Reality check: billions of poor only survive their infant years by modern medicine and vaccination.
But the hatred towards a godlike wealthy elite is quite a problem, since every time I hear this or similar quotes, it is directed against the common man and woman in The West who lives a middle-class lifestyle.
Taxes don't target the elite, they hover above them. Everything you do only hits the middle class and by attacking them, you split their ranks into slum side and elite side. Only a working, wealthy middle class can ever hope to control a corrupt elite. No one else can, not the entire People's Liberation Army. (Just look at the levels of corruption inside their ranks)
Ideas that were regarded as "totally raving leftist lunatic" are now commonly referred to as only being "very lefty".
I could express any idea of Stalin himself on any leftist conference without drawing much criticism. I could quote Mao on every Green online forum and it would provoke no one to block my account. Quoting just Reagan would.
A few years down the road Mao and Stalin will look just like any other left politician. Just like the number of right wings or conservatives is decreasing. They are even today all "right wing lunatics".
Even today, "reducing immigration" is considered equal to "exterminating a million Jews" in public debate.
There's only a partly-socialist Middle (Obama, Merkel, Sarkozy), the socialist Left (Stalin, Mao)- and the Nazis. The perceived differences between those who "killed 40 million people" and those who "want to reduce welfare checks" is rapidly decreasing.
Ecologism became a left-right issue about 10-15 years ago, when ecologists or socialists (or the rich) began to equal wealth with ecological destruction.
The entire concept of a "footprint" is deeply rooted in the belief that every man and woman has to have only some limited "right" to anything.
A "footprint", as in "carbon footprint" is a (very successful) political device to curb individual freedom and market mechanisms for resource acquisition and usage. It is a method of control, equalization and authority.
The "footprint" is an alternative and veiled description of the statistically normalized "need" of a human, influenced by authority and wishful thinking.
Just think about it: If you are driving an expensive sports car or living in a large mansion, you are not pursuing happiness through the wealth you acquired by talents, hard work, lucky investment or rich parents, you are just having a giant "carbon footprint".
Once people accept the concept of a "footprint", individual property is no longer free to use for the individual. It is at least immoral to exercise the benefits of your wealth, but from there it is only a few baby steps away from luxury taxes, licensing schemes (co2-caps anyone?) and outright disappropriation.
"You are having a large footprint" is nothing else than "you are using more than your share of resources" (according to my definition of your "share") or "you are mis-using your share of resources" (giving me moral authority to take control over you). "Maintaining your footprint" is "keeping in line with the average".
This is exhibiting the key traits of communism: shared resources, limited individual freedom, harsh limits on private property, control of the indivudal based on minimum, average, statistical needs defined by a distant authority.
And the footprint of people in Elbonia is always lower than yours, so you need to abstain some more.
Dung can be used for fertilizing. Human and pig dung works fine to grow plants. Devoid of other alternatives, it is possible and the plants don't mind the source.
The problem is, you're closing a feedback loop on parasites and bacteria harmful to human or swine. All it takes then is any pathogen that survives composting to quickly increase its effects.
"The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was negotiated on the basis of initial IPCC findings. The UNFCCC was established and signed by almost all countries in 1992 at the Rio Summit."
So UNFCCC exists only because of the IPCC, which tells us something about their relationship.
I would distrust this organization just for the six-letter acronym. Knowing it is the in^h^hmanifestation of IPCC makes things even worse.
Why do we have a scientific research panel, when the science is settled? How scientific is that and why should we continue to tarnish the reputation of science with this global warming agenda?
So in other words, to reduce our carbon footprint (which may or may not do anything about global warming), living in a literal concentration camp is the best alternative to the Western of life?
Is that the IPCC's plan to stop global warming, reducing our life to as much as possible short of executing unwanted polluters?
The inventions, innovations we see in the slums are the result of extremely harsh conditions, high crime and an incredibly accelerated *evolution* of ideas. Because people that don't have those ideas are rapidly killed by mobsters, starved by hunger or consumed by disease.
