Racism and Nationalism are often confused. Not as much as say, Nationalism and Patriotism.
Stereotyping is a byproduct of brains pattern recognition skills; it is not all bad, merely our nature and a fundamentally important one.
An island of clones would differentiate somehow and create some sort of class / status system eventually leading to multiple systems that are not aligned which promote conflict (leaving out explanations of the unknown forming religions which would complicate such an experiment.)
Come on, everybody knows the free market religion being hyped for a generation now its not insightful for hardly anybody to repeat the mantra again.
I could argue but I've found it about as pointless as debating the existence of god to a believer.
It IS legal if that is the law of the land in which you live. If greed is the motive, then don't enter a market with a ceiling lower than your ambition.
You're just being argumentative if you are grasping for hypocrisy in my TV viewing comments.
I reduced my TV viewing down over the years; I've seen the culture change during both periods. Fear is encouraged and exploited.
My state charged based on car value; now its same price for all. Weight means nothing here due to politics. All states have to overcome similar political issues and it is not likely mine is the only one who is still backwards. We also pay tax on new cars.
MAD: it IS equal damage by your own words; annihilation is a lot of equal damage... Its relevant because of issues like missile defense creating inequality so the "safe" side can be more aggressive. Despite the fact that the losses are not acceptable; somehow some nuts in government feel safer knowing only 90% are annihilated... and it impacts their risk assessment.)
As for stats, like I said I've seen up close how even honest people have to decide the numbers in ways that move the results around... Although I mostly observed bias towards an end applied.
Aside from the many thresholds involved (I think of all the soccer moms who almost killed me with their minivans at 30mph and I don't bike on the highway,) one has to consider if the whole measure is applicable to the question. Physics, regulation and design are against high speeds; this is common knowledge and could result in compensation on many levels so the numbers go would down; but its possible its still #1. In either case, it doesn't make it safer in the context of an accident, just less --likely-- So, it could be said that highway is safer in terms of having an accident based on the odds you gave.
Oh, and demographics was another one; my parents generation (that I know) largely stays off the highway and are more frail. When they inevitably have an accident (and I'm surprised there are only 2 so far) they were/are harmed more. Especially when seat belts seem less of a concern at lower speeds... bet people wear them less driving in side roads.
You pay by your water usage which is really just a means to charge for water treatment of your waste water which is not metered. If you use no water; you pay almost nothing, yet you can dump tons of horrible waste into the system like many businesses do currently without added expense. A friend of mine invented a meter for waste water but nobody wants it.
I see nothing wrong with charging for throughput like we do with water and power utilities. Initial hook ups cost if you want a 'bigger pipe' but unless you get a different wire/fibre cable that cost wouldn't differ.
At least this would encourage more bandwidth usage... by users-- and discourage bloated web content. I'd much rather have an internet meter next to my power meter; even though it would cost me more because I'm not within the normal user they project their pricing scale for.
I teach CS and I'm against CS. Classic CS is not what is taught or where the degree migrates towards.
Computer Engineering I think of as Software Engineering; I never quite got used to it as the CS branch of electrical engineering. The correct term I should use is Software Engineering.
Like programming? that should be your place. Like math more than programming? do CS. But that is not where it has evolved to. I don't hear about Software Engineering degree programs; everybody is stuck on CS and turning it into that.
Going further:
I agree that CS should be a rare degree; but we need something "marketable" to replace it-- what business wants is more of a trade school degree or certification but too much status is given to a CS degree. Sure it is beneficial; however, the field of APPLICATION of CS should be a form of engineering, not science. Programming is an art form itself as well as a group activity - far more appropriate for the master/apprentice long-term education model than the degree model.
-
MSCE's are a joke in many circles; being the garbagemen of the computer field. They serve a purpose and deserve respect. Human status games are at the root of these issues but that doesn't mean we can not try to compensate for our inherent flaws instead of bending to trends so easily.
Most industry jobs don't need the formal logic and math theory. Perhaps an engineer who has a foot on both sides can help apply new science is useful... Most just try to apply existing stuff skillfully and I argue that is more like developing a trade skill. In the USA, we are stuck on Degrees so we nail everything with that hammer.
I like to take positions to get people thinking;-) however on this one I am serious.
I'm not going to the waste time. You can feel like you "won" if that helps your ego. "evidence" isn't so simple; your cited source didn't provide much detail for those stats and I don't have the time to waste checking it out. For example, fatal accidents could include many debatable situations including where a car runs over a pedestrian; the driver lacks a seat belt, drives off a cliff, has a medical condition, etc.
Culture of Fear is not likely Propaganda but about a wide spread kind of Propaganda in use in this culture. Propaganda (aka P.R.) is evolving as well as more commonly used than ever before.
