|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Trumpton
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
I'm not the one insisting on the church/state divide. Here, we have a head of state who's also head of the church.
I think you'll find it was the founding fathers of the USA, almost either Christian or Deist to a man, who insisted on it.
So either you're a wholly private school, or you're not. There's no halfway house, and that's how the law's being interpreted.
To then flip out at what appears to be a perfectly predictable consequence strikes me as absurd. If Catholics don't want their kids getting trans cooties, then they'll have to pony up for the lunches themselves.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
jbohn
Shipmate
# 8753
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I'm sorry. I didn't realise that "school" meant on one hand "public school run by Christian charity with federal funds" and "place where we can trample on the Church/State divide" on the other.
The point was that the acceptance of a small federal subsidy for a lunch programme in a different school in the diocese was sufficient to contaminate the funding for all schools in the diocese and make them subject to title IX.
It's not entirely obvious to me that that would be true, or that there should be any church/state divide trampling going on if the government provides lunches for poor kids in private schools.
If the government handed each poor child a packed lunch as he left his home in the morning, you wouldn't be complaining that it violated the church/state divide if some of those lunches were consumed in private church schools. But achieving the same result in a more efficient manner by handing out the food in schools is a violation. I don't think that needs to be true.
This is really pretty simple - if a school district (or in this case, a Catholic diocese acting as their own school district) takes federal funding, it has to follow the rules that come with it. Full stop. Don't like the rules? Don't take the money.
--------------------
We are punished by our sins, not for them.
--Elbert Hubbard
Posts: 989 | From: East of Eden, west of St. Paul | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
So either you're a wholly private school, or you're not. There's no halfway house, and that's how the law's being interpreted.
Let's suppose a government provided free immunizations to children as a public health measure. An efficient way to do that would be to send vaccines to places where lots of children are assembled, such as schools.
If a government provides vaccines to private school pupils, does that stop the school from being private? I'd argue that of course it doesn't. You, it seems, would insist that the private school pony up for its own vaccines.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
The conservative poster I referred to is only a friend in the sense that I shoulld view everyone as such. I would trust him on anything scientific without ethical aspects.
Meanwhile, I am following a recommendation from the presenter on LBC (a phone in radio station) and downloading Sinclair Lewis' book "It Can't Happen Here" from the 30s, because it now has.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
No, because the government isn't giving money to the school so they can buy their own vaccines? And on the off-chance not vaccinate the trans or gay kids?
I don't make the rules. I don't even get to say whether or not I think the rules are stupid. I just get to say "this is what the rules say, and that's not in dispute".
If American Christians want Trump wants to ride roughshod over the separation of church and state, then the unforeseen circumstances will be both tragic and hilarious in turn.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
I'm with LC on this one. We are talking about humanitarian action for vulnerable children here, and it should be made available to them regardless of the context in which they are being schooled. I think that Obama's administration was being heavy-handed, and there were advocates of this policy who were prepared to use the availability of funding to bring schools into line with their New, Enlightened Thinking, despite following rules that would have been perfectly acceptable just a few years earlier. Besides, the discussion on gender-identity practices relating to transgender persons is far from over.
However, this is all small fry compared with the challenges we are facing now.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
Obama was being heavy-handed? No comment on the officially-sanctioned discrimination against trans kids in school?
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase)...
During Bill Clinton's time in office, the US national debt was paid off.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Obama was being heavy-handed? No comment on the officially-sanctioned discrimination against trans kids in school?
If a school had decided to let transsexual children use whatever toilet they felt like just 5 - 10 years ago, it may well have faced prosecution. Suddenly, if they don't change their policy to suit the whims of government social welfare departments, they are somehow morally abhorrent.
Just because someone feels like they are of different gender than they physically are, doesn't necessarily make them that in the perception of society around them, and their views shouldn't the only ones that matter. I am sure that you will view me dreadfully intolerant for saying that, but I do ask you to at least tolerate the perspective of the school and consider their reasons for resistance.
But this thread is really dedicated to DT who is in a league of his own, so I don't really want to continue this tangent.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase)...
During Bill Clinton's time in office, the US national debt was paid off.
