Comment Re:Really clever... (Score 1) 249
Actually, it's trying to punish you for having a crappy uptime.
Would you rather A) be unarmed, or B) have a concealed pistol.
In short, would I want to spend every waking moment surrounded by people who are armed to the teeth for the highly unlikely offchance that I happen to be in a situation like this one at some point, and then hope that amateurs take him down without hitting even more innocent people in the smoke, darkness, and chaos?
There was an incident in Montréal (Canada) last year where police officers firing upon a criminal hit and killed a random passerby about half a block away. If trained police officers in relatively controlled conditions can kill innocent people, I'd hate to see what would happen if a bunch of amateurs started firing in a crowded and smoky movie theater.
What happened to just being good to each other, self sacrifice.. about actually "giving" and caring for people
The American "Christian" Right abolished all that. Didn't you hear? It's all about judging others now.
> Seriously, though, it seems to me that infrastructure spending is one of those no-brainer things that shouldn't even be a question.
Of course it's a question; why should it be any different just because it's "infrastructure?" If there is demand for it, let the free-market provide it... nothing dictates that "infrastructure" be provided by some entity that maintains a monopoly on the use of force. Note too that "free market" includes voluntarily assembled co-operatives and communes. Communal activity for common good is one thing... forced participation in some initiative, at the point of a gun barrel, is something quite different.
Back in the early 2000s, Ontario (that's in Canada) de-regulated the power market. A few months later, the government had to step in again, because your much-vaunted free market had more than doubled electricity rates in the space of a few months.
It's not about education. What's happening is certain groups are training people to believe things are true based on "because I say so" instead of "I can prove it". Pretty scary, if you think about the implications.
They *are* saying they can prove it, and then point to the Bible. What's really scary is when people just reply "Okay".
Why don't you look at how much work the lawyers put in, over how many years.
I think it would be interesting to know how much of that work and time was actually necessary and much served to pad pockets.
That depends on the country. Many countries grant Americans an implicit visa to travel there for tourism for a specific period of time, but many others do not. India and Vietnam are two examples that immediately come to mind. Some countries will grant you a visa in the airport after you fill out some paperwork, while others require you to apply from outside the country in advance (and waiting periods vary).
You should travel more.
Indeed. I had to get a tourism visa to enter China, coming in from Canada.
Might fly.... Only if you throw them hard enough.
Pull!
Look at North Korea.
I can't. Google Maps won't show me anything but a blank map.
God does not play dice.
"He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of any of the other players (ie everyone), to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time."
With apologies to Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman.
The funniest part about people referring to McCarthyism is that they do not seem to be aware that the people who actually did the things that are considered the abuses of "McCarthyism" were Democrats.
Do we really need the petty partisan politics here? He was a paranoid wingnut who very nearly did a lot of damage to the country. Does it really matter what side of the fence he started on if he was so far around the bend that he couldn't see sanity on a clear day?
An Ada exception is when a routine gets in trouble and says 'Beam me up, Scotty'.
