Screaming for the government to actually uphold and enforce existing immigration laws is not a call for "isolation". Unfortunately governments in Europe have decided to do nothing about the tidal wave of immigrants and some even treat them as if they had special rights despite the fact they enter the country illegally. A country is supposed to be able to decide who it lets in. Refugee or not. It's also supposed to see if the claims are valid and if the person attempting to enter is a criminal wanted in other countries. I've been a resident in many, many countries and a criminal records/interpol check is ALWAYS done.
No. We had no trouble being online BEFORE the internet. If anything it will make it harder to trace/monitor communications because everything would shift to private WANs/LANs.
This I fully agree with. I've seen graduates who can't do basic arithmetic without a calculator much less the ability to apply their knowledge to a situation they have not specifically encountered before. I think it's because students are taught to pass tests instead of taught actual practical and applied knowledge.
If you're somewhere between turd and brilliant, I guess that means you'd better hurry up and pick one or the other?
I used extremes because it's an easy way to make an argument. But if you're "average", then you should expect average results. Another thing I have learned which ties in to the second part of your comment: It is almost impossible for an excellent person to continue excelling in a mediocre environment. It's much more likely they will become mediocre themselves.
And let's be honest, oil is not an infinite resource.
Well then there's the adibiatic theory (which has not been proven and in fact there is evidence against it) which would point to unlimited oil. But we had better hope that oil is limited, otherwise we really will end up poisoning ourselves. As it is the worst we can possibly do is put back all the CO2 that was originally in the atmosphere to begin with. What remains to be seen is if this is compatible with life.
Well the correct term is petroleum... petr from petra which means rock, and oleum means oil, so "rock oil". Quite appropriately named. Perhaps the supergroup which includes gaseous deposits should be called "organic fuel", since carbon chemistry is organic chemistry.
When methane reaches sufficient concentration in our O2-rich atmosphere the problem will literally take care of itself. I don't want to be around when that happens though.
Not to mention that in order to manufacture and/or re-use the material you probably need an energy source which will require - tadaaa - the production of as much CO2 as you sequestered, if not more (because no process is 100% efficient).
University graduates were rare. There were far fewer universities and university places. Thus the intrinsic value of having a degree was higher, all other things being equal. And the difference in education between someone who had finished university and someone who had not was readily apparent. Nowadays the lines have become blurred. The sheer volume of graduates means that you are competing against many people who have exactly the same educational qualifications as you, whereas before it was a distinct advantage.
A degree is no longer a guarantee of a decent job in your field. In fact nowadays a Bachelor's is almost a minimum requirement for many jobs. On the other hand, NOT having a degree can be a disadvantage. It's up to the individual to weigh themselves carefully and judge whether the time and effort and debt required to receive higher education are worth it. A brilliant person will shine through even when covered in mud, and you can polish a turd as much as you want but it will remain a turd. So are you brilliant, or a turd? This should influence your decision.
First of all: this one quote ain't from Aristotle. It's from some Roman guy[1] who is as famous with you as my uncle Bob.
The quote is from the book Nicomachean Ethics, written by Aristotle in 350 BC, Long before the Roman empire was founded. Therefore, fool, I will not argue with you anymore because doing so is vain.
That's why islam is in desperate need of the equivalent of the christian "enlightenment". Otherwise it won't be suffered to exist for much longer simply because itself it does not suffer those of different faith. There are plenty of "abominations" in Jewish and Christian teachings that call for death and dismemberment, but we don't act on those anymore. The radicals have to understand that they must evolve also.
Bush toppled a government and occupied a country. He created the instability that led to ISIS. But he did not engage ISIS. So spare us your flawed arguments especially since you are not offering any sort of solution. The motivation of those who wish to see you dead are quite simple. They wish to see you dead.
Wait, doesn't the leader of ISIS have a PhD? Didn't like 8 of the 9/11 attackers have engineering degrees?
I think we can toss "education" on the does-not-work pile.
I'm pretty sure the leader of ISIS is not doing any shooting or suicide bombing. He's the one who is good at manipulating the others into doing stuff for him. Hell he probably doesn't even believe in Allah or Mohammed - but he sure as hell gives the impression he does. I'm talking about the poor fool who agrees to be sent on a suicide mission in the hope of a better life. He's the one who needs education.
So you think terrorists should be allowed to commit an act before they're captured or killed then?
Personally I think it's hard to try someone for a crime they haven't done yet. The criminal always has the initiative. But there is common sense and warning signs that can let you catch them at the "conspiracy" stage. And you don't let mullahs go around in the mosques you let build in your country preach "death to the West".
