You are probably right, but I've heard a reasonable argument that central planning could someday be possible if you had the right data and the ability to make heads or tales of it. There's some scifi in this vein. In other words, central planning left up to the equivalent of a single-party, unaccountable US Congress = bad idea. Central planning left to some soulless supercomputer = probably a bad idea, but no one has tried it yet:)
I'd recommend a good usenet client until such time that the for-pay product is at least as good as the free (illegal) one. Don't give these knuckleheads your money or they'll never learn.
Perhaps, but when you have a theoretical system where simply running the test has always meant authoritarian rule... well, it doesn't much matter whether communism is flawed or not - you simply can't risk trying it again.
Making sure that people don't starve, aren't worked to death, have health care, and aren't destitute in their old age is NOT the same as "ensuring that each person who works is paid in proportion to the value their work produces". Except for government employees, this is almost uniformly left to the market in Western Europe.
I believe the standard retort here is that despite many countries trying to implement communism over a 70 year period, all ended up with something with the general theme of authoritarian rule. It is reasonable to conclude that perhaps it is impossible to implement "communism" as Karl Marx envisioned - that it is a nice idea that cannot be realized with current levels of technology.
"Capitalism" does not mean "free from government interference". In fact, it thrives (and maybe depends on) on certain kinds of heavy government interference: IP laws, a solid banking system, corporate charters, and limited liability spring to mind.
Well, yes, kind of. You back-test the model because you obviously can't forward test it. You have to watch out for perils like overfitting, but there are techniques to attempt to avoid this.
It's faster and you don't deal with loose nails. I think hammers are still a must, but real experts use the best tool for the job, not the one that best demonstrates their unique skills.
US policy indeed had little to do with it. And that was just as true when Bush was in office and they invaded Georgia. But you could not have told that to the Bush haters that used to spend all their free time here.
I certainly wouldn't want to be in charge there. The past governments had a really tough task... it can't be easy to straddle the line between forcing a secular government on people and repressing them. Erdogan is no better for applying Islamic rules about speech to the entire society, even if it is what the masses demand. People forget that US "democracy" included only male landowners for the most part until much later on. It's a tough mentality to get established.
I don't know nuthin' about construction, but I know the sound of a hammer and the sound of a nail gun, and it's been a long time since I've walked by a construction site and heard the former. I have a feeling they have it worked out.
The post you replied to clearly was poking fun at how we are basically right back to where we were when we elected Obama. His "reset" does not seemed to have worked. It's all Bush's fault that Russia invaded Georgia and effectively annexed a small pro-Russian part. Obama will do better. And Georgia earned it by being too aggressive with Russia. Hopefully other former Soviet republics will learn and be more passive - that should head off any future annexations of territory.
You must have missed a decade here at Slashdot. For 8 years even a discussion about particle physics would have several people blaming Bush for something or another. It mostly evaporated when Bush III was elected (twice) and the same policies and problems persisted, though sometimes you see some anti-Obama madness substituted instead.
To compare to America, I think you'd do better to look at Afghanistan or Chechnya. "Capturing" an island (peninsula?) that wants to be captured is not exactly the best example. You'd have to go back to the annexation of Texas, Hawaii, or something else in the 19th century to get a good analog on the US side.
And that is the point, the 19th century kind of sucked for all sorts of reasons, and it would be nice if Russia didn't take us back there.
Slashdot Mirror
You are probably right, but I've heard a reasonable argument that central planning could someday be possible if you had the right data and the ability to make heads or tales of it. There's some scifi in this vein. In other words, central planning left up to the equivalent of a single-party, unaccountable US Congress = bad idea. Central planning left to some soulless supercomputer = probably a bad idea, but no one has tried it yet :)
I'd recommend a good usenet client until such time that the for-pay product is at least as good as the free (illegal) one. Don't give these knuckleheads your money or they'll never learn.
