Comparing the 2010s to the 1990s isn't fair. The economy was booming, and we still had a middle class. We just went through the biggest recession since the great depression, and the benefits of recovery have accrued entirely to the rich. There's a reason why they call it a "jobless recovery".
I graduated college in '92 with a BS in Electrical Engineering. I job hunted intensively for around 5 years looking for jobs either in hardware or software. Never even had a single interview because I didn't meet the prerequisites. Eventually I just gave up looking. It was obvious that you needed to have experience to get a real job. Every single ad that I saw required a minimum of 2 years experience, but usually 3-5. Every once in a long while I'd see an ad that only required 6-12 months of experience. I had none at all. So I started working at shit jobs instead and the rest is history. My degree wasn't worth shit in the real world.
I have found that getting a shit job is more difficult than it used to be though. But that may also have something to do with the fact that I'm a lot older than I used to be. For jobs like stocking shelves, register work, bagging groceries, washing dishes etc managers seem to prefer younger people and I can't say I blame them.
I've heard time and time again, that Canadian (and American) men are highly desired by women in Japan. I've also heard time and time again, that the reason is because too many Japanese men are downright useless and misogynistic assholes.
Are you a genuinely nice North American dude with a real job? If so, it really is remarkably easy to meet wonderful women in Japan.
Who told you this? This is 100% racist bullshit. It isn't even slightly true. It's funny though because I've heard that same story told for many different countries and it isn't any more true in those countries.
It may be slightly easier for an unattractive guy to get a girlfriend in Japan, but only slightly, and you had better be in your twenties. Age differences of more than 2-3 years are simply not tolerated there.
I've spent 10-15 years of my life on a research project looking for a place where an ugly guy can get a pretty girlfriend or wife. There are a few such places, but Japan is unfortunately not on the list. I say unfortunately because I think Japanese women have the best personalities. There are other countries with lots of pretty girls, but none with personalities that I find so appealing. But if you want a cute j-girl you're gonna have to be at least somewhat good looking yourself. It's also one of the most expensive and difficult places on the planet for a foreigner to live. But if I were a good looking guy and could have a pretty girlfriend or wife of any nationality a Japanese girl would be at the top of my list. A French girl would be my second choice. An American girl would be nearly dead last.
OTOH, if you go to suicide discussion groups you will find that many of them are planning to kill themselves for essentially financial reasons. I would ask them, "If you didn't have to work, if you had enough money for food and shelter without working, would you still be planning suicide?" A surprisingly large numbered answered no.
If I had to work a regular shit job and interact with people socially I would almost certainly kill myself. In order to cope with constant negative reinforcement I need at least some positive reinforcement occassionally as well or living just seems like pointless suffering.
It's also important to remember that it is not always easy to find a job when you are antisocial or have social anxiety. It can be nearly impossible even when your standards are very low indeed. After you get rejected for the first 50 shit jobs (like bagging groceries, dishwashing at fast food restaurants etc) you apply for that doesn't exactly encourage you to want to go out into the world either. Again, the only reinforcement out there is negative.
Right. Because the only way to get video games is to buy them. Food and shelter is all you need to live. The only reason I ever leave my house is to buy food, and I try to do it quickly. If I didn't need to do that I would never ever leave. The outside world is pretty awful. I've also noticed that whenever I leave my house for extended periods of time bad things tend to happen to me.
You do realize that France is not the only country in Europe, right? They have the best cheese and bread and pastries and the prettiest girls and the most beautiful language and overall probably some of the best food if you can afford it, but there are other countries. I mean, they do exist even if they cannot bake a croissant to save their lives.
I figure there are a few possibilities. The first, and the one that I favor, is that the CIA or NSA is ultimately responsible for this leak about France. If there's one thing the US needs right now it is to spread the blame. To show that other people are doing the same. To some people that will seem like a valid defense.
