What do you think is a good solution? Let people die? I don't want to live in a world where doctors are forced to let people die because they broke the law. Hell, murderers get free health care in this country!
I suppose one solution is to stop all immigration across the border. I posit, however, that anything close to this is categorically impossible.
I'm open to solutions, though. I'm not trying to win an argument; I'm trying to find a workable solution. It's a shame too many in this world are more concerned with winning than solving.
I'm curious about the HK divisions. Was it socioeconomic where you could tell who reaped the rewards of the British system years ago, or was it something akin to Han v. Manchu?
That is the classiest way I've ever seen someone accuse another of bullshitting. You, sir, are a man of refinement and breeding (by internet standards).
I'm not willing to agree that the Japanese people have a negative body image like you suggest, but I will point out that at my university in Japan, in a class on US-Japan relations I was taking, the professor asked the Americans in the class if they'd be willing to date a Japanese person. Every hand went up. Marriage? Hands stayed up.
He asked the same of the Japanese people. Hands went almost all up for dating. Marriage? EVERY hand went down.
Not really any allegation of racism in this story. I just found it curious that foreigners are date material but not marriage material. I don't find agreement among Americans I know (which could be a bias in that I don't hang out with xenophobes (not to imply that those Japanese classmates were xenophobes)).
First, where did you go? It's not like central Tokyo, where a ton of foreigners live, is a hotbed of foreigner exclusion.
Second, the fact that there were/any/ restaurants in major metropolitan areas banning foreigners during a world-wide event with media crawling everywhere shows how little they realize racism is something to be ashamed of.
First off, the post wasn't saying the US didn't have discrimination. It was saying it didn't have the burakumin discrimination Japan has.
Second, you're a fool to conflate discrimination in the US with that of Japan. I've lived in both countries, and the racism in Japan is orders of magnitude more insidious than in the US.
Granted, I'm white, so you could say that I'm just not "in touch" with the discrimination that exists in the US (and people will likely argue this against me here), but from a numbers standpoint, the discrimination in Japan is so bad that people don't even understand that discrimination is offensive!
There was a famous letter to the editor written in Tokyo a few years ago, "Do not treat us like wild animals." It told a story of a white lady who was out in nature. Some Japanese adults ran up and asked to take a picture with her because she was white.
No, I take that back: THEY ASKED BUT DIDN'T WAIT FOR AN ANSWER. They just took pictures with her.
In any case, the responses to the letter were basically like "chill out, lady. It's an honor. We just think white people are so exotic and foreign!" Etc.
Oh, and restaurants DURING THE FUCKING WORLD CUP banning foreigners from entrance.
Oh, and restaurants and hotels and other businesses hanging signs EVEN TO THIS DAY that say "no gaijin allowed." "Gaijin" is a term applied uniformly to non-Japanese, even those who have Japanese citizenship and speak fluently, so long as they are not racially Japanese (as distinguished from ethnically Japanese).
Oh, and there are tons of racial Koreans who are third-generation born-in-Japan, but Japan still won't let them get citizenship. The official position is not racial, but you'd better believe it's really because of the very hostile relations, traditionally, between Japan and Korea.
Oh, and the government recently RESCINDED an apology for forcing Korean women to be sex slaves for Japanese soldiers during WWII. Why did they do this? BECAUSE "THE KOREANS VOLUNTEERED."
Not to mention living in Japan as a foreigner fluent in Japanese (having passed objective tests administered by the government there), and having people pretend they don't understand your FLUENT JAPANESE for the lulz.
Japanese university-educated people don't even know why Chinese people are upset with Japanese people (protip: WWII). They are just not taught the facts. The base of the ruling party in Japan are right-wing farmers in Japan (and the yakuza!); reconciliation is not in their interests.
And the assumption that everyone white speaks English (I guess you could criticize Americans for thinking this, too;)).
Recently, the government of Japan offered money to Japanese citizens who have Brazilian ancestry money to RENOUNCE THEIR CITIZENSHIP and move out of the country.
The list goes on and on. And I didn't even include the topic of this article, the burakumin-discrimination problem that is so bad that people who are seventh generation descendants of butchers cannot get hired by companies like Toyota because they are "untouchables."
Look: Japan is an awesome place to visit. The people there are almost uniformly friendly. I loved my time there. But the racism there is so bad compared to in the US. People in the US are at least aware of racism. In Japan, racism is so accepted that many (most?) people don't even see a problem with it! My first visit at a university club, the first question I was asked was (literally): "How big is your cock?" (!!!)
not everyone is the go to the gym 5 times a week, run 50 miles a month, eat wheat and rye type health nut that some folks are. It is what makes the world go around.
Those are hardly necessary criteria for not being obese.
You've woken up the the UK? That's awesome. I'm honestly very excited to see what happens in the UK now. One can only hope we get a more active populace in the US!
