Americans are not patriotic. Patriotic people wouldn't let their country slide to tyranny, nor let its leaders shit all over its laws, nor keep voting for people who can't even pass a damn budget without turning it into a game of "chicken".
Hmmm...yeah, cause history has proven that patriotism has never been used as a tool to support tyranny.
Wow. What on earth do they teach kids these days. Please read a book or 2 on history. The irony of anyone making a comment like that calling the previous post ignorant is staggering. What's even worst it gets modded +5 Insightful.
While that's entirely possible, the fact is that they aren't at the top.
The US has been the most powerful national economy on the planet since the late 19th century and the most powerful militarily for almost as long. Since at least the 19th century those go pretty much hand in hand. Not sure how you measure being on top but if those don't count please enlighten us on what standard you think maters.
It's American's turn to show what you're made of and whether you can handle real power. This far, the answers seem to be "pyrite" and "no". And so the USA fades to history, the same as every previous empire who failed the test. But at least the world has calmed down enough that it's unlikely anyone will be ransacking Washington.
Whether and/or how quickly the United State's power is fading is definitely open for argument but again if you actually had any knowledge of history the US has been about the most benevolent world power thus far. Whether that can be credited to something special about the US or simple an accident of historical timing is again debatable.
So what you are saying is that you can solve the obsolete design part (is that even a problem? something newer isn't automatically better) but the problems of rare unplanned-for events and bad luck are still there.
No. They already have. A reactor of modern design would almost certainly not have melted down even under the conditions experienced there.
People died during the evacuation, and now at least 20 odd children have cancer that was likely caused by leaks from the plant with many more to come in the next few years.
You are truly a complete idiot. Increase those numbers by an order of magnitude and they're still several orders of magnitude lower then death and disease caused by petrochemical industry. But no...oooh. One killed or diseased by the nuclear industry is far worse that thousands killed or diseased by the petrochemical industry.
But hay, who gives a fuck about the human suffering, it's costing hundreds of billions of dollars to clean the damn thing up and compensate everybody!
It's the "I know what I'm doing" area. Once you get to about 100 jumps, 100 dives, then you think you're getting the hang of it and you know what the risks are and that you can mitigate them.
That combined with skydiving tends to attract a rather risk craving type of crowd. I watched a guy do a hook turn on a tiny canopy and came out where he had to pull his legs up and his ass was less than a foot above the ground as he skimmed by at what had to be a good 40 mph.
He grounded himself for 2 weeks. He had over 1000 jumps.
There is a huge difference between making a bad decision and something like doing hook turns with a high loaded canopy. To put it in terms you might be able to better relate to it's like the difference between driving a normal car reasonable close to the speed limit and riding 100 mph doing wheelies splitting lanes on a rice rocket. Surely you'll agree actions like that greatly increase your chance of death.
The thing with skydiving is a much higher percentage of the people are the ones riding 100 mph doing wheelies splitting lanes. This greatly distorts the statistical calculations of the risk of death for the guy that's just out there doing speed stars and landing like a sane person.
Skydiving is 7 micromorts per jump. That's equivalent to travlling 1600 miles by car.
That's really a distortion of how dangerous skydiving is. The vast majority of skydiving deaths aren't really accidents but rather someone doing something stupid under a perfectly good canopy. If you don't do hook turns on a 3:1 loaded canopy you're much less likely to get killed.
Hmmm...thinking about I guess you can say the same thing about driving also. With the caveat that a collision driving is much more likely to gather in someone not doing something stupid than in skydiving.
Why are European politicians involved in "negotiations" at all? They could save their time and just sign a document written by the U.S. government. Same result with less effort.
Why are European politicians involved in "negotiations" at all? They could save their time and just sign a document written by the US content industries (RIAA, MPAA). Same result with less effort.
I just love how the wingnuts have shifted from trying to defend the indefensible to the ludicrous assertion "well your partisans are just as bad as ours!" Clue: the Republicans have gone off the deep end into Lalaland. Deal with it. This is nothing more than a false equivalency fallacy.
Yeah, cause Obama has been a paragon in defense of the constitution and rule of law. I'm not going to bother arguing beyond that as it's evident in anything you read outside the left wing propaganda that can only be your staple. There is no point in arguing with the likes of you because you're so far gone from reality that it would make no difference and so closed minded no seep of reality would be visible.
