You have two exclusive statements...one which makes sense, the other which doesn't.
Who cares? I mean honestly, who does?
In the long run, this is quite a minor historical marker. We're going to see article 5 million and MAYBE that will matter a little more. Maybe.
You can't even quote Wikipedia on a college paper, so why should anyone be using it
Correct - it's rather dumb to use it on a college paper (like using a regular paper encyclopedia); however, Wikipedia is the fastest starting point and is a good medium on not only specific information on subjects and sources, but also on the opinions of people with education, expertise, and bias on their subjects. If you dig into some controversial topics' histories, there is actually some VERY good information to wade through and find sources on. The end result is not perfect, the system IS flawed, but the information that you can glean from digging and researching STARTING at Wikipedia is quite useful.
Plus, the specialized wikis that are popping up that are using wiki-style management for their small wikis (where REAL experts can actually post) may be the bigger genius behind wikipedia).
If your complaint about wikipedia is that the final articles are flawed, you're right...but look at the process behind some of those articles and the histories. Dig into that, and you find what you need.
Wow, my experience was almost the exact opposite. Mom stayed home, Dad worked outside (and we didn't hit the mid-middle class until just before I became a teenager). We never lacked anything when I was a kid, especially my older brother who is more or less ADD. Mom and Dad were good disciplinarians and made sure we didn't watch too much tv.
We didn't do a whole lot of vacations, and we were HAPPY.
Sometimes both parents working is way too much stress as well...I wish that more families would do a cost analysis on whether or not a second job is actually profitable (day care, gas, extra car, etc). Good parenting makes up for toys and games and all the "extras" that society says we need.
Unfortunately, it's very difficult to get two good kings in a row (or to NOT get five BAD kings in a row). Such is the genious of democracy...at least you can pick which bad leader you hate the least.
Studying history. Unlike a lot of people on Slashdot, it's my degree. This isn't anti-Catholic, it's anti-bad leadership (don't equate an attack on the papal political leadership as an attack on Catholicism).
The papacy since just after early Christianity has been more of a political position than a theological one, possessed by powerful men who were often friends or relatives of kings and nobility...particularly true in the middle ages.
John Paul II was probably the only good one in recent history; he was a man who I admired and believe he was an honest Christian. The more I hear and read about him, the more I wish that more leaders were like him (the only fault I ever found with his papacy was the mis-handling of the molestation cases, and I think that any position out of the vatican was more about the consistent - though aberrant - belief that they should handle their own matters of justice).
So do you mean that real scientists cannot be religious, or have a genuine faith in a deity? If so, you have just undermined any scientific thought that predates the 20th century.
If the Dems want to win in '08, they are barking up the wrong tree against Karl Rove. Few people care about Rove or what he did in his role at the White House. It almost doesn't matter because most situations are so clouded that it looks far too complicated to work out or too petty for anyone to realize that a situation goes beyond playing politics....and the Dems in Congress care too much about finding bad guys on the right wing rather than moving forward and trying to fix real problems that have solutions in the here and now.
With nothing positive coming out of the current Democratically-controlled Congress, they are sliding downhill hard and fast. Compounding these investigations after investigations with broken promises on legislation and further wasting taxpayer dollars (not to mention "ending the war" that the hard leftists were striving for, and even some further right), they are cutting their own tombstone for the next decade.
If they REALLY wanted to win, REALLY wanted change, they would put legislation after legislation, pared-down and direct, on the President's desk and force him to make the hard decisions on whether to sign. Instead, they are making the job easier for the right, who just has to sit back and watch them squirm.
I'm not sure if the hard left realizes that their path to correcting whatever problems they percieve is to win the Presidency - NOT waste precious taxpayer money and their own time playing politics over investigations.
Attack politics only works well as a defense or when expertly applied (which is VERY hard to accomplish), something the Dems aren't very good at. If they attempted a positive change and showed real leadership, backbone, and integrity, they could have owned the House, Senate, and Presidency for the next 2-3 terms. As it stands, they may have thrown it all away in less than a year.
Filter=bias here. This is a good thing...it may help show all sides of a story and cover those points which reporters leave out, and hopefully provide context to news stories.
Hopefully, this adds a little bit of legitimacy to people who actually know something of what they're writing about. The inherent problem with journalism is a journalism degree - you may be able to write a nice-sounding story, but what do you know about things like engineering, biology, history, police work, law, or anything on what is being written about?
You might be right if there were actually a biological thing called "race." There isn't. There are just a handful of differing general genetic traits, but we can all interbreed and produce offspring with different people groups.
Race is merely an invention to differentiate social strata - to prop people up and to keep people down.
By the way, I'm a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy, so no flames about me being a lefty, please.
The problem with your argument is that it promotes the interests of population centers over rural areas...who don't want to pay for city stuff they don't use and don't care about.
If this thing is going to be closer than some satellites, here's a cartoon that could creep you out. The premise was that a comet got too close and caused armageddon...
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.askaninja.com/ and http://www.homestarrunner.com/.
Sure, slashdot, maybe, but that's just so people can validate my sense of humor and I can troll liberals.
You have two exclusive statements...one which makes sense, the other which doesn't.
Who cares? I mean honestly, who does?
In the long run, this is quite a minor historical marker. We're going to see article 5 million and MAYBE that will matter a little more. Maybe.
You can't even quote Wikipedia on a college paper, so why should anyone be using it
Correct - it's rather dumb to use it on a college paper (like using a regular paper encyclopedia); however, Wikipedia is the fastest starting point and is a good medium on not only specific information on subjects and sources, but also on the opinions of people with education, expertise, and bias on their subjects. If you dig into some controversial topics' histories, there is actually some VERY good information to wade through and find sources on. The end result is not perfect, the system IS flawed, but the information that you can glean from digging and researching STARTING at Wikipedia is quite useful.
