We wrote a contract together in order to place our marriage on an equal footing and replace all the hideous misogyny in common law. It wasn't about contemplating divorce, but about making the marriage itself a fairer one. (Neither of us owned any property we wanted to shield.)
Why not put it on government servers that at least have to be hacked into rather than letting random Russian assholes trash it seconds after it goes up?
Pressing the brakes in a car saves the operator's life. Firing a gun does not save the operator's life. It damages or kills something else. There's no correlation. Most people who shoot other people are not in any danger.
Most of the mechanisms proposed don't depend on fingerprints, but upon possession of a short range radio bracelet, so the sweat issue is moot. But generally speaking I don't want panicky civilians firing guns in any case. The correct default state of a firearm is "unavailable." I'm prepared to make exceptions for people who are professionally trained and STAY in training.
No, that's not the right analogy -- the fingerprint sensor IS the gun's brakes. The brakes stop the car, the fingerprint sensor stops the gun. That's the point.
We didn't "let the marketplace decide" whether to mandate seat belts in cars. They're a damn good idea, so we mandated them in new vehicles. But we didn't require that you retrofit them, nor that you get rid of your older car. The same will happen here.
None of what you say say changes the fact that the Religious Right is vehemently opposed to teaching critical thinking and is using their political power to ensure that it is not taught in schools. Democrats may read tea leaves, but they don't insist that reading tea leaves be part of the science curriculum.
Require a credit card to use a forum. Have the moderators charge it one dollar for the first instance of trolling, and double it for each additional instance. To stop a sadist, simply reflect the pain back to them.
It depends on what analogy you use for your blog. If your blog is an anonymous bulletin board in which any idiot can post anything he likes, fine -- but don't expect decent people to spend much time there. Mine is a cocktail party in my own home.
It's still not "censorship," though. At most it is editorial selection.
Sounds like you're an idiot who thinks that censorship solely involves the government. It doesn't. Private entities can censor things.
Yes it does. YOU don't know what censorship means. Private entities are perfectly entitled to control the speech in spaces they own any way they like. If you come to a party at my house and start spouting offensive opinions, I'll throw you out. That's not censorship, that's being hospitable to my other guests.
Censorship is the use of government power and ONLY government power. All else is up for grabs.
Hurricanes you can see coming. But having some malicious person report you for being a terrorist, or possessing child porn, is all it takes to get your door smashed in, your family terrorized, and your house ripped apart.
You can be pretty confident the management doesn't impose this on themselves.
It's up to a human manager to determine if you're abusing bathroom breaks or not. Sometimes there are good reasons. A robot isn't going to give any leeway.
It also isn't nearly as good as a real teacher at inspiring students, and when a student doesn't get it, a video can't think of an alternate way to explain the same issue, or find an analogy the student understands.
This hatred of teachers becomes a downward spiral. We hate them, so we won't raise their pay, so fewer good people are inclined to take up the job -- who needs the hatred and the low pay? -- and so the quality gets worse, and down it goes.
Khan Academy is great, but it's only assistive technology, not a substitute for the real thing.
We didn't have an ass until we lost our tails, so we had to squat on our haunches the way monkeys still do. But now that we have an ass to sit on, that's what I prefer.
I'm my own employer, and I am and always have been careful about what I say, because I was raised to be civil. I also have the backbone to stand behind my words like a man, not hide behind a bedsheet and lob insults like a Klansman.
Slashdot Mirror
We wrote a contract together in order to place our marriage on an equal footing and replace all the hideous misogyny in common law. It wasn't about contemplating divorce, but about making the marriage itself a fairer one. (Neither of us owned any property we wanted to shield.)
Nah, I picked them at random.
Why not put it on government servers that at least have to be hacked into rather than letting random Russian assholes trash it seconds after it goes up?
Pressing the brakes in a car saves the operator's life. Firing a gun does not save the operator's life. It damages or kills something else. There's no correlation. Most people who shoot other people are not in any danger.
Most of the mechanisms proposed don't depend on fingerprints, but upon possession of a short range radio bracelet, so the sweat issue is moot. But generally speaking I don't want panicky civilians firing guns in any case. The correct default state of a firearm is "unavailable." I'm prepared to make exceptions for people who are professionally trained and STAY in training.
No, that's not the right analogy -- the fingerprint sensor IS the gun's brakes. The brakes stop the car, the fingerprint sensor stops the gun. That's the point.
We didn't "let the marketplace decide" whether to mandate seat belts in cars. They're a damn good idea, so we mandated them in new vehicles. But we didn't require that you retrofit them, nor that you get rid of your older car. The same will happen here.
None of what you say say changes the fact that the Religious Right is vehemently opposed to teaching critical thinking and is using their political power to ensure that it is not taught in schools. Democrats may read tea leaves, but they don't insist that reading tea leaves be part of the science curriculum.
You can't teach critical thinking in schools. The Texas state Republican party platform is explicitly opposed to it.
Require a credit card to use a forum. Have the moderators charge it one dollar for the first instance of trolling, and double it for each additional instance. To stop a sadist, simply reflect the pain back to them.
The primary activity of beat cops is neither tracking down bad guys nor preventing terrorism, but dealing with drunks.
"Go to socialize"? I can socialize in a bar or a public park.
It's evidently not for makers; makers need electricity and tools, unless they're whittling wood.
Walk around and look at nude people? Is that seriously the point of the exercise?
What might have been insightful commentary was undermined by the sexist wisecracks under the pictures, so I stopped reading.
It depends on what analogy you use for your blog. If your blog is an anonymous bulletin board in which any idiot can post anything he likes, fine -- but don't expect decent people to spend much time there. Mine is a cocktail party in my own home.
It's still not "censorship," though. At most it is editorial selection.
Sounds like you're an idiot who thinks that censorship solely involves the government. It doesn't. Private entities can censor things.
Yes it does. YOU don't know what censorship means. Private entities are perfectly entitled to control the speech in spaces they own any way they like. If you come to a party at my house and start spouting offensive opinions, I'll throw you out. That's not censorship, that's being hospitable to my other guests.
Censorship is the use of government power and ONLY government power. All else is up for grabs.
Camille Paglia isn't even remotely a feminist. She's a cock-worshiping lesbian, i.e. a traitor.
Hurricanes you can see coming. But having some malicious person report you for being a terrorist, or possessing child porn, is all it takes to get your door smashed in, your family terrorized, and your house ripped apart.
Well, there's your problem.
You can be pretty confident the management doesn't impose this on themselves.
It's up to a human manager to determine if you're abusing bathroom breaks or not. Sometimes there are good reasons. A robot isn't going to give any leeway.
It also isn't nearly as good as a real teacher at inspiring students, and when a student doesn't get it, a video can't think of an alternate way to explain the same issue, or find an analogy the student understands.
This hatred of teachers becomes a downward spiral. We hate them, so we won't raise their pay, so fewer good people are inclined to take up the job -- who needs the hatred and the low pay? -- and so the quality gets worse, and down it goes.
Khan Academy is great, but it's only assistive technology, not a substitute for the real thing.
We didn't have an ass until we lost our tails, so we had to squat on our haunches the way monkeys still do. But now that we have an ass to sit on, that's what I prefer.
It's depressing because it's so idiotic and yet so many people are taken in by it.
The authors of the Federalist papers were dissidents.
If they contain a ringing endorsement of anonymous hate speech, I missed it.
I'm my own employer, and I am and always have been careful about what I say, because I was raised to be civil. I also have the backbone to stand behind my words like a man, not hide behind a bedsheet and lob insults like a Klansman.