Why bother with actual definitions when you can make up your own? This has been a common thread I've seen going around in my different groups lately. I don't know if it's the start of a new trend or a temporary resurgence of the fallacy. It's not like it's uninformed zealots either, many of the people I interact with are generally decent, logical people with serious flaws in logic. While I'm comfortable with cognitive dissonance, I'm not comfortable with blatantly twisting facts by people who should be aware that they are doing it.
Most likely areas where they perform a lot of family separations that can also be close enough to other common locations with many people of color to be a useful training aid. Arizona is close to the south with wide open cities and Chicago is indicative of a lot of northern cities with choose packed buildings. There's already a ton of teaching facilities for individual houses or foreign locations. This is really not that surprising. If they were building something like Minneapolis or Boise I'd take more notice.
It's not just supposed to be a punishment and it's obviously not a deterrent. Rehabilitation and allowing for proper reintegration into society needs to happen or you end up with a former felon being stuck in a cycle of crime that they are forced into.
While I agree with your assessment of private prisons, I think we've begun to use the legal sure and imprisonment for things it wasn't intended for, such as minor vice crimes, based on flawed broken window thinking and making police terrified of the communities that they serve.
Not all states perform emissions checks. Almost all perform safety checks. No idea why EVs would be exempt from these so your solution would probably work.
Power is actually pretty easy to solve compared to transportation. You can reliably generate either wind, water, or solar anywhere on the planet and store it locally. You're right though that centralizing populations tends to be the most efficient use of resources.
Car prices in my area would generally consider $10-$15k for a relatively new EV vehicle off lease as a deal, I just checked prices around here and confirmed that. A new ICE car here can easily set you back over $30k for a small car and upwards of $60k for a large truck. Unless you're making less than average in this area the price of an EV is only slightly more than an ICE vehicle used in the same condition.
You can't grow food faster. You can only make more of it which requires more resources. The jobs being created today are mostly poverty level jobs or high end jobs and this trend is expected to continue which hollows out the middle class. Pure unemployment numbers aren't useful since the expected date increases with a tighter labor market haven't been happening at all. Once worker wages became decoupled from the value that they actually created, none of the idea that you're paid what your with was valid. Now you're paid what you can negotiate which depends entirely upon how much power you have. Most workers have none.
We could feed the world, we don't. We could vaccinate, give clean water, nearly free electricity to every person on the planet. We don't. It's not that we don't have the resources, we consciously choose not to do these because they would cause a minor inconvenience to those who have enough. The top .001 percent don't even live in the same reality as the rest of us, and there's plainly no way they could. The don't interact with anyone who isn't like them.
The difference is with science the truth will eventually out. No one says science is incorruptible, but the process of science means that it generally keeps moving in the correct direction, despite normal human tendencies. The other part is that when science is found to be wrong, scientists change their assumptions based on new information. There's numerous examples of science being used for ill. Light bulbs that burn out faster because of a cabal of bulb makers, functional vaccines for diseases locked up for years unused, and mistakes like radiation poisoning of workers and people because we just didn't understand the ramifications at the time. All of these were eventually corrected by other scientists. Now specific to writing papers, paper writing is required for some educational job progress. The journals are supposed to be ethical, however this problem has been known about and pointed out numerous times by ethical scientists.
This article essentially just makes the claim that if you do nothing magic will make climate change go away. He didn't disprove the claim that vegetarianism will help lower carbon emissions, doesn't provide any real information for people looking to lower their carbon emissions. He also doesn't disclose he's the author of books that specifically claim that global warming isn't happening.
You're arguing a different point. The refund is because the beach of contract was only for a specified time. A total refund provides no incentive to attempt to rectify the situation.
Yeah the article really didn't have much interesting science in it. It was a lot of presumption and story but nothing really other than a poll to back things up. Anecdata isn't strong evidence at all.
Your post is full of strawmen and logical fallacies. You cherry pick statements in order to make your own position sound more rational. You lump Christianity into one big group and then ignore the anti-science crusade currently going on by most of Christianity. You dislike definitions so you make up new ones and claim that are better because only then can you claim that they are silly. Every single part of your post shows you didn't understand or possibly read much of the article. The article at hand didn't say religion is silly, it didn't say it was wrong. The article simply described that more people in the United States are losing faith and that it's a gradual process where faith gets replaced by the brain by some other thing whether that be sports, science, or some other thing it didn't matter. I'm sure you're a wonderful person, but your arguments only sound clever if you make up arguments or you already fervently believe solely in Christianity.
You apparently didn't read the article. Traffic got worse after Waze, not better. Now the highways are jammed and the side streets which has made traffic worse overall and drive times slower. Waze created a worse problem. The solution is to create better public transportation and can more cars. There's a solution, I'm just sure you won't like it.
My road is a winding country lane in a small city. The speed limit is 30MPH. Visibility is poor, the street winds and narrows. People have run into houses, but that doesn't stop people from gunning it to 60-70MPH on the small straight sections that exist and throwing their liquor bottles into my yard. People don't care about other people when they get behind the wheel of a vehicle and their aren't enough police to solve the problem. People are the problem.
