Sigh. The Nazis were not against the rich. The Nazis were against Jews. The propaganda was that Jews were rich, to stir up envy and the desire to plunder. Read Mein Kampf if you're going to continue to spout nonsense (it does make an appropriate punishment, as anyone who's tried reading the thing knows).
How does conspiracy factor into that? In essence, a conspiracy is communicating for the intent to commit a crime.
IANAL, but I had the impression is that conspiracy was not a crime if it involved talking only, but required some tangible act towards the specific crime being discussed. This has of course been severely abused at times. Treason is not just speech, either.
The Nazis rose to power based on nationalism. If they'd been rising to power on socialism, they'd have been a lot friendlier with the socialists and communists. They drummed up support vilifying the Jews while getting cozy with the rest of the 1%. If you read Mein Kampf, there's a lot of vituperation against Jews, but little or nothing against non-Jewish capitalists. Once they had a lock on power, they let people keep their guns, by and large, unless they were Jews or something like that.
Based on what I've observed is taught in some right-wing states, distorting science and pushing right-wing and nationalist policies is just fine with the extreme right.
Read Friedrich Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom", especially the chapter on the roots of Nazism. He documents, quite carefully, in that chapter how socialism was the foundation of political thought in Germany long before WWI.
In other words, he's so far wrong he's not worth a look. There were socialists in Germany before WWI, true, but they had little or no power. Bismarck put through some social programs as a way of disarming the socialists, so they had some indirect influence, but Bismarck was very definitely not a socialist. Most German politicians were OK with sending people in the German working class to fight their class brethren in Russia, Belgium, and France.
Right now, I can walk into a ladies' room. It isn't locked. People are going to wonder what I'm doing there and take precautions accordingly, since I'm either being very confused or up to no good. There's really no excuse. In the meantime, if a trans female walks in, looking female and dressing female and acting female, there's not going to be any fuss or any harm. Common sense works here.
Now, with bathroom laws in effect, how is anyone going to know for sure whether I'm an actual male, and therefore forbidden from the ladies' room, or a trans male who still legally counts as female, and is required to use the ladies' room? Some trans males look a lot more masculine than I do. A bathroom law forces women to accept people who are, to all intents and appearances, male in the ladies' room.
In the US, both statements are legal. Over here, we have the attitude that free speech means you get to say almost anything, and the overly racist remarks are normally disapproved in public. This doesn't mean speech is necessarily free of consequences, nor does it mean that anyone has to listen or offer a venue to speech they dislike.
Nazis were not left-wing in any sense while in power. The left wing of the party was terminated with extreme prejudice in the 1930s, and they hadn't had significant influence in Hitler's governing up until then..
Nazists were socialists, but not internationally oriented socialists
Nazis weren't socialists when they were in power. They had a socialist wing until Hitler had most of it murdered. Socialism, as a political movement, is internationally oriented. It's based on the idea that a working-class Frenchman is more similar to a working-class Italian than an upper-class Frenchman. (WWI, when working-class Germans fought working-class Frenchmen, was a serious blow to socialism who'd hoped that it would make national war obsolete.) Extreme nationalists are not socialists politically. (This doesn't hold for all instances of proposed economic socialism, like the "Nationalism" movement caused by Bellamy's "Looking Backward" in the US, or the right-wing idea of the Showa Restoration in Japan.)
The lefties call nazis for right-wing extremists because the nazis were extreme nationalists.
That's because lefties have a clue. Extreme nationalism is normally right-wing. Extreme classisim is normally left-wing.
In reality, anyone wanting collectivism and a strong state instead of individualism and human rights, are like nazis.
In that they want collectivism and a strong state, that's true. There's different ways to get there. Communism talks about the withering away of the state as an endgame, so it's not like National Socialism in that regard.
It's interesting to look at how the big factions of WWII generally saw each other. The West saw the Nazis and Communists (and the militaristic Japanese) as totalitarian and collectivist. Germany and Japan saw the West and Communists as sticking to materialism, ignoring the supreme power of national will. The Soviets saw the rest of WWII as a fight between the imperialist capitalists and the fascist capitalists.
I'm in favor of carbon taxes. What I'm not keen on is pushing for technology to remove CO2 from the air in the near future. That requires more energy than we got from creating the CO2 in the first place. It's only a good idea if we have a large surplus of energy we can't use to replace fossil fuel burning.
It would appear that the toxic, immature, masculinity came first. I haven't seen toxic and immature femininity established yet, although I could have overlooked it. Claiming about sexual harassment that actually exists is mature and professional. The professional way to handle that situation is to go to HR, and externally if that fails.
