Because there are social goals that we are willing to pay money for and make the economy less efficient to achieve. That's why we don't allow slavery. That's why we don't allow child labor.
Slavery is allowed. The 13th amendment has a provision to allow slavery as punishment for a crime. We have slave labor in prisons.
But you're wrong about the economic argument... slave labor is not more efficient than free market labor, particularly wage slaves and obviously machine labor. The reason slaves make license plates in prisons is that the prisons get a sweetheart deal and it pads their funding... but a wage slave factory in China could turn out better license plates for 1/2 the cost.
Slavery is an example of an inefficient local minimum. While slavery exists it seems like it's the cheapest way you can do it, and a lot of effort is put into maintaining that state. But then someone comes along and invents the cotton gin... would it have been invented sooner if slavery hadn't been around?
I'm not sure what your point is in regards to disavowing the KKK, the point is that it ok him 24 hours to do it and he initially refused and then lied about.
No the point is he shouldn't have to do it.
Second, no major reporter has asked Hillary about the KKK endorser about her.
Yup, exactly. Look, KKK figures are probably going to vote and endorse SOMEONE. Every time there's an election. When the media tends to harass one one candidate more than others, they are clearly being biased. Do you support media bias?
Fourth, the Dragon who endorsed Hillary did so out of essentially a conspiracy theory about her actual policies being different than her stated policies
You probably won't believe it but I have heard people say they are strongly supportive of abortion because minorities get more abortions.
Trump isn't racist and in fact is more closely aligned with blacks on some issues than most candidates, specifically about illegal immigration. Economically, blacks support a higher minimum wage and tighter immigration control. I don't think Trump supports the higher wage, but he's the only serious candidate about immigration control. And what good is a higher minimum wage when you don't have a job? The black unemployment rate is quite high.
Nope you're wrong. This is outside the democratic process. This is coercion, not political engagement. Know the difference? If you want to influence people democratically, you go talk to people who are willing to listen and tell them your views. Coercion is when you go around harassing people to the extent that you can get away with. Like if a business owner said "I will fire anybody with a Bernie bumper sticker." That's not democratic.
You're just whitewashing this stuff because it's a position you happen to agree with.
The real question I have is what is going to happen to Trumps supporters when they realize he is not nearly as conservative as they think he is, and will he be able to control them?
Nobody is as conservative as what conservatives want. The political conservative class has changed their definition of conservatism to include selling out the country on trade deals to export expensive jobs, and importing cheap labor to handle the jobs we haven't exported. How is that conservative? It's not. And those are far bigger issues than gay marriage or abortion or whatever.
This country would be in a hell of a lot better shape if only landowners could vote.
People who own land, or real estate like Trump, have a truly vested interest in the success of the country. Land prices go up if the country does well.
Compare that to other rich people and you see huge conflicting interests. Jeff Bezos probably derives some level of his hatred for Trump because of Trumps stance against H1Bs, for instance. Bezos would gladly vote against the prosperity of America for his own bottom line, whereas Trump's bottom line IS the prosperity of America.
Look for this petition to succeed though, because Jeff Bezos really hates Trump. He owns the Washington Post, which has written some of the most ridiculous anti-Trump articles this past year. I think they've called Trump "the new Hitler" more than any other major publication.
Why? Probably genuine hatred over political differences, but there's also the bottom line... Trump is against H1B's.
Yes, it is actually. That's life. That's why we did in fact have slavery, jim crow, and discrimination against various groups.
The fact that everything is valid when put to a vote is why that stuff can change though, rather than saying "No no no, GOD wants slavery, so you can't just 'vote' it away, that's blasphemy."
Linux, like any Unix-like OS, expects the user to have some minimal understanding of what they are doing.
Incidentally, your first mistake is thinking that the "graphical boot" is actually part of the system.
Your first mistake is confusing the kernel with the operating system. The stuff I'm talking about is most certainly part of the system.
I think what you want is a game-console. If so, get one.
How exactly do you think a game console is going to replace a file server?
Now I have been thinking of splitting the server up into a simpler NAS device for the storage pool and a smaller low-power server for the other tasks the server handles.
"Linux Desktop" is more than the GUI though. Non-technical people are doing more advanced stuff with their computers than ever before, in my experience, so a desktop OS has to enable them to do that while staying fairly non-technical.
And when you start doing advanced stuff, you start running into errors. Linux is pretty bad at dealing with errors, and ironically it's gotten WORSE over time as it tries to become cooler and more friendly.
I've got a file server running Fedora. The boot sequence is all hidden now. There's a silly progress bar instead. If you hit escape at the right time, you can see the status messages of systemd as it's booting. If something goes wrong, guess what happens... it just stops. If you had hit escape at the right time, you'd see a message that you might think is related to why the boot stopped. Well, thanks to systemd's parallel boot it might not.
I've got like 8 hard drives in this server, some of them a bit old, so sometimes there are hard drive errors that prevent something from mounting properly. In the past, the boot would be interrupted and it would say "enter the root password for maintenance" or something like that. Then you'd have to run fsck.
