"if you don't encrypt and a certain file gets flagged as kiddie-pron then it's extremely simple for google to hash files and plant that illegal file on any political enemies' backups and call the FBI."
I'm glad someone else thinks like I do, but It's a fallacy that if you don't win the popular vote that somehow you don't "have the support of the American people"... Yes, you do, just not *all* of them. You'll never have the support of *all* of the people. It doesn't work that way. I'm so sick and tired of people saying "not that it matters, I'm not complaining, but Trump didn't win the popular vote"... My response to them is always: SFW!!!! If it doesn't matter, WHY ARE YOU BRINGING IT UP?!? Do you even CONSTITUTION?!? It's a dishonest debate trick. Period.
Here's something that doesn't click with a lot of people: The electoral system is 50 separate State (plus 1 for DC) elections, with the weight of the individual elections given more "points" by merit of their populations when it comes time to tally up the winner. So in effect, the popular vote is only a statistic in the end, but not a deciding factor other than the popular votes only matter *within each state*, to show who won each *state*. Now, after that, you tally up your points. This is an equitable and fair way to involve each state without disenfranchising the lower-populated states, otherwise it would be California, Texas, Florida, New York deciding the elections with their "winner take all" point assignment to electoral votes. If I were to make a change to shut the "popular vote" idiots up, I'd make every state apportion points via the amounts voted for each candidate, and the winner is the one who reaches the appropriate electoral vote goal or 51% of the electoral votes. People have no problem with frickin March Madness or Baseball or Superbowl Playoffs, but can't seem to get on board with the Electoral College... It boggles my mind.
If anything, the greater crime is the "faithless electors" and primary vote rigging. Everybody bitches about how not having elections via the popular vote is somehow the "greatest threat" to democracy, when in reality it's the people within the process voting against their electorate's wishes and the Party procedural hijinks that the Dems used to lock Bernie out (while "legal" in implementation but quite honestly unfair to Bernie if you really objectively look at the whole thing). That, and this idea that if you're not a career politician that somehow you're "unfit" to govern... I'm sorry but that's just elitist hogwash. You can't open a newspaper today without seeing examples of how corrupt "career" politicians truly are.
Ooo poor baby. Here let me share my birth certificate conspiracy theory...
That was originally introduced by the Clinton campaign? What about the "Russian" conspiracy? Who pushed that narrative first? Right... It was the Clinton campaign again... Are we starting to sense a pattern?
If one quarter of the people of the planet said "Galactic Overlord Xenu is real", would you believe them? What about if one quarter of the population of the world said there was a flying spaghetti monster in space? What gives the Abrahamic religions a pass? It is not wrong to point out who the enemy is. It is not racist, as Islam is a religious political ideology, and a dangerous one at that.
Q: Do you know the difference between a "religion" and a "cult"?
A: The number of followers.
It's not prejudicial to say that Islam does have a problem with violence, nor is it bigotry or racism, for that matter. It's just stating facts. And Islam is probably what will force the world into WW3. If you really want to get technical, the crusades were "world wars" in their own right, 25 retaliatory battles of Christian Europe pushing back the Islamic jihadists over a couple hundred years, compared to over 500 separate relentless Jihadi battles into Europe over the course of 1300 years? Please don't tell me that Jihad is not a thing, you'll be immediately be laughed at by everyone...
Religion is an mental illness taught to people (usually starting at childhood) for the purpose of control. The weak minded or those incapable of actual logical acceptance of their mortality (and reality) perpetuate this sickness/insanity throughout history. What's more is that it doesn't matter the faith, the "faithful" all have committed horrible crimes in the names of their gods, whomever they be. This has to end.
Religion uses many tricks and fallacies to convince people to do the most horrible things, but when you mix religion and politics, then you get an even greater power dynamic. Now you get complete control. This has been repeated over the 5+ thousand years that we've had civilizations.