A second possibility is that Snowden, despite his predicament, inspired a French agent to do the same, except anonymously. I find this only slightly less probable than the first possibility.
And finally there is the possibility that the timing is a complete coincidence. I think it's more likely that the moon is made of cheese, but I suppose it is not impossible.
I don't think they ever needed it. The NSA, FBI, and CIA know that they have nothing to fear from us. I don't see us rising up in an armed revolt any time soon and that is the only thing that will stop us from reaching the full vision of George Orwell eventually. We are certainly more than halfway there already. As others have pointed out it's probably technology rather than the Patriot Act that is really responsible for this. To think that there are any checks on the power of these spooks is naive to the extreme. I don't think laws mean very much to them.
I believe the original intent of the GCHQ and NSA was to spy on foreign enemies for the purpose of winning wars either current wars or expected ones. So I don't think just saying, "that's what you pay us to do." would be a very good defense. Unless you want to make it sound like your own citizens are the enemy.
Armed forces are paid to kill, but that doesn't work as an excuse for a Tiananmen Square massacre. "Well you pay us to kill. We were just doing what you pay us for. And I think we did a good job because we killed a lot!".
No that's not the problem. Spying on your citizens is fine.
Speak for yourself. 1984 was never intended to be an instruction manual. Is that really the kind of society you want to live in? Your every communication monitored like you are some kind of lab animal?
As a Libertarian, let me say that I don't hate Obama. Certainly no more than I hated Bush. What I feel towards Obama is some mixture of indifference and contempt. Pretty much the same as any other modern president. They're all basically idiots who really make no difference. They're just a part of a larger corrupt, evil system which exists for its own sake, to serve its own ends, to accumulate more and more power. I do like that at least Obama has some charisma. Unlike either of the Bush creatures who had all of the charisma of a rodent. I think it's important for a leader to be charismatic. So for that reason I think Obama is a better president than Bush. I also think it's kind of cool that he's not white. Our first non-white president.
I think it's the partisans who really seem to hate whatever president is from the other party. Democrats hate Republican presidents with a passion just as Republicans hate Democratic presidents with a passion. It's all so predictable. It's what happens when the public consists of mostly brainwashed drones who prefer stimulus-response to actual thought.
In the 80s and maybe even the early 90s the Democrats were often on our (Libertarians) side when it came to social issues. It was nice to have mainstream people on our side from time to time. I guess you could call them ACLU Democrats, an endangered species these days unfortunately.
I'd wager that if he wasn't mixed-race or a Democrat, we'd be reading stories on CNN about how Obama would be considered of the greatest presidents ever.
I'm guessing that ACLU democrats would see him as a fascist and I'd be curious to see an argument as to how he is any better or really any different than Bush. Well aside from the charisma thing. I'm also guessing that you would feel the same way about any Democratic president.
Good. Please stay home, we don't want your damn ass in the States.
Believe me. They already know they are not welcome. You don't have to be a genuis to figure that out immediately on arrival when you are subjected to intense interrogations and are treated like a criminal. A lot of tourists naive enough not to realize what things were like behind our barbed wire vow never to return. The novelty value of feeling like you are checking into a prison gets old very quickly. As does constantly having to prove that you did not come here to blow stuff up.
Your link doesn't work for me. I get a blank page with a NYT banner at the top. You do realize that saying something 100 times does not make it any more true. If you have evidence of European allies spying on the US then go ahead and trot it out.
Aren't you going to miss those angry, obese guys with blue gloves sensually running their fingers through your hair, massaging your balls, sliding their fingers up and down your ass crack and inside of your waistband? And where else can you go for a nice strip search, either electronic or for real? You also get to know what if feels like to be a suspected terrorist with our intensive 'interviews' upon entry. They will only want your entire life history and a very, very good explanation of why you would even think about visiting here. You'll have to do some pretty fast talking to convince them you are not here to blow things up. I don't see how anyone could possibly resist that experience. Then you could visit our jails and see how real Americans live. Don't be fooled. Those cages are for our own safety.
