I tend to agree, but I'd like to talk more with some Saudi Wahhabists before reaching more conclusions on this issue. Your sig seems both insightful and appropriate to this topic.
The expectation is that you either back up your beliefs when challenged or demonstrate the incorrectness of the opposing argument. You seem to need a great deal of instruction. It's okay, since you said we were friends then I don't mind explaining.
You're shitting on a minority, for being a minority. You say their issues are objectively not important, because you have defined "important" to exclude them.
It's obviously a mental problem (since there is nothing physically wrong with the body
It's a fairly normal result of human biological development, but since you and many others will go out of your way to shit on trans people, it tends to have severe psychological repercussions. It's a medical condition, not a disease: people who are transgender do not wish to be cured of that. As a medical condition, there's no reason why insurance should not cover that, assuming the provider is willing. And the exact treatment is pretty much none of your business.
There's a fairly substantial segment of transgender medical researchers who feel that this inclusion is harmful, not least because of the associations people will all-too-willingly form.
Which has little to do with gender identity. That would be an entirely separate process biologically, which happens after the development of the genitalia. Gender identity is also to some degree distinct from gender expression.
The bathroom policy is not settled because it's not politically useful for it to be settled. As an issue it was invented because the Supreme Court said that being mean to gays wasn't okay any more, so we had to pick on the smaller group of "deviants". It's not going to go away until it stops driving voters to the polls. I'm not sure what isn't blatantly transparent about that.
This is an amazing example of projection. The parent presents an argument which, even if you do not like them, was comprised of reason and fact, and your post is nothing but an ad hominem attack. I think 4chan is probably going to be a bit more your style.
And these lgbtq... "issues" are just a whiny fringe who need to worry about more important issues. And as they alienate more people, they are sobataging their agenda.
It's a circular definition because you don't consider their issues valid no matter what they are.
If one feels the need to choose from a list a letters to sexually identify with, they are no better than folks who want to limit folks to two genders.
Right, because you don't feel like you should be forced to acknowledge that these people exist at all. Which is how this problem started.
What do we call you and what you're doing? Looks like you're on an anti-Islamic jihad to me. Are you also fighting against terrorism committed against Muslims? Because it is apparently news to you that the most of the violence of these fundamentalists is directed against the insufficiently faithful members of their own faith. Being an apostate is much worse than being an infidel.
Ah, replace "fear of the unknown" with "having their empires systematically dismantled by the West" followed by another couple centuries of arbitrary map-redrawing and regime change.
Its amazing what a little fear of the unknown can do to a mass of people, especially when [the] leaders succumb to it.
That's like saying, "read the Old Testament, then come again." The Koran has been interpreted by Islamic scholars for centuries, and these writings are at least as important to understanding Islam.
The definition of jihad is 'struggle', and in countries that haven't been bombed back to the stone age very few people are willing to interpret it as meaning "I need to blow myself up for God." However, the term jihad is also very easily used to describe the actions and attitudes of the anti-Islamic movement in the US.
I've argued against the Saudis before, even pretty recently. But, they're at least ideologically opposed to the Islamic State. But I've also read that one of bin Laden's goals was to drive this precise wedge between Saudi Arabia and the US, so this all becomes muddled very quickly. That, and our attempts at regime change have not been wildly successful. Most Americans know Iran as "some Muslim country that hates us," and don't seem to realize that the reason for that is that we overthrew their democratically-elected government and installed a brutal dictator to protect Anglo-American oil interests there.
So generally it's complicated. I don't know how much we can blame the nonviolent Wahhabists for the violent Wahhabists. We would probably rather have the stable government and their supply of oil than try to set anything else up. Either way, it's a bad situation, but there aren't a lot of good options for changing it.
Hmmm. You know, it almost looked like that, except it was the one I linked. Which gave several examples of computation not involving electricity, but I did forget cellular automata, so that's another category of things. "You're off your rocker." is not an argument.
If you completely ignore the argument, then yes, there's nothing but rage. I presented a reasoned argument (that yes, happened to insult your intelligence) and examples to support my point, and your response...I mean, I hope you're proud of it. As far as I'm concerned that one remark makes you a complete jerk, and further supports my opinion of your intelligence. I had thought that you were among the persons here who could occasionally be trusted to supply more light than heat in a discussion. I've certainly corrected that opinion.
However, it's not a total loss. This subject will actually make a pretty good blog post.
Most of the foundational CS work was done before personal computers became available. Knuth I believe has had a number of these, and someone eventually persuaded Dijkstra that he needed a computer for email, but he never wrote anything CS-related with anything other than a fountain pen. The point was not so much that this was literally true, which is subject to some interpretation (the literal truth hinges on "owned" being taken to mean personal ownership rather than mere access), but that in general computer science is the hardware-independent description of what these machines do.
You can call me what you like Mr Unemployable, I'm the one with the well paid dev job. You're just some hobbiest.
