Because simple human minds love being part of a group. And especially having others who they can exclude from it, so they can feel superior. Even if their accomplishment for belonging to this group is close to or identical to zero.
For reference, see any xenophobic rhetoric.
In their complaint, they claim that a State Department agency called the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) violated their first amendment right to free speech by telling Defense Distributed that it couldn't publish a 3-D printable file for its one-shot plastic pistol known as the Liberator, along with a collection of other printable gun parts, on its website.
So, just as a hypothetical
Or is their robust defense of freedom of speech limited solely to commercial activities? Might they even suggest that not all information falls under freedom of speech or serves the public good?
As often as not, corporations make what they claim is a principled stand, which really amounts to "Yarg, we want to make money".
Yet a simple little piece of metal, sufficiently accelerated, can cure that.
Non-black people are attacked by police every day.
Really? You see any riot police in paramilitary gear in the below pictures? Any white "thugs" getting shot in the back while running away? Hell, if you're white, you don't even have to run away. White guys have walked into movie theaters armed like Rambo and murdered a bunch of people in cold blood and the police take them alive and make sure they don't bump their head on the cruiser door when placing them in the back seat.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelli...
https://www.google.com/search?...
You can not possibly believe that interactions between police and white people are anything like interactions between police and black people or hispanic people. Let me ask you this: You hear about any white people who have been shot and killed in police custody with their hands handcuffed behind their back?
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_new...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/in...
I very rarely complain that a story doesn't belong on Slashdot, but this time I will, because this is probably the least Slashdot-worthy story I've seen yet.
This is not news for nerds. This does not matter.
Sadly, no, I don't think we can.
-gate has apparently become cultural shorthand for or "scandal". Some people probably don't even know the origins of it any more.
I fear it's cromulency is no longer up for debate, even if it doesn't embiggen the language.
I think we're stuck with at this point.
That's an interesting finding of facts on your part - can you cite some established evidence?
Yes, the police report made by the arresting officer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"According to the charging documents submitted by the Baltimore police,[27] at 8:39 a.m, Lieutenant Brian W. Rice, Officer Edward Nero, and Officer Garrett E. Miller were patrolling on bicycles and "made eye contact" with Gray,[24][28][29"
He was stopped because he was a well known criminal hanging out in a high-crime area who took off running as soon as he saw the police and wouldn't stop when asked to.
Do you blame him for running? Freddie Gray was not a suspect in a crime. He was not seen doing anything illegal. He was not found to be engaged in any illegal activity. He fucking made eye contact. He did not show sufficient humility in the face of police presence by casting his eyes downward as young black men are supposed to.
Motherfucker, you've got big white militia assholes carrying automatic weapons and drawing down on Federal officers and the cops are polite and careful not to hurt their delicate feels. A young black man makes eye contact and he's sent to the morgue. You think these guys ever have to worry about "making eye contact" with law enforcement?
http://www.capitolhillblue.com...
Wake the fuck up.
Like doing what you're (legally) supposed to do has ever shielded an employee from getting fired...
Overengineered designs come from people who don't have the experience of having to maintain an older product. The kids out of college are smart and fun to work with, but between the overengineering and their difficulty in perceiving fads from the frameworks that will endure, I find I'd rather not work with them until they have a few more years under their belt.
The people running the companies are absolutely short-term obsessed. The people buying the stocks are gambling and have long since stopped caring about fundamentals, and instead go on hype.
The irrational stock market and the terrible management both exist.
For some reason, people voluntarily throw reason to the winds when they see a startup. When a company is valued at 50 years worth of projected revenue, the market has become a farce.
All publicly traded companies are short term obsessed, but if you can keep the hype machine going loudly enough, the market will opt to ignore reality and stick with it.
The stock market doesn't seem to understand long-term investment in any meaningful way.
It's like that old joke about the young and the old bulls
Instead of asking your employees to knock their brains out, read the fucking Mythical Man Month and realize that the death march is an idiotic way to do things which doesn't really work.
Too many companies are being ran by MBAs who have no understanding of how to build stuff, and think 9 women can have a baby in a month. Or even that 4 women working really long hours can do it in half the time.
The problem is companies are being ran by short sighted idiots who don't understand the nature of their business.
Yes, Cuba does need business and capital, it does need to expand its economy, it does need better infrastructure, and the unfinished/rough cinderblock construction is everywhere.
They have lots of poverty, and lots of problems. Their internal transportation is a mess.
It's also true that I've met many educated people working on resorts because they could make far more money.
I am not disagreeing with a single thing you said.
What I am saying is Cuba's tourism industry is already stretched beyond what it can handle, and is in desperate need of some re-vamping and improving
If you just unleash the economic chaos on them and hope everything will sort itself out, you'll do a lot of damage to them. And, as you say, if that change is exploitative it will harm them even further.
I'm not saying this isn't a sign of improvement for Cuba. But I also don't think suddenly saying "OK, two more million tourists, deal with it" will work
In the short term, this has the potential to be more harmful than beneficial, because you can't just go full steam ahead and expect that to ramp up like it would be in a first world country.
