Gold IS used for much more than just jewelry, and some recent scientific breakthroughs continue to find new uses for gold (I read about them here on Slashdot but don't recall them off the top of my head.) I do agree with you that the money doesn't have to be backed by gold, and that it can be something else, instead.
The federal government doesn't supply the bulk of the funding for our roads. Ron Paul would currently take the money we are spending in Iraq and put it towards social security, and set up the system to transition us away from it over time. We don't need the bureaucracy of the IRS, period. There are more efficient solutions to that problem, like NOT spending so damn much. Ron Paul doesn't want unethical business practices going on, so under him, the government would still deal with illegal business practices, so your Robber Baron analogy is false.
About the gold standard, he has said before that it doesn't HAVE to be the gold standard, that it can be based on some other hard value, it just can't be done how it currently is done, and that it has always been that it must take an amendment to change what the constitution says, which is why he says what he says about it.
Thank you for your straw man arguments and sensationalism, though.
Sounds like Kucinich would be your man, then? I have the opposite viewpoints of yours economically, but very similar views on personal freedoms and civil liberties, and so I support Ron Paul. Kucinich is even more libertarian on the social freedoms spectrum, but is basically the opposite of Ron Paul on economic freedoms. So that sounds like your guy to me.
If you are saying that you won't vote for Kucinich because you don't think he has a chance, and are therefore supporting Obama, then fine. But based on your summary of your ideals, Kucinich seems to be the guy for you if he had more of a chance.
2. The Amazon Kindle in fact does allow you to annotate a page. Select the line using the menu scroll wheel, then select "Add Note". You can then enter a note that then stays associated with the line. On the main page a small 'note' icon shows up on the page. You can also browse your notes by selecting "Menu" at the bottom of the page, then select "My Notes & Marks"; this shows a list of all the notes that you've taken. Selecting the note allows you to go directly to the page where the note was set; you can then read your note. (The Sony Reader doesn't allow you to do this because it has no keyboard.) Both devices allow you to bookmark a page. Thanks for the info on the note feature. I hadn't read about that anywhere. Is this feature on any of the other electronic book readers that you have used?
Hence the fiasco that was the raiding of the Liberty Dollar business. The Constitution also says that it must be gold and silver only, which obviously if Ron Paul wanted to go there or do something different would both need an amendment. That is what sucks about having to follow the rules when no one else does. Kind of why he is the underdog, because he actually plays it straight.
He would work to develop an interim solution based on the many proposed theories that are out there. He has talked about the needed transition period to move forward, and that is how he would deal with it. Most people against Ron Paul think he would somehow be able to come in and create sweeping changes. That couldn't happen and that isn't what Ron Paul supporters want, either. We want someone who isn't going to take us further in the wrong direction on either social or economic issues, which a neo-con Republican or a Democrat will. He would first determine the most objective way of moving forward, away from all this mess, and he has the methodical approach to do it right.
Nader's campaign in 2004 made $4,567,299, and Democrats accused Nader of having his bid funded by Republicans who wanted a repeat of his effect on the 2000 election. According to FEC records, the majority of donors who gave the maximum allowed donation to his campaign ($2,300) also gave the maximum to the Bush campaign! So now do we have the opposite going on? I'd like to see someone research it, but I am really doubtful that it will turn out to be a lot of Democrats donating to him. I could be wrong, and there is no way to prove it to you, but my activity in viewing the Ron Paul community seems to tell me otherwise.
There are other solutions to it besides gold and silver. Ron Paul has just said that he likes the ideas behind gold and silver, but I have read or watched him say that it doesn't have to be gold and/or silver.
So, does this mean that their is more dark matter in the universe to make up for it, similarly less dark matter, or that the same amount of dark matter is still supposedly out there?
On the other hand, I find it QUITE surprising that the Wii can so handily outsell the 360 when its game library is, all things considered, horribly outmatched. This is a very strong example of the fact that games do NOT sell the system, as many gamers like to think. Advertisements and price tag do a LOT more than the shelves of dvd-size plastic boxes with the console's logo on them, it seems. If the hardware was priced the same, then I think it WOULD be the games that primarily sell a system.
You've got your definition for "introvert" mixed up with a lot of other stuff that it isn't. See the following, "The most common misconception about introverts": http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=197 96 .