Guess what... the graphical boot apparently has no clue about this. So here's my experience when there's a little hard drive glitch: 1. Reboot after something like a kernel update 2. See the stupid progress bar just sitting there not moving for like 2 minutes 3. Hit escape... the screen goes entirely black with a cursor in the top left corner (notice above I said "if you had hit escape at the right time"... you have to hit it before the error occurs) 4. Try rebooting with sysrq... oh fedora has all the "magic" commands disabled by default, nice 5. Try ctrl alt del 6. Power cycle 7. Hit escape right at the start of the graphical boot so I can see the systemd progress messages 8. Ah! Here's the one where it freezes... weird it has nothing at all to do with mounting or drives or anything like that 9. Reboot to see if the "glitch" is gone 10. Nope 11. Edit the grub config to get rid of the goddamn useless "quiet" and "rhgb" options that seem to magically come back after every update, and I can't figure out how to get rid of them except by manually editing grub.cfg, which then gets overwritten next time there's an update 12. Ah okay there's the password prompt
So 2 steps (reboot, see prompt) became 12 steps, because they wanted to have a damn progress bar and "graphical boot" which is basically still text... even the progress bar looks like one of those old text-based progress bars where it just puts solid block ascii chars to fill it in.
It's shocking and disgusting that the graphical boot has lost touch with the underlying system so much that stuff like this is happening.. it can't interrupt itself to do maintenance anymore.
Oh and how about this... if a hard drive won't mount, keep booting if you can! I've got redundancy, I'd like to be able to boot into the system, mount it in degraded mode, remove it from the storage pool, and keep going! I've added "nofail,x-systemd.device-timeout=30s" to my fstab but that apparently doesn't do shit, or at least not what I expect. I mean one time it did allow the boot to continue when there was a mounting error (intermittent SATA error caused by a loose cable).. but then NFS stopped the boot because apparently it has a dependency on systemd-fstab-generator.service (or something) completing without error. So useless.
I mean I can understand if / won't mount then you can't really boot up, but some random storage pool with a filesystem designed to handle failures? Come on Linux. Come the fuck on. It should be the default behavior based on the filesystem type. If not default, there should be an easy option to add to fstab that says "under no circumstances stop booting for any error, no matter what, related to this mount point, or any service that depends on this mountpoint... I'll fix it later"
I'm getting tired of this crap. I know Windows isn't a panacea, but I have had hard drive failures in Windows before and it handles it much better. If it's not the boot drive, it keeps booting, and the drive is just unavailable.
There's more than one way to get money into an IRA. You can do a 401k rollover for instance. Contribution limits for 401ks are about 18000 for the employee, but 53000 for the employer. The limit is also per employer, not total... so if you own 10 companies and draw a salary from all 10 companies, I guess you can put away half a million per year in 401ks, then roll them over to IRAs.
Another trick is to use a self-directed IRA that lets you hold more investments than just publicly traded stocks and bonds. A self-directed IRA can buy and sell all kinds of stuff like real estate and art. How hard is it for a self-directed IRA to buy some art, then magically sell it the next day for 50x profit to the owner, the owner's company, a friend, etc? I don't know.
According to http://www.bankrate.com/financ... there are 314 taxpayers with IRA balances over $25 million, so definitely some tricks are happening.
Before you get all impressed with yourself at bursting my bubble, I'm a fucking atheist, you twit.
I didn't think you were religious. Most people here aren't. If I'm talking to religious people I generally don't call their books gibberish. I'm actually not a troll. I do think you're an idiot though.
If you honestly believe that these texts have nothing to do with either religion
Nope, what I said was they are meaningless gibberish until they're interpreted. Can you understand the difference? The texts have everything to do with the religion, but your interpretation doesn't. The interpretations of millions of other people are what matters. When you said "Here is just a small sampling of what Christianity endorses if we are going to hold them to their sacred text" that revealed how little critical thought you've given the subject. Who gives a shit if some place in the Bible shows that God told someone to murder some children? It's not supported in the Christian community, so it's not part of Christianity.
Idiots like you defend Islam along the same lines... oh look we found a place in the Koran where Mohammed was a nice guy! See, Islam is fundamentally good, it's just a tiny tiny minority that is bad!! Nope.
So if the KKK had more press lately, and had committed more mass atrocities more recently, then the argument works, but since they haven't been getting a lot of air time lately, it's not the same thing. Is that it? The Westboro assholes aren't big enough, and they haven't detonated any bombs yet, so they're good, even though they specifically exist to incite hatred and bigotry, it's not a big deal, and not at all proof that Christians do bad shit, is that it?
Pretty much.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume that you probably have a reason in mind that I can't point to Hitler (also a Christian)....probably too long ago, huh?
Usually by the time people start using Hitler as a representative of Christianity it's clear that they're just idiots who are trolling. I haven't studied the influence of Christianity on Hitler and vice versa so I dunno. Do you have some convincing evidence that he was motivated by his Christian belief? I doubt it or I'd have heard of it before.
I love how guys like you believe you're super informed and intelligent, but it never occurs to you that when you spend 16 years raining fucking bombs down on a country, eventually, the poor, uneducated, starving people in that country might rise up and right back, in whatever rag-tag militia that they can cobble together.....nah
See that shows how idiotic you are. These areas have been violent shitholes much longer than the Gulf War 1 or 2. (Here's where you bring up the "golden age" of Islam, and I explain that it was still a shithole even then. Can we skip that?)
The reality is, your a fucking hack, dude. You know squat, and talk all the shit you want, but you KNOW I'm right here. You're off base, I tried to be nice, but you wanted to be a condescending prick about it.
Heh uhh what are you trying to do here? Is this like an appeal to your own authority? Pathetic. If I'm a hack from your perspective, at least I sound like I know what I'm talking about more than "Dur hur you're wrong I'm right and you know it hahahahaha I winnnnn"
Seriously, read a little bit sometimes. Stop dreaming up your own delusions, and for goodness sake, stop listening to Rush and Drumpf.
Oh! Powerful stuff! You called Trump Drumpf, I have no reply. God you're stupid.
Apart from, more or less once more, stating that I honestly cannot think of a single reason why blowing up people by abusing the justification of democracy is somehow on a different scale of morality that doing the same in the name of a religion (any religion), I'm not sure what else to say.
