• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
Sign in to follow this  
hkmaly

Story Monday, Mar 2, 2020 [Party-128]

Recommended Posts

I once read a letter from a Sikh protesting against calling Arabs "towel-heads". He claimed that HE was a towel-head, because the fabric of his turban was big enough to make a good towel, but that most Arabs just wore little sheets covering the backs of their heads and necks so should instead be called "little-sheet-heads"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Good point :)

Chronos is correct; they have blacksmiths and horse powered harvest machinery, and such.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Not convinced they actually do enough experiencing.

It varies; some leave, so they obviously get the full experience.

How do you know you would not like to be Amish? Have you ever tried it? I'm guessing they know more about your world than you know about theirs.

Don't forget, they get gawked at constantly by tourists, so they have some contact.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Some drug experience should be mandatorily discussed with psychologist.

Interesting. Who would enforce this? Would you apply the same to alcohol? Cigarettes?

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It's even more important in case of LSD.

From what I've seen, yes, which makes the early years of experimenting with LSD by giving it to people unwittingly even more frightening.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

However, smoking isn't only way how to consume marijuana.

Which is why I singled out smoking.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Wait, we are not?

Not as far as I can tell. You think we are?

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

The laws themselves are not. The MOTIVATION was racist (if that quote is true) and they currently seem to affect white less seriously than others, but that can (theoretically) change without the laws themselves changing.

No, read the Ehrlichman quote, perhaps Google the context; or the history of US drug laws. The basis of the laws was to target certain races and ethnicities.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I mean like lesson that they need to not be too public about that. Instead of not doing it.

Oh. Then you should probably not read current events in the Middle East for the last several decades.You would be disappointed.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I think there would be more examples, but Brazil deforesting the Amazon basin was what I was thinking about. I'm not sure how dense the indigenous tribes are there ...

Generally, "uninhabited land" is not clearly defined ; it can be argued there is still uninhabited land in Europe - but only really small patches of it, and getting smaller every day. Obviously, for country with size of Israel, finding continuous space of uninhabited land is the problem.

Ooo, there's a nice slippery slope; "You aren't occupying your land densely enough, therefore we should take it."

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Yeeeeaaaah ... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." .... "So help me God".

George Burns in the movie, Oh, God!, "So help me, Me."

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I'm pretty sure there are Romani like this around here as well. It's just not the ones you imagine when talking about them. And, well, I think they accepted our culture for most parts, while the ones who remain true to their culture don't blend well.

(Although I must admit I'm not that big expert on their culture.)

The Nazis didn't like them, and killed many. Then again, the Nazis didn't like a lot of people, and killed many.

We have a Carnie (carival worker) subculture, which is not ethnic, but I think may share some of the values and lifestyle. I advised one young lady to become one, once, for her it was a step up from doing nothing. She likes the life. It's definitely not for everyone, and yes, there is a bit of discrimination, even though there's no ethnicity involved. It's viewed as nascent vagrancy.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It's the positive discrimination part of that protection which makes people so angry. They get away with things white would not because it would be hard to prove that it wasn't racial discrimination. Many of them are not even trying to work.

And, actually, not sure about it ... there probably WAS need for SOME laws, but I think we got too much inspiration from US for situation which is different.

I can relate to the positive discrimination part. As a late teen, applying for schools, I viewed Affirmative Action as unfair. Affirmative Action tries to place minorities in colleges and universities; at the time there were quotas, and a minority could get into a school with lower grades and test scores than a white kid like me. Many years later I realized that my youthful view was shallow, the playing field wasn't level in the first place, and that a kid from a poor neighborhood was likely to get an inferior education early on.

Not sure if the US inspired anyone in this regard. Concern for others seems to be about as universal as callousness is, no?

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Modern way is also not throwing trash around your home, not being too loud ... Now, I'm not entirely sure how much of it are just the worst cases and how much is normal, but people living next to them consider it serious enough to move if they can. I'm lucky to NOT live next to them.

I live in a part of America where trash in the yard, of sorts, is not abnormal. Vehicles that haven't worked for years, that are going to get fixed "some day". Where I grew up (so to speak) in Pennsylvania, this would have been unheard of. Nicer communities here are, well, nicer, but in even slightly rural areas, all bets are off.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It's not really argument for living close considering we communicate in way which ignores distance. We could be on different PLANETS and not notice.

Theoretically, thirty years ago, we could have this chat by phone if we somehow knew each other. Now, forty years ago, that would be considerably more problematic ... I'm not sure what country are you in but I suspect there was iron curtain between us, so I might get into serious problems due to that. I mean, if I would be old enough to talk.

I'm curious where you live, if you are willing to share that detail.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

However, yes ... their basic motivation is assumption that Christians are enemies of Islam. This may turn to be self-fulfilling assumption. By making it true, you ARE helping them.

Only way to make them lose is to have a popular organization which is clearly Muslim, clearly opposed to terrorism ... and clearly accepted as such by general Christians. Two of three is not going to make it.

Eh, just like anyone else, some Muslims are nice people and some are @$$#01e$. I've had Muslim coworkers who could not be spoken to, then I had a lady in a Wendy's who was Arabic, I expressed some interest in her background, and we chatted briefly as I ordered a chicken sandwich and coffee. For my next several visits, while she worked there, I was handed a free coffee. I think while religion can dominate a person's life, it is in another sense skin deep, and the real person will shine through, for better or worse.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

... and targeting Sikhs and Hindus would definitely make the situation worse. That said, I'm not surprised many Americans have trouble telling those apart: there is clearly need for some sort of posters showing that.

<snipped picture showing difference>

Well, I can say that I find it somewhat understandable, although at the same time stupid. Until recent decades, we didn't see a whole lot of any of the three, Muslims, Hindus, nor Sikhs. And even now, you still mostly won't unless you are in an urban area. Where I live right now has a bunch, we have a fair pharmaceutical segment, and they like the cheaper technical labor.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Good point :)

Chronos is correct; they have blacksmiths and horse powered harvest machinery, and such.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Not convinced they actually do enough experiencing.

It varies; some leave, so they obviously get the full experience.

How do you know you would not like to be Amish? Have you ever tried it? I'm guessing they know more about your world than you know about theirs.

Don't forget, they get gawked at constantly by tourists, so they have some contact.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Some drug experience should be mandatorily discussed with psychologist.

Interesting. Who would enforce this? Would you apply the same to alcohol? Cigarettes?

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It's even more important in case of LSD.

From what I've seen, yes, which makes the early years of experimenting with LSD by giving it to people unwittingly even more frightening.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

However, smoking isn't only way how to consume marijuana.

Which is why I singled out smoking.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Wait, we are not?

Not as far as I can tell. You think we are?

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

The laws themselves are not. The MOTIVATION was racist (if that quote is true) and they currently seem to affect white less seriously than others, but that can (theoretically) change without the laws themselves changing.

No, read the Ehrlichman quote, perhaps Google the context; or the history of US drug laws. The basis of the laws was to target certain races and ethnicities.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I mean like lesson that they need to not be too public about that. Instead of not doing it.

Oh. Then you should probably not read current events in the Middle East for the last several decades.You would be disappointed.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I think there would be more examples, but Brazil deforesting the Amazon basin was what I was thinking about. I'm not sure how dense the indigenous tribes are there ...

Generally, "uninhabited land" is not clearly defined ; it can be argued there is still uninhabited land in Europe - but only really small patches of it, and getting smaller every day. Obviously, for country with size of Israel, finding continuous space of uninhabited land is the problem.

