You're honestly comparing the american government's level of control over information to north korea and saying they're the same? The NK government has recognised how hard it is to control things like the internet, so they only allow it to the very privileged, and even then they monitor it.
This is in contrast to those governments in the past (such as soviet russia) where copiers were numbered to control information. You're saying that every single webpage, IM, email, bittorrent file, any peer-to-peer transfer are all monitored by the united states government and categorised by sender and recipient? You're saying that the united states government either denies or okays every single news story put out by any news organisation?
I think your view of your government is quite skewed from reality.
Things weren't as complex before, but they were more arbitary. There's more availability of professionals to help those lower on the food chain avoid that complexity.
The numbers for homeschooling and the number of households where both parents must work in order to meet bills defeats this. Required government accreditation defeats the ability of alternative schools to break away from government enforced mediocrity. There is no enforcement of mediocrity - schools can be much better than the minimum level required. Should both parents work, that's the sacrifice for the rampant consumerism that runs society today, which while encouraged by governments isn't enforced.
There's no hyperbole in my post.
At no other point in history has it been so easy to propagate a dog'n'pony show The united states government doesn't control the flow of information anywhere near that which governments in the past have controlled information. Soviet russia, medieval england, a number of fascist and nationalistic governments would never be able to stand the amount of unfiltered information people have access to today. You only have to look at north korea to see how a real government runs a dog'n'pony show, something that the extremes in other countries only dream of.
.. huh? Sure, at no other point in history have things like tax collection been so automated, but they've never been so transparent, either. In medieval times, tax collection was simple - the tax collector said "x is now the property of the state" and it was. There were no appeals for the lower classes, no courts easily available.
I'm not sure where you're going with your educational subject material point, either - as a counterexample, in soviet russia you learnt what you were told, and that was it. This was controlled to the point of copying machines being *numbered*. In today's society (and moreso in america) you can put your children into another school, or in the US homeschool them, with the knowledge required a couple of clicks away on amazon.com or google.com.
Finally, as to your "at no other point in history has government been this large", i agree in absolute terms. In fact, i'd say the government size in absolute terms is larger than some countries populations, but as a relative (fractional of entire population) I entirely disagree.
Sure, there are large issues, but hyperbole "At no other point in history.." makes your arguement unreasonable.
Any government at any time has the means to make people uncomfortable - why do you think that this particular part in time is any different to previous times?
I just said that he local and state governments were incompetant, yet you keep repeating this: If you ignore the hindsight of knowing the local governments were useless by decisions they made instead of capacity to respond, the exact same thing would happen today without regard to who is in power.
I'd put it in *marquee* and *blink*, and you still wouldn't get it. Katrina hit louisiana on august 29th. The president of the united states declared a state of emergency on the 26th (that's 3 days before), (see the official press release here on the whitehouse press site http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/20 050827-1.html . Quoting that article The President's action authorizes the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to coordinate all disaster relief efforts . Note the "coordinate all disaster relief efforts" bit. Louisiana declared a state of emergency on the 26th as well. http://www.gov.state.la.us/index.cfm?md=newsroom&t mp=detail&catID=1&articleID=776&navID=3.
Again: If the local situation is screwed, FEMA is there to step in and take control and call the shots. Not http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/03/national /main1009209.shtml worry about wether his sleeves are rolled up or not, "feel trapped", stating that he's a "fashion god".
No, I wouldn't do any better than brown. Then again, I don't accept positions for which i'm incredibly under qualified for.
No, I couldn't put anyone else as head of FEMA - do i look like the president of the united states? If i was, however, I'd pick someone who knew something about crisis management, someone who had lead an organisation approaching the 2600 that FEMA is.
And as for having to reasses the situation - what planet are you on? There was wall to wall coverage on every news station on how everything was flooded, how a significant proportion of the populace hadn't left, how law and order had broken down into chaos. The united states has satellites in orbit than can view every square meter of the earth, and yet FEMA was supposedly unable to know what was going on. The only reason the national guard wasn't sent in division size is that they were pretty much all over in iraq.
The fact that every other state managed to have it's act together doesn't excuse the fact that FEMA was unable to get a handle on the chaos, even with the resources of the federal government, along with a very large contingent of volunteers and supplies coming from every other state.
Did you read my post? Nagan et al were incompetant, stupid, and short sighted. Noone disputes this. The issue about FEMA is that when they were given the go-ahead, they screwed it all up. They had qualified people sitting on their asses waiting for FEMA to give the green light, and it never came. They hired cruise liners for housing (which was good) at rates far above what they could have gotten.
