Worst thing with stoplights is they break, there is always a human driver who can figure out if all the lights are on red or green and call the police to manage traffic.
Are you really that oblivious when you drive. THE worst thing that could happen with stoplights is if they were all turned green. Most people see a green light and go. You wouldn't have to wait for someone to call the police because they noticed the lights were all green because they'd be there because of the multi-car pileup. Now, if all the lights just went dark, then you'd only have a minor problem on your hand of fewer people flying through no-signal traffic lights. If they all went red you'd just have annoyed people but probably no high speed crashes.
As for the credit card reader, say it consistently overcharged by $5. Say you shop at the local grocery store multiple times a week. You might not be able to pick out that $5 surcharge on your bills but it would definitely add up.
I'd be careful to think that voice mail is only an 'absurdly backward mode of human-computer interaction'. Since I am hearing a person's voice, it is a 'human-human' interaction and one that's rich in information if you care about details.
You make a valid argument for the conveyance of information in voicemail over text. But, from what I gather, the point of the "absurdly backward mode of human-computer interaction" is more in reference to the voicemail service as provided currently. If there was a more intuitive way to access voicemail compared to waiting for a voice to tell you to press 7 or 9 or 4 and the ability to skip messages/ choose the message you want immediately then the interface would be significantly improved. For example, the visual voicemail that comes with the iPhone does just that, it lets you choose which message to listen to (you get to see the number/contact before choosing), it lets you see how long the message is, it lets you skip to a particular part of the message and it's all very intuitive and easy to use. I have no idea how difficult that is to implement but seeing as it's been done I would hope that it would move across to all, or most, mobiles because it seems like such a better way of accessing voicemail. I believe the author is forgetting that there can be improvements to how voicemail is delivered beyond simply converting it to text.
...It's the same argument 'when am I ever going to use algebra/geometry [as taught in high school]'.
As an electrical engineer, in undergrad, we were expected to already know a fairly large amount of algebraic and geometric/trigonometric relationships from high school and we never went over those principles in class. Now, if you're not going into a scientific/engineering/mathematics degree you're probably never going to need to use those principles, but it's a good thing to learn incase you don't know whether you want to be a technical student in college (if you even end up going).
As an electrical-engineering undergraduate... I would think that most people that go through a pure mathematics degree genuinely enjoy these processes... I can guarantee you that this mental training does give me an edge
As an electrical engineering graduate student I can tell you that I genuinely loath my advanced mathematics courses. I'll say it straight up, they're hard as hell. But I will agree with you that because of those courses I've learned skills that allow me to produce better proofs and quicker understanding of mathematical relations in my linear systems, power systems, and dynamic allocations courses compared to my colleagues who have not taken more rigorous mathematics courses.
I always enjoyed studying with the math students (me being the only non-mathematics graduate student). They always were looking for complete, rationally derived proofs, whereas I would be okay with accepting certain principles without a full proof. I don't think they ever understood how I could just assume certain things were correct and then move on to the next step. That's the difference between mathematicians and engineers; mathematicians want a thorough and rigorous proof and engineers are willing to get "just good enough" on the assumption that someone in the past did their mathematics correctly and their equations are correct.
The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed.
Unless you're in the real world. Look at those Pennsylvania judges that sent all those kids to juvenile correction centers in exchange for cash payouts from those running the facilities. The judge is not your typical "sheepdog" but they sit in equivalent seats of authority. Those two judges aren't getting anything near the punishment they deserve (the minimum of which should be equal time in jail to what they sent those kids away for) defeating the whole notion that "sheepdogs" will be severely punished for when they do harm. Democracies and Republics don't work like shepherds, because a real shepherd would actually deal with a sheepdog attacking his flock.
Speaking of shepherds, your story doesn't even mention them. Ever wonder who has the greatest power in the sheep, sheepdog, wolf story. It's the shepherd, and the shepherd doesn't even have to use violence. And that, my friends, is why the shepherd can protect his flock without terrifying them. The difference between the sheepdog and the shepherd in real life is the difference between the cop who gets his gun and thinks, "Now I've got the power." and the cop who gets his gun and thinks, "I hope I never have to use this." The sheepdog is nothing but a wolf who hasn't attacked the wrong people. The shepherd doesn't want to use his power unless necessary and will not resort to it until the time requires it.