I think for a lot of people, in that context, "hanged" is more of an action, where "hung" is descriptive of the action performed. I always think of hanged only in the sense that a person was hung (in a passive past tense) or hanged ( in an active past tense) by someone (including that very person). An object other than a living thing would be hung, not hanged. "The stockings were hung by the chimney with care..." But... this would be accurate in a sentence because it "sounds" right to the ear:
"Bob hanged himself out of sheer sadness over his lost love, but he only hung for a few moments before he realized he wanted to live, and struggled to free himself." The funny thing is that you could use hanged/hung in either spot, but you wouldn't want to use two hangeds or two hungs in one sentence.
Sometimes it's about what "sounds" right as well, ringing back to the "tick tock vs tock tick" rule about how things sound in English.
They're wrong. They invalidated their own research by disregarding the results they specifically said:
"The researchers did find that young people -- specifically people in their twenties -- worked less, but noted that Iran never had a high level of employment among young people"
BR>
Taking from the productive and giving to the non-productive and did not earn it, is STEALING, and to a lesser extent, slavery, no matter what "moral face" you paint onto it.
To lay claim to the fruits of a person's labor and life/time is the exact definition of slavery. You're claiming ownership of THEM and their labor, which equates to their time, which equates to the product of their entire being... their life, which everyone only has a finite amount of. This kind of fascist utopian bullshit makes me SICK.
UBI = Slavery on a mass scale by the government/powerful. PERIOD.
I agree, considering how left the scales have skewn in the last 20 years, Bill Clinton would almost be considered a conservative in my book. He was very business minded like his predecessor JFK, and even supported some ideas conservatives have been seriously pushing to be reinstated (like work requirements for welfare recipients).
He'd probably be looked at much more fondly if he wasn't such a dumbass lying poonhound.
There's a fundamental flaw in your reasoning as your statement is written: "Forcing everyone to work" is not slavery.
People are "forced" to work to live, just like any other creature on this planet must do... That is not slavery, that's called surviving, or "making your own way", or whatever responsible people call "living life" or "making a life for yourself". By saying that "Republicans.... want to force everyone to work..." is your way of implying that they're slaveowners and we are all their slaves, which is totally incorrect by any meaning of the word.
Slavery effectively is the claiming ownership of a person's life and labor, without due compensation. If you pay someone to work a due compensation (sorry, but "due compensation" is inferred to be a fair wage for the job, not some Chinese sweatshop type situation...) for said labor, then it's a contract between the worker and the employer, not slavery. Claiming ownership of someone's life, in any circumstance however, is actual slavery.
@alvinrod: Dude, you GET IT.
In reality, it's not about left or right, liberal or conservative, it's about authoritarianism vs freedom.
UBI isn't freedom. It's a step above slavery, where you are leashed to the state by the invisible tether of income, but it might as well be slavery in practice.
It's the ultimate expression of authority OVER the individual. You control their income, you control THEM. Ideology of the ruling class be damned. It's still slavery.
Entitlement? To quote Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
I'm a child of a WW2/Korean Conflict aged parents. I'm 46 years old, I am not an unintelligent moron, and amazingly, I'm a Trump voter. I think you have a lot to learn about entitlement, (and your opinion of intelligence and who's an arsehole) because it's not what you think it means. Entitlement means you gave up something to be entitled for it. As for the despising of younger generations actions and mentalities, some of it is WELL EARNED. The millennials now (my children's age and older) have a SENSE of entitlement, but no actual *entitlement* to anything if they haven't sacrificed and paid for it. If they have, fine. But this whole "it's not fair" mentality has got to go. My generation and older has been trying to give them a free clue: "Life's not fair. Suck it up, buttercups. Do something about it that makes sense, otherwise you're part of the problem." They fail to understand simple concepts like economics and personal responsibility, and all seem to still share the same "kids in the toybox" mentality of "share everything, and throw a tantrum if you don't get your way".
