more like professional radicals won "gay marriage" so they moved on to the next cause that gets them a paycheck; and the predictions about the consequences of perverting marriage proved true since we are now seeing child abuse on a massive scale, no one dared to train kids in homosexual behavior though they're being taught it's preferable, but any kid can be influenced to into a transgender identification, becoming a client who requires lifelong treatment, creating the equivalent of several full-time jobs
No one is complaining about post-op transsexuals here. It's not about " transgender". It's about a penis in the vagina room.
I'm not sure that's true. From the bill "(1) "Biological sex" means the physical condition of being male or female, which is stated on a person's birth certificate."
A post-op transgender person's physical condition will not match their birth certificate. So under this law it seems a transgender person, who looks, sounds and acts like a man, should be using the women's bathroom. I'm not sure that's the outcome they are looking for.
Some people have a misconception of what a transgender person is. It's not a transvestite, or bubba from the local bar deciding he is a woman; mustache, beer gut and all. Transgender people most often look and act like the gender they identify as. That's kind of the whole point. Requiring them to use the bathroom that matches their birth certificate will result in men in the women's room, which is what this whole thing is ostensibly desinged to prevent.
Either this post is ironic, or you are so deep in the tank you don't even know there's a tank.
Not that you could be troubled to even hint at why he's incorrect, and instead lazily attack the messenger.
No, I indeed could not be troubled. I gain no benefit from futile attempts to disabuse strangers on the Internet of their ignorant beliefs. But, since you bothered to respond, I'll count them down.
In the US, we reward hard work with promotions and higher salaries.
This is patently ridiculous. I hope I don't have to demonstrate the myriad examples of hard-working people not being promoted or getting higher salaries. Look at the people who clean your office, or pick your lettuce for examples.
In Europe, they just tax the wealthy while the six hour work days and bans on checking email outside of work decrease productivity.
Obviously Europe does more than tax the wealthy, and people work more than 6 hours a day (Yes, Sweden experimented with a 6 hour work day). Slightly reducing productivity (if a ban on after-work email even resulted in that) is not really a huge deal.
It's hard work versus socialism taxing successful people. One of these leads to a strong economy, the other to massive debt.
This is quite simplistic, I hope you would agree. Europe has a strong economy and the US has massive debt. I'm not saying Europe is better, or has no debt, or that the US is not hard working or does not have a strong economy. I'm just saying the OP has a very simplistic view of a complex interplay between business, labor, the social contract and the role of the state.
There's no incentive to be successful in Europe, anyway, because the government will just take your money away with taxes to pay for ridiculous social programs that would be unnecessary if people just had jobs and worked 40 hour weeks.
Again, this is ridiculous. There are many wealthy Europeans. This idea that taxation keeps people from being productive and building businesses, that they will just sit on their hands because taxes are just too damn high, is not borne out by evidence. The poster also ignores the fact that Capitalism has manifestly failed to provide for the majority of the population. Many people work 40 hours a week and still need social assistance. So the assertion that employing people at 40 hours will eliminate the need for social programs is just plain flat wrong.
As I said, the post is either sarcastic, or just stupid. I hope it is now more clear as to why.
In the US, we reward hard work with promotions and higher salaries. In Europe, they just tax the wealthy while the six hour work days and bans on checking email outside of work decrease productivity. It's hard work versus socialism taxing successful people. One of these leads to a strong economy, the other to massive debt. There's no incentive to be successful in Europe, anyway, because the government will just take your money away with taxes to pay for ridiculous social programs that would be unnecessary if people just had jobs and worked 40 hour weeks.
- snruter rotsac
Either this post is ironic, or you are so deep in the tank you don't even know there's a tank.
If someone took my work PC with all of my data on it, I would lose my shit as well. He may have had a bitcoin wallet on there with a million dollars in it for all you know. Maybe his only copy of a manuscript he's been working on for half a decade is on there. There are other reasons why someone would lose their cool when their PC/Data suddenly is yanked away that are totally unrelated to kiddie porn.