Violence has only one place - in response to unprovoked aggression.
And I say there's no such thing as unprovoked aggression because I am sure the side doing the aggression will list any number of excuses to justify their action. The ideal solution to all these problems is education. Only education has shown its ability to reduce religious fanaticism. But we don't live in an ideal world. Education takes time and political stability, neither of which we have. So we are left with one option - to defend our values and way of life, by force if necessary.
Oh yes I'm sure ISIS believe themselves to be fighting for god and all sorts of good things especially when they're hooked on Captagon. But what they are fighting for is an islamic caliphate where they see themselves as the warriors who brought this caliphate into being entrenched firmly at the top, and everyone else their slaves paying tribute in goods and women. While this is not necessarily evil if you happen to be in charge of this caliphate, it certainly is evil to today's current social order. While the western system is far from perfect it attempts to reward individual effort and permit individual expression. I for one am not prepared to see this situation change and if I have to be called "extremist" for this view by ignorant fools then so be it. It's easy to say there's no absolutes and no black and white, but in war you only get to pick one side or the other.
And you seem at least as necessarily evil as ISIS is.
How so? Are you seriously comparing silly quotes from historically insignificant people to von Clausewitz and Aristotle? You think blowing up and shooting random people is equivalent to eliminating those who are sworn to do this? Sorry but you are the one who is misguided. If I tie you to a table, knock you out and stick a knife in you, that could be assault with a deadly weapon or surgery. It depends on the reason. THE MEANS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE END.
Chopping people's heads off to make a point and to recruit more crazies is not necessarily evil... uh huh.
And Aristotle taught us that violence IS the answer. "We make war so that we may live in peace". This "violence is never the answer" is just a meaningless feel good politically correct statement to appease the liberal left. There is violence for the right reasons, and violence for the wrong reasons. We need more violence for the right reasons because war, after all, is a contest of violence. These crazy people must be rooted out and dealt with.
Slashdot Mirror
Screaming for the government to actually uphold and enforce existing immigration laws is not a call for "isolation". Unfortunately governments in Europe have decided to do nothing about the tidal wave of immigrants and some even treat them as if they had special rights despite the fact they enter the country illegally. A country is supposed to be able to decide who it lets in. Refugee or not. It's also supposed to see if the claims are valid and if the person attempting to enter is a criminal wanted in other countries. I've been a resident in many, many countries and a criminal records/interpol check is ALWAYS done.
No. We had no trouble being online BEFORE the internet. If anything it will make it harder to trace/monitor communications because everything would shift to private WANs/LANs.
The US constitution is already dead. All that remains is to pull the plug on life support.
Where do these people get their science?
The Bible.
Universities have been dumbed down
This I fully agree with. I've seen graduates who can't do basic arithmetic without a calculator much less the ability to apply their knowledge to a situation they have not specifically encountered before. I think it's because students are taught to pass tests instead of taught actual practical and applied knowledge.
If you're somewhere between turd and brilliant, I guess that means you'd better hurry up and pick one or the other?
I used extremes because it's an easy way to make an argument. But if you're "average", then you should expect average results. Another thing I have learned which ties in to the second part of your comment: It is almost impossible for an excellent person to continue excelling in a mediocre environment. It's much more likely they will become mediocre themselves.
hat those individuals gifted with inflated self worth are statistically more likely to succeed.
Some people might call that "self confidence", and yes it is directly proportional to success.
Depends on your definition of trolling. Apparently for you it's "comments I disagree with". Karma: Excellent. But whatever :)
I live in the third world - studies have shown that I consume far less and produce much less waste than you first worlders. So no, it's your turn :)
And let's be honest, oil is not an infinite resource.
Well then there's the adibiatic theory (which has not been proven and in fact there is evidence against it) which would point to unlimited oil. But we had better hope that oil is limited, otherwise we really will end up poisoning ourselves. As it is the worst we can possibly do is put back all the CO2 that was originally in the atmosphere to begin with. What remains to be seen is if this is compatible with life.
Well the correct term is petroleum... petr from petra which means rock, and oleum means oil, so "rock oil". Quite appropriately named. Perhaps the supergroup which includes gaseous deposits should be called "organic fuel", since carbon chemistry is organic chemistry.
When methane reaches sufficient concentration in our O2-rich atmosphere the problem will literally take care of itself. I don't want to be around when that happens though.
Not to mention that in order to manufacture and/or re-use the material you probably need an energy source which will require - tadaaa - the production of as much CO2 as you sequestered, if not more (because no process is 100% efficient).
