Neoconservative was first coined in the 80s as a synonym for "Reagan Democrats." It was a derisive term for politicians who cynically took (or pretended to take) conservative positions that they do not believe on certain issues for the purpose getting elected. The implication was that they did not hold those views, and once elected would not behave conservatively as they suggested.
It certainly shouldn't be applied to people who have always been conservative. Ann Coulter is not a neocon. Both of the Clintons are. Newt Gingrich is not a neocon, but neither is Nancy Pelosi. Dick Cheney is not, but both the Bush presidents (41,43) could be considered to be. Rudy Guiliani is shaping up to be one. Barack Obama has cleverly been on the campaign trail (or otherwise occupied) during a number of policy-defining votes during his freshman term, so it remains to be seen just exactly what he is, and what he's pretending to be.
Neocons don't tend to control anything, principally because they, like moderates, like to stick their finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing before not really doing anything of substance.
There is no logical reason why the word would be repeated so often about people it does not describe except to create a new definition. One which is intended to associate conservatives with a certain kind of nazis by way of a common prefix. It is very tiring to watch this in action. Especially as it appears to be succeeding amongst the ill-informed, non-critically thinking masses.
Can we please stop using the prefix neo- on everything related to the right. Also I'd like to extend that courtesy to the left as well, should the need arise. It doesn't mean what you think it means. Unless you're a linguistic sadist, which I guess we can't discount given this is slashdot.
It's not "cute" nor does it evoke images of white supremacists as, I assume, was your intention. At least, it's the intention of almost everyone else in the past decade who uses that prefix in a political context.
If they don't know the answer and don't have any desire to help him, what gives them the right to call him a moron? I mean, wouldn't it be easier to just say, "You can't do that with the tools available, and none of us are interested in making tools that would. You're on your own on this, so good luck." Or, y'know, not said anything at all?
You watch way too many movies. Real labs look like messy garages, with the occasional cylinder with lots of bolts and wire thingies sticking out. There are drawers, hopefully labeled, filled with miscellaneous equipment, and perhaps a scarred work-table, stained from chemicals and charred from solder misses. If there is a desk, it's piled high with notes, books, and papers (to be written or read).
Money is not wealth. Wealth is what you buy with money. What good is money if there are few people to chase it? Lots of savings with few offspring sounds like a recipe for inflation to me. A temporary gain for a long-term suffering.
Very good points. But would you be so kind as to opt out of receiving social security benefits when you're old and all the people who would've cared for you weren't born?
Medicine is more than one eighth of the economy right now, and that's only going to grow as more people require it from less people who exist.
Ok, first off, if you leave your friend in your car while you go do something, trust him enough to leave the keys.
now, the electrical system operates at 12 V (well the part the windows are connected to) and salt water doesn't actually conduct all that well. Fresh water even worse. The windows will continue to operate for several minutes after you've been dunked, unless you had an asshole friend who made you wait in the car..that's parked on a bridge for some reason..without leaving the keys so you can listen to the radio or move it if the cops show up to give you a ticket. If you're really worried, you should also be worried about mechanical failure of a manual window mechanism and get a freakin' life-hammer.
Regarding the digital control, you don't need to turn it way down when you start the car because the radio will start at zero volume and slowly rise to your previously set level. You don't have as much control as before, but you do get some other benefits as compensation, for instance steering-wheel mounted volume and channel controls, so you don't even have to lean over to the knob any more.
I don't see why. Who do you think is going to build the damn things, anyway? The Energy Industry, that's who. If it has to be government funded in addition to being government approved then maybe it's not so great as we thought.
Returning things from space via tether provides the tether with a "free" reboost. You really want the tether to be able to boost objects into a HIGHER orbit. In theory, saving a lot of money on conventional propulsion:
e.g. combine a long tether with a hypersonic high-altitude aircraft, mate the payload with the tether at the altitude where tether and aircraft overlap (or a small engine to get from aircraft alt to tether alt) and let centripetal force launch the payload into the higher orbit. Then (magic here) reboost the tether cheaply somehow. There are actually quite a few options depending on how much altitude and delta-v the tether must drop each payload cycle. Many of which fall under the heading, "Electric Propulsion."