I wasn't referring to democracy vs caliphate, but simply that if we take both groups somewhat at their word, one is better than the other. The guy who purposely bombs churches is worse than the guy who accidentally bombs a hospital. That's human nature.. we take into account motive, not just outcome.
Now if you get into weird conspiracy theories that when the US bombed that hospital, they actually did it on purpose.. then we're no longer engaging in rational discourse. There's no evidence for it.
Just like democracy is not better or worse than either in this context. They're all just tools used to play a particular public's opinion in this context, and to appease one or other conscience.
I disagree. I'm not a moral relativist. Modern Western democracy is far superior to an Islamic state of any kind, from democracy (Turkey) or caliphate (ISIS).
I agree that spreading democracy to Muslim countries is not possible, in hindsight, but still it stands that the world would be a better place if Bush/Obama had succeeded. The world would be a worse place if ISIS succeeded.
I'm not helping you make your point. I'm trying to explain that your point is meaningless. I guess you don't get it so let me be more explicit.
There are two types of people. Those who think "Islam" is what's written in the Koran, and "Christianity" is what's written in the Bible. And there are those who think "Islam" is what Muslims do, and "Christianity" is what Christians do.
I'm the 2nd type. I think the 1st type are stupid. They are completely faith based... because the reality is whatever is written in the Koran and the Bible is meaningless gibberish until someone interprets it. The 1st type of person is an arrogant or short-sighted person who thinks "Okay, I read this in the Koran, so that's what Islam is... despite all these people calling themselves Muslims and doing something else." They don't seem to understand that what they think the Koran says only matters to them.
Unfortunately, you go on to completely contradict yourself by talking about your understanding of Christians in America to be such that they wouldn't do such things. Guessing you're unfamiliar with the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church, huh?
Oh yeah I'm familiar with them. How big are they, do you know? Isn't Westboro Baptist like 15 people? And have they ever committed a crime of violence against other people? Not that I'm aware of, and I'm sure it would be big news. As for the KKK, what have they done recently? How big are they? How relevant are they? The biggest news about the KKK is when a KKK leader endorses someone for president... not exactly in the same league as ISIS, right? Or can you not admit that?
If you had been brave enough to click, you'd see that it's actually a well organized site with good navigation illustrating the hundreds if not thousands of incitements to violence in the Bible.
Hopefully after this comment you can understand why I dismissed your source. Not because of the domain name, but because a site that says "The Biblical God is NOT pro-life, he advocates child murder, infanticide, child abuse and abortion" is simply full of shit.
Let me clarify for you: there is no fucking God, and he did not advocate anything, because he doesn't exist. Get it yet? That's why this line of reasoning fails. You read the Bible and say oh ho ho, look at these savages, they're the same or worse as the Muslims!!!! and chortle to yourself like you know something all the dumb Christians don't. But you're an idiot. It doesn't matter what the Bible says, it matters how it's interpreted and implemented by people who call themselves Christians. That's why religions change over time. That's why there are some Christian groups who call themselves textual literalists, and yet other Christians disagree with them. How on Earth do you explain that, if you think Christianity is defined by the literal text of the Bible? How can there be disagreement?
Please think about it. You sound like an idiot to many people when you create a false equivalence between Islam and Christianity based on some stupid excerpts from a book that even most Christians haven't read completely.
What I'm saying is that no terrorist attacks are committed by people who are or who have in the past attempted to be kicked out of the country.
That's true, but I'm not saying border security is the only thing we need to do in the fight against terrorism. It's a prerequisite for other steps though, such as kicking out radicals.
I know exactly what you're talking about. The 3D effect in movies is terrible... which makes sense because it's not actually 3D, it's just a trick. In a real 3D movie, each person in the audience would have a different perspective and it would change as you move around.
Most of them seem to have a pretty obvious background plane, then an action plane, then very occasionally some motion out of the action plane towards the audience. That's about it.
Drone strikes are not in the news everyday because they don't kill people that are "one of us".
Pretty sure drone strikes are in the news every day, actually... either actual news of a drone strike, or someone talking about drone strikes in general. For instance here's one today http://www.kuna.net.kw/Article...
Their number of killed innocent bystanders are reduced by classifying every killed "military-aged male" as an "enemy killed in action".
And the number of innocent bystanders is increased when people come along and remove the weapons they were carrying.
They also hit hospitals, and then just administratively sanction the people that were responsible for it rather than prosecuting them for war crimes.
It's not a war crime.
The fact that these acts are not carried out in the name of Christianity (except for possibly in case of Bush Jr), is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.
Well that's fine as far as you're concerned, but does anybody else care about your concerns? To many others the fact that these acts are not carried out in the name of Christianity is of critical importance.
and the fact that the US self-identifies as a Christian nation is of course abused by IS to claim this is in fact Christian-inspired violence, just like you are doing above w.r.t. Islam
That's not "just like" others are doing. Nobody is saying that all crimes committed by Muslims are inspired by Islam. But there are crimes that are obviously inspired by Islam and committed by Muslims. That's a big difference.
In the West we generally use democracy and human rights as justifications with the same goals, and with just as little relevance.
That's true, but still you're talking about a different scale of morality here. No Christians are suicide-bombing mosques in the name of human rights. But Muslims are suicide-bombing Western targets in the name of Islam. You still don't have an answer for that except to simply declare it irrelevant as far as you're concerned, and that's not an acceptable answer for others.
If we were kicking anyone out this might make a difference...but we're not actually kicking anyone out so adding borders does not have any effect other than to annoy those of us who like traveling between countries here.
