The thing you totally neglect here is intent.
You fail to understand, probably by choice, that a rumour is manufactured for a purpose. It's not neutral like a car or even a gun (which contrary to popular belief don't kill people out of themselves but definitely facilitate the actual killing a lot). A rumour that you are a child molester is put out there with the purpose of harming you. Thus is more appropriate comparable to the aiming of a gun and the pulling of a trigger.
Your simile with manufacturing the gun and/or putting it on the table would be more akin to planting an article about child molestation with the name of the offender replaced by a blank space and then your calling card and a pen for anyone to complete the rumour for themselves.
The guy posting the rumor manufactured the gun and left it on the table. He didn't pull the trigger. That's a big difference. Are you one of those types that believe a manufacturer should be liable if the product is used to commit a crime? In addition to guns, how 'bout knives, and scissors, and automobiles, or a bar of soap? If something is used to commit crime, I want you to go after the perpetrator, not the tool he used. I want you to charge him with the crime, not the method used to do it.
This is slashdot after all, so I shouldn't be entirely surprised that you're 100% (that's metric percentage btw) binary. But that's ok. Call me again when you find a 100% binary world to live in.
Clearly our way of seeing how rumours work is diffrent, that might be because of cultural diffrences or something. However, I feel my view is firmly based in reality as opposed to yours. Byt YMMW.
That's precisely the kind of arguement thet gun control people use. To paraphrase the appropriate reply, Rumors don't destry lives, people who act on them do. The rumor is merely the gun on the table, and it's one that's just as likely to blow up in the user's face. But the guy who pulls the trigger is the assassin. If I live in a society that so easily acts on rumor and innuendo, then society has a much bigger problem than free speech.
And in that case it won't come as a shocking surprise to you that I'm for Gun Control as well. Not that it matters much, since I live in a country that enforces gun control allready.
But wether it's the rumour itself or the people who act on it who are the problem really is just petty semantics. The consequences are the same for the ones who are affected. Just like the similarity between being shot in the face by a gun and with a gun is that in both cases you're probably dead.
Besides, using your own simile, the guy posting the rumour is effectively pulling the trigger and is hence the assassin. You may champion the cause of his right to killing people all you want, it still won't matter much to the dead.
You'd be damn wrong. I would have no trouble convincing my family that you're a loon(not that you are really, unless you tried it), and to pay no attention. If you go beyond speech, then I will take the matter up with you.
But would you ve able to convince your boss? Your co-workers? Your neigbours? The woman at the counter in the grocery store?
These kind of rumours have been known to destroy peoples lifes in the past. And most likely will do again, no matter how eloquent you pride yourself to be. I highly doubt it's possible to protect yourself from rumours in an increasingly paranoid society. Let's say someone starts accusing you of supporting terrorism instead? Even if you're aquitted, would you be willing to face the kind of treatment that is reserved for "suspected terrorists" these days? Would that not end up hurting you? Would you not perfer to stop it before you're hit by the effects?
Free speech is important, yes. But so are consequences. And when we're weighing consequences most just would prefer not to be a martyr for limtless free speech. Thus implying that free speech indeed can be regulated however vile the thought might appear at first.
Same goes for spam. Most people do value the importance of free speech, but would still prefer if someone shut down the mailservers bombarding them with ceaseless advertisements for "GET H UGE KOCK WITH V IAG6RA!".
There's a black box with blinking lights on it at the corner of Elm and Main! Someone put it on top of a pole. Call the bomb squad, send the bill to traffic control!
You know, wouldn't the responsibility for a fake alarm call be put at a the hands of the one who calls the false alarm not the person who happened to put up something an idiot took for a bomb. There's a lot of mystic things that I can interpret as a threat, but I restrain myself thus not costing the community a lot of money.
Production Budget: $30,000,000
Worldwide Gross: $185,724,838
Well, with taxes and all that's hardly a gold plated limousine for each Exec. I can't see how any company would want to touch the W&G franchise after that.
Sigh... what happened to art?
I loved the film. I reccomended it to all my geeky animation fan pals and I bought the DVD.
Exactly how unprofitable was it? Does anyone have the figures? Ballpark numbers even?
Dude, buy more RAM. RAM is cheap.
You know what the philosophy that it's the user that should upgrade not the programmer who should optimize brought us? That's right, Windows Vista.
