Money is worth what you can get for it. If I have Bitcoin, I can sell then for dollars, and there are places that will just take it as payment. Nobody's going to give me anything for five Thornleycoins, no matter how cool the blockchain implementation.
What's the argument for legalizing marijuana or any other drug? It will be something like the benefits outweigh the harms, states' rights, personal rights, federal government over reach, or so. All the same arguments apply for the right of self defense, or most all anyway.
Sure, but there's lots of people who say there should be no restriction on owning guns without going for a cost-benefit analysis. They often cherry-pick studies that support their point of view and make up stories to make it seem more important. I'd like to see a good, honest discussion on gun control, the good points, and the bad points, and nobody seems willing to provide me with one.
This proves beyond a doubt that this is not about background checks, this was an attempt to create a database of all firearms and who owns them. Why would any government want a database of all firearms and who owns them? Ponder that, and look at what history taught us about previous firearm registries.
That they aren't important? The firearm owners in the USA are not a threat to government. The government can always apply vastly superior force if necessary, and trained soldiers in trained units are going to win against a civilian militia approximately all the time. Lots of them seem to have a delusion that they could oppose what they see as tyranny, and this capability has not existed in developed countries for more than a century.
Comcast starts with good connections to each house, and so internet service is not that difficult. Having a city infrastructure (which will typically build connections to each house) is going to cost a lot of money.
Cable TV at least used to make money, which is why cable companies went to all that bother to get the franchises. Forcing someone to bundle a profitable service in with another service that uses most of the same equipment doesn't sound particularly onerous.
Now, if you like your Comcast service, great. Lots of people don't. As long as it's Comcast or DSL, Comcast doesn't have to be very good to be the best choice. Comcast is known for not necessarily building high-speed connections to areas where it would be unprofitable. If the city internet is competitive, people have more of a choice.
(the author of a novel is not a valid source of what the novel is about, it must be some 'appropriate magazine' or such),
That is how Wikipedia works. If you have original research that you want to contribute, get it published elsewhere, and cite that in the article. If you're an author of a significant book, and you want to talk about its meaning, you can probably write something up and get it published.
An operating system with Linux and Gnu on it is still an operating system. People can do things with it. Linux itself isn't. The kernel can't rebuild itself. The kernel with Gnu can.
There's a definite difference between Linux and Gnu and everything else that makes things that work work better.
I agree with that, but giving illegal immigrants amnesty does improve the situation. What illegal immigration mostly does is create a pool of abusable labor that can be paid peanuts and treated illegally without the laborer having recourse.
Yeah, and I can list a whole host of rules which will prevent this and that. You know what happens when there's a long unwritten list of such rules? People don't obey all of them all the time. It's part of human nature. The purpose they do serve is that the smug get to say "I told you so" later on.
By your reasoning, someone who leaves their keys in the car and has is stolen is soley to blame, not the person who steals the car.
You also have completely failed to explain what "correcting their own behavior" means, given an irrevocable mistake.
The Obama legacy isn't gone, despite Trump's frantic struggles to destroy it. We're still pretty much operating in an Obama economy. You said that some of the improvements happened during Obama's term.
The ACA is responsible for millions of people having health insurance, and the people I talk to who work with the poor think it's a great thing. It's far from perfect, and I'd like to see it replaces with something better, but I haven't seen anything better being considered. You appear to agree with me that millions would lose health insurance, except that you call it "opting out". Health insurance isn't a luxury like cable TV or bottled water. It's something most people are going to need some time, unless and until we get this crazy medical care system rebuilt.
ACA policies cover pre-existing conditions and can't be arbitrarily canceled because the policy holder gets sick, which were how previous policies were often useless.
My health insurance continues to be superb, and I haven't heard people complaining about their policies getting worse. Perhaps you live somewhere where the government deliberately tried to screw up the ACA, with bad results.
It's quite possible to disagree with me without being a white supremacist. It's not possible to be a white supremacist without disagreeing with me.
Your original claim was that "The Democrats openly dislike and work against them [white people]". Your cites included one from someone who wasn't necessarily a Democrat, and one a call for diversity that may have gone too far. Let's see, that's jumping to an unwarranted conclusion, five yards, using it as an ad hominem, ten yards, changing the topic ten yards, that's twenty-five yards, still second down.
As far as "the qualifications be related to the job" goes, there is solid evidence that white-appearing males tend to get interviews over others of similar qualifications. How do you know that all the white guys were hired because they were the best qualified?
Trump has been getting paid by the Feds for putting Secret Service agents in his properties. This is unconstitutional. It would have to be dealt with by Congress, which is abdicating its responsibilities. The press has mentioned the acts, but more as examples of impropriety than violations of the Constitution. In the meantime, people keep talking about the Article I emoluments clause that covers all Federal officials, including the President, and not Article II, Secion 1, paragraph 7:
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
Reading the Constitution now and then is edifying and can be fun.
Catering to the numerically largest market isn't necessarily a good idea. There's advantages in catering for a market with lots of disposable income. Designing for iOS and not Android is a business decision, not automatically an idiotic one.
