and no force of law behind their unlawful detentions? No more harassment that I have to put up with or be arrested? No more "VIPR" teams roaming the highways?
Yep, exactly like inmates in private prisons can leave any time they want.
Can you really say someone "invented" something if they never actually managed to build it? I have tremendous respect for the work Babbage and Lovelace did, but honestly, I'm not sure they invented the computer any more than da Vinci invented the airplane.
Microsoft is giving away technology at no cost to help law enforcement gather data from computers? So is open source. Get over your bad self.
OSS forensics tools are available to everyone, and provided by people who generally believe in giving away their code. COFFEE is available only to law enforcement, and provided by a company which generally makes money from selling closed-source, proprietary software. Please don't try to pretend that the two situations are even remotely comparable.
[T]hose who achieve ascent to power... are all deluded.
FTFY.
Seriously. Politicians, Wall Street traders, CEOs, generals, religious leaders, pretty much anyone who is willing to do what you have to do to get and keep power over large numbers of other people -- they all live in a reality distortion field. And in the particular case under discussion (the 2008 crash) yes, damn it, Wall Street's RDF had a lot more to do with it than anyone else's RDF did. Those like OP who try to pretend otherwise are distorting reality themselves, and they're probably not even getting paid for it.
It's the other players in this game (who do have the empathy) who only occasionally gain power and who always cause disasters when they do.
So who are you talking about? Politicians? Because I will say again, if you think empathy is their defining quality, you're not living on the same planet as the rest of us.
Empathy is 100% responsible for the crash.... It's when those with empathy are given power... that's when feel-good-everyone-can-afford-what-they-can't-afford bubbles happen.
Riiight, because Wall Street traders are known for their empathy above all other qualities.
What color is the sky on your planet?
Re:Yes, I will tell you that
on
House Passes CISPA
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Jesus H. Christ. Here is a very clear-cut case, having practically nothing to do with either entitlements or war, in which a strong majority of Democrats voted against expanding the power of the state, and a strong majority of Republicans voted for it. Just out of curiosity, is there anything that could convince you that there's a meaningful difference between the parties?
Universities don't have a "Automobile Science" dept. They don't have a 'Radio Science" dept. They don't have a "Television Science" dept. They don't have a "Pharmaceutical Science" dept. If you want to enter those fields, you study mechanical, or electrical, or chemical engineering, etc.
Others have already pointed out the flaws in your other examples. I thought I'd offer a link that shows why the one I bolded is a spectacularly bad example for the argument you're trying to make:
Infinitesimals never really went away -- they may not be formally used in calculus any more, but the practice of treating "dx" as though it were a real number (which works surprisingly well for many types of problems) is a powerful holdover from their era.
For example, authors are charged almost $3,000 to publish a single article in PLoS Biology.
PLoS, like all reputable open-access publishers, waives publication fees for authors who can't pay. Basically, the fees paid by authors on big grants from NIH, NSF, et al. which specifically cover publication fees (remember, a lot of traditional journals charge publication fees too, for things like color figures, and waivers are considerably harder to get in that case!) are in part subsidizing articles from authors who aren't on those grants and don't have the resources to pay the publication fees. It's not a perfect system by any means, but it seems to be working so far.
The same way lots of people are infected with some very potent diseases. It's just they're immune to it, so they're really just carriers of the disease. Heck, isn't something like chickenpox able to hide for decades in people only to infect those who haven't had it yet?
Not really comparable. Carriers are still infected, in the sense that the pathogens can still reproduce inside their bodies; they just don't show any symptoms, presumably because their immune systems are capabable of keeping the infection at a subclinical level. Malware infections, OTOH, are, well, binary -- a system is either infected or it's not.
The "Macs" that are infected with Windows malware, it sounds like, are really Apple-branded machines running both OS X and Windows, through dual-booting or with something like Parallels. The only thing comparable in medicine would be if someone were a chimera of different species, vulnerable to two different sets of diseases and with two different immune systems to deal with them, and both the diseases and the immune systems switched places throughout the day. IOW, there's really no such thing.