Plus, the specialized wikis that are popping up that are using wiki-style management for their small wikis (where REAL experts can actually post) may be the bigger genius behind wikipedia).
If your complaint about wikipedia is that the final articles are flawed, you're right...but look at the process behind some of those articles and the histories. Dig into that, and you find what you need.
And weren't these things inspired by designs from kids?
Wow, my experience was almost the exact opposite. Mom stayed home, Dad worked outside (and we didn't hit the mid-middle class until just before I became a teenager). We never lacked anything when I was a kid, especially my older brother who is more or less ADD. Mom and Dad were good disciplinarians and made sure we didn't watch too much tv.
We didn't do a whole lot of vacations, and we were HAPPY.
Sometimes both parents working is way too much stress as well...I wish that more families would do a cost analysis on whether or not a second job is actually profitable (day care, gas, extra car, etc). Good parenting makes up for toys and games and all the "extras" that society says we need.
Giving kids stuff isn't good parenting.
"Arrogance" was released by Atari early on, for the 2600.
My grandpa told me this same thing in less educated - and wiser - terms.
"Laziness is the mother of invention." Of course, I think someone else said it first.
Imagine when things get crazy when you settle with yourself out of court for an "undisclosed amount."
There's a Joseph Smith, the high authority on Egyptian, line here somewhere...
Unfortunately, it's very difficult to get two good kings in a row (or to NOT get five BAD kings in a row). Such is the genious of democracy...at least you can pick which bad leader you hate the least.
I was just thinking how to phrase a similar joke. They should have just stuck to making decent speakers to go in other cars.
I like Mad Max's solution more. A bomb on the gas tank is a nice way to get rid of naughty people.
Studying history. Unlike a lot of people on Slashdot, it's my degree. This isn't anti-Catholic, it's anti-bad leadership (don't equate an attack on the papal political leadership as an attack on Catholicism).
The papacy since just after early Christianity has been more of a political position than a theological one, possessed by powerful men who were often friends or relatives of kings and nobility...particularly true in the middle ages.
John Paul II was probably the only good one in recent history; he was a man who I admired and believe he was an honest Christian. The more I hear and read about him, the more I wish that more leaders were like him (the only fault I ever found with his papacy was the mis-handling of the molestation cases, and I think that any position out of the vatican was more about the consistent - though aberrant - belief that they should handle their own matters of justice).
Oh, waitaminute....
Torch=Flashlight. Got it. Was getting an interesting picture there...
Brits and their English, sheesh...
So do you mean that real scientists cannot be religious, or have a genuine faith in a deity? If so, you have just undermined any scientific thought that predates the 20th century.
You just described most of the Popes.
or even a wench to get it up on a trailer
Oh, good grief, I'll just let the mispelling be the joke in and of itself...
If the Dems want to win in '08, they are barking up the wrong tree against Karl Rove. Few people care about Rove or what he did in his role at the White House. It almost doesn't matter because most situations are so clouded that it looks far too complicated to work out or too petty for anyone to realize that a situation goes beyond playing politics....and the Dems in Congress care too much about finding bad guys on the right wing rather than moving forward and trying to fix real problems that have solutions in the here and now.
With nothing positive coming out of the current Democratically-controlled Congress, they are sliding downhill hard and fast. Compounding these investigations after investigations with broken promises on legislation and further wasting taxpayer dollars (not to mention "ending the war" that the hard leftists were striving for, and even some further right), they are cutting their own tombstone for the next decade.
If they REALLY wanted to win, REALLY wanted change, they would put legislation after legislation, pared-down and direct, on the President's desk and force him to make the hard decisions on whether to sign. Instead, they are making the job easier for the right, who just has to sit back and watch them squirm.
I'm not sure if the hard left realizes that their path to correcting whatever problems they percieve is to win the Presidency - NOT waste precious taxpayer money and their own time playing politics over investigations.
Attack politics only works well as a defense or when expertly applied (which is VERY hard to accomplish), something the Dems aren't very good at. If they attempted a positive change and showed real leadership, backbone, and integrity, they could have owned the House, Senate, and Presidency for the next 2-3 terms. As it stands, they may have thrown it all away in less than a year.
Filter=bias here. This is a good thing...it may help show all sides of a story and cover those points which reporters leave out, and hopefully provide context to news stories.
Hopefully, this adds a little bit of legitimacy to people who actually know something of what they're writing about. The inherent problem with journalism is a journalism degree - you may be able to write a nice-sounding story, but what do you know about things like engineering, biology, history, police work, law, or anything on what is being written about?
Has anyone ever done a study on what is probably the most inbred population on the planet - the European royals?
You might be right if there were actually a biological thing called "race." There isn't. There are just a handful of differing general genetic traits, but we can all interbreed and produce offspring with different people groups.
Race is merely an invention to differentiate social strata - to prop people up and to keep people down.
By the way, I'm a member of the vast right-wing conspiracy, so no flames about me being a lefty, please.
The problem with your argument is that it promotes the interests of population centers over rural areas...who don't want to pay for city stuff they don't use and don't care about.
If this thing is going to be closer than some satellites, here's a cartoon that could creep you out. The premise was that a comet got too close and caused armageddon...
Did you NOT watch Captain N, the Gamemaster? Sheesh...
Until you get carpet burns. Give me bruises on hardwood instead.