Whenever someone trots out 'studies', the sources are usually politically biased such that the whole proof chain is dubious at best. Who funded these 'studies' and what are their political positions? Did they have any social motivations beyond telling as much truth as possible? Was the science sound? Most times we can't even answer these questions, and the presenters dont' bother telling us. Laziness or calculation? Who knows..
Hell, if we all asked these questions of ourselves every time the media trots out a 'study' as 'proof' of a need for some political change, a lot of them would go up in the smoke they're made from.
Women have their own behavior and set of socio-sexual dynamics. It's just that they aren't criminalized like mens'. Women today belittle, manipulate, and yes, stalk, in their own way, men and/or their trappings of power or property. If a guy complains about it, he's told to man up and take it, or worse, let her win, else he be labeled a misogynist. Of course, when she complains, he's automatically assumed to be a dickhead and reprimanded/fired, and possibly ridiculed publicly. There are so many layers of hypocritical fallacy about this subject nowadays, it's nearly impossible to talk about these negative aspects, nevermind determine unbiased fact. This is why political-correctness is truly evil.
As far as guys like you go, it's time to lay off the feminist kool-aid for a bit. Unfortunately, the insecurity of today's 'men' make them so desperate to 'win' as many women as possible, they figure the only way to win their favor is to suck up to them with biased law and cultural expectation. These guys selling the rest of us out are the ones being used now, and feminists are laughing all the way to the bank.
You want empathy? More like you're demanding others join you in your stockholm syndrome. You're a fool.
That doesn't mean it's primarily due to discrimination. Unfortunately it doesn't stop the colleges from pumping out drones who repeat this and other mantras behind the protective screen of political-correctness.
oh goody I can't wait to have my 'local' computing limits dictated by artificial social and business interests. If I can't control the core tools I depend on, there is no job or financial security. I'll pass.
No, it's not racism. It's a legitimate concern, but it doesn't just apply to the chinese. Who's to say that Cisco/nortel/juniper et al don't also have backdoors in their firmware? Frankly, no western country has a right to bitch about chinese government abuse of civil liberties and police state paranoia when they themselves are doing the same things. I'm surprised the indian government isn't choosing to distrust western closed hardware as well. They should.
This is yet another reason why closed software sucks. There's no way to audit what's running on the hardware.
The fact is flash sucked at all those things because: 1. It's bloated, it's slow, it's buggy as hell. It's so bad that browsers now have a plugin-wrapper to prevent it from crashing the entire browser. 2. It's closed, so it can't easily be ported to other platforms.. basically, flashterbated sites are only going to work well on windows, poorly on linux and mac, and not at all on anything else. Useless.. might as well just distribute OS specific binaries and be done with it..
I'm glad flash is dying. It's stagnated these activities since 1998. Even Cu-Seeme was better than flash. If we have to take a step back to motivate people, then I'm for it. To be honest, we shouldn't be using the browser for these tasks. This everything-in-a-browser trend is what's stagnated potential, not the death of flash. The browser should provide HTML, with links that open external applications which are far more likely to be better tuned for the environment the user is using, both performance wise as well as interface consistency.
For one, you have the cause and effect reversed. Having a gun does not make someone want to kill people, just like having bottles of toxic cleaners in a cabinet doesn't make one want to poison someone.
The issue claimed here is about ease of access. It's harder to get an AK47 into your hands today than it is to build a homebrew explosive device for example. Guys like lanza use what's at their disposal. if he didn't have access to weaponry, he would've made his own.
That's my point. The problem is cultural. Simple bans will not alter this...and no, the USA is not the only country with problems. Quit restricting yourself to eurocentric media.
I agree with some of your post, except for two areas.
Bully anyone enough, even the most well-adjusted happy teenager, and you'll get a psychopath out the other end, regardless of his upbringing.. The public schools are breeding grounds for this kind of behavior because instead of teaching kids to stand up for themselves, our 'PC' culture teaches ineffectual passive-aggressive 'coping skills' that actually magnify the teasing as they destroy self-esteem. The 'normal' kids who aren't fully indoctrinated with them actually end up with better self esteem than the kids they tease as a result. So instead of a fist fight or two in 7th grade, he shoots up his school senior year.. or, much more likely, has some kind of breakdown. I've watched less extreme examples following the same dynamics go down time and time again while I was in school, and I can't imagine my school system was/is unique.
