Just to elaborate on what I mean, and try not to get me wrong with this example: "We understand that a non-muslim doctor would do the job just as good, but we really prefer that a muslim doctor treats our daughter's injury."
The Muslim-ness of a physician is irrelevant. The free-ness of software is not. If you rely on non-free software for your business, you are at the mercy of your vendor. Reliance on proprietary software is madness, though a popular madness.
Of course, reliance on a WYSIWYG tool for a medium that is inherently what-you-see-is-not-what-other-people-will-get is also a popular madness.
These aren't "charges". It's a fact that Paul published racist and homophobic gibberish.
There are only three opinions: he believes that crap; he doesn't believe it but allowed it to be published, probably in order to pander to racists; he doesn't believe and didn't know about it, because he's an idiot who's incompetent to run a 'zine.
An interesting article, that points out that the reason many Democrats hate Ron Paul is that he espouses progressive ideals...
Being opposed to separation of church and state is progressive? Being anti-science is progressive? Being anti-choice is progressive? Wanting to allow states to destroy free speech and privacy rights is progressive? Publishing racist and homophobic gibberish is progressive?
Paul is not progressive. He's not even libertarian. He's merely anti-federalist -- he's happy to have the states and the aristocracy screw us over, just not the feds. And he also wants to take away the feds power to stop the states from screwing us over.
Yes, he would end federal drug laws -- but would leave state ones in place. A real progressive would operate from understanding that the War on (some) Drugs is a violation of the right of privacy, and work to end it at all levels; but Paul doesn't believe that such a right exists.
Capitalism means control of capital by a small, state-backed class of absentee owners -- banksters, landlords, stockholders, etc.
Socialism means control of capital by workers. When workers exercise that control via the state, it's possible for the state to detach from the workers -- exactly what happened in the USSR and China. This "state socialism" ends up just as bad, if not worse, than capitalism.
But state socialism is not the only form of socialism. The state can be removed from socialism, but not from capitalism. Consult your local anarchist for more information.
our litigious society and the risk-averse enterprise culture that litigation and regulation foster...
What nation do you live in where there is a risk-averse enterprise culture? Here in the U.S., we repeatedly see total negligence with important data. We could certain do with more risk-adverse attitude.
Christianity only demands that Christians do not take slaves...
Where in the Bible is that? The Old Testament explicitly okays slavery, and I don't think Jesus ever condemned it.
Some religions have other names for forced labourers, like for example Hinduism's "dalits" or buddhism's many forms of forced labourers, like "vasala", who should be forced to work by the point of a sword.
Dalits have been the targets of hideous discrimination, but I don't know that they've ever been forced laborers, and reform movements within Hinduism have been trying to purge the caste system for centuries.
"Vasala" just means "outcast". In Buddhism, what makes a person an outcast is one's misdeeds -- "Not by birth is one an outcast; not by birth is one a brahman. By deed one becomes an outcast, by deed one becomes a brahman."
If you can cite any sutra where the Buddha tells people to force these outcasts at swordpoint to work -- indeed, if you can cite a sutra where the Buddha tells people to point a sword at anyone -- I'd appreciate the information.
Islam for example, demands muslims not only support slavery...
No more so than Christians or Jews, whose holy books also speak positively of slavery.
There are of course also atheists who have defended slavery -- Mao, for example, effectively enslaved millions.
They're using Microsoft's version of QA testing whereby you ship a beta package to consumers and let them pay for the privilege of beta testing it for you.
Also seems to be Apple's version of QA now, as evidenced by Siri.
Laptops get hot. Sperm want to live at 97F (definitely not at 98.6, which is average body temperature).
"...compared to healthy sperm stored for the same time in the same temperature away from the computer." So, if they didn't just screw up (always a possibility), the difference in motility cannot be due to the increased temperature near the laptop.
But the neat thing about the physical world is that it exists
We're deep enough into epistemology to note that the existence of the physical world is an axiom, not something that can be proven. Brain in a vat, dreaming butterfly, Descartes's demon, etc.
