And what would be in it for us? Have you looked at what it takes to get elected to even a modest political office? Every little thing you say, and every single thing that can be dug up from your and your acquiantances' past, is milked for every drop of 'scandal' it can give; and even if that were not the case, you still spend most of your time delivering the same bland speech at every little town hall, as actually taking a clear and honest stance on most issues would just make you meat for your opponents.
Why would a smart person actually do that to themselves?
That's pretty much exactly how I use FB: I'm on it under my real name, so people who I've lost touch with can find and ping me. When that happens, we exchange emails/phone numbers and continue contact through those or in RL. I have no personal info there except name, city of residence, and one or two boring photographs. I never post anything except to answer pings - and since those pings generate email alerts, I only ever log in when I know there's a personal message waiting, which is every couple of months or so. Never read any of the inane posts either, who cares if one of my friends' cat is feeling blue today.
So yes, it's a great way to get in touch with people who you lost touch with and who are not on LinkedIn, but that's pretty much the only use I see;)
When the summary says '3D is more immersive', it says so specifically within the context of '3D' movies and '3D' handhelds, so yes of course the real world is 3D, but while true that's entirely irrelevant to the summary or the discussion here.
Yeah, but '3D' as in the movie technology is not immersive at all, have to strain my eyes continuously to even see 3D instead of 2 images, and makes my head hurt llike shit. Saw 3D Avatar in an IMAX, so it wasn't a cheapo implementation, but still fucking torture. You like it, you're welcome to it - I'm staying away.
Idiot. What high frequency trading algos do is look at past price behavior of the same asset, and prices of related assets, to try and predict its movement in the future couple of minutes. That data is available at that time to anybody willing to pay for a box in a co-location facility, and later on to everybody subscribing to any sort of data feed for that asset.
What possible relationship to insider trading is there? Insider trades don't need low latency, they're executed at human time scale (minutes to days).
You might not see the 'societal usefulness' of HF trading, but that's a long way from claiming any relationship to illegality.
Don't think so. People in Muslim countries hate the US for things like supporting Israel, having military bases in Saudi Arabia, and invading Iraq - the way it treats the handful of people in Guantanamo will never be enough to offset that. On the other hand, a lot of people in Europe and the US hate Guantanamo because of the fundamental libertiy and rule of law issues involved, and will not be moved by whether the interior of the cage feels nice.
Lucky you - polyamorous relationships I've been in tended to develop an unstable dynamic and explode or drift apart - great if that's not the case for you'all.
Not with you on the not wanting children bit though - if you think the country you live in is going to the dogs (which I would agree with in the case of the US), why not go find a better one? The world is a big and wonderful place, Europe is great if you want cozy and quality-of-life focused, Asia is great if you want space for ambition and drive, and there's much to be said for just drifting across the continents if you can't make up your mind;)
Well ultimately values can't be proven, only chosen and/or felt to be right, so I don't think there is an objective best state or direction of society, only opinions. As far as my personal opinions go, I believe laws and rules should be gender-blind except to prevent outirght discrimination (so equal-pay laws are a good thing), so there should be equality of formal opportunity; but I also belive that equality of outcomes is unattainable, and that most kinds of diversity, including gender diversity, have no intrinsic value for most purposes, and should thus neither be encouraged nor discouraged. When I interview a job candidate, all I care about is whether they'll be able to do the job well.
In particular, I don't believe women have more of a special insight than, say, tall people or naturalized children of immigrants or any other of a hundred possible categories, on most topics except those specifically related to women. If wikipedia is worried about bias, US-centric bias or deletionist bias would appear to be much more of a problem if indeed there is one.
It's just that there's a meme going round that gender diversity is a thing worth expending effort to attain in any group of people, no matter the context, and I think it's just not true (gender diversity is not bad either, it's just irrelevant in most circumstances); and it is annoying to hear this meme time and again.
That he, like many other people, is pissed off with forced equalization of outcomes and thinks political correctness has long reached all the justifiable goals it once had (equal rights for women and all that), and has since gone way beyond sane? And doesn't think there is the slightest problem problem if female participation is not 50% everywhere?
I, possibly like the GP, have a set of moral principles, and the topmost of them is survival of my family and close friends. This only kicks in when there is severe danger (not having means to support my immediate family, for example), but then it's an imperative. If that disagrees with your notions of right and wrong, well I really couldn't care less - but if your principles would result in your child not getting, for example, the medical treatment they need, or having them grow up in a shit part of town because the daddy is so noble and can't get a well-paying job, what kind of a father are you? Do you even have kids btw?
You keep your standards of right and wrong and I'll keep mine, thank you very much.
Hmm, your post started so well-reasoned but trailed off into the usual anti-corporation whine. Absolutely the whole offshoring debate is a question of economic nationalism. There is nothing inherently un-ethical about offshoring, people who say there is just assign zero value to jobs created overseas and huge value to jobs created in-country - a very American thing to do btw in my experience, treating the rest of the world like it barely matters except as a backdrop. On the other hand, the state should definitely care about whether that makes it weaker or stronger (both cases are possible, depending on the circumstances) and change its laws to promote its benefit, not because it's 'ethical', but out of self-interest.