Face it, slums are almost like concentration camps, without the gas chambers. With the Mob taking over the role of the SS, and complete with starvation, humiliation, disease, poverty and the inability to really leave the place. Some leave the slums, but most who were born there also die in that place.
Imprisoned Jews in the concentration camps built simple submachine guns and radio transmitters out of rubbish, literally. If occupants of a slum produce similar incredible feats of poor-engineering, it is a testament of human endurance, ingenuity and spirit prevailing even in hellish environments. It is telling us how strong and clever humans can be, if they need to. It is not the future standard model of urban living.
Why do all people living in the slum leave it at the earliest possible convenience if they can afford it? Why do all people living outside the slum vote to demolish these settlements as soon as a political opportunity opens up?
If it is ecological wonderland, why do they have no sewage system, not even septic tanks? If it is ecological wonderland, why do people die of disease, crime and poverty there? If it is *regarded* as ecological wonderland, with such a low standard of living, filthy unsanitary conditions, high infant mortality, extreme crime levels, extreme poverty, garbage-digging humiliation, fire hazards - does it tell us something about the slum, - or does it rather tell us something about The Greens that rave and dream about living in a human-made hellhole?
I always suspected the Ecological Stalinists want us to go back into the caves. *Knowing* they dream of slums of totally impoverished illegal aliens is even more frightening.
Let's just say I hope we'll all be able to choose our own vehicles.
I hope there's at least one manufacturer bold enough to actually SELL the cars they are constantly presenting as proof-of-concept, pre-series, prototypes and all that.
There's a ton of incredibly beautiful, modern, futuristic or even plain future cars at major trade shows, but they never ever sell the damn things.
I don't want to *put* kids in the back, they can crawl into the backseat themselves. I don't want to put groceries in the *boot*, I can put them in whatever cargo compartment is aerodynamically perfect. I don't need to sit in the upright grandpa position, I love to lounge or slouch comfortably, thank you.
Because the other model frankly looks like all the others on the parking lot at the mall, bland, boring, traditional, practical, economical and above all like it was designed for or even by my grandmother.
We only read about those that lived to tell the story. We don't read or hear about people who failed with the same or better methods. That way, we get the wrong impression about a subject just by judging the few successes, decades after the failures are forgotten.
Pretty much like the notion that old cars were built extremely sturdy while today's cars are flimsy cardboard boxes that fail in droves. We just have forgotten all those crappy cars except the Pinto and the Edsel.
OK, let's accept for a while that the Canadian winter is special. Unlike the winter in Finland, Russia, Northern China where a billion people live altogether, but no, it's special.
Would you please tell me, where on Earth I can routinely find a non-condensing environment outside an air-conditioned house?
Brazil? No, 100% humidity, tropical. Africa? No, it's either tropical (100% humidity) or desert region (-5C at night, 45C at noon, humidity will condense at night) UK? 100% humidity, rain, constantly.
What environment is un-special enough to be fully entitled to Apple's operating conditions and warranty?
Should we switch off our mobile phones before we leave the house? Or just move to Idaho?
So opening the phone box somewhere in the UK, Brazil, Cote d'Ivoire instantly voids any and all warranties, since they usually have 90-100% humidity weather?
Just to get that straight: is it possible to have a mobile phone voided in warranty when a mobile phone user leaves the air conditioned house in Brazil, any time of year? What does "mobile" mean then?
If the phone is sold anywhere in a tropical region, say Rio de Janeiro, the phone severely violates even the non-operational specs a few minutes after the shipping box is unloaded off the cargo plane.
Operational specs that don't fit the advertised use of a "mobile" phone are not the customer's problem, they are fraud.
You never left the phone behind in your car, did you?
And you never noticed that girls keep phones in their handbags. A handbag freely carried in blowing -15C wind will reach freezing temperatures quite fast. In that environment even writing a text message is enough exposure to cool the entire phone well below freezing point.
