The problem is the government does way too much. If the government did 4 or 5 things, you could punish them when they screw just one of those up. When they're doing thousands and thousands of things it's hard to vote on one issue. And when the Federal government is controlling so much of our lives no one pays attention to local politics anyway.
"Mitch McConnell has warned Obama not to send the trade deal to Capitol Hill for a vote before the presidential election." - http://www.startribune.com/sta... It looks like Democrat in Republican clothing is once again trying to get Obama's will carried out without being held responsible for it by having the vote during a lame duck session.
That's pretty much all I need to know about the TPP to oppose it.
If it were genuinely a good bill he could pass it before the election and take credit for it. Instead I bet he's telling the crony capitalists to be patient and they'll get what they want when the next election is two years away and the voters are likely to forget about once again being defrauded by the Republican leadership.
She no longer has the job so she can't be fired. But her poor judgement should disqualify her from further positions requiring access to top secret information.
To me the problem isn't so much the legality - regulations can be a huge pain and how can you remember them all while trying to conduct diplomacy in a complex world? What bothers me is the lack of judgement. Even if she tried to keep classified stuff off the server and did a pretty good job - she's the Secreatary of State. Nearly everything that is emailed to her is something an enemy might be interested in. She agrees to go to lunch with Joe from accounting again? Joe seems to have her ear he would be a great guy to gain influence over to get him to influence her policies and gain information.
Related to this is the problem of our mental ability to conceive of that which we have never experienced. Can anyone understand imagine a 4D space as more than just a mathematical model? How about the behavior of time as something that dialates? We can do the math, but we can't wrap our minds around the reality because our brains just aren't wired that way.
What if the whole "everything has a reason" could be in the same category as the constancy of time - something obviously true but wrong. And because our brain refuses to accept any other conclusion we rationalize things that have no reason by supplying reasons.
Even logic might have this problem. If A implies B and B implies C, then A implies true. Obviously and undeniably true according to our brains. Are our brains correct? We have a model of logic is internally consistent and that seems to work for us. We judge everything against that model. If that model is wrong then we'll never know.
I guess I missed the part where you're boss was an "ego-maniacal prick". He asked you to calculate the uncompensated overtime. You wanted to include a lot of time that you had done without being asked for. That was going to be a huge chunk of time and would likely make him look bad somehow - and why should he get that blame when he never asked you to do it? And when you started working the 40 hour week you had agreed to when you were hired, he didn't complain and he gave you compensation (4 vacation hours in exchange for one worked hour) when you had to work on a day you had wanted to take as vacation.
Psychology studies show it's not the absolute material wealth that makes you happy and content but the relative, in comparison to others in your social group
This especially makes sense for men who are working to attract women. If you're the richest guy in the neighborhood, whether you're making $100 a week compared to everyone else's $90 a week, or whether you're making $1,000,000 a week compared to everyone else's $900,000 a week, simply by being the richest you'll have a greatly improved chance of attracting the best looking women in the neighborhood.
Did I see this same story about 6 months ago? I remember it because there are so few things the Obama administration does that are good so it really stuck out. It is good to have a reminder though. It's nice to be reminded that this administration can do a good thing.
Yes, so if someone from earth (remember, Earth will be a lot richer and more powerful than the struggling colonists for a very long time) decides to kill everyone on Mars for the fun of it, no one on Earth will be obligated or perhaps even legally permitted to help the Martians.
Exactly. Quality costs time and money. If you want to prevent SQL-Injection you not only need senior developers, you need an environment where they are encouraged to find problems in code and bring attention to it so people can learn from mistakes. Code reviews take time and money but customers don't want to pay for them. They may say they're willing to pay for code reviews but but they'll complain about the cost and hire someone else if you actually do them.
