The operating system's permissions model itself is supposed to prevent stupid or evil users from doing stupid or evil things. The execution policy is just security theater.
Because the mainstream media sources don't have fake news. They may get news wrong, but they certainly aren't out there fabricating stories like Pepsi attacked Trump.
Indeed. The only people I ever hear whining about how all the other races hate the white race are angry white men. I live in a town with a high Native American population, not to mention many Asians, and none of them have ever called me a racist.
I think you're a little confused. Hindenburg was the President of Germany, not the Chancellor (Prime Minister in Westminster parlance). It was Franz von Papen who convinced Hindenburg (who, even though he was going a bit senile by this point, deeply disliked Hitler, viewing him as an absurd little man) to name Hitler Chancellor. von Papen's error was the same as Hindenburg's completely underestimating Hitler, assuming he was a crazy demagogue who, when put into power, would be suitably chastised and overwhelmed, and allow the German ruling class to exert control.
Of course history shows what a fool von Papen was. Hitler may have played the crazed demagogue to the German Alt-right of the day, but he was nobody's fool, and once he was Chancellor, all he had to do was wait until Hindenburg slipped into complete somnolence and died, and after that he was able push through the Enabling Act on to an overawed Reichstag and become absolute ruler of Germany.
While I don't think you can make a perfect parallel, mainly because the Weimar government didn't have the same degree of checks and balances as the US Constitution affords, I do think the lesson of Franz von Papen is something the GOP should ponder as they decide how to work with the Trump Administration. They may believe he's just a brainless demagogue whom Ryan and McConnell can manipulate and bend to their will, and maybe that's the case. But maybe he's a cannier player than that, and maybe it's they who get shoved into the corner.
Pah! I've picked the size of my scrotum. All God-fearing average sized ballsacks, join me to preserve our median testicles from the savages of the small and large balled inferiors!
It isn't really any different. Immigrants, with a few notable exceptions, will assimilate into the larger culture. Anti-immigrant sentiment, by the way, is very old, and early versions of it have eerily similar overtones to the current hysteria over Muslims and Mexicans. A century or so ago, it was the fear of Irish and to some extent of Eastern European immigrants, not to mention on the Pacific coast of North America, fears about Asians, and in particular Chinese. There were similar fears of the white man being outbred. I remember looking at magazines from the turn of the 20th century being fearful of the "Yellow Hoard". Immigrants are often tarred with nefarious intentions, and often the misbehavior of some small group of an ethnic population are used to slander the entire group.
One of my great-grandfathers grew up in a German-speaking Mennonite community in Ontario in the late 19th century. There were all kinds of distaff Pennsylvania Dutch communities throughout eastern North America who still primarily spoke German and Eastern European languages, and some, like the Amish, still prosper today. But when my great-grandfather left home to find work, he had to learn to speak and read English far better than he had as a child, and in the end, so I'm told, the German accent wasn't terribly perceptible.
My grandfather on my dad's side grew up in an area of British Columbia with a large population (for the region in the early 20th century) of Swedes and Norwegians, and all his sisters married Swedes, accept for his youngest, who married a Norwegian. Family reunions when I kid were fun, with lots of Olafs and Svens, and even a Thor, in attendance. So far as I remember, all the husbands were actually born in Scandinavia, and still had fairly thick accents.
But their grandkids, who I chummed around with when I visited when I was a kid, didn't know any Scandinavian language (except swear words, somehow those get passed on). Even their parents, second generation, knew very little, having to make their way in the English-speaking world.
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if Bannon is out soon. I'm getting this feeling, and I don't know whether it's good or bad, that Trump is getting rid of all the undesirable people he needed to get where he was. Bannon may bring the alt-right, but maybe Trump, having got them to vote for him, isn't terribly interested in keeping a pack of nasty white supremacists in his corner. At any rate, I have a hard time believing that Kushner, who does seem to be running the show, would have much love for an anti-Semite like Bannon.
