I've never seen such a breathless defense of fascism on Slashdot as this post.
You don't even know what this guy did/didn't do, or why they took his shit, and you assume he was innocent and didn't deserve it?
You're assuming the cops are guilty of committing a crime with absolutely no idea at all what happened. All you know is what some other bloggers wrote, GOOD source of info there, no bias or anything.
Get a fucking grip, $10 says this guy did something illegal as shit and is just a bumbling idiot.
LOL.
And then:
Lets make this use an evolution analogy for this, since most slashdotters perfer that religion.
Well, to just imagine, if you were the only person alive using Linux, I'd imagine you'd have a wee bit of trouble getting apps and drivers for it! The more people use Linux, the more developers produce for it. Simple as that.
Phantom limbs, despite the name, are not paranormal and we have a basic understanding of them. The parent had the right idea about Ramachandran's research--he used a visual illusion to cure phantom limb pain in subjects.
Phantom limbs exist because the body has a sense of positioning and actually existing. To illustrate this, sit on your leg until it "falls asleep" and try to walk around. Your pinched nerve will not report positioning correctly and you'll have an interesting time walking around. You might even feel like you're falling even though your foot is firmly hitting the ground (and you can't feel it).
Even though the arm or leg might be gone, the brain thinks it is there.
What is stupid is, assuming that another man is stupid because you can't comprehend his statements.
The great laughable irony here is that your post is a total non-sequitur. You apparently didn't even understand what Hao Wu was saying; it had nothing to do with incompetent people (which no doubt exist, I would however point to both you and Hao Wu as examples) but whether the research was useless, pointing out the "obvious." Hilariously you didn't comprehend his or my statements. And by your own logic, that is stupid.
I don't know what cognitive deficits you suffer from, but I didn't even talk about parents. I was talking about a general understanding of the human brain and how it develops.
I suppose you're the type that denies global warming is at all occurring because "it shore feels cold here, Jethro!"
Disclaimer: I am a neuroscientist and I indeed believe that lots of behavioral and, in fact, neurological research is utter rubbish, but this belief doesn't invalidate sound studies.
In the middle of winter, do you need to walk outside and discover it is cold or do you grab your jacket without a second thought?
Maybe you live in a warmer climate where the weather may fluctuate around the "jacket/no jacket" line in cooler months, but in areas with more distinct seasons you plan your wardrobe ahead of time. -9 Degrees Fahrenheit outside? I guess I need to wear extra layers today. I should probably put on some boots, as the weather man said it would snow.
You're pretty stupid. Science is methodological and precise to avoid relying on "common sense" because common sense often is not actually correct. Also, it's often easy for you to see ahead of time that this seemed obvious, but in fact was not. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection? Seems obvious to us now (although given the stupidity of your post I wouldn't doubt if you deny it!) but in fact took quite a long time for us to get a good theory of evolution down. Hell, it took a long time to get rid of phlogiston and the ether and "animal spirits." It took us an Einstein to get relativity!
This discovery has very applicable uses, particularly in the general processes of the cognitive processes of toddlers, brain development, and memory storage and retrieval.
Academics, practicing science, are more in the "real world" than you are, because they need rigor and experimentation. It seems anecdote and casual observation is good enough for you.
The most important thing nowadays is efficiency. Human choice or just living your own damn life and enjoying it *awful* because it might indirectly impact someone by some small degree. In the distant future I can see them regulating our diets, too-- probably by requiring us to fulfill our dietary obligations set out during our mandatory checkups (preventative medicine...)
Humans beings have always been pathetic creatures.
Uh, most libertarians point out to self-regulation. They only oppose government regulation. Market self-regulation is still essentially market action. You're using a definition of "free market" that nobody else uses and doesn't even make sense.
Slashdot Mirror
In -theory-, anyway.
Jesus, even the dictionary contains the definition I was using:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fascist
2: a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control
You seem quite distressed over the whole issue. Perhaps you feel I've cheapened your ideology or something. Sorry. How about "totalitarian" instead?
Are you on drugs? I'm a Richard Dawkins-book-toting atheist.
Exactly. I thought I could get away with it without some pretentious half-wit complaining. I guess I was wrong.
I've never seen such a breathless defense of fascism on Slashdot as this post.
You don't even know what this guy did/didn't do, or why they took his shit, and you assume he was innocent and didn't deserve it?
You're assuming the cops are guilty of committing a crime with absolutely no idea at all what happened. All you know is what some other bloggers wrote, GOOD source of info there, no bias or anything.
