Australian politicians in both the cabinet and shadow cabinet, at both federal and state levels) have government chauffeur-driven cars, so they would not have to pay personally anyway
So, Australian politicians never drive their own cars on the weekend or on a holiday? They don't have family and friends who drive their own cars? Sorry, but pretty much everybody drives at some point. There's no way they could get too extreme with speed limits, without there being a massive political cost - and they don't like having their driving restricted any more than anybody else.
Road conditions certainly play a significant part in road safety, however, the high-speed roads of most developed countries - on average - are no worse designed and in no worse condition than the Autobahns
The high-speed roads aren't really the issue. It's your typical urban roads with intersections and schools, pedestrian traffic, etc. where speeding is the biggest problem. The other huge problem here is red light running. You don't have any problem with red light cameras, do you? People who run lights really are the worst kind of asshole.
To raise another point along these lines, these sorts of numbers are duplicated pretty much everywhere - the safest roads to be on are the ones with the highest speed limits.
That completely misses the point. It's not because of the speed limit, it's because those roads are freeways - with very few obstructions, or reasons to stop suddenly, and usually with better markings and maintenance than other roads. If you applied that logic to the typical urban grid roads, there would be mass carnage.
Actually it'd be pretty simple. Compare the license plates to a database of police officers(and other VIPs), discard if a match is found.
But why would they do that? Usually the automated ticketing is run by completely different people than the local police, so there would be no incentive to do so. And if it were discovered, it would be a massive scandal. Anyway, I thought the argument was this was all about revenue raising. Why would they throw away that extra revenue? And what about all the cop's family and friends? Would their cars be in the "exempt" list?
Sorry, this is getting into tinfoil hat territory. It's amazing to what lengths and bizarre arguments people will go to to avoid a speeding ticket. If you had that level of corruption, then speeding cameras are the least of your problems.
My point is that it would be better to allow Iraq to become peaceful than it is to allow outside entities like Iran specifically act to inflame violence there.
So, you think we should withdraw so we can allow changes to happen? because it sure isn't going to become peaceful while we have troops occupying the country.
US soldiers don't blow up mosques.
Actually, they do. And they rape Iraqi women and children, and then burn them alive.
Because to the extent that it IS happening, it's happening because some outside party is doing it,
What's your evidence for this? Sounds like a scapegoat to me. You can't seriously tell me that none of the violence is coming from Iraqis opposing the occupation. I think this is just the new talking point, the new made-up threat like the non-existent WMDs. because you need a new bogeyman to distract from the failure in Iraq. You don't have Saddam to demonize anymore, so you have to find a replacement. I know, IRAN! Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
But if it yields truthful information even just once to save any number of American or allied lives, it's worth it.
So, torturing thousands of people is worth it to save the life of one American? How so? Especially as there is no evidence it would save even one life.
What if you were the person being tortured? Would you think your own torture was worth saving the life of one Iraqi? What happens when the tables turn? You are justifying the torture of yourself. Except you think it will never happen to you. Well, guess what - innocent people get tortured. Just because you're not a terrorist doesn't mean you won't be subjected to it.
I'm sure terrorists could give false information. What is your solution. Do nothing? Let people die?
False dichotomy. How about interrogating them without torture? Torture is known to increase the likelihood of inaccurate information. It's worse than useless.
Do you really think they would have pulled firefighters, police, and EMS workers from New York to go over to Chicago 'just in case'?
No, but it could result in having valuable and scarce intelligence resources being led down the garden path. That's the big risk of distraction here. Hell, we've seen it recently, with the case of a man who had his family threatened with torture if he didn't confess to being involved in the 9/11 attacks. Of course, he was completely innocent - but he tied up legal and intelligence resources, and the courts.
Rather than me argue endlessly why I think it's a good idea, why do you think it's a bad idea?
Because torture doesn't work. It does not give us answers or better intelligence. It only hurts us, and destroys the values we hold dear. It's inhuman. And if you're going to commit inhuman atrocities, you'd better have a damn good reason, rather than simply "Why not?"
How do you explain the fact that healthcare quality are much lower in those countries with more public healthchare?
Easily - it's bullshit propaganda that has no basis in truth. The quality of healthcare is often higher in those countries. It varies from case to case and region to region. One thing's for certain, countries with universal healthcare have a much better record of preventative medicine - they tend to stop problems before they develop, rather than doing things the American way - expensive surgery or treatments after the problem gets out of hand.
Well, option (1) as described is what's giving the problem discussed in the article, due to incompatibilities with particular 3rd party software
With this particular 3rd party software that is known to be bad news. Not just any old 3rd party software. Anyway - if you have the backup, and get the problem, then you can just restore and do it again. What's the problem? If it works, you've saved time, if it doesn't, you have a backup to fall on.
