in republican, which is just another term for ayn randian, everything is left to the private parties to decide.
I think you missed his use of the qualifier "traditional", and I'm not sure if leaving the "r" in lower case was intentional. Modern Republicans are almost all big-government pushers, they just tend to push warfare first and welfare second (see Bush II wars and medicare prescription bill).
Randians (Rational Objectivists)are nothing like modern Republicans, and have little in common with traditional, pre-neocon, lowercase republicans. Perhaps you are mistaking the current wave of GOP Republican Constitution-reading for something sincere (it isn't), or have an incomplete view of Rational Objectivism, or some combination of the two.
If you want proof of GOP Republicans being aligned against Rational Objectivism, look at the GOP's treatment of Ron Paul (who is not a strict Rational Objectivist as far as I know, but adheres to the same political policies). He was barred from presidential debates despite strong showings in the primaries, was not allowed to have his delegates' votes counted at the last convention, and has only now finally been allowed the chair of the Monetary Policy committee despite being senior enough he should have had it a decade ago (which is mostly to placate the more hardcore small-government constituents in the Republican party).
This statistic doesn't distinguish between different types of sex offenders. Sexual assault against an adult, statutory rape, and child molestation are very different offenses, and the perpetrators very different kinds of people.
He's never had success outside of California - he can't hold any Federal office (maybe I should have said "trouble in Federal politics"). California may be big, but it's not mainstream. Arnold Schwarzenegger was governor there, for heaven's sake.
An interesting clip, but I think it confirms my opinion on him. His statements here were, to me at least, meant in a literary sense rather than a literal sense. Like the sinner beating his breast in the back of the church, as opposed to the self-righteous in the front.
He's not a mainstream Democrat by any stretch. He's widely known for promoting zero-growth policies, which I doubt most modern Democrats would support. He was at one time something of an environmental extremist.
Above all, he seems to be, whether you like him or not, a very principled guy, who has had trouble in mainstream politics due to being honest and uncompromising. Kind of a Ron Paul of the left. I don't like him, but I believe he is at least a sincere person with some degree of integrity.
You're right, but you may be missing something. When Android is the dominant mobile OS, content providers will see WebM as the "must-have" and H.264 for iOS devices as what they begrudgingly do for backward compatibility with the minority of the market.
Good point. Will the new tablet and phone OS flavors from Microsoft run non-IE browsers? If not, no one will buy them. Why have a tablet you can't watch YouTube with?
Lots of educated engineers, and this probably could have been fixed with a daemonized perl script that could send a trap to an snmp monitor if conditions got beyond a certain point. Or something like that. I'm sure they had more complex monitoring software, but obviously missed something simple along the way.
In some cases, I can see where you're coming from. If it weren't an emotionally charged context, maybe it would make sense to edit a piece of literature for modernity's sake, so it makes more sense to the reader. Yet I've read some translations of books which really fell flat with me because the language updates did not flow with the contents (I'm thinking specifically of a translation of Lao Tse which I intensely disliked for it being modernized).
But then on the other hand, the whole collection of Uncle Remus stories are remarkably valuable exactly because they record in writing a specific, archaic, and almost unreadable (to today's average reader) dialect of English. Change the language, and you change the whole nature of the beast.
Finally, I think that even if I agreed in part with you that edits for clarity would help the reader, in this case we've got a remarkable example of literature bringing historical and cultural tensions forward and backward over a hundred years, which gives even more impetus to Huck's internal struggle to come to terms with Jim as a person as opposed to an object. The book would not be as meaningful without the offensive language. Twain may or may not have forseen this, but would have enjoyed the uproar.
All I'm asking is for you to point out some examples of his genius and greatness, in light of the racism and violence in his character I think you've quite open-mindedly and fairly acknowledged in this thread.
Perhaps if I state explicitly that I believe there were much better ways to deal with the problems of his presidency than what he chose, and that I do not admire the man generally, this helps explain the fundamental gap in our understanding? That I do not accept as I was once instructed in school that he was one of the great men of our history?
You are trying to judge a man based on your own modern judgement and preconception.
I am, as are you. This doesn't give any additional weight to anything you're saying compared with what I'm saying.
Whether or not the South fired the first shots, the North had already amassed a large military presence clearly showing the use of force was a primary option in negotiations surrounding the political situation. Thus, Lincoln was responsible for his part in the violence. Since it was Lincoln trying to impose his will on others, he is the first actor in terms of the conflict if not the violence.
