kids don't have sexuality. you cannot separate sex from the hormonal changes that are related to it. sex cannot be understood until you have been in the mindset that can only be achieved through the influence of those hormones.
i don't think of post puberty people so much as 'kids' as woefully under-prepared proto-adults, however many people do still think of these folks as 'kids' which is fine in my book.
where your argument fails this situation is that porn is by defenition fantasy, it's purposely unrealistic. in porn sex happens in situations where it simply won't in real life, and the men get to treat women in ways they don't get to in real life (usually), and the women always like the treatment they get in porn while in real life they will appreciate such treatment much less often.
porn is fine once you've got some bearings but it's a horrible way to be introduced to sexuality of any sort for the very first time.
the kind of zealotry described seems to go beyond people who liked a product and were tired of whiners. could you really put something like that past microsoft?
so does anyone know if this stream can be recorded on a linux box and what software to use? wasn't there another article stating silverlight would be used?
the proceedings are public and cannot be copyrighted since it would be 'sweat of the brow' so lets record it and put it on thepiratebay.
you know, i used to wonder if a malware site could look across into another tab and look at what i was typing. guess i'm closing the browser and restarting a single tab to do banking stuff now.
well sales tax on a single purchase taxes a larger percentage of a smaller income. but people with money buy alot of extra crap. i have no idea where that leaves the balance though.
wheren't alot of those shorts aimed at adults originally too? i thought they would play at the start of a WB movie in theaters. there defenitely seems to be a point (60's is my guess) where they started aiming them at kids (the 2nd duck dodgers, where the galaxy's supply of yo-yo polish is in danger, give me a damned break). but id' always thought the stuff from the 40's and 50's were aimed at adults first.
i've seen remote control airplanes smaller than 6 inches square made of styrofoam. that have cameras on them. the range sucks though. in fact the footage i've seen might have been the early stages of culminated in what this article is about. couldn't swear to it.
what you've just described is a cycle. students will encounter MS software in 'the real world' so they should be taught MS software. then, in "the real world" since they only know MS software, they stick to using it. in an educational environment it's tragic not to expose these students to more than one operating system. there is no argument for not having some machines dual booting windows/linux so that at least the curious can experiment. the highest it could possibly cost is that computer being down while it gets reformatted and reinstalled if something breaks, but that's going to be happening often enough with the purely windows machines anyways.
at best, since an entire school year is (i think) too long to just learn how to use a windows machine, it's not unreasonable to figure out some curricular for teaching at least some linux knowledge at some schools. if you have a computer teacher who knows it, they can figure out some things to put into a lesson plan.
it's not a perfect solution but a total monoculture is a sin at best and villainy at worst.
if you think your social skills are horrible, get a part time job doing some form of customer service. bagging groceries or handing out coffee might not me much social interaction but it's more than none and you'll work along side at least one person who's good at it whom you can learn from watching. plus having to do it for work forces you to put your mind in a mode where you *want* to deal with people and all the silly little pleasantries, which is half the battle.
the heat of combustion from firing the round would likely vaporise some of the toxin to be inhaled by the shooter. fire enough rounds and you're poisoning your own people.
another (much more generic) way to think about it is that momentum gives direction to energy. if you have energy that's not heat, you'll likely find momentum along with it.
Re:That's what abortions are for ...
on
My Genome, My Self?
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
the fact that you can boil a person down to 'non-viable' is fucking disgusting.
i know a guy with cystic fibrosis. his life is far from tragic, he's one of the most fun guys you could spend time with. even suggesting he shouldn't have been born just to 'save him the trouble' is just arrogant and uninformed.
everyone has their cross to bear, but if that cross is too heavy they should not be born? what's the threshold, where do we draw the line? should we abort someone who'll have autism? aspergers? cystic fibrosis? what's the list?
i can stalemate you easily on that abortion point too. we have no proof that it *isn't* a person at 12 weeks. there's really not much proof either way, it's all purely the realm of philosophy.
and: the phrase is 'mouth breathers' implying that unintelligent people often leave their mouths open when not speaking instead of closing them like us smarties.
