John McCain has suffered multiple plane crashes, imprisonment in a Vietnamese POW camp, and several bouts of malignant cancer. My theory is, he's immoral.
I think if you are a white male and have lived to age 75, your life expectancy is about another 11 years. Does that mean Ron Paul would have about a 50% chance of not dieing in office?
Well, let's say Ron Paul is elected four years from now at age 77. If his life expectancy is 86, he'll have on average 9 years left. Assuming a standard distribution, that means he has a 50% chance of dying after turning 86 and a 50% chance of dying before turning 86. Assuming even that he serves two terms, he would leave office at age 85, meaning he would have a less than 50% chance of dying in office. How much less we can't determine without knowing the standard deviation--and since we don't even know that age-of-death meets a standard distribution we probably can't even say as much as we have.
If you run for president for a year and most people still don't know anything about you, that pretty much proves that you have absolutely no chance of winning.
Read the title of the thread - "Free speech doesn't extend to private property." You lost that one.
I have argued that free speech doesn't extend to private property, especially when it comes to unsolicited mass email. Are you confusing me with someone else?
You also fail, in your pitifully confused arguments, to recognize that driving a car isn't a "right". Since it isn't a right, we have the right to set rules.
Fact is, the seatbelt laws are mostly passed by state legislatures looking to increase revenue collection--"we" didn't have anything to do with it. Find a single state where the seatbelt law was passed into law by initiative or public referendum and I'll concede the point.
The government does, in fact, have the authority to regulate the public roads in order to serve the public interest. That doesn't make the seatbelt requirement a good regulation.
I actually think the regulations should be a lot stricter--it should be harder to get a drivers license, tailgaters and aggressive drivers should get pulled over more often, and so forth. Pulling people over for not wearing a seatbelt only wastes time and distracts police from more important things: it serves no real public interest and, on top of that, is paternalistic and intrusive.
However, it is true that I would certainly not object to you being sterilized. Or retroactively aborted, or anything else that will make you squak with self-righteous indignation about your "rights".
Well that just makes you the smaller man, doesn't it? By the way, I never said anything about rights in this discussion. Check on it.
BTW - last I looked, the US is the capital when it comes to involuntary euthanasia - except its called the death penalty.
Now instead of childishly insisting that they're Terrorists and therefore not worth acknowledging, it might be smart to admit their legitimacy in the eyes of their own people and find some way to coexist without killing each other.
Loath as I am to point this out, there was another fringe political party not unlike Hamas that won parliamentary elections in Germany a few decades back, and instead of finding a way to peacefully coexist with them we defeated them in war and tried the leaders for their war crimes. Democratically elected government or not, launching rockets into residential neighborhoods to kill people is terrorism, and the people who commit terrorism are terrorists.
Remember, you're the one who tried to claim that people had no right to dictate whether you be required to wear a seatbelt or not. Experience, the concept of democratic legislation, and the law ALL say you're wrong, which is why you haven't been able to justify your really inane position.
If you want to talk about a truly inane position, let's examine your position that the law is always right. By your standards, I have no right to rip copy-protected DVD movies (that I own) to my own hard drive (that I own). I also have no right to disseminate the hexadecimal number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
Likewise, by your standard of "lowering the costs of insurance and health care trumps personal freedom", your freedom to eat as you like, to choose for yourself the level and amount of exercise you do, to refuse preventative medical treatment, to engage in sexual activities with consenting partners, and so forth can and should be stripped from you just to save everyone else some money. Taken to their logical conclusions, your views would justify the coercive sterilization of the mentally handicapped and the wholesale application of involuntary euthanasia.
Having established who and what you are, I can only accept your contempt as the highest honor you could ever bestow on me. I should be ashamed to ever earn your respect.
You can't copyright the rules to a game, sorry. Trademark violation, maybe.
Well, you can copyright the rules, if you talk about the rules as a text document. But someone could write different, logically equivalent rules without infringing copyright.
In this case, "Who's your daddy?" does not in fact indicate any kind of father-daughter relationship. It's used to elicit an admission of submission, "You're my daddy" which simply means "You are dominating me (and I like it)" The 'daddy' is the top, the dominant person, the one controlling the experience.
