You're right, to an extent. Living without pain is very hard--some individuals born without the ability have hellish lives as a result. But sometimes, pain teaches us lessons that aren't so good, like "I should never touch anyone for the rest of my life," because touching is so strongly associated with pain. How people with this sort of thing varies from one individual to the next, but for someone with a deeply ingrained irrational fear based on some painful experience, maybe removing the memory could be a good thing.
Another way of looking at it is this: if you are raped, and the idea of sex is permanently distorted in your mind by the memory, then this memory is a punishment for something that isn't your fault, haunting you and messing up your life to this day. Wouldn't it be a good thing to allow the *option* of removing this weight from one's shoulders?
This is anecdotal and perhaps not particularly interesting, but the last three times I've had antibiotics I was given ten days worth. I am in California FYI. And, I do not know the answer to your question, but I am interested.
Yeah, grandparent seems to imply that the public school system *isn't* hopelessly behind those of its students who are well-educated. That concept is so far removed from my personal experience that I am not sure how to react.
Hahaha. That's so true, but the whole point of middle management is to make bad engineering decisions for political (read: "stupid") reasons, because the people who know enough wouldn't, and the people above them think it'll save money to have a political layer (that is, a stupidity) like that inbetween. The people at the top can't make those decisions directly, because when they screw up, someone has to take the blame. So these people are pushed to make "the hard decisions", then get blamed for it when they turned out to be "the stupid decisions". So, execs keep their noses clean, and engineers get bypassed. Of course, if middle management has their way, they push the responsibility on down as far as they can, but that's irrelevant from the perspective of the execs who put the stupidity layer in place.
Though you have a point, you've only made half of it. While they reduce the overall cost of the operation, they also reduce the cost to you--looking something up on google is far more convenient than driving to the library and looking something up, even if you amortize the trip across all the research you do while you're there. This reduced cost means you (the generic user, not "you" you) do far more searches on Google than you would trips to the library for the same information.
So, while you're probably right that they're saving energy, it's very unlikely there's a one-to-one correspondence between Google searches and trips to the library in absence of a Google.
George Washington did not claim to be of Christian faith. Note that he did not claim otherwise, either, but it was slightly controversial at the time, and certainly not implied by his silence. I'd like to offer the following quotes from this site. (I have not checked their quotes against the primary sources.)
In concluding the interview, Dr. Wilson said "I have diligently perused every line
that Washington ever gave to the public, and I do not find one expression in which he
pledges him self as a believer in Christianity. I think anyone who will candidly do as I
have done, will come to the conclusion that he was a Deist and nothing more"
(Remsberg, pp. 121-122, emphasis added).
In February 1800, after Washington's death, Thomas Jefferson wrote this statement in
his personal journal
Dr. Rush told me (he had it from Asa Green) that when the clergy addressed General
Washington, on his departure from the government, it was observed in their consultation
that he had never, on any occasion, said a word to the public which showed a belief in
the Christian religion, and they thought they should so pen their address as to force him
at length to disclose publicly whether he was a Christian or not. However, he observed,
the old fox was too cunning for them. He answered every article of their address
particularly, except that, which he passed over without notice....
I know that Gouverneur Morris [principal drafter of the constitution], who claimed to
be in his secrets, and believed him self to be so, has often told me that General
Washington believed no more in that system [Christianity] than he did" (quoted in
Remsberg, p. 123 from Jefferson's Works, Vol. 4, p. 572, emphasis added).
Your point is solid, because what's relevant is whether that's been true recently--let's say, the last hundred years. It is, however, factually false. The religious views of all the founding fathers and early presidents are not all known, and they are certainly not all the same, but the common theme is Deism. (There are good articles on the subject but I'm reluctant to link one without checking it; you can easily search for "founding fathers" "deism" and evaluate the claims for yourself, if you wish.)
Your comment is a decent guess based only on the summary, but if you actually read the article, you'll find a PDF link to the government report. The report specifically says that all cases of overlap are included in the fraud count, and not the technical violation count, and also gives the exact numbers. So yes, the total is correct. (The summary set off my "I don't think so"-dar the same way, but I went to check the article before I commented.)
That's funny. I worked there for almost the entire span mentioned between parent and grandparent, and I wouldn't say they haven't changed. I'd say they've changed a lot, for the worse;-)
That would be true if no error were introduced in counting and evaluating votes. I'm sure you wouldn't actually express confidence that the votes were counted 100% accurately if I mention sound bites like "Diebold" and "hanging chad", would you? And that's without bothering to make a valid argument. Even with the best of intentions and good design, there is still some error in any system as large as this. And, after attempting to quantify this error, an argument can be made that exit polls are more accurate than the actual election! (Though I am convinced by this argument, I won't try to make or defend it here--I am just mentioning its existence is implied by measurable error in both.)
Slashdot Mirror
Help! I followed your instructions and now I'm stuck on some site called Google!!