Having worked in government a bit I've seen the number games and how they work as well as how much effort it can take to verify such things especially if you get a few lawyers nitpicking each other on every tiny point.
I'm not convinced. I do know the fact that cars are regulation tested for low speeds and higher speeds more potentially dangerous. If in fact the stats indicate people are more careful at higher speeds (which I don't concede) it does not change other issues involved. Such as your implication that lower numbers means its perfectly safe to continue because something else is worse. A big SUV is a problem at lower speeds too.
So, you like MAD huh? well then, why not apply that to cars as well? Both sides get equitable damage...
-
I can't make people GROW UP, give them courage, or a sense of responsibility to their community (let alone community itself which is dead.) I don't have to be accepting of such behavior and I have every right to say anything I want to anybody. I can also apply that bias in choosing a side of a debate; for example taxing cars on weight instead of value (BTW heavier ones wear the public roads more don't need to bring up other issues on that debate.) You take a libertarian position and then say I should shut up?
Jack Bower? I don't watch TV.
BTW, Get off my lawn! Oh, and stop polluting our environment for your personal recreation.
Industry in the so called "real world" just ideally wants worker drones. Since college has become a form of entry level certification requirement for industry it can only stand to reason that will eventually influence the college system competing for students.
I've seen some amazingly well run colleges without much overhead; however, they HAVE been harmed by the modern religion of business as much as any other (except their employees are happy because they are free from living Dilbert.)
Part of the problem is that while a Trade School is more fitting the majority of jobs out there-- the college degree looks better to employers so everybody wants that "edge" or these days-- they just want to be on par with everybody else who has a college degree. I was raised on that BS about being stuck at McDonalds if I didn't get a COLLEGE degree.
Corps need to recognize certification/training education as being what they actually want otherwise universities will continue to slide into becoming trade schools. I honestly am against Computer Science; I think people should learn Computer Engineering-- well, thats a whole other discussion especially since they've went and made up a degree program called Computer Engineering which is something else...
Well, sumdumass, I do not put moron into my user name...
You may want to read "Culture of Fear" not that I did; because I get it, but you do not.
I take risks when on the road with selfish pricks in compensation cars and large coward mobiles with the latter tending to be more aggressive in their hogging of the road. I am not afraid; but I am careful because I am aware of the danger while others need extra protection because they either can't handle it or want to be care free (at the expense of others and their own pocketbook.) I don't need a study to be told that SUV drivers are more aggressive, careless, and less road conscious, I've observed it.
I suppose that one has to be a moron not to carry a gun around with them everywhere because some nut may have one? I suppose one has to be a moron if they do not have the biggest nuclear weapon stockpile? Never mind, don't suppose you see the connection.
Stop rationalizing and wake up. Why do people spend so much mental effort backing up positions they didn't put any effort into formulating??
Non-specific generic stats are sooo useful..(sarcasm)
Cars are transportation; I never lost sight of that. Its not a toy or a recreation vehicle or a helmet.
Invention happens without IP; most our progress has been without IP law and the before Orwellian phrase "IP" was created.
Plenty of things come into being without patents. A smart phone without these features can be marketed against by those that do have them; only takes 1 to start the trend.
This is just an IDEA not a real invention and its not worthy of IP protection-- sure it is good, but it is merely a response to an existing use case that is more of a problem when people have smarter phones that lose power from heavier usage (doing non-phone activities.)
If the system was as broken when cell phones started getting "smart" there would be IP on having phone calls interrupt the other activities to inform the user that there is an incoming call. Ridiculous; however, not these days...
I am sick of anti-intellectuals belittling academia and the educated for being out of touch with the so called "real world" implying that they - the insecure - are somehow more in touch with "reality." Its most often an attempt to undermine the benefit of actual expertise and critical thinking skills to create a level playing field where often there shouldn't be one.
If one actually digs, you find that reality is so big and complex that all aspects can not be covered (especially with limited time even with a limited scope... one can get into endless debates about how to limit the scope too.) Its an appeal to ignorance which often traps intellectuals who if they are honest with themselves have a good idea of how little they know of "reality" even in their field of expertise. The US media often takes two sides and presents them as equal when 1 can be pathetically inadequate; a similar tactic.
Often the "real world" person is conceding ideals the academic is not; which are part of a different side debate I've rarely seen the "real worlder" willing to explore. At its heart, Academia explores the real-world at depth and tries to abstract (to help comprehend) and explain the nature of reality-- so its quite an odd claim it is out of touch with reality when its purpose is to better understand reality. Now, sure it can't cover everything and even a moron could contribute something constructive-- the infinite scope of the problem allows for that and many academics can forget this (which is easy to do just from conditioning from interaction with "normal" people.)