(I was in San Diego for a conference a few years ago and went over the Tijuana for an afternoon. Folks thought I had to be nuts, but when I pointed out that 1) I was sticking to the touristy border area, and 2) I'm from Baltimore, they quieted down...)
Dealing with those drug lords would require a military.
Or an assassin.
An assassin needs information about their targets. Hackers get information. As it happens, by coincidence many hackers have an interest in and experience with firearms.
I'm not saying I favor assassination, mind you; but drug lords are vulnerable to IEDs and to snipers once their identities and locations are known and broadcast on social media.
Kinda a shame though, once upon a time this was a decent country, now it is just some rich pigs at the top figuring out every scam they can to fuck everyone else.
When exactly was this mythical time when the U.S. was a decent country? Certainly not before 1865, and I'd have a hard time believing it was before the 1960s. The current strategy of the rich pigs at the top figuring out every scam they can to fuck everyone else dates to the start of the Reagan era...so I guess the idea was we were a decent nation in about the 70s? When the "War on Drugs" started? The Watergate years? Yeah, that was a golden era to be sure.
But as the wise Thomas Jefferson said...
The "wise" slave rapist? Yeah, right.
This nation was founded on genocide and slavery, and the aristocracy has always profited from oppression and exploitation. Let's not pretend differently.
Or make fewer laws, and take some of the current laws off the books so that they are simpler to understand.
We could certainly save resources by no longer locking people up for "consensual crimes", to be sure; that would save in prisons but not so much, I think, in policing.
No one will even lend you money anymore because your bonds are junk.
Pay attention to the news much? Investors all over the world are fleeing to U.S. treasury bonds, keeping interest rates low and making it an amazing cheap time for the federal government to borrow money.
Since when was education the responsibility of a nation?
Since industrialization and democracy made an educated populace both necessary and possible.
1. What's wrong with cops in general? You think the average cop is too bottom of the barrel to be a cop? 2) Bad cops are bad because of their authority and their above the law status.
Yes. People have been disqualified from police forces for having too high of an IQ. And back in *1967*, the Presidentâ(TM)s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice recommended that a four-year degree be mandatory for cops, and in 1973 the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals made the same recommendation. Study after study has found that cops with more education do a better job -- i.e., it's not just "because of their authority and their above the law status", it's because of the men and women we put into those jobs. Yet very few departments have put such an educational requirement in place.
I find it sad that people most likely to quote the 10th amendment are incapable of reading the rest of the Constitution to find out what powers are delegated to the United States by it. Article I, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power...To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." When you buy stuff from a vendor in another state, that's "Commerce...among the several States", and the feds are Constitutionally empowered to set any taxes or regulations on that they want.
some lard ass to taser everyone he sees in the name of policing,
If you want better cops, you need to pay better salaries to attract more qualified people and pay for more training.
or some pot-hole filled monstrosity that's always under repairs in the name of roads
If you want better roads, you need to pay more maintenance, and for a higher grade of construction.
or some zero tolerance school that teaches kids to walk through metal detectors, etc etc etc is not "better".
If you want better schools, you need to pay to repair the buildings, and pay for more and better qualified teachers.
All the problems you cite are evidence that taxes are too low to support necessary services. The idea that "underfunded public services suck, so we won't tax the wealthy to pay for public services" meme is the most irrational idea floating around in politics today.
you don't often see Bible Belters railing against Buddists.
Only because there aren't enough Buddhists in the Bible Belt to make it worthwhile.
I'm not sure what a "Buddhist Fundamentalist" would look like -- the core of the Buddha's teaching (the Four Noble Truths) has fsck-all to do with metaphysics. You can be a Buddhist and an scientific atheist at the same time with no conflict. Even the Dalai Lama, head of one of the more woo-woo sects of Buddhism, has expressed admiration for the scientific method and said that if science is in conflict with Buddhism, then Buddhism has to change.
Point is, not every religion is like Bible-thumping Xianity. Religion, literally, means "reconnection" ("to tie again"), not "belief in supernatural forces and invisible omnipotent beings".
Because, of course, private education in schools usually based around religious dogma, military-style discipline, or the glorification of socioeconomic class hierarchies, produce such better results.
