With iTunes (not that this information is impossible to find, but I never explored enough to overcome my annoyance), I'm not even sure where the music files lived.
$HOME/Music/iTunes Library (or something like that... my PowerBook is at home and I'm at school.) Not too hard to find!
Re:It'll be a sad state of affairs when this happe
on
A Flu Pandemic?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
what makes you think my bosses are insane enough to invest that research money when the product is going to be confiscated?
When large numbers of people start dying, and your bosses face the possibility of contracting the disease and facing death themselves, I think you'll find that they'll suddenly develop a motivation to invest research money into cures.
As for your CD prices, that may be the case for pop music. For most of the music I listen to, which isn't quite as well known as your top 40s stuff, I find that the music stores in my area charge on average between $24 and $32 CAD.
In my opinion, the internet is way better and safer than alcohol and drugs any day.
I dunno about you, dude, but I've know people who have spend hours and hours of their time online because of their net addiction, often going to bed at 4:00 AM because they're so busy IMing. I've had friends fail out of school and lose their jobs because of this. I've never had a friend of mine lose their job because they smoked pot; even the most pot-addicted of them (and trust me, I know a few) are reasonably functional, and probably healthier than those people who stay up until 4:00 eating junk food and then getting little sleep and complaining about their "insomnia".
Last time I checked, morals are pretty important. Someone in advertising has morals that are entirely incompatible with mine. Anyways, no worries... I met someone else a few months later, and we're married now, so it all worked out!
After two hours of trying to get it to work under OS X without success, I pretty much gave up. Maybe it's just really undertested on that OS. Furthermore, the page links to some "instructions" which 404, so unless you can guess at the process, you're screwed.
It's true; the TV shows and movies I watch don't make me feel hyperstimulated, but then again, it's probably because I choose shows that are "quiet", i.e. the plot is straightforward, the action minimal, the number of cutscenes small, etc. For example, I was just horrified by the only episode of Iron Chef America that I watched. Within minutes I was so confused and so overwhelmed that I found it painful to watch the rest of the show, which was disappointing since I enjoyed the slower pace of the Japanese original considerably. I wouldn't watch shows like 24 or the majority of reality TV. I'm instead drawn to comedies like That 70s Show, South Park, Home Movies, etc. These are easy to watch for me, and don't affect me negatively. My taste in movies is similar: I tend to enjoy lightheared comedic fluff and rarely will choose to watch an action movie or a drama.
I will admit that there are times that I do appreciate advertising, but they're rare. For example, I go to the University of Toronto, and there are a number of school cafes and cafeterias that have taken to putting small, unintrusive signs on the street outside the building that they're on that list simply their specials of the day. This form of advertising is incredibly informative to those that would make use of it, and easily ignored to those that wouldn't. The majority of advertisements these days sadly seem to revolve around implanting name-brand recognition.
I agree with you... I feel betrayed when a site I frequent - and particularly one I pay for - decides to move to ad-based revenue. As I've mentioned a number of times and will continue to do, one of my favourite online organizations is LiveJournal, as they provide a sevice that many enjoy, free of charge and without ads, but offer enough subscription incentives that thousands of people happily fork over cash (myself included) for paid accounts. More companies should strive to emulate that business model, IMO.
Many slashdotters think its really kewl to block ads, but ads pay for the sites you are viewing, ads pay for slashdot (not nearly enough of us subscribe to keep this site running).
Slashdot, as well as every website I can think of that employs ad-based content could certainly find ways to cover costs and generate revenue without relying on ad-based income. LiveJournal, for instance, offers enough value-added content to subscribers that thousands and thousands of users happily pay; never has LiveJournal had to rely on ads. This is a business model which more online companies should seek to emulate.
