That's because you're probably thinking it is an all or nothing thing. No one system, not even capitalism, is going to ever work. No political ideology will work in its pure form. They're all unsustainable. Maybe you need to do a bit more thinking and digging.
Wait... You think Saudi Arabia wants them? Hah! Pull the other leg and maybe I'll do a trick. Nobody, except maybe Iceland, wants them from what I can see. I guess I can understand why and I don't have the answers.
I'm too lazy to Google but I read a long post earlier that quoted Islam as being created in 1630. Not that this has one damned thing to do with your point but I think you'll find that it's only 1300+ years (1385, I suppose) since the start of Islam. Where that leaves the remainder of your 'facts' is something for others to decide and I'm assuming the earlier poster was correct as they were quoting some sort of scholar on the subject.
Might want to make sure (if you do this sort of thing) that you read the terms and ensure they're not telling you that they'll be sharing your information with third parties. Spam filters are good enough now that I don't even worry about it. Hell, I have an email address posted in this response. Let 'em email me. I've got broadband and a spam filter.
We Libertarians aren't all crackpots and we actually can make sense when we're not too stoned. We may have some outlandish ideas from time to time but we're generally harmless. Unfortunately, we've been coopted by ashamed Republicans, angst-filled teens, people with Asperger's (spelling?), and more. The 1980s was the start to our downfall. We were pretty high, to be honest. It was great seeing the new interest. It was awesome to let anyone use the name and bring us more publicity. Good idea, they said... Good idea... *sighs*
So, now we've got a mess and a bunch of semi-literate, mentally handicapped, pseudo-rugged individualist who are more interested in oppressing and corporatism than they are the rights of the individual. It is illegal for me to cause them bodily harm.
I'm 57. The closest I've come to an idealistic vote would be Clinton's second term. I've been voting third party for forty years and am kind of, sort of, proud that I almost never vote for the winning candidate. To be honest, if half of the people I've voted for had a chance of winning then I'd probably not have voted for them. Nader, Perot, etc...
I wish Sanders would be honest and run under the Libertarian tent or the American Socialist Party. I'd be more comfortable voting for him then but he's probably got my vote if he makes it that far. I vote in every election. I even vote in the small elections and the State elections. I vote in the mid-terms. I do not vote in Canada though I'm entitled to do so - I don't live there so don't feel entitled to impact those who do. I'm a citizen by grace of my heritage, nothing more. I do own property there but, no, I don't vote in Canadian elections and never have.
I pounded out some other gibberish and don't feel like repeating myself. It ties in, abstractly, with this and gives a more rounded view - albeit a vulgar view. http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
If you dig through my post history you'll find that I'm running for State Senate for my district in Maine. I don't want to but, really, someone has to do so. However, this is not a political platform site nor is this my personal blog. I'm certainly not anonymous but, well, I try to pretend I have some distance between my 'private' conversations here and my real life. (I don't. I just like to pretend I do. I'm sure someone can easily find me. Hell, I've visited a few people in real life that I met here on this site already so it's not like I'm all that worried.)
I drive more than that on a fairly regular basis. However, I'd not take a Tesla on that trip and have plenty of other options for my transit needs or wants. Imagine that, a vehicle doesn't fit every lifestyle but is niche based? I'm still planning on buying a Tesla (I'm an automobile aficionado, how could I not?) but with this announcement I am going to wait to see what happens.
It's called cherry picking. They're picking a selective vehicle and hoping nobody is aware of the vast differences between a Tesla (of any kind) and an F-450. I own two F-series trucks. They are really quite nice and I own them for a reason. That reason is not long trips or commuting. One is my plow truck, the other one is owned by me but used by someone who works for me often enough that they should have the ability to haul stuff.
When this whole thing first came out with the waterboarding, my brother and a friend of mine all took turns trying it out on a decline bench in my basement. I suspect it's something to do with the mentality or with the method because, frankly, I'd not tell you shit if you did that to me. Now we were all drunken former Marines but I doubt it matters. You're going to get your face wet, inhale a little water. It sucks. They're not going to kill you, if they were going to kill you then they'd have already done so.
We got wet, giggled a lot, and generally concluded that it is probably torture to those in the right mindset but otherwise pretty tame. It sucks but it's not deadly or anything. Maybe we did it wrong? We used a big jug of water and a black t-shirt to cover the face. We weren't exactly gentle about it. We poured it reasonably slow and stopped once in a while to ask the person if the were ready to say, "I want to join the Air Force." Or a few other things. The other two went twice - I was not one of them.
