But wouldn't that cut into the amount of time/space available for vague ramblings about "freedom" and "liberty" and accusing anyone who disagrees with the corporate insurance system we have in the US of being a fascist and a Stalinist?
When you have emotionally charged rhetoric to throw around like beads on Mardi Gras, bringing up facts and figures is just a waste of time.
Except Shirley Sherrod has been working for the Departmenf of Agriculture for decades, has a long track record of excellent service, and was relaying a story of how she did something positive at a NAACP event on her own time. Cappedge was fired for actually being a disruptive and problematic employee.
Generally speaking, if you don't "invest" as much time as other players you are at a disadvantage no matter what. The best players are, typically, those who play the most...
If you keep losing at TF2, I posit that it's because you aren't as good as the people you're playing against and it doesn't matter what guns any of you are using.
You seem to be implying that art is rational and objective. Art is neither, it is emotional. Video games most certainly ARE art, and just as purchasing art is most certainly NOT a rational activity, neither is purchasing video games. That doesn't make spending money on either foolish or bad, rationality is not a measure of morality or other subjective values.
Most people, whatever they believe, are hugely in favor of engaging in some degree of irrationality. Anything you do that does not directly improve your material condition on strictly survival and evolutionary measures is, ultimately, irrational... which ironically includes a dogged commitment to doing only those things which are most obviously rational, as doing so would almost certainly lead to social isolation and associated difficulty with both survival and reproduction.
I imagine GP was hoping for an orderly repetition of memes. None of this mucking about, inserting one bad joke directly inside another. No sir, we need lines.
Unless the author has a full ride scholarship including room and board... I'd say there is at least a partially legitimate claim to some rights here.
Anyway, yeah, campus networks can be like that. It's bull. It's also, in my experience, rarely something the IT people are terribly fond of; most of them are at least passingly familiar with how the internet works, and ultimately it requires far more work to maintain a ridiculously locked-down network than one with minimal restrictions. Usually, that comes from higher up in the organization, from some old administrator or trustee or something... IT takes order in academia just like they do in business.
The best bet for getting a change on this is actually o complain to higher administration, and perhaps as well to school and/or local publications. Putting things in writing usually works well. Bring up issues of censorship and academic freedom, and be sure to mention how this new-fangled internet thing is a really important part of the future. Keep in mind that the details of what is or is not filtered is, largely, irrelevant... it's easy to lose a non-techie audience by getting into the weeds. The point here is to engage them on the emotional level: these decisions are not made because there are clear-cut rational arguments for them, they are made because somebody doesn't like ______ which they believe to be on the internet. Again, getting too logical or specific will just make eyes glaze over, so keep it rhetorical and abstract.
No, GGP's reasoning was stupid. Shooting guns in the direction of other people, even if you don't believe you pose a threat to their safety, is stupid and dangerous. The gun could misfire, the ammo could be incorrectly marked (ie. instead of birdshot you get buckshot... oops), you could be mistaken about the danger posed or where you have aimed, or you might even have the misfortune of the other person having a gun as well and mistaking your shooting at them for... well... shooting at them, and their gun might not be loaded with ammunition unsuited to killing humans.
Unless you aim to shoot somebody, never, ever aim to shoot near them.
Any "man" who claims not to know better than to commit rape is lying. No really does mean no, always, there are no exceptions or circumstances where this is not the case. Is "don't have sex with anyone without their consent" really so difficult to abide by? It seems pretty damned straightforward to me.
That said, women who like to throw around accusations of rape when they aren't really appropriate are no better. It's not rape if you have consensual sex, then later regret it. It's not rape if you have consensual sex, then discover information about your partner that you don't like (ex. that they are married, or older than you thought, or wasn't wearing a condom... note that any/all of those can indicate shitty, amoral behavior, but that not all shitty, amoral behavior is rape). It's not rape if you have consensual sex, then decide you want your partner to get arrested. Basically, consensual sex cannot be turned into rape after the fact.
Indeed, Colombus was considered insane not because anyone thought he would fall off of the world, but because they knew he would starve. Colombus was very insistent that the world is quite a bit smaller than it actually is, and calculated out the supplies he would need based on a distance everyone knew was about half of what he would actually need to travel. His original destination was India, and by the time he hit the Caribbean they were pretty much out of food and fresh water, and not far from mutiny. Everyone else was pretty much right, they were just unaware that he would run into an unknown continent.
Spain only took him up on the proposal because they were extremely desperate and he wouldn't stop bugging them... so they gave him 3 leaky, obsolete, undersized ships crewed by criminals, foreigners and other undesirables, gambling that either he would find *something* of value or that nothing of value would be lost. It worked out well for them, but it was never a good bet, and they never believed it was.