but what's really sick is how you mix the beliefs that someone should be saved the suffering of their genetic disease with the idea that if they are born they're worthless as human beings. simply because they have a degenerative disease there is no reason to allow them to be born.
at best having a kid with such a disease is really just a crapshoot. but so is having a kid with when you have no known risks of passing on such a disease, it's just a crapshoot with better odds. and the gamble isn't whether or not the kid will have the disease, the gamble is whether or not the suffering will outweigh the joy in their lives if they should be born.
the lapse in morals and ethics is to assume that you have all the answers and that anyone who disagrees is wrong with such a topic.
it's the suffering that gives perspective to everything else.
Re:No nationalized insurance without eugenics!
on
My Genome, My Self?
·
· Score: 1
"shouldn't have kids?"
do you think your friends with cystic fibrosis should not have been born? who are you to impose your judgments on these people?
it's not immoral to have kids knowing they *might* have a disease, nor is it immoral to not have kids for the same reason. if the second couple had gotten the testing and it turned out positive, should they then have been barred from having kids? your assumption is that such offspring can have no contribution to society, that because someone has a disease and will live a shorter and more painful life that they have no worth. sure you save them all that suffering but they'll also never have joy. and if the fact that they wont be born makes them not ever knowing joy a moot point, well then it also makes the pain and suffering moot. does all that suffering outweigh any joy they might have during their lives? would they even view it as suffering?
you'd advocate people lose their insurance simply for procreating, not even with a check to see if the child was born with the *costly* disease first. costly, that's really what you're arguing. you realize that, right? for you to argue that a life filled with lots of suffering has to be meaningless is just insane. i have a friend who has cystic fibrosis (well not exactly but it's something very close) he's got one of the most fulfilling lives i can think of. he has no fear of doing anything he thinks would be fun because he realizes how little time he's got to cram it all in. would you ask someone like that if they should not have been born if his parents knew he *might* be born with this disease?
if you think people should not be born into a life of suffering, lets start with abusive homes first. parents who are going to senselessly beat their kids, or sexually molest them. these families have a much greater cost to society than people with genetic diseases.
the other difference between a gun and a hammer is that when both are held by an attacker and an intended victim, only the gun offers either a level field or possibly gives the victim an advantage, where the hammer gives the advantage to whoever is strongest and most violent.
you came up with two songs with silly lyrics, one of which really is just a nice simple song not intended to be really about anything (octopuss' garden) and you defend the band that wrote Astronomy Domine? jesus have you listened to any Floyd past the wall and darkside?
they named a song 'several species of small furry animals gathered around in a cave and grooving with a pict.' that alone offsets the weirdness of 'i am the walrus.' sure they were a good band and wrote one of the best albums ever made, but syd went way off his rocker before they got rid of him and alot of the stuff they came up with right after that was really sort of juvenile attempts at lofty 'meaningful' lyrics (you choose the place, i'll choose the time/and i'll climb/that hill in my own way/just wait a while for the right day).
i mean don't get me wrong i love the floyd, i love the beatles, but if you compare the musical arrangements the beatles used with alot of what floyd used, floyd gets kicked up and down the street. sure floyd did a wierd 7/4 signature with 'money', but the beatles used 3 time signatures in 'here comes the sun'.
musically the beatles did alot more interesting thigns i think.
and there are great bands around today, but theres alot of pure crap too. there's phenominal talent in a band like vampire weekend, but then we have to suffer through the pretentiousness of panic at the disco, the mediocrity of paramour, the boringness of nicleback...
in any age though the mediocrity outweighs the brilliance, but the wierdness of 'i am the walruss' doesn't negate the beatles contributions. and octopus's' garden is just a good song, get over it.
i hate to jump down your throat but the treatment you gave the gp was really unjustified.