You've 'never had a problem'... a sample of one is hardly definitive of everybody else's experience, is it?!
Not definitive, but highly indicative. That is actually the normal experience. Problems with botched normal installs are a very rare exception. And over the years, I haven't just been upgrading my Macs, I've been upgrading workshops full of them.
Seriously, problems like this are very rare, and anybody running APE should have known to disable it first. You can hardly blame the MacOS for the effects of that crapware. As it says in the Daring Fireball article - if you diddle with your system in unholy ways, then do an archive and install. If you don't do stupid things with your system (like install APE), then a normal upgrade is perfectly fine.
The you go to court with them to sort it out. But I'd have to ask - what the hell were you doing loaning your car to someone who wouldn't own up to it?
What makes you think that police and politicians obey the same laws as you do? It isn't uncommon to follow a police car to find your going 15 or 20 miles per hour over the posted speed limit here.
I'm not talking about police cars. You do realize that police aren't on-duty 24/7, and that they have their own private vehicles, which they dirve when they aren't working? Speed cameras actually put an end to this problem. With the camera, it doesn't care if you are a cop or politician - it only cares about your speed. Before cameras, off-duty cops could get off if they were pulled over and made friendly with their fellow cop. With cameras, they get ticketed just like everybody else.
as a recent episode of Inside Edition revealed police have to make a quota of busts as a performance standard (and no negative points for busting innocent people if there aren't enough violators around)
What would that have to do with the cameras? The cameras aren't tied to any particular police officer. If anything, the cameras are a solution to that problem. Anyway, why not get rid of the corrupt system like quotas, rather than a good idea like speed cameras?
Treat the problem at its root, not some totally unrelated symptom
Well, it's good to have someone agree with me for once. The other thing I find is that people will bitch about being fined - but then if one of their family members gets hit by a speeding car, they are outraged at the speeding. So you get two mutually exclusive forces operating - people want to get away with their own traffic infringements, but want other drivers jailed for life. Because everybody thinks they are the best driver in the world, but every other car on the road is a threat. People might actually get somehwere with changing road rules if they had a consistent message.
But that's actually the point! You can't read the EULA before you fire up the computer for the first time, and that's after the actual sale has happened.
Can't you read the EULA on the company's website? And isn't it usually printed on paper that comes with the software?
Speeding fines are budgeted for by the state - they need them to meet their budget.
If that's true, then maybe that should change. But I doubt that's true everywhere in the world where there are speed cameras. Some places actually just want to reduce road fatalaties.
If the collection methods cease to be effective, a new method of bleeding money out of the motorists is devised to allow them to meet budget again (Average Speed cameras, undercover cars, hidden cameras, etc)
But again, if the motorists obey the road rules and follow posted limits, how are those methods going to raise any revenue? It just seems that the people who bitch about this stuff want to speed. And if it became so onerous, then wouldn't there be a voter uprising?
No, they will simply keep lowering the speed limit until people begin breaking it again.
I don't think so. Police and politicians have to get places by car, too. Generally I think the speed limits are pretty reasonable. It's just that drivers can't stand any form of restriction, and always want to go faster.
Seriously, if people can't follow a simple speed limit, why should they be entrusted with more liberty on the road? If people would obey them and drive like sane people, then they could be allowed to drive faster. You have to earn responsibility.
What if we caught him only a few days or a few hours before it all went down?
How would torturing help get accurate information?
Do you want the terrorist treated like an American Citizen (which he isn't) and have his lawyer contacted, his rights read, and a trial date set--or do you want to obtain the information that may save lives by any means necessary?
Of course I'd want him treated constitutionally. The Constitution is not just for US citizens. It is the ideal of what America stands for. If we don't treat others the same way, then that's hypocrisy, and makes a mockery the nation's values and the constitution.
Any sane person would chose the 'by any means necessary' method. It has more potential for saving lives. If a terrorist gives false information, oh well. At least we took a gamble on saving lives. It sucks if we lose, but it's great if we win.
So, it's insane to not torture? I don't think so. You haven't demonstrated in any way that torture would be more effective in obtaining information. And false information is an "oh well" for you? What if the false information results in more people getting killed, because it is used to divert resources on a wild-goose-chase? What if it results in innocent people getting detained or killed? What if the information is actually a part of the terrorist plot?
Tick tock, alarm clock, I'm gonna be late,
Porridge, toast, kids, car, bloody school gate.
Factory floor, what a chore, another week's graft,
And fifty times a day I hear "You havin' a laugh?"
Whatever happened to my dreams, is this the life I chose?
The highlight of my ruddy day is when the whistle blows!
