Londoner here.
Nope, we use a comma as a thousands separator. I believe some European countries use a period though.
1,380 karma · joined August 12, 2011
interested in functional programming, learning chinese
email: glisher (underscore) rock (at) hotmail (dot) com
Nope, we use a comma as a thousands separator. I believe some European countries use a period though.
And there are many who not only disagree with Trump, but are appalled at his persona. There was that big march and that whole "Not my president" thing. They are already primed to believe that Trump will attempt to turn the US into a fascist state. In that light they say this as Step 1 of the "US turns fascist" and they are reacting as though he is suggesting Step 10 Imprisoning political opponents. Because they "see" the path and are doing everything they can to stop it.
According to that 811 people were shot and killed by police in 2016 who had a weapon. So a significant % of those killed did indeed have a weapon. I clicked on a few stories of unarmed people shot and killed by police and in some cases it seems obviously justified eg they were driving a vehicle as a weapon or attacked an officer reaching for the officers weapon.
In other cases its less so, eg man killed on 12 December after neighbours mistook his crucifix for a gun or 22 November where a teenager was shot in the back for running from the police or 16 September where a mans car broke down in the road and was shot by police despite clearly complying with instructions.
The paper in question is (http://www.elainehatfield.com/uploads/3/2/2/5/3225640/7._hat...) "A little bit about Love" by Hatfield, Elaine & Berscheid, Elaine (1974). It was "facilitated in part by NIMH grant MH 16661 and NSF grants GS 35157X and GS 30822X". It is mostly a review of scientific thinking of the topic at the time and is surprisingly readable and enlightening read.
BBC also reported on a teenager getting 16 weeks (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-11479831).
In both cases it seems they were jailed purely for failure to disclose passwords and not in conjunction with any other offence.
For what its worth, I think "evil" is a word that shouldn't be used outside of storybooks. It is a binary word that is far too overgeneralised to the point it is meaningless to ascribe. It doesn't serve any persuasive or descriptive purpose.
agreed.
but surely the natural solution is to increase the number of informed people (education, PSAs, 'nudging' people towards being more informed). not to disenfranchise the poor.
I've been using Pimsleur which I highly recommend, but I find I end up atuned to their particular voices and can not understand genuine Vietnamese speech. Also I am using memrise to learn vocabulary, but without example sentences and the like I find it of limited use until I find the same word in a real life context.
Interested in your thoughts.
You have the strange notion that without nationalism to enforce an identity on myself that naturally there is no way my neighbor and me can live in "peace and harmony". I suggest that I can work with other people just fine, even if I don't share an identity with them. In fact, if you can only work peacefully with people similar to yourself I believe that is discrimination of some form or another. I realize no human is an ideal machine, but any person with empathy really ought to be able to work with women/men/muslims/jews/french/british/german/ginger/blond/tall/short/disabled people without issue - especially if they want to remain employed in the modern world.
Finally, please avoid insulting people who express a different opinion to your own.
many vulnerable people don't claim even if they know they qualify because the whole process is demeaning. sometimes when you have lost everything, you desperately hold onto your dignity, even if that isn't profit-maximising. real people (as opposed to idealised economic agents) are like that.
many vulnerable people can't claim because they slip through the cracks. the process of verification can be intense, especially as the public demand absolutely no benefit cheats meaning everyone is treated as a fraudulent with a lack of empathy or compassion.
many vulnerable people have no incentive to save money (since that might disqualify them from receiving benefits in the future). this is similar to what happens with company budgets. you need to spend all that money or you won't get it next year when you might actually need it.
tl;dr its complicated. the end result depends on a ton of externalities.
That is irrelevant to the level safety precautions. Unless you were trying to argue that their costly training makes them worth more than other people. I hope that is not what you were arguing.
> doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing everything we can to ensure a safe flight
At some point you have to declare something 'safe enough' since 100% safety is an impossible perfection. Bicycles aren't 100% safe, but we don't go around insisting on multiple backup systems. Personally I do find it curious that the standard of safety for astronauts is so high. The cynic in me suggests its less out of concern for the astronauts and more to do with the publicity fallout that occurs after disasters and the damage to other assets. The optimist suggests its more a concern for all the ground crew and spectators who are also at risk. There is potential for a lot more than 4 casualties when you play with that much fire.
autonomous cars can form trains because they can react orders of magnitude faster than a human can to suddenly changing driving conditions.
I imagine any sensible, practical proposal for basic income would start it relatively low, keeping many current benefits and gradually expand it if it is successful. That seems to be the option Finland proposal will probably take. This will give time to assess the impact and allow corrections/adaptions/cancelling it . No doubt basic income is a blunt instrument, honestly I think that's part of its appeal to me. It seems fair compared to a plethora of well-meaning but convoluted network of social welfare initiatives, that we call a social welfare system.
I will consider you points more carefully.
- obviously a lot depends on the level of basic income. and what is sacrificed for it. I had not considered the politics of people using basic income as an excuse to withdraw education or health subsidies.
- effect on wages can be mitigated in the short term by retaining a (perhaps lower?) minimum wage.
- I agree a lot of basic income will be swallowed in rent. but that will be because that is what is important to people with the money to spend.
- cost-of-living differences will encourage job-seekers to relocate to cheaper areas. this seems like a good thing. if inner city companies can not find the workers it needs, it will either relocate or provide company buses or something. that seems a much better solution than keeping job-seekers where they are.
- non-citizens is a very good point I hadn't considered. But then, non-citizens are penalized by requiring visas etc. plus EU nations will be restricted on what they can do to stop EU citizens claiming.
thanks again.
basic income has no effect on diversity or homogeneity. perhaps it might encourage people to immigrate, but that's hardly a reason not to do it. having a country that is so desirable others would like to immigrate into it is a clear indication of doing something right. besides I think its obvious you would only qualify for basic income as a citizen.
I will accept that there are almost certainly edge cases which I can't predict that will need ironing out. probably due to the administration of updating the list appropriately. but basic income seems very much like the proverbial silver bullet that never exists, so I am curious over its negative aspects.
in discussing with friends and family, the worst thing about basic income is it means paying people for doing nothing and that _really_ _really_ angers some people. even worse, it means even millionaires get basic income!
The Wikipedia on DVD link doesn't seem to work http://www.wikipediaondvd.com/.
And I am not sure what to do with the Database backup dumps if the only thing I want is some static HTML pages, how could I get some readable HTML out of them?
This should not be taken as legal advice, YMMV, yadda yadda.
As a matter of interest Shamirs Secret Sharing algorithm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamir's_Secret_Sharing) is quite nice in that respect. The "secret" would be the decryption key. Using Shamirs Secret Sharing algorithm you could split the key into two so you would need both parts in order to work out the decryption key. The government could have a part. The company could have another. Only when both were combined could anyone work out the decryption key.
This would mean neither the company nor the government could decrypt messages until they work together - and therefore reduce the risk of hackers and rogue employees. It wouldn't break the encryption with dangerous backdoors but would allow the authorities to quickly gain access when needed for a specific investigation.
I doubt anyone would ever implement anything like that since it would be (slightly more) complex and you would have to trust that the decryption parts are valid. But I thought I would just mention it in case anyone else might find that algorithm as interesting as I do.
Surely having the public record is in your favour because you can point to similar jobs that pay more.
you know many many people risk their lives under extreme conditions to do exactly that. See Latin Americans trying to get to US or Africans into Europe.
Hell I am in the process of emigrating from one Western country to another, and its an incredibly stressful process with no guarantee of success for me.