Ooo, there's a nice slippery slope; "You aren't occupying your land densely enough, therefore we should take it."

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Yeeeeaaaah ... "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." .... "So help me God".

George Burns in the movie, Oh, God!, "So help me, Me."

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I'm pretty sure there are Romani like this around here as well. It's just not the ones you imagine when talking about them. And, well, I think they accepted our culture for most parts, while the ones who remain true to their culture don't blend well.

(Although I must admit I'm not that big expert on their culture.)

The Nazis didn't like them, and killed many. Then again, the Nazis didn't like a lot of people, and killed many.

We have a Carnie (carival worker) subculture, which is not ethnic, but I think may share some of the values and lifestyle. I advised one young lady to become one, once, for her it was a step up from doing nothing. She likes the life. It's definitely not for everyone, and yes, there is a bit of discrimination, even though there's no ethnicity involved. It's viewed as nascent vagrancy.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It's the positive discrimination part of that protection which makes people so angry. They get away with things white would not because it would be hard to prove that it wasn't racial discrimination. Many of them are not even trying to work.

And, actually, not sure about it ... there probably WAS need for SOME laws, but I think we got too much inspiration from US for situation which is different.

I can relate to the positive discrimination part. As a late teen, applying for schools, I viewed Affirmative Action as unfair. Affirmative Action tries to place minorities in colleges and universities; at the time there were quotas, and a minority could get into a school with lower grades and test scores than a white kid like me. Many years later I realized that my youthful view was shallow, the playing field wasn't level in the first place, and that a kid from a poor neighborhood was likely to get an inferior education early on.

Not sure if the US inspired anyone in this regard. Concern for others seems to be about as universal as callousness is, no?

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Modern way is also not throwing trash around your home, not being too loud ... Now, I'm not entirely sure how much of it are just the worst cases and how much is normal, but people living next to them consider it serious enough to move if they can. I'm lucky to NOT live next to them.

I live in a part of America where trash in the yard, of sorts, is not abnormal. Vehicles that haven't worked for years, that are going to get fixed "some day". Where I grew up (so to speak) in Pennsylvania, this would have been unheard of. Nicer communities here are, well, nicer, but in even slightly rural areas, all bets are off.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It's not really argument for living close considering we communicate in way which ignores distance. We could be on different PLANETS and not notice.

Theoretically, thirty years ago, we could have this chat by phone if we somehow knew each other. Now, forty years ago, that would be considerably more problematic ... I'm not sure what country are you in but I suspect there was iron curtain between us, so I might get into serious problems due to that. I mean, if I would be old enough to talk.

I'm curious where you live, if you are willing to share that detail.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

However, yes ... their basic motivation is assumption that Christians are enemies of Islam. This may turn to be self-fulfilling assumption. By making it true, you ARE helping them.

Only way to make them lose is to have a popular organization which is clearly Muslim, clearly opposed to terrorism ... and clearly accepted as such by general Christians. Two of three is not going to make it.

Eh, just like anyone else, some Muslims are nice people and some are @$$#01e$. I've had Muslim coworkers who could not be spoken to, then I had a lady in a Wendy's who was Arabic, I expressed some interest in her background, and we chatted briefly as I ordered a chicken sandwich and coffee. For my next several visits, while she worked there, I was handed a free coffee. I think while religion can dominate a person's life, it is in another sense skin deep, and the real person will shine through, for better or worse.

 

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

... and targeting Sikhs and Hindus would definitely make the situation worse. That said, I'm not surprised many Americans have trouble telling those apart: there is clearly need for some sort of posters showing that.

<snipped picture showing difference>

Well, I can say that I find it somewhat understandable, although at the same time stupid. Until recent decades, we didn't see a whole lot of any of the three, Muslims, Hindus, nor Sikhs. And even now, you still mostly won't unless you are in an urban area. Where I live right now has a bunch, we have a fair pharmaceutical segment, and they like the cheaper technical labor.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Not convinced they actually do enough experiencing.

It varies; some leave, so they obviously get the full experience.

How do you know you would not like to be Amish? Have you ever tried it? I'm guessing they know more about your world than you know about theirs.

Let's see ... one computer in front of me, one to the right, one behind me, two smartphones one dump phone, working in IT, more than doubled time spent outside since pokemon Go, reading fantasy and sci-fi, literally allergic to nature (hay fever) ... somehow I don't think I would need to try.

Also, "my world" would be more likely to describe INTERNET than the physical location I'm in. And I'm pretty sure they don't know much about TCP/IP, HTTP or other basic internet stuff, as even people who visit internet regularly usually don't care.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Some drug experience should be mandatorily discussed with psychologist.

Interesting. Who would enforce this? Would you apply the same to alcohol? Cigarettes?

23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

It's even more important in case of LSD.

From what I've seen, yes, which makes the early years of experimenting with LSD by giving it to people unwittingly even more frightening.

I didn't hear anything about cigarettes causing non-obvious psychical problems. And while alcohol is often abused in situations which would be better solved by going to psychologist, I don't think it causes anything hard to understand by itself. Hallucinogens, meanwhile, do.

... and, yes, of course it would be impossible to ENFORCE, but so are current laws. Idea is that if it would be in law, people might actually consider doing it. Like, sure, people are not actually considering confessing to taking drugs and going into jail, but visiting psychologist is not THAT bad and doesn't take so long.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

However, smoking isn't only way how to consume marijuana.

Which is why I singled out smoking.

Yeah, but only later.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Wait, we are not?

Not as far as I can tell. You think we are?

Yeah, I though we are in place where we can address those questions like adults. Not sure why you don't think so. Do you know something about who reads this server that I don't?

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Ooo, there's a nice slippery slope; "You aren't occupying your land densely enough, therefore we should take it."

It would only be slippery slope if it would be new idea. Isn't this basically why native americans lost their land?

And, remember that we are comparing to the alternative of "We should take your land just because". Of course not taking anyone's land would be preferable, but closest land which - according to international treaties - not belongs to anyone is Moon (Antartic is controlled by 54 countries).

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

We have a Carnie (carival worker) subculture, which is not ethnic, but I think may share some of the values and lifestyle. I advised one young lady to become one, once, for her it was a step up from doing nothing. She likes the life. It's definitely not for everyone, and yes, there is a bit of discrimination, even though there's no ethnicity involved. It's viewed as nascent vagrancy.

Some, probably. Thinking about it from this angle, maybe even the ones I described as holding to their culture already lost big parts of it, but, well, those were the parts of their culture that the communists really didn't liked.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I can relate to the positive discrimination part. As a late teen, applying for schools, I viewed Affirmative Action as unfair. Affirmative Action tries to place minorities in colleges and universities; at the time there were quotas, and a minority could get into a school with lower grades and test scores than a white kid like me. Many years later I realized that my youthful view was shallow, the playing field wasn't level in the first place, and that a kid from a poor neighborhood was likely to get an inferior education early on.

Not sure if the US inspired anyone in this regard. Concern for others seems to be about as universal as callousness is, no?

Not only thing I'm speaking about, but let's look at this: sure the playing field is not level and they are likely to get an inferior education early on, but ... isn't college and university too late to fix that? It's definitely too late later: when applying for a job, you CANT excuse the person having worse education just because it's not their fault; the education is NECESSARY for the job.

I think that quotas are seemingly easy but not really good solution for that problem. That first, it needs to be solved sooner, at high school at worst, second, that it's important to address the main problem, being the lack of money: like, around here, most schools are free (officially, but you still need to buy books etc, so ...), but as I understand in US most are paid and not really cheap.

