wandering incident?! who was the marketing genius that made it sound like a particle physics event??
I don't think anyone is marketing "wandering incidents." Also, seeing as alzheimers predates particle physics, and is probably more commonly discussed than particle physics, I'd have to ask instead what idiot physicist made a particle physics event sound like an alzheimers patient wandering off.
(If you were going for humor, you appear to have had your own wandering incident)
Which is just one of the hundreds of ways unscrupulous companies could overstate the results they are selling.
I do think it's likely though that most companies will be following established markers, saying for example "You have form B of gene X which may predispose you to breast cancer, you should be more vigilant about getting mammograms. This does not mean you WILL get breast cancer." It would be quite an obvious ethical violation if a company like this were to say "You have gene Y, that means Y disease or good thing will happen."
In fact, I don't think these companies should deliver any news but INCREASED risk of certain diseases. No matter how many disclaimers you put on any "good" news, about how it's just one factor, you know people will just hear what they want to hear.
For example, if you tested for a gene that maybe lowered your risk of heart disease slightly, people would:
1. See that they have one marker for low risk of heart disease 2. Ignore/misunderstand the disclaimers that this is just one marker and there are numerous factors 3. Use it as an excuse to smoke and eat steak and eggs every day, saying "It's okay, I have good genes!" 4. Die of massive heart attack 5. Families sue these companies saying they lied, which will be a waste 6. PROFIT (for the lawyers)
But there are known risk factors in DNA sequences that have been established even when epigenetics have been ignored. Risk factors that you can do something about, like predisposition to certain types of cancers, are something people should be aware of.
Not so sure about predispositions to uncurable diseases like huntington's. I'm sure some of these companies will offer options to people who don't want to know about things they'll have no control over.
I screwed myself and I did it willingly because I didn't want to wait.
It's good that you were willing (not sure how that would work otherwise) but it doesn't count. You're still a virgin, or "waiting for marriage" if you prefer.
Actually, Occam did indeed show that occam's razor was in fact knowing, by using occam's razor, calling "dibs." He successfully defended this in debates by putting his fingers in his ears and yelling "nananananan! I'm Occam I cant hear you! NANANAN!"
This is dangerous: studies have shown that when you give extrinsic motivation for something, the intrinsic motivation tends to die away.
Makes you wonder if this will kill students' interest in what they're learning about later in life, leading to more lawyers and MBAs and less scientists.
Then again, science classes in high school and grade school now are already pretty shoddy as far as evoking a sense of interest in students, that might be something we need to fix independantly of making students pay more attention in class. I saw a video in which the late Stephen Jay Gould said something along the lines of "The best thing I can say about my science classes in public education is that they didn't completely kill my interest in science."
The RIAA, as usual, has no clue and blames it all on piracy.
Funny thing is, I don't know who they think cares. Those lovely ads equating car theft to movie piracy... did that convince anyone?
It would be one thing if they were going to lawmakers with this, but they seem to think that a public awareness campaign is the way to go.
The people who are convinced by that aren't pirating stuff. The people who are pirating have numerous ways of justifying it, some legitimate some questionable.
Seriously, why are they wasting this much effort? Morale boosting around mafiaa headquarters?
After all these years, creationists are still resorting to the same strawman arguments. I guess changing their tactics over time to be more successful would be hypocritical.
Hell, even if videogames DO cause those murders, that's still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol, neither of which is banned
And ALL of which have big powerful industries behind them. We're talking about videogames like they're endangered. There is huge industry with lobbyists on our side. And anyway, senior citizens who think games are the devil are dying everyday, while kids who grew up playing games are reaching voting ages every day. Momentum and lobbyist money, if not organization and self-righteousness, are on our side, we don't need to panic every time some idiot government official says something stupid about videogames.
Not to say "Let's not worry about it" lets just keep some perspective that these things aren't gaining much steam.
You have it backwards. It would not be your responsibility to disprove anything. It would be the accuser's full burden to PROVE that you have murdered. Unless they can, then you shouldn't have to lift a finger or be inconvenienced by it.
That is where the metaphor breaks down, as there is no such burden in the court of public opinion, and public opinion unchecked causes these things. If we ignore it and do nothing to correct people who for some reason think there is a proven link between violent videogames and actual violence, their elected officials aren't going to say "no, sorry, prove it."
You're right, that would be insulting the intelligence of sheep. I've never seen sheep "t-bag," nor heard them misuse racial slurs over xbox live in their high prepubescent voices, nor have I seen them get into angry ridiculous arguments about how gaming platform x is better than gaming platform y.
