Ah, a "just doing my job" apologist...
Ah, a "just doing my job" apologist...
Of all the games to pick, this is not a good example.
It has been positively plagued with random stability issues and glitches. 'Tuning' doesn't account for it, as many many people have invested significant time trying to get it to work well.
If the game itself offered more engaging gameplay or actual technological advances, it'd be one thing. As it stands there are many superior alternatives. It's just a poorly written, bloated game.
It's funny, I've thought a time or two about leaving IT and starting a lawn and snowplowing business. Why? Pay isn't quite as good, but except in the winter when you're plowing, you set your own hours, don't need to interact with people, and the pay is pretty damn good just the same. If only for allergies....
Our 'lawn boy' is an 18 (now 19?) year old gay kid. He's been mowing lawns for 3 years, every summer. He has bought his own new truck -with cash - and all the accessories you'd expect. He makes at least $70k/year after taxes, and that's just with the people we know are his customers, paying voluntarilly, in cash/check, $20-40 at a time.
No 401k or insurance necessary.
Those poor lawn boys...
It's all of that, yes. But it's also:
* cost of living/price of housing per foot
* food costs are insane
* the culture is hostile to child rearing (even eg. Facebook offer bereavement leave and adoption assistance... but no on-premises childcare? That's standard for many large companies throughout the country.)
* the tax rate is obscene
* the tech work culture is extremely ageist, and anyone over 30 is going to encounter it
* the SF area IT culture actively encourages career instability (which is problematic if you'd ever like to buy a house).
You can make half as much in another locale and have twice the quality of living, if not more, in many other metro areas in the US, working in IT... if you're going to the bay area, you're likely in it to make a mark and a name, not to raise a family.
I've been busy flagging the specious content-free claims on my feed, and it's working. I'm no longer seeing many CNN or Snopes links on my feed.
So if other methods aren't as lethal as a firearm, wouldn't you want to maintain access to firearms to a) provide a means for suicidal people from maiming themselves severely and permanently, b) allow them to ease their suffering in as humane a fashion as possible?
If people are going to try to kill themselves for real, they're just going to do it. Reducing the margin of error and making it easier seems like the more civilized way to do this, don't you think?
Nah, it'd result in some pretty crappy rip-offs.
Have you seen the show Dark Matter? It tries really hard to be Firefly-esque - identical (if shallower) archetyped characters (bravado gunman, gifted girlchild, etc.) , all with a similar gist. At least in the first couple episodes, that's as far as I got due to the insufferable dialog and acting.
And without the characters - the acting, the motion, etc. - it'd not be the same. And which is harder, impersonating someone, or playing a unique character? I'm fairly certain the latter, due to how many impersonators there are...
Now, if you had a fan-made Firefly continuum? If production quality was good, I can definitely see that being potentially viable due to the love that fans put into their stuff....
Because that theme hasn't been tried a billion times in other shows?
I can think of a half dozen shows which fit that criteria and with only marginal retrofitting it'd be what you describe.
Fuck that. I want a John Wayne styled LCARS first.
"Life is hard when you're stupid."
"That'll be the day."
"Take 'er easy there, Pilgrim."
"I wouldn't make it a habit of calling me that, son."
That would seem to invalidate the value of a vote, then.
You're not voting for someone, you're voting against the guy who wants to steal from you and destroy what you've got.
I'd agree entirely. It's basically thuggery, and no amount of rhetoric validates it.
I would think you'd need a fairly substantial burden of proof for this type of thinking.
So, without a strong government (which is using a big stick to take approximately half of everything, currently), you'd have chaos and strong men with big sticks taking everything?
What you're saying is that voting disenfranchises people and removes their ability to exercise self-determination if they either lose, or don't vote.
If the implications of a vote have such broad reaching implications as to change the course of history, to impoverish people or to make people rich, then the system is wrong: it is a system designed to increase inequity, as power always begets power. Yes, democracy increases inequity.
And, to wit, you can't fix a system by being a part of the system, particularly not a dichotomy like our political system. That isn't how the money and vote brokering works. Sorry: you become a part of he system by being a part of the system. It's already happened with Johnson - he's "sold out" the libertarian party, significantly - and it will happen further.
I'd imagine a good half of the people on slashdot are (or at least were, 10 years ago) in the top 1%.
The Dept. of the Treasury can not be eliminated, as it was founded on direction from the Constitution.
The IRS itself, didn't exist until the Civil War (and that should be a very big clue to you as to how legal it is).
The Revenue Act of 1862. Look it up. It's the sole basis for the IRS, and it was unconstitutional as the Constitution REQUIRES taxation to be uniform - which the tax code has never been.
Yep, though I think this time, the establishment may actually allow there to be a -different- party come next election, be one of the chosen two.
It'll be the Democrats and the Libertarians in 2018 or 2020, but all the Libertarians will really just be Republicans...
Thus mathematics may be defined as the subject in which we never know what we are talking about, nor whether what we are saying is true. -- Bertrand Russell