> (1) old, unfocused open-source platforms which are tired and broken, or (2) new, amazing publishing systems which are completely proprietary and closed
Nothing against Ghost, but I've spent about a decade in the area of content management and publishing and don't recognise 1 or 2. The proprietary market leader is AEM which is atrocious to actually implement once you get past their sales demos, and in open source you have Drupal which is a well proven solution for large and small scale publishing, particularly relevant with Drupal 8 and its publishing focused distro Thunder (both particularly adept at services and deployment, tricky areas in publishing)
barriers to entrance on data subs are complex supplier and per end user exchange licensing, and more so millisecond latency (to the extent that you compete on physical proximity to exchanges and low level tightly coupled native code)
in Europe, having guns widely dispersed throughout society would be considered about as expensive as it gets (and far more likely to kill the patient than offer a potential cure under very particular and exceptional conditions)
in Europe, having guns widely dispersed throughout society...
In Europe a number of countries has and has had guns widely dispersed throughout society since forever. A number of those countries are - and have used to be - very peaceful.
Source: Grew up in Europe. Could disassemble an assault rifle since I was a teenager (my father was assigned one as part of extended draft and kept that and a number of rounds at home. At some point he showed me since I was interested. He also used the opportunity to tell me how grateful I should be for peace and how he hoped he would never have to use it for real).
The EU also has far fewer beating deaths, stabbing deaths, etc. Do you attribute that to gun control as well?
I'm aware that Europeans have their own unique culture with their own unique unsupported assumptions and myths. That's not really a substitute for evidence.
Also, you dodged the question of whether we should ban other things that are vastly more dangerous than guns. Weird.
You seem generally confused about the distinction between correlation and causation
You seem generally confused about how reason works.
I provided strong evidence that the causal relationship is {violent tendencies} -> {gun violence, fist violence, knife violence}. Your theory {gun ownership} -> {gun violence} simply does not predict the observed result; it suggests that gun violence should be high, but knife violence should be the same.
That's evidence that your theory is false and mine is true. Though I don't think you really care.
Incidentally, we can find lots of things that Europe has which the US doesn't, and equally well attribute crime differences to that. For example, the US has lots of blacks and Europe doesn't. But I'm guessing you will dodge the question of whether you support the same conclusion in this case as well.
I didn't dodge anything - your whataboutism is in fact dodging so I ignored it
It's hardly fact dodging. I assert that you don't really care about danger, all you care about is banning the cultural expressions of cultures you oppose.
Dodging a question about other dangerous activities that your own culture favors provides strong evidence that you do, in fact, not really care about danger - only winning some culture war.
> Yet more whataboutism and aspergic levels of specious reasoning.
I find this to be quite far away from the ideals of this site:
Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say in a face-to-face conversation. Avoid gratuitous negativity.
When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
Furthermore, using the name of a medical condition as an insult insults a whole group of unrelated individuals.
> Those two numbers are self-evidently not an unrelated random correlation - yet you seem to be claiming that they somehow are.
We have pointed out to you a number of exceptions that should raise serious doubts about the idea that gun ownership drives gun deaths. If this was the case then several countries in Europe would have similar problems, just on a smaller scale.
> IMO you seem to try to brush of the opinions of anyone who disagrees with you as stupid.
Well the numbers are overwhelmingly against you and a smart person would stop digging.
Your own figures show that the US is off the charts compared to EU on a) gun ownership b) gun deaths - it's a no brainer and therefore no useful debate on the merits/demerits. (I'm not going to get into US politics and it's really up to them if they want to have more deaths, but even they fall back on 2nd amendment and notions of tradition to try and justify gun ownership.)
There are companies who are selling tech that will recognise a person rapidly walking past in a conference crowd (had it demoed to me), so yes the tech is definitely capable now
FB is a commercial privately owned publishing platform. In some countries, you need a model release to publish photos of me, in others you need a release for my kids, in others none. This is the thorny unresolved question of what jurisdiction 'cyberspace' operates under.
If you are storing any PID of EU citizens, regardless of your jurisdiction, that will come under GDPR very soon (not sure how that impacts social publishing, photos, info gathered in public vs private places, or if it has a get-out clause etc but mentioning it as an example)
