If X increases and Y decreases, it might be that X causes Y, yet factor Z is increasing even more, which counter-acts the effects of X on Y. So no, Jane Q Public's "logic" is a farce.
It's both. Republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive. Why do people have such difficulty with this? It's not hard. Democracy = people vote. Republic = a country without a dynastic leader.
Oh it must be true, as a pithy one-liner describes it so. Or not. Yes, Google gets the majority of its money from advertising. You fail to notice that Google users are the ones who buy the advertising, and are the ones who click on adverts. This also ignores the many non-ad-based services Google offers, but I guess that's not as cool as your one-liner, even if it is far more accurate, so you will keep spouting that nonsense.
Your post is so full of nonsense it's bewildering how you managed to fit so much into two sentences.
First off, the "anti-gun" cities are separated from "pro-gun" cities by porous borders, making their gun control less than perfect - serious gun control laws work, as have been demonstrated by the countries in which they have been instituted.
Secondly, private gun ownership in Mexico is far from forbidden, with over 3,000,000 registered, legal guns in private ownership (in 2012), increasing every year.
Thirdly, by your ridiculous metric every other country should be able to remove the 5 most crime-ridden areas/cities and restore the US to its rightful position as the second-most murderous country in the developed world.
But I guess it's easier to simply make excuses, or claim that the US's pathetic murder rate is somehow a feature and not a bug, than it is to admit something's wrong and needs to be fixed. Your attitude guarantees problems are never fixed.
Senior System Engineer/Architect/Arrogant-lunatic-who-is-frequently-wrong,-but-somehow-convinces-himself-that-he's-correct-and-the-universe-is-incorrect more like.
Ask why 2007 and 18 years ago were chosen and you have your answer: You listen to idiots, and have allowed yourself to become one. Plus ice volume has been dropping at both poles whereas surface area might be increasing - but I guess those mean the same thing to you. Fool.
Or you could act like an adult and be the truth-seeker you claim to be and look at the scientific papers. I guess that's too difficult, so you just listen to what the Telegraph has to say on the matter because genius. You and your ilk are causing untold damage to our "lifeboat" simply because you can convince yourself you are not. Future generations will not look kindly upon you and your sort, and thankfully your inane nonsensical postings will survive for all to point at and try to ensure this sort of mass-science-denialism doesn't happen again. Ask yourself this question: If the "alarmists" are correct, what stops your "I don't listen to alarmism" stance from blinding you to reality? If someone at your place of business screamed that the building is on fire, do you open up telegraph.co.uk, look for a story on whether it is on fire, and upon finding none call them an alarmist and go back to dying? Discounting something because you assume it's "alarmist" only helps to perpetuate any existing problems, ensure our collective reaction to real problems is delayed or ineffectual, and makes you look like an absolute muppet of the highest calibre.
Helium does disappear from the planet. The rest of your rant was just pathetic. You are lazily trying to explain why your wasteful lifestyle is acceptable, when anyone with half an ounce of grey matter can instantly see it for what it is.
You seem to have difficulty reading people's meaning in their text, beyond the literal at least. You seem rather socially awkward, which would explain your desire to tell everyone that you are a senior blah-whatever at where you work (according to you, anyway). You are weird. I wish you the best.
It's really quite easy - ban money from politics. No politician can ever earn money privately. They have to declare their worth before they become politicians, and can not leave with anything more than the accumulated wages they earned during their life in office. All subsequent earnings are subject to investigation should conflicts of interest be alleged. The media has to actually engage in journalism and cover issues with the minimum possible level of bias - any failures result in censure or worse. The problem now is that if an entity has money they can use that money to directly influence politicians. That is utterly pathetic, and causes so much grief in the US (and, indirectly, the rest of the world). For a country which bangs on about how awesome democracy is, it sure seems to have no problem watching the democratic process be quickly eroded by swathes of corporations. No, money is not speech. Money is money and speech is speech. Wrapping something up as a "free speech" issue does not mean it should be revered in hushed tones like some embodiment of the American ideal - if it's bullshit call it out, otherwise you end up in this tragically disgusting state of affairs where the largest wallet dictates what everyone else has to do, and the only good happens when a one-in-a-million alignment of massive evils cancel each other out and a trickle of progress seeps through. The world weeps for the US - other developed countries have their issues with their political systems, but most seem to be able to keep this separation far better than in the US.
