anatess2

P.S. In my day, there was only Computer Engineering. We were the first CompEng grads in the Philippines. Before that, computers were in Electronics and Communications Engineering and before ECE was created in the 80's, they were in Electrical Engineering. There were no Software Engineers in the Philippines until the 2000's. So, in my day, Computer Engineers get to design the Software for their creations. That's why I got plenty of software training even as I was in Computer Engineering. The past couple decades split the Software part from the Hardware part because technology got so wieldy.

Software Engineers design software technology into existence. Programmers use software technology created by engineers. The ONLY reason most companies don't require a professional license for software engineering is because technology changes too fast for the licensure exam to be relevant to the current engineering activity. But just because you were able to work on technology without a license doesn't mean that you are not bound to ethical practice. It simply means there's no way to measure knowledge and ethics in a technology that changes drastically every couple years. "Works in IT" doesn't mean you're an engineer. AI human implants is the work of computer and software engineers (and biomech, of course). It did not exist before they started building it. It does not exist in the general public right now. But, according to Musk, if the 'rona didn't sideswipe them, they would have the first human implant before the end of this year. Musk - even as he is high up on the AI chain and is a big contributor to its development - has been blaring warnings about this technology for years. Nobody has addressed the ethics and human negative impact of the thing... because, it is developing soooo fast. This would be like Edison and Tesla inventing electricity... they don't have "electrical engineering licenses" until much later in the electric age because technology is moving fast they haven't figure out how to license the thing yet!

But... of course... this is not about saving lives. This is about appeasement.

@prisonchaplain, this should make your day, yes? https://www.supremecourt.gov/ Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru (19-267) The First Amendment’s Religion Clauses foreclose the adjudication of the employment-discrimination claims of Catholic school teachers Morrissey-Berru and Biel. Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania (19-431) The Departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, and the Treasury had authority under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 to promulgate rules exempting employers with religious or moral objections from providing contraceptive coverage to their employees; and those rules satisfy the Administrative Procedure Act’s notice requirements.

A software engineer is completely different than a programmer. And... information technology DO affect life, health, and safety of the public. If you haven't, you need to watch any interview with Elon Musk where he warns about the looming AI technology.

I'm quoting just this because everything else you stated was great, except this one - it's not as great. I loved Blaire White's twitter post (that is not LDS-wording approved so I'm not gonna link it) that basically says (paraphrased), "I think a lot of folks assume they are mocked for their beliefs when in reality they are just unlikeable". It is never a good thing to be so prideful to think that you're so good that the awkward/negative/dismissive/hostile people are so bad. It is always best to use these criticisms to check yourself and either accept the criticism as valid or dismiss them as invalid without needing to disparage their character. You can't really love anyone while disparaging them.

It is ALWAYS two times worse to mandate a population to HAVE TO DO something than it is to mandate a population to NOT DO something. For example, it is two times worse (if not more) to mandate that a population HAVE TO call you Xir than it is to mandate that a population NOT call you Ma'am.. yet banning speech (censorship) is still bad bad bad. This goes the same for masks. In Florida, a Florida statute banning masks was instituted in 1951 due to the KKK. In 1979, a lawsuit was filed against the constitutionality of the mask ban such that in 1981, the statute was modified to be toothless so much so that it can be used against KKK hoods and masked robbers and the like but with very very big burden on proving intent of the mask use. If I was a Floridian in 1981, I would vote to strike the entire statute out of existence. And that was a BAN. How much more for a mandate HAVE TO WEAR?

Duuude... what's up with THAT? You ruined my image of you. Statists gonna state. DON'T FALL INTO THE TRAP!