Still, by adding in this extra player, you're still left with an oversimplification of good and evil. If you want a free society you have to live with the dangers of a free society. If we had authoritarian rule then there probably wouldn't be as much violence in the public, but you've gotta believe the government would be killing off all those who broke the least of laws or just happened to upset someone in authority. I'd rather have the risks of freedom than any government "security blanket." Simply put, those who tell us that our freedoms our not the most important things are those who are too afraid to step into the dark and face the unknown. These are the kinds of people that would never go to the moon, that would never risk their lives for something, and who seek only to control what is ultimately uncontrollable, humanity.
So let's get this straight. It might have happened during the Big Bang. So, if we want to recreate it we're probably going to need to create a power source within a few magnitudes of the Big Bang. I don't know about you, but I don't feel comfortable using up significant percentages of the Universe's total energy. No need to accelerate the Big Freeze.
I think you're missing the point of sleep. I don't sleep to pass the time, I sleep cause I'm tired. If I fell asleep while using the warp drive, 8 hours (if I was lucky) would pass outside and I'd only get a few minutes of sleep. I don't know about you, but I would consider that an epic fail in terms of sleep.
Just because I don't have enough money to continue doing R&D, doesn't mean that my engineers don't possess valuable information that I already paid for and that is rightly my trade secret.
If a company has a legitimate cause of action against a former employee transferring proprietary info, then let them make the case and be subject to a penalty if they lose.
What you're talking about is more of a non-disclosure / trade secrets clause as opposed to a non-compete. A non-compete keeps you from working at a company that is in the same industry as your former company. A non-disclosure / trade secrets clause keeps you from divulging information about your former company that would give your new company a competitive advantage.
What is logical and clear to us, may not be to the court.
Plus they can just refuse to hear any cases related to it, and let any new law stand without making any ruling. Much as they did with the 2nd for so many decades.
The only difference is that the supreme court has ruled on the first amendment much more often in the past than they have on the second (I believe that count is 1 ruling on the 2nd amendment in the history of the US). This law (as described in the summary) seems like a slam dunk to get bounced by the supreme court.
The OP said he is looking for something to go with his Mac Book Pro. I don't know how many ports they have, but considering it's a laptop it's probably not that many.
Your post makes a good point. I might actually consider a usb wireless mouse if the usb receiver was also a charging dock. But if it was simply an rf transmitter/receiver then I wouldn't mess with it.
I don't think I'd ever use a usb-wireless mouse simply for the fact that it's eating up a usb port. When I can connect my mouse to my computer without occupying any of the ports I can't think of any reason not to. And bluetooth is a very good connection, at least in all of my experiences with it.
It takes some time getting used to the right click mechanism. I know I didn't become comfortable with it for a few weeks, but now I find myself slightly lifting my index finger off of standard two button mouses as if it were my mighty mouse.
Well, to file this under "Shit that's never going to happen!" is probably not correct considering there's a very high likelihood that there will be solar flares in the future. Whether or not we need to take action to protect against it is another thing. But I would say that the world is going to end in 2012 because the Mayans say so is probably "shit that's never going to happen!" I guess we only have to wait three years.
Well, considering resistance decreases with radius that makes perfect sense. Now, if they're referring to power capacity then it's a fairly large resistor. It's all about whether you're referring to Ohms or Watts.
This is within the CHP's right to release. What about all the damage she caused. The public has a right to the information through FOIA.
Judging by the action taken by the CHP (suspending the two officers involved) they didn't have the right to release the images in the manner that they did. CHP my have a legal right to release the photos, but it probably doesn't involve leaks to internet websites, it probably involves more formal public channels.
He asked our school's counselor if he could use that score to get into college and got a pretty quick, "No!"
Let me refine this statement a little bit. He wasn't trying to get into school early. He was seeing if using his eighth grade SAT scores should be the ones he submitted as a senior in HS. And that's what he was told not to do. If you do great in eighth grade that doesn't mean you can submit those scores four years later as your SAT scores, it just doesn't look good to college admittance staff.
If some teenager takes the SAT and gets a good score in 7th or 8th grade. Could they possibly get into college?
I actually know someone who pulled a 1550 (out of 1600) when he was in eight grade. He asked our school's counselor if he could use that score to get into college and got a pretty quick, "No!" The fact is, SATs are just stupid tests that don't tell you much about somebody. If you manage to get a great score, good for you, but if you can't back that up with good grades in coursework then it's pretty much moot.
yeah, and when i just want to transfer my new cd to my shuffle, i have to download a 60mb installer and agree to run that bloated crap on my already windows encumbered pc.
i threw down my shuffle in a rage out of the seventh floor window. just got my new sony ericsson w595 with 4gb memory. i can just copy all of my wmplayer-ripped library and paste it on the phone over bluetooth. no extra software.