"Is this how things got so big in the US in the first place? They just redefined the scale?:-)"
Actually, about 10 years or so ago, we did redefine the scale, moving the definitions for "overweight" and "obese" down 5 points on the BMI scale. A couple years later we were talking about the obesity epidemic and record high numbers of overweight people.
Now it's likely that researchers correct for this or just use the raw data for doing historical studies, but it still seemed a bit coincidental that we had so many more fat people after we redefined "fat" thinner.
So.. they have a full set of redundant bosses in a rather expensive part of the world to live. As well as a full set of bosses where they actually make their product?
We have an "Adversarial Justice System" which seems to mean that we have a prosecution/plaintiff, a defense, and 12d2.
But it's because of the GP's point that a lot of otherwise smart people seem to think it's a good idea to avoid jury duty simply because it's a personal inconvenience. If you agree that taxes are necessary to being a functioning member of society, I fail to see how you could disagree that jury duty would also be necessary.
The company DOES NOT HAVE THE OPTION of raising prices to cover the cost, because it can ONLY raise prices as high as the market will allow.
Indeed, but if it also does not have the option of controlling costs through salaries or automation. It will eventually have squeezed so far (as you put it) that the costs are greater than the market price of the product. The company cannot survive negative cash flow for long (unless that company is Microsoft with HUGE coffers...). There is an object example in the slow demise of US automakers, specifically GM.
*which are just plain stupid, really, since the cost of those benefits could be part of your salary instead and YOU could decide what do do with it. There's a reason benefits exist, and it doesn't have anything to do with workers rights. It has to do with a worker shortage during a period where salaries were capped.
There actually are benefits to fiat money, but that has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of gold, except where gold itself is the fiat money (as in, trades for more than its worth because of its value as a trade facilitator)
If you use backed money, you have to warehouse the backing commodity or you won't be able to convert on demand. It's actually not optimal for an economy to have huge quantities of anything just sitting in a warehouse not being used by anyone, so it would be wrong to say that fiat money has no benefit at all.
You can't possibly gather enough statistics to prove quantum immortality, since by definition you can't use anyone experience as proof. You can only use yourself as proof, and you need to somehow measure the potential lethality of every event.
Because of its epistemological deficiencies, QI is a useless, unprovable theory. And even if it's true, you wouldn't be able to test it, since the longest life-line worlds are the ones in which you either choose against or are prevented from pulling the trigger.
I'd say that the quantum immortality theorem would also work if you do load a real gun, but simply decide not to pull the trigger for whatever reason. Or if you, like most of us, read about the experiment but decide it's not really not worth the risk.
That's ridiculous. Suppose some large IP-holding organization sues a sweet old lady for copyright infringement, and manages to, through sheer force of millions of dollars in lawyer-time, convince a court that she's guilty of a couple thousand dollars in infringement?
Heck, let's assume she was actually guilty and the fine was appropriate.
Is it really fair to saddle her with such a disproportionate level of compensation that she'll never be able to repay?
What about the reverse, wherein the little old lady is incapable of protecting her IP from being stolen by a larger organization because of millions of dollars of stalling and diversionary tactics?
No, what we need is a "stupid pays" system. Where an omniscient overlord assigns legal costs to the party that acted stupid or maliciously.
Yeah, that bugs me, too. Most of their business is clearly paid accounts, so shouldn't they really change their name to "NetNearlyTen" or something like that?
Gold has value other than its use as a trade facilitator: it's maleable, a decent conductor, doesn't corrode easily, etc.
Its imaginary value* is certainly greater than that of wheat, but I for one would not want to try to walk into Best Buy with the quantity of grain equal in value to a 52" plasma screen TV. And I definitely wouldn't want my retirement fund stored as piles of corn.
It's because they can't get through the word Aspergers without cracking up as if it's some kind of unbelievably undelicious fast-food sandwich. Also, that other thing you said.
I think you've neglected the hard part of producing a functional vacuum tube. I'll give you a hint, it's the first part of the phrase "vacuum tube." You've also failed to mention what you'd use for a getter, but I doubt you'd be able to achieve the high vacuum necessary in the first place, so maintaining it is somewhat less of an issue.
The third component is a microprocessor. Those things have like..dozens of transistors.;)
I suppose you could say that the software is the magic, but you don't ask for a schematic of software. You ask for a listing.
