@Lost_Geometer's banner p

Lost_Geometer


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 17 22:46:14 UTC

				

User ID: 1246

Lost_Geometer


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 17 22:46:14 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1246

Yep. Have you seen the videos of chimpanzees doing similar tasks? They're super good, so I guess it's plausible for it not to covary with the other abilities. On the other hand, it's easy to come up with hypotheses as to why one might do idiosyncratically well or poorly on any given test. I assume that clinical grade measures have more parts to try and average this out.

The gizmo says I'm comparatively stupid in an isolated way.

Memory 109 Verbal 138 Spatial 149

Mostly got dinged on the first memory sub-test. This is possibly more interesting than the high-score all around or low-score all-around options.

Quotes like this put the Onion out of business:

“You were the happiest and biggest goofball in the platoon. We realized this for the first time when you set a house on fire without approval in order to boost morale,” said one of his fellow soldiers in a subsequent eulogy at the funeral.

You're claiming that the traders mentioned in the previous post were giving away money? If so, could you elaborate on what you think the cause of error was, since I rather like it when non-me people distribute free cash.

Those words mean something to some of us...

Something indeed, and apparently something different to you than what they meant to the people who wrote them.

Yes, to retain the spirit of freedom of speech there needs to be some sort of balancing. As you suggest, giving full government control to corporate speech seems wrong, but so does treating, say, Exxon-Mobil as if they were a biological citizen in that regard. I don't think the law is written here -- at the time of founding corporations were rare and presumably the framers would likely have little issue with restricting their rights. In that case history and tradition reasoning sends the issue to the legislature, though other types of interpretation leave roles for the courts.

The court took it upon itself to write a much broader opinion than was necessary to decide the case, and it's this opinion that the people object to. I don't care to defend the FEC's original position, but I don't think it's as obviously wrong as you suggest -- the movie was allegedly long-form campaign ad, and that is a fact that could be tried by a jury if needed.

You ask:

If you are so worried about for-profit corporations buying elections, why not pass a law that is narrowly-tailored to prevent just that, without going after someone who creates a kickstarter for their latest documentary "Trump: the Orange Menace"?

This is exactly the type of thing that the decision prevents. In fact, the kickstarter would have been strongly protected already as private speech. Corporations, as creatures of the state, should be able to have their speech limited by the state, which was the law prior to CU v. FEC.