Being a judge for some horse association has nothing to do with being the head of the emergency management task force. Nothing at all.
Well, gee, I think everyone found that out, didn't they. The head of FEMA should be someone used to directing and managing a crisis management team, not someone who got fired from their old job that didn't have anything to do with high visibility crisis management.
It in no way reflects ones abilities to do something outside that arena.
If working for some horse association doesn't reflect on one's ability to head a crisis management team that needs strong leadership, then why was he picked to lead FEMA? What skills did he transfer from the horse association that meant he was better qualified than everyone else to head FEMA?
nd had the plans that FEMA worked with them on, been actually followed, you wouldn't have anything to whine about right now.
Well, duh. Except they weren't, because the leadership of FEMA had no clue what to do. Now, if had something to with horses, then i'm sure FEMA would have excelled.
Do you understand why schools practice fire or tornado drills? It is so when there is an emergency that requires it, people can be safe and the rescuers can concentrate on less people. If a school ever caught fire and several classes ignored the warnings and done everythign possible to impeade the response that had been practiced, you would blame the teachers or principle for the incompetence, not the firefighters and first responders. But here, you purposely fail to look at anything other then FEMA and the president because of some blind hate for them. I hope you aren't that stupid in other things in you life. If you are, you will be one of these people whining that the economy is crap and you life sucks. And I will let you in on a secrete, It has nothing to do with who is in office and more to do with your understanding of how things work.
Are you normally this blind? I said:
The whole point of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) is to take over a disaster situation that is not being adequately managed by local personnel. Irrespective of the incompetancy of both the new orleans government and the state government, fema should have put things right.
I've bolded the parts where I point out the incompetancy of both the new orleans government and the state government, so you can actually read what I said this time.
The whole point of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) is to take over a disaster situation that is not being adequately managed by local personnel. Irrespective of the incompetancy of both the new orleans government and the state government, fema should have put things right.
Another person may not have been able to significantly improve the situation, but as someone trained and experienced in managing similar situations would have done much better than someone fired from the position of a Judges and Horses Commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association.
If it's a legitimate ID, they'd be calling the cops then and there, and she can deal with them (because taking a real driver's license and not giving it back is called theft).
Re: confiscating the license: from other comments, it seems it's her responsibility to take the license.
Posting them on the internet: not so sure it's a good idea, but maybe the idiots who thought putting her job in danger will realise how stupid they were running around with fake ids.
Like accidently hitting your nose somewhere on your car during a sudden stop. Cutting yourself on something sharp while moving heavy/awkward object into and out of a car. Having a preexisting cut and breaking the scab open doing something energetic.
Howso? A war between the US and China would require troops/material/focus that the US doesn't have right now because of iraq, which would make it very uneven.
There is a need to prove something - if you target an online casino, they don't pay and you ddos them, their competitors will notice and realise it could happen to them. Whereas, if you don't follow through on your threat to ddos them, word will still get around, but it will be "the threats are empty".
I like where you're heading! Should the poor/lower income group intake ever be racist more than not, the army will become racist to keep morale high. I can't wait till they start saying "Sargeant, me and my homies here as a group don't want to go out on patrol today, as it will lower our morale. toodles!".
The idea is that you take a picture of the barcode, and email/drag and drop/whatever into a specialised program that will decipher the information, where you'll then be able to click a link.
Because the IT staff can diagnose problems and propose solutions, but it's management that are paid to make the call. They're the ones that once the problem is known and solutions have been devised, need to weigh up the pros and cons of each solution and work out which is best. *that is why management need to be contactable*
I'm argueing that they had no other choice because they simply couldn't deny it. Most other companies try and weasel out by redefining what they said, or indeed sue. Securicom simply can't weasel out of this, and I don't doubt for a moment they would if they could.
The entire company knowingly sold a product which didn't even begin to do what they said it did. They must have deliberately looked at the costs of providing what they said they would and what they did, and chose to write software to hide this up that any CS graduate could have, and then charged a huge premium for it, getting the endorsement of the French Intelligence Server (who have to be complicit in this) to use these.
Secustick is not rare, in that their product in no way shape or form performed to specifications. There is no way that the information is irretrieveable if the password is not entered correctly.
They had no choice when their product was shown to be completely crap, not if they wanted to at least try and keep their french government customers.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, the australian federal government doesn't set standards for queensland or western australian schools. Nice try!
