Re:Tell that to your fiancee... :0)
on
The Diamond Age
·
· Score: 1
The Claddagh dates back way further than the 17th Century.
The design was a creation of Joyce, who was captured and sold as a slave to a goldsmith in Algiers. He fashioned the ring to give to his girlfriend who he hoped to marry back in Ireland. When he returned, they were wed and that was the ring she had. That was in the late 1680's.
There is no verified claims of the claddagh dating prior to Joyce. People say the Druids built Stonehenge, doesn't make it so, either.
Re:Tell that to your fiancee... :0)
on
The Diamond Age
·
· Score: 1
Pretty symbol with an interesting pre-Christian Irish history.
The customer satisfaction and efficient software are "far-sighted" tactics compared to throwing jobs across half the world and putting thousands of people out of work.
When did customer satisfaction truly play a part in goods? Microsoft is #1, and their quality is horrible. Same with a lot of clothing, and cars, and just about everything. You don't have to worry about customer satisfaction.
Your incorrect conjectures and dubious comments certainly seem to suggest you're a short-sighted (pun intended) person yourself.
Because I understand business, you make all sorts of accusations about me. Right. What incorrect statement have I made? I'm talking factually incorrect, not incorrect in your ideals?
You can't sue for emotional damage in small claims, only for financial distress.
You can for Tort, which covers that though. I would just assume most people here think Torts are something you put in a toaster with frosted sprinkles and strawberry filling, though.
Why hasn't anyone tried to take them to court for wrongful prosecution, or whatever violation they're committing?
It could be construed as harassment. The ESA has deep pockets, and they could get out of it fairly well. I still think that filing small claims for $5K would get their attention if everybody started doing it. You can represent yourself, and say that it caused emotional damage as well as technical time to validate their claim. On top of wasted bandwidth and time, at your contracted rate, you can get a decent damage claim.
"They said this file was infringing, I had to verify no files were actually part of what they were saying. It was unreasonable to assume they made the claim based purely on a filename. I spent 60 hours verifying no intellectual property violations where there, and expect to be compensated."
My question is, why another license? I actually like QT. I use KDE every day and I write for QT for my private purpose. And I don't care if they charge billion dollars for Windows version. But why did they HAVE TO create yet another license that pose such a strong restriction like "you cannot earn even 1 cent using this software" when it seems (at least to me) that the GPL would have sufficed (and less restrictive)? Would somebody please enlighten?
It's their lifeblood. They are trying very hard to create a commercial quality toolkit for cross-platform development. Their big threat to profits is not gaining compensation for Windows applications. Since Windows is the dominant desktop platform, that is why they want money for Windows development.
I think that it is a touch silly, but I do understand where they are coming from. If you want to do Windows development, you have to pay. Windows is a proprietary/commercial platform so they are just staying with the paradigm.
I don't see how Qt's "business like homepage" should have anything to do with how good a toolkit Qt is.
Considering that Trolltech is a business, I think it does reflect the quality of Qt. If Trolltech was a business, and their website looked like half the other OSS projects out there, nobody would take them seriously.
The "free for linux not for w32" is of course a valid point, but it's the only one.
So you're saying that businesses are willing to sacrifice profits for the sake of efficiency? Probably not. As long as at the end of the day you end up with more money using plan A instead of plan B, then plan A will prevail, regardless of anything else. That's capitalism, American capitalism, and it isshort-sighted when you're only considering the consequences of optimizing one variable and ignoring the rest.
I guess that's why companies invest millions into open source projects. Because it maximizes profits.
It's everything to do with profit margins, just like every political move that makes no sense unless you account for the profits (like the war in Iraq). Almost every company in the world is running with just that one variable in mind, and they better be or else they won't last long.
You sound like a child telling their parents something isn't fair.
Any faith I had in the legal system was lost on the O.J. Trial. I'm placing my bets on who's pockets are deeper (IBM). Remember, the law isn't about what's right or wrong.
Civil or Criminal? OJ was found guilty in the civil hearing, and thus is broke ass.
Damn, imagine what I could do with a quarter of a million lines of python code. Seriously C is a great language for systems work, but writing accounting packages in C is just not the way to go.
Not only did you put words in my mouth by suggesting that I did not care about any industry besides the tech industry, but you say you're telling me what "short-sighted" means when you have not actually done so.
No, I didn't suggest anything. I flat out said that you are saying it's a short-sighed business decision because it's the tech-sector. Which you are.
Just because "almost every industry has done it" doesn't mean the behavior isn't short-sighted.
