That's a philisophical opinion, and not the argument I presented. Were I a christian, for one, I would believe that my soul is who I am, not the mortal body I walk around in. My soul would be the same regardless of the body that it inhabits.
To move to your argument however, why stop there, I am not the same me I was when I wrote the original post, I'm not the same me now at this instant that I was when I wrote the above paragraph. I'm certainly not the same me when you read this. I am someone very similar, but not the same. However, there is a cohesive "I" that I imagine is me regardless that the makeup of me changes from instant to instant. Am I not me now? Am I not me twenty minutes from now. Would I not be me had, on the drive home, took a different route. Yes, at least I would believe that I'm me so I believe that had I not gone bald I would still be me.
Not true. Not that I'm against interacial reproduction in any way shape or form, but it's fairly simple to see: Different races are prone to different diseases, for exampl sickle cell anemia. Over an extended period of time race becaomes less and less of an issue as more and more interacial children are born. Take this to a point in the far future where there is technically only one race. A single disease, or virus, can run rampant through the entire world population because the potential for catching it has been bred into the entire population. It doesn't even have to be an existing disease, say a new type of AIDS appears in 3000 years that by some trick of nature attacks only people of a certain race, or would have if the genes of different races weren't mixed to a point where there is only one race.
I was taking the opposite stance than this guy above but let me reverse things for a second. Proud may not be the word, but liking who you are is a pretty good idea, seeing as how there's nothing you can do to change it. Though people are proud of things that they have no control over all the time. I'm proud of my intelligence for instance.
Heh, allready thought of that. If I were a religious man it wouldn't matter, the shell would be different but the soul inside would still be the same. I'd still be me, but a me with hair;) Of course it would be interesting to see how different I'd turn out. Of course who knows what other "defects" I would have, maybe I'd have huge ears, or wouldn't be able to fill out my boxers as well, or at all I coulda been a chick. I think I'll be happy with my genetics, if for different reasons than you suggest.:)
Yes I do have to slam you for this, because it makes no sense.
Number one, don't start blabbering about natural selection. That wen't the way of the dinosaur years ago. The world today does everything it can to keep weakness in the gene pool. Diseases are treated so that they thrive, rather than being allowed to be filtered out. Diabetes for example. Civilization can be defined as the force that attempts to get past natural selection (on an individual basis at least) by keeping the weak alive. I'm not saying this is good or bad it's just the way it is.
Secondly, adoption is another way that society keeps potentially harmful genes in the pool. Orphaned children most likely come from parents who, for some reason or another, could not function in society, and the chances that these children will not be able to function as well.
Keep in mind I'm not expressing a stance on the subject here, only that the further civilization progresses, the more it grows away from natural selection.
I think that designer babies are ok as far as eliminating disease but could hurt genetic diversity and cause genetic elitism if used to try to get the perfect baby.
Tread softly, you're walking down a dangerous path. If genetic diversity is considered an absolute "good" the next logical step is to be against inter-racial reproduction. It causes the same result, though it decreases genetic elitism.
That being said, I should point out that genetic diversity is a good thing health wise. It's what stops diseases from running rampant through the whole of humanity.
That's not insightful, that's silly. Think of all the famous people who could have been had we started this screening sooner. This could be an entirely different world, for better or worse, whichever way you look at it. For all you know the contributions of those selected could dwarf the ones of those who had not been.
We're not getting a new comic until tomorrow, I'd have been royally pissed if I couldn't get my MT fix cuz of slashdotting. I get really cranky when I don't get to see my MT. It's definitely one of the best comics out there.
Oh, right. The only people getting the ads would be the people who asked for it. The rest of us would be spam-free.
That's not a problem, that's the ideal situation. People who hate Spam aren't going to click. Believe me if Spammers could filter out those who absolutely would never click they would, it would allow them to send more mail to those who do follow links.
Maybe you personally, but the in the collective case of the word I this is simply not true, huge numbers of people DO opt in and allow their addresses to be sold through affiliate programs and the like.
How about modding this to patently obvious or at least redundant. If spamming didn't return results spamming would stop, but the simple fact is enough people click, call, or buy to make the practice worthwhile.
