I don't like it either, but I was asking for objective evidence for a reason. What percentage of collisions are left-to-right lane merges with the right-hand driver in the blind spot? How does that compare against right-to-left changes? How often does passing on the left versus passing on the right happen on a given stretch of freeway?
You can allege something is a problem, you can even firmly believe in the rectitude of that assertion, but you will never know how much of a problem it is that way.
Well, it's easy to condemn everyone besides yourself(and anyone who happens to agree with whatever argument you're presently making) as being wrong. It's harder to identify where they might have gone wrong, and help people understand better. That's the real burden of a free society. You can't just lay blame on others, when you are automatically empowered with the right to help them see better.
1) The US. Where the article is focused. 2) Oh yes, let me commit some crimes so that I can talk about crime. And let's never discuss murder with non-murderers. 3) Uh huh. Good job.
The sad thing is that these premises aren't lost on the people who study crime. The problem is almost entirely populist, which in the U.S. is a very hard force to counter.
No one should ever have a government incentive to promote crime. Privatized prisons are exactly that. But enough of a radical that I believe that all government work should be direct hires, and that government contracts and privatization in general are a failure.
"Any tolerance at all" is an interesting phrasing, because it suggests an absolutist position on morality. I do feel complicit with the crimes of my country, but my approach is to moderate and improve all those failings in every area, rather than throwing up my hands and saying "If I can't fix all of it at once, it's pointless!"
But your cynical political nihilism totally makes you the coolest one in the conversation. You're too cool for me.
Also you are correct about our prisons aka 'correctional facilities'. They suck. We are warehousing criminals little more. What if instead of warehousing we forced all of them to learn skills. Usable skills not just bending metal into license plates and digging ditches. Things like you end up here welcome to your new school. Think if instead of bottom of the rung people who have little choice in what they do we ended up with master level graduate students?
The why is obvious, isn't it? The basic idea feeding it is people who do bad things are bad people. It comes from an absolutist moral position. It's Calvinism directing political beliefs centuries after it should have died.
I was referring to "our" understanding of what prison sentences achieve, not what they actually do. And what's really ironic is that anyone with a young child will tell you there's no real difference in terms of correction between a 1 minute time-out and 30 minute one, in terms of how much of a lesson it teaches.
Motive is relevant when considering crimes. It's the difference between first degree murder and involuntary manslaughter(or even justified self-defense).
Here we have prison to punish people. It doesn't exist as a means to control risk by controlling dangerous people. We've collectively decided that we should put people in cells(and let them be raped) like it's telling 5 year olds to stand in the corner.
Without basic tools to do so, how are you going to get software on your Operating System? Could we automatically boot to floppy like an Apple ][? What do you even want?
VB.Net is a simple symbol substitution away from being c# though. It changed its syntax in subtle little ways between VB 6 and VB.net to do so. It's fairly trivial to write a parser that converts VB.net to C#(the other way is a tinge more complicated). I don't think it's fair to call it a true descendent of BASIC.
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to comment that Dice hasn't done anything to ruin thinkgeek yet, but they don't actually own that one.
Yours is the third completely subjective reply. Do you think I've never driven, and seen these things? My concern is for whether intuition is correct.
I don't like it either, but I was asking for objective evidence for a reason. What percentage of collisions are left-to-right lane merges with the right-hand driver in the blind spot? How does that compare against right-to-left changes? How often does passing on the left versus passing on the right happen on a given stretch of freeway?
You can allege something is a problem, you can even firmly believe in the rectitude of that assertion, but you will never know how much of a problem it is that way.
I wasn't expressing an opinion, but recounting popular beliefs.
Your argument is one against oversimplification, not data-driven insurance.
Okay, yeah, it's annoying, but do you have objective evidence to suggest harm?
My inclination is to say "scientific experimentation" but that's a high target.
Well, it's easy to condemn everyone besides yourself(and anyone who happens to agree with whatever argument you're presently making) as being wrong. It's harder to identify where they might have gone wrong, and help people understand better. That's the real burden of a free society. You can't just lay blame on others, when you are automatically empowered with the right to help them see better.
1) The US. Where the article is focused.
2) Oh yes, let me commit some crimes so that I can talk about crime. And let's never discuss murder with non-murderers.
3) Uh huh. Good job.
I know you're not. I was explaining my observation of what popular perception is(ugh, gotta be a better way to say that).
The sad thing is that these premises aren't lost on the people who study crime. The problem is almost entirely populist, which in the U.S. is a very hard force to counter.
No one should ever have a government incentive to promote crime. Privatized prisons are exactly that. But enough of a radical that I believe that all government work should be direct hires, and that government contracts and privatization in general are a failure.
"Any tolerance at all" is an interesting phrasing, because it suggests an absolutist position on morality. I do feel complicit with the crimes of my country, but my approach is to moderate and improve all those failings in every area, rather than throwing up my hands and saying "If I can't fix all of it at once, it's pointless!"
But your cynical political nihilism totally makes you the coolest one in the conversation. You're too cool for me.
It's one of those "it's so bad that lots of alternatives are better" situations in the US.
Justice doesn't play into the authoritarian mindset. Right is being the "good guys."
Sure. Whatever. In the layman's vernacular, those two words are synonymous. I wasn't presenting a legal argument as a lawyer.
Also you are correct about our prisons aka 'correctional facilities'. They suck. We are warehousing criminals little more. What if instead of warehousing we forced all of them to learn skills. Usable skills not just bending metal into license plates and digging ditches. Things like you end up here welcome to your new school. Think if instead of bottom of the rung people who have little choice in what they do we ended up with master level graduate students?
The why is obvious, isn't it? The basic idea feeding it is people who do bad things are bad people. It comes from an absolutist moral position. It's Calvinism directing political beliefs centuries after it should have died.
Matter-energy conversion principle says that you already are pure energy, just that some of that energy is expressed as mass.
I was referring to "our" understanding of what prison sentences achieve, not what they actually do. And what's really ironic is that anyone with a young child will tell you there's no real difference in terms of correction between a 1 minute time-out and 30 minute one, in terms of how much of a lesson it teaches.
We have here the kind of person that was thrilled when they through Nelson Mandela in jail.
Motive is relevant when considering crimes. It's the difference between first degree murder and involuntary manslaughter(or even justified self-defense).
That's dumb. Cameras are everywhere and easier to use than pencil rubbings.
Here we have prison to punish people. It doesn't exist as a means to control risk by controlling dangerous people. We've collectively decided that we should put people in cells(and let them be raped) like it's telling 5 year olds to stand in the corner.
Without basic tools to do so, how are you going to get software on your Operating System? Could we automatically boot to floppy like an Apple ][? What do you even want?
VB.Net is a simple symbol substitution away from being c# though. It changed its syntax in subtle little ways between VB 6 and VB.net to do so. It's fairly trivial to write a parser that converts VB.net to C#(the other way is a tinge more complicated). I don't think it's fair to call it a true descendent of BASIC.