Agreed, but borders is a prerequisite. You can't complain that we're not kicking people out therefore we don't need borders, when we don't actually have well controlled borders to begin with. That logic doesn't work.
The terrorist attacks are like Anonymous attacks in that they are sometimes well coordinated and sometimes done by incompetent loners.
Even the loners are doing it for some ideology or in the name of some group, even if they're not actually part of it. The San Bernardino terrorists, afaik, were not "part" of ISIS, but the woman declared her allegiance to ISIS before they did it.
no, I have not actually heard anyone at all basing their position based on terrorism, other than to be more against Daesh than ever.
You must not read much news. I've seen it in every major newspaper, both in articles and in the comment section. Here's just one of many examples of what I said above: https://www.washingtonpost.com...
The entire line of reasoning is idiotic... you make decisions based on what's best for you, not some psychoanalysis of your enemy and what they want or don't want.
While I feel bad for the families of those who have been killed or wounded, the reality is that Daesh have managed to kill fewer people outside of the middle east than die in car crashes here in a month
More people die in car crashes than lots of stuff. Yet we regulate lots and lots of other stuff. Now unless you're going around saying "I'm not willing to put up with the inconveniences of food safety regulations just to save a handful of people from food poisoning, when CAR CRASHES kill so many more" then you're being awfully hypocritical.
Your argument is also very short-sighted... we already do a hell of a lot to fight against terrorism right now. We have multiple government agencies, civilian and military, dealing with terrorist groups and state sponsors. I think it's pretty remarkable, and no accident, that a wealthy terrorist group like ISIS hasn't gotten their hands on some nuclear bombs when there are suppliers from the former USSR, Pakistan, North Korea, and so on.
which is why I do not perceive Daesh's ability to do war against us here to be substantial enough to justify any significant changes in the way that I live my life (i.e. being willing to put up with more security theater that isn't useful for stopping Daesh anyway).
I agree about security theater, in the instances where it is theater, but let me ask you this. If you're not Muslim, and even if you are but you're not like a hardcore radical, how would it significantly change your life if we went around shutting down radical mosques, deporting every Muslim who ever said "Yes I would welcome sharia law in [some Western country]" or "Yes I support the death penalty for apostasy", refusing all refugees and immigrants from areas with strong ISIS influence, and so on? Seems like it would have absolutely no effect on most people, including Muslims.
I don't know what your point is. I didn't say anything about passports, just border security.
Do you think valid passports are magic and allow immediate entry? There are thousands of valid passports issued in regions of Syria controlled by ISIS... guess what... I don't think those people should be let in, despite their valid passports.
Nothing GP said is incorrect. Whining about filters and "ignorant bigotry" is all you've got left, and it's utter garbage. Nobody cares about these baseless accusations anymore. It's not bigotry or racism or Islamophobia or whatever "bad word of the day" to list the widespread problems in the Muslim world, and if you think it is, that's your issue.
OP isn't claiming the Brussels attacks are about cartoons, he mentioned them as an example of how stupid it is to say Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, etc.
First of all, it's clear that YOU don't understand the tenets and foundations of either religion, because you think there IS an agreed upon set of tenets and foundations. There's not. It shows you have no clue what you're talking about.
If you think "Islam says suicide bombing is wrong" then you are an idiot. If you say "Islam says suicide bombing is right" then you are an idiot. "Islam" isn't a person, it can't say anything. Oh and spoiler alert, there is no Allah, so there's no divine command whispered into your ear about which way is correct. You just read a book, and *bam* you're the expert, you interpret it, you do whatever you want as long as you can reconcile it in your own head (or not). Hell you don't even have to read the book, you can just grow up around other self-proclaimed Muslims and imitate them.
That's how religion works.
What's important is what the people of a religion actually do. I don't give two shits about what dirt you can dig up according to "evilbible.com" (wow, I'm sure that's a fair source). Why? Because Christians in America today don't stone people for eating shellfish or whatever crap you've deluded yourself into thinking is a true "tenet and foundation" of Christianity.
If that's true, it's pretty shocking. I buy all my games on disc, mainly because discs actually go on sale whereas the download version typically doesn't.
Random example: Call of Duty Ghosts, released 2013, is on sale at the xbox store for $59.99 (the original release price) whereas at Amazon it's $17.80
For fairly new games, a place like Amazon will put them on sale within a few months, usually a temporary sale like their "deal of the day" thing, and suddenly it'll be $35 instead of $59.99. And of course now they have their deal for prime members, 20% all preorders and new releases.
1) Border controls don't do anything to stop people already in the borders from doing harm.
Yes they do. They allow you to start kicking people out. Without border patrols, the people you kick out can come right back in.
2) Explosives are available in the UK, the same as in Belgium, France and every other country in the world - and if someone wants to blow themselves up and take other people with them - they're going to do it.
That's right, but if it's just some random "someone" doing it, it's a different situation. If they're not part of a larger, organized group, then what did they accomplish? Killing a few people. On the other hand, terrorist groups manipulate governments and populations with their attacks. They have goals.
Look at the plight of free speech for instance... you have people in the US, which is much stronger on free speech than Europe already, saying that the dude in Florida shouldn't burn Korans because it might provoke terrorist attacks abroad. WTF? That conversation simply doesn't happen when some random idiot blows himself up. Meanwhile in Europe you have many many people justifying their positions based on terrorism... did you not hear arguments such as "we have to accept refugees, because ISIS wants us to NOT accept refugees, thus justifying attacks against us?"
So don't pretend there's no difference between the two situations.
Slashdot Mirror
Because there are social goals that we are willing to pay money for and make the economy less efficient to achieve. That's why we don't allow slavery. That's why we don't allow child labor.