I block and avoid as much as possible
on
Why Do You Block Ads?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I would like to use Opera, as it seems to run faster than Firefox on OS X, but given that it doesn't offer something like adblock, as far as I'm concerned, the web is unusable with it. I'm a very easily distracted and hyperstimulated person (I suspect that I'm a high functioning person with Asperger's syndrome), and the nature of ads these days is so obnoxious (shaking banner ads, bright and flashing colours that can have no purpose other than to induce epileptic seizures) that unless I block these graphics, I feel physically sick after several hours of using the web and cannot focus on the content of the page I'm trying to read. Because of this, I've blocked all the ads I've come across, and for months now that I have adblock configured to my liking, I've seldom seen a single one.
I feel similarly about movies and television. The ads on both of these mediums are designed to grab attention and maintain it, but I find them too intensive; the constant movement, colour, etc. makes me dizzy and anxious to the point that I feel extremely unpleasant and need to retreat to my home to relax. I now download ad-free content using Bittorrent and watch all my TV shows sans ads and my movies in the comfort of my own home, free of charge. Is this stealing? Absolutely, but given the psychologically manipulative tactics used in advertising these days, I don't particularly care. I'm fully aware that two wrongs don't make a right, but I feel no inclination to behave with the slightest bit of decency towards industries that treat me in such a vile manner.
(On the other hand, I fully do support companies that I feel treat me well. I happily pay for their products. I go see my favourite musicians in concert and buy their albums and make a point of saving money beforehand so that I can buy their albums and merchandise there to show my appreciation for them.)
The whole point of advertising these days is to be as intrusive as possible. For example, in Toronto right now, a movie theatre along one of our major highways, the QEW, wants to erect a huge LCD screen to present highway drivers with movie previews. The problem is that their proposed screen surpasses the size limitations set by the city. They're fighting to change the bylaws. Opponents are claiming that the ad will distract drivers and increase the probability of accidents, while the movie company is stating that there is no evidence of such a thing. The sad thing is that the city is even considering it, from my understanding. The entire purpose of the screen, it seems to me, is to distract drivers as the screen is not visible to anyone other than people in cars on this highway, so I can't even fathom how the theatre's claim has any merit whatsoever. It boggles my mind.
I mean, we're constantly being bombarded by advertising. Now when I go to the gas station, I have LCD screens ON THE GAS MACHINES blaring loud advertisements in my face. Similarly for the subway stations, which have essentially become painted with ads for TV shows. The hubcaps of taxis are now advertisements for TV stations. It's rare that I have a day where I don't end up using a urinal that forces ads into my face. Often, these ads are so wasteful from a resource perspective that I can't wrap my mind around it; for example, we have a TV show up here in Canada called Canada's Worst Driver. One of their advertising mechanisms is for a tow-truck to pull around a severely decimated car with a huge advertisement for the show printed on the side of the car. This is permissible in an era where gas prices are soaring and smog is becoming a huge problem in Toronto?
How can I possibly show even the slightest hint of respect for an industry that gladly stomps on my toes at every possible opportunity it gets? As far as I'm concerned, there is no lifeform worth less on the face of this planet than those in advertising, who bring almost nothing beneficial or worthy to the table of humanity, only forcing more mental pollution upon us. I once met someone with whom I was quite compatible, but upon hearing that this person was in college studying marketing, I sent them packing as I could never date someone with those ambitions, regardless of how amazingly we got along.
This may be true of the people that strike you as being anxious, but it is unlikely that these people have anxiety disorders. As someone with Generalized Anxiety Disorder, I can tell you that to an individual who suffers with anxiety, it is absolutely paramount (and a huge source of stress) that, apart from perhaps close friends and family, absolutely no one knows about it. The majority of anxiety sufferers are incredibly anxious that someone will discover that they are anxious (with good reason - try to explain to someone that you're just having a panic attack when you're in the midst of a panic attack and your limbs are seized up and jerking and your heart is racing at an insane pace), and hence, they often come across in public as very cool and collected despite the fact that underneath the surface, their minds are racing with anxious thoughts. People tell me that I'm seemingly one of the most mellow and relaxed people that they know. I'm one of the few anxiety sufferers I know that isn't shy about disclosing my anxiety (as it minimizes it to simply announce it before it causes problems), and everyone is absolutely amazed to hear that I have an anxiety disorder, and people who don't know me well are quite skeptical of that fact (despite the fact that even with extensive daily relaxation exercises, benzodiazepines, and 5-HTP, my quality of life is still significantly less than the average person).