Unit tests are no match for years of reliable service because for useful programs there is no such thing as a comprehensive unit test. One of the reasons computers are so useful is they can handle so many different input values - so many that you can't possibly test them all. Want to test a '+' operator for integers? Unless you run all MAX_INT * MAX_INT (oh way, I mean MAX_INT - MIN_INT+1 * MAX_INT-MIN_INT +1) possible inputs, how can you be sure you got everything? Well, let's just pick a representative test. Oh wait, we need to make sure we try with a negative number. Oh yeah, we need to a negative+negative, a positive+positive, a positive+negative, and a negative+positive. That it? Oh yeah we need to try negatives positives with zeros too. NOW we're done. What? OOHHH overflow! We need to write a test for two very large positive numbers and another for two very large negative numbers!
That's just for simple integer addition. When you start writing real-life code the combinations of inputs grow very quickly. You do your best, but it simply isn't practical to test for every possible thing that could cause a problem.
Because when you go to a party, get drunk, and shit yourself on the sofa, you stay behind to help clean up or you never get invited back again.
On the other hand if show up and spend 40 years keeping someone from getting killed they might seem a bit ungrateful if they complain about you getting diarrhea while doing so.
It's about fraud. Widespread organised fraud.
Should that really be legal in your opinion?
Or should it be legal if they do it "for the party", since it's fraud for the sake of politics?
The entire reason we've got all this shit is because of some donors setting the agenda and turning science denial into a political point of difference between two parties when both used to consider reality previously.
Do you deny science for The Party comrade? Papers please.
Assuming the global warming warners are correct, the reason we have this issue is the people doing the warning have made several huge mistakes.
1. They have not lived as though they believed their warnings. The Democrats supposedly believe the world is going to be very messed up, and yet it is way down on their list of priorities. World leaders who presumably have good access to intelligence don't seem very concerned. Al Gore flew around in carbon spewing private planes while living in heavy carbon footprint house.
3. Al Gore becoming the first major spokesperson was a huge mistake because he's clearly a partisan and had just come through a brutal campaign. He was bound to make half the electorate skeptical. If George W. Bush had lost the election and immediately started talking about global warming then it would be the Democrats claiming the whole thing was a host and yet another example of "the politics of fear".
4. Using words like "denier" and saying "the debate is over" as a way to shout down and shut down debate rather than trying to convince people. We need fewer articles that threaten and insult skeptics and more articles that respectfully explain both sides of the debate. Everytime the word "denier" shows up in print it reinforces the idea that the global warming believers know they can't make a case and have to result to poisoning the well attacks.
When the WSJ was sold the bias of the paper shifted not-so-subtly to the right. It may be a top-tier newspaper, but its bias clearly indicates it is a tool of the Murdoch empire.
Comparing the WSJ to the Washington Post probably is appropriate since the Washington Post shares the right wing bias.
The bottom line is that he owns way too many media outlets which tends to drown out other voices. The argument that any of his media outlets are truly independent is really a joke. They publish what he wants them to publish through direct, indirect, or implied influence. That is why the hate.
Washington Post has a "right-wing bias"? Since when is "right-wing" pro-abortion, pro-Democrats, pro-illegal immigration, pro-Obamacare, pro-gay-marriage, and pro-big-buiness-bailouts?
I consider myself more of a conservative than a libertarian, but I think everyone should have a strong libertarian instinct. Too often when a problem arises the first thing the news media says is "and the government isn't doing anything to solve this!" And people ask "why isn't the government solving this.
The proper questions should be "are we sure this can't be fixed without the government?" and "is the benefit of having the government solve this worth the introduction of force, the loss of freedom, and the likely side-effects?" Sometimes the answer is "yes", but most of the time it is "no".
And once again another reminder that anyone carrying a cellphone is effectively transmitting their location to the authorities at all times.
The summary also mentioned CCTV. Just another reminder that anyone reflecting light is effectively transmitting their location to the authorities at all times.
