Well, if you start out wanting a product without knowing how good it is, you are an idiot indeed. But if you read about the product before purchase and then figure out that it's not something you want to spend money on, then what are you complaining about? Seriously?
Thanks for reminding me, I gave away my old LX3 to my brother since I didn't use it much after I got my DSLR. But now this LX7 looks quite nifty indeed!
To be fair, in a typical phone call you cannot determine if the other persons lips are moving. There is some slight chance she wasn't lying after all;)
The broken Windows logo and the Bill Gates Borg logo are just funny little jokes. If you take it that serious then I would advise you to seek psychiatric help.
Yeah what really gets me is that they had a headstart with their maemo tablets long before the iphone came out. These were "only" lacking the phone component, but were arguable intended to fill the same "niche" as the iphone, and yet they never really put any effort into making them really good. They could have been where apple is now, but instead we get more Microsoft crap. Way to go Nokia.
If somebody steals 20 dollars from you and gives you back 10, you didn't benefit from the transaction, even though you received 10 dollars.
I'm not claiming that this is the exact same situation, but the point is that you have to evaluate the overall net effect, not just the "cheap food" part. It's possible that the net effect is not a gain.
It doesn't matter what he did or didn't do in the past. What matters is whether legal procedure is being followed, and this case stinks to high heaven when it comes to legal procedure. If we stop following legal procedure for the bad guys, it's only a matter of time before we drop it completely.
First of all, I haven't committed any crime and I certainly haven't been busted. But I have had the police grossly misrepresent my statements in court, conveniently forgetting other statements, threatening me to admit to violating the law (which I did not do), illegally forcing me to go the police station (without actually arresting me) and so on and so on.
Second, I never claimed that you must believe zimmermans version. I'm saying that you can't know either way, and therefore making up your mind without knowing all facts in either direction is wrong. But you seem to think that it's ok to believe he is a murderer, but there is something completely wrong if you consider the possibility that he just might be innocent.
You're a hypocrite and you do your best to turn other peoples words into something they did not and didn't mean to say.
That's circular reasoning. You're saying because it was murder he was lying, and his lying is evidence of it having been murder. Does not compute.
And if you trust anything the police say in this day and age you certainly are naive and haven't had the "pleasure" to be in contact with the police yet. They are sloppy lying bastards as far as I am concerned, and I can say that from more personal experience than I would like.
This is no worse (but also no better) than everyone who thinks they KNOW that he shot him because he was black. Which was probably the point of GPs post.
I mostly hate that fact that when I do forget to login, slashdot will forget everything about where I was and what I was about to do once I do login. Fucking ridiculous. Most of the time I just don't bother...
I don't want to start an overly long discussion that leads nowhere, but I don't see anything of what you said as being contradictory to what I stated in my two posts (espcecially the second post).
What we do may be the spirit, but the stuff that makes us do what we do (i.e. culture) is, or at least could be, also based on genetics. My point is that, no matter how indirect, in the end it all comes from the genes and external influences. It's true that the external influences cannot be disregarded, but neither can genetics. Without our genes being as they are, the "human spirit" might be completely different.
In science, there is no room for a magic essence such as a "soul" or "pure spirit". It's all based on causality. External factors and our genes determine the outcome, not some abstract concept called "spirit".
On further thought the quote is actually is a contradiction in terms. The human spirit is by very definition something about humans (as opposed to monkeys, aliens, plants...). What makes humans into humans? Their genes of course. You might argue that the human spirit is a cultural thing, but then I would say that culture also is shaped by genetics. I'm not saying that culture is 100% predetermined by genetics, but I'm saying that without human genes being what they are, human culture most likely would be different from what they are.
It might be a (rhetorically speaking) good quote from a great movie - but that doesn't make it true.
Please note that I'm not willing to state the exact opposite either. However, to my knowledge we have no reason to believe that "spirit" is not something determined by genetics, just as we don't have evidence that it is determined by genetics.
I too found the description confusing as hell, and your attempts at clarifying it were hardly better (no offense). Let me try and see if I got this right:
1) magician shows 6 cards, you pick one 2) magician replaces his 5 cards in the hand with 5 different ones, all of which he knows what they are 3) you put the card back 4) since the magician knows the new 5 cards, he can easily see which one is not one of the ones he replaced.
I'm guessing this must be it, but why someone wouldn't just outright say so and instead hide the truth in some convoluted sentences I'll never know.
I'm sorry, but the posted link just makes it far more confusing for me. It's such a bloated confusing mess and never really comes straight out and tells you what's going on. A lot of people making vague statements, but reading/skimming through the whole thing I still have no clue as to what actually happened. Can somebody give an executive summary?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you start out wanting a product without knowing how good it is, you are an idiot indeed. But if you read about the product before purchase and then figure out that it's not something you want to spend money on, then what are you complaining about? Seriously?
> tl;dr your a failure
should read
> tl;dr your'e a failure
Sincerely,
Hauptgrammatikfuhrer
Thanks for reminding me, I gave away my old LX3 to my brother since I didn't use it much after I got my DSLR. But now this LX7 looks quite nifty indeed!
