Solution? STOP LOBBYING TO SAVE THE GUYS. Eliminate the demonstrations, the wack-job anti-death penalty organizations that appeal all convictions on principle, regardless of the circumstances... the whole process would go much more smoothly. Let the inmate have his appeal or two, then put them away.
I think in regards to the anthrax, the Media was just stupid and unreliable (as normal), and the Government happily let them report every misconception and misunderstanding... perhaps to draw attention away from their own cluelessness.
True. Politics have been silly, trite, and corrupt for the history of the Republic. Not always, but certainly the day-to-day running of the government has been just as stupid or worse. In some ways, we're less corrupt and more transparent now then ever.
Have a lot further to go before we get out of the negative numbers, though.
I don't disagree that this is a silly publicity stunt; but I get the impression that if the Dems were doing it in a republican-controlled house, you wouldn't have as much of a problem with it.
By the way, I disagree with you about the immediacy of the results of energy policy reform. Much of the increase in the price of oil is speculative; it's like the internet bubble in the 90s. Even if a bill doesn't get a substantial amount of new oil into the market for a few years, the knowledge that it is coming will have an immediate effect on the market. Plus, I have a hunch our Arab friends will up the supply, rather than risk the US reducing its dependency on them.
Some people simply don't want you to have a choice. Their ego is tied up in their lifestyle; they feel that those of us who don't bike, are an affront to their chosen pastime. We must be WRONG, and laws should be passed, public coffers opened to convert us.
It's rather snotty to flatly contradict a statement you disagree with, and then claim to have "fixed" it.
I'd mod that +1 informative if I could... there's a lot of slashdot posters who don't seem to realize how rude it is... and how rudeness undercuts real discussion.
You really believe that gay or leftists are singled out for more abuse? The persecution complex I'm seeing in this thread is really amazing.
Whenever this topic comes up on Slashdot, it's like the normally quite intelligent posters completely lose their rationality, and start basing every comment on their impulsive, knee-jerk emotionality.
Abuse does happen. But it is a logical flaw to point at one, one hundred, or one thousand reports, and say that it is the norm. If this was an article about a new scientific study, you people wouldn't be making this mistakes. There are probably over a hundred thousand police officers in the country, and I'm sure they make dozens of stops, arrests, or interrogations per day. That's millions per day, possibly billions in a year. A few dozen people being having their cameras smashed? Statistical noise.
Officers should be serving jail time when it happens; I completely agree that all citizens have a right to record police. But many of you are irrationally overstating the prevalence of corruption.
Valid point. I'm sure you're the rule, not the exception. This 'anti-snitching' mentality is very harmful, though; an instance where a vice is held up as a virtue.
I think his point is that it's rare. Which is true. I would feel very confident recording any encounter with the police, because the vast majority of the time it would be absolutely fine. Of course abuse happens, and when it does it should be publicly decried, and the guilty officers should be serving jail time... but also, the magnitude of the problem shouldn't be overstated.
As long as you keep your wits about you, and remain civil, the police are rarely your enemy.
That case was not really related to this. He was withholding evidence he had been subpoenaed for in a criminal case, video footage of criminals caught in the act of vandalism. Maybe you disagree, but it's not like he was being beaten up by corrupt cops on the down low. The proper legal niceties were observed.
Sorry, that argument doesn't fly. Yes, the House and Senate are somewhat complicit, and everyone loves a good 'Republocrat' joke, but there is a HUGE difference between the two parties. Don't forget, the Democrats do not have an overwhelming majority in either house, and Republicans can win if they just filibuster.
You have absolutely bought into lies. I know I can't change your mind; but I hope that you can at least let a seed of skepticism blossom in your mind. Maybe the Democrats really are just as bad as the Republicans. They both lie. They both are powerhungry. They both want to restrict the American people. The only difference is in the details of the corruption.
Just admit the possibility. Shedding party affiliation is a bit like shaking a religious upbringing; the hardest part is breaking the initial unshakable faith.
That's all pretty much true, but while the owl was a bit of a manufactured controversy, the amount of economic harm and disruption wasn't; it had significant effects in many northwestern counties.
So, while no one cared about the spotted owl prior to it being seized upon as a tool to stop logging, the real issue has long been, and remains, very important to a lot of people.
If it is so clear and obvious as to make one "severely delusional" to consider alternative motivations, it would be nice if you provided some form of supporting content for the statement.
But it's clear and obvious; why should he? The only people who argue against it are deliberately ignoring the truth, or misunderstanding him. (Really... it is both clear and obvious).