I don't think it was paid off, but it was substantially reduced in terms of a percentage of GDP thanks to a fiscal surplus and strong economic growth.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase)...
During Bill Clinton's time in office, the US national debt was paid off.
Well, it did help that the military was down-sized from Cold War levels during his tenure. However he didn't use the windfall to start a bunch of expensive programs, but instead used it to pay down the debt, which is to his credit.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Obama was being heavy-handed? No comment on the officially-sanctioned discrimination against trans kids in school?
If a school had decided to let transsexual children use whatever toilet they felt like just 5 - 10 years ago, it may well have faced prosecution. Suddenly, if they don't change their policy to suit the whims of government social welfare departments, they are somehow morally abhorrent.
Just because someone feels like they are of different gender than they physically are, doesn't necessarily make them that in the perception of society around them, and their views shouldn't the only ones that matter.
Yes they fucking should be. That's the whole problem there - religious bigots thinking they know best and should be able to impose their views.
[ 26. January 2017, 22:16: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
A 13 year old asked me today what country trump will declare war on. I don't know which one. Is he going to start a war.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Probably. With an inadvertent tweet, a heedless trade war (which he started today, with Mexico), or some other idiocy that could have been avoided by a child of ten. Pray, now, that it doesn't involve nukes. You don't want the entire globe to be drawn into our disasters.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
If we're running a sweepstake, I'm putting my money down for a bit in internal repression first.
It'll either be Chicago (I think that's right, unless I'm confusing it with Detroit) with its high murder rate, or the oil pipeline protesters. Marshal law imposed, paramilitary law enforcement, curfews, ID laws, stuff like that.
Who knows, he may even go after people's guns, but it'll be okay because it'll be red, brown and black people's guns.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Makes perfect sense, except for three things: the foreigner, the anti-fascism, and the reading.
You've forgotten something important. There are always alternatives
Who knows where Orwell was born? All the birth records could have been faked, and he was American. Believing all the evidence about where someone was born ... that's just not the way right thinking people do things.
Animal Farm was "clearly anti-Communist", therefore Orwell was an anti-Communist author. So, that's OK then.
Animal Farm was an animated movie. Someone could produce a picture story version of 1984 for the American public.
Oh for fucks sake. I'm quite confident Trump has not inspired his followers to read a book.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stercus Tauri
Shipmate
# 16668
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If we're running a sweepstake, I'm putting my money down for a bit in internal repression first.
It'll either be Chicago (I think that's right, unless I'm confusing it with Detroit) with its high murder rate, or the oil pipeline protesters. Marshal law imposed, paramilitary law enforcement, curfews, ID laws, stuff like that.
Who knows, he may even go after people's guns, but it'll be okay because it'll be red, brown and black people's guns.
I'm guessing that you mean martial law. Hell of a difference.
--------------------
Thay haif said. Quhat say thay, Lat thame say (George Keith, 5th Earl Marischal)
Posts: 905 | From: On the traditional lands of the Six Nations. | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
Just now in the POST I see that Dishonest Don is calling for the internet to be shut down. Terrorists, you know.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Brenda--
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Probably. With an inadvertent tweet, a heedless trade war (which he started today, with Mexico), or some other idiocy that could have been avoided by a child of ten. Pray, now, that it doesn't involve nukes. You don't want the entire globe to be drawn into our disasters.
Wednesday night's "Nightline", on ABC, had an interview with him. Good interview. IMHO, the reporter showed great restraint in the way he handled T. He asked important questions, but he didn't needle him.
Anyway, when they were walking through the White House, the reporter asked if there was anything about the job that was keeping him up at night. The nuclear codes? "No," Trump said, I know I'd do the right thing." (close to being a quote) But he's worried about terrorism.
I'm not sure I want to know what he thinks would be the right thing to do about using nukes...
![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Oh for fucks sake. I'm quite confident Trump has not inspired his followers to read a book.
All I know is that sales of 1984 have increased. That doesn't mean the people buying it will actually read it. It can join the small selection of books his followers have on their book shelf, unread, that they say they know what it says and how it supports their political views. Like The Bible.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yes they fucking should be. That's the whole problem there - religious bigots thinking they know best and should be able to impose their views.
