If you find they are in undersupply in the places where most of the engineering jobs are
Are they? I've got one, so I don't really pay attention to that anymore:-)
If you don't want to pay attention to data from outside your personal experience you don't have much business discussing extinctions do you?
Moreover, even if your experience were typical, remember that for every man like you there is another displaced somewhere. Many US engineers get Chinese wives. That's what you're recommending. However, along with the explosive economic growth and high male to female birth ratio for the last couple of decades, I'd say you
are recommending a pattern of behavior that could result in warfare.
Where are the fertile females in over supply and where are they in under supply?
If you find they are in undersupply in the places where most of the engineering jobs are, it doesn't matter whether every last engineer gets married and has children: There are tradeoffs that mitigate against his having high quality offspring compared to a male with a wide array of choices in his area.
In the Wired storyThe Geek Syndrome Bryna Siegel has hypothesized the explosion in autism rates is due to:
One provocative hypothesis that might account for the rise of spectrum disorders in technically adept communities like Silicon Valley, some geneticists speculate, is an increase in assortative mating. Superficially, assortative mating is the blond gentleman who prefers blondes; the hyperverbal intellectual who meets her soul mate in the therapist's waiting room. There are additional pressures and incentives for autistic people to find companionship - if they wish to do so - with someone who is also on the spectrum. Grandin writes, "Marriages work out best when two people with autism marry or when a person marries a handicapped or eccentric spouse.... They are attracted because their intellects work on a similar wavelength."
That's not to say that geeks, even autistic ones, are attracted only to other geeks. Compensatory unions of opposites also thrive along the continuum, and in the last 10 years, geekitude has become sexy and associated with financial success. The lone-wolf programmer may be the research director of a major company, managing the back end of an IT empire at a comfortable remove from the actual clients. Says Bryna Siegel, author of The World of the Autistic Child and director of the PDD clinic at UCSF, "In another historical time, these men would have become monks, developing new ink for early printing presses. Suddenly they're making $150,000 a year with stock options. They're reproducing at a much higher rate."
Now, whether you accept this hypothesis for the eitology of autism or not, the subtext is that it is acceptable to hypothesize that certain genetic factors contribute to software engineering skills.
So, let's go with that in the context of "the extinction of the American programmer" and ask ourselves what the real cost of reproduction is for American programmers vs programmers from societies where programmers have marriages arranged with women of comparable educational and socioeconomic background with extended family support (frequently with someone in the extended family providing food direct from the clan's farm) for children.
Societies like India.
You can rest assured that the more an American excells at programming the lower his odds of reproducing are for the simple reason that no matter where he works he is in a male saturated environment with a high cost of living. A very very few make it really really rich and have a couple of kids, yes. Maybe there are a few Orthodox Jews, Mormons or traditionalist Catholics and have some cultural protections of their fertility.
But on the whole, the last cohort of engineers to have any sort of reproductive success were those that were born before 1950 and were therefore in a position to enjoy affordable real estate in combination with being in a position to ride the shockwave of the baby boom which came just after they were positioned to avail themselves of all that cheap labor (and nice nubile female fertility).
If you go to a typical office on Wall Street or Madison Avenue or some law firm in Washington D.C. you will find professional men who are just as dedicated as the most dedicated programmer -- with a huge difference: They are surrounded by young fertile women. New York City has one of the highest female to male ratios in the world.
There's a eugenics program going on in the US alright -- or should I say pogrom.
From 1996-1998, 28% of
new hiring for programmer
jobs
went to H-1b workers. That rose to 50% in 1999 and
according to some expert estimates, 90% in 2001.
As a result, by 2002, there
were over 463,000 H-1b workers employed in US
information technology programming jobs--a job
category with fewer than 3 million workers in total.
(And that figure doesn't include people who recently used guest worker programs to obtain green cards and workers using other guest worker visas.)
The iterated PD is a different game than the PD and it is in fact more "in the spirit" of natural science than is the PD where there can be no memory of what opponents have done. Indeed, the way these guys "abused" the iterated PD is "in the spirit" of natural science since it gets to the heart of something all evolutionary biologists now accept: kin selection.
Genes are given before life. They affect the way memories are used in exactly the same sense that algorithms given before play in the iterated prisoner's dilemma affect the way records of opponenets' moves are used:
Yeah, that's not the Prisoner's Dilemma. Or even the Iterated PD
It is perfectly legitimate iterated PD. There is nothing in the rules of iterated PD that says records of moves cannot be kept and acted on. Indeed, that's precisely the idea of the iterated PD as explicitly stated.