You're honestly comparing the american government's level of control over information to north korea and saying they're the same? The NK government has recognised how hard it is to control things like the internet, so they only allow it to the very privileged, and even then they monitor it.
This is in contrast to those governments in the past (such as soviet russia) where copiers were numbered to control information. You're saying that every single webpage, IM, email, bittorrent file, any peer-to-peer transfer are all monitored by the united states government and categorised by sender and recipient? You're saying that the united states government either denies or okays every single news story put out by any news organisation?
I think your view of your government is quite skewed from reality.
.. huh? Sure, at no other point in history have things like tax collection been so automated, but they've never been so transparent, either. In medieval times, tax collection was simple - the tax collector said "x is now the property of the state" and it was. There were no appeals for the lower classes, no courts easily available.
I'm not sure where you're going with your educational subject material point, either - as a counterexample, in soviet russia you learnt what you were told, and that was it. This was controlled to the point of copying machines being *numbered*. In today's society (and moreso in america) you can put your children into another school, or in the US homeschool them, with the knowledge required a couple of clicks away on amazon.com or google.com.
Finally, as to your "at no other point in history has government been this large", i agree in absolute terms. In fact, i'd say the government size in absolute terms is larger than some countries populations, but as a relative (fractional of entire population) I entirely disagree.
Sure, there are large issues, but hyperbole "At no other point in history.." makes your arguement unreasonable.
Any government at any time has the means to make people uncomfortable - why do you think that this particular part in time is any different to previous times?
I thought that was the whole point - a state of emergency is declared by both sides, and FEMA coordinates (you go there) the response.
After a google search I found http://www.northsidejournal.com/special2.htm, and it seems indeed I was talking out of my ass. Mea Culpa
I just said that he local and state governments were incompetant, yet you keep repeating this: If you ignore the hindsight of knowing the local governments were useless by decisions they made instead of capacity to respond, the exact same thing would happen today without regard to who is in power.
0 050827-1.html . Quoting that article The President's action authorizes the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), to coordinate all disaster relief efforts . Note the "coordinate all disaster relief efforts" bit. Louisiana declared a state of emergency on the 26th as well. http://www.gov.state.la.us/index.cfm?md=newsroom&t mp=detail&catID=1&articleID=776&navID=3.
l /main1009209.shtml worry about wether his sleeves are rolled up or not, "feel trapped", stating that he's a "fashion god".
I'd put it in *marquee* and *blink*, and you still wouldn't get it. Katrina hit louisiana on august 29th. The president of the united states declared a state of emergency on the 26th (that's 3 days before), (see the official press release here on the whitehouse press site http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/08/2
Again: If the local situation is screwed, FEMA is there to step in and take control and call the shots. Not http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/03/nationa
No, I wouldn't do any better than brown. Then again, I don't accept positions for which i'm incredibly under qualified for.
No, I couldn't put anyone else as head of FEMA - do i look like the president of the united states? If i was, however, I'd pick someone who knew something about crisis management, someone who had lead an organisation approaching the 2600 that FEMA is.
And as for having to reasses the situation - what planet are you on? There was wall to wall coverage on every news station on how everything was flooded, how a significant proportion of the populace hadn't left, how law and order had broken down into chaos. The united states has satellites in orbit than can view every square meter of the earth, and yet FEMA was supposedly unable to know what was going on. The only reason the national guard wasn't sent in division size is that they were pretty much all over in iraq.
The fact that every other state managed to have it's act together doesn't excuse the fact that FEMA was unable to get a handle on the chaos, even with the resources of the federal government, along with a very large contingent of volunteers and supplies coming from every other state.
Did you read my post? Nagan et al were incompetant, stupid, and short sighted. Noone disputes this. The issue about FEMA is that when they were given the go-ahead, they screwed it all up. They had qualified people sitting on their asses waiting for FEMA to give the green light, and it never came. They hired cruise liners for housing (which was good) at rates far above what they could have gotten.
Being a judge for some horse association has nothing to do with being the head of the emergency management task force. Nothing at all.
Well, gee, I think everyone found that out, didn't they. The head of FEMA should be someone used to directing and managing a crisis management team, not someone who got fired from their old job that didn't have anything to do with high visibility crisis management.
It in no way reflects ones abilities to do something outside that arena.
