Well, here I am trying to start a meta-argument, and I end up with an actual argument. And not a particularly productive one at that---we've all read/participated in arguments on the Internet, and it's a fair guess that when someone starts going quote-by-quote in an effort to "tear up" the previous post, they're not really interested in exchanging ideas, they just want to score points. So here's a million points. You win the Internet.
Before I read this, I had no idea this thing existed.
Now, I am consumed with an overwhelming need to discover the reason for this transmission. I will not be able to rest until I have discovered the secret. This transmission is now the most important thing in my life.
You know, by switching that light switch, you are creating a tiny ripple in the Earth's momentum, which could, over a period of time, change the direction of the sun relative to the Earth.
I suggest doing it continuously for 28 years and seeing if there are any measurable results.
Minor point, but a quick glance at the Wikipedia article shows that while all Judeo-Christian variants agree that there are Commandments that must be followed, and that there are 10 of them, they cannot seem to agree which Commandment is which. For instance, the Sixth Commandment is "thou shalt not kill" for Episcopalians, but "thou shalt not commit adultery" for Lutherans. If you mix and match denominations, you could obtain anywhere between 9 and 12 Commandments.
The original point of the post was not to say that the feeling is correct, or that it is anything other than a broad prejudice. Let me break this down for you:
1) I have food preferences 2) I am inclined to believe that my food preferences make me a morally superior being 3) I am fully aware that this lies on a very shaky foundation, and so as a rational-minded person, I am inclined to disregard the feeling 4) Nonetheless, the feeling persists 5) I am making an observation about the irrational feeling
It's an interesting phenomenon, and, I think, generalizable to a broad category of people. For instance, if you replaced "food preferences" with "skin color," it would be a particularly interesting way to look at racism.
No, I like science, and I'm making an observation, not a normative claim. I'm not saying that my food preferences make me superior--that would be silly--it's just that I have an unshakable feeling that they do.
I'm not going to drag you to Ethiopian restaurants, but it's interesting to base a more general theory of human behavior on that model; George Bush wearing a cowboy hat versus John Kerry windsurfing. And so on.
And I feel smugly superior to you because I believe that my preferences for a wider variety of food reflects a more cosmopolitan attitude, which I view as having a more "sophisticated" quality.
Your preferences are your own, but I still think mine are better than yours, that I am, comparatively, a morally elevated being. In the same way, I think being a fan of "Jerry Springer" is a character flaw, and that not appreciating "Star Wars" is a sign of a crippled imagination.
So, to get to my point here, instead of agreeing to disagree, because this is the Internet, I am required to inform you that you are a) lame, b) stupid, and c) possibly homosexual. I just thought I'd proffer an explanation first.;-)
The technicalities of the law in my state really says I have no chance what-so-ever of winning IF the attorney would have done more than the MINIMUM. Which is really what is needed in THIS case.
You really had better hope that the defendant doesn't read Slashdot. This is one reason why lawyers exist---to tell their clients to shut the fuck up about pending court cases.
I support bleeping. Not because I have a problem with the word "fuck," but rather, because I love it dearly.
If everyone treated expletives the same as non-expletives, then we would cease to have expletives. If it "fuck" were really just a word, then it would lose its meaning. It would become a hollowed-out shell of its former self. If saying, "Oh, fuck!" is the equivalent of saying, "Oh, golly!", then fuck it, I am done with the English language. You need specific words or phrases to convey a particular attitude or connotation. The word "fuck" depends on its disreputable status; it's varied usage is entirely due to the fact that, like a high-quality spice, it adds obscenity to even the most innocent of phrases.
"Can I have some tea?" ---> "Can I have some fucking tea?" "I love the English language." ---> "I fucking love the English language."
There's not really any equivalent. Saying you "really, really" love English doesn't carry the same kind of effect.
The censors are protecting the integrity of the English language---not by keeping dirty words out of it, as they claim, but by preserving their meaning. I think we're at a happy medium with respect to words. If "fuck" were completely illegal in all areas, it would only be said in whispers, like a word of fear and power...probable overkill. If it were completely acceptable for everyone in every situation, it would have virtually no power. If it's got social restrictions on "time and place"...including broadcast television where "children might hear"...then I think it's got the right amount.
