I have to turn a part of what you said upside down, because you hint at where I'll take it.
The only problem is that government is allowing corporations to push their agenda in the classroom.
Do you really truly believe this? I believe this is a Government agenda which we have seen growing for 50+ years with the removal of the classical education system and it's replacement with the communist industrial education system. Yes folks, this really happened.
Here is where you hint at the same meaning.
They'll be free from the propaganda and allowed to be creative and free. But, not the common man, because he can't afford freedom.
The wealthiest pushing these agendas don't use public schools. It's not just the execs at the MPAA and RIAA. This is the Kennedy, Rockefeller, the Bush, the Rothschild, etc.., families. The same people that own the banks, and are ramming their agenda down our Government to you and I.
The same people that are immune to taxes, immune to criminal investigation and prosecution, etc...
So to answer your last question, the answer is "no". There are shitbags in society, and shitbags will always be in society. Just like there are nice people in society and will always be nice people in society. The shitbags tend to step on everyone up until the point where society has to revolt against their control. Happened over and over through out history. We are nearing that point again, but it won't be the last time we see it. Human nature and psychology ensure that this pattern repeats.
Why? To destroy the business and make a couple people lots of money. This is what normally happens, but it should not be happening with Utilities (though Enron will tell you it's happened before with different circumstances).
When company after company does this with similar effect, you really can't believe it's just stupidity. To you and I, the decisions look stupid because we think about things at a different level. Execs are not stupid, they have a very different motivation for their decisions. In this case, they don't care about consumers or employees as has happened with hundreds of large companies.
Right to Work Law: Employer rights, anti-union rules, no rights for employes.
Citizens United: Allows "Corporations" rights of citizens. No benefit to citizens.
Patriot Act: Dismembers the US Constitution and is anti-patriotic.
Fusion Center: The area where information is distributed from one Government agency to another, not "fused".
I'm guessing that this "Civil Liberties & Privacy Officer" will figure out ways around our Civil Liberties and Privacy, publish misinformation if they get caught, and generate FUD to extend operations.
I was one of the last to wear the 6th Cavalry crossed cutlasses. The 6th was merged into the a support command (503rd or 513?), and our nickname for their badge was "The Flaming Assholes" (obviously not just due to the patch design). I always liked the "Screaming Eagles" of the 101st too.
The risks are very different first off. If I crash my computer I don't usually kill anyone, if I crash my double trailer on the freeway there is a good chance that people die.
Second, the fatigue is very different between mental jobs and manual labor. I agree that for the most part humans shut down after 8 hours. That said, Tech jobs are quite a bit like being an artist. You find a groove, and you can make magic. I have done a couple of 20 hour days in the past because A) I really really enjoyed the project I was working on, and B) I was in a groove and everything was snapping together. The 20 hour days are extremely rare, but I doubt I'm the only one that's had a couple of those moments.
The thing is, if you find your groove and work a 12 hour day the bosses need to make sure you get compensated. A 40 hour week does not give much time to rest, and a 50 hour week leads to burn out rather quickly. If your boss does not allow comp time, get the hell out!
Many managers learn who the workers are and never comp, often pushing the workers harder and burning them out quicker. As long as they get their bonus they don't care about the staff they have left next quarter.
You are correct, and I was incorrect that it's the home of the 82nd Airborne (I was discharged 2 decades ago). I was not going to list any of the special ops, because Bragg's web page lists no Units that I could find, neither does Benning. Certain special operations units at Bragg 'may' be considered confidential (such as Delta).
You did not ready very well. In war time bombs should be active and I agree, but you are not flying over friendly space for very long. When training or transporting weapons during peace time or over your own territory, weapons should never be active.
Ft. Bragg is the home of the 101st Airborne division and is most surely a high value target, as is Ft. Benning, and Ft. Hood. There are very few Military bases not considered high value targets.
Just to make the NSA happy, this is public knowledge and is not classified or sensitive information.
I'm not sure you understand how these things are really designed to work. A Bomber crashing is supposed to be in the design scope of the munition. A mid-air collision or any other type of disaster should never send active bombs downward. This is true for conventional munitions as well as nuclear weapons. Nuclear bombs are supposed to be activated prior to release so that they can detonate. They are never supposed to be loaded in an armed state except for during combat missions. An inactive bomb should never get to the first fail safe, let alone the 2nd or 3rd.
I would be willing to bet that changes came about because the "almost" should have never been.
Were you being sarcastic? I have compiled thousands of pieces of code in the last 30 years. None of them have magically transformed into anything other than what I compiled. AI is not voodoo, magic, or anything else. Machine learning happens but is not that common. Do you realize how much code and processor power is required to teach something how to learn? If it was simply a matter of time, DOS today would be some AI code stealing money from bank accounts.