Just in case you missed , it is not the government selling fear thus time (WMD Anyone?), but rather the right wing media. The left media can spin as well, but are simply outclassed by outlets such as fox, which has ingrained itself as 'mainstream'. I have friends from over seas who laugh when they hear Obama is called an extremist.
You are completely lost in one of the meaningless battles that is exactly one of the fears they are using for control. The idiotic argument of left versus right is nothing more than one of ways the government keeps the people from seeing what it's doing as it slowly usurps the constitution. ZOMG, it's the Republicans/Democrats. We can't let them have power. The world will end if that happens. The reality is they are both equally as bad.
If you actually objectively watched the crap put out by the MSM left or right all of it is focused on sensationalized meaningless crap and none of it is focused on the right problems. If the MSM were doing their job every news program and newspaper in the country would be screaming to have the assholes who blatantly lied to congress put in jail. It is just incredulous that no has even considered that's what should happen. It should be focused on pissing off the government rather than conciliating it . But you don't see objectively. You only see it through your donkey colored glasses.
And don't get me wrong. The idiots who think just the Democrats are the problem are in the exact same boat that you are.
Not necessarily but that too needs to be publicly available. Not all medical mistakes are elevated to the level of malpractice. That's one of the biggest problems with the system. You remove the wrong body part or leave something you weren't supposed to inside someone, yeah, that's probably malpractice. But a misdiagnosis or even given someone the wrong medication doesn't always rise to that level. I would argue they are more often systematic or process problems. The fact that in general they are almost always immediately deemed as malpractice is a contributing factor to keeping all mistakes secret. Making this information public would contribute greatly to making the system more efficient at correcting these types of problems. It would also allow the market to weed out the less competent practitioners.
Just as one example, an intern making a mistake after only 4 hours of sleep for 5 days straight I wouldn't consider malpractice. It's a systematic error in that they are forced to perform a difficult high risk job under those conditions. better sharing about information would allow more thorough evaluation of the system to help improve.
Man, your breath must really stink cause you're surely talking out your ass.
In all three cases the fire was caused by an event that rarely causes a fire in a conventionally powered car. That it was an outside source is irrelevant to this, as it's a normal hazard of operating a car over the road - regardless of it's power source.
In the first place the second fire involved a high speed collision into several objects. That could definitely has a reasonable chance to cause fire in any vehicle. As to the other 2 fires you seem to have some statistics that prove a similar incident wouldn't cause a fire in a gas car? It certainly seems to me running over something that has enough force to puncture "a 3-inch hole through the 1/4-inch-thick armor plate" would have a enough force to puncture a gas tank.
How about you supply some of this evidence you seem to have to support your fallacious claims.
Quite the contrary. In a conventionally powered car, the fuel tank is located in the rear of the car. In the case of incidents like the Tesla fires, the fuel tank is protected by the entire length of the car , while the Tesla's battery is only minimally protected despite it's more exposed position to such hazards.
So when you run something over the gas tank is protected by the entire length of the car? I really want to see how you're managing to drive your car standing on end.
No, the people who need to get a grip are people like yourself - those who, whether through ignorance or bias, continue to insist on making apples-to-oranges comparisons, misrepresenting the facts, and blowing smoke in order to exonerate the Tesla.
To claim there is no need, no value, no "up side" to having a strong national intelligence organization marks you as irrelevant to the discussion as the blind patriots knee-jerking that "it's fine because I have nothing to hide".
And you're just being a demagogue.
To claim the only way to have a strong national intelligence organization is to illegally record everything everybody does marks you as irrelevant to the discussion as the blind patriots knee-jerking that claim "it's all for the children."
I've never understood why protesters obey the rules and regulations of protests. I understand protesting, but for god's sake people, staying behind the line, or really keeping up any fabricated reason not to go to jail, is silly. The whole reason for a protest is to go to jail. It's not just to go to jail, but to have so many people go to jail that there is no feasible way that they can house them all.