If you're in column view, it has the exact same behaviour; the panel on the right, when you click on a file, will give you a preview of the file if possible and tell you all the relevant information (size, date modified, etc).
No, you can't hover over a file to get the information. All I have to say is thank god for that. I hate the insanely large "tooltip" windows that Windows pops up over every mouse hover. It's distracting and messy.
It deprives you of information about what you're looking at, you have to use the so called never needed right click to "get info" about files.
File Menu - Get Info or Cmd-I
This would not be a bad thing if you were given at least some information in at least one of the view modes about the files you are looking at (size etc) but no information is provided.
Go into the detail view, and you get "Date Modified" and "Size" fields. IIRC, you can also change this and pick which fields you'd like and in what order.
The rest are just folders created by certain apps which for whatever reason related to their function, think that you will be placing at least some music in those folders.
I totally understand your frustration here, but Apple can't be held accountable for folders created by applications that you install; furthermore, this is indicative of a shortcoming in those applications rather than a shortcoming in Finder. (I do agree that Spotlight should try to make some kind of distinction between them, though - perhaps displaying full path name relative to user dir if you hover over them.)
Perhaps he doesn't need the money, or has a moral opposition to Fuddruckers in some way? Not everyone sees the world with price tags; if they did, the GNU project wouldn't even exist.
this same professor "has caused outrage in the past with claims that white people are more intelligent than blacks and that criminal traits are genetically inherited."
I fail to see how making such claims invalidates his points; it's quite possible that both of those statements are true. Of course, the first of these two causes everyone to yank out the racist card, but honestly - at least in my case as a young gay while male - I think it's also possible that the average Asian is more intelligent than the average white person, and if that turned out to be supported by evidence, I'd hardly feel threatened by it.
While I'm as socially liberal as one can get, I'm getting rather sick of this politically correct bullshit we have to deal with where people freak out at the mere suggestion that one societal group is more intelligent or otherwise more capable than another in some fashion. It's important, in understanding different groups, whether they be ehtnicities, sexes, sexual orientations, etc. to recognize that they may characteristically demonstrate both strengths and weaknesses.
For example, I for one prefer working under women than under men, as I find that women in positions of power bring intelligence and motivation usually tempered by compassion to the table; men, on the other hand, in my experience, are more prone to let compassion fall by the wayside and dehumanize roles in the workplace. At the same time, I am much happier dating men than I can imagine I'd be dating women, as I find men are more direct, easier to communicate with due to their frankness, and easier to please than women.
Of course, that's not always the case, and to assume that it was would be silly, but there are trends, and I see no reason why they should be ignored.
I've lived with women a few times (I'm a gay dude, so only as friends), and I have to say... where does all the toilet paper go?! What can they do with that much of it? I typically go through maybe a roll every couple weeks on my own. When I had a female roommate, we'd use at least a couple rolls a week. Some days, I'd replace the roll, and in the evening I'd come home and my mind would fart at how small it had gotten during the day while I was at school.
Hear, hear. I seldom - if ever - play games. They were fun when I was younger, but I've lost interest, so game availability lost any sway in my choice of OS.
Tell me, in layman's terms, something positive that successful marketers and advertisers bring to the table apart from the ability to make (also possibly useless) already overwealthy stakeholders rich, and I may dispel my notions that your profession is the blemish on the backside of humanity.
In the majority of cases that I've witnessed, your industry preys psychologically on human psychology and our insecurities. When I think of software, I think of a majority of products that are possibly overpriced but in many cases, useful and worth the expense. When I think of advertising, I think of intrusive tactics on television, though e-mails, at the beginning of movies, and on billboards on highways that get in my face and distract me against my desires.
