Is that we never end them. We implement them, then due to our collective national ego that manifests most clearly in congress, never roll them back for partial success. We take a hardline of "our way or the highway" and the highway ends up looking more appealing to your Cubas, your Irans, and now your Russias.
"The stick" only works when the donkey can see a future where it won't be beaten.
P.S. That's not to say anything other than screw Putin and his imperial ambitions.
1. Dose makes the poison. 2. Cleaning up is possible. 3. "Warned us enough" makes it sound like there's some level of "sufficient" warning for "us". Who are we? What defines its sufficiency?
Which is why you're not on a computer right now, but instead trying to secure a future by nakedly chasing down a cow and killing it with your bare hands.
I like that someone modded him up, as if flu vaccines don't substantially lower fatality rate among at-risk populations, such as young children, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems.
Just because catching flu doesn't tend to kill healthy adults, they just write-off the rest of the world in the perfect mixture of selfishness and ignorance, all the while acting smugly superior about the conspiracy only they can see.
Well, in this case, hundreds of people have already died, but, sure that's "nothing". Nothing is going to happen in the US, thanks in part to large scale international public health planning of exactly this sort.
I like preppers, they rarely, if ever, actually understand the consequences of social collapse, and falsely view increased individualism as the primary consequence of major institutional failure.
They don't consider the social structures that arise in post-governmental situations. The importance of community connectivity increases with importance as rigid social structures fail. You want a local warlord, a gang, a tribe, or some other primitive power structure, if you want to survive in a "lawless" world.
Your post makes me feel like this is a question for psychologists/sociologists. In-group knowledge and recruitment for esoteric social causes kinda thing. The simple pop-psych answer is that people like to see others agree with them.
The natural problem is that open source has to constantly pose as emerging useful technology to match up against the marketing that closed source software uses. It's just framing yourself as a perpetual underdog.
Oh and as long as I'm making genuinely off topic posts to invite perfectly reasonable down modding, don't think I don't know what it means when someone just happens to come in to a thread on anonymous coward to mention how I just happened to have exactly one downmod down an entire thread. Come on. You're not fooling anyone.
I'm sorry I call out morons directly for their inane bullshit. I'm sorry you were one of those morons sometime, and decided that a vendetta called for.
Yeah, I get downmodded occasionally, particularly when calling out the worst sorts of people who don't actually argue a position, who fucking cares? You? I gotta say that's sad. They're imaginary internet points. And they're not even your imaginary internet points.
Yeah, you're stupid as all hell. People in Bhutan aren't doing fine in the absence of evil western consumerism(which I don't even like). That's just silly.
From wikipedia Population below poverty line
31.7% (2003)
There's no fucking elitism in the seeing the fact that a huge swath of the country isn't doing so hot, and guessing that people who aren't doing so hot might be looking to support themselves.
No one said that. But if you for one minute think that poverty doesn't incentivize theft(you know, by means of having greater need), you're a goddamn moron.
Oh my fucking god, people are modding him up? You were serious. Ugh.
Let's explain then, because Jesus Christ this is stupid.
Poverty creates desperation. Some desperate people steal. The end. Being poor doesn't make you mentally inferior, morally questionable(in fact all objective evidence says the opposite is true), or deserving of blame.
What it does do is sometimes make you wonder where your next meal is coming from. And if you're enough of a liar to say that you wouldn't consider stealing some rich foreigners' drone charging station to eat, and that some people upon considering it might do it, I can't argue against you.
As with other roads in Bhutan, the Lateral Road presents serious safety concerns due to pavement conditions, sheer drops, hairpin turns, weather and landslides
.
I think perhaps the problem is perhaps that weather knocks out mountain roads, and so supplies can't be delivered until they're repaired.
People who are living in a nation with annual average wages of $6000 not stealing from these "fully automated landing stations" seems really improbable. I mean, Bhutan apparently has an uniquely low violent crime rate for southern Asia, but that just seems like a lot of money for people so poor.
Any difference looks a lot smaller than the markup I've ended up paying for things like going through an energy co-op instead of straight from the generating company.
Hey, look, your post related to mine in exactly zero ways, but did manage to act smugly superior in making a bunch of bald assertions.
The terrifying fucking tragedy is that you think this makes you look smart. Like, you can see it, sitting there asserting some random red herring(ha) about surveillance, as if it had anything at all to do with the question of "defining communism". And you just cackling to yourself, about how you showed me, while kinda just assuming I'm a communist.
Let me tell you something, since it might have slid straight through your skull here: having an interest in what something means, and how definitions are abused, has no bearing on the value you place in something.
I'd argue all day about what racism means, if someone were pretending that, for example, race was this totally real thing, but that doesn't mean I value racism. You need to chill.
Debating what is and isn't communist is one of those pointless questions that exists only to create debate.
Under Marx one thing was meant. Under Lenin, another. Under Mao, a third. And by the time Russia got to Stalin, they were already pushing the "we're not communist, yet" lie pretty hard.
The one thing that can be said for sure is that no nation ever actually fit the definition that exists only in the collective consciousness of the American right wing, where taxes are used as a means of establishing dominance and control over individuals, like a pack of wolves.
Slashdot Mirror
Is that we never end them. We implement them, then due to our collective national ego that manifests most clearly in congress, never roll them back for partial success. We take a hardline of "our way or the highway" and the highway ends up looking more appealing to your Cubas, your Irans, and now your Russias.
"The stick" only works when the donkey can see a future where it won't be beaten.
P.S. That's not to say anything other than screw Putin and his imperial ambitions.
