What really shocks me though is the response of a significant number of people here, that the suffering he endured was justified as it was 'deserved'.
Why? He's a Grade A completely Evil Bastard who does deserve pain and suffering. Specifically, he should be anally raped and then killed the same way that he raped and killed his victim.
On television, split screen with the crime scene photos of the dead woman.
I never bothered memorizing multiplication tables and I can easily figure such things out.
While you're figuring out what 7*8 is, the people who have memorized the multiplication tables have that (usually intermediate) answer and have gone on to more interesting stuff.
Memorizing facts gives one a fund of knowledge from which to deduce patterns and gain deeper insights.
If he wanted to be an artists, mechanic, chef, carpenter, etc, etc -- trades which require abilities manifestly beyond his capacity --, then yes, I would have.
If you can't do that, then maybe University isn't for you.
Bottom line: not everyone is able to do what most other people can do (hence "dis-abled"), and -- speaking from experience -- must make the best of your limitations.
Does this classification require legislation or something?
Hopefully. After all, bureaucrats shouldn't be able to just pass any regulations they feel like. Instead, they should be bound by the bills that the Congress passes and the President signs.
Likewise, the Courts should not invent new law based upon their own feelings of what's Right and Wrong, but on the actual text of Laws and the Constitution.
The urge is overwhelming to ask if you have a full-time job with a for-profit business, or work for some low-rent NGO while drinking toasts to Che Guevara at night.
But why was it bigger? I say, "Because it's fairer" and you say, "nuh unh!"
China with it's non-democratic state capitalism will have a greater GDP than the USA.
Per capita GDP will still be much lower. When Chinese state capitalism generates a per capita GDP that's as high as that of the US, then that will be an indication that such an economic system distributes wealth as well as the US system.
Larger doesn't mean fairer.
Larger implies fairer, because "fairer" generates "larger".
More empirical evidence that Western capitalism is (as corrupt as it is) fairer than other systems: people are migrating here from there. If the US didn't have a relatively fairer system, people would be migrating "there" instead.
In the 1980s, the peak US military spending was 8% of GDP. OTOH, the Sovs pumped 15-17% of GDP into it's military.
But, you say, the US had/has a much larger economy than the USSR (and now Russia)... sure, because capitalism generates more wealth for more people than communism.
Oh, wait. That's what "economically fairER" means!
What makes you so sure the US isn't going to collapse?
The US might collapse. If it does, it will still have lasted much, much longer than the USSR and so be judged "better". Not the absolutist term "perfect", but the relative term "better".
Of course, if it does collapse, there will be many who would say that it collapsed because in the end too few workers supported too many non-workers.
Yes, capitalism is unfair. Sadly, all other economic systems -- when implemented in large scale, and in the real world -- are even less fair. Otherwise, the Soviet Union would have survived while the US collapsed.
Slashdot Mirror
Naturally, Futurama covered this 13 years ago... http://vimeo.com/12915013
But how many things are ever watched more than once?
Come to my house and see how my daughter loves to watch the same romance movies over and over.
Back in 1995 when I built a machine with a Celeron processor running 333 MHz
1995 was the era of the 120MHz Pentium. The first Celerons didn't arrive until 1998. Maybe you're thinking of 1999?
Because we know there's nothing like that in the Linux kernel...
There are 99x more Windows computers than x86-based Linux computers, and they've been running a lot of the same code for 15 years.
Thus, in the question What's the Most Often-Run Piece of Code -- Ever? the answer is probably related to Windows.
of the Windows NT kernel that hasn't changed since the 1990s?
What really shocks me though is the response of a significant number of people here, that the suffering he endured was justified as it was 'deserved'.
Why? He's a Grade A completely Evil Bastard who does deserve pain and suffering. Specifically, he should be anally raped and then killed the same way that he raped and killed his victim.
On television, split screen with the crime scene photos of the dead woman.
Memorizing random facts does no one any real good, and you only serve to waste your own time.
Only if they stay random facts.
I never bothered memorizing multiplication tables and I can easily figure such things out.
While you're figuring out what 7*8 is, the people who have memorized the multiplication tables have that (usually intermediate) answer and have gone on to more interesting stuff.
Memorizing facts gives one a fund of knowledge from which to deduce patterns and gain deeper insights.
If you think that regulatory agencies are given too much latitude, then your complaint is with congress.
Naturally.
Would you have told Steven Hawking to go home?
If he wanted to be an artists, mechanic, chef, carpenter, etc, etc -- trades which require abilities manifestly beyond his capacity --, then yes, I would have.
If you can't do that, then maybe University isn't for you.
Bottom line: not everyone is able to do what most other people can do (hence "dis-abled"), and -- speaking from experience -- must make the best of your limitations.
Right. But they chose "information service" (which I think is *stupid*) and then tried to treat them like a CC. That's... not fair.
(Note that I am in fact in favor of Net Neutrality and of ISPs acting like common carriers.)
Does this classification require legislation or something?
Hopefully. After all, bureaucrats shouldn't be able to just pass any regulations they feel like. Instead, they should be bound by the bills that the Congress passes and the President signs.
Likewise, the Courts should not invent new law based upon their own feelings of what's Right and Wrong, but on the actual text of Laws and the Constitution.
By denying him the right to build a large house, you are taking food out of the mouths of innocent babies.
Shame on you, heartless fiend!!!
WTF do you need to ask questions that are really none of your business?
I'm not surprised you respond like this when the time comes to put up or shut up.
No, you haven't. You've just said that they're flawed. Not what the flaws are.
It doesn't take long to figure out that lots of people want to change the political-economic system they live in.
All you have done, though, is moaned about how unfair capitalism is without proposing a viable alternative.
The urge is overwhelming to ask if you have a full-time job with a for-profit business, or work for some low-rent NGO while drinking toasts to Che Guevara at night.
Just that their GDP was bigger.
But why was it bigger? I say, "Because it's fairer" and you say, "nuh unh!"
China with it's non-democratic state capitalism will have a greater GDP than the USA.
Per capita GDP will still be much lower. When Chinese state capitalism generates a per capita GDP that's as high as that of the US, then that will be an indication that such an economic system distributes wealth as well as the US system.
Larger doesn't mean fairer.
Larger implies fairer, because "fairer" generates "larger".
More empirical evidence that Western capitalism is (as corrupt as it is) fairer than other systems: people are migrating here from there. If the US didn't have a relatively fairer system, people would be migrating "there" instead.
US militarism? Think again.
http://i.cfr.org/content/publications/July2013/010_national_defense_1948.png
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mo-budget.htm
In the 1980s, the peak US military spending was 8% of GDP. OTOH, the Sovs pumped 15-17% of GDP into it's military.
But, you say, the US had/has a much larger economy than the USSR (and now Russia)... sure, because capitalism generates more wealth for more people than communism.
Oh, wait. That's what "economically fairER" means!
What makes you so sure the US isn't going to collapse?
The US might collapse. If it does, it will still have lasted much, much longer than the USSR and so be judged "better". Not the absolutist term "perfect", but the relative term "better".
Of course, if it does collapse, there will be many who would say that it collapsed because in the end too few workers supported too many non-workers.
Eh?
Capitalism is not fair, but it is fairER. To put another way, it is the least unfair.
That is why it has lasted longer than communism.
So maximum fairness is the same as maximum efficiency
Certainly I've never thought such an idea.
capitalism is inherently unfair
Yes, capitalism is unfair. Sadly, all other economic systems -- when implemented in large scale, and in the real world -- are even less fair. Otherwise, the Soviet Union would have survived while the US collapsed.