As self-appointed resident expert in kinky sex, maybe you can explain this to me: how exactly does this not have extremely creepy overtones of incest?
I guess that's because, as a "double major in philosophy and computer science", you're too stupid to either follow the links elsewhere in this thread, or this.
I backtracked through the whole thread and only found two links, neither of which directly support your argument that seatbelt usage reduces health care and insurance costs for others. And I'm not going to waste my time looking up support for your arguments. That's your job.
Then again, you have to flatter yourself - after looking at your arguments, nobody else would. You come off exactly as you are - a snot-nosed know-nothing who should have been held behind a few years more, no experience in the "real world", non-existent logic skills, poor research and debating ability, whose childish responses can best be summed up as "lalala i can't here u i have my fingers in my ears lalalala".
Yes, and you are a paragon of restraint and maturity by comparison.
On the elementary and possibly middle school levels you're right--although at those levels, you can have them read about science, so they learn some science alongside learning how to read. On the high school level it should be somewhat expected that students are at least literate so they can learn some background information behind what they want to study in college. Since evolution is a basic unifying theory behind a lot of biology, it absolutely should be taught at this level. On the other hand, public education fails so miserably at so many levels that discussing how to improve it is (no pun intended) a completely academic exercise--without something drastic like breaking up the teachers' unions nothing is going to improve.
Learn to read. The studies all show that not wearing a seatbelt also increases your likelyhood of serious injury, as opposed to just walking away. The money you save by people dying who wouldn't if they were belted is not enough to compensate for those who have injuries that are more serious than they would have been if they had buckled up.
Amazing that I only have your word to take for it, eh?
By the way, thanks so much for researching the current state of the legal profession for me. No, not because I was worrying about it--fact is, I'm not even considering a legal career myself--but because wasting your time in unrelated arguments second-guessing what I study in college just proves how much of a paternalistic asswipe you are.
It's actually a wide coalition. The charcoal industry is just part of it: little league baseball is involved too. I wouldn't be surprised if SAD sufferers are involved too.
There's a point in the scene where she actually says, "It's amazing how the neck can support that much weight...". So it was either mercy, careless curiosity, or stress testing.
This is a major theme of Battlestar Galactica. As Adama said in "Resurrection Ship, Part II": "It's not enough to survive. One must be worthy of survival."
Slashdot Mirror
John McCain has suffered multiple plane crashes, imprisonment in a Vietnamese POW camp, and several bouts of malignant cancer. My theory is, he's immoral.
Well, let's say Ron Paul is elected four years from now at age 77. If his life expectancy is 86, he'll have on average 9 years left. Assuming a standard distribution, that means he has a 50% chance of dying after turning 86 and a 50% chance of dying before turning 86. Assuming even that he serves two terms, he would leave office at age 85, meaning he would have a less than 50% chance of dying in office. How much less we can't determine without knowing the standard deviation--and since we don't even know that age-of-death meets a standard distribution we probably can't even say as much as we have.
If you run for president for a year and most people still don't know anything about you, that pretty much proves that you have absolutely no chance of winning.
I have argued that free speech doesn't extend to private property, especially when it comes to unsolicited mass email. Are you confusing me with someone else?
You also fail, in your pitifully confused arguments, to recognize that driving a car isn't a "right". Since it isn't a right, we have the right to set rules.Fact is, the seatbelt laws are mostly passed by state legislatures looking to increase revenue collection--"we" didn't have anything to do with it. Find a single state where the seatbelt law was passed into law by initiative or public referendum and I'll concede the point.
The government does, in fact, have the authority to regulate the public roads in order to serve the public interest. That doesn't make the seatbelt requirement a good regulation.
I actually think the regulations should be a lot stricter--it should be harder to get a drivers license, tailgaters and aggressive drivers should get pulled over more often, and so forth. Pulling people over for not wearing a seatbelt only wastes time and distracts police from more important things: it serves no real public interest and, on top of that, is paternalistic and intrusive.
However, it is true that I would certainly not object to you being sterilized. Or retroactively aborted, or anything else that will make you squak with self-righteous indignation about your "rights".Well that just makes you the smaller man, doesn't it? By the way, I never said anything about rights in this discussion. Check on it.
