to cyberwar with the Internet you got, not the Internet that you *** BUFFER OVERFLOW FREE AFTER USE NULL POINTER EXCEPTION KERNEL PANIC ***
He helped created both a low-level language and a OS that are still widely used everywhere, 40 years later.
His contribution to our everyday life shouldn't be understated.
Yes. But it's still an open question whether the success of Unix and C was a good thing.
The Internet might not be riddled with quite so many buffer-overflow errors if it had been built in a language with array bounds checking, for example. Like, oh I dunno, Microsoft BASIC on any of the 8 bit micros of the late 1970s...
This is awesome, and I agree with it almost wholeheartedly.
The #1 trend which bugs me in computing right now is what appears to me to be an across-the-board drift away from Platforms to Products - led by Apple, or at least by all the companies now desperately trying to be Apple.
Even Microsoft don't get this entirely. They have so many different subplatforms with such a rapid churn rate that it becomes exhausting trying to predict which one will become the real platform. PowerShell is a bright spark in an otherwise depressing OS - I really, really hope it becomes the backbone of all future MS products, because it's the first time I've seen anything nearly like a true user-accessible platform-wide API for a Microsoft OS since DOS.
But the point that you can't make a product that fits everyone, and yet companies seem to be trying to do the impossible - yes. So very yes.
As a user, give me a Product which is almost 100% a user-accessible Platform - give me the ability to customise my own workflow - and you'll create something so much better than 1984's Mac was better than the IBM PC. Preferably, don't try to lock this Platform down with patents or DRM or you'll set back computing by at least 20 years if not 50. But build it.
I just hope anyone's still listening, in the wave of Apple-clone No User-Serviceable Parts Inside Product fever which has swept the industry from Ubuntu to Chrome.
The term "UFO" (while including the word "unidentified"), implies "extraterrestrials".
No, that's the opposite of a true thing. The term UFO was deliberately chosen by Ed Ruppelt of BLUE BOOK to avoid jumping to any conclusions about the origin of unidentified aerial phenomena and take the sightings purely at face value - as a reaction to the 1948 SIGN group's jumping directly to the embarrassing "extraterrestrial hypothesis", and then GRUDGE attempting to bury all unexplained sightings as conventional explanations.
If you've read some of the original ufologists, for instance Vallee and Hynek (Vallee is particularly interesting for Slashdotters as he is one of the guys who really did work on the Internet - his 1982 The Network Revolution is a brilliant prediction of today's forum culture, you'll find that they are very ambiguous as to the source of sightings, and even to what extent they are physical vs mental events. There are many features of actual UFO reports which don't translate at all well into the "nuts and bolts spaceships and biological extraterrestrials" lore that people brought up on fictional treatments from Steven Spielberg and Chris Carter might expect.
If you'd like to consult source documents rather than third and fourth-hand Hollywood folklore, some of the history of the SIGN group is described here: Saturday Night Uforia: Matters of National Interest. (This is not my blog, but I'm a fan. The author has a spinoff site here: Saturday Night Uforia - but it doesn't yet have all his old articles.)
Well, other more enterprising individuals would have gone and created their printer company, and included said functionality as a key differentiating feature of their technology.
Huh?
Why is it more efficient to have to create a whole new commercial entity, with all the bureaucratic registration, administrative overhead, sales force and debt payments required to make it run, and commit a huge number of man-years to make that entity work -- rather than simply to add a few lines of code to a system to add a feature you want?
That would be like, every time you wanted to add a new word to the English language, having to register a patent on that word and launch a company to market it. Instead of just using the word.
For some things, a free "market" is a klunky steampunk overkill monster - at best.
It is not so much that the supply of oil is infinite as that it is so ****ing big that we have yet to quantify its bigness.
On the contrary, I rather venture to speculate that we can indeed quantify the bigness of the supply of oil on Planet Earth as, for one, at least less than the total volume of Planet Earth. In other words, a bigness of lessbig than the Andromeda Galaxy and potentially morebigger bigness than the bigness of the moon.
At least assuming that Planet Earth is made of a crunchy hydrocarbon core surrounded by a juicy, delicious oil-soaked mantle with a crisp skin of petroleum byproducts forming the rocky crust - but I think all oil executives would agree is a perfectly natural assumption to make.
It's very cool - in theory - to be able to type in the box and search the Start Menu for stuff. And when it works, it's great.