Slashdot Mirror
Neoconservative was first coined in the 80s as a synonym for "Reagan Democrats." It was a derisive term for politicians who cynically took (or pretended to take) conservative positions that they do not believe on certain issues for the purpose getting elected. The implication was that they did not hold those views, and once elected would not behave conservatively as they suggested.
It certainly shouldn't be applied to people who have always been conservative. Ann Coulter is not a neocon. Both of the Clintons are. Newt Gingrich is not a neocon, but neither is Nancy Pelosi. Dick Cheney is not, but both the Bush presidents (41,43) could be considered to be. Rudy Guiliani is shaping up to be one. Barack Obama has cleverly been on the campaign trail (or otherwise occupied) during a number of policy-defining votes during his freshman term, so it remains to be seen just exactly what he is, and what he's pretending to be.
Neocons don't tend to control anything, principally because they, like moderates, like to stick their finger in the air and see which way the wind is blowing before not really doing anything of substance.
There is no logical reason why the word would be repeated so often about people it does not describe except to create a new definition. One which is intended to associate conservatives with a certain kind of nazis by way of a common prefix. It is very tiring to watch this in action. Especially as it appears to be succeeding amongst the ill-informed, non-critically thinking masses.
Can we please stop using the prefix neo- on everything related to the right. Also I'd like to extend that courtesy to the left as well, should the need arise. It doesn't mean what you think it means. Unless you're a linguistic sadist, which I guess we can't discount given this is slashdot.
It's not "cute" nor does it evoke images of white supremacists as, I assume, was your intention. At least, it's the intention of almost everyone else in the past decade who uses that prefix in a political context.
If they don't know the answer and don't have any desire to help him, what gives them the right to call him a moron? I mean, wouldn't it be easier to just say, "You can't do that with the tools available, and none of us are interested in making tools that would. You're on your own on this, so good luck." Or, y'know, not said anything at all?
You watch way too many movies. Real labs look like messy garages, with the occasional cylinder with lots of bolts and wire thingies sticking out. There are drawers, hopefully labeled, filled with miscellaneous equipment, and perhaps a scarred work-table, stained from chemicals and charred from solder misses. If there is a desk, it's piled high with notes, books, and papers (to be written or read).
Money is not wealth. Wealth is what you buy with money. What good is money if there are few people to chase it? Lots of savings with few offspring sounds like a recipe for inflation to me. A temporary gain for a long-term suffering.
The best retirement plan is a big family.
Very good points. But would you be so kind as to opt out of receiving social security benefits when you're old and all the people who would've cared for you weren't born?
Medicine is more than one eighth of the economy right now, and that's only going to grow as more people require it from less people who exist.
Ok, first off, if you leave your friend in your car while you go do something, trust him enough to leave the keys.
now, the electrical system operates at 12 V (well the part the windows are connected to) and salt water doesn't actually conduct all that well. Fresh water even worse. The windows will continue to operate for several minutes after you've been dunked, unless you had an asshole friend who made you wait in the car..that's parked on a bridge for some reason..without leaving the keys so you can listen to the radio or move it if the cops show up to give you a ticket. If you're really worried, you should also be worried about mechanical failure of a manual window mechanism and get a freakin' life-hammer.
Regarding the digital control, you don't need to turn it way down when you start the car because the radio will start at zero volume and slowly rise to your previously set level. You don't have as much control as before, but you do get some other benefits as compensation, for instance steering-wheel mounted volume and channel controls, so you don't even have to lean over to the knob any more.
What about the gender bias inherent in the word, Woman?
I don't see why. Who do you think is going to build the damn things, anyway? The Energy Industry, that's who. If it has to be government funded in addition to being government approved then maybe it's not so great as we thought.
Returning things from space via tether provides the tether with a "free" reboost. You really want the tether to be able to boost objects into a HIGHER orbit. In theory, saving a lot of money on conventional propulsion:
e.g. combine a long tether with a hypersonic high-altitude aircraft, mate the payload with the tether at the altitude where tether and aircraft overlap (or a small engine to get from aircraft alt to tether alt) and let centripetal force launch the payload into the higher orbit. Then (magic here) reboost the tether cheaply somehow. There are actually quite a few options depending on how much altitude and delta-v the tether must drop each payload cycle. Many of which fall under the heading, "Electric Propulsion."