Doubling the number of privatized prisons in his state was one of Bush's main achievements as Governor of Texas. This is not a new thing.
You're right, to an extent. Living without pain is very hard--some individuals born without the ability have hellish lives as a result. But sometimes, pain teaches us lessons that aren't so good, like "I should never touch anyone for the rest of my life," because touching is so strongly associated with pain. How people with this sort of thing varies from one individual to the next, but for someone with a deeply ingrained irrational fear based on some painful experience, maybe removing the memory could be a good thing.
Another way of looking at it is this: if you are raped, and the idea of sex is permanently distorted in your mind by the memory, then this memory is a punishment for something that isn't your fault, haunting you and messing up your life to this day. Wouldn't it be a good thing to allow the *option* of removing this weight from one's shoulders?
This is anecdotal and perhaps not particularly interesting, but the last three times I've had antibiotics I was given ten days worth. I am in California FYI. And, I do not know the answer to your question, but I am interested.
Maybe they think 600 is "most" of 18 million? ;-)
Yeah, grandparent seems to imply that the public school system *isn't* hopelessly behind those of its students who are well-educated. That concept is so far removed from my personal experience that I am not sure how to react.
I'm impressed with your restraint. "Not surprising" is putting it a bit mildly. But maybe I'm just feeling grumpy this morning ;-)
Hahaha. That's so true, but the whole point of middle management is to make bad engineering decisions for political (read: "stupid") reasons, because the people who know enough wouldn't, and the people above them think it'll save money to have a political layer (that is, a stupidity) like that inbetween. The people at the top can't make those decisions directly, because when they screw up, someone has to take the blame. So these people are pushed to make "the hard decisions", then get blamed for it when they turned out to be "the stupid decisions". So, execs keep their noses clean, and engineers get bypassed. Of course, if middle management has their way, they push the responsibility on down as far as they can, but that's irrelevant from the perspective of the execs who put the stupidity layer in place.
Sigh.
68K employees, eh? My company settled for the cheaper 6502 employees, but they just don't work as hard ;-(
Though you have a point, you've only made half of it. While they reduce the overall cost of the operation, they also reduce the cost to you--looking something up on google is far more convenient than driving to the library and looking something up, even if you amortize the trip across all the research you do while you're there. This reduced cost means you (the generic user, not "you" you) do far more searches on Google than you would trips to the library for the same information. So, while you're probably right that they're saving energy, it's very unlikely there's a one-to-one correspondence between Google searches and trips to the library in absence of a Google.
I'm not arguing with you, but I'm interested to read more about this. Can you provide those sources?
Gotten is standard in American English.
Seriously, I've got nothing. I'm 27 and I think my brain is already going ;-)
My brain fell over while reading your post. I must not be geeky enough.
British Telecom tracks when you go to the bathroom? Yikes!
About 10,000. *sigh*
At the risk of being modded troll or flamebait, let me be the first to say that whoever put that tag on this article is an asshole.
Er . . . can someone explain why this is tagged "banana"? I don't get it.
Eh, it's not so bad having it in the summary. I haven't laughed harder at a /. summary since epoch. That makes it worth it in my book :-)
In concluding the interview, Dr. Wilson said "I have diligently perused every line that Washington ever gave to the public, and I do not find one expression in which he pledges him self as a believer in Christianity. I think anyone who will candidly do as I have done, will come to the conclusion that he was a Deist and nothing more" (Remsberg, pp. 121-122, emphasis added).
In February 1800, after Washington's death, Thomas Jefferson wrote this statement in his personal journal
Your point is solid, because what's relevant is whether that's been true recently--let's say, the last hundred years. It is, however, factually false. The religious views of all the founding fathers and early presidents are not all known, and they are certainly not all the same, but the common theme is Deism. (There are good articles on the subject but I'm reluctant to link one without checking it; you can easily search for "founding fathers" "deism" and evaluate the claims for yourself, if you wish.)
Your comment is a decent guess based only on the summary, but if you actually read the article, you'll find a PDF link to the government report. The report specifically says that all cases of overlap are included in the fraud count, and not the technical violation count, and also gives the exact numbers. So yes, the total is correct. (The summary set off my "I don't think so"-dar the same way, but I went to check the article before I commented.)
That's funny. I worked there for almost the entire span mentioned between parent and grandparent, and I wouldn't say they haven't changed. I'd say they've changed a lot, for the worse ;-)
I have mod points, but there's no +1 Cute option.
That would be true if no error were introduced in counting and evaluating votes. I'm sure you wouldn't actually express confidence that the votes were counted 100% accurately if I mention sound bites like "Diebold" and "hanging chad", would you? And that's without bothering to make a valid argument. Even with the best of intentions and good design, there is still some error in any system as large as this. And, after attempting to quantify this error, an argument can be made that exit polls are more accurate than the actual election! (Though I am convinced by this argument, I won't try to make or defend it here--I am just mentioning its existence is implied by measurable error in both.)