There should be backups. If the IT department is doing its job, the loss of a particular machine should be inconsequential. If a person is storing critical data like a bitcoin wallet or manuscript on a single disk without a backup, they're gonna have a bad time no matter what their scheming coworkers are up to.
In other words, people being FORCED to change their behavior. If people were truly WILLING to make changes to their lifestyle, you would not need rules, people would do these things without them.
So, you have noticed that people generally don't change until circumstances force them to. Congratulations, welcome to reality. Do you pretend you are not also this way? Sure, if men were angels no government would be necessary. And if my aunt were a man she'd be my uncle. You can be pissed about it if you want, but it changes nothing and only results in you being pissed off.
But humans have done stupid things for 20K years and we are still here
I have been alive my whole life, and therefore will never die. I mean, death has never happened to me before, why should I think it would in the future?
20,000 years ago we had no technology and our impact on our environment was minimal. Over time our tools have grown more powerful, extending our impact and capabilities. Since you seem to be an investor, you should know that past performance is not indicative of future earnings.
Also, they could lead by example. Ride the bus, get your tubes tied (and your kids' & grandkids' tubes tied if you have them) and start paying an additional 20% income tax to combat climate change. No more private jets. Do that for a year and the rest of us might be willing to go half as far.
Let me guess: You think Al Gore is a hypocrite because he flies on planes.
To investigate the possibility of climatic cooling, scientists drilled into the Greenland ice caps to obtain core samples. The oxygen isotopes from the ice caps suggested that the Medieval Warm Period had caused a relatively milder climate in Greenland, lasting from roughly 800 to 1200. However, from 1300 or so the climate began to cool. By 1420, the "Little Ice Age" had reached intense levels in Greenland.
They took these measurements from ice cores. Does it not stand to reason that the ice in those cores existed at the time being measured? See where I'm going with this?
If you would be patient, we're almost done with that. Autonomous electric vehicles will be hitting the streets in the next two years, and they will be so cheap that no-one will ever want to own a car again
LOL, so they have global warming on your planet too?
Not a Republican. While I do believe that the climate is changing and is affected by man, I do believe that it is also cyclical. These cooling and warming periods come and go over time. Humans have likely accelerated this to the detriment of the planet. Quite a few experts on both sides of the argument believe we are actually headed for a period of cooling.
I know it's a tired meme, but I do think we need a citation in this case.
Have you seen the infrastructure in the USA? You know how many bridges and overpasses have an F rating? I've seen how well the government handles that along with the VA hospitals.
It's almost as if putting people who hate government in charge of the government creates a a self-fulfilling prophesy. People (maybe not you) rail about taxation as "theft" and then complain about inadequate government goods and services.
So, my datacenter that I have built and put together myself should be a public service for everyone to use without compensating me for things like startup costs and growing pains? I don't think so.
And neither does anyone else, so relax. This is about the cost of being connected to the Internet; not the servers that serve the data.
I fully agree, comrade. The answer is always to take public ownership of all private property.
What the fuck is wrong with you people? Do you really prioritise a company's ability to make as much profit as possible over your ability to get a fair and decent service? All the while you bang on about the free market fixing things while simultaneously doing everything to make the market as closed as possible. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?
This is what happens when ideology becomes divorced from reality.
No, he said, "That's just another good reason why the network - the data center, the cables in the road etc. should be a public service like water pipes and electricity."
Then AC said, "... The answer is always to take public ownership of all private property."
How you and he make the leap from "The network should be a public service" to " The answer is always to take public ownership of all private property" is the part I don't get. It is manifestly, demonstrably not what he said.
The problem with this conspiracy theory is that if the billionaires got to pick the president, it would have been Jeb Bush, not Donald Trump. Do you think that "the elite" wanted TPP cancelled, NAFTA re-negotiated, and subsidized pensions/healthcare for coal miners? Most billionaires would have picked Hillary over Donald. She was the "status quo" candidate, and the status quo is working pretty well for them.