He's not saying that's the only use for it, just that that is the obvious primary purpose, and that is the reason Nintendo and all the game publishers are going after it. I'm sure you know that.
That's an absolutely unreasonable response on Craig's List. Do you understand why?
Because when the results of the decision are presented to them in the form of a subpoena, they will cave and release the info. In other words, they are sticking to their principles just enough to have bad stuff happen, but not enough to actually prompt any change for the better.
If online gaming is essential to you then that's why you don't see any games worth playing. There's no question that the Wii needs to pick up the game in the online arena to attract that crowd...
Ok, you just clarified a thought for me. I've been a bit perplexed at the criticisms of the Wii's line up. I mean, compare it to the PS3!
But there are niches in gaming, and one niche is the FPS online multiplayer deathmatch genre. I think that group barely considers something outside of that genre as an actual game. So in their minds, the comparison is: "My 360 has Halo, Gears of War, Call of Duty, so on, and the Wii has what, Metroid and Red Steel? What a terrible lineup."
And if the 360 or PS3 has more games that interest them, then good for them. They just need to realize that not every gamer, not even every hard-core gamer, feels the same way.
Then the Wii's online implementation is very flawed for gaming, as many games do require spit-second timing,
It's not the Wii. It's inherent in internet gaming. The more precise reaction times enter into gameplay, the more that even small lag times will disrupt gameplay. First person shooters have this problem, to a degree, but fighting games are worse because timing is even more critical. How many online fighting games are out there, for any console or pc? Not many, and none of them work very well.
People who want to play games at this point have a 360, PS3, or PC and know that the Wii, while a sales beast, is totally failing to live up to its hype and potential.
You're mistakenly speaking for a group when you shouldn't be, attributing your beliefs to everybody in that group when not everybody feels that way. I'm a gamer, with only a Wii from this generation. I'll probably get a 360 soon, and someday a PS3 when I see one for $75 at a yard sale. The key point is, right now, if I had none of them, and they all cost the exact same amount, I'd still buy the Wii first.
You are correct that the Wii is failing to live up to its potential... but that's because it truly has far more potential than the 360 or PS3 (I'm not referring to graphics, which are coming to be less and less relevant).
It really doesn't mean much. It's a poor rephrasing of "you should make more money," written in such a way as to try to give the impression "I'm way more expert-like than you. Don't dare disagree."
Some products aren't worth more than a few hundred dollars a year. It doesn't mean they aren't being 'monetized properly.' It might mean that it's just not something that more than a dozen people want in a year, and they aren't willing to pay more than $20. Some issues can't be fixed by upping the marketing. Should he stop selling the product entirely?
The problem is the creation of an e-commerce infrastructure that is setting a lower bound on volume and profitability. In effect, there is a certain level of sales below which it makes no sense to run a business. And that's really a bad idea. For one thing, it's just antithetical to the model that caused the explosive growth of the web in the first place. Everybody is a content consumer and a content provider. Everybody can buy, everybody can sell. Raising the minimum cost of business means that small value, small demand products simply go away.
Secondly, once a certain arbitrary minimum expense has been set, it will raise. Year after year. Nearly all major companies would love for there to be, say, a $1,000 yearly fee simply for the privilege of offering product on the internet. Fairly meaningless 'security certificates' are about as arbitrary and meaningless as any other certification or license. Do they really deter actual criminals?
Of course you think women are inferior to you. You hate them. You find vaginas disgusting and women deplorable. I am sure you have some female friends but only to hide what you truly feel about them. Do you keep them as friends just to make yourself feel superior. This is ridiculous.
Geez, I was going to point out your ridiculousness, but I'm not sure it's necessary. Even if any sane Slashdot reader initially disagreed with the parent, I'm sure your inane post has already driven them to his side.
Here's a tip: If you support a cause, I think you could best help it by staying quiet. At least then you won't be actively driving people away.
Slashdot Mirror
Solution? STOP LOBBYING TO SAVE THE GUYS. Eliminate the demonstrations, the wack-job anti-death penalty organizations that appeal all convictions on principle, regardless of the circumstances... the whole process would go much more smoothly. Let the inmate have his appeal or two, then put them away.
Your Government and your Media lied to you.
I think in regards to the anthrax, the Media was just stupid and unreliable (as normal), and the Government happily let them report every misconception and misunderstanding... perhaps to draw attention away from their own cluelessness.
It was to the Senate Majority Leader and the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, that happened to be Democrats.
