For people to resolve their disputes by private arbitration, however, is fine; that's a private choice and no government force is involved; therefore, there is no justification or need to have such resolutions be public.
There's a popular conspiracy theory that says Planned Parenthood is secretly carrying out a eugenics program. The theory survives for much the same reason: Planned Parenthood does try to focus resources on low-income communities, and low income communities in the US do tend to be black communities, so it gives the impression of an attempt to contracept or abort an ethnic minority out of existence.
Maybe that theory comes from the founder of Planned Parenthood - Margaret Sanger -
from Wikipedia "After World War I, Sanger increasingly appealed to the societal need to limit births by those least able to afford children. The affluent and educated already limited their child-bearing, while the poor and ignorant lacked access to contraception and information about birth-control.[98] Here she found an area of overlap with eugenicists.[98] She believed that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." They differed in that "eugenists imply or insist that a woman's first duty is to the state; we contend that her duty to herself is her duty to the state."[99] Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit.[100]
In "The Morality of Birth Control," a 1921 speech, she divided society into three groups: the "educated and informed" class that regulated the size of their families, the "intelligent and responsible" who desired to control their families in spite of lacking the means or the knowledge, and the "irresponsible and reckless people" whose religious scruples "prevent their exercising control over their numbers." Sanger concludes, "There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped"
As somewhat of an off tangent matter, he's Persian, which means that if he ever fills out a typical questionnaire asking about race/ethnicity in the US, the closest option he can pick to his ethnicity is either caucasian or white, even though neither precisely fit. You may as well call a Native American an Asian at that rate.
News flash, most people don't get to pick their ethnicity. Caucasian is a race, not an ethnicity. Hispanic ethnicity is made up of a lot of people of the Caucasian race, etc. The whole ethnicity/race thing has been completely blurred by the 70's and 80's PC introduction of "African American" which is not a race and certainly confusing to people who actually come from Africa that could be of Negroid (black), Mongoloid (Asian) or Caucasian (white) race. When does "American" become and ethnicity anyway if we're all supposed to be equal in the end.
Right... I mean, not only should they better themselves, but they should do it without the resources that anyone else has...
You're kidding, right? When has "giving" instead of "earning" ever worked? It doesn't matter if its a poor neighborhood that receives excessive tax payer and government attention (free school lunch, no income tax, significantly higher usage of police, fire, and ambulance, neighborhood redevelopment tax credits, Medicare, disability, planned parenthood, free cell phones, protection from getting utility cutoff for non-payment, EBT/food stamps, etc) - poor remain poor due to poor decisions, not lack of resources. The same "hand-out" instead of "hand-up" or "tough love" mentality also fails in the affluent households - think of upper middle class parents with lazy, drug addicted adults still jobless and living at home where the parents think continually giving them things actually helps their kids better themselves - it's never worked.
I propose a test: Create an alternate account and re-post the same things Donald Trump posts. Maybe change the names/groups mentioned in order to protect the innocent.
Then, if Twitter shuts you down, you would have a pretty open and shut case as to preferential and selective treatment.
...and what exactly would that prove? That Twitter is a company that is free to apply its policies as it sees fit? If you don't like Twitters business practices you're free to go elsewhere...
p>Why the hell people think that isn't utterly idiotic on the internet is beyond me. It's like the internet makes people stupid or something.
The degree of "internet stupid" increased dramatically with smartphones and tablets with everyone giving away their privacy for a "free" app. That idiocy of accepting whatever has carried over into everything on the internet and soon to be fully embedded in all OS's. If you try to avoid this stuff people start looking at you as if you live under a bridge.. "you don't have a facebook account?" "you've never been on instagram?" "you don't play angry birds?". It's like I'm the moron for not being oblivious to the privacy and security give-away.
Poor is a state of mind. Your arguments are no more in depth than any other I've heard. Its all conjecture. You're free to continue peddling your "victimology" as I'm done with this useless thread.