Get a fucking grip, $10 says this guy did something illegal as shit and is just a bumbling idiot.
LOL.
And then:
Lets make this use an evolution analogy for this, since most slashdotters perfer that religion.
Troll.
His naivety is pretty cute, though. He's like the little kid that says babies come from storks or something. It's adorable.
You're right, I'm obviously supportive of dictatorships because I dislike democracy for it resulting in less freedoms. OF COURSE...!
-I- myself have great contempt for the democratic process, but I would actually point to these kind of shenanigans as part of the reason why!
What do I care if Linux works for you?
Well, to just imagine, if you were the only person alive using Linux, I'd imagine you'd have a wee bit of trouble getting apps and drivers for it! The more people use Linux, the more developers produce for it. Simple as that.
So you're fine with censorship as long as it's democratic. Gotcha. Glad to see such a profound respect for individual rights in this day and age.
So you'd be fine with it if it was the government doing it?
hahahahahaha
Score:6, Funny
Yeah, I know, but since he seemed to think "phantom limbs" referred to some paranormal claim I didn't want to get too technical for him.
You're a stupid fucking moron, you dumb piece of shit.
Phantom limbs, despite the name, are not paranormal and we have a basic understanding of them. The parent had the right idea about Ramachandran's research--he used a visual illusion to cure phantom limb pain in subjects.
Phantom limbs exist because the body has a sense of positioning and actually existing. To illustrate this, sit on your leg until it "falls asleep" and try to walk around. Your pinched nerve will not report positioning correctly and you'll have an interesting time walking around. You might even feel like you're falling even though your foot is firmly hitting the ground (and you can't feel it).
Even though the arm or leg might be gone, the brain thinks it is there.
What is stupid is, assuming that another man is stupid because you can't comprehend his statements.
The great laughable irony here is that your post is a total non-sequitur. You apparently didn't even understand what Hao Wu was saying; it had nothing to do with incompetent people (which no doubt exist, I would however point to both you and Hao Wu as examples) but whether the research was useless, pointing out the "obvious." Hilariously you didn't comprehend his or my statements. And by your own logic, that is stupid.
I don't know what cognitive deficits you suffer from, but I didn't even talk about parents. I was talking about a general understanding of the human brain and how it develops.
I suppose you're the type that denies global warming is at all occurring because "it shore feels cold here, Jethro!"
Disclaimer: I am a neuroscientist and I indeed believe that lots of behavioral and, in fact, neurological research is utter rubbish, but this belief doesn't invalidate sound studies.
Out of curiosity, can you elaborate?
In the middle of winter, do you need to walk outside and discover it is cold or do you grab your jacket without a second thought?
Maybe you live in a warmer climate where the weather may fluctuate around the "jacket/no jacket" line in cooler months, but in areas with more distinct seasons you plan your wardrobe ahead of time. -9 Degrees Fahrenheit outside? I guess I need to wear extra layers today. I should probably put on some boots, as the weather man said it would snow.
You're pretty stupid. Science is methodological and precise to avoid relying on "common sense" because common sense often is not actually correct. Also, it's often easy for you to see ahead of time that this seemed obvious, but in fact was not. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection? Seems obvious to us now (although given the stupidity of your post I wouldn't doubt if you deny it!) but in fact took quite a long time for us to get a good theory of evolution down. Hell, it took a long time to get rid of phlogiston and the ether and "animal spirits." It took us an Einstein to get relativity!
This discovery has very applicable uses, particularly in the general processes of the cognitive processes of toddlers, brain development, and memory storage and retrieval.
Academics, practicing science, are more in the "real world" than you are, because they need rigor and experimentation. It seems anecdote and casual observation is good enough for you.
The most important thing nowadays is efficiency. Human choice or just living your own damn life and enjoying it *awful* because it might indirectly impact someone by some small degree. In the distant future I can see them regulating our diets, too-- probably by requiring us to fulfill our dietary obligations set out during our mandatory checkups (preventative medicine...)
Humans beings have always been pathetic creatures.
Wouldn't a libertarian argue against copyrights? Oops, there went your point.
Uh, most libertarians point out to self-regulation. They only oppose government regulation. Market self-regulation is still essentially market action. You're using a definition of "free market" that nobody else uses and doesn't even make sense.
Yeah, and that's mostly because that's what gets ratings--that's what the hoi polloi like. The entire world can't cater to your tastes.
How do sex and "blue schlongs" at all damage their psychology?