I agree that people don't become immediately immune to criticism the minute they die. I fully intend to go to the first bar I can find and buy a round for the house the instant I hear Dick Cheney is dead.
However, the argument that she hadn't yet done much is a two-edged argument. If her actual accomplishment were small because she was young, her ability to cause offense is equally small. It's tragic because a bright young person full of potential has lost their life due to a medical problem. Bog knows we can use all the bright young people we can get. And as a parent I cannot but sympathize with her family.
And for the required ad hominem attack: if you don't understand why this is a tragedy, climb up out of the basement and ask your mom. Asshole.
Okay, I have to know. What, exactly, does light add to the process of wiping? Do you crane your neck over your shoulder to watch, or do you look between your legs? I'm actually curious because I've had a light time out like that as well, but it didn't make me flail about. I finished my business and exited the stall, at which point the lights came back on and I washed up and left.
Or is this simply the story you came up with when the kid's dad wanted to know why you were in the middle of the restroom with your pants down?
It's not a paradox that these areas get good cell coverage before other "modern" conveniences. It only makes sense. It's cheap and easy to provide cell service, and the low hanging fruit is always picked first.
It's not only low-hanging fruit, but developing nations are, by definition, poor. If you string up 5 miles of copper phone line during the day, it's a sure bet that it will be pulled down that night. It's practically impossible to prevent, and copper is easily turned into cash. Ask anyone who's ever attempted a network build-out in one of the less advantaged regions of the world.
Jurassic Park is frightning in the dark
All the dinosaurs are running wild
Someone shut the fence off in the rain
I admit it's kinda eerie
But this proves my chaos theory
And I don't think I'll be coming back again
On no
Cell phones can be a huge distraction in classes that are hard enough to manage, and no student should be using one in class as a matter of course. However.....
those "automatic consequences" are one of the many, many reasons it's hard to foster a sense of respect for authority in kids. Why should they respect a group of putative adults who have no discretion in how they respond to the circumstances of a given situation, but simply react with a simpleminded "one size fits all" policy? I wouldn't (and don't) respect them either. And, like most reasonable people, I care not a whit for what some idiot who managed to pass the bar thinks about anything that pertains to the safety of myself or my family. Frankly, they'd rather have someone die in a manner that doesn't allow for a lawsuit than be inconvenienced in a manner that does.
As for not obeying a proscription on cell phones during a lockdown, that's simple common sense (and possibly survival instinct). Were my daughter to inform me that a security lockdown had taken place and all of the students were denied any chance to call for help if needed, my initial response would be a strong desire to grab whoever was responsible for that little decision by the throat and pound their heads on the nearest solid object until I was good and tired.
I know darn well that kids are not angels, and even the best kids are prone to do stupid things now and then. I do spend a fair bit of time at the school, volunteering for this and that, mostly building sets for the Performing Arts group. I'm not one who has no exposure to kids like this, and I think this kid mostly got what she deserved. Just don't try to paint the people in charge as being universally good at their jobs, or even minimally competent. I've seen a lot of people I wouldn't trust with a burnt-out match somehow rise to a position of authority, and the results are seldom very inspiring.
Is this your standard response when someone asks _you_ a question? If I wanted to spend the rest of the day browsing around Google results, I'd look myself, but that wouldn't necessarily give me what you were referring to. Sheesh.
True, but I'm pretty sure you'd easily find some high-quality references to the idea that torture is not only ineffective in most situations, but that the act of torturing harms both sides, albeit in different ways. To be honest, it's a bit hard for me to believe that the original respondent questioned the idea. The idea that anyone can commit what amount to atrocities outlawed with good reason by both U.S. and international law, and yet remain unfazed, requires credulity that borders on mental incompetence.
I don't know exactly what punishments are suitable, but I do believe that *any* military personnel who were involved should be separated from their branch of service immediately, for the good of the service (an actual legally valid reason for separation, not just a phrase). Their participation in torture renders them unfit for further service.
Sharp lawyers will find a loophole or technicality in a law in order to satisfy the will of their client. It's what they're paid to do and you'll find it happening in courtrooms around the world. BTW, what exactly do you mean by "does damage to those who commit it"? Examples?
Well, there are no shortage of examples out there. Google not work on your computer?