Oh, and simply kicking the crap out of children for every offense doesn't build empathy. It builds deep seated anger if done repeatedly to modify behavior. For example, I heard today there was a 12 year old who shot his neonazi father for abuse and the kid is serving 11 years for that. The claim is that the father regularly beat both the kid and his wife.
To those who say gun bans would've prevented this, I say it wouldn't have. Instead of a 'gun death', the murder/act of self defense would've been counted some other way as it would've likely still occurred.
Outside the USA, gun bans are normal and deaths by weapons are all a tiny fraction of those in the USA. Where guns are allowed (e.g. Switzerland has quite a few) they get a lot more deaths, Swiss being more prone to just killing themselves than gun rampage+suicide.
That's nice. Consensus doesn't imply truth or justify a course of action unles the goal is solely to make people feel better temporarily.
People with knives, you can run away from, guns though are designed to give the owner a killing advantage. There's simply no need for a killing advantage unless your intention is to kill.
You can sanitize the environment all you like, but if someone wants to kill, they will.
So you're blaming the kid going into school with his moms GUN on the economy? "Kneejerk", hardly kneejerk, this has been raised again and again and needs to be tackled but Republican gun nuts like Diane Franklin would sacrifice thousands of school children for their few thousand dollars NRA lobby money.
omg the children! the children! will someone please protect them? (the irony here being that schools are using armed guards WITH GUNS to do the protecting).
Yes, I am blaming it, indirectly, among other things. A miserable economy affects everyone's well being negatively. The worse things get for more people, the more 'canaries' like lanza you'll see come out of the woodwork. If kids are going batshit crazy in school, like columbine or VA tech, or are targeting schools years after they graduated even when the targeted school isn't one they attended, maybe the core problem lies elsewhere? Of course, that would require liberals to acknowledge that the public school system needs serious repair, but they won't do more than pay lip service to that.
Maybe, but that doesn't excuse the giant misdirection from the left with its assumption that more bans = safer (look at chicago, and we tried this with alcohol too). If anything, more bans increases the pressure of the conflict. People who shoot up schools/malls/whatever are highly motivated. Making guns harder to get will not stop these people. If the goal is to prevent these events, then the leadership should spend more time fixing the core problems of our society, like the dying economy and civil liberties instead of passing populist kneejerk unsolutions. When most people are doing well, fewer are interested in killing.
The dirty, skanky, shit-packed bootheel of socialism on everyone's backs won't solve these problems either...and we have a lot more socialism in the world today than free-market capitalism. Look closely at the countries run that way. While I'd prefer more control over my money as well as my civil liberties back, this is nothing compared to the crushing oppression in North Korea and china, or the mollifying, soft socialism of places like sweden, where you're 'free' until you say something that upsets someone's feelings and the state takes 75% of your income (50% + VAT). Of course, your whole premise is a one dimensional dichotomy, and these never solve anything.
The tea party's position is the complete opposite of the one you label them with. I like how you assume the level of expenditure we have now is some kind of foregone reality that must exist. You don't manage budgets solely by caving to demands for more money and then raising taxes/borrowing to pay for them. Sometimes you have to reduce expenditures. Of course, what's needed for that are the balls to say 'No,' among other things, but we have nothing but pantywaisted 'team players' in washington these days. You reek with bias.
Who've been the ones demanding the tax payer fund all sorts of mostly useless bullshit over the last 50 years? The democrats have the ideological mandates for the centralization and control of power, and the neo-con republicans push for exemptions for big money, leaving us with the bill. That leaves the tea party and/or the libertarians fighting for individual control over our money and our civil rights. They are NOT about the government spending money.. Where do you get your information?
So it's only ok to have racist government policy that gives entitlements to certain races and not others, but not ok when someone complains about it on the internet?
1. references to 'inequality' despite the statement that whites are just as affected 2. the strong antigun reference,which is just a cheap attention grab considering recent events. if memory serves switzerland is one of the most well armed citizenries in the world. despite the cultural differences between the two countries, this fact punches a rather large hole in his argument that mere mass possession of firearms is a cause. 3. the 'nice' anti individualist statement towards the end of the article makes the ideological underpinnings of the author stand out loud and clear.