Except that the same group of people wrote both. It shows that they at least claimed to believe those things. Thomas Jefferson wrote the rough draft of the declaration (I believe Ben Franlkin was responsible for the final wording of that frist sentence though) and the other four including Ben Franklin and John Adams did the rest. It represents evidence of the beliefs and intent of at least some of the Founders.
Russia never actually offered him asylum. They merely said they would consider it and promised that they would not extradite him back to the US. But I do agree that withdrawing his application for asylum was a risky thing to do. He may need that and the insult of withdrawing the request might make it less likely that they would approve if Snowden has no other choice. Staying in Russia would have been safer in some ways too. US planes or helicopters will not be invading Russian airspace. So he doesn't have to worry about extraordinary rendition or having his plane shot down or grounded in a US friendly country where he could be extradited.
Yeah. I was wondering about that. Whether you were serious or not. I read that he applied to Austria but that they told him he had to apply in Austrian territory.
I also remember that story about the Moscow embassy. That was fine. The US and USSR were clearly enemies and it was understood that we would be spying on each other all the time. To me that is not the same as being caught spying on, say, Canada. To me spying on enemies is one thing. Spying on close friends is another one entirely. That is what I find shocking. That we are spying on so many countries that are friendly to us and our interests. I mean forget about morality. What is the point? Are we planning to invade any of these countries in the near future? If nothing else it is an immense waste of resources.
Officials at Portugal's foreign ministry and National Civil Aviation Authority could not be reached for comment. French government officials reached overnight said they could not confirm whether Morales' plane was denied permission to fly over France.
The Austrian president, Heinz Fischer, visited Morales at the airport in the early hours of Wednesday and later said that the plane had been cleared to leave. "The flight route is normal, as far as I am informed. Spain's airspace is also open for him. [Morales] will resume his trip shortly," he said.
When I read the news stories on the subject France had not yet denied the accusation. They are certainly denying it now. Although the wording of the denial seems a bit suspicious. It makes it ambiguous as to whether they did in fact deny the flight flyover permission initially and then allow it later.
Portugal seems to claim that they denied landing permission but that they did not deny permission to fly through their airspace.
Portugal said it had granted permission for the plane to fly through its air space but declined Bolivia's request for a refueling stop in Lisbon due to unspecified technical reasons.
It seems unlikely that President Morales just decided out of the blue to humiliate himself and his country and spend an extra 14 hours in Vienna in order to, what? Just to make Latin Americans angry? If that is all they wanted they could have invented a much better story that did not also delay and humilate the president.
I've now also read some reports of responses from Washington. They are unwilling to explicitly deny that they contacted Portugal, France, Spain, or Italy about the Morales flight. That seems odd. That would be an easy thing to deny.
So, to me, the events are still unclear. A misunderstanding brought about by Portugal's refusal to allow a refueling and heightened by miscommunications with France is possible, but until/unless further evidence is revealed I find Bolivia's story more convincing than the alternative. It would definitely be in France's interest to deny the accusations. Portugal's answer sounds more like the truth. That they didn't deny a flyover. Just a refuelling stop.
What if making that information available allows terrorists to now be successful and they kill 100s if not 1000s of innocent people? Are those guys still heros?
Absolutely. Although the premise doesn't really apply here. He hasn't released anything that could help terrorists. Well, unless you consider everyone to be terrorists.
sometimes who the good guys and bad guys are isn't so black and white.
Yes. sometimes, but not in this case. This is about as black and white as it gets in the real world.
Slashdot Mirror
Comparing the 2010s to the 1990s isn't fair. The economy was booming, and we still had a middle class. We just went through the biggest recession since the great depression, and the benefits of recovery have accrued entirely to the rich. There's a reason why they call it a "jobless recovery".