Well and good, but they were clearly amateurs at first with the Internet side; the first newsletters were plain text and HTML expertise came slowly.
That doesn't make sense. Plain text emails indicate expertise, while HTML in mail indicates an amateur. HTML in email is an abomination and an extreme violation of netiquette. It's not a good thing.
Now I'm not familiar with the intimate details of Abu Ghraib, but if one of the terrorists there were...say...plotting to detonate a nuke in downtown LA, Chicago, DC, or a city of an ally like Germany, Turkey, etc...--it would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans or their allies.
Ahh, the whole "ticking bomb" fallacy. Which is, of course, a fallacy. Can you show me one real-world example of this having actually happened? And even if you did do it, how would you know the person being tortured is giving you correct information? They could just as easily be giving false information to distract you while the bomb goes off somewhere else.
Sounds like you've been watching a little too much 24.
Slashdot Mirror
So, Australian politicians never drive their own cars on the weekend or on a holiday? They don't have family and friends who drive their own cars? Sorry, but pretty much everybody drives at some point. There's no way they could get too extreme with speed limits, without there being a massive political cost - and they don't like having their driving restricted any more than anybody else.
The high-speed roads aren't really the issue. It's your typical urban roads with intersections and schools, pedestrian traffic, etc. where speeding is the biggest problem. The other huge problem here is red light running. You don't have any problem with red light cameras, do you? People who run lights really are the worst kind of asshole.
That completely misses the point. It's not because of the speed limit, it's because those roads are freeways - with very few obstructions, or reasons to stop suddenly, and usually with better markings and maintenance than other roads. If you applied that logic to the typical urban grid roads, there would be mass carnage.
But why would they do that? Usually the automated ticketing is run by completely different people than the local police, so there would be no incentive to do so. And if it were discovered, it would be a massive scandal. Anyway, I thought the argument was this was all about revenue raising. Why would they throw away that extra revenue? And what about all the cop's family and friends? Would their cars be in the "exempt" list?
Sorry, this is getting into tinfoil hat territory. It's amazing to what lengths and bizarre arguments people will go to to avoid a speeding ticket. If you had that level of corruption, then speeding cameras are the least of your problems.
Since speed cameras - the camera doesn't know they're a cop.
So, you think we should withdraw so we can allow changes to happen? because it sure isn't going to become peaceful while we have troops occupying the country.
US soldiers don't blow up mosques.Actually, they do. And they rape Iraqi women and children, and then burn them alive.
Because to the extent that it IS happening, it's happening because some outside party is doing it,What's your evidence for this? Sounds like a scapegoat to me. You can't seriously tell me that none of the violence is coming from Iraqis opposing the occupation. I think this is just the new talking point, the new made-up threat like the non-existent WMDs. because you need a new bogeyman to distract from the failure in Iraq. You don't have Saddam to demonize anymore, so you have to find a replacement. I know, IRAN! Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
So, torturing thousands of people is worth it to save the life of one American? How so? Especially as there is no evidence it would save even one life.
What if you were the person being tortured? Would you think your own torture was worth saving the life of one Iraqi? What happens when the tables turn? You are justifying the torture of yourself. Except you think it will never happen to you. Well, guess what - innocent people get tortured. Just because you're not a terrorist doesn't mean you won't be subjected to it.
False dichotomy. How about interrogating them without torture? Torture is known to increase the likelihood of inaccurate information. It's worse than useless.
Do you really think they would have pulled firefighters, police, and EMS workers from New York to go over to Chicago 'just in case'?No, but it could result in having valuable and scarce intelligence resources being led down the garden path. That's the big risk of distraction here. Hell, we've seen it recently, with the case of a man who had his family threatened with torture if he didn't confess to being involved in the 9/11 attacks. Of course, he was completely innocent - but he tied up legal and intelligence resources, and the courts.
Rather than me argue endlessly why I think it's a good idea, why do you think it's a bad idea?Because torture doesn't work. It does not give us answers or better intelligence. It only hurts us, and destroys the values we hold dear. It's inhuman. And if you're going to commit inhuman atrocities, you'd better have a damn good reason, rather than simply "Why not?"
Easily - it's bullshit propaganda that has no basis in truth. The quality of healthcare is often higher in those countries. It varies from case to case and region to region. One thing's for certain, countries with universal healthcare have a much better record of preventative medicine - they tend to stop problems before they develop, rather than doing things the American way - expensive surgery or treatments after the problem gets out of hand.
With this particular 3rd party software that is known to be bad news. Not just any old 3rd party software. Anyway - if you have the backup, and get the problem, then you can just restore and do it again. What's the problem? If it works, you've saved time, if it doesn't, you have a backup to fall on.
