But does calling them stupid make any difference? Does it further your agenda? Does it earn anyone to your way of thinking? I'm of the school of thought that there are good people everywhere. The Republican Party is no exception.
If voting is so important, why isn't it a Federal holiday? Why isn't it a paid day off like Columbus Day or MLK Day? I haven't even heard the idea on the table in any discussions in my entire life. Can anyone answer that?
One man's progress is another man's setback. Stop lumping people into broad catergories. I consider myself a "progressive" and I abhor the notion of a non-citizen having control over my destiny. I'd like to think that there are a lot of other "progressives" stand with that.
Besides, I personally don't believe that to be progress in the least.
But enjoying physically and psychologically harmful working conditions day after day and believing (correctly or otherwise) that there's no way out is likely more harmful than hearing one lie about how pretty your eyes are.
You think that's bad, join the military. Especially a rating or MOS you don't want to do. That's physically and psychologically harmful with no way out. Hell, the Thai women I met in the middle east were there on contract with their caretakers. Both are contractually obligated professions that some would deem unfit for human work. Who are you to judge?
Trust me when I tell you that if you've got a choice of a job (telemarketing)or no job (no lights, food, home, etc), your principled ideals will be weighed heavily. At the end of the day, there's no excuse for a lot of things that happen.. Unless you count self-preservation.
Let's not get into the debate of choice of jobs.. When you're on the bottom looking up, you've gotta grab the fruit you can reach.
Your post makes it seem like you have a problem with that. You're welcome to go elsewhere and do otherwise while we try to continue our species. We may be doing it wrong, but self-preservation is a pretty strong instinct. Personally, I think it's a good idea to try to save as much diversity as possible.
That'd be ideal.. Except that's not the case anymore. Nobody wants the liability. And still more don't want to be the bad guy. Hell, for extra credit, try it in a union shop.
Re:in other news, cementing the BP CEO has started
on
Gulf Oil Leak Plugged?
·
· Score: 1
Yes. Personally, I do. At shallower (more manageable) depths, this wouldn't have been even NEARLY the issue. On top of that, with proper oversight, it could be a safer venture than this. You can stop drilling. You can stop getting oil. You can stop using oil. You ALSO can ram your car into a crowded street of people. It doesn't mean there are no consequences. And while this is a terrible disaster, I don't believe this is just a consequence of drilling. I think it's a consequence of drilling unsafely.
Nah.. It won't get to that. They'll wise up beforehand. I've gotta ask though. Do you have any links to this MSM organization? And where do I apply? I'm in the wrong business.
So they fire an old lady on the cusp of retirement for making an off-colored joke on the FaceBooks? Next thing you know, the sherriff will be sporting a top hat and cape with a handlebar moustache tying damsels in distress to railroad tracks.
Come on guys, that has to be a fat load to actually fire someone that late in their life for something as innocuous as a joke on Facebook. Seriously. It's almost.. Dastardly.
DARPA wasn't just INVOLVED in it's creation. I think you're missing the point though. If some other country with less "visibility" routes resources and creates a program for internet-based attacks, they don't have to be so forthcoming. If the US Government routes funding that's not in a "black" op and create a new Cyber Warfare Division without announcing it, someone SOMEWHERE is going to whip out an "OH NOES!!! SNEAKY BLACK PROJECT!!!" and it'll look like one. This way, they're out in the open.
I agree with your statements and sentiments. Unfortunately, the militarization of the internet has been happening for a while. We're just late (officially) to the party.
No, the content of the message doesn't change. It's the intent of the message. Coloring your speech with polarizing words is a bit misleading in mine and other peoples' opinions who actually appreciate opinions to further develop our own. I wouldn't have hated on you for using a more formal way of explaining your point. Actually, that's what I was driving at. It's a pretty safe tactic to try to elicit an emotional response from your target group to have them rally behind you. It's all over the news, it's all over the TV, and everyone tunes it out because it's too negative. Then, your target audience shrinks to those who listen to and enjoy the negativity anyways.
I wasn't deriding your message. Actually, I thought it was well thought out and really insightful. I just think the doom and gloom of your message doesn't help to fix the problem. I agree with you. Our imperialism and militaristic nature is going to be our downfall. We should be looking for a way to fix it and talking about that, not lamenting the eventual demise of our society.
Sure, but that requires them to not fuck it up. And they're HP (a great company 30 years ago, but a pathetic shadow today).
With a name like that (macshit), I'm aghast and wholly surprised you'd make a statement like that. It's like you've developed a prejudgement toward HP due to their competition with another company you may hold dear. Regardless of your bias, there's a reason HP is still around and there's a reason they had the capital on hand to buy Palm. Sure, Apple may have more UI experience. Sure, Google has the engineers. Who is to say another entry to the market to foster some competition is a bad thing?
I'm glad you put that in your sig. There for a minute it seemed like you said poor governance of the economy was a cause for instability. I'd like to see a citation on that. Not because I disbelieve you, but because the history of a lack of governance seems to lend itself to bubbles and busts. Granted, you can over-regulate... But we're not even close to a government run economy. Regardless of what the scaremongers would have you believe.
