More willful ignorance. As I've clearly explained twice now, we have the example of similar nations to go off of. When you aren't doing something well it's the height of stupidity to keep doing it rather than learn from some one else's example.
But what should I expect from some one who ends a post with "plonk". Is that a baby sound?
That's funny, I would say you're "one dumb motherfucker" for being willfully ignorant on the subject of guns.
It's true, we tried banning alcohol and it failed miserably so we stopped doing that. We've also tried the mass ownership of guns and it has clearly failed miserably at keeping us safer. When will we learn from other, similiar countries examples and solve the problem we've created for ourselves?
Sorry, your anecdotal experience is worthless to me. A poverty rate of near 50% speaks for itself. A shrinking population due to economic flight speaks for itself.
I'm phenominally naive? You're the one who literally has no logical backing for your argument.
Our crime, and violent crime rates are pretty similiar to other first world nations suggesting similiar crime prone societies and yet our homicide and gun violence rates are through the roof. Clearly there's a problem there.
I would suggest it was "phenominally naive" of you to think "American is super special and different and so can never be compared to anyone else" was an insightful response.
Putting words in my mouth!? How terribly clever of you!
No, I'm saying controlling for known key drivers of crime is necessary when making comparisons on crime. This is, for instance, why no one who even has a basic grasp on the subject of sociology would ever be surprised that Lafayette had a lower homicide rate than Chicago.
Oh yes, the statisical blip that is Londons current homicide rate. For the past 7 decades at least London has had a drastically lower homicide rate than New York. After that, if you compare any other major first world city in another country to New York, New York is back to looking pretty bad.
So in summary, your comparison between two individual cities does not accurately reflect the reality of homicide rates in the US versus that of other first world nations with much stricter gun control
Comparing one of Americas biggest urban areas (urban areas being the source of most of any first world country's crime) to a mostly rural state on crime.
"It really is 100% true that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns."
Of course in first world nations where there are very few guns there are also very few outlaws with guns as seen by there drastically lower levels of gun violence. Given this, your scenario is not terribly scary.
Your description of Puerto Rico isnt matching the statisitcs I'm seeing
Chief of which is a poverty rate at close to 50% and a declining population due to people fleeing the country for the mainland to find work. https://datausa.io/profile/geo...
Sure, there are poorer third world nations but if Puerto Rico was a nation on its own it certainly wouldnt be considered a first world nation with those stats
I love that I got modded down to 0, Troll. There is clearly nothing Trollish about my post; no insults, harassment, or any other quality one associates with trolls. All I do is point out an easily verifiable fact in the context of showing that guns don't make us any safer.
It's really just a massive show of weakness on the part of those modding me down.
Well sure, most territories and protectorates have standards of living comparable to third world nations. Just look at Puerto Rico right here in the US. No US state has a standard of living as poor as theirs.
Nice, you're probably right although what an oddball thing for the parent to drop without an explanation. Queen's best stuff was released before quite a lot of slashdot users were even alive.
I don't respond to AC's partly because their post's are generally done by less thoughtful people. In this case " It's not shyness it's that I'm introverted and most people suck." strongly suggests that they are incapable of seeing themselves as the problem.
If some one thinks "most people suck" then it is far more likely that they are the one that sucks and not the majority of others.
I wasn't lucky enough to be naturally gifted at socializing around others but I am a far happier person for having figured that shit out (and don't think for a second it wasn't hell trying to do so).
On seeing "We have not run book recommendations and book discussion posts for some time." the first thing I wondered is why has slashdot not ever made this as a regular monthly thing? All news sources have their regular cultural posts like this, why shouldn't slashdot?
And please people, don't restrict this type of thing to modern works. If you're re-reading a classic younger folks might appreciate the recommendation. I'd have never read Asimov without such recommendations.