So, yeah, it could suck and I don't think we should do it to people - regardless. However, it's not that terrible in the scope of terrors. Just chill out and allow your head to wander to a different place.
I guess, that's my take-away. Don't do it. However, it's pretty damned mild. I think it may be a mental thing. I imagine it would suck if I didn't know I was going to be fine afterwards and that I had no chance of ending up dead. I suppose the bravado, ego, and alcohol helped as well.
Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. He's a fucking neo-con who coopted the title without actually knowing shit about the platform. Any Rand was a fucking moron. The fault is not yours. The fault is ours for not having spoken up. I am working to change that. We Libertarians are fine with protecting the commons and, you know what, letting gays wed has jack shit to do with the government and should never have been an issue in the first place - make legally binding civil unions (contracts) and leave weddings and such to the damned churches. Let them have their primitive ceremonies.
It's in the name - 'liberty.' It hasn't got a damned thing to do with businesses, in fact. Businesses, well, they have rights but they're pretty damned low on the list of priorities and take a back seat to the individual and the commons.
Sorry, I get a bit riled sometimes but I hate Paul. His dad was marginally better. Well, maybe an order of magnitude now that I think of it. As a fairly moderate Libertarian you'll find that I'm more likely to vote for Sanders than for any other candidate at this point. That tells you how screwed the spectrum is. I, a Libertarian, am further to the left (in practice - though my reasons are different) than any elected official that I know about.
Why am I on the left? Well, how about the whole personal freedoms thing. Let's ensure we have the rights to act on our freedoms. Now, I support a strong social safety net, libraries, roads, etc... Why? It stops people from stealing my shit. I like my shit. I paid for it because I wanted it. I don't want the poor and destitute to turn into roving hordes of thieves. I want them fed, housed, educated, and able to be at liberty to control their lives in an upwardly mobile fashion for the long term. Feed them. Protect them. Educate them. Give them the same chances I had.
I sure as shit don't care what you do in your bedroom (with consenting individuals). I sure as hell don't want the government snooping unlawfully - or at all, if we can realistically help that. I want my rights protected. I want my liberties. I want them for you, too. I'd seriously consider going to jail for cracking Paul in the jaw, live and on public television. I probably wouldn't but, man, he's done nothing to help the image. And yes, the image is our fault. Let me apologize for having been so lazy and inattentive. The fault is my own, and of others, and I'm striving to change this but it will take time. You can help, if you want, but first you may need to readjust your views and decide what works for you.
I throw my vote away on a third party candidate and pretty much always have (though I did vote for Bill Clinton's second term). I know I am throwing it away and, honestly, I don't even want the people I vote for to win. I just want the number crunchers to know there's a growing number of us who are disenfranchised.
Perhaps you should look at what "compute" means and then learn what the device you're currently using is doing beyond it's abstracted results that you see on your screen.
I seem to recall them bitching about VW's antics in a recent thread. Odd... That's a pretty good analogy if you ask me. A company willfully violating the law in the name of profits? I don't think I can support that. What *is* disturbing is how many people will trot out Rosa Parks as an example. Funny, I never see them trot out Pablo Escobar or MS13.
The Democrats hate him, the Republicans despise him. He won't get much done. A government amusing itself with itself might be a good thing for the citizens. There's that.
That's true but I still want it. I'd probably only go through with it if it were reasonably safe - it seems like they could "patch" in at the optical nerves (for example) and that we might then develop the neural pathways on our own though I am probably too "plastic" for that. Or is not plastic enough? I am not a brain surgeon.
It stops me from spending more than I should. It's a checks and balances thing. I tend to forget how much I spend, more so since selling my business and retiring. I've had some very interesting monthly credit card statements.
If I know the potential risks and opt to take them then I'm not sure why you'd feel compelled (or entitled) to tell me that I am disallowed. I don't tell you what you can do with your body so long as it doesn't harm my body and, frankly, can afford such and any health complications that come along with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Close enough. That makes it 17 years off and still not over 1500 years ago. I'm lazy. In my defense, entropy.
The problem is that anything I have to say doesn't fit in a neat slogan or fit on a bumper sticker. :/
That's because you're probably thinking it is an all or nothing thing. No one system, not even capitalism, is going to ever work. No political ideology will work in its pure form. They're all unsustainable. Maybe you need to do a bit more thinking and digging.
