How does he avoid deception? For example, how can he be certain that the cashier he's dealing with is honest enough to do that and not, say, fold a dollar bill into an L-shape to give to him, and then pocket four ones to keep the books straight?
I can not be certain unless I personally observe every piece of meat I eat from birth to consumption. I'm not foolish enough to believe that the meat industry is a loving, caring entity. However, I would welcome any improvements to the process that reduce the suffering of the animals involved. I'm happy to pay a little extra on a half-dozen eggs knowing that the hens could at least move beyond an inch. Infact, I would freely welcome lab-grown meat provided it was both tasty and safe.
I'm not saying that you should observe every piece of meat from birth to consumption to be certain, but you can certainly take reasonable measures to create enough certainty that you only buy meat from farms treated in that manner. Instead of buying random meat from some random store, do you even bother to check for labels like "organic" or "free-range"? Or even just shop at stores like Whole Foods?
Again, I'm not apologizing for it. All I'm saying is that everyone is reading only biased media, and assuming the facts. You say that it is purposeless, but how certain can you be that anything you've read has captured both sides of the story? I've read many articles regarding this "ritual" and they were all biased to the side that is horrified by the practice.
Thanks for completely missing the point--that being that we should worry about the needless massacre of any species--not just dolphins because they're cute. Non-cute animals need protection too.
PS Do you check to see whether all the meat you eat comes from animals that were humanely slaughtered? Or do you just assume it was? I can tell you right now that such an assumption is probably wrong. Do the eggs you eat come from battery-caged chickens or free-range chickens? You say you care about animals being slaughtered humanely, but do you make sure that they were?
Are you certain that Westerners try to be humane in their killing ways? Do you take industrial farming to task for the way they treat their animals (to say the least, it's not humane at all)?
And how can you assume that the killing of those dolphins is completely purposeless? Have you talked with the people that did it?
They kill the dolphins in that manner because its efficient. Hunter-gatherer societies often did similar things with herd animals because it was efficient. Industrial farms often treat and kill their animals in the most cost-effective and efficient manners possible, without any regard to being humane.
And as I said, the Japanese do keep tabs on population sizes since they are IUCN members, just as the US keeps tabs on the population sizes of many species within its own border.
I'm not apologizing for Japanese culture, but rather that people object to the killing of dolphins at all. Some ways of killing are better than others, and the way those Japanese do it is probably one of the worst, but killing dolphins in and of itself is only wrong if it endangers the survivability of the species.
The first? Try reading at -1. Let's not even mention that your post is far more incoherent.
As far as herding animals to their death--that's happened throughout our history. It's a common technique used by hunter-gatherer societies that would herd animals over cliffs to their death.
And that's far more humane than the way industrial farms treat their animals today--and yet you're complaining about this?
Also, I did specify a preference for human survival in my post. Dolphins are often valued due to their intelligence compared to other animals, but humans are never measured on such a scale. Call it specism if you want, but it's a part of what's made us successful.
And I won't address your last two paragraphs because it's obvious you don't know much about Japanese history, and what lead Japan into its hyper-aggression during that period. I don't have any particular penchant for Japanese culture, but your words are just plain racist.
Firstly, many dolphin species aren't even threatened, much less endangered, and so therefore don't need protection.
Secondly, Japan is an IUCN member, and therefore respects and enforces laws regarding threatened and endangered species, and monitors population numbers on species that are secure, which includes any number of dolphin species.
Thirdly, from what I've read, these so-called "massacres" are local, and not something endorsed or encouraged outside that area.
Finally, dolphins are a part of nature, and are therefore subject to the brutalities thereof. There's no reason to worry more about the "massacre" of dolphins than of other species except our own (unless someone wants to argue something from the specist angle, but I think that's a little extreme). Just because they're relatively intelligent compared to many other species doesn't inherently put them on some sort of pedestal. I would argue that many octopus and squid species are a lot more intelligent, but we don't give them any special value.
Yes, dolphins hold a special place in Western culture due to the centuries of mythology that has built up around them, but no more a special place than cows in Indian culture. Hell, they're less special because they hold no particular religious significance. Should people stop eating beef because of the significance of cows in Hinduism?
The problem with the idea is getting the household appliance industry to agree upon some standards, and I would bet that this would an industry particularly resistant to the idea.
Why do execs say such funny things away from their engineering teams? And why do I get the sneaking suspicion that some group at Google has actually figured out how to do this?
Anyway, until this is beyond hype, I find the Annenberg Fact Check to be the most reliable source out there.
Slashdot Mirror
A separate mic wouldn't be necessary for a Bluetooth phone. A Bluetooth phone could even be hacked to surreptitiously spy on close-by conversations.
How does he avoid deception? For example, how can he be certain that the cashier he's dealing with is honest enough to do that and not, say, fold a dollar bill into an L-shape to give to him, and then pocket four ones to keep the books straight?
Are cable and phone companies forming gangs or something?
East Coast Cable don't take no shit from West Coast Bell! Word up!
[News later that day...]
"Notorious B.E.L.L. was found with all their wires cut this morning as phone and cable gang wars heat up."
