I know of a group of people who tried to start a small bank. Even though they had sufficient resources, government regulators prevented them from doing so.
That's how regulation always works. Those who are already in an industry use regulation to keep out competition.
The nature of the United States is that there are primarily two opposing political forces vying for control.
This is quite right, and is what is at issue here. One side has been controlling education for decades...really a century or so, and the other side is finally fighting back, trying to wrest control.
Now, in my opinion, the real answer is decentralization of education, with more homeschooling, and devolving large schools into small, independent (preferably private) neighborhood schools. Then, you have less centralized power for anyone to try to control.
Too bad the Americans can't tolerate the idea of an empire based on non-American culture and values, as such an empire wouldn't necessarily listen to political and military pressure of the American government as it tries to enforce the ideas of political capitalism, that is, a capitalism providing benefits for the few instead of the many as it feeds the hungry, overweight employees of the American companies and the dictatorships formed by political assassinations.
As much as I tend towards isolationism, it's still hard not to respond that over the past century, at least a couple of "empire(s) based on non-American culture and values" have been proposed and imposed, with somewhat less than positive results.
As long as you don't distribute what you create, you are free to do whatever you like with GPL software. You can *use* it however you like. You are not required to even accept the GPL. The only limitation is that you have no right to distribute any derivative works, other than those provided by the GPL, if you choose to accept it. Read COPYING some time.
This is idiotic, and is typical of the kind of pseudo-science underlying much of the climate alarmism currently en vogue. Like a lot of things, it is pretty much impossible to quantify which language ultimately uses more power, because of all the variables. As others have pointed out, you might save some power in the deployment of the code, but you would surely use more power in the development of that code. Then, you have to figure out what the total impact of that is, since you'd have more man-hours of coding, using human coders, who sit at desks, in offices, which must be heated and cooled, etc., etc.
Clinton did the same stuff, FYI. So, you could just say that Obama is continuing Bush's continuation of Clinton's anti-privacy policies.
Yes, you can argue that it's really Congress that is doing this, but there is a lot of coordination, especially when you are talking about a Congress controlled by the same party.
And there isn't a single "right wing" or "left wing" view on this. What it boils down to is a statist view, and an anti-statist view.
BTW, did you click the link to the Atlantic article? That article is really good, and proposes a real fix to the health care system. It should be seriously considered.
What I meant was that in the popular media, the term "death panels" has gained traction. While it may be used in the context of trying to debunk its assertion, in the long run, the widespread use of the term undermined the political momentum of the proponents of the Obama/Dem plan. So much so that they promptly removed the provision that didn't exist.
She is no dummy; that was a brilliant little bit of political guerilla fighting.
I suppose you have to cut them some slack. The indoctrination in government schools is unrelenting these days.
But, yeah...it is kind of like "Slashkos."
That's why I hardly post these days. Or, for that matter, visit. Sad. This was a really cool place in the nineties. 'Course we had to ride a stationary bike with a generator uphill both ways in a snowstorm just to keep our Compaq Portable Computers running long enough to post a one-liner.
I know all you slavishly leftist Slashdotters of the current age think that Sarah Palin is a moron.
But, she's got everyone using the term "death panels," doesn't she?
Maybe she's not so dumb, after all, eh?
The answer to the shortcomings of private insurance bureaucracies is not bigger bureaucracies, it's putting the decision-making back into the hands of patients.
Re:WHBQ Fox13 != Fox News
on
Fox Hacks Fark
·
· Score: 1
Ah, you're new here!
Actually, I'm not (see uid).
However, I might as well be, as I don't spend much time around here anymore, largely due to the problems to which you allude. And the infestation of numbskulls.
At one time, there weren't really any politics to speak of here, and we discussed technical issues.
WHBQ Fox13 != Fox News
on
Fox Hacks Fark
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Fox News Channel is an entirely different thing than a local Fox affiliate, even one that is owned by News Corp. The summary above should make that more clear.
