How did he stop chemical weapon attacks? Were they happening on a daily or weekly basis before? Otherwise, we can't tell from Syrian actions. We know he didn't do all that much damage, since the airfield was launching strikes again within hours.
So, what is the failure about the Obama economy? Do you object to the massive deficit reduction? The decrease in unemployment? The millions of people who could finally afford health care? The growth of the economy as a whole?
It isn't really useful to think of those idiots as idiots. It's a lot more useful to try to understand why they voted Trump. Partly it's because they fell for the most successful con game in history, the con man appealing to their prejudices and greed, but the real issue is that they hate the way things are going. Rural America is suffering heavily from the loss of their traditional jobs to automation and offshoring, and they're suffering.
Clinton was actually the candidate offering more real help for them, but she was too honest to offer the good old days.
Why do you think all those people voted for Trump? It wasn't because he was a reasonable, moral, honest, or intellectual individual. Sanders came close to winning the Democratic nomination despite not being a Democrat.
None of this will make it easy for passengers to use their devices while hindering the drivers from using their devices. If a control is easy enough for a passenger to bypass, drivers will do it. If it's difficult for drivers to disable, it will be difficult for passengers to disable..
If Hitler was so anti-Capitalist, why was he at such pains to court capitalists, and reward the cooperative once when he came to power? If he'd been a Socialist, these industrialists would have been his natural enemies. I'm looking at what he actually did, rather than what he said (which is completely unreliable). Hitler ran on being a Socialist to some extent even after he'd gotten rid of the Socialist wing of the NSDAP. Hitler was obviously fine with Capitalism. His concentration was on nationalism and the People.
I have absolutely no idea where you get your ideas of history, but you need to find less biased sources.
A barrier to entry, economically, is something that makes it difficult to enter a field of business. There are barriers to entry set up by governments, and there are barriers to entry set up by businesses.
Some are network effects. People write software for MS Windows because that's where the users are, and the users buy Windows because of the software available. If you want to buy or sell something, eBay and Craigslist are where the buyers are if you're a seller, and where people are selling things if you're a buyer.
Some are market control. Amazon went full-on to get into their position, and rivaling it would take an immense amount of money in the face of uncertain success. Soap and detergent companies maintain lots of slightly different products with different brands to increase the competition a newcomer would face.
Some are a matter of existing contractual arrangements. Cereal manufacturers pay grocery stores for favorable placement of their products.
Some are a matter of high infrastructure costs. It's really expensive to wire a whole town for cable or internet, so it's rare to see someone else coming into a town and starting it. (There used to be legal monopolies, but they've been abolished. The diversity of available products doesn't seem to have improved much since then.)
None of these are a case of any government doing anything to favor the established players.
What happens to capitalists is one distinguishing factor between socialism and capitalism. There are other differences between Communism and fascism, but I'm strongly against any collectivist authoritarian philosophy of government.
The three greatest powers of WWII were the US, the Soviet Union, and Germany. From the US point of view, we were allying out of expediency with one totalitarian regime to fight another. From the Soviet point of view, they were allying with the imperialist capitalists against the fascist capitalists (and they worked hard to make WWII a fight between imperialists and fascists). From the German (and more explicitly Japanese) point of view, they were fighting two powers with materialist philosophies, while the Germans and Japanese were using superior national character and willpower and fighting spirit. We tend to just assume the US viewpoint, but if you want to understand what was going on at the highest levels you need to understand the other viewpoints.
MS Word is more suitable for businesses, where MS Word is a standard format, and if the customer's MS Word doesn't work perfectly with the document you sent them not produced by Word it's your fault. I use LibreOffice at home, and it does everything I want an office suite to do and more. (Then again, I use vim to write fiction and poetry.) Most individual users are better off with something else.
Sure. If you don't have a path to increased revenue and profit, only the stupid investors will invest. There are situations (like Amazon's when they started out) where just having a lot of customers is the right thing to do. The difference between Amazon and Uber was that everyone could see how Amazon was supposed to profit when it went into that phase, and I don't see how Uber's supposed to become profitable with its current business model.
