Have you tried to add CSS to myspace? It's a nasty hack that involves cutting and pasting computer code into the "about me" section. Normal people don't want to do that because it's a pain and the ass and easy to screw up.
Myspace has a terrible UI. Much of it could be fixed with adherence to standards. End users will care--not because of the standards but because of the better UI resulting from their implementation.
Well we have a part in our constitution to prohibit discrimination based on sex. We teach that philosophy in our schools. We enforce it in our courts (mostly). I know it is not a value in many other countries, though it is in much of the west. I can't speak for them because I haven't studied them. On this US site, I assume a US audience unless stated otherwise.
For you to infer some kind of crafty slam at all other countries is somewhat... unfounded. My props go out to europe for the development of most of the philosophy we hold dear over here.
Yes, discriminating based race and sex go against core american values. I don't care who did it in the past. I don't care what mainstream american values were 50 or 200 years ago. Fortunately, the US has progressed morally since then. We've kept most of the good values and revised most of the bad ones. Economic progress has afforded us the ability to abandon many forms of oppressive pragmatism in favor of idealism, and that's only a good thing.
Would I have supported cosmopolitan, equal-rights reform if I were alive a long time ago? I can't say for sure, but I would like to think so. I hold moral opinions today which aren't supported by the majority of people.
I am absolutely in favor of income-based educational support. America should progress down the path of becoming a fair meritocracy. But to give money to rich Hispanic children for school while denying it to poor white children is anti-social racist hypocrisy. It was 50 years ago and still is.
Oh no! I have a "Bachelor of Science in Computer Science and Engineering" degree. What should I call myself? Should I get a new job title?
The fact is, what is considered "good practice" (not "hacking" or "code artistry") in the software industry really IS good engineering methodology. This is partially because many people came to software from EE, but partially because designing software systems is inherently like any other systems engineering. Software development does have a sort of "folk engineering" that is becoming more formal, and being taught at many of the better universities.
Many of the software people in the industry today have arrived at good engineering practices through trial and error, but now it IS being taught at schools. Either way though, it's engineering.
Civil engineering, for example, existed before there were formal classes in "civil engineering." That's the way all schools of knowledge start.
Computers designed by women may be more attractive to women
You may have something there. I work with a black guy who is buying a particular car because it is "designed by a minority(=black guy)." My opinion is "who the hell cares who designed it?" But, apparently, if you can sell a product as "minority designed," people will buy it solely on the basis of racism.
This is the kind of guy who is in all sorts of black societies, only hangs out at black clubs, goes to a black church, etc. And despite the fact that his family is rich, his kids go for all the black scholarships. My poor white ass got NOTHING.
I hate racism. I hate "reverse" racism just as much as any other kind. But if it sells, I'm sure the marketers will go for it 100%.
does it hurt to give a little plus to someone who's nationality, race or gender is underrepresented in your group?
Yes.
If you are hiring someone to do a job, you should select the candidate who is best for the job. If you do anything else, you don't have the best man (or woman) for the job.
A core American value is not to discriminate based on race, or gender. You suggest doing exactly that, and you are exactly unamerican for doing so.
Too much money can be enslaving? That's one of those myths the poor like to pass around to console themselves for sucking at life. It's like that "money can't buy happiness" BS.
The fact is, the more money you have, the more freedom and the less stress you have. You can manage it as actively or as passively as you like. I wouldn't call it enslaving to set up a simple rotating CD, collect interest checks once a month, and live the rest of my life on the beach in the Caribbean (or wherever the hell else I wanted to be). If I want to be a slave and react to every minor fluctuation of the stock market, I can. But that's my choice.
Time is finite. Learning a language at any age takes a lot of time. Colloquially, "takes much time" == "hard". You can't dispute that learning foreign languages is hard. In the judgment of many, the finite amount of time you have at school is better spent learning economically valuable skills rather than valueless foreign language skills.
Even with studies like this, I don't think this is a reason to learn a language I will use maybe once in my life on a foreign vacation. It is most likely that the mechanism for improving mental health is not specific to language. I imagine we will eventually see a study that links strategy video games to good mental health. I would rather play games in my retirement than memorize French verb conjugation. And until retirement, I would rather learn math and science than memorizing the arbitrary genders of all the nouns. It likely has similar effects on health.
