What everybody is unhappy about is that the government wants to force people who DON'T want to try programming to do it.

what the fuck are you talking about? where do you morons come from?

can we stop with this nonsense please? it is similar to idiots who oppose teaching all kids programming

restricting access to developing a skillset which just builds on abstract reasoning is a joke, nothing more. it's as if lots of people making lots of programs somehow hurts good programs and good programmers. how? can someone define me how that works? there has to be a formal logical fallacy for what this low iq idea suggests. it's like saying gays getting married somehow hurts heterosexual marriage. and we see how well that mental diarrhea has persuaded

lots of people trying programming only hurts mediocre programmers. the only kind of people who take this nonissue seriously. it's popularity on slashdot therefore does not bode very well for the readership of this website

meanwhile, i welcome anyone who wants to try programming and i wish them well. it can be fun, it can be infuriating. and if in your quest you wind up being more skilled and hired to replaced than the kind of weak mouth breather who wants to somehow magically limit the pursuit of programming to some of kind of bullshit guild, this a surefire win

It's easy, just shift a couple to your mouth while you type.

You should practice, it'd be educational for you.

No. I own several dictionaries and none of them explain why you're using a term intended to belittle others and discount their opinions.

You don't appear to be able to either. You truly are a cunt.

You're demonstrating that my use of the word cunt is very appropriate, and also backing up my point about people throwing the word privilege around to push an indefensible agenda.

You still haven't answered my initial questions, because you want to demonize me for challenging you instead of setting out your arguments. It's quite comical.

As it happens, yes. I have Aspergers, I get shit scared by ignorant cunts abusing standard English terms in order to avoid having to defend their agenda of hatred.

Happens that 'privilege' is an excellent example of just that.

Using the word 'privilege' is a troll in itself.

What the fuck _is_ privilege? What the fuck do you know about the person to whom you used it as a slur? How the fuck is being surprised that a class of musicians don't prioritise their art any form of fucking alleged privilege anyway?

You were trolling, and flaming the person to whom you responded. The bit that I'm amazed at is that you got any insightful mods.

Yeah, jeans aren't acceptable here. I combine a proper shirt with black jeans and competence, and get away with it.

What about them? Headgear indoors is bad form.

Claim some religious exemption for your headgear and don't be surprised if I claim religious exemption for my lack of trousers.

So where a skirt, not khakis.
Take a second pair of shoes. You can change your shoes you know?

If you have 1000 tabs open then you definitely need to learn how to use a computer.

Oh, wait, you didn't need to pass a test for that.

I'm just trying to think how that would have been possible. I think back then there was a medical exception you could plead for. I didn't. I passed the 20 WPM test fair and square and got K6BP as a vanity call, long before there was any way to get that call without passing a 20 WPM test.

Unfortunately, ARRL did fight to keep those code speeds in place, and to keep code requirements, for the last several decades that I know of and probably continuously since 1936. Of course there was all of the regulation around incentive licensing, where code speeds were given a primary role. Just a few years ago, they sent Rod Stafford to the final IARU meeting on the code issue with one mission: preventing an international vote for removal of S25.5 . They lost.

I am not blaming this on ARRL staff and officers. Many of them have privately told me of their support, including some directors and their First VP, now SK. It's the membership that has been the problem.

I am having a lot of trouble believing the government agency and NGO thing, as well. I talked with some corporate emergency managers as part of my opposition to the encryption proceeding (we won that too, by the way, and I dragged an unwilling ARRL, who had said they would not comment, into the fight). Big hospitals, etc.

What I got from the corporate folks was that their management was resistant to using Radio Amateurs regardless of what the law was. Not that they were chomping at the bit waiting to be able to carry HIPAA-protected emergency information via encrypted Amateur radio. Indeed, if you read the encryption proceeding, public agencies and corporations hardly commented at all. That point was made very clearly in FCC's statement - the agencies that were theorized by Amateurs to want encryption didn't show any interest in the proceeding.

So, I am having trouble believing that the federal agency and NGO thing is real because of that.

Illegal immoral and entirely unenforceable stuff. Why not sign, none of it will hold up in court anyway.