Wait... You think Saudi Arabia wants them? Hah! Pull the other leg and maybe I'll do a trick. Nobody, except maybe Iceland, wants them from what I can see. I guess I can understand why and I don't have the answers.
I'm too lazy to Google but I read a long post earlier that quoted Islam as being created in 1630. Not that this has one damned thing to do with your point but I think you'll find that it's only 1300+ years (1385, I suppose) since the start of Islam. Where that leaves the remainder of your 'facts' is something for others to decide and I'm assuming the earlier poster was correct as they were quoting some sort of scholar on the subject.
I don't always read the article but when I do it's surprising how many of the subjects are about raving lunatics.
Might want to make sure (if you do this sort of thing) that you read the terms and ensure they're not telling you that they'll be sharing your information with third parties. Spam filters are good enough now that I don't even worry about it. Hell, I have an email address posted in this response. Let 'em email me. I've got broadband and a spam filter.
We Libertarians aren't all crackpots and we actually can make sense when we're not too stoned. We may have some outlandish ideas from time to time but we're generally harmless. Unfortunately, we've been coopted by ashamed Republicans, angst-filled teens, people with Asperger's (spelling?), and more. The 1980s was the start to our downfall. We were pretty high, to be honest. It was great seeing the new interest. It was awesome to let anyone use the name and bring us more publicity. Good idea, they said... Good idea... *sighs*
So, now we've got a mess and a bunch of semi-literate, mentally handicapped, pseudo-rugged individualist who are more interested in oppressing and corporatism than they are the rights of the individual. It is illegal for me to cause them bodily harm.
I'm 57. The closest I've come to an idealistic vote would be Clinton's second term. I've been voting third party for forty years and am kind of, sort of, proud that I almost never vote for the winning candidate. To be honest, if half of the people I've voted for had a chance of winning then I'd probably not have voted for them. Nader, Perot, etc...
I wish Sanders would be honest and run under the Libertarian tent or the American Socialist Party. I'd be more comfortable voting for him then but he's probably got my vote if he makes it that far. I vote in every election. I even vote in the small elections and the State elections. I vote in the mid-terms. I do not vote in Canada though I'm entitled to do so - I don't live there so don't feel entitled to impact those who do. I'm a citizen by grace of my heritage, nothing more. I do own property there but, no, I don't vote in Canadian elections and never have.
I pounded out some other gibberish and don't feel like repeating myself. It ties in, abstractly, with this and gives a more rounded view - albeit a vulgar view.
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
If you dig through my post history you'll find that I'm running for State Senate for my district in Maine. I don't want to but, really, someone has to do so. However, this is not a political platform site nor is this my personal blog. I'm certainly not anonymous but, well, I try to pretend I have some distance between my 'private' conversations here and my real life. (I don't. I just like to pretend I do. I'm sure someone can easily find me. Hell, I've visited a few people in real life that I met here on this site already so it's not like I'm all that worried.)
Or indicating that a spammer used those as generic addresses and you happened to have them enabled.
I drive more than that on a fairly regular basis. However, I'd not take a Tesla on that trip and have plenty of other options for my transit needs or wants. Imagine that, a vehicle doesn't fit every lifestyle but is niche based? I'm still planning on buying a Tesla (I'm an automobile aficionado, how could I not?) but with this announcement I am going to wait to see what happens.
It's called cherry picking. They're picking a selective vehicle and hoping nobody is aware of the vast differences between a Tesla (of any kind) and an F-450. I own two F-series trucks. They are really quite nice and I own them for a reason. That reason is not long trips or commuting. One is my plow truck, the other one is owned by me but used by someone who works for me often enough that they should have the ability to haul stuff.
Like hell I wouldn't. I'd download ALL of them.
When this whole thing first came out with the waterboarding, my brother and a friend of mine all took turns trying it out on a decline bench in my basement. I suspect it's something to do with the mentality or with the method because, frankly, I'd not tell you shit if you did that to me. Now we were all drunken former Marines but I doubt it matters. You're going to get your face wet, inhale a little water. It sucks. They're not going to kill you, if they were going to kill you then they'd have already done so.
We got wet, giggled a lot, and generally concluded that it is probably torture to those in the right mindset but otherwise pretty tame. It sucks but it's not deadly or anything. Maybe we did it wrong? We used a big jug of water and a black t-shirt to cover the face. We weren't exactly gentle about it. We poured it reasonably slow and stopped once in a while to ask the person if the were ready to say, "I want to join the Air Force." Or a few other things. The other two went twice - I was not one of them.