Slavery is allowed. The 13th amendment has a provision to allow slavery as punishment for a crime. We have slave labor in prisons.
But you're wrong about the economic argument... slave labor is not more efficient than free market labor, particularly wage slaves and obviously machine labor. The reason slaves make license plates in prisons is that the prisons get a sweetheart deal and it pads their funding... but a wage slave factory in China could turn out better license plates for 1/2 the cost.
Slavery is an example of an inefficient local minimum. While slavery exists it seems like it's the cheapest way you can do it, and a lot of effort is put into maintaining that state. But then someone comes along and invents the cotton gin... would it have been invented sooner if slavery hadn't been around?
I'm not sure what your point is in regards to disavowing the KKK, the point is that it ok him 24 hours to do it and he initially refused and then lied about.
No the point is he shouldn't have to do it.
Second, no major reporter has asked Hillary about the KKK endorser about her.
Yup, exactly. Look, KKK figures are probably going to vote and endorse SOMEONE. Every time there's an election. When the media tends to harass one one candidate more than others, they are clearly being biased. Do you support media bias?
Fourth, the Dragon who endorsed Hillary did so out of essentially a conspiracy theory about her actual policies being different than her stated policies
You probably won't believe it but I have heard people say they are strongly supportive of abortion because minorities get more abortions.
Trump isn't racist and in fact is more closely aligned with blacks on some issues than most candidates, specifically about illegal immigration. Economically, blacks support a higher minimum wage and tighter immigration control. I don't think Trump supports the higher wage, but he's the only serious candidate about immigration control. And what good is a higher minimum wage when you don't have a job? The black unemployment rate is quite high.
Nope you're wrong. This is outside the democratic process. This is coercion, not political engagement. Know the difference? If you want to influence people democratically, you go talk to people who are willing to listen and tell them your views. Coercion is when you go around harassing people to the extent that you can get away with. Like if a business owner said "I will fire anybody with a Bernie bumper sticker." That's not democratic.
You're just whitewashing this stuff because it's a position you happen to agree with.
The real question I have is what is going to happen to Trumps supporters when they realize he is not nearly as conservative as they think he is, and will he be able to control them?
Nobody is as conservative as what conservatives want. The political conservative class has changed their definition of conservatism to include selling out the country on trade deals to export expensive jobs, and importing cheap labor to handle the jobs we haven't exported. How is that conservative? It's not. And those are far bigger issues than gay marriage or abortion or whatever.
This country would be in a hell of a lot better shape if only landowners could vote.
People who own land, or real estate like Trump, have a truly vested interest in the success of the country. Land prices go up if the country does well.
Compare that to other rich people and you see huge conflicting interests. Jeff Bezos probably derives some level of his hatred for Trump because of Trumps stance against H1Bs, for instance. Bezos would gladly vote against the prosperity of America for his own bottom line, whereas Trump's bottom line IS the prosperity of America.
Look for this petition to succeed though, because Jeff Bezos really hates Trump. He owns the Washington Post, which has written some of the most ridiculous anti-Trump articles this past year. I think they've called Trump "the new Hitler" more than any other major publication.
Why? Probably genuine hatred over political differences, but there's also the bottom line... Trump is against H1B's.
not everything is valid when put to a vote.
Yes, it is actually. That's life. That's why we did in fact have slavery, jim crow, and discrimination against various groups.
The fact that everything is valid when put to a vote is why that stuff can change though, rather than saying "No no no, GOD wants slavery, so you can't just 'vote' it away, that's blasphemy."
Linux, like any Unix-like OS, expects the user to have some minimal understanding of what they are doing.
Incidentally, your first mistake is thinking that the "graphical boot" is actually part of the system.
Your first mistake is confusing the kernel with the operating system. The stuff I'm talking about is most certainly part of the system.
I think what you want is a game-console. If so, get one.
How exactly do you think a game console is going to replace a file server?
Now I have been thinking of splitting the server up into a simpler NAS device for the storage pool and a smaller low-power server for the other tasks the server handles.
"Linux Desktop" is more than the GUI though. Non-technical people are doing more advanced stuff with their computers than ever before, in my experience, so a desktop OS has to enable them to do that while staying fairly non-technical.
And when you start doing advanced stuff, you start running into errors. Linux is pretty bad at dealing with errors, and ironically it's gotten WORSE over time as it tries to become cooler and more friendly.
I've got a file server running Fedora. The boot sequence is all hidden now. There's a silly progress bar instead. If you hit escape at the right time, you can see the status messages of systemd as it's booting. If something goes wrong, guess what happens... it just stops. If you had hit escape at the right time, you'd see a message that you might think is related to why the boot stopped. Well, thanks to systemd's parallel boot it might not.
I've got like 8 hard drives in this server, some of them a bit old, so sometimes there are hard drive errors that prevent something from mounting properly. In the past, the boot would be interrupted and it would say "enter the root password for maintenance" or something like that. Then you'd have to run fsck.
Guess what... the graphical boot apparently has no clue about this. So here's my experience when there's a little hard drive glitch:
1. Reboot after something like a kernel update
2. See the stupid progress bar just sitting there not moving for like 2 minutes
3. Hit escape... the screen goes entirely black with a cursor in the top left corner (notice above I said "if you had hit escape at the right time"... you have to hit it before the error occurs)
4. Try rebooting with sysrq... oh fedora has all the "magic" commands disabled by default, nice
5. Try ctrl alt del
6. Power cycle
7. Hit escape right at the start of the graphical boot so I can see the systemd progress messages
8. Ah! Here's the one where it freezes... weird it has nothing at all to do with mounting or drives or anything like that
9. Reboot to see if the "glitch" is gone
10. Nope
11. Edit the grub config to get rid of the goddamn useless "quiet" and "rhgb" options that seem to magically come back after every update, and I can't figure out how to get rid of them except by manually editing grub.cfg, which then gets overwritten next time there's an update
12. Ah okay there's the password prompt
So 2 steps (reboot, see prompt) became 12 steps, because they wanted to have a damn progress bar and "graphical boot" which is basically still text... even the progress bar looks like one of those old text-based progress bars where it just puts solid block ascii chars to fill it in.