Not in the current governmental system in the US. The way they have it set up now getting thrown in jail for a protest like that pretty much gives the government the ammunition to destroy the rest of your life. They throw a dozen felony charges at you, disorderly conduct, disobeying a police officer, resisting arrest, assault on a police officer and of course the always present trump cards terroristic threats and actions, and you're spending massive amounts of money and the next 5 or 10 years doing nothing but trying to stay out of FPMITAP. Imagine what it's like trying to get a job when you have terrorism charges pending against you. That's one method of oppression used here and is arguable more effective than the much more brutal methods used by more obviously oppressive states. Foremost it doesn't instill further discontent the way more brutal methods would while still achieving the same goal.
You need to choose your battles and in my opinion these types of protests aren't the battles worth pushing to that level. As a best case you provide justification for more brutal oppression methods. And the free and open MSM will report it exactly that way: "Police suppress violent protests...".
I know of no similar argument for most of the current generation of electronics in cars
How about 40,000 people killed and hundreds of thousands maimed and injured in the US alone every year. I'd say that's a pretty good argument. And then we can add in the billions in lost productivity for time spent in traffic due to idiot drivers.
This reporter was writing articles exposing government misconduct, and she's a free woman who is publicizing her story on the internet. That doesn't happen in a police state.
Hmmm, more like you don't know what a police state is. Actually the most effective police state would be one where brutal tactics aren't needed to control the policed. This kind of crap goes a long way towards suppressing any kind of dissent. It's far more effective than brutal tactics which may actually encourage dissent.
Uhhh, what is it that Rand is advocating and railing against?
I'm guessing she isn't railing against anything at the moment since she's been dead for over 30 years.
I can't really sum up Objectivism in a/. post but a few current events that I'm sure have her rolling over in her grave:
Government supporting and propping up corrupt inefficient corporate entities (e.g. various banking corporations, auto manufacturers).
Innovative productive entities having there innovation disrupted or stolen by non-productive entities through far overreaching "Intellectual Property" rights. And before anyone brings it up, yes in Atlas Shrugs patents play an important part and that she advocates patents. But the patent system today is far different then what it was when she wrote that and is doing the opposite of what she was advocating the patent system for. Patents are no longer used to help innovative entities improve productivity. They are used by non-productive entities to basically steal the fruits of an productive entities innovations.
Government supporting and passing laws to exclusively support and prop up outdated industries (e.g. RIAA, MPAA).
The movement of capital from productive individuals and entities to an increasingly exclusive elitist group that is non-productive and in many cases destroys productive entities to their own financial gain.
The increasing militarization of the police force to exercise absolute control over any dissent.
Although the mechanisms by which things are happening are very different then how she portrayed them in Atlas Shrugged the underlying cause and effects pretty closely match it. This becomes much more clear if one reads her writings beyond that one book.
First of all selfishness, especially in the way Rand describe it, is not good. It is a means to escape repercussions for the persons action.
You need to reread the GP post. You are a perfect example of the reference to "writers either cluelessly or maliciously misrepresenting her position".
Actually what Rand wrote and the philosophy she advocated means exactly the opposite of what you state here. It truly amazes at the number of people who misrepresent Rand's beliefs and philosophy as being pretty much the exact opposite of what it is. You can't possible have actually read her works and draw the above conclusion. What Rand advocated is total responsibility for one's actions.
You see this also in people claiming that what is happening in the US today is what Rand was advocating for when it is in reality exactly what she was railing against.
Even the summary states they hand over very little. Much less than I had anticipated.
FTFA:
The count does not include requests made using "National Security Letters" issued by the FBI or other U.S. federal agencies that have the force of a warrant or subpoena, albeit without the oversight or control provided by the courts that issue those sorts of orders.
So the report is on a subset of the requests they receive and the most regulated subset at that. The request that bypass the judicial system (and arguable the US Constitution) aren't included.
Except that they've already confirmed that they're not storing your actual fingerprint. They're storing hashes of the fingerprints that they use to verify your fingerprint when you attempt to login
Guessing you're not a software type? Whether they store it on a form of permanent storage or not in order to calculate the hash they HAVE TO feed in the raw data to the hash function. If the hash is of your digitized fingerprint then the digitized fingerprint data is there. You can't just magically create a hash value. While it's there it is vulnerable. The malicious software simple has to intercept the raw data before it's fed into the hash function. The most likely place to do this is to read the raw data feed from the sensor.
Slashdot Mirror
Americans are not patriotic. Patriotic people wouldn't let their country slide to tyranny, nor let its leaders shit all over its laws, nor keep voting for people who can't even pass a damn budget without turning it into a game of "chicken".
