Want China to improve on human rights? Sure, the people in power are horrible, but the best thing we, as westerners, could do for these people is to help them improve their economy.
Discussing shortcomings is one thing, rejecting out of hand is another (which you personally might not be doing). i've observed a trend (in the US, at least) toward anything we do/think about doing to thwart terrorists being met with kneejerk cries of invasion of privacy and abuse of authority.
That's because the things that have been proposed don't catch terrorists and they do piss off/violate the rights of citizens. Why shouldn't we reject them out of hand?
It used to be the right whining about big brother and invasions of privacy... claiming we were headed for Marxism. The right used to decry interventionism (Somalia, Yugoslavia etc). Power changed hands, planes hit buildings,
The right only said those things because it wasn't them doing it; power changed hands, and 9/11 was a convenient excuse to invade Iraq and institute a bunch of fascist programs.
Just today my carpool partner said that Sarah Palin shouldn't be running, that she should be taking care of her baby with downs.
I'd say that Palin should be running because she's unfit to lead the country, and McCain probably won't see 2012 (he's old and creaky). I don't want someone who views separation of church and state as an inconvenience anywhere in government.
This is stupid - terrorists don't hide, and there are enough people that hate us with no real record that there's no point in pursuing this (for terrorists). If you want to fight terrorism, stop giving people a reason to want to die to kill us.
The free market. It was more efficient to offshore those jobs so they were offshored. The lessions to be drawn are two:
Fuck the free market, I want some import duties because I can't very well just go live in china, now can I? Also, I shouldn't have to - the gub should be looking out for me, just a little bit, instead of pushing for even more offshoring.
Spoken like a true product of government schools. The individual is meaningless, only the group matters. I have my own problems with some of Ms. Rand's philosophy, but I'd prefer to live in her world than the soulless socialism you are espousing.
Yeah right. fact is, banding together will improve your chances of being heard - this isn't some stupid socialism rant, it's human society. Just wait, though, you'll get to see Rand's twisted dream unfold soon enough.
Why don't you go read some history and see just what happens when all the workers have to negotiate on their own.
On that theme, if something is boilerplate, why should I have to figure it out or figure out which of the dozen odd safe ways the last guy did them? Better to enshrine one right way as best practice and make the job easier. It does slow innovation in some areas, but electrical wiring is a fairly mature thing, at least for residential.
Which is to say Joe Bob with his Master Electrician badge is more fit to wire your house than a guy with a PhD in electrical engineering who has 20 years experience in the field. Not only is he more fit, but you can't even hire the other guy because he can't get licensed without jumping through the union hoops.
And they're right. Nowhere in EE do they teach electrical codes for wherever you happen to live.
Do you really want a bunch of senior people telling you what qualifications you need to have?
Beats some HR drone that doesn't know that experience with Oracle 7 means you can deal with Oracle 11.
I forgot the name where "what is good for one, is bad when everyone tries it".
Sounds like the free rider problem; usually discussed for things like national defense, where the cost of defending one more person is about zero, but nobody would be willing to pay for it because they only see that marginal case.
There are plenty of ways to enjoy life without blowing piles of cash. Hell, giving up $3 lattes and saving that money can fund your vacations (if you're a bit frugal). Going to Vail is expensive - so don't go every year. Go some place cheaper if you want to go skiing and drive an older car. It's still fun.
China and India both have tiny educated workforces - India's tech workers aren't that cheap anymore and China's is mostly unproven and on paper. Of course, you're spot on with the state of our schools.
Sure, I'd pay more, but the basic car would be an extra $2k and the milk would be $4 or $5 - not terrible. And you really need to stop using GM's sweetheart contracts as a basis to generalize about US industry.
One example isn't really important - the unabomber was a math prof, after all. Your bottom quartile is frequently there due to poor impulse control and a lack of planning - piss enough of them off and some of them will do something about it. Hell, I'm surprised nobody did that to Ken Lay.
I dunno, the bottom quartile frequently has anger problems and doesn't always think things through - piss them off and one of them will do something stupid and violent.