You've 'never had a problem'Not definitive, but highly indicative. That is actually the normal experience. Problems with botched normal installs are a very rare exception. And over the years, I haven't just been upgrading my Macs, I've been upgrading workshops full of them.
Seriously, problems like this are very rare, and anybody running APE should have known to disable it first. You can hardly blame the MacOS for the effects of that crapware. As it says in the Daring Fireball article - if you diddle with your system in unholy ways, then do an archive and install. If you don't do stupid things with your system (like install APE), then a normal upgrade is perfectly fine.
The you go to court with them to sort it out. But I'd have to ask - what the hell were you doing loaning your car to someone who wouldn't own up to it?
I'm not talking about police cars. You do realize that police aren't on-duty 24/7, and that they have their own private vehicles, which they dirve when they aren't working? Speed cameras actually put an end to this problem. With the camera, it doesn't care if you are a cop or politician - it only cares about your speed. Before cameras, off-duty cops could get off if they were pulled over and made friendly with their fellow cop. With cameras, they get ticketed just like everybody else.
What would that have to do with the cameras? The cameras aren't tied to any particular police officer. If anything, the cameras are a solution to that problem. Anyway, why not get rid of the corrupt system like quotas, rather than a good idea like speed cameras?
Treat the problem at its root, not some totally unrelated symptom
Well, it's good to have someone agree with me for once. The other thing I find is that people will bitch about being fined - but then if one of their family members gets hit by a speeding car, they are outraged at the speeding. So you get two mutually exclusive forces operating - people want to get away with their own traffic infringements, but want other drivers jailed for life. Because everybody thinks they are the best driver in the world, but every other car on the road is a threat. People might actually get somehwere with changing road rules if they had a consistent message.
Can't you read the EULA on the company's website? And isn't it usually printed on paper that comes with the software?
If that's true, then maybe that should change. But I doubt that's true everywhere in the world where there are speed cameras. Some places actually just want to reduce road fatalaties.
If the collection methods cease to be effective, a new method of bleeding money out of the motorists is devised to allow them to meet budget again (Average Speed cameras, undercover cars, hidden cameras, etc)But again, if the motorists obey the road rules and follow posted limits, how are those methods going to raise any revenue? It just seems that the people who bitch about this stuff want to speed. And if it became so onerous, then wouldn't there be a voter uprising?
I don't think so. Police and politicians have to get places by car, too. Generally I think the speed limits are pretty reasonable. It's just that drivers can't stand any form of restriction, and always want to go faster.
Seriously, if people can't follow a simple speed limit, why should they be entrusted with more liberty on the road? If people would obey them and drive like sane people, then they could be allowed to drive faster. You have to earn responsibility.
So, what's your solution?
How would torturing help get accurate information?
Do you want the terrorist treated like an American Citizen (which he isn't) and have his lawyer contacted, his rights read, and a trial date set--or do you want to obtain the information that may save lives by any means necessary?Of course I'd want him treated constitutionally. The Constitution is not just for US citizens. It is the ideal of what America stands for. If we don't treat others the same way, then that's hypocrisy, and makes a mockery the nation's values and the constitution.
Any sane person would chose the 'by any means necessary' method. It has more potential for saving lives. If a terrorist gives false information, oh well. At least we took a gamble on saving lives. It sucks if we lose, but it's great if we win.So, it's insane to not torture? I don't think so. You haven't demonstrated in any way that torture would be more effective in obtaining information. And false information is an "oh well" for you? What if the false information results in more people getting killed, because it is used to divert resources on a wild-goose-chase? What if it results in innocent people getting detained or killed? What if the information is actually a part of the terrorist plot?
But that's not what the Democrats' public health proposals are about. Nice attempt at spinning, though.
Tick tock, alarm clock, I'm gonna be late,
When the whistle blows.Porridge, toast, kids, car, bloody school gate.
Factory floor, what a chore, another week's graft,
And fifty times a day I hear "You havin' a laugh?"
Whatever happened to my dreams, is this the life I chose?
The highlight of my ruddy day is when the whistle blows!
When the whistle blows.
That doesn't make sense. Plain text emails indicate expertise, while HTML in mail indicates an amateur. HTML in email is an abomination and an extreme violation of netiquette. It's not a good thing.
So, only Muslims torture? Right.
Ahh, the whole "ticking bomb" fallacy. Which is, of course, a fallacy. Can you show me one real-world example of this having actually happened? And even if you did do it, how would you know the person being tortured is giving you correct information? They could just as easily be giving false information to distract you while the bomb goes off somewhere else.
Sounds like you've been watching a little too much 24.
Outside? At a girlfriend's house?