As a kid I had a friend that would steal anything. I went to his room once and saw this big metal box and about 20 feet of black hose. I asked him WTF it was. He said someone put it on the side of the road to count cars and he just had to have it.
Most likely because the most "backward" parts of the US have people that pretty much mind their own business. How's that offshore wind farm project going in Massachusetts?
Florida had Port Canaveral which is a large port. Also you have direct barge access to most of the launch sites. That's how the External Tank got from Louisiana to Kennedy Space Center.
It seems to me the anti-intellectual feelings only come about when a politician says since they are smarter than you they are going to force you to live like they want.
Take salt for example. Probably a good idea to limit the intake. But I don't want someone forcing businesses not to use it.
Also you can't be a federal employee and run for partisan public office. I guess politicians don't want people that actually know how their policies work competing with them.
If someone went "outlaw" on you they went "outlaw" on the whole of the law abiding. You could hire someone to kill them and take their stuff. There were less homicides in the Wild West then in modern US cities.
I wouldn't have a problem with a letter that said if you want to be included in this lawsuit please read the following and sign it. Then it makes sense that since I want to sue I need to review the documents.
The problem is that you are automatically in the lawsuit unless you opt out. I get at least one of these things a month if not more. I don't want to sue in almost all cases but I also don't want to read 20 pages of legal jargon I have better things to do with my time. I don't make it a habit to sign things I don't read. The system is screwed up if it makes it my responsibility in order to do work not to sue.
It would be like I got a law passed that allowed me to take $1 out of everyone's bank account as long as I sent them a form in which they could opt out. I then make the form 20 pages. I am forcing people to do something. That's not liberty it's coercion.
True. But there are very interesting theories of justice under anarchy. The old west was such a time. And contrary to popular belief it was relatively safe. I mean the things the most famous gangsters did back then would barely make the local news today. The most interesting theory is that of an outlaw. You had a voluntarily justice system where those that wished to be protected by it would agree to settle disputes. As long as you accepted the ruling you were still protected by the law and those that adhered to the law. But if you didn't show up for trial or escaped from the law or didn't follow the sentencing you were considered outside the law or an outlaw. You gave up your right to be protected by the law and then anyone could kill or enslave you, steal your things, or do whatever they wanted with you since you chose to be outside of the law.
I've watched many landings at KSC. Even here it's very difficult to see it. The way it lands is there is an imaginary cylinder in the sky that is tangent to it's path and the runway. It heads towards this at a predetermined altitude. When it flies into the cylinder it can be as high as 50,000 ft. It's a little speck in the sky and there is no vapor trail. It's glide slope is about 20 degrees and they basically fly it like they are trying to dive head first a couple hundred yards shy of the runway. At the last few seconds they pull into the flare. It's a pretty impressive thing to see.
What is wrong IMHO is that the lawyers get to put people in the Class by default. You have to specifically sign a document to be removed from the class. Most people just throw those away because they are long and confusing. It would be different if the lawyers had to advertise and convince you to be a part of the class. This could be handled much easier by people taking these companies to small claims court.
Or we could make small claims court easier and cheaper. Then people could take these big companies to court themselves. It would be much more expensive to fight 1000 small claims cases then to fight one big case.
The current system of class action lawsuits is not libertarian. It is an opt out system. The plaintiffs get to include you in the class seeking the lawsuit without your permission. This is completely backwards on how it would work in a free system. In a free system a plaintiff could ask if you want to join them and you are free to do so. The current system is only supported by regulations that allow a plaintiff to include you without your consent. They just send you a very lengthy scary legal letter that you have to sign to opt out. Most people including myself don't sign them because I don't want to read 20 pages of legal jargon and sign my name to it.
The question you have to ask yourself is does firing someone that makes a racist, sexist, ect comment help? Do you think people that harbor the same views have those views changed or reinforced? I personally think racist people shouldn't be shouted down or fired but those of us who see things differently should try to reason with them and figure out why they feel this way.
I see what you are saying and you are right. I use this example when someone says they have a hot broker.