Please, stick to a standard when writing your articles--preferably metric. I want none of this crap of switching between the metric and English.
Well, that's it. From now on, all wars will be fought in the name of the funny. Only nut shots will be allowed.
...but that musical score is fucking fantastic!
Cats. I can't help but think of herding cats.
Doubtful. With that kind of license agreement, the only way your code will end up in Vista is if the server that's serving it has Vista installed.
I could imagine someone else being in that position, but not really a different character.
Hodgman, as the PC person, is supposed to be the bumbling-buffoon comic relief.
Well, no one is paying for grammar, that's for sure.
I mean, uhh, that's what my, uhm, cat has been saying all these years. Yeah, cat...
I'm not saying that you should observe every piece of meat from birth to consumption to be certain, but you can certainly take reasonable measures to create enough certainty that you only buy meat from farms treated in that manner. Instead of buying random meat from some random store, do you even bother to check for labels like "organic" or "free-range"? Or even just shop at stores like Whole Foods?
Again, I'm not apologizing for it. All I'm saying is that everyone is reading only biased media, and assuming the facts. You say that it is purposeless, but how certain can you be that anything you've read has captured both sides of the story? I've read many articles regarding this "ritual" and they were all biased to the side that is horrified by the practice.
You keep assuming I'm Japanese, and that I'm apologizing for Japanese culture--that's a bad assumption. I'm neither.
What I object to is cultural elitism. All cultures have skeletons in the closet. Some are just buried deeper, and further back in history.
Are you allergic to people who express ideas contrary to your worldview?
Thanks for completely missing the point--that being that we should worry about the needless massacre of any species--not just dolphins because they're cute. Non-cute animals need protection too.
PS Do you check to see whether all the meat you eat comes from animals that were humanely slaughtered? Or do you just assume it was? I can tell you right now that such an assumption is probably wrong. Do the eggs you eat come from battery-caged chickens or free-range chickens? You say you care about animals being slaughtered humanely, but do you make sure that they were?
Are you certain that Westerners try to be humane in their killing ways? Do you take industrial farming to task for the way they treat their animals (to say the least, it's not humane at all)?
And how can you assume that the killing of those dolphins is completely purposeless? Have you talked with the people that did it?
They kill the dolphins in that manner because its efficient. Hunter-gatherer societies often did similar things with herd animals because it was efficient. Industrial farms often treat and kill their animals in the most cost-effective and efficient manners possible, without any regard to being humane.
And as I said, the Japanese do keep tabs on population sizes since they are IUCN members, just as the US keeps tabs on the population sizes of many species within its own border.
I'm not apologizing for Japanese culture, but rather that people object to the killing of dolphins at all. Some ways of killing are better than others, and the way those Japanese do it is probably one of the worst, but killing dolphins in and of itself is only wrong if it endangers the survivability of the species.
The first? Try reading at -1. Let's not even mention that your post is far more incoherent.
As far as herding animals to their death--that's happened throughout our history. It's a common technique used by hunter-gatherer societies that would herd animals over cliffs to their death.
And that's far more humane than the way industrial farms treat their animals today--and yet you're complaining about this?
Also, I did specify a preference for human survival in my post. Dolphins are often valued due to their intelligence compared to other animals, but humans are never measured on such a scale. Call it specism if you want, but it's a part of what's made us successful.
And I won't address your last two paragraphs because it's obvious you don't know much about Japanese history, and what lead Japan into its hyper-aggression during that period. I don't have any particular penchant for Japanese culture, but your words are just plain racist.
Firstly, many dolphin species aren't even threatened, much less endangered, and so therefore don't need protection.
Secondly, Japan is an IUCN member, and therefore respects and enforces laws regarding threatened and endangered species, and monitors population numbers on species that are secure, which includes any number of dolphin species.
Thirdly, from what I've read, these so-called "massacres" are local, and not something endorsed or encouraged outside that area.
Finally, dolphins are a part of nature, and are therefore subject to the brutalities thereof. There's no reason to worry more about the "massacre" of dolphins than of other species except our own (unless someone wants to argue something from the specist angle, but I think that's a little extreme). Just because they're relatively intelligent compared to many other species doesn't inherently put them on some sort of pedestal. I would argue that many octopus and squid species are a lot more intelligent, but we don't give them any special value.
Yes, dolphins hold a special place in Western culture due to the centuries of mythology that has built up around them, but no more a special place than cows in Indian culture. Hell, they're less special because they hold no particular religious significance. Should people stop eating beef because of the significance of cows in Hinduism?
WoW players would comment, but they're too busy at the moment.
The problem with the idea is getting the household appliance industry to agree upon some standards, and I would bet that this would an industry particularly resistant to the idea.
So it wasn't aliens abducting people and probing their asses all these years.
A ferengi is crying happy tears.
Bureau of Industry and Insecurity? Why would successful Chinese cracks be a surprise to them?
Some one should make a show out of that.
Why do execs say such funny things away from their engineering teams? And why do I get the sneaking suspicion that some group at Google has actually figured out how to do this?
Anyway, until this is beyond hype, I find the Annenberg Fact Check to be the most reliable source out there.