I hold to my arguement, that everybody has a price. It doesn't preclude the possibility that some people (your noble heros) have a price so high it's virtually impossible to pay it.
I respect people who won't be bought for what the world is offering, in fact I try to be one of them. But I have to wonder what would happen if "the world" upped it's offer?
Think about it: if somebody walked up to you on the street, and gave you $1mil and asked you to kill someone where would you draw the line? Your arch-rival? Your boss? A bum? A random ordinary person? A celebrity? A friend? A loved one? Yourself? What if it was $10mil, or $100mil, or the Presidency of the US?
Thankfully, most people never have to put up with that kind of temptation, because I doubt many could resist. I say humans are generally good, because it isn't cost-effective (in a total life, not monetary sense) not to be. The probable cost of societal consequences of unaccepted behavior are higher than the possible gain minus the person's ethical price. The old saying crime doesn't pay is true...unless you have a low ethical price.
Call me a cynic, but I'd rather have a low expectation and be pleasantly surprised by good people than have a high one and be dissapointed with the bad people.
It's just yet another insult from the two stooges.
The "bad guys" used to be Communist sympathizers, so sympathizers has a bad ring to it in our culture, and thus it is the word the two main parties supporters use to try to make the third party supporters sound evil...or at the very least disreputable.
Although if you take the meaning of the word literally, it's not really that bad (from m-w.com): sympathize 1 : to be in keeping, accord, or harmony 2 : to react or respond in sympathy 3 : to share in suffering or grief : syn:COMMISERATE ; also : to express such sympathy 4 : to be in sympathy intellectually
My support of the Libertarian Party fits all 4 of those definitions.
I didn't. I skimmed through, reading the questions, and enough of the responses to see that they were the normal "party line" BS that I have to see every commercial break on TV (I live in a swing state...bleh!...thank God for mute)...Nader got a bit more complete read, since he doesn't get the same level of coverage as Bush and Kerry.
On a side note: I'm glad this debate at least admitted that there were more than two candidates, but it would have been nice if some more of the larger third parties (Green, Libertarian...maybe Constitution, and Socialist too...) had been included.
Question #5 in particular was dissapointing...neither main candidate even came close to answering it, but I'm not surprised since the policy by both the R's and D's all along has been "Deny all knowledge of other options."
There are better pictures of the action at: http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/MSH/Images/MSH 04/ They are generally posted withing 24 hours of being taken, and there are high-res versions that make great desktop wallpapers.
"Combine that with genes for better feathers, and we'll also get fluffier pillows!"
Actually, this has already been done through regular old fashioned selective breeding in several breeds of chickens...although the softer fluffy feathers were selected for appearance, not use in pillows. I don't think feather pillows are a lucrative enough market to offset the costs of using GM....
Unfortunately all breeds of chicken still taste like...chicken.
All in all I'd say it does a pretty good job...at least for my views:
1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%) 2. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (66%) 3. Bush, President George W. - Republican (52%) 4. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (44%) 5. Cobb, David - Green Party (32%) 6. Nader, Ralph - Independent (32%) 7. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (31%) 8. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (18%)
If I had been making that list myself, I would have ordered them: Badnarik, Peroutka, Nader, Cobb, Bush, Kerry, Brown. But then, I tend to respect people who know what they stand for even if I disagree with their views (to a point), so maybe I do agree with Bush more often than Pertouka, Nader, and Cobb but just don't like him (or more importantly his VP and Sec Def, who seem to be running the show).
I think the flaw in this setup is that it takes the candidates at their word...and far too often the "official position" of a candidate (especially for the R&D's) on an issue is only for show.
"and then our stupid atmosphere goes and blocks it or it dissipates before it can be collected"
Yes, our stupid atmosphere which dissipates the sun's radiation so we don't get fried, and converts it to heat so we don't freeze. DAMN YOU ATMOSPHERE!!!
Given that our atmosphere is the only reason there is life on the planet, maybe you should give it a break....
Personally, I think the worst mistake religious people make is trying to rationalize their religious convictions. Christianity is a religion of a personal relationship with God...so unless God reveals himself to a person no amount of shouting and Bible thumping or rational argument is going to convert an unbeliever. And usually, it just ends up making the Christian look rude or foolish.