Wait.. wasn't that Goebbels?
Oh, I see what you did there.. clever!
"Is this how things got so big in the US in the first place? They just redefined the scale? :-)"
Actually, about 10 years or so ago, we did redefine the scale, moving the definitions for "overweight" and "obese" down 5 points on the BMI scale. A couple years later we were talking about the obesity epidemic and record high numbers of overweight people.
Now it's likely that researchers correct for this or just use the raw data for doing historical studies, but it still seemed a bit coincidental that we had so many more fat people after we redefined "fat" thinner.
So.. they have a full set of redundant bosses in a rather expensive part of the world to live. As well as a full set of bosses where they actually make their product?
That's gonna last...
We have an "Adversarial Justice System" which seems to mean that we have a prosecution/plaintiff, a defense, and 12d2.
But it's because of the GP's point that a lot of otherwise smart people seem to think it's a good idea to avoid jury duty simply because it's a personal inconvenience. If you agree that taxes are necessary to being a functioning member of society, I fail to see how you could disagree that jury duty would also be necessary.
*which are just plain stupid, really, since the cost of those benefits could be part of your salary instead and YOU could decide what do do with it. There's a reason benefits exist, and it doesn't have anything to do with workers rights. It has to do with a worker shortage during a period where salaries were capped.
True, but what are they going to do about their contract with a non-AT&T phone provider? iPhone's kind of useless without a carrier, isn't it?
There actually are benefits to fiat money, but that has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of gold, except where gold itself is the fiat money (as in, trades for more than its worth because of its value as a trade facilitator)
If you use backed money, you have to warehouse the backing commodity or you won't be able to convert on demand. It's actually not optimal for an economy to have huge quantities of anything just sitting in a warehouse not being used by anyone, so it would be wrong to say that fiat money has no benefit at all.
You can't possibly gather enough statistics to prove quantum immortality, since by definition you can't use anyone experience as proof. You can only use yourself as proof, and you need to somehow measure the potential lethality of every event.
Because of its epistemological deficiencies, QI is a useless, unprovable theory. And even if it's true, you wouldn't be able to test it, since the longest life-line worlds are the ones in which you either choose against or are prevented from pulling the trigger.
I'd say that the quantum immortality theorem would also work if you do load a real gun, but simply decide not to pull the trigger for whatever reason. Or if you, like most of us, read about the experiment but decide it's not really not worth the risk.
That's ridiculous. Suppose some large IP-holding organization sues a sweet old lady for copyright infringement, and manages to, through sheer force of millions of dollars in lawyer-time, convince a court that she's guilty of a couple thousand dollars in infringement?
Heck, let's assume she was actually guilty and the fine was appropriate.
Is it really fair to saddle her with such a disproportionate level of compensation that she'll never be able to repay?
What about the reverse, wherein the little old lady is incapable of protecting her IP from being stolen by a larger organization because of millions of dollars of stalling and diversionary tactics?
No, what we need is a "stupid pays" system. Where an omniscient overlord assigns legal costs to the party that acted stupid or maliciously.
Yeah, that bugs me, too. Most of their business is clearly paid accounts, so shouldn't they really change their name to "NetNearlyTen" or something like that?
Gold has value other than its use as a trade facilitator: it's maleable, a decent conductor, doesn't corrode easily, etc.
Its imaginary value* is certainly greater than that of wheat, but I for one would not want to try to walk into Best Buy with the quantity of grain equal in value to a 52" plasma screen TV. And I definitely wouldn't want my retirement fund stored as piles of corn.
*value as a "valuable object"
It's because they can't get through the word Aspergers without cracking up as if it's some kind of unbelievably undelicious fast-food sandwich. Also, that other thing you said.
You don't have common currency then. You have money stamps.
I think you've neglected the hard part of producing a functional vacuum tube. I'll give you a hint, it's the first part of the phrase "vacuum tube." You've also failed to mention what you'd use for a getter, but I doubt you'd be able to achieve the high vacuum necessary in the first place, so maintaining it is somewhat less of an issue.
;)
The third component is a microprocessor. Those things have like..dozens of transistors.
I suppose you could say that the software is the magic, but you don't ask for a schematic of software. You ask for a listing.