So you posted this comment from a browser you wrote on your own, built your own TCP/IP stack so that you could function on the Internet, and you wrote all of that code inside the OS you wrote yourself including the compilers? I believe you are pompous, and in need of a reality check.
I would not say it's like poetry, any more than I would say it can be taught like a foreign language. Neither is true in the broad sense.
My context comes from a Math/Philosophy education (before we had CS degrees). I am not a programmer for a living, but I have had to write programs for nearly 30 years. My "programming" is not something a user normally interfaces with, my programs have to interface with everything else. I have had little problem writing in Perl, Ruby, C, various "sh" scripts, and started with Fortran and Pascal. The reason I could do this is because I know concepts that sit underneath, I know logic and can break problems down to components. I know how to take knowledge in one subject and use it to my advantage in other subjects. Wisdom came with age and practice, but I needed the base knowledge to start with.
This giant push for STEM will not teach people critical thinking and logic, which you can benefit from in any job. This "push" won't make better programmers, because we are not teaching the core logic.
See, the problem with teaching everyone logic is that it comes at a risk. People in power don't want to be questioned, and a bunch more smart people would cause problems. Hence, why teaching Logic and Rhetoric was removed from public schools as soon as the US Government took over the role of dictating a national policy in the 1930s. Here is a good summary of political opinion on critical thought, and more can be found written by "insiders" on the subject as far back as the founding of the US Department of Education
For those that want to claim that "we are so much smarter today than we were in the 50s" I will point you to this, and scoff. No, we are not anywhere near it. You just fall for the appeal to emotion that gets tossed out all the time to make you feel good about yourself and our pathetic level of public education.
Go to a peaceful protest somewhere, something anti-government. Go up to random cops and just try to strike up conversation. Sure, some cops are cool and some people appear to ask for trouble. At the same time, you will find a tremendous amount of unfriendly and unprofessional cops.
The best experiment I ever saw was of ex cops trying to ask for complaint forms at police stations. Yeah, now that's a good time to be had for sure.
It would take too long to critique this flaming turd of a post, so let me just say "your generalization is wrong" and "your advice is ignorant drivel based on an invalid generalization".
It's BS to say it's putting cops' lives at risk, for the most part.
Well, "Save the children" and "all men are rapists" have already been overused, they had to come up with some type of appeal to emotion slogan to be taken seriously right?
Middle mouse works to paste in terminals, like Xterm, where ctrl+v does not work. Additionally, it's very efficient. In a terminal I can double click a string and paste the string much more efficiently than using a keyboard. Yeah, I know.. if you are using Windows you really don't worry too much about efficiency either.
In what city are you getting a 3 bed house for less than 3K? Freemont? East Palo Alto? Sure, some areas are a bit lower than others but unless you are in a pretty bad neighborhood 2bedroom apartments are 2.5-3K/month. Hell, I know people paying that much for rent in areas where they are afraid to go outside at dark in East Palo Alto, Freemont, and San Jose.
Housing in SV is absolutely horrid as far as price. Count how many 1 and 2 bedroom apartments have 4 or more adults living in them. I have a neighbor with 5 adults and 2 kids living in a 2 bedroom apartment because unless you are making 120K/year you can't afford rent.
You should have qualified this as "today's Government". We had a revolt a couple hundred years ago which broke away from England for the same reason we need to do something today.
All Governments have gone corrupt over time, because the type of person who gravitates to this job is a sociopath or psychopath. Sophists sound a whole lot like Philosophers when you hear them talk and lack training in rhetoric and logic. The "fix" in Athens was to go to a lottery system for representation, which successfully got the "few" out of offices for a time. Daggers and Knives got rid of that system pretty quickly however, so it was not a solution but a short term fix. The US founders knew all of this when they drafted our founding documents, which is why the last 40 years we have seen this shredded and ignored.
Though I am not surprised. Assuming everything happened as TFA stated, how was the alleged professor to know that she had psychological problems? He can't, and if her problems were so severe why is her family/medical care worker, etc.. letting her unsupervised on a web page? You are giving her all of the benefit of the doubt, but not the other way around. You are severely lacking in empathy in your post, and if this is your true feelings I'll suggest a mental health exam.