I'm sorry - your rebuttal is full of straw man conjecture - "hundred's of miles?" come on. I'm middle aged and very aware of being working poor myself. I think it's amazing that its too burdensome to get and ID but on election day all of a sudden the burden is removed. I live in the country and my voting precinct is as far away as the DMV - a 20mile round trip and no bus or taxi is ever going to come out here to give me a ride - certainly not for $6 - so does that make me already disenfranchised? I just don't get the defense here. Why is it so bad to prove who you are when participating in something as important as voting? To be honest, I really don't want people voting that can't take the time to fully participate in the process and that has nothing to do with race, income or party.
And to answer your question - yes, I made voting important enough to forgo other useless activities like playing the lottery, buying drinks at the bar, and not wasting money on cigarettes - all while living paycheck to paycheck and borrowing to get by. it's called priorities. I'm sorry I'm not sympathetic to people with misaligned priorities trying to vote without an ID. That doesn't make me ignorant or an ass.
Because DMV offices are only open during business hours and not on weekends in poorer areas.
That's a stretch... its also not true in my state where voter ID laws have been derided with the same fact-less "poor, minority, democrat" nonsense. There are weekend hours and extend evening hours during the week. These same "poor" seem to have no trouble using the SS office hours to get their "paycheck".
I keep hearing this argument that voter ID requirements disenfranchise the poor and minorities. Why is that a given? Why can't poor people get the free ID or what possible connection do being a minority have to do with not having an ID? I don't get it. Poor and minorities use ID's all the time for buying alcohol, cashing checks and getting title loans...all of a sudden they can't find their ID on election day? But I'll agree with you - the greatest fraud will be found in the vote harvesting that is increasing with the expansion of early voting. The biggest threats to our voting as I see it are early voting, open primaries and touchscreen voting machines - more so than voting day fraud.
I don't think police take people into custody without asserting some law has been broken - however wrong they may be. That's why the court is there. Fighting the police in real time is the worst way for an individual to change the system without ending up a martyr at best. Smart people don't fight the police directly...they change the leadership over time.
I could also die from a wreck in my electric car or by falling off my roof while cleaning snow off my solar panels. In those cases I paid extra for the opportunity to die but my general health care costs didn't go down because I bought into either.
This is an interesting assertion that I would like to know more about. can you provide any sources for reference?
In the case of coal power, it's often found that the external costs per kWh is actually DOUBLE that of the internal costs. So if you get $50 of electricity from coal, it's actually costing you $150. This translates to you, on average, getting one extra upper respiratory tract infection each year, plus a small chance of lung cancer or other serious illness that can lead to death.
Yes, it's actually cheaper to spend $100 on cleaner electricity in the first place.
I live in coal fired power land and in my 4 decades I've never had an upper respiratory infection and neither has any of my immediate family. I also don't see respiratory issues in my friends and coworkers outside of those that smoke. For reference I can see a natural gas power plant out my window and I could drive 50 miles either way to a coal power plant - 100 miles to nuclear. My electricity cost is $.10/kwh.
Also, the following article give some insight to the high energy usage by at least hospitals: http://www.eia.gov/consumption...
quote from article: "The 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) data showed that large hospitals (greater than 200,000 square feet) accounted for less than 1 percent of all commercial buildings and 2 percent of commercial floorspace, but consumed 4.3 percent of the total delivered energy used by the commercial sector in 2003"
Do you mean supporting things like immanent domain over us rural land owners? Forcing the sale or easements through our properties for the greater good? It's funny - all of this energy discussion ends up being more about "not in my backyard". It doesn't matter if it's coal burning, windmills, solar panels or hazardous mining - the cities need this and the voting population in these cities are more than willing to vote in people that will take things from others so they can feel good about their "clean" energy. I'd love to see just one city doze a block of dilapidated houses and put up just one of the giant windmills or crack open a hazardous lead mine downtown.
Do you have any facts to support your assertions of coal burning causing higher health costs? Are there no health related issues for the process of extracting the hazardous materials used for solar panels and the storage batteries needed?