There were plenty of people with all kinds of attitudes about race relations in Lincoln's day. Perhaps he was right about race relations, but did his actions (and those in the punitive reconstruction) help to cement racial hatred? What if a terrible war had been avoided?
In England the slaves were freed without violence. The government purchased them and freed them. On a monetary cost basis the war probably was within an order of magnitude of that cost. On a human basis?
In the USA there was a war and a bitter reconstruction, and a legacy of racial hatred. In the UK there was no war, and there is little I've ever heard of problems like in the USA between races.
So you've thrown a few mitigating arguments my way which excuse or minimize my criticisms of Lincoln, but still nothing that tells me what was genius or great about Lincoln. If other governments were able to end slavery without bloodshed, I think it's a bit strange to be consider Lincoln a great genius. Wouldn't he be described as something more along the lines of a ham-fisted despot?
For specific purposes carriers may provision SMSC (short message service centers) and GMSC (gateway message service centers) to send binary data to interact with applications on the mobiles.
In practice, this is very rare because the carriers have known for a long time that binary payloads may be susceptible to misuse for malicious reasons. Thus, very few originators of short messages are permitted to send binary payloads (or at least when I was doing this a few years ago, maybe now it's different).
This is probably now much of an issue because it's really quite difficult to get binary sms provisioning from carriers (AT&T, TMO, etc.) because you need to have a contract with special stipulations about what the originating messages will be used for. These are looked at closely by carriers.
If, in fact, his intent was to eliminate Africans from the US, and to do this he started a war in which almost half a million were killed, can you please point out the element of genius and greatness?
It would seem, at best, that if you agree with the premise that his intent was as I suggested, that we are extraordinarily lucky he was murdered and more reasonable people took over after his war.
I'd recommend something like an FMRI or PET scanner which can determine when you're perceiving something (i.e. don't measure the house, measure yourself).
Since ghosts don't seem to show up on recordings in any reliable, repeatable way, it suggests that if they do exist they directly project their energy into the brain, rather than manifest physically. So you'd need to detect the perception, rather than the physical anomaly itself (which probably doesn't exist).
I recall being exposed to various modern music (rock bands, The Beatles, Miles Davis, etc.) as part of general music classes in public schools. We also had different musical genres presented as part of music history in college (I was a music major at one time). Though I rarely find enjoyment in listening to it, I don't see why rap wouldn't be an important part of a survey of modern music. The fact that I didn't have rap presented in an educational context is probably more due to my age and the relatively slow movement of music curricula than anything inherent to the genre.
I can only assume if I were a first year student in music at a college today, rap would be part of the listening assignments for history of music. I'd also assume elementary or middle school teachers might include rap and hip-hop as part of their courses, as well (though it's likely they'd be highly selective about which particular artists/tracks were presented).
I completely disagree. All art has context, but great art transcends context. Art which we come to appreciate despite offensive content in its intent or context is still art we appreciate.
Do I love John Coltrane's "Alabama" because of the story behind it? No, I loved it before I understood that, because the pain it depicts transcends the senseless murder of children it was actually about. I enjoy it differently now that I know.
With Huckleberry Finn, the context is offensive, but that's what I'm bringing to the art, and understanding that things change is something I get to appreciate on a deeper level because not only do I get the benefit of seeing Huck's attitude change, but also the historical social changes between the setting and my lifetime which Twain couldn't have provided.
Art is appreciated in an interaction between the art and the beholder. If you can demonstrate art that has value without ever being observed, maybe there's something to what you say, but I don't think that's possible.
Does this mean that all rap music must also be purged of those words? Or only rap music presented in school music classes? At what level? Elementary, secondary, college?
With respect, did you read the article? Regression to mean was specifically described as what was happening there. Are you saying that term wasn't appropriately applied, or did you miss that part?
Slashdot Mirror
in republican, which is just another term for ayn randian, everything is left to the private parties to decide.
I think you missed his use of the qualifier "traditional", and I'm not sure if leaving the "r" in lower case was intentional. Modern Republicans are almost all big-government pushers, they just tend to push warfare first and welfare second (see Bush II wars and medicare prescription bill).
Randians (Rational Objectivists)are nothing like modern Republicans, and have little in common with traditional, pre-neocon, lowercase republicans. Perhaps you are mistaking the current wave of GOP Republican Constitution-reading for something sincere (it isn't), or have an incomplete view of Rational Objectivism, or some combination of the two.