Because almost every industry has done it, and gained much from it does make it planned, and decidedly not short-sighted.
Doing something purely for the sake of preserving profit margin is short-sighted by defintion because it does not account for other consequences aside from immediate concerns about profit margins.
Yes, and longevity and stability of the company isn't planning? Or perhaps the only way they can maintain profitability at all (excluding profit margins, just staying afloat) is by outsourcing work? All of these are short-sighted behaviors? Right.
My guess is you have never worked at a company that does outsource, because there are heated debates about the cost efficiency and gain of it all. We do it at my company, and that's why there are less than 20 people that even are remotely related to programming that work here. It's not about profit margins, it's about intelligent business.
If you call that short-sighted, than it's because you have personal beliefs that cloud the facts surrounding the issue. If almost every industry does it and benefits, it's not short-sighted.
You need to understand that "putting words in your mouth" and "short-sighted" don't mean what you think they are. If you didn't have a vested interest in the tech sector, you wouldn't have the idiotic stance of the decisions being short sighted.
Somehow I can't manage to find the place in my post from which you derived the above quote. Probably because I never said anything remotely like what you suggested.
Uhm, "shortsighted business" is pretty close to that. You are saying it's short-sighted, yet almost every industry has done it. It isn't short-sighted.
The tech industry was a high paying field. Any jobs the formerly-employed techs end up at is quite likely going to pay less. At any rate, farming out jobs purely for the sake of preserving profit margin is short-sighted, regardless of the industry.
Do you know the definition of short-sighted?
I don't mind political debate, and I always like to learn more about various issues, but you cannot put words in my mouth and expect to have a rational discourse.
I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm informing you what short-sighted means. Apparently, you have no clue what so over as to it's definition.
As much as I hate that people are losing jobs due to shortsighted business practices, this may be how linux finally gains a dominant foothold in the computer market.
Since when did tried-and-true business moves equate to short-sighted business practice? Oh, when it hit your industry. When it was cars, manufacturing, textiles, and clothing it didn't matter?
The economy didn't collapse, and the companies hired more domestic workers in higher paying jobs... get some perspective.
There was a VA sponsored contest on IRC a few years back. One of the questions was, "Where does Alan Cox live?" I said, "United Kingdom" and someone else after me said, "Wales."
They said he was correct. I even responded after the contest complaining that Wales wasn't even a fucking country, but was part of the United Kingdom (Just like England isn't a country.) The response, "That's what it says on my card, so you are wrong."
American's (I am American) can't even spell aluminium correctly.:)
Would it be a huge problem for Slashdot to download the video first and then put up a bittorrent link for the file? Really -- any video link posted in a story immediately goes down due to mega-traffic.
That would require the Slashdot editors to do more work, and that isn't going to happen. Beg the submittors, but most of them don't care unless it's their site anyway.
Well, I don't know if you were trying to imply it, but I'm not defensive in that regard.
No, I wasn't at all.
Perhaps it's the fact that I'm NOT a programmer, and therefore haven't met as many as you're likely to have met (I'm assuming), but I've found in general that programmers tend toward higher intelligence. Like I said, however, I've had a limited exposure.
At first glance, I would admit that. After a while, most of them really are idiots. We can't hire any good programmers here because of that. They interview fine, but after working with them, they really are just plain ass clowns.
The fact that the reporting is rather pathetic doesn't bother me, because no matter how I manage to get the information, it's liable to be badly distorted. That's journalism for you. But I don't want the full research papers... It's not my field, so it tends to be very hard to read (I hate having to read with 15 different references open, it messes with my train of thought). What I do get is acceptable, as I can make allowances.
Agreed. Following the links provided often times is fairly interesting. Reading the comments or the editorial is a waste of time.
Sorry I'm sounding more formal/long winded/whatever now... I'm getting tired and that always makes me sound like I'm trying to write a paper or something.
No problems, your take on it has been valuable. You have definitely contributed in a very positive manner to this thread. Thanks.
I mean, come on... we're both just having a pissing match here anyway. Neither of us has been a particularly skillful debater. I tend to favor my side, but re-reading the thread only shows that we're both kinda acting like 12 years olds...
I fully and openly admit I'm an idiot. I have no problems with saying it, but the thing that I also hold dear is: so is everybody else.
Work is slow and busy at the same time, putting me in a bitchy mood waiting for other people to get things working. Probably why I have a hostile tone. If it does make a difference, I have no hostile or ill feelings towards you. I really am just an asshole.