I live in a coal and nuclear supplied power state. I don't know of extra health costs related to either. I'll make my own claim that the hospitals and medical facilities here benefit from their own cheaper energy sources and that has helped keep costs down. I'm all for these magic Clinton solar panels at my house but I'd still like to keep my coal and nuclear, thank you very much.
but that's exactly why we have a court system - to sort out what is and is not legal. Our "democracy" has created too many laws...that's what has fucked up the democracy and I'll agree with the courts that its not reasonable for police to know all the laws. Even lawyers don't know all the laws and that's their sole job. The real answer here is not to blame the individual police but to look for ways to change how they are lead. That means people need to pay attention to who they elect but that seems way to inconvenient for most people these days. It's much easier to just blame others...
emanate domain, sometimes also called condemnation - is what government uses to do the same thing and almost always now to give to another company "for the greater good". Ever been forced to allow an easement, usually for some cabling or piping company to make a profit through your land? We've had land taken around here for a city owned bike trail and at least one of the property owners was not contacted before they took his land and built the trail without his knowledge - condemnation later took care of that problem when he didn't want to sell them what they already took.
I've been an admin for a very long time. What I see is a lot of admins think the OS is the most important and fail to understand why the server even exists in the first place. If you patch simply because it was made available, you don't test or know what the application the server is hosting does at all, then are you really doing what is best? Yes, patches break things and often the patch "fixes" something that was low or no risk inside the corporate network to begin with. Too many admins fail to balance the risks with application uptime....and that's why you end up with a CAB - to keep everyone informed, to balance risk and to account for audit controls. These usually pop up after too many system outages or lack of information sharing. Admins have a bad habit of being too smart and too busy to keep others informed. I have worked with a lot of CAB's in many companies and the best way to work with them is to be proactive in keeping them informed and to build a trust relationship in advance.
The root of currency IS its convenience. Currency is supposed to represent so value of something, like a barter item. Bitcoin will fail as a replacement currency if it's convenience is not addressed.
Slashdot Mirror
For people to resolve their disputes by private arbitration, however, is fine; that's a private choice and no government force is involved; therefore, there is no justification or need to have such resolutions be public.
Unless, of course, you're going on Judge Judy.
There's a popular conspiracy theory that says Planned Parenthood is secretly carrying out a eugenics program. The theory survives for much the same reason: Planned Parenthood does try to focus resources on low-income communities, and low income communities in the US do tend to be black communities, so it gives the impression of an attempt to contracept or abort an ethnic minority out of existence.
Maybe that theory comes from the founder of Planned Parenthood - Margaret Sanger -
from Wikipedia "After World War I, Sanger increasingly appealed to the societal need to limit births by those least able to afford children. The affluent and educated already limited their child-bearing, while the poor and ignorant lacked access to contraception and information about birth-control.[98] Here she found an area of overlap with eugenicists.[98] She believed that they both sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit." They differed in that "eugenists imply or insist that a woman's first duty is to the state; we contend that her duty to herself is her duty to the state."[99] Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit.[100] In "The Morality of Birth Control," a 1921 speech, she divided society into three groups: the "educated and informed" class that regulated the size of their families, the "intelligent and responsible" who desired to control their families in spite of lacking the means or the knowledge, and the "irresponsible and reckless people" whose religious scruples "prevent their exercising control over their numbers." Sanger concludes, "There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped"
As somewhat of an off tangent matter, he's Persian, which means that if he ever fills out a typical questionnaire asking about race/ethnicity in the US, the closest option he can pick to his ethnicity is either caucasian or white, even though neither precisely fit. You may as well call a Native American an Asian at that rate.
News flash, most people don't get to pick their ethnicity. Caucasian is a race, not an ethnicity. Hispanic ethnicity is made up of a lot of people of the Caucasian race, etc. The whole ethnicity/race thing has been completely blurred by the 70's and 80's PC introduction of "African American" which is not a race and certainly confusing to people who actually come from Africa that could be of Negroid (black), Mongoloid (Asian) or Caucasian (white) race. When does "American" become and ethnicity anyway if we're all supposed to be equal in the end.
Right... I mean, not only should they better themselves, but they should do it without the resources that anyone else has...
