There is absolutely a ton of criminal activity that relies on a cash economy. That's the price you pay for having the freedom to make an untracked purchase. Remember, a government powerful enough to give you everything you want, if also powerful enough to take everything you have. You clarify have good intentions, but are either naive or ignorant of history. Then again, you may be okay with that explicitly. Likely because you have never lived in a totalitarian regime.
I find it quite sad that you completely miss the concept of why we need inalienable rights and then get modded insightful. I bet you said think we don't need free speech, self defense, non self incrimination, presumption of innocence, etc... because equivalent drivel can be made as a counter argument to anything that actually makes people free. I sure hope that reality does not illustrate to you exactly why you're wrong.
So this year the population is down 80%, the next year it'll be down another 60%... but the following year 100% of the mosquito population will be immune, and there will be 10000% more of them because the bird population decreased 80% from starvation. To challenge nature on it's own terms is generally futile in the long run.
This is part of the new progressive mentality - encourage complete dependence in every aspect of life. Rent an apartment. Ride share a car. No ambition. Once you don't own anything, it's only a small step to having everything you "need" issued by the state. Also, when you don't own, you don't need to feel connected to anything... no country, no community. That'll make it easier to accept the idea that you're prohibited from defending anything, including yourself and your loved ones.
Frankly, this is utter insanity. Don't attribute to malice, what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To that I ascribe the activities of the Republican and Democratic parties that got us the 2016 election result.
This lawsuit is a media and money-grabbing stunt, that is also a further attempt to de-legitimize anyone who disagrees with you. Kind of like on Slashdot, where if you utter anything but a Trump slur, and are immediately called a Russian troll.
I don't understand what I'm supposed to be outraged about. There are people who presumably have valuable skills. They are recruited with money. Am I supposed to dislike them for getting paid well? Is this part of the "let's hate the successful people" campaign that's so popular recently?
Or maybe you can go duck yourself sideways. I worked/studied 80+ hours a week for more than 20 years, sacrificed my entire youth and had to be at the top competitive level the entire time to get where I am. I love what I do, and I help a lot out people. But I sure damn ducking earned my $150+/hr.
Richard Stallman is falling into the same trap that we've been stuck in for ages - he thinks that there is an easy legislative road out of societal problems.
This is the same nonsense that people quote when they think that banning guns and knives will eliminate murder... or the people who think that banning abortions will cause people to stop having abortions... or that mandating abstinence only will cause there to be fewer teen pregnancies.
The technology to monitor everyone is here, and people will use it regardless of what we do. So our society can grow up to stop pretending we're all perfect, and to actively oppose massive stockpiling of data regardless of their benefits... or we will descend into the kind of totalitarian regime that has never been possible before - one that could truly be the thousand-year Reich.
Moreover, with the technological capabilities we are evolving right now, not only could we reach new levels of subconscious manipulation to produce new generations of obedient sheep, we could also engineer perfect weapons that will eliminate "enemies of the state" successfully, efficiency, and with little possibility of defense.
My guess is that this is a Russian troll too, or an American moron. What the left seem to not realize is that there is something far more valuable for Russia, as a competitor to the US, than a friendly president... it's the whole of the US at each other's throats and the collapse of our political system. That my friends is the long term destabilization that will have Russia back on top on the international arena. They don't care about Trump... they'd much rather we were fighting each other. And we're playing into their hands.
Exactly. When your business involves interacting (even digitally) with millions of people, it would be inconceivable for you NOT to encounter some people who are nuts.
Last I checked, the IV amendment doesn't say: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" EXCEPT WHEN IT ANNOYS THE FBI DIRECTOR.
These days that's not a bug, that's a feature. We're done with the digital age. We're into the surveillance age. At least for Winston, he knew the telescreen while likely not be watching everyone all the time. Nowadays, all the screens are always watching... and listening... to everyone.. all the time.