"Not using the phone where humid air can condensate" is a thinly veiled euphemism for "not taking the phone outside your house, ever".
This would not be a mobile phone.
Case in point: Summer: Miami, sunshine, excellent weather, 80% humidity, 35 degree Celsius. Houses are air conditioned: 25 degrees, 50% humidity. Perfect weather for the region in summer. Leave the house with your phone in hand and humidity will condense on it instantly.
Winter: Seattle, sunshine, excellent weather, 30% humidity, -10 degrees Celsius. Houses are heated, 20 degrees, 30% humidity. Perfect weather for the region in winter. Leave the house with the phone in your pocket, stay outside for 2 hours, come back into the house, voila, humidity will condense instantly.
If you routinely wear glasses, you'd know that humidity is condensing practically everywhere, every time.
A phone that cannot handle the environment of regular cheap non-waterproof wrist watches is not a mobile phone.
See, with Sony devices, you can trust they *have* a pile of software on that thing spying on you.
With Apple devices, you can trust they *have* embedded your current GPS coordinates and a timestamp into every single JPG you shoot.
With Apple devices, you can trust they will gouge you for every cent, with a locked phone, apps only from The Man, data exchange through The Man's iTunes application.
And I certainly know other major brands sending tracking information home, HP printers were worst, but there were others I don't remember now.
No brand or World brand, they all spy on you. Even the world's most trusted governments and agencies do.
What is that "Trusted brand" you speak of? We're not in the Fifties anymore when a Brand Name actually carried trust in a sense of "I certify for quality since I built it myself" - since the 1990s, a brand only means "We are expensive. With this brand, you can show your friends how well endowed you are (financially and anatomically)"
Case in point: "Nike" is the world's most well-known brand and they have Vietnamese children to assemble the shoes. Deserving of our trust, eh?
I was explicitly referring to cheaters. The character traits of other players are much less damaging since they don't have an aimbot or wallhack to amplify their egos.
That way, reality (gaming reality) will hobble and wear them down. Dimwits with superior skillz are a challenge, dimwits with regular skillz are usually excellent cannon fodder. Most of them sober up after a while, some take up cheating. If we ban the cheaters, we have only a kind of racemic mixture of dimwits and reasonable players. New dimwits arrive every day, some dimwits convert to the side of reason. If cheaters are expelled, this would be a situation we could endure. We always get new reasonable teammates and always enough cannon fodder. Win-win:)
You're right, he just referred to the character traits.
But I have no problems with dimwits, idjits, griefers if they don't cheat. Griefers that don't cheat have very limited griefing potential, most games have some kind of checks and balances against the "legally" possible griefing.
Dimwits and idjits with a mouse but no aimbot? No problem. Keep 'em coming. On our side, well, tough luck. On the enemie's side: excellent fodder.
After getting owned for months because of no teamplay, most idjits and dimwits enter a state of metamorphosis: some take up aimbots = cheater, to be roasted - but most sober up and become reasonable players.
For every week player, roll a d20: - 1-15: stay dimwit - 16-19: sober up and become reasonable - 20: download a cheat, get hardware-GUID banned for life
I'm sure they have, just much much less than NiCd. But why don't most phones have NiMH batteries? NiMHs are dirt cheap, really. The Changhong phone I had was 2.5cm thick. Not iPhone-class, of course, but not bulky either. I'm sure there are a lot of people and professions out there that could really use a 4000mAh battery with 2 weeks of standby time.
Slashdot Mirror
All living Malthusians are hypocrites. Or mass murders waiting to happen.
Only dead Malthusians are good Malthusians, leading by example.
Reality check: billions of poor only survive their infant years by modern medicine and vaccination.
But the hatred towards a godlike wealthy elite is quite a problem, since every time I hear this or similar quotes, it is directed against the common man and woman in The West who lives a middle-class lifestyle.