Nope, I mean "accepts what scientists say." That you can find at least one or two researchers in any field who promote wingnut views doesn't mean those views aren't pure wingnuttery.
In my area of interests, Proto-Indo-European studies, there are a small group of linguists, primarily Indian nationalists, who insist India is the Urheimat of the Proto-Indo-European languages. The overwhelming majority of PIE researchers view this for what it is, politically motivated rubbish, and point to Pontic-Caspian Steppe as the most likely original homeland of the Indo-European speakers, pointing to the fact that the Baltic and Slavic (sometimes grouped together as the Balto-Slavic languages) as possessing far more PIE primitives than virtually any other family of languages with the possible exception of the extinct Anatolian subfamily.
The point of that long aside is to show you that you will find in any field of research a small number of people who for various reasons, some honest and sincere, some absurd and dishonorable, who ride against the consensus. And so it is with climatology. You have a very small number of climatologists (and a much smaller number of active and publishing researchers) who claim AGW is overstated or false, but the overwhelming majority assert that those very small number of contrarians are wrong, and in some cases, clearly intentionally distorting legitimate research and data to make AGW seem overstated. It doesn't help that some of these contrarians, like Frank Spencer, are basically on anti-AGW political thinktank payrolls, raising serious ethical questions about their motivations for writing anti-AGW screeds (not to mention these very few individuals, like their Creationist counterparts in biology, almost never publish any papers that lay out their great destructive critiques of AGW).
My view is that you just don't want to hear bad news, so you've decided that the overwhelming number of researchers in areas related to climatology are liars, and because you're of an childish and cowardly temperment, literallly a delicate little snowflake, you only want to hear from that tiniest fraction of the research community who promotes claims you are emotionally equipped to deal with.
At the end of the day, of course, the universe doesn't fucking care about your tender snowflake feelings. CO2 has the properties it has, and increasing even fractional percentages of overall CO2 in the atmosphere will inevitably lead to more heat being trapped. I do pity your fragile snowflake ego, though. I understand that your mommy and daddy never really explained to you that reality doesn't owe even the tiniest favor.
Not when the intent is to draw a direct parallel between the white supremacist nationalists of a different age with their modern counterparts. I'm not accidentally pulling a Godwin, I'm out and out calling at least some portions of the Alt-right Nazis.
I don't propose banning any speech. But neither do I think freedom of speech means freedom from consequence, which is what I think at least some here want. They want to be able to make direct or thinly veiled bigoted statements, and have everyone around them act like that's completely normal. You can tell what delicate little snowflakes the Alt-right are because every time they get called on some nasty slur, they start moaning about SJWs. What they really mean is "I don't want to be held accountable, and anyone that holds me accountable is bad."
The Byzantine Empire was in pretty woeful shape long before it fell, and the Ottomans, at least early on, did a great deal to restore some degree of order.
Even if this is the case, you can certainly correct the data for anything like that, so I'm going to call this bullshit. Once again another denier comes up with an idiotic objection and then acts like they discovered the key to destroying an entire scientific theory. There was no global pause. That pause, as it were, is the product of your fellow travelers cherry picking data, not the other way around.
You'll feel that way until a series of drought condition summers lead to massive wild fires. Look at what happened up in Northern Alberta and Saskatchewan last summer. For chrissake, the fire is still burning!
I think you'd best look at who is in charge of Congress now, and who Trump has surrounded himself with. It will be quite something if NOAA isn't defunded and Federal money to universities doing climate change research is clawed back. The one thing is certain is that whatever Trump is, he's at the center of a large body of people who hate science and believe scientists, particularly climatologists, are evil schemers out to destroy the America.
And once again, weather is not climate, and regional climate is not global climate. Global warming means overall average temperatures rise, not that every single location on the planet is going to get hotter, or heat equally.
But I suspect you know that, it's just all you can do in the face of insurmountable evidence is throw out moronic asides. It's really about making yourself feel better, isn't it?