We can't observe them, but we can see what they do. If the cobbler goes to bed one night, and wakes up and finds new shoes made, it may not be cobbler elves, but something was there making shoes.
Knowing more about how planets work could be useful in countering global warming or other such issues.
Knowing about the Higgs means we know a little more about quantum physics, which means we'll be able to do materials science and chemistry a little better, which means someone might develop an exotic new material or chemical reaction, and that could become important. It's quite a few steps from knowing about high-energy particle physics to a better video display or whatever, but it's a plausible course of events.
The GPL defines source code as the preferred representation for changing the program or whatever. I'd imagine the LaTeX or whatever source would be the preferred method, and therefore if you distribute printed textbooks like that you need to either supply the LaTeX file with the book or have a written offer to supply it.
Maybe they'd been playing D&D. There was a period in which people would blame anything D&D players did on the game. At the time, I attributed it to the dislike of the establishment of anything teens do in their free time that doesn't involve sex or drugs.
However, my brain on mainstream news has developed a distrust of mainstream media blaming stuff on something it would be popular to blame said stuff on.
The problem is that it's six citations for millions of marijuana users, assuming the reports were correct in the first place. You'll find people not on marijuana who jump out windows, kill themselves, ignore train whistles, etc. Without further information, I don't know whether doing these things is more or less likely when using marijuana.
I might actually doubt the judgment of someone who did acid and couldn't use proper spelling or grammar anymore. I'd also wonder what "better" really meant in this context.
Rape laws now often have exceptions for when the two people are sufficiently close in age. In this state, a 13-year-old having sex with a 13-year-old isn't necessarily rape, but make one of those two 15 years old and it is.
Suppose I see a young woman limiting her drinks, and I spike them. She gets blind-drunk and I take advantage of the situation. It seems to me that it's my fault.
An iPhone is actually useful, and you aren't restricted to buying a phone and data plan from Apple. It's well made, and if you're going to use something multiple times a day for three or more years it's probably worth paying a few hundred more for a device you like more. You're probably going to have a pocket phone anyway, so it won't take up more space.
This thing is not as central to the average user. It locks the user into an expensive fruit and veggie plan. If the manufacturer goes out of business, it's useless. It takes up space that other and less expensive solutions don't.
Seriously, this doesn't make sense to the typical iPhone user.
Space is big. Mind-bogglingly big. You may think it's a long way to your....
Anyway, the satellites you'd want to recycle are a very few satellites in a large volume of space. There's no single place where they hang around, ready to be harvested. There's billions and billions of cubic miles in LEO space, and maybe a million objects larger than two millimeters. That's thousands of cubic miles per fleck. It's probably going to be more concentrated near the lower part of LEO, but it's still incredibly sparse.
Do you believe in economic injury? The problem with space debris is not that it's going to fall on my house or my foot. The problem is that it will damage other satellites. Satellites are inherently expensive (if only in cost to orbit), and therefore valuable (or they wouldn't be launched) and space debris can therefore destroy valuable property.
I've been around long enough to know that some things are just inherently complex, and you can't make them simpler. My life experience tells me that the drive to simplify everything produces its own brand of chaos.
Dark matter does not exist. Galactic rotation curves are the way they are because there is less mass near the edge of the galaxy, which means time is flowing faster near the galactic rim.
Have you verified your gravitational theory against other observations? I'm not all that into General Relativity, but I do know that there's some things a new theory of gravity has to explain. In what way is your gravitational theory different from MOND and other attempts to change the theory to accommodate galactic rotation curves?
Also, you does your theory explain the Bullet Cluster, gravitational lensing along tendrils of dark matter as predicted, and the composition of the Universe based on the amount of baryonic matter formed?
Slashdot Mirror
How did he stop chemical weapon attacks? Were they happening on a daily or weekly basis before? Otherwise, we can't tell from Syrian actions. We know he didn't do all that much damage, since the airfield was launching strikes again within hours.