And, finally, why should poor white people be disadvantaged? Like, there are more poor people of other colors, but that doesn't mean that poor white people don't exists at all, including ones which would be just as disadvantaged in early education. Now, I understand that they shouldn't be primary target of those programs, but someone should at least think about them.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I live in a part of America where trash in the yard, of sorts, is not abnormal. Vehicles that haven't worked for years, that are going to get fixed "some day". Where I grew up (so to speak) in Pennsylvania, this would have been unheard of. Nicer communities here are, well, nicer, but in even slightly rural areas, all bets are off.

Yeah, and if I had nice grass, I wouldn't want my neighbor to have rusty car wrecks in yard either. On the other hand I wouldn't like some who just put concrete on whole yard either. Nothing against them personally, but there needs to be some distance between people with different ideas about what should be in the yard, around the houses in general, how the houses should look from outside ...

(On the other hand, I would prefer my grass being little longer than the "english lawn", wouldn't fertilize it often and would understand if someone would object. So, really, there needs to be some distance, and, like, warning in advance.)

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I'm curious where you live, if you are willing to share that detail.

I'm not, although I suspect it's not that hard to find out. I deliberately wasn't more exact when writing "EU" as my location (BTW, you don't have ANYTHING entered there) although since I did, my opinion on EU  went only worse.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Eh, just like anyone else, some Muslims are nice people and some are @$$#01e$. I've had Muslim coworkers who could not be spoken to, then I had a lady in a Wendy's who was Arabic, I expressed some interest in her background, and we chatted briefly as I ordered a chicken sandwich and coffee. For my next several visits, while she worked there, I was handed a free coffee. I think while religion can dominate a person's life, it is in another sense skin deep, and the real person will shine through, for better or worse.

Exactly. The problem is that the nice Muslims are not, how to said it, recognized. People don't know about them.

(Also, well, I'm not sure as I don't understand Koran so much, but ... didn't she, as a lady, do something officially prohibited by many muslims by talking to you?)

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
23 hours ago, hkmaly said:

... and targeting Sikhs and Hindus would definitely make the situation worse. That said, I'm not surprised many Americans have trouble telling those apart: there is clearly need for some sort of posters showing that.

<snipped picture showing difference>

Well, I can say that I find it somewhat understandable, although at the same time stupid. Until recent decades, we didn't see a whole lot of any of the three, Muslims, Hindus, nor Sikhs. And even now, you still mostly won't unless you are in an urban area. Where I live right now has a bunch, we have a fair pharmaceutical segment, and they like the cheaper technical labor.

Yeah: It's something understandable which should be solved, not criticized for.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Also, "my world" would be more likely to describe INTERNET than the physical location I'm in.

That's a good point. You can research them any time you need or want to.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah, but only later.

The exact post you are referring to is this:

Quote

 

On 3/8/2020 at 6:02 AM, hkmaly said:

I've seen the end result of recreational alcohol use and it's worse than marijuana.

I agree that alcohol abuse is more immediately destructive than marijuana. As one comedian pointed out, alcoholics run red lights, pot heads wait for the stop sign to turn green.

I am of a mind that marijuana has legitimate uses, but can be abused. I've known pot heads who seem to become out of touch with life. One was very talented and creative, but could not commit to applying effort and was continually depressed, eventually taking his own life. I'm not sure about cause and effect, though. The excessive pot smoking might be a symptom, rather than the cause. My guess is it is a factor, but not just on its own.

I'm really not convinced that smoking marijuana doesn't have similar problems to smoking cigarettes. Or pretty much any plant substance. But we're not at a place where we can even address those questions like adults, are we?

You will notes that smoking is in italics, to distinguish it as a specific ingestion method. So "later" as in "the next paragraph"?

It's worth noting that of the marijuana users I know, most of them seem to ingest mostly or exclusively by smoking; the ones that talk about occasionally using other means are primarily female. I asked one about what she thought about the hazards of the smoke as smoke, and she acknowledged that it was not a healthy habit, but it was an expedient way to consume weed.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah, I though we are in place where we can address those questions like adults. Not sure why you don't think so. Do you know something about who reads this server that I don't?

"We" didn't specifically refer to you and me, or even this forum. As a topic of public discourse, whether marijuana smoke is carcinogenic is overshadowed by the debate about it's overall acceptability. Please understand that in the US, the federal DEA has violently busted up state licensed growers and distributors of medical marijuana and thrown the associated folks into prison. It's pathetic, really.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

It would only be slippery slope if it would be new idea. Isn't this basically why Native Americans lost their land?

Yes; I had them in mind when I posted that.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

And, remember that we are comparing to the alternative of "We should take your land just because". Of course not taking anyone's land would be preferable, but closest land which - according to international treaties - not belongs to anyone is Moon (Antartic is controlled by 54 countries).

The lunar treaties make me chuckle. Might be meaningful someday; "Yeah, what are you going to do with it?" when it was new. I guess there was fear that the few powers that could reach it would grab the whole thing. I suppose in any meaningful sense that's what's going to happen anyway, but there should at least be more players.

With global warming, Antarctica might become valuable land.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Not only thing I'm speaking about, but let's look at this: sure the playing field is not level and they are likely to get an inferior education early on, but ... isn't college and university too late to fix that? It's definitely too late later: when applying for a job, you CANT excuse the person having worse education just because it's not their fault; the education is NECESSARY for the job.

I think that quotas are seemingly easy but not really good solution for that problem. That first, it needs to be solved sooner, at high school at worst, second, that it's important to address the main problem, being the lack of money: like, around here, most schools are free (officially, but you still need to buy books etc, so ...), but as I understand in US most are paid and not really cheap.

And, finally, why should poor white people be disadvantaged? Like, there are more poor people of other colors, but that doesn't mean that poor white people don't exists at all, including ones which would be just as disadvantaged in early education. Now, I understand that they shouldn't be primary target of those programs, but someone should at least think about them.

Not invalid points; some are being or have been addressed. We have an extensive (if you read that as expensive, you're also not far off) busing program to ship kids to schools in other neighborhoods. It is not popular, it is hard on the kids; they spend much time being shipped around, and of course the parents for the privileged kids don't want Johnny and Sally being shipped to the 'hood. But it is a factor in re-balancing the kids' early education. Somewhat. Some of our initiatives, like "No child left behind" are far less effective. Then there's the homeschooling and private school and charter school backlash.

I work with many IT coworkers of color, and they are as smart and as dedicated as anyone. I don't know the circumstances of their childhood, mostly, but at a guess, in the aggregate, they were not privileged. So I have to assume the obstacles can be overcome in the long run. Military service helps, at least in the US; it offers training in what will later become job skills for many.

Our big problem for white folks is not so much poor white families as much as entire states that downplay education. We do have a system of low cost community schools that offer core courses that can transfer to a name school. One unfortunate thing I've seen in my lifetime is that the first college year has become a catch up year for stuff you should have already learned.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah, and if I had nice grass, I wouldn't want my neighbor to have rusty car wrecks in yard either. On the other hand I wouldn't like some who just put concrete on whole yard either. Nothing against them personally, but there needs to be some distance between people with different ideas about what should be in the yard, around the houses in general, how the houses should look from outside ...

(On the other hand, I would prefer my grass being little longer than the "english lawn", wouldn't fertilize it often and would understand if someone would object. So, really, there needs to be some distance, and, like, warning in advance.)

You would not like where I live. Not so much in the newer neighborhoods, which look planned, the older parts of towns have a hodge podge of nice places next to shacks. It was culture shock for me. I've lived in various parts of the US, and this is the first time I've seen this.