The Nazi's didn't, but their sucessors the STATSI did.
Please stop getting your history from the Tea Party and Fox News. The Nazi were virulently anti-Communist and deadly enemies of the USSR; the Stasi was the state security service of the USSR-puppet East German regime, and was essentially an arm of the KGB. Two entirely different groups of evil fuckwads.
Slashdot Mirror
The Muslim-ness of a physician is irrelevant. The free-ness of software is not. If you rely on non-free software for your business, you are at the mercy of your vendor. Reliance on proprietary software is madness, though a popular madness.
Of course, reliance on a WYSIWYG tool for a medium that is inherently what-you-see-is-not-what-other-people-will-get is also a popular madness.
These aren't "charges". It's a fact that Paul published racist and homophobic gibberish.
There are only three opinions: he believes that crap; he doesn't believe it but allowed it to be published, probably in order to pander to racists; he doesn't believe and didn't know about it, because he's an idiot who's incompetent to run a 'zine.
Being opposed to separation of church and state is progressive? Being anti-science is progressive? Being anti-choice is progressive? Wanting to allow states to destroy free speech and privacy rights is progressive? Publishing racist and homophobic gibberish is progressive?
Paul is not progressive. He's not even libertarian. He's merely anti-federalist -- he's happy to have the states and the aristocracy screw us over, just not the feds. And he also wants to take away the feds power to stop the states from screwing us over.
Yes, he would end federal drug laws -- but would leave state ones in place. A real progressive would operate from understanding that the War on (some) Drugs is a violation of the right of privacy, and work to end it at all levels; but Paul doesn't believe that such a right exists.
Capitalism means control of capital by a small, state-backed class of absentee owners -- banksters, landlords, stockholders, etc.
Socialism means control of capital by workers. When workers exercise that control via the state, it's possible for the state to detach from the workers -- exactly what happened in the USSR and China. This "state socialism" ends up just as bad, if not worse, than capitalism.
But state socialism is not the only form of socialism. The state can be removed from socialism, but not from capitalism. Consult your local anarchist for more information.
What nation do you live in where there is a risk-averse enterprise culture? Here in the U.S., we repeatedly see total negligence with important data. We could certain do with more risk-adverse attitude.
Where in the Bible is that? The Old Testament explicitly okays slavery, and I don't think Jesus ever condemned it.
Dalits have been the targets of hideous discrimination, but I don't know that they've ever been forced laborers, and reform movements within Hinduism have been trying to purge the caste system for centuries.
"Vasala" just means "outcast". In Buddhism, what makes a person an outcast is one's misdeeds -- "Not by birth is one an outcast; not by birth is one a brahman. By deed one becomes an outcast, by deed one becomes a brahman."
If you can cite any sutra where the Buddha tells people to force these outcasts at swordpoint to work -- indeed, if you can cite a sutra where the Buddha tells people to point a sword at anyone -- I'd appreciate the information.
No more so than Christians or Jews, whose holy books also speak positively of slavery.
There are of course also atheists who have defended slavery -- Mao, for example, effectively enslaved millions.
Also seems to be Apple's version of QA now, as evidenced by Siri.
You seem to be asserting some correlation between "good" and "popular" here. Makes me seriously question your judgement.
RTFA. Hell, read the fscking summary: "... compared to healthy sperms stored for the same time in the same temperature away from the computer."
You should indeed RTFA: "A separate test also showed that merely placing sperm near a computer (without Wi-Fi) does not cause nearly the same damage."
"...compared to healthy sperm stored for the same time in the same temperature away from the computer." So, if they didn't just screw up (always a possibility), the difference in motility cannot be due to the increased temperature near the laptop.
No, he just had Woz's genius to exploit, Mike Markkula to tap for money, and PARC to steal ideas from.
Genius and hard work helps. But it isn't required, and certainly not something that guarantees success.
It's a government contractor, in which the CIA has invested. If Big Brother's telescreen's use parts sourced from private companies, so what?
We're deep enough into epistemology to note that the existence of the physical world is an axiom, not something that can be proven. Brain in a vat, dreaming butterfly, Descartes's demon, etc.
