I thought a PC was a general purpose machine, a device that did whatever I want to do with it. Apart from no games to write home about from Epic the last few years, it even manages games pretty well.
You can drag WW2 into if you want, but then your making a logical error. There's not fixed amount of violence to be had for every generation. It's a simple fact that post WW2 murderrates (which is 60+ years, so at least 2 generations) in the EU are zilch when compared to the US'es, in which plenty of organized racial murders have taken place, and if we go back far enough, shares the same history as Europe, so there's really no piont to be made here. Facts are facts, and that's that EU citizens are safer than US citizens from crime and murder. About Switzerland: that's a popular myth, gun ownership is noly slightly higher than in other Euro countries and they are not freely available there (unlike Autria for example) and everyone that has a gun, has been allowe to keep it from military service and I you know the way the Swiss army is organized, they psych screen before they allow access to the weapons locker.
You have been indoctrinated with the fantasy that total freedom is somehow attainable (and from the looks of it, the US is the place where its at). You probably buy into the sham that capitalism solves any economical problem magically. Apart from multiple freedom watchlists tha have the US categoricaly score lower than mainland Western Europe, you'll learn in sociology 101 how societies are organised, how they're built up. Study the law for example, the institution which regulates freedom in any western democracy (and thus impaires it, but for very good reasons). You're right in stipulating that compromizing freedoms shouldn't be done lightly, but there are even better reasons to do so in some cases. You're either absolutely naive or brainwashed.
I heard a lot of good things about Europe, but these sentence makes me glad I immigrated to US instead. I sampled your point of view while growing up in Soviet Union. Even though newspapers and TV made you think happy thoughts and didn't promote any racial divisiveness, your concept didn't work too good as a whole.
I can't make heads or tails of this. You're equatiing the 'freedoms; of the Soviet Union with the EU? Maybe should I start comparing Bush with Hitler then, I suppose that makes as much sense as what you say...
So we outlaw detective novels and lock picking enthusiast clubs?
Guns for example are forbidden in most EU countries. And murderrates are for most EU-countries magnitudes less than in the US, so yeah, I'd say that's worth it.
I am sure the shootings will go away if we suppress information about them from media and Internet.
Funny you mentions this, because with the desocialisation of EU news media (which, mostly, have been pretty leftist up until the mid nineties) and increased cover of violence and more graphic depictions of violence coincide with increased shootings in EU schools. OK, only a correlation, but not terribly inconcievable. At least the numbers in the EU are still far lower than in the US.
Don't take this the wrong way, but you have head so far up your ass that you cannot see that censorship is inherent in human societies, that it happens in ways you don't know of (per definition), and that ridiculous ideals like yours have no place on earth.
Talking about strawmans... The piont is to censor these products, and thereby exposure of this subculture. Nowhere is any idea forbidden. And calling for the destruction of jews and foreigners is not political speech, that's sowing hate and calling for violence, both of which fall under criminal law and not freedom. If not, why don't you let the fundamentalist muslims do their thing? Is mostly sowing hate towards the west, not performing terrorist acts (which, by your standards,/are/ acts of freedom fighters and thus should/not/ be prevented).
You're twisting my words and you know it. Freedom isn't absolute, not anywhere and not ever. I thought/. readers hadnt drunk that koolaid, but apperantly some have. Total freedom == anarchy and doesn't work with the high populations densities we have today. We don't want murder, and we don't want theft, although that affects the freedom of murderers and theives. That's the price. Where the line is drawn between we allow this and not that is the continuing issues in a 'free' country. Yes, soem subcultures deserve to be repressed, fundamentalist muslims and neonazis alike.
If you can't see that, then you agree we shouldn't hinder Virginia-Tech-like shooters at all and content ourselves with scraping the brains of our kids of the walls afterwards.
Because it wouldnt cater to the few historycollectors, it would give 'airtime' to a relativiely large subculture in most European countries, neonazis. They advocate hate of nonarians, destroy or desecrate mostly jewish graves and engage in other crimes in many cases.
The suppresion of these materials is an attempt to supress this subculture, which is, in my opinion, in everybody's best interest. It's not like museums have any shortages of nazimaterial. Apart from maybe three serious collectors, nothing is served by not censoring this, or however you want to call it.
This is a far, far cry from what for example the great firewall tries to accomplish.
The idea here is that with proper (x)html and css the enduser can decide how the content is viewed, not you the webdisgner. Provided the end user can parse the (x)html into something he/she can understand (with textreaders or large fonts or braille readers), the user can always use the content. With webdesigners using things like flash/silverlight the options an end user has are limited.
Dude, he/she extends the curtousy of writing in English, NOT Polish, and you flame him for a few grammatic errors...? Please... It's more than clear what he/she means.
W T F?