A quick search revealed some interesting findings in "Torture and Democracy" by Darius M. Rejali"
Frantz Fanon, for example, treated French torturers among his patients
during the Algerian war. One policeman suffered from nightmares, extreme
irritability, and intolerance to noise. Working up to ten hours each day torturing
suspects, he grew impatient with his children, striking even his baby of twenty
months with "unaccustomed savagery." He consulted a doctor only after he set
upon torturing his wife one night. l-le knew quite well he sulfered from spillover
elfects from his job, but he did not want to cease torturing, so he asked Fanon
to show him how to continue torturing without the unfortunate side-effects.
ln another case, a policeman was generally in good spirits during sessions until
one day, Fanon found him trembling, sweating, and overcome with anxiety on
the sidewalk. He had encountered one of his old victims in the hospital hallway.
The policeman developed depression while orderlies found the victim in the
hospital bathroom trying to commit suicide.
...
Setting aside PTSD, torturers are more vulnerable to job bumout than
other violence workers. ln a comparison of Brazilian torturers and killers, researchers
found that the least burned out were those who facilitated violence,
but did not actually perform it. Rank-and-file cops were more burned out than
those who simply ordered the violence, and torturers were more exhausted than
killers. Putting a bullet in the head appears to be an easier occupation than
questioning subiects daily. Generally, torturers suffered from insomnia, hyper-
sensitivity, nervousness, emotional problems, alcoholism, and potential suicidal
behavior. Some had resigned and others had bumed out. Keeping their work
lives secret deprived them of the support of friends and family, while their super-
visors, who did none of the violence, drew richly on their support network.
While the supervisors took pride in their work the real torturers said the military
brass had betrayed them and hung them out to twist in the wind. "'We are
society's toilet paper."
Some of the worst damage is done because, when we (as a society) condone torture, we make the leap to considering ourselves torturers. That's a very large leap from our traditional values. Worse, from a security perspective, we sacrifice the moral high ground, placing ourselves at the same level as some of the worst dictatorships in the world. Militarily, you should never voluntarily give up high ground without a larger, compelling strategic reason. To do so based on nebulous reasoning about "ticking bomb" scenarios borders on treason.
And, even if you accept that there might be some scenario where it was actually, truly the only way to save a bunch of people, what's the time frame? It's been over SEVEN YEARS since 9/11. I'm pretty sure there aren't any timing devices in use with that kind of fuse.
I agree with your first point, but IMHO soldiers who committed torture do not deserve protection. They could and should have refused to execute their orders.
Actually, soldiers are generally not any more privvy to information than you are. They're just told "this guy has information that will prevent , and I need you to get it out of him." Of course, the soldier is trained to A) follow orders B) not worry about the ramifications (don't believe everything the army tells you about wanting brains) and C) is usually an 18-24 year old who wants to do the right thing.
Doesn't really matter. All of those soldiers were specifically informed that following an illegal order is itself illegal, and not to do so. (Been there, done that, got the dress blues to prove it) Of course, you are also told that it's risky, and to be sure of your stance before refusing to obey an order by the officers above you. Also, our previous administration liked to play fast and loose with the definition of "legal". Nonetheless, I like to think I'd have refused to torture people. It doesn't work if your goal is to get accurate information, and the act of torturing does damage to those who commit it, as well as the victims.
The real tragedy (so far) is that the whole thing is blamed on a few "bad apples". No one who has ever served in the military could believe that. This shit was ordered, and not by some platoon sargeant.
If you have the money, a T-1 is *always* an option. Not cheap (I pay almost $700 USD a month for mine), but plenty fast. I'm running a business from my house, and tried all the other options. Satellite is great for email and web browsing, but the latency kills a lot of VPN sessions and can be difficult if you need to access web clients with a lot of little widgets and individual image files (hey, the customers pick 'em, not me).
You know, most parents are completely and utterly incompetent with respect to technology. They tend to rule out of fear instead of experience.
My, aren't we sure of ourselves? I'm 44 years old, and more than a little competent with respect to technology, having worked with it for 25 years now. And there's no way in the world I would have allowed my daughter the privilege to lock me out of a computer when she was 7. Hell, she can't do it now and she's 16. Sure, she has her MySpace account, IM clients, etc. They're on her own laptop, to keep all that crap off of mine. But I do take a look at the logs now and then, and until she was 14 she had to do all her browsing in the family room. She's now old enough to not freak out if something weird pops up, and she'd probably tell me about it if it did.