I graduated college in '92 with a BS in Electrical Engineering. I job hunted intensively for around 5 years looking for jobs either in hardware or software. Never even had a single interview because I didn't meet the prerequisites. Eventually I just gave up looking. It was obvious that you needed to have experience to get a real job. Every single ad that I saw required a minimum of 2 years experience, but usually 3-5. Every once in a long while I'd see an ad that only required 6-12 months of experience. I had none at all. So I started working at shit jobs instead and the rest is history. My degree wasn't worth shit in the real world.
I have found that getting a shit job is more difficult than it used to be though. But that may also have something to do with the fact that I'm a lot older than I used to be. For jobs like stocking shelves, register work, bagging groceries, washing dishes etc managers seem to prefer younger people and I can't say I blame them.
I've heard time and time again, that Canadian (and American) men are highly desired by women in Japan. I've also heard time and time again, that the reason is because too many Japanese men are downright useless and misogynistic assholes.
Are you a genuinely nice North American dude with a real job? If so, it really is remarkably easy to meet wonderful women in Japan.
Who told you this? This is 100% racist bullshit. It isn't even slightly true. It's funny though because I've heard that same story told for many different countries and it isn't any more true in those countries.
It may be slightly easier for an unattractive guy to get a girlfriend in Japan, but only slightly, and you had better be in your twenties. Age differences of more than 2-3 years are simply not tolerated there.
I've spent 10-15 years of my life on a research project looking for a place where an ugly guy can get a pretty girlfriend or wife. There are a few such places, but Japan is unfortunately not on the list. I say unfortunately because I think Japanese women have the best personalities. There are other countries with lots of pretty girls, but none with personalities that I find so appealing. But if you want a cute j-girl you're gonna have to be at least somewhat good looking yourself. It's also one of the most expensive and difficult places on the planet for a foreigner to live. But if I were a good looking guy and could have a pretty girlfriend or wife of any nationality a Japanese girl would be at the top of my list. A French girl would be my second choice. An American girl would be nearly dead last.
I have a horrible fear that one of my kids will end up like my step brother.
Is this because your step brother is unhappy or because you don't want a slacker for a child?
OTOH, if you go to suicide discussion groups you will find that many of them are planning to kill themselves for essentially financial reasons. I would ask them, "If you didn't have to work, if you had enough money for food and shelter without working, would you still be planning suicide?" A surprisingly large numbered answered no.
If I had to work a regular shit job and interact with people socially I would almost certainly kill myself. In order to cope with constant negative reinforcement I need at least some positive reinforcement occassionally as well or living just seems like pointless suffering.
It's also important to remember that it is not always easy to find a job when you are antisocial or have social anxiety. It can be nearly impossible even when your standards are very low indeed. After you get rejected for the first 50 shit jobs (like bagging groceries, dishwashing at fast food restaurants etc) you apply for that doesn't exactly encourage you to want to go out into the world either. Again, the only reinforcement out there is negative.
http://www.thepiratebay.sx/
Right. Because the only way to get video games is to buy them. Food and shelter is all you need to live. The only reason I ever leave my house is to buy food, and I try to do it quickly. If I didn't need to do that I would never ever leave. The outside world is pretty awful. I've also noticed that whenever I leave my house for extended periods of time bad things tend to happen to me.
and not wanting to go into the massive "grind your face into the dirt" mentality that exists in Japan.
What does that mean?
You do realize that France is not the only country in Europe, right? They have the best cheese and bread and pastries and the prettiest girls and the most beautiful language and overall probably some of the best food if you can afford it, but there are other countries. I mean, they do exist even if they cannot bake a croissant to save their lives.
I figure there are a few possibilities. The first, and the one that I favor, is that the CIA or NSA is ultimately responsible for this leak about France. If there's one thing the US needs right now it is to spread the blame. To show that other people are doing the same. To some people that will seem like a valid defense.
A second possibility is that Snowden, despite his predicament, inspired a French agent to do the same, except anonymously. I find this only slightly less probable than the first possibility.