We cannot ever see a complete revolution of the sun around the galaxy core (takes about 200MA). Yet the very small part that we have seen, in combination with what we do know about mechanics, we can, with great certainty (and that's as much as you'll ever get out of science) say that our sun and the other stars orbit around the center of the Milky Way.
Just because the process (like evolution) is on another timescale than ours, doesn't mean we can never be as certain of it as we can of gravity. And, mind you, gravity has a _major_ revision only about 100yrs ago, because in more extreme circumstances, which we don't find in our daily lives, mechanics turned out to be a little different.
If you want to make such processes visible for us humans, you've got to help nature a bit. For example with microscope: I see microbes evolving in hours. Or in selective breeding: specific brands of cat and dog. Cattle is another great example, or contaminative diseases even. Combined with the fossil records, carbon dating and geology we can conclude that the theory of evolution fits like a glove.
Of course, in science nothing is ever 100% certain (Popper), but until someone's found a better theory, this one is as true as we can ever say something is true.
Just hammering on about the fact that evolution just might not be true as some say it is, is stupid, useless, selective and hypocritical. You don't hear people hammering on about how gravity is only a theory, because that's what it is.
The difference is zilch, because in reality the 2nd amendment is only used as an excuse by men who have to compensate for something, or just have guns as toys. The 2nd amendment allows for shootings in schools, nothing else.
No American is ever going to take up arms and remove $government from power. If any gunowner really thought about that 2nd amendment, they'd (or should) have taken up arms against $government al loooong time ago.
It's just not going to happen, and it is only used as another way to keep (a part) of the populous satisfied and left with a sense of control (which they'll never wield for what it was intended for). And the shootings and high murderrates keep the rest of the population scared and threatened, for free! $government doesn't even have to do it itself.
I've always considered Civil Law the better alternative, because it in practise the jury is virtually always like this and Civil Law seems to me to guarantee better jurors (as they are learned judges).
About three games really use it, but do no lok much better than beefed up dx9 game... And all games run about 20% slower, even Microsofts own DX10showcase game (FlightSimX).
I'm a gamer and Vista will never be on my system.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought a PC was a general purpose machine, a device that did whatever I want to do with it. Apart from no games to write home about from Epic the last few years, it even manages games pretty well.
It has, for a long time, had this.
He of course meant within 100 miles of COLD ocean... Don't be so pedantic...
I suppose prohibition is why shootings happen so much less in Europe.
You can drag WW2 into if you want, but then your making a logical error. There's not fixed amount of violence to be had for every generation. It's a simple fact that post WW2 murderrates (which is 60+ years, so at least 2 generations) in the EU are zilch when compared to the US'es, in which plenty of organized racial murders have taken place, and if we go back far enough, shares the same history as Europe, so there's really no piont to be made here. Facts are facts, and that's that EU citizens are safer than US citizens from crime and murder. About Switzerland: that's a popular myth, gun ownership is noly slightly higher than in other Euro countries and they are not freely available there (unlike Autria for example) and everyone that has a gun, has been allowe to keep it from military service and I you know the way the Swiss army is organized, they psych screen before they allow access to the weapons locker. You have been indoctrinated with the fantasy that total freedom is somehow attainable (and from the looks of it, the US is the place where its at). You probably buy into the sham that capitalism solves any economical problem magically. Apart from multiple freedom watchlists tha have the US categoricaly score lower than mainland Western Europe, you'll learn in sociology 101 how societies are organised, how they're built up. Study the law for example, the institution which regulates freedom in any western democracy (and thus impaires it, but for very good reasons). You're right in stipulating that compromizing freedoms shouldn't be done lightly, but there are even better reasons to do so in some cases. You're either absolutely naive or brainwashed.
I heard a lot of good things about Europe, but these sentence makes me glad I immigrated to US instead. I sampled your point of view while growing up in Soviet Union. Even though newspapers and TV made you think happy thoughts and didn't promote any racial divisiveness, your concept didn't work too good as a whole. I can't make heads or tails of this. You're equatiing the 'freedoms; of the Soviet Union with the EU? Maybe should I start comparing Bush with Hitler then, I suppose that makes as much sense as what you say... So we outlaw detective novels and lock picking enthusiast clubs? Guns for example are forbidden in most EU countries. And murderrates are for most EU-countries magnitudes less than in the US, so yeah, I'd say that's worth it. I am sure the shootings will go away if we suppress information about them from media and Internet. Funny you mentions this, because with the desocialisation of EU news media (which, mostly, have been pretty leftist up until the mid nineties) and increased cover of violence and more graphic depictions of violence coincide with increased shootings in EU schools. OK, only a correlation, but not terribly inconcievable. At least the numbers in the EU are still far lower than in the US.
Well, you must appreciate that then, as 'most EU countries' help them express their freedoms, right?