With any rise in minimum wage, some low-paying jobs will go away, but that's not the only result. Wages are set at the amount needed to attract people of the necessary quality, by and large, and no more than the value the employee brings. There's plenty of easily replaceable people doing jobs that need doing, and they get more money. Giving more money to low-income people is a good driver for increased economic activity, and so we see the Seattle success.
Automation has been going on for a long time. I first heard about it something like fifty years ago, and it's proceeded since. The use of kiosks instead of order-takers is just part of this, and the exact minimum wage isn't going to matter for long. Even if humans don't get more expensive, machines keep getting cheaper. I think it's going to end well, but there's going to be a lot of problems in the meantime.
Is it possible for MS to make a hardened version of Windows?
First, you need to define "hardened", You're not going to get exploit-free on something as complex as a modern OS with changing applications that run scripts. Second, Microsoft has. Sometime in the mid 200?s they decided to make things more secure, and did a pretty decent job of it.
Yeah, I thought the WDEF virus was ingenious. Unfortunately, it wasn't properly tested for the MacOS version that came out after it was released (go figure), and could do some serious harm there. Fortunately, by that time I carried around a Disinfectant disk as a matter of habit.
I don't use my iPhone or my Android tablet as general-purpose computing devices. I use my laptop and desktop for those, and those had better run arbitrary software or they're of little use to me.
I'm not sure Pepper comes off as a no-nonsense type, but she's presented as extremely competent. She's off running Stark Enterprises, and was busy off-screen throughout Age of Ultron.
I worked for one not that long after the founder, um, left. One day he transferred stock to his wife so he controlled only 49.5% of the stock, and the next day he was involuntarily out the door.
By your logic, any minimum wage would be too high. If we look at empirical results, we see that places with minimum wages like that tend to do pretty well.
The big reason people stay on welfare is Medicaid. That's worth a lot. Have some sort of health care system like every other developed nation has, and that's no longer an obstacle. Then, set benefits so they all go away slower than income rises, and people will be able to afford to get jobs.
Do you have a breakdown on how much the kiosks cost? I'd imagine that their efficiency would be related to how comfortable people were with using a kiosk rather than talking to a cashier.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you have any evidence that there's any trace of truth in that, as opposed to propaganda? Hitler lied a whole lot.
Sigh. The Nazis were not against the rich. The Nazis were against Jews. The propaganda was that Jews were rich, to stir up envy and the desire to plunder. Read Mein Kampf if you're going to continue to spout nonsense (it does make an appropriate punishment, as anyone who's tried reading the thing knows).
IANAL, but I had the impression is that conspiracy was not a crime if it involved talking only, but required some tangible act towards the specific crime being discussed. This has of course been severely abused at times. Treason is not just speech, either.
The Nazis rose to power based on nationalism. If they'd been rising to power on socialism, they'd have been a lot friendlier with the socialists and communists. They drummed up support vilifying the Jews while getting cozy with the rest of the 1%. If you read Mein Kampf, there's a lot of vituperation against Jews, but little or nothing against non-Jewish capitalists. Once they had a lock on power, they let people keep their guns, by and large, unless they were Jews or something like that.
Based on what I've observed is taught in some right-wing states, distorting science and pushing right-wing and nationalist policies is just fine with the extreme right.
In other words, he's so far wrong he's not worth a look. There were socialists in Germany before WWI, true, but they had little or no power. Bismarck put through some social programs as a way of disarming the socialists, so they had some indirect influence, but Bismarck was very definitely not a socialist. Most German politicians were OK with sending people in the German working class to fight their class brethren in Russia, Belgium, and France.
Right now, I can walk into a ladies' room. It isn't locked. People are going to wonder what I'm doing there and take precautions accordingly, since I'm either being very confused or up to no good. There's really no excuse. In the meantime, if a trans female walks in, looking female and dressing female and acting female, there's not going to be any fuss or any harm. Common sense works here.
Now, with bathroom laws in effect, how is anyone going to know for sure whether I'm an actual male, and therefore forbidden from the ladies' room, or a trans male who still legally counts as female, and is required to use the ladies' room? Some trans males look a lot more masculine than I do. A bathroom law forces women to accept people who are, to all intents and appearances, male in the ladies' room.
In the US, both statements are legal. Over here, we have the attitude that free speech means you get to say almost anything, and the overly racist remarks are normally disapproved in public. This doesn't mean speech is necessarily free of consequences, nor does it mean that anyone has to listen or offer a venue to speech they dislike.