However, I can't really agree with the second half of your post. If somebody in China or India is willing to make and sell that great straw hat I just bought for $20, is your proposal for ethical behavior of companies to not sell it to me, leaving me with either no hat to buy or a Western-made hat costing 3 times as much (that I won't be buying because that's too much), and leaving that Chinese guy out of a job? Greaat idea, and the company that tries it will stay afloat for ever so long. And oh ever so ethical.
> actually, openly proposes that openness is a threat, because it inhibits covert action.
Where exactly? It does say the trends it discusses will make it harder for the US and the FBI to control what's going on, but where does it say it's a bad thing? Quote please.
Been in the forums of the community that The Game describes long before the book came out. Whether money is the criterion or not, it remains the case that to have a serious shot at being attractive to women certainly in the US, you have to behave in a totally different manner than what comes naturally to a lot of people. In particular, being nice gets you nowhere, or rather being used as a doormat.
And I agree with the gp, it's way less bad eg in Russia (where I have personal experience), where basic traits like kindness just seem to be around more in women, and I don't have to fire up nearly as much of a virtual personality to be attractive to them.
The act of _judging_ people by their _race_ is called racism. Not classifying alone, and not by 'appearance' in general.
As for 'great-looking' women, I've made the same experience, on average (not universally of course) they tend to be much more demanding, and thus in the medium run a pain in the ass to be with. Rational for them, since their pool of potential suitors is larger, but it's equally rational for me to not invest the effort they demand because I don't weigh 'great' looks very highly in a partner (not being totally ugly and somewhat maintaining a decent appearance is of course necessary, but that's a filter that includes at least 75% of women), as what mainly matters to me is a woman being fun to be with.
I have a PS3 to play Rock Band 3 with a pal online, but I just found out that the custom (not made by Sony) songs for Rock Band (ie those on the Rock Band Network) can only be directly uploaded for the XBox 360, and Sony only ports some over to PS3 and Wii as and when they feel like it.
As my regular gaming is almost exclusively Rock Band (OK, and Tekken 5 on my PS2 as Tekken 6 on the PS3 sucks so much), that's one more XBox 360 purchase right there...
Slashdot Mirror
And what would be in it for us? Have you looked at what it takes to get elected to even a modest political office? Every little thing you say, and every single thing that can be dug up from your and your acquiantances' past, is milked for every drop of 'scandal' it can give; and even if that were not the case, you still spend most of your time delivering the same bland speech at every little town hall, as actually taking a clear and honest stance on most issues would just make you meat for your opponents.
Why would a smart person actually do that to themselves?
That's pretty much exactly how I use FB: I'm on it under my real name, so people who I've lost touch with can find and ping me. When that happens, we exchange emails/phone numbers and continue contact through those or in RL. I have no personal info there except name, city of residence, and one or two boring photographs. I never post anything except to answer pings - and since those pings generate email alerts, I only ever log in when I know there's a personal message waiting, which is every couple of months or so. Never read any of the inane posts either, who cares if one of my friends' cat is feeling blue today.
;)
So yes, it's a great way to get in touch with people who you lost touch with and who are not on LinkedIn, but that's pretty much the only use I see
When the summary says '3D is more immersive', it says so specifically within the context of '3D' movies and '3D' handhelds, so yes of course the real world is 3D, but while true that's entirely irrelevant to the summary or the discussion here.
Yeah, but '3D' as in the movie technology is not immersive at all, have to strain my eyes continuously to even see 3D instead of 2 images, and makes my head hurt llike shit. Saw 3D Avatar in an IMAX, so it wasn't a cheapo implementation, but still fucking torture. You like it, you're welcome to it - I'm staying away.
Idiot. What high frequency trading algos do is look at past price behavior of the same asset, and prices of related assets, to try and predict its movement in the future couple of minutes. That data is available at that time to anybody willing to pay for a box in a co-location facility, and later on to everybody subscribing to any sort of data feed for that asset.
What possible relationship to insider trading is there? Insider trades don't need low latency, they're executed at human time scale (minutes to days).
You might not see the 'societal usefulness' of HF trading, but that's a long way from claiming any relationship to illegality.
You're being sarcastic, right? Right?
You're saying it's not OK to compeltely disregard authority if its demands make no sense to you and you think you can get away with it?
Don't think so. People in Muslim countries hate the US for things like supporting Israel, having military bases in Saudi Arabia, and invading Iraq - the way it treats the handful of people in Guantanamo will never be enough to offset that. On the other hand, a lot of people in Europe and the US hate Guantanamo because of the fundamental libertiy and rule of law issues involved, and will not be moved by whether the interior of the cage feels nice.
Pointless. As you pointed out, it's still a cage.
Lucky you - polyamorous relationships I've been in tended to develop an unstable dynamic and explode or drift apart - great if that's not the case for you'all.