Some things you learn from participating in adult sanctioned and sponsored extra-curricular activities and organizations. But you also learn a lot from just going out in the world on your own and dealing with it. We sent a kid to live with his grandparents for a few weeks. He made friends. They went out in the neighborhood and explored. They climbed fences they weren't supposed to. They did the kind of stupid and somewhat risky stuff that parents hate but that boys should do. Had he stayed home he would have been busy taking classes, going to camps where he would be told what to do, and doing academic work. I think he learned far more at the grandparents' house. But it's not something that colleges will look at.
I agree that after-school activities are important. But there has to be more. A kid also has to have time to do unstructured things. He has to get into arguments with his friends and learn to sort it out (not have some adult come in and enforce a path to a solution). A kid has to develop confidence that he can handle things without a parent or teacher around.
There has to be a balance. You know your kids better than a university ever will. You shouldn't make yourself a proxy for the University where all your decisions are based on pleasing their admissions office rather than raising your kid to be the best person he can be. Of course the two goals should and will often overlap. But you have to keep your priorities straight.
As a parent with a spouse from a testing-intensive formal-education intensive culture I find myself running into the same problem at home. I want the kids to have time to explore things like programming and creative play. The spouse's attitude is that if it won't be tested and/or the college won't look at it then why bother?
Oh, please. Cheating is bad, but "one of the cruelest and most inhumane things one person can do to another" is at risk of breaking my hyperboleometer.
Let's see you build your life around a commitment and the other person breaks it. From the biological standpoint of a man you forgo all other chances to reproduce on the belief that you're partner will have your child and then you spend a huge portion of your life caring for that child and earning money to support that child. Then you find out it's not your child. You've been tricked into spending your whole existence serving the interests of another man. If you believe the theory of evolution you understand that you have been murdered for eternity.
There are reasons men get jealous and why in most successful societies female infidelity incurs severe punishments, and why rape should also incur severe penalties.
Funny how Slashdot's fierce Fighters for Privacy turn a blind eye when it's victims have done one of the cruelest and most inhumane things one person can do to another.
while Trump yammers about Mexico. I see so much about Trump in the news while this island building has been major activity for some time, all part of plan to "extend" territorial boundaries of China. Glad to know we got our priorities properly set.
I'm no fan of Trump (that's an understatement), but Mexico is an existential problem for American ideas. We see that Mexicans who come here and vote, and their children who vote, tend to vote for the same kinds of policies that have made an economic and political catastrophe of every attempt at democracy in South America, Central America, and Mexico (with or without American involvement). We've seen from the example of American Indians that failing to have and enforce an immigration policy is a recipe for disaster.
China is a threat, but a longer term threat. If we fail to keep our nation strong we'll be overpowered by China no matter whether we confront China now or later.
IANACE* If they build a runway on the reef I assume they would put something more durable under the pavement than sand. Wouldn't they need to at least run some steel posts into the reef below? A category 5 direct hit hurricane would probably take out most buildings, but if you know the hurricane is coming you can evacuate the planes, ships and people before it arrives. The really expensive stuff (the runway) would survive. The buildings could be replaced quickly (it's a military base not a luxury hotel so spartan accommodations would be fine).
This is what's absurd. China's claim if you look at the dashed line is obviously exaggerated and that part of the ocean is obviously not Chinese. It's nowhere close to China and the dotted lines are well within the normal territorial waters of other countries. It's like some general took a crayon and with a shaky hand drew it out and said "this remote and distant ocean is now ours". Columbus style in other words.
Next up, they'll claim that Vietnam and the Phillipines are Chinese territories, and have always been Chinese territories.
Yep, They did that with Taiwan. When America helped for a pro-China candidate to win the presidential election in Taiwan and China was able to start getting a lot of concessions, they moved on to the 9-dash line. Once we appease them with that they'll expand their claims. I understand they have even made a few comments about Okinawa.
Slashdot Mirror
Also destruction of evidence by the cops will kill the case.
if they get caught
The problem is the government does way too much. If the government did 4 or 5 things, you could punish them when they screw just one of those up. When they're doing thousands and thousands of things it's hard to vote on one issue. And when the Federal government is controlling so much of our lives no one pays attention to local politics anyway.