Why do you think we have such hostility against marketing? In perhaps 1% of cases would I say that advertisements are informative instead of exploitative and obnoxious. In fact, due to advertising, I've had to stop watching TV, stop going to the movies (on time - 20 minutes late seems to be okay), stop reading magazines (of which 2/3rds are often ads), and install ad blockers for e-mail and the web. I get phone calls with live and recorded product promotions, where my sense of politeness and my sense of privacy have to fight one another. I fear answering my door, because about a quarter of the time, it's someone advertising and wanting money out of me. My snail mail box is packed with "coupons" (which are hardly coupons much less promotions) and repetitive flyers. How can you possibly advocate that we should accept advertising like we accept software? It's absolutely ludicrous.
You people should be ashamed of yourselves. It's utterly disgusting how you intrude into our lives. I met someone with whom I was quite compatible, but upon discovering that he was in college for marketing, I refused to date him because after years of having to deal with your bullshit, I can no longer do so. The bombardment of garbage I experience in a day is overstimulating and makes me feel utterly sick.
Do us a favour and get a real job doing something constructive for society instead of capitalizing on the rest of us and making money off of desire and shortcomings. You are reprehensible.
If you read their website, you'd realize that this mouse falls entirely in line with Apple's philosophy and makes complete sense: it behaves like a one button mouse by default, and multi-button functionality can be enabled by users that require it. This provides maximum usability in the default scenario, but offers complete flexibility to knowledgable users.
This philosophy, IMO, is why applications like Photoshop also succeed. As a Photoshop newbie that doesn't want or need to learn how to do anything other than the basics, I find that by design, I can go into Photoshop and do what I need to do in a matter of seconds without digging through a nest of convoluted menus. The simple and most readily desired features are at the forefront where they should be, and the complexity is hidden.
While I agree with you and feel that it would be fascinating to do cross-racial studies to further human knowledge, I think that the problem here is human psychology: there are a significant number of us out here who couldn't handle the information that such studies generate and would use it stupidly as justification to manipulate things like, say, hiring policies. ("He's Asian, and they're typically intelligent and diligent, so we'll hire him over the black applicant.")
Does that mean that we shouldn't perform those studies? Personally, I'd say no, but I think we'd better ensure that they don't disadvantage entire racial groups based on the data they generate, and we'd better think whether or not it's even possible to prevent it from happening.
Last I checked, Americans aren't a 'race'. I largely suspect, too, that people that claim to hate Americans actually mean that they hate American politics and feel that a signficiant chunk of the population supports said politics, or, at the very least, doesn't take the steps to change them.
I'll second that. Cognitive behavioural therapy did absolute worlds of good for my generalized anxiety disorder, but 5-HTP enabled me to take the strategies learned during my anxiety recovery and take them a step further.
Furthermore, SSRIs take several weeks to build up in the body until they're effective and often demonstrate a large number of unpleasant side effects and withdrawal, whereas 5-HTP works immediately, usually has no side effects (may cause nausea in some, particularly in the presence of vitamin B-6 which metabolizes it as serotonin aka 5-HT, and serotonin receptors in the stomach can be overstimmed), and demonstrates absolutely no withdrawal.
I would never even consider taking an SSRI in light of how effective 5-HTP can be.
Absolutely, but is it possible that 5-HT and NE levels in the brain are influenced through actions? Given the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (albeit, sadly, this research is lacking in light of our society's lack of desire to embrace such techniques in light of instantaneous solutions like SSRIs / SNRIs that often have long-term consequences), I would conclude that this is very likely the case. I overcame, for the most part, generalized anxiety disorder without medication and via therapy, and hence I believe that it is possible to alter neurochemistry through behaviour.