To be fair, in a typical phone call you cannot determine if the other persons lips are moving. There is some slight chance she wasn't lying after all ;)
The broken Windows logo and the Bill Gates Borg logo are just funny little jokes. If you take it that serious then I would advise you to seek psychiatric help.
Most epic post on slashdot in a long time. If you weren't already at +5 I'd mod you up.
Yeah what really gets me is that they had a headstart with their maemo tablets long before the iphone came out. These were "only" lacking the phone component, but were arguable intended to fill the same "niche" as the iphone, and yet they never really put any effort into making them really good. They could have been where apple is now, but instead we get more Microsoft crap. Way to go Nokia.
If somebody steals 20 dollars from you and gives you back 10, you didn't benefit from the transaction, even though you received 10 dollars.
I'm not claiming that this is the exact same situation, but the point is that you have to evaluate the overall net effect, not just the "cheap food" part. It's possible that the net effect is not a gain.
It doesn't matter what he did or didn't do in the past. What matters is whether legal procedure is being followed, and this case stinks to high heaven when it comes to legal procedure. If we stop following legal procedure for the bad guys, it's only a matter of time before we drop it completely.
you should try to look up the word "context" in a dictionary.
Good luck with abusing the system by selling a drug that hasn't been approved yet.
First of all, I haven't committed any crime and I certainly haven't been busted. But I have had the police grossly misrepresent my statements in court, conveniently forgetting other statements, threatening me to admit to violating the law (which I did not do), illegally forcing me to go the police station (without actually arresting me) and so on and so on.
Second, I never claimed that you must believe zimmermans version. I'm saying that you can't know either way, and therefore making up your mind without knowing all facts in either direction is wrong. But you seem to think that it's ok to believe he is a murderer, but there is something completely wrong if you consider the possibility that he just might be innocent.
You're a hypocrite and you do your best to turn other peoples words into something they did not and didn't mean to say.
That's circular reasoning. You're saying because it was murder he was lying, and his lying is evidence of it having been murder. Does not compute.
And if you trust anything the police say in this day and age you certainly are naive and haven't had the "pleasure" to be in contact with the police yet. They are sloppy lying bastards as far as I am concerned, and I can say that from more personal experience than I would like.
This is no worse (but also no better) than everyone who thinks they KNOW that he shot him because he was black. Which was probably the point of GPs post.
I mostly hate that fact that when I do forget to login, slashdot will forget everything about where I was and what I was about to do once I do login. Fucking ridiculous. Most of the time I just don't bother...
I don't want to start an overly long discussion that leads nowhere, but I don't see anything of what you said as being contradictory to what I stated in my two posts (espcecially the second post).
What we do may be the spirit, but the stuff that makes us do what we do (i.e. culture) is, or at least could be, also based on genetics. My point is that, no matter how indirect, in the end it all comes from the genes and external influences. It's true that the external influences cannot be disregarded, but neither can genetics. Without our genes being as they are, the "human spirit" might be completely different.
In science, there is no room for a magic essence such as a "soul" or "pure spirit". It's all based on causality. External factors and our genes determine the outcome, not some abstract concept called "spirit".
On further thought the quote is actually is a contradiction in terms. The human spirit is by very definition something about humans (as opposed to monkeys, aliens, plants...). What makes humans into humans? Their genes of course. You might argue that the human spirit is a cultural thing, but then I would say that culture also is shaped by genetics. I'm not saying that culture is 100% predetermined by genetics, but I'm saying that without human genes being what they are, human culture most likely would be different from what they are.
It might be a (rhetorically speaking) good quote from a great movie - but that doesn't make it true.
Please note that I'm not willing to state the exact opposite either. However, to my knowledge we have no reason to believe that "spirit" is not something determined by genetics, just as we don't have evidence that it is determined by genetics.
Thank you, now I understand. And I could of course have googled the answer myself, if I'd have thought of that.
In any case, let me say that that tricks is extremely lame. Oh well.
I too found the description confusing as hell, and your attempts at clarifying it were hardly better (no offense). Let me try and see if I got this right:
1) magician shows 6 cards, you pick one
2) magician replaces his 5 cards in the hand with 5 different ones, all of which he knows what they are
3) you put the card back
4) since the magician knows the new 5 cards, he can easily see which one is not one of the ones he replaced.
I'm guessing this must be it, but why someone wouldn't just outright say so and instead hide the truth in some convoluted sentences I'll never know.
Wish I had modpoints... yeah yeah, mod me redundant...
Wow, I have been saying the same exact thing for a while, nice to see someone else agreeing with me :)
twice
What? where? how?
I'm sorry, but the posted link just makes it far more confusing for me. It's such a bloated confusing mess and never really comes straight out and tells you what's going on. A lot of people making vague statements, but reading/skimming through the whole thing I still have no clue as to what actually happened. Can somebody give an executive summary?