BTW - last I looked, the US is the capital when it comes to involuntary euthanasia - except its called the death penalty.I'm against the death penalty, too.
Loath as I am to point this out, there was another fringe political party not unlike Hamas that won parliamentary elections in Germany a few decades back, and instead of finding a way to peacefully coexist with them we defeated them in war and tried the leaders for their war crimes. Democratically elected government or not, launching rockets into residential neighborhoods to kill people is terrorism, and the people who commit terrorism are terrorists.
If you want to talk about a truly inane position, let's examine your position that the law is always right. By your standards, I have no right to rip copy-protected DVD movies (that I own) to my own hard drive (that I own). I also have no right to disseminate the hexadecimal number 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0.
Likewise, by your standard of "lowering the costs of insurance and health care trumps personal freedom", your freedom to eat as you like, to choose for yourself the level and amount of exercise you do, to refuse preventative medical treatment, to engage in sexual activities with consenting partners, and so forth can and should be stripped from you just to save everyone else some money. Taken to their logical conclusions, your views would justify the coercive sterilization of the mentally handicapped and the wholesale application of involuntary euthanasia.
Having established who and what you are, I can only accept your contempt as the highest honor you could ever bestow on me. I should be ashamed to ever earn your respect.
Yes, and that also applies to a pro-flash developer working for EA. EA doesn't just write graphics-intensive 3D games.
Well, you can copyright the rules, if you talk about the rules as a text document. But someone could write different, logically equivalent rules without infringing copyright.
It also makes glass!
As self-appointed resident expert in kinky sex, maybe you can explain this to me: how exactly does this not have extremely creepy overtones of incest?
Who the fuck are you, George Bush? Declaring victory isn't the same as winning, idiot.
I backtracked through the whole thread and only found two links, neither of which directly support your argument that seatbelt usage reduces health care and insurance costs for others. And I'm not going to waste my time looking up support for your arguments. That's your job.
Then again, you have to flatter yourself - after looking at your arguments, nobody else would. You come off exactly as you are - a snot-nosed know-nothing who should have been held behind a few years more, no experience in the "real world", non-existent logic skills, poor research and debating ability, whose childish responses can best be summed up as "lalala i can't here u i have my fingers in my ears lalalala".Yes, and you are a paragon of restraint and maturity by comparison.
Congratulations, you've added something to my list of "mental images that are only hot when it's a girl".
Well, if you see this van or any van with a similar, very not inconspicuous camera turret on top, then you should probably close your curtains.
On the elementary and possibly middle school levels you're right--although at those levels, you can have them read about science, so they learn some science alongside learning how to read. On the high school level it should be somewhat expected that students are at least literate so they can learn some background information behind what they want to study in college. Since evolution is a basic unifying theory behind a lot of biology, it absolutely should be taught at this level. On the other hand, public education fails so miserably at so many levels that discussing how to improve it is (no pun intended) a completely academic exercise--without something drastic like breaking up the teachers' unions nothing is going to improve.
You're in a flamewar on Slashdot. I think it's pretty well established you're a loser by that alone.
Amazing that I only have your word to take for it, eh?
By the way, thanks so much for researching the current state of the legal profession for me. No, not because I was worrying about it--fact is, I'm not even considering a legal career myself--but because wasting your time in unrelated arguments second-guessing what I study in college just proves how much of a paternalistic asswipe you are.
Took you the whole weekend to think of that one, eh?
That was certainly Newton's intention. Leibniz had other goals in mind.
It's actually a wide coalition. The charcoal industry is just part of it: little league baseball is involved too. I wouldn't be surprised if SAD sufferers are involved too.
There's a point in the scene where she actually says, "It's amazing how the neck can support that much weight...". So it was either mercy, careless curiosity, or stress testing.
Yeah, and I think it was also ultimately established that the Cylons had other reasons for invading.
Telephone soliciting is also illegal if you're on the "do not call" list. And you should be able to opt out of postal mail soliciting.
You say that as if it were a bad thing. (The problem with Cally is that she's always dirty AND she looks about 16.)
This is a major theme of Battlestar Galactica. As Adama said in "Resurrection Ship, Part II": "It's not enough to survive. One must be worthy of survival."