Then, it's clear that it's the religion that's violent, not the people who practice it.
It's ALWAYS the people who are violent. People are the only entities capable of violence. Buddhism is no different than Christianity or Islam in this respect.
Thanks for the great post exemplifying how conservativism is not reality based. I made a factual claim, based on numerous empirical observations. You came back, not with more data that conflicts with my explanation, not with an alternative explanation of the data, not even with a request for a citation, but with a flat denial. This is how conservatives deal with facts they don't like.
Yes, the port was based on a disassembly of the original Apple II PoP binary. Since the Apple II, C64, Atari 800, etc. share the same CPU porting software between the platforms is a common hobby project for retrocomputing enthusiasts.
Also, check your data. It may very well be that the percentage of the elderly (those more likely to have worked and retired with only a high-school diploma or a trade) is skewing your statistics.
Again, all I said was that a correlation exists. Suggesting that the correlation may be due to a third factor and not causal is an entirely plausible suggestion, but even by suggesting that you're agreeing with me that the correlation exists.
Cause, according to the link above, they are toe-to-toe with the liberals among those with graduate degrees.
Four-in-ten Americans with graduate degrees say they are politically moderate, while about three-in-ten say they are either liberal or conservative (29% each). Among those with no more than a high school education, a third says they are moderate, 41% describe themselves as conservative and fewer than one-in-five call themselves liberal (18%).
This data here shows the negative correlation in black and white. You posted it, read it and understand what you are seeing.
Cons Lib HS: 41% 18% Grad: 30% 30%
So you see, as education level increases from high school to graduate level, conservativism decreases and liberalism increases. Plain as day.
I'm just saying that it is not prudent to write away the "other side" as uneducated or stupid.
The fact that conservatives are uneducated and stupid doesn't mean I'm going to "write them off". If anything, it makes them more dangerous. You can't fight these people with reason.
That's not a generalization. That's a repeatable empirical finding. There exists a negative correlation between conservativism and education. Whether there's a causal relationship, and which way it goes is a topic for further study.
BUT... What they all DO have is a very strong preference for the status quo.
Exactly. If you don't want to change anything, you don't actually have to know anything. That's conservativism.
If you want to change something, you have to be educated enough to understand that something needs changing, come up with a plan to change it, and figure out the effects of that change. That's progressivism.
Is it any surprise that progressives are better educated than conservatives then?
Ah well, that proves it conclusively. Thank you for your informative example which in no way illustrates just how stupid you have to be to actually believe in conservative economics.
A peaceful religion - like Buddhism - is where adherents are invited to attend, learn, discuss, and ultimately choose whether or not to accept the tenets and philosophy of the faith. A member of a peaceful religion may set himself on fire in protest of the mistreatment of others, but will not actively attempt to harm another person.
So I guess a largely Buddhist country like Myanmar would be among the most peaceful on Earth, right?
It's all part of the same set of simplistic beliefs. Beliefs like "Tax cuts on the weatlhy always leads to more revenue", "jobs are created by rich people, not demand", are every bit as fantastical as believing that a zygote and infant are identical.
It's a conservative thing. Conservatives everywhere attack education. Whether it's literacy for women in Afghanistan, or sex ed and evolution in the United States, conservatives are anti-education.
Why are conservatives anti-education? Because their beliefs cannot be supported by facts, and so the more factual ideas you teach, the less conservative your people will be. There is a positive correlation between education and liberalism for a reason.
And what exactly about that requires the use of a proprietary sync method, instead of just mounting it as any old USB device and having the sync app do a normal filesystem level copy?
There are quite a few people in the computer security community who keep their work on breaking the security of systems like Tor a secret, and only tell US law enforcement about their results. I have met such people, and they are generally well-meaning -- they really do believe that they are helping to catch dangerous criminals
How does it happen that people who are so smart can be so stupid?
Wikipedia states "When used in a legal context in the US, a narcotic drug is simply one that is totally prohibited
The problem is that the in the legal context, it's a made up word. Narcotic comes from the Greek 'narkos' which means sleep. Narcotics are sleep inducing drugs, no matter what a LEO might tell you.
The fact that law enforcement uses "narcotic" to refer to stimulant drugs is an indication that they don't actually care, or know, what these drugs do. They don't think about it. To them, drug = narcotic = bad. We should not promote, or even tolerate such sloppy thought on the part of our law enforcement.
Sorry, it is a legitimate use of bitcoin. Evading oppression is not only a legitimate use, but the most important possible use of technology. Buying drugs with Bitcoin is every bit as honest and just as, e.g., evading the Great Firewall with Tor.
Slashdot Mirror
Then, it's clear that it's the religion that's violent, not the people who practice it.
It's ALWAYS the people who are violent. People are the only entities capable of violence. Buddhism is no different than Christianity or Islam in this respect.