So, yeah, it could suck and I don't think we should do it to people - regardless. However, it's not that terrible in the scope of terrors. Just chill out and allow your head to wander to a different place.
I guess, that's my take-away. Don't do it. However, it's pretty damned mild. I think it may be a mental thing. I imagine it would suck if I didn't know I was going to be fine afterwards and that I had no chance of ending up dead. I suppose the bravado, ego, and alcohol helped as well.
Rand Paul is not a Libertarian. He's a fucking neo-con who coopted the title without actually knowing shit about the platform. Any Rand was a fucking moron. The fault is not yours. The fault is ours for not having spoken up. I am working to change that. We Libertarians are fine with protecting the commons and, you know what, letting gays wed has jack shit to do with the government and should never have been an issue in the first place - make legally binding civil unions (contracts) and leave weddings and such to the damned churches. Let them have their primitive ceremonies.
It's in the name - 'liberty.' It hasn't got a damned thing to do with businesses, in fact. Businesses, well, they have rights but they're pretty damned low on the list of priorities and take a back seat to the individual and the commons.
Sorry, I get a bit riled sometimes but I hate Paul. His dad was marginally better. Well, maybe an order of magnitude now that I think of it. As a fairly moderate Libertarian you'll find that I'm more likely to vote for Sanders than for any other candidate at this point. That tells you how screwed the spectrum is. I, a Libertarian, am further to the left (in practice - though my reasons are different) than any elected official that I know about.
Why am I on the left? Well, how about the whole personal freedoms thing. Let's ensure we have the rights to act on our freedoms. Now, I support a strong social safety net, libraries, roads, etc... Why? It stops people from stealing my shit. I like my shit. I paid for it because I wanted it. I don't want the poor and destitute to turn into roving hordes of thieves. I want them fed, housed, educated, and able to be at liberty to control their lives in an upwardly mobile fashion for the long term. Feed them. Protect them. Educate them. Give them the same chances I had.
I sure as shit don't care what you do in your bedroom (with consenting individuals). I sure as hell don't want the government snooping unlawfully - or at all, if we can realistically help that. I want my rights protected. I want my liberties. I want them for you, too. I'd seriously consider going to jail for cracking Paul in the jaw, live and on public television. I probably wouldn't but, man, he's done nothing to help the image. And yes, the image is our fault. Let me apologize for having been so lazy and inattentive. The fault is my own, and of others, and I'm striving to change this but it will take time. You can help, if you want, but first you may need to readjust your views and decide what works for you.
I throw my vote away on a third party candidate and pretty much always have (though I did vote for Bill Clinton's second term). I know I am throwing it away and, honestly, I don't even want the people I vote for to win. I just want the number crunchers to know there's a growing number of us who are disenfranchised.
I believe their point was that comparing it with the holocaust is silly. You're still doing that.
'it's" Hmm... Yes, yes I should look at the preview screen.
Perhaps you should look at what "compute" means and then learn what the device you're currently using is doing beyond it's abstracted results that you see on your screen.
I seem to recall them bitching about VW's antics in a recent thread. Odd... That's a pretty good analogy if you ask me. A company willfully violating the law in the name of profits? I don't think I can support that. What *is* disturbing is how many people will trot out Rosa Parks as an example. Funny, I never see them trot out Pablo Escobar or MS13.
Well, it would appear they're criminals by default in a variety of countries. I'd say that's worse than taxis.
The Democrats hate him, the Republicans despise him. He won't get much done. A government amusing itself with itself might be a good thing for the citizens. There's that.
That's true but I still want it. I'd probably only go through with it if it were reasonably safe - it seems like they could "patch" in at the optical nerves (for example) and that we might then develop the neural pathways on our own though I am probably too "plastic" for that. Or is not plastic enough? I am not a brain surgeon.
It stops me from spending more than I should. It's a checks and balances thing. I tend to forget how much I spend, more so since selling my business and retiring. I've had some very interesting monthly credit card statements.
If I know the potential risks and opt to take them then I'm not sure why you'd feel compelled (or entitled) to tell me that I am disallowed. I don't tell you what you can do with your body so long as it doesn't harm my body and, frankly, can afford such and any health complications that come along with it.