Fossil fuels are linked to millions of deaths, though. You being massively ignorant of the topic does not make you right. You are the one blinded by your ideology - linking to wattsupwiththat is not showing you in a good light.
By all means ignore the media and politicians when it comes to matters of science, but don't ignore the scientists. They seem to think CO2 is not that great a thing to be releasing into the atmosphere, and they have all kinds of evidence to show how and why.
Eventually those resources will run out, so would you rather start finding alternatives then or now?
You have your head so firmly in the sand it's not even funny. Where are your new parties? How many seats do your Pirates have? Or are they supposed to figure out which of the identical main parties to court, and then go for it? You are lying to yourself - politics in the US is a team sport with only 2 teams in the whole league.
Of course not - that is actual ride sharing. The driver is going to their destination regardless of whether others will be driving with them. The money is not intended to be financial gain, but recovering losses. Can you not see the difference?
Precisely. That is a perfect demonstration of the difference between ridesharing and a taxi service, even though both consist of a driver driving someone somewhere, and sometimes involving money changing hands.
A unlicensed taxi is not "ridesharing", no matter how many times Uber and its ilk scream that's all they're doing. You not seeing the difference should inform you that maybe you need to read a bit more on the subject and see the precise differences, and the arguments made.
There you go again misusing the word "republic". It doesn't help your argument that the very first point you make is flat-out wrong. All I have learned from that is some Libertarians seem to think they know more than they actually do, which on reflection would explain an awful lot of things.
A republic merely means a country without a dynastic leader. That's it. It has absolutely nothing to do with democracy or "protect[ing] & defend[ing] the rights of the people". Why is it nearly everyone who starts an argument by describing a republic gets it wrong? Is your education really that bad??
But everyone in the intelligence sector did know they didn't have WMDs. This was known, hence all the anger when the "intel" was trotted about - people knew it was nonsense. There was no "accidentally correct", just people who knew their stuff and who screamed the claims were bullshit.
But Bush started the war, and without that action Obama would have nothing to mess up. Bush made up some evidence and started a war for no good reason, yet you claim it's the guy who followed him who screwed it up? If Bush's boys had destroyed "proto" ISIS, where did ISIS come from? Your fawning makes no sense. Obama has done some incredibly messed up stuff, but nothing compared to invading Iraq. Nothing even close.
You condemn "their" "strident, deeply held prejudices" by vomiting your own strident, deeply held prejudices? Get a fucking grip - you are just as ignorant as the stereotypes you are railing against. You should try thinking for yourself - it will help you stop sounding like a backwards xenophobic redneck or an "I'm not racist but..." EDL/UKIPper.
You say you are not conflating Arabs and Islam, but then go on and do just that. And throw in Pakistan too, for good measure. It isn't crypto-racism, it's mindless, ignorant, scared-shitless-by-the-big-scary-world xenophobia. It's not reasonable to think ICMBs have anything to do with this, unless you are a xenophobe, I guess.
There you go again with your xenophobia. The weird thing is that you would let the world know you are scared and ignorant of a great portion of it, and happily so at that. Bizarre.
Bullshit. You are costing the website money, as they have to pay to send every byte to you. Refusing to pay for that by blocking ads is far closer to theft than simply declaring yourself the product like some precious little flower and running off scared of your newly-found self-importance. I use an AdBlocker, but at least I'm honest about what's happening and why I'm doing it. I'm absolutely fed up with adverts all over the web - there must be a better way of covering costs than potentially unleashing insecurities and drive-bys on peoples' computers. Websites might start looking into the more sensible methods of paying for content if they realise the advertising path is not recouping their losses.
The owners of that software don't need to vomit psychotic nonsense all over Slashdot to get people to use their software. I'd say their minds are demonstrably greater than yours, which appears broken. You are spamming an ad-blocking service which can't block your spam. Do you not realise that is not what sane people do?
HOSTS files can't block your spammy Slashdot comments (which is precisely what they are - undesired advertising), whereas your competitors' software can. If I don't want to see your nonsense, I won't reach for your product, but your competitors. Every single post you make is driving people away from your software and to your competition.
Slashdot Mirror
Fossil fuels are linked to millions of deaths, though. You being massively ignorant of the topic does not make you right. You are the one blinded by your ideology - linking to wattsupwiththat is not showing you in a good light.
By all means ignore the media and politicians when it comes to matters of science, but don't ignore the scientists. They seem to think CO2 is not that great a thing to be releasing into the atmosphere, and they have all kinds of evidence to show how and why.