"We have a culture in our country that, among many Americans, cherishes personal autonomy and wants to limit intrusion of government and other entities on our personal lives and also wants to encourage free enterprise and the success of business and industry. Some of those forces may act against the ability to achieve optimal health outcomes,"
if we take away the premise of this article and leave only what it blames, it looks like a partial but typical left wing list of complaints about american society,with the implied solution being, of course, more government, and therfore less self direction in ones own life. even if these changes brought our stats inline with switzerland, adding a few years to the end of my life is not worth giving up ever more control of it to people I dont know, will never know, and who dont give a rats ass about how I want to live.
this applies to ivy league left wing 'cultured' bureaucrats, corporocrats, or any other form of tyrant arguing that hand picked metrics backing half baked political theories make up the sum of a worthwhile existence. while the author is obviously left wing, there are plenty on the right (or who claim to be anyway) who preach this crapola too.
So, your answer to behavior you don't like is to drug them instead? Lovely. You are so 'enlightened' and 'intelligent.' Yours is the typical left wing counterpart to right wing brute violence. While violence is sometimes necessary to survive, there is never an excuse for subjugating people with drugs in order to get ever increasing compliance with ever increasing inhuman social expectations.
software that does not use the OS cert store or SSL lib should still be immune to this. Someone would have to set the software to trust the proxy cert. If not, there's no way for the proxy to decrypt the payload. The solution is to use a real browser that doesn't use nokia's openssl/gnutls.
there is a difference between employee and slave. Just because you employ someone doesnt mean you have sovereignty over their body...or at least it shouldnt.
In trad slashdot style, I didn't read. Best way to do this is to keep R-rated stuff off the family tv's media playback device. Share them on a different share etc.
lack of choice.. I don't know when you were that age, but I'll bet work was more plentiful and the employment process a lot more direct and simple back then.
Slashdot Mirror
Whenever someone trots out 'studies', the sources are usually politically biased such that the whole proof chain is dubious at best. Who funded these 'studies' and what are their political positions? Did they have any social motivations beyond telling as much truth as possible? Was the science sound? Most times we can't even answer these questions, and the presenters dont' bother telling us. Laziness or calculation? Who knows..
Hell, if we all asked these questions of ourselves every time the media trots out a 'study' as 'proof' of a need for some political change, a lot of them would go up in the smoke they're made from.
Women have their own behavior and set of socio-sexual dynamics. It's just that they aren't criminalized like mens'. Women today belittle, manipulate, and yes, stalk, in their own way, men and/or their trappings of power or property. If a guy complains about it, he's told to man up and take it, or worse, let her win, else he be labeled a misogynist. Of course, when she complains, he's automatically assumed to be a dickhead and reprimanded/fired, and possibly ridiculed publicly. There are so many layers of hypocritical fallacy about this subject nowadays, it's nearly impossible to talk about these negative aspects, nevermind determine unbiased fact. This is why political-correctness is truly evil.
As far as guys like you go, it's time to lay off the feminist kool-aid for a bit. Unfortunately, the insecurity of today's 'men' make them so desperate to 'win' as many women as possible, they figure the only way to win their favor is to suck up to them with biased law and cultural expectation. These guys selling the rest of us out are the ones being used now, and feminists are laughing all the way to the bank.
You want empathy? More like you're demanding others join you in your stockholm syndrome. You're a fool.
Well if his explanation isn't excusable, than neither is the feminist position of being 'objectified' by males.
There's a huge gender gap in science
That doesn't mean it's primarily due to discrimination. Unfortunately it doesn't stop the colleges from pumping out drones who repeat this and other mantras behind the protective screen of political-correctness.
Oh, so it's only ok for feminists to stereotype?
oh goody I can't wait to have my 'local' computing limits dictated by artificial social and business interests. If I can't control the core tools I depend on, there is no job or financial security. I'll pass.
No, it's not racism. It's a legitimate concern, but it doesn't just apply to the chinese. Who's to say that Cisco/nortel/juniper et al don't also have backdoors in their firmware? Frankly, no western country has a right to bitch about chinese government abuse of civil liberties and police state paranoia when they themselves are doing the same things. I'm surprised the indian government isn't choosing to distrust western closed hardware as well. They should.