Nazis were not left-wing in any sense while in power. The left wing of the party was terminated with extreme prejudice in the 1930s, and they hadn't had significant influence in Hitler's governing up until then..
Nazis weren't socialists when they were in power. They had a socialist wing until Hitler had most of it murdered. Socialism, as a political movement, is internationally oriented. It's based on the idea that a working-class Frenchman is more similar to a working-class Italian than an upper-class Frenchman. (WWI, when working-class Germans fought working-class Frenchmen, was a serious blow to socialism who'd hoped that it would make national war obsolete.) Extreme nationalists are not socialists politically. (This doesn't hold for all instances of proposed economic socialism, like the "Nationalism" movement caused by Bellamy's "Looking Backward" in the US, or the right-wing idea of the Showa Restoration in Japan.)
That's because lefties have a clue. Extreme nationalism is normally right-wing. Extreme classisim is normally left-wing.
In that they want collectivism and a strong state, that's true. There's different ways to get there. Communism talks about the withering away of the state as an endgame, so it's not like National Socialism in that regard.
It's interesting to look at how the big factions of WWII generally saw each other. The West saw the Nazis and Communists (and the militaristic Japanese) as totalitarian and collectivist. Germany and Japan saw the West and Communists as sticking to materialism, ignoring the supreme power of national will. The Soviets saw the rest of WWII as a fight between the imperialist capitalists and the fascist capitalists.
I'm in favor of carbon taxes. What I'm not keen on is pushing for technology to remove CO2 from the air in the near future. That requires more energy than we got from creating the CO2 in the first place. It's only a good idea if we have a large surplus of energy we can't use to replace fossil fuel burning.
It would appear that the toxic, immature, masculinity came first. I haven't seen toxic and immature femininity established yet, although I could have overlooked it. Claiming about sexual harassment that actually exists is mature and professional. The professional way to handle that situation is to go to HR, and externally if that fails.
Thanks for the correction.
There's idiots all over the political spectum (spectra?). I suspect you've been seeing many more left-wing idiots than a random sample would give you.
BTUs/pound doesn't sound any stupider than it actually is.
Ah, I misunderstood you.
With any rise in minimum wage, some low-paying jobs will go away, but that's not the only result. Wages are set at the amount needed to attract people of the necessary quality, by and large, and no more than the value the employee brings. There's plenty of easily replaceable people doing jobs that need doing, and they get more money. Giving more money to low-income people is a good driver for increased economic activity, and so we see the Seattle success.
Automation has been going on for a long time. I first heard about it something like fifty years ago, and it's proceeded since. The use of kiosks instead of order-takers is just part of this, and the exact minimum wage isn't going to matter for long. Even if humans don't get more expensive, machines keep getting cheaper. I think it's going to end well, but there's going to be a lot of problems in the meantime.
First, you need to define "hardened", You're not going to get exploit-free on something as complex as a modern OS with changing applications that run scripts. Second, Microsoft has. Sometime in the mid 200?s they decided to make things more secure, and did a pretty decent job of it.
Yeah, I thought the WDEF virus was ingenious. Unfortunately, it wasn't properly tested for the MacOS version that came out after it was released (go figure), and could do some serious harm there. Fortunately, by that time I carried around a Disinfectant disk as a matter of habit.
For quite a few years, there were very few viruses available for the Mac. It was a much safer environment because of that.
I don't use my iPhone or my Android tablet as general-purpose computing devices. I use my laptop and desktop for those, and those had better run arbitrary software or they're of little use to me.
I'm not sure Pepper comes off as a no-nonsense type, but she's presented as extremely competent. She's off running Stark Enterprises, and was busy off-screen throughout Age of Ultron.
I worked for one not that long after the founder, um, left. One day he transferred stock to his wife so he controlled only 49.5% of the stock, and the next day he was involuntarily out the door.
Bright orange might mean you're on a drug I was on once. It was a real shock for a moment.
By your logic, any minimum wage would be too high. If we look at empirical results, we see that places with minimum wages like that tend to do pretty well.
The big reason people stay on welfare is Medicaid. That's worth a lot. Have some sort of health care system like every other developed nation has, and that's no longer an obstacle. Then, set benefits so they all go away slower than income rises, and people will be able to afford to get jobs.
Do you have a breakdown on how much the kiosks cost? I'd imagine that their efficiency would be related to how comfortable people were with using a kiosk rather than talking to a cashier.