"Mitch McConnell has warned Obama not to send the trade deal to Capitol Hill for a vote before the presidential election." - http://www.startribune.com/sta... It looks like Democrat in Republican clothing is once again trying to get Obama's will carried out without being held responsible for it by having the vote during a lame duck session.
That's pretty much all I need to know about the TPP to oppose it.
If it were genuinely a good bill he could pass it before the election and take credit for it. Instead I bet he's telling the crony capitalists to be patient and they'll get what they want when the next election is two years away and the voters are likely to forget about once again being defrauded by the Republican leadership.
Hey Trump primary supporters! McConnel hates Cruz more! Vote Cruz!
She no longer has the job so she can't be fired. But her poor judgement should disqualify her from further positions requiring access to top secret information.
To me the problem isn't so much the legality - regulations can be a huge pain and how can you remember them all while trying to conduct diplomacy in a complex world? What bothers me is the lack of judgement. Even if she tried to keep classified stuff off the server and did a pretty good job - she's the Secreatary of State. Nearly everything that is emailed to her is something an enemy might be interested in. She agrees to go to lunch with Joe from accounting again? Joe seems to have her ear he would be a great guy to gain influence over to get him to influence her policies and gain information.
Related to this is the problem of our mental ability to conceive of that which we have never experienced. Can anyone understand imagine a 4D space as more than just a mathematical model? How about the behavior of time as something that dialates? We can do the math, but we can't wrap our minds around the reality because our brains just aren't wired that way. What if the whole "everything has a reason" could be in the same category as the constancy of time - something obviously true but wrong. And because our brain refuses to accept any other conclusion we rationalize things that have no reason by supplying reasons. Even logic might have this problem. If A implies B and B implies C, then A implies true. Obviously and undeniably true according to our brains. Are our brains correct? We have a model of logic is internally consistent and that seems to work for us. We judge everything against that model. If that model is wrong then we'll never know.
I guess I missed the part where you're boss was an "ego-maniacal prick". He asked you to calculate the uncompensated overtime. You wanted to include a lot of time that you had done without being asked for. That was going to be a huge chunk of time and would likely make him look bad somehow - and why should he get that blame when he never asked you to do it? And when you started working the 40 hour week you had agreed to when you were hired, he didn't complain and he gave you compensation (4 vacation hours in exchange for one worked hour) when you had to work on a day you had wanted to take as vacation.
Psychology studies show it's not the absolute material wealth that makes you happy and content but the relative, in comparison to others in your social group
This especially makes sense for men who are working to attract women. If you're the richest guy in the neighborhood, whether you're making $100 a week compared to everyone else's $90 a week, or whether you're making $1,000,000 a week compared to everyone else's $900,000 a week, simply by being the richest you'll have a greatly improved chance of attracting the best looking women in the neighborhood.
Did I see this same story about 6 months ago? I remember it because there are so few things the Obama administration does that are good so it really stuck out. It is good to have a reminder though. It's nice to be reminded that this administration can do a good thing.
Yes, so if someone from earth (remember, Earth will be a lot richer and more powerful than the struggling colonists for a very long time) decides to kill everyone on Mars for the fun of it, no one on Earth will be obligated or perhaps even legally permitted to help the Martians.
Exactly. Quality costs time and money. If you want to prevent SQL-Injection you not only need senior developers, you need an environment where they are encouraged to find problems in code and bring attention to it so people can learn from mistakes. Code reviews take time and money but customers don't want to pay for them. They may say they're willing to pay for code reviews but but they'll complain about the cost and hire someone else if you actually do them.
