Depending on your work that point may be earlier or later than most but you WILL accept stuff. Be it what is in history book , social facts, math, physic, what a reporter is telling happens the other side of the world, or what the doctor tells you, some stuff you WILL accepet as fact either what expert tell you or plain where you are not located. Now truth to be told there is gradation, e.g. if you tell me alien landed i will request far more evidence than if you told me there is a bushfire in australia during the summer. But you cannot simply fact check everything. At some point trust will apply. The point you apply that trust is open. One rule of thumb for me is to not forward anything i did not fact check, but then again i read a LOT of article on sciences, economy so i am an outlier.
The framer could not have foreseen that a single person could mow people down, literally, with a semi automatic rifle with easy reloading, or even in some case double circular reloading add on. Reading what they wrote I view them as highly rational people having gone through a revolution, and thus from the parameter of THAT TIME, wrote what they could. Seeing how rational they were and well written the constitution was, i am betting they would be horrified. Furthermore the second amendment does not disallow restriction on training, or even type of weapon allowed. I would say the average person should only be allowed single shot weapon which have to be manually reloaded.
I am ranting with "uuur guuuns" because people spout excuse for the gun lobby without thinking twice and I am an old coger enough that those issue were clarified again and again and again but the same BS keep cropping up (see same thing with global warming). Looking at *absolute* number of death is one of those tactic. Yes cars kill more people in absolute. But this is a wrong number to compare, you have to compare per hour of driving usage, to per hour of gun usage or a similar statistic. Cars are used far far more per capita than guns are carried. Thus what appears in absolute a bigger number, is actually factually per capita/per hours usage a much lower number. So the 12 fatality per 100K for car comapred to the suicide+murder of In 2013 the United States' firearm-related death rate was 10.7 deaths for every 100K inhabitants , or murder solely 3.5K per 100K you quickly see that due to the huge usage per hours of day of cars, or even their *predominant* presence in every corner city or rural, that gun are far far far more dangerous than cars by order of magnitude.
Facit : compare what is comparable. If you start comparing absolute number, then chance is that you are trying to push an agenda. You gotta make sure numbers are on a valid scale. Nuff said. Feel free to rant about me.
The previous automation were not general purpose automate you could train for nearly any low skilled job, whereas this is the case. Nobody which compare previous automation seem to even get what this means : there would be no new low skilled job, which COULD NOT be replaced by an AI automate when we reach that point. So what do you do ? Make people dig ditch with broken shovel and let them fill back in ?
The second point people miss is that the transition period of the previously mentioned revolution were UGLY. It was not the same people which were shifted en mass, it was the younger worker or sometime the next generations of workers. The older worker or previous generation ? Fucked.
And you need a permit to operate a car. Look there are many many reason all those car/cooking knife (or heck swimming pool) comparison to gun death are utterly stupid. For one we have accepted that some objects have a primary useful activity which the general public enjoy making our capitalist societies better : transportation (car) cooking/preparing/cutting (knife) and entertainment (swimming pool). When accident do happen we try as a society to make up new law enforcing certain protection or minimum standard to help increase security lower death count, e.g. seat belt, e.g. baby seat placement instruction on car seat. Killing is at best a bar far secondary objective of such items (combat knife) or even never the objective (car, pool). But with gun it is different. The primary reason of the guns, is that they were invented to kill more efficiently. Forget the BS about sport , that did not happen in the 18th century for your average person in the US, at the time of the framing of the second amendment. And yet contrary to car, you don't have anywhere near the regulation for an instrument made up primary to kill. You don't even have nearly the same training, and you have not even the same follow up on ownership.
Every attempt at having a minimum , heck like car tracking ownership or having non discriminatory permit/training is met by a "they want to get uuuuur guuuunns" lobby of the NRA which says "no" to EVERYTHING. As long as you let those fuckers block everything with a "no", even something as simple as allowing : 1) tracking ownership electronically 2) enforce having a real training with permit like a car (that does not infringe the general population right of ownership IMO if it stops you getting one because you are too fucked up to pass the permit, as long as the exams is not the stupid 4h training the NRA offer anybody can pass with the finger in the nose) 3) allow again the CDC to study gun violence and/or solution , then the situation will get fucked up. Look up the statistics : while gun violence dropped in the last 3 decades, mass shooting actually rose. Sharply. That should tell you something right there.