You're kidding, right? When has "giving" instead of "earning" ever worked? It doesn't matter if its a poor neighborhood that receives excessive tax payer and government attention (free school lunch, no income tax, significantly higher usage of police, fire, and ambulance, neighborhood redevelopment tax credits, Medicare, disability, planned parenthood, free cell phones, protection from getting utility cutoff for non-payment, EBT/food stamps, etc) - poor remain poor due to poor decisions, not lack of resources. The same "hand-out" instead of "hand-up" or "tough love" mentality also fails in the affluent households - think of upper middle class parents with lazy, drug addicted adults still jobless and living at home where the parents think continually giving them things actually helps their kids better themselves - it's never worked.
I propose a test: Create an alternate account and re-post the same things Donald Trump posts. Maybe change the names/groups mentioned in order to protect the innocent.
Then, if Twitter shuts you down, you would have a pretty open and shut case as to preferential and selective treatment.
...and what exactly would that prove? That Twitter is a company that is free to apply its policies as it sees fit? If you don't like Twitters business practices you're free to go elsewhere...
I agree with all you said above, but why then can't a bakery refuse to make a cake for a gay wedding?
My thoughts exactly. It seems the haters here are out in full force.
p>Why the hell people think that isn't utterly idiotic on the internet is beyond me. It's like the internet makes people stupid or something.
The degree of "internet stupid" increased dramatically with smartphones and tablets with everyone giving away their privacy for a "free" app. That idiocy of accepting whatever has carried over into everything on the internet and soon to be fully embedded in all OS's. If you try to avoid this stuff people start looking at you as if you live under a bridge.. "you don't have a facebook account?" "you've never been on instagram?" "you don't play angry birds?". It's like I'm the moron for not being oblivious to the privacy and security give-away.
Poor is a state of mind. Your arguments are no more in depth than any other I've heard. Its all conjecture. You're free to continue peddling your "victimology" as I'm done with this useless thread.
I'm sorry - your rebuttal is full of straw man conjecture - "hundred's of miles?" come on. I'm middle aged and very aware of being working poor myself. I think it's amazing that its too burdensome to get and ID but on election day all of a sudden the burden is removed. I live in the country and my voting precinct is as far away as the DMV - a 20mile round trip and no bus or taxi is ever going to come out here to give me a ride - certainly not for $6 - so does that make me already disenfranchised? I just don't get the defense here. Why is it so bad to prove who you are when participating in something as important as voting? To be honest, I really don't want people voting that can't take the time to fully participate in the process and that has nothing to do with race, income or party.
And to answer your question - yes, I made voting important enough to forgo other useless activities like playing the lottery, buying drinks at the bar, and not wasting money on cigarettes - all while living paycheck to paycheck and borrowing to get by. it's called priorities. I'm sorry I'm not sympathetic to people with misaligned priorities trying to vote without an ID. That doesn't make me ignorant or an ass.
Because DMV offices are only open during business hours and not on weekends in poorer areas.
That's a stretch... its also not true in my state where voter ID laws have been derided with the same fact-less "poor, minority, democrat" nonsense. There are weekend hours and extend evening hours during the week. These same "poor" seem to have no trouble using the SS office hours to get their "paycheck".
I keep hearing this argument that voter ID requirements disenfranchise the poor and minorities. Why is that a given? Why can't poor people get the free ID or what possible connection do being a minority have to do with not having an ID? I don't get it. Poor and minorities use ID's all the time for buying alcohol, cashing checks and getting title loans...all of a sudden they can't find their ID on election day? But I'll agree with you - the greatest fraud will be found in the vote harvesting that is increasing with the expansion of early voting. The biggest threats to our voting as I see it are early voting, open primaries and touchscreen voting machines - more so than voting day fraud.
I don't think police take people into custody without asserting some law has been broken - however wrong they may be. That's why the court is there. Fighting the police in real time is the worst way for an individual to change the system without ending up a martyr at best. Smart people don't fight the police directly...they change the leadership over time.
Nice job troll. What's the point in visiting slashdot if all answers are a simple google a way...there's no intelligent discussion in that.
ah...gotcha. The problem there is setting standards that are "equal" without bias by the folks setting the standards.
