Obama summarily executed Bin Laden, and even has apparently gone so far as to mark US citizens abroad for the same summary execution.
I just knew some right-wingers would find something at fault with the way that Obama handled bin Laden. I wasn't quite aware though that it would go to this level of delusion and flat-out lies.
And you know why we're getting this stupid idea? Because of the American Public's obsessive opposition to a proper gas tax. Grow a pair, and start to accept that a gas tax is the simplest, most obvious way to fund the highway system. And if anyone's worried that trucks will be driven into the ground because of inordinate gas prices, you could even have a tiered system at the pump, where someone who purchases 100 gallons in one block pays a different tax than someone who purchases 5 gallons. But this approach is the single worst way of getting people to fund the maintenance of the roads. And anyone who complains about this better first look in the mirror to check whether you are willing to support paying for infrastructure to begin with. Because the reason this is even considered is that a gas tax is demonstrated political suicide.
Yes. Apparently, a few thousand neurons is all that it takes to realize that your own chances of survival go up if you are a member of a group, and that being a member of a group is easier if the other members of the group think you contribute to the group.
Conclusion: Randians have less neurons than bees, and/or a less complex intelligence than these robots.
You assume that privacy has value. What value really is there to it? There are a few good examples, but none of them apply to the current scenario, or even the sharing of email addresses. And before you reply "Because", think about the value judgment that you're making. What exactly is it that makes privacy as valuable a concept as, say, equality or liberty?
Finally, a free email system of the quality of gmail is worth a lot to me. Google can have the privacy that they're asking for it. One thing is sure though: as much as I'm ok to trade my privacy for a free email account like gmail, they better ask me for it. Switch-and-baits and fine print or outright lying is grounds for immediate blackballing of the company.
Let me ask you something: if you walk towards somebody with the order of "Bring him in preferably alive, but dead is ok too" and he starts shooting at you, do you still try to take him alive? Especially since the operation is in what is pretty close to enemy territory?
Yeah, we all would have liked to see him paraded around in a court house, and sentenced to life in prison. But I would rather have him dead than lose one more life in his pursuit.
In general, it is the old people who have the money who are complaining about taxes, government regulation and state how the free market will fix everything.
There's also a very significant proportion of students and middle-aged business people who think Ayn Rand is better than Jesus. Small Government is a religious tenet right now, with representation all across the population. Just look at who votes for Paul Father & Son: it's a nice niche of middle-class Americans who believe that their success is 100% their doing. In that, they're not that different from the protestants of old who came over by boat.
You're right that those who are up in arms about caps would not complain about government intervention - because those who understand how bad caps are in the current system also understand that the free market cannot fix the current situation. But that doesn't mean that cries of "Government Intervention!" won't be a nice distraction from the problem.
Congrats for your failure to understand Econ 101. They cover natural monopolies right out of the gate there. Common sense can explain that as well, but that seems to be missing among libertarians.
That's the beauty of the cap - it currently doesn't affect ATT's version of IPTV. You can also be certain that any service that ATT launches will also be exempt from the bandwidth cap. Hypothetically speaking, ATT could launch a new search engine and exempt it from the bandwidth cap. And Google will be dead in a way that neither MS nor Yahoo could achieve.
41% devoted to online child porn, 59% for EVERYTHING else. Cyber attacks are not the primary mission of the FBI. As a matter of fact, they are supposed to be the counter-intelligence arm of the US security apparatus, which would mean that I would expect that to be the largest part of their effort. Instead, it is a mediocre 19%.
Also, would you prefer the FBI not go after child porn? I personally think it's a pretty odious thing, and the Internet is making it easier for pedophiles to indulge (where, for example, in the past they might have had to order magazines or videos from shady overseas sources or something).
Bullshit. Sorry, but you drank the Koolaid that online pervs are the biggest risk to kids. Never mind that the biggest risk of plain old abuse comes from parents and family members, the biggest risk of abduction comes from parents and the biggest risk of abuse comes from family members and friends of the family. Online pervs are a drop in the bucket in that list. Online posting of child porn is a) just proof of a crime that has happened in the past, and b) catching the posters or downloaders does little to nothing to help solve that particular crime. So yes, it is part of their mission, but it's not 41% of their mission. If anything, I'd peg it at about 1%-2%.
Where every local implementation of DRM has been broken. Sure, they could require a working internet connection for every picture taken, but I'm pretty sure even the laziest corporate-boot-loving shopaholic would draw the line at buying a camera with such a "feature".