Pedophilia is the attraction to youth which DO NOT present sexual secondary characteristic, and is recognized as a mental illness. Whereas hebephilia and otehr associated preference, usually look for people which do HAVE secondary sexual characteristic, and are also interrested into sex. This is also not a DSM IV mental illness. This *MAY* be recognized both as being immoral, which is fine, but confusing a mental illness with a (potentially) amoral sexual preference is wrong. Pedophilia is one thing, a mental sickness, hebephilia and other associated preference are not, especially that most of the time it isn't a preferential choice.
On a fundemental level, eliminating large class of hidden variable, you have an unpredictible system. But while unpredictible it still follow a distributioon of probability, which when you go to the macro level end up eliminating it partially enough that our own macro world looks deterministic enough to be qualified as such. Think about it as newton physic versus GR, for a moving car newton is enough, for shooting a ball or cascading domino determinism is good enough. I would argue that as such the universe is deterministic enough for the most common human understanding of it.
By your count an homeless person begging 10$ a day would be far richer than somebody getting 10$ a day with a house in one third world country. No. Triple no. That 1% comparison must be done SOLELY within the same parity purchasing power. Otherwise you get totally stupid result like your own post shows. A person earning 32k$ is NOT in the global 1%, as the 1% is defined. That person is definitively in the 99%, because in the US that purchasing power parity is such that 32K is *nothing* in many part of the country.
There is TWO part to depression treatment. The first is anti depressive, the second is a psychotherapy. If you take/get only the pill then somebody in the health care dropped the ball. A pill without therapy is nearly worthless.
The things is super mutant with power is the basis of those universe. If you can't suspend belief about that, you won't watch those film. but even within those universe some thing are more difficult to swallow than other: e.g. your belief has to be suspended far harder. Alien with advanced tech ? Yes sure. Some part of human advancing far more than the rest of the world ? Be it Atlantis or Wancanda or whatever ? Nan. See most tech is based on advanced from earlier tech. This is why the world advanced more or less by period, the WHOLE world. But having par utterly isolated and having such advanced tech ? Difficult to swallow especially when the isolation ITSELF require already existing advanced tech like that shield. See tech would have spread to neighbor city BEFORE that shield would have been invented. That is why this is far more difficult to accept that suspension. There might be a bit of prejudice, I have no doubt of that, but for some people like me such highly advanced isolated iv is utterly incompatible with trying to suspend belief. Even in spite of accepting a boy bitten by a spider.
Initially I tried to type a long good message... Only to get AT MOST a single 6 word sentence as response, at worst a one word sentence "Yes." (wtf ? Do you want me to continue speaking ? Are you interrested ? Not at all ? WHATTTTT ?). And there there is the scammer. So after a month or so I took the shotgun approach and got a few response (funnily enough I estimated the number of single women in my region using OKCupid for my age : 55. Everybody else is 100 +km, so that service does not seem to be widely used here). So I am part of the problem, but then again, we are human we don't persist into using what do not work, we do try to use other method and stays with what works.
The problem seem to be that those microplastic bullet are by nature accumulating some chemicals on their surface you might not want to end in fish while floating in water (there were a few article last month about that), then releasing in while in the stomach of the fish. The problem is not per see the microplastic bullet, but those "rider" chemicals...
With it would come huge disruption. Forget SF tropes about FTL drives and so forth. The most likely reason somebody would cross that huge divide, would be on generation ship and to colonize. Nuff said.
Is the US constitution relevant to this day and age (I am not even speaking on the process of changing it - just whether it is relevant) ? It was written for a certain of world and that world evolved, well beyond the parameter the writer could ever see, to the point of (IMO) obsolescence for certain amendment. Many western country around the world severely limited or restricted gun ownership, the US still is holding onto it, even if the power of the weapon and their relevance to any militia isn't that obvious anymore.
