I don't know about the UK where this is being discussed, but in the USA the pictures have to have lascivious intent, which the scanners do not. that doesn't mean that zealous neighbors/police don't turn in people and create problems, but the law at the federal level says that the depictions must be lascivious (or some similar wording implying for sexual purposes.)
It's not clear to me that it's religiously motivated. When I was a kid in the 80's we swam naked in the pool at the YMCA, it was actually encouraged because it kept the pool cleaner. What happened in the USA at least was several high-profile cases of alleged group child (sex) abuse and numerous child kidnappings. People became really freaked out about who was stalking thir kids. I remember walking to school and a few years later having to attend classes at school about how to watch out for predators and never be unattended. American society changed for the worse
I believe the quote was: "[An attack on Iran] will not happen on my watch...There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box." --Admiral William Fallon
Read: media without profit motive threatens the moneyed-interest propaganda monoculture. And are we seriously supposed to believe that the son of Rupert Murdoch doesn't understand that media is international these days?
"As Orwell foretold, to let the state enjoy a near-monopoly of information is to guarantee manipulation and distortion," Murdoch said, referring to George Orwell's book, "1984."
It's not necessarily the immigrants. If you look at TB numbers for example, what you find out is that the majority of the TB sources in the USA are citizens who have come back from a trip out of the country. However, the percentage overall of TB carriers who are of foreign origin, legal or otherwise, has jumped, and the fact remains that treatment resistant TB is coming from places that don't have it under control.
As far as crime is concerned, my statement is "My home town never had a gang until it got a Mexican gang." I'm not attributing it to anything in particular about Mexicans, it just so happened that a spike in crime was directly attributable to the rise in legal and illegal immigration from Mexico into my home town because the perpetrators were easily identifiable.
You are just trading one huge problem for another. We don't live in the third world, we live in the first world. We expect a certain quality of life. The third world is enormous. Industry in the USA competes on price. Therefore it is always desirable for business to take advantage of labor that will work on wages that can't support a first-world standard of living if you can get them into the country. It doesn't even matter if they have kids that grow up expecting a first-world standard of living because you can still always bring in more from outside the country.
Do you desire a first world standard of living? It's thanks to things like the forty-hour work week, labor rights and the minimum wage, all things that immigrants in the third world are used to compromising on. So you can ease immigration restrictions all you want, the third world will always have people that will work less than what is legal and create a market for illegal, untrackable labor that is not getting those health checks. You can keep allowing more until there's no restriction at all and health checks are irrelevant because you're living in a world where so many people live and work without even basic health care.
The government of California has a sixteen BILLION dollar deficit and continues to spend more than it takes in in revenues. There are actually times when it makes sense to reduce the size of government, like when you can't pay for it. People want services, but it doesn't matter where it comes from, those services are not free. Unless it's a specific emergency situation (NOT "we can't reach a budget agreement because no one wants to be the one cut,) a government should not be operating under massive debt.
Our concept of having no right to privacy in public was precluded by a supposition that it wasn't possible to spy on everyone everywhere all the time, either. Before, everyone had equal power to see everyone else in public. The balance of power has shifted away from the public, so it's probably time to re-visit the issue of privacy in public.
They are suing for the land and the clearing of their good name, both of which was taken by the Church against the Templars. The actual trials and executions of the individual Templars for Heresy were done by the government of France, not the Church. If you want to know why that was, I guess you'd have to ask Philip.
There were at least two Templar survivors that were discovered several years after the executions (they were not punished in any way,) but it's important to note that one of their vows was a vow of Chastity and leadership succession was absolutely not familial. There is no one to collect on this thing, and even if there were, most of those holdings were land which is now privately-or-state-owned. At any rate, the Templars were not truly an independent organization and existed at the pleasure of the Catholic Church. The Church disbanded it, it doesn't exist anymore, the end.
Why don't they implement a challenge-response system in-game like a CAPTCHA? Ask the player some specifically worded question about some game event. You don't have to ban people outright for getting it wrong, but you definitely could do that enough that you could build a statistical profile that indicated a player was cheating. Then ban them.
Not really, because the power of the government to do so hinges on the fact that entry into the US is a voluntary act and the border search is a condition of entry. The government sets the rules for entry, if you don't like them you don't have to subject yourself to them but that's a choice you make.