So, let's get this straight, you bought a player that is well known to require iTunes to put music onto and then complain about having to download iTunes. I don't buy a playstation and complain about it not playing XBox games.
Their search function sucks. It has no ability to say "search for The Simpsons in TV Shows" so you get the shows, and the soundtracks.
I know this is asking a lot, but you could do a ctrl-A on all of your movies/shows and edit the info to include "movie" or "tv show" in the information setting. Then you could search for "simpson tv show" and only get the tv show.
He said un biased. To quote John Steward - "I'll admit I'm biased. I've got my head so far up Kerry's ass I can tell you what he had for breakfast."
You're quote fails because it...
[x] - Lacks context
[ ] - Isn't true
[ ] - Isn't funny
[x] - Lacks expression
[ ] - Is from Billy C. under oath
Seriously, Jon Stewart said that in mocking to those two idiots on Hardball. And while The Daily Show has bias, it's not a hidden bias. If one has an ounce of intelligence and takes a moments time to think about the show one will realize that it is a comedy show and should not be taken as fact. On the other hand, many shows on cable news channels are not as overt about their bias and claim to be, "Fair and Balanced" or "The Most Trusted Name in News."
A Journalist is essentially this: a person with no education on a topic whatsoever and who likely already possesses an opinion of it is supposed to go out and write an informed, accurate, and neutral (or objective, whatever the standard is now) article on it for all the world to read.
Interesting point, maybe journalists should be more like lawyers (gasp, but I'm serious, at least like some lawyers). I have no idea what number of lawyers actually do this, but I know some people that majored in chemistry, physics, biology, various engineering fields, economics, etc. as undergrads and then went on to law school. They will get all the education from law school regarding what is required of them as lawyers, but they also have a fair bit of knowledge on their particular field of undergraduate studies. This could be applied to journalists. You could get your undergraduate degree in some field, say electrical engineering. Then spend some time (maybe only a year) in journalism school and you'd be able to report with much more authority and knowledge of what questions to ask on topics such as expansion of the US power grid, CFL use, etc. Now, this would greatly increase the costs to news networks of employing a journalist so I don't see this happening anytime soon, but it'd be an interesting approach.
And no, I don't think that this would get rid of bias. As a power engineer I'm biased to investment and research in power systems, but my bias is fairly obvious based on my field of study. And as a fairly well rounded individual I'm not violently opposed to discussing investment in other sectors, but it takes me a little longer to see the benefits from investment outside my field of expertise.
To be fair, Olbermann runs a political commentary show, similar to O'Reilly. I have no problem with those two (other than personal distaste for their views and methods) but they have no obligation to present an unbiased view of the news because they are, in fact, entertainment shows as opposed to news broadcasts.
On the other hand, the news casts on those channels need to clean themselves up of their political views. If you claim to be a news broadcaster then you shouldn't act like a political commentator. And people in general need to stop treating political commentary like news. Too many people have told me that they heard O'Reilly say something so it must be true. Smarten up folks.
This is no bad or good thing. It's just how it is.
I think you just directly contradicted yourself right here. Now, I agree that there is no news source that is out there that is unbiased, and that it is practically (if not actually) impossible to create an unbiased news source. It would require the news anchor to tell everything that happened that day, and I mean everything because if one omits something then one's bias shows that event didn't matter.
It would only continue the bad parts of modern journalism: the focus on death, destruction, and polarizing events.
That's because news has shifted to "entertainment." SEAL snipers coming onto a ship at night to snipe three pirates is exiting news. Private John Doe spent the last two months building a simple one room classroom that might drastically affect the futures of kids on the other side of the world is not.
It's really sad, because the latter example has a much greater chance of saving many more people. While there was immediate risk of death to that ship captain, he was only one man. The efforts of soldiers, volunteers and others working on infrastructure in a war torn country has the potential to move that country out of a future of wars.
Slashdot Mirror
Worst thing with stoplights is they break, there is always a human driver who can figure out if all the lights are on red or green and call the police to manage traffic.