Anyway it is a moot point. I view this in horror as a foreigner, but it is obvious after sandy hook that if shooting down 20 about 6-7 year old do NOTHING then nothing else will.
There is a gran of truth in what he says. The grain of truth is that shifting climate will make arable terrain less arable, and will open to potential moderate climate terrain which was not arable or is poor. So shifting climate may actually reduce globally the amount of field which are good for agriculture. Nothing to do with evolution.... Just with simply top earth quality for what we currently grow. As for your kip about a repeat of 2017: actually 2017 and the last 3 or 4 decade are decades where there was the LEAST amount of war, compared to last centuries... As for population upheaval , the same can be said qualitatively. 2017 forced mirgation is nothing to compare if whole frigging region decide to go north or south because their agriculture is in the shitter , in say 75 or 100 years.
I mean if a pyroman set a barn is on fire, and a denier pretend the warmth is due to hot summer time the other pretend barn on fire is a natural occurrence, does it matter ? They are both wrong, and in the end you gotta stop the fire anyway.
Republican keep harping that they are for reducing the debt and deficit, when they are not in power - you don't seem democrat making that point one of their campaigning point. But republican are are in power it is deficit & debt glutony all over. That is the hypocrisy Rand Paul as speaking about a few days ago.
I bought one to browse, watch youtube and twitch , browse email, and such stuff, while travelling or in public transport. This is far more protable than a laptop for such action (too heavy not portable enough - lower battery time), and far more convenient than a phone (too small). This fill the niche the portable netbook were about but with even more convenience. Again it depends on what are your expectation comapred to the tablet power.
This is about WHO get it to make those tech cheaper : " Included in the budget cuts are funds for programs researching fuel efficient vehicles, bioenergy technologies, solar energy technology and electric car technologies" if you cut research that means you leave the lead to future technology to others. If it was cut on promoting solar or whatever I would agree with you, but this seem to be cut on research. As for "i would rather than the fed get away" be wary of what you are asking for : some fundamental research is done solely on the fed level, because it does not pan out any immediate useful tech or patent for the private sector, yet down the line they may be indirectly getting the fruit of it. Cut that research, then you stall.
One of the cause that you get the warning much later is because the app is getting directly message from the scheduling & operating system, while you get your warning from the RES (or sometimes CKI) systems. The airline backend are a series of interconnected systems and the time it takes to propagate or even the resource given are not the same. Most probably you were actually not buying your ticket directly from the airline but through an agency or a third party system. In which case your booking was in the GDS, and potentially you are not even getting in this case the "late" message from the airline, but through the GDS messaging from the stuff you have in your PNR : email or SMS.
If it was all one big system in the hand of the airline you would get your "late" warning probably more quickly. But this is not the case. Here google will probably tell you quicker, because the other side has to go through many legacy system, with many different protocols , some with no guaranted time but guaranted delivery among others it could be MATIP A, MATIP B, teletype, then to you it could be email and SMS. I am not even going into details here....
"In the absence of regulation profit maximisation has no ethical or moral constraints. "
Indeed :
externalities. Without rules and EPA, guess who would polute and reject all their waste in the local river ? If there is no rules, then profit maximization occurs, ethics be damned.
Once to fall bad apple have been removed, you get the harder to fall bad apple. There is nearly always never good apple. By now "idealist" have long been removed from the cryptocurrency ecosystem, leaving only the pure capitalist. And as human mostly base our capitalist endeaviour on pure greed and have as much as possible. That means that without rules you have only bad apple managing to stay afloat, because their advantage over good apple is too great.
Heck you can see something similar with banks : remove rules and they try to do incredibly unethical but legal stuff. Sometimes they do it *even* with the rules on. So as long as there is no governmental rules on cryptocurrency, it will stay a wild west where ONLY bad apple & a lot of hacking and fraud occurs, comapred to traditional money processing.
"Oh yeah right. The NHS is widely known as the most efficient. Give me a break..." compared to the US model, with the outcomes it has right now, the total cost , and the coverage ? Yes it is far more efficient than the US model.