The reason that fires in a theater are dangerous is because they can start in an area outside of the main auditorium, and cut off exits. You might not even see smoke. As a result, you are forced to rely on hearsay.
Trampling over one another, especially when you don't even see a fire in the first place, is not going to help. Fires spread, but they don't spread at the speed of light (not to mention that trampling over each other would just slow everyone down).
Have you ever see a large mob in action? You can't slow it down. The most common way to die is being crushed against a barrier. Or someone trips, and you can't do anything but step on them, because the mob behind you prevents you from stopping or side-stepping them.
Whose fault is that? The fault of the idiots who panic so easily, I'd say.
And doesn't solve the problem that people do panic.
I still don't see what your argumentation has to do with the problem at hand: that the approach of the Japanese government is completely ludicrous, self-serving and destructive to society.
The difference is that when I read something on the Internet about face-melting radiation levels in Fukushima, I can take another 5 minutes to verify that bit of information. If I'm in Fukushima, chances are that I'm not reading the Internet, but busy cleaning up the reactor mess.
There are three related reasons why it is illegal to shout "Fire" in a crowded theater: it is false information, it is information that indicates an immediate threat to your life, and the reasonable individual response to the threat causes death when emulated by many people.
The only related item in this list is that the Fukushima radiation information is false. The only reason for the government to make false information illegal is because it is tired of getting blamed for the mess.
I really, really wish people would understand the importance of free speech and its limitations. Free speech is the foundation of nearly everything that is good about western civilization, and misunderstanding its reach and impact is the first step back to the Dark Ages.
Is it basically just distributed scalable redundant web hosting run by a big company? So you're basically renting to avoid the start-up capital costs of those services and to put them in the hands of specialists, while you focus on your web apps?
More or less. You can rent all kinds of stuff these days. But the idea remains the same: put the stuff that isn't your core competency into the hands of somebody who has that as their core competency, and focus on what you do best. It's basically the theory of comparative advantage put to a real world challenge, and it's working. Yes, occasionally things like an EC2 outage happen. But you don't hear the millions of times a corporate server failed and took down their own apps.
What it boils down to is trust: do you trust the other company to do a better job than you at running infrastructure and hosting services? And if you think you're better, do you think that the time and money you spend running and hosting stuff would be put to better use creating or selling your widget? If you answer yes to either question, you're better off hosting stuff in the cloud.
You don't know what a gray area is. Gray area: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gray+area. Sexually stimulating is very well defined on an individual level. And unfortunately, bans are made through individual assessments of whether something is sexually stimulating. Get enough people in the right position to agree with the ban, and presto: black and white ban on boobies.
Get back to me when you understand the words that you're using.
You're cute. Can't even understand that I'm giving you the easy out for your claim that you bashed Bush more than Obama. Or that you actually provided all the evidence for my claim by agreeing that you had no posts available that show you bashing Bush. Tell me, do people make you wear a helmet when you go out?
No. You're missing the point. The issue is not that there's a grey area, it's that what is sexual stimulation for one is just a medical curiosity for someone else. What do you think a fetish is? Some people get turned on by naked bodies, others consider them normal.
That's the real issue, and the real danger. Your breast exam site would require a.xxx location in many muslim countries. Your naked breast ads would be in.xxx in the US, and on the corporate site in Europe.
What this can lead to is a mad rush to put everything objectionable to someone behind a permanently blocked TLD, turning everyone who visits those sites into pervs and deviants. - because only pervs and deviants go to the TLD that hosts porn.
Hmmmm... or maybe like Obama, who unilaterally decided to bomb a foreign country without even consulting with Congress, which the Constitution requires him to do?
Look up the War Powers Act. Not to mention that a Commander in Chief who has to consult 600 people before moving a troop is not much of a Commander in Chief.
I love how quiet you were during the Bush era when shit like this went down on a near daily basis, but you pitch a fit because Obama didn't consult Congress on whether to drop a couple of bombs.
You put up a lot of truly idiotic, short-sighted, wrong, naive and ignorant opinions, but that one takes the cake - because it is so patently wrong, and based 100% on team colors.
Slashdot Mirror
Fair enough. You also just lost your right to bitch about gas prices.
Obama summarily executed Bin Laden, and even has apparently gone so far as to mark US citizens abroad for the same summary execution.
I just knew some right-wingers would find something at fault with the way that Obama handled bin Laden. I wasn't quite aware though that it would go to this level of delusion and flat-out lies.