At one time, people were talking about IE 5 on MacOS as being a really good browsing experience. At that time, Apple didn't have its own browser, so it was competing against Netscape and winning handily.
The problems came when they decided to stand still and not spend money on trying to keep IE the best it could be.
Um, the consequences included President Trump, and I haven't seen much better wording in accepting responsibility. If you think that quote sounds like ducking out of anything, you need a remedial English class.
Actually, it's a significant contribution to how subatomic physics works. The proper question is whether whoever wrote TFS was that stupid or just looking for some attention?
Yeah, but we've got lots of hydrogen around, and if we fuse that into heavier elements we create power. All the quarks I can see here at my desk are pretty firmly bound, and we'd have to unbind them to fuse them. According to TFS, scientists bashed atoms together in the LHC and got a few quarks to swap around. That doesn't sound like an energy source (from TFS).
Speaking as a white person, I find the Democrats to be welcoming and helpful. Your first cite is an attempt by the DNC to get diversity in its employee base. They've already got enough cisgender straight white men, and would prefer not to increase that. Your second is a quote from an ex-Sanders aide, and I'll remind you that Sanders is not a Democrat.
In other words, the Democratic Party is just fine for whites who don't insist on keeping supremacy.
Every indicator that isn't filtered through a anti Trump filter seems to show that we are doing just fine. The GPA is up, illegal immigration is down, and for millions haven't lost health insurance.
We're still running on the Obama legacy, for the most part. Also, the reason millions haven't lost health insurance is that a few Republican Senators joined with the Democrats to thwart all attempts at health care "reform". Trump had wanted to repeal the ACA, and couldn't get an acceptable bill through a Republican Congress.
Nope. One of the two was going to be elected. First past the post typically forces a two-candidate system, since people who really didn't want Trump to win had to vote for Clinton as the only viable way, and vice versa.
What it says is that a sufficiently large number of sufficiently stupid people can ruin things for everyone - and the sufficiently large number is distressingly small.
In that case I unleash my fiendish plan by uploading hash after hash of cute cat pictures, preventing them from being on Facebook, and the world lies prostrate at my feet! Mwahahahaha!
In other words, nobody should ever do anything that might come back to bite them sometime, no matter how unlikely it appears. And if somebody does, it's their fault. Also, nobody should be shielded from the full potential consequences of their actions. We need to ban insurance companies, to start with.
If you send a nudie to someone and then realize it's a really bad idea, correcting your own behavior isn't going to do a bit of good.
That's not how English is commonly used or understood. From a descriptivist's viewpoint, that's not how English works. It's one of "da rulez" that became established a long time ago, such as not splitting an infinitive, that turn out not to work well in practice.
Slashdot Mirror
Money is worth what you can get for it. If I have Bitcoin, I can sell then for dollars, and there are places that will just take it as payment. Nobody's going to give me anything for five Thornleycoins, no matter how cool the blockchain implementation.
How does the government foster competition in a natural monopoly situation?
Sure, but there's lots of people who say there should be no restriction on owning guns without going for a cost-benefit analysis. They often cherry-pick studies that support their point of view and make up stories to make it seem more important. I'd like to see a good, honest discussion on gun control, the good points, and the bad points, and nobody seems willing to provide me with one.
That they aren't important? The firearm owners in the USA are not a threat to government. The government can always apply vastly superior force if necessary, and trained soldiers in trained units are going to win against a civilian militia approximately all the time. Lots of them seem to have a delusion that they could oppose what they see as tyranny, and this capability has not existed in developed countries for more than a century.
Comcast starts with good connections to each house, and so internet service is not that difficult. Having a city infrastructure (which will typically build connections to each house) is going to cost a lot of money.
Cable TV at least used to make money, which is why cable companies went to all that bother to get the franchises. Forcing someone to bundle a profitable service in with another service that uses most of the same equipment doesn't sound particularly onerous.
Now, if you like your Comcast service, great. Lots of people don't. As long as it's Comcast or DSL, Comcast doesn't have to be very good to be the best choice. Comcast is known for not necessarily building high-speed connections to areas where it would be unprofitable. If the city internet is competitive, people have more of a choice.
That is how Wikipedia works. If you have original research that you want to contribute, get it published elsewhere, and cite that in the article. If you're an author of a significant book, and you want to talk about its meaning, you can probably write something up and get it published.
An operating system with Linux and Gnu on it is still an operating system. People can do things with it. Linux itself isn't. The kernel can't rebuild itself. The kernel with Gnu can.
There's a definite difference between Linux and Gnu and everything else that makes things that work work better.
I agree with that, but giving illegal immigrants amnesty does improve the situation. What illegal immigration mostly does is create a pool of abusable labor that can be paid peanuts and treated illegally without the laborer having recourse.
Yeah, and I can list a whole host of rules which will prevent this and that. You know what happens when there's a long unwritten list of such rules? People don't obey all of them all the time. It's part of human nature. The purpose they do serve is that the smug get to say "I told you so" later on.