When dealing with the police, avoid being black. This will greatly reduce your chances of being beaten, unlawfully being detained/arrested/searched, or otherwise having your other civil rights violated.
Well, I"m of the thought that there is a little preponderance to DWB, etc...but I don't think it is JUST being dark skinned that is the majority of the problem.
It seems to show that it is mostly black, in that an disproportionate amount of crime is perpetrated by black people, and many of the worst neighborhoods, poor and crime ridden are majority black / minority occupied, so this skews the stats a bit.
And, from many of the video's I've seen (and some experience viewed in person while living in New Orleans), many black people interact and react to the cops in a hostile manner right off to bat.
If a cop comes up to them, quite often you see the citizen immediately get confrontational, start cursing, etc.....that just escalates a tense situation on both sides.
I would posit that so many of these arrests and all would sharply drop if many of these folks interacted with the cops as I have when dealing with them. I stand very still, if asked to move or comply with doing something, I do it. I am quiet, I don't really talk to the officer unless specifically answering a direct question (if it is something not violating my rights). I address the officer as "Yes/No Sir/Ma'am" when responding to them. I am quiet, polite and as non-confrontational as I can possibly be.
Before I move to do anything (get something out of pocket or out of car, etc...I ask the officer if it is ok to do xyz....and wait till they say yes, and Imove very slowly, etc.
In other words, I give the officer(s) as little reason as possible to escalate things.
But when I see folks...no matter the color, get all excited and belligerent when dealing with the officer, I'm just think in my head. "well...they're going to jail".
I mean seriously, so this many folks need to go to a class how to deal with police, and talk and deal with people in general? This should be a no brainer....
The LAST person whose face I want to get into, is an police officer with a gun.
It is amazing what a "Yes Sir" and being calm will do for you....why is this so far for folks to figure out?
Anyway, I just related the textbook version; I wasn't aware of any US military deployments in Cuba (besides them leasing the Guantanamo Bay facility)
Leasing? America is NOT "leasing" Guantanamo in any legitimate use of that word.
America jammed the Platt Amendment into Cuba's Constitution at the end of a war, which unilaterally said "we get to keep a navy base here"
Cuba has never cashed the checks, has repeatedly said they don't consent to Guantanamo, and don't want the Americans there.
Guantanamo is basically a forcible military presence in a foreign country.
It sure as fuck isn't 'leased' in any honest meaning of 'lease'.
There's more to it than that. Far more.
Starting in 1901 when the US jammed the Platt Amendment into the Cuiban Constitution which America said entitles them to keep a naval base in Cuba (that's what Guantanamo is).
Carrying forward, the US was a backer of Batista, who was a petty little thug who did things like:
Back in power, Batista suspended the 1940 Constitution and revoked most political liberties, including the right to strike. He then aligned with the wealthiest landowners who owned the largest sugar plantations, and presided over a stagnating economy that widened the gap between rich and poor Cubans.[5] Batista's increasingly corrupt and repressive government then began to systematically profit from the exploitation of Cuba's commercial interests, by negotiating lucrative relationships with the American mafia, who controlled the drug, gambling, and prostitution businesses in Havana, and with large multinational American corporations that had invested considerable amounts of money in Cuba.[5][6] To quell the growing discontent amongst the populaceâ"which was subsequently displayed through frequent student riots and demonstrationsâ"Batista established tighter censorship of the media, while also utilizing his anti-Communist secret police to carry out wide-scale violence, torture and public executions; ultimately killing anywhere from 1,000 to 20,000 people.[7][8] For several years until 1959, the Batista government received financial, military, and logistical support from the United States.[9]
But, as always happens, he was a thug and a dictator but friendly to US business interests. So America liked him.
Basically the Cubans were poor and starving under a terrible government who cared more about US interests than its own citizens.
The American Mafia is largely whose stuff was nationalized:
In the 1950s, Havana served as "a hedonistic playground for the world's elite", producing sizable gambling, prostitution and drug profits for American Mafiosos, corrupt law-enforcement officials, and their politically elected cronies.[38] In fact, drugs, be it marijuana or cocaine, were so plentiful at the time that one American magazine in 1950 proclaimed "Narcotics are hardly more difficult to obtain in Cuba than a shot of rum. And only slightly more expensive."[38]
In a bid to profit from such an environment, Batista established lasting relationships with organized crime, notably with American mobsters Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano, and under his rule Havana became known as "the Latin Las Vegas."[39] Batista and Lansky formed a friendship and business relationship that flourished for a decade. During a stay at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York in the late 1940s, it was mutually agreed that, in return for kickbacks, Batista would give Lansky and the Mafia control of Havana's racetracks and casinos.[40]
So, let's not pretend that Cuba wasn't already under a corrupt dictatorship under which the citizens suffered hugely.
I'm not defending everything Castro did, but everyone likes to conveniently the history of American supported dictators allowing American organized crime to treat the nation as their own private playground.
Batista and the crooks really needed to go. And I'm afraid I have little sympathy for them.
Americans like to act like Castro overthrew a benign government, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Don't just look at the last 50 years, look at the last 100.
Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.