Slashdot Mirror
With iTunes (not that this information is impossible to find, but I never explored enough to overcome my annoyance), I'm not even sure where the music files lived.
$HOME/Music/iTunes Library
(or something like that... my PowerBook is at home and I'm at school.) Not too hard to find!
what makes you think my bosses are insane enough to invest that research money when the product is going to be confiscated?
When large numbers of people start dying, and your bosses face the possibility of contracting the disease and facing death themselves, I think you'll find that they'll suddenly develop a motivation to invest research money into cures.
I have never paid anything but PayPal for allofmp3.com, and have certainly never had any issues with such.
This is how liberty dies...with thunderous fatness.
And, if my digestive system is par for the course when faced with a large McDonald's meal, with thunderous flatulence.
As for your CD prices, that may be the case for pop music. For most of the music I listen to, which isn't quite as well known as your top 40s stuff, I find that the music stores in my area charge on average between $24 and $32 CAD.
In my opinion, the internet is way better and safer than alcohol and drugs any day.
I dunno about you, dude, but I've know people who have spend hours and hours of their time online because of their net addiction, often going to bed at 4:00 AM because they're so busy IMing. I've had friends fail out of school and lose their jobs because of this. I've never had a friend of mine lose their job because they smoked pot; even the most pot-addicted of them (and trust me, I know a few) are reasonably functional, and probably healthier than those people who stay up until 4:00 eating junk food and then getting little sleep and complaining about their "insomnia".
Last time I checked, morals are pretty important. Someone in advertising has morals that are entirely incompatible with mine. Anyways, no worries... I met someone else a few months later, and we're married now, so it all worked out!
After two hours of trying to get it to work under OS X without success, I pretty much gave up. Maybe it's just really undertested on that OS. Furthermore, the page links to some "instructions" which 404, so unless you can guess at the process, you're screwed.
It's true; the TV shows and movies I watch don't make me feel hyperstimulated, but then again, it's probably because I choose shows that are "quiet", i.e. the plot is straightforward, the action minimal, the number of cutscenes small, etc. For example, I was just horrified by the only episode of Iron Chef America that I watched. Within minutes I was so confused and so overwhelmed that I found it painful to watch the rest of the show, which was disappointing since I enjoyed the slower pace of the Japanese original considerably. I wouldn't watch shows like 24 or the majority of reality TV. I'm instead drawn to comedies like That 70s Show, South Park, Home Movies, etc. These are easy to watch for me, and don't affect me negatively. My taste in movies is similar: I tend to enjoy lightheared comedic fluff and rarely will choose to watch an action movie or a drama.
I will admit that there are times that I do appreciate advertising, but they're rare. For example, I go to the University of Toronto, and there are a number of school cafes and cafeterias that have taken to putting small, unintrusive signs on the street outside the building that they're on that list simply their specials of the day. This form of advertising is incredibly informative to those that would make use of it, and easily ignored to those that wouldn't. The majority of advertisements these days sadly seem to revolve around implanting name-brand recognition.
I agree with you... I feel betrayed when a site I frequent - and particularly one I pay for - decides to move to ad-based revenue. As I've mentioned a number of times and will continue to do, one of my favourite online organizations is LiveJournal, as they provide a sevice that many enjoy, free of charge and without ads, but offer enough subscription incentives that thousands of people happily fork over cash (myself included) for paid accounts. More companies should strive to emulate that business model, IMO.
Many slashdotters think its really kewl to block ads, but ads pay for the sites you are viewing, ads pay for slashdot (not nearly enough of us subscribe to keep this site running).
Slashdot, as well as every website I can think of that employs ad-based content could certainly find ways to cover costs and generate revenue without relying on ad-based income. LiveJournal, for instance, offers enough value-added content to subscribers that thousands and thousands of users happily pay; never has LiveJournal had to rely on ads. This is a business model which more online companies should seek to emulate.