Go live in Somalia. Please. It should be a paradise in your eyes.
I think you might want to check your sarcasm meter. It seems to be broken.
And you know why we're getting this stupid idea? Because of the American Public's obsessive opposition to a proper gas tax. Grow a pair, and start to accept that a gas tax is the simplest, most obvious way to fund the highway system. And if anyone's worried that trucks will be driven into the ground because of inordinate gas prices, you could even have a tiered system at the pump, where someone who purchases 100 gallons in one block pays a different tax than someone who purchases 5 gallons. But this approach is the single worst way of getting people to fund the maintenance of the roads. And anyone who complains about this better first look in the mirror to check whether you are willing to support paying for infrastructure to begin with. Because the reason this is even considered is that a gas tax is demonstrated political suicide.
Yes. Apparently, a few thousand neurons is all that it takes to realize that your own chances of survival go up if you are a member of a group, and that being a member of a group is easier if the other members of the group think you contribute to the group.
Conclusion: Randians have less neurons than bees, and/or a less complex intelligence than these robots.
You assume that privacy has value. What value really is there to it? There are a few good examples, but none of them apply to the current scenario, or even the sharing of email addresses. And before you reply "Because", think about the value judgment that you're making. What exactly is it that makes privacy as valuable a concept as, say, equality or liberty?
Finally, a free email system of the quality of gmail is worth a lot to me. Google can have the privacy that they're asking for it. One thing is sure though: as much as I'm ok to trade my privacy for a free email account like gmail, they better ask me for it. Switch-and-baits and fine print or outright lying is grounds for immediate blackballing of the company.
Let me ask you something: if you walk towards somebody with the order of "Bring him in preferably alive, but dead is ok too" and he starts shooting at you, do you still try to take him alive? Especially since the operation is in what is pretty close to enemy territory?
Yeah, we all would have liked to see him paraded around in a court house, and sentenced to life in prison. But I would rather have him dead than lose one more life in his pursuit.
In general, it is the old people who have the money who are complaining about taxes, government regulation and state how the free market will fix everything.
There's also a very significant proportion of students and middle-aged business people who think Ayn Rand is better than Jesus. Small Government is a religious tenet right now, with representation all across the population. Just look at who votes for Paul Father & Son: it's a nice niche of middle-class Americans who believe that their success is 100% their doing. In that, they're not that different from the protestants of old who came over by boat.
You're right that those who are up in arms about caps would not complain about government intervention - because those who understand how bad caps are in the current system also understand that the free market cannot fix the current situation. But that doesn't mean that cries of "Government Intervention!" won't be a nice distraction from the problem.
Congrats for your failure to understand Econ 101. They cover natural monopolies right out of the gate there. Common sense can explain that as well, but that seems to be missing among libertarians.
That's the beauty of the cap - it currently doesn't affect ATT's version of IPTV. You can also be certain that any service that ATT launches will also be exempt from the bandwidth cap. Hypothetically speaking, ATT could launch a new search engine and exempt it from the bandwidth cap. And Google will be dead in a way that neither MS nor Yahoo could achieve.
41% devoted to online child porn, 59% for EVERYTHING else. Cyber attacks are not the primary mission of the FBI. As a matter of fact, they are supposed to be the counter-intelligence arm of the US security apparatus, which would mean that I would expect that to be the largest part of their effort. Instead, it is a mediocre 19%.
Also, would you prefer the FBI not go after child porn? I personally think it's a pretty odious thing, and the Internet is making it easier for pedophiles to indulge (where, for example, in the past they might have had to order magazines or videos from shady overseas sources or something).
Bullshit. Sorry, but you drank the Koolaid that online pervs are the biggest risk to kids. Never mind that the biggest risk of plain old abuse comes from parents and family members, the biggest risk of abduction comes from parents and the biggest risk of abuse comes from family members and friends of the family. Online pervs are a drop in the bucket in that list. Online posting of child porn is a) just proof of a crime that has happened in the past, and b) catching the posters or downloaders does little to nothing to help solve that particular crime. So yes, it is part of their mission, but it's not 41% of their mission. If anything, I'd peg it at about 1%-2%.
Where every local implementation of DRM has been broken. Sure, they could require a working internet connection for every picture taken, but I'm pretty sure even the laziest corporate-boot-loving shopaholic would draw the line at buying a camera with such a "feature".
Which can be verified by you.
The reason that fires in a theater are dangerous is because they can start in an area outside of the main auditorium, and cut off exits. You might not even see smoke. As a result, you are forced to rely on hearsay.