What isn't so cool is how the Start Menu search box is now much less usable for direct navigation to the file system, which is what I used to use it for. See, in XP, I'd regularly bring up the Start Menu, R for Run, and then type C:\My Stuff\Whatever, and there I'd be. Now, I bring up the Start Menu, click in the search box, start typing C:\... and half the time instead of bringing up an Explorer window, the "intelligent" search decides in its higher wisdom to instantiate the first Control Panel applet it can find beginning with "C".
This is less than helpful, and the behaviour is not predictable. It seems to depend on exactly how fast I type, and the general impression is of a system that's just flaky and unreliable.
The masses are embracing Win 7 because it brought some really cool new features and it's rock-solid-stable.
The masses are embracing Win 7 because Win XP is being end-of-lifed and Win 7 is all you can buy now.
I've been using Win 7 for over a year and I don't love a lot of things about it, such as the search box in the Start Menu which resolutely refuses to just get out of my way and find things. But what am I going to do? It's the new corporate standard, I don't have a choice. Well, I could quit my job and go work at a Linux startup in my garage, I guess. But I'd probably have better luck launching a rocket to the moon, so I learn to put up with Win7's quirks.
One thing I do love about 7? PowerShell. Now that is more like what I expected from the computer revolution back in the 80s: an OO language which is actually object-oriented in the original Smalltalk sense instead of glorified C compiler preprocessors like C++,COM, Java and.NET. If the team who designed PowerShell ever set their minds to building an entire OS, it would blow everything else away.
Naturally that won't be allowed to happen, I guess. But one could dream.
Seriously... try to imagine an alternate reality where neither Apple or Microsoft existed. Who was going to create our industry the way that it is?
IBM? I sincerely doubt it. They would have never believed in personal computing, or that there could even be personal computing. Computers would still be AS400 mainframes to this day most likely.
Well, for a start, there were microcomputers before and alongside the Apple II; the entire S-100 ecosystem, for a start.
But the big deal in the 1970s was time-sharing: small companies and individuals would rent access to applications run on big centralised machines in data centers through terminal devices which were hard-coded to be mostly 'dumb' interfaces, with command sets for reading and drawing and a little local storage, but most of the processing would be in the mainframe.
Fast-forward through the micro revolution of the late-70s-80s and the Web/Net buildout of the 1990s, and suddenly here we are in 2011. And what are the hottest new trends? Web 2.0 online apps, Cloud computing, iDevices with cut-down OSes optimised for being dumb terminals to the Cloud, and centralised oligopoly providers of rentable computing: Amazon, Google and Facebook. It's shinier, and we've got more brute processing power in our pockets, but at the App Store layer the model is converging back to the Bell/IBM vision of the future. HTML is becoming an updated VT-100 protocol, and the anarchic "everyone is a peer server" net of the 1990s seems an anomalous blip.
Steve Jobs led the personal computing revolution, but he also led the counter-revolution. He made personal computing devices desirable and ubiquitous luxury commodities; he didn't necessarily aim to make the production of computing content, rather than its consumption, open and democratic.
Is the consumerisation of a revolution a good thing or a bad thing? Well, that may depend on your political standpoint. But it's a thing.
Why would a toolbar contact a government-run weather services instead of their own
Probably because they're too cheap to actually own a weather service so they'd rather just flash ads in your face while loading the free government-run one? That is how the invisible middle finger of the free market works best.
It's my opinion Microsoft takes security very seriously.
Indeed. In fact, all Microsoft developers are required to take a strict regimen of humour-suppressing drugs in order to protect them from bouts of spontaneous uncontrollable giggles as they compile the monthly Patch Tuesday list of "privately reported" buffer overflows which their ten years of uber-security focus on top of decades of advanced compiler technology have somehow failed to detect before shipping.
Also the study divided flash player and pdf reader as two different packages. But lumped Java JRE update tool vulnerabilities with JRE array bounds violation. Cant figure that out.
Possibly because Flash Player and Adobe Reader are two separate downloads, each with their own auto-updater, while Java JRE with its auto-updater is one download?
I've travelled from the Gamma Quadrant to the City at the Edge of Forever, and I've seen a lotta strange stuff. But I've never seen anything to convince me that there's one all-powerful Great Bird of the Galaxy controlling everything. It's all a lotta simple tricks and Corbomite Maneuvers. Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good transporter chief and a phaser set to "stun".