 

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

I'm not, although I suspect it's not that hard to find out. I deliberately wasn't more exact when writing "EU" as my location (BTW, you don't have ANYTHING entered there) although since I did, my opinion on EU  went only worse.

I'm in the US, North Carolina, near Raleigh and Durham. I have not been secretive about that, but I suspect you're referring to a profile that I've probably ignored. I'll look for it.

 

37 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

Exactly. The problem is that the nice Muslims are not, how to said it, recognized. People don't know about them.

(Also, well, I'm not sure as I don't understand Koran so much, but ... didn't she, as a lady, do something officially prohibited by many muslims by talking to you?)

Yeah: It's something understandable which should be solved, not criticized for.

I'm not overly knowledgeable about Islam either, but I do know that just like Christians, there are many different flavors. In the job role she had, running a cash register and taking orders, she had to talk to customers. Many Muslims would have prohibited her being out of her home and having a job. There is a Muslim owned Subway near that Wendys, and they have about 50% female personnel; and yes, they also talk to customers. (Muslim owned Subways seems to be a thing here.)

The folks that attack random people wearing a turban in response to events such as 9/11 are, as you might expect, generally not looking to be educated. They pretty much know everything already, or so they think.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Darth Fluffy said:

The lunar treaties make me chuckle. Might be meaningful someday; "Yeah, what are you going to do with it?" when it was new. I guess there was fear that the few powers that could reach it would grab the whole thing. I suppose in any meaningful sense that's what's going to happen anyway, but there should at least be more players.

The Lunar Treaties were created in order to head off a potential Treaty_of_Tordesillas situation.In that treaty, the entire "uncivilized" world (both New World and Old World) was (with the Pope's blessing) between Spain and Portugal--not even other Catholic nations such as France were allowed a single acre, and this treaty was passed in 1494--barely a year after Columbus had returned to Europe from his first voyage, so nobody actually knew how much land there was out there yet. The consensus behind the Lunar Treaties boils down to "if you can't take physical possession of it, then you can't claim it". Claiming the standard 20-km perimeter around your bases/fortresses is one thing. Drawing lines on a map declaring ownership of land hundreds of kilometers away from anybody who could enforce that claim is another thing entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ijuin said:

The Lunar Treaties were created in order to head off a potential Treaty_of_Tordesillas situation.In that treaty, the entire "uncivilized" world (both New World and Old World) was (with the Pope's blessing) between Spain and Portugal--not even other Catholic nations such as France were allowed a single acre, and this treaty was passed in 1494--barely a year after Columbus had returned to Europe from his first voyage, so nobody actually knew how much land there was out there yet. The consensus behind the Lunar Treaties boils down to "if you can't take physical possession of it, then you can't claim it". Claiming the standard 20-km perimeter around your bases/fortresses is one thing. Drawing lines on a map declaring ownership of land hundreds of kilometers away from anybody who could enforce that claim is another thing entirely.

I recall some dude selling miniscule plots of land on the moon mail order. I recall a displayable deed was the main deliverable. Also, he filed some claim to real estate on the moon in some jurisdiction, one that had no say in it, but didn't notice the audacity of the claim or didn't care. I suppose a verified original deed from this scam would have value as a novelty item.

Here's the wiki, and here's the various sales pitches; it's still ongoing. It's also much older that I realized.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only claims of ownership on the Moon that I know of being recognized by any governments are to the probes and Apollo spacecraft themselves and the immediate perimeter around them. Anybody who makes claims of ownership to Lunar terrain without the backing of a national government is basically just drawing lines on the map and making an unsupported declaration that can not be enforced in any court of law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

You will notes that smoking is in italics, to distinguish it as a specific ingestion method. So "later" as in "the next paragraph"?

I mean that I reacted on the smoking part in the reply to message you first mentioned it in, all previous messages didn't specified it.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

It's worth noting that of the marijuana users I know, most of them seem to ingest mostly or exclusively by smoking; the ones that talk about occasionally using other means are primarily female. I asked one about what she thought about the hazards of the smoke as smoke, and she acknowledged that it was not a healthy habit, but it was an expedient way to consume weed.

This MIGHT be related to shortage of options. I wonder if current experiments in smoking would help ; like, would vaping marijuana be 1) possible 2) healthier than smoking? ... (I don't wonder enough to try, however.)

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
5 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah, I though we are in place where we can address those questions like adults. Not sure why you don't think so. Do you know something about who reads this server that I don't?

"We" didn't specifically refer to you and me, or even this forum. As a topic of public discourse, whether marijuana smoke is carcinogenic is overshadowed by the debate about it's overall acceptability. Please understand that in the US, the federal DEA has violently busted up state licensed growers and distributors of medical marijuana and thrown the associated folks into prison. It's pathetic, really.

Oh. This "we".

That's really crazy. However, there might still be public debate happening without US.

Isn't marijuana legal in canada for example? (googling ... Canada Defends Marijuana Legalization In Response To International Skepticism ...) ok, world really doesn't seem ready for such discussion.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Not invalid points; some are being or have been addressed. We have an extensive (if you read that as expensive, you're also not far off) busing program to ship kids to schools in other neighborhoods. It is not popular, it is hard on the kids; they spend much time being shipped around, and of course the parents for the privileged kids don't want Johnny and Sally being shipped to the 'hood. But it is a factor in re-balancing the kids' early education. Somewhat. Some of our initiatives, like "No child left behind" are far less effective. Then there's the homeschooling and private school and charter school backlash.

It would be sad if I would be first one raising those points. Of course, government actually addressing them should be called commendable as it unfortunately isn't granted.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Our big problem for white folks is not so much poor white families as much as entire states that downplay education. We do have a system of low cost community schools that offer core courses that can transfer to a name school. One unfortunate thing I've seen in my lifetime is that the first college year has become a catch up year for stuff you should have already learned.

Isn't that problem for everyone? Also, isn't the problem that there are whole COUNTRIES that downplay education?

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I work with many IT coworkers of color, and they are as smart and as dedicated as anyone. I don't know the circumstances of their childhood, mostly, but at a guess, in the aggregate, they were not privileged. So I have to assume the obstacles can be overcome in the long run. Military service helps, at least in the US; it offers training in what will later become job skills for many.

Definitely ; especially in IT. There are plenty of people who didn't bothered to finish university and got rich with programming skills they basically only get by self-educating.

It's more matter of numbers. Less obstacles means more people would try. In fact, the most interested people wouldn't be stopped by obstacles and if they are also smart, can often get to the same ending point as others - it's those closer to average who might not bother to finish their education.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

You would not like where I live. Not so much in the newer neighborhoods, which look planned, the older parts of towns have a hodge podge of nice places next to shacks. It was culture shock for me. I've lived in various parts of the US, and this is the first time I've seen this.

... I suppose you don't mean the romantic kind of shack ...

Note that the distance doesn't need to be that big. It's possible that I wouldn't mind living in those newer neighborhoods because the older parts of towns would be sufficiently far away.

(Older parts of MY town are protected by law as historic.)

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I'm in the US, North Carolina, near Raleigh and Durham. I have not been secretive about that, but I suspect you're referring to a profile that I've probably ignored. I'll look for it.

Yeah, I meant the profile.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I'm not overly knowledgeable about Islam either, but I do know that just like Christians, there are many different flavors. In the job role she had, running a cash register and taking orders, she had to talk to customers. Many Muslims would have prohibited her being out of her home and having a job. There is a Muslim owned Subway near that Wendys, and they have about 50% female personnel; and yes, they also talk to customers. (Muslim owned Subways seems to be a thing here.)