Agreed, another problem is that many people are a combination of two of those styles. I personally am one of those people that needs all four in roughly equal quantities.
There is evidence that boys and girls learn better in different sorts of environments. Early one one claim was made that girls were too intimidated to participate in class because boys were loud and rambunctious, tending to interrupt, shouting out questions or answers. The "solution" was to force the boys to sit down and shut up so that the girls wouldn't be intimidated and therefore could learn better. the problem is that it now appears that this has been actively detrimental to boys' education because it is contrary to THEIR learning style. One solution is sex-segregated classrooms.
No one could ever possibly be concerned that a movie adaptation might emasculate a story for commercial viability, because that's never happened, especially not to an Alan Moore book.
The majority of anything anyone "knows" that does not come from direct experience is largely derived from nonscientific methods. I know a lot of people on Slashdot like to consider reading a science book equivalent with scientific method, but unless you are actually experienced in any particular field you are just hoping that what you are reading is correct. the arguments are about the same as the ones against conspiracy theories, but people don't like to apply them to conventional knowledge because it's too much work. Conspiracy theories are so slippery because it's nearly impossible to prove ANYTHING once you go down the path of total verification.
I've learned repeatedly that things I've read at one time were just not true. It really doesn't matter how smart you are, the majority of your knowledge is unexamined, indeed nearly unexaminable, and very prone to being wrong.
Owning a dog in any capacity is frowned upon in Iran, even though it does occur and some people are even illegally keeping them as pets now. And for a consistent reason, it's considered an unclean animal. I'd call that having a problem with dogs.
People claim things are gnostic heresies when there's *evidence* to suggest that they're heresies.
There are non-Gnostic books that are eliminated by this same method, but the fact remains that Irenaeus and others decided that they didn't like a specific interpretation of Christianity and worked to undermine it. Have you ever actually read Iraneaus? It's political BS and very light on any serious scholarship or theology.
this is the truth, whether you like it or not: you are part of a human society. a currency is something that is only valued in the convention of human society...any money you have is nothing more than an abstract representation of your relationship with the society you live in.
They know they live in a society. The reason they want to get it out of the government's hands is because without a backed currency, the government can alter the value of money legislatively and at whim. If the money is backed by something, any individual or group is limited in its ability to affect the value of money by how much of that money they control, how many dollars they actually have in hand.
So the issue with them is not that gold is intrinsically valuable (not entirely anyway), but that having your currency backed by something makes it less manipulable. As I said, they know good and well that they live in a society--that is the basis of their argument, that your ability to affect the economy should be proportional to how much money you actually have.
I agree with you that the flaws of gold-backed currency are well known. I suspect that if you asked any educated person who otherwise believed in the gold standard, they would say flat out that they don't trust the federal government to regulate money. I'm not saying it's a sound argument, but I'm trying to explain why they think that way.
I know exactly how it works. I left out one significant detail, which another person has detailed below, which is that you can figure out what the highest proxy bid is by continuously bidding a dollar more until you beat them out. The problem with this is, because of the "game" aspect of the auction, as soon as someone sees that they are losing, they re-evaluate how much they are willing to pay. You get a whole group of people doing this and they are feeding off each other jacking up the price.
Here is why sniping is superior from a buying point of view:
* you deprive other bidders of the ability to see what you are willing to pay, depriving them of the ability to mentally re-evaluate how much THEY will pay and outbid you. Most people don't put in the ACTUAL largest amount they'll pay, and you don't let them go temporarily crazy in the heat of battle and bid way more than they should have.
* correspondingly, by avoiding that bidding war you are depriving yourself of buyer's remorse from having bid way too much. You just learn how to properly evaluate how much you are willing to pay, you put it in your sniper program, and maybe you win or not.
* In most cases, this results in the sale price being significantly lower. Nothing any of you say will convince me otherwise because I have experienced this myself, repeatedly. There is no doubt.
Every user should snipe. It helps EVERYONE but two people: the seller, and morons who pathologically outbid you to fill some psychological need.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know about the UK where this is being discussed, but in the USA the pictures have to have lascivious intent, which the scanners do not. that doesn't mean that zealous neighbors/police don't turn in people and create problems, but the law at the federal level says that the depictions must be lascivious (or some similar wording implying for sexual purposes.)