Modern culture has raised the money makers into the new high priests of our society and finally in recent years their status is being questioned (just a little.) Over a generation ago, scientists were the high priests who were going to take us to space and solve all the worlds problems with their mighty science. They didn't accomplish these unrealistic ideals (which wasn't heavily promoted on their part) so it stands to reason many people were disillusioned; lack of significant progress in recent times prevents a repeat on the same scale as before. (Computers almost did but people were more jaded.)
Yes I called Americans cowards. I am one but I don't watch TV and find that most Americans are afraid of their own shadow if the TV tells them to be. Oddly, motorcycles, mopeds, bicycles are still used in small numbers; largely because the TV doesn't market against their safety, I suspect...
1st thing people get concerned about is safety with compact cars; wasn't such a big deal before the 90s push to have massive SUV killers-- and the promoted attitude of "at least I'll be in better shape than the other driver" plus marketing it to mothers-- the few mothers I discussed this with were all for killing others to lower injury to their family. It wasn't a question of equality but a COLD WAR of wanting to be safer at the expense of others (and their pocketbook.)
In the 80s people were not nearly as bad; some sort of marketing push must have happened around the 90s probably trying to broaden the appeal of "small dick" vehicles to women.
Its a culture of FEAR and the market promotes it because its easy money. Driving my compact car is only risky at highway speeds where its more risky for any kind of car not just mine; but MORE SAFE than me biking around town. Over here every winter more SUVs wipe out because they think 4 wheel drive somehow defies the laws of friction! The TV implies somehow stopping with 4-wheel DRIVE is better...
If there were no laws there would be no crime. Criminal Law *drives* crime.
If it is not regulated, limited or forbidden-- how can it be "corrupt?" In other words, if you make it legal then how can doing it be corrupt?
Selfish bastards with plenty of motivation will always find ways to CRACK the system; it can not be completely prevented, best we've done is to try to punish those who go too far by creating "reasons" to use when going after those who exploit others-- regulations and laws. The intention of the whole thing is to stop unfair accumulation of wealth and power at the expense of others. Without legal justification and due process how can we reasonably implement systems to help towards approximating our ideals?
Lilo and Stich was a FLUKE. It was as if they were trying to knock off Pixar as a last ditch effort to save that division which I believe was closed after that film.
Nintendo isn't just a developer they've become a producing and publishing house as well. They do some in house hire out some aspects, produce and publish games.
Metroid Prime for example, they produced it: contracted the whole thing out with as much oversight as they wanted.
Games are so expensive and complex to make now just about every game has a bunch of companies in the credits-- if not bugging you before the menu screen.
Other nations like Germany use regulation to keep corporations from leaving but in the USA, we encourage it. Not for the benefit of the public, but because the weak government has fallen to the influence of the giant corporations WE THE PEOPLE allowed to become too big to limit and regulate-- and yes, even too big to allow to fail.
Even now, baring a bigger depression, the public thinks it is good to have no ceiling on the amount of power a corporation can amass.
We get upset at bigger government we have less control over but corporations-- they can do no wrong and their power doesn't corrupt it helps our economy... its a religion in the USA.
Corporations BENEFIT greatly by government services as well as deals they make with government on all levels.
Corporations USE the system and when they succeed they should pay relative to their success back into the system that allowed them to succeed. (Besides the obvious fact: corporations are not human but are just government legal construct and have no real rights beyond what the government chooses to define... leaving behind the other issue of the creation taking control of its master...)
SMALL BUSINESS! Everybody forgets them! They can't cheat like these crooks do. They won't betray people like crooks do (they might if they could but they are too small... and if they did, they are too small to do much damage.)
--
Microsoft needs to focus on its 2 monopolies instead of "innovating" in other areas at huge losses to harm almost every industry they enter into. They produce mostly SOFTWARE and have MASSIVE profit margins; so they can't bribe, steal, sue, buyout, FUD, and stifle competition in as many areas as they could previously. This is a Win Win situation.
Interesting how low we've come. A Tax Cheat costs honest tax payers money.
SMALL BUSINESS POWERS MOST OF THE ECONOMY. THEY CAN'T CHEAT LIKE MS!
If I don't pay taxes than YOU end up paying the difference. That alone should upset tax payers. Instead we frame it in some warped way so many of us rejoice that somebody is screwing the system-- are we so daft that we can't see the next step anymore?
Then we have big tax cheats who BRIBE officials (using legal games - everybody knows its bribery) to continue to cheat and/or create more ways to cheat on their taxes! That should REALLY upset tax payers. Instead we get easily fooled with irrelevant distractions like the endless rhetorical debate over taxation itself and government services etc.
Fix the tax system. Make it fair. THEN spend eternity fussing over details and principles.
BTW, teach MATH. Too many people do not understand how percentage works and why it is equitable.
A truly wonderful game Eternal Darkness was hardly noticed or promoted. I only knew about it from an unusually positive review of the game I read online from a harsh critic like myself.