This is yet another reason why closed software sucks. There's no way to audit what's running on the hardware.
The fact is flash sucked at all those things because:
1. It's bloated, it's slow, it's buggy as hell. It's so bad that browsers now have a plugin-wrapper to prevent it from crashing the entire browser.
2. It's closed, so it can't easily be ported to other platforms.. basically, flashterbated sites are only going to work well on windows, poorly on linux and mac, and not at all on anything else. Useless.. might as well just distribute OS specific binaries and be done with it..
I'm glad flash is dying. It's stagnated these activities since 1998. Even Cu-Seeme was better than flash. If we have to take a step back to motivate people, then I'm for it. To be honest, we shouldn't be using the browser for these tasks. This everything-in-a-browser trend is what's stagnated potential, not the death of flash. The browser should provide HTML, with links that open external applications which are far more likely to be better tuned for the environment the user is using, both performance wise as well as interface consistency.
For one, you have the cause and effect reversed. Having a gun does not make someone want to kill people, just like having bottles of toxic cleaners in a cabinet doesn't make one want to poison someone.
The issue claimed here is about ease of access. It's harder to get an AK47 into your hands today than it is to build a homebrew explosive device for example. Guys like lanza use what's at their disposal. if he didn't have access to weaponry, he would've made his own.
That's my point. The problem is cultural. Simple bans will not alter this. ..and no, the USA is not the only country with problems. Quit restricting yourself to eurocentric media.
I agree with some of your post, except for two areas.
Bully anyone enough, even the most well-adjusted happy teenager, and you'll get a psychopath out the other end, regardless of his upbringing.. The public schools are breeding grounds for this kind of behavior because instead of teaching kids to stand up for themselves, our 'PC' culture teaches ineffectual passive-aggressive 'coping skills' that actually magnify the teasing as they destroy self-esteem. The 'normal' kids who aren't fully indoctrinated with them actually end up with better self esteem than the kids they tease as a result. So instead of a fist fight or two in 7th grade, he shoots up his school senior year.. or, much more likely, has some kind of breakdown. I've watched less extreme examples following the same dynamics go down time and time again while I was in school, and I can't imagine my school system was/is unique.
Oh, and simply kicking the crap out of children for every offense doesn't build empathy. It builds deep seated anger if done repeatedly to modify behavior. For example, I heard today there was a 12 year old who shot his neonazi father for abuse and the kid is serving 11 years for that. The claim is that the father regularly beat both the kid and his wife.
To those who say gun bans would've prevented this, I say it wouldn't have. Instead of a 'gun death', the murder/act of self defense would've been counted some other way as it would've likely still occurred.
Outside the USA, gun bans are normal and deaths by weapons are all a tiny fraction of those in the USA. Where guns are allowed (e.g. Switzerland has quite a few) they get a lot more deaths, Swiss being more prone to just killing themselves than gun rampage+suicide.
That's nice. Consensus doesn't imply truth or justify a course of action unles the goal is solely to make people feel better temporarily.
People with knives, you can run away from, guns though are designed to give the owner a killing advantage. There's simply no need for a killing advantage unless your intention is to kill.
You can sanitize the environment all you like, but if someone wants to kill, they will.
So you're blaming the kid going into school with his moms GUN on the economy?
"Kneejerk", hardly kneejerk, this has been raised again and again and needs to be tackled but Republican gun nuts like Diane Franklin would sacrifice thousands of school children for their few thousand dollars NRA lobby money.
omg the children! the children! will someone please protect them? (the irony here being that schools are using armed guards WITH GUNS to do the protecting).
Yes, I am blaming it, indirectly, among other things. A miserable economy affects everyone's well being negatively. The worse things get for more people, the more 'canaries' like lanza you'll see come out of the woodwork. If kids are going batshit crazy in school, like columbine or VA tech, or are targeting schools years after they graduated even when the targeted school isn't one they attended, maybe the core problem lies elsewhere? Of course, that would require liberals to acknowledge that the public school system needs serious repair, but they won't do more than pay lip service to that.