I would like to use Opera, as it seems to run faster than Firefox on OS X, but given that it doesn't offer something like adblock, as far as I'm concerned, the web is unusable with it. I'm a very easily distracted and hyperstimulated person (I suspect that I'm a high functioning person with Asperger's syndrome), and the nature of ads these days is so obnoxious (shaking banner ads, bright and flashing colours that can have no purpose other than to induce epileptic seizures) that unless I block these graphics, I feel physically sick after several hours of using the web and cannot focus on the content of the page I'm trying to read. Because of this, I've blocked all the ads I've come across, and for months now that I have adblock configured to my liking, I've seldom seen a single one.
I feel similarly about movies and television. The ads on both of these mediums are designed to grab attention and maintain it, but I find them too intensive; the constant movement, colour, etc. makes me dizzy and anxious to the point that I feel extremely unpleasant and need to retreat to my home to relax. I now download ad-free content using Bittorrent and watch all my TV shows sans ads and my movies in the comfort of my own home, free of charge. Is this stealing? Absolutely, but given the psychologically manipulative tactics used in advertising these days, I don't particularly care. I'm fully aware that two wrongs don't make a right, but I feel no inclination to behave with the slightest bit of decency towards industries that treat me in such a vile manner.
(On the other hand, I fully do support companies that I feel treat me well. I happily pay for their products. I go see my favourite musicians in concert and buy their albums and make a point of saving money beforehand so that I can buy their albums and merchandise there to show my appreciation for them.)
The whole point of advertising these days is to be as intrusive as possible. For example, in Toronto right now, a movie theatre along one of our major highways, the QEW, wants to erect a huge LCD screen to present highway drivers with movie previews. The problem is that their proposed screen surpasses the size limitations set by the city. They're fighting to change the bylaws. Opponents are claiming that the ad will distract drivers and increase the probability of accidents, while the movie company is stating that there is no evidence of such a thing. The sad thing is that the city is even considering it, from my understanding. The entire purpose of the screen, it seems to me, is to distract drivers as the screen is not visible to anyone other than people in cars on this highway, so I can't even fathom how the theatre's claim has any merit whatsoever. It boggles my mind.
I mean, we're constantly being bombarded by advertising. Now when I go to the gas station, I have LCD screens ON THE GAS MACHINES blaring loud advertisements in my face. Similarly for the subway stations, which have essentially become painted with ads for TV shows. The hubcaps of taxis are now advertisements for TV stations. It's rare that I have a day where I don't end up using a urinal that forces ads into my face. Often, these ads are so wasteful from a resource perspective that I can't wrap my mind around it; for example, we have a TV show up here in Canada called Canada's Worst Driver. One of their advertising mechanisms is for a tow-truck to pull around a severely decimated car with a huge advertisement for the show printed on the side of the car. This is permissible in an era where gas prices are soaring and smog is becoming a huge problem in Toronto?
How can I possibly show even the slightest hint of respect for an industry that gladly stomps on my toes at every possible opportunity it gets? As far as I'm concerned, there is no lifeform worth less on the face of this planet than those in advertising, who bring almost nothing beneficial or worthy to the table of humanity, only forcing more mental pollution upon us. I once met someone with whom I was quite compatible, but upon hearing that this person was in college studying marketing, I sent them packing as I could never date someone with those ambitions, regardless of how amazingly we got along.
This may be true of the people that strike you as being anxious, but it is unlikely that these people have anxiety disorders. As someone with Generalized Anxiety Disorder, I can tell you that to an individual who suffers with anxiety, it is absolutely paramount (and a huge source of stress) that, apart from perhaps close friends and family, absolutely no one knows about it. The majority of anxiety sufferers are incredibly anxious that someone will discover that they are anxious (with good reason - try to explain to someone that you're just having a panic attack when you're in the midst of a panic attack and your limbs are seized up and jerking and your heart is racing at an insane pace), and hence, they often come across in public as very cool and collected despite the fact that underneath the surface, their minds are racing with anxious thoughts. People tell me that I'm seemingly one of the most mellow and relaxed people that they know. I'm one of the few anxiety sufferers I know that isn't shy about disclosing my anxiety (as it minimizes it to simply announce it before it causes problems), and everyone is absolutely amazed to hear that I have an anxiety disorder, and people who don't know me well are quite skeptical of that fact (despite the fact that even with extensive daily relaxation exercises, benzodiazepines, and 5-HTP, my quality of life is still significantly less than the average person).
