It's not really a case of leverage in the Council.
It's that some adamantly anti-choice politicos over here oppose the pro-death folks in the UN funding family planning programs that even mention abortion... and hence try to blackmail the President and friends into adding stipulations to their UN funding bills.
He means the various Christian groups with strong political views. Specifically, certain groups such as the Christian Coalition and the Heritage Foundation which both promote their view of Christianity... and have criticized the administration in the past.
Congressmen are permitted to *refer* a non-profit group to the IRS which is to put them near the head of a queue for examining whether they should lose their tax-exempt status for political activity, which tends to be a no-no... This referral does *not* guarantee an audit... just a check.
The FBI has not been the friend of militia groups... and they might try to use their power by claiming that such videos incite violence, conspiracy and so forth, thus presenting an allegedly clear-and-present danger. They'd probably have much of the media on their side, as well.
Despite the First Amendment, it's not unusual to see journalists going on and on about the evils of, say, Paladin Press, or hate groups, or militias; and then cheerily, but incorrectly, implying that they're all part of some Hillaryesque Right-Wing Conspiracy headed by Limbaugh, Buchanan and the Aryan Nation.
Tell that to the McDonald's owner whose store got smashed up. Tell that to the delegates getting attacked. Tell that to the businesses whom these protestors block...
Peaceful? Nope. Legal? Nope. Not when it involves assault, B&E, destruction of property...
1980: 22.7% of federal budget outlays were Nat'l Defense.
1998: 16.2%.
Deal.
Source: OMB numbers, "Budget of the United States Government". FY 2000 (1999).
Re:power != rights, except in China
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 2
Mao's quote (translated, of course. By whom? Dunno.) was "Power comes from the barrel of a gun". In his case, it did.
My main claim is that unless there's rights that are *natural* and assumed to belong to everybody, then there really aren't *any* rights at all, except what one can tear from the claws of others -- and that's not really a "right" in that sense.
But I digress.
Re:Licenses could cut down on headaches
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 2
How about establishing a common curiculuum that ISPs should present to their customers, and -- to a degree -- holding the ISPs accountable?
There are many things a provider could do beyond simply saying, "Here's a phone number. Click through these buttons, and you'll be on the Internet"; there's so much more, like explaining a bit about USENET culture (or at least pointing them towards news.announce.newusers); describing various do's-and-don'ts; and so forth. And make it expressly stated in the terms of service that failure to abide is grounds for (in the most egregious cases) termination of service.
Providers that failed to discourage this behavior could gradually be filtered out by other service (SMTP, NNTP...) providers...
Re:Drivers Licenses are GROSSLY Immoral
on
License to Surf
·
· Score: 2
According to that argument, there are never rights. Why?
Because who's assigning the privileges and rights? The only logical conclusion is rule by complete force; since, say, somebody could stab you with a knife and take your wallet, it's perfectly fine to do so: he's asserting power, and that's the source of "rights".
My thinking is that we sped it up by accelerating the arms race. They strained their economy trying to spend the money both in development and in production, neglecting other critical parts of their economy in the process... which they couldn't afford.
If, say, for some reason there were no arms race (that is: there wasn't anybody else...), it would have taken longer for 'em to wind down, and it might have been a very different transition. It might have been worse -- say, a violent revolution once more. Or, it might have been better -- such as a more gradual shift towards capitalism, as the PRC is trying (but while maintaining complete political control...).
Right-oh. I regularly meandered through a few local BBSes, partly for the bboard chats (and most of the other patrons tended to be peers -- namely, local high school folk that I knew *before* BBSing), and partly for the doors (in particular, "Hack & Slash" and the SRE/BRE duo).
It *really* helps when you've known the folks offline *first*, and when the number of "regulars" is quite low. This promotes discussion since y'all have a good idea of the context; the in-jokes; and so forth. In addition, there's a strong degree of mutual trust.
Telnet into a bbs, and nowadays you may have absolutely no idea who you're dealing with; one can misrepresent himself at will. You don't know whether they'll be around the next day, either. That's *very* different.