While it is possible some groups without any access to large areas of flat land or open water *might* have believed the world to be flat, no seafaring culture ever labored for long under such a misconception, because spotting the curvature of the Earth at sea is trivially easy even with the naked eye.
So I take it that you believe it is simply impossible that there are more genuine links and other legitimate ranking metrics for speadingsantorum.com than for any other site? It can't possibly be that, like it or not, that's the #1 result because it is the most relevant, and not because of SEO and political conspiracy?
The terrible truth is that the Thing on Trump's head is, in fact, Donald Trump. The grotesque fleshy appendage below, commonly believed to be his actual body, is really the partially consumed remains of a deformed orangutan. That Thing, as it were, is a partially-sentient trans-dimensional parasite, using its host for the purposes of locomotion, sustenance, and reproduction: which it accomplishes by implanting slug-like larvae into the ears of human hosts between the ages of 17 and 32. The larvae then gestate for approximately 23 years, using that time to invade the central nervous system, and at the moment of maturity seize full motor and sensory control from the victim, leaving their former host a helpless, but conscious witness to the atrocities their former bodies will then commit.
The day of reckoning will come, Trump shall rule this world, and his Glory shall build an Empire to span our universe. All shall know Him and tremble at his Might and Power. We shall be His eternal servants, in life His serfs, in death His sustenance. Those few deemed worthy may even be given the Great Honor of serving as Trump's Host for some years, until our flesh is no longer fit to carry His Magnificence and we are ceremoniously cast into the sun as tribute to our Master.
"Yes it runs on the 4, but not as well, so it makes sense that Apple would disable it entirely"
Given the nature of the feature, the same could be said for simply using it as a phone, and by your logic it would make sense for Apple to disable the use of all iPhones older than the 4S as telephones...
It would be a pretty aggressive business model, though.
In the sense that you cannot rule out the existence of a deity, yes. That doesn't mean you should believe in one, think that the existence of a deity is probable, or operate as though it is a meaningful question. It's a small semantic point, but it does actually matter that there is no evidence to suggest a deity couldn't exist, merely a lack of compelling evidence to suggest one does. New things are found every day: maybe tomorrow, someone will find a god.
And which member of the House of Lords are, in fact, responsible for Alan Turing's conviction? Are any of the ones currently sitting senior enough that they did so at the time? How many were even alive at the time?
You're advocating for punishing people for things they not only didn't do, but couldn't have done even if they wanted to. Why?
A private religious organization is free to do and say as they see fit. If the CLDS wants to claim Mitt's dead atheist father-in-law is actually a Mormon just because they performed a ritual after his death, they can go ahead and say it... and if you or I wants to state that the CLDS is stupid and insane for doing so, we are also free to do that.
If that is the case, doesn't a pardon carry the same flaw? Anything they can do is, unfortunately, too little too late; if whatever they do will always be an inadequate gesture, then it seems like pushing for more of them is pretty much the same thing.
How about instead of running more petitions demanding... whatever... for Alan Turing, why not petition and clamor for something that might meaningfully improve the lives of people going forward? The current state of civil rights in, well, everywhere, is still in need of improvement. Homosexuals are still subject to persecution all over the world. Demanding that Parliament/Congress pass laws (or Constitutional amendments) clarifying that nobody can be denied their civil rights or unfairly discriminated against based on sex, gender, sexual preference, or any related trait would be a better use of time and energy. Demanding that foreign aid be absolutely denied to countries which refuse to respect the rights of homosexuals or other minorities would also be a better use of time and energy. Even demanding something as ultimately meaningless as a declared holiday or day of remembrance or whatever would be a better use of time and energy.
I don't think anyone actually claimed that CFIT never happens at all to anyone anywhere. The claim is that it used to be substantially more common, so much more common that it was the leading cause of fatal aviation accidents, and now it is anomalous for a commercial plane to be involved in such an incident. That Air New Zealand crash is notable specifically because the accident is so rare on modern aircraft.
I think Henry Rollins should sue to force him to use that song. He could use the argument that, since it's clearly piracy if a person fails to buy music (according to the RIAA), it must also be copyright infringement if a candidate fails to license a song.
I think he might even have enough absurdist leanings to give it a go, just for chuckles.
Maybe... but the Statue of Liberty was also originally sculpted to look like an African woman. It was changed after arrival because a large and politically powerful portion of the population strongly objected to the idea of an African breaking free from the chains that bind them in a display of ultimate literal liberty.
Slashdot Mirror
But wouldn't that cut into the amount of time/space available for vague ramblings about "freedom" and "liberty" and accusing anyone who disagrees with the corporate insurance system we have in the US of being a fascist and a Stalinist?
When you have emotionally charged rhetoric to throw around like beads on Mardi Gras, bringing up facts and figures is just a waste of time.