I like it when one simple factual statement can totally blow away the dozen charged, politically-slanted rants that precede it. Thanks.
True. Politics have been silly, trite, and corrupt for the history of the Republic. Not always, but certainly the day-to-day running of the government has been just as stupid or worse. In some ways, we're less corrupt and more transparent now then ever.
Have a lot further to go before we get out of the negative numbers, though.
I don't disagree that this is a silly publicity stunt; but I get the impression that if the Dems were doing it in a republican-controlled house, you wouldn't have as much of a problem with it.
By the way, I disagree with you about the immediacy of the results of energy policy reform. Much of the increase in the price of oil is speculative; it's like the internet bubble in the 90s. Even if a bill doesn't get a substantial amount of new oil into the market for a few years, the knowledge that it is coming will have an immediate effect on the market. Plus, I have a hunch our Arab friends will up the supply, rather than risk the US reducing its dependency on them.
Some people simply don't want you to have a choice. Their ego is tied up in their lifestyle; they feel that those of us who don't bike, are an affront to their chosen pastime. We must be WRONG, and laws should be passed, public coffers opened to convert us.
It's rather snotty to flatly contradict a statement you disagree with, and then claim to have "fixed" it.
I'd mod that +1 informative if I could... there's a lot of slashdot posters who don't seem to realize how rude it is... and how rudeness undercuts real discussion.
I'm almost in favor of allowing anybody to beat up on critical mass bicyclists. What a supremely irritated organization that is.
(Of course, I'm not serious. They shouldn't be beaten up. Just fined or arrested when they are impeding traffic.)
gay, lefty
You really believe that gay or leftists are singled out for more abuse? The persecution complex I'm seeing in this thread is really amazing.
Whenever this topic comes up on Slashdot, it's like the normally quite intelligent posters completely lose their rationality, and start basing every comment on their impulsive, knee-jerk emotionality.
Abuse does happen. But it is a logical flaw to point at one, one hundred, or one thousand reports, and say that it is the norm. If this was an article about a new scientific study, you people wouldn't be making this mistakes. There are probably over a hundred thousand police officers in the country, and I'm sure they make dozens of stops, arrests, or interrogations per day. That's millions per day, possibly billions in a year. A few dozen people being having their cameras smashed? Statistical noise.
Officers should be serving jail time when it happens; I completely agree that all citizens have a right to record police. But many of you are irrationally overstating the prevalence of corruption.
Valid point. I'm sure you're the rule, not the exception. This 'anti-snitching' mentality is very harmful, though; an instance where a vice is held up as a virtue.
I think his point is that it's rare. Which is true. I would feel very confident recording any encounter with the police, because the vast majority of the time it would be absolutely fine. Of course abuse happens, and when it does it should be publicly decried, and the guilty officers should be serving jail time... but also, the magnitude of the problem shouldn't be overstated. As long as you keep your wits about you, and remain civil, the police are rarely your enemy.
That case was not really related to this. He was withholding evidence he had been subpoenaed for in a criminal case, video footage of criminals caught in the act of vandalism. Maybe you disagree, but it's not like he was being beaten up by corrupt cops on the down low. The proper legal niceties were observed.
Ha! Funniest thing I've read Slashdot in ages.
This Nietzsche quote seems apt, "At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid."
That quote is going in my file. I don't think Democratic supporters understand how many faithful Republican voters they've created.
Sorry, that argument doesn't fly. Yes, the House and Senate are somewhat complicit, and everyone loves a good 'Republocrat' joke, but there is a HUGE difference between the two parties. Don't forget, the Democrats do not have an overwhelming majority in either house, and Republicans can win if they just filibuster.
You have absolutely bought into lies. I know I can't change your mind; but I hope that you can at least let a seed of skepticism blossom in your mind. Maybe the Democrats really are just as bad as the Republicans. They both lie. They both are powerhungry. They both want to restrict the American people. The only difference is in the details of the corruption.
Just admit the possibility. Shedding party affiliation is a bit like shaking a religious upbringing; the hardest part is breaking the initial unshakable faith.
That's all pretty much true, but while the owl was a bit of a manufactured controversy, the amount of economic harm and disruption wasn't; it had significant effects in many northwestern counties.
So, while no one cared about the spotted owl prior to it being seized upon as a tool to stop logging, the real issue has long been, and remains, very important to a lot of people.
If it is so clear and obvious as to make one "severely delusional" to consider alternative motivations, it would be nice if you provided some form of supporting content for the statement.