Now if you want to shell out money (even small ammounts) for the privilege of using bloated shit, I'm not about to stop you. But you must realize that you look pretty silly ridiculing those who actually go for the smarter option.
Even if RAM cost as little as 1$ per GB I would still prefer it if programmers optimized their prodcts.
Give us Orbital space elvators!
A thick enough strand of spider silk equivalent can be used to thether a geosynchronous satelite and then use it as an elevator to transport people and equipment up while we trasport minerals mined in the asteroid belt down. Cheap pre-launch for interplanetary travel.
Now that beats web tents.
Pneumatic Tubes rock, tube-mail kicks e-mail by the sheer power of steampunk over cyberpunk.
A system with Pringles Tubes like the parent suggests migth be troublesome, especially when overweight smoking geeks try to forward your package by puffing in their end of the tube.
Technically speaking that is correct, but a rabbit won't flourish on grass alone and that kind of depends upon the land used for rabbit feed couldn't be cultivated to grow man feed.
Why don't the North Koreans just continue to eat dogs?
A dog must eat meat to grow, which means you have to first feed an animal that you feed to the dog. As you can understand this is wastefull since you'll loose energy in the conversion from vegetables to dogfood.
The problem is that any conversion from vegetables to meat is a lossy one, so in the end even the rabbits are a stupid (yet so brilliantly communistic) idea. It would be better to grow crops and feed the north Koreans vegetarian food. (though they might want to rebell if forced to eat just carrots)
Well, the general principle was ok and as you say based on stability, sadly the system collapsed when the US deficit went to large. On the other hand, the export of inflation that became the result of the Bretton Woods system had already benefited the US echonomy greatly. And of course still benefit the US since all major global trades are made in dollars. (Though the Euro is an up and coming contender, last I heard OPEC wanted to trade oil in Euro instead of Dollars)
But the industries have found that consumers prefer standard. We like standard. Just because you don't, doesn't mean we should switch.
Hey, I'm the one who's on the side of standard on this. International standard that is. The imperial measuring system is the anomaly.
But as I said, whatever you feel is right for domestic use doesn't really bother me. Of course it seems a bit quaint to me, holding on to a non-standardized measuring system like the imperial one even though the rest of the world has moved on. Much like the brittish (among others) queer idea of still driving on the wrong side of the road.
Sure, no system is (as far as I know) de facto superior to the other in itself. The benefit is in the standardization.
Very much like there would be a consumer benefit if electrical currents all over the world were alike (and the plugs of course) there would be a consumer benefit if TV standards was the same instead of divided into PAL, NTSC and SECAM.
But again, this is not really about domestic measurments, it's about a governmental organization that in the future are going to cooperate even more with other international organizations and as such has choosen to change their set of measurements into the one that their previous set was standardized against to begin with
"In 1958 the United States and countries of the Commonwealth of Nations defined the length of the international yard to be precisely 0.9144 metres. Consequently, the international inch is defined to be equal to 25.4 millimetres."
Whereas the metre is defined (as I'm sure you know) as "...the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second."
Well, either we reach an understanding, one of us gives up or the thread goes and gets closed down on us.
Regarding paying the tab, then I'd say a study has to be undertaken regarding whether its more expensive to keep the dual system or unify. And since a dual system would mean tax payers from all over the rest of the world would be affected (unless it's going to be a strict from Imperal to SI conversion all the way conducted singularly by NASA through the project) your majority might be in more jeopardy than you might want to think.
And how ever strange this can seem the majority of people in this case is the rest of the scientiffic world and a majority of american NASA scientists. Case solved.
Switching to metric in any of our environments will cost more than it will ever net us.
Do you base that statement on some tangible fact or is it just an assumption?
Because, well, facts I'm forced to respect while any assumption will never be more than at best equal to my own if you ask me.
If you don't mind me saying so, you miss my point, that's the whole of it.
My point would be that it's not a question of superiority. It's a matter of majority.
Turn it around, when we do this joint venture, what right would the US have to force a system which is not superior to ours upon us (the rest of the world) just so that we can go to Mars?
I don't care what you use to measure car parts, you milk and your baked goods in. But I do see the point in NASA doing this transition, since it makes sense.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah yes, semantics is of course always a fun topic, though it's verging on the border to "off" here.
I don't know if it will run Linux, but I for one welcome our new silicon brained overlords.