... good point, taking orders is not something you can do without talking to customers :)

Hmmm ... not sure what is worse (in terms of how many Muslims would prohibit that to women): talking to other men or having a job?

But yes, I know that there are Muslims who allow that. What I don't know is how they are called. I mean, with Christians, we have Protestants, Catholics, Evangelica- ... uh, Evangelical Christians - and you can mostly recognize how serious they are about it by that. I know there are Shia and Sunni, and Sunni are supposed to be more orthodox, but both Shia and Sunni are, for example, requiring women to wear hijab, yet there are Muslim women who don't consider it necessary.

3 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

The folks that attack random people wearing a turban in response to events such as 9/11 are, as you might expect, generally not looking to be educated. They pretty much know everything already, or so they think.

That only means you need to be more direct in educating them. That's why I recommended posters.

Granted, for some you would need to use a clue bat.

3 hours ago, ijuin said:

The Lunar Treaties were created in order to head off a potential Treaty_of_Tordesillas situation.In that treaty, the entire "uncivilized" world (both New World and Old World) was (with the Pope's blessing) between Spain and Portugal--not even other Catholic nations such as France were allowed a single acre, and this treaty was passed in 1494--barely a year after Columbus had returned to Europe from his first voyage, so nobody actually knew how much land there was out there yet. The consensus behind the Lunar Treaties boils down to "if you can't take physical possession of it, then you can't claim it". Claiming the standard 20-km perimeter around your bases/fortresses is one thing. Drawing lines on a map declaring ownership of land hundreds of kilometers away from anybody who could enforce that claim is another thing entirely.

Yeah ... I'm sure there would be people already claiming other galaxies otherwise.

1 hour ago, ijuin said:

The only claims of ownership on the Moon that I know of being recognized by any governments are to the probes and Apollo spacecraft themselves and the immediate perimeter around them. Anybody who makes claims of ownership to Lunar terrain without the backing of a national government is basically just drawing lines on the map and making an unsupported declaration that can not be enforced in any court of law.

Which is probably good.

Although ... I have a strong suspicion that the main reason those are not enforceable would be that otherwise someone would buy a piece of moon, officially put a company headquarter there (without ever visiting) and use that for tax evasion.

Tesla would probably be able to get a physical headquarter to Moon in year with the additional funding from other companies who's headquarters would be on board if the lawyers would say it would work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

Which is probably good.

Although ... I have a strong suspicion that the main reason those are not enforceable would be that otherwise someone would buy a piece of moon, officially put a company headquarter there (without ever visiting) and use that for tax evasion.

Tesla would probably be able to get a physical headquarter to Moon in year with the additional funding from other companies who's headquarters would be on board if the lawyers would say it would work.

For the time being, outer space is considered equivalent to the "High Seas" in terms of applicable jurisdictions--each vessel is responsible for applying the laws of its home nation onboard, while natural objects are a no-man's-land, where everyone is empowered to arrest and prosecute certain "crimes against humanity" (piracy, acts of war, etc.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ijuin said:

For the time being, outer space is considered equivalent to the "High Seas" in terms of applicable jurisdictions--each vessel is responsible for applying the laws of its home nation onboard, while natural objects are a no-man's-land, where everyone is empowered to arrest and prosecute certain "crimes against humanity" (piracy, acts of war, etc.).

That became quite common knowledge recently.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ijuin said:

The only claims of ownership on the Moon that I know of being recognized by any governments are to the probes and Apollo spacecraft themselves and the immediate perimeter around them. Anybody who makes claims of ownership to Lunar terrain without the backing of a national government is basically just drawing lines on the map and making an unsupported declaration that can not be enforced in any court of law.

You should read the Wiki. It has even dumber earth bound precedents. But the few people that are doing it are making some money at it, in spite of not having a legitimate claim.

And real estate is weird like that. What is true today can become gray areas in the future. Look at land seized by governments after the government is overturned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

I mean that I reacted on the smoking part in the reply to message you first mentioned it in, all previous messages didn't specified it.

This MIGHT be related to shortage of options. I wonder if current experiments in smoking would help ; like, would vaping marijuana be 1) possible 2) healthier than smoking? ... (I don't wonder enough to try, however.)

It came up in conversation recently, so I was probably more aware of it. Not being a user myself, it's not on the forefront of the issues I think about.

There are more options where marijuana is legal. In Colorado, you can buy marijuana vape products. The health effects of vaping are still TBD, but questionable, it still gets in your lungs, but it's likely healthier than tar. You can also buy edibles over the counter there and pills.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Oh. This "we".

That's really crazy. However, there might still be public debate happening without US.

Isn't marijuana legal in canada for example? (googling ... Canada Defends Marijuana Legalization In Response To International Skepticism ...) ok, world really doesn't seem ready for such discussion.

This part of overindulging in alcohol and pharmaceuticals I get, wanting to forget the jackasses in charge. I believe a lot of indulgence is a reaction to feeling powerless to make things better. Not my route, but I get it.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

It would be sad if I would be first one raising those points. Of course, government actually addressing them should be called commendable as it unfortunately isn't granted.

Here, you can tell how important education is to a region by how much they are willing to pay for education; teachers salaries in particular. While never lavish, in the more developed regions, it is higher, ballpark double what it is in the US Southeast.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Isn't that problem for everyone? Also, isn't the problem that there are whole COUNTRIES that downplay education?

There are poor countries that spend little on education. Same problem the poor neighborhoods have on a bigger scale. There are countries that have a weird religious slant on education. They'll focus on education, but it will have holes in it. Evolution didn't happen. That's a common one here, actually. We have states that want to push "Teach the controversy". :( Also, of course, many places the rules for girls are different; that was the whole reason Malala Yousafzai was attacked.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Definitely ; especially in IT. There are plenty of people who didn't bothered to finish university and got rich with programming skills they basically only get by self-educating.

I have an offspring that did that. "Rich" would be an exaggeration, but "making a good living without formal training" would fit. Works in the video game industry.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

It's more matter of numbers. Less obstacles means more people would try. In fact, the most interested people wouldn't be stopped by obstacles and if they are also smart, can often get to the same ending point as others - it's those closer to average who might not bother to finish their education.

There is significant motivation to avoid higher education, at least here. It has become overly commercialized, and many of the government programs allegedly designed to help secure loans saddle the student with lifelong debt.

Also, it has become quite easy to educate yourself, albeit in a somewhat myopic and incoherent way. There is still value to formal education that lays out a long term plan, but it is not necessarily obvious to the struggling student. And of course, the value of the certificate that says you are educated, that employers will want to see.

In a sense this is no different than how it's always been, but the ease and availability are enhanced; the bar is lowered. The flip side is that you are always responsible for your own education, a fact that is lost on many young people. Our youth expect to be spoon fed.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

... I suppose you don't mean the romantic kind of shack ...

Note that the distance doesn't need to be that big. It's possible that I wouldn't mind living in those newer neighborhoods because the older parts of towns would be sufficiently far away.

(Older parts of MY town are protected by law as historic.)

Shack means a small building of substandard construction, poor finish, perhaps lacking major features. What you seem to be referring to sounds derivative of "to shack up". I don't know the specific connection, Google probably does.

We do that here as well. There's usually breaks, like tax breaks, for the owner of a historic building, but requirements how to maintain it.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Hmmm ... not sure what is worse (in terms of how many Muslims would prohibit that to women): talking to other men or having a job?

