Zero in my family, actually. My Mom, son, and I still use Gnome (with Gnome panel), and my wife thinks Unity is great. (Then again she married me, so you already know she has strange preferences.)
Except that I'm neither Christian nor conservative, nor do I dismiss the idea that AGW is possible. I just think that argumentum ad Hitlerum is unscientific, and that the drumbeat of use of the term "denialist" makes those who want to warn others about the externalities of AGW seem less persuasive, not more.
Anyway, if the goal is to wind people up, then that sort of childishness proves my point.
Like actual violence only? Or are stories likethis false? Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with religious conservatives on this issue. But Canada's reputation is of being a country where one can be civilly liable for expressing politically incorrect opinions, and if so, that's pretty fucking far from free speech.
I speculate that the reason you're uncomfortable with it is not to do with science at all, but to do with your politics. You find that the people on the other side of the political spectrum from you have no doubt about AGW. But that people who are your natural allies are where the deniers come from. That's obviously going to make you uneasy about it.
That's probably fair. Thing is, though, not only do (most) progressives have no doubt about AGW, they've stridently politicized skepticism toward it. That doesn't make them wrong on the issue, but at the same time it's not unreasonable that would make moderates, conservatives, and libertarians suspect that their motivation is not so much from science, but rather is simply a convenient article of faith that supports their ideological objectives.
This. I'm one of the ones who really doesn't know what to believe, but every time I hear the term "denier" used in this amazingly offensive and inappropriate context I stop listening, because it makes it sound like the one saying it doesn't have actual dispassionate arguments and has to rely on ad hominem. I won't say I agree with the skeptics, but mocking them is the antithesis of science, not the defense of it.
peruse tr.v. perused, perusing, peruses: To read or examine, typically with great care. So in other words, it's pretty much what they're saying they're entitled to do.
(or at least universal for the sex that cares about protecting freedoms)
You're engaging in this sort of collectivist thinking here. Neither sex cares about protecting freedoms. There are a few individuals of each sex who do, and overall probably more of them are men than women, but that's as close as you can get to your remark — which, in case you don't realize it, is more likely to be alienating than persuasive.
It's not quite the cupholder call, but in the '90s I did phone support for an ISP that had a lot of elderly customers, and one time I really did get the "any key" call.
The problem here is that legislation and regulation doesn't come about for the benefit of you and me, it's designed to benefit the policy makers and corporate executives who work hand in hand for mutual advantage. And the only way to avoid that is for there to be less political power for them to grasp.
I'm in the same position. All my machines run 12.04 LTS, and since that will be supported until 2017 I have plenty of time to see how the UI situation shakes out.
Except that people do it all the time here, not just in this particular thread. "Why, I remember when Slashdot was great, and no one had a six digit ID, and people wore onions on their belts, and blah blah blah." Just shut up and leave already.
Maybe it's entrepreneurs you should be consulting. From the article: "One of the more interesting concepts from this period did not come from NASA but from a model company called MPC."
Interesting. I had been thinking of him as the Bradley Manning of the free culture movement. It would be better for those he leaves behind if he ends up being its Mohamed Bouazizi. Either way, RIP.
Running would suck, but it would suck less than thirty years in a medieval federal prison. It probably wouldn't suck less than six months or a year, though, which is what he was realistically looking at. And it would suck a lot less than being dead.
But that's just my opinion, and it was his call. RIP.
Slashdot Mirror
Zero in my family, actually. My Mom, son, and I still use Gnome (with Gnome panel), and my wife thinks Unity is great. (Then again she married me, so you already know she has strange preferences.)
Except that I'm neither Christian nor conservative, nor do I dismiss the idea that AGW is possible. I just think that argumentum ad Hitlerum is unscientific, and that the drumbeat of use of the term "denialist" makes those who want to warn others about the externalities of AGW seem less persuasive, not more.
Anyway, if the goal is to wind people up, then that sort of childishness proves my point.
Like actual violence only? Or are stories like this false? Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with religious conservatives on this issue. But Canada's reputation is of being a country where one can be civilly liable for expressing politically incorrect opinions, and if so, that's pretty fucking far from free speech.
So, everyone can express their honest, unvarnished opinion about ethnicity, religion, and homosexuality in Canada, right?
I speculate that the reason you're uncomfortable with it is not to do with science at all, but to do with your politics. You find that the people on the other side of the political spectrum from you have no doubt about AGW. But that people who are your natural allies are where the deniers come from. That's obviously going to make you uneasy about it.
That's probably fair. Thing is, though, not only do (most) progressives have no doubt about AGW, they've stridently politicized skepticism toward it. That doesn't make them wrong on the issue, but at the same time it's not unreasonable that would make moderates, conservatives, and libertarians suspect that their motivation is not so much from science, but rather is simply a convenient article of faith that supports their ideological objectives.
This. I'm one of the ones who really doesn't know what to believe, but every time I hear the term "denier" used in this amazingly offensive and inappropriate context I stop listening, because it makes it sound like the one saying it doesn't have actual dispassionate arguments and has to rely on ad hominem. I won't say I agree with the skeptics, but mocking them is the antithesis of science, not the defense of it.
Here's a longer, more nuanced verison of why crying "denier!" is anti-scientific.
In an era of "quantitative easement", leaving money in the bank does involve risk.
No surprise -- some of my best libertarian friends are also still unconformed hippies.
peruse tr.v. perused, perusing, peruses: To read or examine, typically with great care. So in other words, it's pretty much what they're saying they're entitled to do.
The program is new, but the school isn't. They've been accredited for nearly fifty years.
No way. As I learned from Star Trek, they're all M-class. All of them.
Thanks! I put it in the public domain, so share and enjoy.
Hence the saying that the Constitution may not be perfect, but it's better than what we have now.
(or at least universal for the sex that cares about protecting freedoms)
You're engaging in this sort of collectivist thinking here. Neither sex cares about protecting freedoms. There are a few individuals of each sex who do, and overall probably more of them are men than women, but that's as close as you can get to your remark — which, in case you don't realize it, is more likely to be alienating than persuasive.
Yes, and Mongolia can claim to have conquered Russia...
just not lately.
It's not quite the cupholder call, but in the '90s I did phone support for an ISP that had a lot of elderly customers, and one time I really did get the "any key" call.
The problem here is that legislation and regulation doesn't come about for the benefit of you and me, it's designed to benefit the policy makers and corporate executives who work hand in hand for mutual advantage. And the only way to avoid that is for there to be less political power for them to grasp.
I'm in the same position. All my machines run 12.04 LTS, and since that will be supported until 2017 I have plenty of time to see how the UI situation shakes out.
Except that people do it all the time here, not just in this particular thread. "Why, I remember when Slashdot was great, and no one had a six digit ID, and people wore onions on their belts, and blah blah blah." Just shut up and leave already.
Maybe it's entrepreneurs you should be consulting. From the article: "One of the more interesting concepts from this period did not come from NASA but from a model company called MPC."
Interesting. I had been thinking of him as the Bradley Manning of the free culture movement. It would be better for those he leaves behind if he ends up being its Mohamed Bouazizi. Either way, RIP.
Maybe, but still... citation needed.
Running would suck, but it would suck less than thirty years in a medieval federal prison. It probably wouldn't suck less than six months or a year, though, which is what he was realistically looking at. And it would suck a lot less than being dead.
But that's just my opinion, and it was his call. RIP.
If everyone here thinks Slashdot is so awful, then what are you all still doing here?
Teach a man to fish etc
"Teach a man to teach others to fish, and you feed the world." -- Charles W. Evans