Well, hey, there *should* be some guilt involved, due to deliberately hastening the collapse of the Soviet system by straining its economy... The Western powers, especially the US, basically helped destroy a government that'd been in place since 1917. Given that our quarrel was more with the leaders than the bulk of the citizens, it'd be nice if we lent 'em a hand.
It also makes decent sense to get the Ukraine and other former SSRs back onto a firm economic basis. While the Ukraine might not be a nuclear (armed) power anymore, IIRC (thinking that they transferred their weapons to either Russian control or to over here for disassembly), there should be *somebody* stable in the region.
Think not only does it need to be relatively non-polluting (at least in terms of heat, it will pollute, right? I'm also under the impression that solar cells, for instance, produce chemical waste byproducts, but eh...), but it needs to be dependable, scalable and preferably ubiquitous...
Where are your facts and figures? If you're willing to decide that the Ukraine doesn't *need* the electrical power, and that you already know the expected costs and benefits, where are they?
For what it's worth, you have to accept the possibility of mistakes. Ever cross a street? The solution isn't to avoid risk, but to manage it competently. In this industry, that should mean having a well-designed plant where safety measures such as shutting down a reactor happen as smoothly as possible, and having a trained, competent staff... not by running away and pretending that the need for power isn't there.
Too late; it's already here. Ia ia Shub-Internet fhtagn!
Shub-Internet:
* Forces people to consume HARD-CORE PORN! * Lures YOUNG KIDS to COMPLETE STRANGERS! * CONS people out of their MONEY on E-BAY! * Lets those evil CRYPTO-FREAKS conspire secretly! * Forces your EMPLOYEES to do ZERO work in a day!
How many Australian boxes with network servers are Linux boxes? Of those, how many are up-to-date "hardened" configurations? True, you don't have to create a 'asio' account (password: "1Mp34ch!", shell:/bin/rsh, no access to anything but political philosophy documents...)
'sides, they could always try for physical access, or park a TEMPEST van outside your flat and wait until you do enter some passwords. Assuming you're not using some kind of physical OTP S/key-like smartcard.
That mathematician you cited showed that completeness was impossible in sound proving systems of sufficient complexity, not that it is debatable whether the sine of pi over 2 is 1.
There's no argument about what Goldbach's conjecture means; it's unclear as to whether it's even provable, but it is completely unambiguous.
Try coming up with the same level of exactness over, say, the effects of linguistic fragmentation and tribalism in Africa on the fractured peoples in the post-colonialist era.
You don't follow what North Korea's income comes from, do you? Hint: Iraq did not design the initial Scud missiles, for instance; they only modified one of the designs to increase range at the expense of warhead mass and accuracy.
Considering that their leader is completely unstable, that they have a huge standing army, that they are consistently confrontational -- to the degree of assassinating South Korean cabinet ministers... and that they're neighbors with both Russia and the PRC, one has to be *very* careful regarding the region.
'tho you might have to examine your civil service system. I don't know enough about your government to know how often the civil servants rotate, or whether members tend to survive, say, a parliamentary vote of no-confidence.
I suspect that the party would correct your statement and indicate that the government has the greatest {\it potential} for evil, not that it always is. Why? Because, unlike a business, it can operate primarily by coercion under the banner of legitimacy...
Businesses just want your money; some governments want {\it everything}, including your life.
You can control for that and the results are still basically the same.
Off-hand, one notes that parochial schools typically have *very* low budgets, but often walk all over public schools in terms of academic performance. There are also plenty of examples of urban schools with insane budgets that still do pathetically poorly.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not really a case of leverage in the Council.
It's that some adamantly anti-choice politicos over here oppose the pro-death folks in the UN funding family planning programs that even mention abortion... and hence try to blackmail the President and friends into adding stipulations to their UN funding bills.
He means the various Christian groups with strong political views. Specifically, certain groups such as the Christian Coalition and the Heritage Foundation which both promote their view of Christianity... and have criticized the administration in the past.