Lol no. It's been mostly freelance/remote work, but I'm in interviews with a number of SV startups; it seems likely that I'll be down there in a month or so. I'd ask what you considered to be "well paid" but I'm sure you can agree that salary is also not a strong indicator of being able to program -- we can use each other as evidence of that. And you probably shouldn't confuse lack of interest in money with lack of money.
However, whether or not I am a hobbyist, I would still be the one doing this for love of knowledge and you would be the one doing this for money. I'm sure that you can justify that to yourself but you're not going to convince many that you have some inherently greater virtue. The "Greed is Good" speech wasn't meant to be taken seriously. Which I believe brings us right back around to you being an asshole, but hopefully you have exhausted that topic.
Hey fuckwit. Either find an argument or quit spouting vacuities. Preferably the latter as the amount of public shame you deserve for this is more trouble than it's worth.
No, you're just too dumb to distinguish between a mathematical discipline and an engineering one. Computer science has fuck-all to do with electricity. High and low current can be used to implement binary math, but so can any number of other physical phenomena, and the entire point of the discipline is to be able to describe computation independently of the physical world. And you should know as well as anyone that the field was founded by Turing long before an electrical digital computer existed.
Now, you may have meant to say something not-retarded like that computer engineering is impossible without knowing about electricity. You would still be wrong, for the same reason: non-electric computers may not be practical, but they do exist. Of particular note there have been a couple fluid computers, which implemented binary logic using liquids. You may also have heard of optical computation, which has been verging on being a practical technology for a couple decades now.
The point where you need to know about electricity in computers is when you're dealing with the computer on an electrical level. When we start talking about zeros and ones instead of high and low signal, we've started dealing with abstraction (even the high and low signal could be done using either current or voltage). If you're operating at a higher level of abstraction than that, you do not need to know about electricity, and you'll rarely be exposed to it.
Personally, I find an obsession with volts and ohms to be somewhat gauche in a software engineer; When I'm programming I'm not setting voltages in circuits, I'm describing a mathematical operation as a sequence of instructions. We are forced to consider our computations as they are performed in the real world, but only insofar as that may not be abstracted. If you're a hardware engineer then you should also know better, but the electrical fixation may be excused.
Slashdot Mirror
I tend to agree, but I'd like to talk more with some Saudi Wahhabists before reaching more conclusions on this issue. Your sig seems both insightful and appropriate to this topic.
The expectation is that you either back up your beliefs when challenged or demonstrate the incorrectness of the opposing argument. You seem to need a great deal of instruction. It's okay, since you said we were friends then I don't mind explaining.
You're shitting on a minority, for being a minority. You say their issues are objectively not important, because you have defined "important" to exclude them.
It's obviously a mental problem (since there is nothing physically wrong with the body
It's a fairly normal result of human biological development, but since you and many others will go out of your way to shit on trans people, it tends to have severe psychological repercussions. It's a medical condition, not a disease: people who are transgender do not wish to be cured of that. As a medical condition, there's no reason why insurance should not cover that, assuming the provider is willing. And the exact treatment is pretty much none of your business.
There's a fairly substantial segment of transgender medical researchers who feel that this inclusion is harmful, not least because of the associations people will all-too-willingly form.
I don't know why you bother to lie. No, they're not on immunosuppressants. Again, I think 4chan is really more your style here.
Which has little to do with gender identity. That would be an entirely separate process biologically, which happens after the development of the genitalia. Gender identity is also to some degree distinct from gender expression.
The bathroom policy is not settled because it's not politically useful for it to be settled. As an issue it was invented because the Supreme Court said that being mean to gays wasn't okay any more, so we had to pick on the smaller group of "deviants". It's not going to go away until it stops driving voters to the polls. I'm not sure what isn't blatantly transparent about that.
This is an amazing example of projection. The parent presents an argument which, even if you do not like them, was comprised of reason and fact, and your post is nothing but an ad hominem attack. I think 4chan is probably going to be a bit more your style.
This is no more correct biologically than it was when you used the same argument against gays.
And these lgbtq... "issues" are just a whiny fringe who need to worry about more important issues. And as they alienate more people, they are sobataging their agenda.
It's a circular definition because you don't consider their issues valid no matter what they are.
If one feels the need to choose from a list a letters to sexually identify with, they are no better than folks who want to limit folks to two genders.
Right, because you don't feel like you should be forced to acknowledge that these people exist at all. Which is how this problem started.
What do we call you and what you're doing? Looks like you're on an anti-Islamic jihad to me. Are you also fighting against terrorism committed against Muslims? Because it is apparently news to you that the most of the violence of these fundamentalists is directed against the insufficiently faithful members of their own faith. Being an apostate is much worse than being an infidel.
Ah, replace "fear of the unknown" with "having their empires systematically dismantled by the West" followed by another couple centuries of arbitrary map-redrawing and regime change.