Are you really that oblivious when you drive. THE worst thing that could happen with stoplights is if they were all turned green. Most people see a green light and go. You wouldn't have to wait for someone to call the police because they noticed the lights were all green because they'd be there because of the multi-car pileup. Now, if all the lights just went dark, then you'd only have a minor problem on your hand of fewer people flying through no-signal traffic lights. If they all went red you'd just have annoyed people but probably no high speed crashes.
As for the credit card reader, say it consistently overcharged by $5. Say you shop at the local grocery store multiple times a week. You might not be able to pick out that $5 surcharge on your bills but it would definitely add up.
Strange as it looks, "one's" is the correct singular, gender-neutral, third person possessive pronoun.
Speak English, please (also removed a wrong comma -- it's not a serial comma because there was no "and", "or", or similar).
His is a decidedly masculine pronoun. One is the correct gender neutral pronoun, though it is fairly antiquated.
I'd be careful to think that voice mail is only an 'absurdly backward mode of human-computer interaction'. Since I am hearing a person's voice, it is a 'human-human' interaction and one that's rich in information if you care about details.
You make a valid argument for the conveyance of information in voicemail over text. But, from what I gather, the point of the "absurdly backward mode of human-computer interaction" is more in reference to the voicemail service as provided currently. If there was a more intuitive way to access voicemail compared to waiting for a voice to tell you to press 7 or 9 or 4 and the ability to skip messages/ choose the message you want immediately then the interface would be significantly improved. For example, the visual voicemail that comes with the iPhone does just that, it lets you choose which message to listen to (you get to see the number/contact before choosing), it lets you see how long the message is, it lets you skip to a particular part of the message and it's all very intuitive and easy to use. I have no idea how difficult that is to implement but seeing as it's been done I would hope that it would move across to all, or most, mobiles because it seems like such a better way of accessing voicemail. I believe the author is forgetting that there can be improvements to how voicemail is delivered beyond simply converting it to text.
...It's the same argument 'when am I ever going to use algebra/geometry [as taught in high school]'.
As an electrical engineer, in undergrad, we were expected to already know a fairly large amount of algebraic and geometric/trigonometric relationships from high school and we never went over those principles in class. Now, if you're not going into a scientific/engineering/mathematics degree you're probably never going to need to use those principles, but it's a good thing to learn incase you don't know whether you want to be a technical student in college (if you even end up going).
As an electrical-engineering undergraduate ... I would think that most people that go through a pure mathematics degree genuinely enjoy these processes... I can guarantee you that this mental training does give me an edge
As an electrical engineering graduate student I can tell you that I genuinely loath my advanced mathematics courses. I'll say it straight up, they're hard as hell. But I will agree with you that because of those courses I've learned skills that allow me to produce better proofs and quicker understanding of mathematical relations in my linear systems, power systems, and dynamic allocations courses compared to my colleagues who have not taken more rigorous mathematics courses.
I always enjoyed studying with the math students (me being the only non-mathematics graduate student). They always were looking for complete, rationally derived proofs, whereas I would be okay with accepting certain principles without a full proof. I don't think they ever understood how I could just assume certain things were correct and then move on to the next step. That's the difference between mathematicians and engineers; mathematicians want a thorough and rigorous proof and engineers are willing to get "just good enough" on the assumption that someone in the past did their mathematics correctly and their equations are correct.
There are two major flaws with this story...
The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed.
Unless you're in the real world. Look at those Pennsylvania judges that sent all those kids to juvenile correction centers in exchange for cash payouts from those running the facilities. The judge is not your typical "sheepdog" but they sit in equivalent seats of authority. Those two judges aren't getting anything near the punishment they deserve (the minimum of which should be equal time in jail to what they sent those kids away for) defeating the whole notion that "sheepdogs" will be severely punished for when they do harm. Democracies and Republics don't work like shepherds, because a real shepherd would actually deal with a sheepdog attacking his flock.
Speaking of shepherds, your story doesn't even mention them. Ever wonder who has the greatest power in the sheep, sheepdog, wolf story. It's the shepherd, and the shepherd doesn't even have to use violence. And that, my friends, is why the shepherd can protect his flock without terrifying them. The difference between the sheepdog and the shepherd in real life is the difference between the cop who gets his gun and thinks, "Now I've got the power." and the cop who gets his gun and thinks, "I hope I never have to use this." The sheepdog is nothing but a wolf who hasn't attacked the wrong people. The shepherd doesn't want to use his power unless necessary and will not resort to it until the time requires it.