It's shocking and disgusting that the graphical boot has lost touch with the underlying system so much that stuff like this is happening.. it can't interrupt itself to do maintenance anymore.
Oh and how about this... if a hard drive won't mount, keep booting if you can! I've got redundancy, I'd like to be able to boot into the system, mount it in degraded mode, remove it from the storage pool, and keep going! I've added "nofail,x-systemd.device-timeout=30s" to my fstab but that apparently doesn't do shit, or at least not what I expect. I mean one time it did allow the boot to continue when there was a mounting error (intermittent SATA error caused by a loose cable).. but then NFS stopped the boot because apparently it has a dependency on systemd-fstab-generator.service (or something) completing without error. So useless.
I mean I can understand if / won't mount then you can't really boot up, but some random storage pool with a filesystem designed to handle failures? Come on Linux. Come the fuck on. It should be the default behavior based on the filesystem type. If not default, there should be an easy option to add to fstab that says "under no circumstances stop booting for any error, no matter what, related to this mount point, or any service that depends on this mountpoint... I'll fix it later"
I'm getting tired of this crap. I know Windows isn't a panacea, but I have had hard drive failures in Windows before and it handles it much better. If it's not the boot drive, it keeps booting, and the drive is just unavailable.
There's more than one way to get money into an IRA. You can do a 401k rollover for instance. Contribution limits for 401ks are about 18000 for the employee, but 53000 for the employer. The limit is also per employer, not total... so if you own 10 companies and draw a salary from all 10 companies, I guess you can put away half a million per year in 401ks, then roll them over to IRAs.
Another trick is to use a self-directed IRA that lets you hold more investments than just publicly traded stocks and bonds. A self-directed IRA can buy and sell all kinds of stuff like real estate and art. How hard is it for a self-directed IRA to buy some art, then magically sell it the next day for 50x profit to the owner, the owner's company, a friend, etc? I don't know.
According to http://www.bankrate.com/financ... there are 314 taxpayers with IRA balances over $25 million, so definitely some tricks are happening.
Before you get all impressed with yourself at bursting my bubble, I'm a fucking atheist, you twit.
I didn't think you were religious. Most people here aren't. If I'm talking to religious people I generally don't call their books gibberish. I'm actually not a troll. I do think you're an idiot though.
If you honestly believe that these texts have nothing to do with either religion
Nope, what I said was they are meaningless gibberish until they're interpreted. Can you understand the difference? The texts have everything to do with the religion, but your interpretation doesn't. The interpretations of millions of other people are what matters. When you said "Here is just a small sampling of what Christianity endorses if we are going to hold them to their sacred text" that revealed how little critical thought you've given the subject. Who gives a shit if some place in the Bible shows that God told someone to murder some children? It's not supported in the Christian community, so it's not part of Christianity.
Idiots like you defend Islam along the same lines... oh look we found a place in the Koran where Mohammed was a nice guy! See, Islam is fundamentally good, it's just a tiny tiny minority that is bad!! Nope.
So if the KKK had more press lately, and had committed more mass atrocities more recently, then the argument works, but since they haven't been getting a lot of air time lately, it's not the same thing. Is that it? The Westboro assholes aren't big enough, and they haven't detonated any bombs yet, so they're good, even though they specifically exist to incite hatred and bigotry, it's not a big deal, and not at all proof that Christians do bad shit, is that it?
Pretty much.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and assume that you probably have a reason in mind that I can't point to Hitler (also a Christian)....probably too long ago, huh?
Usually by the time people start using Hitler as a representative of Christianity it's clear that they're just idiots who are trolling. I haven't studied the influence of Christianity on Hitler and vice versa so I dunno. Do you have some convincing evidence that he was motivated by his Christian belief? I doubt it or I'd have heard of it before.
I love how guys like you believe you're super informed and intelligent, but it never occurs to you that when you spend 16 years raining fucking bombs down on a country, eventually, the poor, uneducated, starving people in that country might rise up and right back, in whatever rag-tag militia that they can cobble together.....nah
See that shows how idiotic you are. These areas have been violent shitholes much longer than the Gulf War 1 or 2. (Here's where you bring up the "golden age" of Islam, and I explain that it was still a shithole even then. Can we skip that?)
The reality is, your a fucking hack, dude. You know squat, and talk all the shit you want, but you KNOW I'm right here. You're off base, I tried to be nice, but you wanted to be a condescending prick about it.
Heh uhh what are you trying to do here? Is this like an appeal to your own authority? Pathetic. If I'm a hack from your perspective, at least I sound like I know what I'm talking about more than "Dur hur you're wrong I'm right and you know it hahahahaha I winnnnn"
Seriously, read a little bit sometimes. Stop dreaming up your own delusions, and for goodness sake, stop listening to Rush and Drumpf.
Oh! Powerful stuff! You called Trump Drumpf, I have no reply. God you're stupid.
Apart from, more or less once more, stating that I honestly cannot think of a single reason why blowing up people by abusing the justification of democracy is somehow on a different scale of morality that doing the same in the name of a religion (any religion), I'm not sure what else to say.