However, regarding: "There is no such evidence of the existence of God, so any belief in him must be a different sort of faith than what you describe."
I would like to point out that Christians have seen exactly such evidence, in their personal relationship with God and God's provision for them during their lives...and that's what makes them Christians.
Unless you're omniscient, there are things in the universe that you haven't personally witnessed. It takes some degree of faith to believe in anything. Believing in Antarctica based on the accounts and pictures of those who have been there doesn't take much faith...believing in Christianity based only on the words and deeds of Christians and on the Bible takes a lot of faith...believing in Christianity when God has revealed himself to you personally doesn't take as much faith.
Finally, regarding: "The historical man Jesus Christ is known from exactly four documents: the four Gospels. There are, to the best of my knowledge, no other known documents claiming first-hand knowledge of the man."
Just to use the most common example: How many first hand accounts are there of the Big Bang? I bet it's less than four.... Obviously there was something to it, given that many early Christians died for their beliefs. If you and your three friends wrote your stories, and I arrested you and told you to recant or die, would you die for your story if it was a lie? So, either the majority of early Christians were insane, or they had some real reason to believe what they wrote. Now, has the Bible changed some over time...probably...I've played the human telephone game enough to know we can't keep our stories straight.... People who read the Bible literally, word for word, are as foolish as those who discount it as complete fiction.
Unfortunately, in order to help select questions, you have to trust the NVP with your personally identifiable information. After a quick look at their privacy policy, I don't. Particularly:
Use: We do not use any information collected for any purpose inconsistent with state or federal law, or for any purpose other than forwarding the goals of the New Voter Project.
Seems like dodging the issue to me...normally use of personal information is spelled out in some detail. Not to mention that political organizations are exempt from many privacy laws... And what exactly are those goals?...it never really says that either. Now, I'm not a tinfoil hat wearer (usually a tinfoil hat wearer basher, in fact), but given the above combined with reports of "irregularities" involving NVP in Wisconsin (amoung other places), I'm not going to be letting them know anything about me.
I know I haven't been faithful when it comes to computing. I've done it with your mother Win 2k at school, your great aunt Win 98 at my sister's, two of the Linux sisters, Redhat and Mandrake in our own apartment, and even your sister Win XP Home on my lap(top) right in front of you. I know your father M$ is mad since I've never paid him (a visit). But you've always been my main OS, ever since I first met you. I've always taken good care of you, patched all your flaws, protected you from viruses, and kept you secure when we go out in the world (wide web). Please don't leave me. None of the other OS's have everything I need and want.
I disagree on your take on the bias of the show. I've always thought TDS does a great job of picking on everybody...and I'm a conservative (mostly) youth (still, barely) from the midwest (completely).
I can guess from the on set interviews that Stewart is a liberal, but I have to say he and the writers do a good job of keeping the ripping "fair and balanced" (tm)...not to mention damn funny. The Republicans get a bit more coverage simply because they're in charge...that's the way it always works with political comedy.
Hmmmm....if you don't know of the longstanding geek vs. nerd debate, chances are you aren't either.
A short summary of geeks vs. nerds (my own opinion, which everyone else will no doubt disagree with, but that's par for the course with geeks and nerds):
Both: Obsessive about details which most people consider obscure, generally socially inept, but of above average intelligence.
Nerds: Generally more academic, love taking things apart and figuring out how and why they work, tend to study for the sake of studying, make fools of themselves in public because they just aren't paying attention to other people. PhD's are usually nerds. Scientists, engineers, musicologists, mathematicians, and art historians are often nerds.
Geeks: Tend to be fans or participants, often collectors, tend to study for the sake of knowing more than the other guy (or girl), make fools out of themselves in public to get attention from other people. Marching Band members, people who dress up at cons, gamers (of all types), and sports stats nuts are often geeks.
Nerds generally consider the objects of geeks obsessions to be trivial when compared to their fields, but often share geeks interests in addition to their academic pursuits. Geeks think nerds are elitist snobs (which often we are), but generally respect their expertise as it applies to the geek's interests.