Still, by adding in this extra player, you're still left with an oversimplification of good and evil. If you want a free society you have to live with the dangers of a free society. If we had authoritarian rule then there probably wouldn't be as much violence in the public, but you've gotta believe the government would be killing off all those who broke the least of laws or just happened to upset someone in authority. I'd rather have the risks of freedom than any government "security blanket." Simply put, those who tell us that our freedoms our not the most important things are those who are too afraid to step into the dark and face the unknown. These are the kinds of people that would never go to the moon, that would never risk their lives for something, and who seek only to control what is ultimately uncontrollable, humanity.
So let's get this straight. It might have happened during the Big Bang. So, if we want to recreate it we're probably going to need to create a power source within a few magnitudes of the Big Bang. I don't know about you, but I don't feel comfortable using up significant percentages of the Universe's total energy. No need to accelerate the Big Freeze.
I think you're missing the point of sleep. I don't sleep to pass the time, I sleep cause I'm tired. If I fell asleep while using the warp drive, 8 hours (if I was lucky) would pass outside and I'd only get a few minutes of sleep. I don't know about you, but I would consider that an epic fail in terms of sleep.
Just because I don't have enough money to continue doing R&D, doesn't mean that my engineers don't possess valuable information that I already paid for and that is rightly my trade secret.
If a company has a legitimate cause of action against a former employee transferring proprietary info, then let them make the case and be subject to a penalty if they lose.
What you're talking about is more of a non-disclosure / trade secrets clause as opposed to a non-compete. A non-compete keeps you from working at a company that is in the same industry as your former company. A non-disclosure / trade secrets clause keeps you from divulging information about your former company that would give your new company a competitive advantage.
What is logical and clear to us, may not be to the court.
Plus they can just refuse to hear any cases related to it, and let any new law stand without making any ruling. Much as they did with the 2nd for so many decades.
The only difference is that the supreme court has ruled on the first amendment much more often in the past than they have on the second (I believe that count is 1 ruling on the 2nd amendment in the history of the US). This law (as described in the summary) seems like a slam dunk to get bounced by the supreme court.
The OP said he is looking for something to go with his Mac Book Pro. I don't know how many ports they have, but considering it's a laptop it's probably not that many.
Your post makes a good point. I might actually consider a usb wireless mouse if the usb receiver was also a charging dock. But if it was simply an rf transmitter/receiver then I wouldn't mess with it.
I don't think I'd ever use a usb-wireless mouse simply for the fact that it's eating up a usb port. When I can connect my mouse to my computer without occupying any of the ports I can't think of any reason not to. And bluetooth is a very good connection, at least in all of my experiences with it.
It takes some time getting used to the right click mechanism. I know I didn't become comfortable with it for a few weeks, but now I find myself slightly lifting my index finger off of standard two button mouses as if it were my mighty mouse.
Well, to file this under "Shit that's never going to happen!" is probably not correct considering there's a very high likelihood that there will be solar flares in the future. Whether or not we need to take action to protect against it is another thing. But I would say that the world is going to end in 2012 because the Mayans say so is probably "shit that's never going to happen!" I guess we only have to wait three years.
Well, considering resistance decreases with radius that makes perfect sense. Now, if they're referring to power capacity then it's a fairly large resistor. It's all about whether you're referring to Ohms or Watts.
This is within the CHP's right to release. What about all the damage she caused. The public has a right to the information through FOIA.
Judging by the action taken by the CHP (suspending the two officers involved) they didn't have the right to release the images in the manner that they did. CHP my have a legal right to release the photos, but it probably doesn't involve leaks to internet websites, it probably involves more formal public channels.
He asked our school's counselor if he could use that score to get into college and got a pretty quick, "No!"
Let me refine this statement a little bit. He wasn't trying to get into school early. He was seeing if using his eighth grade SAT scores should be the ones he submitted as a senior in HS. And that's what he was told not to do. If you do great in eighth grade that doesn't mean you can submit those scores four years later as your SAT scores, it just doesn't look good to college admittance staff.
If some teenager takes the SAT and gets a good score in 7th or 8th grade. Could they possibly get into college?
I actually know someone who pulled a 1550 (out of 1600) when he was in eight grade. He asked our school's counselor if he could use that score to get into college and got a pretty quick, "No!" The fact is, SATs are just stupid tests that don't tell you much about somebody. If you manage to get a great score, good for you, but if you can't back that up with good grades in coursework then it's pretty much moot.
yeah, and when i just want to transfer my new cd to my shuffle, i have to download a 60mb installer and agree to run that bloated crap on my already windows encumbered pc. i threw down my shuffle in a rage out of the seventh floor window. just got my new sony ericsson w595 with 4gb memory. i can just copy all of my wmplayer-ripped library and paste it on the phone over bluetooth. no extra software.