It's not clear to me that it's religiously motivated. When I was a kid in the 80's we swam naked in the pool at the YMCA, it was actually encouraged because it kept the pool cleaner. What happened in the USA at least was several high-profile cases of alleged group child (sex) abuse and numerous child kidnappings. People became really freaked out about who was stalking thir kids. I remember walking to school and a few years later having to attend classes at school about how to watch out for predators and never be unattended. American society changed for the worse
There are actually Buddhist Monasteries, many in South Korea, that will take and train foreigners for extended periods of time.
Where am I going to find one of those???
There is a reason that Bush didn't go into Iran, and it was that people in the military were actively thwarting him.
I believe the quote was: "[An attack on Iran] will not happen on my watch...There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box." --Admiral William Fallon
OH SNAP:
Media Concentration
Read: media without profit motive threatens the moneyed-interest propaganda monoculture. And are we seriously supposed to believe that the son of Rupert Murdoch doesn't understand that media is international these days?
"As Orwell foretold, to let the state enjoy a near-monopoly of information is to guarantee manipulation and distortion," Murdoch said, referring to George Orwell's book, "1984."
What an unbelievable fucking tool.
It's not necessarily the immigrants. If you look at TB numbers for example, what you find out is that the majority of the TB sources in the USA are citizens who have come back from a trip out of the country. However, the percentage overall of TB carriers who are of foreign origin, legal or otherwise, has jumped, and the fact remains that treatment resistant TB is coming from places that don't have it under control.
As far as crime is concerned, my statement is "My home town never had a gang until it got a Mexican gang." I'm not attributing it to anything in particular about Mexicans, it just so happened that a spike in crime was directly attributable to the rise in legal and illegal immigration from Mexico into my home town because the perpetrators were easily identifiable.
You are just trading one huge problem for another. We don't live in the third world, we live in the first world. We expect a certain quality of life. The third world is enormous. Industry in the USA competes on price. Therefore it is always desirable for business to take advantage of labor that will work on wages that can't support a first-world standard of living if you can get them into the country. It doesn't even matter if they have kids that grow up expecting a first-world standard of living because you can still always bring in more from outside the country.
Do you desire a first world standard of living? It's thanks to things like the forty-hour work week, labor rights and the minimum wage, all things that immigrants in the third world are used to compromising on. So you can ease immigration restrictions all you want, the third world will always have people that will work less than what is legal and create a market for illegal, untrackable labor that is not getting those health checks. You can keep allowing more until there's no restriction at all and health checks are irrelevant because you're living in a world where so many people live and work without even basic health care.
The government of California has a sixteen BILLION dollar deficit and continues to spend more than it takes in in revenues. There are actually times when it makes sense to reduce the size of government, like when you can't pay for it. People want services, but it doesn't matter where it comes from, those services are not free. Unless it's a specific emergency situation (NOT "we can't reach a budget agreement because no one wants to be the one cut,) a government should not be operating under massive debt.
Our concept of having no right to privacy in public was precluded by a supposition that it wasn't possible to spy on everyone everywhere all the time, either. Before, everyone had equal power to see everyone else in public. The balance of power has shifted away from the public, so it's probably time to re-visit the issue of privacy in public.
They are suing for the land and the clearing of their good name, both of which was taken by the Church against the Templars. The actual trials and executions of the individual Templars for Heresy were done by the government of France, not the Church. If you want to know why that was, I guess you'd have to ask Philip.
There were at least two Templar survivors that were discovered several years after the executions (they were not punished in any way,) but it's important to note that one of their vows was a vow of Chastity and leadership succession was absolutely not familial. There is no one to collect on this thing, and even if there were, most of those holdings were land which is now privately-or-state-owned. At any rate, the Templars were not truly an independent organization and existed at the pleasure of the Catholic Church. The Church disbanded it, it doesn't exist anymore, the end.
OK, but if the benchmark software demonstrably can't be trusted, what good is completeness? You're back to square one.
Why don't they implement a challenge-response system in-game like a CAPTCHA? Ask the player some specifically worded question about some game event. You don't have to ban people outright for getting it wrong, but you definitely could do that enough that you could build a statistical profile that indicated a player was cheating. Then ban them.
