There's nothing wrong with pointing out weaknesses -- of course the Playbook has some. The question is, do these weaknesses make it "unusable"?
My point is that the "review", as is apparently the case with much of his writing, is an overstated rant designed to provoke responses and reposts. After all, how many other (positive or negative) reviews of the Playbook have been posted to Slashdot? This one was because it was sufficiently rabid to provoke discussion, which is after all what all blog sites are all about.
I mean, come on -- "homeless guy who plays air guitar"? Perhaps a better metaphor would have been "instead of an insightful review, we got turgid prose".
It should be kept in mind that this review is from an author given to overstatedscreeds -- so take with a grain (or a saltshaker) of salt. This is an author who knows how to write things that will be reposted.
Look, ID isn't scientific but that doesn't mean that anyone who speaks in support of it is a troll. Taking ideas you've learned in class and defending them in a public forum is a good thing. A troll (IMHO) is someone who's in a discussion primarily for the conflict. These students obviously aren't -- they're there at best to learn, and at worst to get through a class (who hasn't been there?). I suspect that anyone who thinks this is a bad thing is more closed-minded than any ID/Creationism/Insert-Your-Hobby-Horse-Here partisan.
More Iraqis have died since the beginning of the Iraqi war than under Saddam's reign.
Er, documentation? And since you're no doubt including all fatalities, including those inflicted by enemy forces, be sure to include the deaths from Saddam's futile war against Iran.
According to the original article, this is a routine annual report listing who we are happy with or unhappy with concerning copyright and such. There's also no mention of DMCA. Evidently, countries come and go off these lists all the time. It's just a way for the USA to communicate what it does and doesn't like about other countries behavior. It's called diplomacy. How does anyone get "blacklist" out of this?
By the way, it mentions that North Korea was taken off the bad-boy list. Does anyone really think North Korea instituted a DMCA-like law?
Again, read the complaint. The popularity of the "erotic services" section drives traffic to the site, making their employment ads more profitable. And if it's not profitable, why put up the resistance that Craigslist has to removing or better regulating the section?
I wish more of the authors of these smug, dismissive comments would read the complaint.
It makes a compelling case that the primary use of the "erotic services" section of Craigslist is prostitution, both the "consenting adults" variety and the quite non-consenting child sex slavery variety. It also cites specific cases where Craigslist was used to facilitate the abuse of child sex slaves. Is anyone here concerned with that, and that Craigslist is profiting from that traffic?
Note that the sheriff isn't trying to shut down Craigslist; his office sent 5 letters to Craigslist asking them to better police the "erotic services" section or shut it down. According to the complaint, Craigslist refused. It would seem that the owners of Craigslist value their profits more than the lives of the children whose exploitation they benefit from.
How often has the phrase "Think of the children" been bandied about on Slashdot with a wink and a sneer? Well, here's a case where there are actual, real, hurting children to think about. How many of you are brave enough to challenge the groupthink around here and do that? Where is the outrage that Craigslist is profiting from human traffic? Some of you need to turn in your liberal credentials at the door.
Second, it's patently untrue that Sinaiticus "makes no mention of the resurrection". The version of the gospel of Mark in it omits the last passage where Jesus appears to his disciples, but other post-resurrection appearances occur in the other gospels -- and even the Sinaiticus Mark version ends with an angel's pronouncement that he has risen. You can read an English translation for yourself here.
Note that I didn't dispute the discovery of statistically significant genetic changes; yes, I understand that that can be verified. I simply question the conclusion -- that human evolution is speeding up. That's a very broad, general and sweeping statement that, I humbly suggest, needs broader evidence for support.
And at the risk of making myself even more of a nuisance to right-thinking biologist and statisticians everywhere, what's the statistical significance for the rate of genetic change from Neanderthal to ancient human? What's the sample size for Neanderthal DNA? In my biological and statistical ignorance, I suspect it's much smaller than 270.
Again, I don't doubt the quality of the research, I'm simply troubled by the headline conclusion -- one that will be uncritically propagated throughout the media on the basis of this kind of article.
The researchers looked for the appearance of favorable gene mutations over the past 80,000 years of human history by analyzing voluminous DNA information on 270 people from different populations worldwide. (Emphasis mine)
This is what I can't stand about science by press release (and yes, I'm a scientist). Pretty sweeping conclusion drawn from a miniscule sample size.
Appreciation of good science should have no political boundaries. But the Chinese, of course, are doing this for political reasons, just as the Americans did before them. Doesn't besmirch in any way their results, but the choice of what science gets funded is almost always political and economic.