We can divide all of humanity into those who read slashdot and those who do not.
Ok, 750,000 that do. Since we can't divide all of humanity, because most of them don't speak English, lets just use the English speakers: ~371,750,000.
Considering the mentally feeble and the illiterate fall into the non-readers, we already have a certain level of selection that lowers the average intelligence of the non-reader.
Comparing illiterates and mentally retarded is, well, retarded.
The question then arises about what the actual difference is. My point was that though it exists, it's not nearly as high as those post here seem to think.
Uhm, what?
You're guilty of the same thing you're accusing me of. Can't you see that?
What did I accuse you of? Being elitist? Damn straight, because you said, "Slashdot readers/posters are as a group smarter than non-readers/posters. They are, however, not nearly as smart as they think they are, generally speaking."
Just because you appended the second sentence, doesn't mean that the first sentence has any basis on reality.
And the sad thing is I was agreeing with most of what you said. I do agree the people here tend to be arrogant and elitist, and to denigrate others in order to feed their egos. I'm a little puzzled why you turned on me for (for the most part) agreeing with you.
Because, you said that as a group people here are smarter which is exactly what I'm saying isn't true.
There are only maybe a few dozen people on Earth who qualify as "big-time actors".
Or, uhm, several thousand. I'll define big-time actor as anybody who has been a character in a main stream movie that spoke for more than 5 minutes in a movie. I would be amazed if there are even 30 Slashdot members that are Mensa members.
As I wrote in another comment, Mensa is for people who need validation and are amongst the IQ elite. I would say it's safe to assume most Slashdotters need validation, or they wouldn't get so defensive when someone calls them collective dumbasses, so people would tout Mensa memberships (and a few people do.)
The way to prove it is to find out if more than 2% of the Slashdot readership has an IQ over 145 (Is that the current Mensa cut-off?) -- if you honestly think so, than you have a point.
I'd be surprised if over 50% had an IQ over 120 (Depending upon the nation, is the median.) The US, in the 1980's had a median of less than a hundred. There was even a Trivial Pursuit question that stated that the median was 80.
Slashdot seems to self-select for trolls (I don't know HOW, I just accept that it is so, as I'm not interested in finding out why) and people who are interested in science and tech, which tends to be brighter people.
This is the whole cause of this thread, and I don't understand it. Science is a more "bright" field, but the science that gets discussed here is dumbed down to the point of being useless. Re-hashing the same theories offered by first year Physics for Poets teachers, and proclaiming brilliance for understanding them. Tech isn't a bright field. Most programmers are freaking morons. Out of all the programmers I've met in my entire life, only about 2% of them I would even begin to assume are above average intelligence. The rest are usually average.
And maybe the/. Mensa crowd just doesn't go around talking about it. (thinking back... uh, much, anyway). I certainly wouldn't if I bothered to get a card, as it would seem fairly childish in most cases...
Mensa caters towards the top 2%. If you are in that group you either realize it's pointless or need validation. Do you really think that, just by the average converstaions that get posted on here, that the members and users of Slashdot are comfortable enough with themselves to not need validation? I sure as hell don't think so.
If they were, they wouldn't get so defensive when I say that most tech. people aren't above average in terms of intelligence.
To seriously respond: I decided that the conversation/tirade/rant/whatever was kinda stupid and I was attempting to discontinue it.
If you were seriously attempting to discontinue it, why use potentially offensive (and baiting) language to do so?
You have very strong opinions, and they are clouding your ability to listen to what I am saying without significant distortion.
You have not made a valid point to even listen to. Several people have in this thread, and you are not one of them.
Hence, we are not in the same frame of reference, and a conversation is worth while. This is more of a 'don't talk to the crazy people' motive than a passive aggressive one.
If it makes you feel better to think that way, go ahead. Go back and read the thread, because you have a) proven your own arrogance, b) not provided any valid counter-argument, and c) failed to discuss this in an even remotely reasonable manner.
Lemme get this straight... you are making a judgement call on a complete stranger, given a few lines of anonymous text... and I'm arrogant? cool...
Not a judgement, an observation. If I walk into a room, and there is a white wall I say it's white. It's not judgment, just an observation. If you post sentences detailing your arrogance, it's just an observation.
Slashdot Mirror
The Claddagh dates back way further than the 17th Century.
The design was a creation of Joyce, who was captured and sold as a slave to a goldsmith in Algiers. He fashioned the ring to give to his girlfriend who he hoped to marry back in Ireland. When he returned, they were wed and that was the ring she had. That was in the late 1680's.
