Some vaccinations DO have complications. A simple example would be certain types of flu vaccine, which can be dangerous for those with weakened immune systems (as some vaccines contain live, though weakened, viruses). There are a number of vaccines which, IIRC, do not work at all with inactivated viruses, so there remains some risk.
I think allergies might also play a role with certain vaccines, but I am not positive on that.
Like the right of my child to be school/raised an as risk free environment as possible?
Funny, I never knew about that right. I had understood "parenting" (like the right to choose what medical treatment your child receives) was a fundamental right recognized at the founding of the country, whereas public education was a relatively recent development.
But I suppose if you want you can declare anything a right; certainly that seems to be all the rage these days.
Give this man a medal (and a +5 mod), if more people on slashdot could admit when they were wrong and back down more we might actually make some progress now and then.
Not until we get that whole "exactly how reliable are SSDs and what is their failure mode" thing worked out, they wont. They will get a lot more popular, but Im keeping my non-IO-bound servers on mechanical drives until we get that figured out. Right now there seems to be way too much uncertainty.
At least with a mechanical drive you have some indication (SMART, bad sectors, slowing motor) that its about to die, and you have some reasonable expectation that it could last 5+ years; the same is not true of SSDs.
Comparing a 65w TDP to a 15w TDP is such a stretch its not even funny.
Im sorry, I love AMD, how cheap they are, their graphics, the competition they bring to intel, etc; but theyre so uncompetitive right now its not even funny. For $200 I can get an intel processor that can do over 1GB/sec of AES encryption (thats around 10gbit vpn tunnels, if youre keeping score) in a 20w package. They seriously need to get their act together, especially as regards power draw.
It doesnt have CPU graphics, but whether or not it has integrated graphics is up to the motherboard manufacturer. I have been looking at a number of server builds with various Xeon chips which dont have the Intel HD graphics, and a lot of them have Nuvoton graphics chips with a paltry amount of video RAM.
It boils down to, do you really want Sandy Bridge graphics chewing up an extra 10w of electricity in your CPU when you could just use a much more modest chip?
You have no chance of seeing the black hole, not only because of the distance but because of its innate unobservability. Your only evidence for its existence is what others have written, and I would guess that the sources which you have read do not include every scrap of evidence and math necessary to make its deduction possible.
That is my point; everyone takes much of what they "know" on the same kind of "faith" that christians have, especially historical events (which do not have a mathematical basis which can be derived independently).
I have never heard anyone claim that as the reason for their belief, and its certainly not the foundation for any apologetic I've heard. It was just an observation of the futility of trying to find an objective meaning or purpose in a random universe.
No. True is simply a value we assign to a fact. The only constraint is that it is logically consistent with the remaining true facts.
Objectivity and fact are synonyms. Something that is objective has a truth value that is irrespective of anyone's perceptions or beliefs. A for absolute scale, it depends on what is being discussed-- if it is "existence", the scale is "exists" or "does not exist". Some things have scale with more shades inbetween.
But you are saying that evil is defined on a relative, subjective scale, and denying that there is any higher authority to which one could appeal for such an objective scale.
Of course. Doing otherwise would be insane.
The problem remains that you cannot call your own personal beliefs "true" while asserting that they are subjective. Either they are true, or they are not, and truth is NOT subjective.
No, it is in the context of a judge enforcing penal justice upon the guilty.
Rape is never condoned in the bible, full stop. It carries hefty penalties, and I would hazard that the only reason it does not carry the death penalty is because then there would be left no provision for the woman at all.
Thats only a barely accurate summary of my post. Im saying that its not murder for a judge to execute the guilty upon conviction, and that God would qualify as the perfect judge due to his knowledge of the facts, his power to enforce, and his innate justice.
I do not think that any arbitrary evil deed would become a good deed if God were to perform it, there are things which God would not do because they would in fact remain evil deeds. I do not think God has done any, and most of the accusations leveled against God are examples of penal justice (and are in fact labeled as such in the bible-- see Habakkuk, for example).
So you are arguing that it is ok for God to kill needlessly, torture people and play around like a boy with an anthill and a magnifying glass because God made people,
Never said that, please re-read my post. I am not a fan of repeating myself, nor am I a fan of people twisting my words into something they are not.
But by that logic, would it not be just as acceptable for parents to rape and torture their children?
No, but then you seem to have failed to grasp what my argument was to begin with; im still not sure whether you are doing so on purpose or not. Are you?
You are right about lowering consumption, no arguments. My beef is with any attempt to compare first world countries with developing countries when it comes to energy consumption and generation.
FYI the folks in sodom and gomorrah werent killed because they were gay, they were killed because of their attempt to sodomize visitors to a town by violence.
Totally innocent, right?
And FYI the Bible explicitly endorses sex, theres an entire book of the bible devoted to it (Song of Songs).
It also is of dubious artistic merit, contains explicit sex scenes and glorifies violence.
If you will claim that it glorifies violence, would you also say that the Diary of Anne Frank glorifies violence? Because both are the same style of literature-- that is, historical writings, and both contain violence.
Slashdot Mirror
Promote political violence
Oh good gracious, youre actually serious, arent you?
You actually think the Tea Party counts as political violence in the sense of fascism?
the right-wing fascists have changed the definition of "communist" to "anything we don't like"
And the left wing communists have changed the word "fascist" to mean "anything we dont like" :)
We appear to be in a good old fashioned mexican standoff....
I'll admit that to me it only seems OK because I don't believe in the Right to Put Everyone In Danger By Being a Total Moron.
Do you also not believe that a parent has the right (rather than the doctor) to determine what kind of treatment his/her child receives?