Except Shirley Sherrod has been working for the Departmenf of Agriculture for decades, has a long track record of excellent service, and was relaying a story of how she did something positive at a NAACP event on her own time. Cappedge was fired for actually being a disruptive and problematic employee.
Generally speaking, if you don't "invest" as much time as other players you are at a disadvantage no matter what. The best players are, typically, those who play the most...
If you keep losing at TF2, I posit that it's because you aren't as good as the people you're playing against and it doesn't matter what guns any of you are using.
You seem to be implying that art is rational and objective. Art is neither, it is emotional. Video games most certainly ARE art, and just as purchasing art is most certainly NOT a rational activity, neither is purchasing video games. That doesn't make spending money on either foolish or bad, rationality is not a measure of morality or other subjective values.
Most people, whatever they believe, are hugely in favor of engaging in some degree of irrationality. Anything you do that does not directly improve your material condition on strictly survival and evolutionary measures is, ultimately, irrational... which ironically includes a dogged commitment to doing only those things which are most obviously rational, as doing so would almost certainly lead to social isolation and associated difficulty with both survival and reproduction.
I imagine GP was hoping for an orderly repetition of memes. None of this mucking about, inserting one bad joke directly inside another. No sir, we need lines.
Unless the author has a full ride scholarship including room and board... I'd say there is at least a partially legitimate claim to some rights here.
Anyway, yeah, campus networks can be like that. It's bull. It's also, in my experience, rarely something the IT people are terribly fond of; most of them are at least passingly familiar with how the internet works, and ultimately it requires far more work to maintain a ridiculously locked-down network than one with minimal restrictions. Usually, that comes from higher up in the organization, from some old administrator or trustee or something... IT takes order in academia just like they do in business.
The best bet for getting a change on this is actually o complain to higher administration, and perhaps as well to school and/or local publications. Putting things in writing usually works well. Bring up issues of censorship and academic freedom, and be sure to mention how this new-fangled internet thing is a really important part of the future. Keep in mind that the details of what is or is not filtered is, largely, irrelevant... it's easy to lose a non-techie audience by getting into the weeds. The point here is to engage them on the emotional level: these decisions are not made because there are clear-cut rational arguments for them, they are made because somebody doesn't like ______ which they believe to be on the internet. Again, getting too logical or specific will just make eyes glaze over, so keep it rhetorical and abstract.
No, GGP's reasoning was stupid. Shooting guns in the direction of other people, even if you don't believe you pose a threat to their safety, is stupid and dangerous. The gun could misfire, the ammo could be incorrectly marked (ie. instead of birdshot you get buckshot... oops), you could be mistaken about the danger posed or where you have aimed, or you might even have the misfortune of the other person having a gun as well and mistaking your shooting at them for... well... shooting at them, and their gun might not be loaded with ammunition unsuited to killing humans.
Unless you aim to shoot somebody, never, ever aim to shoot near them.
Bullshit.
Any "man" who claims not to know better than to commit rape is lying. No really does mean no, always, there are no exceptions or circumstances where this is not the case. Is "don't have sex with anyone without their consent" really so difficult to abide by? It seems pretty damned straightforward to me.
That said, women who like to throw around accusations of rape when they aren't really appropriate are no better. It's not rape if you have consensual sex, then later regret it. It's not rape if you have consensual sex, then discover information about your partner that you don't like (ex. that they are married, or older than you thought, or wasn't wearing a condom... note that any/all of those can indicate shitty, amoral behavior, but that not all shitty, amoral behavior is rape). It's not rape if you have consensual sex, then decide you want your partner to get arrested. Basically, consensual sex cannot be turned into rape after the fact.
Or Libertarians, or Socialists, or Anarchists, or Communists, or... you get the idea.
Indeed, Colombus was considered insane not because anyone thought he would fall off of the world, but because they knew he would starve. Colombus was very insistent that the world is quite a bit smaller than it actually is, and calculated out the supplies he would need based on a distance everyone knew was about half of what he would actually need to travel. His original destination was India, and by the time he hit the Caribbean they were pretty much out of food and fresh water, and not far from mutiny. Everyone else was pretty much right, they were just unaware that he would run into an unknown continent.
Spain only took him up on the proposal because they were extremely desperate and he wouldn't stop bugging them... so they gave him 3 leaky, obsolete, undersized ships crewed by criminals, foreigners and other undesirables, gambling that either he would find *something* of value or that nothing of value would be lost. It worked out well for them, but it was never a good bet, and they never believed it was.
While it is possible some groups without any access to large areas of flat land or open water *might* have believed the world to be flat, no seafaring culture ever labored for long under such a misconception, because spotting the curvature of the Earth at sea is trivially easy even with the naked eye.