I think "you can't leave the home" is a consequence of "I don't want you talking to people".

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

That only means you need to be more direct in educating them. That's why I recommended posters.

Granted, for some you would need to use a clue bat.

"Dad, I need money for my education club."

"Oh? Who's running it? Where is it being held?"

"It's not that kind of a club, dad."
 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Yeah ... I'm sure there would be people already claiming other galaxies otherwise.

From the Wiki article: "Dean Lindsay made claims for all extraterrestrial objects on June 15, 1936." Already happened some decades before we were born.

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Which is probably good.

Although ... I have a strong suspicion that the main reason those are not enforceable would be that otherwise someone would buy a piece of moon, officially put a company headquarter there (without ever visiting) and use that for tax evasion.

Why should a fantasy claim be enforceable? If you have some inside knowledge here, maybe we can make some fast cash.

I claim the sun. If you're using my power, send me my royalties.

"You wait, in five billion years, we'll be after you for damages."

"Where are you going to sue? Your venue will be gone."

 

On 3/11/2020 at 1:41 AM, hkmaly said:

Tesla would probably be able to get a physical headquarter to Moon in year with the additional funding from other companies who's headquarters would be on board if the lawyers would say it would work.

Tesla is spinning in his grave with how his name is being used, but the good news is that he's hooked up a generator and is providing power.

Edited by Darth Fluffy
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ijuin said:

For the time being, outer space is considered equivalent to the "High Seas" in terms of applicable jurisdictions--each vessel is responsible for applying the laws of its home nation onboard, while natural objects are a no-man's-land, where everyone is empowered to arrest and prosecute certain "crimes against humanity" (piracy, acts of war, etc.).

Yarrgh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah ... I'm sure there would be people already claiming other galaxies otherwise.

I claim galaxy M77. Your* refusal to acknowledge the validity of my claim has no harmful impact on me or my claim.

 

;-)

 

 

* Your refusal, and everyone else's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can claim it, but no court with the power to enforce your claim would uphold it, so you probably will not be able to sue for trespassing or collect any rent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

There are more options where marijuana is legal. In Colorado, you can buy marijuana vape products. The health effects of vaping are still TBD, but questionable, it still gets in your lungs, but it's likely healthier than tar. You can also buy edibles over the counter there and pills.

Vaping of nicotine would likely be bad because nicotin itself is carcinogenic. But in case of marijuana ... well, TBD, of course, but the tar is obviously unhealthy.

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

This part of overindulging in alcohol and pharmaceuticals I get, wanting to forget the jackasses in charge. I believe a lot of indulgence is a reaction to feeling powerless to make things better. Not my route, but I get it.

Ooooh, so that's why there is so big problem with opiates in US ...

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
18 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Isn't that problem for everyone? Also, isn't the problem that there are whole COUNTRIES that downplay education?

There are poor countries that spend little on education. Same problem the poor neighborhoods have on a bigger scale. There are countries that have a weird religious slant on education. They'll focus on education, but it will have holes in it. Evolution didn't happen. That's a common one here, actually. We have states that want to push "Teach the controversy". :( Also, of course, many places the rules for girls are different; that was the whole reason Malala Yousafzai was attacked.

Poor countries are one thing ; weird religious slant another ; but there seem to be quite wide downplay of education in relatively rich countries just because the establishment see priorities elsewhere. It's almost like if they looked at voters preferences and realized that the more educated vote for opposition anyway. But maybe it's just because better education will only pay in like ten years and they can count of staying in power so long anyway.

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
18 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Definitely ; especially in IT. There are plenty of people who didn't bothered to finish university and got rich with programming skills they basically only get by self-educating.

I have an offspring that did that. "Rich" would be an exaggeration, but "making a good living without formal training" would fit. Works in the video game industry.

Ask them about languages with context-free grammar, asymptotic time complexity and vector clocks. That would be three topics I met on university which might be hard to find out by self-educating - not hard to learn, but hard to realize they might be useful.

(The context-free grammar specifically was big surprise for me, as a first topic which was neither too theoretical nor something I already knew. Something I though is hard before and suddenly on the lecture I realized it's actually easy. There were more like that later, but nothing surprised me like this, probably because it was first.)

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
18 hours ago, hkmaly said:

... I suppose you don't mean the romantic kind of shack ...

Note that the distance doesn't need to be that big. It's possible that I wouldn't mind living in those newer neighborhoods because the older parts of towns would be sufficiently far away.

(Older parts of MY town are protected by law as historic.)

Shack means a small building of substandard construction, poor finish, perhaps lacking major features. What you seem to be referring to sounds derivative of "to shack up". I don't know the specific connection, Google probably does.

Not that kind of romantic. It's just that wooden shack might look more romantic in nature than plastered house. When construction material include plastic or  metal sheets however, it's not looking romantic anywhere.

(The difference between such shack and log cabin would be that log cabin uses logs, shack planks or boards.)

Wikipedia specifically mentions that in Australian English shack can also refer to a small holiday house with limited conveniences ; I think that started with the shacks I have in mind.

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

We do that here as well. There's usually breaks, like tax breaks, for the owner of a historic building, but requirements how to maintain it.

Well, but your history wasn't that long ago :)

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
19 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah ... I'm sure there would be people already claiming other galaxies otherwise.

From the Wiki article: "Dean Lindsay made claims for all extraterrestrial objects on June 15, 1936." Already happened some decades before we were born.

And BEFORE the treaties we talk about.

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Why should a fantasy claim be enforceable? If you have some inside knowledge here, maybe we can make some fast cash.

I claim the sun. If you're using my power, send me my royalties.

"You wait, in five billion years, we'll be after you for damages."

"Were are you going to sue? Your venue will be gone."

:)

13 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
19 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Tesla would probably be able to get a physical headquarter to Moon in year with the additional funding from other companies who's headquarters would be on board if the lawyers would say it would work.

Tesla is spinning in his grave with how his name is being used, but the good news is that he's hooked up a generator and is providing power.

Really shame this doesn't work, we could power whole US with the founding fathers.

5 hours ago, ijuin said:

You can claim it, but no court with the power to enforce your claim would uphold it, so you probably will not be able to sue for trespassing or collect any rent.

... not talking about the fact that noone will be trespassing there anytime soon.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Don Edwards said:

I claim galaxy M77. Your* refusal to acknowledge the validity of my claim has no harmful impact on me or my claim.

 

;-)

 

 

* Your refusal, and everyone else's.

 

6 hours ago, ijuin said:

You can claim it, but no court with the power to enforce your claim would uphold it, so you probably will not be able to sue for trespassing or collect any rent.

Hey, if someone from this planet manages to trespass on my claim... I'll be very very happy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Ooooh, so that's why there is so big problem with opiates in US ...

Also the War on other Drug forces the more law abiding folks towards a somewhat less illegal solution.

 

10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Poor countries are one thing ; weird religious slant another ; but there seem to be quite wide downplay of education in relatively rich countries just because the establishment see priorities elsewhere. It's almost like if they looked at voters preferences and realized that the more educated vote for opposition anyway. But maybe it's just because better education will only pay in like ten years and they can count of staying in power so long anyway.

It seems like the Industrial Revolution has been a factor in foisting a mediocre standard of education on our collective cultures. There is a need for educated individuals, but industry doesn't want to pay for them, so they substitute lower standards like specific product certifications, reducing everything to a two year degree level. Look at railroads; the jobs have become very specific over the two centuries of operation. Or auto assembly, you no longer have to be much of a mechanic at all to participate.