I don't think you are being too pedantic. What you say is true enough. If anything, I'm probably being overly pragmatic. :)
Perhaps, but when you have a theoretical system where simply running the test has always meant authoritarian rule... well, it doesn't much matter whether communism is flawed or not - you simply can't risk trying it again.
Either way, based on history we should probably be cynical when someone proposes to implement such a system.
Making sure that people don't starve, aren't worked to death, have health care, and aren't destitute in their old age is NOT the same as "ensuring that each person who works is paid in proportion to the value their work produces". Except for government employees, this is almost uniformly left to the market in Western Europe.
I believe the standard retort here is that despite many countries trying to implement communism over a 70 year period, all ended up with something with the general theme of authoritarian rule. It is reasonable to conclude that perhaps it is impossible to implement "communism" as Karl Marx envisioned - that it is a nice idea that cannot be realized with current levels of technology.
"Capitalism" does not mean "free from government interference". In fact, it thrives (and maybe depends on) on certain kinds of heavy government interference: IP laws, a solid banking system, corporate charters, and limited liability spring to mind.
Well, yes, kind of. You back-test the model because you obviously can't forward test it. You have to watch out for perils like overfitting, but there are techniques to attempt to avoid this.
IIRC, DOS still runs in a VM, even on Windows 8.
That battle is lost, man. The language has already changed.
So, your definition of "contemporary" does not include events that happen within 1-7 years? I think we're going to have trouble discussing this.
Also, you are including the "insurgency" phase of both Iraq and Afghanistan but not the Chechnya wars.
Prehistory? Action in Chechnya was contemporary with US efforts in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
I'm impressed that Putin has a Slashdot ID almost as low as mine. That's some planning, right there.
Of course, I'm wearing a shirt while composing my message. No pants, but I do have my shirt on.
It's faster and you don't deal with loose nails. I think hammers are still a must, but real experts use the best tool for the job, not the one that best demonstrates their unique skills.
US policy indeed had little to do with it. And that was just as true when Bush was in office and they invaded Georgia. But you could not have told that to the Bush haters that used to spend all their free time here.
Did you have some kind of special roofing? I definitely hear the guns for asphalt. Not sure how they handle slate or metal.
To continue the analogy, sometimes you gotta use the shell...
The Limbaugh is strong in this one, LOL. Yeah, troll is pretty weird.
I certainly wouldn't want to be in charge there. The past governments had a really tough task... it can't be easy to straddle the line between forcing a secular government on people and repressing them. Erdogan is no better for applying Islamic rules about speech to the entire society, even if it is what the masses demand. People forget that US "democracy" included only male landowners for the most part until much later on. It's a tough mentality to get established.
I don't know nuthin' about construction, but I know the sound of a hammer and the sound of a nail gun, and it's been a long time since I've walked by a construction site and heard the former. I have a feeling they have it worked out.
But the professionals have moved on to nail guns.
The post you replied to clearly was poking fun at how we are basically right back to where we were when we elected Obama. His "reset" does not seemed to have worked. It's all Bush's fault that Russia invaded Georgia and effectively annexed a small pro-Russian part. Obama will do better. And Georgia earned it by being too aggressive with Russia. Hopefully other former Soviet republics will learn and be more passive - that should head off any future annexations of territory.
You must have missed a decade here at Slashdot. For 8 years even a discussion about particle physics would have several people blaming Bush for something or another. It mostly evaporated when Bush III was elected (twice) and the same policies and problems persisted, though sometimes you see some anti-Obama madness substituted instead.
I think this is flame bait, but just in case...
To compare to America, I think you'd do better to look at Afghanistan or Chechnya. "Capturing" an island (peninsula?) that wants to be captured is not exactly the best example. You'd have to go back to the annexation of Texas, Hawaii, or something else in the 19th century to get a good analog on the US side.
And that is the point, the 19th century kind of sucked for all sorts of reasons, and it would be nice if Russia didn't take us back there.