Hmmm...yeah, cause history has proven that patriotism has never been used as a tool to support tyranny.
Wow. What on earth do they teach kids these days. Please read a book or 2 on history. The irony of anyone making a comment like that calling the previous post ignorant is staggering. What's even worst it gets modded +5 Insightful.
While that's entirely possible, the fact is that they aren't at the top.
The US has been the most powerful national economy on the planet since the late 19th century and the most powerful militarily for almost as long. Since at least the 19th century those go pretty much hand in hand. Not sure how you measure being on top but if those don't count please enlighten us on what standard you think maters.
It's American's turn to show what you're made of and whether you can handle real power. This far, the answers seem to be "pyrite" and "no". And so the USA fades to history, the same as every previous empire who failed the test. But at least the world has calmed down enough that it's unlikely anyone will be ransacking Washington.
Whether and/or how quickly the United State's power is fading is definitely open for argument but again if you actually had any knowledge of history the US has been about the most benevolent world power thus far. Whether that can be credited to something special about the US or simple an accident of historical timing is again debatable.
So what you are saying is that you can solve the obsolete design part (is that even a problem? something newer isn't automatically better) but the problems of rare unplanned-for events and bad luck are still there.
No. They already have. A reactor of modern design would almost certainly not have melted down even under the conditions experienced there.
People died during the evacuation, and now at least 20 odd children have cancer that was likely caused by leaks from the plant with many more to come in the next few years.
You are truly a complete idiot. Increase those numbers by an order of magnitude and they're still several orders of magnitude lower then death and disease caused by petrochemical industry. But no...oooh. One killed or diseased by the nuclear industry is far worse that thousands killed or diseased by the petrochemical industry.
But hay, who gives a fuck about the human suffering, it's costing hundreds of billions of dollars to clean the damn thing up and compensate everybody!
Evidently you don't
Statistics are statistics.
They sure are. The more churches there are per square mile the more murders there are per square mile.
They just don't always say what people represent them to say.
It's the "I know what I'm doing" area. Once you get to about 100 jumps, 100 dives, then you think you're getting the hang of it and you know what the risks are and that you can mitigate them.
That combined with skydiving tends to attract a rather risk craving type of crowd. I watched a guy do a hook turn on a tiny canopy and came out where he had to pull his legs up and his ass was less than a foot above the ground as he skimmed by at what had to be a good 40 mph.
He grounded himself for 2 weeks. He had over 1000 jumps.
the risk is that you'll make a bad decision
There is a huge difference between making a bad decision and something like doing hook turns with a high loaded canopy. To put it in terms you might be able to better relate to it's like the difference between driving a normal car reasonable close to the speed limit and riding 100 mph doing wheelies splitting lanes on a rice rocket. Surely you'll agree actions like that greatly increase your chance of death.
The thing with skydiving is a much higher percentage of the people are the ones riding 100 mph doing wheelies splitting lanes. This greatly distorts the statistical calculations of the risk of death for the guy that's just out there doing speed stars and landing like a sane person.
Skydiving is 7 micromorts per jump. That's equivalent to travlling 1600 miles by car.
That's really a distortion of how dangerous skydiving is. The vast majority of skydiving deaths aren't really accidents but rather someone doing something stupid under a perfectly good canopy. If you don't do hook turns on a 3:1 loaded canopy you're much less likely to get killed.
Hmmm...thinking about I guess you can say the same thing about driving also. With the caveat that a collision driving is much more likely to gather in someone not doing something stupid than in skydiving.
The point is that when the reality is unknown, you make your decisions on the best available evidence - the consensus.
Consensus is not evidence in any sense of the word.
Why are European politicians involved in "negotiations" at all? They could save their time and just sign a document written by the U.S. government. Same result with less effort.
Why are European politicians involved in "negotiations" at all? They could save their time and just sign a document written by the US content industries (RIAA, MPAA). Same result with less effort.
FTFY
I just love how the wingnuts have shifted from trying to defend the indefensible to the ludicrous assertion "well your partisans are just as bad as ours!" Clue: the Republicans have gone off the deep end into Lalaland. Deal with it. This is nothing more than a false equivalency fallacy.
