In fact, it is akin to telling a rape victim that s?he owes their rapist for services rendered.
Huh? Consumers are choosing to consume. The companies that outsource to other countries are doing so knowingly. Increased CO2 is an inevitable outcome. How is that in any way like rape?
Instead, we should put an increasing tax on all goods based on where the parts come from. In addition, the normalization should be co2 / $GDP.
So richer countries are allowed to pollute more than poorer countries? How very unfair.
Suppose you have this rough ground, hill at one end, sloping off down at the other. And you want to build a playing field on it.
One way would be to completely randomly shift dirt around in the hope that averaging and gravity would somehow make it level over time.
Another way would be to deliberately and systematically shift dirt from the high part to the low part.
The former is egalitarianism, the latter is feminism. They both have the objective of equality, but use different approaches.
The accusation that some are making is that ALL the people involved with feminism want to make the low end of the ground into the high end and vice versa. And that isn't true. Some do, some don't.
The worst are women that want to get the benefits of feminism and also the benefits of chauvinism. The type that will complain of sexism at work, whilst expecting the man to open the doors, buy the drinks and meal. But in my experience most women like that don't claim to be feminists.
Men feature more as both the perpetrators and victims of violence and murder. The rape stat might be higher for women, though it's hard to be sure as most rapes of men happen in prison, where they tend not to be reported.
But the question is why you are distinguishing? It's also true that black people are feature more as perpetrators and victims of violence, yet it's not acceptable to only worry about white people.
We should have sympathy and fight for ALL victims regardless of race of gender, and condemn all perpetrators regardless of race or gender.
The tendency of some people to only care about hurt to their own gender or race, or only condemn another race or gender is appalling. And I think that's the trap you are falling into.
All varieties of feminism without exception are based on patriarchy theory, which holds men as the eternal oppressors and women as the forever oppressed.
That's simply not true. Looks like you have a chip on your shoulder.
Sadly, it will also become controversially once the far left realizes that America is NOT the massive polluter that they claim, but that instead, it will turn out that most of the 3rd world nations are some of the WORST.
You seem to be assuming something that couldn't be measured till now. Maybe you're right and maybe you're wrong. BUT you're probably not even framing the question right. If American companies are contracting 3rd world nations to make products or product components, that are then consumed in America, then that CO2 should rightly be assigned to America, not the 3rd world countries.
That's not "a massive out". That's just rather more sophisticated thinking.
Because the climate is a complex system. And because you like to start looking at the year of an El Nino effect, and we're currently in a La Nina period,
Now just because there has been a satellite launched to measure CO2 is no reason for your denialism memes you be repeated once again, you tedious asshole. So fuck off.
I'm not exactly new to this. In my lifetime I've seen many varieties of feminism, and the worthwhile ones are about equality. There are indeed other varieties that aren't, as my earlier post already indicated. But their existence doesn't invalidate the feminism that is about equality.
"Disproportionately"? Could you tell me what a proportional amount is, and why everything would be OK if that figure was met.
You know men are "disproportionately" victims of murder. So does that mean we shouldn't worry too much about women that are murdered?
You're just making silly excuses that women hitting men isn't as serious as men hitting women. Which is a deeply sexist point of view. Your brand of feminism isn't about equality, it's about supporting your team. Every bit as much as a misogynist does.
Thanks for the link. If feminism beans people having equal rights ad responsibilities, regardless of gender then I'm a feminist. But I do get tired of some feminists over-egging the pudding. Like one that insists that Margaret Thatcher was only hated because she was a women. No she was hated because she had very damaging policies for much of the country.
However, "mangina"? Are you assuming the person you replied to is a man? Isn't that a bit of sexism right there?
Obv it's out of the question because of the outrageous amount of fuel that would be burned. But for the sake of the imagination...
The technology wouldn't be ready until it was autonomous. Most people couldn't do the thinking in 3D necessary to fly one themselves, and be safe.
They'd have to design flying cars to have the minimum chance of things falling off. So there'd be no equivalent of hub caps and fenders. And cars tend to have the mechanics on the underside reasonably exposed. I'd imagine a flying car being as much of an enclosed shape as possible such that anything that does fall off just rolls about inside (if it's not a flight critical thing!)
And with the autonomous thing, you could imagine them being routed as far as possible over fields, rivers, wilderness etc. where anything falling out of the sky would be very unlikely to hit anyone.
They happen to live two mountain ranges over and across a lake from me so the path to get there is rather circuitous.
