Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 1) 438

Even if it is by design, it does not explain why the numbers are going down. Even if tobacco would take 50% of all deaths and we have a lottery that takes out another 25%, the number can still grow. So unless you show me what the percentage of tobacco death are during the years they are talking about, it means nothing in this context. It does not explain why the numbers are starting to get lower. It explains why they are high as they are, but not the change, unless you have numbers that back it up.

You should also look to other countries and see what the reason might be.

You want clarity behind the numbers when the numbers quite literally slipped fractions of a percent across the aggregate. I'm not going to even try and distill that level of needle-in-a-haystack analysis when statistics can be mutilated to the point of being utterly worthless. Suicides and depression is up. Economy isn't exactly wonderful. Opiate addiction is on a rampage, along with a socialized healthcare system that is creating heroin addicts as a side-effect. A super-sized obese society. Take your pick as to why the numbers are "going down".

And the key number that has been held down is the population number. Without death by design, we would be facing a whole new wealth of issues related to resource management. Population control is a key component of resource management.

Tobacco was but one example I provided that kills hundreds of thousands of Americans every year, approved by the very Government that not only benefits from taxation, but also meets the obligation of resource management and creates massive profits treating related illnesses before a premature death. It's a win-win-win.

Comment Re:Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 1) 438

You're so wrong. It's legal because of greed. They wouldn't have taxed tobacco to hell and back in most states if "they" wanted people to die.

Ah, not quite. It's legal because it creates highly profitable ailments before it all but guarantees a premature death. Both of those side effects to legalizing tobacco feed the needs of the greedy and the obligation of resource management. It's a win-win.

You're making the mistake many make of assuming somebody is in charge of this ship we call society. There's no one in charge. It's every man and woman for themselves.

Uh, legislators are somewhat in charge when you look at the fact that most people do not steal cars and burn down buildings because it is against the law, which is enforced. Our laws dictate how the ship called Society steers. The proof of that would be to look at societies that Americans would define as far less civilized in their behavior, and the amount of regulatory control applied and enforced. There are many "lawless" places around the world that Americans fear to tread; those are the societies where no one is at the proverbial helm.

Comment Verizon - the next class-action victim (Score 5, Insightful) 165

"Verizon will not be taking part in this update because of the added risk..."

Ah, say no more Verizon. When a Verizon-powered Note 7 device burns up in the cargo hold and takes down a passenger plane killing hundreds over that precious holiday season you wish to protect, Samsung et al will know exactly who to identify in the class-action suit/counter-suit.

Seems customer ignorance is infectious...

Comment Re:you no longer own your devices (Score 0) 178

The Geneva Conventions exist to make warfare civilized. While that may seem contradictory, it isn't. It's the difference between stabbing someone in the kidney because they dared talk to your girl and asking them if they would like to step outside because of it. Yeah, still not a very pleasant activity, but things like not using nerve agents and land mines make it as civil as a fight (war) can be.

Killing another human is hardly defined as a "civilized" activity. Only when society deems it somehow justified is it acceptable.

For thousands of years we humans have been rather busy killing each other in order to prove what happens after you die. That tends to make a scavenger hunt for WMDs look like a booger by comparison, and I'd say our ability to define justified is about as good as our ability to be civil towards each other.

Well a lot of the Geneva convections are actually specific rules to prevent you from killing people during a war.

They include things like prohibiting targeting marked medical personel and equipment, prohibiting the execution staving and tourture of prisoners of war, etc.

This is "civilized" ins the sense that by signing on you get the benefit of reasonable expectation that your soldiers will benefit from the rules at the cost of you having to also play by them. Much like being part of civilization means you get the benefit of being able to own property at the cost of also having to respect your neighbor's property rights. It's that "social contract" thing John Lock was talking about.

You are correct. This is a more palatable form of warfare. To call it civilized pushes the very boundaries of that word.

And while we're busy making bloodshed more palatable, perhaps the correct "social contract" that leans towards a civilized society is addressing how to avoid bloodshed altogether.

Somehow I feel that will never happen because in the end, bloodshed is a highly profitable business.

Comment Re:you no longer own your devices (Score 0) 178

The Geneva Conventions exist to make warfare civilized. While that may seem contradictory, it isn't. It's the difference between stabbing someone in the kidney because they dared talk to your girl and asking them if they would like to step outside because of it. Yeah, still not a very pleasant activity, but things like not using nerve agents and land mines make it as civil as a fight (war) can be.

Killing another human is hardly defined as a "civilized" activity. Only when society deems it somehow justified is it acceptable.

For thousands of years we humans have been rather busy killing each other in order to prove what happens after you die. That tends to make a scavenger hunt for WMDs look like a booger by comparison, and I'd say our ability to define justified is about as good as our ability to be civil towards each other.