People like these millenial/antifa children are the reason we have idiots like Bernie Sanders preaching his economically ignorant socialist promises running around, and AntiFA (Anti-First Amendment is more like it) people rioting, pepper spraying, smashing windows and burning shit. Don't expect to be taken seriously if you defend their idiocy, because the adults in the room are tired of it. My generation didn't have everything handed to them "on a golden platter". We actually understand what a work ethic is, and what sacrifices are.
People can't even agree on gender, what makes you think we're going to understand how the mind works? We'll have the first TRANS-SEXUAL AI in 2048!!! weeeeeeee!!!
ORRRRrrrr.... we start by getting America to start forcing women to be circumcised. Almost no women get circumcised in this country, whereas a good 50% or more men are, by women who sit and claim "it's my body" when the pro-lifers object to abortion, but don't afford men the same rights to their own bodies and have mothers saying "It's MY child"... No, it's their child, but not THEIR body.
I am all FOR women being circumcised until the barbaric practice is stopped on innocent, defenseless men, all in the name of maternal laziness and "aesthetics".
OK, Anon... You obviously have an inaccurate and biased viewpoint as to the purpose of the Electoral College.
The Presidency is not decided by popular vote because it is not a purely democratic system. We live in a Republican form of government which uses representatives to offset the "mob rule" of a "pure" democracy, and gives a voice to the smaller states via the Electoral College. I learned this in school back in the 80's, and as far as I know, condescending, misguided, biased "liberalsplaining" of history aside, it has not changed.
As to your allegation of "an unfit presidency voted by mass hysteria", you're right! Hillary is totally unfit to be President, given her long and storied (if not scandal-ridden) history of lies, graft, incompetent administrative actions (Remember Chris Stevens?) and all-around general sleaze-bagginess in politics.
Your explanation of "an unfit presidency voted by mass hysteria" DOES apply in this case, because the Electoral College WORKED, it prevented "an unfit presidency voted by mass hysteria" by allowing the smaller population States to have a voice, not just a few states like California, Illinois, New York, Florida and Texas running the election by sheer mass of voters, thereby preventing the most unfit candidate in American history to become President: Hillary Rodham Clinton.
There was hysteria in this election. There was corruption in this election. Just look at all the media and how they collaborated to influence the election with "fake news" and outrageous claims about how Trump was "evil" and "a sexual predator", and "literally Hitler". Look at the collusion and corruption within the Democrat party, who was anything BUT Democratic when after all the insider party "Superdelegates" were counted, Hillary won, when she was getting roundly beaten by an old Socialist hack named Bernie Sanders in the voting booths of the Democrat conventions! Look at the liberal left "hysteria" about how Hillary was already ASSUMED to be the "First Woman President", and that if you didn't vote for her you were "a sexist bigot".
But what you were told NOT to look at was her history of lies, theft, possible connections to some pretty shady deaths over the years, the corruption, the lies, the war hawk who was openly antagonistic and led an administration that toppled regimes that were no threat to us, and led to countless pointless deaths, and destabilized the entire Middle East, but for WHAT?!?....
Yes, my friend, the Electoral College DID prevent an unfit president, and I, and my fellow Trump supporters... THANK OUR FOREFATHERS for devising such a system to prevent an unmitigated disaster that was Hillary Clinton in the White House.
Is Apple Pay. They don't want people using the headphone jack credit card readers that come with other payment services with their devices. They want people to go through Apple Pay so they get their 30% cut..... It's greed. Plain and simple.
Slashdot Mirror
Soy. Look at the harmful effects from soy.
2400 baud? You mean the BBS or internet Dialup circa late 80's? Oh yeah, NOBODY used that... lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... PEOPLE WILL DIE!
But by then precedents will have been set by our generation and the ones before that they will not be able to overcome
"if you don't encrypt and a certain file gets flagged as kiddie-pron then it's extremely simple for google to hash files and plant that illegal file on any political enemies' backups and call the FBI."
There, I FTFY.
