You should get out and actually learn about the world with practical first hand experience, and then you can have an informed opinion.
Three years as a night shift taxi driver in Melbourne where brothels are legal, regulated, and discrete. Informed by brief first hand accounts (and offers to barter services) from literally hundreds of prostitutes, admittedly it was two decades ago but nothing appears to have changed. What's your first hand experience, oh worldly one?
even if it were fully legalized the way it is in Amsterdam
Having also been to Amsterdam in the flesh, I think the main difference with Melbourne is the level of visibility, in Melbourne the average brothel looks like a big house, in Amsterdam they display themselves in shop front windows. The laws have been this way in Melbourne for at least 30yrs and you will find similar laws and attitudes across most of western Europe, Amsterdam gets all the attention because it's in your face,
You sound like an academic who is an expert on sex because you have read every single book on the subject.
If you have never met a hooker who enjoys her job, then perhaps you are projecting your shortcomings onto me? The hooker has the right to say no to a customer without giving a reason, a customer has the same right, these messy logistical and organic details are agreed upfront. The opinion of many of the happy hookers I met was the job is about as dangerous as driving a taxi or tending bar on a Saturday night
In answer to your flamebait, you sound like a frustrated young man who desperately needs to meet an intelligent, shameless whore who looks like butter wouldn't melt in her mouth. I suspect you have the sitcom "Big Bang Theory" of women as reluctant participants in sex which is reinforced by their reluctance to have sex with you. As for my own expertise in sex, I'm a divorced grandfather of 3 in a de-facto relationship, when your chest is silver and your sack starts suffering from gravel rash come back and we will talk about "life-experience" again.
Not if they pull him over with a marked police car as soon as he leaves his driveway, or arrest him after a public appearance, or some other civilized method that does not involve a full scale home invasion. Sad thing is, apart from the mansion it sounds exactly like your average pot-head bust.
The last two years have been the wettest on record here in Oz, this was preceded by our worst and longest drought. That's what climate scientists mean when they say extremes will be more common. James Hansen has a new paper in the Journal of Science (it's pay-walled) that estimates the recent level of extreme events we are seeing have only a 0.1% chance of happening in the absence of AGW, (N hemisphere only). He uses the concept of loaded dice to illustrate what this means, it's not a difficult concept to grasp and is backed up by solid evidence published in a highly regarded peer-review journal. Arguing about the 1930's dustbowl is irrelevant, it's not about comparing single events in a particular region, it's about the rate at which those (and more extreme) events can be expected to occur. One dustbowl per century is tragic but manageable, one per decade would be catastrophic.
Just a nit-pick. The physics goes back to Fourier who predicted CO2 would be a GHG in 1824 (while inventing spectroscopy), someone else confirmed it by experiment in the 1850's (forget the name, he used glass jars, sunlight, and thermometers). A Swedish guy who's name I can't spell came up with AGW ~1900, nobody really believed him until the 1950's when hi-res spectroscopes made it possible to separate CO2 and H20 spectra. In 1958 the National Academies claimed they had detected AGW, their basic claim has not changed, their confidence has grown with the evidence collected over the last half century.
From a commercial POV the "cloud" exists for the same reason car rentals exist. Cloud providers want to attract corporate customers, corporate customers know what's in the contract and have a standing army of lawyers to make sure they get what they were sold. Personal cloud users basically ride on the back of that business for "free", giving away the service for limited personal use is a form of advertising.
Civilization depends on the division of labour, a corporation cannot provide everything it needs from it's own workforce, it must buy goods and services from others. For example most corporations don't generate their own electricity, more than a few lease their fleet of company cars rather than owning them outright, most rent their security guards rather than employing them directly. From a business POV renting IT services is the same concept.
"Will there be problems?" is the wrong question, of course there will be problems, everything has problems, when was the last time you experienced a power outage from an electricity supplier?
"Is it profitable for both sides?" - will at least tell you if the service has a future, or not.
If you are from a country with a Westminster system it's similar to being a member of the democratic party. You don't have to be a party member to vote in the election, but you do if you want to vote on internal party matters (such as picking the candidates to represent the party - a process known in the US as "the primaries"). Not sure how registering as independent works, by default the Westminster system considers anyone not registered with a party as the independent group.
