but to cry "logical fallacy" here is just an attempt to dismiss the objection without discussing its actual merits.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, right here:
The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad.
We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings
This argument is correctly labeled as a "slippery slope" argument, but what the author fails to mention is that "slippery slope" arguments are part of a group of arguments known as logical fallacy's. The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad. This is illogical.
Umm, the American Ethanol Debacle is not a product of government
Sure it is, the only reason the industry had a chance was because of big government subsidies. It was always a money loser, but the government saved them.
I wish the anti-government types would realize just how many free market failurs there out out there.
The free market's whole point is to kill failures, so no doubt there is many. The parent's point was when the government leads a "helping" hand to failures that it only hurts consumers in the end.
There is some support for your argument in history. The X-Ray machine, for example, was never patented. This allowed the device to be made easily and in great quantities and allowed for the widespread adoption of it.
I don't know about you, but the wireless syncing and game support was much better than the Ipod's until the touch came out. Those were great features, but even the best products fail with terrible ads and marketing.
It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.
Geek-cool or cool-people cool? Because, quite frankly, they're very different.
Don't hurt yourself thinking about this question, I realize it's very difficult.
The Zune isn't/wasn't a bad device, in fact it had features that Ipods lacked for many years. It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.
Who cares about password strength anyway? A four letter password is still stronger protection than most people give. The weak link in the chain is and always has been humans. I've found that the security questions to reset the password are easier than the password to crack. Either that or just wait for some Security Official to slip up and sell a hard drive with passwords and usernames on ebay.
That's actually not a bad idea, considering that Venus is in many ways similar to earth. Venus's average temperature is 461 Celsius, so it would be ideal for testing the injection of micro-particles into the atmosphere.
Not really, because the assumption is that everyone deserves to be taxed. Not being taxed is the exception - it's a special privilege, and if you want that status, you are required to do certain things.
Actually, taxation started the opposite way. The income tax was originally created to only tax the wealthiest.001% of the population. Those taxed were the exception, not the rule. It's only been the last 75 years or so that everyone else has been paying more taxes.
The thief is probably regretting his decision right this minute.
Thief: "Sweet, I bagged another Iphone! Wait, what is this? M-Phone:"Welcome to Microsoft Windows Phone Edition. Please Wait." Thief: "NOOOO!" (The thief throws the phone in the 1st available dumpster)
Everything is somewhat vulnerable, and a determined intruder with infinite resource will almost always find a way in.
The point is facial recognition alone is so vulnerable! All you need is a cameraphone and a photo printer - and you can't revoke your face as your password either. At least with fingerprints you can get hacked nearly 10 times (on average) before it becomes a problem.
Regular locks are SO vulnerable too. Why do we use them? Because it deters petty thieves. If I see $10 on the ground, I grab it. If I see it behind a locked locker door, I keep walking.
But, would you like to pay $5 a AA battery? That's what the result would be. As much as we hate pollution and forced Chinese labor, we also hate high prices even more.
Also, what would you do with Mexicans and Canadians smuggling batteries across the border. That's what will happen, like it or not.
Slashdot Mirror
but to cry "logical fallacy" here is just an attempt to dismiss the objection without discussing its actual merits.
I'm pretty sure that's what I did, right here:
The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad.
Dr. David King equates
part again. It isn't my argument, it's his. My point was that is doesn't make sense.
We may find ourselves gradually drifting towards the genetic engineering of human beings
This argument is correctly labeled as a "slippery slope" argument, but what the author fails to mention is that "slippery slope" arguments are part of a group of arguments known as logical fallacy's. The error is that the Dr. David King equates changing monkeys to genetic engineering and then assumes that genetic engineering on other organisms, namely humans, is inevitable; since human genetic engineering is bad, then all genetic engineering MUST be bad. This is illogical.
Quick, someone embed the three laws in the linux kernal.
Umm, the American Ethanol Debacle is not a product of government
Sure it is, the only reason the industry had a chance was because of big government subsidies. It was always a money loser, but the government saved them.
I wish the anti-government types would realize just how many free market failurs there out out there.
The free market's whole point is to kill failures, so no doubt there is many. The parent's point was when the government leads a "helping" hand to failures that it only hurts consumers in the end.
What about byzantine?
There is some support for your argument in history. The X-Ray machine, for example, was never patented. This allowed the device to be made easily and in great quantities and allowed for the widespread adoption of it.
It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.
Geek-cool or cool-people cool? Because, quite frankly, they're very different.
Don't hurt yourself thinking about this question, I realize it's very difficult.
patent 20080167127 covers switching a gaming console between various media, including television, video, music, and games
Wow, that sounds just like a remote control.
Or you could buy two monitors, watch TV on one, play on the other.
The Zune isn't/wasn't a bad device, in fact it had features that Ipods lacked for many years. It was just marketed poorly and could beat the Ipod's cool factor.
Who cares about password strength anyway? A four letter password is still stronger protection than most people give. The weak link in the chain is and always has been humans. I've found that the security questions to reset the password are easier than the password to crack. Either that or just wait for some Security Official to slip up and sell a hard drive with passwords and usernames on ebay.
The answer is D, obviously. I thought trick questions was an area that teachers had to excel in.
you get throttled back to ISDN speeds for a few hours
I wish I could be throttled to ISDN speeds, that's faster than my existing connection. Thank you AT&T.
It just goes to show the importance of moderation in all things. Moderation in regulation. Moderation in privatization.
Moderation in Moderation?
That's actually not a bad idea, considering that Venus is in many ways similar to earth. Venus's average temperature is 461 Celsius, so it would be ideal for testing the injection of micro-particles into the atmosphere.
I would advise you to read Fallen Angels as you seem to have described the premise quite well. Of course, you did forget the ending.
Not really, because the assumption is that everyone deserves to be taxed. Not being taxed is the exception - it's a special privilege, and if you want that status, you are required to do certain things.
Actually, taxation started the opposite way. The income tax was originally created to only tax the wealthiest .001% of the population. Those taxed were the exception, not the rule. It's only been the last 75 years or so that everyone else has been paying more taxes.
Trees are sustainable though.
The best part, the new LCD screens will cost more because they have to cover "court costs." It's a lose-lose situation for consumers.
The thief is probably regretting his decision right this minute.
Thief: "Sweet, I bagged another Iphone! Wait, what is this?
M-Phone:"Welcome to Microsoft Windows Phone Edition. Please Wait."
Thief: "NOOOO!" (The thief throws the phone in the 1st available dumpster)
Everything is somewhat vulnerable, and a determined intruder with infinite resource will almost always find a way in.
The point is facial recognition alone is so vulnerable! All you need is a cameraphone and a photo printer - and you can't revoke your face as your password either. At least with fingerprints you can get hacked nearly 10 times (on average) before it becomes a problem.
Regular locks are SO vulnerable too. Why do we use them? Because it deters petty thieves. If I see $10 on the ground, I grab it. If I see it behind a locked locker door, I keep walking.
But, would you like to pay $5 a AA battery? That's what the result would be. As much as we hate pollution and forced Chinese labor, we also hate high prices even more. Also, what would you do with Mexicans and Canadians smuggling batteries across the border. That's what will happen, like it or not.
You forget that farming pollutes too. Farms require the use of pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizer, all of which are toxic to humans.