Just a note, I've read the coloring book now and I want to see it back up. It's a good resource. Even the one controversial picture is important, 9/11 is a relevant disaster to use to illustrate the point about media coverage reminding a kid about what they have been through, over and over. There is no controversy as far as I'm concerned, kids don't even need to know what the hell 9/11 is to get the point.
The article is a VERY clever troll, in the Christian Science Monitor, which I consider to be one of the last bastions of good reporting. But it just lost some of my respect. Still, good troll, it got us both.:-)
"Oh, a wise guy, eh? Why I otta..." Although the line is probably even more hoary and ancient than that.
As for these and other types of mental disorders, they seem to exist in a spectrum. A little bit of this one, plus a dash of that one, and you've got a person who thinks a little differently and may be a little bit smarter in certain situations. Get just the right combination, and you've got genius. Get it wrong, and you've got a semi functional person. Get it dead wrong and you've got a person who is non functional or worse, dangerous.
Of course, all of this genetics is moderated and shaped by environment. Stress hormones at the wrong time in development can trigger conditions that would lay dormant in a luckier individual. Healthier societies (in my hypothesis) will have more smart people and less dysfunctional types because of lower stress. This could create long term pressures towards more cooperative, less competitive (and thus stressful) societies.
These long term pressures would more than offset the tendency of society wide traumatic events like famine to make people competitive and selfish for generations. But that is really a separate hypothesis.
"Just drop it already" is a request. Again you demonstrate your strangely rigid personal boundaries. I'm trying to help you stop making a fool of yourself.
FDR was wrong to imprison Japanese Americans, and demonstrably unfair and biased by doing so while not locking up German Americans.
I'm a red diaper baby, to me, the schools seemed like right wing conservative hellholes full of aggrandizement of American imperialism and denial of any wrongdoing or immorality on our part.
You keep asserting that without any proof. Nutbard's book doesn't even talk about the New Deal. Find me some damn evidence or admit you have none. I gave evidence. You don't refute it, you just make baseless claims. You gave me an irrelevant book by a dubious author, refuted and rejected by the mainstream, about the failures BEFORE the New Deal. You put on airs of the radical rebellious free thinker, but like many libertarians, it is just a thin mask hiding a sociopath whose entire political philosophy boils down to "You aren't the boss of me, I'll do what I want!"
There are thoughtful libertarians. I've met some, and had enjoyable discussions with them. You aren't one of them. You are a closed minded selfish simpleton who can't even elucidate his philosophy, but merely points to irrelevant books by other, more intellectually capable wingnuts.
Mine is the mainstream view, no matter how you and fringe idiots from mises try to rewrite history. Don't try the 'emotional attachment' bullshit with me, you are the one who can't let it go and you know it. Just drop it already.
What, you mean something like twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was? Don't you know justice is blind?
Wait, wait, wait. You're saying embedded code often stinks? Don't we use embedded code in voting machines? My God, has anyone checked them? This sounds like it could be a real problem, I think we need to notify the authorities.
My first attempt to run X-Windows was on a 386 with 16 megs of RAM, and it worked fine. We used VI in an xterm and that's the way we liked it! Web browsers, bah! Gopher still works, you know. Now get off my lawn.
That is mentioned as a consequence of the ruling. Now it remains to be seen whether the manufacturer will release the source code. If they won't, presenting a copy of Bruner's exhibits will be a 'get out of jail free' card for drunk driving in Minnesota. Which will mean the state will have to go with a manufacturer that WILL provide the source. Nice.
I resemble this remark. Fortunately for me, there is a mineral hot spring LOADED with lithium an hour away from me.
So, ah, I'm curious. Who else here has this problem, and how bad? I'm cyclothymic, which is a pretty mild version of bipolor disorder, and I've been keeping it (mostly) under control with sertraline.
I've had suicidal ideation, mainly as a teen, but no actual attempts. Mostly, I just get totally manic about a project for a month or two, and have a hard time sleeping, eating, or focusing on anything else. Then a couple weeks of normal. Then a month or two of eating too much and not being able to focus on anything, then a week or two of normal again.