Taxes don't target the elite, they hover above them. Everything you do only hits the middle class and by attacking them, you split their ranks into slum side and elite side. Only a working, wealthy middle class can ever hope to control a corrupt elite. No one else can, not the entire People's Liberation Army. (Just look at the levels of corruption inside their ranks)
Exactly.
Ideas that were regarded as "totally raving leftist lunatic" are now commonly referred to as only being "very lefty".
I could express any idea of Stalin himself on any leftist conference without drawing much criticism. I could quote Mao on every Green online forum and it would provoke no one to block my account. Quoting just Reagan would.
A few years down the road Mao and Stalin will look just like any other left politician. Just like the number of right wings or conservatives is decreasing. They are even today all "right wing lunatics".
Even today, "reducing immigration" is considered equal to "exterminating a million Jews" in public debate.
There's only a partly-socialist Middle (Obama, Merkel, Sarkozy), the socialist Left (Stalin, Mao)- and the Nazis. The perceived differences between those who "killed 40 million people" and those who "want to reduce welfare checks" is rapidly decreasing.
I breathe out carbon dioxide.
I guess you breathe out methane, mixed with tiny, but very perceptible amounts Indole and Skatole.
Ecologism became a left-right issue about 10-15 years ago, when ecologists or socialists (or the rich) began to equal wealth with ecological destruction.
The entire concept of a "footprint" is deeply rooted in the belief that every man and woman has to have only some limited "right" to anything.
A "footprint", as in "carbon footprint" is a (very successful) political device to curb individual freedom and market mechanisms for resource acquisition and usage. It is a method of control, equalization and authority.
The "footprint" is an alternative and veiled description of the statistically normalized "need" of a human, influenced by authority and wishful thinking.
Just think about it: If you are driving an expensive sports car or living in a large mansion, you are not pursuing happiness through the wealth you acquired by talents, hard work, lucky investment or rich parents, you are just having a giant "carbon footprint".
Once people accept the concept of a "footprint", individual property is no longer free to use for the individual. It is at least immoral to exercise the benefits of your wealth, but from there it is only a few baby steps away from luxury taxes, licensing schemes (co2-caps anyone?) and outright disappropriation.
Environmentalists are already targeting SUVs and luxury cars in Europe and sometimes large private homes. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_D%C3%A9gonfl%C3%A9s
"You are having a large footprint" is nothing else than "you are using more than your share of resources" (according to my definition of your "share") or "you are mis-using your share of resources" (giving me moral authority to take control over you). "Maintaining your footprint" is "keeping in line with the average".
This is exhibiting the key traits of communism: shared resources, limited individual freedom, harsh limits on private property, control of the indivudal based on minimum, average, statistical needs defined by a distant authority.
And the footprint of people in Elbonia is always lower than yours, so you need to abstain some more.
Dung can be used for fertilizing. Human and pig dung works fine to grow plants. Devoid of other alternatives, it is possible and the plants don't mind the source.
The problem is, you're closing a feedback loop on parasites and bacteria harmful to human or swine. All it takes then is any pathogen that survives composting to quickly increase its effects.
"The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was negotiated on the basis of initial IPCC findings. The UNFCCC was established and signed by almost all countries in 1992 at the Rio Summit."
So UNFCCC exists only because of the IPCC, which tells us something about their relationship.
I would distrust this organization just for the six-letter acronym. Knowing it is the in^h^hmanifestation of IPCC makes things even worse.
Why do we have a scientific research panel, when the science is settled? How scientific is that and why should we continue to tarnish the reputation of science with this global warming agenda?
So in other words, to reduce our carbon footprint (which may or may not do anything about global warming), living in a literal concentration camp is the best alternative to the Western of life?
Is that the IPCC's plan to stop global warming, reducing our life to as much as possible short of executing unwanted polluters?
The inventions, innovations we see in the slums are the result of extremely harsh conditions, high crime and an incredibly accelerated *evolution* of ideas. Because people that don't have those ideas are rapidly killed by mobsters, starved by hunger or consumed by disease.