Bet it's beautiful though. And with autonomous cars on the way, you can enjoy that view. Or (when they are good enough to really trust) you can read or watch a video.
Forget the flying car thing. It's not just safety issues, it's a really bad use of dwindling supplies of fossil fuel.
And it's damn time the boomers start getting off'd by their dementia
Hmm... that's quite a chip on your shoulder you have there. How young are you? Mom still telling you what to do?
Go learn to think before
Which invariably means "I hate it that you have different thoughts to me."
I live in Colorado, btw, notorious for this: the excuse here is that the cabs are a public utility. Strange that if I give a neighbor a lift for free it's legal but if he pays for gas it's technically and suddenly not.
I expect you've got that wrong. Fuel sharing is usually perfectly legal. Laws requiring special licenses for commercial driving are generally phrased in terms of "for reward", which a genuine fuel share isn't.
The Beeching Axe was a horrendous mistake. We now need again many of those railway lines that were scrapped, as the road system isn't scalable enough, and population keeps on growing.
Rail transport is a public service, it's not meant to be profitable. Countries with decent rail transport all subsidise them.
Who said "medalions" need eliminating. Medalions are a device to enforce proper insurance, roadworthy vehicles, qualified drivers and a maintainable level of taxis. For why a free for all can be a bad idea, see the tragedy of the commons.
If they are operating illegally in a particular area, that warrants either criminal prosecution or civil penalties as appropriate to the law in question. You don't get to choose what laws you follow.
I'm not really sure why people think that Elementary OS is a copy of OS X.
OSX is my everyday desktop. And I looked at the video on the homepage of Elementary OS, and to me it looked every bit like OSX.
No it's not just the Dock. Though the dock is a blatent copy, right down to the bouncing whilst launching.
Going through the vid: The progress spinner si a an OSX copy. There's also the system tray icons top left, they are an OSX copy. In the music app, there is a source-list copy. The file browser is an OSX Finder clone. The delete icon consisting of a white X is black circle with white border verlapping the top left corner of an object is a copy of one used in various places of OSX and iOS. The task switcher is the same, only switching top and bottom of the screen.
And that's from just a very short vid, most of which isn't showing OS chrome.
It's certainly somewhere in the inspired by OSX->Copy of OSX continuum.
And very nice it looks too.
BTW you point out the lack of an application menu, looking at screenshots in Google Images, I see (presumably older version) pictures of Elementary OS with an OSX like application menu sticking to the top of the screen. So whilst perhaps they are experimenting with deprecating the app menu as a primary interaction element, when it was there it was a OSX copy, as was everything else.
If I wanted OS X I'd run OS X. I'm not sure why Slashdot is bothering to cover a distro whose claim to fame is ripping off somebody elses design. Or at least cover it and act like they're doing something unique.
Linux is the platform made by copying. Linux itself is a copy of Unix. Most of the desktop environments originally copied the Win 95 style, and have moved forwards from there. In mobile, Android originally copied Blackberry, then switched overnight to copying iOS when that came out.
The clock rate is software programmable - as a fraction of the crystal used. So you can run it at 12 MHz. And then there's a WAITCNT instruction that effectively sleeps till a programmable counter reaches zero. So you can put all the cogs to sleep except one, and only wake the remaining one up as infrequently as you need to poll.
Still not as power efficient for some device that's waiting a long time between events and is running from battery. But a hell of a lot of devices are not that.
And for sure it's far less complex than using interrupts. Providing that you can do all the different things you need in 7+1 different processes. If you have to share a cog to do two different things, then it suddenly becomes very hard.
The propeller is a delight to use. I hadn't had as much fun coding for years as when I used one. Though again thats's more of a selling point for hobbyists than professionals.;-)
You've said it all yourself. The difference in risk between one driver and another will be what car they drive. And that's one of the variables that exists right now. You pay a lot more insurance for a sports car than a runabout. Similarly you'll pay more for autonomous cars with a worse safety record.
These's nothing wrong with that. As you say, the insurance companies have to set prices against risks.
There is literally no hurdle to jump as regard insurance and autonomous cars. It's not an issue.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Remove Apple from having it's name on the App Store (or just allow anybody to set up their own store)
2. Removing Apple's 100% control of what apps are listed (Or just allow anybody to set up their own store)
Neither suggestion solves any of the problems listed.
In fact, it is akin to telling a rape victim that s?he owes their rapist for services rendered.