University graduates were rare. There were far fewer universities and university places. Thus the intrinsic value of having a degree was higher, all other things being equal. And the difference in education between someone who had finished university and someone who had not was readily apparent. Nowadays the lines have become blurred. The sheer volume of graduates means that you are competing against many people who have exactly the same educational qualifications as you, whereas before it was a distinct advantage.
A degree is no longer a guarantee of a decent job in your field. In fact nowadays a Bachelor's is almost a minimum requirement for many jobs. On the other hand, NOT having a degree can be a disadvantage. It's up to the individual to weigh themselves carefully and judge whether the time and effort and debt required to receive higher education are worth it. A brilliant person will shine through even when covered in mud, and you can polish a turd as much as you want but it will remain a turd. So are you brilliant, or a turd? This should influence your decision.
That is an arithmetic error, not a transposition error.
First of all: this one quote ain't from Aristotle. It's from some Roman guy[1] who is as famous with you as my uncle Bob.
The quote is from the book Nicomachean Ethics, written by Aristotle in 350 BC, Long before the Roman empire was founded. Therefore, fool, I will not argue with you anymore because doing so is vain.
I don't underestimate. It's people like Angela Merkel who underestimate.
That's why islam is in desperate need of the equivalent of the christian "enlightenment". Otherwise it won't be suffered to exist for much longer simply because itself it does not suffer those of different faith. There are plenty of "abominations" in Jewish and Christian teachings that call for death and dismemberment, but we don't act on those anymore. The radicals have to understand that they must evolve also.
We've tried stupid reactionary wars.
Bush toppled a government and occupied a country. He created the instability that led to ISIS. But he did not engage ISIS. So spare us your flawed arguments especially since you are not offering any sort of solution. The motivation of those who wish to see you dead are quite simple. They wish to see you dead.
Wait, doesn't the leader of ISIS have a PhD? Didn't like 8 of the 9/11 attackers have engineering degrees? I think we can toss "education" on the does-not-work pile.
I'm pretty sure the leader of ISIS is not doing any shooting or suicide bombing. He's the one who is good at manipulating the others into doing stuff for him. Hell he probably doesn't even believe in Allah or Mohammed - but he sure as hell gives the impression he does. I'm talking about the poor fool who agrees to be sent on a suicide mission in the hope of a better life. He's the one who needs education.
So you think terrorists should be allowed to commit an act before they're captured or killed then?
Personally I think it's hard to try someone for a crime they haven't done yet. The criminal always has the initiative. But there is common sense and warning signs that can let you catch them at the "conspiracy" stage. And you don't let mullahs go around in the mosques you let build in your country preach "death to the West".
Violence has only one place - in response to unprovoked aggression.
And I say there's no such thing as unprovoked aggression because I am sure the side doing the aggression will list any number of excuses to justify their action. The ideal solution to all these problems is education. Only education has shown its ability to reduce religious fanaticism. But we don't live in an ideal world. Education takes time and political stability, neither of which we have. So we are left with one option - to defend our values and way of life, by force if necessary.
Oh yes I'm sure ISIS believe themselves to be fighting for god and all sorts of good things especially when they're hooked on Captagon. But what they are fighting for is an islamic caliphate where they see themselves as the warriors who brought this caliphate into being entrenched firmly at the top, and everyone else their slaves paying tribute in goods and women. While this is not necessarily evil if you happen to be in charge of this caliphate, it certainly is evil to today's current social order. While the western system is far from perfect it attempts to reward individual effort and permit individual expression. I for one am not prepared to see this situation change and if I have to be called "extremist" for this view by ignorant fools then so be it. It's easy to say there's no absolutes and no black and white, but in war you only get to pick one side or the other.
And you seem at least as necessarily evil as ISIS is.
How so? Are you seriously comparing silly quotes from historically insignificant people to von Clausewitz and Aristotle? You think blowing up and shooting random people is equivalent to eliminating those who are sworn to do this? Sorry but you are the one who is misguided. If I tie you to a table, knock you out and stick a knife in you, that could be assault with a deadly weapon or surgery. It depends on the reason. THE MEANS DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE END.
Chopping people's heads off to make a point and to recruit more crazies is not necessarily evil... uh huh. And Aristotle taught us that violence IS the answer. "We make war so that we may live in peace". This "violence is never the answer" is just a meaningless feel good politically correct statement to appease the liberal left. There is violence for the right reasons, and violence for the wrong reasons. We need more violence for the right reasons because war, after all, is a contest of violence. These crazy people must be rooted out and dealt with.