Select results from a new Pew survey of Muslims worldwide show that Palestinian Muslims are among the most "religiously conservative" and intolerant of all Muslim-majority countries.
Given their experiences with western democracies, I can hardly blame them. The right way to get these people to open up is to show them the benefits of democracy.
Those who pretend that a "one state solution" would respect the rights of a Jewish minority are knowingly lying
This is what constitutional guarantees are for.
Furthermore, never in history has there ever been a single Jewish suicide bomber.
They don't need suicide bombers. The state of Israel is more than willing to do the killing itself.
There is a proven biological drive pertaining to procreation
What sort of experiment would prove that?
And your assertion that parents are not as happy as childless is totally subjective
No, that's what the actual sociological research indicates. Having fewer demands on your time, and less to worry about makes people happier. Look it up some time.
there is no parent group doing the reverse and attacking childfree types. The need to criticize and attack others is a typical sign of a lack of happiness with one's own existence
Again, look at the post to which I was replying. All I said is that I wanted equal treatment, and I was attacked. Much more viciously than I replied, BTW.
I can confirm quite definitively that I'm immeasurably happier with two beautiful children in my life than I was prior to their births.
There's a strong selective advantage to make you believe that, but that doesn't make it true. There is a difference between believing you are happier and actually being happier, BTW.
To elaborate, the search incident to arrest is justified for the officer's safety. If you had a sealed letter on you, they could open it because there might be a shiv in the letter. In opening that letter, the contents enter plain view which makes them known to the police.
A cell phone is rightly exempt from this, because you can eliminate any possibility that the cell phone is a weapon without examining the data.
"If anything, it's the people who think the Earth needs another little them to suck up resources, and who think they deserve a big chunk of time off, who are conceited and entitled."
That's not berating? Okay, you want equal treatment? Do you want people taking that attitude that you're expressing above and turn it on your choice not to have children?
Read the post to which I was replying. My "berating" was merely turning around what the parent poster said about my choice. And he used significantly more negative adjectives than I did. So whether I want people to insult me or not, they will. Turn about is fair play.
I still don't see any reason why child bearing should be given special consideration. So what it it's "part of a natural cycle of humanity that has persisted for millions of years"? Natural doesn't mean good. What is good and what isn't good is an individual value judgement, based on what we expect to make us happy. Employers should absolutely not attempt to influence the values of their employees, it's simply not their place.
And for the most part, I don't think there is a biological need to have children. I think there's a biological need to have sex, and a cultural imperative to have children. If there was an actual biological need to have children, I'd expect parents to be happier than the childless. Most sociological research tends in the other direction.
You're putting your own financial desires ahead of the survival of the species. Darwin is not amused.
I don't live my life to make Darwin happy.
Because employers conclude that a new baby may be more important than filing the TPS report, and give time off to the new parents, that's "discrimination"? Dude, sort out your priorities. Seriously.
Help me out here. Why is that new baby important to anyone other than the parents?
In what way is that a "success"? Dying and leaving nothing to carry on in your wake is not a success, for a living organism
Living a happy life is a success. What happens after that life is irrelveant to the living organism, because he won't be around for it.
you were as TRULY nihilistic as you're trying to come across
I'm not nihilistic. I like my life. In fact, I like it so much that I don't want to waste any time changing diapers, being crabby because of a lack of sleep, running around to soccer practice, etc. etc.
We should teach exactly what we have evidence to support. There is no evidence to support a message in pi, and there is no evidence to support creationism. No, we can't rule out that God guides evolution, but there's no evidence to support that assertion so it has no place in a science class.
It's not that the science literate object to creationism because it involves God. We object to creationism because there is no evidence for it. Any theory that is well supported by evidence belongs in a science class. Any theory that is not, does not.
Fact: A society that's not reproducing at or above its own death rate is a moribund society, in decline and destined to fail.
Who defines failure? If the individuals in that society are happy with their decision not to have children, that's a success. If the society comes to an end, at least it's a happy ending.
That's their choice. I choose not to. Neither choice is "right". The perptuation of the species is irrelevant really. What matters is that individuals make free choices. If those free choices lead to perpetuation of the species, that's OK. If those choices lead to the species dying out, that's OK too.
If anything, it's the people who think the Earth needs another little them to suck up resources, and who think they deserve a big chunk of time off, who are conceited and entitled.
You joke, but it's really not fair that people who choose to have kids get leave that the rest of us don't. I have to work harder to pick up the slack because of your lifestyle choice.
It's also worth pointing out that providing the same amount of leave to childfree individuals would decrease discrimination to some extent. Surely when employers are interviewing women of child bearing ages, some of them are hesitant to hire because they expect to have to deal with a major leave of absence in the future. Giving everyone the ability to take a leave of absence would level the playing field.
No one thinks he intentionally blew up his fertilizer plant to kill 14 people.
Did he intentionally blow it up? No, but he intentionally neglected the safety precautions that would have prevented it from blowing up in order to increase his profits. That's not any better than deliberately tossing bombs at people, and on the whole employer negligence is a much, much bigger threat to the people of this country than terrorism is. Accordingly, it should be a higher law enforcement priority.
Lets suppose for the sake of argument that I would blame the teachers if this child had blown herself up. Does it follow from that that the only reasonable response is to charge this child with felonies?