Face it, slums are almost like concentration camps, without the gas chambers. With the Mob taking over the role of the SS, and complete with starvation, humiliation, disease, poverty and the inability to really leave the place. Some leave the slums, but most who were born there also die in that place.
Imprisoned Jews in the concentration camps built simple submachine guns and radio transmitters out of rubbish, literally. If occupants of a slum produce similar incredible feats of poor-engineering, it is a testament of human endurance, ingenuity and spirit prevailing even in hellish environments. It is telling us how strong and clever humans can be, if they need to. It is not the future standard model of urban living.
Why do all people living in the slum leave it at the earliest possible convenience if they can afford it?
Why do all people living outside the slum vote to demolish these settlements as soon as a political opportunity opens up?
If it is ecological wonderland, why do they have no sewage system, not even septic tanks?
If it is ecological wonderland, why do people die of disease, crime and poverty there?
If it is *regarded* as ecological wonderland, with such a low standard of living, filthy unsanitary conditions, high infant mortality, extreme crime levels, extreme poverty, garbage-digging humiliation, fire hazards - does it tell us something about the slum, - or does it rather tell us something about The Greens that rave and dream about living in a human-made hellhole?
I always suspected the Ecological Stalinists want us to go back into the caves. *Knowing* they dream of slums of totally impoverished illegal aliens is even more frightening.
Let's just say I hope we'll all be able to choose our own vehicles.
I hope there's at least one manufacturer bold enough to actually SELL the cars they are constantly presenting as proof-of-concept, pre-series, prototypes and all that.
There's a ton of incredibly beautiful, modern, futuristic or even plain future cars at major trade shows, but they never ever sell the damn things.
I don't want to *put* kids in the back, they can crawl into the backseat themselves. I don't want to put groceries in the *boot*, I can put them in whatever cargo compartment is aerodynamically perfect. I don't need to sit in the upright grandpa position, I love to lounge or slouch comfortably, thank you.
That said, I would prefer http://www.geekologie.com/2007/12/07/future-car-1.jpg all the time.
Because the other model frankly looks like all the others on the parking lot at the mall, bland, boring, traditional, practical, economical and above all like it was designed for or even by my grandmother.
We need Spice in design. And we need Moar.
We only read about those that lived to tell the story. We don't read or hear about people who failed with the same or better methods. That way, we get the wrong impression about a subject just by judging the few successes, decades after the failures are forgotten.
Pretty much like the notion that old cars were built extremely sturdy while today's cars are flimsy cardboard boxes that fail in droves. We just have forgotten all those crappy cars except the Pinto and the Edsel.
Funny thing is, Wikipedia has that covered, too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias
Rule 1 & 2 dude :)
OK, let's accept for a while that the Canadian winter is special. Unlike the winter in Finland, Russia, Northern China where a billion people live altogether, but no, it's special.
Would you please tell me, where on Earth I can routinely find a non-condensing environment outside an air-conditioned house?
Brazil? No, 100% humidity, tropical.
Africa? No, it's either tropical (100% humidity) or desert region (-5C at night, 45C at noon, humidity will condense at night)
UK? 100% humidity, rain, constantly.
What environment is un-special enough to be fully entitled to Apple's operating conditions and warranty?
Should we switch off our mobile phones before we leave the house? Or just move to Idaho?
So opening the phone box somewhere in the UK, Brazil, Cote d'Ivoire instantly voids any and all warranties, since they usually have 90-100% humidity weather?
Just to get that straight: is it possible to have a mobile phone voided in warranty when a mobile phone user leaves the air conditioned house in Brazil, any time of year? What does "mobile" mean then?
If the phone is sold anywhere in a tropical region, say Rio de Janeiro, the phone severely violates even the non-operational specs a few minutes after the shipping box is unloaded off the cargo plane.
Operational specs that don't fit the advertised use of a "mobile" phone are not the customer's problem, they are fraud.
You never left the phone behind in your car, did you?