I'm glad someone else thinks like I do, but It's a fallacy that if you don't win the popular vote that somehow you don't "have the support of the American people"... Yes, you do, just not *all* of them. You'll never have the support of *all* of the people. It doesn't work that way. I'm so sick and tired of people saying "not that it matters, I'm not complaining, but Trump didn't win the popular vote"... My response to them is always: SFW!!!! If it doesn't matter, WHY ARE YOU BRINGING IT UP?!? Do you even CONSTITUTION?!? It's a dishonest debate trick. Period.
Here's something that doesn't click with a lot of people: The electoral system is 50 separate State (plus 1 for DC) elections, with the weight of the individual elections given more "points" by merit of their populations when it comes time to tally up the winner. So in effect, the popular vote is only a statistic in the end, but not a deciding factor other than the popular votes only matter *within each state*, to show who won each *state*. Now, after that, you tally up your points. This is an equitable and fair way to involve each state without disenfranchising the lower-populated states, otherwise it would be California, Texas, Florida, New York deciding the elections with their "winner take all" point assignment to electoral votes. If I were to make a change to shut the "popular vote" idiots up, I'd make every state apportion points via the amounts voted for each candidate, and the winner is the one who reaches the appropriate electoral vote goal or 51% of the electoral votes. People have no problem with frickin March Madness or Baseball or Superbowl Playoffs, but can't seem to get on board with the Electoral College... It boggles my mind.
If anything, the greater crime is the "faithless electors" and primary vote rigging. Everybody bitches about how not having elections via the popular vote is somehow the "greatest threat" to democracy, when in reality it's the people within the process voting against their electorate's wishes and the Party procedural hijinks that the Dems used to lock Bernie out (while "legal" in implementation but quite honestly unfair to Bernie if you really objectively look at the whole thing). That, and this idea that if you're not a career politician that somehow you're "unfit" to govern... I'm sorry but that's just elitist hogwash. You can't open a newspaper today without seeing examples of how corrupt "career" politicians truly are.
Ooo poor baby. Here let me share my birth certificate conspiracy theory...
That was originally introduced by the Clinton campaign? What about the "Russian" conspiracy? Who pushed that narrative first? Right... It was the Clinton campaign again... Are we starting to sense a pattern?
If one quarter of the people of the planet said "Galactic Overlord Xenu is real", would you believe them? What about if one quarter of the population of the world said there was a flying spaghetti monster in space? What gives the Abrahamic religions a pass? It is not wrong to point out who the enemy is. It is not racist, as Islam is a religious political ideology, and a dangerous one at that.
Q: Do you know the difference between a "religion" and a "cult"?
A: The number of followers.
It's not prejudicial to say that Islam does have a problem with violence, nor is it bigotry or racism, for that matter. It's just stating facts. And Islam is probably what will force the world into WW3. If you really want to get technical, the crusades were "world wars" in their own right, 25 retaliatory battles of Christian Europe pushing back the Islamic jihadists over a couple hundred years, compared to over 500 separate relentless Jihadi battles into Europe over the course of 1300 years? Please don't tell me that Jihad is not a thing, you'll be immediately be laughed at by everyone...
Religion is an mental illness taught to people (usually starting at childhood) for the purpose of control. The weak minded or those incapable of actual logical acceptance of their mortality (and reality) perpetuate this sickness/insanity throughout history. What's more is that it doesn't matter the faith, the "faithful" all have committed horrible crimes in the names of their gods, whomever they be. This has to end.
Religion uses many tricks and fallacies to convince people to do the most horrible things, but when you mix religion and politics, then you get an even greater power dynamic. Now you get complete control. This has been repeated over the 5+ thousand years that we've had civilizations.
It must be wiped out.