Maybe, but that doesn't excuse the giant misdirection from the left with its assumption that more bans = safer (look at chicago, and we tried this with alcohol too). If anything, more bans increases the pressure of the conflict. People who shoot up schools/malls/whatever are highly motivated. Making guns harder to get will not stop these people. If the goal is to prevent these events, then the leadership should spend more time fixing the core problems of our society, like the dying economy and civil liberties instead of passing populist kneejerk unsolutions. When most people are doing well, fewer are interested in killing.
The dirty, skanky, shit-packed bootheel of socialism on everyone's backs won't solve these problems either...and we have a lot more socialism in the world today than free-market capitalism. Look closely at the countries run that way. While I'd prefer more control over my money as well as my civil liberties back, this is nothing compared to the crushing oppression in North Korea and china, or the mollifying, soft socialism of places like sweden, where you're 'free' until you say something that upsets someone's feelings and the state takes 75% of your income (50% + VAT). Of course, your whole premise is a one dimensional dichotomy, and these never solve anything.
The tea party's position is the complete opposite of the one you label them with. I like how you assume the level of expenditure we have now is some kind of foregone reality that must exist. You don't manage budgets solely by caving to demands for more money and then raising taxes/borrowing to pay for them. Sometimes you have to reduce expenditures. Of course, what's needed for that are the balls to say 'No,' among other things, but we have nothing but pantywaisted 'team players' in washington these days. You reek with bias.
Who've been the ones demanding the tax payer fund all sorts of mostly useless bullshit over the last 50 years? The democrats have the ideological mandates for the centralization and control of power, and the neo-con republicans push for exemptions for big money, leaving us with the bill. That leaves the tea party and/or the libertarians fighting for individual control over our money and our civil rights. They are NOT about the government spending money.. Where do you get your information?
So it's only ok to have racist government policy that gives entitlements to certain races and not others, but not ok when someone complains about it on the internet?
You've drunk too much PC kool-aid.
1. references to 'inequality' despite the statement that whites are just as affected
2. the strong antigun reference,which is just a cheap attention grab considering recent events. if memory serves switzerland is one of the most well armed citizenries in the world. despite the cultural differences between the two countries, this fact punches a rather large hole in his argument that mere mass possession of firearms is a cause.
3. the 'nice' anti individualist statement towards the end of the article makes the ideological underpinnings of the author stand out loud and clear.
"We have a culture in our country that, among many Americans, cherishes personal autonomy and wants to limit intrusion of government and other entities on our personal lives and also wants to encourage free enterprise and the success of business and industry. Some of those forces may act against the ability to achieve optimal health outcomes,"
if we take away the premise of this article and leave only what it blames, it looks like a partial but typical left wing list of complaints about american society,with the implied solution being, of course, more government, and therfore less self direction in ones own life. even if these changes brought our stats inline with switzerland, adding a few years to the end of my life is not worth giving up ever more control of it to people I dont know, will never know, and who dont give a rats ass about how I want to live.
this applies to ivy league left wing 'cultured' bureaucrats, corporocrats, or any other form of tyrant arguing that hand picked metrics backing half baked political theories make up the sum of a worthwhile existence. while the author is obviously left wing, there are plenty on the right (or who claim to be anyway) who preach this crapola too.
So, your answer to behavior you don't like is to drug them instead? Lovely. You are so 'enlightened' and 'intelligent.' Yours is the typical left wing counterpart to right wing brute violence. While violence is sometimes necessary to survive, there is never an excuse for subjugating people with drugs in order to get ever increasing compliance with ever increasing inhuman social expectations.
Well that might explain why there are so few people with large penises these days, the small penis'd guys killed them off.
software that does not use the OS cert store or SSL lib should still be immune to this. Someone would have to set the software to trust the proxy cert. If not, there's no way for the proxy to decrypt the payload. The solution is to use a real browser that doesn't use nokia's openssl/gnutls.
there is a difference between employee and slave. Just because you employ someone doesnt mean you have sovereignty over their body...or at least it shouldnt.
maybe in your orwellian nightmare but not in a free country.
In trad slashdot style, I didn't read. Best way to do this is to keep R-rated stuff off the family tv's media playback device. Share them on a different share etc.
1. Make copies of the discs for them to use.
2. Put them on a media server.
lack of choice.. I don't know when you were that age, but I'll bet work was more plentiful and the employment process a lot more direct and simple back then.