But I can't imagine there's any human who could keep perfect attention and ready to take over while being driven by an automatic car. A driver keeps attention on the road by having a continuous feedback of input and output. What they're asking their drivers to do is pay perfect attention without any feedback for I presume hours on end. Human drivers fall asleep if the road has too few turns... this is far worse. I doubt you could get the safety driver to focus for more than 30-60 minutes. It's simply too boring.
I was generous. It's probably 0.1-percenter, or 0.01 percenter.
Yes they're progressive as long as they get to remain a 0.01 percenter. Just ask Jimmy Kimmel.
The progressives in the government remain so because they realize that when the government owns everything, and they control how to distribute it, they will just distribute it according to their wants and needs.
Basically you're describing Feudalism, which is definitely not progressive. Its quite the opposite. Feudalism is where the lord maintains the ownership of all the lands and the tenants (serfs and freemen) rent off the lord for a portion of their produce. The tenants, well at least the freemen are permitted to work it as they see fit as long as the lords get their tribute. This is very much a conservative wet dream who are still bitter about having to give up any of their rights to the peasantry.
The difference here is that instead of a ruling family you have "the government". The Soviets used to have an expression: "you own what you guard". When the government owns and controls everything, the bureaucrats own and control everything, including you. In Soviet Union, the government officials had property, income, and quality of life that far exceeded the rest, and was proportional to their position. I fail to see the difference.
Have you been to Manhattan, San Francisco, Silicon Valley - they so-called havens of the progressives? They are far more segregated, stratified, with their high castles inaccessible to the common citizens, compared to the South, for example.
Do not make the mistake of eating shit that's in a fancy wrapper. It's still shit.
Actually it's much more complex than that. Unless it's lung-drowningly obvious, pneumonia is a clinical diagnosis, not a purely radiographic one.
Perhaps it's some dork's wet dream to have all-knowing AI make all their decisions in life for them, but I can't help wondering how much humanity we're willing to give up.
Slashdot Mirror
There is absolutely a ton of criminal activity that relies on a cash economy. That's the price you pay for having the freedom to make an untracked purchase. Remember, a government powerful enough to give you everything you want, if also powerful enough to take everything you have. You clarify have good intentions, but are either naive or ignorant of history. Then again, you may be okay with that explicitly. Likely because you have never lived in a totalitarian regime.
I find it quite sad that you completely miss the concept of why we need inalienable rights and then get modded insightful. I bet you said think we don't need free speech, self defense, non self incrimination, presumption of innocence, etc... because equivalent drivel can be made as a counter argument to anything that actually makes people free. I sure hope that reality does not illustrate to you exactly why you're wrong.
So this year the population is down 80%, the next year it'll be down another 60%... but the following year 100% of the mosquito population will be immune, and there will be 10000% more of them because the bird population decreased 80% from starvation. To challenge nature on it's own terms is generally futile in the long run.
This is part of the new progressive mentality - encourage complete dependence in every aspect of life. Rent an apartment. Ride share a car. No ambition. Once you don't own anything, it's only a small step to having everything you "need" issued by the state. Also, when you don't own, you don't need to feel connected to anything ... no country, no community. That'll make it easier to accept the idea that you're prohibited from defending anything, including yourself and your loved ones.
That's the same "common sense" we should use for gun control...
That's an actual lie. Per the census bureau, about 60% of registered voters voted in 2016.
https://www.census.gov/data/ta...
Frankly, this is utter insanity.
Don't attribute to malice, what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
To that I ascribe the activities of the Republican and Democratic parties that got us the 2016 election result.
This lawsuit is a media and money-grabbing stunt, that is also a further attempt to de-legitimize anyone who disagrees with you. Kind of like on Slashdot, where if you utter anything but a Trump slur, and are immediately called a Russian troll.
I don't understand what I'm supposed to be outraged about. There are people who presumably have valuable skills. They are recruited with money. Am I supposed to dislike them for getting paid well? Is this part of the "let's hate the successful people" campaign that's so popular recently?