Its amazing what a little fear of the unknown can do to a mass of people, especially when [the] leaders succumb to it.
Plus ca change, eh?
That's like saying, "read the Old Testament, then come again." The Koran has been interpreted by Islamic scholars for centuries, and these writings are at least as important to understanding Islam.
The definition of jihad is 'struggle', and in countries that haven't been bombed back to the stone age very few people are willing to interpret it as meaning "I need to blow myself up for God." However, the term jihad is also very easily used to describe the actions and attitudes of the anti-Islamic movement in the US.
I've argued against the Saudis before, even pretty recently. But, they're at least ideologically opposed to the Islamic State. But I've also read that one of bin Laden's goals was to drive this precise wedge between Saudi Arabia and the US, so this all becomes muddled very quickly. That, and our attempts at regime change have not been wildly successful. Most Americans know Iran as "some Muslim country that hates us," and don't seem to realize that the reason for that is that we overthrew their democratically-elected government and installed a brutal dictator to protect Anglo-American oil interests there.
So generally it's complicated. I don't know how much we can blame the nonviolent Wahhabists for the violent Wahhabists. We would probably rather have the stable government and their supply of oil than try to set anything else up. Either way, it's a bad situation, but there aren't a lot of good options for changing it.
Hmmm. You know, it almost looked like that, except it was the one I linked. Which gave several examples of computation not involving electricity, but I did forget cellular automata, so that's another category of things. "You're off your rocker." is not an argument.
You might look at the preceding post then, in which many points of fact are raised.
If you completely ignore the argument, then yes, there's nothing but rage. I presented a reasoned argument (that yes, happened to insult your intelligence) and examples to support my point, and your response...I mean, I hope you're proud of it. As far as I'm concerned that one remark makes you a complete jerk, and further supports my opinion of your intelligence. I had thought that you were among the persons here who could occasionally be trusted to supply more light than heat in a discussion. I've certainly corrected that opinion.
However, it's not a total loss. This subject will actually make a pretty good blog post.
My apologies, I hadn't realized that you had nothing to add to any discussion and are just here to troll.
cuck-filled
Stopped reading. That doesn't fly in polite society. I would encourage you to correct your own behavior.
Have you lived to regret your username yet?
Most of the foundational CS work was done before personal computers became available. Knuth I believe has had a number of these, and someone eventually persuaded Dijkstra that he needed a computer for email, but he never wrote anything CS-related with anything other than a fountain pen. The point was not so much that this was literally true, which is subject to some interpretation (the literal truth hinges on "owned" being taken to mean personal ownership rather than mere access), but that in general computer science is the hardware-independent description of what these machines do.
You can call me what you like Mr Unemployable, I'm the one with the well paid dev job. You're just some hobbiest.
Lol no. It's been mostly freelance/remote work, but I'm in interviews with a number of SV startups; it seems likely that I'll be down there in a month or so. I'd ask what you considered to be "well paid" but I'm sure you can agree that salary is also not a strong indicator of being able to program -- we can use each other as evidence of that. And you probably shouldn't confuse lack of interest in money with lack of money.
However, whether or not I am a hobbyist, I would still be the one doing this for love of knowledge and you would be the one doing this for money. I'm sure that you can justify that to yourself but you're not going to convince many that you have some inherently greater virtue. The "Greed is Good" speech wasn't meant to be taken seriously. Which I believe brings us right back around to you being an asshole, but hopefully you have exhausted that topic.
Hey fuckwit. Either find an argument or quit spouting vacuities. Preferably the latter as the amount of public shame you deserve for this is more trouble than it's worth.
No, you're just too dumb to distinguish between a mathematical discipline and an engineering one. Computer science has fuck-all to do with electricity. High and low current can be used to implement binary math, but so can any number of other physical phenomena, and the entire point of the discipline is to be able to describe computation independently of the physical world. And you should know as well as anyone that the field was founded by Turing long before an electrical digital computer existed.
Now, you may have meant to say something not-retarded like that computer engineering is impossible without knowing about electricity. You would still be wrong, for the same reason: non-electric computers may not be practical, but they do exist. Of particular note there have been a couple fluid computers, which implemented binary logic using liquids. You may also have heard of optical computation, which has been verging on being a practical technology for a couple decades now.
The point where you need to know about electricity in computers is when you're dealing with the computer on an electrical level. When we start talking about zeros and ones instead of high and low signal, we've started dealing with abstraction (even the high and low signal could be done using either current or voltage). If you're operating at a higher level of abstraction than that, you do not need to know about electricity, and you'll rarely be exposed to it.
Personally, I find an obsession with volts and ohms to be somewhat gauche in a software engineer; When I'm programming I'm not setting voltages in circuits, I'm describing a mathematical operation as a sequence of instructions. We are forced to consider our computations as they are performed in the real world, but only insofar as that may not be abstracted. If you're a hardware engineer then you should also know better, but the electrical fixation may be excused.