I read what you wrote, but I'm just going to quote this first sentence because the rest is, I think, irrelevant to my response below. Liberal is a word. It is not a political word, just a descriptor. You can use Liberal in politics - such as "I am passionate about limited government which makes me a liberal" and you can use Liberal in cooking "Sprinkle a liberal amount of salt". Liberal means individual belief holds higher value than the authority. So liberal in politics basically means holding individual value higher than government imposed traditions. Liberal use of salt means - don't worry about what the recipe says - put as much as you like. I am politically a liberal. In my opinion, this is the proper way to be in government.... UNTIL the US Constitution was invented. The founding fathers of the US Constitution are liberal. Why do I say that? Well.. very simply because they liberated themselves from the traditions of monarchy and enshrined such liberal philosophy into the US Constitution - enshrining limits on government to maximize individual liberty. The US Constitution, therefore, is the encapsulation of liberal philosophy. And because of that, being liberal against the US Constitution becomes the total opposite of being liberal against governments anywhere else in the world. So, when applying liberal to the Church, it is freeing the individual from the bounds of Church doctrine. In my opinion, this is not the proper way to be in God's kingdom... it will only be proper if one believes that the Church is not God's Church nor led by God's prophets. This is what President Lee is talking about. He is not talking about being liberal against Utah culture or being liberal against Stake policies. He is talking about being liberal against God's laws as taught by God's prophets. If the LDS Church is not led by God's prophets, then being liberal against Church teachings can be an individual pushing Church leaders to go closer to God. But this is not the case - we believe that we are led by God's prophets with God's authority. And this is why words such as Liberal and Feminism and even Anti-Fascist becomes meaningless in its context - because, Feminism has become the opposite of what the descriptor of the word means... Liberalism (in the USA) has become the opposite of what the descriptor of the word means... Anti-Fascist has become the opposite of what the descriptor of the word means.... and this is why the first lesson I taught my children when they graduated from "dada, mama" talk is to teach them that Words Are Important. In summary, you can be both a Philippine Law liberal and a God's Law conservative at the exact same time and it means the exact same core values.

Wait... software engineers don't require licenses? I'm not talking about MCSE certification and the like either. I thought you guys have Electronics, Computer, and Software Engineers, et. al., certified through the same professional board. I'm not a software engineer, I'm a computer engineer graduate that didn't take the board exam because, first, I wanted to be a programmer, and 2nd I wanted to chase tech in the USA. I graduated in the 90's when Philippine technology was 10 years behind the US. There is no board exams in the Philippines specific for computer engineering because computer engineering technology flies so fast that the exam creation can't change at the same pace as tech - in the Philippines, professional exams have to first be enacted by Philippine law with oversight by the Philippine Regulatory Commission and an accreditation board creates the exam. Any changes have to go through this cycle of going through law. It has become that when you start your engineering course in college, the tech you were studying on is obsolete by the time you graduate. For example, I started my engineering course on an 8088 microprocessor. By the time I graduated, the 8088 chip was obsolete. So the PRC decided that computer engineers can take the EELE exams with the electronics engineers for certification which necessitated computer engineers to double major in electronics and communications engineering (which can still be completed in 5 years). From what I heard, the Philippines finally got caught up enough to have their computer engineering board exams approved by PRC. I'm not sure when the exams are going to start though. Software Engineers in the Philippines also get board exams (basically, you can't put Engr before your name in any engineering field and stamp it on designs unless you get the license). The field started in the Philippines waaaay after Computer Engineering though - when I was already in the USA - so I didn't pay attention to how they are licensed. And yes, Software Engineers do get their names stamped on their software even if the software is an OS that is programmed into a chip and the chip itself says Intel on it. The engineers' names are usually either embedded in the source code or held at the company you work for who owns the source code. In the Philippines though, you can't stamp your name as Engr. antess2 unless you have the license. By the way, you remember the I Love You virus? Yeah, it was super easy to track the dude who wrote the thing because he stamped his name on it. Hah hah, Filipinos... I got my masters in systems engineering in the US. Systems Engineers go through a CSEP licensure in the USA.

Ahh yeah. Programming these days has become a... lemme google a script for that...

So, I saw an interview with Scott (I think it was with Joe Rogan) and he was asked if his dad just tells him, we need you for this role in Trouble with the Curve... and Scott said his dad doesn't do that. He said he had to audition for all his roles including Trouble with the Curve and his dad wouldn't hire him if he wasn't the right guy for the job. He wouldn't even dream of asking his dad for a role over dinner - it's just not the way he grew up.