Asking a question when you're looking for information is not the Socratic method. That's being a student, asking a teacher. The Socratic method involves the teacher asking the student a question in order to get the student to think about the problem.
IMO, the AC, despite being rhetorical, is much closer to being Socratic than GGP.
But since I tried it yesterday, they've changed a search for "pcmn" to "Did you mean: pacman?" Which says something for their search engine, every if the doodle's JS is broken.
I think that C is not green either, since it's really more efficient to code the game in assembly code that can be inlined in the web page.
But assembly still consumes those excess cycles. You know what's really green? Not playing Pac-Man.
Certainly, playing Pac-Man as it was originally---as an arcade game with a dedicated CRT monitor---is out of the question.
Actually, I'm a little concerned with your comment up there, because it seems like there may have been some CPU cycles that were wasted in your comment. And why are you posting this on Slashdot? They use Perl to handle HTTP traffic! You really need to use a website developed in C. It's the green thing to do.
If you try to do a Google search in the search bar after you're done playing the game, the WASD keys don't work. Even after you do the search from the first page, and the first page of results shows up, you still can't use those keys.
I'm betting that "pcmn" is going to be one of today's hottest Google trends.
Slashdot Mirror
the US wouldn't (heck, already doesn't) recognise British "English" as official and vice-versa.
FTFY
I just spent ten minutes of my life tracking down the source of that unattributed quote.
So if you have less free time than me (and if so, why are you on Slashdot?), it's misquoted, and it's this guy.
As someone who went through 2 pairs of cheap-ass Wal-Mart shoes in as many months, I can empathize.
Well, here I am trying to start a meta-argument, and I end up with an actual argument. And not a particularly productive one at that---we've all read/participated in arguments on the Internet, and it's a fair guess that when someone starts going quote-by-quote in an effort to "tear up" the previous post, they're not really interested in exchanging ideas, they just want to score points. So here's a million points. You win the Internet.
See how morally superior I am?
Before I read this, I had no idea this thing existed.
Now, I am consumed with an overwhelming need to discover the reason for this transmission. I will not be able to rest until I have discovered the secret. This transmission is now the most important thing in my life.
DAMN YOU!
You know, by switching that light switch, you are creating a tiny ripple in the Earth's momentum, which could, over a period of time, change the direction of the sun relative to the Earth.
I suggest doing it continuously for 28 years and seeing if there are any measurable results.
I do not know this feature of which you speak, unless you are referring to something that was also in Vista.
Minor point, but a quick glance at the Wikipedia article shows that while all Judeo-Christian variants agree that there are Commandments that must be followed, and that there are 10 of them, they cannot seem to agree which Commandment is which. For instance, the Sixth Commandment is "thou shalt not kill" for Episcopalians, but "thou shalt not commit adultery" for Lutherans. If you mix and match denominations, you could obtain anywhere between 9 and 12 Commandments.
Denmark's a prison.
You misunderstand.
The original point of the post was not to say that the feeling is correct, or that it is anything other than a broad prejudice. Let me break this down for you:
1) I have food preferences
2) I am inclined to believe that my food preferences make me a morally superior being
3) I am fully aware that this lies on a very shaky foundation, and so as a rational-minded person, I am inclined to disregard the feeling
4) Nonetheless, the feeling persists
5) I am making an observation about the irrational feeling
It's an interesting phenomenon, and, I think, generalizable to a broad category of people. For instance, if you replaced "food preferences" with "skin color," it would be a particularly interesting way to look at racism.
No, I like science, and I'm making an observation, not a normative claim. I'm not saying that my food preferences make me superior--that would be silly--it's just that I have an unshakable feeling that they do.
I'm not going to drag you to Ethiopian restaurants, but it's interesting to base a more general theory of human behavior on that model; George Bush wearing a cowboy hat versus John Kerry windsurfing. And so on.