Or maybe you can go duck yourself sideways. I worked/studied 80+ hours a week for more than 20 years, sacrificed my entire youth and had to be at the top competitive level the entire time to get where I am. I love what I do, and I help a lot out people. But I sure damn ducking earned my $150+/hr.
Richard Stallman is falling into the same trap that we've been stuck in for ages - he thinks that there is an easy legislative road out of societal problems.
This is the same nonsense that people quote when they think that banning guns and knives will eliminate murder... or the people who think that banning abortions will cause people to stop having abortions... or that mandating abstinence only will cause there to be fewer teen pregnancies.
The technology to monitor everyone is here, and people will use it regardless of what we do. So our society can grow up to stop pretending we're all perfect, and to actively oppose massive stockpiling of data regardless of their benefits... or we will descend into the kind of totalitarian regime that has never been possible before - one that could truly be the thousand-year Reich.
Moreover, with the technological capabilities we are evolving right now, not only could we reach new levels of subconscious manipulation to produce new generations of obedient sheep, we could also engineer perfect weapons that will eliminate "enemies of the state" successfully, efficiency, and with little possibility of defense.
My guess is that this is a Russian troll too, or an American moron. What the left seem to not realize is that there is something far more valuable for Russia, as a competitor to the US, than a friendly president... it's the whole of the US at each other's throats and the collapse of our political system. That my friends is the long term destabilization that will have Russia back on top on the international arena. They don't care about Trump... they'd much rather we were fighting each other. And we're playing into their hands.
Exactly. When your business involves interacting (even digitally) with millions of people, it would be inconceivable for you NOT to encounter some people who are nuts.
Last I checked, the IV amendment doesn't say:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" EXCEPT WHEN IT ANNOYS THE FBI DIRECTOR.
These days that's not a bug, that's a feature. We're done with the digital age. We're into the surveillance age. At least for Winston, he knew the telescreen while likely not be watching everyone all the time. Nowadays, all the screens are always watching... and listening... to everyone.. all the time.
I think they should actually duel.
Yes. That's the point.
That's the worst argument ever. I can save more than one life by tomorrow if I ban cars and liquor.
But I can't imagine there's any human who could keep perfect attention and ready to take over while being driven by an automatic car. A driver keeps attention on the road by having a continuous feedback of input and output. What they're asking their drivers to do is pay perfect attention without any feedback for I presume hours on end. Human drivers fall asleep if the road has too few turns... this is far worse. I doubt you could get the safety driver to focus for more than 30-60 minutes. It's simply too boring.
That's why it's imperative that we ban humans.
No, kind of like a gun kills its victims.
Recurrent C diff is most effectively treated by stool transplants. Been known for at least 6 years.
I didn't say anything about limiting affordability. I clearly stated that they would like everyone neatly stacked into little boxes... affordably.
I was generous. It's probably 0.1-percenter, or 0.01 percenter.
Yes they're progressive as long as they get to remain a 0.01 percenter. Just ask Jimmy Kimmel.
The progressives in the government remain so because they realize that when the government owns everything, and they control how to distribute it, they will just distribute it according to their wants and needs.
The difference here is that instead of a ruling family you have "the government". The Soviets used to have an expression: "you own what you guard". When the government owns and controls everything, the bureaucrats own and control everything, including you. In Soviet Union, the government officials had property, income, and quality of life that far exceeded the rest, and was proportional to their position. I fail to see the difference.
Have you been to Manhattan, San Francisco, Silicon Valley - they so-called havens of the progressives? They are far more segregated, stratified, with their high castles inaccessible to the common citizens, compared to the South, for example.
Do not make the mistake of eating shit that's in a fancy wrapper. It's still shit.
Actually it's much more complex than that.
Unless it's lung-drowningly obvious, pneumonia is a clinical diagnosis, not a purely radiographic one.
Perhaps it's some dork's wet dream to have all-knowing AI make all their decisions in life for them, but I can't help wondering how much humanity we're willing to give up.