He likely used "nig" to be a badass in his notes, and to be lazy. I've read a lot of law students' notes, having (FORMERLY! w00t!) been a law student myself. Notes on cases can say stuff like "asshole sailed his shit, fucking hurricane showed up, asshole docked his boat on some private property due to goddamn wind---trespass?" It's a stress relief for students.
And "no nig covenant" describes a covenant on some real property involved in Shelley v. Kraemer. There was a restrictive covenant on some land the (black) Shelley familiy purchased. The covenant barred black and "Mongolian" people from owning the property. To adjust "no nig covenant" to have proper punctuation to help assist readability: "No black people!" covenant.
I'd like to elucidate. He graduated from HLS in 2004. There were at this point (and still are) many law school forums online. One of these is Autoadmit (a/k/a XOXO). There, "nig" is very slang and is always used in a disparaging manner. The site is also frequented by the students at the elite law schools, of which Harvard is one.
I would not be surprised if this guy picked up the "nig" usage from the site.
I would just say he's a dumbass for making something like that available. He's definitely given up any shot at a political career (and you don't think guys from Harvard like that sort of thing?), and he's lucky not to have been "C&FPWNED" (i.e., be denied admission to the bar of his state under a failing in the "character and fitness" criteria).
On my Mac, OOo runs very poorly. It locks up, crashes, locks files so next time I try to open them they are read-only, and it scrolls very slowly.
I've actually found myself using MS Office more recently since I have to write 30+ page papers now. Scrolling between pages in MS Office is smooth; scrolling between pages in OOo is clunky, slow, and rough.
I haven't gotten on Windows in a long time now, so I don't know how OOo is working there. Suffice to say, MS Office has (unfortunately) got me switched over because it's better than OOo. Granted, I got a huge student discount (to the tune of "free" at my law school), so cost wasn't much of an issue.
I looked to see if you are from Europe, but couldn't find the information on/.
In Europe, there is a loser-pays system, IIRC. However, very rarely in the US is the loser of a case forced to pay the winner's fees.
There are policy reasons both ways, but one reason the US falls on the side it does is because the loser-pays system discourages the little guy from filing suit against the big guy (because the big guy has a real shot at winning and the big guy will run up massive legal bills).
Because we don't have a loser-pays system, we have a system in which lawyers who take on little-guy clients get paid a percentage of the award if the client wins, and gets nothing if the client loses.
Because this entails a real risk for the lawyer (believe it or not, a large portion of lawyers in the US make five-figure salaries--in fact, the starting salary is bimodal, with a massive amoung of lawyers making approx. 40K/yr with 150K+ in student loan debt), contingency percentages are relatively high (30% and such, I've heard--though I'm not a lawyer yet, so I don't know for sure).
And don't even get me started on companies that are outsourcing their legal services to India!;)
0. There is a very famous saying in law, "omnia praesumuntur contra spoliatorem." This means "presume all against the spoiler." This means that if you destroy evidence while on notice that there is a civil suit (i.e., as soon as you receive a copy of the complaint), and you destroy evidence, it shall be presumed that the contents were against your interest. Basically, if X sues Y, Y destroys hard drive, the fact-finder (often a jury) can assume that whatever was on the drive was against the destroyer's interest. Example.
1. just because you can come up with an excuse does not mean the trial judge has to believe it and prevent it from entering into evidence
2. A subpoena does not start initiate civil legal proceedings. A complaint does. A subpoena orders someone to appear in court. Methinks you don't know what you're talking about at all.
This does, of course, provide a justification for high schoolers pirating Photoshop but not providing a justification for professional photographers to do the same.
Your statement only matters if a person can afford all their desired products. If a person cannot, then piracy is actually a net benefit to society provided that the pirate pays for all the alternatives he can afford.
This is the principle of maximum utility, IIRC. Every party involved in the system has maximized his utility. Those who are victims of piracy would never have gotten money anyways, but now the pirate has acquired everything he wants, and those who were paid would have been paid under either system.
Thus, pirate is ahead, payees are ahead, victims are even. Society is ahead.
Note that this only works if a pirate purchases everything he can.
Slashdot Mirror
What do you think is a good solution? Let people die? I don't want to live in a world where doctors are forced to let people die because they broke the law. Hell, murderers get free health care in this country!
I suppose one solution is to stop all immigration across the border. I posit, however, that anything close to this is categorically impossible.
I'm open to solutions, though. I'm not trying to win an argument; I'm trying to find a workable solution. It's a shame too many in this world are more concerned with winning than solving.
Well that takes care of hydropolitical tensions now, doesn't it?
I got 101 problems but a bitch ain't one.
I'm curious about the HK divisions. Was it socioeconomic where you could tell who reaped the rewards of the British system years ago, or was it something akin to Han v. Manchu?