Comment Re:Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 1) 438

There's a much more mundane reason why alcohol and tobacco are still legal: we're sitting on millions of addicted people.

From the cradle addiction to the actual grave, every step along the way feeds capitalism. Government fully supports that because it also meets the needs related to resource management. Addicts don't cost money. They make money.

Remember what happened during the prohibition era? It turned out that addicted people are willing to help destroy society to get their fix. They'd rather pay the Mafia, an organisation bent on killing folk and subverting the rule of law, than try to do without their fix. The result was that the prohibition era basically caused most of America's organised crime and we're still paying for that.

The reasons for Prohibition never coming back again are a bit different today than when it was introduced. Alcoholism was conveniently labeled as a "disease" many decades ago. Why? So that the growing Medical Industrial Complex could obtain a massive benefit from it, backed by insurance companies who will now cover you to treat this new affliction. Pure capitalism drives the legalities around alcohol today, which will never be denied no matter how many MADD mothers march. Alcohol is now a $200 billion dollar burden on society, which drives a lot of money into the pockets of those lobbying to keep it legal.

Addicted people aren't really human in the normal sense of the word, and if you forget that, you'll pay for it.

In a capitalistic society controlled by pure unadulterated greed, an addict is nothing more than a reliable customer.

Even countries which are trying to address these issues are doing it slowly, one baby step at a time, because they must ensure that at every given step all the addicted non-humans won't suddenly go off on one.

Controlling the addicted zombies to keep the horde at bay is a cute theory. I prefer to accept the fact that resource management is an obligation of every government. The baby steps are political bullshit pandering to put forth the image that we are a civil society who actually gives a shit about not creating addicts while maintaining profitable legislation that unfortunately creates addicts.

Comment Re:Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 1) 438

TL; DR - Death is by design, backed by policy, because every government has a responsibility of resource management.

+4 interesting? Wow. So you're implying the government is killing off the locals to keep the population down?

No, I'm implying that resource management is an obligation of every government. Death is merely a side effect of the effectiveness of executing that duty, and in many ways is a required side effect.

If that's true, why does the country allow so much immigration?

Governments have drawn lines all over this rock we live on that sustains human life, separating "yours" from "mine", making the pool of resources to manage all the more finite. Outside of perhaps pure charity, I have no logical explanation for the political decision to ignore the shit out of current immigration policy that would otherwise deny access, but logic bleeding over into politics seems to be more and more of a rarity these days.

It's ironic that we want to embrace the dated "melting pot" concept in America while continuing to ignore the fact that every country draws lines for similar and valid reasons. We take this a step further and chastise those who simply want to enforce current immigration law. The term "undocumented", while offering some legal clarity, does little to resolve issues, and creates confusion. Not unlike politics itself.

Comment Re:Welcome to the Trump future... (Score 1) 438

Ah, because there's no chance the change in healthcare has caused the decrease, right?

Before the change, I hadn't been to a doctor in 20 years because I couldn't afford it, then this year I was able to go in for treatment. Let's hear your theory for how being able to see a doctor has killed people. Are doctors that incompetent?

First of all, when I speak of change, I'm talking about the shift to socialized medicine within the US. Yes, this helped millions of people perhaps obtain insurance for the first time, but it sure as shit was not the golden egg that was promised with regards to choice, and a lot of those millions are finding it's worth it to pay the penalties rather than pay the insurance premiums. Ironically, families who do participate likely get sick more often because they're burdened with paying insane insurance premiums, and can't afford to put healthy food on the table. Starts to really make you wonder what the fuck the point of it all was, other than to put more money into the pockets of the greedy who lobbied for it.

As far as doctors being incompetent, that depends on how biased their decisions are to feed the Medical Industrial Complex. Chances are you won't escape a doctors office today without being prescribed something in a bottle, along with a half-dozen follow-up examinations which are 4 minutes long, just enough time to legally check the liability box, but not a second more. They're also being far more intrusive regarding those "standard forms" you fill out when you visit for a bad cough, asking questions about job performance and how depressed you are. Ignorance would deny the profits being driven from such statistical gathering. I made an appointment for a cough, and suddenly I'm getting my head shrunken, which of course is always fixed with a bottle of new-and-improved pills that we'll find wrapped up in a class-action lawsuit 5 years from now due to the negative impact.

If you want to dig deeper into the theory behind bias, I covered that in another post regarding resource management.

Comment Re:Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 1) 438

You explicitly mentioned population control.

And regarding resource management. What resource is exactly being managed in your examples?

