Will Schmidt
- 211 comments
- 1 likes given
- 50 likes received
Bio not provided
@charliehilton It sucked every single time. Was the worst feeling. Betrayal. Power corrupts.
Good stuff.
Pretty good stuff. I feel like it's missing something though, like it's half-complete.
Need rain.
All these clouds are bringing back memories from that one time I was banned at FrostCloud forums. And that other time I was banned. And that other time. And that other time. And that other time. And that other time. And that other time. I think that's about right.
I see how you wrote BST and not GMT nor UTC. Imperialist.
A pleasure to read.
Pretty awesome. The lifehack genre is glorious to behold.
I know what the Hodge Twins would say about the title of this article :)LOL!
I'm surprised, and yet not surprised, at the amount of "liberal" persons that blocked/ignored others on an SNS because of differing political views. The weakness of humans is just staggering.
I wonder, what brought The Clipperton Project to your attention, Courtney Sexton?
This is pretty good stuff.
@Natasha Pilides So you posted that picture knowing the female of the species was less massive than the male?
What was the point of posting that picture, from your perspective?
I'm not saying those women should have less of a right or chance to get there than men, but that those women should get their priorities straight. I suppose they do have the right to be a psychopathic corporate executive, but it would be far preferable to humans and society if they chose a different career path, or in the sciences, in engineering, archaeology, medicine, education, social services, etc. Maximizing profits for shareholders should be on the bottom of every person's, including females, list.
You know, I have a special spot in my heart for "equal opportunity", and I've made this hypothetical offer to other women. If I, and all men, gave up their right to vote in order to avoid conscription, and you, and women, being voters, would then be the only gender conscripted, would you accept this offer? Civic duty. Would you accept this offer? For thousands and thousands of years, it has been men that have been conscripted to fight another man's war. Men killing men, raping women, burning cities and villages. Is it so hard to ask to see merely a thousand years of 18-19 and twenty-something year old female conscripts gang-raping men, killing other women, missing legs, blown off faces, and burning some cities to the ground?
Imagine, one can be targeted by the United States in a signature strike just by "being a male of military age in the vicinity of a 'terrorist'". I dream for a world where corrupt and evil female politicians plot and scheme to kill women terrorists and nearby "females of a military age": i.e., teenagers. It is hard to ask that, isn't it? It is hard to ask. War among humans is inevitable. Inevitable. It shall happen again. And when it happens again, the amount of men that shall be mobilized and killed will be devastating. Help me reduce the amount of men that shall be killed, and help increase the amount of women that will be killed. Equal opportunity.
War is inevitable among humans. Inevitable. And in this current conscription paradigm, it shall be men that will be slaughtered on the battlefield (the bombing and razing of cities is indiscriminate, so from an equal opportunity point of view, I have no quarrel with it). If you want equal opportunity, then support equal opportunity. Advocate female conscription.
Cave Johnson isn't afraid of asbestos :(
Women should be less interested in heading FTSE 100 boards and more interested in filling Nobel Laureate candidate lists. I mean, if they perform better on an academic level then their male counterparts, would it not be logical that they would maintain academic supremacy were they to remain in academia?
"No matter how many rules are introduced to impose equality, what needs to change is the way people think. And this applies to women just as much as it applies to men."
Changing the way persons think is imposition, as opposed to having default thoughts that are of equality. The fact that one has to "learn" that certain things are equal implies there is inequality to be perceived, and if there is inequality to be perceived, perhaps there is indeed inequality.
And finally, in that image of the Schistosoma the male is indeed the smaller looking of the two stained organisms in the picture. However, that is a transversal view of the male worm. The male worm is actually over twenty times more massive than the female, twenty seven times more massive using Wikipedia's largest figures for both animals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schistosoma_mansoni if you calculate volume and assume density is equal.
I find it awesomely lulzy that, in an article about promoting equality, there is an image apparently demonstrating sexual dimorphism with a larger female (and all the supposed qualities that go with an organism in being larger), but that in fact the larger worm is indeed the male. Talk about ironic.
I suppose the real question is, is it O.K. if sex defines success? Is there something intrinsically wrong with sex defining success, especially if success is subjective? Perhaps the only time it would be "wrong" for sex defining success would be if success were objective, but since it's not, well then why not?
There is such an obsession about equality. There is a difference between "equality" and "equal opportunity", and I think many persons blur, or even erase, the line between the two different ideas.
And let's not forget the irony of the picture.
SCIENCE.
