Fine, there is also an inverse correlation between US poverty level by state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty_rate) and the general religiousness of a state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_United_States).
Your assertion simply flies in the face of the data. The exact opposite of what you claim is suggested by actual data, If you have any data beyond what you decided was probably the case by all means share it.
Lastly I didn't conflate the two. Religious organizations are front in center fighting against marriage equality, abortion rights, income inequality and any number of other issues. They're also front in center in fighting for them. This is because ultimately the organizations are reflection of their constituents belief systems and they gravitate to ones that fit their world view.
Saying religious organizations have been at the forefront of most social change is a bit of a meaningless statement.
If 80% of the population is affiliated with a religion then they damn well ought to be at the forefront. In fact they ought to account for the majority and preferably at least 80%.
One could just as easily say that religious organizations have been at the forefront of resisting most social change, education and civil rights movements (see current debate on gay rights, marriage equality, global warming, abortion rights).
Lastly I see no reason that your assertion that lack of religion strongly correlates with poverty and economic mobility. In fact I believe it's quite the opposite and the facts seem to back that up. The countries with the highest economic mobility and lowest poverty happen to be the ones with the lowest religious affiliation (the US is not a leader in any of those categories).
I'd be very interested in reading your paper where you include the math where working through the conceptualization of 'outside looking in'.
I'd certainly be open to other interpretations but they need to be a bit more rigorous than: I fundamentally don't understand the math of modern cosmology so I came up with some new model that's about as complicated as visualizing an inflated balloon.
BTW, your analogy really ought to be 20 cameras not 20 eye witnesses. That's a closer approximation.
Given that so much of the non-GNU/Linux code is written by paid programmers I wonder who it is exactly that is going to fix all the code. I mean back when it was written Computer programming was much less of a gold rush. Nowadays everyone is competing for jobs that pay $120,000. Who is willing to pay programmers to go through all of the old code to fix it.
It's really not an issue. It's already fixed in OpenBSD. Certainly there's some user space code that also counts seconds since 1970 but if folks would simply start now there's no future fix necessary. The set of code written today which will be in use in 2038 will be vanishingly small. The remaining folks will pay some gray hair to knock it into shape. Missed code will make itself apparent sometime that Tuesday morning.
To be fair it's not at all clear that in this particular case the contamination came from fracking or is in fact even a health problem. Never the less the philosophical point still stands, the onus should be on the contaminator to stop, not the effected party to accommodate it.
First of all people have been drinking water out of wells for several thousand years prior to the invention of reverse osmosis systems. In general it's completely safe, in specific areas it could be unwise.
Second of all there's a difference between: is it safe to drink water from an arbitrary well, and why does this well that used to be safe to drink now contain fracking byproducts.
If in fact the well had been perfectly fine to drink until recently and is now contaminated with fracking byproducts then I think it's reasonable to ask the drilling companies to stop and fix their system.
I never really understand why folks are surprised by this kind of thing. There's nothing fundamentally different between a Windows box attached to the internet in the late 90s and a cell phone except that a heck of a lot more people have cell phones and they're easier to connect to a remote site. Both systems are perfectly happy to let you install random software you found god knows where that does god knows what. All that's really changed is the admission bar has lowered.
They should be ecstatic that all these apps do is send some tracking info to a few thousand sites.
That's good entry level tight strategy but will get you cleaned out playing no limit against a seasoned pro. You really have to learn how to win with any two random cards against any flop. You don't make a run at the hand every time but you must occasionally. If you know your opponent only plays face cards and likes to slow play strong hands preflop I'd rather call a minimum bet preflop with 2 3 than with KQ. I can get out cheap or absolutely clobber him with a good flop and I avoid the risk that he has some Ax, KK, QQ, JJ or some other face cards that can put my KQ in an uncomfortable spot.
Lastly, if in doubt never call. Either raise or fold. Calling should be a very deliberate play. Most folks call because they have no clue if they're winning or losing a hand. Hint, you're losing.
I seemed to gravitate to management where ever I went. I tried to do real work while organizing and directing the folks that worked for me. After almost 2 decades I finally got good enough at real work that they let me stop managing and just go back to working for a living. Much more enjoyable.
Then again maybe they realized I sucked as a manager.
It's not my fault because I didn't create the circumstances and I'm powerless to prevent or cure it. How the hell is it not his fault. He's omniscient and omnipotent. He knows it happens and could stop it yet chooses not to. If you see a child being beaten and killed do you step in and help or do you stand around and watch to see if any of your peers are worthy of your respect.