Fine. But bigotry can work both ways, that's always good to remember.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If we're running a sweepstake, I'm putting my money down for a bit in internal repression first.
It'll either be Chicago (I think that's right, unless I'm confusing it with Detroit) with its high murder rate, or the oil pipeline protesters. Marshal law imposed, paramilitary law enforcement, curfews, ID laws, stuff like that.
Who knows, he may even go after people's guns, but it'll be okay because it'll be red, brown and black people's guns.
I'm guessing that you mean martial law. Hell of a difference.
Evil me thinks I can just go back and edit my post so that what you say now makes no sense.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Probably. With an inadvertent tweet, a heedless trade war (which he started today, with Mexico), or some other idiocy that could have been avoided by a child of ten. Pray, now, that it doesn't involve nukes. You don't want the entire globe to be drawn into our disasters.
China I reckon.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
Shut down the internet? Who will then read his great thoughts?
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yes they fucking should be. That's the whole problem there - religious bigots thinking they know best and should be able to impose their views.
Fine. But bigotry can work both ways, that's always good to remember.
The asymmetry between "I am transgender, please treat me as the gender I see myself" and "No you're not. You're wrong." is amply illustrated by the pronouns in use.
It's like the tattoo thread in Purgatory - it's not harming anyone, it's none of your fucking business.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Just now in the POST I see that Dishonest Don is calling for the internet to be shut down. Terrorists, you know.
All except his own Twitter feed?
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I don't make the rules. I don't even get to say whether or not I think the rules are stupid. I just get to say "this is what the rules say, and that's not in dispute".
If American Christians want Trump wants to ride roughshod over the separation of church and state, then the unforeseen circumstances will be both tragic and hilarious in turn.
If having rules that mean religious schools have to do what the federal government says in order to get funding isn't a violation of the separation of church and state then I can't see how not having those rules would count as such.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I can't get my head around this.
Imagine a Muslim school which has some rule about wearing particular clothing. Imagine a federal edit regulating the wearing those clothes. Is that interference from the state in the religious school?
If yes, then that seems to be saying that church and state are not seperated, that the state can actually tell religious groups that their profession of faith is not acceptable.
If no, that opens the door to religious schools which operate in ways that the federal authorities think is not acceptable.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
it's not harming anyone
Well, that's the question isn't it? Women-only areas (mostly, but not exclusively, toilets) exist to protect women. ISTM that that can only be achieved if there is actually an independent definition of "man" and "woman" (which would include independent confirmation that someone has changed from one to the other if appropriate), otherwise any man who wanted to get in could do so simply by claiming to identify as female.
I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common. They are entirely private so they on the gender of the user, reversing the usual practice.
Maybe this practice could be the way to proceed in areas where people may be vulnerable and uncomfortable.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.
But, is anyone (in the case of schools) actually saying it's simply relying on what the person says? If a pupil (or, indeed a teacher) identifies as transgender this will be supported by various professional assessments by psychologists and other experts. And, there's no reason why someone coming to that school identifying as transgender and wishing to use the toilet/changing rooms of the gender they identify with couldn't produce that evidence.
The issue in other situations could be very different. As a general principle someone who has transitioned from male to female should use the ladies (and, vice versa). But, I wouldn't expect them to need to produce all the professional assessments to go to a public toilet in a bar or airport (as examples). Which does open up scope for a bloke dressing up as a woman to get a cheap thrill, or worse. The question, as is so often the case, is one of whether to violate human rights (to take a pee where you're most comfortable) to protect against a low risk of someone being harmed (by a predatory male in the ladies toilets).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
it's not harming anyone
Well, that's the question isn't it? Women-only areas (mostly, but not exclusively, toilets) exist to protect women. ISTM that that can only be achieved if there is actually an independent definition of "man" and "woman" (which would include independent confirmation that someone has changed from one to the other if appropriate), otherwise any man who wanted to get in could do so simply by claiming to identify as female.
I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.
There was a missing 'if'. My point is it's not for other people to dictate to you your gender identity.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common. They are entirely private so they on the gender of the user, reversing the usual practice.
Maybe this practice could be the way to proceed in areas where people may be vulnerable and uncomfortable.