There is no verified claims of the claddagh dating prior to Joyce. People say the Druids built Stonehenge, doesn't make it so, either.
Pretty symbol with an interesting pre-Christian Irish history.
17th century isn't exactly "pre-Christian"
The customer satisfaction and efficient software are "far-sighted" tactics compared to throwing jobs across half the world and putting thousands of people out of work.
When did customer satisfaction truly play a part in goods? Microsoft is #1, and their quality is horrible. Same with a lot of clothing, and cars, and just about everything. You don't have to worry about customer satisfaction.
Your incorrect conjectures and dubious comments certainly seem to suggest you're a short-sighted (pun intended) person yourself.
Because I understand business, you make all sorts of accusations about me. Right. What incorrect statement have I made? I'm talking factually incorrect, not incorrect in your ideals?
go otzi
He did go. Just not very far.
I understand that hacking tools don't kill people, people kill people... But what about the children?
If you think about the children, the terrorists have already won in this Post September 11th world and in Soviet Russia the children care about you.
You can't sue for emotional damage in small claims, only for financial distress.
You can for Tort, which covers that though. I would just assume most people here think Torts are something you put in a toaster with frosted sprinkles and strawberry filling, though.
Ya, he's so broke he has to go out golfing in Florida everyday while the rest of us non-murderers have to fucking work all day...
Nonsense. Plenty of murderers still have to work.
Why hasn't anyone tried to take them to court for wrongful prosecution, or whatever violation they're committing?
It could be construed as harassment. The ESA has deep pockets, and they could get out of it fairly well. I still think that filing small claims for $5K would get their attention if everybody started doing it. You can represent yourself, and say that it caused emotional damage as well as technical time to validate their claim. On top of wasted bandwidth and time, at your contracted rate, you can get a decent damage claim.
"They said this file was infringing, I had to verify no files were actually part of what they were saying. It was unreasonable to assume they made the claim based purely on a filename. I spent 60 hours verifying no intellectual property violations where there, and expect to be compensated."
It would be funny, anyway.
"If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers."
That's the line I found hilarious. Which material are they talking about? The email or the "infringing file"?
You received this notice in error, so please delete the file we thought was a violation so that we don't send it to you again. Thanks!
My question is, why another license? I actually like QT. I use KDE every day and I write for QT for my private purpose. And I don't care if they charge billion dollars for Windows version. But why did they HAVE TO create yet another license that pose such a strong restriction like "you cannot earn even 1 cent using this software" when it seems (at least to me) that the GPL would have sufficed (and less restrictive)? Would somebody please enlighten?
It's their lifeblood. They are trying very hard to create a commercial quality toolkit for cross-platform development. Their big threat to profits is not gaining compensation for Windows applications. Since Windows is the dominant desktop platform, that is why they want money for Windows development.
I think that it is a touch silly, but I do understand where they are coming from. If you want to do Windows development, you have to pay. Windows is a proprietary/commercial platform so they are just staying with the paradigm.
I don't see how Qt's "business like homepage" should have anything to do with how good a toolkit Qt is.
Considering that Trolltech is a business, I think it does reflect the quality of Qt. If Trolltech was a business, and their website looked like half the other OSS projects out there, nobody would take them seriously.
The "free for linux not for w32" is of course a valid point, but it's the only one.
That isn't even a valid point. Qt 2.3 for Win32, free.
So you're saying that businesses are willing to sacrifice profits for the sake of efficiency? Probably not. As long as at the end of the day you end up with more money using plan A instead of plan B, then plan A will prevail, regardless of anything else. That's capitalism, American capitalism, and it isshort-sighted when you're only considering the consequences of optimizing one variable and ignoring the rest.
I guess that's why companies invest millions into open source projects. Because it maximizes profits.
It's everything to do with profit margins, just like every political move that makes no sense unless you account for the profits (like the war in Iraq). Almost every company in the world is running with just that one variable in mind, and they better be or else they won't last long.
You sound like a child telling their parents something isn't fair.
Any faith I had in the legal system was lost on the O.J. Trial. I'm placing my bets on who's pockets are deeper (IBM). Remember, the law isn't about what's right or wrong.
Civil or Criminal? OJ was found guilty in the civil hearing, and thus is broke ass.
Damn, imagine what I could do with a quarter of a million lines of python code. Seriously C is a great language for systems work, but writing accounting packages in C is just not the way to go.
I know, just look at Quicken and MS Money.
Er, wait...