The theory behind giving developing nations more time is to allow them to use fossil fuels to get their economies to the point where they can transition to alternatives. For the most part the industrialized world is probably within a decade or two of a major transition, if it just pulls the finger out of its ass, starts pricing carbon for the damage it is doing (in other words, remove what effectively amounts to a massive subsidy to an unsustainable means of energy production). As it is, alternative energy is making major inroads in the industrialized world.
Yes, China's emissions are a problem, but the fact is that the West, and the US in particular, are still responsible for the overwhelming amount of greenhouse gas emissions, so blaming it on China is little more than a farting man blaming the stink on his dog's bad breath.
YOur issue is a non-issue. Human civilization began and has flourished in a fairly narrow band of climatological conditions. While, in the space of geological time, those conditions will change, the nice about geological time is that it is a LONG FUCKING TIME. What we're doing now is leading to major climactic changes in a very SHORT FUCKING TIME. It's one thing to adapt to changing climate on the order of centuries or millennia, it's another thing to try to adapt to major changes in the order of decades.
The focus should be on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and trying to do as much harm reduction as we can, not on pretending that the problem doesn't exist and going for easy targets so we can pretend that there is no problem. CO2 emissions caused by humans are leading to warming, so humans can fix the problem. Otherwise all your advocating is we fuck over our grandchildren because we're too stupid and evil and selfish to work towards the solution now.
And for what? So you can gas up your car cheaper or have cheaper electricity? Do you hate the future that much? Do your kids fill you with such loathing that you would just dispense with their welfare and pretend we can do nothing? What the fuck is wrong with you?
Slashdot Mirror
The operating system's permissions model itself is supposed to prevent stupid or evil users from doing stupid or evil things. The execution policy is just security theater.
Because the mainstream media sources don't have fake news. They may get news wrong, but they certainly aren't out there fabricating stories like Pepsi attacked Trump.
Indeed. The only people I ever hear whining about how all the other races hate the white race are angry white men. I live in a town with a high Native American population, not to mention many Asians, and none of them have ever called me a racist.
I think you're a little confused. Hindenburg was the President of Germany, not the Chancellor (Prime Minister in Westminster parlance). It was Franz von Papen who convinced Hindenburg (who, even though he was going a bit senile by this point, deeply disliked Hitler, viewing him as an absurd little man) to name Hitler Chancellor. von Papen's error was the same as Hindenburg's completely underestimating Hitler, assuming he was a crazy demagogue who, when put into power, would be suitably chastised and overwhelmed, and allow the German ruling class to exert control.
Of course history shows what a fool von Papen was. Hitler may have played the crazed demagogue to the German Alt-right of the day, but he was nobody's fool, and once he was Chancellor, all he had to do was wait until Hindenburg slipped into complete somnolence and died, and after that he was able push through the Enabling Act on to an overawed Reichstag and become absolute ruler of Germany.
While I don't think you can make a perfect parallel, mainly because the Weimar government didn't have the same degree of checks and balances as the US Constitution affords, I do think the lesson of Franz von Papen is something the GOP should ponder as they decide how to work with the Trump Administration. They may believe he's just a brainless demagogue whom Ryan and McConnell can manipulate and bend to their will, and maybe that's the case. But maybe he's a cannier player than that, and maybe it's they who get shoved into the corner.
Pah! I've picked the size of my scrotum. All God-fearing average sized ballsacks, join me to preserve our median testicles from the savages of the small and large balled inferiors!
It isn't really any different. Immigrants, with a few notable exceptions, will assimilate into the larger culture. Anti-immigrant sentiment, by the way, is very old, and early versions of it have eerily similar overtones to the current hysteria over Muslims and Mexicans. A century or so ago, it was the fear of Irish and to some extent of Eastern European immigrants, not to mention on the Pacific coast of North America, fears about Asians, and in particular Chinese. There were similar fears of the white man being outbred. I remember looking at magazines from the turn of the 20th century being fearful of the "Yellow Hoard". Immigrants are often tarred with nefarious intentions, and often the misbehavior of some small group of an ethnic population are used to slander the entire group.
