Ah, and how lucrative is it to misrepresent [politifact.com] information?
or do you realize now, that you've been informed of the misapprehensions of your own source
If you run a personal blog talking about that stuff, then fair game
Is it? Suppose, he was into homo rather than heterosexual subjugation... Do you suppose, they would've banished him just as well — even if he were open about it?
should not be anyone's business but his.
"$450 billion ($1,800 per resident) per year from 1987–1990."
Yeah, and the next sentence explains that figure as: "These losses included $18 billion in medical and mental health care spending, $87 billion in other tangible costs, and $345 billion in pain, suffering, and reduced quality of life."
Different ways to count it can result in vastly different numbers — depending on what one wishes to demonstrate, ha-ha... The point remains, though, the cost of crime, however you count it, is still below the "commie socialist programs" that serviscope_minor attempted to justify.
And, the "war on poverty" isn't solely about reducing crime
Of course, it is not! Moreover, I argue, that it is not about reducing crime at all. It is about genuine compassion for some and the ability to spread the wealth around for others. That "spreading" of the wealth of captive taxpayers is pure unadulterated tyranny, of course, and the folks advocating it usually have a vast conflict of interest.
The overhead of charities ranges from 15% to as much as 70% — with government's operations being on the greater side of it. It is an incredibly lucrative and powerful position to be in control of spending even $1 billion, even if a mere $150 million of it are yours to dispense on the "overhead". With $800 billion per year you can find words, sponsor poems, finance movies and other artworks, and even find a smooth talking nincompoop, who will sincerely protect your trough, while denouncing opponents as greedy and egoistic bastards...
programs/applications are web base and/or deal with database stuff that always have a bottle neck issue else where as the GP already stated.
The observation I posted is just as applicable to the SQL-queries and even the database-servers themselves.
One of the web-browsers out there is to have a minor change to its GUI... How fascinating...
A particularly slownewsday? I wish it were...
I sure hope, you are just as prepared to agree with this...
Among those laws was the 1979 Department of Education Organization Act that established that entity.
Yep. As I said: a mission creep. Government looking, what else it can do...
The rules are simple. If (what seems like) a problem:
then the government must not touch it.
For the government to violate this principle is tyranny — taxpayer's money is confiscated to pay for things, he would not have paid for voluntarily.
And, like all other tyrannies, it is also inefficient. Your own example of public education is an ongoing disaster: per-pupil costs of public schools have quadrupled since the 1960-ies (inflation-adjusted), but 70% of the 8th-graders still can not be said to be "proficient" in reading.
Space-exploration is fascinating — leave it to Musk, Bezos, and Branson. They spend their own monies on it...
Who really cares if I can get a loop to run in 800ns instead of 1500ns
Indeed. A human being can not even perceive a difference between 1 millisecond and 1 microsecond.
But, repeated a million times, the former turns into 15 minutes, whereas the latter is still merely a second. Food for thought...
You may be better off without the option.
I may be. All I am saying is, I'd like it to be my choice, not yours and not the EFF's.
As long as I'm entering into the contract with the manufacturer voluntarily, there is really nothing justifying your (and the EFF's) concern about it...
If I don't own it, then my use is dependent on the whims of others.
Well, the "whims" are all spelled-out for you and known before you pay for it, maybe it is not so bad...
But, if anything is not to your satisfaction, you still have the option of buying an older, unencumbered, shovel.
On the other hand, if the EFF has their way, my option of using the hypothetical "smart-shovel" without owning it may not exist... Because the EFF knows better, what's good for me...
I wish, they stuck to fighting government's overreach. Fighting manufacturers of the proverbial "nice things" simply makes fewer of the nice things available.
Patents are also why we can own^H^H^H use nice things.
There, fixed that for you.
Is that distinction making a difference, though? As long as I can use a shovel, do I care, whether I own it?
If the manufacturer offers me a shovel, that can dig on its own, on the condition I do not attempt to disassemble it, am I not better off than I was without the option?
What ever you want is going to cost a little more than it is worth. -- The Second Law Of Thermodynamics