I think for a lot of people, in that context, "hanged" is more of an action, where "hung" is descriptive of the action performed. I always think of hanged only in the sense that a person was hung (in a passive past tense) or hanged ( in an active past tense) by someone (including that very person). An object other than a living thing would be hung, not hanged. "The stockings were hung by the chimney with care..." But... this would be accurate in a sentence because it "sounds" right to the ear:
"Bob hanged himself out of sheer sadness over his lost love, but he only hung for a few moments before he realized he wanted to live, and struggled to free himself." The funny thing is that you could use hanged/hung in either spot, but you wouldn't want to use two hangeds or two hungs in one sentence.
Sometimes it's about what "sounds" right as well, ringing back to the "tick tock vs tock tick" rule about how things sound in English.
They're wrong. They invalidated their own research by disregarding the results they specifically said:
"The researchers did find that young people -- specifically people in their twenties -- worked less, but noted that Iran never had a high level of employment among young people"
BR> Taking from the productive and giving to the non-productive and did not earn it, is STEALING, and to a lesser extent, slavery, no matter what "moral face" you paint onto it.
To lay claim to the fruits of a person's labor and life/time is the exact definition of slavery. You're claiming ownership of THEM and their labor, which equates to their time, which equates to the product of their entire being... their life, which everyone only has a finite amount of. This kind of fascist utopian bullshit makes me SICK.
UBI = Slavery on a mass scale by the government/powerful. PERIOD.
I agree, considering how left the scales have skewn in the last 20 years, Bill Clinton would almost be considered a conservative in my book. He was very business minded like his predecessor JFK, and even supported some ideas conservatives have been seriously pushing to be reinstated (like work requirements for welfare recipients). He'd probably be looked at much more fondly if he wasn't such a dumbass lying poonhound.
There's a fundamental flaw in your reasoning as your statement is written: "Forcing everyone to work" is not slavery.
.... want to force everyone to work..." is your way of implying that they're slaveowners and we are all their slaves, which is totally incorrect by any meaning of the word.
People are "forced" to work to live, just like any other creature on this planet must do... That is not slavery, that's called surviving, or "making your own way", or whatever responsible people call "living life" or "making a life for yourself". By saying that "Republicans
Slavery effectively is the claiming ownership of a person's life and labor, without due compensation. If you pay someone to work a due compensation (sorry, but "due compensation" is inferred to be a fair wage for the job, not some Chinese sweatshop type situation...) for said labor, then it's a contract between the worker and the employer, not slavery. Claiming ownership of someone's life, in any circumstance however, is actual slavery.
Stop being a BernieBot and think for yourself.
"I like where this is going... giggity, giggity, gig-a-dee!" - Quagmire
GO AWAY! BATIN'!
@alvinrod: Dude, you GET IT. In reality, it's not about left or right, liberal or conservative, it's about authoritarianism vs freedom. UBI isn't freedom. It's a step above slavery, where you are leashed to the state by the invisible tether of income, but it might as well be slavery in practice. It's the ultimate expression of authority OVER the individual. You control their income, you control THEM. Ideology of the ruling class be damned. It's still slavery.
Entitlement? To quote Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
I'm a child of a WW2/Korean Conflict aged parents. I'm 46 years old, I am not an unintelligent moron, and amazingly, I'm a Trump voter. I think you have a lot to learn about entitlement, (and your opinion of intelligence and who's an arsehole) because it's not what you think it means. Entitlement means you gave up something to be entitled for it. As for the despising of younger generations actions and mentalities, some of it is WELL EARNED. The millennials now (my children's age and older) have a SENSE of entitlement, but no actual *entitlement* to anything if they haven't sacrificed and paid for it. If they have, fine. But this whole "it's not fair" mentality has got to go. My generation and older has been trying to give them a free clue: "Life's not fair. Suck it up, buttercups. Do something about it that makes sense, otherwise you're part of the problem." They fail to understand simple concepts like economics and personal responsibility, and all seem to still share the same "kids in the toybox" mentality of "share everything, and throw a tantrum if you don't get your way".
