80 karma · joined August 7, 2011
I don't know why you think this would upset libertarians, myself included. Much of the problem we have with public funding* is that it privatizes gain and socializes loss, thus distorting market outcomes.
IP is more controversial among libertarians, and I will grant that many libertarians support it on psuedo-Lockean grounds -- though many oppose it in whole or in part because of the market distortions it can create and because it restricts the peaceful behaviour of others.
*I do not object to all public funding.
"more" here refers to "a greater number than", not "poorer than"
It's possible that he was misinformed by his advisers and indeed did not actually know. But I am not optimistic about that notion.
Tea Party, maybe, but not libertarian. Reason, Cato, and the like are highly critical of military spending and very frequently chastise mainstream Republicans for focussing on discretionary and entitlement spending while ignoring the military spending.
> Port Web Wizard from Java to python. 140 files changed, 5076 (+), 11416 (-). Removed 55 files, 10426 lines of java code (Javier Fernandez)
So it looks like they're trying to scrub out the Java parts (except perhaps in Base). Does anyone know if this is the case?
Then again, from what we know about the FISC it's hard to say whether legal challenges make much difference.
>People will pay for a half-assed book on PHP, but if you want to sell a journal on astrophysics the internet gets all riled up about it.
Those examples are not analogous at all. Research isn't funded through the subscription fees to the journals, it's funded through tuition (via faculty salaries) and grants.
Uncorrected multiple comparisons are, of course, a big portion of the statistical dubiousness inherent it "data dredging"
I think it's worth noting that many of the areas are saddled with burdensome regulation, with the caveat that this is certainly not the only or even the primary hindrance, and that the fact they may be hindrances doesn't in itself mean they aren't warranted.
1. "In 2011, the Texas Legislature shifted authority to order textbooks from the state to individual school districts with Senate Bill 6. The law deprived the board of its final say-so."
2. "Now, [textbook publishers] only have to meet 50 percent of the standards…Textbook publishers have a little more wiggle room."
Those details seem quite important for giving context to the TEA members' attempted or realized changes to the curriculum in terms of what actually threatens education vs. what ultimately comes down to grandstanding.
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/revising-the-revisio...
"Dunbar claims she's a "big fan" of Thomas Jefferson, but thinks a "secular humanistic ideology" has clouded current interpretations of his work. So she cuts him out of the standards on the Enlightenment and its influence on the US' founding documents, instead substituting in pre-enlightenment figures like Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin."
From droithomme's comment:
"When this story first came out last year claiming that Thomas Jefferson was removed from the curriculum because he was an atheist (which he was not), I went and looked at the actual differences made to the state standards so I could have a laugh. [...]"
They seem pretty related to me.
I'm getting very tired of this. If you want to have an informed discussion about gun violence you need to acquire at least a modicum of information about firearms, especially but not limited to different actions, e.g., single-action, semi-automatic, and automatic.
Virginia Tech? 2 semi-automatic pistols. Sandy Hook? 1 semi-automatic rifle and 2 semi-automatic pistols. UT Austin? 1 semi-automatic shotgun, 2 bolt-action rifles, 1 pump-action rifle, 2 semi-automatic pistols, 1 revolver, 1 semi-automatic carbine Columbine? 1 pump-action shotgun, 1 break-action shotgun, 1 semi-automatic carbine, 1 semi-automatic pistol.
What do those have in common? No automatic weapons.
Almost no crimes are committed with legally owned automatic weapons. There are very few of them available and many are quite old, so those owned by non-LEAs are very expensive and largely collectors' items. And even with illegally owned automatic weapons, crimes committed with them barely even register. [1]
If you want to argue that semi-automatic weapons are "bad enough," fine. But please have some idea what you are talking about.
The genealogical data is one of the main things I'm looking for; 23AndMe has been "OK" and AncestryDNA has just been a waste.
I'm wondering if it would be worthwhile to pay for a data import onto FTDNA.
Opposition to government-subsidized healthcare is not anarchism.
So yes, it is silly, to put it nicely.