Often when you see someone arguing against federal education, there's either paranoia at play, or an ulterior motive like "defunding federal government" or "states rights" (and all the historical baggage that claim goes with).
Slashdot we are better than this. Let's be skeptical.
This is not to say federal (or state) education standards can't be abused. The above article is an example of that (and we should fight against it). But let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Let's decide what great education looks like, and fight to make sure EVERY child in this country has access. Let's not settle for letting a regressive state like Kansas hurt their kids with a bad education AND GET AWAY WITH IT.
(I honestly don't remember when I 1st made this login but it was a long time ago now. Rob still had links to his favorite sites as part of the content.)
Your userid is about the same as my first userid (lost passwd) so I would guess late 98 early 99.
Being anti GMO is every bit as nonsensical as being an anti-vaxer. There's all of about zero credible scientific data against it.
Hm. If you are talking about being anti-GMO because you are afraid it will kill you or cause cancer if you eat it, sure.
What if you are worried about whether or not a particular gene combination that would not "normally" exist in nature spreads far and wide across a single type of crap, say potato(e)s and that some bacteria or fungus somewhere develops some sort of appetite for it and wholesale destroys all potato crops for a year?
This has happened naturally but that is not an argument for creating such a thing.
The big lie is that you can have any technical means to do this without throwing it wide open. Then it's just a matter of who is abusing it
The thought process is that YOU will not have access to it. The thought of other governmental entities accessing the backdoor without the permission of the United States is beyond them. Of course, they probably thought my records at the OPM were perfectly safe too.
I'll never forget getting pushback from a lawyer regarding a desire to use AES with a claim that I'd need an export certificate. I pointed out that AES wasn't developed in the United States and that when I went to the Bureau of Standards website at the time that it linked to a foreign website for sources. Now how exactly was that an EXPORT or cryptography?
Unfortunately, your lawyer was correct. I am not an expert on ITAR restrictions but I do get yearly training (and I slept at a Holiday Inn Express!).
Even if you imported something, exporting it back to where you originally received it from can be an ITAR violation. Stupid? Yes. Senseless? Of course. A perfect example of a normal government regulation? Perfect indeed.
Amazing. You wrote exactly what I could have/should have wrote, from Amiga onwards. There is only one minor difference, my computer takes about 3 seconds longer to boot up. There is a mildly annoying pause for the WM to start up. It did not exist previously... but anyways. Spot on sir. Spot on... but I would like to note that I tried this on a desktop (entirely custom and "arbitrary") and a laptop (obviously not custom). The desktop had a proprietary driver for the video card and the laptop had a proprietary driver for the Broadcom bluetooth/wifi.
I should add that I am a gamer. I miss GTA V but only because I like to wander about the environment. I don't do the missions. There are still plenty of games for me to play so it is not a problem.
I want to be the one in control of my car. I like to drive.
That's nice but not really particularly important to society.
You making more money than you need to live is not particularly important to society either... and actually, it would be more beneficial for society if society took all of the money you did not need to live and spend it on society.
We are discussing the United States of America here. Take your ideas of society and go somewhere else where they fit.
I like to be in control. I like to have a car that stops as well as it accelerates and handles. I don't want a computer intervening in my driving.
Really? The plain fact of the matter is that without computer assistance your ability to control the vehicle is limited, particularly in difficult corner cases. In the right conditions you WILL stop faster with ABS brakes than without.
Actually, no. Many people can stop a car faster than relying on ABS alone will. Most of the American cars that I have driven start the ABS fluctuation early to prevent skids as once traction is lost, it takes a bit to regain it. Anyone who can keep the tires at the limit of traction can easily stop faster than this.
A high quality ABS will only take over once you have made a mistake. This will allow you to ride the limit of traction to a complete stop. This is a great feature.
In the right conditions you WILL accelerate better with traction control than without.
It is hard to argue when you put "in the right conditions" as a preface to your remark... Anywhere that traction is not close to perfect is the wrong condition for traction control. Again, Mercedes does pretty good with traction control that will allow you to accelerate despite patchy traction conditions, but most traction control will just leave you at a dead stop in conditions like sand or deep gravel.
In summary, the guy you are responding to loves his high quality, well tuned, and very sharp tools.
In summary to the summary, you are not an artisan and could care less about the tool that you have to use and want lots of safeguards built in... and wanting to require such things of people who are masters at using the tool. Because society.
I am unsure why this situation is so cloudy for you. There are places/times where lines can be crossed, but why is this an issue anyways?
To answer some of your questions: Assuming a Wild West situation where there are numerous active shooters, most Bad Guys, some Good Guys, the good guys are either smart enough to lower their weapons when the police arrive or they get shot as being indistinguishable from the bad guys... and too bad for them. Stupid is as stupid does.
To address your other question, I would like to pose a question to you: What happens when the police shoot an innocent? If the situation was volatile enough, it is likely the police officer would be exonerated. While a normal citizen would never be granted as much leeway as a police officer, the situation is the same.
It sounds like you may not be able to deal with the responsibility of owning and carrying a firearm. That is fine. Nobody is requiring you to do so.
In other words, you have provided arguments about why YOU should not carry guns but you have not provided any arguments about why others should be prohibited from carrying guns.
He seems to be clueless. Guns are ubiquitous in Somalia, which has no functional government at all, much less a democratic one. While England seems to get by just fine with handguns banned.
Guns are ubiquitous to WHO in Somalia? The general population? I think not.
While England seems to be descending into an Orwellian hell with handguns banned. Go Go Gadget GCHQ!
Give me the frequencies. I'll have jammers made in China within a month.
What do you need the frequencies for? Just cut an electric cord and scrape the ends against each other rapidly while plugged in. White noise across the entire spectrum.
Now you can get you(sic) desperately ignorant words written down to a piece of paper and shove it up your ass.
Yeah, Brazilian here.
I am not who you are replying to but perhaps you should address this issue and the wording in the article if you wish to change people's perception of Brazil.
"What a wonder is USENET; such wholesale production of conjecture from such a trifling investment in fact." -- Carl S. Gutekunst