There is no such thing as "the problem" in most cases. Trump causes a large number of problems. Spy agencies cause problems also.
So, what is the failure about the Obama economy? Do you object to the massive deficit reduction? The decrease in unemployment? The millions of people who could finally afford health care? The growth of the economy as a whole?
In what way did Clinton steal the election? The votes were fairly counted. I saw no corruption in the caucus and convention process I was involved in.
You may not approve of her tactics, but she got more delegates than Sanders did, even if you don't count the superdelegates.
It isn't really useful to think of those idiots as idiots. It's a lot more useful to try to understand why they voted Trump. Partly it's because they fell for the most successful con game in history, the con man appealing to their prejudices and greed, but the real issue is that they hate the way things are going. Rural America is suffering heavily from the loss of their traditional jobs to automation and offshoring, and they're suffering.
Clinton was actually the candidate offering more real help for them, but she was too honest to offer the good old days.
Why do you think all those people voted for Trump? It wasn't because he was a reasonable, moral, honest, or intellectual individual. Sanders came close to winning the Democratic nomination despite not being a Democrat.
None of this will make it easy for passengers to use their devices while hindering the drivers from using their devices. If a control is easy enough for a passenger to bypass, drivers will do it. If it's difficult for drivers to disable, it will be difficult for passengers to disable..
If Hitler was so anti-Capitalist, why was he at such pains to court capitalists, and reward the cooperative once when he came to power? If he'd been a Socialist, these industrialists would have been his natural enemies. I'm looking at what he actually did, rather than what he said (which is completely unreliable). Hitler ran on being a Socialist to some extent even after he'd gotten rid of the Socialist wing of the NSDAP. Hitler was obviously fine with Capitalism. His concentration was on nationalism and the People.
I have absolutely no idea where you get your ideas of history, but you need to find less biased sources.
A barrier to entry, economically, is something that makes it difficult to enter a field of business. There are barriers to entry set up by governments, and there are barriers to entry set up by businesses.
Some are network effects. People write software for MS Windows because that's where the users are, and the users buy Windows because of the software available. If you want to buy or sell something, eBay and Craigslist are where the buyers are if you're a seller, and where people are selling things if you're a buyer.
Some are market control. Amazon went full-on to get into their position, and rivaling it would take an immense amount of money in the face of uncertain success. Soap and detergent companies maintain lots of slightly different products with different brands to increase the competition a newcomer would face.
Some are a matter of existing contractual arrangements. Cereal manufacturers pay grocery stores for favorable placement of their products.
Some are a matter of high infrastructure costs. It's really expensive to wire a whole town for cable or internet, so it's rare to see someone else coming into a town and starting it. (There used to be legal monopolies, but they've been abolished. The diversity of available products doesn't seem to have improved much since then.)
None of these are a case of any government doing anything to favor the established players.
What happens to capitalists is one distinguishing factor between socialism and capitalism. There are other differences between Communism and fascism, but I'm strongly against any collectivist authoritarian philosophy of government.
The three greatest powers of WWII were the US, the Soviet Union, and Germany. From the US point of view, we were allying out of expediency with one totalitarian regime to fight another. From the Soviet point of view, they were allying with the imperialist capitalists against the fascist capitalists (and they worked hard to make WWII a fight between imperialists and fascists). From the German (and more explicitly Japanese) point of view, they were fighting two powers with materialist philosophies, while the Germans and Japanese were using superior national character and willpower and fighting spirit. We tend to just assume the US viewpoint, but if you want to understand what was going on at the highest levels you need to understand the other viewpoints.
MS Word is more suitable for businesses, where MS Word is a standard format, and if the customer's MS Word doesn't work perfectly with the document you sent them not produced by Word it's your fault. I use LibreOffice at home, and it does everything I want an office suite to do and more. (Then again, I use vim to write fiction and poetry.) Most individual users are better off with something else.