And I feel smugly superior to you because I believe that my preferences for a wider variety of food reflects a more cosmopolitan attitude, which I view as having a more "sophisticated" quality.
Your preferences are your own, but I still think mine are better than yours, that I am, comparatively, a morally elevated being. In the same way, I think being a fan of "Jerry Springer" is a character flaw, and that not appreciating "Star Wars" is a sign of a crippled imagination.
So, to get to my point here, instead of agreeing to disagree, because this is the Internet, I am required to inform you that you are a) lame, b) stupid, and c) possibly homosexual. I just thought I'd proffer an explanation first. ;-)
The technicalities of the law in my state really says I have no chance what-so-ever of winning IF the attorney would have done more than the MINIMUM. Which is really what is needed in THIS case.
You really had better hope that the defendant doesn't read Slashdot. This is one reason why lawyers exist---to tell their clients to shut the fuck up about pending court cases.
Not on a 24" widescreen monitor.
And no, I'm not going to resize my browser window.
Nobody wants to see Goatse, but it's huge.
(Figuratively!)
Having seen my share of post-apocalyptic movies, I'm confident in saying that a highway robber is probably more perishable than a can of beans.
You go ahead and do that, anyway; get in a fire fight with some other asshole who's doing the same thing. Me, I'll be feasting in my bunker.
IMHO, Ben Affleck isn't half bad when he's behind the camera, and Casey's definitely the better actor.
I support bleeping. Not because I have a problem with the word "fuck," but rather, because I love it dearly.
If everyone treated expletives the same as non-expletives, then we would cease to have expletives. If it "fuck" were really just a word, then it would lose its meaning. It would become a hollowed-out shell of its former self. If saying, "Oh, fuck!" is the equivalent of saying, "Oh, golly!", then fuck it, I am done with the English language. You need specific words or phrases to convey a particular attitude or connotation. The word "fuck" depends on its disreputable status; it's varied usage is entirely due to the fact that, like a high-quality spice, it adds obscenity to even the most innocent of phrases.
"Can I have some tea?" ---> "Can I have some fucking tea?"
"I love the English language." ---> "I fucking love the English language."
There's not really any equivalent. Saying you "really, really" love English doesn't carry the same kind of effect.
The censors are protecting the integrity of the English language---not by keeping dirty words out of it, as they claim, but by preserving their meaning. I think we're at a happy medium with respect to words. If "fuck" were completely illegal in all areas, it would only be said in whispers, like a word of fear and power...probable overkill. If it were completely acceptable for everyone in every situation, it would have virtually no power. If it's got social restrictions on "time and place"...including broadcast television where "children might hear"...then I think it's got the right amount.
Asking a question when you're looking for information is not the Socratic method. That's being a student, asking a teacher. The Socratic method involves the teacher asking the student a question in order to get the student to think about the problem.
IMO, the AC, despite being rhetorical, is much closer to being Socratic than GGP.
I won't touch the iPad until it's something else.
I have devised the perfect counter for that argument, marred only by this sentence.
The way that you disable the eHow thing is to disable third-party cookies in your browser.
But since I tried it yesterday, they've changed a search for "pcmn" to "Did you mean: pacman?" Which says something for their search engine, every if the doodle's JS is broken.
I think that C is not green either, since it's really more efficient to code the game in assembly code that can be inlined in the web page.
But assembly still consumes those excess cycles. You know what's really green? Not playing Pac-Man.
Certainly, playing Pac-Man as it was originally---as an arcade game with a dedicated CRT monitor---is out of the question.
Actually, I'm a little concerned with your comment up there, because it seems like there may have been some CPU cycles that were wasted in your comment. And why are you posting this on Slashdot? They use Perl to handle HTTP traffic! You really need to use a website developed in C. It's the green thing to do.
They have a bug in the Pacman game.
If you try to do a Google search in the search bar after you're done playing the game, the WASD keys don't work. Even after you do the search from the first page, and the first page of results shows up, you still can't use those keys.
I'm betting that "pcmn" is going to be one of today's hottest Google trends.