;)
Not with you on the not wanting children bit though - if you think the country you live in is going to the dogs (which I would agree with in the case of the US), why not go find a better one? The world is a big and wonderful place, Europe is great if you want cozy and quality-of-life focused, Asia is great if you want space for ambition and drive, and there's much to be said for just drifting across the continents if you can't make up your mind
Well ultimately values can't be proven, only chosen and/or felt to be right, so I don't think there is an objective best state or direction of society, only opinions. As far as my personal opinions go, I believe laws and rules should be gender-blind except to prevent outirght discrimination (so equal-pay laws are a good thing), so there should be equality of formal opportunity; but I also belive that equality of outcomes is unattainable, and that most kinds of diversity, including gender diversity, have no intrinsic value for most purposes, and should thus neither be encouraged nor discouraged. When I interview a job candidate, all I care about is whether they'll be able to do the job well.
In particular, I don't believe women have more of a special insight than, say, tall people or naturalized children of immigrants or any other of a hundred possible categories, on most topics except those specifically related to women. If wikipedia is worried about bias, US-centric bias or deletionist bias would appear to be much more of a problem if indeed there is one.
It's just that there's a meme going round that gender diversity is a thing worth expending effort to attain in any group of people, no matter the context, and I think it's just not true (gender diversity is not bad either, it's just irrelevant in most circumstances); and it is annoying to hear this meme time and again.
SOs? How many have you got?
I was just about to post the very same thing ;)
Yes, and sometimes they are. And when there's enough of those many, such things may well run out of steam and even reverse a bit.
That he, like many other people, is pissed off with forced equalization of outcomes and thinks political correctness has long reached all the justifiable goals it once had (equal rights for women and all that), and has since gone way beyond sane? And doesn't think there is the slightest problem problem if female participation is not 50% everywhere?
I, possibly like the GP, have a set of moral principles, and the topmost of them is survival of my family and close friends. This only kicks in when there is severe danger (not having means to support my immediate family, for example), but then it's an imperative. If that disagrees with your notions of right and wrong, well I really couldn't care less - but if your principles would result in your child not getting, for example, the medical treatment they need, or having them grow up in a shit part of town because the daddy is so noble and can't get a well-paying job, what kind of a father are you? Do you even have kids btw?
You keep your standards of right and wrong and I'll keep mine, thank you very much.
Too bad you'll never see the reply, being an AC:)
Very well said.
Hmm, your post started so well-reasoned but trailed off into the usual anti-corporation whine. Absolutely the whole offshoring debate is a question of economic nationalism. There is nothing inherently un-ethical about offshoring, people who say there is just assign zero value to jobs created overseas and huge value to jobs created in-country - a very American thing to do btw in my experience, treating the rest of the world like it barely matters except as a backdrop. On the other hand, the state should definitely care about whether that makes it weaker or stronger (both cases are possible, depending on the circumstances) and change its laws to promote its benefit, not because it's 'ethical', but out of self-interest.
However, I can't really agree with the second half of your post. If somebody in China or India is willing to make and sell that great straw hat I just bought for $20, is your proposal for ethical behavior of companies to not sell it to me, leaving me with either no hat to buy or a Western-made hat costing 3 times as much (that I won't be buying because that's too much), and leaving that Chinese guy out of a job? Greaat idea, and the company that tries it will stay afloat for ever so long. And oh ever so ethical.
> Even the Nazi's weren't defeated by foreign forces, at the end of the day, the system collapsed from the inside.
Care to justify that bizarre statement?
> Giving money and food to poor people in a foreign country does not remove money and food from the poor people of my own country
Where does that money and food come from then - magic?
> actually, openly proposes that openness is a threat, because it inhibits covert action.
Where exactly? It does say the trends it discusses will make it harder for the US and the FBI to control what's going on, but where does it say it's a bad thing? Quote please.
Been in the forums of the community that The Game describes long before the book came out. Whether money is the criterion or not, it remains the case that to have a serious shot at being attractive to women certainly in the US, you have to behave in a totally different manner than what comes naturally to a lot of people. In particular, being nice gets you nowhere, or rather being used as a doormat.
And I agree with the gp, it's way less bad eg in Russia (where I have personal experience), where basic traits like kindness just seem to be around more in women, and I don't have to fire up nearly as much of a virtual personality to be attractive to them.
The act of _judging_ people by their _race_ is called racism. Not classifying alone, and not by 'appearance' in general.
As for 'great-looking' women, I've made the same experience, on average (not universally of course) they tend to be much more demanding, and thus in the medium run a pain in the ass to be with. Rational for them, since their pool of potential suitors is larger, but it's equally rational for me to not invest the effort they demand because I don't weigh 'great' looks very highly in a partner (not being totally ugly and somewhat maintaining a decent appearance is of course necessary, but that's a filter that includes at least 75% of women), as what mainly matters to me is a woman being fun to be with.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ezekiel+23%3A20
I have a PS3 to play Rock Band 3 with a pal online, but I just found out that the custom (not made by Sony) songs for Rock Band (ie those on the Rock Band Network) can only be directly uploaded for the XBox 360, and Sony only ports some over to PS3 and Wii as and when they feel like it.
As my regular gaming is almost exclusively Rock Band (OK, and Tekken 5 on my PS2 as Tekken 6 on the PS3 sucks so much), that's one more XBox 360 purchase right there...
A win for MS there, I wonder why?