They will just pay the local government with an insurance plan to cover the costs of all lawsuits for rights violations. Naturally, it will ultimately be payed by the locals going into debt for decades but they will not sell it that way.
The legal system is broken, you can't sue for enough money to force changes; they can always ends up appealing so it amounts to their pocket change (especially if spread out over YEARS in court.) I wonder how many people would speed if their tickets only cost a nickel?? Also, they wouldn't be pulled over by the police, a representative would be pulled over and they'd be notified to slow down after they reached their destination.
If your network is left open or hacked into why are you not considered an ISP? If you provide free wifi to people near your house or around your small business you are an ISP. A larger ISP is not punished for it's customers; libraries and other institutions which provide free internet to "customers" are not viewed as ISPs but they are.
If there is an exemption for ISPs who are just carriers than how does one get that legal status as well? Surely, it must be made available to small businesses as well which is your loophole to get some people an ability to be exempt from being liable for what their users do over their network.
To add another thing; debate is a collaboration, a struggle towards answers. We think of it as metaphorical warfare we describe it using war and fight metaphors which creates the wrong attitude. The fanatics take this even further but when the culture has a warped view in the first place the fanatics do not stand out as quickly as they should.
It is not an intellectually honest strategy to kill debate and to undermine the oppositions positions by removing their access to the the truth --- and if you find that science is almost always against you you should start thinking instead of strategically removing science from the debate simply because it is the best way for you to win against the other side.
That is exactly what these fanatics are doing and what is particularly vile about it is how they do it under such dishonest justifications. I don't know what is worse, lying to oneself to do something horrible as a "true believer" or to cynically attack any potential future threat.
Traitorous politicians like Harper and a great many in the USA only care about winning AT ALL COST. The nation and the democracy do not matter they are not actually important, only winning the "war". Anybody who is not "one of us" must be cleansed of the body politic and naturally these lesser people are to be despised. This kind of fanaticism is as old as civilization and it always starts out minor then it grows until it is extreme enough and/or large enough that a majority can see it (usually it has to be really bad before enough slow people wake up and take action.) This does not always result in the extremes you might be imagining because sometimes it can be addressed before it becomes a huge problem; the harm it causes is immeasurable regardless.
The problem is while we can see them as a extremely damaging to democracy or worse and they probably are -- but the question is, are we falling into the same sick twisted mindset as they are? Should we hate them for their hateful vile actions and if so, have we become them or are we them in the 1st place?
Attacking science, news, statics, even truth itself becomes another victim of the paranoia to be eliminated and undermined as if it were no different than the opposition. The predetermined conclusions must be maintained at all cost for the fanatic believer.
I should be able to moderate higher and if 2-3 people also agree then it becomes a 6. Not that complex of a feature to add. Use exponential growth; int(score_as_float) when enough people contribute to the total it'll reach 6,7,8 and so on but require more moderators each time. I'm suggesting a non-linear moderation scale. A 6 would mean multiple moderators gambled a point to raise it above 5. It would be extremely rare to achieve an 8 (in which case that post should be turned into an article?)
Too many people fail to realize that small contributions from millions of people add up. This covers multiple topics. Also, a basic real understanding of large numbers or growth is severely lacking; obviously nobody can comprehend large scales like a million without abstractions but I would say that the abstractions commonly used are the problem. Statistics is much much worse and it is used so heavily today even in the "hard" sciences; making it more important for people to learn than topics like calculus or even science courses (where the philosophy of science has been replaced with wrote learning.)
The sky seems huge and infinite; and people know it is not but that does not protect them from grossly over estimating its scope and their ability to impact it. Air density is LOW and people know that if you bring it up, but they don't realize the scales involved. Also, few people I've talked to have made the connection with the thinning air of higher altitude and the amount of matter in the atmosphere - as if it we had a uniform shell around the earth 100s miles thick instead 20 miles. The skeptics will put up a fight over how burning gas produces more lbs of exhaust than the lbs of gas put in and not feel anything while confidently being so ignorant.
Then there is a the CO2 factor, where lab results show its heat retaining power; or one can simply look at history of the space race to see the huge impact it has on Venus and can figure ball park numbers there. One can figure how much humans put out now vs the past and do basic estimates there as well. It puts it all into perspective and the skeptics could continue to expand on the complexity until they end up becoming scientists in the field... and it is likely they won't be skeptics before they get to that point.