So cities adopting a tried-and-tested system of owning the last mile and leasing it out to whoever wants to use it shouldn't happen because if a bunch of people decide to run RAID NAS over it to the internet it will not be fast enough. Gotcha. Awesome.
They'd have their investments wiped out because of a few tens of thousand of dollars of equipment? Do you even know how investment funds work? With each of your posts you are showing us you get easily confused.
It's not breaking the system, though, as other countries have demonstrated time and time and time again. Breaking the system is ensuring the status quo is maintained.
You are calling for the government to regulate that a company will step up and maintain the last mile for every resident? Genius work, sparky!
Of course he doesn't - if he had enough mental capacity to realise that, he wouldn't be on slashdot showing the world what a hate-filled asshat he is, tilting at brown windmills that only exist mainly in the mind of him and his racist ilk.
Ladies and gentlemen, here we have a good example of why the government might think secret trials are a good idea: Some people (such as residents_parking) are swayed more by emotional rhetoric than demonstrable facts, and as such any details of a brown guy in the dock will cause them to conclude they are "right" about whatever hate-filled, ignorance-dripping nonsense they heard some other racist muppet hear down the pub or on the radio the other night.
I don't agree with secret trials, and I also don't agree with people thinking it's OK to be intellectually lazy when they denounce an entire religion, or even just a fictionalised subsection thereof (due to its reflection on the rest of the followers of that religion).
It seems the UK needs a big dose of education to get itself out of this quagmire, and I'm not sure where that's going to come from.
That can be figured out. Leaving the current system broken because some unnamed mystery people might want some ambiguous amount of money seems ridiculously short-sighted.
Slashdot Mirror
If X increases and Y decreases, it might be that X causes Y, yet factor Z is increasing even more, which counter-acts the effects of X on Y. So no, Jane Q Public's "logic" is a farce.
He mentioned "civilized", so "self-defense" doesn't count.
It's both. Republic and democracy are not mutually exclusive. Why do people have such difficulty with this? It's not hard. Democracy = people vote. Republic = a country without a dynastic leader.
Oh it must be true, as a pithy one-liner describes it so. Or not. Yes, Google gets the majority of its money from advertising. You fail to notice that Google users are the ones who buy the advertising, and are the ones who click on adverts. This also ignores the many non-ad-based services Google offers, but I guess that's not as cool as your one-liner, even if it is far more accurate, so you will keep spouting that nonsense.
I guess if you lock up enough people for petty crimes you can affect all sorts of other statistics... "Two wrongs", etc. etc.
Your post is so full of nonsense it's bewildering how you managed to fit so much into two sentences.
First off, the "anti-gun" cities are separated from "pro-gun" cities by porous borders, making their gun control less than perfect - serious gun control laws work, as have been demonstrated by the countries in which they have been instituted.
Secondly, private gun ownership in Mexico is far from forbidden, with over 3,000,000 registered, legal guns in private ownership (in 2012), increasing every year.
Thirdly, by your ridiculous metric every other country should be able to remove the 5 most crime-ridden areas/cities and restore the US to its rightful position as the second-most murderous country in the developed world.
But I guess it's easier to simply make excuses, or claim that the US's pathetic murder rate is somehow a feature and not a bug, than it is to admit something's wrong and needs to be fixed. Your attitude guarantees problems are never fixed.
Senior System Engineer/Architect/Arrogant-lunatic-who-is-frequently-wrong,-but-somehow-convinces-himself-that-he's-correct-and-the-universe-is-incorrect more like.
Ask why 2007 and 18 years ago were chosen and you have your answer: You listen to idiots, and have allowed yourself to become one. Plus ice volume has been dropping at both poles whereas surface area might be increasing - but I guess those mean the same thing to you. Fool.