Nintendo has more games than they have time to make revisions for; in addition, they are somewhat constrained by those games in the new versions (not that it has stopped them from taking risks).
Plus they have new ideas which take LONGER to do. Design takes TIME and its much easier to copy existing stuff like most others do.
Free exercise can be individualized as well as regulated (or both;) as free speech is to some degree and the free press even more so. The "free" press is taxed and regulated.
More accurately stated: "even banning all religious organizations" I often confuse religion with the supporting organizations do to personal experience. Scientology is a great example as to why one might think of religion in terms of an organization.
Religion is a personal thing. No organization is required (they may form organically but its not a part of legitimate religions. I'm looking at YOU Scientologists.) Any total ban wouldn't stop it, as history shows. Many possible directions one can go once religion becomes personal:
Ban the forming of corporations and provide no other means for official recognition. You could have a church, but it wouldn't have any corporate rights or government recognition as an organization. Donations would then go to people running the church and all the tax rules etc would then apply. Non-profits would likely be the loophole here... so limitations would have to exist on those (They can't be PACs now, this would be along similar lines. Religions can't be PACs either; although this one is poorly enforced.)
Sure, one can argue-- my religion is business! So you can't freely exercise your business religion without being able to incorporate. However, these type of argumentative positions are shot down when it comes to the other rights. (human/animal sacrifice, child abuse, tax avoidance schemes, yelling "Fire!" in a crowd, taxing the Free Press, abortion bans, privacy in what you eat/smoke, etc.)
Oh, don't forget the failed attempts by fan clubs to create stuff like a Jedi religion officially recognized. Doesn't stop them that much, but limits them from being Scientology (sorry, don't mean to insult them with that comparison...uh, I mean I don't want insult the Jedi.)
Then you have the argument that religious absolutism is the root of many of the great evils in history; so organizing a large enough religious organization is worse than yelling "Fire!" in a crowd. I won't argue that point; however, it would become tricky with economic or political based religions.
Then you have games you can play with the limitations of "free." Like we do with speech, press, voting etc. Just try do exercise your nudist belief in public... Recently, a mother and son are on the run from the law because the parents didn't want to put their child on chemo therapy! On the grounds its child abuse! Next thing is they will label you a suicidal for refusing treatment. We've already had high profile cases on the right to death...
2) The 1st ONLY prevents special treatment, it does not stop equal regulation or even banning all religion. No, not anything can be a religion-- but if you did equally ban all religions then word games would become popular. A better argument can be made for not taxing the press than not taxing religions.
The DFL was distracted by those inside and outside the party who WANTED TO AVOID PUBLIC SCRUTINY of the broken election system in the USA.
Blame Nader when Gore won by all recounts and the other 3rd party candidates INCLUDING the nearly non-existent COMMUNIST PARTY who got more than the margin of difference. Under this line of reasoning you can blame EVERY 3rd party or just blame the communists... or just blame Nader.
Can't ever get the public upset over their broken voting system! We're #1 after all...
We HAD computer voting systems with "bugs" of heavily pre-loaded results that would have gone unnoticed; and essentially it did-- because in 2004 we had more of the "buggy" things. Proper attention in 2000 would have prevented their spread.
FYI: I personally heard Nader talking behind the scenes (2000) and he didn't care if Bush won and conjectured that it might be good if Bush won broke everything! Waking up the sleeping public before it was too late to fix things! Perhaps this was the case; perhaps Pearl Harbor was needed or we'd all be speaking German?
I voted for Gore, BTW. I pick the lesser of two declines.
I eventually saw Nemesis last year and I wish I had listened to people because I wasted my time and unfortunately it'll take a while before I completely forget it. I will not waste my time on this Action Trek.
Not that most the trek movies were that great now that I think about it.... Its the series that led to the films which were just made to exploit that success; not a promising formula...
Why is it that anything set in the future is automatically labeled science fiction?
A republic tries to protect the minority from mob rule. While the democratic representation delays mob rule but gives the majority power. Tyranny of the majority is the preferable bias.
Naturally, ANY system can be hacked. Maintenance is the only real protection one can have (detect and prevent or clean up problems.) The majority is poor at maintenance and the better the society does the more they slack off.
Despotism is where all governments end up. It doesn't really matter what form of government, its how you measure its success.
How about Politician duty? Like jury duty. Can't be much worse than we have at this point.
Big mistake in the USA was the direct election of Senators. Just watch the EU fall in similar ways within our lifetime. It'll likely happen that fast; even if people don't realize the nearly unrecoverable position they get themselves into.
Slashdot Mirror
Racism and Nationalism are often confused. Not as much as say, Nationalism and Patriotism.
Stereotyping is a byproduct of brains pattern recognition skills; it is not all bad, merely our nature and a fundamentally important one.