Just because you like being alone a lot does not mean that you are shy or that you get anxious around people. Yes, some introverts are also shy or have social anxiety, but that isn't what makes them an introvert.
I guess it is just arguing over semantics, but this is one of the societal changes that I was referring to, though you are right that it could be that you are getting quality sleep, but just not enough. It could be that you aren't getting quality sleep, and therefore waking up too early because of it.
One of the problems with the latest studies I have heard about is that they don't differentiate when they poll people between desired sleep time (which people will often tell you), actual time in bed (which is the other one that people will give you), and actual sleep time (which most people don't really accurately keep track of).
Yes, it may not be completely a quality problem, but then that is you choosing to go along with a societal/modern traditional problem. My guess is that if you DID actually try to sleep according to the sun, if you got adequate sunlight exposure in the morning time, and you slept without an alarm, you would be getting much more restful sleep, and possibly the longer 8+ hours of sleep. Realize that just because you are told that "everyone should get" 8.5 hours of sleep does not mean that less is individually bad for many adults. What really matters is how you feel and your health.
Some of the latest epidemiological studies show that we are getting the same amount of sleep. The problem is: Are we getting the same quality of sleep as we used to? There are many health conditions today brought on by societal changes that are grossly affecting our sleep.
The simple reason why video games are a target is that most soccer mom's don't play video games any more complex the Snood or Bejeweled Not only that, but I would argue that video games are still looked upon as simply children's games by the vast majority of people, even if they are rated Mature. For that reason they are continually going to be marginalized by many adults.
Until we have what are the equivalent of great literary works, constitutions, social commentaries, documentaries, or works of art in the video game format (yes, I know, many gamers argue that we do, but that hasn't caught on), or until they have a serious application in the workforce, i.e. when they are not just there for simply entertainment, until then, until they are truly appreciated universally by the majority of adults in this kind of sense, then they won't be given the more adult treatment that people are asking for them.
The previous poster's argument still stands. How many of those "large numbers of the elite intellect & previously seriously respected Government officials" also believe in a personal God, or miracles, or anything else of the like that is largely improbable? Many scientists with a PhD and who are well respected for their work still believe in things like this. It is the same type of scenario.
Some researchers and/or theorists have thought that autism (even in women) could be this hyper or over masculinization of thought or cognition, meaning that if what you, this, and they say holds true, it might not be of such a narrow scope.
The United States is a republic, but it is also a democracy. A "democracy" does not just refer to a "direct democracy". From dictionary.com:
democracy - 1.) government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.
While I understand what you are saying and agree, there are topics and courses that are quite interdisciplinary between CS, Computer Engineering, and Software Engineering and it should be made clear that it could serve well to have these degrees taught at the same locations on campuses. I think they should be a part of the same department, say a Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering and Computer and Information Sciences. The curriculum should obviously differ for each. Remember, we are primarily talking about undergraduate students here, where a lot of what they learn is going to have a good bit of overlap in these topics. And, for the graduate students and the professors, it would do good to have their research centrally located, because it is, of course, similar minds just working at different sides of the same spectrum.
What would also be nice is to see more computer-topic-related schools set up interdisciplinary relationships with the research going on in departments doing work in the other sciences. Understanding how to apply what you have learned to other disciplines should greatly improve your job selection pool in the future.
I know other people have been critical of the idea here that consciousness and quantum effects could be tied together, but I do think it is interesting to consider. When I read that comment, I immediately thought of artificial neural networks, and noise being introduced to produce learning within them.
I realize that you can create signal noise without having to explicitly deal with the quantum level and that there are neural networks that can work without introducing noise.
We would have to somehow determine that the processes inside the human brain work at or depend upon the lower, quantum level in a more direct and novel way than any other biological process that we know of.
I never said anything about alcohol not being a drug, and personally, I think that most illegal drugs should be legalized. The guy above claiming I am a Republican needs to get real. I am a libertarian, by far.
Furthermore, a comment a couple posts down said the same thing that I did (that while the drug addict could have chosen not to try the drug that they are now addicted to, the person with Huntington's disease could not have chosen), but somehow he got moderated up. Must have been the D.A.R.E. reference.