They are also becoming quite common in the UK. Just before Christmas I was in Glasgow for a meeting, and decided to go to the library to do a couple of hours work (rather than drive back here, maybe get half an hour in, before leaving again). As I was leaving headed for the door which had the usual lady and gentleman sign on it expecting it to open on an anteroom or corridor with at least two doors, one ladies and one gents, only to find myself in a large room facing a row of cubicles. I caught sight of some girls to my right, turned to my left thinking "shit, how did I get that wrong?" and hoping to leave quickly before being spotted - then saw boys to my left and realised where I was. Interestingly, there was a definite invisible line in the floor at the door and all the men were on one side, all the women on the other - because none of us wants to do something that will potentially make others uncomfortable if there is an option to do otherwise.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common. They are entirely private so they on the gender of the user, reversing the usual practice.
Maybe this practice could be the way to proceed in areas where people may be vulnerable and uncomfortable.
Don't even need to go that far - several British museums have toilet cubicals off a central lobby. No specific gender needs to be signalled to use specific cubicals.
I appreciate that there may need to be changes to the layout of the standard arrangement, but you'd think it wasn't really beyond the wit of man (err, mankind) to work out a way to do it.
If nothing else, such things may end up reducing the queues in the ladies whilst the mens cubicals are left unused.
[ 27. January 2017, 10:50: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Shut down the internet? Who will then read his great thoughts?
I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now that
(a) America doesn't own the internet
(b) It's impossible
(c) See (a)
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now that
(a) America doesn't own the internet
(b) It's impossible
(c) See (a)
Actually given the scary amount of power held by a tiny number of men, most of which are located in the USA (for example ICANN), it would be scarily easy for a dictator in the White House to bring down the whole thing and scarily difficult for the rest of the infrastructure to reboot elsewhere.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
Or for another Amazon Web Services. Imagine Trump deciding somehow to regulate Amazon, and you've potentially lost a massive amount of the internet, because huge numbers of web services actually run on Amazon services.
I don't think it is going to happen, but people who say it isn't possible don't know what they're talking about.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common.
Yes, unisex toilets would also solve the problem.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
The whole point of the internet is that it's a distributed network. Yes, there are bottlenecks, but if you honestly believe that Trump can shut down the global internet (USA, yes - China? Hell no) I have a bridge you might be interested in.
ISPs aren't even required to register their presence in the US. The US gave up their stake in ICANN in 2014. There's even such a thing as satellite internet now.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The whole point of the internet is that it's a distributed network. Yes, there are bottlenecks, but if you honestly believe that Trump can shut down the global internet (USA, yes - China? Hell no) I have a bridge you might be interested in.
Facts are facts. ICANN is located in the USA and, until recently, was stewarded by the US government.
If one was able to disable ICANN's functions, one might not be able to disable the whole internet but would make it incredibly difficult to find anything.
Yes, the infrastructure could be rebuilt, I'm not saying it is irreversible. But it isn't impossible for a US president to have an enormous impact on the way that the internet works.
quote:
ISPs aren't even required to register their presence in the US. The US gave up their stake in ICANN in 2014. There's even such a thing as satellite internet now.
Nope, it was in October 2016. There are 14 keyholders at ICANN of which 7 have to be present several times a year to sign the root of the entire internet.
In the USA.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Facts are facts.
Not any more.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doc Tor
Deepest Red
# 9748
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The whole point of the internet is that it's a distributed network. Yes, there are bottlenecks, but if you honestly believe that Trump can shut down the global internet (USA, yes - China? Hell no) I have a bridge you might be interested in.
Facts are facts. ICANN is located in the USA and, until recently, was stewarded by the US government.
If one was able to disable ICANN's functions, one might not be able to disable the whole internet but would make it incredibly difficult to find anything.
Yes, the infrastructure could be rebuilt, I'm not saying it is irreversible. But it isn't impossible for a US president to have an enormous impact on the way that the internet works.
quote:
ISPs aren't even required to register their presence in the US. The US gave up their stake in ICANN in 2014. There's even such a thing as satellite internet now.
Nope, it was in October 2016. There are 14 keyholders at ICANN of which 7 have to be present several times a year to sign the root of the entire internet.