They have to pay somebody for it if I recall correctly. They didn't want to continue to pay for it and their stats show a small number of users need it; those that do are keeping the old machines around longer -- they do not care about people who want to run old stuff for so long (long to them is in consumer electronic time scales not small business time scales.) Instead they probably are cutting budget or paying for something else instead; I would figure the dictionary they use costs something and maybe they've added something to the OS that costs something to use. DVD playback probably still costs them something??
Tell that to the lawyers; most politicians are lawyers. They love to create issues out of nothing, it boosts their business.
Sometimes I wonder if politicians are trying to be programmers and make Judges into computers; except they have zero software engineering skills and their profession (and their own law firms they have a vested interest in) greatly benefits from "bugs" in their legal code.
Blasphemy! You can't say such things because they are against the economic religion of the times; you must be a communist! If you are not with us 100% you are a blaspheming communist!
Tariffs are evil protectionism, the almighty holy market is the decider and how dare you contradict it's wishes!
The all mighty market and its prophets (PACs) run the government and control the ignorant populace; it is so rigged you can't introduce reasonable tariffs anymore.
This is nothing new it is just in an area/. readers care about.
When the war on drugs did this and more, nobody said a dam thing. Who cares about them, they are sub human they are not me... and they are guilty until proven innocent.
Far worse is done on the drug war but take away some movie piracy from the consumers and another minority starts talking revolution... The majority will see you as fanatics and out of touch-- they don't care about you or the stuff you care about and you are probably guilty of piracy and therefore less of a person and deserve what you get!
BTW, they've taken property without due process and KEPT it after losing in court on the primary charges for decades. One has to sue and spend at least $20k after winning just to get the stolen property back again. That is, if they even bother to charge you with a crime and just don't take your stuff under the claim that it was bought with drug money - they don't need to convict you of anything; the property was bought with drug money because they said so. You prove otherwise.
This is nothing new. wake up. Same old "1st they came for the jews" applies here and any situation where short sighted selfishness eventually blows back on you.
Apple has always jerked around developers with changes larger than this one; also they don't mind upsetting loyal customers either.
The TFA is a troll, the new sandboxing policy is something developers should have been able to do for at least a decade and expecting them to do it now makes sense. Part of development should involve sand boxing; merely following the documented API is not enough the scope of use of those system calls should have always been specified in a technically useful format.
It is one thing to believe the majority of scientists IN THE RELEVANT sciences and quite another thing to be a "skeptic" too lazy to educate yourself. As far as their "prove it to me" attitude, I think it merely indicates the pointlessness of talking to them and possibly a lack of a fundamental understanding of science.
Maybe education and expertise means nothing and going to college was a big scam that only made people believe you know more than a novice?? I do not think so.
Most these "skeptics" are just using skepticism as a cover for their own personal beliefs. This is why study after study shows that introducing more facts and truth is ineffective and can even strengthen their resolve. The reason is because it is off topic, it is about beliefs and emotions NOT facts and reason. Therefore, addressing the "skepticism" facade is a complete waste of time; a distraction to keep you from going after the real reasons for their opposition. Could be it is a defensive tactic because the real reasons are too sensitive...
I know that in Australia they had great success undermining support by marketing the global scientist conspiracy as part of their conservative identity. So part of believing you are a conservative is drinking this cool aid; and since it may be a life-long identity nearly impossible to give up, piggybacking an issue onto the definition engineers their unwitting submission.
Be glad it is a public insurance program and can afford to be flexible. You'd have been paying 30% more your whole life if it was private insurance and they'd NEVER be kind and extend it during a depression. (Assuming they'd not screw you out of it as private insurance often does.)
In the end, unemployment insurance can go for long periods of time for millions of people and that cost will just be averaged into the insurance rates of everybody in the future - just how disasters cause everybody's rates to rise over time in the private insurance market. Being a public program it has the maximum pool size (lowest rates) and largest borrowing power.
The benefits of extending unemployment insurance during bad times are well established; not that facts mean anything to ideological zealots...
Saying you do not own a TV is like saying you are drug free. Not a big deal among people who are not addicts but among addicts it does have a smug feeling to it when rubbing it in their faces - it also has a similar appearance to being a jerk.
It is not as bad as informing everybody you are a Christian.
People are different. They are not machines and educated students are NOT like products. MBA's beliefs must be dismissed as the baseless belief it is. They have a fancy hammer and view everything as a nail.