Please back that up with something solid. The French have done well with medium sized standardized plants, and I doubt the eff. is much lower than with a large one. Further, the actual amount of fuel is fairly low - hell, you can use a chopper if you care about security/safety.
Re:Typical Slashdot misinformation
on
Zero Day Threat
·
· Score: 1
Did you actually read the report? From the linked report:
There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 â" 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), "A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-related if at least one driver or non-occupant (such as a pedestrian or pedalcyclist) involved in the crash is determined to have had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of.01 gram per deciliter (g/dL) or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-related crash is considered an alcohol-related fatality. The term 'alcohol-related' does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol."
Now, if you look at how the figures are computed (anyone present at the scene of the accident has some booze in them) and then note that the NHTSA adds a fudge factor because not everyone is tested, you will realize that we don't actually know the true number, but it's certainly less than 17000. 1000 is as well supported as any, and I don't believe it's all that far off. Since you haven't got anything to support your numbers, I'll keep mine.
As a parting shot, I'll mention that the organization pushing for ever stiffer penalties and wider bans on DUI (MADD) are mainly interested in making it impossible to drink at all. DUI fatalities aren't a big part of traffic accidents, at least not according to any hard data (there is none), and the people that are actually dangerous tend to not have a license anymore and drive at.15 or more. Basically, DUI laws are way beyond the point where they actually improve safety.
Slashdot Mirror
DMCA was introduced during democratic president.
So what? Congress makes the laws, and it was mostly freshmen republicans doing that.
Yeah, but it raised the dead
There aren't a lot of jobs for minimally-skilled doctors or lawyers.
Hello, paralegal, medical practicioner?
Want China to improve on human rights? Sure, the people in power are horrible, but the best thing we, as westerners, could do for these people is to help them improve their economy.
Yeah, that's worked out well so far...
Discussing shortcomings is one thing, rejecting out of hand is another (which you personally might not be doing). i've observed a trend (in the US, at least) toward anything we do/think about doing to thwart terrorists being met with kneejerk cries of invasion of privacy and abuse of authority.
That's because the things that have been proposed don't catch terrorists and they do piss off/violate the rights of citizens. Why shouldn't we reject them out of hand?
It used to be the right whining about big brother and invasions of privacy... claiming we were headed for Marxism. The right used to decry interventionism (Somalia, Yugoslavia etc). Power changed hands, planes hit buildings,
The right only said those things because it wasn't them doing it; power changed hands, and 9/11 was a convenient excuse to invade Iraq and institute a bunch of fascist programs.
Just today my carpool partner said that Sarah Palin shouldn't be running, that she should be taking care of her baby with downs.
I'd say that Palin should be running because she's unfit to lead the country, and McCain probably won't see 2012 (he's old and creaky). I don't want someone who views separation of church and state as an inconvenience anywhere in government.
This is stupid - terrorists don't hide, and there are enough people that hate us with no real record that there's no point in pursuing this (for terrorists). If you want to fight terrorism, stop giving people a reason to want to die to kill us.
The free market. It was more efficient to offshore those jobs so they were offshored. The lessions to be drawn are two:
Fuck the free market, I want some import duties because I can't very well just go live in china, now can I? Also, I shouldn't have to - the gub should be looking out for me, just a little bit, instead of pushing for even more offshoring.
Spoken like a true product of government schools. The individual is meaningless, only the group matters. I have my own problems with some of Ms. Rand's philosophy, but I'd prefer to live in her world than the soulless socialism you are espousing.
Yeah right. fact is, banding together will improve your chances of being heard - this isn't some stupid socialism rant, it's human society. Just wait, though, you'll get to see Rand's twisted dream unfold soon enough.
Why don't you go read some history and see just what happens when all the workers have to negotiate on their own.
By theoretical, I assume you mean "if you attack a client in open court or act like a batshit insane loon for 10 or 15 years".