That is the classiest way I've ever seen someone accuse another of bullshitting. You, sir, are a man of refinement and breeding (by internet standards).
It's not insightful. I said how Japanese are. AC accused me of telling Japanese how they should be.
Any interpretation of my comments as being prescriptive rather than descriptive are the subconscious fiddlings of the reader.
I'm not willing to agree that the Japanese people have a negative body image like you suggest, but I will point out that at my university in Japan, in a class on US-Japan relations I was taking, the professor asked the Americans in the class if they'd be willing to date a Japanese person. Every hand went up. Marriage? Hands stayed up.
He asked the same of the Japanese people. Hands went almost all up for dating. Marriage? EVERY hand went down.
Not really any allegation of racism in this story. I just found it curious that foreigners are date material but not marriage material. I don't find agreement among Americans I know (which could be a bias in that I don't hang out with xenophobes (not to imply that those Japanese classmates were xenophobes)).
First, where did you go? It's not like central Tokyo, where a ton of foreigners live, is a hotbed of foreigner exclusion.
Second, the fact that there were /any/ restaurants in major metropolitan areas banning foreigners during a world-wide event with media crawling everywhere shows how little they realize racism is something to be ashamed of.
First off, the post wasn't saying the US didn't have discrimination. It was saying it didn't have the burakumin discrimination Japan has.
Second, you're a fool to conflate discrimination in the US with that of Japan. I've lived in both countries, and the racism in Japan is orders of magnitude more insidious than in the US.
Granted, I'm white, so you could say that I'm just not "in touch" with the discrimination that exists in the US (and people will likely argue this against me here), but from a numbers standpoint, the discrimination in Japan is so bad that people don't even understand that discrimination is offensive!
There was a famous letter to the editor written in Tokyo a few years ago, "Do not treat us like wild animals." It told a story of a white lady who was out in nature. Some Japanese adults ran up and asked to take a picture with her because she was white.
No, I take that back: THEY ASKED BUT DIDN'T WAIT FOR AN ANSWER. They just took pictures with her.
In any case, the responses to the letter were basically like "chill out, lady. It's an honor. We just think white people are so exotic and foreign!" Etc.
Oh, and restaurants DURING THE FUCKING WORLD CUP banning foreigners from entrance.
Oh, and restaurants and hotels and other businesses hanging signs EVEN TO THIS DAY that say "no gaijin allowed." "Gaijin" is a term applied uniformly to non-Japanese, even those who have Japanese citizenship and speak fluently, so long as they are not racially Japanese (as distinguished from ethnically Japanese).
Oh, and there are tons of racial Koreans who are third-generation born-in-Japan, but Japan still won't let them get citizenship. The official position is not racial, but you'd better believe it's really because of the very hostile relations, traditionally, between Japan and Korea.
Oh, and the government recently RESCINDED an apology for forcing Korean women to be sex slaves for Japanese soldiers during WWII. Why did they do this? BECAUSE "THE KOREANS VOLUNTEERED."
Not to mention living in Japan as a foreigner fluent in Japanese (having passed objective tests administered by the government there), and having people pretend they don't understand your FLUENT JAPANESE for the lulz.
Japanese university-educated people don't even know why Chinese people are upset with Japanese people (protip: WWII). They are just not taught the facts. The base of the ruling party in Japan are right-wing farmers in Japan (and the yakuza!); reconciliation is not in their interests.
And the assumption that everyone white speaks English (I guess you could criticize Americans for thinking this, too ;)).
Recently, the government of Japan offered money to Japanese citizens who have Brazilian ancestry money to RENOUNCE THEIR CITIZENSHIP and move out of the country.
The list goes on and on. And I didn't even include the topic of this article, the burakumin-discrimination problem that is so bad that people who are seventh generation descendants of butchers cannot get hired by companies like Toyota because they are "untouchables."
Look: Japan is an awesome place to visit. The people there are almost uniformly friendly. I loved my time there. But the racism there is so bad compared to in the US. People in the US are at least aware of racism. In Japan, racism is so accepted that many (most?) people don't even see a problem with it! My first visit at a university club, the first question I was asked was (literally): "How big is your cock?" (!!!)
But no one was arguing about being super healthy. You were responding to someone pointing out the unhealthiness of being obese.
When you responded with the absurdity, the implication was that it is absurd to expect people not to be obese.
The only way I could understand that you were trying to prove a point is if your point was, through sarcasm, that it's actually easy to be healthy.
The rest of your post belies sarcasm, though.
Please elucidate: I'm clearly missing something, because I don't think you'd lie or miss something so trivial.
"Reporting it to your boss" and "reporting it to someone who will do something about it [e.g., the media]" are two entirely different things.