I wasn't referring to democracy vs caliphate, but simply that if we take both groups somewhat at their word, one is better than the other. The guy who purposely bombs churches is worse than the guy who accidentally bombs a hospital. That's human nature.. we take into account motive, not just outcome.
Now if you get into weird conspiracy theories that when the US bombed that hospital, they actually did it on purpose.. then we're no longer engaging in rational discourse. There's no evidence for it.
Just like democracy is not better or worse than either in this context. They're all just tools used to play a particular public's opinion in this context, and to appease one or other conscience.
I disagree. I'm not a moral relativist. Modern Western democracy is far superior to an Islamic state of any kind, from democracy (Turkey) or caliphate (ISIS).
I agree that spreading democracy to Muslim countries is not possible, in hindsight, but still it stands that the world would be a better place if Bush/Obama had succeeded. The world would be a worse place if ISIS succeeded.
I'm not helping you make your point. I'm trying to explain that your point is meaningless. I guess you don't get it so let me be more explicit.
There are two types of people. Those who think "Islam" is what's written in the Koran, and "Christianity" is what's written in the Bible. And there are those who think "Islam" is what Muslims do, and "Christianity" is what Christians do.
I'm the 2nd type. I think the 1st type are stupid. They are completely faith based... because the reality is whatever is written in the Koran and the Bible is meaningless gibberish until someone interprets it. The 1st type of person is an arrogant or short-sighted person who thinks "Okay, I read this in the Koran, so that's what Islam is... despite all these people calling themselves Muslims and doing something else." They don't seem to understand that what they think the Koran says only matters to them.
Unfortunately, you go on to completely contradict yourself by talking about your understanding of Christians in America to be such that they wouldn't do such things. Guessing you're unfamiliar with the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church, huh?
Oh yeah I'm familiar with them. How big are they, do you know? Isn't Westboro Baptist like 15 people? And have they ever committed a crime of violence against other people? Not that I'm aware of, and I'm sure it would be big news. As for the KKK, what have they done recently? How big are they? How relevant are they? The biggest news about the KKK is when a KKK leader endorses someone for president... not exactly in the same league as ISIS, right? Or can you not admit that?
If you had been brave enough to click, you'd see that it's actually a well organized site with good navigation illustrating the hundreds if not thousands of incitements to violence in the Bible.
Hopefully after this comment you can understand why I dismissed your source. Not because of the domain name, but because a site that says "The Biblical God is NOT pro-life, he advocates child murder, infanticide, child abuse and abortion" is simply full of shit.
Let me clarify for you: there is no fucking God, and he did not advocate anything, because he doesn't exist. Get it yet? That's why this line of reasoning fails. You read the Bible and say oh ho ho, look at these savages, they're the same or worse as the Muslims!!!! and chortle to yourself like you know something all the dumb Christians don't. But you're an idiot. It doesn't matter what the Bible says, it matters how it's interpreted and implemented by people who call themselves Christians. That's why religions change over time. That's why there are some Christian groups who call themselves textual literalists, and yet other Christians disagree with them. How on Earth do you explain that, if you think Christianity is defined by the literal text of the Bible? How can there be disagreement?
Please think about it. You sound like an idiot to many people when you create a false equivalence between Islam and Christianity based on some stupid excerpts from a book that even most Christians haven't read completely.
What I'm saying is that no terrorist attacks are committed by people who are or who have in the past attempted to be kicked out of the country.
That's true, but I'm not saying border security is the only thing we need to do in the fight against terrorism. It's a prerequisite for other steps though, such as kicking out radicals.
I know exactly what you're talking about. The 3D effect in movies is terrible... which makes sense because it's not actually 3D, it's just a trick. In a real 3D movie, each person in the audience would have a different perspective and it would change as you move around.
Most of them seem to have a pretty obvious background plane, then an action plane, then very occasionally some motion out of the action plane towards the audience. That's about it.
Drone strikes are not in the news everyday because they don't kill people that are "one of us".
Pretty sure drone strikes are in the news every day, actually... either actual news of a drone strike, or someone talking about drone strikes in general. For instance here's one today http://www.kuna.net.kw/Article...
Their number of killed innocent bystanders are reduced by classifying every killed "military-aged male" as an "enemy killed in action".
And the number of innocent bystanders is increased when people come along and remove the weapons they were carrying.
They also hit hospitals, and then just administratively sanction the people that were responsible for it rather than prosecuting them for war crimes.
It's not a war crime.
The fact that these acts are not carried out in the name of Christianity (except for possibly in case of Bush Jr), is irrelevant as far as I'm concerned.
Well that's fine as far as you're concerned, but does anybody else care about your concerns? To many others the fact that these acts are not carried out in the name of Christianity is of critical importance.
and the fact that the US self-identifies as a Christian nation is of course abused by IS to claim this is in fact Christian-inspired violence, just like you are doing above w.r.t. Islam
That's not "just like" others are doing. Nobody is saying that all crimes committed by Muslims are inspired by Islam. But there are crimes that are obviously inspired by Islam and committed by Muslims. That's a big difference.
In the West we generally use democracy and human rights as justifications with the same goals, and with just as little relevance.
That's true, but still you're talking about a different scale of morality here. No Christians are suicide-bombing mosques in the name of human rights. But Muslims are suicide-bombing Western targets in the name of Islam. You still don't have an answer for that except to simply declare it irrelevant as far as you're concerned, and that's not an acceptable answer for others.
If we were kicking anyone out this might make a difference...but we're not actually kicking anyone out so adding borders does not have any effect other than to annoy those of us who like traveling between countries here.
Agreed, but borders is a prerequisite. You can't complain that we're not kicking people out therefore we don't need borders, when we don't actually have well controlled borders to begin with. That logic doesn't work.