Forget MIT for a moment and take this for what it is, internet web sites providing content and chat. Not very different from what Facebook does, or Google+, or even Twitter for that matter. If you meet someone online and ask for naked pictures and they comply, are you supposed to have done an extensive background check on them? Given that there is anonymity and you don't even know that the person is who they say they are (remember she didn't even know if it was the real guy or not due to the nature of the system). If you want to hold that viewpoint fine, but it had best be unilateral.
A huge issue in this case is that we don't see any evidence, only anecdote and allegation. Given that we have had several Universities falsely accuse people of crimes (see fraudulent sexual assault cases) there is an issue of trust here which the University is not meeting.
Plausible, perhaps, but I still believe that a person should be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. You know, the same way our legal system is supposed to be working but isn't. Without proof, and without trust in the system, I refuse to condemn the guy.
In addition to jailing whistle blowers as we have seen numerous times, Journalists who report what Whistle blowers tell them are now felons. The first amendment has officially been shredded, and now comes the icing on the cake.
CISPA is back on the fast track program, as well as other programs to jail anyone and everyone including White hats.
Since the TPP is being fast tracked too, and corporations have immunity from all prosecution, we may not know what happens since Chinese hackers will simply be handing names to US officials who will make people disappear. Who's gonna write an article when they are going to prison for doing so?
The thing is, I have not seen anyone screaming about CISPA like the last go around. Nobody seems to know anything at all about any of these other programs, and the news won't even mention TPP. If you are not nervous about the political happenings going on, you are a fool.
Schools have done such a marvelous job with zero tolerance gun laws that we have to have examples of how the law has punished schools that break the law right? I mean, you said the system is working so show me one example of this happening. I wonder, exactly how much money in pain and suffering did that 8 year old kid get after the school suspended him and cops interrogated him without his parents for biting a pop-tart into the shape of a gun? Oh yeah, nothing. The family spent a ton of money to fight the school and had to move their kid to a different school recouping nothing.
Yeah, that was probably a bad example of schools abusing power, so let me ask a more direct question about your statement. How many prospective/current employees have been able to recoup damages from employers demanding their social media credentials? Again, if what you say is true we must be able to find some examples of either civil or criminal actions taken against these employers right? Oh, again we find that nobody received any damages for the coercion to break a contract, and nobody went to jail for clearly violating a person's rights.
Quoting is not scary, you should brush up on your English language skills. Maybe even read a Wiki page to find out why quotes get used in writing. That you find them "scary" (your words, not mine) is telling.
Untrue, there used to be a single program which provided housing funding, utility payments, and a small amount of cash each month. Food stamps and Medicaid used to be the other programs people signed up for.
What I intended with Welfare is actually the mass of solutions that people are provided with when they "need" assistance. This used to be just "Welfare", "Food Stamps", and "Medicaid", but has turned into dozens of additional programs today.
As someone else mentioned, the US constitution is a body that must be interpreted in whole. There is overlap between the amendments, very intentionally. "Unreasonable" can be interpreted by reading the other amendments to the US Constitution. Further meaning can be gained by reading the history surrounding the Constitution including the Federalist Papers.
I fully agree that it's baked into our biology. I actually had written up some of what you said regarding the prime age for child bearing and scrapped it, I was guessing I'd be rated a troll with the little bit of anti extremist I had. The prime age for child bearing is an age where people are not as financially secure. This does not make the decision to have kids bad, just something to weigh in the decision.
Even further, people generally have more than one child. This means that there are at least a couple years where a woman's career would be on "hold" unless her career was in child care somewhere. This is not a bad thing, and again not a sacrifice as the extremists claim. It's a choice, and a society benefiting choice (aka. "good").
Sorry, but it IS illegal and protected by the Constitution under the 4th amendment (emphasis mine below). Do you see that word "seizures"? Look it up, it protects people from civil forfeiture.
Amendment 4 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and
no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.