 

10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Ask them about languages with context-free grammar, asymptotic time complexity and vector clocks. That would be three topics I met on university which might be hard to find out by self-educating - not hard to learn, but hard to realize they might be useful.

(The context-free grammar specifically was big surprise for me, as a first topic which was neither too theoretical nor something I already knew. Something I though is hard before and suddenly on the lecture I realized it's actually easy. There were more like that later, but nothing surprised me like this, probably because it was first.)

I don't think she'd care. She knows enough to be in demand and get paid. Leans toward customer service.

 

10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Not that kind of romantic. It's just that wooden shack might look more romantic in nature than plastered house. When construction material include plastic or  metal sheets however, it's not looking romantic anywhere.

(The difference between such shack and log cabin would be that log cabin uses logs, shack planks or boards.)

Wikipedia specifically mentions that in Australian English shack can also refer to a small holiday house with limited conveniences ; I think that started with the shacks I have in mind.

OK, I can see that sounds romantic. I've gone camping in places like that, rented a cabin.

You are also not picturing it next door; it would not be as picturesque if it affected your property value.

 

10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Well, but your history wasn't that long ago :)

My history is as long as yours, just wasn't here. :P

 

10 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Really shame this doesn't work, we could power whole US with the founding fathers.

Oh, God, no kidding. I watch the news with dread; "What has the toddler in chief tweeted today?"

I saw an Anderson Cooper clip yesterday, interviewing a right wing apologist talking head, "He could take a dump on the desk in the Oval Office, and you would defend it." Actually got the talking head to pause his diatribe for a bit in shock; I think there was a glimmer of understanding that it was essentially true.

You know what Thomas Jefferson would say if he were alive today? "Let me out of this damn box!" But he'd probably say stuff about our current state of affairs afterward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
On 3/12/2020 at 2:03 AM, hkmaly said:

Poor countries are one thing ; weird religious slant another ; but there seem to be quite wide downplay of education in relatively rich countries just because the establishment see priorities elsewhere. It's almost like if they looked at voters preferences and realized that the more educated vote for opposition anyway. But maybe it's just because better education will only pay in like ten years and they can count of staying in power so long anyway.

It seems like the Industrial Revolution has been a factor in foisting a mediocre standard of education on our collective cultures. There is a need for educated individuals, but industry doesn't want to pay for them, so they substitute lower standards like specific product certifications, reducing everything to a two year degree level. Look at railroads; the jobs have become very specific over the two centuries of operation. Or auto assembly, you no longer have to be much of a mechanic at all to participate.

I don't think that's it. Like, sure, it IS cheaper to use someone less educated, but mostly because there are plenty of people like that. If there WOULD be enough mechanics to build all those cars, they would be using them ... and wouldn't need to pay them so much because they wouldn't have that much choice.

Generally, I think that industries are reacting to the low education and not causing it.

Note that those people working at car assembly ... they weren't doing educated job before. Before industrial revolution, those were working in agriculture.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
On 3/12/2020 at 2:03 AM, hkmaly said:

(The context-free grammar specifically was big surprise for me, as a first topic which was neither too theoretical nor something I already knew. Something I though is hard before and suddenly on the lecture I realized it's actually easy. There were more like that later, but nothing surprised me like this, probably because it was first.)

I don't think she'd care. She knows enough to be in demand and get paid. Leans toward customer service.

Oh. Customer service. Then you may be right. Also, I would say that customer service needs more ability to communicate and stuff like that, and you can't get that in university anyway.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
On 3/12/2020 at 2:03 AM, hkmaly said:

Wikipedia specifically mentions that in Australian English shack can also refer to a small holiday house with limited conveniences ; I think that started with the shacks I have in mind.

OK, I can see that sounds romantic. I've gone camping in places like that, rented a cabin.

You are also not picturing it next door; it would not be as picturesque if it affected your property value.

We (family) owned a holiday house like that, totally uninhabitable during winter. Not visible from outside the  parcel, so definitely not affecting property value of anything. We upgraded to real house with brick walls later. Much easier to be in, but less romantic.

Now, next door to where I live, in city ... that would be really weird to happen.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
On 3/12/2020 at 2:03 AM, hkmaly said:

Well, but your history wasn't that long ago :)

My history is as long as yours, just wasn't here. :P

Well, yes ... I should've said it differently, as I meant the city.

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:
On 3/12/2020 at 2:03 AM, hkmaly said:

Really shame this doesn't work, we could power whole US with the founding fathers.

Oh, God, no kidding. I watch the news with dread; "What has the toddler in chief tweeted today?"

Hey, recently I saw a really optimistic news about your president ... where it was ... this one :)

20 hours ago, Darth Fluffy said:

You know what Thomas Jefferson would say if he were alive today? "Let me out of this damn box!" But he'd probably say stuff about our current state of affairs afterward.

I think this was shown in some comics recently: they would definitely say stuff about US current state of affairs ... they might also prove that the position of women changed a lot since their time.

Reminds me one joke from the time of cold war ... which may be getting less funny considering current candidates ...

Two politicians, American and Russian, (I used to knew who it was but it changed in time anyway), got frozen and wake up 50 years later. They realize lot of time passed and eagerly check newspapers to see what changed in world. The Russian politician finds something interesting and starts laughing a lot, then shows the American the title "Communist Party of the United States of America won the election". American politician gets grumpy and quickly searches for something else ... and then he burst in laugh as well. He shows the title: "Unrests on China-Finland border continue".

Now ... putting aside the fact that those 50 years might already passed and current candidates in US ... how would they find newspapers now? In shop? How would they pay it for? Credit card they don't know what is, or money which would no longer be accepted due to being too old to have necessary counterfeit features?

Lot of stuff changed which you don't realize at first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2020 at 9:21 PM, hkmaly said:

I don't think that's it. Like, sure, it IS cheaper to use someone less educated, but mostly because there are plenty of people like that. If there WOULD be enough mechanics to build all those cars, they would be using them ... and wouldn't need to pay them so much because they wouldn't have that much choice.

I don't think that's it. Like, sure, it IS cheaper to use someone less educated, but mostly because there are plenty of people like that. If there WOULD be enough mechanics to build all those cars, they would be using them ... and wouldn't need to pay them so much because they wouldn't have that much choice.

Generally, I think that industries are reacting to the low education and not causing it.

Don't get me wrong; I don't think it's the result of a cabal meeting in a cloistered setting and conspiring to dumb down education, but in effect, that's what happens.

 

On 3/12/2020 at 9:21 PM, hkmaly said:

Note that those people working at car assembly ... they weren't doing educated job before. Before industrial revolution, those were working in agriculture.

I beg to differ; I've never been a farmer, I'm guessing neither have you. I've been around plants and livestock enough to know that being successful at either is knowledge intensive. Not to mention that especially pre-industrial, many of those folks were jack-of-all-trades around their homes. Many built their own homes.

 

On 3/12/2020 at 9:21 PM, hkmaly said:

We (family) owned a holiday house like that, totally uninhabitable during winter. Not visible from outside the  parcel, so definitely not affecting property value of anything. We upgraded to real house with brick walls later. Much easier to be in, but less romantic.

Sounds really nice. The rental cabins are similar. You wouldn't want to live in one year round, full time.

 

On 3/12/2020 at 9:21 PM, hkmaly said:

Hey, recently I saw a really optimistic news about your president ... where it was ... this one :)

Sadly, I had a hunch roughly where this was headed. I wouldn't wish that even on him. I'd be tempted, I'd think of it as a comeuppance, but I wouldn't wish it on him.