Southamptom entries, on the other hand, are complex, sneaky, and cheating against (perhaps unwritten, but nonetheless agreed-upon) rules. They're ugly. They only prove that backstabbing cheating bastards may defeat just-and-fair if the referee is looking the other way for a moment.
No -- they also prove that the unwritten but nonetheless agree-upon rules are not allowing for kin selection. By not allowing for kin selection you are violating another and more important layer of unwritten, but nonetheless agreed-up rules: That PD tournaments be relevant. Perhaps its time to write down these more important rules of the PD tournaments so that the protean nature of the PD is demonstrated between levels of selection, as described by Hamilton.
The article shows how talented but morally challenged techies are becoming stooges of 'spammers, con artists, and other criminals.'
And it will only get worse so long as "legitimate" authorities continue to appeal to morality rather than direct self interest in order to keep hackers from turning into crackers. The only thing an appeal to morality can do in the present situation of depressed wages for hackers is effectively run a eugenics program where the most morally impressionable hackers fail to reproduce. If you happen to like morality however you might call this a dysgenics program.
This is a clever demonstration of kin selection among groups of competing algorithms.
A mathematical treatment of population genetics in groups was given by W. D. Hamilton in "Innate Social Aptitudes of Man". In the last sentence of that paper, Hamilton, the originator of modern kin selection theory, states:
One hears that game theorists, trying to persuade people to play even two-person games like 'Prisoner's Dilemma', often encounter exasperated remarks like: 'There ought to be a law against such games!' Some of the main points of this paper can be summarized as an answer to this comment: that often, in real life, there is a law, and we can see why, and that sadly we also see the protean nature of this Dilemma, which, when suppressed at one level, gathers its strength at another.
What Hamilton is referring to is the fact that in any structure of components vs composite, there is the opportunity to defect. An individual gene can defect against the organism within which it resides via, say, meiotic drive. An individual may defect against his tribe made up of his close relatives. A tribe may defect against the others making up a nation. A nation may defect against others making up a geographic race. A geographic race may defect against others making up humanity as a whole.
It is indeed a dilemma but it isn't without a rigorous treatement within genetic theory.
Steve Sailer has written an an excellent review of the politically touchy issue of ethnic nepotism given from Hamilton's group selective perspective.
When asked why he has chosen himself as the seed of all future Harvard clones, Professor Dershowitz responded, "Cloning is evil. Someone must stop others from cloning themselves and the answer is a worldwide army of Alan Dershowitz's working together to stop this scourge in its tracks."
A greatful world thanks Professor Dershowitz for choosing himself to shoulder this heavy burden, as only he can.
A leftist Canadian whose name escapes me at the moment, has been promoting the "propaganda" that the 1932-1934 Ukranian famine was largely a hoax of fascists and certainly nowhere near 8 million Ukranians were starved to death by Stalin's kommisars.
He has not been prosecuted although others have been held without charges in Canada as "national security threats" due to their questioning the "6 million Jews" figure of the German National Socialist period.
It is arguable that the Ukranian famine resulted in the hysterical reaction of the German people -- and that therefore it is more important to the public peace to remember that famine than the subsequent deaths of Jews under National Socialism.
The earlier in the process the easier it is to have an influence on the legislative language resulting from it. Its obvious, for example, that this legislation should be separate from the human trafficing legislation regardless of the merits of either.
Secondly, the article you claim offers a "good" explanation of the issues doesn't cover some of the central issues about such legislation. One of the more obvious issues is what principle is used to select which "identifiable groups" are protected and which are not protected from "hate propaganda". As it stands it smacks of a kind of inverse bill of attainder more than anything principled. If I can somehow get my favorite group protected under this umbrella but you can't get yours protected, why should your group not "hate" my group?
What when people start saying, "Kill all the lawyers."?
You might want to check out datalog programming in XSB. XSB uses "tabling", which is a form of memoization of prior calls, to optimize datalog programming.
In more mathematical terms OO is typically functional whereas predicates are typically relational. The Object-Relational "impedance mismatch" is little more. With all the enegy poured into OO programming -- particularly collection classes -- you'd think people would wake up to the idea that functions are a special kind of relation (N:1 mapping, rather than N:M) and that therefore maybe you should just try to optimize relational programming so that you get collections for free and functional programming optimization will fall out naturally.
