And open it up for editing 3 years from now, and right to bear and free speech will be trashed. BOTH sides would love to revise it; that's why neither side should be allowed to.
You're exactly wrong. If it was communist, I would have to contribute to open source software. But I get to choose. I can donate just to the extent that it is rewarding to me. (In other words... profit.)
I'm just slightly skeptical regarding global warming; I think it's probably happening, and I think there is at least a reasonable chance that humans are contributing to it.
But I still don't really care. I haven't been convinced that global warming is a bad thing, whereas many of the proposed 'solutions' are quite painful, and many will result in economic collapse and the indirect deaths of many... primarily in poverty-stricken countries.
On the contrary, historically, periods of increased temperature have typically been the times when life, both animal and vegetable, have prospered. Correlate extinctions and warming periods... it's cooling that is a tragedy, not warming.
I remember reading one hysterical article claiming that one of the bad results of global warming would be a massive increase in the amount of poison ivy. Yeah. Think that one through.
Thank you. College graduates form a tight, very insular clique that makes it very difficult for those without one to get into any sort of skilled position, regardless of abilities and skills.
In my last job, I was the only employee out of a group of probably 150 that didn't have a degree. It wasn't a computer programming field, though; I've always wanted to work in that area, but I don't have a degree, so I'm dismissed out of hand.
And referenced incorrectly, as well. You may feel Ann Coulter is evil, is deceptive, is ugly... whatever. But if you think she's a "dim bulb", you're wrong. She is far from dumb. Viciously intelligent would be a better description.
That explains some of the other questions raised, by the way. Most governors are exceptional people. They have incredible talents and skills. They just aren't talented and skilled in the areas that we want them to be (leadership, integrity, common sense). They're talented in the areas that win elections: Salesmanship. That's almost a tautology.
My teenage son (17 years old at the time) was playing Call of Cthulhu on the XBox. His younger brother (13) and about a half dozen friends (aged 10-13) were in the room watching him.
If you're not familiar with the game, it's a first person game, but you pretty much go the first half of the game with no weapon. There's a sequence where your character is in a hotel room, and the whole inbred town decides to kill you.
You're defenseless. You run into rooms, open doors that lead to more villagers that you run away from. You lock doors behind you, they splinter after moments. You're helpless, you're just trying to escape, and it's not working
The screams from the children were delicious. They were in no more danger than from any scary movie; but scary movies can be scary indeed.
By pirating it, though, you're reducing the value of all physical copies already printed. If I own a copy of a book, and it is widely pirated, I will not be able to resell it for as much. The value to the original author and publisher is not the only consideration; you're indirectly, although in a minor way, hurting everyone that bought a copy of the book legally.
2:21 vs:29 is a ratio of 5.13::1. If attaching a lighter email would shave ten seconds off (I don't think it would), the ratio would still be 4.5::1. This is 3rd grade level math.
That is very irritating. There's all sorts of legitimately crappy stuff that Bush did... but there is nothing wrong with that banner. The carrier was returning home after completing the longest mission a nuclear carrier had ever made. Everybody using it as a 'bash Bush' image either doesn't know the truth, or doesn't care about the truth. Probably most just don't know.
No; that's only if you believe that self-serving ends are unethical. Many sensible people don't, since nearly everything good in life has been created by self-serving individuals.
"People complain about scalding hot coffee at specific restaurant. Restaurant has policy that states coffee temperature. Coffee is continually over this temperature. People again complain about scaling coffee. Again, investigation reports coffee outside norms. Restaurant says it'll fix it. Person gets nether regions burned by coffee, sues and wins due to the afformentioned problems. Get the facts right."
The are free to sell themselves and voluntarily act as a slave for the rest of their life. They just can't have the opportunity to change their mind in the future waived.
I think if you know a little math, a few philosophical principles, and some basics of physics... you know about two-thirds of science. You may not know all the details of every field (that last 33% requires a lot of study), but you have the tools you need to evaluate most ideas in a scientific manner.
The problem with the nonsensical over-credulity of the public is not because they don't have enough science education; it's because they aren't being taught that that science education matters.
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game
on
How Do Games Grow Up?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
How did amphibians survive the much greater temperature swings in Earth's history? They've been around for a long time. Were there partial extinctions and then they rediversified?
I think you misinterpreted my post. Most of the replies did, so perhaps I didn't write clearly. Note that I said we rated sex too strictly, and should loosen up; note that I didn't say we need to hide sex from children. I said "The exposure of youth to sexual imagery can lead to problems when done wrong". Playboy to a 13 year old may not be a problem. Hustler to a 9 year old may be.