While I was going to College one of the best things I ever did for myself was get myself promoted to a supervisor on the front end of the grocery store I worked in. Yeah, it was constant panic attack for me for a while but within an admittedly lengthy period (most people wouldn't have taken as long and I was put on discipline a few times for making mistakes due to my nerves and was literally almost fired) I had that shit nailed and coming out of that I am far more well adjusted. After that experience I intentionally put myself through my rate of panic attacks drop to record lows and nowadays I literally just don't get them. In fact, for some absurd reason people generally regard me as an extrovert nowadays.
Now trust me, it fucking sucked ass initially but honestly I regard that move as equally valuable as the degree I got going to college. Also, don't get me wrong here, there are people that have very legitimate psychological issues well above and beyond what I used to have and my trial by fire experience might even be harmful for those types. Ultimately though, those people really are the minority and most shy people just need to force themselves out of their shells.
Shy people: The simple fact is you'll be far happier forcing yourself out of your shell. It will be awkward hell at first but humans are inherently social creatures. Ultimately, we need social contact to thrive.
Also, your sex life will probably be better in the end.
When I travel in Europe I never use a car. It's really rather liberating and I can stay longer because I'm spending less money. (Admitted minor point)
After that, I spent a good while being lower income when I was younger. Oh lord would it have been nice to live in a country where public transportation was widely available and I didn't have to spend such a significant portion of my income on a car and all of it's associated bills. When I go shopping or out to eat literally anywhere the vast majority of those people operating those stores are in the exact same boat as I was back then. The extra money saved by these masses would likely be spent elsewhere contributing far more to job growth then buying and maintaining a car whose construction is largely automated.
And then after that, I remember when I had to commute by car at a slightly older age. What a garbage fest it is commuting by car. I'd have a traded a slightly longer commute by mass transit where I could read, work, or just plane space out the entire time over stop and go traffic where I'm just stuck sitting there having to focus on the road.
And then after that, in all my travels in the US, our highways are never wide enough during high traffic periods and likely never will be under our current transportation model.
In summary, a car is a major expense for most Americans. Sure the convenience of car ownership is nice and I currently thoroughly enjoy it but for many Americans it's an absolute burden.
Also, your signature is retarded. As illustrated by my own post, intolerance does indeed apply to "persons". I do not tolerate "people" who suggest that they understand things they don't. In other words, I'm intolerant to those who make ignorant statements on political topics while pretending to be knowledgeable.
To add another level to this, a normal American English speaker says "people" ( as illustrated by a bunch of nerds on the subject https://english.stackexchange.... ) and I don't think the British do differently so you just look like a weirdo for that as well.
". If you oppose the balance of that social contract, then logically you must also allow for the renegotiation of the union, or it being dissolved, because you are advocating against the terms of the existing social contract."
No, the way the constitution is set up that is not the case at all. A simple ammendment with all of its hurdles is all that it takes. It's right there in the agreement everyone signed.
How many users are really going to take advantage of the slightly greater speeds those phones provide? I just bought last year's model top tier Motorola for $120 ( see for comments on value of purchase https://mobile.slashdot.org/st... ) . These new thousand dollar phones are offering increased values in exactly the opposite places the average user needs.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a power user when it comes to PCs because I play games but unless you're big on mobile gaming or have some super niche, power hungry use for your phone there's very little extra value in these top tier phones. Four of Five years from now you'll be wanting to buy a new phone whether you buys a sub $300 phone or a $1,000 one.
Slashdot Mirror
More willful ignorance. As I've clearly explained twice now, we have the example of similar nations to go off of. When you aren't doing something well it's the height of stupidity to keep doing it rather than learn from some one else's example.
But what should I expect from some one who ends a post with "plonk". Is that a baby sound?
That's funny, I would say you're "one dumb motherfucker" for being willfully ignorant on the subject of guns.
It's true, we tried banning alcohol and it failed miserably so we stopped doing that. We've also tried the mass ownership of guns and it has clearly failed miserably at keeping us safer. When will we learn from other, similiar countries examples and solve the problem we've created for ourselves?
