my dad worked overtime scrubbing toilets while going to college. that shows his dedication to hard work and learning. he was the kind of guy you want on your team. Most Americans would choose unemployment before they would scrub toilets. About 15% of Americans don't work. They "can't" find a job, or "can't" work because they are "disabled", though they can still build themselves a new deck. So they sour around complaining that they're not lucky. Guess how often my dad the janitor couldn't find a job, no job at all?

You have a very hard choice to make. So long as your life is the result of luck, or of what the illuminati decide or whatever, you have an excuse, but you're SCREWED. You can't change THEM. The moment you decide that your life is of your own making, you can have any life you want, but you're accepting your responsibility to.

I prefer a solution rather than an excuse .

I would dispute that. Calculus is not that innovative in what it does. Now, if we were talking about teaching modern algebra, set-theory, topology, or even classical linear algebra, that would be different. But calculus mostly fails at what you think it teaches.

Indeed. Commonly everybody turning into a wimp is a sure sign of impeding cultural collapse.

Over the last 80 years or so, and over any 20 year period, the market has averaged about 8.5%. That's what you'd expect from a boring old index mutual fund. Subtract inflation and that leaves about 4%. Though it'll be close to 4% / year for any 20 year period, the period that matters to you may be a particularly bad one, so figure 3% to be on the safe side. (Or equaliventally use a hedge or other guarantee to lock in 3%).

It is. And that they get away with it is even more scary. It fits into a general trend with the US government having less and less accountability and getting more and more irrational and paranoid. That can only end in a catastrophe. It fits in well with some other current observations though.

So some exceedingly small risk that also required several people to be stupid. No need for any action or any responsibility on the manufacturers side. Injuries from these things basically do not happen, as basically the guy with the cake tripping over his feet and killing himself or the toddler being killed by the fridge tipping over would have been a lot more likely. (Yes, both are so unlikely that they basically never happen. But there have been isolated cases.) Yet are there any calls to ban feet or fridges? No.

The level of stupidity and ignorance with respect to risk-management displayed in this whole affair is staggering.

Only problem is, there are no misdeeds. These things were clearly labeled as not for kids. While there has been a very small number of injuries (small enough that many toys intended for children are actually more dangerous), they are clearly not the fault of the manufacturer, distributor., etc, but the fault of inattentive parents. There will always be injuries to children because of inattentive parents.

Unless you want a complete nanny-state, where everything potentially dangerous to kids is prohibited (wonder how they will get rid of all those stones just lying around, for example), you have to accept that parents are responsible for their kids safety. That includes teaching them to be careful when they are older and it also most definitely includes not letting anything dangerous lying around within their reach when they are at an age where they take everything into their mouths.

If you want a hard definition of robot, you're barking up the wrong tree. But one of the important definitions is that robots have to make decisions. I don't know precisely what it means either, but I'm sure that it's not enough to have a simple trip switch.

He hadn't taught them yet, that was the issue.

Wait, who did? Not me. I didn't vote for any of those assholes.

No, that's what would happen if we listened to libertarians. They advocate a mythical future which doesn't exist in which everyone works in everyone else's best interests and people with more money never have inherent advantages over other people, and where the force used to secure their wealth is good and the force used to secure wealth which they don't agree with is bad.

Sounds like she has mental issues.

Um, what? I've been there, and you obviously haven't.

It's more like... they see that their dealer has lots of cash, a fancy car and other bling-bling... rubs elbows with all kinds of important-looking people... and doesn't seem to have any trouble getting laid. What they -don't- see much of are the addicts who can't afford the habit, or who can't maintain.

-Using- is a choice. -Addiction- is not.

> working at a minimum wage job

I've noticed gas stations start new people at almost double minimum wage. I made minimum wage - for about two months. Then I got raise because I reliably showed up for my shift - I was stoned out of my mind, but I was there. If you're over 16 1/2 and making minimum wage, start showing up on time. Flipping burgers is like a training bra to get prepared for an actual job, it's not a career for raising a family.

> 1/8th of their income

Do you not see that 1/8th of your income on soda is an INCREDIBLY stupid idea? Yet, I just spoke to someone who makes those kinds of decisions regularly. She literally buys several fountain drinks per day and she's on welfare. My ex-wife will always be broke because those are the decisions she makes.