And finally there is the possibility that the timing is a complete coincidence. I think it's more likely that the moon is made of cheese, but I suppose it is not impossible.
I don't think they ever needed it. The NSA, FBI, and CIA know that they have nothing to fear from us. I don't see us rising up in an armed revolt any time soon and that is the only thing that will stop us from reaching the full vision of George Orwell eventually. We are certainly more than halfway there already. As others have pointed out it's probably technology rather than the Patriot Act that is really responsible for this. To think that there are any checks on the power of these spooks is naive to the extreme. I don't think laws mean very much to them.
I believe the original intent of the GCHQ and NSA was to spy on foreign enemies for the purpose of winning wars either current wars or expected ones. So I don't think just saying, "that's what you pay us to do." would be a very good defense. Unless you want to make it sound like your own citizens are the enemy.
Armed forces are paid to kill, but that doesn't work as an excuse for a Tiananmen Square massacre. "Well you pay us to kill. We were just doing what you pay us for. And I think we did a good job because we killed a lot!".
No that's not the problem. Spying on your citizens is fine.
Speak for yourself. 1984 was never intended to be an instruction manual. Is that really the kind of society you want to live in? Your every communication monitored like you are some kind of lab animal?
As a Libertarian, let me say that I don't hate Obama. Certainly no more than I hated Bush. What I feel towards Obama is some mixture of indifference and contempt. Pretty much the same as any other modern president. They're all basically idiots who really make no difference. They're just a part of a larger corrupt, evil system which exists for its own sake, to serve its own ends, to accumulate more and more power. I do like that at least Obama has some charisma. Unlike either of the Bush creatures who had all of the charisma of a rodent. I think it's important for a leader to be charismatic. So for that reason I think Obama is a better president than Bush. I also think it's kind of cool that he's not white. Our first non-white president.
I think it's the partisans who really seem to hate whatever president is from the other party. Democrats hate Republican presidents with a passion just as Republicans hate Democratic presidents with a passion. It's all so predictable. It's what happens when the public consists of mostly brainwashed drones who prefer stimulus-response to actual thought.
In the 80s and maybe even the early 90s the Democrats were often on our (Libertarians) side when it came to social issues. It was nice to have mainstream people on our side from time to time. I guess you could call them ACLU Democrats, an endangered species these days unfortunately.
I'd wager that if he wasn't mixed-race or a Democrat, we'd be reading stories on CNN about how Obama would be considered of the greatest presidents ever.
I'm guessing that ACLU democrats would see him as a fascist and I'd be curious to see an argument as to how he is any better or really any different than Bush. Well aside from the charisma thing. I'm also guessing that you would feel the same way about any Democratic president.
Good. Please stay home, we don't want your damn ass in the States.
Believe me. They already know they are not welcome. You don't have to be a genuis to figure that out immediately on arrival when you are subjected to intense interrogations and are treated like a criminal. A lot of tourists naive enough not to realize what things were like behind our barbed wire vow never to return. The novelty value of feeling like you are checking into a prison gets old very quickly. As does constantly having to prove that you did not come here to blow stuff up.
Right. Because Americans never go to Europe.
Your link doesn't work for me. I get a blank page with a NYT banner at the top. You do realize that saying something 100 times does not make it any more true. If you have evidence of European allies spying on the US then go ahead and trot it out.
And then Americans would be required to apply for a visa to visit Europe.
Aren't you going to miss those angry, obese guys with blue gloves sensually running their fingers through your hair, massaging your balls, sliding their fingers up and down your ass crack and inside of your waistband? And where else can you go for a nice strip search, either electronic or for real? You also get to know what if feels like to be a suspected terrorist with our intensive 'interviews' upon entry. They will only want your entire life history and a very, very good explanation of why you would even think about visiting here. You'll have to do some pretty fast talking to convince them you are not here to blow things up. I don't see how anyone could possibly resist that experience. Then you could visit our jails and see how real Americans live. Don't be fooled. Those cages are for our own safety.