If you want proof of GOP Republicans being aligned against Rational Objectivism, look at the GOP's treatment of Ron Paul (who is not a strict Rational Objectivist as far as I know, but adheres to the same political policies). He was barred from presidential debates despite strong showings in the primaries, was not allowed to have his delegates' votes counted at the last convention, and has only now finally been allowed the chair of the Monetary Policy committee despite being senior enough he should have had it a decade ago (which is mostly to placate the more hardcore small-government constituents in the Republican party).
If it's a long term trend that will continue, yes. If it's a short term trend that may soon reverse, no.
This statistic doesn't distinguish between different types of sex offenders. Sexual assault against an adult, statutory rape, and child molestation are very different offenses, and the perpetrators very different kinds of people.
He's never had success outside of California - he can't hold any Federal office (maybe I should have said "trouble in Federal politics"). California may be big, but it's not mainstream. Arnold Schwarzenegger was governor there, for heaven's sake.
An interesting clip, but I think it confirms my opinion on him. His statements here were, to me at least, meant in a literary sense rather than a literal sense. Like the sinner beating his breast in the back of the church, as opposed to the self-righteous in the front.
He's not a mainstream Democrat by any stretch. He's widely known for promoting zero-growth policies, which I doubt most modern Democrats would support. He was at one time something of an environmental extremist.
Above all, he seems to be, whether you like him or not, a very principled guy, who has had trouble in mainstream politics due to being honest and uncompromising. Kind of a Ron Paul of the left. I don't like him, but I believe he is at least a sincere person with some degree of integrity.
You're right, but you may be missing something. When Android is the dominant mobile OS, content providers will see WebM as the "must-have" and H.264 for iOS devices as what they begrudgingly do for backward compatibility with the minority of the market.
Good point. Will the new tablet and phone OS flavors from Microsoft run non-IE browsers? If not, no one will buy them. Why have a tablet you can't watch YouTube with?
You are right. I wish I had mod points for you.
Another example of politics by gunfire, and also gun crime: The illegal war against Iraq, based on lies, in which 100,000 Iraqi civilians have died.
Let's not forget that gun crime and politics through gunfire is most often, and most grossly, committed by governments.
Operator: "Disk alarm - disk is at 80% capacity."
Manager: "Increase the threshold to 90%."
Lots of educated engineers, and this probably could have been fixed with a daemonized perl script that could send a trap to an snmp monitor if conditions got beyond a certain point. Or something like that. I'm sure they had more complex monitoring software, but obviously missed something simple along the way.
In some cases, I can see where you're coming from. If it weren't an emotionally charged context, maybe it would make sense to edit a piece of literature for modernity's sake, so it makes more sense to the reader. Yet I've read some translations of books which really fell flat with me because the language updates did not flow with the contents (I'm thinking specifically of a translation of Lao Tse which I intensely disliked for it being modernized).
But then on the other hand, the whole collection of Uncle Remus stories are remarkably valuable exactly because they record in writing a specific, archaic, and almost unreadable (to today's average reader) dialect of English. Change the language, and you change the whole nature of the beast.
Finally, I think that even if I agreed in part with you that edits for clarity would help the reader, in this case we've got a remarkable example of literature bringing historical and cultural tensions forward and backward over a hundred years, which gives even more impetus to Huck's internal struggle to come to terms with Jim as a person as opposed to an object. The book would not be as meaningful without the offensive language. Twain may or may not have forseen this, but would have enjoyed the uproar.
All I'm asking is for you to point out some examples of his genius and greatness, in light of the racism and violence in his character I think you've quite open-mindedly and fairly acknowledged in this thread.
Perhaps if I state explicitly that I believe there were much better ways to deal with the problems of his presidency than what he chose, and that I do not admire the man generally, this helps explain the fundamental gap in our understanding? That I do not accept as I was once instructed in school that he was one of the great men of our history?
Right...so then if we grant dolphins personhood, we should imprison them for criminal behavior. But how do we find a jury of peers?
Exactly what projects what?
I have no idea. We're talking about ghosts, man!
You are trying to judge a man based on your own modern judgement and preconception.
I am, as are you. This doesn't give any additional weight to anything you're saying compared with what I'm saying.