Some people benefit with Khan and I frankly do not care if they are a little wrong or skip some things if it prepares students for further advancement when or if it is needed. Math in the USA is one of the worst topics there is where it is all explained and taught the same methodical way everywhere with varying degrees of quality that does little for somebody who's mind is not prepped for that specific learning process.
Good education should be rooted in the brain sciences; and this does mean to some degree profiling is required. Motivation is a HUGE MASSIVE problem and even if Khan was horrible if he made a few % more people succeed in Math it would be worthwhile. I wouldn't care if you had some bimbo strippers going around saying they like men who know math -- it works for selling a lot of stupid products. Yes, I just gave the basis for a controversial PSA campaign by the Dept of Education! (it would be the most successful one in history but nobody cares about reality if it touches their emotions. Remember, a lot of great scientists got started because of inspirational fiction and fantasies; the ones who did not lacked the right trigger...)
Spacial reasoning is all but dead. My peers are pathetic and I'm not young but the kids today are embarrassing - they hardly can handle LEGO. Creativity wise, an old art teacher should be able to fill you in on how kids today have zero creativity. As far as how things work, I know TWO people in their 30s who do not know how to change batteries on their TV remotes! (they buy new ones instead.)
Studies show that critical thinking skills are down in teens entering college as well. This market driven society is producing mindless consumer drones where even the educated are quite dependent outside their specialized wrote learning -- it is a form of perfection towards the ideal consumer marketplace.
Exceptions with the parent: c) cursive writing is a waste of time. If you want productive writing learn to type. d) basic logic, math reasoning, and critical thinking do not require learning how to code. f) most kids judge labor by how society presents it, they do not know construction labor gets paid more just that it is low class; along with janitors etc. Union jobs are evil too...
They already are and will with tired old characters. We've been stuck with a marketing exec obsession with gritty, dark, and attitude since the 80s. Lets have _____ but more dark and gritty and give the characters more attitude. Remember, even Disney was pushing this onto Pixar and screwed up Toy Story so bad that there was a revolt and we ended up with a great movie that ignored the advise from idiot execs. Even Jobs screwed up and wanted the song axed but lost and after it won Oscar he kept his nose out of it (and he said as much.)
We do not need another superman reboot with dark tweaks. American comics are only about spandex super heroes; can't we evolve into something complex instead of having childish characters that need a lot of layering to add depth? Actually, it makes sense you have the lowest common denominator just like our movies and if you can fit in some details that go over their heads but will appease the adults you can widely market it. We can't have something that only english speaking American adults with brains will understand because that is too small of a demographic. (I'm not a big fan of english bound content but the point is things can be done so that they can't be well translated to all groups without losing quality.)
I will not give them my money for comic movie anything. Watchmen was an exception; the Tick might be as well. I would like some creative stories not creative presentations of dead stories (not that the presentation is always creative anymore either.) Indie films have much more potential. What is odd is I'm somebody who does a ton of repetition in my life and likes it but they've gone too far maximizing profits and the public has gradually been conditioned. My movie going friends routinely go to movies and it really doesn't matter what the movies are, they just pick something from the menu and lack any alternative recreational activities-- ALL the movies would have to be painfully horrible to make them change habits and I think millions of people are similar.
I would like a valid source of the poverty level you are claiming.
Last I read the USA's poverty level was officially the same as it was from the 1970s and not adjusted for inflation; not that any serious wonk used the official rates; including the inflation rate for the last 5-6 years.
Relative poverty levels are all that matters; the problem is that it is difficult to figure relative levels. It does not matter if USA poverty rates were higher than the typical wage of another nation. The relative cost of living differs greatly. Even in the USA many people realize it costs more to live in NYC vs Mississippi. I can earn more money living in silicon valley for the same job I have in the midwest but the cost of living makes up the difference.
Mars has freezing rain - not made of water but made of liquified AIR! (= too cold) There are a great many massive problems with Mars beyond space travel.
Reality is that we'd be better off investing in robotics for a LONG time to come and instead of blindly putting faith into science fiction we work to SOLVE REAL PROBLEMS ON EARTH RIGHT NOW. Way too many people see Mars as some sort of lifeboat after we fuck up Earth. Later on when it is feasible to jump start a planet core, build an atmosphere, and setup a sustainable ecological base to support life THEN we can easily and cheaply send humans -- anything before that is just a WASTE. Space robots surpass humans already and by 2030 they will have evolved more than they have in the last 40 years (and we will not have evolved physically or mentally at all.)