An island of clones would differentiate somehow and create some sort of class / status system eventually leading to multiple systems that are not aligned which promote conflict (leaving out explanations of the unknown forming religions which would complicate such an experiment.)
Come on, everybody knows the free market religion being hyped for a generation now its not insightful for hardly anybody to repeat the mantra again.
I could argue but I've found it about as pointless as debating the existence of god to a believer.
It IS legal if that is the law of the land in which you live. If greed is the motive, then don't enter a market with a ceiling lower than your ambition.
You're just being argumentative if you are grasping for hypocrisy in my TV viewing comments.
I reduced my TV viewing down over the years; I've seen the culture change during both periods. Fear is encouraged and exploited.
My state charged based on car value; now its same price for all. Weight means nothing here due to politics. All states have to overcome similar political issues and it is not likely mine is the only one who is still backwards. We also pay tax on new cars.
MAD: it IS equal damage by your own words; annihilation is a lot of equal damage... Its relevant because of issues like missile defense creating inequality so the "safe" side can be more aggressive. Despite the fact that the losses are not acceptable; somehow some nuts in government feel safer knowing only 90% are annihilated... and it impacts their risk assessment.)
As for stats, like I said I've seen up close how even honest people have to decide the numbers in ways that move the results around... Although I mostly observed bias towards an end applied.
Aside from the many thresholds involved (I think of all the soccer moms who almost killed me with their minivans at 30mph and I don't bike on the highway,) one has to consider if the whole measure is applicable to the question. Physics, regulation and design are against high speeds; this is common knowledge and could result in compensation on many levels so the numbers go would down; but its possible its still #1. In either case, it doesn't make it safer in the context of an accident, just less --likely-- So, it could be said that highway is safer in terms of having an accident based on the odds you gave.
Oh, and demographics was another one; my parents generation (that I know) largely stays off the highway and are more frail. When they inevitably have an accident (and I'm surprised there are only 2 so far) they were/are harmed more. Especially when seat belts seem less of a concern at lower speeds... bet people wear them less driving in side roads.
You pay by your water usage which is really just a means to charge for water treatment of your waste water which is not metered.
If you use no water; you pay almost nothing, yet you can dump tons of horrible waste into the system like many businesses do currently without added expense. A friend of mine invented a meter for waste water but nobody wants it.
I see nothing wrong with charging for throughput like we do with water and power utilities. Initial hook ups cost if you want a 'bigger pipe' but unless you get a different wire/fibre cable that cost wouldn't differ.
At least this would encourage more bandwidth usage... by users-- and discourage bloated web content. I'd much rather have an internet meter next to my power meter; even though it would cost me more because I'm not within the normal user they project their pricing scale for.
I teach CS and I'm against CS. Classic CS is not what is taught or where the degree migrates towards.
Computer Engineering I think of as Software Engineering; I never quite got used to it as the CS branch of electrical engineering. The correct term I should use is Software Engineering.
Like programming? that should be your place. Like math more than programming? do CS. But that is not where it has evolved to. I don't hear about Software Engineering degree programs; everybody is stuck on CS and turning it into that.
Going further:
I agree that CS should be a rare degree; but we need something "marketable" to replace it-- what business wants is more of a trade school degree or certification but too much status is given to a CS degree. Sure it is beneficial; however, the field of APPLICATION of CS should be a form of engineering, not science. Programming is an art form itself as well as a group activity - far more appropriate for the master/apprentice long-term education model than the degree model.
-
MSCE's are a joke in many circles; being the garbagemen of the computer field. They serve a purpose and deserve respect. Human status games are at the root of these issues but that doesn't mean we can not try to compensate for our inherent flaws instead of bending to trends so easily.
Most industry jobs don't need the formal logic and math theory. Perhaps an engineer who has a foot on both sides can help apply new science is useful... Most just try to apply existing stuff skillfully and I argue that is more like developing a trade skill. In the USA, we are stuck on Degrees so we nail everything with that hammer.
I like to take positions to get people thinking ;-) however on this one I am serious.
I'm not going to the waste time. You can feel like you "won" if that helps your ego. "evidence" isn't so simple; your cited source didn't provide much detail for those stats and I don't have the time to waste checking it out. For example, fatal accidents could include many debatable situations including where a car runs over a pedestrian; the driver lacks a seat belt, drives off a cliff, has a medical condition, etc.
Culture of Fear is not likely Propaganda but about a wide spread kind of Propaganda in use in this culture. Propaganda (aka P.R.) is evolving as well as more commonly used than ever before.
Having worked in government a bit I've seen the number games and how they work as well as how much effort it can take to verify such things especially if you get a few lawyers nitpicking each other on every tiny point.