Thanks for the great post exemplifying how conservativism is not reality based. I made a factual claim, based on numerous empirical observations. You came back, not with more data that conflicts with my explanation, not with an alternative explanation of the data, not even with a request for a citation, but with a flat denial. This is how conservatives deal with facts they don't like.
Yes, the port was based on a disassembly of the original Apple II PoP binary. Since the Apple II, C64, Atari 800, etc. share the same CPU porting software between the platforms is a common hobby project for retrocomputing enthusiasts.
I did say that already.
Outliers don't disprove a trend.
Again, all I said was that a correlation exists. Suggesting that the correlation may be due to a third factor and not causal is an entirely plausible suggestion, but even by suggesting that you're agreeing with me that the correlation exists.
This data here shows the negative correlation in black and white. You posted it, read it and understand what you are seeing.
Cons Lib
HS: 41% 18%
Grad: 30% 30%
So you see, as education level increases from high school to graduate level, conservativism decreases and liberalism increases. Plain as day.
The fact that conservatives are uneducated and stupid doesn't mean I'm going to "write them off". If anything, it makes them more dangerous. You can't fight these people with reason.
Java is GPLd. It's free. There is no ambiguity.
This would have helped the guy who ported it to the C64. Although, that might have spoiled some of the fun.
That's not a generalization. That's a repeatable empirical finding. There exists a negative correlation between conservativism and education. Whether there's a causal relationship, and which way it goes is a topic for further study.
BUT... What they all DO have is a very strong preference for the status quo.
Exactly. If you don't want to change anything, you don't actually have to know anything. That's conservativism.
If you want to change something, you have to be educated enough to understand that something needs changing, come up with a plan to change it, and figure out the effects of that change. That's progressivism.
Is it any surprise that progressives are better educated than conservatives then?
Ah well, that proves it conclusively. Thank you for your informative example which in no way illustrates just how stupid you have to be to actually believe in conservative economics.
A peaceful religion - like Buddhism - is where adherents are invited to attend, learn, discuss, and ultimately choose whether or not to accept the tenets and philosophy of the faith. A member of a peaceful religion may set himself on fire in protest of the mistreatment of others, but will not actively attempt to harm another person.
So I guess a largely Buddhist country like Myanmar would be among the most peaceful on Earth, right?
It's all part of the same set of simplistic beliefs. Beliefs like "Tax cuts on the weatlhy always leads to more revenue", "jobs are created by rich people, not demand", are every bit as fantastical as believing that a zygote and infant are identical.
My God... It's full of (sea) stars!
It's a conservative thing. Conservatives everywhere attack education. Whether it's literacy for women in Afghanistan, or sex ed and evolution in the United States, conservatives are anti-education.
Why are conservatives anti-education? Because their beliefs cannot be supported by facts, and so the more factual ideas you teach, the less conservative your people will be. There is a positive correlation between education and liberalism for a reason.
They lied their way into a completely optional war of aggression against Iraq. That's got to count for something.
And what exactly about that requires the use of a proprietary sync method, instead of just mounting it as any old USB device and having the sync app do a normal filesystem level copy?
There are quite a few people in the computer security community who keep their work on breaking the security of systems like Tor a secret, and only tell US law enforcement about their results. I have met such people, and they are generally well-meaning -- they really do believe that they are helping to catch dangerous criminals
How does it happen that people who are so smart can be so stupid?
Wikipedia states "When used in a legal context in the US, a narcotic drug is simply one that is totally prohibited
The problem is that the in the legal context, it's a made up word. Narcotic comes from the Greek 'narkos' which means sleep. Narcotics are sleep inducing drugs, no matter what a LEO might tell you.
The fact that law enforcement uses "narcotic" to refer to stimulant drugs is an indication that they don't actually care, or know, what these drugs do. They don't think about it. To them, drug = narcotic = bad. We should not promote, or even tolerate such sloppy thought on the part of our law enforcement.
Sorry, it is a legitimate use of bitcoin. Evading oppression is not only a legitimate use, but the most important possible use of technology. Buying drugs with Bitcoin is every bit as honest and just as, e.g., evading the Great Firewall with Tor.
You have illustrated exactly why we have editors
We have editors?
IQs are gaussian by definition. The question isn't whether the statistics are valid here. The question is whether they're biologically meaningful.
Slashdot has always been a blog.
Commodore, Atari, Coleco, Tandy, IBM - all were there to eat Apples lunch.
And every one of them is out of the PC business today.
You can still play Wizardry, Bard's Tale, Dragon Wars, Wasteland, and others on your Apple computer, even if it isn't 35 years old.
For SMB grade, you have to burn everything onto mask ROMS. And then blow on them.
Troll? No. Shallow and humorless is more likely.