On that theme, if something is boilerplate, why should I have to figure it out or figure out which of the dozen odd safe ways the last guy did them? Better to enshrine one right way as best practice and make the job easier. It does slow innovation in some areas, but electrical wiring is a fairly mature thing, at least for residential.
Which is to say Joe Bob with his Master Electrician badge is more fit to wire your house than a guy with a PhD in electrical engineering who has 20 years experience in the field. Not only is he more fit, but you can't even hire the other guy because he can't get licensed without jumping through the union hoops.
And they're right. Nowhere in EE do they teach electrical codes for wherever you happen to live.
Do you really want a bunch of senior people telling you what qualifications you need to have?
Beats some HR drone that doesn't know that experience with Oracle 7 means you can deal with Oracle 11.
Thermite is proof against HD forensics. Of course, you need some notice period if you want to avoid burning down your house.
"Unproven and on paper". Care to guess what the penalty for failing to produce 660k engineers when the central committee orders it?
So, what you're trying to say is, someone is backdooring your wife?
No, just her box.
depends on who's actually running the botnets - piss off the russian mafia and you could wake up dead.
I forgot the name where "what is good for one, is bad when everyone tries it".
Sounds like the free rider problem; usually discussed for things like national defense, where the cost of defending one more person is about zero, but nobody would be willing to pay for it because they only see that marginal case.
There are plenty of ways to enjoy life without blowing piles of cash. Hell, giving up $3 lattes and saving that money can fund your vacations (if you're a bit frugal). Going to Vail is expensive - so don't go every year. Go some place cheaper if you want to go skiing and drive an older car. It's still fun.
China and India both have tiny educated workforces - India's tech workers aren't that cheap anymore and China's is mostly unproven and on paper. Of course, you're spot on with the state of our schools.
Sure, I'd pay more, but the basic car would be an extra $2k and the milk would be $4 or $5 - not terrible. And you really need to stop using GM's sweetheart contracts as a basis to generalize about US industry.
yeah, some of them have retirement accounts (or relatives with them) and got cleaned out.
One example isn't really important - the unabomber was a math prof, after all. Your bottom quartile is frequently there due to poor impulse control and a lack of planning - piss enough of them off and some of them will do something about it. Hell, I'm surprised nobody did that to Ken Lay.
I dunno, the bottom quartile frequently has anger problems and doesn't always think things through - piss them off and one of them will do something stupid and violent.
cooler room temp is sometimes a waste, but it speeds heat loss from the servers and gives you a buffer if the AC dies.
I guess someone should explain to the suits how basic research works...
Nah, let 'em burn.
Please back that up with something solid. The French have done well with medium sized standardized plants, and I doubt the eff. is much lower than with a large one. Further, the actual amount of fuel is fairly low - hell, you can use a chopper if you care about security/safety.
Did you actually read the report? From the linked report:
There were 16,885 alcohol-related fatalities in 2005 â" 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), "A motor vehicle crash is considered to be alcohol-related if at least one driver or non-occupant (such as a pedestrian or pedalcyclist) involved in the crash is determined to have had a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of .01 gram per deciliter (g/dL) or higher. Thus, any fatality that occurs in an alcohol-related crash is considered an alcohol-related fatality. The term 'alcohol-related' does not indicate that a crash or fatality was caused by the presence of alcohol."
Now, if you look at how the figures are computed (anyone present at the scene of the accident has some booze in them) and then note that the NHTSA adds a fudge factor because not everyone is tested, you will realize that we don't actually know the true number, but it's certainly less than 17000. 1000 is as well supported as any, and I don't believe it's all that far off. Since you haven't got anything to support your numbers, I'll keep mine.
As a parting shot, I'll mention that the organization pushing for ever stiffer penalties and wider bans on DUI (MADD) are mainly interested in making it impossible to drink at all. DUI fatalities aren't a big part of traffic accidents, at least not according to any hard data (there is none), and the people that are actually dangerous tend to not have a license anymore and drive at .15 or more. Basically, DUI laws are way beyond the point where they actually improve safety.