Re:Maybe there's a silver lining here...
on
Storm Worm Rising
·
· Score: 1
I don't know what other people use clamav for primarily, but I use it for scanning email, and most of the clients are Windows.
Well, heck. Maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about.
This screensaver apparently does some kind of http attack. What I'm seeing is an SMTP attack.
But, it may be a counter-attack or something.
So, bottom line: never mind.:-)
I am already seeing the collateral damage. One of my clients is getting attacked massively, and they have nothing whatsoever to do with spamming or web hosting.
Whoever thought this up should be tarred and feathered.
That quiz is a quite inaccurate, at least in my case.
It puts me at just about square-on the same score as the Liberal Democrat party (Economic: 4.12, Social -0.72).
I can assure you, as a rural American with fairly traditional values/beliefs, my political views are quite far from those of Charles Kennedy. I certainly would not consider him a "right-libertarian" in any meaningful way.
Part of the problem is that the reason for answering a question in a particular way may differ, depending on how one reads it.
Also, there are biases in the questions. I would presume I got a "authoritarian" point for answering that abortion should always be illegal, based on the idea that such a view is contrary to liberty. But, if you believe, as many people do, that abortion is the killing of a human being, then such an assignment of points is unfair.
Also, they are equating holding a position that something is immoral or wrong with desiring such a thing to be illegal, which are not the same.
The main question raised by the film, which neither Richard Clarke nor anyone at the White House has ever answered, is why?
Because Richard Clarke approved the flights. Obviously, he felt that it would be prudent to get those people out of the country, given that they are related to the chief suspect, but known to be estranged from him.
If Moore is so concerned, why doesn't he ask Mr. Clarke?
And the "conservative talking points" attack was really, really weak. Why not respond to the fact that Bowling for Columbine was shown to be factually inaccurate on many points?
Moore is basically a propagandist. He's also basically a communist, who can't decide which he hates more: big business or small business. But, hey...if that's what toots your horn...go watch his bilge over and over.
Slashdot Mirror
I know of a group of people who tried to start a small bank. Even though they had sufficient resources, government regulators prevented them from doing so.
That's how regulation always works. Those who are already in an industry use regulation to keep out competition.
Your comments will not be popular here, but you're correct. Such a scenario is plausible.
So, thank you, Democrats. I look forward to watching you become even more insane after President Palin is sworn in.
This is quite right, and is what is at issue here. One side has been controlling education for decades...really a century or so, and the other side is finally fighting back, trying to wrest control.
Now, in my opinion, the real answer is decentralization of education, with more homeschooling, and devolving large schools into small, independent (preferably private) neighborhood schools. Then, you have less centralized power for anyone to try to control.
Regulation will *always* be used by the powerful to buttress their power and position. Always.
The only check against that is a limitation on government power. That is what the founding fathers were attempting to do.
Adding regulation only makes matters worse.
Too bad the Americans can't tolerate the idea of an empire based on non-American culture and values, as such an empire wouldn't necessarily listen to political and military pressure of the American government as it tries to enforce the ideas of political capitalism, that is, a capitalism providing benefits for the few instead of the many as it feeds the hungry, overweight employees of the American companies and the dictatorships formed by political assassinations.
As much as I tend towards isolationism, it's still hard not to respond that over the past century, at least a couple of "empire(s) based on non-American culture and values" have been proposed and imposed, with somewhat less than positive results.
As long as you don't distribute what you create, you are free to do whatever you like with GPL software. You can *use* it however you like. You are not required to even accept the GPL. The only limitation is that you have no right to distribute any derivative works, other than those provided by the GPL, if you choose to accept it. Read COPYING some time.
This is idiotic, and is typical of the kind of pseudo-science underlying much of the climate alarmism currently en vogue. Like a lot of things, it is pretty much impossible to quantify which language ultimately uses more power, because of all the variables. As others have pointed out, you might save some power in the deployment of the code, but you would surely use more power in the development of that code. Then, you have to figure out what the total impact of that is, since you'd have more man-hours of coding, using human coders, who sit at desks, in offices, which must be heated and cooled, etc., etc.