Eventually those resources will run out, so would you rather start finding alternatives then or now?
You have your head so firmly in the sand it's not even funny. Where are your new parties? How many seats do your Pirates have? Or are they supposed to figure out which of the identical main parties to court, and then go for it? You are lying to yourself - politics in the US is a team sport with only 2 teams in the whole league.
One could, in the precise same way one could argue 1 + 2 = 17 by throwing themselves down the stairs.
Capital-L Libertarians or lower-case-L libertarians? The two are not even remotely comparable.
Of course not - that is actual ride sharing. The driver is going to their destination regardless of whether others will be driving with them. The money is not intended to be financial gain, but recovering losses. Can you not see the difference?
Precisely. That is a perfect demonstration of the difference between ridesharing and a taxi service, even though both consist of a driver driving someone somewhere, and sometimes involving money changing hands.
A unlicensed taxi is not "ridesharing", no matter how many times Uber and its ilk scream that's all they're doing. You not seeing the difference should inform you that maybe you need to read a bit more on the subject and see the precise differences, and the arguments made.
That's not exactly an accurate, direct comparison, but I suspect you know that :)
Some will, yes. Some will also go the other way.
There you go again misusing the word "republic". It doesn't help your argument that the very first point you make is flat-out wrong. All I have learned from that is some Libertarians seem to think they know more than they actually do, which on reflection would explain an awful lot of things.
You don't know what "republic" and "democracy" mean, yet insist on using them ad nauseam. Please stop. It's embarrassing.
A republic merely means a country without a dynastic leader. That's it. It has absolutely nothing to do with democracy or "protect[ing] & defend[ing] the rights of the people". Why is it nearly everyone who starts an argument by describing a republic gets it wrong? Is your education really that bad??
But everyone in the intelligence sector did know they didn't have WMDs. This was known, hence all the anger when the "intel" was trotted about - people knew it was nonsense. There was no "accidentally correct", just people who knew their stuff and who screamed the claims were bullshit.
But Bush started the war, and without that action Obama would have nothing to mess up. Bush made up some evidence and started a war for no good reason, yet you claim it's the guy who followed him who screwed it up? If Bush's boys had destroyed "proto" ISIS, where did ISIS come from? Your fawning makes no sense. Obama has done some incredibly messed up stuff, but nothing compared to invading Iraq. Nothing even close.
You condemn "their" "strident, deeply held prejudices" by vomiting your own strident, deeply held prejudices? Get a fucking grip - you are just as ignorant as the stereotypes you are railing against. You should try thinking for yourself - it will help you stop sounding like a backwards xenophobic redneck or an "I'm not racist but..." EDL/UKIPper.
You say you are not conflating Arabs and Islam, but then go on and do just that. And throw in Pakistan too, for good measure. It isn't crypto-racism, it's mindless, ignorant, scared-shitless-by-the-big-scary-world xenophobia. It's not reasonable to think ICMBs have anything to do with this, unless you are a xenophobe, I guess.
There you go again with your xenophobia. The weird thing is that you would let the world know you are scared and ignorant of a great portion of it, and happily so at that. Bizarre.
Bullshit. You are costing the website money, as they have to pay to send every byte to you. Refusing to pay for that by blocking ads is far closer to theft than simply declaring yourself the product like some precious little flower and running off scared of your newly-found self-importance. I use an AdBlocker, but at least I'm honest about what's happening and why I'm doing it. I'm absolutely fed up with adverts all over the web - there must be a better way of covering costs than potentially unleashing insecurities and drive-bys on peoples' computers. Websites might start looking into the more sensible methods of paying for content if they realise the advertising path is not recouping their losses.
Can your HOSTS solution block the spam you post to Slashdot? No. Get some help, please.
If you assume that all browsers have security vulnerabilities that are available to anyone who is willing to look for them, you can never use the web.
So the facts are not straight forward at all, leading you to condemn a man who by your own admission might have had inadequate training.
Your complaints echo those of people who enjoyed horse riding at the advent of the car. The future will not weep for you, nor should it.
The owners of that software don't need to vomit psychotic nonsense all over Slashdot to get people to use their software. I'd say their minds are demonstrably greater than yours, which appears broken. You are spamming an ad-blocking service which can't block your spam. Do you not realise that is not what sane people do?
HOSTS files can't block your spammy Slashdot comments (which is precisely what they are - undesired advertising), whereas your competitors' software can. If I don't want to see your nonsense, I won't reach for your product, but your competitors. Every single post you make is driving people away from your software and to your competition.