I sometimes wonder if the desire to set foot and claim some new territory is just some remnant of primitive male DNA at work.
Guns are pathetic arms; the whole purpose was not to give cowards weapons or for people who do not need to hunt. A state citizen militia of real arms would be better aligned with the intent of the 2nd.
Legally getting guns should be a process designed to aggravate and filter out the nutcases. Real nuts would mostly be filtered out. Most felons are filtered out as well but they are sane and it does not take much to get around bureaucracy.
People killing themselves is their right and largely only impacts themselves it is not the same as a gun nutcase SHOOTING OTHER PEOPLE. But your point over statistics is still a good point.
Victims are still going to happen with or without guns and it should be obvious the number of victims will go down without guns. If you can not realize this then you are not smart enough to waste time trying to argue with.
Eisenhower was describing what he was seeing it does not mean it was not already underway before he was in office. It was bad enough he talked openly about it and did not dare to say something UNTIL he was leaving office which shows it was pretty bad already.
WAR has no winners, everybody loses. Naturally, the excuse always is that the losses are worth it; problem is that people don't think about ALL the losses and the unforeseen losses are unknown even some time afterwards.
The civil war gave us the modern corporation. The war on terror gave us a more powerful Bush Jr who helped make corporations human among many other things.
The cold war caused immeasurable damage worldwide on the scale of the two world wars. It helped bring down Russia and the USA. Both were mortally wounded, Russia died already but the USA was infected and today seems delirious as it heads towards its projected death just after 2020 (by the same man who accurately predicted Russia; he did recently revise 2025 to 2020; however, his 2025 prediction was so far out in advance it is impressive. Nobody can blame him for adjusting it after one of the worst presidents in history.)
So I can never become a judge now because I can not be impartial on most cases.
Anybody who looks into the copyright or patent disasters we have today is going to see it any different... unless they are educated on the topic by the RIAA (the politicians still seem to know nothing, they are not learning anything except who pays more.)
Slashdot Mirror
They will just pay the local government with an insurance plan to cover the costs of all lawsuits for rights violations. Naturally, it will ultimately be payed by the locals going into debt for decades but they will not sell it that way.
The legal system is broken, you can't sue for enough money to force changes; they can always ends up appealing so it amounts to their pocket change (especially if spread out over YEARS in court.) I wonder how many people would speed if their tickets only cost a nickel?? Also, they wouldn't be pulled over by the police, a representative would be pulled over and they'd be notified to slow down after they reached their destination.
If your network is left open or hacked into why are you not considered an ISP? If you provide free wifi to people near your house or around your small business you are an ISP. A larger ISP is not punished for it's customers; libraries and other institutions which provide free internet to "customers" are not viewed as ISPs but they are.
If there is an exemption for ISPs who are just carriers than how does one get that legal status as well? Surely, it must be made available to small businesses as well which is your loophole to get some people an ability to be exempt from being liable for what their users do over their network.
Mesh networks will make this more interesting.
To add another thing; debate is a collaboration, a struggle towards answers. We think of it as metaphorical warfare we describe it using war and fight metaphors which creates the wrong attitude. The fanatics take this even further but when the culture has a warped view in the first place the fanatics do not stand out as quickly as they should.
It is not an intellectually honest strategy to kill debate and to undermine the oppositions positions by removing their access to the the truth --- and if you find that science is almost always against you you should start thinking instead of strategically removing science from the debate simply because it is the best way for you to win against the other side.
That is exactly what these fanatics are doing and what is particularly vile about it is how they do it under such dishonest justifications. I don't know what is worse, lying to oneself to do something horrible as a "true believer" or to cynically attack any potential future threat.
Traitorous politicians like Harper and a great many in the USA only care about winning AT ALL COST. The nation and the democracy do not matter they are not actually important, only winning the "war". Anybody who is not "one of us" must be cleansed of the body politic and naturally these lesser people are to be despised. This kind of fanaticism is as old as civilization and it always starts out minor then it grows until it is extreme enough and/or large enough that a majority can see it (usually it has to be really bad before enough slow people wake up and take action.) This does not always result in the extremes you might be imagining because sometimes it can be addressed before it becomes a huge problem; the harm it causes is immeasurable regardless.