I wouldn't mind location based spam if I registered for it but what I would really like is for the democrats to use my email address and location to figure out that I am not registered with them and that I'm usually located at least 10,000 miles away from the US. Seriously "Michelle" has been spaming me (an Aussie) to send her $5 to "own a piece of the democratic conference", now I'm getting invites to attend the confrence from "Barack".
Maybe they did? I'm not making any specific claims. I'm just offering an alternative interpretation of the quote that upset the OP so much that he "stopped reading". Doing that based on the quote alone is a bit like not reading a newspaper because it includes a horoscope.
Your story reminds me of a bouncer who used to sit in the corner of the local pub and knit football scarfs. (Rural Oz, back in the day before bouncers were licensed and registered).
Rubbish ^2 - The quote does not imply the navy invented radar. "Stumbled upon the concept" directly implies the concept already existed, ie: the Navy heard about it in the 1930's and put it to practical use. Even then, nobody was really interested until WW2.
"reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering"
The people who I have heard saying things like that are simply trying to encourage ME nations to be proud of their heritage the way that (say) Egypt and Turkey are, rather than blowing it up the way the Taliban do. Above and beyond petty religious/political struggles, the ME is the cradle of civilization, it's heritage is ours.
Slashdot Mirror
Technically those physicists are correct. CS is a branch of mathematics, mathematics is not science.
You should get out and actually learn about the world with practical first hand experience, and then you can have an informed opinion.
Three years as a night shift taxi driver in Melbourne where brothels are legal, regulated, and discrete. Informed by brief first hand accounts (and offers to barter services) from literally hundreds of prostitutes, admittedly it was two decades ago but nothing appears to have changed. What's your first hand experience, oh worldly one?
even if it were fully legalized the way it is in Amsterdam
Having also been to Amsterdam in the flesh, I think the main difference with Melbourne is the level of visibility, in Melbourne the average brothel looks like a big house, in Amsterdam they display themselves in shop front windows. The laws have been this way in Melbourne for at least 30yrs and you will find similar laws and attitudes across most of western Europe, Amsterdam gets all the attention because it's in your face,
You sound like an academic who is an expert on sex because you have read every single book on the subject.
If you have never met a hooker who enjoys her job, then perhaps you are projecting your shortcomings onto me? The hooker has the right to say no to a customer without giving a reason, a customer has the same right, these messy logistical and organic details are agreed upfront. The opinion of many of the happy hookers I met was the job is about as dangerous as driving a taxi or tending bar on a Saturday night
In answer to your flamebait, you sound like a frustrated young man who desperately needs to meet an intelligent, shameless whore who looks like butter wouldn't melt in her mouth. I suspect you have the sitcom "Big Bang Theory" of women as reluctant participants in sex which is reinforced by their reluctance to have sex with you. As for my own expertise in sex, I'm a divorced grandfather of 3 in a de-facto relationship, when your chest is silver and your sack starts suffering from gravel rash come back and we will talk about "life-experience" again.
I think the 'free enterprise' solution is to sell the commons to themselves and turn the commoners into renters.
Would armed security staff make a difference?
Not if they pull him over with a marked police car as soon as he leaves his driveway, or arrest him after a public appearance, or some other civilized method that does not involve a full scale home invasion. Sad thing is, apart from the mansion it sounds exactly like your average pot-head bust.
The last two years have been the wettest on record here in Oz, this was preceded by our worst and longest drought. That's what climate scientists mean when they say extremes will be more common. James Hansen has a new paper in the Journal of Science (it's pay-walled) that estimates the recent level of extreme events we are seeing have only a 0.1% chance of happening in the absence of AGW, (N hemisphere only). He uses the concept of loaded dice to illustrate what this means, it's not a difficult concept to grasp and is backed up by solid evidence published in a highly regarded peer-review journal. Arguing about the 1930's dustbowl is irrelevant, it's not about comparing single events in a particular region, it's about the rate at which those (and more extreme) events can be expected to occur. One dustbowl per century is tragic but manageable, one per decade would be catastrophic.