The major exception to these categories is the "computer geek", who is more like the nerd category but in a computer related discipline, and still goes by the title geek. Computer geeks are respected by nerds (not quite as equals, but they do keep our computers running and give us fun new software to use) and are almost worshipped by rank and file geeks. Computer geeks consider both nerds and geeks inferior, since they are not as skilled in the only field which matters - computers - but aside from demeaning them as n00bs they generally get along with both.
Of course the worst category to fall into is: Dork: Obsessive about details which most people consider obscure, generally socially inept, but an idiot. Sadly there are many dorks on/. mixed in with the nerds, geeks and computer geeks.
This isn't a success. The earthquake today was on a completely different segment of the fault, and was significantly weaker than the prediction, not to mention over three weeks after the generous nine month time period.
Don't get me wrong, I like the research, they've had some surprising success in the past, and I hope they continue. But even by the generous error margins allowed for primitive earthquake predictions, they're wrong this time...and if you asked them I'm sure they'd say the same thing.
And as a bonus, these units are pretty cheap.... I got mine for under $200 installed, with the 3-year warranty, and that was a year ago so prices have probably dropped. My unit probably wouldn't be good enough for an audiophile...but then an audiophile wouldn't be playing mp3s on my cheapo stock speakers.
One CD holds about 8 hours of mp3s (aka ~500miles)...so unless you're driving really long days you won't even need to switch disks.
Slashdot Mirror
No harm done...actually it sounds like we are quite alike. If only more people held virtue in a place over $$$ the world would be a better place.
No need to be rude.
I hold to my arguement, that everybody has a price. It doesn't preclude the possibility that some people (your noble heros) have a price so high it's virtually impossible to pay it.
I respect people who won't be bought for what the world is offering, in fact I try to be one of them. But I have to wonder what would happen if "the world" upped it's offer?
Think about it: if somebody walked up to you on the street, and gave you $1mil and asked you to kill someone where would you draw the line?
Your arch-rival? Your boss? A bum? A random ordinary person? A celebrity? A friend? A loved one? Yourself? What if it was $10mil, or $100mil, or the Presidency of the US?
Thankfully, most people never have to put up with that kind of temptation, because I doubt many could resist. I say humans are generally good, because it isn't cost-effective (in a total life, not monetary sense) not to be. The probable cost of societal consequences of unaccepted behavior are higher than the possible gain minus the person's ethical price. The old saying crime doesn't pay is true...unless you have a low ethical price.
Call me a cynic, but I'd rather have a low expectation and be pleasantly surprised by good people than have a high one and be dissapointed with the bad people.
It's just yet another insult from the two stooges.
The "bad guys" used to be Communist sympathizers, so sympathizers has a bad ring to it in our culture, and thus it is the word the two main parties supporters use to try to make the third party supporters sound evil...or at the very least disreputable.
Although if you take the meaning of the word literally, it's not really that bad (from m-w.com):
sympathize
1 : to be in keeping, accord, or harmony
2 : to react or respond in sympathy
3 : to share in suffering or grief : syn:COMMISERATE ; also : to express such sympathy
4 : to be in sympathy intellectually
My support of the Libertarian Party fits all 4 of those definitions.
Everybody has their price...a code of ethics just makes your price higher.
Why not just pay the teens not to have sex? It would probably be cheaper in the long run...
I didn't. I skimmed through, reading the questions, and enough of the responses to see that they were the normal "party line" BS that I have to see every commercial break on TV (I live in a swing state...bleh!...thank God for mute)...Nader got a bit more complete read, since he doesn't get the same level of coverage as Bush and Kerry.
On a side note: I'm glad this debate at least admitted that there were more than two candidates, but it would have been nice if some more of the larger third parties (Green, Libertarian...maybe Constitution, and Socialist too...) had been included.
Question #5 in particular was dissapointing...neither main candidate even came close to answering it, but I'm not surprised since the policy by both the R's and D's all along has been "Deny all knowledge of other options."
There are better pictures of the action at:H 04/
http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/MSH/Images/MS
They are generally posted withing 24 hours of being taken, and there are high-res versions that make great desktop wallpapers.
"Combine that with genes for better feathers, and we'll also get fluffier pillows!"