People are not losing their money and/or property after a court decision found them guilty of some crime, people are losing their money and/or property without a trial at all.
That is what people have been complaining about, and for Holder not to stop it completely is yet another failure of the Obama administration.
I agree with your statement about the police not following the law, but that is an easy fix. Start jailing cops that break the law, jail cops that cover for their buddies, and jail judges who dismiss cases simply because the defendant is a cop. Since we have not been doing that, we recently had cops killed by vigilantes.. go figure.
Why was the expectation for not just the last few hundred years, but thousands of years, that men worked to provide for the family and the mother raised the family and took care of the house? This is not a difficult question to answer, but should answered be for a rational discussion. No, it's not bias. The mother is the only parent that can give birth, and in most cases families consist of more than 1 child. This means that a woman would need to take a lot of time away from their potential career to have the family because nature designed our bodies differently. Two years of stress on their bodies, and recovery from child birth which is a huge stress on their bodies. And the two years assumes that everything goes fine with the two pregnancies and child births. The obvious choice for taking care of the home is the woman who is birthing, the only one that can feed the baby, etc.. etc.. (averages, not the select few that could afford wet nurses).
This idea that women should be working and the family paying someone else to clean the home, cook their meals, educate the kids, etc.. is new to human nature. As with above, averages and not the select few that could afford servants. As to whether or not this is progress is a matter of opinion, and I probably disagree with you since I have changed my opinion of this arrangement drastically in the last 20 years after a lot of research.
That's not to say that women should be treated differently (worse or better) in the workplace if they decide to work. It is a statement that in my opinion society has gone ass backwards with the push for this arrangement in terms of priorities. A woman being able to stay at home and take care of the home used to be a very respectable thing. Moms that worked prior to the 1900s were those in poverty that had no choice but to work. The men who's wives had to work were often looked down upon for not being able to support their family. Today, we have glamorized the same scenario and it seems like the children are the ones who suffer the most in this arrangement. We have also labeled women who decide to raise a family labels criticizing them for their choice.
What gets consistently overlooked, intentionally by the extremist feminists (not sure about you), is that women are the only gender that can carry a baby to term and breast feed the child. In other words, this should be a decision that BOTH parents make when THEY decide to have children. Stop with the bullshit about how the women make sacrifices to have children, it's not a sacrifice. If you want to be a woman with a career then commit and do not have a family. Be honest about it with your partner, because men more often than not want to have children just like women do. Raising a family is a choice, not a sacrifice. Further, it's a much more beneficial choice for society in most cases.
This constant bullshit with us vs. them is despicable, so stop playing the extremists game. BOTH parents are essential for raising children, and mothers are essential for bringing a kid into the world and breast feeding (or bottle feeding breast milk) which is far superior in every way to formula... barring of course rare conditions. There is far more to life than sitting in an office all day and being able to afford the newest gizmos and gadgets, bragging about how big your bonus was. Those same things last forever. The legacy you leave is not how good your credit score was, it's how you bring in the next generation to hopefully improve the world.
Stop repeating the bullshit and actually investigate facts. Measure and weigh those facts, and trust me.. there are plenty of arguments to counter the extreme feminist opinion (read "bullshit) that unfortunately does not get plastered all over media. Many of these studies and opinions are from female psychologists, sociologists, and medical professionals.
1.a) our patchwork of federal, state, and municipal programs and 1.b) the American idea of self-help and individualism.
And reason c: People are worried someone might abuse the system. For some reason, people like the idea that it is better to let 9 guilty men go than an innocent man go to prison, so promote the idea of a justice system that makes it harder to get convicted (or at least used to...), but think it is better to let 9 people starve so one person can't scam his way into a small amount of money and crappy way of life.
People _DO_ abuse the system, in fact show me a country with any form of welfare that is not abused. The problem in the US is that those abuses are on both ends of the spectrum. Like other countries we have people that camp on welfare because it's easier than working. That is the portion of risk we consider to be manageable and expected because the percentage is generally very small. Where the US differs greatly is that our programs are abused at the top as well. People "managing" these services receive extra pay for not doing their job. Performing actions like cancelling programs instead of improving programs. This is a very open corruption that anyone can see, though few dare call it corruption... our media calls it "cost saving". This does not just happen with Welfare either, but VA benefits, and Social Security, and just about everything else.