What you've just described is basically the style of table top wargames, especially ones from Games Workshop different races have different abilities. The only drawback to this type of system is for the game designers to make each new race super powerful in comparison to make it atractive for purchase. The games do turn out to be pretty well balanced, despite cry's to the contrary, a good player will usually win over a bad one regardless of the armies involved.
This concept fleshed out in a computer game would be EXCELLENT. Not only do the gamers win, but the publishers have a way to make a good profit off of coninuing a game's expansion. Consider a computer version of a table top wargame, once the initial engine is written there is little work involved in creating new races, weapons, equipment, vehicles, powers, ect. Rather than spending several years in developement of the sequel release an expansion pack for $20 several times a year. Rather than wait four years to collect $50 for the sequel collect $200 or so for all of the expansions. A new compatible version of the engine could be released every couple of years at that point to keep up with technology.
That is completely based on opinion. Different people like different things. Some people don't WANT to interact a lot with other, some do, and some of us like a mixture of both. Who are you to tell anyone else how to live their lives?
I would however randomly position the character/icons on the screen so that the x,y coords of a click wouldn't be translatable into a specific character by coordinate
That's going to make it awfully difficult to enter a password isn't if there's no way to map a click to a symbol:)
I don't know, will we ever see ANY news posted here regarding Microsoft and not have to wade through the hyperbole posts about how many cliche posts we have to wade through?
Re:The net puts people's ideas on the web.
on
Disinformation.com
·
· Score: 2
Actually I believe in father's rights as well, so my viewpoints on abortion don't fit into your neat little package.
The root of the problem is, however, that in any argument the tnedency is to go to an extreme to make a point rather than to express the moderate view that you really hold. Especially in a medium like a web log it's difficult to maintain a moderate stance, because doing give the appearance of weakness in your viewpoint. Take a stroll through threads in past slashdot articles, find one that's based on a moderate post, and watch how quickly it degenerates to extremes.
I didn't miss the point at all. First of all I don't see the word good anywhere in the original post. And B. it won't take anywhere near ten years for good optimizing compilers to appear, a year at most.
Not likely, it would take a couple of weeks max for the first compilers to appear. Wish I could afford one, I'd love to hack away on a compiler for a new machine.
Slashdot Mirror
To move to your argument however, why stop there, I am not the same me I was when I wrote the original post, I'm not the same me now at this instant that I was when I wrote the above paragraph. I'm certainly not the same me when you read this. I am someone very similar, but not the same. However, there is a cohesive "I" that I imagine is me regardless that the makeup of me changes from instant to instant. Am I not me now? Am I not me twenty minutes from now. Would I not be me had, on the drive home, took a different route. Yes, at least I would believe that I'm me so I believe that had I not gone bald I would still be me.
Not true. Not that I'm against interacial reproduction in any way shape or form, but it's fairly simple to see: Different races are prone to different diseases, for exampl sickle cell anemia. Over an extended period of time race becaomes less and less of an issue as more and more interacial children are born. Take this to a point in the far future where there is technically only one race. A single disease, or virus, can run rampant through the entire world population because the potential for catching it has been bred into the entire population. It doesn't even have to be an existing disease, say a new type of AIDS appears in 3000 years that by some trick of nature attacks only people of a certain race, or would have if the genes of different races weren't mixed to a point where there is only one race.
I was taking the opposite stance than this guy above but let me reverse things for a second. Proud may not be the word, but liking who you are is a pretty good idea, seeing as how there's nothing you can do to change it. Though people are proud of things that they have no control over all the time. I'm proud of my intelligence for instance.
Heh, allready thought of that. If I were a religious man it wouldn't matter, the shell would be different but the soul inside would still be the same. I'd still be me, but a me with hair ;) :)
Of course it would be interesting to see how different I'd turn out. Of course who knows what other "defects" I would have, maybe I'd have huge ears, or wouldn't be able to fill out my boxers as well, or at all I coulda been a chick. I think I'll be happy with my genetics, if for different reasons than you suggest.
Number one, don't start blabbering about natural selection. That wen't the way of the dinosaur years ago. The world today does everything it can to keep weakness in the gene pool. Diseases are treated so that they thrive, rather than being allowed to be filtered out. Diabetes for example. Civilization can be defined as the force that attempts to get past natural selection (on an individual basis at least) by keeping the weak alive. I'm not saying this is good or bad it's just the way it is.