1s and 0s can't hurt you, but the freedom to explore and try new things can really inspire a child.
By all means, show her all the 1s and 0s you want. The pictures of naked people doing funny things to each other is a different story. Context is everything, and a 7-year-old doesn't have the experience or conceptual tools to assimilate stuff like that without a significant risk of doing some harm.
The fact is there's a lot more to be gained than lost by letting a child explore without being afraid of what their parents might think.
No offense, but you have to be either quite young or flat-ass stupid. Maybe both. "Letting a child explore" is a situation that simply cries out for appropriate boundaries. I suspect even you might understand the risks of of, say, allowing a 7-year-old to wander through Detroit without parental supervision. Barring physically risky things like that, are you actually taking the position that there's no form of information/images/video/etc that could harm a child? There's a fair number of putative adults running around that can't handle reality very well, and they've theoretically been exposed to it for quite a while. The boundaries for a young child are considerably stricter than the appropriate boundaries for a high school junior. It still irks me to see people dragging small children into violent movies full of adult situations that no small child can interpret, just to save the cost of a sitter. People, a little judgment, please?
The killer is latency and makes any vpn system other than an SSL based systems drop a connection.
'tis true. I have a similar problem to this, and tried both satellite and a local WISP. The latency on the satellite connection would routinely kill my VPN connections to customer locations within 10-15 minute, after which I'd have to VPN in again and start all over.
The local WISP had good latency and speed...when they were up, which wasn't all the time. Good idea, poor execution. Good guys, but their backbone was all wireless, and just wasn't engineered to five 9's (99.999% uptime). More like one 9, if that.
So, I had a T1 installed. Insanely expensive (~$800USD/month), but it never goes down, and doesn't fade when the snowstorms roll in. I can only afford it because it's supporting my business (telecom consultant). As one poster suggested, I'm considering starting my own little WISP for the area (I can see perhaps a dozen other homes outside my front door, none of whom have reasonable access to broadband) to defray the cost.
Similar indeed. BE/E is/was Basic Electricity and Electronics, the percursor training for all electronically-oriented rates in the U.S. Navy. And yes, I'm a graduate of the training center in Illinois (Great Lakes Naval Base), circa 1982. BTW, I've been the recipient of some excellent hospitality from the Canadian Navy in Esquimalt.
Actual working people are very much portrayed as the unwitting victims in the book
I thought they were portrayed and treated as unimportant worker bees, utterly incapable of any interesting expression, very much like most pre-19th century European high literature did not concern itself with such people, since they could not possibly have anything interesting to say at all. Extremely weak writing, here.
Not always. There is a passage about Galt's Gulch where Dagny Taggart asks one man, who she thinks looks like a truck driver, what he was on the "outside". He replies "A truck driver, but that's not what I wanted to remain". I think this demonstrates the idea that what the ubermensch find important is not effortless brilliance, but competence and striving to better one's self. I think the book's focus is more on competence than brilliance per se.
Slashdot Mirror
Mille grazie. My bad. :-)
I agree that people don't become immediately immune to criticism the minute they die. I fully intend to go to the first bar I can find and buy a round for the house the instant I hear Dick Cheney is dead.
However, the argument that she hadn't yet done much is a two-edged argument. If her actual accomplishment were small because she was young, her ability to cause offense is equally small. It's tragic because a bright young person full of potential has lost their life due to a medical problem. Bog knows we can use all the bright young people we can get. And as a parent I cannot but sympathize with her family.
And for the required ad hominem attack: if you don't understand why this is a tragedy, climb up out of the basement and ask your mom. Asshole.
Wow, what a bunch of badasses we have here. Way to slam a dead teenager for not being as cool as you are. Real men, you are.
and the rest of his inbred band of idiots in 3,2,1.....
Be very, very afraid....
Ha! I remember that episode, too. That was the last time I watched A-Team. Suspension of disbelief only goes so far.
Okay, I have to know. What, exactly, does light add to the process of wiping? Do you crane your neck over your shoulder to watch, or do you look between your legs? I'm actually curious because I've had a light time out like that as well, but it didn't make me flail about. I finished my business and exited the stall, at which point the lights came back on and I washed up and left.