(At least) two different meanings of "science" are at work here. There's science as in "what scientists do," which is indeed a collection of methods and processes; and there's science as in "the body of relevant scientific knowledge," which is what juries need to know to decide on cases. Both are valid meanings, and it's important not to confuse the two.
I don't know of any conservatives who support this kind of effort.
Okay, great. Now, what are conservatives willing to do about it? We liberals are pretty clear about our preferred solutions (strengthening unions, anti-trust enforcement, etc.) Do you have any actual ideas from your side of the aisle? Note that "less regulation and lower union involvement" don't count, because it's pretty clear that that approach does not work in restraining oligopolist behavior.
Ah yes. You were one of those cynical, jaded people we 80's teenagers looked up to, because you'd seen and done it all.;)
Seriously, I suspect your cultural milestones are a lot closer to mine than they are to Beaver Cleaver's. Considering that a fair number of your contemporaries were the children of people born in the immediate post-war spike, it seems really absurd to lump the entire group together.
Baby boomers aren't really middle-aged any more. Depending on how you define "baby boomer," "middle age," and "old age," anyway. But if you were born five years after the end of WW2, you're old enough to start collecting Social Security this year.
And some other asshat has to drag out the term "denialist".
There's no other shoe that fits. If you want to propose a different word, feel free to do so -- but you can't have "skeptic," because that means something different, sorry.
"The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third."
Indeed, if the cops are going around robbing and murdering, why should any of us worry about a Facebook profile?
Slashdot Mirror
and no force of law behind their unlawful detentions? No more harassment that I have to put up with or be arrested? No more "VIPR" teams roaming the highways?
Yep, exactly like inmates in private prisons can leave any time they want.
Can you really say someone "invented" something if they never actually managed to build it? I have tremendous respect for the work Babbage and Lovelace did, but honestly, I'm not sure they invented the computer any more than da Vinci invented the airplane.
Wow, somebody really needs to get laid.
Microsoft is giving away technology at no cost to help law enforcement gather data from computers? So is open source. Get over your bad self.
OSS forensics tools are available to everyone, and provided by people who generally believe in giving away their code. COFFEE is available only to law enforcement, and provided by a company which generally makes money from selling closed-source, proprietary software. Please don't try to pretend that the two situations are even remotely comparable.
[T]hose who achieve ascent to power ... are all deluded.
FTFY.
Seriously. Politicians, Wall Street traders, CEOs, generals, religious leaders, pretty much anyone who is willing to do what you have to do to get and keep power over large numbers of other people -- they all live in a reality distortion field. And in the particular case under discussion (the 2008 crash) yes, damn it, Wall Street's RDF had a lot more to do with it than anyone else's RDF did. Those like OP who try to pretend otherwise are distorting reality themselves, and they're probably not even getting paid for it.
It's the other players in this game (who do have the empathy) who only occasionally gain power and who always cause disasters when they do.
So who are you talking about? Politicians? Because I will say again, if you think empathy is their defining quality, you're not living on the same planet as the rest of us.
Empathy is 100% responsible for the crash. ... It's when those with empathy are given power... that's when feel-good-everyone-can-afford-what-they-can't-afford bubbles happen.
Riiight, because Wall Street traders are known for their empathy above all other qualities.
What color is the sky on your planet?
Jesus H. Christ. Here is a very clear-cut case, having practically nothing to do with either entitlements or war, in which a strong majority of Democrats voted against expanding the power of the state, and a strong majority of Republicans voted for it. Just out of curiosity, is there anything that could convince you that there's a meaningful difference between the parties?
Considering most democrats voted no...and if this makes it to the presidents desk...what will Obama do?
Hopefully, veto it, like he said he would. Mind you, I'm not holding my breath.
... and then tell me "there's no difference" between Democrats and Republicans.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2012/roll192.xml
Universities don't have a "Automobile Science" dept. They don't have a 'Radio Science" dept. They don't have a "Television Science" dept. They don't have a "Pharmaceutical Science" dept. If you want to enter those fields, you study mechanical, or electrical, or chemical engineering, etc.
