"30 years ago 1st graders were being taught to count to 50, the ABCS and how to put together simple words and after that children spent 2 hours a day painting, playing, and cutting shapes out of construction paper."
Bullshit, Bucky. 'Put together simple words'? You mean *talk*? If a six year old can't talk, that six year old has serious problems. If you mean teach grammar, that was being done.
My daughter is thirty-five and school was nowhere near as simple as that when she was in the first grade. She was learning to spell, read (including some phonic irregularities - gh), write and more in the 1st grade. None of that's new.
You want new and destructive? Check out fuzzy math.
So, I take by your complete misunderstanding of what was written that you post Anonymous because you can't remember the correct sequence of the letters of your name?
"Capitalism simply does not deliver good education."
Capitalism has nothing to do with the public educational system, it's run by government.
A piece of evidence against that sentence is that the entrenched public-servant educators in the US are mostly union and vociferously *against* private capitalist schools.
Privacy is not his number one concern, else he would get his own lap top and any GPS is to recover a lost/stolen machine, not track his private wanderings.
Not being found out as having used a company device for personal jollies is his primary concern.
That was 2007. I'm pretty certain those same people are showing up at 9 and working until done now. Changing the situation of "more jobs than kids" to "less jobs than kids" changes a helluva lot.
Well, we can pretty much assume the GPS and other things are, they're on the device and he wants to circumvent. He wants to circumvent because he knows about them. He knows about them because he was told they were there or he purposefully went looking.
"... having to haul two laptops around may be unreasonable."
Please, they weigh what, three pounds and both can fit in the same carry and occupy an entire inch and a half more?
I hunt. I also live on the edge of the Mark Twain Forest. You cannot pull a cart through the Mark Twain Forest and it ain't laws that stop you, it's trees. And no, those "paths to the forest" weren't and aren't smooth. Ruts. Smooth is totally modern. Not even roads in the US were smooth until after WWII. Read up.
"I am guessing you never hunted. you drive to where you hunt, walk around and kill things, drag them to your cart, load up the bodies and then drive home."
One, that's not hunting for a living, that's recreation. The giveaway is the "drive to" you mentioned.
Now, when Ugh and Arrgh hunted, they walked. They also walked ***all the way home*** instead of back to their car.
"When they could not bring 40 slaves to carry all the dead animals, they needed a cart. plus you did not go on a 1 week hunting trip with just your pointy stick."
Because all primitive hunter/gatherers were slave holders? No. You have no clue as to primitive life. U and A were also in far better shape than you and porting a 150lb carcass wasn't all that much.
"You wouldn't want to carry a large prey with you on a sled or on your shoulders, if you would have a cart of some sort to transport it on."
Dude, that's *exactly* how you carry out your kill from deep woods. Today. You ever try to roll a friggin' cart through a forest? No can do. Not even a light woods. There's no clearance.
"Guess what-- the results are still the same. The data showing the planet is warming is real."
Guess what? Not the real question and everyone knows it including you.
The real question is two-fold. Is human activity responsible for "runaway warming" (runaway being a question itself) and will the things presented to 'correct' it (oddly by the very people doing the research) be correct themselves or even necessary?
Now, since the Earth warms and cools independently of human presence, you need to *prove* a link in order to radically alter human activity. And *that* is the actual target of all this research.
Horseshit. McIntyre proved empirically that the "hockey stick" algorithm was written to generate a hockey stick by pumping in noise and getting - a hockey stick.
No witch hunt, Mann used shaky technique, poor method and outright fraud *at best*.
"And yet somehow you fail to acknowledge that it probably was a shill..."
How the hell do you know?
"There are hundreds of these lowlifes........"
Yes, because I always form my opinions of someone's comment based on the opinion of a hostile AC.
"...it's fundamentally dishonest unless they are upfront about who they represent..."
You're disbelief does not constitute proof of a lie on their part, only that you don't believe them. This confusion may be some of the basis of your hostility.
Slashdot Mirror
"Unlimited" in the aggregate, limited in the moment of reality. That you don't understand this explains your confusion.
"you are not taking anything away"
Incorrect. You are removing the right of distributorship. The rest of your post isn't relevant to the crime.
The *ability* to be copied is the mark of nothing. It's a smoke screen for those who want to do so and break an author's copyright.
It's neither a contradiction nor self-affirming.
"30 years ago 1st graders were being taught to count to 50, the ABCS and how to put together simple words and after that children spent 2 hours a day painting, playing, and cutting shapes out of construction paper."
Bullshit, Bucky. 'Put together simple words'? You mean *talk*? If a six year old can't talk, that six year old has serious problems. If you mean teach grammar, that was being done.
My daughter is thirty-five and school was nowhere near as simple as that when she was in the first grade. She was learning to spell, read (including some phonic irregularities - gh), write and more in the 1st grade. None of that's new.