The thing you totally neglect here is intent. You fail to understand, probably by choice, that a rumour is manufactured for a purpose. It's not neutral like a car or even a gun (which contrary to popular belief don't kill people out of themselves but definitely facilitate the actual killing a lot). A rumour that you are a child molester is put out there with the purpose of harming you. Thus is more appropriate comparable to the aiming of a gun and the pulling of a trigger. Your simile with manufacturing the gun and/or putting it on the table would be more akin to planting an article about child molestation with the name of the offender replaced by a blank space and then your calling card and a pen for anyone to complete the rumour for themselves.
The guy posting the rumor manufactured the gun and left it on the table. He didn't pull the trigger. That's a big difference. Are you one of those types that believe a manufacturer should be liable if the product is used to commit a crime? In addition to guns, how 'bout knives, and scissors, and automobiles, or a bar of soap? If something is used to commit crime, I want you to go after the perpetrator, not the tool he used. I want you to charge him with the crime, not the method used to do it.
This is slashdot after all, so I shouldn't be entirely surprised that you're 100% (that's metric percentage btw) binary. But that's ok. Call me again when you find a 100% binary world to live in.
Clearly our way of seeing how rumours work is diffrent, that might be because of cultural diffrences or something. However, I feel my view is firmly based in reality as opposed to yours. Byt YMMW.
That's precisely the kind of arguement thet gun control people use. To paraphrase the appropriate reply, Rumors don't destry lives, people who act on them do. The rumor is merely the gun on the table, and it's one that's just as likely to blow up in the user's face. But the guy who pulls the trigger is the assassin. If I live in a society that so easily acts on rumor and innuendo, then society has a much bigger problem than free speech.
And in that case it won't come as a shocking surprise to you that I'm for Gun Control as well. Not that it matters much, since I live in a country that enforces gun control allready.
But wether it's the rumour itself or the people who act on it who are the problem really is just petty semantics. The consequences are the same for the ones who are affected. Just like the similarity between being shot in the face by a gun and with a gun is that in both cases you're probably dead.
Besides, using your own simile, the guy posting the rumour is effectively pulling the trigger and is hence the assassin. You may champion the cause of his right to killing people all you want, it still won't matter much to the dead.
You'd be damn wrong. I would have no trouble convincing my family that you're a loon(not that you are really, unless you tried it), and to pay no attention. If you go beyond speech, then I will take the matter up with you.
But would you ve able to convince your boss? Your co-workers? Your neigbours? The woman at the counter in the grocery store?
These kind of rumours have been known to destroy peoples lifes in the past. And most likely will do again, no matter how eloquent you pride yourself to be. I highly doubt it's possible to protect yourself from rumours in an increasingly paranoid society. Let's say someone starts accusing you of supporting terrorism instead? Even if you're aquitted, would you be willing to face the kind of treatment that is reserved for "suspected terrorists" these days? Would that not end up hurting you? Would you not perfer to stop it before you're hit by the effects?
Free speech is important, yes. But so are consequences. And when we're weighing consequences most just would prefer not to be a martyr for limtless free speech. Thus implying that free speech indeed can be regulated however vile the thought might appear at first.
Same goes for spam. Most people do value the importance of free speech, but would still prefer if someone shut down the mailservers bombarding them with ceaseless advertisements for "GET H UGE KOCK WITH V IAG6RA!".
There's a black box with blinking lights on it at the corner of Elm and Main! Someone put it on top of a pole. Call the bomb squad, send the bill to traffic control!
You know, wouldn't the responsibility for a fake alarm call be put at a the hands of the one who calls the false alarm not the person who happened to put up something an idiot took for a bomb. There's a lot of mystic things that I can interpret as a threat, but I restrain myself thus not costing the community a lot of money.
That'd be the lost greek legion.
Very, very unprofitable:
Production Budget: $30,000,000
Worldwide Gross: $185,724,838
Well, with taxes and all that's hardly a gold plated limousine for each Exec. I can't see how any company would want to touch the W&G franchise after that.
Sigh... what happened to art?
I loved the film. I reccomended it to all my geeky animation fan pals and I bought the DVD.
Exactly how unprofitable was it? Does anyone have the figures? Ballpark numbers even?
You know how hard it is to rid yourself of a bad hobbit.
I've had it with those motherf****n sharks in this motherf****n pool!
Dude, buy more RAM. RAM is cheap. You know what the philosophy that it's the user that should upgrade not the programmer who should optimize brought us? That's right, Windows Vista.