1. Dose makes the poison.
2. Cleaning up is possible.
3. "Warned us enough" makes it sound like there's some level of "sufficient" warning for "us". Who are we? What defines its sufficiency?
I just want to restate your argument so you can see how stupid it is:
"People die from other causes, therefore people should not concern themselves with this cause, ever"
Which is why you're not on a computer right now, but instead trying to secure a future by nakedly chasing down a cow and killing it with your bare hands.
Grade C Bullshit.
I know it's a section on wikipedia but you can see the naive individualism oozing off almost, but not quite, every term.
I like that someone modded him up, as if flu vaccines don't substantially lower fatality rate among at-risk populations, such as young children, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems.
Just because catching flu doesn't tend to kill healthy adults, they just write-off the rest of the world in the perfect mixture of selfishness and ignorance, all the while acting smugly superior about the conspiracy only they can see.
Well, in this case, hundreds of people have already died, but, sure that's "nothing". Nothing is going to happen in the US, thanks in part to large scale international public health planning of exactly this sort.
I like preppers, they rarely, if ever, actually understand the consequences of social collapse, and falsely view increased individualism as the primary consequence of major institutional failure.
They don't consider the social structures that arise in post-governmental situations. The importance of community connectivity increases with importance as rigid social structures fail. You want a local warlord, a gang, a tribe, or some other primitive power structure, if you want to survive in a "lawless" world.
Your post makes me feel like this is a question for psychologists/sociologists. In-group knowledge and recruitment for esoteric social causes kinda thing. The simple pop-psych answer is that people like to see others agree with them.
The natural problem is that open source has to constantly pose as emerging useful technology to match up against the marketing that closed source software uses. It's just framing yourself as a perpetual underdog.
Oh and as long as I'm making genuinely off topic posts to invite perfectly reasonable down modding, don't think I don't know what it means when someone just happens to come in to a thread on anonymous coward to mention how I just happened to have exactly one downmod down an entire thread. Come on. You're not fooling anyone.
I'm sorry I call out morons directly for their inane bullshit. I'm sorry you were one of those morons sometime, and decided that a vendetta called for.
Yeah, I get downmodded occasionally, particularly when calling out the worst sorts of people who don't actually argue a position, who fucking cares? You? I gotta say that's sad. They're imaginary internet points. And they're not even your imaginary internet points.
Yeah, you're stupid as all hell. People in Bhutan aren't doing fine in the absence of evil western consumerism(which I don't even like). That's just silly.
From wikipedia
Population below poverty line
31.7% (2003)
There's no fucking elitism in the seeing the fact that a huge swath of the country isn't doing so hot, and guessing that people who aren't doing so hot might be looking to support themselves.
I'm glad you're peddling that colonialist "noble savage" bullshit though. I'm sure that's helping someone.
No one said that. But if you for one minute think that poverty doesn't incentivize theft(you know, by means of having greater need), you're a goddamn moron.
Oh my fucking god, people are modding him up? You were serious. Ugh.
Let's explain then, because Jesus Christ this is stupid.
Poverty creates desperation. Some desperate people steal. The end. Being poor doesn't make you mentally inferior, morally questionable(in fact all objective evidence says the opposite is true), or deserving of blame.
What it does do is sometimes make you wonder where your next meal is coming from. And if you're enough of a liar to say that you wouldn't consider stealing some rich foreigners' drone charging station to eat, and that some people upon considering it might do it, I can't argue against you.
How do you steel copper? I've only ever heard of steeling iron.
You cannot be serious.
Would at least some people? Yes.
From wikipedia:
As with other roads in Bhutan, the Lateral Road presents serious safety concerns due to pavement conditions, sheer drops, hairpin turns, weather and landslides
.
I think perhaps the problem is perhaps that weather knocks out mountain roads, and so supplies can't be delivered until they're repaired.
People who are living in a nation with annual average wages of $6000 not stealing from these "fully automated landing stations" seems really improbable. I mean, Bhutan apparently has an uniquely low violent crime rate for southern Asia, but that just seems like a lot of money for people so poor.
And I'm saying your definition of "true communism" isn't the only one ever used. Is that so unreasonable?
eh.
Any difference looks a lot smaller than the markup I've ended up paying for things like going through an energy co-op instead of straight from the generating company.
Maybe we can start to talk about nuclear risk more pragmatically.
Ha. Hahaha. Ha.
Yeah. Also, maybe we can go down to hell and make some snow angels. Then get on our swines and fly off to a peaceful middle east.
Hey, look, your post related to mine in exactly zero ways, but did manage to act smugly superior in making a bunch of bald assertions.
The terrifying fucking tragedy is that you think this makes you look smart. Like, you can see it, sitting there asserting some random red herring(ha) about surveillance, as if it had anything at all to do with the question of "defining communism". And you just cackling to yourself, about how you showed me, while kinda just assuming I'm a communist.
Let me tell you something, since it might have slid straight through your skull here: having an interest in what something means, and how definitions are abused, has no bearing on the value you place in something.
I'd argue all day about what racism means, if someone were pretending that, for example, race was this totally real thing, but that doesn't mean I value racism. You need to chill.
Debating what is and isn't communist is one of those pointless questions that exists only to create debate.
Under Marx one thing was meant.
Under Lenin, another.
Under Mao, a third.
And by the time Russia got to Stalin, they were already pushing the "we're not communist, yet" lie pretty hard.
The one thing that can be said for sure is that no nation ever actually fit the definition that exists only in the collective consciousness of the American right wing, where taxes are used as a means of establishing dominance and control over individuals, like a pack of wolves.