Whether or not the South fired the first shots, the North had already amassed a large military presence clearly showing the use of force was a primary option in negotiations surrounding the political situation. Thus, Lincoln was responsible for his part in the violence. Since it was Lincoln trying to impose his will on others, he is the first actor in terms of the conflict if not the violence.
There were plenty of people with all kinds of attitudes about race relations in Lincoln's day. Perhaps he was right about race relations, but did his actions (and those in the punitive reconstruction) help to cement racial hatred? What if a terrible war had been avoided?
In England the slaves were freed without violence. The government purchased them and freed them. On a monetary cost basis the war probably was within an order of magnitude of that cost. On a human basis?
In the USA there was a war and a bitter reconstruction, and a legacy of racial hatred. In the UK there was no war, and there is little I've ever heard of problems like in the USA between races.
So you've thrown a few mitigating arguments my way which excuse or minimize my criticisms of Lincoln, but still nothing that tells me what was genius or great about Lincoln. If other governments were able to end slavery without bloodshed, I think it's a bit strange to be consider Lincoln a great genius. Wouldn't he be described as something more along the lines of a ham-fisted despot?
I don't think so. When I read the specs in 2007 binary SMS was not the same as the MMS standard.
For specific purposes carriers may provision SMSC (short message service centers) and GMSC (gateway message service centers) to send binary data to interact with applications on the mobiles.
In practice, this is very rare because the carriers have known for a long time that binary payloads may be susceptible to misuse for malicious reasons. Thus, very few originators of short messages are permitted to send binary payloads (or at least when I was doing this a few years ago, maybe now it's different).
This is probably now much of an issue because it's really quite difficult to get binary sms provisioning from carriers (AT&T, TMO, etc.) because you need to have a contract with special stipulations about what the originating messages will be used for. These are looked at closely by carriers.
Interesting.
If, in fact, his intent was to eliminate Africans from the US, and to do this he started a war in which almost half a million were killed, can you please point out the element of genius and greatness?
It would seem, at best, that if you agree with the premise that his intent was as I suggested, that we are extraordinarily lucky he was murdered and more reasonable people took over after his war.
I'd recommend something like an FMRI or PET scanner which can determine when you're perceiving something (i.e. don't measure the house, measure yourself).
Since ghosts don't seem to show up on recordings in any reliable, repeatable way, it suggests that if they do exist they directly project their energy into the brain, rather than manifest physically. So you'd need to detect the perception, rather than the physical anomaly itself (which probably doesn't exist).
Interesting. I would like to add that there is even documented evidence that Lincoln wrote of abolishing slavery to deport them back to Africa; he saw their existence in the US as a blight. http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/jala/29.1/magness.html
The version of history we believe about what Lincoln's real motives were seems to be far from the truth.
I recall being exposed to various modern music (rock bands, The Beatles, Miles Davis, etc.) as part of general music classes in public schools. We also had different musical genres presented as part of music history in college (I was a music major at one time). Though I rarely find enjoyment in listening to it, I don't see why rap wouldn't be an important part of a survey of modern music. The fact that I didn't have rap presented in an educational context is probably more due to my age and the relatively slow movement of music curricula than anything inherent to the genre.
I can only assume if I were a first year student in music at a college today, rap would be part of the listening assignments for history of music. I'd also assume elementary or middle school teachers might include rap and hip-hop as part of their courses, as well (though it's likely they'd be highly selective about which particular artists/tracks were presented).
I completely disagree. All art has context, but great art transcends context. Art which we come to appreciate despite offensive content in its intent or context is still art we appreciate.
Do I love John Coltrane's "Alabama" because of the story behind it? No, I loved it before I understood that, because the pain it depicts transcends the senseless murder of children it was actually about. I enjoy it differently now that I know.
With Huckleberry Finn, the context is offensive, but that's what I'm bringing to the art, and understanding that things change is something I get to appreciate on a deeper level because not only do I get the benefit of seeing Huck's attitude change, but also the historical social changes between the setting and my lifetime which Twain couldn't have provided.
Art is appreciated in an interaction between the art and the beholder. If you can demonstrate art that has value without ever being observed, maybe there's something to what you say, but I don't think that's possible.
Does this mean that all rap music must also be purged of those words? Or only rap music presented in school music classes? At what level? Elementary, secondary, college?
With respect, did you read the article? Regression to mean was specifically described as what was happening there. Are you saying that term wasn't appropriately applied, or did you miss that part?