I've been watching the way relational calculus has been studiously ignored by both academia and industry for over 20 years now. Date and Darwen make some noise about recognizing that SQL's foundation is the application of predicate calculus to set theory but don't really do much of anything that would be recognizable to Pierce, Russell or Whitehead. Moreover, their "manifestos" about things like the object-relational paradigm don't do much to get to the heart of the issue from first principles.
Almost all the Object Oriented stuff people layer on predicates are,
at best, an ad hoc, and poor, means of optimizing execution speed.
Let me explain.
One of the principles of polymorphism is that the same method has the
same abstract meaning regardless of the kind of object. A predicate
considered as a method subsumes such polymorphism by simply trying the
various possible implementations of the method and committing to only
those that succeed. If more than one succeeds then so be it -- that's
the whole idea of relations as opposed to functions.
So, one reason you want all this OO stuff is the inheritance
hierarchies keep you from going through all possible interpretations
of
a given method when the vast majority of them will fail for a given
object.
Another, related, problem is that inheritance provides defaults
without requiring a lot of thinking on the part of the computer. What
I mean by "thinking" here is the sort of thing that is done by
statistical imputation of missing data via algorithms like expectation
maximization (EM) or multi-relational data mining via inductive logic
programming.
So, the other reason you want all this OO stuff is so you can avoid
mining a background database to provide reasonable defaults for
various aspects of the data.
Some might be concerned that over-riding isn't absolute in such a system -- that you don't absolutely block, say, more generic methods when you have more specific ones present, and they're right. You don't block those methods -- you lower their priority by lowering
the probability of those implementations via the statistical methods of imputation and/or induction. In a microthreading environment they most likely won't get
any resources allocated to them before other higher priority
implementations have succeeded. In a single threaded/depth-first
environment they will be down the list of desired alternatives -- but
they won't be discarded until something equivalent to a prolog cut
operation kills them off.
However, and this is the important point, the work that has been
expended toward OO facilities has vastly outstripped the effort that
which has been put toward more parsimonious ways of optimizing
predicate systems.
One of the better predicate calculus systems out there -- more promising due to its use of tabling to avoid infinite regress on head-recursive definitions and its optimization of queries using some fairly general theorems of predicate calculus -- is XSB. It has an interface to odbc and a direct interface to Oracle, but it would be better if it had something like a recoverable virtual memory substrate to support its roll-back semantics.
If this is impractical because your business has grown to this point, you are no longer an individual.
The Delcaration of Independence's first paragraph says:
one
people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another
In the present circumstances, the signatories to the Declaration of Independence would consider you a traitor and have you hanged by the neck until dead for one very obvious reason:
The moment the second man added his signature to the Declaration of Independence according to you it was invalidated because when individuals act as a group they lose their right to self-determination.
As Benjamin Franklin said during the meeting where the Founders signed the Declaration of Independence:
We must indeed all hang together, or most assuredly we will all hang separately.
When we are living under the direct guns of tyranny -- not separated by a difficult journey, such as was the ocean in 1776, and without leaders of much material substance to stand with us, such as were the Founders -- the consequences of the treason such as yours are all the more serious.
And what the FUCK does any of this have to do with "bootleg radio stations?"
It has everything to do with it only almost 70 years too late. The Telecommunications Act of 1934, by recentralizing control of disemination of ideas under the new technologies of broadcast, undid the Guttenberg revolution. The Guttenberg revolution was the undoing of the theocratic control of Europe which was maintained largely through monopoly on the disemination of ideas through the written word. It was the theocracy of the pre-Reformation era that controled the armies of monks who scribed the books and handed them out to the priesthood to interpret for their "flocks".
You are simply a new form of "sheep" indoctrinated by the new theocracy that has grown up in the centralization of media.
You are quoting the Declaration of Independence which lays out the foundation for the rest of the official documents of the United States and itself is founded on its first paragraph:
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the
separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
It is unambiguous. Equality does not imply integration and indeed must allow separation. All men are equal by the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God to separation entirely at their discretion. This is the belief that most directly contradicts allowance for slavery in Article IV, Section 2, clause 3 of the United States Constitution, and thereby allowed the Union to attack and win over the Confederacy by undercutting the legal legitimacy of the Confederacy to declare separation when they themselves would not allow the separation of slaves from their "owners".
Yes. You're right. I believe in the equal right of any people to separate from others as declared in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. It overrides what any Men may put down on paper.