Imagine a room with 64 people. You flip a coin and everyone has to call it and losers sit down.. After 1 flip you expect 32 winners. 2 flips 16, ect until after 6 flips you have one person that called all 6 correct. Do you think they are really good or just lucky?
The problem is you can't predict ahead of time what will be successful. So if you never try you will stagnate and die. If you try and have some successes and some failures as long as you can identify and cut the failures before too much resources are spent you will come out ahead. Also often a project may fail but sets you up for future success.
Not entirely true. There are two types of seeds that most people can buy. Heirloom and Hybrid. Both will produce plants that generate their own seeds. The difference is the Heirloom seeds when pollinated with other heirlooms of the same variety will produce plants that have the same traits. Hybrid seeds are created by cross pollinating different plants to get a specific trait. They will produce viable seeds but the offspring will not necessarily have the same traits as the parents even if you breed the same hybrid varieties.
A perfect example is the Haas avocado. It was the result of a random genetic mutation and all of the trees in existence were produced by cloning the original mutated tree. If you take a Haas avocado seed and grow it into a tree it will produce avocados just like any other tree.
My parents grew up in a time when people trusted the media. But I've come to the conclusion they are never to be trusted because not only do they have power trips and agendas but they are mildly retarded as well. EVERY time they talk about something in my area of expertise they get it wrong. So why would I expect them to do better in other areas? My favorite is the Bill O'Reilly one where he says nobody knows how the tides work they just go in and out. This jackass went to HARVARD. So much for an Ivy League education.
And think about it. Most of these people are liberal arts majors or lawyers. These people have zero education on how the natural world works. They only know what other people have taught them with no way to verify. At least with science and engineering we can do experiments ourselves to verify what we know. These people are in a total denial circle jerk.
Slashdot Mirror
As a kid I had a friend that would steal anything. I went to his room once and saw this big metal box and about 20 feet of black hose. I asked him WTF it was. He said someone put it on the side of the road to count cars and he just had to have it.
Most likely because the most "backward" parts of the US have people that pretty much mind their own business. How's that offshore wind farm project going in Massachusetts?
Florida had Port Canaveral which is a large port. Also you have direct barge access to most of the launch sites. That's how the External Tank got from Louisiana to Kennedy Space Center.
It seems to me the anti-intellectual feelings only come about when a politician says since they are smarter than you they are going to force you to live like they want.
Take salt for example. Probably a good idea to limit the intake. But I don't want someone forcing businesses not to use it.
Good points.
Also you can't be a federal employee and run for partisan public office. I guess politicians don't want people that actually know how their policies work competing with them.
What are the requirements and restrictions on running for Congress?
If someone went "outlaw" on you they went "outlaw" on the whole of the law abiding. You could hire someone to kill them and take their stuff. There were less homicides in the Wild West then in modern US cities.
I wouldn't have a problem with a letter that said if you want to be included in this lawsuit please read the following and sign it. Then it makes sense that since I want to sue I need to review the documents.
The problem is that you are automatically in the lawsuit unless you opt out. I get at least one of these things a month if not more. I don't want to sue in almost all cases but I also don't want to read 20 pages of legal jargon I have better things to do with my time. I don't make it a habit to sign things I don't read. The system is screwed up if it makes it my responsibility in order to do work not to sue.
It would be like I got a law passed that allowed me to take $1 out of everyone's bank account as long as I sent them a form in which they could opt out. I then make the form 20 pages. I am forcing people to do something. That's not liberty it's coercion.
True. But there are very interesting theories of justice under anarchy. The old west was such a time. And contrary to popular belief it was relatively safe. I mean the things the most famous gangsters did back then would barely make the local news today. The most interesting theory is that of an outlaw. You had a voluntarily justice system where those that wished to be protected by it would agree to settle disputes. As long as you accepted the ruling you were still protected by the law and those that adhered to the law. But if you didn't show up for trial or escaped from the law or didn't follow the sentencing you were considered outside the law or an outlaw. You gave up your right to be protected by the law and then anyone could kill or enslave you, steal your things, or do whatever they wanted with you since you chose to be outside of the law.