In short, learning languages other than English is still a waste of time.
So is English not your primary language? In English, when the word "son" is capitalized, it refers to a particular Christian mythological figure. I thought you were going to tell me you're Jesus!
To add to that, I actually do know physicians who insult their clients--just not to their faces. Surgeons, for example, absolutely HATE operating on fat people. I've heard all sorts of insults from a surgeon friend toward the morbidly obese.
Of course, physicians make three or four times what IT people make, so that's got to put you in a better mood.
The DRM on DVD has been broken. Now, I can exercise my fair use rights with my DVD collection. The keys have not been revoked. Why should HDDVD be any different?
And it doesn't matter if all the tools to exercise my fair use rights are available today. It is only possible for me to exercise my rights if bad DRM schemes (like all those existing today) are broken. I prefer difficult but possible freedom to impossible freedom.
The fundamental idea that everyone else on this site has already realized (in many cases because it bit them personally) is that when you buy a piece of mass media, it should be yours to do whatever you want with (short of selling copies to others). If I buy "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," I should be able to play it on any device I want for the rest of eternity. I want to be able to load it in to my Mediacenter PC (which plays DVDs directly from the hard disk, so I don't have to fuck with plastic disks). I should be able to play it on my video iPod. I should be able to play it on my OpenBSD laptop. When I'm 90 years old, I should be able to play it on my neuro-optical linkup. Also, I should be able to make offsite backups so that I don't lose my media collection if my house burns down. And I should be able to sell all my rights to this mass media to anyone else I want, in any "region" of the globe.
People familiar with digital technology (most slashdotters) already realize that what I listed about is the moral definition of fair use, even if the legal definition hasn't caught up yet.
Today, the only kind of DRM that allows this fair use is broken DRM. Eventually, a PKI/SmartCard/VideoOnDemand scheme (with legal requirements and restrictions) could allow this to be fixed. But that is a long way off. Today, the people breaking DRM are fighting for MY RIGHTS.
Anyone who can't see the value of being able to play your media on any device of your choosing, even those not yet invented, has either never considered the issue seriously, or is just plain dumb.
You weren't moderated into oblivion because of bias. You were moderated into oblivion because everyone who reads this site has heard that argument (baseball bats are useful to murderers!) and already knows it's bunk.
Quick search of the internet reveals: Montreal does have muggings.
So, if you carry cash, you have a nonzero chance of it getting stolen. You also have a chance of it falling out of your pocket. It just isn't a good idea.
The appeal of Trek (well, TOS and TNG) was G.R.s vision of humanity's future, in which everyone is a cosmopolitan secular humanist, and all of today's economic problems are solved by technology. It gave hope to the generations menaced by the cold war, and now it gives hope for the future in contrast to today's religion and oil fueled conflicts.
Your idea may be a good one, but it isn't Trek, to me.
Also, the idea of a universe being ruled by a european male conspiracy might not sit well with Trek's primarily european male fanbase.
I live in a big city. In every big city there is always the chance of getting mugged. It has never happened to me, but it happened to two people I know. This is in in one of the safer parts of the US.
If you think where you live makes you immune from getting mugged, you are a fool. Bad thieves rob their own neighborhoods. Good ones go where there is more money to take.
Even if you are in a gated community, you could always get targeted coming back from a bar, going for a walk, or whatever.
For whatever reason (better law enforcement or better welfare systems?) this almost never happens in the US. The incentive is still there; You could extort tens of killobucks from the average family if successful at extortion, while you will never make more than $200 on a mugging.
I highly highly doubt the end of cash here is going to make a significant difference in kidnapping.
Wow. You call $20/hour poor? That's $42k/year! The average adult in this country earns $35k/year. You just called the MAJORITY of the country poor. You are way out of touch with reality.
Slashdot Mirror
No, I got it right the first time.
Have you tried to add CSS to myspace? It's a nasty hack that involves cutting and pasting computer code into the "about me" section. Normal people don't want to do that because it's a pain and the ass and easy to screw up.
