Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
I don't think Obamacare is so powerful that it changed working hours for the poor 3 years before it was written, and 7 years before it went into effect.
Ahh, but you do not see what is obvious to conservatives - that Obamacare is so awful that it's awfulness warps the space-time continuum allowing it to go back in time as far as centuries back to make the world a horrible place. Especially for those horrible people who might use Medicare expansion services (or, as conservatives call them, freeloaders) or might be able to stay on their parent's policy or might not be denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions by fine, upstanding insurance companies (aka "job creators"). Yes, they've made the world a horribly awful place for conservatives. And you don't want to know what the Libertarians think.
No, really, you don't want to know.
It's called your local community college. It will teach you well enough to build anything you need to get through a zombie apocalypse. For more skills and certification, you'll have to find an apprenticeship program somewhere - that's a bit harder.
The biggest factors now are family structure, and geography.
No, the biggest factors now are wealth and income. However America is even more unwilling to talk about that than race. So yet again we get a smokescreen discussion obscuring the real issues.
Hey! I resent your characterization of Bill Cosby as a comedian!
He hasn't been funny for about thirty years!
The college admission "process" is so arbitrary and broken that doing pretty much anything to it would be an improvement.
That being said, I have a hard time believing in equality as a tenet of our country (even equality of opportunity) when the opportunities of a poor kid from the ghetto, a farm kid from small-town America, a middle-class kid from the burbs, and a rich kid from a mansion differ so greatly. Affirmative action was a way (no matter how imperfect) to attempt to address this issue. I wonder how long the myth of American "equality" can sustain itself when even ameliorative programs such as this are shut down with nothing offered in their place to address this issue.
This is why I've voted Libertarian (where available) for the past decade now.
You act as if that's a good thing. Well, I guess consistency counts for something even if brains aren't a strong suit.
Commercial debt dies with the probate process. It's not passed on.
Don't give Congress any more ideas.
Sadly almost all of us live in the lower atmosphere, you insensitive clod.
Did you ever meet a black person with a college degree?
Here you go off the rails with respect to your argument. When you are talking about subcultures, you're not talking individuals, you're talking statistics. And the statistics here are pretty awful - 8% enrollment gap for black males, 18% for Hispanic males. Female gaps are worse, as are those for college graduation. But appealing to anecdotal evidence (i.e., "Did you ever meet a black person with a college degree?") is not a valid argument when talking about an entire subculture, just as assuming that an entire subculture is deficient based on one metric (in this case, academic achievement) is pretty specious. In fact, did either of you know that, after compensating for socioeconomic status, the racial gap disappears?
Of course, neither of you know this and God knows it doesn't fit in with either of your world views, so it doesn't register in either of your discourses, both of which are based on emotion and specious arguments. If you want to really acknowledge the issue, it's socioeconomic status - class, in short. Liberals (even when they pay lip service to this notion) are too chickenshit to actually do anything about it; Conservatives won't even acknowledge it. Both are useless. Just like arguments on Slashdot.
This doesn't end well.
"Oh, come, come, my good sir! Surely you jest. Of course it ends well! Just think logically... Since we in the upper class hold all means of governance, manufacturing, communications, energy and food production, provisioning of service - in short, all meaningful economic activity - the basic necessities of life, only a fool, no matter how mistreated, would ever rise up against us. And, if he did, he and whoever he might conspire with would be tracked, caught, convicted, and confined, his friends and family persecuted and ruined. And now, for the sake of jest, let us propose that somehow, by some fortuitous fluke, enough of these malcontents band together to become even a minor annoyance to us. Our mercenaries will track, find, infiltrate, and neutralize them. If necessary, our superior technology shall target and kill them. Because that's the final trump, my good fellow - our superiority in bringing death to those who oppose us.
"It is the way of evolution, my dear man. And it will not be stopped. And atop this shining edifice? Striding across the globe, confidently able to command and reap the benefits of our leadership? Why us, my boy! Us! That is, if we don't falter. If we don't lose our nerve...
"Well, there's always a chance the bloody wogs might find some way of rising up before we're ready. Hire some more mercenaries, up the amount of infiltration, and get started on that wholesale bringing death thing, will you? Economic ruin, leading to deprivation, starvation, and illness should get most of them, while our prisons, bombs, and bullets will get the rest. Cary on, Maxwell... Oh, and send in Hansen..."
And you've taken away the I-tag again! I don't know why I'm still coming back here...
Apple, of course, invented their UI all by themselves, right? Never took any ideas from Xerox. Nope.
Nope. They bought the rights from Xerox. Different thing entirely. Micorsoft and the movie industry, though - they wer another matter and have the lawsuits (and subsequent settlement in the case of Microsoft) to prove it.
I wish the Apple-haters around here would at least get their history straight. I'm not an Apple fanboy. However, I am a computer history fanboy and I wish the amateurs would at least not keep spreading misinformation.
I'd have an easier time believing in "equality of opportunity" again if economic power were more evenly distributed. Unless you're telling me a lower-class kid from the ghetto, a middle-class kid from the 'burbs, and an upper-class kid from whatever upper-class enclave you wish to name all have the same "equality of opportunity". From my vantage point, the first has opportunity of jail or long-term unemployment and welfare, the second lifelong debt and wage slavery (until about age 50, where they slide down into the lower-class), and the third gets the opportunity to have just about anything he or she wants. And the statistics about outcomes and class mobility seem to bear this out. The only way to win a rigged game is to change the game.
First, make sure that code that must be secure is transparent. That means little (or no) optimizations, standard calls to OS functions, and clearly structured. It's clear that the OpenSSL developers made their code more opaque than was prudent and the many eyes of open source land could not see through the murk. Yes, clearer code would mean that it ran more slowly and some folks would need to run a few more servers, but the security problem might have been uncovered sooner (or not have happened) if someone hadn't thought that performance was a reason to make the code more complex.
Second, formal independent review would have helped. Most code (especially in volunteer-based open source projects) is only vetted by people directly on the development team. Any piece of software as ubiquitous and critical to the operation of today's internet as OpenSSL cannot have verification and validation mainly by its own developers. For software like this, where security is critical, you should have external review. Start an independent project that vets these things, folks.
Third, understand the limits of testing vs. design. More unit tests would not have caught this. Simple designs lead to simple and correct implementations. Complex designs (or no designs) lead to seas of unit tests that simply tells you the ways that the code happens not to be broken at the moment. Code like that in OpenSSL ideally should be simple enough to be formally proved correct.
I think we've known about why these sorts of things happen ever since I entered he field thirty years ago. We have ways to prevent them, but they usually take time, money, or lowered performance. That they are still happening because of performance zealotry, bad process, and "teh web-speed is everything" mentality is a black mark on our profession.
So Slashdot's beta is addictive? I don't think so...