How does centralised healthcare mean that I cannot speak my mind about my government.
It doesn't. But, suppose, for example, that I like to smoke. Or drink. Or eat fatty foods. Or have unprotected sex. Now, if I am responsible for my own health care, then society can allow me to make those choices, since the negative consequences hurt only me. But if, as under a centralized health care system, the negative consequences of my actions hurt other people, those people are going to demand that I stop smoking, drink less, eat healthy and exercise, and wear a condom - and they will have the power of the state on their side.
Economic theory has little to do with personal freedom.
On the contrary, it is at the very heart of the issue.
Re:Focus on Artificial life
on
The Los Alamos Bug
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Seriously... what good the creation of a bug do to humanity?
Imagine a bug that can convert cellulose to alcohol. Or eats dioxins and destroys them. Or generates hydrogen from sun and water. Wouldn't these be somewhat beneficial?
I can't speak for all Americans, but I think that you would not find general agreement with that premise. Why? Because as soon as you do not bear the costs (and benefits) of your actions yourself, but are forced share those costs (and benefits) with others, then those others have a material basis for controlling your behavior so as to minimize your costs and maximize your benefit.
No, I said anything after WW2 was self interest, really mostly from the 60s onwards. Just because you were the good-guy in WW2, it doesn't absolve you of all further actions.
The Cold War was a long, dirty, fight, and it's sad that Europe seemed so unwilling to fight, except to the extent that they would tolerate Americans preventing the Soviets from rolling through the Fulda gap. I suspect that the value of this conflict, and perhaps even its eventual outcome, are the source of much of the dissatisfaction with the United States in Europe. But you would understand our actions better if you simply give us the benefit of the doubt that are motives in that conflict were not from evil, but to promote and protect our way of life.
Briefcases can make good gadget storage locations, because unlike most bags, they can absorb an incredible amount of abuse and still protect the delicate instruments inside. YOu can get most briefcases with a sholder strap for prolonged carrying. Plus, they look a lot more manly than a purse, and a nice silver or polished aluminum case even looks decidedly high-tech.
Thankfully I have to drive through their swarm up University Avenue every night and do my best to raise the body count and delay their shambling masses
The web does not need ANOTHER wave of
"OMG!!!!1111!!!! L0L1!!1!1 dats t3h funnyest sh1t!!"
The web also does not need anymore elitist assholes like you. I know it may offend you that the proles dare to use your precious internets to communicate thoughts far below your elevated intellect, but they are, after all, paying the bills.
Our infrastructure in the U.S. is sad when you consider the fact that we're still (for now) the largest economy in the world.
It's the curse of the early adopter. We were among the earliest to go whole-hog into telecommunications, especially in the urban centers, then spent a fortune bringing it to the rural areas, and we have been coasting along on legacy infrastructure for a long time now while other countries have been building more modern networks from scratch.
The problem here is obvious. Infrastructure needs upgrading, and the U.S. having a relatively low population density makes this much more expensive. Somebody has to pay those costs, and fairly enough those who actually use the new infrastructure pay the costs.
Anybody who thinks that passing a law or breaking up a company will make infrastructure cheaper is fooling themselves.
I'm surprised nobody else has mentioned what a boon this could be to indie developers, who might come up with some great original gameplay but not have millions of dollars to produce a full-blown game release. The ability to get some simpler yet fun independent games via XBL, if utilized, could be a great feature.
Artists and musicians can create their work using the computer itself as their main tool, and so they choose the best tool for that job.
...
No, it's not work the same way construction work is work (I've done that, too) but it's a *kind* of work.
No argument from me. I certainly respect the hard work that goes into IP. But TFA takes such a condescending tone, as though those who aren't doing your kind of work are constantly wishing we were, and that we should buy a Mac so we can be more like you. Which plays right into the stereotype you describe and probably does more to alienate than to persuade.
Erase the myth from your mind that you need Microsoft software because everyone else uses it. Actually, only about 95 percent of the computing world uses it. The other 5 percent is comprised of the free thinkers who are willing to try new things; the artists, writers, and musicians who shape our culture; the software geniuses and inventors who brings us new innovations; the scientists and engineers that make everything work; the desktop publishers, multimedia professionals, video editors, and graphic artists who make communication happen; and just about all the actors and celebrities in Hollywood. If you feel yourself to be a part of this group (or at least want to be invited to their parties), get off Microsoft as soon as you can.
Talk about a lame, tone-deaf argument. Sorry, but the vast majority of people aren't presumptuous enough to consider themselves memebers of these so-called self-appointed elite. This may be a surprise, but a lot of people don't consider artists and musicians, and multimedia professionals to be "better" than doctors, lawyers, and plumbers. You know, the people who are too busy WORKING to be worried about Hollywood celebrities and the quality of their parties.
I'd say you're as much at fault (not in an insurance or legal sort of way) for putting yourself in that situation to begin with.
What situation? Going through a green light without clairvoyantly knowing that the other car is not going to stop? You make it sound like the only way to get hit in a controlled intersection is to be stopped in the middle of it. Most collisions, however, occur when two people going in perpendicular directions enter the intersection simultaneously, one properly and one improperly.
Then it is still helpful to communicate the ambiguity of X. THe ambiguity created by the passive form is even greater, i.e., the listener doesn't even know whether the subject is ambiguous or not. At least by using an ambiguous subject, you tell the listener that the subject is in fact ambiguous, which can be useful knowledge.
Wow, that font rendering looks like ass. No, worse, it looks like ass that fell off a truck into a pool of acid and was run over repeatedly by Soviet T-72 heavy tanks.