Except that the same group of people wrote both. It shows that they at least claimed to believe those things. Thomas Jefferson wrote the rough draft of the declaration (I believe Ben Franlkin was responsible for the final wording of that frist sentence though) and the other four including Ben Franklin and John Adams did the rest. It represents evidence of the beliefs and intent of at least some of the Founders.
Russia never actually offered him asylum. They merely said they would consider it and promised that they would not extradite him back to the US. But I do agree that withdrawing his application for asylum was a risky thing to do. He may need that and the insult of withdrawing the request might make it less likely that they would approve if Snowden has no other choice. Staying in Russia would have been safer in some ways too. US planes or helicopters will not be invading Russian airspace. So he doesn't have to worry about extraordinary rendition or having his plane shot down or grounded in a US friendly country where he could be extradited.
Yeah. I was wondering about that. Whether you were serious or not. I read that he applied to Austria but that they told him he had to apply in Austrian territory.
I also remember that story about the Moscow embassy. That was fine. The US and USSR were clearly enemies and it was understood that we would be spying on each other all the time. To me that is not the same as being caught spying on, say, Canada. To me spying on enemies is one thing. Spying on close friends is another one entirely. That is what I find shocking. That we are spying on so many countries that are friendly to us and our interests. I mean forget about morality. What is the point? Are we planning to invade any of these countries in the near future? If nothing else it is an immense waste of resources.
Yes, I believe the Bolivian president just made the whole thing up.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/03/edward-snowden-bolivia-plane-vienna
Officials at Portugal's foreign ministry and National Civil Aviation Authority could not be reached for comment. French government officials reached overnight said they could not confirm whether Morales' plane was denied permission to fly over France.
The Austrian president, Heinz Fischer, visited Morales at the airport in the early hours of Wednesday and later said that the plane had been cleared to leave. "The flight route is normal, as far as I am informed. Spain's airspace is also open for him. [Morales] will resume his trip shortly," he said.
When I read the news stories on the subject France had not yet denied the accusation. They are certainly denying it now. Although the wording of the denial seems a bit suspicious. It makes it ambiguous as to whether they did in fact deny the flight flyover permission initially and then allow it later.
Portugal seems to claim that they denied landing permission but that they did not deny permission to fly through their airspace.
Here's an interesting link:
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_23590259/snowden-france-denies-blocking-bolivian-plane
Portugal said it had granted permission for the plane to fly through its air space but declined Bolivia's request for a refueling stop in Lisbon due to unspecified technical reasons.
It seems unlikely that President Morales just decided out of the blue to humiliate himself and his country and spend an extra 14 hours in Vienna in order to, what? Just to make Latin Americans angry? If that is all they wanted they could have invented a much better story that did not also delay and humilate the president.
I've now also read some reports of responses from Washington. They are unwilling to explicitly deny that they contacted Portugal, France, Spain, or Italy about the Morales flight. That seems odd. That would be an easy thing to deny.
So, to me, the events are still unclear. A misunderstanding brought about by Portugal's refusal to allow a refueling and heightened by miscommunications with France is possible, but until/unless further evidence is revealed I find Bolivia's story more convincing than the alternative. It would definitely be in France's interest to deny the accusations. Portugal's answer sounds more like the truth. That they didn't deny a flyover. Just a refuelling stop.
Most people don't support what he has done.
Citation?
What if making that information available allows terrorists to now be successful and they kill 100s if not 1000s of innocent people? Are those guys still heros?
Absolutely. Although the premise doesn't really apply here. He hasn't released anything that could help terrorists. Well, unless you consider everyone to be terrorists.
sometimes who the good guys and bad guys are isn't so black and white.
Yes. sometimes, but not in this case. This is about as black and white as it gets in the real world.