Is he infinite or is he finite. You can't have it both ways. If he's infinite he's demented, if he's finite he may be worthy of respect or awe but not worship.
It worked, I have no faith in him what so ever. Frankly he's a right prick. Ooh, lets test those parents faith by giving their new born child some hideously painful cancer. It's ok though because their baby will live forever up in heaven and it's worth it to cause all that pain on the offhand chance one of its parents makes the grade.
I'd be a better god than that jack ass. If he really does exist I want nothing to do with him and given half the chance I'd beat the shit out of him when I saw him.
Yes it does serve a purpose. By choosing to release all info and never redacting then at some level they shield themselves from claims of bribery or bias. What happens if Sony and WB both have information leaks, WB makes a 10M donation to Wikileaks to redact info and Sony doesn't.
I'm not arguing they should or shouldn't redact but strict rules of always releasing all information they receive does serve a purpose.
It's pretty painfully obvious if you look at the actual data that this is just a registration error. If you go to the actual site with the statistics http://www.carolinatransparenc... you see a nice predictable distribution by age with a large spike at 112 years of age. This is for the 2012 election so clearly a number of people had their birth date entered as 1900 (probably just 00 and borked Y2K software but meh).
If you look at the 2014 election results you can see those errors were corrected and there is no longer any such spike. Every precinct in the US is going to have this type of error.
This isn't voter fraud this is imperfect data entry on registration rolls.
Slashdot Mirror
If you use a small enough font it will.
Fine, there is also an inverse correlation between US poverty level by state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_poverty_rate) and the general religiousness of a state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_the_United_States).
Your assertion simply flies in the face of the data. The exact opposite of what you claim is suggested by actual data, If you have any data beyond what you decided was probably the case by all means share it.
Lastly I didn't conflate the two. Religious organizations are front in center fighting against marriage equality, abortion rights, income inequality and any number of other issues. They're also front in center in fighting for them. This is because ultimately the organizations are reflection of their constituents belief systems and they gravitate to ones that fit their world view.
Saying religious organizations have been at the forefront of most social change is a bit of a meaningless statement.
If 80% of the population is affiliated with a religion then they damn well ought to be at the forefront. In fact they ought to account for the majority and preferably at least 80%.
One could just as easily say that religious organizations have been at the forefront of resisting most social change, education and civil rights movements (see current debate on gay rights, marriage equality, global warming, abortion rights).
Lastly I see no reason that your assertion that lack of religion strongly correlates with poverty and economic mobility. In fact I believe it's quite the opposite and the facts seem to back that up. The countries with the highest economic mobility and lowest poverty happen to be the ones with the lowest religious affiliation (the US is not a leader in any of those categories).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...
I'd be very interested in reading your paper where you include the math where working through the conceptualization of 'outside looking in'.
I'd certainly be open to other interpretations but they need to be a bit more rigorous than: I fundamentally don't understand the math of modern cosmology so I came up with some new model that's about as complicated as visualizing an inflated balloon.
BTW, your analogy really ought to be 20 cameras not 20 eye witnesses. That's a closer approximation.
And none too soon. We won't be able to get off the planet fast enough once it's overrun with genetically engineered super spiders.
Well mostly all the time. April 11th 1954 was noted for it's absence of this kind of shit.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...
Purina CoderChow(TM) made from 100% all natural compounds and elements.
Given that so much of the non-GNU/Linux code is written by paid programmers I wonder who it is exactly that is going to fix all the code. I mean back when it was written Computer programming was much less of a gold rush. Nowadays everyone is competing for jobs that pay $120,000. Who is willing to pay programmers to go through all of the old code to fix it.
It's really not an issue. It's already fixed in OpenBSD. Certainly there's some user space code that also counts seconds since 1970 but if folks would simply start now there's no future fix necessary. The set of code written today which will be in use in 2038 will be vanishingly small. The remaining folks will pay some gray hair to knock it into shape. Missed code will make itself apparent sometime that Tuesday morning.
To be fair it's not at all clear that in this particular case the contamination came from fracking or is in fact even a health problem. Never the less the philosophical point still stands, the onus should be on the contaminator to stop, not the effected party to accommodate it.
First of all people have been drinking water out of wells for several thousand years prior to the invention of reverse osmosis systems. In general it's completely safe, in specific areas it could be unwise.