The problem is while we can see them as a extremely damaging to democracy or worse and they probably are -- but the question is, are we falling into the same sick twisted mindset as they are? Should we hate them for their hateful vile actions and if so, have we become them or are we them in the 1st place?
Attacking science, news, statics, even truth itself becomes another victim of the paranoia to be eliminated and undermined as if it were no different than the opposition. The predetermined conclusions must be maintained at all cost for the fanatic believer.
Parent can't be moderated above 5.
I should be able to moderate higher and if 2-3 people also agree then it becomes a 6. Not that complex of a feature to add. Use exponential growth; int(score_as_float) when enough people contribute to the total it'll reach 6,7,8 and so on but require more moderators each time. I'm suggesting a non-linear moderation scale. A 6 would mean multiple moderators gambled a point to raise it above 5. It would be extremely rare to achieve an 8 (in which case that post should be turned into an article?)
Too many people fail to realize that small contributions from millions of people add up. This covers multiple topics. Also, a basic real understanding of large numbers or growth is severely lacking; obviously nobody can comprehend large scales like a million without abstractions but I would say that the abstractions commonly used are the problem. Statistics is much much worse and it is used so heavily today even in the "hard" sciences; making it more important for people to learn than topics like calculus or even science courses (where the philosophy of science has been replaced with wrote learning.)
The sky seems huge and infinite; and people know it is not but that does not protect them from grossly over estimating its scope and their ability to impact it. Air density is LOW and people know that if you bring it up, but they don't realize the scales involved. Also, few people I've talked to have made the connection with the thinning air of higher altitude and the amount of matter in the atmosphere - as if it we had a uniform shell around the earth 100s miles thick instead 20 miles. The skeptics will put up a fight over how burning gas produces more lbs of exhaust than the lbs of gas put in and not feel anything while confidently being so ignorant.
Then there is a the CO2 factor, where lab results show its heat retaining power; or one can simply look at history of the space race to see the huge impact it has on Venus and can figure ball park numbers there. One can figure how much humans put out now vs the past and do basic estimates there as well. It puts it all into perspective and the skeptics could continue to expand on the complexity until they end up becoming scientists in the field... and it is likely they won't be skeptics before they get to that point.
They have to pay somebody for it if I recall correctly. They didn't want to continue to pay for it and their stats show a small number of users need it; those that do are keeping the old machines around longer -- they do not care about people who want to run old stuff for so long (long to them is in consumer electronic time scales not small business time scales.) Instead they probably are cutting budget or paying for something else instead; I would figure the dictionary they use costs something and maybe they've added something to the OS that costs something to use. DVD playback probably still costs them something??
Figures that is is a US Poly Sci prof who argues learning basic math logic is a waste of money.
Tell that to the lawyers; most politicians are lawyers. They love to create issues out of nothing, it boosts their business.
Sometimes I wonder if politicians are trying to be programmers and make Judges into computers; except they have zero software engineering skills and their profession (and their own law firms they have a vested interest in) greatly benefits from "bugs" in their legal code.
Blasphemy! You can't say such things because they are against the economic religion of the times; you must be a communist! If you are not with us 100% you are a blaspheming communist!
Tariffs are evil protectionism, the almighty holy market is the decider and how dare you contradict it's wishes!
The all mighty market and its prophets (PACs) run the government and control the ignorant populace; it is so rigged you can't introduce reasonable tariffs anymore.
This is nothing new it is just in an area /. readers care about.
When the war on drugs did this and more, nobody said a dam thing. Who cares about them, they are sub human they are not me... and they are guilty until proven innocent.
Far worse is done on the drug war but take away some movie piracy from the consumers and another minority starts talking revolution... The majority will see you as fanatics and out of touch-- they don't care about you or the stuff you care about and you are probably guilty of piracy and therefore less of a person and deserve what you get!
BTW, they've taken property without due process and KEPT it after losing in court on the primary charges for decades. One has to sue and spend at least $20k after winning just to get the stolen property back again. That is, if they even bother to charge you with a crime and just don't take your stuff under the claim that it was bought with drug money - they don't need to convict you of anything; the property was bought with drug money because they said so. You prove otherwise.
This is nothing new. wake up. Same old "1st they came for the jews" applies here and any situation where short sighted selfishness eventually blows back on you.
Apple has always jerked around developers with changes larger than this one; also they don't mind upsetting loyal customers either.