In the USA.
Yawn. (Bill to give up stewardship of ICANN was signed in 2014. Ted Cruz notwithstanding)
You realise that this is all software, right? That you can script it to run anywhere? That there's no magical locked vault which the keys have access to? That the vault is virtual, and could be located anywhere? That ICANN will have thought about a back-up server somewhere, and the key holders are probably even now in discussion as to how to protect the internet from a potentially hostile US government?
I'm not saying the WWW wouldn't go down for a while while they rebuilt the DNS list. But the actual constituent parts of the internet often predate and are independent of the WWW. JANET, for example. Other countries have similar networks.
To conclude. Disabling the internet in a foreign country would involve actual attacks on the actual infrastructure, either physically or electronically, requiring concerted effort and expenditure, and would most likely be taken as an act of war by the recipient. There is no 'off' button, and Trump can't conjure one up.
--------------------
Forward the New Republic
Posts: 9131 | From: Ultima Thule | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768
|
Posted
Can he, however, organise denial of access to files which may have been placed in other places, but which originated in the US? As in climate change research, which I suspect may be behind his suggestion.
I expect he could find hackers in Russia or China who would have the skills.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Doc Tor: quote:
Disabling the internet in a foreign country would involve actual attacks on the actual infrastructure, either physically or electronically, requiring concerted effort and expenditure, and would most likely be taken as an act of war by the recipient.
Disabling the Internet in the UK would BE an act of war, according to our own chancellor Philip Hammond.
Of course, if the UK internet is taken down by Mrs May's new best friend they may not be so worried. They'd much rather have us relying on the Daily Heil for all the news they think is fit to print.
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
... any man who wanted to get in could do so simply by claiming to identify as female. .... distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. ...
Transgender people in face overwhelming hatred, discrimination and violence throughout their lives. Nobody "pretends" to be transgender.
It's possible that somewhere out there, there's a boy who dresses as a girl once in a while because he wants to get on the girls soccer team so he can watch them in the bathroom or the locker room, and he doesn't get called names or beaten up and nobody can stop him. If he exists, it's still no reason to deny justice and respect to trans people.
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
molopata
The Ship's jack
# 9933
|
Posted
I suppose the one good thing about May's love-in with Trump is that it'll mean almost one day in his presidency without some disgusting policy announcement or fevered twitter rage.
On the other hand, maybe he'll make up for it this evening.
--------------------
... The Respectable
Posts: 1718 | From: the abode of my w@ndering mind | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
It is important to remember that what Trump says or signs does not necessarily hook up to the real world as we know it. If he signs a document decreeing a wall, or registering Muslims, or deporting people, Congress still has to pass legislation to fund the work. Without money, it's just hot air. I classify 'closing down the internet' in this category. He surely has no idea how it works, probably would not know what software is if someone hit him over the head with a Linux manual. He is probably thinking of the Internet as a large tube, easily plugged up with duct tape. (This is how my mother thinks of it; she is 90.)
It is worthwhile to know he is thinking of these things, so that we are not surprised (or not too surprised) by Dishonest Don's horrific actions. But what comes out of his lips are (as Scripture suggests) very equivalent to what comes out of his other orifices.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common.
And of course most of us have unisex toilets in our homes. But for high-volume facilities, urinals are significantly more efficient (both in terms of square feet per urinator and time taken for each urinator) than stalls, for people with penises.
I think with respect to schools, people are more concerned about changing rooms than toilets. They worry about toilets from the unlikely point of view of a boy claiming to be a girl in order to ogle / assault vulnerable girls, but a typical school changing-room setup has a class-full of pupils standing around naked changing in and out of swimming costumes, gym kit, or whatever, and they don't want their girls seeing a penis.
So they want to force the person with a penis to change in some private area so it's not on display. The fact that most trans girls do not wander around changing rooms flaunting their penes, and in fact tend to go to some effort to avoid anyone seeing them isn't enough for these people: they want a no penis guarantee.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
The edit window has closed, drat it, but here is a link to the actual account. You would not want to miss the nuances of the PG's internet savvy.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
It was mentioned to me that Barney Rubble has not aged well. What do you think of the hands?
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