(In the interest of full disclosure: I am an avid gamer and enjoy lamb chops occasionally)
The wiki page for the moon tells me the surface area of the moon is "about a quarter the Earth's land area, approximately as large as Russia, Canada, and the United States combined." Plenty of room to make new historical sites rather than change old one which has no significance that I can see other than historical.
abort: the act of terminating a project or procedure before it is completed
Who is twisting terminology here? It's typical that you went with "abort" rather than "abortion." Abortion of course, to most people, doesn't mean the act of stopping something.
The actual definition of "abortion" from your source "# S: (n) abortion (termination of pregnancy) # S: (n) miscarriage, abortion (failure of a plan) "
That first one is the one the anti-stem cell movement is hoping people will think of, since that's the one they're queasy about. But ESC doesn't involve pregnancy or the termination thereof. It's not a miscarriage. This isn't removing an embryo from a woman to kill it. These are embyros that were never on their way to being born, it doesn't even fall into your definition.
The hypocrisy here is so thick I can't help but think you're trolling.
It's still a human life...
I'm not arrogant enough to claim I know what constitutes human life, but I do believe it's more than just having a set of nucleotide instructions on how to make a human, which is all 5 day old embryos have.
Slashdot Mirror
The French "Conseil Constitutionnel" is a joke compared to the US Supreme Court
Fighting urge to make jokes about the French surrendering...
wandering incident?! who was the marketing genius that made it sound like a particle physics event??
I don't think anyone is marketing "wandering incidents." Also, seeing as alzheimers predates particle physics, and is probably more commonly discussed than particle physics, I'd have to ask instead what idiot physicist made a particle physics event sound like an alzheimers patient wandering off.
(If you were going for humor, you appear to have had your own wandering incident)
You'd think, but since the lawyers profit there, it's just trading one class of idiot for another.
C'mon man, stop beating around the bush and get to your point.
It had something to do with star wars. The sith lord part tipped me off.
Fuck! I'm going to poor every drop of booze in my house down the sink!
Comcast has rerouted your sink too, so that will only help them! Getting drunk in this case? Not one of their better evil plans...
Which is just one of the hundreds of ways unscrupulous companies could overstate the results they are selling.
I do think it's likely though that most companies will be following established markers, saying for example "You have form B of gene X which may predispose you to breast cancer, you should be more vigilant about getting mammograms. This does not mean you WILL get breast cancer." It would be quite an obvious ethical violation if a company like this were to say "You have gene Y, that means Y disease or good thing will happen."
In fact, I don't think these companies should deliver any news but INCREASED risk of certain diseases. No matter how many disclaimers you put on any "good" news, about how it's just one factor, you know people will just hear what they want to hear.
For example, if you tested for a gene that maybe lowered your risk of heart disease slightly, people would:
1. See that they have one marker for low risk of heart disease
2. Ignore/misunderstand the disclaimers that this is just one marker and there are numerous factors
3. Use it as an excuse to smoke and eat steak and eggs every day, saying "It's okay, I have good genes!"
4. Die of massive heart attack
5. Families sue these companies saying they lied, which will be a waste
6. PROFIT (for the lawyers)
But there are known risk factors in DNA sequences that have been established even when epigenetics have been ignored. Risk factors that you can do something about, like predisposition to certain types of cancers, are something people should be aware of.
Not so sure about predispositions to uncurable diseases like huntington's. I'm sure some of these companies will offer options to people who don't want to know about things they'll have no control over.
PS: calling yourself "screwmaster" isn't fooling anyone.
I screwed myself and I did it willingly because I didn't want to wait.
It's good that you were willing (not sure how that would work otherwise) but it doesn't count. You're still a virgin, or "waiting for marriage" if you prefer.
Occam's Razor != knowing
Actually, Occam did indeed show that occam's razor was in fact knowing, by using occam's razor, calling "dibs." He successfully defended this in debates by putting his fingers in his ears and yelling "nananananan! I'm Occam I cant hear you! NANANAN!"
This is dangerous: studies have shown that when you give extrinsic motivation for something, the intrinsic motivation tends to die away.
Makes you wonder if this will kill students' interest in what they're learning about later in life, leading to more lawyers and MBAs and less scientists.
Then again, science classes in high school and grade school now are already pretty shoddy as far as evoking a sense of interest in students, that might be something we need to fix independantly of making students pay more attention in class. I saw a video in which the late Stephen Jay Gould said something along the lines of "The best thing I can say about my science classes in public education is that they didn't completely kill my interest in science."