One of my great-grandfathers grew up in a German-speaking Mennonite community in Ontario in the late 19th century. There were all kinds of distaff Pennsylvania Dutch communities throughout eastern North America who still primarily spoke German and Eastern European languages, and some, like the Amish, still prosper today. But when my great-grandfather left home to find work, he had to learn to speak and read English far better than he had as a child, and in the end, so I'm told, the German accent wasn't terribly perceptible.
My grandfather on my dad's side grew up in an area of British Columbia with a large population (for the region in the early 20th century) of Swedes and Norwegians, and all his sisters married Swedes, accept for his youngest, who married a Norwegian. Family reunions when I kid were fun, with lots of Olafs and Svens, and even a Thor, in attendance. So far as I remember, all the husbands were actually born in Scandinavia, and still had fairly thick accents.
But their grandkids, who I chummed around with when I visited when I was a kid, didn't know any Scandinavian language (except swear words, somehow those get passed on). Even their parents, second generation, knew very little, having to make their way in the English-speaking world.
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if Bannon is out soon. I'm getting this feeling, and I don't know whether it's good or bad, that Trump is getting rid of all the undesirable people he needed to get where he was. Bannon may bring the alt-right, but maybe Trump, having got them to vote for him, isn't terribly interested in keeping a pack of nasty white supremacists in his corner. At any rate, I have a hard time believing that Kushner, who does seem to be running the show, would have much love for an anti-Semite like Bannon.
Nope, I mean "accepts what scientists say." That you can find at least one or two researchers in any field who promote wingnut views doesn't mean those views aren't pure wingnuttery.
In my area of interests, Proto-Indo-European studies, there are a small group of linguists, primarily Indian nationalists, who insist India is the Urheimat of the Proto-Indo-European languages. The overwhelming majority of PIE researchers view this for what it is, politically motivated rubbish, and point to Pontic-Caspian Steppe as the most likely original homeland of the Indo-European speakers, pointing to the fact that the Baltic and Slavic (sometimes grouped together as the Balto-Slavic languages) as possessing far more PIE primitives than virtually any other family of languages with the possible exception of the extinct Anatolian subfamily.
The point of that long aside is to show you that you will find in any field of research a small number of people who for various reasons, some honest and sincere, some absurd and dishonorable, who ride against the consensus. And so it is with climatology. You have a very small number of climatologists (and a much smaller number of active and publishing researchers) who claim AGW is overstated or false, but the overwhelming majority assert that those very small number of contrarians are wrong, and in some cases, clearly intentionally distorting legitimate research and data to make AGW seem overstated. It doesn't help that some of these contrarians, like Frank Spencer, are basically on anti-AGW political thinktank payrolls, raising serious ethical questions about their motivations for writing anti-AGW screeds (not to mention these very few individuals, like their Creationist counterparts in biology, almost never publish any papers that lay out their great destructive critiques of AGW).
My view is that you just don't want to hear bad news, so you've decided that the overwhelming number of researchers in areas related to climatology are liars, and because you're of an childish and cowardly temperment, literallly a delicate little snowflake, you only want to hear from that tiniest fraction of the research community who promotes claims you are emotionally equipped to deal with.
At the end of the day, of course, the universe doesn't fucking care about your tender snowflake feelings. CO2 has the properties it has, and increasing even fractional percentages of overall CO2 in the atmosphere will inevitably lead to more heat being trapped. I do pity your fragile snowflake ego, though. I understand that your mommy and daddy never really explained to you that reality doesn't owe even the tiniest favor.
Not when the intent is to draw a direct parallel between the white supremacist nationalists of a different age with their modern counterparts. I'm not accidentally pulling a Godwin, I'm out and out calling at least some portions of the Alt-right Nazis.