People actually believe this crap though, and it's pretty frightening. Not saying humans don't have sociopaths and psychopaths, but if we could rid ourselves somehow of our current political classes of people the problems would not be bad.
For example, people in Africa that have lived for countless generations on the same land are having it stolen by "tycoons" and politicians. They have to move now because they can't survive without any land to live on, and their land is converted to exploit it's resources for a select few to profit at the expense of the masses. Happens all over sadly.
I think we should convert to a very successful time in Athens, where politicians were selected by lottery... Out with the political class and the people that can buy them.
Funny how these guys and gals make such strong claims, but never want to be the victims of their own policies. Don't worry, we have the same exact rules in the US where politicians are immune to laws, and rich people of course. The only people subject to laws are the "common" people, or in the words of Henry Kissinger and his ilk "the useless eaters". Yeah yeah, some of their "business" communications may be classified but their emails to gramma should be fully available for public consumption.
Petitions should go up immediately: Politicians are the "trial" batch for seeing how this works and the public requires full access to their personal communications. Beta group, or what ever you want to call them. A 2 year moratorium should be placed on any other changes pending the usefulness and feedback from that group. Further, anyone with a net worth of more than 50 million should be in the same pilot group, or perhaps make them group C phased in 1 year after the politicians are snooped upon.
Lets also not forget that the recent terrorists in France _were_ snooped upon and used zero encryption on their mail. They were just missed in all the noise, probably because of the massive haystacks of data people "claim" they need to find something. Bigger haystacks don't make needles easier to find, quite the opposite. Many of our security experts on both sides of the pond have said that same thing.. repeatedly.
Slashdot Mirror
So you posted this comment from a browser you wrote on your own, built your own TCP/IP stack so that you could function on the Internet, and you wrote all of that code inside the OS you wrote yourself including the compilers? I believe you are pompous, and in need of a reality check.
I think this person is beyond the Vicodin and into the Oxycontin level stuff.
I would not say it's like poetry, any more than I would say it can be taught like a foreign language. Neither is true in the broad sense.
My context comes from a Math/Philosophy education (before we had CS degrees). I am not a programmer for a living, but I have had to write programs for nearly 30 years. My "programming" is not something a user normally interfaces with, my programs have to interface with everything else. I have had little problem writing in Perl, Ruby, C, various "sh" scripts, and started with Fortran and Pascal. The reason I could do this is because I know concepts that sit underneath, I know logic and can break problems down to components. I know how to take knowledge in one subject and use it to my advantage in other subjects. Wisdom came with age and practice, but I needed the base knowledge to start with.
This giant push for STEM will not teach people critical thinking and logic, which you can benefit from in any job. This "push" won't make better programmers, because we are not teaching the core logic.
See, the problem with teaching everyone logic is that it comes at a risk. People in power don't want to be questioned, and a bunch more smart people would cause problems. Hence, why teaching Logic and Rhetoric was removed from public schools as soon as the US Government took over the role of dictating a national policy in the 1930s. Here is a good summary of political opinion on critical thought, and more can be found written by "insiders" on the subject as far back as the founding of the US Department of Education
For those that want to claim that "we are so much smarter today than we were in the 50s" I will point you to this, and scoff. No, we are not anywhere near it. You just fall for the appeal to emotion that gets tossed out all the time to make you feel good about yourself and our pathetic level of public education.
Canada does not have Google maps yet?
On the more serious side, allies do spy and sometimes get caught. These things are usually handled without executions, since we are "allies" and all.
Go to a peaceful protest somewhere, something anti-government. Go up to random cops and just try to strike up conversation. Sure, some cops are cool and some people appear to ask for trouble. At the same time, you will find a tremendous amount of unfriendly and unprofessional cops.
The best experiment I ever saw was of ex cops trying to ask for complaint forms at police stations. Yeah, now that's a good time to be had for sure.