Not only did you put words in my mouth by suggesting that I did not care about any industry besides the tech industry, but you say you're telling me what "short-sighted" means when you have not actually done so.
No, I didn't suggest anything. I flat out said that you are saying it's a short-sighed business decision because it's the tech-sector. Which you are.
Just because "almost every industry has done it" doesn't mean the behavior isn't short-sighted.
Because almost every industry has done it, and gained much from it does make it planned, and decidedly not short-sighted.
Doing something purely for the sake of preserving profit margin is short-sighted by defintion because it does not account for other consequences aside from immediate concerns about profit margins.
Yes, and longevity and stability of the company isn't planning? Or perhaps the only way they can maintain profitability at all (excluding profit margins, just staying afloat) is by outsourcing work? All of these are short-sighted behaviors? Right.
My guess is you have never worked at a company that does outsource, because there are heated debates about the cost efficiency and gain of it all. We do it at my company, and that's why there are less than 20 people that even are remotely related to programming that work here. It's not about profit margins, it's about intelligent business.
If you call that short-sighted, than it's because you have personal beliefs that cloud the facts surrounding the issue. If almost every industry does it and benefits, it's not short-sighted.
You need to understand that "putting words in your mouth" and "short-sighted" don't mean what you think they are. If you didn't have a vested interest in the tech sector, you wouldn't have the idiotic stance of the decisions being short sighted.
Somehow I can't manage to find the place in my post from which you derived the above quote. Probably because I never said anything remotely like what you suggested.
Uhm, "shortsighted business" is pretty close to that. You are saying it's short-sighted, yet almost every industry has done it. It isn't short-sighted.
The tech industry was a high paying field. Any jobs the formerly-employed techs end up at is quite likely going to pay less. At any rate, farming out jobs purely for the sake of preserving profit margin is short-sighted, regardless of the industry.
Do you know the definition of short-sighted?
I don't mind political debate, and I always like to learn more about various issues, but you cannot put words in my mouth and expect to have a rational discourse.
I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm informing you what short-sighted means. Apparently, you have no clue what so over as to it's definition.
As much as I hate that people are losing jobs due to shortsighted business practices, this may be how linux finally gains a dominant foothold in the computer market.
Since when did tried-and-true business moves equate to short-sighted business practice? Oh, when it hit your industry. When it was cars, manufacturing, textiles, and clothing it didn't matter?
The economy didn't collapse, and the companies hired more domestic workers in higher paying jobs... get some perspective.
There was a VA sponsored contest on IRC a few years back. One of the questions was, "Where does Alan Cox live?" I said, "United Kingdom" and someone else after me said, "Wales."
:)
They said he was correct. I even responded after the contest complaining that Wales wasn't even a fucking country, but was part of the United Kingdom (Just like England isn't a country.) The response, "That's what it says on my card, so you are wrong."
American's (I am American) can't even spell aluminium correctly.
Would it be a huge problem for Slashdot to download the video first and then put up a bittorrent link for the file? Really -- any video link posted in a story immediately goes down due to mega-traffic.
That would require the Slashdot editors to do more work, and that isn't going to happen. Beg the submittors, but most of them don't care unless it's their site anyway.
Well, I don't know if you were trying to imply it, but I'm not defensive in that regard.
No, I wasn't at all.
Perhaps it's the fact that I'm NOT a programmer, and therefore haven't met as many as you're likely to have met (I'm assuming), but I've found in general that programmers tend toward higher intelligence. Like I said, however, I've had a limited exposure.
At first glance, I would admit that. After a while, most of them really are idiots. We can't hire any good programmers here because of that. They interview fine, but after working with them, they really are just plain ass clowns.
The fact that the reporting is rather pathetic doesn't bother me, because no matter how I manage to get the information, it's liable to be badly distorted. That's journalism for you. But I don't want the full research papers... It's not my field, so it tends to be very hard to read (I hate having to read with 15 different references open, it messes with my train of thought). What I do get is acceptable, as I can make allowances.
Agreed. Following the links provided often times is fairly interesting. Reading the comments or the editorial is a waste of time.
Sorry I'm sounding more formal/long winded/whatever now... I'm getting tired and that always makes me sound like I'm trying to write a paper or something.
No problems, your take on it has been valuable. You have definitely contributed in a very positive manner to this thread. Thanks.
I mean, come on... we're both just having a pissing match here anyway. Neither of us has been a particularly skillful debater. I tend to favor my side, but re-reading the thread only shows that we're both kinda acting like 12 years olds...