Slashdot Mirror
an invasion of mainland japan would have killed a lot more people than the bombs ever could have.
kids don't have sexuality. you cannot separate sex from the hormonal changes that are related to it. sex cannot be understood until you have been in the mindset that can only be achieved through the influence of those hormones.
i don't think of post puberty people so much as 'kids' as woefully under-prepared proto-adults, however many people do still think of these folks as 'kids' which is fine in my book.
where your argument fails this situation is that porn is by defenition fantasy, it's purposely unrealistic. in porn sex happens in situations where it simply won't in real life, and the men get to treat women in ways they don't get to in real life (usually), and the women always like the treatment they get in porn while in real life they will appreciate such treatment much less often.
porn is fine once you've got some bearings but it's a horrible way to be introduced to sexuality of any sort for the very first time.
the kind of zealotry described seems to go beyond people who liked a product and were tired of whiners. could you really put something like that past microsoft?
so does anyone know if this stream can be recorded on a linux box and what software to use? wasn't there another article stating silverlight would be used?
the proceedings are public and cannot be copyrighted since it would be 'sweat of the brow' so lets record it and put it on thepiratebay.
plus target isn't ruining local economies.
you know, i used to wonder if a malware site could look across into another tab and look at what i was typing. guess i'm closing the browser and restarting a single tab to do banking stuff now.
well sales tax on a single purchase taxes a larger percentage of a smaller income. but people with money buy alot of extra crap. i have no idea where that leaves the balance though.
what i caught onto was you promising not to exploit uranus because people might notice.
what? sorry i spaced out early in your post.
wheren't alot of those shorts aimed at adults originally too? i thought they would play at the start of a WB movie in theaters. there defenitely seems to be a point (60's is my guess) where they started aiming them at kids (the 2nd duck dodgers, where the galaxy's supply of yo-yo polish is in danger, give me a damned break). but id' always thought the stuff from the 40's and 50's were aimed at adults first.
man, chuck jones was a genius.
dude, what are you talking about? they had one in oceans 11!
styrofoam?
i've seen remote control airplanes smaller than 6 inches square made of styrofoam. that have cameras on them. the range sucks though. in fact the footage i've seen might have been the early stages of culminated in what this article is about. couldn't swear to it.
ever hear the phrase "self fulfilling prophecy?"
what you've just described is a cycle. students will encounter MS software in 'the real world' so they should be taught MS software. then, in "the real world" since they only know MS software, they stick to using it. in an educational environment it's tragic not to expose these students to more than one operating system. there is no argument for not having some machines dual booting windows/linux so that at least the curious can experiment. the highest it could possibly cost is that computer being down while it gets reformatted and reinstalled if something breaks, but that's going to be happening often enough with the purely windows machines anyways.
at best, since an entire school year is (i think) too long to just learn how to use a windows machine, it's not unreasonable to figure out some curricular for teaching at least some linux knowledge at some schools. if you have a computer teacher who knows it, they can figure out some things to put into a lesson plan.
it's not a perfect solution but a total monoculture is a sin at best and villainy at worst.
if you think your social skills are horrible, get a part time job doing some form of customer service. bagging groceries or handing out coffee might not me much social interaction but it's more than none and you'll work along side at least one person who's good at it whom you can learn from watching. plus having to do it for work forces you to put your mind in a mode where you *want* to deal with people and all the silly little pleasantries, which is half the battle.
the heat of combustion from firing the round would likely vaporise some of the toxin to be inhaled by the shooter. fire enough rounds and you're poisoning your own people.
how many pretty decent coders that can produce solid, though non-genius, code would you turn down that way?
me too, i pictured godzilla and mothra in an epic battle while waiting for code to compile.
i read 'text only mirror' and my first thought was 'how in hell do they choose what gets reflected?'
another (much more generic) way to think about it is that momentum gives direction to energy. if you have energy that's not heat, you'll likely find momentum along with it.
the fact that you can boil a person down to 'non-viable' is fucking disgusting.
i know a guy with cystic fibrosis. his life is far from tragic, he's one of the most fun guys you could spend time with. even suggesting he shouldn't have been born just to 'save him the trouble' is just arrogant and uninformed.
everyone has their cross to bear, but if that cross is too heavy they should not be born? what's the threshold, where do we draw the line? should we abort someone who'll have autism? aspergers? cystic fibrosis? what's the list?