I'm simply saying that the old canard about "Americans can show a breast being stabbed but not kissed" simplistically overlooks that fact that the violence and sex are entirely different, and are censored (or at least rated) for entirely different reasons. The fear about violence is that they will grow to stop being repulsed by it; the fear about sex is they will become more obsessed with it. Sex is like eating; a great and wonderful impulse that can be screwed up when all a kid learns about nutrition is from McDonalds.
If we switched the rating priorities completely, and didn't allow violence in films (books, internet, whatnot) but allowed explicit sex... we still wouldn't see the vast majority of teens committing murder and just weird loners having sex. Human nature.
If you had even an inkling of understanding, you wouldn't characterize it as "defense".
You know, I do have an inkling of understanding. Even more than that, even more than an Iota, past the point of smidge. Why the insults? Rational discussion too hard?
sex is much more of a temptation than violence is. 99.9% of kids won't commit murder regardless of what movies they watch, but 99.9% of them will make stupid decisions at some point regarding sex
And why do you think that is?
Has it not occurred to you that perhaps it's because they're told from an early age that sex is bad and guns are good, and so therefore want to experiment with the taboo?
Sure, it occurred to me, and I mostly dismissed it. I think the main reason is that sex feels REALLY REALLY GOOD, and violence rarely does. (Trust me.) Everybody goes through puberty; not everybody thrillkills.
In honesty, you're partly correct, in that forbidden fruit will draw attention; but you're partly incorrect, in that people would still be making screwed up decisions at a young age even if there was no forbidden fruit aspect at all. Sex is simply different than violence.
Now, if you had slowed down to read my post, I said we were too uptight about sex and should lighten up the ratings, like Germany.
On the flip side, is the European rating system part of the reason they're all freaked out by guns over there? Perhaps they need to adopt some of our free-thinking ways.
Slashdot Mirror
And open it up for editing 3 years from now, and right to bear and free speech will be trashed. BOTH sides would love to revise it; that's why neither side should be allowed to.
That was a Comment.
Not every access... every WRITE.
Well, he did win a Nobel Prize. Florida not so much.
You're exactly wrong. If it was communist, I would have to contribute to open source software. But I get to choose. I can donate just to the extent that it is rewarding to me. (In other words... profit.)
I'm just slightly skeptical regarding global warming; I think it's probably happening, and I think there is at least a reasonable chance that humans are contributing to it.
But I still don't really care. I haven't been convinced that global warming is a bad thing, whereas many of the proposed 'solutions' are quite painful, and many will result in economic collapse and the indirect deaths of many... primarily in poverty-stricken countries.
On the contrary, historically, periods of increased temperature have typically been the times when life, both animal and vegetable, have prospered. Correlate extinctions and warming periods... it's cooling that is a tragedy, not warming.
I remember reading one hysterical article claiming that one of the bad results of global warming would be a massive increase in the amount of poison ivy. Yeah. Think that one through.
Thank you. College graduates form a tight, very insular clique that makes it very difficult for those without one to get into any sort of skilled position, regardless of abilities and skills.
In my last job, I was the only employee out of a group of probably 150 that didn't have a degree. It wasn't a computer programming field, though; I've always wanted to work in that area, but I don't have a degree, so I'm dismissed out of hand.
You're ridiculously and irrationally partisan.
The guy made a living from plumbing. What do we call people that do that?
And referenced incorrectly, as well. You may feel Ann Coulter is evil, is deceptive, is ugly... whatever. But if you think she's a "dim bulb", you're wrong. She is far from dumb. Viciously intelligent would be a better description.
That explains some of the other questions raised, by the way. Most governors are exceptional people. They have incredible talents and skills. They just aren't talented and skilled in the areas that we want them to be (leadership, integrity, common sense). They're talented in the areas that win elections: Salesmanship. That's almost a tautology.
My teenage son (17 years old at the time) was playing Call of Cthulhu on the XBox. His younger brother (13) and about a half dozen friends (aged 10-13) were in the room watching him.
If you're not familiar with the game, it's a first person game, but you pretty much go the first half of the game with no weapon. There's a sequence where your character is in a hotel room, and the whole inbred town decides to kill you.
You're defenseless. You run into rooms, open doors that lead to more villagers that you run away from. You lock doors behind you, they splinter after moments. You're helpless, you're just trying to escape, and it's not working
The screams from the children were delicious. They were in no more danger than from any scary movie; but scary movies can be scary indeed.