Who are you? What do you want? Who do you serve? Who do you trust? How many lights do you see?
Carol Marcus never told you what happened to your father. I. Am! your.... Father!
If you go to Za'ha'dum, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair.
what database would you use that existed in 1991 and will still run on a modern PC today?
I dream of a far future where the state of software development could get to the point where a question like this becomes unthinkable, because along with a universally addressable packet-routing Internet we'd also have developed a universal structured data format as persistent as 7-bit ASCII is today. Sadly, given today's IT attention span, this might take a while.
oh look it's 2011 time for a new data standard. let's move all our data to eight-track cassettes made of chocolate!
No, see, that's my entire point. We're not using newer scientific ideas just because they're new; we're using them because they're objectively, testably better. We're also still using a lot of very old scientific ideas (like, say, Pythagoras' theorem of the hypotenuse) because despite being old, they're still correct, and don't magically become incorrect just because of the passing of time.
If someone can point to objective metrics that show why a new data format is better than an old one - and also explain why these same metrics were not available to the people who invented the first format - then I'm happy to agree that we have a case of objective progress.
But if we're just replacing one no-fully-thought-out format with another one that's not any better thought out? That's not progress, that's churn, and it won't help.
"Flowcharts? What is it with you engineers. It's software, it's not as if we're building a bridge or anything. We just keep on typing stuff in until it happens and that gets the job done. If it doesn't work we can clean it up later."
And that's why the cats keep getting stuck in the tubes.
Development writes the code that set up the DNS, the firewalls, even the kickstart files (or whatever your local equivalent is) that control OS installation.
I'm unfamiliar with the term "DevOps", but in my kind of workplace, Operations do that kind of OS configuration stuff (including writing automated scripts to manage it), and then we have Application developers who don't know and don't care anything about the OS, but want their precious application to write to C:\Windows\WhyDontIhaveRightsHere and have an always-on two-way RDP connection on port 31337 to a data centre in Korea.
OS and Applications Development will fight eternally, in my experience. It's nothing to do with "development" vs "operations" or automation vs manual configuration - the OS guys want to lock everything down and use standard systems, and the applications guys want to open everything up and do everything custom and bespoke. How do you resolve that conflict?
"The old format was buggy and had a lot of legacy problems. Therefore the new spreadsheet module was written from scratch."
O rly? And whose fault was it that the old format was buggy? Was it perchance the the same organisation which is releasing the new format? So why exactly should we believe that the new one is "better"?
I'm tired of format churn. 90% of it doesn't need to happen. Just get it right and stick with it, and if you try to tell me that you can't tell whether or not you've ever "got it right" because there's, like, no right or wrong, dude, and I should just lighten up and sorta go with the flow of the vibe of the zeitgeist of the moment and buy this month's iPad -- well, then you've just invalidated your claim to have got it right this time.
Surely data formats aren't rocket surgery. Just build it so it's a bit extensible, doesn't hardcode any silly assumptions, doesn't embed a Turing-complete binary format which can root your OS, and you'll be pretty much there.
Defense costs are small compared to government transfers of money to the old and poor... we're giving as much money as possible to the wrong people
Because God forbid that our parents should get to eat after they're done building our basement 3D TV hangouts... and we're all better off with a starving, diseased criminal underclass hating us than with a happy productive, educated citizenry invested in the nation... right?
I really don't understand this American fixation with demonising the poor and elderly and hero-worshipping the military. It seems about as far from the dream of "liberty and justice for all" as you can get.
Slashdot Mirror
Modern lisp I'll leave it to others to tell me what that is written in
Modern Lisp is made of lambdas
Modern Lisp compiles itself
Modern Lisp conses up Alonzo Church
Alonzo Church terrifies me
Alonzo Church makes me party
Alonzo Church puts my faith in Kurt Goedel
Kurt Goedel - non-terminating
Kurt Goedel - recursive loop
Kurt Goedel don't believe in Modern Lisp.
C++ wouldn't have come about without C either.
And we'd all have breathed a huge sigh of relief, and gone on to use an actual OO language like Smalltalk instead.
Oh well. You go to cyberwar with the Internet you got, not the Internet that you
*** BUFFER OVERFLOW FREE AFTER USE NULL POINTER EXCEPTION KERNEL PANIC ***
He helped created both a low-level language and a OS that are still widely used everywhere, 40 years later.