Huh? Consumers are choosing to consume. The companies that outsource to other countries are doing so knowingly. Increased CO2 is an inevitable outcome. How is that in any way like rape?
Instead, we should put an increasing tax on all goods based on where the parts come from. In addition, the normalization should be co2 / $GDP.
So richer countries are allowed to pollute more than poorer countries? How very unfair.
Suppose you have this rough ground, hill at one end, sloping off down at the other. And you want to build a playing field on it.
One way would be to completely randomly shift dirt around in the hope that averaging and gravity would somehow make it level over time.
Another way would be to deliberately and systematically shift dirt from the high part to the low part.
The former is egalitarianism, the latter is feminism. They both have the objective of equality, but use different approaches.
The accusation that some are making is that ALL the people involved with feminism want to make the low end of the ground into the high end and vice versa. And that isn't true. Some do, some don't.
The worst are women that want to get the benefits of feminism and also the benefits of chauvinism. The type that will complain of sexism at work, whilst expecting the man to open the doors, buy the drinks and meal. But in my experience most women like that don't claim to be feminists.
Men feature more as both the perpetrators and victims of violence and murder. The rape stat might be higher for women, though it's hard to be sure as most rapes of men happen in prison, where they tend not to be reported.
But the question is why you are distinguishing? It's also true that black people are feature more as perpetrators and victims of violence, yet it's not acceptable to only worry about white people.
We should have sympathy and fight for ALL victims regardless of race of gender, and condemn all perpetrators regardless of race or gender.
The tendency of some people to only care about hurt to their own gender or race, or only condemn another race or gender is appalling. And I think that's the trap you are falling into.
All varieties of feminism without exception are based on patriarchy theory, which holds men as the eternal oppressors and women as the forever oppressed.
That's simply not true. Looks like you have a chip on your shoulder.
Sadly, it will also become controversially once the far left realizes that America is NOT the massive polluter that they claim, but that instead, it will turn out that most of the 3rd world nations are some of the WORST.
You seem to be assuming something that couldn't be measured till now. Maybe you're right and maybe you're wrong. BUT you're probably not even framing the question right. If American companies are contracting 3rd world nations to make products or product components, that are then consumed in America, then that CO2 should rightly be assigned to America, not the 3rd world countries.
That's not "a massive out". That's just rather more sophisticated thinking.
Because the climate is a complex system. And because you like to start looking at the year of an El Nino effect, and we're currently in a La Nina period,
Now just because there has been a satellite launched to measure CO2 is no reason for your denialism memes you be repeated once again, you tedious asshole. So fuck off.
I'm not exactly new to this. In my lifetime I've seen many varieties of feminism, and the worthwhile ones are about equality. There are indeed other varieties that aren't, as my earlier post already indicated. But their existence doesn't invalidate the feminism that is about equality.
"Disproportionately"? Could you tell me what a proportional amount is, and why everything would be OK if that figure was met.
You know men are "disproportionately" victims of murder. So does that mean we shouldn't worry too much about women that are murdered?
You're just making silly excuses that women hitting men isn't as serious as men hitting women. Which is a deeply sexist point of view. Your brand of feminism isn't about equality, it's about supporting your team. Every bit as much as a misogynist does.
You should reconsider your opinions.
Linking to the article they are ridiculing doesn't mean they agree with it. Quite the contrary.
Similarly Slashdot doesn't agree with all the links that appear in their stories.
Thanks for the link. If feminism beans people having equal rights ad responsibilities, regardless of gender then I'm a feminist. But I do get tired of some feminists over-egging the pudding. Like one that insists that Margaret Thatcher was only hated because she was a women. No she was hated because she had very damaging policies for much of the country.
However, "mangina"? Are you assuming the person you replied to is a man? Isn't that a bit of sexism right there?
Obv it's out of the question because of the outrageous amount of fuel that would be burned. But for the sake of the imagination...
The technology wouldn't be ready until it was autonomous. Most people couldn't do the thinking in 3D necessary to fly one themselves, and be safe.
They'd have to design flying cars to have the minimum chance of things falling off. So there'd be no equivalent of hub caps and fenders. And cars tend to have the mechanics on the underside reasonably exposed. I'd imagine a flying car being as much of an enclosed shape as possible such that anything that does fall off just rolls about inside (if it's not a flight critical thing!)
And with the autonomous thing, you could imagine them being routed as far as possible over fields, rivers, wilderness etc. where anything falling out of the sky would be very unlikely to hit anyone.