Slashdot Mirror
Depending on your work that point may be earlier or later than most but you WILL accept stuff. Be it what is in history book , social facts, math, physic, what a reporter is telling happens the other side of the world, or what the doctor tells you, some stuff you WILL accepet as fact either what expert tell you or plain where you are not located. Now truth to be told there is gradation, e.g. if you tell me alien landed i will request far more evidence than if you told me there is a bushfire in australia during the summer. But you cannot simply fact check everything. At some point trust will apply. The point you apply that trust is open. One rule of thumb for me is to not forward anything i did not fact check, but then again i read a LOT of article on sciences, economy so i am an outlier.
The framer could not have foreseen that a single person could mow people down, literally, with a semi automatic rifle with easy reloading, or even in some case double circular reloading add on. Reading what they wrote I view them as highly rational people having gone through a revolution, and thus from the parameter of THAT TIME, wrote what they could. Seeing how rational they were and well written the constitution was, i am betting they would be horrified. Furthermore the second amendment does not disallow restriction on training, or even type of weapon allowed. I would say the average person should only be allowed single shot weapon which have to be manually reloaded.
I am ranting with "uuur guuuns" because people spout excuse for the gun lobby without thinking twice and I am an old coger enough that those issue were clarified again and again and again but the same BS keep cropping up (see same thing with global warming). Looking at *absolute* number of death is one of those tactic. Yes cars kill more people in absolute. But this is a wrong number to compare, you have to compare per hour of driving usage, to per hour of gun usage or a similar statistic. Cars are used far far more per capita than guns are carried. Thus what appears in absolute a bigger number, is actually factually per capita/per hours usage a much lower number. So the 12 fatality per 100K for car comapred to the suicide+murder of In 2013 the United States' firearm-related death rate was 10.7 deaths for every 100K inhabitants , or murder solely 3.5K per 100K you quickly see that due to the huge usage per hours of day of cars, or even their *predominant* presence in every corner city or rural, that gun are far far far more dangerous than cars by order of magnitude.
Facit : compare what is comparable. If you start comparing absolute number, then chance is that you are trying to push an agenda. You gotta make sure numbers are on a valid scale. Nuff said. Feel free to rant about me.
The previous automation were not general purpose automate you could train for nearly any low skilled job, whereas this is the case. Nobody which compare previous automation seem to even get what this means : there would be no new low skilled job, which COULD NOT be replaced by an AI automate when we reach that point. So what do you do ? Make people dig ditch with broken shovel and let them fill back in ?
The second point people miss is that the transition period of the previously mentioned revolution were UGLY. It was not the same people which were shifted en mass, it was the younger worker or sometime the next generations of workers. The older worker or previous generation ? Fucked.
And you need a permit to operate a car. Look there are many many reason all those car/cooking knife (or heck swimming pool) comparison to gun death are utterly stupid. For one we have accepted that some objects have a primary useful activity which the general public enjoy making our capitalist societies better : transportation (car) cooking/preparing/cutting (knife) and entertainment (swimming pool). When accident do happen we try as a society to make up new law enforcing certain protection or minimum standard to help increase security lower death count, e.g. seat belt, e.g. baby seat placement instruction on car seat. Killing is at best a bar far secondary objective of such items (combat knife) or even never the objective (car, pool). But with gun it is different. The primary reason of the guns, is that they were invented to kill more efficiently. Forget the BS about sport , that did not happen in the 18th century for your average person in the US, at the time of the framing of the second amendment. And yet contrary to car, you don't have anywhere near the regulation for an instrument made up primary to kill. You don't even have nearly the same training, and you have not even the same follow up on ownership.
Every attempt at having a minimum , heck like car tracking ownership or having non discriminatory permit/training is met by a "they want to get uuuuur guuuunns" lobby of the NRA which says "no" to EVERYTHING. As long as you let those fuckers block everything with a "no", even something as simple as allowing : 1) tracking ownership electronically 2) enforce having a real training with permit like a car (that does not infringe the general population right of ownership IMO if it stops you getting one because you are too fucked up to pass the permit, as long as the exams is not the stupid 4h training the NRA offer anybody can pass with the finger in the nose) 3) allow again the CDC to study gun violence and/or solution , then the situation will get fucked up. Look up the statistics : while gun violence dropped in the last 3 decades, mass shooting actually rose. Sharply. That should tell you something right there.