I fully and openly admit I'm an idiot. I have no problems with saying it, but the thing that I also hold dear is: so is everybody else.
Work is slow and busy at the same time, putting me in a bitchy mood waiting for other people to get things working. Probably why I have a hostile tone. If it does make a difference, I have no hostile or ill feelings towards you. I really am just an asshole.
We can divide all of humanity into those who read slashdot and those who do not.
Ok, 750,000 that do. Since we can't divide all of humanity, because most of them don't speak English, lets just use the English speakers: ~371,750,000.
Considering the mentally feeble and the illiterate fall into the non-readers, we already have a certain level of selection that lowers the average intelligence of the non-reader.
Comparing illiterates and mentally retarded is, well, retarded.
The question then arises about what the actual difference is. My point was that though it exists, it's not nearly as high as those post here seem to think.
Uhm, what?
You're guilty of the same thing you're accusing me of. Can't you see that?
What did I accuse you of? Being elitist? Damn straight, because you said, "Slashdot readers/posters are as a group smarter than non-readers/posters. They are, however, not nearly as smart as they think they are, generally speaking."
Just because you appended the second sentence, doesn't mean that the first sentence has any basis on reality.
And the sad thing is I was agreeing with most of what you said. I do agree the people here tend to be arrogant and elitist, and to denigrate others in order to feed their egos. I'm a little puzzled why you turned on me for (for the most part) agreeing with you.
Because, you said that as a group people here are smarter which is exactly what I'm saying isn't true.
There are only maybe a few dozen people on Earth who qualify as "big-time actors".
Or, uhm, several thousand. I'll define big-time actor as anybody who has been a character in a main stream movie that spoke for more than 5 minutes in a movie. I would be amazed if there are even 30 Slashdot members that are Mensa members.
As I wrote in another comment, Mensa is for people who need validation and are amongst the IQ elite. I would say it's safe to assume most Slashdotters need validation, or they wouldn't get so defensive when someone calls them collective dumbasses, so people would tout Mensa memberships (and a few people do.)
The way to prove it is to find out if more than 2% of the Slashdot readership has an IQ over 145 (Is that the current Mensa cut-off?) -- if you honestly think so, than you have a point.
I'd be surprised if over 50% had an IQ over 120 (Depending upon the nation, is the median.) The US, in the 1980's had a median of less than a hundred. There was even a Trivial Pursuit question that stated that the median was 80.
Slashdot seems to self-select for trolls (I don't know HOW, I just accept that it is so, as I'm not interested in finding out why) and people who are interested in science and tech, which tends to be brighter people.
/. Mensa crowd just doesn't go around talking about it. (thinking back... uh, much, anyway). I certainly wouldn't if I bothered to get a card, as it would seem fairly childish in most cases...
This is the whole cause of this thread, and I don't understand it. Science is a more "bright" field, but the science that gets discussed here is dumbed down to the point of being useless. Re-hashing the same theories offered by first year Physics for Poets teachers, and proclaiming brilliance for understanding them. Tech isn't a bright field. Most programmers are freaking morons. Out of all the programmers I've met in my entire life, only about 2% of them I would even begin to assume are above average intelligence. The rest are usually average.
And maybe the
Mensa caters towards the top 2%. If you are in that group you either realize it's pointless or need validation. Do you really think that, just by the average converstaions that get posted on here, that the members and users of Slashdot are comfortable enough with themselves to not need validation? I sure as hell don't think so.
If they were, they wouldn't get so defensive when I say that most tech. people aren't above average in terms of intelligence.
To seriously respond: I decided that the conversation/tirade/rant/whatever was kinda stupid and I was attempting to discontinue it.
If you were seriously attempting to discontinue it, why use potentially offensive (and baiting) language to do so?
You have very strong opinions, and they are clouding your ability to listen to what I am saying without significant distortion.
You have not made a valid point to even listen to. Several people have in this thread, and you are not one of them.
Hence, we are not in the same frame of reference, and a conversation is worth while. This is more of a 'don't talk to the crazy people' motive than a passive aggressive one.
If it makes you feel better to think that way, go ahead. Go back and read the thread, because you have a) proven your own arrogance, b) not provided any valid counter-argument, and c) failed to discuss this in an even remotely reasonable manner.
Lemme get this straight... you are making a judgement call on a complete stranger, given a few lines of anonymous text... and I'm arrogant? cool...
Not a judgement, an observation. If I walk into a room, and there is a white wall I say it's white. It's not judgment, just an observation. If you post sentences detailing your arrogance, it's just an observation.