In some areas right now they argue you need a PhD to do silicon verification
In my experience, nerdy professors are far worse at spotting fake boobs than your average joe.
However you can search for: ...2 girls 1 cup
Who needs sex when you have 2 chicks 1 cup?
No! If people from India can't search for sex, they might not know how to do it! Think of what that would do to their population!
Stupid kids spending their parents' money on Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus albums.
I spend my OWN money on those catchy songs, you insensitive clod!
The RIAA, as usual, has no clue and blames it all on piracy.
Funny thing is, I don't know who they think cares. Those lovely ads equating car theft to movie piracy... did that convince anyone?
It would be one thing if they were going to lawmakers with this, but they seem to think that a public awareness campaign is the way to go.
The people who are convinced by that aren't pirating stuff. The people who are pirating have numerous ways of justifying it, some legitimate some questionable.
Seriously, why are they wasting this much effort? Morale boosting around mafiaa headquarters?
After all these years, creationists are still resorting to the same strawman arguments. I guess changing their tactics over time to be more successful would be hypocritical.
Hell, even if videogames DO cause those murders, that's still several orders of magnitude less dangerous than tobacco or alcohol, neither of which is banned
And ALL of which have big powerful industries behind them. We're talking about videogames like they're endangered. There is huge industry with lobbyists on our side. And anyway, senior citizens who think games are the devil are dying everyday, while kids who grew up playing games are reaching voting ages every day. Momentum and lobbyist money, if not organization and self-righteousness, are on our side, we don't need to panic every time some idiot government official says something stupid about videogames.
Not to say "Let's not worry about it" lets just keep some perspective that these things aren't gaining much steam.
You have it backwards. It would not be your responsibility to disprove anything. It would be the accuser's full burden to PROVE that you have murdered. Unless they can, then you shouldn't have to lift a finger or be inconvenienced by it.
That is where the metaphor breaks down, as there is no such burden in the court of public opinion, and public opinion unchecked causes these things. If we ignore it and do nothing to correct people who for some reason think there is a proven link between violent videogames and actual violence, their elected officials aren't going to say "no, sorry, prove it."
Yes, because it was engineers who came up with vaccines.
Because companies like 3D Realms and God Games made it an L.A. Strippers Convention for a few years there.
You're right, press, especially videogame press, could never find it's way into strippers.
The Louisiana House Legislature killed Socrates? That's terrible.
I wouldn't be surprised, in 2001 (yes, within this millennium) they branded Darwin a racist [state.la.us] with the following flawless logic:
So because they used terrible logic, you wouldn't be surprised if it turned out they had gone back in time to kill Socrates?
Are you admitting you killed Socrates?
Gamers aren't sheep like that.
You're right, that would be insulting the intelligence of sheep. I've never seen sheep "t-bag," nor heard them misuse racial slurs over xbox live in their high prepubescent voices, nor have I seen them get into angry ridiculous arguments about how gaming platform x is better than gaming platform y.
(In the interest of full disclosure: I am an avid gamer and enjoy lamb chops occasionally)
I'm not looking for Gears of War Tennis
You bloody well should be. Think about it, chainsaw guns, alien bugs, and tennis?
I don't want to play any other game now, I'm boycotting all videogames until someone makes gears of tennis!
Counterpoint: why not?
The wiki page for the moon tells me the surface area of the moon is "about a quarter the Earth's land area, approximately as large as Russia, Canada, and the United States combined." Plenty of room to make new historical sites rather than change old one which has no significance that I can see other than historical.
abort: the act of terminating a project or procedure before it is completed
Who is twisting terminology here? It's typical that you went with "abort" rather than "abortion." Abortion of course, to most people, doesn't mean the act of stopping something.
The actual definition of "abortion" from your source
"# S: (n) abortion (termination of pregnancy)
# S: (n) miscarriage, abortion (failure of a plan) "
That first one is the one the anti-stem cell movement is hoping people will think of, since that's the one they're queasy about. But ESC doesn't involve pregnancy or the termination thereof. It's not a miscarriage. This isn't removing an embryo from a woman to kill it. These are embyros that were never on their way to being born, it doesn't even fall into your definition.
The hypocrisy here is so thick I can't help but think you're trolling.
It's still a human life...
I'm not arrogant enough to claim I know what constitutes human life, but I do believe it's more than just having a set of nucleotide instructions on how to make a human, which is all 5 day old embryos have.