First of all, I believe you really don't know what you want to do until you get (at least) a couple of years of college under your belt. Sometimes you get lucky and guess correctly before then, but most folks just aren't mature enough or have enough life experience to be able to tell what you will enjoy doing. Yes, I understand there are exceptions to this on both ends of the spectrum; I'm talking averages here.
Second, the college folks are right on about needing a broader focus. As it is, students are too quick to dismiss fields of learning that they don't see as relevant to their interests. Sadly, most folks realize only after they leave school that the purpose of school at nearly all levels is not so much to teach you certain subjects, but to teach you how to learn.
If you freeze my assets, I have no use of them. That is the same as seizure.
Again, no. If I seize your assets, I can do with them as I wish, including selling them. If I freeze your assets, I can't sell them, but I prevent you from selling them.
It's arguable if what they do can be considered "due process" under the law, but it's a lot better than what this order gives the Treasury Department the authority to do.
Uh, you do know that the IRS is part of the Treasury Department, don't you? The bottom line is, as has been pointed out by numerous posters, this kind of authority is not unusual, nor is it a violation of the fifth amendment.
The language is ridiculously broad and does appear to violate the 5th amendment.
No. The relevant part of the fifth amendment states:...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Blocking the use of property is not legally the same as depriving someone of it (although, admittedly, practically-speaking it comes pretty close). If this were a violation of the fifth amendment, so would the IRS putting a lien on someone's property for tax purposes.
...and I don't see a damn thing about using the word fuck, shit, or ass in anything that I've read.
Hmmm... ever read Ephesians 5:3,4?
"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people.
Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving." [Eph 5:3,4 NIV]
Slashdot Mirror
I stopped reading after the first three words. Just like they should have given up three years ago.
Just remember -- they were saying the same thing about Apple 15 years ago.
Things can turn quickly.
Wow, another Slashdot hatchet job on RIM. Heavy into Apple stock, are we?
RIM certainly has issues, and it may not survive. But it seems the Slashdot editorial staff wants to make sure.
There's nothing wrong with pointing out weaknesses -- of course the Playbook has some. The question is, do these weaknesses make it "unusable"?
My point is that the "review", as is apparently the case with much of his writing, is an overstated rant designed to provoke responses and reposts. After all, how many other (positive or negative) reviews of the Playbook have been posted to Slashdot? This one was because it was sufficiently rabid to provoke discussion, which is after all what all blog sites are all about.
I mean, come on -- "homeless guy who plays air guitar"? Perhaps a better metaphor would have been "instead of an insightful review, we got turgid prose".
It should be kept in mind that this review is from an author given to overstated screeds -- so take with a grain (or a saltshaker) of salt. This is an author who knows how to write things that will be reposted.
The Atom N450 has been re-architected ...
Wow -- I guess it was waaaaay too advanced to merely be "re-designed".
Look, ID isn't scientific but that doesn't mean that anyone who speaks in support of it is a troll. Taking ideas you've learned in class and defending them in a public forum is a good thing. A troll (IMHO) is someone who's in a discussion primarily for the conflict. These students obviously aren't -- they're there at best to learn, and at worst to get through a class (who hasn't been there?). I suspect that anyone who thinks this is a bad thing is more closed-minded than any ID/Creationism/Insert-Your-Hobby-Horse-Here partisan.
More Iraqis have died since the beginning of the Iraqi war than under Saddam's reign.
Er, documentation? And since you're no doubt including all fatalities, including those inflicted by enemy forces, be sure to include the deaths from Saddam's futile war against Iran.
...just like email killed faxes.
According to the original article, this is a routine annual report listing who we are happy with or unhappy with concerning copyright and such. There's also no mention of DMCA. Evidently, countries come and go off these lists all the time. It's just a way for the USA to communicate what it does and doesn't like about other countries behavior. It's called diplomacy. How does anyone get "blacklist" out of this?
By the way, it mentions that North Korea was taken off the bad-boy list. Does anyone really think North Korea instituted a DMCA-like law?
Again, read the complaint. The popularity of the "erotic services" section drives traffic to the site, making their employment ads more profitable. And if it's not profitable, why put up the resistance that Craigslist has to removing or better regulating the section?
I wish more of the authors of these smug, dismissive comments would read the complaint.
It makes a compelling case that the primary use of the "erotic services" section of Craigslist is prostitution, both the "consenting adults" variety and the quite non-consenting child sex slavery variety. It also cites specific cases where Craigslist was used to facilitate the abuse of child sex slaves. Is anyone here concerned with that, and that Craigslist is profiting from that traffic?