Sorry, your anecdotal experience is worthless to me. A poverty rate of near 50% speaks for itself. A shrinking population due to economic flight speaks for itself.
I'm phenominally naive? You're the one who literally has no logical backing for your argument.
Our crime, and violent crime rates are pretty similiar to other first world nations suggesting similiar crime prone societies and yet our homicide and gun violence rates are through the roof. Clearly there's a problem there.
I would suggest it was "phenominally naive" of you to think "American is super special and different and so can never be compared to anyone else" was an insightful response.
Putting words in my mouth!? How terribly clever of you!
No, I'm saying controlling for known key drivers of crime is necessary when making comparisons on crime. This is, for instance, why no one who even has a basic grasp on the subject of sociology would ever be surprised that Lafayette had a lower homicide rate than Chicago.
Oh yes, the statisical blip that is Londons current homicide rate. For the past 7 decades at least London has had a drastically lower homicide rate than New York. After that, if you compare any other major first world city in another country to New York, New York is back to looking pretty bad.
So in summary, your comparison between two individual cities does not accurately reflect the reality of homicide rates in the US versus that of other first world nations with much stricter gun control
Comparing one of Americas biggest urban areas (urban areas being the source of most of any first world country's crime) to a mostly rural state on crime.
That's just super
"It really is 100% true that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns."
Of course in first world nations where there are very few guns there are also very few outlaws with guns as seen by there drastically lower levels of gun violence. Given this, your scenario is not terribly scary.
Your description of Puerto Rico isnt matching the statisitcs I'm seeing
Chief of which is a poverty rate at close to 50% and a declining population due to people fleeing the country for the mainland to find work. https://datausa.io/profile/geo...
Sure, there are poorer third world nations but if Puerto Rico was a nation on its own it certainly wouldnt be considered a first world nation with those stats
I love that I got modded down to 0, Troll. There is clearly nothing Trollish about my post; no insults, harassment, or any other quality one associates with trolls. All I do is point out an easily verifiable fact in the context of showing that guns don't make us any safer.
It's really just a massive show of weakness on the part of those modding me down.
Well sure, most territories and protectorates have standards of living comparable to third world nations. Just look at Puerto Rico right here in the US. No US state has a standard of living as poor as theirs.
Our mass ownership of guns in this country has left us with a homicide rate that is on average 5 times greater than any other first world nation.
I'm sure those people feel safer carrying but their ability to do so is making our society as a whole far less safe.
The parent's point plus the sample size here is completely ridiculous. You cant draw any meaningful conclusions off those miniscule numbers.
"Optional, as in it's optional to play Fortnite, which *requires* an internet connection?"
Well take that up with the developers of Fortnite, as in, not Nintendo.
I do very much agree with your final point in a general sense but Nintendo has no role in what you're bothered about here.
Maybe you missed the part where this is an optional service. You can still save locally.
Nice, you're probably right although what an oddball thing for the parent to drop without an explanation. Queen's best stuff was released before quite a lot of slashdot users were even alive.
"and some artists also got very creative to spike the public's ears (eg Bohemian Rhapsody)."
I'm puzzled as to what you mean here. Do you mean "make a good song" or is their some weird history to bohemian rhapsody I've never heard of?
"Eating out is suppose to be a special occasion thing, or for convince when you are not near a kitchen."
No, eating out is and has always been up to individual will. No one has ever opened a restaurant and said "this place is for special occasions only"
Also, use your freezer and you don't have to eat everything you make from a chicken all at once.
I don't respond to AC's partly because their post's are generally done by less thoughtful people. In this case " It's not shyness it's that I'm introverted and most people suck." strongly suggests that they are incapable of seeing themselves as the problem.
If some one thinks "most people suck" then it is far more likely that they are the one that sucks and not the majority of others.
I wasn't lucky enough to be naturally gifted at socializing around others but I am a far happier person for having figured that shit out (and don't think for a second it wasn't hell trying to do so).