Sure. If you don't have a path to increased revenue and profit, only the stupid investors will invest. There are situations (like Amazon's when they started out) where just having a lot of customers is the right thing to do. The difference between Amazon and Uber was that everyone could see how Amazon was supposed to profit when it went into that phase, and I don't see how Uber's supposed to become profitable with its current business model.
We can't observe them, but we can see what they do. If the cobbler goes to bed one night, and wakes up and finds new shoes made, it may not be cobbler elves, but something was there making shoes.
Knowing more about how planets work could be useful in countering global warming or other such issues.
Knowing about the Higgs means we know a little more about quantum physics, which means we'll be able to do materials science and chemistry a little better, which means someone might develop an exotic new material or chemical reaction, and that could become important. It's quite a few steps from knowing about high-energy particle physics to a better video display or whatever, but it's a plausible course of events.
The GPL defines source code as the preferred representation for changing the program or whatever. I'd imagine the LaTeX or whatever source would be the preferred method, and therefore if you distribute printed textbooks like that you need to either supply the LaTeX file with the book or have a written offer to supply it.
Maybe they'd been playing D&D. There was a period in which people would blame anything D&D players did on the game. At the time, I attributed it to the dislike of the establishment of anything teens do in their free time that doesn't involve sex or drugs.
However, my brain on mainstream news has developed a distrust of mainstream media blaming stuff on something it would be popular to blame said stuff on.
The problem is that it's six citations for millions of marijuana users, assuming the reports were correct in the first place. You'll find people not on marijuana who jump out windows, kill themselves, ignore train whistles, etc. Without further information, I don't know whether doing these things is more or less likely when using marijuana.
I might actually doubt the judgment of someone who did acid and couldn't use proper spelling or grammar anymore. I'd also wonder what "better" really meant in this context.
Rape laws now often have exceptions for when the two people are sufficiently close in age. In this state, a 13-year-old having sex with a 13-year-old isn't necessarily rape, but make one of those two 15 years old and it is.
Suppose I see a young woman limiting her drinks, and I spike them. She gets blind-drunk and I take advantage of the situation. It seems to me that it's my fault.
I agree it's the consumables that matter. That's why I wouldn't invest a dime in this.
An iPhone is actually useful, and you aren't restricted to buying a phone and data plan from Apple. It's well made, and if you're going to use something multiple times a day for three or more years it's probably worth paying a few hundred more for a device you like more. You're probably going to have a pocket phone anyway, so it won't take up more space.
This thing is not as central to the average user. It locks the user into an expensive fruit and veggie plan. If the manufacturer goes out of business, it's useless. It takes up space that other and less expensive solutions don't.
Seriously, this doesn't make sense to the typical iPhone user.
Space is big. Mind-bogglingly big. You may think it's a long way to your....
Anyway, the satellites you'd want to recycle are a very few satellites in a large volume of space. There's no single place where they hang around, ready to be harvested. There's billions and billions of cubic miles in LEO space, and maybe a million objects larger than two millimeters. That's thousands of cubic miles per fleck. It's probably going to be more concentrated near the lower part of LEO, but it's still incredibly sparse.
Do you believe in economic injury? The problem with space debris is not that it's going to fall on my house or my foot. The problem is that it will damage other satellites. Satellites are inherently expensive (if only in cost to orbit), and therefore valuable (or they wouldn't be launched) and space debris can therefore destroy valuable property.
I've been around long enough to know that some things are just inherently complex, and you can't make them simpler. My life experience tells me that the drive to simplify everything produces its own brand of chaos.
Have you verified your gravitational theory against other observations? I'm not all that into General Relativity, but I do know that there's some things a new theory of gravity has to explain. In what way is your gravitational theory different from MOND and other attempts to change the theory to accommodate galactic rotation curves?
Also, you does your theory explain the Bullet Cluster, gravitational lensing along tendrils of dark matter as predicted, and the composition of the Universe based on the amount of baryonic matter formed?