So I take it that you believe it is simply impossible that there are more genuine links and other legitimate ranking metrics for speadingsantorum.com than for any other site? It can't possibly be that, like it or not, that's the #1 result because it is the most relevant, and not because of SEO and political conspiracy?
I see your Schwartz is as big as mine. Now let's see how well you handle it.
The terrible truth is that the Thing on Trump's head is, in fact, Donald Trump. The grotesque fleshy appendage below, commonly believed to be his actual body, is really the partially consumed remains of a deformed orangutan. That Thing, as it were, is a partially-sentient trans-dimensional parasite, using its host for the purposes of locomotion, sustenance, and reproduction: which it accomplishes by implanting slug-like larvae into the ears of human hosts between the ages of 17 and 32. The larvae then gestate for approximately 23 years, using that time to invade the central nervous system, and at the moment of maturity seize full motor and sensory control from the victim, leaving their former host a helpless, but conscious witness to the atrocities their former bodies will then commit.
The day of reckoning will come, Trump shall rule this world, and his Glory shall build an Empire to span our universe. All shall know Him and tremble at his Might and Power. We shall be His eternal servants, in life His serfs, in death His sustenance. Those few deemed worthy may even be given the Great Honor of serving as Trump's Host for some years, until our flesh is no longer fit to carry His Magnificence and we are ceremoniously cast into the sun as tribute to our Master.
All Hail Trump.
"Yes it runs on the 4, but not as well, so it makes sense that Apple would disable it entirely"
Given the nature of the feature, the same could be said for simply using it as a phone, and by your logic it would make sense for Apple to disable the use of all iPhones older than the 4S as telephones...
It would be a pretty aggressive business model, though.
And if that doesn't work, they'll stop coming back with bigger probes. Something's gotta work...
"annual $5 Billion budget"
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! You fucking WISH the number was that low! $5 billion per year is NOTHING compared to the actual military budget.
Wow, thanks for that. I really needed a good laugh.
Carrier pigeons are susceptible to attack via bird feeders. They simply harvest the information when the pigeons stop to eat.
You just can't win.
In the sense that you cannot rule out the existence of a deity, yes. That doesn't mean you should believe in one, think that the existence of a deity is probable, or operate as though it is a meaningful question. It's a small semantic point, but it does actually matter that there is no evidence to suggest a deity couldn't exist, merely a lack of compelling evidence to suggest one does. New things are found every day: maybe tomorrow, someone will find a god.
And which member of the House of Lords are, in fact, responsible for Alan Turing's conviction? Are any of the ones currently sitting senior enough that they did so at the time? How many were even alive at the time?
You're advocating for punishing people for things they not only didn't do, but couldn't have done even if they wanted to. Why?
A private religious organization is free to do and say as they see fit. If the CLDS wants to claim Mitt's dead atheist father-in-law is actually a Mormon just because they performed a ritual after his death, they can go ahead and say it... and if you or I wants to state that the CLDS is stupid and insane for doing so, we are also free to do that.
If that is the case, doesn't a pardon carry the same flaw? Anything they can do is, unfortunately, too little too late; if whatever they do will always be an inadequate gesture, then it seems like pushing for more of them is pretty much the same thing.
How about instead of running more petitions demanding... whatever... for Alan Turing, why not petition and clamor for something that might meaningfully improve the lives of people going forward? The current state of civil rights in, well, everywhere, is still in need of improvement. Homosexuals are still subject to persecution all over the world. Demanding that Parliament/Congress pass laws (or Constitutional amendments) clarifying that nobody can be denied their civil rights or unfairly discriminated against based on sex, gender, sexual preference, or any related trait would be a better use of time and energy. Demanding that foreign aid be absolutely denied to countries which refuse to respect the rights of homosexuals or other minorities would also be a better use of time and energy. Even demanding something as ultimately meaningless as a declared holiday or day of remembrance or whatever would be a better use of time and energy.
What is an "info mountain" and how do I get to fly one? That sounds AWESOME!
I don't think anyone actually claimed that CFIT never happens at all to anyone anywhere. The claim is that it used to be substantially more common, so much more common that it was the leading cause of fatal aviation accidents, and now it is anomalous for a commercial plane to be involved in such an incident. That Air New Zealand crash is notable specifically because the accident is so rare on modern aircraft.
I think Henry Rollins should sue to force him to use that song. He could use the argument that, since it's clearly piracy if a person fails to buy music (according to the RIAA), it must also be copyright infringement if a candidate fails to license a song.
I think he might even have enough absurdist leanings to give it a go, just for chuckles.
Maybe... but the Statue of Liberty was also originally sculpted to look like an African woman. It was changed after arrival because a large and politically powerful portion of the population strongly objected to the idea of an African breaking free from the chains that bind them in a display of ultimate literal liberty.