Congressmen are permitted to *refer* a non-profit group to the IRS which is to put them near the head of a queue for examining whether they should lose their tax-exempt status for political activity, which tends to be a no-no... This referral does *not* guarantee an audit... just a check.
The FBI has not been the friend of militia groups... and they might try to use their power by claiming that such videos incite violence, conspiracy and so forth, thus presenting an allegedly clear-and-present danger. They'd probably have much of the media on their side, as well.
Despite the First Amendment, it's not unusual to see journalists going on and on about the evils of, say, Paladin Press, or hate groups, or militias; and then cheerily, but incorrectly, implying that they're all part of some Hillaryesque Right-Wing Conspiracy headed by Limbaugh, Buchanan and the Aryan Nation.
Tell that to the McDonald's owner whose store got smashed up. Tell that to the delegates getting attacked. Tell that to the businesses whom these protestors block...
Peaceful? Nope. Legal? Nope. Not when it involves assault, B&E, destruction of property...
Not proportionally, it isn't.
1980: 22.7% of federal budget outlays were Nat'l Defense.
1998: 16.2%.
Deal.
Source: OMB numbers, "Budget of the United States Government". FY 2000 (1999).
Mao's quote (translated, of course. By whom? Dunno.) was "Power comes from the barrel of a gun". In his case, it did.
My main claim is that unless there's rights that are *natural* and assumed to belong to everybody, then there really aren't *any* rights at all, except what one can tear from the claws of others -- and that's not really a "right" in that sense.
But I digress.
How about establishing a common curiculuum that ISPs should present to their customers, and -- to a degree -- holding the ISPs accountable?
There are many things a provider could do beyond simply saying, "Here's a phone number. Click through these buttons, and you'll be on the Internet"; there's so much more, like explaining a bit about USENET culture (or at least pointing them towards news.announce.newusers); describing various do's-and-don'ts; and so forth. And make it expressly stated in the terms of service that failure to abide is grounds for (in the most egregious cases) termination of service.
Providers that failed to discourage this behavior could gradually be filtered out by other service (SMTP, NNTP...) providers...
According to that argument, there are never rights. Why?
Because who's assigning the privileges and rights? The only logical conclusion is rule by complete force; since, say, somebody could stab you with a knife and take your wallet, it's perfectly fine to do so: he's asserting power, and that's the source of "rights".
Go read about natural law.
My thinking is that we sped it up by accelerating the arms race. They strained their economy trying to spend the money both in development and in production, neglecting other critical parts of their economy in the process... which they couldn't afford.
If, say, for some reason there were no arms race (that is: there wasn't anybody else...), it would have taken longer for 'em to wind down, and it might have been a very different transition. It might have been worse -- say, a violent revolution once more. Or, it might have been better -- such as a more gradual shift towards capitalism, as the PRC is trying (but while maintaining complete political control...).
Right-oh. I regularly meandered through a few local BBSes, partly for the bboard chats (and most of the other patrons tended to be peers -- namely, local high school folk that I knew *before* BBSing), and partly for the doors (in particular, "Hack & Slash" and the SRE/BRE duo).
It *really* helps when you've known the folks offline *first*, and when the number of "regulars" is quite low. This promotes discussion since y'all have a good idea of the context; the in-jokes; and so forth. In addition, there's a strong degree of mutual trust.
Telnet into a bbs, and nowadays you may have absolutely no idea who you're dealing with; one can misrepresent himself at will. You don't know whether they'll be around the next day, either. That's *very* different.
Well, hey, there *should* be some guilt involved, due to deliberately hastening the collapse of the Soviet system by straining its economy... The Western powers, especially the US, basically helped destroy a government that'd been in place since 1917. Given that our quarrel was more with the leaders than the bulk of the citizens, it'd be nice if we lent 'em a hand.
It also makes decent sense to get the Ukraine and other former SSRs back onto a firm economic basis. While the Ukraine might not be a nuclear (armed) power anymore, IIRC (thinking that they transferred their weapons to either Russian control or to over here for disassembly), there should be *somebody* stable in the region.