Come now, if I said only "won't" then someone would have preached about how it's not cost prohibitive. If I said only "can't" then technically I would be wrong. I did not think it important to write a dissertation on the merits of both arguments
If we dump CO2 underground, that CO2 does not sit in the atmosphere. Obviously it does not remove CO2 from the Universe, but our "air" and atmosphere is temporarily showing improvement.
If O2 levels drop to 20.5% human productivity goes down. This is a natural phenomenon. We heal slower, require more rest, and can not exert as much energy. At.5% it would be a measurable impact on human health and energy. Of course if we continue to slide downward mammals start to die at roughly 16%. Yes, that is a ways off, but the sloping curve has never gone upward in the last 40 years. (save nitpicking further about a single location in somewhere in the world that did show an increase on one day at one time).
If a well leaks it would depend on your proximity to the well blowing out and the size of the well and resultant leak. Fair that CO2 poisoning would occur in addition to Oxygen deprivation, the end result is the same for victims of either. Both would occur.
Your 5th point matches my closing paragraph does it not?
It's not easy, it's very expensive and time consuming. This is why I was rather generic in my response. It's kind of like the ole CO2 scrubbers. They made a mess, reduced efficiency, costs a whole lot of money, and required lots of maintenance.
In a technical sense you are correct that we "can" separate. In a business sense, you "can't".
As a few others already pointed out, there is to be no clamor. The problem of pump and dump does not change because of this, and the potential for more extreme problems grow.
Let me give an example to clarify. Landfills were seen as a great savior. Bury the trash, especially in colder climates and build ski resorts on top of the fills. Michigan did this. The first year was cool, a new village sprouted up around the fill and ski fans flocked in. Then the seepage contaminated the water supply of not just the small village, but water supplies for hundreds of thousands of suburbanites and it all closed down. Nobody wanted to ski in turd smelling snow, let alone live near it or drink the water from the areas around it.
The better solution would have been to extend and grow recycling operations, limit massive dumping by large companies to paid officials to look the other way, and help society be more aware of their impact. You know, kind of like we started to do in the early 70s and forgot about due to massive add campaigns and cheap toys.
What will pumping CO2 into the ground get us? Temporary reprieve from increasing CO2 levels (with thinning green areas to process that back in to Oxygen)? What happens if the well leaks? Massive deaths from O2 starvation?
Now if they could remove the O2 and put that back in the air and dump the remaining Carbon down the tubes, well in a few million years we'd have lots of diamonds. They won't or can't, so there is no use in investing lots of time and effort into this type of project.
Society needs to stop accepting bandaid fixes to problems that people are creating in order to make massive profits from society. The people making profits should be re-investing that into making society at least remain stable instead of constantly shitting in the wells.
I quoted quite a bit more than four words and an emoticon.
It is rather concerning that people believe that they are being "scientific" and rational when espousing the same beliefs as every religion. "you can't see it so it must be true" is not scientific. That comment gets rated +5 insightful, where a religious person providing their belief would get a -5 troll or flame bait rating.
I'm not against people having beliefs, I have my own just like we all do. I'm against people preaching their belief as scientific fact and using irrational methods of proving their "belief" to be correct.
You are confusing belief with theory. Theory is the basis of science. Belief is the realm of religion.
You are claiming that you can have a belief without a theory or visa-versa? Come now, you are better than that aren't you?
And if you are a two dimensional creature living in flatland, there is no way for you to directly prove that there exists a third dimension. Well unless some external force rotates you along an axis out of your two dimensional space.
Wow, that is a lot of broken thought. First, we are not 2 dimensional so your "what if we were" is nonsense. Second, isn't that exactly what Religion teaches? You can't prove it so it must be true?
Science is all about trying to explain things, not saying well "we don't know".
You don't understand science at all. What is the Scientific Method? We can't explain what we don't know scientifically, we can only describe within our ability to measure and detect. When we fall short (which we often do), we admit that we can't measure and detect well enough, and set about developing better tools and processes to do so.
If science did as you claim, every religion everywhere must be true. Every crack-pot theory ever described must also be true, so the world is flat and Columbus fell off the edge as predicted by "Scientists".
What is really happening is that people like you determine that you are so much better than those other scientists that your "beliefs" must be true. Then you set about chastising people that question those "beliefs". History repeats itself because people fail to observe that their actions are identical to their predecessors.
Slashdot Mirror
So the only possible action is complacency or surrender? Please shut the fuck up you shill!!
I have to turn a part of what you said upside down, because you hint at where I'll take it.
The only problem is that government is allowing corporations to push their agenda in the classroom.
Do you really truly believe this? I believe this is a Government agenda which we have seen growing for 50+ years with the removal of the classical education system and it's replacement with the communist industrial education system. Yes folks, this really happened.
Here is where you hint at the same meaning.
They'll be free from the propaganda and allowed to be creative and free. But, not the common man, because he can't afford freedom.