Eh, it's a little late but I guess better late than never. The reason I say personal bias is because you put such vitriolic candor to your musings that you can't be taken seriously by someone who is actually trying to form an informed opinion. If you'd just state your opinion plainly without coloring it up for effect, then you wouldn't seem quite so biased. If people (like myself and others, I assure you) believe you're biased and biased against them, they'll close up and your message is lost. Now, if you do this purely for mental masturbation, by all means continue.
I'm an American and I agree with you. I don't think anyone should steal my information and the keys in the car analogy fits. While I think it might be a little overboard to drawe up criminal charges just yet, I think it might be a step in the right direction to see if Google would actually "Do No Evil" with the info and get rid of it. I'm not sure if intent plays a role in Germany, but I'm sure it'll come out eventually.
I've heard this sentiment before. All I've got to say about that is: You frame your own life. If you leave it up to someone else to make a man out of you, you'll never be a man. Not to get all hippy-tastic on you or anything, but anyone with the complaint of their life being meaningless should probably reevaluate their life. They're doing it wrong.
That's an interesting perspective given that the chart you referenced clearly shows Federal government spending as less than 5% of GDP in 1930, and ~25% of GDP right now.
Do you know what that ~25% of GDP buys us? Civilization. You know, the framework that allows the rest of the economy to continue on? The cost of civilization might be a little too high right now, but I'm sure the markets will take care of it. As soon as another company offers Civilization. Last I checked, if it weren't for regulation, we'd be all pumping Standard Oil and BP and wouldn't have a chance. Then that "free market controlled by the companies" becomes that "free market controlled by that one company."
Here's an interesting note: back in 1930, weren't we in the middle of some financial trouble? That was waaaaay back in the golden age of America when the Free Market ruled all. Back then they were spending less than 5% GDP on Civilization. 35% is probably too much, but saying gov't is a cancer is not realizing where the REST of the dangers lie.
And say hello to AIDS, you naive fool who thought fidelity still existed.
Just because you have a poor choice in a mate doesn't mean it applies to the majority. And if it's not from first-hand experience, why are you peddling this tripe as if it's a fact? Regardless, that world view comes from the people you choose to trust. There are some who are a little more selective... Or careful.. Depending on your values.
You know, that would have been a good argument if you would have left your personal bias out. But what's a good rant without a little personal bias to set the tone?
Slashdot Mirror
But does calling them stupid make any difference? Does it further your agenda? Does it earn anyone to your way of thinking? I'm of the school of thought that there are good people everywhere. The Republican Party is no exception.
If voting is so important, why isn't it a Federal holiday? Why isn't it a paid day off like Columbus Day or MLK Day? I haven't even heard the idea on the table in any discussions in my entire life. Can anyone answer that?
One man's progress is another man's setback. Stop lumping people into broad catergories. I consider myself a "progressive" and I abhor the notion of a non-citizen having control over my destiny. I'd like to think that there are a lot of other "progressives" stand with that.
Besides, I personally don't believe that to be progress in the least.
But enjoying physically and psychologically harmful working conditions day after day and believing (correctly or otherwise) that there's no way out is likely more harmful than hearing one lie about how pretty your eyes are.
You think that's bad, join the military. Especially a rating or MOS you don't want to do. That's physically and psychologically harmful with no way out. Hell, the Thai women I met in the middle east were there on contract with their caretakers. Both are contractually obligated professions that some would deem unfit for human work. Who are you to judge?
With a sig like that, I'm aghast you'd ssubmit such a post.
Kevin? That you? Get off Slashdot and get back to your cube!
Trust me when I tell you that if you've got a choice of a job (telemarketing)or no job (no lights, food, home, etc), your principled ideals will be weighed heavily. At the end of the day, there's no excuse for a lot of things that happen.. Unless you count self-preservation.
Let's not get into the debate of choice of jobs.. When you're on the bottom looking up, you've gotta grab the fruit you can reach.
Your post makes it seem like you have a problem with that. You're welcome to go elsewhere and do otherwise while we try to continue our species. We may be doing it wrong, but self-preservation is a pretty strong instinct. Personally, I think it's a good idea to try to save as much diversity as possible.
That'd be ideal.. Except that's not the case anymore. Nobody wants the liability. And still more don't want to be the bad guy. Hell, for extra credit, try it in a union shop.
Yes. Personally, I do. At shallower (more manageable) depths, this wouldn't have been even NEARLY the issue. On top of that, with proper oversight, it could be a safer venture than this. You can stop drilling. You can stop getting oil. You can stop using oil. You ALSO can ram your car into a crowded street of people. It doesn't mean there are no consequences. And while this is a terrible disaster, I don't believe this is just a consequence of drilling. I think it's a consequence of drilling unsafely.
Atlanta? Try Norfolk, Virginia! That place gets shut down in a dusting!
Nah.. It won't get to that. They'll wise up beforehand. I've gotta ask though. Do you have any links to this MSM organization? And where do I apply? I'm in the wrong business.