Think not only does it need to be relatively non-polluting (at least in terms of heat, it will pollute, right? I'm also under the impression that solar cells, for instance, produce chemical waste byproducts, but eh...), but it needs to be dependable, scalable and preferably ubiquitous...
Hmmm. Geothermal energy? Hydroelectricity? Wind power?
Where are your facts and figures? If you're willing to decide that the Ukraine doesn't *need* the electrical power, and that you already know the expected costs and benefits, where are they?
For what it's worth, you have to accept the possibility of mistakes. Ever cross a street? The solution isn't to avoid risk, but to manage it competently. In this industry, that should mean having a well-designed plant where safety measures such as shutting down a reactor happen as smoothly as possible, and having a trained, competent staff... not by running away and pretending that the need for power isn't there.
...designing Nerf toys that are not for export. Looks like those dern furriners aren't allowed our latest tech...
*chuckle*
Sounds like a good reason to keep around some obsolete hardware.
Apple ]['s in prominent positions 'round the office, say...
"Yes, officer. That's my computer. And that one, and that one, and that one, and..."
Too late; it's already here. Ia ia Shub-Internet fhtagn!
Shub-Internet:
* Forces people to consume HARD-CORE PORN!
* Lures YOUNG KIDS to COMPLETE STRANGERS!
* CONS people out of their MONEY on E-BAY!
* Lets those evil CRYPTO-FREAKS conspire secretly!
* Forces your EMPLOYEES to do ZERO work in a day!
Quick! Ban the Internet!
How many Australian boxes with network servers are Linux boxes? Of those, how many are up-to-date "hardened" configurations? True, you don't have to create a 'asio' account (password: "1Mp34ch!", shell: /bin/rsh, no access to anything but political philosophy documents...)
'sides, they could always try for physical access, or park a TEMPEST van outside your flat and wait until you do enter some passwords. Assuming you're not using some kind of physical OTP S/key-like smartcard.
It's only insane because of the certain details, not the overall concept; ask the Israelis.
You are aware of the school shootings *stopped* when a teacher retrieves a shotgun from his car, right? Or did the media not mention 'em to you?
Those details include:
* Most teachers over here haven't had firearms training, and probably wouldn't want it. Hence, many of them might be worse than useless.
* The Israelis aren't messing around with handguns, but are instead armed for bear.
Nope. You got my point backwards -- that the ambiguity is GOOD, because it forces people to think.
And no, I've not been in high school for some time...
That mathematician you cited showed that completeness was impossible in sound proving systems of sufficient complexity, not that it is debatable whether the sine of pi over 2 is 1.
There's no argument about what Goldbach's conjecture means; it's unclear as to whether it's even provable, but it is completely unambiguous.
Try coming up with the same level of exactness over, say, the effects of linguistic fragmentation and tribalism in Africa on the fractured peoples in the post-colonialist era.
Bzzzzt.
You don't follow what North Korea's income comes from, do you? Hint: Iraq did not design the initial Scud missiles, for instance; they only modified one of the designs to increase range at the expense of warhead mass and accuracy.
Considering that their leader is completely unstable, that they have a huge standing army, that they are consistently confrontational -- to the degree of assassinating South Korean cabinet ministers... and that they're neighbors with both Russia and the PRC, one has to be *very* careful regarding the region.
Vote 'em out, and make it clear *why*?
'tho you might have to examine your civil service system. I don't know enough about your government to know how often the civil servants rotate, or whether members tend to survive, say, a parliamentary vote of no-confidence.
I suspect that the party would correct your statement and indicate that the government has the greatest {\it potential} for evil, not that it always is. Why? Because, unlike a business, it can operate primarily by coercion under the banner of legitimacy...
Businesses just want your money; some governments want {\it everything}, including your life.
In your particular example, did Title IX play a role?
You can control for that and the results are still basically the same.
Off-hand, one notes that parochial schools typically have *very* low budgets, but often walk all over public schools in terms of academic performance. There are also plenty of examples of urban schools with insane budgets that still do pathetically poorly.