Actually, this has already been done through regular old fashioned selective breeding in several breeds of chickens...although the softer fluffy feathers were selected for appearance, not use in pillows. I don't think feather pillows are a lucrative enough market to offset the costs of using GM....
Unfortunately all breeds of chicken still taste like...chicken.
All in all I'd say it does a pretty good job...at least for my views:
1. Your ideal theoretical candidate. (100%)
2. Badnarik, Michael - Libertarian (66%)
3. Bush, President George W. - Republican (52%)
4. Peroutka, Michael - Constitution Party (44%)
5. Cobb, David - Green Party (32%)
6. Nader, Ralph - Independent (32%)
7. Kerry, Senator John, MA - Democrat (31%)
8. Brown, Walt - Socialist Party (18%)
If I had been making that list myself, I would have ordered them: Badnarik, Peroutka, Nader, Cobb, Bush, Kerry, Brown.
But then, I tend to respect people who know what they stand for even if I disagree with their views (to a point), so maybe I do agree with Bush more often than Pertouka, Nader, and Cobb but just don't like him (or more importantly his VP and Sec Def, who seem to be running the show).
I think the flaw in this setup is that it takes the candidates at their word...and far too often the "official position" of a candidate (especially for the R&D's) on an issue is only for show.
And perhaps so should you...
Who knows...maybe you'll get modded funny later...maybe I will. Until then, I guess we're both unfunny.
"and then our stupid atmosphere goes and blocks it or it dissipates before it can be collected"
Yes, our stupid atmosphere which dissipates the sun's radiation so we don't get fried, and converts it to heat so we don't freeze. DAMN YOU ATMOSPHERE!!!
Given that our atmosphere is the only reason there is life on the planet, maybe you should give it a break....
Personally, I think the worst mistake religious people make is trying to rationalize their religious convictions. Christianity is a religion of a personal relationship with God...so unless God reveals himself to a person no amount of shouting and Bible thumping or rational argument is going to convert an unbeliever. And usually, it just ends up making the Christian look rude or foolish.
However, regarding:
"There is no such evidence of the existence of God, so any belief in him must be a different sort of faith than what you describe."
I would like to point out that Christians have seen exactly such evidence, in their personal relationship with God and God's provision for them during their lives...and that's what makes them Christians.
Unless you're omniscient, there are things in the universe that you haven't personally witnessed. It takes some degree of faith to believe in anything. Believing in Antarctica based on the accounts and pictures of those who have been there doesn't take much faith...believing in Christianity based only on the words and deeds of Christians and on the Bible takes a lot of faith...believing in Christianity when God has revealed himself to you personally doesn't take as much faith.
Finally, regarding:
"The historical man Jesus Christ is known from exactly four documents: the four Gospels. There are, to the best of my knowledge, no other known documents claiming first-hand knowledge of the man."
Just to use the most common example: How many first hand accounts are there of the Big Bang? I bet it's less than four.... Obviously there was something to it, given that many early Christians died for their beliefs. If you and your three friends wrote your stories, and I arrested you and told you to recant or die, would you die for your story if it was a lie? So, either the majority of early Christians were insane, or they had some real reason to believe what they wrote. Now, has the Bible changed some over time...probably...I've played the human telephone game enough to know we can't keep our stories straight.... People who read the Bible literally, word for word, are as foolish as those who discount it as complete fiction.
" I've yet to meet a site that *forces* me to use IE"
What about:
http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/
It's a somewhat critical site is you have a windows box.
Unfortunately, in order to help select questions, you have to trust the NVP with your personally identifiable information. After a quick look at their privacy policy, I don't. Particularly:
Use:
We do not use any information collected for any purpose inconsistent with state or federal law, or for any purpose other than forwarding the goals of the New Voter Project.
Seems like dodging the issue to me...normally use of personal information is spelled out in some detail. Not to mention that political organizations are exempt from many privacy laws... And what exactly are those goals?...it never really says that either. Now, I'm not a tinfoil hat wearer (usually a tinfoil hat wearer basher, in fact), but given the above combined with reports of "irregularities" involving NVP in Wisconsin (amoung other places), I'm not going to be letting them know anything about me.
Inattentional blindness...now when that idiot in the SUV mows me down while I'm crossing the street, they can say it wasn't their fault....