His contribution to our everyday life shouldn't be understated.
Yes. But it's still an open question whether the success of Unix and C was a good thing.
The Internet might not be riddled with quite so many buffer-overflow errors if it had been built in a language with array bounds checking, for example. Like, oh I dunno, Microsoft BASIC on any of the 8 bit micros of the late 1970s...
(No, I'm not really kidding.)
This is awesome, and I agree with it almost wholeheartedly.
The #1 trend which bugs me in computing right now is what appears to me to be an across-the-board drift away from Platforms to Products - led by Apple, or at least by all the companies now desperately trying to be Apple.
Even Microsoft don't get this entirely. They have so many different subplatforms with such a rapid churn rate that it becomes exhausting trying to predict which one will become the real platform. PowerShell is a bright spark in an otherwise depressing OS - I really, really hope it becomes the backbone of all future MS products, because it's the first time I've seen anything nearly like a true user-accessible platform-wide API for a Microsoft OS since DOS.
But the point that you can't make a product that fits everyone, and yet companies seem to be trying to do the impossible - yes. So very yes.
As a user, give me a Product which is almost 100% a user-accessible Platform - give me the ability to customise my own workflow - and you'll create something so much better than 1984's Mac was better than the IBM PC. Preferably, don't try to lock this Platform down with patents or DRM or you'll set back computing by at least 20 years if not 50. But build it.
I just hope anyone's still listening, in the wave of Apple-clone No User-Serviceable Parts Inside Product fever which has swept the industry from Ubuntu to Chrome.
The term "UFO" (while including the word "unidentified"), implies "extraterrestrials".
No, that's the opposite of a true thing. The term UFO was deliberately chosen by Ed Ruppelt of BLUE BOOK to avoid jumping to any conclusions about the origin of unidentified aerial phenomena and take the sightings purely at face value - as a reaction to the 1948 SIGN group's jumping directly to the embarrassing "extraterrestrial hypothesis", and then GRUDGE attempting to bury all unexplained sightings as conventional explanations.
If you've read some of the original ufologists, for instance Vallee and Hynek (Vallee is particularly interesting for Slashdotters as he is one of the guys who really did work on the Internet - his 1982 The Network Revolution is a brilliant prediction of today's forum culture, you'll find that they are very ambiguous as to the source of sightings, and even to what extent they are physical vs mental events. There are many features of actual UFO reports which don't translate at all well into the "nuts and bolts spaceships and biological extraterrestrials" lore that people brought up on fictional treatments from Steven Spielberg and Chris Carter might expect.
If you'd like to consult source documents rather than third and fourth-hand Hollywood folklore, some of the history of the SIGN group is described here: Saturday Night Uforia: Matters of National Interest. (This is not my blog, but I'm a fan. The author has a spinoff site here: Saturday Night Uforia - but it doesn't yet have all his old articles.)
What do you suppose will happen, though, if some unethical weasel goes to the moon
It would be a giant stride for mad genetic engineering, for one thing.
Well, other more enterprising individuals would have gone and created their printer company, and included said functionality as a key differentiating feature of their technology.
Huh?
Why is it more efficient to have to create a whole new commercial entity, with all the bureaucratic registration, administrative overhead, sales force and debt payments required to make it run, and commit a huge number of man-years to make that entity work -- rather than simply to add a few lines of code to a system to add a feature you want?
That would be like, every time you wanted to add a new word to the English language, having to register a patent on that word and launch a company to market it. Instead of just using the word.
For some things, a free "market" is a klunky steampunk overkill monster - at best.
It is not so much that the supply of oil is infinite as that it is so ****ing big that we have yet to quantify its bigness.
On the contrary, I rather venture to speculate that we can indeed quantify the bigness of the supply of oil on Planet Earth as, for one, at least less than the total volume of Planet Earth. In other words, a bigness of lessbig than the Andromeda Galaxy and potentially morebigger bigness than the bigness of the moon.
At least assuming that Planet Earth is made of a crunchy hydrocarbon core surrounded by a juicy, delicious oil-soaked mantle with a crisp skin of petroleum byproducts forming the rocky crust - but I think all oil executives would agree is a perfectly natural assumption to make.
Will WinRT prevent programmers from shipping Internet-facing apps with zero-day buffer overflows?
If not, then what use is it?
Improved search and Start-Menu-Search.
Yes, that's one of my pet annoyances with Win 7.