Don't take this the wrong way, but you have head so far up your ass that you cannot see that censorship is inherent in human societies, that it happens in ways you don't know of (per definition), and that ridiculous ideals like yours have no place on earth.
Talking about strawmans... The piont is to censor these products, and thereby exposure of this subculture. Nowhere is any idea forbidden. And calling for the destruction of jews and foreigners is not political speech, that's sowing hate and calling for violence, both of which fall under criminal law and not freedom. If not, why don't you let the fundamentalist muslims do their thing? Is mostly sowing hate towards the west, not performing terrorist acts (which, by your standards, /are/ acts of freedom fighters and thus should /not/ be prevented).
You're twisting my words and you know it. Freedom isn't absolute, not anywhere and not ever. I thought /. readers hadnt drunk that koolaid, but apperantly some have. Total freedom == anarchy and doesn't work with the high populations densities we have today. We don't want murder, and we don't want theft, although that affects the freedom of murderers and theives. That's the price. Where the line is drawn between we allow this and not that is the continuing issues in a 'free' country. Yes, soem subcultures deserve to be repressed, fundamentalist muslims and neonazis alike.
If you can't see that, then you agree we shouldn't hinder Virginia-Tech-like shooters at all and content ourselves with scraping the brains of our kids of the walls afterwards.
Because it wouldnt cater to the few historycollectors, it would give 'airtime' to a relativiely large subculture in most European countries, neonazis. They advocate hate of nonarians, destroy or desecrate mostly jewish graves and engage in other crimes in many cases. The suppresion of these materials is an attempt to supress this subculture, which is, in my opinion, in everybody's best interest. It's not like museums have any shortages of nazimaterial. Apart from maybe three serious collectors, nothing is served by not censoring this, or however you want to call it. This is a far, far cry from what for example the great firewall tries to accomplish.
The idea here is that with proper (x)html and css the enduser can decide how the content is viewed, not you the webdisgner. Provided the end user can parse the (x)html into something he/she can understand (with textreaders or large fonts or braille readers), the user can always use the content. With webdesigners using things like flash/silverlight the options an end user has are limited.
You think this is a coincidence?
Only on /. that could be modded informative...
Dude, he/she extends the curtousy of writing in English, NOT Polish, and you flame him for a few grammatic errors...? Please... It's more than clear what he/she means.
W T F? We cannot ever see a complete revolution of the sun around the galaxy core (takes about 200MA). Yet the very small part that we have seen, in combination with what we do know about mechanics, we can, with great certainty (and that's as much as you'll ever get out of science) say that our sun and the other stars orbit around the center of the Milky Way. Just because the process (like evolution) is on another timescale than ours, doesn't mean we can never be as certain of it as we can of gravity. And, mind you, gravity has a _major_ revision only about 100yrs ago, because in more extreme circumstances, which we don't find in our daily lives, mechanics turned out to be a little different. If you want to make such processes visible for us humans, you've got to help nature a bit. For example with microscope: I see microbes evolving in hours. Or in selective breeding: specific brands of cat and dog. Cattle is another great example, or contaminative diseases even. Combined with the fossil records, carbon dating and geology we can conclude that the theory of evolution fits like a glove. Of course, in science nothing is ever 100% certain (Popper), but until someone's found a better theory, this one is as true as we can ever say something is true. Just hammering on about the fact that evolution just might not be true as some say it is, is stupid, useless, selective and hypocritical. You don't hear people hammering on about how gravity is only a theory, because that's what it is.
Cancer? Source please.
Haha, 10%! We have an average of 20% here in Yurp, you should feel sorry for us!
No, no, noes! Think on them!
The difference is zilch, because in reality the 2nd amendment is only used as an excuse by men who have to compensate for something, or just have guns as toys. The 2nd amendment allows for shootings in schools, nothing else. No American is ever going to take up arms and remove $government from power. If any gunowner really thought about that 2nd amendment, they'd (or should) have taken up arms against $government al loooong time ago. It's just not going to happen, and it is only used as another way to keep (a part) of the populous satisfied and left with a sense of control (which they'll never wield for what it was intended for). And the shootings and high murderrates keep the rest of the population scared and threatened, for free! $government doesn't even have to do it itself.
But what's so intrinsically desireble in having a jury of my peers? Having a fair trail seems to me to be the most important, for everyone.
I've always considered Civil Law the better alternative, because it in practise the jury is virtually always like this and Civil Law seems to me to guarantee better jurors (as they are learned judges).
About three games really use it, but do no lok much better than beefed up dx9 game... And all games run about 20% slower, even Microsofts own DX10showcase game (FlightSimX). I'm a gamer and Vista will never be on my system.
Kudo's to Microsoft though: it appears they at least submit the message you were trying to type to /. before truly shutting down.
And that's bad? I'm sorry we're not all white Anglo-Saxons.