But it's clear and obvious; why should he? The only people who argue against it are deliberately ignoring the truth, or misunderstanding him. (Really... it is both clear and obvious).
He's not saying that's the only use for it, just that that is the obvious primary purpose, and that is the reason Nintendo and all the game publishers are going after it. I'm sure you know that.
That's an absolutely unreasonable response on Craig's List. Do you understand why?
Because when the results of the decision are presented to them in the form of a subpoena, they will cave and release the info. In other words, they are sticking to their principles just enough to have bad stuff happen, but not enough to actually prompt any change for the better.
When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up.
c. s. Lewis
If online gaming is essential to you then that's why you don't see any games worth playing. There's no question that the Wii needs to pick up the game in the online arena to attract that crowd...
Ok, you just clarified a thought for me. I've been a bit perplexed at the criticisms of the Wii's line up. I mean, compare it to the PS3!
But there are niches in gaming, and one niche is the FPS online multiplayer deathmatch genre. I think that group barely considers something outside of that genre as an actual game. So in their minds, the comparison is: "My 360 has Halo, Gears of War, Call of Duty, so on, and the Wii has what, Metroid and Red Steel? What a terrible lineup."
And if the 360 or PS3 has more games that interest them, then good for them. They just need to realize that not every gamer, not even every hard-core gamer, feels the same way.
Then the Wii's online implementation is very flawed for gaming, as many games do require spit-second timing,
It's not the Wii. It's inherent in internet gaming. The more precise reaction times enter into gameplay, the more that even small lag times will disrupt gameplay. First person shooters have this problem, to a degree, but fighting games are worse because timing is even more critical. How many online fighting games are out there, for any console or pc? Not many, and none of them work very well.
People who want to play games at this point have a 360, PS3, or PC and know that the Wii, while a sales beast, is totally failing to live up to its hype and potential.
You're mistakenly speaking for a group when you shouldn't be, attributing your beliefs to everybody in that group when not everybody feels that way. I'm a gamer, with only a Wii from this generation. I'll probably get a 360 soon, and someday a PS3 when I see one for $75 at a yard sale. The key point is, right now, if I had none of them, and they all cost the exact same amount, I'd still buy the Wii first.
You are correct that the Wii is failing to live up to its potential... but that's because it truly has far more potential than the 360 or PS3 (I'm not referring to graphics, which are coming to be less and less relevant).
...something deep inside me tells me that the Wii will have been a collector's item for quite a while when the US recession will finally be over.
You have no idea what lies ahead, sorry to say that. Next up: all-out thermonuclear war in the Middle East.
You have no more of an idea than the people you're lecturing to, so don't make claims. "Something deep inside" doesn't count as knowledge.
Learn to monetize your offering
I admit I'm not quite sure what this means.
It really doesn't mean much. It's a poor rephrasing of "you should make more money," written in such a way as to try to give the impression "I'm way more expert-like than you. Don't dare disagree."
Some products aren't worth more than a few hundred dollars a year. It doesn't mean they aren't being 'monetized properly.' It might mean that it's just not something that more than a dozen people want in a year, and they aren't willing to pay more than $20. Some issues can't be fixed by upping the marketing. Should he stop selling the product entirely?
The problem is the creation of an e-commerce infrastructure that is setting a lower bound on volume and profitability. In effect, there is a certain level of sales below which it makes no sense to run a business. And that's really a bad idea. For one thing, it's just antithetical to the model that caused the explosive growth of the web in the first place. Everybody is a content consumer and a content provider. Everybody can buy, everybody can sell. Raising the minimum cost of business means that small value, small demand products simply go away.
Secondly, once a certain arbitrary minimum expense has been set, it will raise. Year after year. Nearly all major companies would love for there to be, say, a $1,000 yearly fee simply for the privilege of offering product on the internet. Fairly meaningless 'security certificates' are about as arbitrary and meaningless as any other certification or license. Do they really deter actual criminals?
Of course you think women are inferior to you. You hate them. You find vaginas disgusting and women deplorable. I am sure you have some female friends but only to hide what you truly feel about them. Do you keep them as friends just to make yourself feel superior. This is ridiculous.
Geez, I was going to point out your ridiculousness, but I'm not sure it's necessary. Even if any sane Slashdot reader initially disagreed with the parent, I'm sure your inane post has already driven them to his side.
Here's a tip: If you support a cause, I think you could best help it by staying quiet. At least then you won't be actively driving people away.