Hey, guys, I didn't report the murder to the police because I told Jimmy the butcher that I saw it! I totally reported it, guys!
Those are hardly necessary criteria for not being obese.
You've woken up the the UK? That's awesome. I'm honestly very excited to see what happens in the UK now. One can only hope we get a more active populace in the US!
I'm anti-Bono. Before he skiied into a tree, he was campaigning for perpetual copyright.
I'd love to hear your definition of "justice." Philosophers have been arguing about that for centuries.
Until then, I suggest we have some courts, even if we have to settle for the poor proxy of "legality."
He likely used "nig" to be a badass in his notes, and to be lazy. I've read a lot of law students' notes, having (FORMERLY! w00t!) been a law student myself. Notes on cases can say stuff like "asshole sailed his shit, fucking hurricane showed up, asshole docked his boat on some private property due to goddamn wind---trespass?" It's a stress relief for students.
And "no nig covenant" describes a covenant on some real property involved in Shelley v. Kraemer. There was a restrictive covenant on some land the (black) Shelley familiy purchased. The covenant barred black and "Mongolian" people from owning the property. To adjust "no nig covenant" to have proper punctuation to help assist readability: "No black people!" covenant.
I'd like to elucidate. He graduated from HLS in 2004. There were at this point (and still are) many law school forums online. One of these is Autoadmit (a/k/a XOXO). There, "nig" is very slang and is always used in a disparaging manner. The site is also frequented by the students at the elite law schools, of which Harvard is one.
I would not be surprised if this guy picked up the "nig" usage from the site.
I would just say he's a dumbass for making something like that available. He's definitely given up any shot at a political career (and you don't think guys from Harvard like that sort of thing?), and he's lucky not to have been "C&FPWNED" (i.e., be denied admission to the bar of his state under a failing in the "character and fitness" criteria).
My browser, IE, has a splelchecker, too. Big whoop.
On my Mac, OOo runs very poorly. It locks up, crashes, locks files so next time I try to open them they are read-only, and it scrolls very slowly.
I've actually found myself using MS Office more recently since I have to write 30+ page papers now. Scrolling between pages in MS Office is smooth; scrolling between pages in OOo is clunky, slow, and rough.
I haven't gotten on Windows in a long time now, so I don't know how OOo is working there. Suffice to say, MS Office has (unfortunately) got me switched over because it's better than OOo. Granted, I got a huge student discount (to the tune of "free" at my law school), so cost wasn't much of an issue.
Referencing Halo isn't nerdy. It's what frat boys did when I was in college.
I looked to see if you are from Europe, but couldn't find the information on /.
In Europe, there is a loser-pays system, IIRC. However, very rarely in the US is the loser of a case forced to pay the winner's fees.
There are policy reasons both ways, but one reason the US falls on the side it does is because the loser-pays system discourages the little guy from filing suit against the big guy (because the big guy has a real shot at winning and the big guy will run up massive legal bills).
Because we don't have a loser-pays system, we have a system in which lawyers who take on little-guy clients get paid a percentage of the award if the client wins, and gets nothing if the client loses.
Because this entails a real risk for the lawyer (believe it or not, a large portion of lawyers in the US make five-figure salaries--in fact, the starting salary is bimodal, with a massive amoung of lawyers making approx. 40K/yr with 150K+ in student loan debt), contingency percentages are relatively high (30% and such, I've heard--though I'm not a lawyer yet, so I don't know for sure).
And don't even get me started on companies that are outsourcing their legal services to India! ;)
0. There is a very famous saying in law, "omnia praesumuntur contra spoliatorem." This means "presume all against the spoiler." This means that if you destroy evidence while on notice that there is a civil suit (i.e., as soon as you receive a copy of the complaint), and you destroy evidence, it shall be presumed that the contents were against your interest. Basically, if X sues Y, Y destroys hard drive, the fact-finder (often a jury) can assume that whatever was on the drive was against the destroyer's interest. Example.
1. just because you can come up with an excuse does not mean the trial judge has to believe it and prevent it from entering into evidence
2. A subpoena does not start initiate civil legal proceedings. A complaint does. A subpoena orders someone to appear in court. Methinks you don't know what you're talking about at all.
This does, of course, provide a justification for high schoolers pirating Photoshop but not providing a justification for professional photographers to do the same.
Your statement only matters if a person can afford all their desired products. If a person cannot, then piracy is actually a net benefit to society provided that the pirate pays for all the alternatives he can afford.
This is the principle of maximum utility, IIRC. Every party involved in the system has maximized his utility. Those who are victims of piracy would never have gotten money anyways, but now the pirate has acquired everything he wants, and those who were paid would have been paid under either system.
Thus, pirate is ahead, payees are ahead, victims are even. Society is ahead.
Note that this only works if a pirate purchases everything he can.