It would take too long to critique this flaming turd of a post, so let me just say "your generalization is wrong" and "your advice is ignorant drivel based on an invalid generalization".
It's BS to say it's putting cops' lives at risk, for the most part.
Well, "Save the children" and "all men are rapists" have already been overused, they had to come up with some type of appeal to emotion slogan to be taken seriously right?
Middle mouse works to paste in terminals, like Xterm, where ctrl+v does not work. Additionally, it's very efficient. In a terminal I can double click a string and paste the string much more efficiently than using a keyboard. Yeah, I know.. if you are using Windows you really don't worry too much about efficiency either.
In what city are you getting a 3 bed house for less than 3K? Freemont? East Palo Alto? Sure, some areas are a bit lower than others but unless you are in a pretty bad neighborhood 2bedroom apartments are 2.5-3K/month. Hell, I know people paying that much for rent in areas where they are afraid to go outside at dark in East Palo Alto, Freemont, and San Jose.
Housing in SV is absolutely horrid as far as price. Count how many 1 and 2 bedroom apartments have 4 or more adults living in them. I have a neighbor with 5 adults and 2 kids living in a 2 bedroom apartment because unless you are making 120K/year you can't afford rent.
You should have qualified this as "today's Government". We had a revolt a couple hundred years ago which broke away from England for the same reason we need to do something today.
All Governments have gone corrupt over time, because the type of person who gravitates to this job is a sociopath or psychopath. Sophists sound a whole lot like Philosophers when you hear them talk and lack training in rhetoric and logic. The "fix" in Athens was to go to a lottery system for representation, which successfully got the "few" out of offices for a time. Daggers and Knives got rid of that system pretty quickly however, so it was not a solution but a short term fix. The US founders knew all of this when they drafted our founding documents, which is why the last 40 years we have seen this shredded and ignored.
Most companies in SV are hip to the remote worker, and your pay will be granted or reduced appropriately to your geographic location.
Though I am not surprised. Assuming everything happened as TFA stated, how was the alleged professor to know that she had psychological problems? He can't, and if her problems were so severe why is her family/medical care worker, etc.. letting her unsupervised on a web page? You are giving her all of the benefit of the doubt, but not the other way around. You are severely lacking in empathy in your post, and if this is your true feelings I'll suggest a mental health exam.
Forget MIT for a moment and take this for what it is, internet web sites providing content and chat. Not very different from what Facebook does, or Google+, or even Twitter for that matter. If you meet someone online and ask for naked pictures and they comply, are you supposed to have done an extensive background check on them? Given that there is anonymity and you don't even know that the person is who they say they are (remember she didn't even know if it was the real guy or not due to the nature of the system). If you want to hold that viewpoint fine, but it had best be unilateral.
A huge issue in this case is that we don't see any evidence, only anecdote and allegation. Given that we have had several Universities falsely accuse people of crimes (see fraudulent sexual assault cases) there is an issue of trust here which the University is not meeting.
Plausible, perhaps, but I still believe that a person should be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. You know, the same way our legal system is supposed to be working but isn't. Without proof, and without trust in the system, I refuse to condemn the guy.
In addition to jailing whistle blowers as we have seen numerous times, Journalists who report what Whistle blowers tell them are now felons. The first amendment has officially been shredded, and now comes the icing on the cake.
CISPA is back on the fast track program, as well as other programs to jail anyone and everyone including White hats.
Since the TPP is being fast tracked too, and corporations have immunity from all prosecution, we may not know what happens since Chinese hackers will simply be handing names to US officials who will make people disappear. Who's gonna write an article when they are going to prison for doing so?
The thing is, I have not seen anyone screaming about CISPA like the last go around. Nobody seems to know anything at all about any of these other programs, and the news won't even mention TPP. If you are not nervous about the political happenings going on, you are a fool.
See what happens when you mess with Fox network?