They happen to live two mountain ranges over and across a lake from me so the path to get there is rather circuitous.
Bet it's beautiful though. And with autonomous cars on the way, you can enjoy that view. Or (when they are good enough to really trust) you can read or watch a video.
Forget the flying car thing. It's not just safety issues, it's a really bad use of dwindling supplies of fossil fuel.
Guess what? There's no lead in pencils either.
And I ignored your pointless attempt at filtering.
And it's damn time the boomers start getting off'd by their dementia
Hmm... that's quite a chip on your shoulder you have there. How young are you? Mom still telling you what to do?
Go learn to think before
Which invariably means "I hate it that you have different thoughts to me."
I live in Colorado, btw, notorious for this: the excuse here is that the cabs are a public utility. Strange that if I give a neighbor a lift for free it's legal but if he pays for gas it's technically and suddenly not.
I expect you've got that wrong. Fuel sharing is usually perfectly legal. Laws requiring special licenses for commercial driving are generally phrased in terms of "for reward", which a genuine fuel share isn't.
The Beeching Axe was a horrendous mistake. We now need again many of those railway lines that were scrapped, as the road system isn't scalable enough, and population keeps on growing.
Rail transport is a public service, it's not meant to be profitable. Countries with decent rail transport all subsidise them.
It's also a big mistake to privatise them.
Sorry but most people don't buy your libertarian snake oil.
Who said "medalions" need eliminating. Medalions are a device to enforce proper insurance, roadworthy vehicles, qualified drivers and a maintainable level of taxis. For why a free for all can be a bad idea, see the tragedy of the commons.
If they are operating illegally in a particular area, that warrants either criminal prosecution or civil penalties as appropriate to the law in question. You don't get to choose what laws you follow.
From Mavericks onward each screen has a menu bar and a dock. There is no need to move your cursor to another screen to access the menu bar.
I'm not really sure why people think that Elementary OS is a copy of OS X.
OSX is my everyday desktop. And I looked at the video on the homepage of Elementary OS, and to me it looked every bit like OSX.
No it's not just the Dock. Though the dock is a blatent copy, right down to the bouncing whilst launching.
Going through the vid: The progress spinner si a an OSX copy. There's also the system tray icons top left, they are an OSX copy. In the music app, there is a source-list copy. The file browser is an OSX Finder clone. The delete icon consisting of a white X is black circle with white border verlapping the top left corner of an object is a copy of one used in various places of OSX and iOS. The task switcher is the same, only switching top and bottom of the screen.
And that's from just a very short vid, most of which isn't showing OS chrome.
It's certainly somewhere in the inspired by OSX->Copy of OSX continuum.
And very nice it looks too.
BTW you point out the lack of an application menu, looking at screenshots in Google Images, I see (presumably older version) pictures of Elementary OS with an OSX like application menu sticking to the top of the screen. So whilst perhaps they are experimenting with deprecating the app menu as a primary interaction element, when it was there it was a OSX copy, as was everything else.
If I wanted OS X I'd run OS X. I'm not sure why Slashdot is bothering to cover a distro whose claim to fame is ripping off somebody elses design. Or at least cover it and act like they're doing something unique.
Linux is the platform made by copying. Linux itself is a copy of Unix. Most of the desktop environments originally copied the Win 95 style, and have moved forwards from there. In mobile, Android originally copied Blackberry, then switched overnight to copying iOS when that came out.
The clock rate is software programmable - as a fraction of the crystal used. So you can run it at 12 MHz. And then there's a WAITCNT instruction that effectively sleeps till a programmable counter reaches zero. So you can put all the cogs to sleep except one, and only wake the remaining one up as infrequently as you need to poll.
Still not as power efficient for some device that's waiting a long time between events and is running from battery. But a hell of a lot of devices are not that.
And for sure it's far less complex than using interrupts. Providing that you can do all the different things you need in 7+1 different processes. If you have to share a cog to do two different things, then it suddenly becomes very hard.
The propeller is a delight to use. I hadn't had as much fun coding for years as when I used one. Though again thats's more of a selling point for hobbyists than professionals. ;-)
You've said it all yourself. The difference in risk between one driver and another will be what car they drive. And that's one of the variables that exists right now. You pay a lot more insurance for a sports car than a runabout. Similarly you'll pay more for autonomous cars with a worse safety record.
These's nothing wrong with that. As you say, the insurance companies have to set prices against risks.
There is literally no hurdle to jump as regard insurance and autonomous cars. It's not an issue.