By your reasoning, someone who leaves their keys in the car and has is stolen is soley to blame, not the person who steals the car.
You also have completely failed to explain what "correcting their own behavior" means, given an irrevocable mistake.
The Obama legacy isn't gone, despite Trump's frantic struggles to destroy it. We're still pretty much operating in an Obama economy. You said that some of the improvements happened during Obama's term.
The ACA is responsible for millions of people having health insurance, and the people I talk to who work with the poor think it's a great thing. It's far from perfect, and I'd like to see it replaces with something better, but I haven't seen anything better being considered. You appear to agree with me that millions would lose health insurance, except that you call it "opting out". Health insurance isn't a luxury like cable TV or bottled water. It's something most people are going to need some time, unless and until we get this crazy medical care system rebuilt.
ACA policies cover pre-existing conditions and can't be arbitrarily canceled because the policy holder gets sick, which were how previous policies were often useless.
My health insurance continues to be superb, and I haven't heard people complaining about their policies getting worse. Perhaps you live somewhere where the government deliberately tried to screw up the ACA, with bad results.
It's quite possible to disagree with me without being a white supremacist. It's not possible to be a white supremacist without disagreeing with me.
Your original claim was that "The Democrats openly dislike and work against them [white people]". Your cites included one from someone who wasn't necessarily a Democrat, and one a call for diversity that may have gone too far. Let's see, that's jumping to an unwarranted conclusion, five yards, using it as an ad hominem, ten yards, changing the topic ten yards, that's twenty-five yards, still second down.
As far as "the qualifications be related to the job" goes, there is solid evidence that white-appearing males tend to get interviews over others of similar qualifications. How do you know that all the white guys were hired because they were the best qualified?
Trump has been getting paid by the Feds for putting Secret Service agents in his properties. This is unconstitutional. It would have to be dealt with by Congress, which is abdicating its responsibilities. The press has mentioned the acts, but more as examples of impropriety than violations of the Constitution. In the meantime, people keep talking about the Article I emoluments clause that covers all Federal officials, including the President, and not Article II, Secion 1, paragraph 7:
Reading the Constitution now and then is edifying and can be fun.
Catering to the numerically largest market isn't necessarily a good idea. There's advantages in catering for a market with lots of disposable income. Designing for iOS and not Android is a business decision, not automatically an idiotic one.
At one time, people were talking about IE 5 on MacOS as being a really good browsing experience. At that time, Apple didn't have its own browser, so it was competing against Netscape and winning handily.
The problems came when they decided to stand still and not spend money on trying to keep IE the best it could be.
Um, the consequences included President Trump, and I haven't seen much better wording in accepting responsibility. If you think that quote sounds like ducking out of anything, you need a remedial English class.
Violations of the two emoluments clauses should do nicely.
Actually, it's a significant contribution to how subatomic physics works. The proper question is whether whoever wrote TFS was that stupid or just looking for some attention?
Yeah, but we've got lots of hydrogen around, and if we fuse that into heavier elements we create power. All the quarks I can see here at my desk are pretty firmly bound, and we'd have to unbind them to fuse them. According to TFS, scientists bashed atoms together in the LHC and got a few quarks to swap around. That doesn't sound like an energy source (from TFS).
Are you sure that this "they" of yours numbers enough people to count as plural? I've never seen any of "them" as you describe "them".
Speaking as a white person, I find the Democrats to be welcoming and helpful. Your first cite is an attempt by the DNC to get diversity in its employee base. They've already got enough cisgender straight white men, and would prefer not to increase that. Your second is a quote from an ex-Sanders aide, and I'll remind you that Sanders is not a Democrat.
In other words, the Democratic Party is just fine for whites who don't insist on keeping supremacy.
We're still running on the Obama legacy, for the most part. Also, the reason millions haven't lost health insurance is that a few Republican Senators joined with the Democrats to thwart all attempts at health care "reform". Trump had wanted to repeal the ACA, and couldn't get an acceptable bill through a Republican Congress.
Nope. One of the two was going to be elected. First past the post typically forces a two-candidate system, since people who really didn't want Trump to win had to vote for Clinton as the only viable way, and vice versa.
What it says is that a sufficiently large number of sufficiently stupid people can ruin things for everyone - and the sufficiently large number is distressingly small.
In that case I unleash my fiendish plan by uploading hash after hash of cute cat pictures, preventing them from being on Facebook, and the world lies prostrate at my feet! Mwahahahaha!
In other words, nobody should ever do anything that might come back to bite them sometime, no matter how unlikely it appears. And if somebody does, it's their fault. Also, nobody should be shielded from the full potential consequences of their actions. We need to ban insurance companies, to start with.
If you send a nudie to someone and then realize it's a really bad idea, correcting your own behavior isn't going to do a bit of good.
That's not how English is commonly used or understood. From a descriptivist's viewpoint, that's not how English works. It's one of "da rulez" that became established a long time ago, such as not splitting an infinitive, that turn out not to work well in practice.