Schools have done such a marvelous job with zero tolerance gun laws that we have to have examples of how the law has punished schools that break the law right? I mean, you said the system is working so show me one example of this happening. I wonder, exactly how much money in pain and suffering did that 8 year old kid get after the school suspended him and cops interrogated him without his parents for biting a pop-tart into the shape of a gun? Oh yeah, nothing. The family spent a ton of money to fight the school and had to move their kid to a different school recouping nothing.
Yeah, that was probably a bad example of schools abusing power, so let me ask a more direct question about your statement. How many prospective/current employees have been able to recoup damages from employers demanding their social media credentials? Again, if what you say is true we must be able to find some examples of either civil or criminal actions taken against these employers right? Oh, again we find that nobody received any damages for the coercion to break a contract, and nobody went to jail for clearly violating a person's rights.
Quoting is not scary, you should brush up on your English language skills. Maybe even read a Wiki page to find out why quotes get used in writing. That you find them "scary" (your words, not mine) is telling.
Untrue, there used to be a single program which provided housing funding, utility payments, and a small amount of cash each month. Food stamps and Medicaid used to be the other programs people signed up for.
What I intended with Welfare is actually the mass of solutions that people are provided with when they "need" assistance. This used to be just "Welfare", "Food Stamps", and "Medicaid", but has turned into dozens of additional programs today.
As someone else mentioned, the US constitution is a body that must be interpreted in whole. There is overlap between the amendments, very intentionally. "Unreasonable" can be interpreted by reading the other amendments to the US Constitution. Further meaning can be gained by reading the history surrounding the Constitution including the Federalist Papers.
I fully agree that it's baked into our biology. I actually had written up some of what you said regarding the prime age for child bearing and scrapped it, I was guessing I'd be rated a troll with the little bit of anti extremist I had. The prime age for child bearing is an age where people are not as financially secure. This does not make the decision to have kids bad, just something to weigh in the decision.
Even further, people generally have more than one child. This means that there are at least a couple years where a woman's career would be on "hold" unless her career was in child care somewhere. This is not a bad thing, and again not a sacrifice as the extremists claim. It's a choice, and a society benefiting choice (aka. "good").
Sorry, but it IS illegal and protected by the Constitution under the 4th amendment (emphasis mine below). Do you see that word "seizures"? Look it up, it protects people from civil forfeiture.
Amendment 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures , shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
People are not losing their money and/or property after a court decision found them guilty of some crime, people are losing their money and/or property without a trial at all.
That is what people have been complaining about, and for Holder not to stop it completely is yet another failure of the Obama administration.
I agree with your statement about the police not following the law, but that is an easy fix. Start jailing cops that break the law, jail cops that cover for their buddies, and jail judges who dismiss cases simply because the defendant is a cop. Since we have not been doing that, we recently had cops killed by vigilantes.. go figure.
Why was the expectation for not just the last few hundred years, but thousands of years, that men worked to provide for the family and the mother raised the family and took care of the house? This is not a difficult question to answer, but should answered be for a rational discussion. No, it's not bias. The mother is the only parent that can give birth, and in most cases families consist of more than 1 child. This means that a woman would need to take a lot of time away from their potential career to have the family because nature designed our bodies differently. Two years of stress on their bodies, and recovery from child birth which is a huge stress on their bodies. And the two years assumes that everything goes fine with the two pregnancies and child births. The obvious choice for taking care of the home is the woman who is birthing, the only one that can feed the baby, etc.. etc.. (averages, not the select few that could afford wet nurses).
This idea that women should be working and the family paying someone else to clean the home, cook their meals, educate the kids, etc.. is new to human nature. As with above, averages and not the select few that could afford servants. As to whether or not this is progress is a matter of opinion, and I probably disagree with you since I have changed my opinion of this arrangement drastically in the last 20 years after a lot of research.
That's not to say that women should be treated differently (worse or better) in the workplace if they decide to work. It is a statement that in my opinion society has gone ass backwards with the push for this arrangement in terms of priorities. A woman being able to stay at home and take care of the home used to be a very respectable thing. Moms that worked prior to the 1900s were those in poverty that had no choice but to work. The men who's wives had to work were often looked down upon for not being able to support their family. Today, we have glamorized the same scenario and it seems like the children are the ones who suffer the most in this arrangement. We have also labeled women who decide to raise a family labels criticizing them for their choice.