I'm not convinced. I do know the fact that cars are regulation tested for low speeds and higher speeds more potentially dangerous. If in fact the stats indicate people are more careful at higher speeds (which I don't concede) it does not change other issues involved. Such as your implication that lower numbers means its perfectly safe to continue because something else is worse. A big SUV is a problem at lower speeds too.
So, you like MAD huh? well then, why not apply that to cars as well? Both sides get equitable damage...
-
I can't make people GROW UP, give them courage, or a sense of responsibility to their community (let alone community itself which is dead.) I don't have to be accepting of such behavior and I have every right to say anything I want to anybody. I can also apply that bias in choosing a side of a debate; for example taxing cars on weight instead of value (BTW heavier ones wear the public roads more don't need to bring up other issues on that debate.) You take a libertarian position and then say I should shut up?
Jack Bower? I don't watch TV.
BTW, Get off my lawn! Oh, and stop polluting our environment for your personal recreation.
Industry in the so called "real world" just ideally wants worker drones. Since college has become a form of entry level certification requirement for industry it can only stand to reason that will eventually influence the college system competing for students.
I've seen some amazingly well run colleges without much overhead; however, they HAVE been harmed by the modern religion of business as much as any other (except their employees are happy because they are free from living Dilbert.)
Part of the problem is that while a Trade School is more fitting the majority of jobs out there-- the college degree looks better to employers so everybody wants that "edge" or these days-- they just want to be on par with everybody else who has a college degree. I was raised on that BS about being stuck at McDonalds if I didn't get a COLLEGE degree.
Corps need to recognize certification/training education as being what they actually want otherwise universities will continue to slide into becoming trade schools. I honestly am against Computer Science; I think people should learn Computer Engineering-- well, thats a whole other discussion especially since they've went and made up a degree program called Computer Engineering which is something else...
Guess I hurt the ego of the user 'sumdumass.'
Well, sumdumass, I do not put moron into my user name...
You may want to read "Culture of Fear" not that I did; because I get it, but you do not.
I take risks when on the road with selfish pricks in compensation cars and large coward mobiles with the latter tending to be more aggressive in their hogging of the road. I am not afraid; but I am careful because I am aware of the danger while others need extra protection because they either can't handle it or want to be care free (at the expense of others and their own pocketbook.) I don't need a study to be told that SUV drivers are more aggressive, careless, and less road conscious, I've observed it.
I suppose that one has to be a moron not to carry a gun around with them everywhere because some nut may have one? I suppose one has to be a moron if they do not have the biggest nuclear weapon stockpile? Never mind, don't suppose you see the connection.
Stop rationalizing and wake up. Why do people spend so much mental effort backing up positions they didn't put any effort into formulating??
Non-specific generic stats are sooo useful..(sarcasm)
Cars are transportation; I never lost sight of that. Its not a toy or a recreation vehicle or a helmet.
Invention happens without IP; most our progress has been without IP law and the before Orwellian phrase "IP" was created.
Plenty of things come into being without patents. A smart phone without these features can be marketed against by those that do have them; only takes 1 to start the trend.
This is just an IDEA not a real invention and its not worthy of IP protection-- sure it is good, but it is merely a response to an existing use case that is more of a problem when people have smarter phones that lose power from heavier usage (doing non-phone activities.)
If the system was as broken when cell phones started getting "smart" there would be IP on having phone calls interrupt the other activities to inform the user that there is an incoming call. Ridiculous; however, not these days...
I am sick of anti-intellectuals belittling academia and the educated for being out of touch with the so called "real world" implying that they - the insecure - are somehow more in touch with "reality." Its most often an attempt to undermine the benefit of actual expertise and critical thinking skills to create a level playing field where often there shouldn't be one.
If one actually digs, you find that reality is so big and complex that all aspects can not be covered (especially with limited time even with a limited scope... one can get into endless debates about how to limit the scope too.) Its an appeal to ignorance which often traps intellectuals who if they are honest with themselves have a good idea of how little they know of "reality" even in their field of expertise. The US media often takes two sides and presents them as equal when 1 can be pathetically inadequate; a similar tactic.
Often the "real world" person is conceding ideals the academic is not; which are part of a different side debate I've rarely seen the "real worlder" willing to explore. At its heart, Academia explores the real-world at depth and tries to abstract (to help comprehend) and explain the nature of reality-- so its quite an odd claim it is out of touch with reality when its purpose is to better understand reality. Now, sure it can't cover everything and even a moron could contribute something constructive-- the infinite scope of the problem allows for that and many academics can forget this (which is easy to do just from conditioning from interaction with "normal" people.)
Modern culture has raised the money makers into the new high priests of our society and finally in recent years their status is being questioned (just a little.) Over a generation ago, scientists were the high priests who were going to take us to space and solve all the worlds problems with their mighty science. They didn't accomplish these unrealistic ideals (which wasn't heavily promoted on their part) so it stands to reason many people were disillusioned; lack of significant progress in recent times prevents a repeat on the same scale as before. (Computers almost did but people were more jaded.)