Trampling over one another, especially when you don't even see a fire in the first place, is not going to help. Fires spread, but they don't spread at the speed of light (not to mention that trampling over each other would just slow everyone down).
Have you ever see a large mob in action? You can't slow it down. The most common way to die is being crushed against a barrier. Or someone trips, and you can't do anything but step on them, because the mob behind you prevents you from stopping or side-stepping them.
Whose fault is that? The fault of the idiots who panic so easily, I'd say.
And doesn't solve the problem that people do panic.
I still don't see what your argumentation has to do with the problem at hand: that the approach of the Japanese government is completely ludicrous, self-serving and destructive to society.
The difference is that when I read something on the Internet about face-melting radiation levels in Fukushima, I can take another 5 minutes to verify that bit of information. If I'm in Fukushima, chances are that I'm not reading the Internet, but busy cleaning up the reactor mess.
There are three related reasons why it is illegal to shout "Fire" in a crowded theater: it is false information, it is information that indicates an immediate threat to your life, and the reasonable individual response to the threat causes death when emulated by many people.
The only related item in this list is that the Fukushima radiation information is false. The only reason for the government to make false information illegal is because it is tired of getting blamed for the mess.
I really, really wish people would understand the importance of free speech and its limitations. Free speech is the foundation of nearly everything that is good about western civilization, and misunderstanding its reach and impact is the first step back to the Dark Ages.
Is it basically just distributed scalable redundant web hosting run by a big company? So you're basically renting to avoid the start-up capital costs of those services and to put them in the hands of specialists, while you focus on your web apps?
More or less. You can rent all kinds of stuff these days. But the idea remains the same: put the stuff that isn't your core competency into the hands of somebody who has that as their core competency, and focus on what you do best. It's basically the theory of comparative advantage put to a real world challenge, and it's working. Yes, occasionally things like an EC2 outage happen. But you don't hear the millions of times a corporate server failed and took down their own apps.
What it boils down to is trust: do you trust the other company to do a better job than you at running infrastructure and hosting services? And if you think you're better, do you think that the time and money you spend running and hosting stuff would be put to better use creating or selling your widget? If you answer yes to either question, you're better off hosting stuff in the cloud.
So your solution to the fact that once I buy something, I can do whatever I want with it, is to kill the second hand market for games? Nice.
Ditto that. This post should be used as the definitive answer to any question around why the XXX TLD is a bad idea.
You don't know what a gray area is. Gray area: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/gray+area. Sexually stimulating is very well defined on an individual level. And unfortunately, bans are made through individual assessments of whether something is sexually stimulating. Get enough people in the right position to agree with the ban, and presto: black and white ban on boobies.
Get back to me when you understand the words that you're using.
You're cute. Can't even understand that I'm giving you the easy out for your claim that you bashed Bush more than Obama. Or that you actually provided all the evidence for my claim by agreeing that you had no posts available that show you bashing Bush. Tell me, do people make you wear a helmet when you go out?
Damn. Posted my own version of this before I saw your post. Here's a virtual mod point for you.
No. You're missing the point. The issue is not that there's a grey area, it's that what is sexual stimulation for one is just a medical curiosity for someone else. What do you think a fetish is? Some people get turned on by naked bodies, others consider them normal.
That's the real issue, and the real danger. Your breast exam site would require a .xxx location in many muslim countries. Your naked breast ads would be in .xxx in the US, and on the corporate site in Europe.
What this can lead to is a mad rush to put everything objectionable to someone behind a permanently blocked TLD, turning everyone who visits those sites into pervs and deviants. - because only pervs and deviants go to the TLD that hosts porn.
ROFL. You get one fallacy wrong, and the other is irrelevant. Nice work. Does everyone laugh at you in real life as well?
I'm sure you have a link to that blast, right?
Hmmmm... or maybe like Obama, who unilaterally decided to bomb a foreign country without even consulting with Congress, which the Constitution requires him to do?
Look up the War Powers Act. Not to mention that a Commander in Chief who has to consult 600 people before moving a troop is not much of a Commander in Chief.
I love how quiet you were during the Bush era when shit like this went down on a near daily basis, but you pitch a fit because Obama didn't consult Congress on whether to drop a couple of bombs.
You put up a lot of truly idiotic, short-sighted, wrong, naive and ignorant opinions, but that one takes the cake - because it is so patently wrong, and based 100% on team colors.