Secondly, adoption is another way that society keeps potentially harmful genes in the pool. Orphaned children most likely come from parents who, for some reason or another, could not function in society, and the chances that these children will not be able to function as well.
Keep in mind I'm not expressing a stance on the subject here, only that the further civilization progresses, the more it grows away from natural selection.
I think that designer babies are ok as far as eliminating disease but could hurt genetic diversity and cause genetic elitism if used to try to get the perfect baby.
Tread softly, you're walking down a dangerous path. If genetic diversity is considered an absolute "good" the next logical step is to be against inter-racial reproduction. It causes the same result, though it decreases genetic elitism.
That being said, I should point out that genetic diversity is a good thing health wise. It's what stops diseases from running rampant through the whole of humanity.
That's not insightful, that's silly. Think of all the famous people who could have been had we started this screening sooner. This could be an entirely different world, for better or worse, whichever way you look at it. For all you know the contributions of those selected could dwarf the ones of those who had not been.
Speak for yourself, those of us who are losing their hair see it differently, ease of hair care aside. ;)
I was wondering how long it would take someone to mention JN. What a way to make a living, telling other people what to do. ;)
We're not getting a new comic until tomorrow, I'd have been royally pissed if I couldn't get my MT fix cuz of slashdotting. I get really cranky when I don't get to see my MT. It's definitely one of the best comics out there.
Yeah that's reasonable. Let's not exaggerate at all now.
Oh, right. The only people getting the ads would be the people who asked for it. The rest of us would be spam-free.
That's not a problem, that's the ideal situation. People who hate Spam aren't going to click. Believe me if Spammers could filter out those who absolutely would never click they would, it would allow them to send more mail to those who do follow links.
Maybe you personally, but the in the collective case of the word I this is simply not true, huge numbers of people DO opt in and allow their addresses to be sold through affiliate programs and the like.
How about modding this to patently obvious or at least redundant. If spamming didn't return results spamming would stop, but the simple fact is enough people click, call, or buy to make the practice worthwhile.
This concept fleshed out in a computer game would be EXCELLENT. Not only do the gamers win, but the publishers have a way to make a good profit off of coninuing a game's expansion. Consider a computer version of a table top wargame, once the initial engine is written there is little work involved in creating new races, weapons, equipment, vehicles, powers, ect. Rather than spending several years in developement of the sequel release an expansion pack for $20 several times a year. Rather than wait four years to collect $50 for the sequel collect $200 or so for all of the expansions. A new compatible version of the engine could be released every couple of years at that point to keep up with technology.
That is completely based on opinion. Different people like different things. Some people don't WANT to interact a lot with other, some do, and some of us like a mixture of both. Who are you to tell anyone else how to live their lives?
I would however randomly position the character/icons on the screen so that the x,y coords of a click wouldn't be translatable into a specific character by coordinate
That's going to make it awfully difficult to enter a password isn't if there's no way to map a click to a symbol
I don't know, will we ever see ANY news posted here regarding Microsoft and not have to wade through the hyperbole posts about how many cliche posts we have to wade through?
The root of the problem is, however, that in any argument the tnedency is to go to an extreme to make a point rather than to express the moderate view that you really hold. Especially in a medium like a web log it's difficult to maintain a moderate stance, because doing give the appearance of weakness in your viewpoint. Take a stroll through threads in past slashdot articles, find one that's based on a moderate post, and watch how quickly it degenerates to extremes.
And by the way, didn't he just post a piece of tripe a couple of weeks ago that said the web HAD NO HEART??
I didn't miss the point at all. First of all I don't see the word good anywhere in the original post. And B. it won't take anywhere near ten years for good optimizing compilers to appear, a year at most.
First compilers are the MOST useful compilers since they are the ones that will be used to create the later ones.
Yep and we'll have be careful not to jostle the keyboard, otherwise we won't be able to find the home keys.
Not likely, it would take a couple of weeks max for the first compilers to appear. Wish I could afford one, I'd love to hack away on a compiler for a new machine.
In a word, quantum. Or maybe that's two words, actually it might only be a word when you're looking directly at it.