Why not? The presumption for US citizens is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. There's literally no evidence presented to support the CBP. There's no rules defined publicly, so it's literally secret police type rules that they can make up on the spot from public perception.
Edit: I'm aware of the fact that this isn't a US citizen, however there's no standards to define what the rules are and absolutely zero ability for accountability to the people that they are supposed to be protecting.
Yes because without any corroboration we should trust people just because they passed a job entrance test. There is nothing that makes CBP any less likely to have all the human flaws of everyone else. Why isn't there video that could be shown to show actual evidence that they claim? They control every part of the entrance process but somehow never seem to have any evidence of anything. I can tell you that this isn't all that much detail to fabricate nor is it something that probably isn't boilerplate for them for certain violations that they want to claim. Police reports are wildly similar based on the type of violation that's claimed because they know the specific words that need to be said for legal reasons whether or not those events happened. It's why you get cases where the only crime is resisting arrest. In what world is not wanting to be arrested for no reason a crime?
I've definitely had sites where FF doesn't work properly with LastPass. I've already had sites that plainly don't work at all with FF. I've never blamed the browser for that though. It's the developer responsibility to make sure I can access their site or I go elsewhere.
China could easily afford to wipe Hong Kong off the face of the map, but it would ruin the image that they are trying to show of paternalism. China militarized islands they said they wouldn't, invaded India, is threatening the United States military ships in international waters, and egging on war with Japan. China has a massive and captive internal market that makes up the majority of their economy. It would certainly hurt to lose the western trading powers, but it's not like they wouldn't be able to survive without them.
It's not capitalist unless you're talking state capitalism. It's market socialist, and not the European flavor of progressive socialism, but the dictatorial flavor of centralized control of the soviet style. I agree though that this is definitely not Marxist communism, but that also has major social implications such as free love, etc.
Since when does the Chinese government care about a few innocents? This is the country the labels entire groups of people as dissidents simply for being an ethnic minority and then tracks them using gait and facial recognition, as well as DNA and voice identification. If the US police are considered overboard, then the Chinese police are the ones saying "Here hold my beer." I'm not sure why this is a surprise to anyone at this point, as it's pretty much what the Chinese government does. They care more about image than anything and it pervades numerous points of their government including smiling during inappropriate times, train subsidies, recycling policies, currency manipulation, and constantly breaking their international promises against militarization.
I'm not sure who the appropriate audience is for this article. The writer seems to be genuinely trying to convey that lock-in isn't good, but isn't the be all end all, which everyone knows. Lock in is avoided not by looking at software stacks but by following standards that translate with minimal friction across more than one platform, unless your a highly specific use case that requires lock in due to heavy tuning. Sometimes lock-in can't be avoided, most times it can. Open source has literally nothing to do with lock in unless you're building directly on top one that product. It's just a development methodology that provides resiliency against losing access to the software, as long as you're willing to build any future improvements yourself if it gets locked up, which in a way provides a slight buffer against lock in, but maybe he runs in circles where people all think open source software is magical.
I've found SumatraPDF to be the lowest overhead document browser for Windows. Surface book is actually a really nice piece of kit. I'm surprised the surface laptop came from MS.
Ding ding ding. This is just silicon valley living in their v rockstar bubble again. They don't act to have to pay for top talent, they don't want to grow it, but then complain that qualified candidates don't just spring from the womb as willing to be underpaid experienced coders.
No zoning doesn't mean it's cheaper. There's zero evidence to support that prices magically go down because zoning laws go away. The only thing that will decrease cost is more supply or less demand. Zoning laws should be made more sensible to allow for combined work and living spaces. Transit systems should be prioritized, but otherwise if housing is to expensive move further away. I commuted for almost 10 years almost an hour to get a house I could afford. Now that my career is more established we were able to move into a closer house. That's simple arbitrage. City prices are always going to be way more expensive than suburbs. Better punished transportation and slowly removing the parking requirements will solve the problem long term. It's a simple solution.
Yeah because the single largest logistics system in the world knows nothing about transportation. You free market only people really are blind to reality. The US government is the single best move of people and goods on the planet. We literally run our military on logistics. Show me any real private industry that runs their transportation as efficiently as a government one with the limited resources and requirements for service that public does. You know how the private market makes money? They cut out the poor people and inefficient routes which public industry can't do because their mission is to actual serve the community instead of shareholders.
You can't compare Texas with literally acres of open space surrounding their cities to real states with actual population densities. Texas literally brags about how big they are and how much land they have. Come talk to me when Texas has less than 20% of it's population as cows unlike the 40% it's at now.
My company makes no software people don't want. I'm actually sort of surprised because my company is exactly the type of company that one would expect to do such a thing. I suspect it's more likely that we're not mature enough yet to have someone justify stupid options rather than benevolence.