Indeed the entire point of the First Amendment to the US Constitution was to minimize the need for war against or between governmental entities by allowing people to peaceably separate from one another to the greatest extent possible within the laboratory of the States. The founders understood scientific method -- and the need for control groups to discover what works and what doesn't work in social experiments, involving beliefs about how we should live our lives, as well as physical experimentation. If you cannot allow people to voluntarily enter into their own experiments and impose upon them your perverse ideas of what constitutes "equality" then you have just declared war on the Declaration of Independence and on freedom itself.
That they had been corrupted by slavery in no way detracts from the importance of their overall vision.
EEOC compliance requires you to abide by a set of beliefs about how you should conduct your private business. These beliefs are religious beliefs being imposed by the government on private associations. They are a state religion.
The government has been defaulting on the First Amendment ever since it started licensing broadcast rights to centralized groups and excluding others from those rights.
Of course, such small radio stations will not recover the First Amendment -- the Internet has done a lot more to recover First Amendment rights anyway.
However, even with one person one watt, the failure of the government to protect freedom of religion and indeed impose politically correct beliefs upon the private lives of citizens continues not only unabated but exacerbated through the multiplication of government agencies overseeing out compliance with federal mandates about with whom we must associate in our private affairs.
The damage caused by that interference has now built up a debt as large as slavery. Such debts are so enormous and the government so unlikely to pay down those debts that basically the current US government cannot claim any legitimacy any longer.
Project psychologist Dr David Lewis said... "So, if you haven't got the skill to do something important, leave it alone. If something is urgent or complex, find a simple way to do it. If something going wrong will particularly aggravate you, make certain you know how to do it."
When asked why so many of his psychotherapy patients commit suicide, Dr. Lewis went on to say, "You're implying something went wrong. They would have become serial murderers or child rapists if I handn't helped them. Are you saying I should be aggravated over the outcome of having saved lives while protecting little children from molestation? If I didn't have the skills I have, you might not be standing here asking such questions, you Wanker."
Given the history of behvior of the United States, where "authorities" claim that abolation of slavery was not the sole justification for defeating the Confederacy, ANY country that enters the European Union without a clear means of secession is in serious danger of tyranny from the European Union central government.
Self determination is the primoridal human right. Without it all other rights are worthless. You don't have to have been sold into slavery by West African slave traders to have the right to self determination.
Slashdot Mirror
Are they? I've got one, so I don't really pay attention to that anymore :-)
If you don't want to pay attention to data from outside your personal experience you don't have much business discussing extinctions do you?
Moreover, even if your experience were typical, remember that for every man like you there is another displaced somewhere. Many US engineers get Chinese wives. That's what you're recommending. However, along with the explosive economic growth and high male to female birth ratio for the last couple of decades, I'd say you are recommending a pattern of behavior that could result in warfare.
Where are the fertile females in over supply and where are they in under supply?
If you find they are in undersupply in the places where most of the engineering jobs are, it doesn't matter whether every last engineer gets married and has children: There are tradeoffs that mitigate against his having high quality offspring compared to a male with a wide array of choices in his area.
So, let's go with that in the context of "the extinction of the American programmer" and ask ourselves what the real cost of reproduction is for American programmers vs programmers from societies where programmers have marriages arranged with women of comparable educational and socioeconomic background with extended family support (frequently with someone in the extended family providing food direct from the clan's farm) for children.
Societies like India.
You can rest assured that the more an American excells at programming the lower his odds of reproducing are for the simple reason that no matter where he works he is in a male saturated environment with a high cost of living. A very very few make it really really rich and have a couple of kids, yes. Maybe there are a few Orthodox Jews, Mormons or traditionalist Catholics and have some cultural protections of their fertility.
But on the whole, the last cohort of engineers to have any sort of reproductive success were those that were born before 1950 and were therefore in a position to enjoy affordable real estate in combination with being in a position to ride the shockwave of the baby boom which came just after they were positioned to avail themselves of all that cheap labor (and nice nubile female fertility).
If you go to a typical office on Wall Street or Madison Avenue or some law firm in Washington D.C. you will find professional men who are just as dedicated as the most dedicated programmer -- with a huge difference: They are surrounded by young fertile women. New York City has one of the highest female to male ratios in the world.
There's a eugenics program going on in the US alright -- or should I say pogrom.
