Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
njtosd
Participant[quote=NotCranky]Wasn’t it Louis CK who said, If you like laws, sausages or youth sports, you should never watch any of them being made” ?
[/quote]
The quote (minus the reference to youth sports) is as old as the hills. In terms of your views of women, perhaps that’s your experience but it seems very out of the ordinary to me.
November 14, 2017 at 5:41 PM in reply to: OT: Creative Lawyering – Fascinating reason for some fake news #808510Participant[quote=spdrun]I’m of the opinion that copyright should be strictly limited to five years at most. Allow producers to profit, keep the parasites from milking old content for decades. Then get rid of the DMCA.[/quote]
Sigh. As a first question, five years from what? As a second question, you would have no problem with your artwork being used after that 5 yr period by some group that you are very opposed to? For example, a photo taken of your home? And I don’t know why you want to get rid of the DMCA.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]njtosd, some people believe that the context of past times apply and they use that to justify their heroes. And some people still use old historical texts to justify present behavior.
However, I believe we need to evolve with the times and reject anachronistic ideas. Judge people on how they address things in the present, by our own standards.[/quote]
Again I say, oh please. This quote may have gotten you a B on your middle school civics essay, but it is ridiculous in the present context.
and PS: Please tell me in what historical context it was appropriate to let a young girl drown in order to avoid exposing your extramarital affairs?
Participant[quote=scaredyclassic]we should not idolize people.
we will always be let down.
but louie, i love you, man.
things arent gonna be the same tho.
you spoke for us.
i hope he can find a way forwatd thats funny.
other comedians suck so bad compared to louie…[/quote]
It’s hard to tell a side splitting G-rated joke. It takes intelligence and wit. That is in short supply. Billy Crystal did a good job of it. So did Bob Newhart.
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=njtosd]The rate of narcissism and exhibitionism among entertainers and politicians (regardless of party affiliation) is staggering. I’m so sick of all of it.[/quote]
Sex wise, we are all the same. But only 1 party has godly superior family values.
And only 1 party elects and nominates known sexual harassers. Clarence Thomas is one of them.[/quote]
Oh please. Have you forgotten Bill Clinton? I voted for him and I thought he was a very good president. But he had issues. How many times did Ted Kennedy get elected after Chappaquiddick? And let’s not even start on Illinois politicians.
Most people believe that they are on the side of the good guys. I’m never sure.
PS – just saw Rich’s post. Thanks.
ParticipantThe rate of narcissism and exhibitionism among entertainers and politicians (regardless of party affiliation) is staggering. I’m so sick of all of it.
Participant[quote=spdrun]Probably buy a property or two in NJ (gone up some, but foreclosures are still there) and use it to pay for expenses whilst in grad school. Real world is overrated. PhD with minimal school debt sounds like fun.
Worst case, I’ll end up with a roof over my head and a teaching job. There are worse ways to live — never really liked the corporate/business world, found it boring.[/quote]
Oh my gosh. There’s enough cynicism in academia. Instructors are supposed to be positive and excited about their subjects – unless you have a very Dr Jekyll/Mr Hyde personality, do the kids at Farleigh Dickinson a favor and rethink this. Here’s an idea: how about doing something about which you can actually say something positive? Plus, the words that you’ve used on the board suggest your social media footprint might get in the way …..
Participant[quote=harvey]Detroit isn’t a techie city.
If they go anywhere in the rust belt, it will be Pittsburgh.
But I’d be surprised if it was either.[/quote]
I agree about the low likelihood but not about the lack of tech types. Lots of engineers (and their kids) are still there. The University of Michigan can supply a few I’m sure …
Quote from Forbes “Reinventing America
The Cities Creating The Most Tech Jobs 2017”Easily the biggest surprise on the list is Detroit, which improved its position to ninth, a remarkable 30-place jump from the last edition of this list in 2015. It generated 26% growth in high-tech jobs and boosted its STEM employment by 8.4%. Despite the decline of the central city, the Detroit metro area has never faded as a technical center; due largely to the auto industry its per capita STEM employment has long been above the national average. This is reflected in a post-recession boom in engineering services in the region – some 14,000 new jobs since 2006 – leaving Detroit with a concentration of engineering services more than three times the national average. Its percentage of STEM workers is 50% above the U.S. norm, roughly equivalent to that of Raleigh-Durham, Boston and Denver.
Participant[quote=spdrun]Detroit is a symbol of everything that’s wrong with America — from exporting the auto industry, car culture, to urban crime, decay, and mismanagement in favor of suburban hellholes. I don’t wish it well, especially not as a host for a parasitic corporation like Amazon.[/quote]
You are a dependable ray of sunshine spdrun.
ParticipantParticipant[quote=scaredyclassic]I bought a bag of organic cacao nibs.
Ingredients, 100 percent cacao
Bag had a warning label saying there was something that caused cancer.
The bag?
The nibs?
Air?[/quote]
Almost every plant produces something to deter predators – in fact, many things that humans like, such as spicy peppers, mint, etc are actually supposed to be unappealing and discourage animals from eating the plants that produce them. Many produce mutagens (cancer causing agents) – think of taxol, vinca alkaloids or poisons like belladonna. Here is a link to an article about all the (naturally occurring) carcinogens in Thanksgiving dinner: https://www.scribd.com/mobile/document/153941243/ACSH-Holiday-Dinner-Menu
Fruit generally has fewer of these things because plants want fruits to be consumed. For this reason I haven’t been terribly committed to shoving large amounts of vegetables into my children, but I do encourage fruit.
Participant[quote=moneymaker]Maybe those are maximum amounts, I’ve always heard 5 times income. If it was 5 times take home then I would agree, but I for one don’t feel comfortable spending 5 times gross income on a house. Not sure how many people first starting out realistically have the 20% down.[/quote]
When I was young the multiplier was three. The house that I grew up in was worth less than my dad made in a year. It just wasn’t such a big deal – and nobody knew the square footage of each others homes.
Participant[quote=ocrenter]
Guns are not the problem. Lack of regulation that allows someone to buy and own 40+ weapons and endless ammo is the problem.
If cars need to be registered, if dogs need to be registered, then why not guns?[/quote]
How can you be sure? People used to be able to buy most of what is available now through mail order or at sporting goods stores, and there weren’t problems like Steven Paddock. How do you know that more regulations won’t increase criminal activity in terms of stealing firearms or trafficking in illegal firearms?
As I’ve said a couple of times – I am not a gun enthusiast. But, I think everyone wants to believe that these sorts of tragedies can be prevented with more gun control. Exaggerating to make a point: I’m sure there is a lot of gun control in North Korea – that doesn’t make it a great place to live.Participant[quote=svelte]I didn’t include the text that went along with the diagram (they eluded to the map stats being related to each state’s gun restrictions) because I didn’t think there was enough evidence that the two were related.
OCRenter’s diagram shows there indeed may be other reasons for the map stats. They may be all related (ie, low gun ownership may mean the residents are more open to gun restrictions, low gun ownership means less weapons may mean less weapon deaths, tighter restrictions may mean less weapon deaths, or some combination of these) but that would take somebody to study it in depth to determine.
I don’t have that kind of time. :-)[/quote]
Almost 2/3 of US gun related deaths are suicides, and the US suicide rate is pretty average (so these would be unlikely to decline significantly if guns ownership declined to European rates). How about some statistics that exclude suicides?I don’t love guns – not a gun owner, etc. But I think events like this make people believe guns are the problem. As indicated in my post above, guns used to be widely available and we didn’t see this type of shooting.
-
AuthorPosts