I'm not an expert in the field, but that at least sounds plausible. Why hasn't this been modded up?
So they fire an old lady on the cusp of retirement for making an off-colored joke on the FaceBooks? Next thing you know, the sherriff will be sporting a top hat and cape with a handlebar moustache tying damsels in distress to railroad tracks.
Come on guys, that has to be a fat load to actually fire someone that late in their life for something as innocuous as a joke on Facebook. Seriously. It's almost.. Dastardly.
DARPA wasn't just INVOLVED in it's creation. I think you're missing the point though. If some other country with less "visibility" routes resources and creates a program for internet-based attacks, they don't have to be so forthcoming. If the US Government routes funding that's not in a "black" op and create a new Cyber Warfare Division without announcing it, someone SOMEWHERE is going to whip out an "OH NOES!!! SNEAKY BLACK PROJECT!!!" and it'll look like one. This way, they're out in the open.
I agree with your statements and sentiments. Unfortunately, the militarization of the internet has been happening for a while. We're just late (officially) to the party.
No, the content of the message doesn't change. It's the intent of the message. Coloring your speech with polarizing words is a bit misleading in mine and other peoples' opinions who actually appreciate opinions to further develop our own. I wouldn't have hated on you for using a more formal way of explaining your point. Actually, that's what I was driving at. It's a pretty safe tactic to try to elicit an emotional response from your target group to have them rally behind you. It's all over the news, it's all over the TV, and everyone tunes it out because it's too negative. Then, your target audience shrinks to those who listen to and enjoy the negativity anyways.
I wasn't deriding your message. Actually, I thought it was well thought out and really insightful. I just think the doom and gloom of your message doesn't help to fix the problem. I agree with you. Our imperialism and militaristic nature is going to be our downfall. We should be looking for a way to fix it and talking about that, not lamenting the eventual demise of our society.
Sure, but that requires them to not fuck it up. And they're HP (a great company 30 years ago, but a pathetic shadow today).
With a name like that (macshit), I'm aghast and wholly surprised you'd make a statement like that. It's like you've developed a prejudgement toward HP due to their competition with another company you may hold dear. Regardless of your bias, there's a reason HP is still around and there's a reason they had the capital on hand to buy Palm. Sure, Apple may have more UI experience. Sure, Google has the engineers. Who is to say another entry to the market to foster some competition is a bad thing?
I'm glad you put that in your sig. There for a minute it seemed like you said poor governance of the economy was a cause for instability. I'd like to see a citation on that. Not because I disbelieve you, but because the history of a lack of governance seems to lend itself to bubbles and busts. Granted, you can over-regulate... But we're not even close to a government run economy. Regardless of what the scaremongers would have you believe.
Eh, it's a little late but I guess better late than never. The reason I say personal bias is because you put such vitriolic candor to your musings that you can't be taken seriously by someone who is actually trying to form an informed opinion. If you'd just state your opinion plainly without coloring it up for effect, then you wouldn't seem quite so biased. If people (like myself and others, I assure you) believe you're biased and biased against them, they'll close up and your message is lost. Now, if you do this purely for mental masturbation, by all means continue.
I'm an American and I agree with you. I don't think anyone should steal my information and the keys in the car analogy fits. While I think it might be a little overboard to drawe up criminal charges just yet, I think it might be a step in the right direction to see if Google would actually "Do No Evil" with the info and get rid of it. I'm not sure if intent plays a role in Germany, but I'm sure it'll come out eventually.
It seems as if your sig contains some irony.
I've heard this sentiment before. All I've got to say about that is: You frame your own life. If you leave it up to someone else to make a man out of you, you'll never be a man. Not to get all hippy-tastic on you or anything, but anyone with the complaint of their life being meaningless should probably reevaluate their life. They're doing it wrong.
That's an interesting perspective given that the chart you referenced clearly shows Federal government spending as less than 5% of GDP in 1930, and ~25% of GDP right now.
Do you know what that ~25% of GDP buys us? Civilization. You know, the framework that allows the rest of the economy to continue on? The cost of civilization might be a little too high right now, but I'm sure the markets will take care of it. As soon as another company offers Civilization. Last I checked, if it weren't for regulation, we'd be all pumping Standard Oil and BP and wouldn't have a chance. Then that "free market controlled by the companies" becomes that "free market controlled by that one company."
Here's an interesting note: back in 1930, weren't we in the middle of some financial trouble? That was waaaaay back in the golden age of America when the Free Market ruled all. Back then they were spending less than 5% GDP on Civilization. 35% is probably too much, but saying gov't is a cancer is not realizing where the REST of the dangers lie.
And say hello to AIDS, you naive fool who thought fidelity still existed.
Just because you have a poor choice in a mate doesn't mean it applies to the majority. And if it's not from first-hand experience, why are you peddling this tripe as if it's a fact? Regardless, that world view comes from the people you choose to trust. There are some who are a little more selective... Or careful.. Depending on your values.
You know, that would have been a good argument if you would have left your personal bias out. But what's a good rant without a little personal bias to set the tone?