I don't propose banning any speech. But neither do I think freedom of speech means freedom from consequence, which is what I think at least some here want. They want to be able to make direct or thinly veiled bigoted statements, and have everyone around them act like that's completely normal. You can tell what delicate little snowflakes the Alt-right are because every time they get called on some nasty slur, they start moaning about SJWs. What they really mean is "I don't want to be held accountable, and anyone that holds me accountable is bad."
The Byzantine Empire was in pretty woeful shape long before it fell, and the Ottomans, at least early on, did a great deal to restore some degree of order.
In other words it is a fake news site that buries the bullshit in a veneer of actual stories.
His ex wife produced his anti semitic email in.proceedings. It wasn't just hearsay
I'm getting the feeling you have no idea what "fascist" means.
By "antiscience" you mean "accepts what actual scientists say."
I'm white and I've never been called a racist. Then again, I don't say racist things. Hmm, maybe there's a connection
That's how they'll defend it, by being even more vile than Bannon. Welcome to Brownshirt America.
Even if this is the case, you can certainly correct the data for anything like that, so I'm going to call this bullshit. Once again another denier comes up with an idiotic objection and then acts like they discovered the key to destroying an entire scientific theory. There was no global pause. That pause, as it were, is the product of your fellow travelers cherry picking data, not the other way around.
You'll feel that way until a series of drought condition summers lead to massive wild fires. Look at what happened up in Northern Alberta and Saskatchewan last summer. For chrissake, the fire is still burning!
I think you'd best look at who is in charge of Congress now, and who Trump has surrounded himself with. It will be quite something if NOAA isn't defunded and Federal money to universities doing climate change research is clawed back. The one thing is certain is that whatever Trump is, he's at the center of a large body of people who hate science and believe scientists, particularly climatologists, are evil schemers out to destroy the America.
And once again, weather is not climate, and regional climate is not global climate. Global warming means overall average temperatures rise, not that every single location on the planet is going to get hotter, or heat equally.
But I suspect you know that, it's just all you can do in the face of insurmountable evidence is throw out moronic asides. It's really about making yourself feel better, isn't it?
The theory behind giving developing nations more time is to allow them to use fossil fuels to get their economies to the point where they can transition to alternatives. For the most part the industrialized world is probably within a decade or two of a major transition, if it just pulls the finger out of its ass, starts pricing carbon for the damage it is doing (in other words, remove what effectively amounts to a massive subsidy to an unsustainable means of energy production). As it is, alternative energy is making major inroads in the industrialized world.
Yes, China's emissions are a problem, but the fact is that the West, and the US in particular, are still responsible for the overwhelming amount of greenhouse gas emissions, so blaming it on China is little more than a farting man blaming the stink on his dog's bad breath.
YOur issue is a non-issue. Human civilization began and has flourished in a fairly narrow band of climatological conditions. While, in the space of geological time, those conditions will change, the nice about geological time is that it is a LONG FUCKING TIME. What we're doing now is leading to major climactic changes in a very SHORT FUCKING TIME. It's one thing to adapt to changing climate on the order of centuries or millennia, it's another thing to try to adapt to major changes in the order of decades.
The focus should be on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and trying to do as much harm reduction as we can, not on pretending that the problem doesn't exist and going for easy targets so we can pretend that there is no problem. CO2 emissions caused by humans are leading to warming, so humans can fix the problem. Otherwise all your advocating is we fuck over our grandchildren because we're too stupid and evil and selfish to work towards the solution now.
And for what? So you can gas up your car cheaper or have cheaper electricity? Do you hate the future that much? Do your kids fill you with such loathing that you would just dispense with their welfare and pretend we can do nothing? What the fuck is wrong with you?
Yes, but that would cost fossil fuel companies a lot of money, so they send out their useful idiots and shills to spread disinformation, even when said fossil fuel companies have known about AGW for decades