Not really, because the power of the government to do so hinges on the fact that entry into the US is a voluntary act and the border search is a condition of entry. The government sets the rules for entry, if you don't like them you don't have to subject yourself to them but that's a choice you make.
Agreed, another problem is that many people are a combination of two of those styles. I personally am one of those people that needs all four in roughly equal quantities.
There is evidence that boys and girls learn better in different sorts of environments. Early one one claim was made that girls were too intimidated to participate in class because boys were loud and rambunctious, tending to interrupt, shouting out questions or answers. The "solution" was to force the boys to sit down and shut up so that the girls wouldn't be intimidated and therefore could learn better. the problem is that it now appears that this has been actively detrimental to boys' education because it is contrary to THEIR learning style. One solution is sex-segregated classrooms.
No one could ever possibly be concerned that a movie adaptation might emasculate a story for commercial viability, because that's never happened, especially not to an Alan Moore book.
The majority of anything anyone "knows" that does not come from direct experience is largely derived from nonscientific methods. I know a lot of people on Slashdot like to consider reading a science book equivalent with scientific method, but unless you are actually experienced in any particular field you are just hoping that what you are reading is correct. the arguments are about the same as the ones against conspiracy theories, but people don't like to apply them to conventional knowledge because it's too much work. Conspiracy theories are so slippery because it's nearly impossible to prove ANYTHING once you go down the path of total verification.
I've learned repeatedly that things I've read at one time were just not true. It really doesn't matter how smart you are, the majority of your knowledge is unexamined, indeed nearly unexaminable, and very prone to being wrong.
People used to quote that Sabbath shit to Jesus too, and he also broke it.
Owning a dog in any capacity is frowned upon in Iran, even though it does occur and some people are even illegally keeping them as pets now. And for a consistent reason, it's considered an unclean animal. I'd call that having a problem with dogs.
People claim things are gnostic heresies when there's *evidence* to suggest that they're heresies.
There are non-Gnostic books that are eliminated by this same method, but the fact remains that Irenaeus and others decided that they didn't like a specific interpretation of Christianity and worked to undermine it. Have you ever actually read Iraneaus? It's political BS and very light on any serious scholarship or theology.
this is the truth, whether you like it or not: you are part of a human society. a currency is something that is only valued in the convention of human society...any money you have is nothing more than an abstract representation of your relationship with the society you live in.
They know they live in a society. The reason they want to get it out of the government's hands is because without a backed currency, the government can alter the value of money legislatively and at whim. If the money is backed by something, any individual or group is limited in its ability to affect the value of money by how much of that money they control, how many dollars they actually have in hand.
So the issue with them is not that gold is intrinsically valuable (not entirely anyway), but that having your currency backed by something makes it less manipulable. As I said, they know good and well that they live in a society--that is the basis of their argument, that your ability to affect the economy should be proportional to how much money you actually have.
I agree with you that the flaws of gold-backed currency are well known. I suspect that if you asked any educated person who otherwise believed in the gold standard, they would say flat out that they don't trust the federal government to regulate money. I'm not saying it's a sound argument, but I'm trying to explain why they think that way.
No, because in each of those fields they have separate standards for men and women.
I know exactly how it works. I left out one significant detail, which another person has detailed below, which is that you can figure out what the highest proxy bid is by continuously bidding a dollar more until you beat them out. The problem with this is, because of the "game" aspect of the auction, as soon as someone sees that they are losing, they re-evaluate how much they are willing to pay. You get a whole group of people doing this and they are feeding off each other jacking up the price.
Here is why sniping is superior from a buying point of view:
* you deprive other bidders of the ability to see what you are willing to pay, depriving them of the ability to mentally re-evaluate how much THEY will pay and outbid you. Most people don't put in the ACTUAL largest amount they'll pay, and you don't let them go temporarily crazy in the heat of battle and bid way more than they should have.
* correspondingly, by avoiding that bidding war you are depriving yourself of buyer's remorse from having bid way too much. You just learn how to properly evaluate how much you are willing to pay, you put it in your sniper program, and maybe you win or not.
* In most cases, this results in the sale price being significantly lower. Nothing any of you say will convince me otherwise because I have experienced this myself, repeatedly. There is no doubt.
Every user should snipe. It helps EVERYONE but two people: the seller, and morons who pathologically outbid you to fill some psychological need.