From The Jobs Crunch we see why this is important:
The iterated PD is a different game than the PD and it is in fact more "in the spirit" of natural science than is the PD where there can be no memory of what opponents have done. Indeed, the way these guys "abused" the iterated PD is "in the spirit" of natural science since it gets to the heart of something all evolutionary biologists now accept: kin selection.
kin selection.
You cannot ignore kin selection in any attempt to model game theory if that model is to be relevant at all.
It is perfectly legitimate iterated PD. There is nothing in the rules of iterated PD that says records of moves cannot be kept and acted on. Indeed, that's precisely the idea of the iterated PD as explicitly stated.
No -- they also prove that the unwritten but nonetheless agree-upon rules are not allowing for kin selection. By not allowing for kin selection you are violating another and more important layer of unwritten, but nonetheless agreed-up rules: That PD tournaments be relevant. Perhaps its time to write down these more important rules of the PD tournaments so that the protean nature of the PD is demonstrated between levels of selection, as described by Hamilton.
And it will only get worse so long as "legitimate" authorities continue to appeal to morality rather than direct self interest in order to keep hackers from turning into crackers. The only thing an appeal to morality can do in the present situation of depressed wages for hackers is effectively run a eugenics program where the most morally impressionable hackers fail to reproduce. If you happen to like morality however you might call this a dysgenics program.
A mathematical treatment of population genetics in groups was given by W. D. Hamilton in "Innate Social Aptitudes of Man". In the last sentence of that paper, Hamilton, the originator of modern kin selection theory, states:
What Hamilton is referring to is the fact that in any structure of components vs composite, there is the opportunity to defect. An individual gene can defect against the organism within which it resides via, say, meiotic drive. An individual may defect against his tribe made up of his close relatives. A tribe may defect against the others making up a nation. A nation may defect against others making up a geographic race. A geographic race may defect against others making up humanity as a whole.It is indeed a dilemma but it isn't without a rigorous treatement within genetic theory.
Steve Sailer has written an an excellent review of the politically touchy issue of ethnic nepotism given from Hamilton's group selective perspective.
When asked why he has chosen himself as the seed of all future Harvard clones, Professor Dershowitz responded, "Cloning is evil. Someone must stop others from cloning themselves and the answer is a worldwide army of Alan Dershowitz's working together to stop this scourge in its tracks."
A greatful world thanks Professor Dershowitz for choosing himself to shoulder this heavy burden, as only he can.
He has not been prosecuted although others have been held without charges in Canada as "national security threats" due to their questioning the "6 million Jews" figure of the German National Socialist period.
It is arguable that the Ukranian famine resulted in the hysterical reaction of the German people -- and that therefore it is more important to the public peace to remember that famine than the subsequent deaths of Jews under National Socialism.
Secondly, the article you claim offers a "good" explanation of the issues doesn't cover some of the central issues about such legislation. One of the more obvious issues is what principle is used to select which "identifiable groups" are protected and which are not protected from "hate propaganda". As it stands it smacks of a kind of inverse bill of attainder more than anything principled. If I can somehow get my favorite group protected under this umbrella but you can't get yours protected, why should your group not "hate" my group?
What when people start saying, "Kill all the lawyers."?
You might want to check out datalog programming in XSB. XSB uses "tabling", which is a form of memoization of prior calls, to optimize datalog programming.
In more mathematical terms OO is typically functional whereas predicates are typically relational. The Object-Relational "impedance mismatch" is little more. With all the enegy poured into OO programming -- particularly collection classes -- you'd think people would wake up to the idea that functions are a special kind of relation (N:1 mapping, rather than N:M) and that therefore maybe you should just try to optimize relational programming so that you get collections for free and functional programming optimization will fall out naturally.
Almost all the Object Oriented stuff people layer on predicates are, at best, an ad hoc, and poor, means of optimizing execution speed.
Let me explain.
One of the principles of polymorphism is that the same method has the same abstract meaning regardless of the kind of object. A predicate considered as a method subsumes such polymorphism by simply trying the various possible implementations of the method and committing to only those that succeed. If more than one succeeds then so be it -- that's the whole idea of relations as opposed to functions.
So, one reason you want all this OO stuff is the inheritance hierarchies keep you from going through all possible interpretations of a given method when the vast majority of them will fail for a given object.
Another, related, problem is that inheritance provides defaults without requiring a lot of thinking on the part of the computer. What I mean by "thinking" here is the sort of thing that is done by statistical imputation of missing data via algorithms like expectation maximization (EM) or multi-relational data mining via inductive logic programming.