You are making assumptions about the goals of whomever is behind this. Did you read the other linked article? https://www.theguardian.com/po... People do things for reasons other than making money or preserving the status quo. Besides, I'm just relating what I have experienced. Since a little before the election, right-wing trolls have been out in force, in a way I have never seen before. I can assume it's a coincidence that so many on the right have taken to comment sections where they previously were not found. Or I can think they were sent there. Read the article; it is plausible they were sent there.
Either Trump's supporters just all decided to get active online at the same time, or there is a coordinated effort going on.
Maybe people are just tired of being told that they only reason they voted the way they did was because they were manipulated, uneducated, or racist.
Or maybe you're right, and just like your candidate knew all along, the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is alive and well.
And all those people just decided to get online and tweak the liberals? Please don't assume who my candidate was. I am not a Democrat, and think the "My team vs. Your team" dynamic is damaging to our democracy.
This is enough that they can identify what ads to show you to influence your opinion
But do they know that I use an adblocker? Only time I've seen an ad online this century was when I switched browsers and had to download a new adblocker for the new browser. That must have been the best part of 20 minutes when I could see ads this century....
Of course they know you use an ad blocker. That's one more data point they have about you..
If the Horrendous Harridan was so fucking competent, why'd she run such an utter train-wreck of a campaign?
Hillary! LOST!!! BWAAA HAAA HAA!
So, tell me, are you part of what is described in the summary and articles? I have noticed that since shortly before the election, all of the message boards I participate in have been swarmed with right-wing trolls. And I do mean all of them. The vast majority are just like you; hurling stupid insults and trying to get under people's skin and provoke an emotional response. Either Trump's supporters just all decided to get active online at the same time, or there is a coordinated effort going on. Knowing what I do about social manipulation, I suspect the latter.
So are you one of them? Do you get paid for this? Are you merely a computer program? These are the questions we need to ask, at least to ourselves, when reading comment sections and other social media. Well funded organizations are working to manipulate and influence what we think, what our values are and how we view the world. Let's at least keep an eye out for it.
and it won't stop as long as these "persuadable" voters make their decisions based on facebook posts.
Oh, it won't stop there either. If Facebook stops being an effective vector, they'll move to something else. Propaganda is an ancient art. Technology and the fact that so many people are volunteering their personal information, just make it more effective.
Everyone should read the article linked behind "a global plutocracy" in the summary above. https://www.theguardian.com/po... This is a very well organized and funded campaign. The average person, being unaware of even the possibility of doing what they are doing, has no defense against it. People call me paranoid and a conspiracy theorist when I say that society and culture are being engineered behind the scenes. Well, read the article and see if you can honestly tell me you don't think so too.
He said "Obama had my wires tapped". That means Obama specifically ordered his communications to be monitored
No, it doesn't. It means Obama's administration ordered and carried it out. Wiretapping and chasing down warrants are not the job of POTUS -- but they are absolutely the jobs of people who directly work for POTUS. I am sure you know there are 100,000's of people working in the executive branch of government and every single one of them ultimately reports to POTUS.
I am honestly surprised that any reasonable person would think that Obama personally ordered the wiretap and personally installed it himself.....that....isn't...what Presidents do
Stop putting words in his mouth. He did not say the Obama Administration. He said Obama. He said "Bad (or sick) guy!" Was he talking about the administration then too? Does "guy" now mean the Administration too?
Trump made a baseless accusation. I'm not sure why his supporters can't just own up to that fact. Next you'll be arguing over what the definition of "is" is.
Slashdot Mirror
more like professional radicals won "gay marriage" so they moved on to the next cause that gets them a paycheck; and the predictions about the consequences of perverting marriage proved true since we are now seeing child abuse on a massive scale, no one dared to train kids in homosexual behavior though they're being taught it's preferable, but any kid can be influenced to into a transgender identification, becoming a client who requires lifelong treatment, creating the equivalent of several full-time jobs
Seriously, where do you get this stuff?