On seeing "We have not run book recommendations and book discussion posts for some time." the first thing I wondered is why has slashdot not ever made this as a regular monthly thing? All news sources have their regular cultural posts like this, why shouldn't slashdot?
And please people, don't restrict this type of thing to modern works. If you're re-reading a classic younger folks might appreciate the recommendation. I'd have never read Asimov without such recommendations.
While I was going to College one of the best things I ever did for myself was get myself promoted to a supervisor on the front end of the grocery store I worked in. Yeah, it was constant panic attack for me for a while but within an admittedly lengthy period (most people wouldn't have taken as long and I was put on discipline a few times for making mistakes due to my nerves and was literally almost fired) I had that shit nailed and coming out of that I am far more well adjusted. After that experience I intentionally put myself through my rate of panic attacks drop to record lows and nowadays I literally just don't get them. In fact, for some absurd reason people generally regard me as an extrovert nowadays.
Now trust me, it fucking sucked ass initially but honestly I regard that move as equally valuable as the degree I got going to college. Also, don't get me wrong here, there are people that have very legitimate psychological issues well above and beyond what I used to have and my trial by fire experience might even be harmful for those types. Ultimately though, those people really are the minority and most shy people just need to force themselves out of their shells.
Shy people: The simple fact is you'll be far happier forcing yourself out of your shell. It will be awkward hell at first but humans are inherently social creatures. Ultimately, we need social contact to thrive.
Also, your sex life will probably be better in the end.
When I travel in Europe I never use a car. It's really rather liberating and I can stay longer because I'm spending less money. (Admitted minor point)
After that, I spent a good while being lower income when I was younger. Oh lord would it have been nice to live in a country where public transportation was widely available and I didn't have to spend such a significant portion of my income on a car and all of it's associated bills. When I go shopping or out to eat literally anywhere the vast majority of those people operating those stores are in the exact same boat as I was back then. The extra money saved by these masses would likely be spent elsewhere contributing far more to job growth then buying and maintaining a car whose construction is largely automated.
And then after that, I remember when I had to commute by car at a slightly older age. What a garbage fest it is commuting by car. I'd have a traded a slightly longer commute by mass transit where I could read, work, or just plane space out the entire time over stop and go traffic where I'm just stuck sitting there having to focus on the road.
And then after that, in all my travels in the US, our highways are never wide enough during high traffic periods and likely never will be under our current transportation model.
In summary, a car is a major expense for most Americans. Sure the convenience of car ownership is nice and I currently thoroughly enjoy it but for many Americans it's an absolute burden.
Also, your signature is retarded. As illustrated by my own post, intolerance does indeed apply to "persons". I do not tolerate "people" who suggest that they understand things they don't. In other words, I'm intolerant to those who make ignorant statements on political topics while pretending to be knowledgeable.
To add another level to this, a normal American English speaker says "people" ( as illustrated by a bunch of nerds on the subject https://english.stackexchange.... ) and I don't think the British do differently so you just look like a weirdo for that as well.
". If you oppose the balance of that social contract, then logically you must also allow for the renegotiation of the union, or it being dissolved, because you are advocating against the terms of the existing social contract."
No, the way the constitution is set up that is not the case at all. A simple ammendment with all of its hurdles is all that it takes. It's right there in the agreement everyone signed.
Really? Scoff.
How many users are really going to take advantage of the slightly greater speeds those phones provide? I just bought last year's model top tier Motorola for $120 ( see for comments on value of purchase https://mobile.slashdot.org/st... ) . These new thousand dollar phones are offering increased values in exactly the opposite places the average user needs.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'm a power user when it comes to PCs because I play games but unless you're big on mobile gaming or have some super niche, power hungry use for your phone there's very little extra value in these top tier phones. Four of Five years from now you'll be wanting to buy a new phone whether you buys a sub $300 phone or a $1,000 one.