Yeah, cause Obama has been a paragon in defense of the constitution and rule of law. I'm not going to bother arguing beyond that as it's evident in anything you read outside the left wing propaganda that can only be your staple. There is no point in arguing with the likes of you because you're so far gone from reality that it would make no difference and so closed minded no seep of reality would be visible.
Just in case you missed , it is not the government selling fear thus time (WMD Anyone?), but rather the right wing media. The left media can spin as well, but are simply outclassed by outlets such as fox, which has ingrained itself as 'mainstream'. I have friends from over seas who laugh when they hear Obama is called an extremist.
You are completely lost in one of the meaningless battles that is exactly one of the fears they are using for control. The idiotic argument of left versus right is nothing more than one of ways the government keeps the people from seeing what it's doing as it slowly usurps the constitution. ZOMG, it's the Republicans/Democrats. We can't let them have power. The world will end if that happens. The reality is they are both equally as bad.
If you actually objectively watched the crap put out by the MSM left or right all of it is focused on sensationalized meaningless crap and none of it is focused on the right problems. If the MSM were doing their job every news program and newspaper in the country would be screaming to have the assholes who blatantly lied to congress put in jail. It is just incredulous that no has even considered that's what should happen. It should be focused on pissing off the government rather than conciliating it . But you don't see objectively. You only see it through your donkey colored glasses.
And don't get me wrong. The idiots who think just the Democrats are the problem are in the exact same boat that you are.
you mean Malpractice
Not necessarily but that too needs to be publicly available. Not all medical mistakes are elevated to the level of malpractice. That's one of the biggest problems with the system. You remove the wrong body part or leave something you weren't supposed to inside someone, yeah, that's probably malpractice. But a misdiagnosis or even given someone the wrong medication doesn't always rise to that level. I would argue they are more often systematic or process problems. The fact that in general they are almost always immediately deemed as malpractice is a contributing factor to keeping all mistakes secret. Making this information public would contribute greatly to making the system more efficient at correcting these types of problems. It would also allow the market to weed out the less competent practitioners.
Just as one example, an intern making a mistake after only 4 hours of sleep for 5 days straight I wouldn't consider malpractice. It's a systematic error in that they are forced to perform a difficult high risk job under those conditions. better sharing about information would allow more thorough evaluation of the system to help improve.
Man, your breath must really stink cause you're surely talking out your ass.
In all three cases the fire was caused by an event that rarely causes a fire in a conventionally powered car. That it was an outside source is irrelevant to this, as it's a normal hazard of operating a car over the road - regardless of it's power source.
In the first place the second fire involved a high speed collision into several objects. That could definitely has a reasonable chance to cause fire in any vehicle. As to the other 2 fires you seem to have some statistics that prove a similar incident wouldn't cause a fire in a gas car? It certainly seems to me running over something that has enough force to puncture "a 3-inch hole through the 1/4-inch-thick armor plate" would have a enough force to puncture a gas tank.
How about you supply some of this evidence you seem to have to support your fallacious claims.
Quite the contrary. In a conventionally powered car, the fuel tank is located in the rear of the car. In the case of incidents like the Tesla fires, the fuel tank is protected by the entire length of the car , while the Tesla's battery is only minimally protected despite it's more exposed position to such hazards.
So when you run something over the gas tank is protected by the entire length of the car? I really want to see how you're managing to drive your car standing on end.
No, the people who need to get a grip are people like yourself - those who, whether through ignorance or bias, continue to insist on making apples-to-oranges comparisons, misrepresenting the facts, and blowing smoke in order to exonerate the Tesla.
Wow, the level of irony in that statement...
Is this going to include medical error injuries? That's what really needs to be publicly reported.
To claim there is no need, no value, no "up side" to having a strong national intelligence organization marks you as irrelevant to the discussion as the blind patriots knee-jerking that "it's fine because I have nothing to hide".
And you're just being a demagogue.
To claim the only way to have a strong national intelligence organization is to illegally record everything everybody does marks you as irrelevant to the discussion as the blind patriots knee-jerking that claim "it's all for the children."
I've never understood why protesters obey the rules and regulations of protests. I understand protesting, but for god's sake people, staying behind the line, or really keeping up any fabricated reason not to go to jail, is silly. The whole reason for a protest is to go to jail. It's not just to go to jail, but to have so many people go to jail that there is no feasible way that they can house them all.