The terrorist attacks are like Anonymous attacks in that they are sometimes well coordinated and sometimes done by incompetent loners.
Even the loners are doing it for some ideology or in the name of some group, even if they're not actually part of it. The San Bernardino terrorists, afaik, were not "part" of ISIS, but the woman declared her allegiance to ISIS before they did it.
no, I have not actually heard anyone at all basing their position based on terrorism, other than to be more against Daesh than ever.
You must not read much news. I've seen it in every major newspaper, both in articles and in the comment section. Here's just one of many examples of what I said above: https://www.washingtonpost.com...
The entire line of reasoning is idiotic... you make decisions based on what's best for you, not some psychoanalysis of your enemy and what they want or don't want.
While I feel bad for the families of those who have been killed or wounded, the reality is that Daesh have managed to kill fewer people outside of the middle east than die in car crashes here in a month
More people die in car crashes than lots of stuff. Yet we regulate lots and lots of other stuff. Now unless you're going around saying "I'm not willing to put up with the inconveniences of food safety regulations just to save a handful of people from food poisoning, when CAR CRASHES kill so many more" then you're being awfully hypocritical.
Your argument is also very short-sighted... we already do a hell of a lot to fight against terrorism right now. We have multiple government agencies, civilian and military, dealing with terrorist groups and state sponsors. I think it's pretty remarkable, and no accident, that a wealthy terrorist group like ISIS hasn't gotten their hands on some nuclear bombs when there are suppliers from the former USSR, Pakistan, North Korea, and so on.
which is why I do not perceive Daesh's ability to do war against us here to be substantial enough to justify any significant changes in the way that I live my life (i.e. being willing to put up with more security theater that isn't useful for stopping Daesh anyway).
I agree about security theater, in the instances where it is theater, but let me ask you this. If you're not Muslim, and even if you are but you're not like a hardcore radical, how would it significantly change your life if we went around shutting down radical mosques, deporting every Muslim who ever said "Yes I would welcome sharia law in [some Western country]" or "Yes I support the death penalty for apostasy", refusing all refugees and immigrants from areas with strong ISIS influence, and so on? Seems like it would have absolutely no effect on most people, including Muslims.
I don't know what your point is. I didn't say anything about passports, just border security.
Do you think valid passports are magic and allow immediate entry? There are thousands of valid passports issued in regions of Syria controlled by ISIS... guess what... I don't think those people should be let in, despite their valid passports.
Nothing GP said is incorrect. Whining about filters and "ignorant bigotry" is all you've got left, and it's utter garbage. Nobody cares about these baseless accusations anymore. It's not bigotry or racism or Islamophobia or whatever "bad word of the day" to list the widespread problems in the Muslim world, and if you think it is, that's your issue.
What do you mean by "this" ?
OP isn't claiming the Brussels attacks are about cartoons, he mentioned them as an example of how stupid it is to say Islam has nothing to do with terrorism, etc.
Ah right. Because it's been abused by other people in times past, we should never go down that path again. Flawless logic!
It's like that one time we banned the internet because someone distributed child porn over it, right? Evil! Never again! Never forget!
First of all, it's clear that YOU don't understand the tenets and foundations of either religion, because you think there IS an agreed upon set of tenets and foundations. There's not. It shows you have no clue what you're talking about.
If you think "Islam says suicide bombing is wrong" then you are an idiot. If you say "Islam says suicide bombing is right" then you are an idiot. "Islam" isn't a person, it can't say anything. Oh and spoiler alert, there is no Allah, so there's no divine command whispered into your ear about which way is correct. You just read a book, and *bam* you're the expert, you interpret it, you do whatever you want as long as you can reconcile it in your own head (or not). Hell you don't even have to read the book, you can just grow up around other self-proclaimed Muslims and imitate them.
That's how religion works.
What's important is what the people of a religion actually do. I don't give two shits about what dirt you can dig up according to "evilbible.com" (wow, I'm sure that's a fair source). Why? Because Christians in America today don't stone people for eating shellfish or whatever crap you've deluded yourself into thinking is a true "tenet and foundation" of Christianity.
If that's true, it's pretty shocking. I buy all my games on disc, mainly because discs actually go on sale whereas the download version typically doesn't.
Random example: Call of Duty Ghosts, released 2013, is on sale at the xbox store for $59.99 (the original release price) whereas at Amazon it's $17.80
For fairly new games, a place like Amazon will put them on sale within a few months, usually a temporary sale like their "deal of the day" thing, and suddenly it'll be $35 instead of $59.99. And of course now they have their deal for prime members, 20% all preorders and new releases.
1) Border controls don't do anything to stop people already in the borders from doing harm.
Yes they do. They allow you to start kicking people out. Without border patrols, the people you kick out can come right back in.
2) Explosives are available in the UK, the same as in Belgium, France and every other country in the world - and if someone wants to blow themselves up and take other people with them - they're going to do it.
That's right, but if it's just some random "someone" doing it, it's a different situation. If they're not part of a larger, organized group, then what did they accomplish? Killing a few people. On the other hand, terrorist groups manipulate governments and populations with their attacks. They have goals.
Look at the plight of free speech for instance... you have people in the US, which is much stronger on free speech than Europe already, saying that the dude in Florida shouldn't burn Korans because it might provoke terrorist attacks abroad. WTF? That conversation simply doesn't happen when some random idiot blows himself up. Meanwhile in Europe you have many many people justifying their positions based on terrorism... did you not hear arguments such as "we have to accept refugees, because ISIS wants us to NOT accept refugees, thus justifying attacks against us?"
So don't pretend there's no difference between the two situations.
What did that have to do with Baptists?