Or you could act like an adult and be the truth-seeker you claim to be and look at the scientific papers. I guess that's too difficult, so you just listen to what the Telegraph has to say on the matter because genius. You and your ilk are causing untold damage to our "lifeboat" simply because you can convince yourself you are not. Future generations will not look kindly upon you and your sort, and thankfully your inane nonsensical postings will survive for all to point at and try to ensure this sort of mass-science-denialism doesn't happen again. Ask yourself this question: If the "alarmists" are correct, what stops your "I don't listen to alarmism" stance from blinding you to reality? If someone at your place of business screamed that the building is on fire, do you open up telegraph.co.uk, look for a story on whether it is on fire, and upon finding none call them an alarmist and go back to dying? Discounting something because you assume it's "alarmist" only helps to perpetuate any existing problems, ensure our collective reaction to real problems is delayed or ineffectual, and makes you look like an absolute muppet of the highest calibre.
Because he doesn't like it. There is simply no other reason to simply and quickly refute it in that manner.
Helium does disappear from the planet. The rest of your rant was just pathetic. You are lazily trying to explain why your wasteful lifestyle is acceptable, when anyone with half an ounce of grey matter can instantly see it for what it is.
You seem to have difficulty reading people's meaning in their text, beyond the literal at least. You seem rather socially awkward, which would explain your desire to tell everyone that you are a senior blah-whatever at where you work (according to you, anyway). You are weird. I wish you the best.
Windows 7 was not a debacle. ME & Vista, fair enough, but not 7.
It's really quite easy - ban money from politics. No politician can ever earn money privately. They have to declare their worth before they become politicians, and can not leave with anything more than the accumulated wages they earned during their life in office. All subsequent earnings are subject to investigation should conflicts of interest be alleged. The media has to actually engage in journalism and cover issues with the minimum possible level of bias - any failures result in censure or worse. The problem now is that if an entity has money they can use that money to directly influence politicians. That is utterly pathetic, and causes so much grief in the US (and, indirectly, the rest of the world). For a country which bangs on about how awesome democracy is, it sure seems to have no problem watching the democratic process be quickly eroded by swathes of corporations. No, money is not speech. Money is money and speech is speech. Wrapping something up as a "free speech" issue does not mean it should be revered in hushed tones like some embodiment of the American ideal - if it's bullshit call it out, otherwise you end up in this tragically disgusting state of affairs where the largest wallet dictates what everyone else has to do, and the only good happens when a one-in-a-million alignment of massive evils cancel each other out and a trickle of progress seeps through. The world weeps for the US - other developed countries have their issues with their political systems, but most seem to be able to keep this separation far better than in the US.
"Freedom always has to be won with blood" - apart from the bloodless revolutions...
So cities adopting a tried-and-tested system of owning the last mile and leasing it out to whoever wants to use it shouldn't happen because if a bunch of people decide to run RAID NAS over it to the internet it will not be fast enough. Gotcha. Awesome.
They'd have their investments wiped out because of a few tens of thousand of dollars of equipment? Do you even know how investment funds work? With each of your posts you are showing us you get easily confused.
That's mobile internet, not wired. That's not particularly pertinent to the discussion.
It's not breaking the system, though, as other countries have demonstrated time and time and time again. Breaking the system is ensuring the status quo is maintained.
You are calling for the government to regulate that a company will step up and maintain the last mile for every resident? Genius work, sparky!
Keep telling yourself that. Ignore the problems, and ensure the decline continues. Good jerb!
Of course he doesn't - if he had enough mental capacity to realise that, he wouldn't be on slashdot showing the world what a hate-filled asshat he is, tilting at brown windmills that only exist mainly in the mind of him and his racist ilk.
You don't seem to believe in it either, as you are willing to do away with it. You need some help.
Ladies and gentlemen, here we have a good example of why the government might think secret trials are a good idea: Some people (such as residents_parking) are swayed more by emotional rhetoric than demonstrable facts, and as such any details of a brown guy in the dock will cause them to conclude they are "right" about whatever hate-filled, ignorance-dripping nonsense they heard some other racist muppet hear down the pub or on the radio the other night.
I don't agree with secret trials, and I also don't agree with people thinking it's OK to be intellectually lazy when they denounce an entire religion, or even just a fictionalised subsection thereof (due to its reflection on the rest of the followers of that religion).
It seems the UK needs a big dose of education to get itself out of this quagmire, and I'm not sure where that's going to come from.
Did you read the summary? Of course you didn't. We're discussing fiber, not copper. Fiber is ridiculously cheap to lay, support, and maintain.
That can be figured out. Leaving the current system broken because some unnamed mystery people might want some ambiguous amount of money seems ridiculously short-sighted.