Or is this simply the story you came up with when the kid's dad wanted to know why you were in the middle of the restroom with your pants down?
Just how many patriots or citizens who are sick of our government doing stupid shit do we have in the US?
FTFY.
Use excess to raise sea/river water to an upper artificial lake.
Kinda like this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludington_Pumped_Storage_Power_Plant/
I'd go with Betty. But I'd be thinking about Wilma.
Excellent Red Dwarf quote for the win!
It's not only low-hanging fruit, but developing nations are, by definition, poor. If you string up 5 miles of copper phone line during the day, it's a sure bet that it will be pulled down that night. It's practically impossible to prevent, and copper is easily turned into cash. Ask anyone who's ever attempted a network build-out in one of the less advantaged regions of the world.
Jurassic Park is frightning in the dark
All the dinosaurs are running wild
Someone shut the fence off in the rain
I admit it's kinda eerie
But this proves my chaos theory
And I don't think I'll be coming back again
On no
Well done, sir.
Cell phones can be a huge distraction in classes that are hard enough to manage, and no student should be using one in class as a matter of course. However.....
those "automatic consequences" are one of the many, many reasons it's hard to foster a sense of respect for authority in kids. Why should they respect a group of putative adults who have no discretion in how they respond to the circumstances of a given situation, but simply react with a simpleminded "one size fits all" policy? I wouldn't (and don't) respect them either. And, like most reasonable people, I care not a whit for what some idiot who managed to pass the bar thinks about anything that pertains to the safety of myself or my family. Frankly, they'd rather have someone die in a manner that doesn't allow for a lawsuit than be inconvenienced in a manner that does.
As for not obeying a proscription on cell phones during a lockdown, that's simple common sense (and possibly survival instinct). Were my daughter to inform me that a security lockdown had taken place and all of the students were denied any chance to call for help if needed, my initial response would be a strong desire to grab whoever was responsible for that little decision by the throat and pound their heads on the nearest solid object until I was good and tired.
I know darn well that kids are not angels, and even the best kids are prone to do stupid things now and then. I do spend a fair bit of time at the school, volunteering for this and that, mostly building sets for the Performing Arts group. I'm not one who has no exposure to kids like this, and I think this kid mostly got what she deserved. Just don't try to paint the people in charge as being universally good at their jobs, or even minimally competent. I've seen a lot of people I wouldn't trust with a burnt-out match somehow rise to a position of authority, and the results are seldom very inspiring.
True, but I'm pretty sure you'd easily find some high-quality references to the idea that torture is not only ineffective in most situations, but that the act of torturing harms both sides, albeit in different ways. To be honest, it's a bit hard for me to believe that the original respondent questioned the idea. The idea that anyone can commit what amount to atrocities outlawed with good reason by both U.S. and international law, and yet remain unfazed, requires credulity that borders on mental incompetence.
I don't know exactly what punishments are suitable, but I do believe that *any* military personnel who were involved should be separated from their branch of service immediately, for the good of the service (an actual legally valid reason for separation, not just a phrase). Their participation in torture renders them unfit for further service.
Well, there are no shortage of examples out there. Google not work on your computer?
A quick search revealed some interesting findings in "Torture and Democracy" by Darius M. Rejali"
Some of the worst damage is done because, when we (as a society) condone torture, we make the leap to considering ourselves torturers. That's a very large leap from our traditional values. Worse, from a security perspective, we sacrifice the moral high ground, placing ourselves at the same level as some of the worst dictatorships in the world. Militarily, you should never voluntarily give up high ground without a larger, compelling strategic reason. To do so based on nebulous reasoning about "ticking bomb" scenarios borders on treason.
And, even if you accept that there might be some scenario where it was actually, truly the only way to save a bunch of people, what's the time frame? It's been over SEVEN YEARS since 9/11. I'm pretty sure there aren't any timing devices in use with that kind of fuse.
Doesn't really matter. All of those soldiers were specifically informed that following an illegal order is itself illegal, and not to do so. (Been there, done that, got the dress blues to prove it) Of course, you are also told that it's risky, and to be sure of your stance before refusing to obey an order by the officers above you. Also, our previous administration liked to play fast and loose with the definition of "legal". Nonetheless, I like to think I'd have refused to torture people. It doesn't work if your goal is to get accurate information, and the act of torturing does damage to those who commit it, as well as the victims.