No one is complaining about post-op transsexuals here. It's not about " transgender". It's about a penis in the vagina room.
I'm not sure that's true. From the bill "(1) "Biological sex" means the physical condition of being male or female, which is stated on a person's birth certificate."
A post-op transgender person's physical condition will not match their birth certificate. So under this law it seems a transgender person, who looks, sounds and acts like a man, should be using the women's bathroom. I'm not sure that's the outcome they are looking for.
Some people have a misconception of what a transgender person is. It's not a transvestite, or bubba from the local bar deciding he is a woman; mustache, beer gut and all. Transgender people most often look and act like the gender they identify as. That's kind of the whole point. Requiring them to use the bathroom that matches their birth certificate will result in men in the women's room, which is what this whole thing is ostensibly desinged to prevent.
Either this post is ironic, or you are so deep in the tank you don't even know there's a tank.
Not that you could be troubled to even hint at why he's incorrect, and instead lazily attack the messenger.
No, I indeed could not be troubled. I gain no benefit from futile attempts to disabuse strangers on the Internet of their ignorant beliefs. But, since you bothered to respond, I'll count them down.
In the US, we reward hard work with promotions and higher salaries.
This is patently ridiculous. I hope I don't have to demonstrate the myriad examples of hard-working people not being promoted or getting higher salaries. Look at the people who clean your office, or pick your lettuce for examples.
In Europe, they just tax the wealthy while the six hour work days and bans on checking email outside of work decrease productivity.
Obviously Europe does more than tax the wealthy, and people work more than 6 hours a day (Yes, Sweden experimented with a 6 hour work day). Slightly reducing productivity (if a ban on after-work email even resulted in that) is not really a huge deal.
It's hard work versus socialism taxing successful people. One of these leads to a strong economy, the other to massive debt.
This is quite simplistic, I hope you would agree. Europe has a strong economy and the US has massive debt. I'm not saying Europe is better, or has no debt, or that the US is not hard working or does not have a strong economy. I'm just saying the OP has a very simplistic view of a complex interplay between business, labor, the social contract and the role of the state.
There's no incentive to be successful in Europe, anyway, because the government will just take your money away with taxes to pay for ridiculous social programs that would be unnecessary if people just had jobs and worked 40 hour weeks.
Again, this is ridiculous. There are many wealthy Europeans. This idea that taxation keeps people from being productive and building businesses, that they will just sit on their hands because taxes are just too damn high, is not borne out by evidence. The poster also ignores the fact that Capitalism has manifestly failed to provide for the majority of the population. Many people work 40 hours a week and still need social assistance. So the assertion that employing people at 40 hours will eliminate the need for social programs is just plain flat wrong.
As I said, the post is either sarcastic, or just stupid. I hope it is now more clear as to why.
In the US, we reward hard work with promotions and higher salaries. In Europe, they just tax the wealthy while the six hour work days and bans on checking email outside of work decrease productivity. It's hard work versus socialism taxing successful people. One of these leads to a strong economy, the other to massive debt. There's no incentive to be successful in Europe, anyway, because the government will just take your money away with taxes to pay for ridiculous social programs that would be unnecessary if people just had jobs and worked 40 hour weeks.
- snruter rotsac
Either this post is ironic, or you are so deep in the tank you don't even know there's a tank.
If someone took my work PC with all of my data on it, I would lose my shit as well. He may have had a bitcoin wallet on there with a million dollars in it for all you know. Maybe his only copy of a manuscript he's been working on for half a decade is on there. There are other reasons why someone would lose their cool when their PC/Data suddenly is yanked away that are totally unrelated to kiddie porn.
There should be backups. If the IT department is doing its job, the loss of a particular machine should be inconsequential. If a person is storing critical data like a bitcoin wallet or manuscript on a single disk without a backup, they're gonna have a bad time no matter what their scheming coworkers are up to.