More bluntly, is it the responsibility of the parent or of the state to keep the child healthy?
What party would that be, and who are they fielding as their 2012 candidate? Inquiring minds want to know.
Some vaccinations DO have complications. A simple example would be certain types of flu vaccine, which can be dangerous for those with weakened immune systems (as some vaccines contain live, though weakened, viruses). There are a number of vaccines which, IIRC, do not work at all with inactivated viruses, so there remains some risk.
I think allergies might also play a role with certain vaccines, but I am not positive on that.
Like the right of my child to be school/raised an as risk free environment as possible?
Funny, I never knew about that right. I had understood "parenting" (like the right to choose what medical treatment your child receives) was a fundamental right recognized at the founding of the country, whereas public education was a relatively recent development.
But I suppose if you want you can declare anything a right; certainly that seems to be all the rage these days.
Give this man a medal (and a +5 mod), if more people on slashdot could admit when they were wrong and back down more we might actually make some progress now and then.
Whose money, pray tell, are those taxes?
*braces for epic debate*
Not until we get that whole "exactly how reliable are SSDs and what is their failure mode" thing worked out, they wont. They will get a lot more popular, but Im keeping my non-IO-bound servers on mechanical drives until we get that figured out. Right now there seems to be way too much uncertainty.
At least with a mechanical drive you have some indication (SMART, bad sectors, slowing motor) that its about to die, and you have some reasonable expectation that it could last 5+ years; the same is not true of SSDs.
Not brick-and-mortar vendors, at least not in the DC area-- theyre about 150-200% normal price.
I agree with everything in your post.
I would buy that processor.
Comparing a 65w TDP to a 15w TDP is such a stretch its not even funny.
Im sorry, I love AMD, how cheap they are, their graphics, the competition they bring to intel, etc; but theyre so uncompetitive right now its not even funny. For $200 I can get an intel processor that can do over 1GB/sec of AES encryption (thats around 10gbit vpn tunnels, if youre keeping score) in a 20w package. They seriously need to get their act together, especially as regards power draw.
There are already Xeons with 20w and 45w TDP-- the Xeon E3 1220L and 1260L.
It doesnt have CPU graphics, but whether or not it has integrated graphics is up to the motherboard manufacturer. I have been looking at a number of server builds with various Xeon chips which dont have the Intel HD graphics, and a lot of them have Nuvoton graphics chips with a paltry amount of video RAM.
It boils down to, do you really want Sandy Bridge graphics chewing up an extra 10w of electricity in your CPU when you could just use a much more modest chip?
You have no chance of seeing the black hole, not only because of the distance but because of its innate unobservability. Your only evidence for its existence is what others have written, and I would guess that the sources which you have read do not include every scrap of evidence and math necessary to make its deduction possible.
That is my point; everyone takes much of what they "know" on the same kind of "faith" that christians have, especially historical events (which do not have a mathematical basis which can be derived independently).
I have never heard anyone claim that as the reason for their belief, and its certainly not the foundation for any apologetic I've heard. It was just an observation of the futility of trying to find an objective meaning or purpose in a random universe.
No. True is simply a value we assign to a fact. The only constraint is that it is logically consistent with the remaining true facts.
Objectivity and fact are synonyms. Something that is objective has a truth value that is irrespective of anyone's perceptions or beliefs. A for absolute scale, it depends on what is being discussed-- if it is "existence", the scale is "exists" or "does not exist". Some things have scale with more shades inbetween.
But you are saying that evil is defined on a relative, subjective scale, and denying that there is any higher authority to which one could appeal for such an objective scale.
Of course. Doing otherwise would be insane.
The problem remains that you cannot call your own personal beliefs "true" while asserting that they are subjective. Either they are true, or they are not, and truth is NOT subjective.
What makes you think the bible was, or that christians do so?
No, it is in the context of a judge enforcing penal justice upon the guilty.
Rape is never condoned in the bible, full stop. It carries hefty penalties, and I would hazard that the only reason it does not carry the death penalty is because then there would be left no provision for the woman at all.
Thats only a barely accurate summary of my post. Im saying that its not murder for a judge to execute the guilty upon conviction, and that God would qualify as the perfect judge due to his knowledge of the facts, his power to enforce, and his innate justice.
I do not think that any arbitrary evil deed would become a good deed if God were to perform it, there are things which God would not do because they would in fact remain evil deeds. I do not think God has done any, and most of the accusations leveled against God are examples of penal justice (and are in fact labeled as such in the bible-- see Habakkuk, for example).
So you are arguing that it is ok for God to kill needlessly, torture people and play around like a boy with an anthill and a magnifying glass because God made people,
Never said that, please re-read my post. I am not a fan of repeating myself, nor am I a fan of people twisting my words into something they are not.
But by that logic, would it not be just as acceptable for parents to rape and torture their children?
No, but then you seem to have failed to grasp what my argument was to begin with; im still not sure whether you are doing so on purpose or not. Are you?
It might also help that Bhutan has 38 passenger cars per 1000 people.
You are right about lowering consumption, no arguments. My beef is with any attempt to compare first world countries with developing countries when it comes to energy consumption and generation.
FYI the folks in sodom and gomorrah werent killed because they were gay, they were killed because of their attempt to sodomize visitors to a town by violence.
Totally innocent, right?
And FYI the Bible explicitly endorses sex, theres an entire book of the bible devoted to it (Song of Songs).
Yay +5 ignorant.
It also is of dubious artistic merit, contains explicit sex scenes and glorifies violence.
If you will claim that it glorifies violence, would you also say that the Diary of Anne Frank glorifies violence? Because both are the same style of literature-- that is, historical writings, and both contain violence.