Yes I called Americans cowards. I am one but I don't watch TV and find that most Americans are afraid of their own shadow if the TV tells them to be. Oddly, motorcycles, mopeds, bicycles are still used in small numbers; largely because the TV doesn't market against their safety, I suspect...
1st thing people get concerned about is safety with compact cars; wasn't such a big deal before the 90s push to have massive SUV killers-- and the promoted attitude of "at least I'll be in better shape than the other driver" plus marketing it to mothers-- the few mothers I discussed this with were all for killing others to lower injury to their family. It wasn't a question of equality but a COLD WAR of wanting to be safer at the expense of others (and their pocketbook.)
In the 80s people were not nearly as bad; some sort of marketing push must have happened around the 90s probably trying to broaden the appeal of "small dick" vehicles to women.
Its a culture of FEAR and the market promotes it because its easy money. Driving my compact car is only risky at highway speeds where its more risky for any kind of car not just mine; but MORE SAFE than me biking around town. Over here every winter more SUVs wipe out because they think 4 wheel drive somehow defies the laws of friction! The TV implies somehow stopping with 4-wheel DRIVE is better...
Pixar is worth the money the rest the new Disney content is largely not even worth the time to watch it.
If there were no laws there would be no crime.
Criminal Law *drives* crime.
If it is not regulated, limited or forbidden-- how can it be "corrupt?" In other words, if you make it legal then how can doing it be corrupt?
Selfish bastards with plenty of motivation will always find ways to CRACK the system; it can not be completely prevented, best we've done is to try to punish those who go too far by creating "reasons" to use when going after those who exploit others-- regulations and laws. The intention of the whole thing is to stop unfair accumulation of wealth and power at the expense of others. Without legal justification and due process how can we reasonably implement systems to help towards approximating our ideals?
Lilo and Stich was a FLUKE. It was as if they were trying to knock off Pixar as a last ditch effort to save that division which I believe was closed after that film.
Nintendo isn't just a developer they've become a producing and publishing house as well. They do some in house hire out some aspects, produce and publish games.
Metroid Prime for example, they produced it: contracted the whole thing out with as much oversight as they wanted.
Games are so expensive and complex to make now just about every game has a bunch of companies in the credits-- if not bugging you before the menu screen.
Other nations like Germany use regulation to keep corporations from leaving but in the USA, we encourage it. Not for the benefit of the public, but because the weak government has fallen to the influence of the giant corporations WE THE PEOPLE allowed to become too big to limit and regulate-- and yes, even too big to allow to fail.
Even now, baring a bigger depression, the public thinks it is good to have no ceiling on the amount of power a corporation can amass.
We get upset at bigger government we have less control over but corporations-- they can do no wrong and their power doesn't corrupt it helps our economy... its a religion in the USA.
Corporations BENEFIT greatly by government services as well as deals they make with government on all levels.
Corporations USE the system and when they succeed they should pay relative to their success back into the system that allowed them to succeed. (Besides the obvious fact: corporations are not human but are just government legal construct and have no real rights beyond what the government chooses to define... leaving behind the other issue of the creation taking control of its master...)
SMALL BUSINESS! Everybody forgets them! They can't cheat like these crooks do. They won't betray people like crooks do (they might if they could but they are too small... and if they did, they are too small to do much damage.)
--
Microsoft needs to focus on its 2 monopolies instead of "innovating" in other areas at huge losses to harm almost every industry they enter into. They produce mostly SOFTWARE and have MASSIVE profit margins; so they can't bribe, steal, sue, buyout, FUD, and stifle competition in as many areas as they could previously. This is a Win Win situation.
Interesting how low we've come.
A Tax Cheat costs honest tax payers money.
SMALL BUSINESS POWERS MOST OF THE ECONOMY. THEY CAN'T CHEAT LIKE MS!
If I don't pay taxes than YOU end up paying the difference. That alone should upset tax payers. Instead we frame it in some warped way so many of us rejoice that somebody is screwing the system-- are we so daft that we can't see the next step anymore?
Then we have big tax cheats who BRIBE officials (using legal games - everybody knows its bribery) to continue to cheat and/or create more ways to cheat on their taxes! That should REALLY upset tax payers. Instead we get easily fooled with irrelevant distractions like the endless rhetorical debate over taxation itself and government services etc.
Fix the tax system. Make it fair. THEN spend eternity fussing over details and principles.
BTW, teach MATH. Too many people do not understand how percentage works and why it is equitable.
A truly wonderful game Eternal Darkness was hardly noticed or promoted. I only knew about it from an unusually positive review of the game I read online from a harsh critic like myself.
