Since the byline mentions mister Bond, presumably a derivation from the '64 007-flick Goldfinger ("No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die!"), I need to point out that "fender" is a decidedly American English term, which one would call "mudguard" in proper English. Not that I care much one way or the other, but I have this vivid picture in my head of agent 007 feigning not understanding the reply.
Thanks for the info. Unfortunately a lot of non-specific arguments along the lines of "because animals" have been floated above and elsewhere. This was refuted with a specific counter-instance that I feel I am sufficiently knowledgeable about. Sorry, no wolves in my back yard.
I think the take-away message is that one can not take a snapshot during certain circumstances, and only for certain species, and then take that as the be-all and end-all to model human politics on. How absurd. Then again, it seems to be a human tendency to squint "just right" at the data to prove whatever they want.
So, who are the lucky bastards who get the Dolly Parton universe?
Presumably, those are the alternative slasdotters that are married to the opposite sex and don't live in the basement either.
It's a basic human desire/nature to want to control the things you have earned, if the hunter kills a deer he wants to make sure his family gets the best meat and gets fed first. He will share the leftovers with the tribe because he gains a promise of return via the safety of the group, respect, recognition, and a bonding within said group.
Capitalism, as an economic concept, appeals to human nature because the individual controls the "wealth" and distribution.
Communism means that the group decides what gets done with your deer, and your family may or may not get enough to eat. Therefore communism is an unnatural artifice the rubs human nature the wrong way, this is why communism always fails.
Problem is, one does not always bring home a deer.
When the prey brought home is an mammoth, there is more than what you and your family can eat before it perishes ==> Socialism is an obvious answer.
When the prey brought home is a hare (that had to be chased for half a day), there is hardly enough for you and your spouse ==> Capitalism is an obvious answer.
Anecdote here. I keep 8 chickens as pets and for an egg supply. Each morning, I feed them a quantity of mixed-grains fowl feed. This is strewn on the ground, usually in a rough line or a few spots. They then proceed to peck up this feed. I started feeding them enough so that there is some left after they had finished. I then adjusted the quantity down so that there is no wastage - discouraging rodents and other birds from the area. (Chickens are left for the rest of the day to forage free range.)
In the beginning of a feeding session, while there is plentiful, "sharing" gets along nicely. Everyone pecks away in his/her own position. Smaller chicks will be called with a specific sound (mostly be the mother, but others may do it too), shown a piece of grain in the beak of the caller, which is then deposited near the chick for it to eat. The rooster will also use this sound to "call" the hens to come and eat. All nice and commie altruistic, one gets tears.
About halfway through the feeding session, when the food has been diminished by about half, things get interesting. Those higher up in the pecking order (natural fowl social hierarchy) chase away those lower down, to get to their food. No matter that the "higher-up" still had some left where she was pecking. No matter that there should be (just) enough for everyone. No matter that there is a whole day left to forage more. Looks to me quite like the nasty monopolizing side of capitalism from where I stand.
Please people, don't come preach about animal behavior and present that as the absolute and static alpha and omega. Circumstances change, even in a single feeding session.
only a moron would include 'Unknown Code Words' and 'references to surveillance technologies and projects' in a resume. Seems to be over 27,000 of them.
Which part of "intelligence community" don't you understand?
A young doctor and an old doctor chat over the water cooler.
Asks the old doctor: "So, what did you treat mrs. Smith for?"
Young doctor: "$17 000."
ODr: "No.... I mean: what did she have?"
YDr: "$17 000!"
How about PFC chicken?
I guess that would be MFC = Mauritius Fried Chicken. Hopefully it tastes more like chicken than chicken does.
It all fits: From the outside, an idyllic travel brochure-worthy prospectus. On the inside, lots of soon-to-be-extinct beings poisoning their drinking water with their own shit, too dumb to move off the known path, trapping themselves.
Now just waiting for the Dutch to help them out of their misery.
All metaphorically speaking, of course.
"There's too many chiefs and not enough Indians around this place."
H-1B visas to the rescue!
Not to mention special ops, infantry combat,.... These professions are all mostly male. I guess we'd better go figure out how to get more women there too.
Couldn't they, I don't know, change the program to show how it "attempts to achieve societal good."?
Web is for video playback, reading news and blogs
You forgot to mention the cat pictures.
In the mean time, I wish I had gone with the other option for a number of reasons, including:
Every day, I long to be not dependent on the grid. Even storage, which is charged from the grid as opposed from PV (i.e. a huge UPS for the household), would be preferable.
Our OS who art in CPU, UNIX be thy name. Thy programs run, thy syscalls done, In kernel as it is in user!