Clinton did the same stuff, FYI. So, you could just say that Obama is continuing Bush's continuation of Clinton's anti-privacy policies.
Yes, you can argue that it's really Congress that is doing this, but there is a lot of coordination, especially when you are talking about a Congress controlled by the same party.
And there isn't a single "right wing" or "left wing" view on this. What it boils down to is a statist view, and an anti-statist view.
BTW, did you click the link to the Atlantic article? That article is really good, and proposes a real fix to the health care system. It should be seriously considered.
What I meant was that in the popular media, the term "death panels" has gained traction. While it may be used in the context of trying to debunk its assertion, in the long run, the widespread use of the term undermined the political momentum of the proponents of the Obama/Dem plan. So much so that they promptly removed the provision that didn't exist.
She is no dummy; that was a brilliant little bit of political guerilla fighting.
Speaking of research, Trig is a boy. And really classy move there, mocking the disabled.
But, yeah...it is kind of like "Slashkos."
That's why I hardly post these days. Or, for that matter, visit. Sad. This was a really cool place in the nineties. 'Course we had to ride a stationary bike with a generator uphill both ways in a snowstorm just to keep our Compaq Portable Computers running long enough to post a one-liner.
I know all you slavishly leftist Slashdotters of the current age think that Sarah Palin is a moron. But, she's got everyone using the term "death panels," doesn't she? Maybe she's not so dumb, after all, eh? The answer to the shortcomings of private insurance bureaucracies is not bigger bureaucracies, it's putting the decision-making back into the hands of patients.
Actually, I'm not (see uid).
However, I might as well be, as I don't spend much time around here anymore, largely due to the problems to which you allude. And the infestation of numbskulls.
At one time, there weren't really any politics to speak of here, and we discussed technical issues.
Fox News Channel is an entirely different thing than a local Fox affiliate, even one that is owned by News Corp. The summary above should make that more clear.
I don't know what other people use clamav for primarily, but I use it for scanning email, and most of the clients are Windows.
Since we're being pedantic...that only gets you to the exit. You still need a few minutes to get to the actual location. :-)
We're all conservative rednecks out here and it's always windy, and we get snowstorms and ice storms.
If you drive 120 miles an hour, maybe. It's at mile marker 82 or so. Do the math.
Well, heck. Maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about. This screensaver apparently does some kind of http attack. What I'm seeing is an SMTP attack. But, it may be a counter-attack or something. So, bottom line: never mind. :-)
I am already seeing the collateral damage. One of my clients is getting attacked massively, and they have nothing whatsoever to do with spamming or web hosting. Whoever thought this up should be tarred and feathered.
You'd think around here we'd know the difference.
It puts me at just about square-on the same score as the Liberal Democrat party (Economic: 4.12, Social -0.72).
I can assure you, as a rural American with fairly traditional values/beliefs, my political views are quite far from those of Charles Kennedy. I certainly would not consider him a "right-libertarian" in any meaningful way.
Part of the problem is that the reason for answering a question in a particular way may differ, depending on how one reads it.
Also, there are biases in the questions. I would presume I got a "authoritarian" point for answering that abortion should always be illegal, based on the idea that such a view is contrary to liberty. But, if you believe, as many people do, that abortion is the killing of a human being, then such an assignment of points is unfair.
Also, they are equating holding a position that something is immoral or wrong with desiring such a thing to be illegal, which are not the same.
Because Richard Clarke approved the flights. Obviously, he felt that it would be prudent to get those people out of the country, given that they are related to the chief suspect, but known to be estranged from him.
If Moore is so concerned, why doesn't he ask Mr. Clarke?
And the "conservative talking points" attack was really, really weak. Why not respond to the fact that Bowling for Columbine was shown to be factually inaccurate on many points?
Moore is basically a propagandist. He's also basically a communist, who can't decide which he hates more: big business or small business. But, hey...if that's what toots your horn...go watch his bilge over and over.