YES! DEFINITELY!... which is basically how we got Trump. Who would have, in a million years, made me consider that a Real Estate and Reality TV Business Tycoon can actually hold executive office. I used to think that a Law Degree or a vast experience in Law through State positions held a lot of value on that totem pole of values, not only in the Legislative and Judicial branches but also in the Executive branch. But 2015 has made me come to the realization that vast experience in politics and the brainwashing happening in law schools are actually detrimental to the office of POTUS in today's world. So, stating what I did above... I'd add this one: Through Mistborn, I thought Kelsier - the survivor - was the right choice for chosen leader to topple the establishment. His death was a "huh?" to me but then I realized Vin was actually the chosen leader and I'm like, yeah that would make sense, Kelsier was the mentor of the leader... except as the story progresses, we realize Vin is only useful to break down obstacles. Sayzed - somebody I didn't even consider to hold the office - was actually the PERFECT leader because he has the intrinsic "eternal" values to set things back together in their proper place. Juxtaposed with today's political climate - Trump is Vin. Trump has 4 more years to do his Vin-things of breaking obstacles. 2024 would need a Sayzed and McEnany isn't that. But, let's say Trump is Kelsier (surviving Fake News and every establishment institutions), then let's say 2024 we're gonna still need a Vin to complete Trump's work... then it will be 2032 for Sayzed to bring things back together... I still don't think McEnany is strong enough to be a Vin. DJTJr might - although, I'm still not sure if he's got a strong instinctive compass (which McEnany has). I'm still thinking of someone that would be great in 2024/2032. But I'm thinking this is gonna be just like Sayzed - he/she will come up in the campaign season completely surprising me.

This is my opinion... When choosing a possible POTUS/VPOTUS, proven leadership (Executive Skills) should be a higher requirement than wit (masterful communication). And even higher than that is the direction of one's natural compass (separate from the party's compass, taking into consideration one's self-interest). McEnany has great communication skills and can drive a narrative but has unproven leadership skills. Ivanka has proven leadership but I don't trust her natural compass. Don Jr has both leadership and a compass directed in the same direction as my inclinations, but he is lacking his father's (and McEnany's) masterful ability to control the narrative even as he has wit. I can't really think of anybody right now who can do what DJT can do and has done. As has been evident, establishment positions in the Executive branch has been going rogue for decades and 4 years of DJT just managed to put a dent on the machine. For 2024, you need a DJT-like candidate that, not only can make that dent break wide open, but can also masterfully get Congress on board with the compass to change the culture of Exective Orders into lasting legislation.

If I was a lawyer I'd file a class action... except... who do I sue?

A friend of mine was the foreman in the construction of an intercoastal bridge. Everytime we drive over the bridge he says, "this is my bridge" such that it has become tradition. The bridge is named after some important historical figure. I used to tell him, they should've named it after you. But then he says to me, I just followed the civil engineers' diagrams. It should be named after them.

Yeah. That's the problem with social media. They come up with these fad science just to make themselves feel better then if other people don't conform to the fad science because they see through the b.s. they come up with mis-applied scripture to back it all up so they can continue the social pressure with gaslights. One of the reasons I can't stand bible thumpers.

When we were kids, our neighbor lit up a rocket while having several other rockets hanging from his pants pocket. He knelt down to light the fuse and the sparks caused the rockets in his pocket to spark too... He ended up taking off his pants in the middle of the street before running for his life. We will never make him forget that day....

A lot of people like to say this. Yet, they have no idea who are making the guidelines and why. "Wear a mask"... "Why?"... "Because the internet says you won't transmit Cov-19 if you wear one."... "But I don't have Cov-19."... "You don't know if you have Cov-19"... "I've been quarantined in my house for 4 months and have not come into contact with anybody close enough to catch Cov-19"... "You don't know that...you're going to kill grandma"... "So, how do you know that wearing a mask will stop grandma from dying?"... "Because the internet..."

I'll answer for @Carborendum only because he took too long . He read the whole thing... he addressed that specific sentence in the post to discuss. That sentence has become some kind of a bone of contention in the Trump era and magnified by 1,000 in the modern Cancel Culture.

In other words, you have a 1.6% mortality rate so you have to wear a mask. Interesting... By the way, to enforce a mask rule, you need police to enforce it. There are too many people not wearing masks for the police to effectively enforce anything. Also - all mandatory mask ordinances I've seen requires masks when Social Distancing is not possible. So, as long as you're sufficiently distanced, you can leave out the mask.

Ahh no. That's not how this is shaping up. The Black Vote is currently being pulled by BLM and Antifa on one side and WalkAway and Blexit on the other side. It is already July. At this stage of the campaign, with BLM and Antifa decimating the Democrat Party and WalkAway and Blexit forming a powerful Trump coalition, most of the people in the middle are STILL in the middle because they can't vote Republican (creds, culture, family, same thing as why converted people from the Baptist churches don't join the LDS church). Biden won South Carolina, et. al., because of the centrist Black vote. These voters didn't vote Biden because they like Biden. They voted Biden not only because they can't support a socialist, but also because they can't vote for a gay guy. These type of voters are not going to vote Trump. But they will vote Kanye.

Oh, I thought this was a new one.