Nintendo has more games than they have time to make revisions for; in addition, they are somewhat constrained by those games in the new versions (not that it has stopped them from taking risks).
Plus they have new ideas which take LONGER to do. Design takes TIME and its much easier to copy existing stuff like most others do.
Free exercise can be individualized as well as regulated (or both;) as free speech is to some degree and the free press even more so. The "free" press is taxed and regulated.
More accurately stated: "even banning all religious organizations"
I often confuse religion with the supporting organizations do to personal experience. Scientology is a great example as to why one might think of religion in terms of an organization.
Interpretations:
Individual "free exercise thereof."
Religion is a personal thing. No organization is required (they may form organically but its not a part of legitimate religions. I'm looking at YOU Scientologists.) Any total ban wouldn't stop it, as history shows. Many possible directions one can go once religion becomes personal:
Ban the forming of corporations and provide no other means for official recognition. You could have a church, but it wouldn't have any corporate rights or government recognition as an organization. Donations would then go to people running the church and all the tax rules etc would then apply. Non-profits would likely be the loophole here... so limitations would have to exist on those (They can't be PACs now, this would be along similar lines. Religions can't be PACs either; although this one is poorly enforced.)
Sure, one can argue-- my religion is business! So you can't freely exercise your business religion without being able to incorporate. However, these type of argumentative positions are shot down when it comes to the other rights. (human/animal sacrifice, child abuse, tax avoidance schemes, yelling "Fire!" in a crowd, taxing the Free Press, abortion bans, privacy in what you eat/smoke, etc.)
Oh, don't forget the failed attempts by fan clubs to create stuff like a Jedi religion officially recognized. Doesn't stop them that much, but limits them from being Scientology (sorry, don't mean to insult them with that comparison...uh, I mean I don't want insult the Jedi.)
Then you have the argument that religious absolutism is the root of many of the great evils in history; so organizing a large enough religious organization is worse than yelling "Fire!" in a crowd. I won't argue that point; however, it would become tricky with economic or political based religions.
Then you have games you can play with the limitations of "free." Like we do with speech, press, voting etc. Just try do exercise your nudist belief in public... Recently, a mother and son are on the run from the law because the parents didn't want to put their child on chemo therapy! On the grounds its child abuse! Next thing is they will label you a suicidal for refusing treatment. We've already had high profile cases on the right to death...
1) FRANCE is not in the USA.
2) The 1st ONLY prevents special treatment, it does not stop equal regulation or even banning all religion. No, not anything can be a religion-- but if you did equally ban all religions then word games would become popular. A better argument can be made for not taxing the press than not taxing religions.
The DFL was distracted by those inside and outside the party who WANTED TO AVOID PUBLIC SCRUTINY of the broken election system in the USA.
Blame Nader when Gore won by all recounts and the other 3rd party candidates INCLUDING the nearly non-existent COMMUNIST PARTY who got more than the margin of difference. Under this line of reasoning you can blame EVERY 3rd party or just blame the communists... or just blame Nader.
Can't ever get the public upset over their broken voting system! We're #1 after all...
We HAD computer voting systems with "bugs" of heavily pre-loaded results that would have gone unnoticed; and essentially it did-- because in 2004 we had more of the "buggy" things. Proper attention in 2000 would have prevented their spread.
FYI:
I personally heard Nader talking behind the scenes (2000) and he didn't care if Bush won and conjectured that it might be good if Bush won broke everything! Waking up the sleeping public before it was too late to fix things! Perhaps this was the case; perhaps Pearl Harbor was needed or we'd all be speaking German?
I voted for Gore, BTW. I pick the lesser of two declines.
I eventually saw Nemesis last year and I wish I had listened to people because I wasted my time and unfortunately it'll take a while before I completely forget it. I will not waste my time on this Action Trek.
Not that most the trek movies were that great now that I think about it.... Its the series that led to the films which were just made to exploit that success; not a promising formula...
Why is it that anything set in the future is automatically labeled science fiction?
A republic tries to protect the minority from mob rule. While the democratic representation delays mob rule but gives the majority power. Tyranny of the majority is the preferable bias.
Naturally, ANY system can be hacked. Maintenance is the only real protection one can have (detect and prevent or clean up problems.) The majority is poor at maintenance and the better the society does the more they slack off.
Despotism is where all governments end up. It doesn't really matter what form of government, its how you measure its success.
How about Politician duty? Like jury duty. Can't be much worse than we have at this point.
Big mistake in the USA was the direct election of Senators. Just watch the EU fall in similar ways within our lifetime. It'll likely happen that fast; even if people don't realize the nearly unrecoverable position they get themselves into.
First they went after alcohol. I didn't notice because it was before my time.
Then they went after the smokers with taxes. I said "good they shouldn't smoke anyhow."
Now they are going after fat people. I said "wait a second, I'm not fat..."