Note that the sheriff isn't trying to shut down Craigslist; his office sent 5 letters to Craigslist asking them to better police the "erotic services" section or shut it down. According to the complaint, Craigslist refused. It would seem that the owners of Craigslist value their profits more than the lives of the children whose exploitation they benefit from.
How often has the phrase "Think of the children" been bandied about on Slashdot with a wink and a sneer? Well, here's a case where there are actual, real, hurting children to think about. How many of you are brave enough to challenge the groupthink around here and do that? Where is the outrage that Craigslist is profiting from human traffic? Some of you need to turn in your liberal credentials at the door.
Na-Na+ Na-Na+
Na-Na+ Na-Na+
He He He
B-
You mean "write their first radios", since the era of hardware radios is essentially over?
*Snort*
Let me know when lines of code can pluck a signal from the air and mix it with the IF. There's more to making a radio than signal processing.
People have proven time and time again they don't think about consequences, and they assume what is good for them is what is good for everyone.
There. Fixed that for you.
Where to start, where to start...
First of all, there's some dispute as to whether Sinaiticus is indeed the oldest -- a cursory Google will show that Codex Vaticanus is believed by some to be older.
Second, it's patently untrue that Sinaiticus "makes no mention of the resurrection". The version of the gospel of Mark in it omits the last passage where Jesus appears to his disciples, but other post-resurrection appearances occur in the other gospels -- and even the Sinaiticus Mark version ends with an angel's pronouncement that he has risen. You can read an English translation for yourself here.
Use the "classic" version of Hotmail -- worked fine with Firefox 2.0.0.11 about 2 minutes ago. How useful are these "enhancements" anyway?
Note that I didn't dispute the discovery of statistically significant genetic changes; yes, I understand that that can be verified. I simply question the conclusion -- that human evolution is speeding up. That's a very broad, general and sweeping statement that, I humbly suggest, needs broader evidence for support.
And at the risk of making myself even more of a nuisance to right-thinking biologist and statisticians everywhere, what's the statistical significance for the rate of genetic change from Neanderthal to ancient human? What's the sample size for Neanderthal DNA? In my biological and statistical ignorance, I suspect it's much smaller than 270.
Again, I don't doubt the quality of the research, I'm simply troubled by the headline conclusion -- one that will be uncritically propagated throughout the media on the basis of this kind of article.
From the article:
The researchers looked for the appearance of favorable gene mutations over the past 80,000 years of human history by analyzing voluminous DNA information on 270 people from different populations worldwide. (Emphasis mine)
This is what I can't stand about science by press release (and yes, I'm a scientist). Pretty sweeping conclusion drawn from a miniscule sample size.
The bill commented upon by the EFF is/was S1709, a Senate bill. The bill in question is HR3791, a House bill. Only the acronym is the same.
Appreciation of good science should have no political boundaries. But the Chinese, of course, are doing this for political reasons, just as the Americans did before them. Doesn't besmirch in any way their results, but the choice of what science gets funded is almost always political and economic.
First of all, I believe you really don't know what you want to do until you get (at least) a couple of years of college under your belt. Sometimes you get lucky and guess correctly before then, but most folks just aren't mature enough or have enough life experience to be able to tell what you will enjoy doing. Yes, I understand there are exceptions to this on both ends of the spectrum; I'm talking averages here.
Second, the college folks are right on about needing a broader focus. As it is, students are too quick to dismiss fields of learning that they don't see as relevant to their interests. Sadly, most folks realize only after they leave school that the purpose of school at nearly all levels is not so much to teach you certain subjects, but to teach you how to learn.
If you freeze my assets, I have no use of them. That is the same as seizure.
Again, no. If I seize your assets, I can do with them as I wish, including selling them. If I freeze your assets, I can't sell them, but I prevent you from selling them.
It's arguable if what they do can be considered "due process" under the law, but it's a lot better than what this order gives the Treasury Department the authority to do.
Uh, you do know that the IRS is part of the Treasury Department, don't you? The bottom line is, as has been pointed out by numerous posters, this kind of authority is not unusual, nor is it a violation of the fifth amendment.
The language is ridiculously broad and does appear to violate the 5th amendment.
...nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
No. The relevant part of the fifth amendment states:
Blocking the use of property is not legally the same as depriving someone of it (although, admittedly, practically-speaking it comes pretty close). If this were a violation of the fifth amendment, so would the IRS putting a lien on someone's property for tax purposes.
One question...
Why does the new "Junk" icon look like a flame? Most of us don't burn our trash anymore.
...and I don't see a damn thing about using the word fuck, shit, or ass in anything that I've read.
Hmmm... ever read Ephesians 5:3,4?
"But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God's holy people.
Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place, but rather thanksgiving." [Eph 5:3,4 NIV]