The wealthiest pushing these agendas don't use public schools. It's not just the execs at the MPAA and RIAA. This is the Kennedy, Rockefeller, the Bush, the Rothschild, etc.., families. The same people that own the banks, and are ramming their agenda down our Government to you and I.
The same people that are immune to taxes, immune to criminal investigation and prosecution, etc...
So to answer your last question, the answer is "no". There are shitbags in society, and shitbags will always be in society. Just like there are nice people in society and will always be nice people in society. The shitbags tend to step on everyone up until the point where society has to revolt against their control. Happened over and over through out history. We are nearing that point again, but it won't be the last time we see it. Human nature and psychology ensure that this pattern repeats.
Why? To destroy the business and make a couple people lots of money. This is what normally happens, but it should not be happening with Utilities (though Enron will tell you it's happened before with different circumstances).
When company after company does this with similar effect, you really can't believe it's just stupidity. To you and I, the decisions look stupid because we think about things at a different level. Execs are not stupid, they have a very different motivation for their decisions. In this case, they don't care about consumers or employees as has happened with hundreds of large companies.
Have you ever seen a mid-air collision? What do you think happens to anything on board a plane?
Are you confused because a mid-air collision is a type of crash?
Don't answer, it won't defend your position.
Every time MS releases a new Phone or Tablet all I can think of is the execs at Apple and Google saying "Big whoop wanna fight about it?"
Welcome to rhetoric!
Right to Work Law: Employer rights, anti-union rules, no rights for employes.
Citizens United: Allows "Corporations" rights of citizens. No benefit to citizens.
Patriot Act: Dismembers the US Constitution and is anti-patriotic.
Fusion Center: The area where information is distributed from one Government agency to another, not "fused".
I'm guessing that this "Civil Liberties & Privacy Officer" will figure out ways around our Civil Liberties and Privacy, publish misinformation if they get caught, and generate FUD to extend operations.
I was one of the last to wear the 6th Cavalry crossed cutlasses. The 6th was merged into the a support command (503rd or 513?), and our nickname for their badge was "The Flaming Assholes" (obviously not just due to the patch design). I always liked the "Screaming Eagles" of the 101st too.
The risks are very different first off. If I crash my computer I don't usually kill anyone, if I crash my double trailer on the freeway there is a good chance that people die.
Second, the fatigue is very different between mental jobs and manual labor. I agree that for the most part humans shut down after 8 hours. That said, Tech jobs are quite a bit like being an artist. You find a groove, and you can make magic. I have done a couple of 20 hour days in the past because A) I really really enjoyed the project I was working on, and B) I was in a groove and everything was snapping together. The 20 hour days are extremely rare, but I doubt I'm the only one that's had a couple of those moments.
The thing is, if you find your groove and work a 12 hour day the bosses need to make sure you get compensated. A 40 hour week does not give much time to rest, and a 50 hour week leads to burn out rather quickly. If your boss does not allow comp time, get the hell out!
Many managers learn who the workers are and never comp, often pushing the workers harder and burning them out quicker. As long as they get their bonus they don't care about the staff they have left next quarter.
Yeah yeah, no surprise to me.
Correct, I was incorrect. 82nd and Airborne training is at Bragg.
You are correct, and I was incorrect that it's the home of the 82nd Airborne (I was discharged 2 decades ago). I was not going to list any of the special ops, because Bragg's web page lists no Units that I could find, neither does Benning. Certain special operations units at Bragg 'may' be considered confidential (such as Delta).
You did not ready very well. In war time bombs should be active and I agree, but you are not flying over friendly space for very long. When training or transporting weapons during peace time or over your own territory, weapons should never be active.
Ft. Bragg is the home of the 101st Airborne division and is most surely a high value target, as is Ft. Benning, and Ft. Hood. There are very few Military bases not considered high value targets.
Just to make the NSA happy, this is public knowledge and is not classified or sensitive information.
I'm not sure you understand how these things are really designed to work. A Bomber crashing is supposed to be in the design scope of the munition. A mid-air collision or any other type of disaster should never send active bombs downward. This is true for conventional munitions as well as nuclear weapons. Nuclear bombs are supposed to be activated prior to release so that they can detonate. They are never supposed to be loaded in an armed state except for during combat missions. An inactive bomb should never get to the first fail safe, let alone the 2nd or 3rd.
I would be willing to bet that changes came about because the "almost" should have never been.
Were you being sarcastic? I have compiled thousands of pieces of code in the last 30 years. None of them have magically transformed into anything other than what I compiled. AI is not voodoo, magic, or anything else. Machine learning happens but is not that common. Do you realize how much code and processor power is required to teach something how to learn? If it was simply a matter of time, DOS today would be some AI code stealing money from bank accounts.
Hey wait a minute....