I've watched many landings at KSC. Even here it's very difficult to see it. The way it lands is there is an imaginary cylinder in the sky that is tangent to it's path and the runway. It heads towards this at a predetermined altitude. When it flies into the cylinder it can be as high as 50,000 ft. It's a little speck in the sky and there is no vapor trail. It's glide slope is about 20 degrees and they basically fly it like they are trying to dive head first a couple hundred yards shy of the runway. At the last few seconds they pull into the flare. It's a pretty impressive thing to see.
http://wiki.ssm-fans.info/landing
What is wrong IMHO is that the lawyers get to put people in the Class by default. You have to specifically sign a document to be removed from the class. Most people just throw those away because they are long and confusing. It would be different if the lawyers had to advertise and convince you to be a part of the class. This could be handled much easier by people taking these companies to small claims court.
Or we could make small claims court easier and cheaper. Then people could take these big companies to court themselves. It would be much more expensive to fight 1000 small claims cases then to fight one big case.
You haven't read the letters. You are already in the class. You have to sign and return the letter to be REMOVED from the class.
The current system of class action lawsuits is not libertarian. It is an opt out system. The plaintiffs get to include you in the class seeking the lawsuit without your permission. This is completely backwards on how it would work in a free system. In a free system a plaintiff could ask if you want to join them and you are free to do so. The current system is only supported by regulations that allow a plaintiff to include you without your consent. They just send you a very lengthy scary legal letter that you have to sign to opt out. Most people including myself don't sign them because I don't want to read 20 pages of legal jargon and sign my name to it.
This lady opted out of a class action and took Honda to small claims court and won.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2012/02/03/234115.htm
The question you have to ask yourself is does firing someone that makes a racist, sexist, ect comment help? Do you think people that harbor the same views have those views changed or reinforced? I personally think racist people shouldn't be shouted down or fired but those of us who see things differently should try to reason with them and figure out why they feel this way.
Holodeck Whorehouse.
This can't be true. Once a monopoly gets established it's grip cannot be broken by market forces. We need government to break up monopolies.
I see what you are saying and you are right. I use this example when someone says they have a hot broker.
Imagine a room with 64 people. You flip a coin and everyone has to call it and losers sit down.. After 1 flip you expect 32 winners. 2 flips 16, ect until after 6 flips you have one person that called all 6 correct. Do you think they are really good or just lucky?
The problem is you can't predict ahead of time what will be successful. So if you never try you will stagnate and die. If you try and have some successes and some failures as long as you can identify and cut the failures before too much resources are spent you will come out ahead. Also often a project may fail but sets you up for future success.
Oh well.
Maybe we can let NDT take a look and demote some?
C is the hex value for 12 not speed of light c
Not entirely true. There are two types of seeds that most people can buy. Heirloom and Hybrid. Both will produce plants that generate their own seeds. The difference is the Heirloom seeds when pollinated with other heirlooms of the same variety will produce plants that have the same traits. Hybrid seeds are created by cross pollinating different plants to get a specific trait. They will produce viable seeds but the offspring will not necessarily have the same traits as the parents even if you breed the same hybrid varieties.
A perfect example is the Haas avocado. It was the result of a random genetic mutation and all of the trees in existence were produced by cloning the original mutated tree. If you take a Haas avocado seed and grow it into a tree it will produce avocados just like any other tree.
My parents grew up in a time when people trusted the media. But I've come to the conclusion they are never to be trusted because not only do they have power trips and agendas but they are mildly retarded as well. EVERY time they talk about something in my area of expertise they get it wrong. So why would I expect them to do better in other areas? My favorite is the Bill O'Reilly one where he says nobody knows how the tides work they just go in and out. This jackass went to HARVARD. So much for an Ivy League education.
And think about it. Most of these people are liberal arts majors or lawyers. These people have zero education on how the natural world works. They only know what other people have taught them with no way to verify. At least with science and engineering we can do experiments ourselves to verify what we know. These people are in a total denial circle jerk.