I'm pretty sure I made it clear as hell that I don't approve of that, and you can take your invented double standard and shove it up your anti-democracy ass.
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. Suggesting that human-taken records are faithful is pretty damned flawed. Hell, we can't even trust people to write down important things like major historical events accurately.
Now... the overall picture described by large volumes of this sort of data does have value in cross-checking other observations/predictions. More data, if its context is properly understood, never actively hurts.
The number of solutions to our two party systems I'd endorse as an improvement over the status quo is too great to list here. (My favorites are much smaller districts and proportional party voting).
Supporting any of them is actually my personal number 1 criteria for federal office. Too bad no one running supports any. We're just too stuck in our ways.
Using abstract classes in C++ (with multiple inheritance) is a bit like surgically cutting a hole in your foot so that when you shoot yourself, it doesn't hurt too bad.
Yeah, it achieves the goal, and makes it a little less messy to clean up, but it doesn't really guide the coding process to protect yourself the way compiler recognized interfaces do.
The republicans gerrymandered the fuck out of the country in 2010. That's not to implicitly forgive any past gerrymanderings by democrats or anything, but the house doesn't even remotely represent the popular sentiment of the country. My states' 2012 elections were more than enough evidence of that. 51% of voters voted for democratic candidates, 9 out of 13 seats went to republicans, with another really close. Nothing has changed since then.
The senate, on the other hand, has always leaned a little disproportionately republican, because low-population, rural-as-hell states are overrepresented by constitutional design. Democratic control of the body is more a fluke than not, even though the soft majority of total votes tends to lean democratic.
The people of this country are more liberal than the government of this country. Not by a huge margin, but a bit.
The US legal process is so unreasonably complicated.
Every region not only has it's own laws, but its own constitution defining how laws are passed and structured.
The simple, short version, is that in most states, legislatures can take things members don't want to be responsible for voting for, and put them on a ballot for the next election.
Some states have really dumb rules, like California that requires all taxes to pass a popular vote, but not all spending, and you can imagine how that lead to a catastrophic situation a few years ago.
Interfaces are the magic that tend to make strongly typed languages work well. That, for example, C and C++ don't positively contribute to the trends this article discusses(though I can certainly imagine that people who know how to manage their own memory tend to have a more robust understanding of code).
The ability to abstractly describe the kinds of behavior that are needed to fulfill a class of task in an application lends itself to a framework that's intuitive to complete. In other languages you expose yourself to a lot of time spent manually lining up the requirements of external pieces to what you're writing now.
Again, all conjecture, but it comes from my own observation of when I tend to make mistakes.
I'm pretty sure "upset" is just how Alan Moore is.
"Oh, I'm a respected comic book writer for super hero comics? Better make satirize the whole genre."
"Oh, someone adapted a couple of my greatest works relatively faithfully, even at expense of marketability? Better be grouchy about how it didn't perfectly match my vision."
Yeah, but it's not just awkward, it's antithetical to being honest. Whatever trends you might mentally extrapolate into a mental model are never going to justify 100% certainty about this sort of thing.
I mean, let's at least acknowledge the obvious alternate case: an internal lawyer raising liability concerns.
How people theoretically using violence to overturn the results of democratic elections are would protect us from tyranny. Tyranny like controlling the classes of weapons available to people like them.
Honestly, I'm not sure there's any insight to be gained from having this conversation.
These people are lucky that the crash happened on a test flight. This kind of thing happens, and it could've happened on their flight. Then virgin would have their deposits, and their fares, and they'd be dead.
Look, you rich, entitled assholes: being rich doesn't protect you from the deadliness of reality. Being rich doesn't insulate you completely from making deadly mistakes. This was always a risk, and nothing has changed
As an ex boy-scout, they make non-mandatory merit badges for any hobby a scout youth has demonstrated extraordinary competence in. Individual troops can even order custom ones for local oddities. Considering how hiding is an almost typical outdoorsman skill(particularly for hunters), I am not as staggered by your revelation as you were intending.
It's greatly tempting, when replying to slashdot comments, to find something to be contrary about, and argue forever.
Like that there are more shitty cops than we collectively like to acknowledge, or that, systemically, these kinds of measures just cause bad apples to be sneakier.
But the reality is that you're right. Transparency measures don't have to fix everything to be a good idea. There don't need to be a strong super-majority of flawless police to appreciate that most are just people doing their best. This is the only attitude that has any hope of working to a future where no one distrusts cops.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure I made it clear as hell that I don't approve of that, and you can take your invented double standard and shove it up your anti-democracy ass.
They did have control of a substantial majority of legislatures when the redistricting happened.
Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. Suggesting that human-taken records are faithful is pretty damned flawed. Hell, we can't even trust people to write down important things like major historical events accurately.
Now... the overall picture described by large volumes of this sort of data does have value in cross-checking other observations/predictions. More data, if its context is properly understood, never actively hurts.
The model you describe has a very bad historical track record of achieving anything approaching justice.
It's wishful thinking, at best.
No, it's really not more like the EU.
In the wishful thinking of legally long-outdated anti-federalists, it is like that.
Also, the EU will grow to be more like the US, as the scope of things that are aided by international standardization expands.
The number of solutions to our two party systems I'd endorse as an improvement over the status quo is too great to list here. (My favorites are much smaller districts and proportional party voting).