In other words, people being FORCED to change their behavior. If people were truly WILLING to make changes to their lifestyle, you would not need rules, people would do these things without them.
So, you have noticed that people generally don't change until circumstances force them to. Congratulations, welcome to reality. Do you pretend you are not also this way? Sure, if men were angels no government would be necessary. And if my aunt were a man she'd be my uncle. You can be pissed about it if you want, but it changes nothing and only results in you being pissed off.
But humans have done stupid things for 20K years and we are still here
I have been alive my whole life, and therefore will never die. I mean, death has never happened to me before, why should I think it would in the future?
20,000 years ago we had no technology and our impact on our environment was minimal. Over time our tools have grown more powerful, extending our impact and capabilities. Since you seem to be an investor, you should know that past performance is not indicative of future earnings.
Also, they could lead by example. Ride the bus, get your tubes tied (and your kids' & grandkids' tubes tied if you have them) and start paying an additional 20% income tax to combat climate change. No more private jets. Do that for a year and the rest of us might be willing to go half as far.
Let me guess: You think Al Gore is a hypocrite because he flies on planes.
As soon as liberals evacuate Florida, New york city, and coastal California due to rising oceans I'll believe they are serious about global warming.
Until then they are full of shit.
So, they're full of shit until the effects of what they've been warning of get so bad they have to evacuate their homes? Really, that's your bar?
If you don't understand that this is the entire source of your political corruption, you're delusional.
Unfortunately the same people also use their money to corrupt our information sources. I chose my sig for a reason.
South African is not a race.
Race is a social construct. So it could be if we wanted it to be!
Sorry, but when was Greenland green?
Geez, it ain't hard to find....:
To investigate the possibility of climatic cooling, scientists drilled into the Greenland ice caps to obtain core samples. The oxygen isotopes from the ice caps suggested that the Medieval Warm Period had caused a relatively milder climate in Greenland, lasting from roughly 800 to 1200. However, from 1300 or so the climate began to cool. By 1420, the "Little Ice Age" had reached intense levels in Greenland.
They took these measurements from ice cores. Does it not stand to reason that the ice in those cores existed at the time being measured? See where I'm going with this?
If you would be patient, we're almost done with that. Autonomous electric vehicles will be hitting the streets in the next two years, and they will be so cheap that no-one will ever want to own a car again
LOL, so they have global warming on your planet too?
Not a Republican. While I do believe that the climate is changing and is affected by man, I do believe that it is also cyclical. These cooling and warming periods come and go over time. Humans have likely accelerated this to the detriment of the planet. Quite a few experts on both sides of the argument believe we are actually headed for a period of cooling.
I know it's a tired meme, but I do think we need a citation in this case.
Have you seen the infrastructure in the USA? You know how many bridges and overpasses have an F rating? I've seen how well the government handles that along with the VA hospitals.
It's almost as if putting people who hate government in charge of the government creates a a self-fulfilling prophesy. People (maybe not you) rail about taxation as "theft" and then complain about inadequate government goods and services.
So, my datacenter that I have built and put together myself should be a public service for everyone to use without compensating me for things like startup costs and growing pains? I don't think so.
And neither does anyone else, so relax. This is about the cost of being connected to the Internet; not the servers that serve the data.
I fully agree, comrade. The answer is always to take public ownership of all private property.
What the fuck is wrong with you people? Do you really prioritise a company's ability to make as much profit as possible over your ability to get a fair and decent service? All the while you bang on about the free market fixing things while simultaneously doing everything to make the market as closed as possible. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?
This is what happens when ideology becomes divorced from reality.
so dumbfuck - who pays?
Everybody, collectively; since everybody benefits from it, collectively. It's fairly straightforward. I'm not sure where your confusion lies.
That's EXACTLY what he said and meant.
No, he said, "That's just another good reason why the network - the data center, the cables in the road etc. should be a public service like water pipes and electricity."
Then AC said, "... The answer is always to take public ownership of all private property."