The TFA is a troll, the new sandboxing policy is something developers should have been able to do for at least a decade and expecting them to do it now makes sense. Part of development should involve sand boxing; merely following the documented API is not enough the scope of use of those system calls should have always been specified in a technically useful format.
I see stupid people. I do not have special powers, I'm in the USA.
It is one thing to believe the majority of scientists IN THE RELEVANT sciences and quite another thing to be a "skeptic" too lazy to educate yourself. As far as their "prove it to me" attitude, I think it merely indicates the pointlessness of talking to them and possibly a lack of a fundamental understanding of science.
Maybe education and expertise means nothing and going to college was a big scam that only made people believe you know more than a novice?? I do not think so.
Most these "skeptics" are just using skepticism as a cover for their own personal beliefs. This is why study after study shows that introducing more facts and truth is ineffective and can even strengthen their resolve. The reason is because it is off topic, it is about beliefs and emotions NOT facts and reason. Therefore, addressing the "skepticism" facade is a complete waste of time; a distraction to keep you from going after the real reasons for their opposition. Could be it is a defensive tactic because the real reasons are too sensitive...
I know that in Australia they had great success undermining support by marketing the global scientist conspiracy as part of their conservative identity. So part of believing you are a conservative is drinking this cool aid; and since it may be a life-long identity nearly impossible to give up, piggybacking an issue onto the definition engineers their unwitting submission.
Be glad it is a public insurance program and can afford to be flexible. You'd have been paying 30% more your whole life if it was private insurance and they'd NEVER be kind and extend it during a depression. (Assuming they'd not screw you out of it as private insurance often does.)
In the end, unemployment insurance can go for long periods of time for millions of people and that cost will just be averaged into the insurance rates of everybody in the future - just how disasters cause everybody's rates to rise over time in the private insurance market. Being a public program it has the maximum pool size (lowest rates) and largest borrowing power.
The benefits of extending unemployment insurance during bad times are well established; not that facts mean anything to ideological zealots...
Saying you do not own a TV is like saying you are drug free. Not a big deal among people who are not addicts but among addicts it does have a smug feeling to it when rubbing it in their faces - it also has a similar appearance to being a jerk.
It is not as bad as informing everybody you are a Christian.
People are different. They are not machines and educated students are NOT like products. MBA's beliefs must be dismissed as the baseless belief it is. They have a fancy hammer and view everything as a nail.
Some people benefit with Khan and I frankly do not care if they are a little wrong or skip some things if it prepares students for further advancement when or if it is needed. Math in the USA is one of the worst topics there is where it is all explained and taught the same methodical way everywhere with varying degrees of quality that does little for somebody who's mind is not prepped for that specific learning process.
Good education should be rooted in the brain sciences; and this does mean to some degree profiling is required. Motivation is a HUGE MASSIVE problem and even if Khan was horrible if he made a few % more people succeed in Math it would be worthwhile. I wouldn't care if you had some bimbo strippers going around saying they like men who know math -- it works for selling a lot of stupid products. Yes, I just gave the basis for a controversial PSA campaign by the Dept of Education! (it would be the most successful one in history but nobody cares about reality if it touches their emotions. Remember, a lot of great scientists got started because of inspirational fiction and fantasies; the ones who did not lacked the right trigger...)
Spacial reasoning is all but dead. My peers are pathetic and I'm not young but the kids today are embarrassing - they hardly can handle LEGO. Creativity wise, an old art teacher should be able to fill you in on how kids today have zero creativity. As far as how things work, I know TWO people in their 30s who do not know how to change batteries on their TV remotes! (they buy new ones instead.)
Studies show that critical thinking skills are down in teens entering college as well. This market driven society is producing mindless consumer drones where even the educated are quite dependent outside their specialized wrote learning -- it is a form of perfection towards the ideal consumer marketplace.
Exceptions with the parent: c) cursive writing is a waste of time. If you want productive writing learn to type. d) basic logic, math reasoning, and critical thinking do not require learning how to code. f) most kids judge labor by how society presents it, they do not know construction labor gets paid more just that it is low class; along with janitors etc. Union jobs are evil too...
They already are and will with tired old characters. We've been stuck with a marketing exec obsession with gritty, dark, and attitude since the 80s. Lets have _____ but more dark and gritty and give the characters more attitude. Remember, even Disney was pushing this onto Pixar and screwed up Toy Story so bad that there was a revolt and we ended up with a great movie that ignored the advise from idiot execs. Even Jobs screwed up and wanted the song axed but lost and after it won Oscar he kept his nose out of it (and he said as much.)