Not in the current governmental system in the US. The way they have it set up now getting thrown in jail for a protest like that pretty much gives the government the ammunition to destroy the rest of your life. They throw a dozen felony charges at you, disorderly conduct, disobeying a police officer, resisting arrest, assault on a police officer and of course the always present trump cards terroristic threats and actions, and you're spending massive amounts of money and the next 5 or 10 years doing nothing but trying to stay out of FPMITAP. Imagine what it's like trying to get a job when you have terrorism charges pending against you. That's one method of oppression used here and is arguable more effective than the much more brutal methods used by more obviously oppressive states. Foremost it doesn't instill further discontent the way more brutal methods would while still achieving the same goal.
You need to choose your battles and in my opinion these types of protests aren't the battles worth pushing to that level. As a best case you provide justification for more brutal oppression methods. And the free and open MSM will report it exactly that way: "Police suppress violent protests...".
I know of no similar argument for most of the current generation of electronics in cars
How about 40,000 people killed and hundreds of thousands maimed and injured in the US alone every year. I'd say that's a pretty good argument. And then we can add in the billions in lost productivity for time spent in traffic due to idiot drivers.
...then you don't know what a police state is.
This reporter was writing articles exposing government misconduct, and she's a free woman who is publicizing her story on the internet. That doesn't happen in a police state.
Hmmm, more like you don't know what a police state is. Actually the most effective police state would be one where brutal tactics aren't needed to control the policed. This kind of crap goes a long way towards suppressing any kind of dissent. It's far more effective than brutal tactics which may actually encourage dissent.
Still playing catch up with Red China, North Korea, and Cuba. But we are trying our best.
I'm not sure we're not already way past them. The tools used are much subtler in the US but may surpass them in effectiveness.
look like they are about to hand the government its own ass in respect to seizing SSL keys.
Never gonna happen. And neither you nor anyone else will ever know why. Cause, you know, national security all.
allowing the computers to sift through the vast collection and just flag the potentially interesting things for human examination.
Or allowing them to go back and review every bit of communication you ever been involved in once they decide you're "a person of interest".
Uhhh, what is it that Rand is advocating and railing against?
I'm guessing she isn't railing against anything at the moment since she's been dead for over 30 years.
I can't really sum up Objectivism in a /. post but a few current events that I'm sure have her rolling over in her grave:
Although the mechanisms by which things are happening are very different then how she portrayed them in Atlas Shrugged the underlying cause and effects pretty closely match it. This becomes much more clear if one reads her writings beyond that one book.
First of all selfishness, especially in the way Rand describe it, is not good. It is a means to escape repercussions for the persons action.
You need to reread the GP post. You are a perfect example of the reference to "writers either cluelessly or maliciously misrepresenting her position".
Actually what Rand wrote and the philosophy she advocated means exactly the opposite of what you state here. It truly amazes at the number of people who misrepresent Rand's beliefs and philosophy as being pretty much the exact opposite of what it is. You can't possible have actually read her works and draw the above conclusion. What Rand advocated is total responsibility for one's actions.
You see this also in people claiming that what is happening in the US today is what Rand was advocating for when it is in reality exactly what she was railing against.
Even the summary states they hand over very little. Much less than I had anticipated.
FTFA:
The count does not include requests made using "National Security Letters" issued by the FBI or other U.S. federal agencies that have the force of a warrant or subpoena, albeit without the oversight or control provided by the courts that issue those sorts of orders.
So the report is on a subset of the requests they receive and the most regulated subset at that. The request that bypass the judicial system (and arguable the US Constitution) aren't included.
Except that they've already confirmed that they're not storing your actual fingerprint. They're storing hashes of the fingerprints that they use to verify your fingerprint when you attempt to login
Guessing you're not a software type? Whether they store it on a form of permanent storage or not in order to calculate the hash they HAVE TO feed in the raw data to the hash function. If the hash is of your digitized fingerprint then the digitized fingerprint data is there. You can't just magically create a hash value. While it's there it is vulnerable. The malicious software simple has to intercept the raw data before it's fed into the hash function. The most likely place to do this is to read the raw data feed from the sensor.
This way, there is no way to recover any usable fingerprint data.
Ummm...except reading the actual output from the scanning device.