Myspace has a terrible UI. Much of it could be fixed with adherence to standards. End users will care--not because of the standards but because of the better UI resulting from their implementation.
Well we have a part in our constitution to prohibit discrimination based on sex. We teach that philosophy in our schools. We enforce it in our courts (mostly). I know it is not a value in many other countries, though it is in much of the west. I can't speak for them because I haven't studied them. On this US site, I assume a US audience unless stated otherwise.
For you to infer some kind of crafty slam at all other countries is somewhat... unfounded. My props go out to europe for the development of most of the philosophy we hold dear over here.
Yes, discriminating based race and sex go against core american values. I don't care who did it in the past. I don't care what mainstream american values were 50 or 200 years ago. Fortunately, the US has progressed morally since then. We've kept most of the good values and revised most of the bad ones. Economic progress has afforded us the ability to abandon many forms of oppressive pragmatism in favor of idealism, and that's only a good thing.
Would I have supported cosmopolitan, equal-rights reform if I were alive a long time ago? I can't say for sure, but I would like to think so. I hold moral opinions today which aren't supported by the majority of people.
I am absolutely in favor of income-based educational support. America should progress down the path of becoming a fair meritocracy. But to give money to rich Hispanic children for school while denying it to poor white children is anti-social racist hypocrisy. It was 50 years ago and still is.
Oh no! I have a "Bachelor of Science in Computer Science and Engineering" degree. What should I call myself? Should I get a new job title?
The fact is, what is considered "good practice" (not "hacking" or "code artistry") in the software industry really IS good engineering methodology. This is partially because many people came to software from EE, but partially because designing software systems is inherently like any other systems engineering. Software development does have a sort of "folk engineering" that is becoming more formal, and being taught at many of the better universities.
Many of the software people in the industry today have arrived at good engineering practices through trial and error, but now it IS being taught at schools. Either way though, it's engineering.
Civil engineering, for example, existed before there were formal classes in "civil engineering." That's the way all schools of knowledge start.
You lose.
You may have something there. I work with a black guy who is buying a particular car because it is "designed by a minority(=black guy)." My opinion is "who the hell cares who designed it?" But, apparently, if you can sell a product as "minority designed," people will buy it solely on the basis of racism.
This is the kind of guy who is in all sorts of black societies, only hangs out at black clubs, goes to a black church, etc. And despite the fact that his family is rich, his kids go for all the black scholarships. My poor white ass got NOTHING.
I hate racism. I hate "reverse" racism just as much as any other kind. But if it sells, I'm sure the marketers will go for it 100%.
Yes.
If you are hiring someone to do a job, you should select the candidate who is best for the job. If you do anything else, you don't have the best man (or woman) for the job.
A core American value is not to discriminate based on race, or gender. You suggest doing exactly that, and you are exactly unamerican for doing so.
Nano batteries for micro devices? I'm pico excited about this!
Too much money can be enslaving? That's one of those myths the poor like to pass around to console themselves for sucking at life. It's like that "money can't buy happiness" BS.
The fact is, the more money you have, the more freedom and the less stress you have. You can manage it as actively or as passively as you like. I wouldn't call it enslaving to set up a simple rotating CD, collect interest checks once a month, and live the rest of my life on the beach in the Caribbean (or wherever the hell else I wanted to be). If I want to be a slave and react to every minor fluctuation of the stock market, I can. But that's my choice.
Care to expand on that? Or are you a "troll and run" type if coward?
Well, crap. I was going to ask you how you fit all those animals on to one boat. Oh well.
Time is finite. Learning a language at any age takes a lot of time. Colloquially, "takes much time" == "hard". You can't dispute that learning foreign languages is hard. In the judgment of many, the finite amount of time you have at school is better spent learning economically valuable skills rather than valueless foreign language skills.
Even with studies like this, I don't think this is a reason to learn a language I will use maybe once in my life on a foreign vacation. It is most likely that the mechanism for improving mental health is not specific to language. I imagine we will eventually see a study that links strategy video games to good mental health. I would rather play games in my retirement than memorize French verb conjugation. And until retirement, I would rather learn math and science than memorizing the arbitrary genders of all the nouns. It likely has similar effects on health.