An area *ruled* by thugs is, ipso facto, not anarchy.
Anyway, in 2010 -- a peak year -- Tijuana had 844 murders, with a population about 1.3 million: that's 60 per 100,000. New Orleans's rate was 49.1 that year -- but was a whopping 95 per 100,000 when it peaked in 2007. It's bad, yes, but there are areas of the U.S. about as bad.
(I was in San Diego for a conference a few years ago and went over the Tijuana for an afternoon. Folks thought I had to be nuts, but when I pointed out that 1) I was sticking to the touristy border area, and 2) I'm from Baltimore, they quieted down...)
Or an assassin.
An assassin needs information about their targets. Hackers get information. As it happens, by coincidence many hackers have an interest in and experience with firearms.
I'm not saying I favor assassination, mind you; but drug lords are vulnerable to IEDs and to snipers once their identities and locations are known and broadcast on social media.
When exactly was this mythical time when the U.S. was a decent country? Certainly not before 1865, and I'd have a hard time believing it was before the 1960s. The current strategy of the rich pigs at the top figuring out every scam they can to fuck everyone else dates to the start of the Reagan era...so I guess the idea was we were a decent nation in about the 70s? When the "War on Drugs" started? The Watergate years? Yeah, that was a golden era to be sure.
The "wise" slave rapist? Yeah, right.
This nation was founded on genocide and slavery, and the aristocracy has always profited from oppression and exploitation. Let's not pretend differently.
I'll bet you'd tell Ai Weiwei, "Maybe then don't make subversive art?"
We could certainly save resources by no longer locking people up for "consensual crimes", to be sure; that would save in prisons but not so much, I think, in policing.
Pay attention to the news much? Investors all over the world are fleeing to U.S. treasury bonds, keeping interest rates low and making it an amazing cheap time for the federal government to borrow money.
Since industrialization and democracy made an educated populace both necessary and possible.
Yes. People have been disqualified from police forces for having too high of an IQ. And back in *1967*, the Presidentâ(TM)s Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice recommended that a four-year degree be mandatory for cops, and in 1973 the National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals made the same recommendation. Study after study has found that cops with more education do a better job -- i.e., it's not just "because of their authority and their above the law status", it's because of the men and women we put into those jobs. Yet very few departments have put such an educational requirement in place.
I find it sad that people most likely to quote the 10th amendment are incapable of reading the rest of the Constitution to find out what powers are delegated to the United States by it. Article I, Section 8: "The Congress shall have Power...To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." When you buy stuff from a vendor in another state, that's "Commerce...among the several States", and the feds are Constitutionally empowered to set any taxes or regulations on that they want.
If you want better cops, you need to pay better salaries to attract more qualified people and pay for more training.
If you want better roads, you need to pay more maintenance, and for a higher grade of construction.
If you want better schools, you need to pay to repair the buildings, and pay for more and better qualified teachers.
All the problems you cite are evidence that taxes are too low to support necessary services. The idea that "underfunded public services suck, so we won't tax the wealthy to pay for public services" meme is the most irrational idea floating around in politics today.
Only because there aren't enough Buddhists in the Bible Belt to make it worthwhile.
I'm not sure what a "Buddhist Fundamentalist" would look like -- the core of the Buddha's teaching (the Four Noble Truths) has fsck-all to do with metaphysics. You can be a Buddhist and an scientific atheist at the same time with no conflict. Even the Dalai Lama, head of one of the more woo-woo sects of Buddhism, has expressed admiration for the scientific method and said that if science is in conflict with Buddhism, then Buddhism has to change.
Point is, not every religion is like Bible-thumping Xianity. Religion, literally, means "reconnection" ("to tie again"), not "belief in supernatural forces and invisible omnipotent beings".
Because, of course, private education in schools usually based around religious dogma, military-style discipline, or the glorification of socioeconomic class hierarchies, produce such better results.
Please stop getting your history from the Tea Party and Fox News. The Nazi were virulently anti-Communist and deadly enemies of the USSR; the Stasi was the state security service of the USSR-puppet East German regime, and was essentially an arm of the KGB. Two entirely different groups of evil fuckwads.