Now if you want to shell out money (even small ammounts) for the privilege of using bloated shit, I'm not about to stop you. But you must realize that you look pretty silly ridiculing those who actually go for the smarter option.
Even if RAM cost as little as 1$ per GB I would still prefer it if programmers optimized their prodcts.
Give us Orbital space elvators!
A thick enough strand of spider silk equivalent can be used to thether a geosynchronous satelite and then use it as an elevator to transport people and equipment up while we trasport minerals mined in the asteroid belt down. Cheap pre-launch for interplanetary travel.
Now that beats web tents.
Pneumatic Tubes rock, tube-mail kicks e-mail by the sheer power of steampunk over cyberpunk.
A system with Pringles Tubes like the parent suggests migth be troublesome, especially when overweight smoking geeks try to forward your package by puffing in their end of the tube.
Technically speaking that is correct, but a rabbit won't flourish on grass alone and that kind of depends upon the land used for rabbit feed couldn't be cultivated to grow man feed.
Why don't the North Koreans just continue to eat dogs?
A dog must eat meat to grow, which means you have to first feed an animal that you feed to the dog. As you can understand this is wastefull since you'll loose energy in the conversion from vegetables to dogfood.
The problem is that any conversion from vegetables to meat is a lossy one, so in the end even the rabbits are a stupid (yet so brilliantly communistic) idea. It would be better to grow crops and feed the north Koreans vegetarian food. (though they might want to rebell if forced to eat just carrots)
Well, the general principle was ok and as you say based on stability, sadly the system collapsed when the US deficit went to large. On the other hand, the export of inflation that became the result of the Bretton Woods system had already benefited the US echonomy greatly. And of course still benefit the US since all major global trades are made in dollars. (Though the Euro is an up and coming contender, last I heard OPEC wanted to trade oil in Euro instead of Dollars)
Think of it as payback for you guys convincing other countries to accept dollar as a base for their echonomy instead of gold ;)
But the industries have found that consumers prefer standard. We like standard. Just because you don't, doesn't mean we should switch.
Hey, I'm the one who's on the side of standard on this. International standard that is. The imperial measuring system is the anomaly.
But as I said, whatever you feel is right for domestic use doesn't really bother me. Of course it seems a bit quaint to me, holding on to a non-standardized measuring system like the imperial one even though the rest of the world has moved on. Much like the brittish (among others) queer idea of still driving on the wrong side of the road.
Sure, no system is (as far as I know) de facto superior to the other in itself. The benefit is in the standardization.
Very much like there would be a consumer benefit if electrical currents all over the world were alike (and the plugs of course) there would be a consumer benefit if TV standards was the same instead of divided into PAL, NTSC and SECAM.
But again, this is not really about domestic measurments, it's about a governmental organization that in the future are going to cooperate even more with other international organizations and as such has choosen to change their set of measurements into the one that their previous set was standardized against to begin with
"In 1958 the United States and countries of the Commonwealth of Nations defined the length of the international yard to be precisely 0.9144 metres. Consequently, the international inch is defined to be equal to 25.4 millimetres."
Whereas the metre is defined (as I'm sure you know) as "...the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second."
Well, either we reach an understanding, one of us gives up or the thread goes and gets closed down on us.
Regarding paying the tab, then I'd say a study has to be undertaken regarding whether its more expensive to keep the dual system or unify. And since a dual system would mean tax payers from all over the rest of the world would be affected (unless it's going to be a strict from Imperal to SI conversion all the way conducted singularly by NASA through the project) your majority might be in more jeopardy than you might want to think.
Frighteners was a wonderfull movie and it had Michael J Fox as the lead, what more could you ask for?
And how ever strange this can seem the majority of people in this case is the rest of the scientiffic world and a majority of american NASA scientists. Case solved.
Switching to metric in any of our environments will cost more than it will ever net us.
Do you base that statement on some tangible fact or is it just an assumption?
Because, well, facts I'm forced to respect while any assumption will never be more than at best equal to my own if you ask me.
If you don't mind me saying so, you miss my point, that's the whole of it.
My point would be that it's not a question of superiority. It's a matter of majority.
Turn it around, when we do this joint venture, what right would the US have to force a system which is not superior to ours upon us (the rest of the world) just so that we can go to Mars?
I don't care what you use to measure car parts, you milk and your baked goods in. But I do see the point in NASA doing this transition, since it makes sense.