So, let's get this straight, you bought a player that is well known to require iTunes to put music onto and then complain about having to download iTunes. I don't buy a playstation and complain about it not playing XBox games.
Their search function sucks. It has no ability to say "search for The Simpsons in TV Shows" so you get the shows, and the soundtracks.
I know this is asking a lot, but you could do a ctrl-A on all of your movies/shows and edit the info to include "movie" or "tv show" in the information setting. Then you could search for "simpson tv show" and only get the tv show.
He said un biased. To quote John Steward - "I'll admit I'm biased. I've got my head so far up Kerry's ass I can tell you what he had for breakfast."
You're quote fails because it ...
[x] - Lacks context
[ ] - Isn't true
[ ] - Isn't funny
[x] - Lacks expression
[ ] - Is from Billy C. under oath
Seriously, Jon Stewart said that in mocking to those two idiots on Hardball. And while The Daily Show has bias, it's not a hidden bias. If one has an ounce of intelligence and takes a moments time to think about the show one will realize that it is a comedy show and should not be taken as fact. On the other hand, many shows on cable news channels are not as overt about their bias and claim to be, "Fair and Balanced" or "The Most Trusted Name in News."
A Journalist is essentially this: a person with no education on a topic whatsoever and who likely already possesses an opinion of it is supposed to go out and write an informed, accurate, and neutral (or objective, whatever the standard is now) article on it for all the world to read.
Interesting point, maybe journalists should be more like lawyers (gasp, but I'm serious, at least like some lawyers). I have no idea what number of lawyers actually do this, but I know some people that majored in chemistry, physics, biology, various engineering fields, economics, etc. as undergrads and then went on to law school. They will get all the education from law school regarding what is required of them as lawyers, but they also have a fair bit of knowledge on their particular field of undergraduate studies. This could be applied to journalists. You could get your undergraduate degree in some field, say electrical engineering. Then spend some time (maybe only a year) in journalism school and you'd be able to report with much more authority and knowledge of what questions to ask on topics such as expansion of the US power grid, CFL use, etc. Now, this would greatly increase the costs to news networks of employing a journalist so I don't see this happening anytime soon, but it'd be an interesting approach.
And no, I don't think that this would get rid of bias. As a power engineer I'm biased to investment and research in power systems, but my bias is fairly obvious based on my field of study. And as a fairly well rounded individual I'm not violently opposed to discussing investment in other sectors, but it takes me a little longer to see the benefits from investment outside my field of expertise.
- double each time Biden refers to a conversation he'd had that sounds suspiciously like something made up
You're trying to tell me that conversation the Billy B. had with Joey Denko at the gas station wasn't true. Is it too late to change my vote.
To be fair, Olbermann runs a political commentary show, similar to O'Reilly. I have no problem with those two (other than personal distaste for their views and methods) but they have no obligation to present an unbiased view of the news because they are, in fact, entertainment shows as opposed to news broadcasts.
On the other hand, the news casts on those channels need to clean themselves up of their political views. If you claim to be a news broadcaster then you shouldn't act like a political commentator. And people in general need to stop treating political commentary like news. Too many people have told me that they heard O'Reilly say something so it must be true. Smarten up folks.
There is no such thing as unbiased.
This is no bad or good thing. It's just how it is.
I think you just directly contradicted yourself right here. Now, I agree that there is no news source that is out there that is unbiased, and that it is practically (if not actually) impossible to create an unbiased news source. It would require the news anchor to tell everything that happened that day, and I mean everything because if one omits something then one's bias shows that event didn't matter.
It would only continue the bad parts of modern journalism: the focus on death, destruction, and polarizing events.
That's because news has shifted to "entertainment." SEAL snipers coming onto a ship at night to snipe three pirates is exiting news. Private John Doe spent the last two months building a simple one room classroom that might drastically affect the futures of kids on the other side of the world is not.
It's really sad, because the latter example has a much greater chance of saving many more people. While there was immediate risk of death to that ship captain, he was only one man. The efforts of soldiers, volunteers and others working on infrastructure in a war torn country has the potential to move that country out of a future of wars.