If working for some horse association doesn't reflect on one's ability to head a crisis management team that needs strong leadership, then why was he picked to lead FEMA? What skills did he transfer from the horse association that meant he was better qualified than everyone else to head FEMA?
nd had the plans that FEMA worked with them on, been actually followed, you wouldn't have anything to whine about right now.
Well, duh. Except they weren't, because the leadership of FEMA had no clue what to do. Now, if had something to with horses, then i'm sure FEMA would have excelled.
Do you understand why schools practice fire or tornado drills? It is so when there is an emergency that requires it, people can be safe and the rescuers can concentrate on less people. If a school ever caught fire and several classes ignored the warnings and done everythign possible to impeade the response that had been practiced, you would blame the teachers or principle for the incompetence, not the firefighters and first responders. But here, you purposely fail to look at anything other then FEMA and the president because of some blind hate for them. I hope you aren't that stupid in other things in you life. If you are, you will be one of these people whining that the economy is crap and you life sucks. And I will let you in on a secrete, It has nothing to do with who is in office and more to do with your understanding of how things work.
Are you normally this blind? I said:
The whole point of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) is to take over a disaster situation that is not being adequately managed by local personnel. Irrespective of the incompetancy of both the new orleans government and the state government, fema should have put things right.
I've bolded the parts where I point out the incompetancy of both the new orleans government and the state government, so you can actually read what I said this time.
The whole point of FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) is to take over a disaster situation that is not being adequately managed by local personnel. Irrespective of the incompetancy of both the new orleans government and the state government, fema should have put things right.
Another person may not have been able to significantly improve the situation, but as someone trained and experienced in managing similar situations would have done much better than someone fired from the position of a Judges and Horses Commissioner for the International Arabian Horse Association.
It means that now, sendmail is bad software, whereas before it was good software.
Times have changed. Nowadays, they just get a staffer from the vice president's office to leak secrets.
If it's a legitimate ID, they'd be calling the cops then and there, and she can deal with them (because taking a real driver's license and not giving it back is called theft).
Re: confiscating the license: from other comments, it seems it's her responsibility to take the license.
Posting them on the internet: not so sure it's a good idea, but maybe the idiots who thought putting her job in danger will realise how stupid they were running around with fake ids.
Stability, low amounts of change - all things which humans can readily agree with.
Like accidently hitting your nose somewhere on your car during a sudden stop. Cutting yourself on something sharp while moving heavy/awkward object into and out of a car. Having a preexisting cut and breaking the scab open doing something energetic.
Howso? A war between the US and China would require troops/material/focus that the US doesn't have right now because of iraq, which would make it very uneven.
And if you think both are wrong and that the world is not made up of binary issues, support neither.
It's not so much "The Feds" as strong and uncorrupted law and order structures.
There is a need to prove something - if you target an online casino, they don't pay and you ddos them, their competitors will notice and realise it could happen to them. Whereas, if you don't follow through on your threat to ddos them, word will still get around, but it will be "the threats are empty".
I like where you're heading! Should the poor/lower income group intake ever be racist more than not, the army will become racist to keep morale high. I can't wait till they start saying "Sargeant, me and my homies here as a group don't want to go out on patrol today, as it will lower our morale. toodles!".
"safest technology" wtf? Safe from everyone but microsoft, and microsoft is as pretty much as big a threat as they come.
The idea is that you take a picture of the barcode, and email/drag and drop/whatever into a specialised program that will decipher the information, where you'll then be able to click a link.
Because the IT staff can diagnose problems and propose solutions, but it's management that are paid to make the call. They're the ones that once the problem is known and solutions have been devised, need to weigh up the pros and cons of each solution and work out which is best. *that is why management need to be contactable*
A show of hands if you are suprised by kickbacks and corruption, both in government and in businesses?
I'm argueing that they had no other choice because they simply couldn't deny it. Most other companies try and weasel out by redefining what they said, or indeed sue. Securicom simply can't weasel out of this, and I don't doubt for a moment they would if they could.
The entire company knowingly sold a product which didn't even begin to do what they said it did. They must have deliberately looked at the costs of providing what they said they would and what they did, and chose to write software to hide this up that any CS graduate could have, and then charged a huge premium for it, getting the endorsement of the French Intelligence Server (who have to be complicit in this) to use these.
Secustick is not rare, in that their product in no way shape or form performed to specifications. There is no way that the information is irretrieveable if the password is not entered correctly.
They had no choice when their product was shown to be completely crap, not if they wanted to at least try and keep their french government customers.