So, the other reason you want all this OO stuff is so you can avoid mining a background database to provide reasonable defaults for various aspects of the data.
Some might be concerned that over-riding isn't absolute in such a system -- that you don't absolutely block, say, more generic methods when you have more specific ones present, and they're right. You don't block those methods -- you lower their priority by lowering the probability of those implementations via the statistical methods of imputation and/or induction. In a microthreading environment they most likely won't get any resources allocated to them before other higher priority implementations have succeeded. In a single threaded/depth-first environment they will be down the list of desired alternatives -- but they won't be discarded until something equivalent to a prolog cut operation kills them off.
However, and this is the important point, the work that has been expended toward OO facilities has vastly outstripped the effort that which has been put toward more parsimonious ways of optimizing predicate systems.
One of the better predicate calculus systems out there -- more promising due to its use of tabling to avoid infinite regress on head-recursive definitions and its optimization of queries using some fairly general theorems of predicate calculus -- is XSB. It has an interface to odbc and a direct interface to Oracle, but it would be better if it had something like a recoverable virtual memory substrate to support its roll-back semantics.
The Delcaration of Independence's first paragraph says:
In the present circumstances, the signatories to the Declaration of Independence would consider you a traitor and have you hanged by the neck until dead for one very obvious reason:
The moment the second man added his signature to the Declaration of Independence according to you it was invalidated because when individuals act as a group they lose their right to self-determination.
As Benjamin Franklin said during the meeting where the Founders signed the Declaration of Independence:
When we are living under the direct guns of tyranny -- not separated by a difficult journey, such as was the ocean in 1776, and without leaders of much material substance to stand with us, such as were the Founders -- the consequences of the treason such as yours are all the more serious.
It has everything to do with it only almost 70 years too late. The Telecommunications Act of 1934, by recentralizing control of disemination of ideas under the new technologies of broadcast, undid the Guttenberg revolution. The Guttenberg revolution was the undoing of the theocratic control of Europe which was maintained largely through monopoly on the disemination of ideas through the written word. It was the theocracy of the pre-Reformation era that controled the armies of monks who scribed the books and handed them out to the priesthood to interpret for their "flocks".
You are simply a new form of "sheep" indoctrinated by the new theocracy that has grown up in the centralization of media.
Yes. You're right. I believe in the equal right of any people to separate from others as declared in the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. It overrides what any Men may put down on paper.
Indeed the entire point of the First Amendment to the US Constitution was to minimize the need for war against or between governmental entities by allowing people to peaceably separate from one another to the greatest extent possible within the laboratory of the States. The founders understood scientific method -- and the need for control groups to discover what works and what doesn't work in social experiments, involving beliefs about how we should live our lives, as well as physical experimentation. If you cannot allow people to voluntarily enter into their own experiments and impose upon them your perverse ideas of what constitutes "equality" then you have just declared war on the Declaration of Independence and on freedom itself.
That they had been corrupted by slavery in no way detracts from the importance of their overall vision.
EEOC compliance requires you to abide by a set of beliefs about how you should conduct your private business. These beliefs are religious beliefs being imposed by the government on private associations. They are a state religion.
Of course, such small radio stations will not recover the First Amendment -- the Internet has done a lot more to recover First Amendment rights anyway.
However, even with one person one watt, the failure of the government to protect freedom of religion and indeed impose politically correct beliefs upon the private lives of citizens continues not only unabated but exacerbated through the multiplication of government agencies overseeing out compliance with federal mandates about with whom we must associate in our private affairs.
The damage caused by that interference has now built up a debt as large as slavery. Such debts are so enormous and the government so unlikely to pay down those debts that basically the current US government cannot claim any legitimacy any longer.
Ask anyone who worked on the Apollo program whether they used Einstein's equations of motion or Newton's equations of motion.
When asked why so many of his psychotherapy patients commit suicide, Dr. Lewis went on to say, "You're implying something went wrong. They would have become serial murderers or child rapists if I handn't helped them. Are you saying I should be aggravated over the outcome of having saved lives while protecting little children from molestation? If I didn't have the skills I have, you might not be standing here asking such questions, you Wanker."
Given the history of behvior of the United States, where "authorities" claim that abolation of slavery was not the sole justification for defeating the Confederacy, ANY country that enters the European Union without a clear means of secession is in serious danger of tyranny from the European Union central government.
Self determination is the primoridal human right. Without it all other rights are worthless. You don't have to have been sold into slavery by West African slave traders to have the right to self determination.