Unit tests are no match for years of reliable service because for useful programs there is no such thing as a comprehensive unit test. One of the reasons computers are so useful is they can handle so many different input values - so many that you can't possibly test them all. Want to test a '+' operator for integers? Unless you run all MAX_INT * MAX_INT (oh way, I mean MAX_INT - MIN_INT+1 * MAX_INT-MIN_INT +1) possible inputs, how can you be sure you got everything? Well, let's just pick a representative test. Oh wait, we need to make sure we try with a negative number. Oh yeah, we need to a negative+negative, a positive+positive, a positive+negative, and a negative+positive. That it? Oh yeah we need to try negatives positives with zeros too. NOW we're done. What? OOHHH overflow! We need to write a test for two very large positive numbers and another for two very large negative numbers!
That's just for simple integer addition. When you start writing real-life code the combinations of inputs grow very quickly. You do your best, but it simply isn't practical to test for every possible thing that could cause a problem.
Are they able to ask us to clean up the mess in fluent Russian? If not then maybe they should be a little more grateful.
Because when you go to a party, get drunk, and shit yourself on the sofa, you stay behind to help clean up or you never get invited back again.
On the other hand if show up and spend 40 years keeping someone from getting killed they might seem a bit ungrateful if they complain about you getting diarrhea while doing so.
It's about fraud. Widespread organised fraud. Should that really be legal in your opinion? Or should it be legal if they do it "for the party", since it's fraud for the sake of politics? The entire reason we've got all this shit is because of some donors setting the agenda and turning science denial into a political point of difference between two parties when both used to consider reality previously. Do you deny science for The Party comrade? Papers please.
Assuming the global warming warners are correct, the reason we have this issue is the people doing the warning have made several huge mistakes.
1. They have not lived as though they believed their warnings. The Democrats supposedly believe the world is going to be very messed up, and yet it is way down on their list of priorities. World leaders who presumably have good access to intelligence don't seem very concerned. Al Gore flew around in carbon spewing private planes while living in heavy carbon footprint house.
2. They have discredited themselves by setting themselves up to make a profit from the hysteria. Exhibit A is again Al Gore with his investments: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new... http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11...
3. Al Gore becoming the first major spokesperson was a huge mistake because he's clearly a partisan and had just come through a brutal campaign. He was bound to make half the electorate skeptical. If George W. Bush had lost the election and immediately started talking about global warming then it would be the Democrats claiming the whole thing was a host and yet another example of "the politics of fear".
4. Using words like "denier" and saying "the debate is over" as a way to shout down and shut down debate rather than trying to convince people. We need fewer articles that threaten and insult skeptics and more articles that respectfully explain both sides of the debate. Everytime the word "denier" shows up in print it reinforces the idea that the global warming believers know they can't make a case and have to result to poisoning the well attacks.
When the WSJ was sold the bias of the paper shifted not-so-subtly to the right. It may be a top-tier newspaper, but its bias clearly indicates it is a tool of the Murdoch empire.
Comparing the WSJ to the Washington Post probably is appropriate since the Washington Post shares the right wing bias.
The bottom line is that he owns way too many media outlets which tends to drown out other voices. The argument that any of his media outlets are truly independent is really a joke. They publish what he wants them to publish through direct, indirect, or implied influence. That is why the hate.
Washington Post has a "right-wing bias"? Since when is "right-wing" pro-abortion, pro-Democrats, pro-illegal immigration, pro-Obamacare, pro-gay-marriage, and pro-big-buiness-bailouts?
I consider myself more of a conservative than a libertarian, but I think everyone should have a strong libertarian instinct. Too often when a problem arises the first thing the news media says is "and the government isn't doing anything to solve this!" And people ask "why isn't the government solving this.
The proper questions should be "are we sure this can't be fixed without the government?" and "is the benefit of having the government solve this worth the introduction of force, the loss of freedom, and the likely side-effects?" Sometimes the answer is "yes", but most of the time it is "no".
And once again another reminder that anyone carrying a cellphone is effectively transmitting their location to the authorities at all times.
The summary also mentioned CCTV. Just another reminder that anyone reflecting light is effectively transmitting their location to the authorities at all times.