Exactly! Sure, the US invented the system, launched all the satellites, and bears the maintenance cost, but everybody else in the world depends on it, so it's obviously right that the UN control it!
Juries decide if laws (explained to them by the judge) have been broken.
Right...and they also don't have to give any explanation for their decisions. Remember, in criminal cases, it only takes one person to refuse to convict. If you think jury nullification doesn't happen, you're the one who is being naive.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't. But, suppose, for example, that I like to smoke. Or drink. Or eat fatty foods. Or have unprotected sex. Now, if I am responsible for my own health care, then society can allow me to make those choices, since the negative consequences hurt only me. But if, as under a centralized health care system, the negative consequences of my actions hurt other people, those people are going to demand that I stop smoking, drink less, eat healthy and exercise, and wear a condom - and they will have the power of the state on their side.
Economic theory has little to do with personal freedom.
On the contrary, it is at the very heart of the issue.
Imagine a bug that can convert cellulose to alcohol. Or eats dioxins and destroys them. Or generates hydrogen from sun and water. Wouldn't these be somewhat beneficial?
I can't speak for all Americans, but I think that you would not find general agreement with that premise. Why? Because as soon as you do not bear the costs (and benefits) of your actions yourself, but are forced share those costs (and benefits) with others, then those others have a material basis for controlling your behavior so as to minimize your costs and maximize your benefit.
The Cold War was a long, dirty, fight, and it's sad that Europe seemed so unwilling to fight, except to the extent that they would tolerate Americans preventing the Soviets from rolling through the Fulda gap. I suspect that the value of this conflict, and perhaps even its eventual outcome, are the source of much of the dissatisfaction with the United States in Europe. But you would understand our actions better if you simply give us the benefit of the doubt that are motives in that conflict were not from evil, but to promote and protect our way of life.
Briefcases can make good gadget storage locations, because unlike most bags, they can absorb an incredible amount of abuse and still protect the delicate instruments inside. YOu can get most briefcases with a sholder strap for prolonged carrying. Plus, they look a lot more manly than a purse, and a nice silver or polished aluminum case even looks decidedly high-tech.
You're a Madison Metro bus driver?
What the hell? That's just totally baseless libel. The U.S. most certainly is a key member of ITER. Many other developed countries are not.
The web also does not need anymore elitist assholes like you. I know it may offend you that the proles dare to use your precious internets to communicate thoughts far below your elevated intellect, but they are, after all, paying the bills.
Isn't Linux a copy/emulation/rip-off of proprietary Unix?
In Korea, only old people...um...wait...
So you have a domain, and presumably a domain controller, but don't use Active Directory for application deployment and scripting? Why not?
It's the curse of the early adopter. We were among the earliest to go whole-hog into telecommunications, especially in the urban centers, then spent a fortune bringing it to the rural areas, and we have been coasting along on legacy infrastructure for a long time now while other countries have been building more modern networks from scratch.
The problem here is obvious. Infrastructure needs upgrading, and the U.S. having a relatively low population density makes this much more expensive. Somebody has to pay those costs, and fairly enough those who actually use the new infrastructure pay the costs.
Anybody who thinks that passing a law or breaking up a company will make infrastructure cheaper is fooling themselves.
I'm surprised nobody else has mentioned what a boon this could be to indie developers, who might come up with some great original gameplay but not have millions of dollars to produce a full-blown game release. The ability to get some simpler yet fun independent games via XBL, if utilized, could be a great feature.
...
No, it's not work the same way construction work is work (I've done that, too) but it's a *kind* of work.
No argument from me. I certainly respect the hard work that goes into IP. But TFA takes such a condescending tone, as though those who aren't doing your kind of work are constantly wishing we were, and that we should buy a Mac so we can be more like you. Which plays right into the stereotype you describe and probably does more to alienate than to persuade.
I think I'll patent the making of the "I have a patent on stupid patents" jokes that appear below.
Talk about a lame, tone-deaf argument. Sorry, but the vast majority of people aren't presumptuous enough to consider themselves memebers of these so-called self-appointed elite. This may be a surprise, but a lot of people don't consider artists and musicians, and multimedia professionals to be "better" than doctors, lawyers, and plumbers. You know, the people who are too busy WORKING to be worried about Hollywood celebrities and the quality of their parties.
In Word 2003, the only change it suggests is decapitalizing the "Upon" in the second line.
Right...that was my point. That is one way that society decides what the law is.
What situation? Going through a green light without clairvoyantly knowing that the other car is not going to stop? You make it sound like the only way to get hit in a controlled intersection is to be stopped in the middle of it. Most collisions, however, occur when two people going in perpendicular directions enter the intersection simultaneously, one properly and one improperly.
Then it is still helpful to communicate the ambiguity of X. THe ambiguity created by the passive form is even greater, i.e., the listener doesn't even know whether the subject is ambiguous or not. At least by using an ambiguous subject, you tell the listener that the subject is in fact ambiguous, which can be useful knowledge.
Wow, that font rendering looks like ass. No, worse, it looks like ass that fell off a truck into a pool of acid and was run over repeatedly by Soviet T-72 heavy tanks.
Note this is why passive voice is disfavored; it is often unnecessarily ambiguous.
I use hollow points, you insensitive clod!
Exactly! Sure, the US invented the system, launched all the satellites, and bears the maintenance cost, but everybody else in the world depends on it, so it's obviously right that the UN control it!
Right...and they also don't have to give any explanation for their decisions. Remember, in criminal cases, it only takes one person to refuse to convict. If you think jury nullification doesn't happen, you're the one who is being naive.