The real tragedy (so far) is that the whole thing is blamed on a few "bad apples". No one who has ever served in the military could believe that. This shit was ordered, and not by some platoon sargeant.
If you have the money, a T-1 is *always* an option. Not cheap (I pay almost $700 USD a month for mine), but plenty fast. I'm running a business from my house, and tried all the other options. Satellite is great for email and web browsing, but the latency kills a lot of VPN sessions and can be difficult if you need to access web clients with a lot of little widgets and individual image files (hey, the customers pick 'em, not me).
My, aren't we sure of ourselves? I'm 44 years old, and more than a little competent with respect to technology, having worked with it for 25 years now. And there's no way in the world I would have allowed my daughter the privilege to lock me out of a computer when she was 7. Hell, she can't do it now and she's 16. Sure, she has her MySpace account, IM clients, etc. They're on her own laptop, to keep all that crap off of mine. But I do take a look at the logs now and then, and until she was 14 she had to do all her browsing in the family room. She's now old enough to not freak out if something weird pops up, and she'd probably tell me about it if it did.
1s and 0s can't hurt you, but the freedom to explore and try new things can really inspire a child.
By all means, show her all the 1s and 0s you want. The pictures of naked people doing funny things to each other is a different story. Context is everything, and a 7-year-old doesn't have the experience or conceptual tools to assimilate stuff like that without a significant risk of doing some harm.
The fact is there's a lot more to be gained than lost by letting a child explore without being afraid of what their parents might think.
No offense, but you have to be either quite young or flat-ass stupid. Maybe both. "Letting a child explore" is a situation that simply cries out for appropriate boundaries. I suspect even you might understand the risks of of, say, allowing a 7-year-old to wander through Detroit without parental supervision. Barring physically risky things like that, are you actually taking the position that there's no form of information/images/video/etc that could harm a child? There's a fair number of putative adults running around that can't handle reality very well, and they've theoretically been exposed to it for quite a while. The boundaries for a young child are considerably stricter than the appropriate boundaries for a high school junior. It still irks me to see people dragging small children into violent movies full of adult situations that no small child can interpret, just to save the cost of a sitter. People, a little judgment, please?
As do I.
'tis true. I have a similar problem to this, and tried both satellite and a local WISP. The latency on the satellite connection would routinely kill my VPN connections to customer locations within 10-15 minute, after which I'd have to VPN in again and start all over.
The local WISP had good latency and speed...when they were up, which wasn't all the time. Good idea, poor execution. Good guys, but their backbone was all wireless, and just wasn't engineered to five 9's (99.999% uptime). More like one 9, if that.
So, I had a T1 installed. Insanely expensive (~$800USD/month), but it never goes down, and doesn't fade when the snowstorms roll in. I can only afford it because it's supporting my business (telecom consultant). As one poster suggested, I'm considering starting my own little WISP for the area (I can see perhaps a dozen other homes outside my front door, none of whom have reasonable access to broadband) to defray the cost.
Similar indeed. BE/E is/was Basic Electricity and Electronics, the percursor training for all electronically-oriented rates in the U.S. Navy. And yes, I'm a graduate of the training center in Illinois (Great Lakes Naval Base), circa 1982. BTW, I've been the recipient of some excellent hospitality from the Canadian Navy in Esquimalt.
So, how is BE/E these days?
From a once-upon-a-time ET1.
I thought they were portrayed and treated as unimportant worker bees, utterly incapable of any interesting expression, very much like most pre-19th century European high literature did not concern itself with such people, since they could not possibly have anything interesting to say at all. Extremely weak writing, here.
Not always. There is a passage about Galt's Gulch where Dagny Taggart asks one man, who she thinks looks like a truck driver, what he was on the "outside". He replies "A truck driver, but that's not what I wanted to remain". I think this demonstrates the idea that what the ubermensch find important is not effortless brilliance, but competence and striving to better one's self. I think the book's focus is more on competence than brilliance per se.
Let's see.....
NASA death toll = 10 (3 Gemini astronauts, plus one space shuttle full)
Armadillo death toll = 0
You, sir, are a buffoon.
Schroeder, is that you?