No wonder you are posting AC. *sigh* What is presented is not a solution you dolt! It does not address or touch the problem.
You make it sound like it was my idea..
How about not cherry-picking worst-case scenarios and really talking about solutions?
I hinted various solutions through my post. How about you read it and stop cherry picking what you want to bitch about?
Come now, if I said only "won't" then someone would have preached about how it's not cost prohibitive. If I said only "can't" then technically I would be wrong. I did not think it important to write a dissertation on the merits of both arguments
I was not wrong, you are trying to nitpick.
If we dump CO2 underground, that CO2 does not sit in the atmosphere. Obviously it does not remove CO2 from the Universe, but our "air" and atmosphere is temporarily showing improvement.
If O2 levels drop to 20.5% human productivity goes down. This is a natural phenomenon. We heal slower, require more rest, and can not exert as much energy. At .5% it would be a measurable impact on human health and energy. Of course if we continue to slide downward mammals start to die at roughly 16%. Yes, that is a ways off, but the sloping curve has never gone upward in the last 40 years. (save nitpicking further about a single location in somewhere in the world that did show an increase on one day at one time).
If a well leaks it would depend on your proximity to the well blowing out and the size of the well and resultant leak. Fair that CO2 poisoning would occur in addition to Oxygen deprivation, the end result is the same for victims of either. Both would occur.
Your 5th point matches my closing paragraph does it not?
It's not easy, it's very expensive and time consuming. This is why I was rather generic in my response. It's kind of like the ole CO2 scrubbers. They made a mess, reduced efficiency, costs a whole lot of money, and required lots of maintenance.
In a technical sense you are correct that we "can" separate. In a business sense, you "can't".
As a few others already pointed out, there is to be no clamor. The problem of pump and dump does not change because of this, and the potential for more extreme problems grow.
Let me give an example to clarify. Landfills were seen as a great savior. Bury the trash, especially in colder climates and build ski resorts on top of the fills. Michigan did this. The first year was cool, a new village sprouted up around the fill and ski fans flocked in. Then the seepage contaminated the water supply of not just the small village, but water supplies for hundreds of thousands of suburbanites and it all closed down. Nobody wanted to ski in turd smelling snow, let alone live near it or drink the water from the areas around it.
The better solution would have been to extend and grow recycling operations, limit massive dumping by large companies to paid officials to look the other way, and help society be more aware of their impact. You know, kind of like we started to do in the early 70s and forgot about due to massive add campaigns and cheap toys.
What will pumping CO2 into the ground get us? Temporary reprieve from increasing CO2 levels (with thinning green areas to process that back in to Oxygen)? What happens if the well leaks? Massive deaths from O2 starvation?
Now if they could remove the O2 and put that back in the air and dump the remaining Carbon down the tubes, well in a few million years we'd have lots of diamonds. They won't or can't, so there is no use in investing lots of time and effort into this type of project.
Society needs to stop accepting bandaid fixes to problems that people are creating in order to make massive profits from society. The people making profits should be re-investing that into making society at least remain stable instead of constantly shitting in the wells.
I quoted quite a bit more than four words and an emoticon.
It is rather concerning that people believe that they are being "scientific" and rational when espousing the same beliefs as every religion. "you can't see it so it must be true" is not scientific. That comment gets rated +5 insightful, where a religious person providing their belief would get a -5 troll or flame bait rating.
I'm not against people having beliefs, I have my own just like we all do. I'm against people preaching their belief as scientific fact and using irrational methods of proving their "belief" to be correct.
I made up your own quotes? Okay pal, if you say so. I guess your original point makes much more sense now.
You are confusing belief with theory. Theory is the basis of science. Belief is the realm of religion.
You are claiming that you can have a belief without a theory or visa-versa? Come now, you are better than that aren't you?
And if you are a two dimensional creature living in flatland, there is no way for you to directly prove that there exists a third dimension. Well unless some external force rotates you along an axis out of your two dimensional space.
Wow, that is a lot of broken thought. First, we are not 2 dimensional so your "what if we were" is nonsense. Second, isn't that exactly what Religion teaches? You can't prove it so it must be true?
Science is all about trying to explain things, not saying well "we don't know".
You don't understand science at all. What is the Scientific Method? We can't explain what we don't know scientifically, we can only describe within our ability to measure and detect. When we fall short (which we often do), we admit that we can't measure and detect well enough, and set about developing better tools and processes to do so.
If science did as you claim, every religion everywhere must be true. Every crack-pot theory ever described must also be true, so the world is flat and Columbus fell off the edge as predicted by "Scientists".
What is really happening is that people like you determine that you are so much better than those other scientists that your "beliefs" must be true. Then you set about chastising people that question those "beliefs". History repeats itself because people fail to observe that their actions are identical to their predecessors.
No kidding, it would be difficult for a level 37 bureaucrat to complete.