How you and he make the leap from "The network should be a public service" to " The answer is always to take public ownership of all private property" is the part I don't get. It is manifestly, demonstrably not what he said.
The problem with this conspiracy theory is that if the billionaires got to pick the president, it would have been Jeb Bush, not Donald Trump. Do you think that "the elite" wanted TPP cancelled, NAFTA re-negotiated, and subsidized pensions/healthcare for coal miners? Most billionaires would have picked Hillary over Donald. She was the "status quo" candidate, and the status quo is working pretty well for them.
You are making assumptions about the goals of whomever is behind this. Did you read the other linked article? https://www.theguardian.com/po... People do things for reasons other than making money or preserving the status quo. Besides, I'm just relating what I have experienced. Since a little before the election, right-wing trolls have been out in force, in a way I have never seen before. I can assume it's a coincidence that so many on the right have taken to comment sections where they previously were not found. Or I can think they were sent there. Read the article; it is plausible they were sent there.
Either Trump's supporters just all decided to get active online at the same time, or there is a coordinated effort going on.
Maybe people are just tired of being told that they only reason they voted the way they did was because they were manipulated, uneducated, or racist. Or maybe you're right, and just like your candidate knew all along, the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy is alive and well.
And all those people just decided to get online and tweak the liberals? Please don't assume who my candidate was. I am not a Democrat, and think the "My team vs. Your team" dynamic is damaging to our democracy.
They know all that...
But do they know that I use an adblocker? Only time I've seen an ad online this century was when I switched browsers and had to download a new adblocker for the new browser. That must have been the best part of 20 minutes when I could see ads this century....
Of course they know you use an ad blocker. That's one more data point they have about you..
The butthurt is strong in this one!
If the Horrendous Harridan was so fucking competent, why'd she run such an utter train-wreck of a campaign?
Hillary! LOST!!! BWAAA HAAA HAA!
So, tell me, are you part of what is described in the summary and articles? I have noticed that since shortly before the election, all of the message boards I participate in have been swarmed with right-wing trolls. And I do mean all of them. The vast majority are just like you; hurling stupid insults and trying to get under people's skin and provoke an emotional response. Either Trump's supporters just all decided to get active online at the same time, or there is a coordinated effort going on. Knowing what I do about social manipulation, I suspect the latter.
So are you one of them? Do you get paid for this? Are you merely a computer program? These are the questions we need to ask, at least to ourselves, when reading comment sections and other social media. Well funded organizations are working to manipulate and influence what we think, what our values are and how we view the world. Let's at least keep an eye out for it.
and it won't stop as long as these "persuadable" voters make their decisions based on facebook posts.
Oh, it won't stop there either. If Facebook stops being an effective vector, they'll move to something else. Propaganda is an ancient art. Technology and the fact that so many people are volunteering their personal information, just make it more effective.
Everyone should read the article linked behind "a global plutocracy" in the summary above. https://www.theguardian.com/po... This is a very well organized and funded campaign. The average person, being unaware of even the possibility of doing what they are doing, has no defense against it. People call me paranoid and a conspiracy theorist when I say that society and culture are being engineered behind the scenes. Well, read the article and see if you can honestly tell me you don't think so too.
He said "Obama had my wires tapped". That means Obama specifically ordered his communications to be monitored No, it doesn't. It means Obama's administration ordered and carried it out. Wiretapping and chasing down warrants are not the job of POTUS -- but they are absolutely the jobs of people who directly work for POTUS. I am sure you know there are 100,000's of people working in the executive branch of government and every single one of them ultimately reports to POTUS. I am honestly surprised that any reasonable person would think that Obama personally ordered the wiretap and personally installed it himself.....that....isn't...what Presidents do
Stop putting words in his mouth. He did not say the Obama Administration. He said Obama. He said "Bad (or sick) guy!" Was he talking about the administration then too? Does "guy" now mean the Administration too?
Trump made a baseless accusation. I'm not sure why his supporters can't just own up to that fact. Next you'll be arguing over what the definition of "is" is.