Others have already pointed out the flaws in your other examples. I thought I'd offer a link that shows why the one I bolded is a spectacularly bad example for the argument you're trying to make:
Pharmacology Departments World-Wide
(You may also find the Wikipedia article on pharmacology useful to understand why it's a rather large field of study.)
GPP is unintentionally correct: he's assigning the value "socialism" to "open textbooks," where no such equality previously existed.
Infinitesimals never really went away -- they may not be formally used in calculus any more, but the practice of treating "dx" as though it were a real number (which works surprisingly well for many types of problems) is a powerful holdover from their era.
For example, authors are charged almost $3,000 to publish a single article in PLoS Biology.
PLoS, like all reputable open-access publishers, waives publication fees for authors who can't pay. Basically, the fees paid by authors on big grants from NIH, NSF, et al. which specifically cover publication fees (remember, a lot of traditional journals charge publication fees too, for things like color figures, and waivers are considerably harder to get in that case!) are in part subsidizing articles from authors who aren't on those grants and don't have the resources to pay the publication fees. It's not a perfect system by any means, but it seems to be working so far.
The same way lots of people are infected with some very potent diseases. It's just they're immune to it, so they're really just carriers of the disease. Heck, isn't something like chickenpox able to hide for decades in people only to infect those who haven't had it yet?
Not really comparable. Carriers are still infected, in the sense that the pathogens can still reproduce inside their bodies; they just don't show any symptoms, presumably because their immune systems are capabable of keeping the infection at a subclinical level. Malware infections, OTOH, are, well, binary -- a system is either infected or it's not.
The "Macs" that are infected with Windows malware, it sounds like, are really Apple-branded machines running both OS X and Windows, through dual-booting or with something like Parallels. The only thing comparable in medicine would be if someone were a chimera of different species, vulnerable to two different sets of diseases and with two different immune systems to deal with them, and both the diseases and the immune systems switched places throughout the day. IOW, there's really no such thing.
(At least) two different meanings of "science" are at work here. There's science as in "what scientists do," which is indeed a collection of methods and processes; and there's science as in "the body of relevant scientific knowledge," which is what juries need to know to decide on cases. Both are valid meanings, and it's important not to confuse the two.
What argument? I'm just pointing things out. You know, facts and whatnot.
-1, disingenuous. You're disagreeing with OP; therefore, you have an argument (in both senses of the word.)
Your statement, attacking a position that nobody has taken, is the new political correctness.
This. A thousand times, this.
I don't know of any conservatives who support this kind of effort.
Okay, great. Now, what are conservatives willing to do about it? We liberals are pretty clear about our preferred solutions (strengthening unions, anti-trust enforcement, etc.) Do you have any actual ideas from your side of the aisle? Note that "less regulation and lower union involvement" don't count, because it's pretty clear that that approach does not work in restraining oligopolist behavior.
Ah yes. You were one of those cynical, jaded people we 80's teenagers looked up to, because you'd seen and done it all. ;)
Seriously, I suspect your cultural milestones are a lot closer to mine than they are to Beaver Cleaver's. Considering that a fair number of your contemporaries were the children of people born in the immediate post-war spike, it seems really absurd to lump the entire group together.
Baby boomers aren't really middle-aged any more. Depending on how you define "baby boomer," "middle age," and "old age," anyway. But if you were born five years after the end of WW2, you're old enough to start collecting Social Security this year.
And some other asshat has to drag out the term "denialist".
There's no other shoe that fits. If you want to propose a different word, feel free to do so -- but you can't have "skeptic," because that means something different, sorry.
And anyone who has their real name as their Facebook account is naive at best.
What about people who think using pseudonyms on Facebook -- or on Slashdot, for that matter -- actually protects their privacy?
Oh God, I didn't think of that angle. That's even more terrifying. WHO WILL STOP THE KILLER FACEBOOK PAGES?!?
"The man committed suicide, which meant the police didn't care if the Facebook document was published elsewhere, after robbing two women and murdering a third."
Indeed, if the cops are going around robbing and murdering, why should any of us worry about a Facebook profile?