 

On 3/12/2020 at 9:21 PM, hkmaly said:

I think this was shown in some comics recently: they would definitely say stuff about US current state of affairs ... they might also prove that the position of women changed a lot since their time.

Reminds me one joke from the time of cold war ... which may be getting less funny considering current candidates ...

Two politicians, American and Russian, (I used to knew who it was but it changed in time anyway), got frozen and wake up 50 years later. They realize lot of time passed and eagerly check newspapers to see what changed in world. The Russian politician finds something interesting and starts laughing a lot, then shows the American the title "Communist Party of the United States of America won the election". American politician gets grumpy and quickly searches for something else ... and then he burst in laugh as well. He shows the title: "Unrests on China-Finland border continue".

Now ... putting aside the fact that those 50 years might already passed and current candidates in US ... how would they find newspapers now? In shop? How would they pay it for? Credit card they don't know what is, or money which would no longer be accepted due to being too old to have necessary counterfeit features?

Lot of stuff changed which you don't realize at first.

If they had cash on them, it would be of value to a collector. They wouldn't be aware of that, though.

I remember a National Lampoon bit where someone woke from the WW II era, and saw stuff happening in the early seventies under Nixon. The punchline was, "Wait, who won the war?"

And I find today's headline surreal.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:
On 3/13/2020 at 2:21 AM, hkmaly said:

Note that those people working at car assembly ... they weren't doing educated job before. Before industrial revolution, those were working in agriculture.

I beg to differ; I've never been a farmer, I'm guessing neither have you. I've been around plants and livestock enough to know that being successful at either is knowledge intensive. Not to mention that especially pre-industrial, many of those folks were jack-of-all-trades around their homes. Many built their own homes.

I wasn't farmer but I was taking care about plants before. I'm pretty sure it was physical work intensive more than knowledge intensive. Just as building a home ... and thinking about it, you were speaking about mechanics. Not that they could be completely stupid, but I would say the job requires mainly manual dexterity.

When I'm thinking about education, I'm thinking about science, medicine and similar stuff. We would need more of it, but I'm sure people capable of that are not doing car assembly.

... well, unless they decided to study something humane and then didn't found work in what they studied in because there are a limited number of jobs for experts on 16th century painters. In that case, doing car assembly might be nice alternative to McDonald.

Anyway, back to what industrial revolution did: It did caused more specialization definitely. In many cases, it was necessary because the amount of knowledge went up and people couldn't become professionals in so many areas as before. However, that "jack of all trades" stuff? That definitely went down and I don't think it was necessary.

Sure, people couldn't do as many thing professionally as they could in past, but some general range of knowledge would still be useful. Not directly in employment, but to not get fooled so easily. And that's DEFINITELY missing in education. That and some critical thinking.

In past, lot of jobs involved some general knowledge. Now the specialization means that you divide the knowledge to multiple experts, each better in their own field but worse in seeing the whole picture.

1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:

If they had cash on them, it would be of value to a collector. They wouldn't be aware of that, though.

Yeah. It might be even more useful if they had some IBM stocks, but neither would be something you can quickly pay in shop.

1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:

I remember a National Lampoon bit where someone woke from the WW II era, and saw stuff happening in the early seventies under Nixon. The punchline was, "Wait, who won the war?"

... yeah ... if you look just at surface, USA and Russia won WW II and then Russia lost the cold war. However, it gets significantly more complicated if you look at details. It doesn't look democracy is winning ...

We might be heading into era of last dictatorships of countries. Followed by cyberpunk future of dictatorship of megacorporations.

1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:

And I find today's headline surreal.

Which ones?

I mean, the coronavirus-related ones are surely something unexpected. Nothing like this happened for centuries. Luckily it seems the disease is not as deadly as some of previous ones (like H5N1 or SARS) but it's significantly more infectious.

And as if the disease wouldn't be serious enough, the impact on economy and on society seems to be even worse. I really hope some of those temporary measures to limit it's spread won't end up permanent ....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hkmaly said:

Which ones?

I mean, the coronavirus-related ones are surely something unexpected. Nothing like this happened for centuries. Luckily it seems the disease is not as deadly as some of previous ones (like H5N1 or SARS) but it's significantly more infectious.

And as if the disease wouldn't be serious enough, the impact on economy and on society seems to be even worse. I really hope some of those temporary measures to limit it's spread won't end up permanent ....

 

Mainly the ones where Trump tweets or opens his mouth and words come out.

Covid-19 is less deadly than a few when you catch it, but is killing more people because it spreads incredibly well. It already at about three times the death toll of the ones you mentioned for a similar period. It hides well during the early stages of being infectious, and the incubation period is long. I read "70% of people world wide are expected to catch it."

Then x 2%, so 7x10^9 * .70 * .02 = 100,000,000 deaths world-wide. That hardly depopulates the earth, but you're gonna know some of those folks personally. You have every right to be scares $#!7less, if you wish to commence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Mainly the ones where Trump tweets or opens his mouth and words come out.

Oh ... those tends to be literally surreal ... meaning, as from different universe.

1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Covid-19 is less deadly than a few when you catch it, but is killing more people because it spreads incredibly well. It already at about three times the death toll of the ones you mentioned for a similar period. It hides well during the early stages of being infectious, and the incubation period is long. I read "70% of people world wide are expected to catch it."

Yeah. That's what I mean by more infectious.

I've read only some countries are this pessimistic (like Germany) but that doesn't mean they are not right.

1 hour ago, Darth Fluffy said:

Then x 2%, so 7x10^9 * .70 * .02 = 100,000,000 deaths world-wide. That hardly depopulates the earth, but you're gonna know some of those folks personally.

That's not how infections work. Sure, if those 100,000,000 would be distributed randomly, I would likely know some of them, but the spread of virus highly correlates with who knows who, meaning that if I'm lucky, noone who I know die, while if I'm not, it's likely multiple of them would BECAUSE they catch it from each other or even from me.

In addition to that, there is high correlation between who dies from the virus and age and previous health. I know exactly which two of my relatives have lowest chance to survive. Aaaaand there is definitely high probability both would be infected if one of them would. Sure, that doesn't mean it can't end differently, but ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Oh ... those tends to be literally surreal ... meaning, as from different universe.

He doesn't seem to have human emotions nor empathy, maybe your hypothesis is right.

 

2 hours ago, hkmaly said:

Yeah. That's what I mean by more infectious.

I've read only some countries are this pessimistic (like Germany) but that doesn't mean they are not right.

That's not how infections work. Sure, if those 100,000,000 would be distributed randomly, I would likely know some of them, but the spread of virus highly correlates with who knows who, meaning that if I'm lucky, no one who I know die, while if I'm not, it's likely multiple of them would BECAUSE they catch it from each other or even from me.

In addition to that, there is high correlation between who dies from the virus and age and previous health. I know exactly which two of my relatives have lowest chance to survive. Aaaaand there is definitely high probability both would be infected if one of them would. Sure, that doesn't mean it can't end differently, but ...

I think your outlook would be valid for much of the world, but not for Europe, our urban centers, especially northeast coast and California, nor most of Asia. Too dense, too many interactions. What China did in Wuhan seems draconian, but it is about the only way they could have run an effective quarantine. They're the only ones who could have pulled that off (after initially F----ing up badly). If you haven't heard, they quarantined the city itself, and quarantined everyone in it within their homes.

Our response or Japans is going to be more typical; half-assed measures that are sometimes going to be counterproductive.

Personally, I am authorized to work from home. I will avail myself of that opportunity more than I have.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this