People like these millenial/antifa children are the reason we have idiots like Bernie Sanders preaching his economically ignorant socialist promises running around, and AntiFA (Anti-First Amendment is more like it) people rioting, pepper spraying, smashing windows and burning shit. Don't expect to be taken seriously if you defend their idiocy, because the adults in the room are tired of it. My generation didn't have everything handed to them "on a golden platter". We actually understand what a work ethic is, and what sacrifices are.
Comments like these are EXACTLY why Trump won.
You mean the alt-right neo-cortex-filter? Because everyone knows that the alt-left neo-nazi-cortex-filter is FAR superior at fake news! /sarc
People can't even agree on gender, what makes you think we're going to understand how the mind works? We'll have the first TRANS-SEXUAL AI in 2048!!! weeeeeeee!!!
Amen to that. Why not have them give Harry Harrison's "The Stainless Steel Rat" series a try... satirical science fiction FTW!
ORRRRrrrr.... we start by getting America to start forcing women to be circumcised. Almost no women get circumcised in this country, whereas a good 50% or more men are, by women who sit and claim "it's my body" when the pro-lifers object to abortion, but don't afford men the same rights to their own bodies and have mothers saying "It's MY child"... No, it's their child, but not THEIR body. I am all FOR women being circumcised until the barbaric practice is stopped on innocent, defenseless men, all in the name of maternal laziness and "aesthetics".
You're right, they were serious MS shills. It's sad though, because OS/2 2.11 was the bomb... it was Windows 2000 like 7 years early.
OK, Anon... You obviously have an inaccurate and biased viewpoint as to the purpose of the Electoral College.
The Presidency is not decided by popular vote because it is not a purely democratic system. We live in a Republican form of government which uses representatives to offset the "mob rule" of a "pure" democracy, and gives a voice to the smaller states via the Electoral College. I learned this in school back in the 80's, and as far as I know, condescending, misguided, biased "liberalsplaining" of history aside, it has not changed.
As to your allegation of "an unfit presidency voted by mass hysteria", you're right! Hillary is totally unfit to be President, given her long and storied (if not scandal-ridden) history of lies, graft, incompetent administrative actions (Remember Chris Stevens?) and all-around general sleaze-bagginess in politics.
Your explanation of "an unfit presidency voted by mass hysteria" DOES apply in this case, because the Electoral College WORKED, it prevented "an unfit presidency voted by mass hysteria" by allowing the smaller population States to have a voice, not just a few states like California, Illinois, New York, Florida and Texas running the election by sheer mass of voters, thereby preventing the most unfit candidate in American history to become President: Hillary Rodham Clinton.
There was hysteria in this election. There was corruption in this election. Just look at all the media and how they collaborated to influence the election with "fake news" and outrageous claims about how Trump was "evil" and "a sexual predator", and "literally Hitler". Look at the collusion and corruption within the Democrat party, who was anything BUT Democratic when after all the insider party "Superdelegates" were counted, Hillary won, when she was getting roundly beaten by an old Socialist hack named Bernie Sanders in the voting booths of the Democrat conventions! Look at the liberal left "hysteria" about how Hillary was already ASSUMED to be the "First Woman President", and that if you didn't vote for her you were "a sexist bigot".
But what you were told NOT to look at was her history of lies, theft, possible connections to some pretty shady deaths over the years, the corruption, the lies, the war hawk who was openly antagonistic and led an administration that toppled regimes that were no threat to us, and led to countless pointless deaths, and destabilized the entire Middle East, but for WHAT?!?....
Yes, my friend, the Electoral College DID prevent an unfit president, and I, and my fellow Trump supporters... THANK OUR FOREFATHERS for devising such a system to prevent an unmitigated disaster that was Hillary Clinton in the White House.
Is Apple Pay. They don't want people using the headphone jack credit card readers that come with other payment services with their devices. They want people to go through Apple Pay so they get their 30% cut..... It's greed. Plain and simple.
Or simply filter it through a content firewall... just a thought.
That's like ... 16 walls!