He was right, they were - and the appalling treatment handed out to native americans, contrasted with the treatment they got from Canada and even Russia (in Alaska before it was sold) is evidence that he was right.
The world would have been a better place if the American revolution had failed.
After reading the linked techdirt piece about the FBI fitting some poor, dope smoking sap up to get their own War on Terror stats looking good, I'm not convinced that any of these KST people are anything other than the usual suspects.
Actually I disagree. YOur supposition violates teh Principle of Maximum Incompetence.
If the FBI is failing to prosecute someone to the maximum extent of the law then that is pretty much evidence of their guilt. Its only the innocent that getdone over.
Then there is the concept of what constitutes 'extremism'
Not to mention the difficulty of separating an "extremist" post of a particular flavour from one opposing that brand of extremism. They almost certainly use the same words and phrases - but in a different order!
The outcome of such a policy will be that the issues involved are removed from the public arena completely - resulting in total ignorance. (Actually exactly the same kind of ignorance tha Theresa May herself displayed when she spoke in parliament following the Westminster Bridge attack.)
Where do we get the idea that passing a bad law is better than passing no law?
I've noticed many times in the past that all governments are biased towards action.
So, in the middle east, "political freedom" is so sacrosanct (even when the evidence is that it quickly degeneerates into tyrannical chaos) that it is worth sacrificing the lives of hundreds of western soldiers and thousands of middle eastern civilians in pursuit of it.
In contrast to that a relatively small amount of loss of life in terrorist attacks in the west is worth sacrificing most of our political freedom for.
The only explanation for this self contradictory attitude is the bias towards action in all circumstances.
The problem with this argument is that, although what Google/Apple are doing may be "wrong", legally there really is nothing that can be done about it. The first amendment only restricts government bodies and anti-trust laws were not designed to restrict abuses of monopoly power outside the economic sphere. This is why the lawsuit is struggling to find a law to hang itself on.
Scandinavian systems tend to focus on rehabilitation. That is, removing a person who commits a crime from the general public, and making it so that when they are allowed to rejoin society, that they're unlikely to commit any further crimes. The point is to make it that the person who comes out isn't the same person who went in: they're not a criminal anymore. And, if preventing recidivism is the goal, it seems to work: in Norway, a released criminal has a 20% chance of re-offending within five years; in the U.S., it's over 75%.
Now if the US waas the capitalist free market, free trade haven it claims to be they would immediately outsource their justice system to Norway.
Btw - I am sorry I missed that comment the fiorst time around - it is about the best comment I have seen on Techdirt - ever.
Incidentally this business model is already standard in the aero engine market. Rolls -Royce will sell exactly the same engine at different thrust levels with a different software build, a different price and different servicing arrangements.
I suspect that this has something to do with the fact that at the moment replacement Tesla batteries are effectively subsidised - even more so if replaced under warranty.
However their prediction is that in future this will not be necessary. This gives the company a motive for discouraging behaviour likely to reduce battery life - whilst still providing the ability to make full use of the current technology for those who are prepared to pay a bit more.
To this I would say you're half right, in that 'state vs federal' is focusing on the wrong issue while ignoring the more important underlying one of invasive searches without warrants.
Exactly - the point being that it could easily have been the other way around - in which case you would have wanted the federal government to win.
Better control of highly addictive substances is needed. This arguing over state versus federal law is deck chairs on the Titanic material.
Maybe if you had a proper national healthcare system - instead of the anrachy that prevails in the US...
Its the same as with your gun laws - give an (apparent) freedom with one hand and take more away (with the law enforcement regime that results) with the other.
The Ugandan government is obviously upset at having missed out on the fake bomb detectors - when Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Georgia, India, Iran, Kenya, Niger, Qatar, Romania, Tunisia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates and Vietnam all bought them... see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651#Users
Re: Re: Re: Re: That's contrary to the fundamentals of most religions.
I'm pretty certain that all those people were replacing conventional religion with worshipping their great leaders, which not the same as atheism..
and by the same token Constantine - and every Christian head of state ever since was not really a Christian head of state but was simply using a pretence of Christianity to further his own cause.
If you claim that there as never been an atheist state then I'll claim there's never been a Christian one either.
Re: Re: Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Jung Un. All have acted or are acting on Lennon's suggestion.
Clarke didn't make a suggestion - he made an observation.
I would also say that it is an incorrect observation.
The actual tragedy is the hijacking of morality for the purpose of maintaining power for an elite. and Lenin and his friends most definitely have done that (as anyone who was brought up in the Soviet Union will confirm).
Re: Re: That's contrary to the fundamentals of most religions.
Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Jung Un. All have acted or are acting on Lennon's suggestion.
Ditching religion doesn't seem to make a jot of difference - and on the evidence of those five it seems to have the potential to make matters a whole lot worse.
Having said that, lets keep to the point shall we. This is about free speech - and free speech means the freedom to say things that may offend others. There is no human right not to be offended. In this case the body suppressing free speech is a religious one but in recent history it has been militant atheist regimes that have been the worst offenders (and China is arguably still in that space).
Everyone should remember - before they make a move to restrict someone else's speech - that next time it might be their own opinions that get suppressed.
As St Paul said "so long as it lies with you, live at peace with all men"
my personal favorite the declaration of independence.
You see a great passage - I see a bunch of ungrateful rebels trying desperately to find an eloquent justification for what they were about to do (and at the same time trying to discourage anyone from doing the same to them later - which didn't work as the civil war - less than 100 years later proves).
Fact is that the British had (at great expense) just cleared all the other european colonies out of the path of the expansion westward and had had the bare faced cheek to ask the colonists to pay something for it. The colonists were of course too mean to do so.
Remember that without the British military actions in the years before the revolution what is now the USA would have become a rather smaller country on the East coast and the rest of North America would have been a patchwork of countries, speaking a variety of different languages, rather like South America today.
On the post: Rohingya Ethnic Cleansing (Once Again) Demonstrates Why Demanding Platforms Censor Bad Speech Creates Problems
Re: Re:
is evidence that he was right.
The world would have been a better place if the American revolution had failed.
On the post: Known Terrorists Under Witness Protection Roaming The Country Pretty Much Unattended
Re: Unsure
After reading the linked techdirt piece about the FBI fitting some poor, dope smoking sap up to get their own War on Terror stats looking good, I'm not convinced that any of these KST people are anything other than the usual suspects.
Actually I disagree. YOur supposition violates teh Principle of Maximum Incompetence.
If the FBI is failing to prosecute someone to the maximum extent of the law then that is pretty much evidence of their guilt. Its only the innocent that getdone over.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Then there is the concept of what constitutes 'extremism'
Not to mention the difficulty of separating an "extremist" post of a particular flavour from one opposing that brand of extremism. They almost certainly use the same words and phrases - but in a different order!
The outcome of such a policy will be that the issues involved are removed from the public arena completely - resulting in total ignorance. (Actually exactly the same kind of ignorance tha Theresa May herself displayed when she spoke in parliament following the Westminster Bridge attack.)
Maybe this Imam could enlighten her:
https://youtu.be/qHuzT0JT8EI
but maybe he would be flagged as an extremist.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Where do we get the idea that passing a bad law is better than passing no law?
I've noticed many times in the past that all governments are biased towards action.
So, in the middle east, "political freedom" is so sacrosanct (even when the evidence is that it quickly degeneerates into tyrannical chaos) that it is worth sacrificing the lives of hundreds of western soldiers and thousands of middle eastern civilians in pursuit of it.
In contrast to that a relatively small amount of loss of life in terrorist attacks in the west is worth sacrificing most of our political freedom for.
The only explanation for this self contradictory attitude is the bias towards action in all circumstances.
On the post: Alt-Right Twitter App Developers Sue Google After Gab.Ai App Is Kicked Out Of The Play Store
Re: I can sort of see the logic
On the post: Alt-Right Twitter App Developers Sue Google After Gab.Ai App Is Kicked Out Of The Play Store
Re:
http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Joo_Janta_200_Super-Chromatic_Peril_Sensitive_Sunglass es
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Norwegian Prisons
Scandinavian systems tend to focus on rehabilitation. That is, removing a person who commits a crime from the general public, and making it so that when they are allowed to rejoin society, that they're unlikely to commit any further crimes. The point is to make it that the person who comes out isn't the same person who went in: they're not a criminal anymore. And, if preventing recidivism is the goal, it seems to work: in Norway, a released criminal has a 20% chance of re-offending within five years; in the U.S., it's over 75%.
Now if the US waas the capitalist free market, free trade haven it claims to be they would immediately outsource their justice system to Norway.
Btw - I am sorry I missed that comment the fiorst time around - it is about the best comment I have seen on Techdirt - ever.
On the post: Las Vegas Police Union Fire Off Whining, Flag-Dripping Request To The NFL To 'Investigate' Michael Bennett For Saying Things
Re: Re: Re: ... and then stopped when they noticed that person is somewhat famous?