What gets consistently overlooked, intentionally by the extremist feminists (not sure about you), is that women are the only gender that can carry a baby to term and breast feed the child. In other words, this should be a decision that BOTH parents make when THEY decide to have children. Stop with the bullshit about how the women make sacrifices to have children, it's not a sacrifice. If you want to be a woman with a career then commit and do not have a family. Be honest about it with your partner, because men more often than not want to have children just like women do. Raising a family is a choice, not a sacrifice. Further, it's a much more beneficial choice for society in most cases.
This constant bullshit with us vs. them is despicable, so stop playing the extremists game. BOTH parents are essential for raising children, and mothers are essential for bringing a kid into the world and breast feeding (or bottle feeding breast milk) which is far superior in every way to formula... barring of course rare conditions. There is far more to life than sitting in an office all day and being able to afford the newest gizmos and gadgets, bragging about how big your bonus was. Those same things last forever. The legacy you leave is not how good your credit score was, it's how you bring in the next generation to hopefully improve the world.
Stop repeating the bullshit and actually investigate facts. Measure and weigh those facts, and trust me.. there are plenty of arguments to counter the extreme feminist opinion (read "bullshit) that unfortunately does not get plastered all over media. Many of these studies and opinions are from female psychologists, sociologists, and medical professionals.
1.a) our patchwork of federal, state, and municipal programs and 1.b) the American idea of self-help and individualism.
And reason c: People are worried someone might abuse the system. For some reason, people like the idea that it is better to let 9 guilty men go than an innocent man go to prison, so promote the idea of a justice system that makes it harder to get convicted (or at least used to...), but think it is better to let 9 people starve so one person can't scam his way into a small amount of money and crappy way of life.
People _DO_ abuse the system, in fact show me a country with any form of welfare that is not abused. The problem in the US is that those abuses are on both ends of the spectrum. Like other countries we have people that camp on welfare because it's easier than working. That is the portion of risk we consider to be manageable and expected because the percentage is generally very small. Where the US differs greatly is that our programs are abused at the top as well. People "managing" these services receive extra pay for not doing their job. Performing actions like cancelling programs instead of improving programs. This is a very open corruption that anyone can see, though few dare call it corruption... our media calls it "cost saving". This does not just happen with Welfare either, but VA benefits, and Social Security, and just about everything else.
People actually believe this crap though, and it's pretty frightening. Not saying humans don't have sociopaths and psychopaths, but if we could rid ourselves somehow of our current political classes of people the problems would not be bad.
For example, people in Africa that have lived for countless generations on the same land are having it stolen by "tycoons" and politicians. They have to move now because they can't survive without any land to live on, and their land is converted to exploit it's resources for a select few to profit at the expense of the masses. Happens all over sadly.
I think we should convert to a very successful time in Athens, where politicians were selected by lottery... Out with the political class and the people that can buy them.
Funny how these guys and gals make such strong claims, but never want to be the victims of their own policies. Don't worry, we have the same exact rules in the US where politicians are immune to laws, and rich people of course. The only people subject to laws are the "common" people, or in the words of Henry Kissinger and his ilk "the useless eaters". Yeah yeah, some of their "business" communications may be classified but their emails to gramma should be fully available for public consumption.
Petitions should go up immediately: Politicians are the "trial" batch for seeing how this works and the public requires full access to their personal communications. Beta group, or what ever you want to call them. A 2 year moratorium should be placed on any other changes pending the usefulness and feedback from that group. Further, anyone with a net worth of more than 50 million should be in the same pilot group, or perhaps make them group C phased in 1 year after the politicians are snooped upon.
Lets also not forget that the recent terrorists in France _were_ snooped upon and used zero encryption on their mail. They were just missed in all the noise, probably because of the massive haystacks of data people "claim" they need to find something. Bigger haystacks don't make needles easier to find, quite the opposite. Many of our security experts on both sides of the pond have said that same thing.. repeatedly.