You want new and destructive? Check out fuzzy math.
So, I take by your complete misunderstanding of what was written that you post Anonymous because you can't remember the correct sequence of the letters of your name?
Ego, followed by a tenure long additional stipend of a grand a year is nothing to sneeze at. Two classes a year, two grand.
"Capitalism simply does not deliver good education."
Capitalism has nothing to do with the public educational system, it's run by government.
A piece of evidence against that sentence is that the entrenched public-servant educators in the US are mostly union and vociferously *against* private capitalist schools.
What he's talking about is not wanting to purchase his own portable. No more.
"Pretty sure he's talking about his use of the laptop off company hours."
Sorry, I jumped the gun there, as you agree with me.
Privacy is not his number one concern, else he would get his own lap top and any GPS is to recover a lost/stolen machine, not track his private wanderings.
Not being found out as having used a company device for personal jollies is his primary concern.
That was 2007. I'm pretty certain those same people are showing up at 9 and working until done now. Changing the situation of "more jobs than kids" to "less jobs than kids" changes a helluva lot.
"We don't know what the terms or the job are."
Well, we can pretty much assume the GPS and other things are, they're on the device and he wants to circumvent. He wants to circumvent because he knows about them. He knows about them because he was told they were there or he purposefully went looking.
"... having to haul two laptops around may be unreasonable."
Please, they weigh what, three pounds and both can fit in the same carry and occupy an entire inch and a half more?
Company cars aren't for leisure time. Use your own car.
And my guess is he can watch a DVD on it. Equivalence met.
Don't drive across state. More equivalent to installing your own software or bypassing security.
I hunt. I also live on the edge of the Mark Twain Forest. You cannot pull a cart through the Mark Twain Forest and it ain't laws that stop you, it's trees. And no, those "paths to the forest" weren't and aren't smooth. Ruts. Smooth is totally modern. Not even roads in the US were smooth until after WWII. Read up.
"I am guessing you never hunted. you drive to where you hunt, walk around and kill things, drag them to your cart, load up the bodies and then drive home."
One, that's not hunting for a living, that's recreation. The giveaway is the "drive to" you mentioned.
Now, when Ugh and Arrgh hunted, they walked. They also walked ***all the way home*** instead of back to their car.
"When they could not bring 40 slaves to carry all the dead animals, they needed a cart. plus you did not go on a 1 week hunting trip with just your pointy stick."
Because all primitive hunter/gatherers were slave holders? No. You have no clue as to primitive life. U and A were also in far better shape than you and porting a 150lb carcass wasn't all that much.
"You wouldn't want to carry a large prey with you on a sled or on your shoulders, if you would have a cart of some sort to transport it on."
Dude, that's *exactly* how you carry out your kill from deep woods. Today. You ever try to roll a friggin' cart through a forest? No can do. Not even a light woods. There's no clearance.
I use FireFox and I just went to the puzzle page.
You click the highlighted square and the first thing that happens is an immovable pop-up covers most of the puzzle.
I left it unfinished.
What is this "win" you speak of?
Approval of advertising? If so, one needs to spiral, crash and burn and learn to think better.
And what "goal"?
To be a clone of some vacuous nice to photograph prop?
Again I would promote the crash and burn technique for recovering a rational outlook on life and one's self.
I however, have this odd belief that if you set yourself stupid goals and then succeed in attaining them, you deserve the rewards.
The bulk of a few of them outweighs the bulk of the rest.
"Guess what-- the results are still the same. The data showing the planet is warming is real."
Guess what? Not the real question and everyone knows it including you.
The real question is two-fold. Is human activity responsible for "runaway warming" (runaway being a question itself) and will the things presented to 'correct' it (oddly by the very people doing the research) be correct themselves or even necessary?
Now, since the Earth warms and cools independently of human presence, you need to *prove* a link in order to radically alter human activity. And *that* is the actual target of all this research.
Horseshit. McIntyre proved empirically that the "hockey stick" algorithm was written to generate a hockey stick by pumping in noise and getting - a hockey stick.
No witch hunt, Mann used shaky technique, poor method and outright fraud *at best*.
Got no argument? Drop into ad hominem.
Not just that, but probably determine how to collect it as usable energy. Many articles like this don't bother thinking any deeper than one.
Not a squirrel. A girl with nice tits with ears like a cat, but I saw no squirrel like features at all.
"And yet somehow you fail to acknowledge that it probably was a shill..."
How the hell do you know?
"There are hundreds of these lowlifes........"
Yes, because I always form my opinions of someone's comment based on the opinion of a hostile AC.
"...it's fundamentally dishonest unless they are upfront about who they represent..."
You're disbelief does not constitute proof of a lie on their part, only that you don't believe them. This confusion may be some of the basis of your hostility.