And you never noticed that girls keep phones in their handbags. A handbag freely carried in blowing -15C wind will reach freezing temperatures quite fast. In that environment even writing a text message is enough exposure to cool the entire phone well below freezing point.
And people do that all the time.
Oh you do find some Apple users there. They just keep it IN THE CLOSET.
Talk about a gregarious black-or-white fallacy.
"Not using the phone where humid air can condensate" is a thinly veiled euphemism for "not taking the phone outside your house, ever".
This would not be a mobile phone.
Case in point:
Summer: Miami, sunshine, excellent weather, 80% humidity, 35 degree Celsius. Houses are air conditioned: 25 degrees, 50% humidity. Perfect weather for the region in summer. Leave the house with your phone in hand and humidity will condense on it instantly.
Winter: Seattle, sunshine, excellent weather, 30% humidity, -10 degrees Celsius. Houses are heated, 20 degrees, 30% humidity. Perfect weather for the region in winter. Leave the house with the phone in your pocket, stay outside for 2 hours, come back into the house, voila, humidity will condense instantly.
If you routinely wear glasses, you'd know that humidity is condensing practically everywhere, every time.
A phone that cannot handle the environment of regular cheap non-waterproof wrist watches is not a mobile phone.
See, with Sony devices, you can trust they *have* a pile of software on that thing spying on you.
With Apple devices, you can trust they *have* embedded your current GPS coordinates and a timestamp into every single JPG you shoot.
With Apple devices, you can trust they will gouge you for every cent, with a locked phone, apps only from The Man, data exchange through The Man's iTunes application.
And I certainly know other major brands sending tracking information home, HP printers were worst, but there were others I don't remember now.
No brand or World brand, they all spy on you. Even the world's most trusted governments and agencies do.
What is that "Trusted brand" you speak of? We're not in the Fifties anymore when a Brand Name actually carried trust in a sense of "I certify for quality since I built it myself" - since the 1990s, a brand only means "We are expensive. With this brand, you can show your friends how well endowed you are (financially and anatomically)"
Case in point: "Nike" is the world's most well-known brand and they have Vietnamese children to assemble the shoes. Deserving of our trust, eh?
I was explicitly referring to cheaters. The character traits of other players are much less damaging since they don't have an aimbot or wallhack to amplify their egos.
That way, reality (gaming reality) will hobble and wear them down. Dimwits with superior skillz are a challenge, dimwits with regular skillz are usually excellent cannon fodder. Most of them sober up after a while, some take up cheating. If we ban the cheaters, we have only a kind of racemic mixture of dimwits and reasonable players. New dimwits arrive every day, some dimwits convert to the side of reason. If cheaters are expelled, this would be a situation we could endure. We always get new reasonable teammates and always enough cannon fodder. Win-win :)
You're right, he just referred to the character traits.
But I have no problems with dimwits, idjits, griefers if they don't cheat. Griefers that don't cheat have very limited griefing potential, most games have some kind of checks and balances against the "legally" possible griefing.
Dimwits and idjits with a mouse but no aimbot? No problem. Keep 'em coming. On our side, well, tough luck. On the enemie's side: excellent fodder.
After getting owned for months because of no teamplay, most idjits and dimwits enter a state of metamorphosis: some take up aimbots = cheater, to be roasted - but most sober up and become reasonable players.
For every week player, roll a d20:
- 1-15: stay dimwit
- 16-19: sober up and become reasonable
- 20: download a cheat, get hardware-GUID banned for life
Win-Win.
Better than a Zune at least.
This comment is using Latin characters. Thanks for asking.
Bah, scratch that, I measured it again, it is not 2.5cm but 1.8cm, very similar to a Sony Ericsson W800.
I'm sure they have, just much much less than NiCd. But why don't most phones have NiMH batteries? NiMHs are dirt cheap, really. The Changhong phone I had was 2.5cm thick. Not iPhone-class, of course, but not bulky either. I'm sure there are a lot of people and professions out there that could really use a 4000mAh battery with 2 weeks of standby time.