If you're in column view, it has the exact same behaviour; the panel on the right, when you click on a file, will give you a preview of the file if possible and tell you all the relevant information (size, date modified, etc).
No, you can't hover over a file to get the information. All I have to say is thank god for that. I hate the insanely large "tooltip" windows that Windows pops up over every mouse hover. It's distracting and messy.
It deprives you of information about what you're looking at, you have to use the so called never needed right click to "get info" about files.
File Menu - Get Info
or
Cmd-I
This would not be a bad thing if you were given at least some information in at least one of the view modes about the files you are looking at (size etc) but no information is provided.
Go into the detail view, and you get "Date Modified" and "Size" fields. IIRC, you can also change this and pick which fields you'd like and in what order.
The rest are just folders created by certain apps which for whatever reason related to their function, think that you will be placing at least some music in those folders.
I totally understand your frustration here, but Apple can't be held accountable for folders created by applications that you install; furthermore, this is indicative of a shortcoming in those applications rather than a shortcoming in Finder. (I do agree that Spotlight should try to make some kind of distinction between them, though - perhaps displaying full path name relative to user dir if you hover over them.)
Perhaps he doesn't need the money, or has a moral opposition to Fuddruckers in some way? Not everyone sees the world with price tags; if they did, the GNU project wouldn't even exist.
this same professor "has caused outrage in the past with claims that white people are more intelligent than blacks and that criminal traits are genetically inherited."
I fail to see how making such claims invalidates his points; it's quite possible that both of those statements are true. Of course, the first of these two causes everyone to yank out the racist card, but honestly - at least in my case as a young gay while male - I think it's also possible that the average Asian is more intelligent than the average white person, and if that turned out to be supported by evidence, I'd hardly feel threatened by it.
While I'm as socially liberal as one can get, I'm getting rather sick of this politically correct bullshit we have to deal with where people freak out at the mere suggestion that one societal group is more intelligent or otherwise more capable than another in some fashion. It's important, in understanding different groups, whether they be ehtnicities, sexes, sexual orientations, etc. to recognize that they may characteristically demonstrate both strengths and weaknesses.
For example, I for one prefer working under women than under men, as I find that women in positions of power bring intelligence and motivation usually tempered by compassion to the table; men, on the other hand, in my experience, are more prone to let compassion fall by the wayside and dehumanize roles in the workplace. At the same time, I am much happier dating men than I can imagine I'd be dating women, as I find men are more direct, easier to communicate with due to their frankness, and easier to please than women.
Of course, that's not always the case, and to assume that it was would be silly, but there are trends, and I see no reason why they should be ignored.
I've lived with women a few times (I'm a gay dude, so only as friends), and I have to say... where does all the toilet paper go?! What can they do with that much of it? I typically go through maybe a roll every couple weeks on my own. When I had a female roommate, we'd use at least a couple rolls a week. Some days, I'd replace the roll, and in the evening I'd come home and my mind would fart at how small it had gotten during the day while I was at school.
Someone enlighten me?
Hear, hear. I seldom - if ever - play games. They were fun when I was younger, but I've lost interest, so game availability lost any sway in my choice of OS.
Tell me, in layman's terms, something positive that successful marketers and advertisers bring to the table apart from the ability to make (also possibly useless) already overwealthy stakeholders rich, and I may dispel my notions that your profession is the blemish on the backside of humanity.