The improbability is much greater than this because it does not take into account evolution, which alone would make Binazir's current calculation enormously larger than the actual number, and including the probability of every potential mutation occuring in every generation of every organism would be too much to calculate, let alone the probability of the behavior of particles in the early universe and abiogenesis.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/08/middleeast.construction
http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2009/united-arab-emirates-uae
http://www.hhrjournal.org/index.php/hhr/article/view/435/665
<Laborers often suffer accidents, such as getting pieces of cement and steel chips in eyes, sustaining hand injuries from grinders or power tools, and falls. Saadiyat Island workers told HRW, "Medical care for heatstroke, fever, and workplace injuries (for example, a welder whose leg was injured by a grinding machine) consisted of male nurses handing out ‘Panadol,’ a generic painkiller."35
Only the most serious injuries receive medical care; the employer pays for transportation to the hospital and for medical expenses, which laborers must repay upon recovery—thereby increasing their debt. Both local and foreign contractors have been resistant to safety laws that protect construction workers; in fact, accidents and injuries are often attributed to workers’ inexperience and language problems. In 2004, five workers died and 12 were injured when a reinforcement cage supporting a wall collapsed.36 In the same year, 5,000 construction workers in Dubai were admitted to Rashid Hospital’s emergency room between July and August alone; in 2007, seven workers died and 15 were injured when a bridge collapsed at the Dubai Marina.37 There are conflicting reports on numbers of injuries and deaths; for example, two construction workers are reportedly killed each week (104 per year) in Abu Dhabi, while the Municipality of Dubai recorded only 34 construction worker deaths in all of 2004 and 39 in 2005, despite the significantly greater construction activity there.38 Independent research reported 880 deaths in the UAE among migrant construction workers in 2004 (483 Indians, 397 Pakistanis). Although the causes of death were not disclosed, a representative of the Indian Community Welfare Committee noted that 30 percent of deaths among Indians in Dubai were related to accidents on construction sites.39 An official at Dubai’s Indian Consulate reported to HRW that 971 deaths were registered in 2005, from which 61 were attributed to site accidents. The Bangladesh Embassy in Abu Dhabi estimates repatriating about eight to 10 bodies of construction workers each month, of which three are work-related deaths. The authors speculate that discrepancies in reporting site accidents are due to the UAE’s efforts to downplay risks associated with construction work.">
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jul/18/uae-emirates-battle
<The UAE should also do more to meet international standards on civil, political and human rights. For example, it is one of only 18 states not to have signed the international covenant on civil and political rights.>
http://www.ituc-csi.org/IMG/pdf/final-_tpr_uae.pdf
<EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United Arab Emirates (UAE) have ratified six core ILO labour Conventions. In view of restrictions on the trade union rights of workers, discrimination, child labour, and forced labour, determined measures are needed to comply with the commitments the UAE accepted at Singapore, Geneva and Doha in the WTO Ministerial Declarations over 1996-2001, and in the ILO’s Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work and its 2008 Social Justice Declaration.
The law does not provide the right to organise, collective bargaining and strike. The government has used its powers to limit unwanted action by professional associations. Reports show grave problems of workers’ abuses and exploitation by employers.>
http://www.nioutaik.fr/images/galerie/slavery-gets-shit-done.jpg
Allahu Akbar.
@AlexanderPhillips He certainly does lay out clearly pro and contra arguments, yes, and decent ones, though one does not argue a negative point unless prompted. The fact that he brings up the argument implies he's for, as opposed to against, prisoner voting. It's an abrasive way to put it, but I don't think it's weird. I mean, it's very simple. In prison, your priorities and values change. Telling the truth isn't a virtue any longer. Telling the truth makes you a snitch. Little things become extremely valuable and currencies are different. A guy might kill you because you accidentally knocked his breakfast muffin to the floor. Where in the free world, voting isn't extremely highly considered, by a prisoner who can only take what he can get, voting becomes far more valuable. The "problem" I have with the author is that if he were on the outside, he wouldn't care about voting. It's only because he's in prison that he gives a shit. And I consider that hypocrisy. I mean, it is hypocrisy, let's call apples apples.
I'm not for nor against prisoner voting. I just think that prisoners should have better priorities. The reason they are in prison is because they were stupid. They need to wise up. And voting doesn't make you more intelligent.
@0corin Of course it is.
I agree that he put out a balanced and thoughtful case...up to the point of who's he going to vote for. As a constituent of Her Majesty's Prison Service, his address being Cell X, Cell block Y, Prison Z, which constituency shall he claim eligibility to vote for? As not being a current resident of that constituency, how can he vote there? His argument is fine, but his premise is wrong.
I thought I had explained well enough what I meant. In prison you are powerless. He wants power. He wants to affect his world. He wants to vote because he has nothing else to do, and no other way to affect his world...or so he thinks.
It is logical, I agree, that, being a prisoner himself, this kind of issue would be at the forefront of his mind. In fact, it's too logical, and it's part of the problem. When you realize that you're just a wet sack of molecules above room temperature, your priorities change. And if your number one priority is not to learn particle physics, but try to be able to vote for some MP of a county where you don't currently live, you need to get your priorities straight.