I could also die from a wreck in my electric car or by falling off my roof while cleaning snow off my solar panels. In those cases I paid extra for the opportunity to die but my general health care costs didn't go down because I bought into either.
In the case of coal power, it's often found that the external costs per kWh is actually DOUBLE that of the internal costs. So if you get $50 of electricity from coal, it's actually costing you $150. This translates to you, on average, getting one extra upper respiratory tract infection each year, plus a small chance of lung cancer or other serious illness that can lead to death.
Yes, it's actually cheaper to spend $100 on cleaner electricity in the first place.
I live in coal fired power land and in my 4 decades I've never had an upper respiratory infection and neither has any of my immediate family. I also don't see respiratory issues in my friends and coworkers outside of those that smoke. For reference I can see a natural gas power plant out my window and I could drive 50 miles either way to a coal power plant - 100 miles to nuclear. My electricity cost is $.10/kwh.
Also, the following article give some insight to the high energy usage by at least hospitals: http://www.eia.gov/consumption... quote from article: "The 2003 Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) data showed that large hospitals (greater than 200,000 square feet) accounted for less than 1 percent of all commercial buildings and 2 percent of commercial floorspace, but consumed 4.3 percent of the total delivered energy used by the commercial sector in 2003"
Do you mean supporting things like immanent domain over us rural land owners? Forcing the sale or easements through our properties for the greater good? It's funny - all of this energy discussion ends up being more about "not in my backyard". It doesn't matter if it's coal burning, windmills, solar panels or hazardous mining - the cities need this and the voting population in these cities are more than willing to vote in people that will take things from others so they can feel good about their "clean" energy. I'd love to see just one city doze a block of dilapidated houses and put up just one of the giant windmills or crack open a hazardous lead mine downtown.
Do you have any facts to support your assertions of coal burning causing higher health costs? Are there no health related issues for the process of extracting the hazardous materials used for solar panels and the storage batteries needed? I live in a coal and nuclear supplied power state. I don't know of extra health costs related to either. I'll make my own claim that the hospitals and medical facilities here benefit from their own cheaper energy sources and that has helped keep costs down. I'm all for these magic Clinton solar panels at my house but I'd still like to keep my coal and nuclear, thank you very much.
but that's exactly why we have a court system - to sort out what is and is not legal. Our "democracy" has created too many laws...that's what has fucked up the democracy and I'll agree with the courts that its not reasonable for police to know all the laws. Even lawyers don't know all the laws and that's their sole job. The real answer here is not to blame the individual police but to look for ways to change how they are lead. That means people need to pay attention to who they elect but that seems way to inconvenient for most people these days. It's much easier to just blame others...
Can I select you for the 'nowhere continent"?
another victim of bad spell check selection. the US education system and auto correct have failed me again :( I blame Microsoft.
emanate domain, sometimes also called condemnation - is what government uses to do the same thing and almost always now to give to another company "for the greater good". Ever been forced to allow an easement, usually for some cabling or piping company to make a profit through your land? We've had land taken around here for a city owned bike trail and at least one of the property owners was not contacted before they took his land and built the trail without his knowledge - condemnation later took care of that problem when he didn't want to sell them what they already took.
So, given all that, what has science landed on as the "correct" or "perfect" temperature average for the globe?
I've been an admin for a very long time. What I see is a lot of admins think the OS is the most important and fail to understand why the server even exists in the first place. If you patch simply because it was made available, you don't test or know what the application the server is hosting does at all, then are you really doing what is best? Yes, patches break things and often the patch "fixes" something that was low or no risk inside the corporate network to begin with. Too many admins fail to balance the risks with application uptime. ...and that's why you end up with a CAB - to keep everyone informed, to balance risk and to account for audit controls. These usually pop up after too many system outages or lack of information sharing. Admins have a bad habit of being too smart and too busy to keep others informed. I have worked with a lot of CAB's in many companies and the best way to work with them is to be proactive in keeping them informed and to build a trust relationship in advance.
The root of currency IS its convenience. Currency is supposed to represent so value of something, like a barter item. Bitcoin will fail as a replacement currency if it's convenience is not addressed.