In the majority of cases that I've witnessed, your industry preys psychologically on human psychology and our insecurities. When I think of software, I think of a majority of products that are possibly overpriced but in many cases, useful and worth the expense. When I think of advertising, I think of intrusive tactics on television, though e-mails, at the beginning of movies, and on billboards on highways that get in my face and distract me against my desires.
Why do you think we have such hostility against marketing? In perhaps 1% of cases would I say that advertisements are informative instead of exploitative and obnoxious. In fact, due to advertising, I've had to stop watching TV, stop going to the movies (on time - 20 minutes late seems to be okay), stop reading magazines (of which 2/3rds are often ads), and install ad blockers for e-mail and the web. I get phone calls with live and recorded product promotions, where my sense of politeness and my sense of privacy have to fight one another. I fear answering my door, because about a quarter of the time, it's someone advertising and wanting money out of me. My snail mail box is packed with "coupons" (which are hardly coupons much less promotions) and repetitive flyers. How can you possibly advocate that we should accept advertising like we accept software? It's absolutely ludicrous.
You people should be ashamed of yourselves. It's utterly disgusting how you intrude into our lives. I met someone with whom I was quite compatible, but upon discovering that he was in college for marketing, I refused to date him because after years of having to deal with your bullshit, I can no longer do so. The bombardment of garbage I experience in a day is overstimulating and makes me feel utterly sick.
Do us a favour and get a real job doing something constructive for society instead of capitalizing on the rest of us and making money off of desire and shortcomings. You are reprehensible.
If you read their website, you'd realize that this mouse falls entirely in line with Apple's philosophy and makes complete sense: it behaves like a one button mouse by default, and multi-button functionality can be enabled by users that require it. This provides maximum usability in the default scenario, but offers complete flexibility to knowledgable users.
This philosophy, IMO, is why applications like Photoshop also succeed. As a Photoshop newbie that doesn't want or need to learn how to do anything other than the basics, I find that by design, I can go into Photoshop and do what I need to do in a matter of seconds without digging through a nest of convoluted menus. The simple and most readily desired features are at the forefront where they should be, and the complexity is hidden.
While I agree with you and feel that it would be fascinating to do cross-racial studies to further human knowledge, I think that the problem here is human psychology: there are a significant number of us out here who couldn't handle the information that such studies generate and would use it stupidly as justification to manipulate things like, say, hiring policies. ("He's Asian, and they're typically intelligent and diligent, so we'll hire him over the black applicant.")
Does that mean that we shouldn't perform those studies? Personally, I'd say no, but I think we'd better ensure that they don't disadvantage entire racial groups based on the data they generate, and we'd better think whether or not it's even possible to prevent it from happening.
Last I checked, Americans aren't a 'race'. I largely suspect, too, that people that claim to hate Americans actually mean that they hate American politics and feel that a signficiant chunk of the population supports said politics, or, at the very least, doesn't take the steps to change them.
I'll second that. Cognitive behavioural therapy did absolute worlds of good for my generalized anxiety disorder, but 5-HTP enabled me to take the strategies learned during my anxiety recovery and take them a step further.
Furthermore, SSRIs take several weeks to build up in the body until they're effective and often demonstrate a large number of unpleasant side effects and withdrawal, whereas 5-HTP works immediately, usually has no side effects (may cause nausea in some, particularly in the presence of vitamin B-6 which metabolizes it as serotonin aka 5-HT, and serotonin receptors in the stomach can be overstimmed), and demonstrates absolutely no withdrawal.
I would never even consider taking an SSRI in light of how effective 5-HTP can be.
Absolutely, but is it possible that 5-HT and NE levels in the brain are influenced through actions? Given the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (albeit, sadly, this research is lacking in light of our society's lack of desire to embrace such techniques in light of instantaneous solutions like SSRIs / SNRIs that often have long-term consequences), I would conclude that this is very likely the case. I overcame, for the most part, generalized anxiety disorder without medication and via therapy, and hence I believe that it is possible to alter neurochemistry through behaviour.