Tragedy of the commons
Which doesn't happen as often when things are privately owned.
Of course it doesn't, if you put the commons into private hands then it's no longer the commons, it's private property.
Also, prostitutes generally take that job because they're desperate and don't think they have any good alternatives.
Legalize brothels and you may be surprised how many women think it is a good alternative to a minimum wage job.
A heat wave is relative to average temperatures in the region. There was a heatwave in Greenland recently but the beach was still empty.
Just a nit-pick. The physics goes back to Fourier who predicted CO2 would be a GHG in 1824 (while inventing spectroscopy), someone else confirmed it by experiment in the 1850's (forget the name, he used glass jars, sunlight, and thermometers). A Swedish guy who's name I can't spell came up with AGW ~1900, nobody really believed him until the 1950's when hi-res spectroscopes made it possible to separate CO2 and H20 spectra. In 1958 the National Academies claimed they had detected AGW, their basic claim has not changed, their confidence has grown with the evidence collected over the last half century.
I don't know, passing the bong around congress would probably improve things dramatically.
You can afford coffee but you can't afford food?
Don't you have car rentals in your country?
From a commercial POV the "cloud" exists for the same reason car rentals exist. Cloud providers want to attract corporate customers, corporate customers know what's in the contract and have a standing army of lawyers to make sure they get what they were sold. Personal cloud users basically ride on the back of that business for "free", giving away the service for limited personal use is a form of advertising.
Civilization depends on the division of labour, a corporation cannot provide everything it needs from it's own workforce, it must buy goods and services from others. For example most corporations don't generate their own electricity, more than a few lease their fleet of company cars rather than owning them outright, most rent their security guards rather than employing them directly. From a business POV renting IT services is the same concept.
"Will there be problems?" is the wrong question, of course there will be problems, everything has problems, when was the last time you experienced a power outage from an electricity supplier?
"Is it profitable for both sides?" - will at least tell you if the service has a future, or not.
If you are from a country with a Westminster system it's similar to being a member of the democratic party. You don't have to be a party member to vote in the election, but you do if you want to vote on internal party matters (such as picking the candidates to represent the party - a process known in the US as "the primaries"). Not sure how registering as independent works, by default the Westminster system considers anyone not registered with a party as the independent group.
+1 - Ben Franklin (Defending the right of others to disagree with your opinion).
I wouldn't mind location based spam if I registered for it but what I would really like is for the democrats to use my email address and location to figure out that I am not registered with them and that I'm usually located at least 10,000 miles away from the US. Seriously "Michelle" has been spaming me (an Aussie) to send her $5 to "own a piece of the democratic conference", now I'm getting invites to attend the confrence from "Barack".
I think you replied to the wrong post.
Maybe they did? I'm not making any specific claims. I'm just offering an alternative interpretation of the quote that upset the OP so much that he "stopped reading". Doing that based on the quote alone is a bit like not reading a newspaper because it includes a horoscope.
You don't understand the language
And you think a bald assertion might fix that?
in this semantic context it clearly means "Invented".
What? You think I read TFA? AFAIC the context is the OP's quote, and it can be interpreted either way (depending on which eye you close).
BTW: 95th percentile at state level for mid-HS english comprehension test (1970's), but hey my english teacher thought I cheated too?
Thanks, better than my answer :)
What you may not realize is that storm is a caricature of your posts in this thread.
Your story reminds me of a bouncer who used to sit in the corner of the local pub and knit football scarfs. (Rural Oz, back in the day before bouncers were licensed and registered).
Rubbish ^2 - The quote does not imply the navy invented radar. "Stumbled upon the concept" directly implies the concept already existed, ie: the Navy heard about it in the 1930's and put it to practical use. Even then, nobody was really interested until WW2.
Computer can not create random numbers
Stick a length of wire into your sound card's mic jack, then sample the white noise.
Don't try that sweet talk on me, it might work.
"reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science, math and engineering"
The people who I have heard saying things like that are simply trying to encourage ME nations to be proud of their heritage the way that (say) Egypt and Turkey are, rather than blowing it up the way the Taliban do. Above and beyond petty religious/political struggles, the ME is the cradle of civilization, it's heritage is ours.