It's very cool - in theory - to be able to type in the box and search the Start Menu for stuff. And when it works, it's great.
What isn't so cool is how the Start Menu search box is now much less usable for direct navigation to the file system, which is what I used to use it for. See, in XP, I'd regularly bring up the Start Menu, R for Run, and then type C:\My Stuff\Whatever, and there I'd be. Now, I bring up the Start Menu, click in the search box, start typing C:\... and half the time instead of bringing up an Explorer window, the "intelligent" search decides in its higher wisdom to instantiate the first Control Panel applet it can find beginning with "C".
This is less than helpful, and the behaviour is not predictable. It seems to depend on exactly how fast I type, and the general impression is of a system that's just flaky and unreliable.
The masses are embracing Win 7 because it brought some really cool new features and it's rock-solid-stable.
The masses are embracing Win 7 because Win XP is being end-of-lifed and Win 7 is all you can buy now.
I've been using Win 7 for over a year and I don't love a lot of things about it, such as the search box in the Start Menu which resolutely refuses to just get out of my way and find things. But what am I going to do? It's the new corporate standard, I don't have a choice. Well, I could quit my job and go work at a Linux startup in my garage, I guess. But I'd probably have better luck launching a rocket to the moon, so I learn to put up with Win7's quirks.
One thing I do love about 7? PowerShell. Now that is more like what I expected from the computer revolution back in the 80s: an OO language which is actually object-oriented in the original Smalltalk sense instead of glorified C compiler preprocessors like C++ ,COM, Java and .NET. If the team who designed PowerShell ever set their minds to building an entire OS, it would blow everything else away.
Naturally that won't be allowed to happen, I guess. But one could dream.
Seriously... try to imagine an alternate reality where neither Apple or Microsoft existed. Who was going to create our industry the way that it is?
IBM? I sincerely doubt it. They would have never believed in personal computing, or that there could even be personal computing. Computers would still be AS400 mainframes to this day most likely.
Well, for a start, there were microcomputers before and alongside the Apple II; the entire S-100 ecosystem, for a start.
But the big deal in the 1970s was time-sharing: small companies and individuals would rent access to applications run on big centralised machines in data centers through terminal devices which were hard-coded to be mostly 'dumb' interfaces, with command sets for reading and drawing and a little local storage, but most of the processing would be in the mainframe.
Fast-forward through the micro revolution of the late-70s-80s and the Web/Net buildout of the 1990s, and suddenly here we are in 2011. And what are the hottest new trends? Web 2.0 online apps, Cloud computing, iDevices with cut-down OSes optimised for being dumb terminals to the Cloud, and centralised oligopoly providers of rentable computing: Amazon, Google and Facebook. It's shinier, and we've got more brute processing power in our pockets, but at the App Store layer the model is converging back to the Bell/IBM vision of the future. HTML is becoming an updated VT-100 protocol, and the anarchic "everyone is a peer server" net of the 1990s seems an anomalous blip.
Steve Jobs led the personal computing revolution, but he also led the counter-revolution. He made personal computing devices desirable and ubiquitous luxury commodities; he didn't necessarily aim to make the production of computing content, rather than its consumption, open and democratic.
Is the consumerisation of a revolution a good thing or a bad thing? Well, that may depend on your political standpoint. But it's a thing.
Why would a toolbar contact a government-run weather services instead of their own
Probably because they're too cheap to actually own a weather service so they'd rather just flash ads in your face while loading the free government-run one? That is how the invisible middle finger of the free market works best.
It's my opinion Microsoft takes security very seriously.
Indeed. In fact, all Microsoft developers are required to take a strict regimen of humour-suppressing drugs in order to protect them from bouts of spontaneous uncontrollable giggles as they compile the monthly Patch Tuesday list of "privately reported" buffer overflows which their ten years of uber-security focus on top of decades of advanced compiler technology have somehow failed to detect before shipping.
Working in that kind of environment is no joke.
Also the study divided flash player and pdf reader as two different packages. But lumped Java JRE update tool vulnerabilities with JRE array bounds violation. Cant figure that out.
Possibly because Flash Player and Adobe Reader are two separate downloads, each with their own auto-updater, while Java JRE with its auto-updater is one download?
Makes sense to me.
... that's a Borg Cube.