You say the graphs don't prove anything. Using the numbers from the graph, which are accurate, prove your hypothesis. Or just shut up, it's been a week, dude. Either way, I really don't care anymore.
It really is an art form. On a casual reading, the article really makes it sound like the book was taken down due to protests, but the only outrage actually mentioned came after the fact, as a reaction to the book's removal.
In fact, the whole article seems like a cleverly crafted troll that implies different, offensive things to different people. It implies the book was removed due to protest. It implies the book was worthy of protest, It implies the book focuses on 9/11. Okay, the article actually calls it 'the 9/11 coloring book,' when it has all of two pages mentioning 9/11 in the context of hearing about any disaster over and over again in the news, which is a totally reasonable thing to prepare child survivors for.
Trolls everywhere could learn a thing or two reading that article. I know I did.:) Man, I just reread it, and it is deliberately inflammatory, which is unlike the CS Monitor. I hadn't noticed quite how inflammatory the article is because it happens to match my personal biases.
Allow me to present the whole quote, which you conveniently left unattributed:
But a blogger on the conservative Lew Rockwell website says the government is too âoeobsessedâ with 9/11.
âoeIs it that they want to keep the âoefearâ factor ever-present in the sheepleâ(TM)s minds? After people complained, FEMA removed the coloring book from its site. Too bad we canâ(TM)t remove FEMA from our sight.â
Let me be more specific: please show me where the article makes credible claims from reliable sources who do more than speculate.
So the author of the coloring book says, "I stand firm that it was a very well thought-out and useful resource for kids," Olmsted told FOXNews.com. "But itâ(TM)s obviously being misinterpreted by a lot of people."
Obviously, that could be the only reason the book was taken down. Well, the only newsworthy reason anyhow. And no author would make spurious claims in order to get more publicity.
Please show us where the article makes any claims whatsoever as to why this coloring book was taken down. This is the problem I have with claims of censorship, for all we know, FEMA had a contract to keep the thing up for six years and it just expired. Or they ran our of space on the web server. Or it was an accident. We just don't know, and assuming it was due to public outcry is unwarranted.
And a kick in the nuts isn't brain cancer, either. Doesn't mean we need to be grateful for a kick in the nuts. Yes, I'm aware that I just compared Uwe Boll to brain cancer, but it's not like cancer can take offense.
Whoah there, Bruce. Please point out where the article claims that FEMA took down the coloring book due to pressure. Actually, the article does not state WHY the book was removed. Unless you have access to information we don't, you are making completely unwarranted assumptions.
And then, please show us, either in the summary, or the linked article, where it says that FEMA removed the coloring book due to pressure or complaints.
You should have been more clear rather than demeaning yourself by rushing a sound-bite out in an attempt to get first post. You are Bruce Fricken Perens for crying out loud. You don't need first post to get noticed. And you don't need to put your thoughts into dumbed-down sound bite form. Allow me to quote from your first post:
Censorship is a bigger danger to the American Public than any FEMA publication.
Please, explain to us how that is not hyperbole. It is implying that removal of this publication is somehow a big danger to the American Public. Do you really believe that the removal of a coloring book from the FEMA site is an actual danger, or even some kind of warning sign of danger to come? If so, please explain why. If not, please admit that you engaged in a teeny tiny bit of hyperbole, probably brought on in a misguided attempt to get 'first post' on Slashdot.
Abrams sucks. This Trek will suck. I don't care about the Klingons, but from the ads I've seen, Abrams has worked his usual turdomancy on the franchise, turning a Sci-Fi gem into a steaming pile of Blockbuster Action Flick.
Are you reading the same summary I am? Because I do not see:
1. Anything framing a rejection of an idea. 2. Any claims about lack of bigotry or certifications of opinion holding. 3. A stupid statement that completely invalidates a position or confirms bigotry.
Could you point out examples of what you are talking about? I'm still utterly at a loss, trying to figure out what you see that I don't see.
Slashdot Mirror
Just a note, I've read the coloring book now and I want to see it back up. It's a good resource. Even the one controversial picture is important, 9/11 is a relevant disaster to use to illustrate the point about media coverage reminding a kid about what they have been through, over and over. There is no controversy as far as I'm concerned, kids don't even need to know what the hell 9/11 is to get the point.