In short, learning languages other than English is still a waste of time.
P.S. I love your sig.
So is English not your primary language? In English, when the word "son" is capitalized, it refers to a particular Christian mythological figure. I thought you were going to tell me you're Jesus!
How do they know the caller had any credibility or expertise on the subject? I can call in and say I'm a nurse, too.
It sounds like Aristotle was an extremist toward moderation, placing him in violation of his own principle.
Me, well, I like moderation, but I am also a member of the extremist pedantry school of philosophy.
To add to that, I actually do know physicians who insult their clients--just not to their faces. Surgeons, for example, absolutely HATE operating on fat people. I've heard all sorts of insults from a surgeon friend toward the morbidly obese.
Of course, physicians make three or four times what IT people make, so that's got to put you in a better mood.
The DRM on DVD has been broken. Now, I can exercise my fair use rights with my DVD collection. The keys have not been revoked. Why should HDDVD be any different?
And it doesn't matter if all the tools to exercise my fair use rights are available today. It is only possible for me to exercise my rights if bad DRM schemes (like all those existing today) are broken. I prefer difficult but possible freedom to impossible freedom.
The fundamental idea that everyone else on this site has already realized (in many cases because it bit them personally) is that when you buy a piece of mass media, it should be yours to do whatever you want with (short of selling copies to others). If I buy "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," I should be able to play it on any device I want for the rest of eternity. I want to be able to load it in to my Mediacenter PC (which plays DVDs directly from the hard disk, so I don't have to fuck with plastic disks). I should be able to play it on my video iPod. I should be able to play it on my OpenBSD laptop. When I'm 90 years old, I should be able to play it on my neuro-optical linkup. Also, I should be able to make offsite backups so that I don't lose my media collection if my house burns down. And I should be able to sell all my rights to this mass media to anyone else I want, in any "region" of the globe.
People familiar with digital technology (most slashdotters) already realize that what I listed about is the moral definition of fair use, even if the legal definition hasn't caught up yet.
Today, the only kind of DRM that allows this fair use is broken DRM. Eventually, a PKI/SmartCard/VideoOnDemand scheme (with legal requirements and restrictions) could allow this to be fixed. But that is a long way off. Today, the people breaking DRM are fighting for MY RIGHTS.
Anyone who can't see the value of being able to play your media on any device of your choosing, even those not yet invented, has either never considered the issue seriously, or is just plain dumb.
You weren't moderated into oblivion because of bias. You were moderated into oblivion because everyone who reads this site has heard that argument (baseball bats are useful to murderers!) and already knows it's bunk.
Big city = more than one million people.
Never happened to you -> anecdote is not data.
Quick search of the internet reveals: Montreal does have muggings.
So, if you carry cash, you have a nonzero chance of it getting stolen. You also have a chance of it falling out of your pocket. It just isn't a good idea.
You win the ubertroll award.
The appeal of Trek (well, TOS and TNG) was G.R.s vision of humanity's future, in which everyone is a cosmopolitan secular humanist, and all of today's economic problems are solved by technology. It gave hope to the generations menaced by the cold war, and now it gives hope for the future in contrast to today's religion and oil fueled conflicts.
Your idea may be a good one, but it isn't Trek, to me.
Also, the idea of a universe being ruled by a european male conspiracy might not sit well with Trek's primarily european male fanbase.
I live in a big city. In every big city there is always the chance of getting mugged. It has never happened to me, but it happened to two people I know. This is in in one of the safer parts of the US.
If you think where you live makes you immune from getting mugged, you are a fool. Bad thieves rob their own neighborhoods. Good ones go where there is more money to take.
Even if you are in a gated community, you could always get targeted coming back from a bar, going for a walk, or whatever.
For whatever reason (better law enforcement or better welfare systems?) this almost never happens in the US. The incentive is still there; You could extort tens of killobucks from the average family if successful at extortion, while you will never make more than $200 on a mugging.
I highly highly doubt the end of cash here is going to make a significant difference in kidnapping.
Wow. You call $20/hour poor? That's $42k/year! The average adult in this country earns $35k/year. You just called the MAJORITY of the country poor. You are way out of touch with reality.