We do not need another superman reboot with dark tweaks. American comics are only about spandex super heroes; can't we evolve into something complex instead of having childish characters that need a lot of layering to add depth? Actually, it makes sense you have the lowest common denominator just like our movies and if you can fit in some details that go over their heads but will appease the adults you can widely market it. We can't have something that only english speaking American adults with brains will understand because that is too small of a demographic. (I'm not a big fan of english bound content but the point is things can be done so that they can't be well translated to all groups without losing quality.)
I will not give them my money for comic movie anything. Watchmen was an exception; the Tick might be as well. I would like some creative stories not creative presentations of dead stories (not that the presentation is always creative anymore either.) Indie films have much more potential. What is odd is I'm somebody who does a ton of repetition in my life and likes it but they've gone too far maximizing profits and the public has gradually been conditioned. My movie going friends routinely go to movies and it really doesn't matter what the movies are, they just pick something from the menu and lack any alternative recreational activities-- ALL the movies would have to be painfully horrible to make them change habits and I think millions of people are similar.
I would like a valid source of the poverty level you are claiming.
Last I read the USA's poverty level was officially the same as it was from the 1970s and not adjusted for inflation; not that any serious wonk used the official rates; including the inflation rate for the last 5-6 years.
Relative poverty levels are all that matters; the problem is that it is difficult to figure relative levels. It does not matter if USA poverty rates were higher than the typical wage of another nation. The relative cost of living differs greatly. Even in the USA many people realize it costs more to live in NYC vs Mississippi. I can earn more money living in silicon valley for the same job I have in the midwest but the cost of living makes up the difference.
Mars has freezing rain - not made of water but made of liquified AIR! (= too cold) There are a great many massive problems with Mars beyond space travel.
Reality is that we'd be better off investing in robotics for a LONG time to come and instead of blindly putting faith into science fiction we work to SOLVE REAL PROBLEMS ON EARTH RIGHT NOW. Way too many people see Mars as some sort of lifeboat after we fuck up Earth. Later on when it is feasible to jump start a planet core, build an atmosphere, and setup a sustainable ecological base to support life THEN we can easily and cheaply send humans -- anything before that is just a WASTE. Space robots surpass humans already and by 2030 they will have evolved more than they have in the last 40 years (and we will not have evolved physically or mentally at all.)
I sometimes wonder if the desire to set foot and claim some new territory is just some remnant of primitive male DNA at work.
Guns are pathetic arms; the whole purpose was not to give cowards weapons or for people who do not need to hunt. A state citizen militia of real arms would be better aligned with the intent of the 2nd.
Legally getting guns should be a process designed to aggravate and filter out the nutcases. Real nuts would mostly be filtered out. Most felons are filtered out as well but they are sane and it does not take much to get around bureaucracy.
People killing themselves is their right and largely only impacts themselves it is not the same as a gun nutcase SHOOTING OTHER PEOPLE. But your point over statistics is still a good point.
Victims are still going to happen with or without guns and it should be obvious the number of victims will go down without guns. If you can not realize this then you are not smart enough to waste time trying to argue with.
Humanity has no place in the business world.
I have yet to see any grownups; just children wearing masks.
Eisenhower was describing what he was seeing it does not mean it was not already underway before he was in office. It was bad enough he talked openly about it and did not dare to say something UNTIL he was leaving office which shows it was pretty bad already.
WAR has no winners, everybody loses. Naturally, the excuse always is that the losses are worth it; problem is that people don't think about ALL the losses and the unforeseen losses are unknown even some time afterwards.
The civil war gave us the modern corporation. The war on terror gave us a more powerful Bush Jr who helped make corporations human among many other things.
The cold war caused immeasurable damage worldwide on the scale of the two world wars. It helped bring down Russia and the USA. Both were mortally wounded, Russia died already but the USA was infected and today seems delirious as it heads towards its projected death just after 2020 (by the same man who accurately predicted Russia; he did recently revise 2025 to 2020; however, his 2025 prediction was so far out in advance it is impressive. Nobody can blame him for adjusting it after one of the worst presidents in history.)
So I can never become a judge now because I can not be impartial on most cases.
Anybody who looks into the copyright or patent disasters we have today is going to see it any different... unless they are educated on the topic by the RIAA (the politicians still seem to know nothing, they are not learning anything except who pays more.)