Some things you learn from participating in adult sanctioned and sponsored extra-curricular activities and organizations. But you also learn a lot from just going out in the world on your own and dealing with it. We sent a kid to live with his grandparents for a few weeks. He made friends. They went out in the neighborhood and explored. They climbed fences they weren't supposed to. They did the kind of stupid and somewhat risky stuff that parents hate but that boys should do. Had he stayed home he would have been busy taking classes, going to camps where he would be told what to do, and doing academic work. I think he learned far more at the grandparents' house. But it's not something that colleges will look at.
I agree that after-school activities are important. But there has to be more. A kid also has to have time to do unstructured things. He has to get into arguments with his friends and learn to sort it out (not have some adult come in and enforce a path to a solution). A kid has to develop confidence that he can handle things without a parent or teacher around.
There has to be a balance. You know your kids better than a university ever will. You shouldn't make yourself a proxy for the University where all your decisions are based on pleasing their admissions office rather than raising your kid to be the best person he can be. Of course the two goals should and will often overlap. But you have to keep your priorities straight.
As a parent with a spouse from a testing-intensive formal-education intensive culture I find myself running into the same problem at home. I want the kids to have time to explore things like programming and creative play. The spouse's attitude is that if it won't be tested and/or the college won't look at it then why bother?
Oh, please. Cheating is bad, but "one of the cruelest and most inhumane things one person can do to another" is at risk of breaking my hyperboleometer.
Let's see you build your life around a commitment and the other person breaks it. From the biological standpoint of a man you forgo all other chances to reproduce on the belief that you're partner will have your child and then you spend a huge portion of your life caring for that child and earning money to support that child. Then you find out it's not your child. You've been tricked into spending your whole existence serving the interests of another man. If you believe the theory of evolution you understand that you have been murdered for eternity.
There are reasons men get jealous and why in most successful societies female infidelity incurs severe punishments, and why rape should also incur severe penalties.
Funny how Slashdot's fierce Fighters for Privacy turn a blind eye when it's victims have done one of the cruelest and most inhumane things one person can do to another.
FTFY
while Trump yammers about Mexico. I see so much about Trump in the news while this island building has been major activity for some time, all part of plan to "extend" territorial boundaries of China. Glad to know we got our priorities properly set.
I'm no fan of Trump (that's an understatement), but Mexico is an existential problem for American ideas. We see that Mexicans who come here and vote, and their children who vote, tend to vote for the same kinds of policies that have made an economic and political catastrophe of every attempt at democracy in South America, Central America, and Mexico (with or without American involvement). We've seen from the example of American Indians that failing to have and enforce an immigration policy is a recipe for disaster.
China is a threat, but a longer term threat. If we fail to keep our nation strong we'll be overpowered by China no matter whether we confront China now or later.
IANACE* If they build a runway on the reef I assume they would put something more durable under the pavement than sand. Wouldn't they need to at least run some steel posts into the reef below? A category 5 direct hit hurricane would probably take out most buildings, but if you know the hurricane is coming you can evacuate the planes, ships and people before it arrives. The really expensive stuff (the runway) would survive. The buildings could be replaced quickly (it's a military base not a luxury hotel so spartan accommodations would be fine).
*I am not a civil engineer.
This is what's absurd. China's claim if you look at the dashed line is obviously exaggerated and that part of the ocean is obviously not Chinese. It's nowhere close to China and the dotted lines are well within the normal territorial waters of other countries. It's like some general took a crayon and with a shaky hand drew it out and said "this remote and distant ocean is now ours". Columbus style in other words.
Next up, they'll claim that Vietnam and the Phillipines are Chinese territories, and have always been Chinese territories.
Yep, They did that with Taiwan. When America helped for a pro-China candidate to win the presidential election in Taiwan and China was able to start getting a lot of concessions, they moved on to the 9-dash line. Once we appease them with that they'll expand their claims. I understand they have even made a few comments about Okinawa.