The US is one of the most censored countries in the world
Which country has better free speech protections?
By pirating it, though, you're reducing the value of all physical copies already printed. If I own a copy of a book, and it is widely pirated, I will not be able to resell it for as much. The value to the original author and publisher is not the only consideration; you're indirectly, although in a minor way, hurting everyone that bought a copy of the book legally.
2:21 vs :29 is a ratio of 5.13::1. If attaching a lighter email would shave ten seconds off (I don't think it would), the ratio would still be 4.5::1. This is 3rd grade level math.
That is very irritating. There's all sorts of legitimately crappy stuff that Bush did... but there is nothing wrong with that banner. The carrier was returning home after completing the longest mission a nuclear carrier had ever made. Everybody using it as a 'bash Bush' image either doesn't know the truth, or doesn't care about the truth. Probably most just don't know.
No; that's only if you believe that self-serving ends are unethical. Many sensible people don't, since nearly everything good in life has been created by self-serving individuals.
"People complain about scalding hot coffee at specific restaurant. Restaurant has policy that states coffee temperature. Coffee is continually over this temperature. People again complain about scaling coffee. Again, investigation reports coffee outside norms. Restaurant says it'll fix it. Person gets nether regions burned by coffee, sues and wins due to the afformentioned problems. Get the facts right."
--excerpt from Rorschach's Journal, 1985
Pepto-Bismol is Bismuth salicylate if I remember correctly.
I have to interrupt to say this exactly illustrates what a slashdot comment should be. It's like a glimpse of a platonic ideal.
The are free to sell themselves and voluntarily act as a slave for the rest of their life. They just can't have the opportunity to change their mind in the future waived.
I disagree.
I think if you know a little math, a few philosophical principles, and some basics of physics... you know about two-thirds of science. You may not know all the details of every field (that last 33% requires a lot of study), but you have the tools you need to evaluate most ideas in a scientific manner.
The problem with the nonsensical over-credulity of the public is not because they don't have enough science education; it's because they aren't being taught that that science education matters.
Then how is it different than playing games?
Good grief, I just looked it up. I had read about it, but not actually seen an image before. What an ugly game! Does SONY not understand Cute?
How did amphibians survive the much greater temperature swings in Earth's history? They've been around for a long time. Were there partial extinctions and then they rediversified?
Kids don't toss balls anymore? That's a relic of my shallow, primitive upbringing?
I think you misinterpreted my post. Most of the replies did, so perhaps I didn't write clearly. Note that I said we rated sex too strictly, and should loosen up; note that I didn't say we need to hide sex from children. I said "The exposure of youth to sexual imagery can lead to problems when done wrong". Playboy to a 13 year old may not be a problem. Hustler to a 9 year old may be.
I'm simply saying that the old canard about "Americans can show a breast being stabbed but not kissed" simplistically overlooks that fact that the violence and sex are entirely different, and are censored (or at least rated) for entirely different reasons. The fear about violence is that they will grow to stop being repulsed by it; the fear about sex is they will become more obsessed with it. Sex is like eating; a great and wonderful impulse that can be screwed up when all a kid learns about nutrition is from McDonalds.
If we switched the rating priorities completely, and didn't allow violence in films (books, internet, whatnot) but allowed explicit sex... we still wouldn't see the vast majority of teens committing murder and just weird loners having sex. Human nature.
If you had even an inkling of understanding, you wouldn't characterize it as "defense".
You know, I do have an inkling of understanding. Even more than that, even more than an Iota, past the point of smidge. Why the insults? Rational discussion too hard?
sex is much more of a temptation than violence is. 99.9% of kids won't commit murder regardless of what movies they watch, but 99.9% of them will make stupid decisions at some point regarding sex
And why do you think that is?
Has it not occurred to you that perhaps it's because they're told from an early age that sex is bad and guns are good, and so therefore want to experiment with the taboo? Sure, it occurred to me, and I mostly dismissed it. I think the main reason is that sex feels REALLY REALLY GOOD, and violence rarely does. (Trust me.) Everybody goes through puberty; not everybody thrillkills.
In honesty, you're partly correct, in that forbidden fruit will draw attention; but you're partly incorrect, in that people would still be making screwed up decisions at a young age even if there was no forbidden fruit aspect at all. Sex is simply different than violence. Now, if you had slowed down to read my post, I said we were too uptight about sex and should lighten up the ratings, like Germany.
On the flip side, is the European rating system part of the reason they're all freaked out by guns over there? Perhaps they need to adopt some of our free-thinking ways.