TO make it clear, I never said that the drug addict couldn't have been genetically more susceptible to becoming addicted, however, that still doesn't take away a good bit of their culpability, if they were informed of the risks of the drug that they decided to try. Yes, there are cases where someone somehow may not have been educated about the risks AND they were genetically more susceptible to becoming addicted AND they tried it, and now are an addict. I think that it should have been legal for them to have tried it, but that it is also their responsibility to deal with the repercussions.
Slashdot Mirror
That particular part didn't represent his views, period. He DIDN'T write it. You are the grade-A jerk for your defamatory comments.
Gold IS used for much more than just jewelry, and some recent scientific breakthroughs continue to find new uses for gold (I read about them here on Slashdot but don't recall them off the top of my head.) I do agree with you that the money doesn't have to be backed by gold, and that it can be something else, instead.
The federal government doesn't supply the bulk of the funding for our roads. Ron Paul would currently take the money we are spending in Iraq and put it towards social security, and set up the system to transition us away from it over time. We don't need the bureaucracy of the IRS, period. There are more efficient solutions to that problem, like NOT spending so damn much. Ron Paul doesn't want unethical business practices going on, so under him, the government would still deal with illegal business practices, so your Robber Baron analogy is false.
About the gold standard, he has said before that it doesn't HAVE to be the gold standard, that it can be based on some other hard value, it just can't be done how it currently is done, and that it has always been that it must take an amendment to change what the constitution says, which is why he says what he says about it.
Thank you for your straw man arguments and sensationalism, though.
Sounds like Kucinich would be your man, then? I have the opposite viewpoints of yours economically, but very similar views on personal freedoms and civil liberties, and so I support Ron Paul. Kucinich is even more libertarian on the social freedoms spectrum, but is basically the opposite of Ron Paul on economic freedoms. So that sounds like your guy to me.
If you are saying that you won't vote for Kucinich because you don't think he has a chance, and are therefore supporting Obama, then fine. But based on your summary of your ideals, Kucinich seems to be the guy for you if he had more of a chance.
Yeah, but it can just pull itself up by its bootstraps, so no problem there at all.
Hence the fiasco that was the raiding of the Liberty Dollar business. The Constitution also says that it must be gold and silver only, which obviously if Ron Paul wanted to go there or do something different would both need an amendment. That is what sucks about having to follow the rules when no one else does. Kind of why he is the underdog, because he actually plays it straight.
He would work to develop an interim solution based on the many proposed theories that are out there. He has talked about the needed transition period to move forward, and that is how he would deal with it. Most people against Ron Paul think he would somehow be able to come in and create sweeping changes. That couldn't happen and that isn't what Ron Paul supporters want, either. We want someone who isn't going to take us further in the wrong direction on either social or economic issues, which a neo-con Republican or a Democrat will. He would first determine the most objective way of moving forward, away from all this mess, and he has the methodical approach to do it right.
He's only not a "viable" substitute because people who think in this way like you don't choose to support him.
Nader's campaign in 2004 made $4,567,299, and Democrats accused Nader of having his bid funded by Republicans who wanted a repeat of his effect on the 2000 election. According to FEC records, the majority of donors who gave the maximum allowed donation to his campaign ($2,300) also gave the maximum to the Bush campaign! So now do we have the opposite going on? I'd like to see someone research it, but I am really doubtful that it will turn out to be a lot of Democrats donating to him. I could be wrong, and there is no way to prove it to you, but my activity in viewing the Ron Paul community seems to tell me otherwise.
There are other solutions to it besides gold and silver. Ron Paul has just said that he likes the ideas behind gold and silver, but I have read or watched him say that it doesn't have to be gold and/or silver.
So, does this mean that their is more dark matter in the universe to make up for it, similarly less dark matter, or that the same amount of dark matter is still supposedly out there?
You've got your definition for "introvert" mixed up with a lot of other stuff that it isn't. See the following, "The most common misconception about introverts": http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=197 96 .
Just because you like being alone a lot does not mean that you are shy or that you get anxious around people. Yes, some introverts are also shy or have social anxiety, but that isn't what makes them an introvert.