The article is a VERY clever troll, in the Christian Science Monitor, which I consider to be one of the last bastions of good reporting. But it just lost some of my respect. Still, good troll, it got us both. :-)
"Oh, a wise guy, eh? Why I otta..." Although the line is probably even more hoary and ancient than that.
As for these and other types of mental disorders, they seem to exist in a spectrum. A little bit of this one, plus a dash of that one, and you've got a person who thinks a little differently and may be a little bit smarter in certain situations. Get just the right combination, and you've got genius. Get it wrong, and you've got a semi functional person. Get it dead wrong and you've got a person who is non functional or worse, dangerous.
Of course, all of this genetics is moderated and shaped by environment. Stress hormones at the wrong time in development can trigger conditions that would lay dormant in a luckier individual. Healthier societies (in my hypothesis) will have more smart people and less dysfunctional types because of lower stress. This could create long term pressures towards more cooperative, less competitive (and thus stressful) societies.
These long term pressures would more than offset the tendency of society wide traumatic events like famine to make people competitive and selfish for generations. But that is really a separate hypothesis.
"Just drop it already" is a request. Again you demonstrate your strangely rigid personal boundaries. I'm trying to help you stop making a fool of yourself.
FDR was wrong to imprison Japanese Americans, and demonstrably unfair and biased by doing so while not locking up German Americans.
I'm a red diaper baby, to me, the schools seemed like right wing conservative hellholes full of aggrandizement of American imperialism and denial of any wrongdoing or immorality on our part.
You keep asserting that without any proof. Nutbard's book doesn't even talk about the New Deal. Find me some damn evidence or admit you have none. I gave evidence. You don't refute it, you just make baseless claims. You gave me an irrelevant book by a dubious author, refuted and rejected by the mainstream, about the failures BEFORE the New Deal. You put on airs of the radical rebellious free thinker, but like many libertarians, it is just a thin mask hiding a sociopath whose entire political philosophy boils down to "You aren't the boss of me, I'll do what I want!"
There are thoughtful libertarians. I've met some, and had enjoyable discussions with them. You aren't one of them. You are a closed minded selfish simpleton who can't even elucidate his philosophy, but merely points to irrelevant books by other, more intellectually capable wingnuts.
Mine is the mainstream view, no matter how you and fringe idiots from mises try to rewrite history. Don't try the 'emotional attachment' bullshit with me, you are the one who can't let it go and you know it. Just drop it already.
What, you mean something like twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was? Don't you know justice is blind?
Well I vote [NO]. What? I meant to type [NO]. What's going on here?
But try telling that to kids these days, they mod you offtopic. I've half a mind to shake my cane at them.
Wait, wait, wait. You're saying embedded code often stinks? Don't we use embedded code in voting machines? My God, has anyone checked them? This sounds like it could be a real problem, I think we need to notify the authorities.
My first attempt to run X-Windows was on a 386 with 16 megs of RAM, and it worked fine. We used VI in an xterm and that's the way we liked it! Web browsers, bah! Gopher still works, you know. Now get off my lawn.
That is mentioned as a consequence of the ruling. Now it remains to be seen whether the manufacturer will release the source code. If they won't, presenting a copy of Bruner's exhibits will be a 'get out of jail free' card for drunk driving in Minnesota. Which will mean the state will have to go with a manufacturer that WILL provide the source. Nice.
I resemble this remark. Fortunately for me, there is a mineral hot spring LOADED with lithium an hour away from me.
So, ah, I'm curious. Who else here has this problem, and how bad? I'm cyclothymic, which is a pretty mild version of bipolor disorder, and I've been keeping it (mostly) under control with sertraline.
I've had suicidal ideation, mainly as a teen, but no actual attempts. Mostly, I just get totally manic about a project for a month or two, and have a hard time sleeping, eating, or focusing on anything else. Then a couple weeks of normal. Then a month or two of eating too much and not being able to focus on anything, then a week or two of normal again.