"Of course, judging by the fact that I just wrote that list, I might fall into the dork category ;)"
Nah...if you were a dork you wouldn't have bothered with a list...you would have just flamed me....
"There is a nice view of the volcano."
Or at least there would be if it wasn't cloudy...and if the CAM wasn't slashdotted 90% of the time....
Dear Win XP Pro,
I know I haven't been faithful when it comes to computing. I've done it with your mother Win 2k at school, your great aunt Win 98 at my sister's, two of the Linux sisters, Redhat and Mandrake in our own apartment, and even your sister Win XP Home on my lap(top) right in front of you. I know your father M$ is mad since I've never paid him (a visit). But you've always been my main OS, ever since I first met you. I've always taken good care of you, patched all your flaws, protected you from viruses, and kept you secure when we go out in the world (wide web). Please don't leave me. None of the other OS's have everything I need and want.
-hopemafia
"Think of the people!"
I did...and I still don't like them.
I disagree on your take on the bias of the show. I've always thought TDS does a great job of picking on everybody...and I'm a conservative (mostly) youth (still, barely) from the midwest (completely).
I can guess from the on set interviews that Stewart is a liberal, but I have to say he and the writers do a good job of keeping the ripping "fair and balanced" (tm)...not to mention damn funny. The Republicans get a bit more coverage simply because they're in charge...that's the way it always works with political comedy.
Hmmmm....if you don't know of the longstanding geek vs. nerd debate, chances are you aren't either.
/. mixed in with the nerds, geeks and computer geeks.
A short summary of geeks vs. nerds (my own opinion, which everyone else will no doubt disagree with, but that's par for the course with geeks and nerds):
Both: Obsessive about details which most people consider obscure, generally socially inept, but of above average intelligence.
Nerds: Generally more academic, love taking things apart and figuring out how and why they work, tend to study for the sake of studying, make fools of themselves in public because they just aren't paying attention to other people. PhD's are usually nerds. Scientists, engineers, musicologists, mathematicians, and art historians are often nerds.
Geeks: Tend to be fans or participants, often collectors, tend to study for the sake of knowing more than the other guy (or girl), make fools out of themselves in public to get attention from other people. Marching Band members, people who dress up at cons, gamers (of all types), and sports stats nuts are often geeks.
Nerds generally consider the objects of geeks obsessions to be trivial when compared to their fields, but often share geeks interests in addition to their academic pursuits. Geeks think nerds are elitist snobs (which often we are), but generally respect their expertise as it applies to the geek's interests.
The major exception to these categories is the "computer geek", who is more like the nerd category but in a computer related discipline, and still goes by the title geek. Computer geeks are respected by nerds (not quite as equals, but they do keep our computers running and give us fun new software to use) and are almost worshipped by rank and file geeks. Computer geeks consider both nerds and geeks inferior, since they are not as skilled in the only field which matters - computers - but aside from demeaning them as n00bs they generally get along with both.
Of course the worst category to fall into is:
Dork: Obsessive about details which most people consider obscure, generally socially inept, but an idiot. Sadly there are many dorks on
Yes, I'm aware of the correct word(s)....
"Bonified" is from some movie or other..."Oh Brother Where Art Thou" I think....
Unfortunately, /. is populated mainly by geeks, not nerds.
And as a bonified nerd, I say that with all the disdain possible....
Ummmmm...no.
This isn't a success. The earthquake today was on a completely different segment of the fault, and was significantly weaker than the prediction, not to mention over three weeks after the generous nine month time period.
Don't get me wrong, I like the research, they've had some surprising success in the past, and I hope they continue. But even by the generous error margins allowed for primitive earthquake predictions, they're wrong this time...and if you asked them I'm sure they'd say the same thing.
And yes, I am a geologist.
And as a bonus, these units are pretty cheap.... I got mine for under $200 installed, with the 3-year warranty, and that was a year ago so prices have probably dropped. My unit probably wouldn't be good enough for an audiophile...but then an audiophile wouldn't be playing mp3s on my cheapo stock speakers.
One CD holds about 8 hours of mp3s (aka ~500miles)...so unless you're driving really long days you won't even need to switch disks.