Pedophilia is the attraction to youth which DO NOT present sexual secondary characteristic, and is recognized as a mental illness. Whereas hebephilia and otehr associated preference, usually look for people which do HAVE secondary sexual characteristic, and are also interrested into sex. This is also not a DSM IV mental illness. This *MAY* be recognized both as being immoral, which is fine, but confusing a mental illness with a (potentially) amoral sexual preference is wrong. Pedophilia is one thing, a mental sickness, hebephilia and other associated preference are not, especially that most of the time it isn't a preferential choice.
On a fundemental level, eliminating large class of hidden variable, you have an unpredictible system. But while unpredictible it still follow a distributioon of probability, which when you go to the macro level end up eliminating it partially enough that our own macro world looks deterministic enough to be qualified as such. Think about it as newton physic versus GR, for a moving car newton is enough, for shooting a ball or cascading domino determinism is good enough. I would argue that as such the universe is deterministic enough for the most common human understanding of it.
By your count an homeless person begging 10$ a day would be far richer than somebody getting 10$ a day with a house in one third world country. No. Triple no. That 1% comparison must be done SOLELY within the same parity purchasing power. Otherwise you get totally stupid result like your own post shows. A person earning 32k$ is NOT in the global 1%, as the 1% is defined. That person is definitively in the 99%, because in the US that purchasing power parity is such that 32K is *nothing* in many part of the country.
There is TWO part to depression treatment. The first is anti depressive, the second is a psychotherapy. If you take/get only the pill then somebody in the health care dropped the ball. A pill without therapy is nearly worthless.
The things is super mutant with power is the basis of those universe. If you can't suspend belief about that, you won't watch those film. but even within those universe some thing are more difficult to swallow than other: e.g. your belief has to be suspended far harder. Alien with advanced tech ? Yes sure. Some part of human advancing far more than the rest of the world ? Be it Atlantis or Wancanda or whatever ? Nan. See most tech is based on advanced from earlier tech. This is why the world advanced more or less by period, the WHOLE world. But having par utterly isolated and having such advanced tech ? Difficult to swallow especially when the isolation ITSELF require already existing advanced tech like that shield. See tech would have spread to neighbor city BEFORE that shield would have been invented. That is why this is far more difficult to accept that suspension. There might be a bit of prejudice, I have no doubt of that, but for some people like me such highly advanced isolated iv is utterly incompatible with trying to suspend belief. Even in spite of accepting a boy bitten by a spider.
It is about pretending they are doing something to lawmakers.
Initially I tried to type a long good message... Only to get AT MOST a single 6 word sentence as response, at worst a one word sentence "Yes." (wtf ? Do you want me to continue speaking ? Are you interrested ? Not at all ? WHATTTTT ?). And there there is the scammer. So after a month or so I took the shotgun approach and got a few response (funnily enough I estimated the number of single women in my region using OKCupid for my age : 55. Everybody else is 100 +km, so that service does not seem to be widely used here). So I am part of the problem, but then again, we are human we don't persist into using what do not work, we do try to use other method and stays with what works.
The problem seem to be that those microplastic bullet are by nature accumulating some chemicals on their surface you might not want to end in fish while floating in water (there were a few article last month about that), then releasing in while in the stomach of the fish. The problem is not per see the microplastic bullet, but those "rider" chemicals...
With it would come huge disruption. Forget SF tropes about FTL drives and so forth. The most likely reason somebody would cross that huge divide, would be on generation ship and to colonize. Nuff said.
Is the US constitution relevant to this day and age (I am not even speaking on the process of changing it - just whether it is relevant) ? It was written for a certain of world and that world evolved, well beyond the parameter the writer could ever see, to the point of (IMO) obsolescence for certain amendment. Many western country around the world severely limited or restricted gun ownership, the US still is holding onto it, even if the power of the weapon and their relevance to any militia isn't that obvious anymore.