Second of all there's a difference between: is it safe to drink water from an arbitrary well, and why does this well that used to be safe to drink now contain fracking byproducts.
If in fact the well had been perfectly fine to drink until recently and is now contaminated with fracking byproducts then I think it's reasonable to ask the drilling companies to stop and fix their system.
I never really understand why folks are surprised by this kind of thing. There's nothing fundamentally different between a Windows box attached to the internet in the late 90s and a cell phone except that a heck of a lot more people have cell phones and they're easier to connect to a remote site. Both systems are perfectly happy to let you install random software you found god knows where that does god knows what. All that's really changed is the admission bar has lowered.
They should be ecstatic that all these apps do is send some tracking info to a few thousand sites.
That's good entry level tight strategy but will get you cleaned out playing no limit against a seasoned pro. You really have to learn how to win with any two random cards against any flop. You don't make a run at the hand every time but you must occasionally. If you know your opponent only plays face cards and likes to slow play strong hands preflop I'd rather call a minimum bet preflop with 2 3 than with KQ. I can get out cheap or absolutely clobber him with a good flop and I avoid the risk that he has some Ax, KK, QQ, JJ or some other face cards that can put my KQ in an uncomfortable spot.
Lastly, if in doubt never call. Either raise or fold. Calling should be a very deliberate play. Most folks call because they have no clue if they're winning or losing a hand. Hint, you're losing.
I seemed to gravitate to management where ever I went. I tried to do real work while organizing and directing the folks that worked for me. After almost 2 decades I finally got good enough at real work that they let me stop managing and just go back to working for a living. Much more enjoyable.
Then again maybe they realized I sucked as a manager.
Can I play you for money. Whatever stakes you want (please be a billionaire, please be a billionaire)
You only need 1 for the school. Think of it as a big game of evolutionary musical chairs.
It's not my fault because I didn't create the circumstances and I'm powerless to prevent or cure it. How the hell is it not his fault. He's omniscient and omnipotent. He knows it happens and could stop it yet chooses not to. If you see a child being beaten and killed do you step in and help or do you stand around and watch to see if any of your peers are worthy of your respect.
Is he infinite or is he finite. You can't have it both ways. If he's infinite he's demented, if he's finite he may be worthy of respect or awe but not worship.
Yeah, I was going to post the same thing. Even ISIS only uses twitter to post nonsense. The NSA doesn't really give two shits.
It worked, I have no faith in him what so ever. Frankly he's a right prick. Ooh, lets test those parents faith by giving their new born child some hideously painful cancer. It's ok though because their baby will live forever up in heaven and it's worth it to cause all that pain on the offhand chance one of its parents makes the grade.
I'd be a better god than that jack ass. If he really does exist I want nothing to do with him and given half the chance I'd beat the shit out of him when I saw him.
Yes it does serve a purpose. By choosing to release all info and never redacting then at some level they shield themselves from claims of bribery or bias. What happens if Sony and WB both have information leaks, WB makes a 10M donation to Wikileaks to redact info and Sony doesn't.
I'm not arguing they should or shouldn't redact but strict rules of always releasing all information they receive does serve a purpose.
Lastly nobody forces anybody to read any of it.
Maybe we could put China on double secret probation.
It's pretty painfully obvious if you look at the actual data that this is just a registration error. If you go to the actual site with the statistics http://www.carolinatransparenc... you see a nice predictable distribution by age with a large spike at 112 years of age. This is for the 2012 election so clearly a number of people had their birth date entered as 1900 (probably just 00 and borked Y2K software but meh).
You see the same thing in 2010 http://www.carolinatransparenc... where all the voters happened to be 110 and in 2008 where they were all 2008 http://www.carolinatransparenc....
If you look at the 2014 election results you can see those errors were corrected and there is no longer any such spike. Every precinct in the US is going to have this type of error.
This isn't voter fraud this is imperfect data entry on registration rolls.
Ahh, yeah that makes much more sense and I agree.
Why would people agree to let their spouse leave knowing that they will never see or speak to them again??
I just dug out my marriage license, don't see anything in there about me having to ask my spouse permission to leave.
Maybe it was just a poor choice of words or maybe you really do think one party gets a veto over the other party going off somewhere.
That's nice and all but when can we get the NCIS version. I've been watching their weekly documentary and they have some damned impressive software.
Hey, leave Thor out of this. Sure those other guys can take a leap but don't talk ill about Thor.