I've travelled from the Gamma Quadrant to the City at the Edge of Forever, and I've seen a lotta strange stuff. But I've never seen anything to convince me that there's one all-powerful Great Bird of the Galaxy controlling everything. It's all a lotta simple tricks and Corbomite Maneuvers. Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good transporter chief and a phaser set to "stun".
Who are you? What do you want? Who do you serve? Who do you trust? How many lights do you see?
Carol Marcus never told you what happened to your father. I. Am! your.... Father!
If you go to Za'ha'dum, be sure to wear some flowers in your hair.
Khaaaaaaaaan!
what database would you use that existed in 1991 and will still run on a modern PC today?
I dream of a far future where the state of software development could get to the point where a question like this becomes unthinkable, because along with a universally addressable packet-routing Internet we'd also have developed a universal structured data format as persistent as 7-bit ASCII is today. Sadly, given today's IT attention span, this might take a while.
oh look it's 2011 time for a new data standard. let's move all our data to eight-track cassettes made of chocolate!
If we'd just be content with the status quo, we'd still be using quite a lot of these ideas: http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php
No, see, that's my entire point. We're not using newer scientific ideas just because they're new; we're using them because they're objectively, testably better. We're also still using a lot of very old scientific ideas (like, say, Pythagoras' theorem of the hypotenuse) because despite being old, they're still correct, and don't magically become incorrect just because of the passing of time.
If someone can point to objective metrics that show why a new data format is better than an old one - and also explain why these same metrics were not available to the people who invented the first format - then I'm happy to agree that we have a case of objective progress.
But if we're just replacing one no-fully-thought-out format with another one that's not any better thought out? That's not progress, that's churn, and it won't help.
Mr. Venn died in the early 20s.
Tragically killed in an intersection, I presume?
"Flowcharts? What is it with you engineers. It's software, it's not as if we're building a bridge or anything. We just keep on typing stuff in until it happens and that gets the job done. If it doesn't work we can clean it up later."
And that's why the cats keep getting stuck in the tubes.
Development writes the code that set up the DNS, the firewalls, even the kickstart files (or whatever your local equivalent is) that control OS installation.
I'm unfamiliar with the term "DevOps", but in my kind of workplace, Operations do that kind of OS configuration stuff (including writing automated scripts to manage it), and then we have Application developers who don't know and don't care anything about the OS, but want their precious application to write to C:\Windows\WhyDontIhaveRightsHere and have an always-on two-way RDP connection on port 31337 to a data centre in Korea.
OS and Applications Development will fight eternally, in my experience. It's nothing to do with "development" vs "operations" or automation vs manual configuration - the OS guys want to lock everything down and use standard systems, and the applications guys want to open everything up and do everything custom and bespoke. How do you resolve that conflict?
"Ooh". "Ahhh." That's how cloning Zombie Michael Crichton always starts.
Then later there's running, and thinly veiled right-wing political commentary, and screaming,
"The old format was buggy and had a lot of legacy problems. Therefore the new spreadsheet module was written from scratch."
O rly? And whose fault was it that the old format was buggy? Was it perchance the the same organisation which is releasing the new format? So why exactly should we believe that the new one is "better"?
I'm tired of format churn. 90% of it doesn't need to happen. Just get it right and stick with it, and if you try to tell me that you can't tell whether or not you've ever "got it right" because there's, like, no right or wrong, dude, and I should just lighten up and sorta go with the flow of the vibe of the zeitgeist of the moment and buy this month's iPad -- well, then you've just invalidated your claim to have got it right this time.
Surely data formats aren't rocket surgery. Just build it so it's a bit extensible, doesn't hardcode any silly assumptions, doesn't embed a Turing-complete binary format which can root your OS, and you'll be pretty much there.
Defense costs are small compared to government transfers of money to the old and poor... we're giving as much money as possible to the wrong people
Because God forbid that our parents should get to eat after they're done building our basement 3D TV hangouts... and we're all better off with a starving, diseased criminal underclass hating us than with a happy productive, educated citizenry invested in the nation ... right?
I really don't understand this American fixation with demonising the poor and elderly and hero-worshipping the military. It seems about as far from the dream of "liberty and justice for all" as you can get.
militant vegans
Hut hut hut!
By the right... quick plant!
We like spuds and celery
Brussel sprouts and broccoli
Tofu bake and lentil stew
Keep your animals in the zoo!
Soy! What is it good for? Absolutely everything!
Present... carrots!