Anyway it is a moot point. I view this in horror as a foreigner, but it is obvious after sandy hook that if shooting down 20 about 6-7 year old do NOTHING then nothing else will.
Therefore it is useless. There is good reason why we make A/B test or technical test only : to avoid the visual bias.
There is a gran of truth in what he says. The grain of truth is that shifting climate will make arable terrain less arable, and will open to potential moderate climate terrain which was not arable or is poor. So shifting climate may actually reduce globally the amount of field which are good for agriculture. Nothing to do with evolution.... Just with simply top earth quality for what we currently grow. As for your kip about a repeat of 2017: actually 2017 and the last 3 or 4 decade are decades where there was the LEAST amount of war, compared to last centuries... As for population upheaval , the same can be said qualitatively. 2017 forced mirgation is nothing to compare if whole frigging region decide to go north or south because their agriculture is in the shitter , in say 75 or 100 years.
I mean if a pyroman set a barn is on fire, and a denier pretend the warmth is due to hot summer time the other pretend barn on fire is a natural occurrence, does it matter ? They are both wrong, and in the end you gotta stop the fire anyway.
Republican keep harping that they are for reducing the debt and deficit, when they are not in power - you don't seem democrat making that point one of their campaigning point. But republican are are in power it is deficit & debt glutony all over. That is the hypocrisy Rand Paul as speaking about a few days ago.
I bought one to browse, watch youtube and twitch , browse email, and such stuff, while travelling or in public transport. This is far more protable than a laptop for such action (too heavy not portable enough - lower battery time), and far more convenient than a phone (too small). This fill the niche the portable netbook were about but with even more convenience. Again it depends on what are your expectation comapred to the tablet power.
This is about WHO get it to make those tech cheaper : " Included in the budget cuts are funds for programs researching fuel efficient vehicles, bioenergy technologies, solar energy technology and electric car technologies" if you cut research that means you leave the lead to future technology to others. If it was cut on promoting solar or whatever I would agree with you, but this seem to be cut on research. As for "i would rather than the fed get away" be wary of what you are asking for : some fundamental research is done solely on the fed level, because it does not pan out any immediate useful tech or patent for the private sector, yet down the line they may be indirectly getting the fruit of it. Cut that research, then you stall.
One of the cause that you get the warning much later is because the app is getting directly message from the scheduling & operating system, while you get your warning from the RES (or sometimes CKI) systems. The airline backend are a series of interconnected systems and the time it takes to propagate or even the resource given are not the same. Most probably you were actually not buying your ticket directly from the airline but through an agency or a third party system. In which case your booking was in the GDS, and potentially you are not even getting in this case the "late" message from the airline, but through the GDS messaging from the stuff you have in your PNR : email or SMS.
If it was all one big system in the hand of the airline you would get your "late" warning probably more quickly. But this is not the case. Here google will probably tell you quicker, because the other side has to go through many legacy system, with many different protocols , some with no guaranted time but guaranted delivery among others it could be MATIP A, MATIP B, teletype, then to you it could be email and SMS. I am not even going into details here....
"In the absence of regulation profit maximisation has no ethical or moral constraints. "
Indeed : externalities. Without rules and EPA, guess who would polute and reject all their waste in the local river ? If there is no rules, then profit maximization occurs, ethics be damned.
Once to fall bad apple have been removed, you get the harder to fall bad apple. There is nearly always never good apple. By now "idealist" have long been removed from the cryptocurrency ecosystem, leaving only the pure capitalist. And as human mostly base our capitalist endeaviour on pure greed and have as much as possible. That means that without rules you have only bad apple managing to stay afloat, because their advantage over good apple is too great.
Heck you can see something similar with banks : remove rules and they try to do incredibly unethical but legal stuff. Sometimes they do it *even* with the rules on. So as long as there is no governmental rules on cryptocurrency, it will stay a wild west where ONLY bad apple & a lot of hacking and fraud occurs, comapred to traditional money processing.
"Oh yeah right. The NHS is widely known as the most efficient. Give me a break..." compared to the US model, with the outcomes it has right now, the total cost , and the coverage ? Yes it is far more efficient than the US model.