You say the graphs don't prove anything. Using the numbers from the graph, which are accurate, prove your hypothesis. Or just shut up, it's been a week, dude. Either way, I really don't care anymore.
It really is an art form. On a casual reading, the article really makes it sound like the book was taken down due to protests, but the only outrage actually mentioned came after the fact, as a reaction to the book's removal.
In fact, the whole article seems like a cleverly crafted troll that implies different, offensive things to different people. It implies the book was removed due to protest. It implies the book was worthy of protest, It implies the book focuses on 9/11. Okay, the article actually calls it 'the 9/11 coloring book,' when it has all of two pages mentioning 9/11 in the context of hearing about any disaster over and over again in the news, which is a totally reasonable thing to prepare child survivors for.
Trolls everywhere could learn a thing or two reading that article. I know I did. :) Man, I just reread it, and it is deliberately inflammatory, which is unlike the CS Monitor. I hadn't noticed quite how inflammatory the article is because it happens to match my personal biases.
It's not a 'claim' since I backed it up with graphs PROVING it. That would be what we call a 'fact.'
Allow me to present the whole quote, which you conveniently left unattributed:
But a blogger on the conservative Lew Rockwell website says the government is too âoeobsessedâ with 9/11.
âoeIs it that they want to keep the âoefearâ factor ever-present in the sheepleâ(TM)s minds? After people complained, FEMA removed the coloring book from its site. Too bad we canâ(TM)t remove FEMA from our sight.â
Let me be more specific: please show me where the article makes credible claims from reliable sources who do more than speculate.
So the author of the coloring book says, "I stand firm that it was a very well thought-out and useful resource for kids," Olmsted told FOXNews.com. "But itâ(TM)s obviously being misinterpreted by a lot of people."
Obviously, that could be the only reason the book was taken down. Well, the only newsworthy reason anyhow. And no author would make spurious claims in order to get more publicity.
This is a non issue.
Uh huh. Because some random blogger said so? Some random blogger said to send me $100 for everlasting happiness. Get to it.
Please show us where the article makes any claims whatsoever as to why this coloring book was taken down. This is the problem I have with claims of censorship, for all we know, FEMA had a contract to keep the thing up for six years and it just expired. Or they ran our of space on the web server. Or it was an accident. We just don't know, and assuming it was due to public outcry is unwarranted.
And a kick in the nuts isn't brain cancer, either. Doesn't mean we need to be grateful for a kick in the nuts. Yes, I'm aware that I just compared Uwe Boll to brain cancer, but it's not like cancer can take offense.
Whoah there, Bruce. Please point out where the article claims that FEMA took down the coloring book due to pressure. Actually, the article does not state WHY the book was removed. Unless you have access to information we don't, you are making completely unwarranted assumptions.
And then, please show us, either in the summary, or the linked article, where it says that FEMA removed the coloring book due to pressure or complaints.
You should have been more clear rather than demeaning yourself by rushing a sound-bite out in an attempt to get first post. You are Bruce Fricken Perens for crying out loud. You don't need first post to get noticed. And you don't need to put your thoughts into dumbed-down sound bite form. Allow me to quote from your first post:
Censorship is a bigger danger to the American Public than any FEMA publication.
Please, explain to us how that is not hyperbole. It is implying that removal of this publication is somehow a big danger to the American Public. Do you really believe that the removal of a coloring book from the FEMA site is an actual danger, or even some kind of warning sign of danger to come? If so, please explain why. If not, please admit that you engaged in a teeny tiny bit of hyperbole, probably brought on in a misguided attempt to get 'first post' on Slashdot.
Abrams sucks. This Trek will suck. I don't care about the Klingons, but from the ads I've seen, Abrams has worked his usual turdomancy on the franchise, turning a Sci-Fi gem into a steaming pile of Blockbuster Action Flick.
Are you reading the same summary I am? Because I do not see:
1. Anything framing a rejection of an idea.
2. Any claims about lack of bigotry or certifications of opinion holding.
3. A stupid statement that completely invalidates a position or confirms bigotry.
Could you point out examples of what you are talking about? I'm still utterly at a loss, trying to figure out what you see that I don't see.