Supporting any of them is actually my personal number 1 criteria for federal office. Too bad no one running supports any. We're just too stuck in our ways.
Sure. That's fine. I don't have one.
But... um... sympathy isn't the point. Universality of constitutional protections is the point.
Using abstract classes in C++ (with multiple inheritance) is a bit like surgically cutting a hole in your foot so that when you shoot yourself, it doesn't hurt too bad.
Yeah, it achieves the goal, and makes it a little less messy to clean up, but it doesn't really guide the coding process to protect yourself the way compiler recognized interfaces do.
No more so than any other major industrialized country.
Definitely more than some other major industrialized countries.
Some other constitutional nations actually standardize their processes for regional government too.
Like 60% of US states have unconstitutional provisions in their constitutions. It's not a maximally healthy legal environment when that happens.
I care about requests not served with an appropriate judge-signed warrant.
You're "Secure in your effects" unless someone happens to ask a corporation that's too willing to comply. Then oops. There they go.
It's a little more complicated than that.
The republicans gerrymandered the fuck out of the country in 2010. That's not to implicitly forgive any past gerrymanderings by democrats or anything, but the house doesn't even remotely represent the popular sentiment of the country. My states' 2012 elections were more than enough evidence of that. 51% of voters voted for democratic candidates, 9 out of 13 seats went to republicans, with another really close. Nothing has changed since then.
The senate, on the other hand, has always leaned a little disproportionately republican, because low-population, rural-as-hell states are overrepresented by constitutional design. Democratic control of the body is more a fluke than not, even though the soft majority of total votes tends to lean democratic.
The people of this country are more liberal than the government of this country. Not by a huge margin, but a bit.
The US legal process is so unreasonably complicated.
Every region not only has it's own laws, but its own constitution defining how laws are passed and structured.
The simple, short version, is that in most states, legislatures can take things members don't want to be responsible for voting for, and put them on a ballot for the next election.
Some states have really dumb rules, like California that requires all taxes to pass a popular vote, but not all spending, and you can imagine how that lead to a catastrophic situation a few years ago.
I'm going to put out an alternate conjecture:
Interfaces are the magic that tend to make strongly typed languages work well. That, for example, C and C++ don't positively contribute to the trends this article discusses(though I can certainly imagine that people who know how to manage their own memory tend to have a more robust understanding of code).
The ability to abstractly describe the kinds of behavior that are needed to fulfill a class of task in an application lends itself to a framework that's intuitive to complete. In other languages you expose yourself to a lot of time spent manually lining up the requirements of external pieces to what you're writing now.
Again, all conjecture, but it comes from my own observation of when I tend to make mistakes.
No, that's stupid. Sorry. Not everything is inherently, and automatically obvious to everyone instantaneously. That's never true.
Besides that: "perhaps" was the central point. That's all it takes to undermine bullshitters delivering "100% certainty" when they know nothing.
I'm pretty sure "upset" is just how Alan Moore is.
"Oh, I'm a respected comic book writer for super hero comics? Better make satirize the whole genre."
"Oh, someone adapted a couple of my greatest works relatively faithfully, even at expense of marketability? Better be grouchy about how it didn't perfectly match my vision."
They just made a left join against the database skills table when they should've done an inner join.
Oops.
Yeah, but it's not just awkward, it's antithetical to being honest. Whatever trends you might mentally extrapolate into a mental model are never going to justify 100% certainty about this sort of thing.
I mean, let's at least acknowledge the obvious alternate case: an internal lawyer raising liability concerns.
I too am 100% positive things that I conjecture about with no evidence.
How people theoretically using violence to overturn the results of democratic elections are would protect us from tyranny. Tyranny like controlling the classes of weapons available to people like them.
Honestly, I'm not sure there's any insight to be gained from having this conversation.
It's not really that much more empty than your parents' basement.
going to space would be safe and problem free!
These people are lucky that the crash happened on a test flight. This kind of thing happens, and it could've happened on their flight. Then virgin would have their deposits, and their fares, and they'd be dead.
Look, you rich, entitled assholes: being rich doesn't protect you from the deadliness of reality. Being rich doesn't insulate you completely from making deadly mistakes. This was always a risk, and nothing has changed
As an ex boy-scout, they make non-mandatory merit badges for any hobby a scout youth has demonstrated extraordinary competence in. Individual troops can even order custom ones for local oddities. Considering how hiding is an almost typical outdoorsman skill(particularly for hunters), I am not as staggered by your revelation as you were intending.
Not to directly contradict you(yet), but can you cite any laws that followed this path in US history?
If you're not from the US, you may substitute your own country for the sake of argument.
It's greatly tempting, when replying to slashdot comments, to find something to be contrary about, and argue forever.
Like that there are more shitty cops than we collectively like to acknowledge, or that, systemically, these kinds of measures just cause bad apples to be sneakier.
But the reality is that you're right. Transparency measures don't have to fix everything to be a good idea. There don't need to be a strong super-majority of flawless police to appreciate that most are just people doing their best. This is the only attitude that has any hope of working to a future where no one distrusts cops.
He didn't raise more money: FYI. While Obama was opposed to SuperPACs in terms of legal matters, he used them quite effectively.