i can stalemate you easily on that abortion point too. we have no proof that it *isn't* a person at 12 weeks. there's really not much proof either way, it's all purely the realm of philosophy.
and: the phrase is 'mouth breathers' implying that unintelligent people often leave their mouths open when not speaking instead of closing them like us smarties.
but what's really sick is how you mix the beliefs that someone should be saved the suffering of their genetic disease with the idea that if they are born they're worthless as human beings. simply because they have a degenerative disease there is no reason to allow them to be born.
at best having a kid with such a disease is really just a crapshoot. but so is having a kid with when you have no known risks of passing on such a disease, it's just a crapshoot with better odds. and the gamble isn't whether or not the kid will have the disease, the gamble is whether or not the suffering will outweigh the joy in their lives if they should be born.
the lapse in morals and ethics is to assume that you have all the answers and that anyone who disagrees is wrong with such a topic.
it's the suffering that gives perspective to everything else.
"shouldn't have kids?"
do you think your friends with cystic fibrosis should not have been born? who are you to impose your judgments on these people?
it's not immoral to have kids knowing they *might* have a disease, nor is it immoral to not have kids for the same reason. if the second couple had gotten the testing and it turned out positive, should they then have been barred from having kids? your assumption is that such offspring can have no contribution to society, that because someone has a disease and will live a shorter and more painful life that they have no worth. sure you save them all that suffering but they'll also never have joy. and if the fact that they wont be born makes them not ever knowing joy a moot point, well then it also makes the pain and suffering moot. does all that suffering outweigh any joy they might have during their lives? would they even view it as suffering?
you'd advocate people lose their insurance simply for procreating, not even with a check to see if the child was born with the *costly* disease first. costly, that's really what you're arguing. you realize that, right? for you to argue that a life filled with lots of suffering has to be meaningless is just insane. i have a friend who has cystic fibrosis (well not exactly but it's something very close) he's got one of the most fulfilling lives i can think of. he has no fear of doing anything he thinks would be fun because he realizes how little time he's got to cram it all in. would you ask someone like that if they should not have been born if his parents knew he *might* be born with this disease?
if you think people should not be born into a life of suffering, lets start with abusive homes first. parents who are going to senselessly beat their kids, or sexually molest them. these families have a much greater cost to society than people with genetic diseases.
never played grand theft auto have you? the game surely taught him that he was supposed to hit a lamp post every 35 feet.
the other difference between a gun and a hammer is that when both are held by an attacker and an intended victim, only the gun offers either a level field or possibly gives the victim an advantage, where the hammer gives the advantage to whoever is strongest and most violent.
you came up with two songs with silly lyrics, one of which really is just a nice simple song not intended to be really about anything (octopuss' garden) and you defend the band that wrote Astronomy Domine? jesus have you listened to any Floyd past the wall and darkside?
they named a song 'several species of small furry animals gathered around in a cave and grooving with a pict.' that alone offsets the weirdness of 'i am the walrus.' sure they were a good band and wrote one of the best albums ever made, but syd went way off his rocker before they got rid of him and alot of the stuff they came up with right after that was really sort of juvenile attempts at lofty 'meaningful' lyrics (you choose the place, i'll choose the time/and i'll climb/that hill in my own way/just wait a while for the right day).
i mean don't get me wrong i love the floyd, i love the beatles, but if you compare the musical arrangements the beatles used with alot of what floyd used, floyd gets kicked up and down the street. sure floyd did a wierd 7/4 signature with 'money', but the beatles used 3 time signatures in 'here comes the sun'.
musically the beatles did alot more interesting thigns i think.
and there are great bands around today, but theres alot of pure crap too. there's phenominal talent in a band like vampire weekend, but then we have to suffer through the pretentiousness of panic at the disco, the mediocrity of paramour, the boringness of nicleback...
in any age though the mediocrity outweighs the brilliance, but the wierdness of 'i am the walruss' doesn't negate the beatles contributions. and octopus's' garden is just a good song, get over it.
i hate to jump down your throat but the treatment you gave the gp was really unjustified.