On the post: Tesla Remotely Extended The Range Of Drivers In Florida For Free... And That's NOT A Good Thing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Limiting battery capacity
On the post: Tesla Remotely Extended The Range Of Drivers In Florida For Free... And That's NOT A Good Thing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Limiting battery capacity
However their prediction is that in future this will not be necessary. This gives the company a motive for discouraging behaviour likely to reduce battery life - whilst still providing the ability to make full use of the current technology for those who are prepared to pay a bit more.
On the post: Thanks To The DEA And Drug War, Your Prescription Records Have Zero Expectation Of Privacy
Re: Re:
To this I would say you're half right, in that 'state vs federal' is focusing on the wrong issue while ignoring the more important underlying one of invasive searches without warrants.
Exactly - the point being that it could easily have been the other way around - in which case you would have wanted the federal government to win.
On the post: Thanks To The DEA And Drug War, Your Prescription Records Have Zero Expectation Of Privacy
Re:
Better control of highly addictive substances is needed. This arguing over state versus federal law is deck chairs on the Titanic material.
Maybe if you had a proper national healthcare system - instead of the anrachy that prevails in the US...
Its the same as with your gun laws - give an (apparent) freedom with one hand and take more away (with the law enforcement regime that results) with the other.
On the post: Ugandan Government Obtains Mysterious, South Korean-Built Anti-Porn Machine
Re: Fake Bomb detectors
see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADE_651#Users
On the post: Ugandan Government Obtains Mysterious, South Korean-Built Anti-Porn Machine
Fake Bomb detetecors
On the post: Pakistani School Drops Lennon's 'Imagine' From Concert Amid Protest By Vocal Minority
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: That's contrary to the fundamentals of most religions.
On the post: Pakistani School Drops Lennon's 'Imagine' From Concert Amid Protest By Vocal Minority
Re: Re: Re: Re: That's contrary to the fundamentals of most religions.
I'm pretty certain that all those people were replacing conventional religion with worshipping their great leaders, which not the same as atheism..
and by the same token Constantine - and every Christian head of state ever since was not really a Christian head of state but was simply using a pretence of Christianity to further his own cause.
If you claim that there as never been an atheist state then I'll claim there's never been a Christian one either.
On the post: Pakistani School Drops Lennon's 'Imagine' From Concert Amid Protest By Vocal Minority
Re: Re: Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Jung Un. All have acted or are acting on Lennon's suggestion.
Clarke didn't make a suggestion - he made an observation.
I would also say that it is an incorrect observation.
The actual tragedy is the hijacking of morality for the purpose of maintaining power for an elite. and Lenin and his friends most definitely have done that (as anyone who was brought up in the Soviet Union will confirm).
On the post: Pakistani School Drops Lennon's 'Imagine' From Concert Amid Protest By Vocal Minority
Re: Re:
We shouldn't be teaching kids to blindly believe in nonsense just because someone tells them it's the truth.
Actually the education system totally relies on doing exactly that - and I'm not talking about religion here.
On the post: Pakistani School Drops Lennon's 'Imagine' From Concert Amid Protest By Vocal Minority
Re: Re: That's contrary to the fundamentals of most religions.
Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Kim Jung Un. All have acted or are acting on Lennon's suggestion.
Ditching religion doesn't seem to make a jot of difference - and on the evidence of those five it seems to have the potential to make matters a whole lot worse.
Having said that, lets keep to the point shall we. This is about free speech - and free speech means the freedom to say things that may offend others. There is no human right not to be offended. In this case the body suppressing free speech is a religious one but in recent history it has been militant atheist regimes that have been the worst offenders (and China is arguably still in that space).
Everyone should remember - before they make a move to restrict someone else's speech - that next time it might be their own opinions that get suppressed.
As St Paul said "so long as it lies with you, live at peace with all men"
Or as the Beatles said (in a MUCH better song)
Let it be, let it be, let it be, let it be
Whisper words of wisdom
Let it be
On the post: Deputy Who Rear-Ended Driver At 104 MPH Had Horrendous Service Record, Received Almost Zero Discipline
Re: Re: Re: Re: "Disarm the public"
my personal favorite the declaration of independence.
You see a great passage - I see a bunch of ungrateful rebels trying desperately to find an eloquent justification for what they were about to do (and at the same time trying to discourage anyone from doing the same to them later - which didn't work as the civil war - less than 100 years later proves).
Fact is that the British had (at great expense) just cleared all the other european colonies out of the path of the expansion westward and had had the bare faced cheek to ask the colonists to pay something for it. The colonists were of course too mean to do so.
Remember that without the British military actions in the years before the revolution what is now the USA would have become a rather smaller country on the East coast and the rest of North America would have been a patchwork of countries, speaking a variety of different languages, rather like South America today.
Next >>