I guess it is just arguing over semantics, but this is one of the societal changes that I was referring to, though you are right that it could be that you are getting quality sleep, but just not enough. It could be that you aren't getting quality sleep, and therefore waking up too early because of it.
One of the problems with the latest studies I have heard about is that they don't differentiate when they poll people between desired sleep time (which people will often tell you), actual time in bed (which is the other one that people will give you), and actual sleep time (which most people don't really accurately keep track of).
Yes, it may not be completely a quality problem, but then that is you choosing to go along with a societal/modern traditional problem. My guess is that if you DID actually try to sleep according to the sun, if you got adequate sunlight exposure in the morning time, and you slept without an alarm, you would be getting much more restful sleep, and possibly the longer 8+ hours of sleep. Realize that just because you are told that "everyone should get" 8.5 hours of sleep does not mean that less is individually bad for many adults. What really matters is how you feel and your health.
Some of the latest epidemiological studies show that we are getting the same amount of sleep. The problem is: Are we getting the same quality of sleep as we used to? There are many health conditions today brought on by societal changes that are grossly affecting our sleep.
Until we have what are the equivalent of great literary works, constitutions, social commentaries, documentaries, or works of art in the video game format (yes, I know, many gamers argue that we do, but that hasn't caught on), or until they have a serious application in the workforce, i.e. when they are not just there for simply entertainment, until then, until they are truly appreciated universally by the majority of adults in this kind of sense, then they won't be given the more adult treatment that people are asking for them.
The previous poster's argument still stands. How many of those "large numbers of the elite intellect & previously seriously respected Government officials" also believe in a personal God, or miracles, or anything else of the like that is largely improbable? Many scientists with a PhD and who are well respected for their work still believe in things like this. It is the same type of scenario.
Some researchers and/or theorists have thought that autism (even in women) could be this hyper or over masculinization of thought or cognition, meaning that if what you, this, and they say holds true, it might not be of such a narrow scope.
Wow, didn't expect that suggestion. Thanks, though, but I'll pass. Next time I'll remember to add in the "badum-bum-CHING!" tag, just for you.
What's wrong with using "etc."? lol, j/k.
While I understand what you are saying and agree, there are topics and courses that are quite interdisciplinary between CS, Computer Engineering, and Software Engineering and it should be made clear that it could serve well to have these degrees taught at the same locations on campuses. I think they should be a part of the same department, say a Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering and Computer and Information Sciences. The curriculum should obviously differ for each. Remember, we are primarily talking about undergraduate students here, where a lot of what they learn is going to have a good bit of overlap in these topics. And, for the graduate students and the professors, it would do good to have their research centrally located, because it is, of course, similar minds just working at different sides of the same spectrum.
What would also be nice is to see more computer-topic-related schools set up interdisciplinary relationships with the research going on in departments doing work in the other sciences. Understanding how to apply what you have learned to other disciplines should greatly improve your job selection pool in the future.
I know other people have been critical of the idea here that consciousness and quantum effects could be tied together, but I do think it is interesting to consider. When I read that comment, I immediately thought of artificial neural networks, and noise being introduced to produce learning within them.
I realize that you can create signal noise without having to explicitly deal with the quantum level and that there are neural networks that can work without introducing noise.
We would have to somehow determine that the processes inside the human brain work at or depend upon the lower, quantum level in a more direct and novel way than any other biological process that we know of.
I never said anything about alcohol not being a drug, and personally, I think that most illegal drugs should be legalized. The guy above claiming I am a Republican needs to get real. I am a libertarian, by far.
Furthermore, a comment a couple posts down said the same thing that I did (that while the drug addict could have chosen not to try the drug that they are now addicted to, the person with Huntington's disease could not have chosen), but somehow he got moderated up. Must have been the D.A.R.E. reference.
TO make it clear, I never said that the drug addict couldn't have been genetically more susceptible to becoming addicted, however, that still doesn't take away a good bit of their culpability, if they were informed of the risks of the drug that they decided to try. Yes, there are cases where someone somehow may not have been educated about the risks AND they were genetically more susceptible to becoming addicted AND they tried it, and now are an addict. I think that it should have been legal for them to have tried it, but that it is also their responsibility to deal with the repercussions.
The difference is that the drug addicts could have chosen to do what they learned in D.A.R.E.