Smokers are a HUGE drain on resources. They typically spend their last 5+ years in bad health, costing a lot of money. Not to mention the last 3-6 months. Similar for drugs. Addicts become ill before they die and cost lost of money too. Not to mention the costs for the associated criminality.

That does not look like resource management. You just do not make sense. Now, maybe you mean they are a corrupt bunch of cronies, just in it for the interest of the ruling class, but then you still have not explained how this serves them.

The resources I'm talking about is this large rock we humans all rely on to sustain life, which governments conveniently drew lines all over it, separating "yours" from "mine", putting resources into even more finite pools. And since we're not getting of this rock anytime soon, that finite pool must be managed.

Take tobacco on a global scale. 6 million humans die every year. If you think we have population issues now, imagine what problems we would face if millions of humans were not dying due to tobacco use every year. And that is but one example. These are the impacts that governments take into consideration when creating policy or legalizing products that feed resource management. And yes, I did explicitly mention population control. That is a component of resource management.

As far as the sick and dying being a drain on resources, they also create massive profits, which in a capitalistic society, will always win. Addicts don't "cost" money. They make money for those lobbying governments for that capitalistic right. Governments gladly oblige as long as policy does not interfere too much with the obligation of resource management.

Comment Re:That rarest of events (Score 1) 178

An actual case where the manufacturer is disabling the product in the best interest of the public. Who knows when we'll see it's like again. Someday you'll get to tell your kids about the day this happened...

When you ask?

It is unfortunate that I see the rising "value" of mass censorship as being heralded as some kind of good thing these days, so I see this type of tool coming soon to a Freedom near you, gift-wrapped in pretty best-interest paper...

Comment Re:you no longer own your devices (Score -1, Offtopic) 178

Samsung pays for returns. The phones are disabled at the carrier. Otherwise you can keep your brick/bomb. In civilized countries you are not allowed items that endanger the public with no other function.

How ironic that we are quick to label countries who constantly find themselves involved in warfare as "civilized".

Nope, no profit to see here, move along...

Comment Re:Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 1) 438

and yet the population still grows. I guess that just shows how incompetent the government really is, huh?

It's primarily defined as resource management, not population control.

Population is a component of life itself, and chaos is an element within life that cannot be readily controlled.

And the policies are kind of like Google's "Don't Be Evil" policy. Good for marketing to the masses, but hardly the case when you really look into it.

Comment Re:defense versus health and human services. (Score 4, Insightful) 438

Looking at the data, things like obesity, motor vehicle accidents and gun violence are contributors.

Resource management is a responsibility of our government, so death is by design and backed by policy.

That said, you want to bring gun violence as a factor here, when over 60% of those deaths were caused by suicide. An often overlooked component of gun violence statistics to avoid funding mental health for some reason while making the 2nd Amendment a political talking point. Tobacco kills over 450,000 Americans every year, which makes motor vehicles look like a minor nuisance by comparison, but hey let's not ever talk about making tobacco illegal. After all, it helps feed the responsibility of resource management tremendously.

Comment Resource Management - Death by Design. (Score 3, Interesting) 438

The disturbing part is not the fact that longevity is in decline.

The disturbing part is the likelihood that it is by design.

Every government has a responsibility of resource management, and when a population continues to increase, policies and procedures must be put in place to help execute that responsibility.

If you take a look at our policies and legal products, it paints quite an alarming picture. Tobacco is a legal product. From a health perspective, it makes absolutely zero fucking sense, as it kills 450,000 Americans every year, while providing zero benefit for a human body.

That said, it is a legal product because it kills 450,000 Americans every year. It also is a leading cause of cancer, so government also gets the benefit of ticking off the "creates jobs" box with all of the related diseases caused by tobacco, namely the highly-profitable Cancer Industrial Complex. You really believe we're searching for a cure to eradicate an industry that generates well over $100 billion a year in profits, along with the twisted side benefit of population control? Think again.

And tobacco is but one example of resource management. Think marijuana is still considered "deadly" per DEA Schedule standards? Hardly. It's not legal because it's not deadly enough to benefit resource management. It also helps fund the War on Drugs, creates thousands of jobs in the DEA, and feeds the Privatized Prison Complex. The only downside is we've earned the illustrious moniker of The Incarcerated States of America, but clearly maintaining an illegal status is worth it.

Big Pharma has legalized the opium den in quite an elegant and profitable way, creating addicts, jobs, and deaths. And every study says HFCS is bad for you? Yup, let's ensure we put that shit in as many food products as possible while minimizing health risks. Carcinogens in makeup? Sure, why not. All examples of policy feeding the resource management responsibility.

TL; DR - Death is by design, backed by policy, because every government has a responsibility of resource management.

Slashdot Top Deals

Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso

Working...