If the casino places a mirror behind the dealer, and that gives me an unfair advantage, that's the casino's fault. That's exactly analogous to what happened here.
Proportionality. That's what the kid with a BB gun has to do with this. An accidental death caused by a white boy gets no punishment. An accidental chemical hazard that kills no one, but is caused by a black girl gets charged with felonies. That's disproportionate. What exactly is the non-racist explanation for that lack of proportionality?
Of course we should reform the system. But that's not going to happen unless we make powerful people, like those who run corporations, suffer like the rest of us. If you want to reform the CFAA, we need organziations like the ESEA on our side. Congress is a lot more likely to listen to them than to us.
14 people died in the West Texas fertilizer plant explosion last week. 3 people died in the Boston Bombings. One sparked a citiy wide lock down and door to door manhunt for the responsible party. In the other, the responsible party is well known, and remains a free man. I don't have to tell you which is which.
Granted, you can definitely engage in forms of trespass that are much worse than this, but for something like this situation, which was promptly handled, had no major ill effects, and was responded to in a way that indicates it truly was a mistake, I don't see why anyone should be up for prison time, whether as an individual or a part of a company.
They deserve to face prison time because Aaron Swartz, Andrew Auernheimer, Matthew Keys, Eric McCarty, Stefan Puffer, Bret McDanel all faced prison time for less malicious activites. Either you throw the book at everyone, throw the book at no one, or you have a farcical justice system.
he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software
And if I use my fingers and eyes to write a mental program that allows me to beat the house at blackjack(e.g. card counting), is that hacking too? No, it's strategy.
He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software.
Bullshit. He's playing the game as it is implemented. He found a strategy that allowed him to win more than the casino intended. The game might be unfairly balanced against the casino, but that's the casino's fault.
The technical details of how his strategy works doesn't change the fact that it's a strategy. And discovering winning strategies is the whole point of playing games.
Slashdot Mirror
Select results from a new Pew survey of Muslims worldwide show that Palestinian Muslims are among the most "religiously conservative" and intolerant of all Muslim-majority countries.
Given their experiences with western democracies, I can hardly blame them. The right way to get these people to open up is to show them the benefits of democracy.
Those who pretend that a "one state solution" would respect the rights of a Jewish minority are knowingly lying
This is what constitutional guarantees are for.
Furthermore, never in history has there ever been a single Jewish suicide bomber.
They don't need suicide bombers. The state of Israel is more than willing to do the killing itself.
There is a proven biological drive pertaining to procreation
What sort of experiment would prove that?
And your assertion that parents are not as happy as childless is totally subjective
No, that's what the actual sociological research indicates. Having fewer demands on your time, and less to worry about makes people happier. Look it up some time.
there is no parent group doing the reverse and attacking childfree types. The need to criticize and attack others is a typical sign of a lack of happiness with one's own existence
Again, look at the post to which I was replying. All I said is that I wanted equal treatment, and I was attacked. Much more viciously than I replied, BTW.
I can confirm quite definitively that I'm immeasurably happier with two beautiful children in my life than I was prior to their births.
There's a strong selective advantage to make you believe that, but that doesn't make it true. There is a difference between believing you are happier and actually being happier, BTW.
To elaborate, the search incident to arrest is justified for the officer's safety. If you had a sealed letter on you, they could open it because there might be a shiv in the letter. In opening that letter, the contents enter plain view which makes them known to the police.
A cell phone is rightly exempt from this, because you can eliminate any possibility that the cell phone is a weapon without examining the data.
Read the post to which I was replying. My "berating" was merely turning around what the parent poster said about my choice. And he used significantly more negative adjectives than I did. So whether I want people to insult me or not, they will. Turn about is fair play.
I still don't see any reason why child bearing should be given special consideration. So what it it's "part of a natural cycle of humanity that has persisted for millions of years"? Natural doesn't mean good. What is good and what isn't good is an individual value judgement, based on what we expect to make us happy. Employers should absolutely not attempt to influence the values of their employees, it's simply not their place.
And for the most part, I don't think there is a biological need to have children. I think there's a biological need to have sex, and a cultural imperative to have children. If there was an actual biological need to have children, I'd expect parents to be happier than the childless. Most sociological research tends in the other direction.
You're putting your own financial desires ahead of the survival of the species. Darwin is not amused.
I don't live my life to make Darwin happy.
Because employers conclude that a new baby may be more important than filing the TPS report, and give time off to the new parents, that's "discrimination"? Dude, sort out your priorities. Seriously.
Help me out here. Why is that new baby important to anyone other than the parents?
In what way is that a "success"? Dying and leaving nothing to carry on in your wake is not a success, for a living organism
Living a happy life is a success. What happens after that life is irrelveant to the living organism, because he won't be around for it.
you were as TRULY nihilistic as you're trying to come across
I'm not nihilistic. I like my life. In fact, I like it so much that I don't want to waste any time changing diapers, being crabby because of a lack of sleep, running around to soccer practice, etc. etc.
Who's berating anyone? I just want equal treatment.
We should teach exactly what we have evidence to support. There is no evidence to support a message in pi, and there is no evidence to support creationism. No, we can't rule out that God guides evolution, but there's no evidence to support that assertion so it has no place in a science class.
It's not that the science literate object to creationism because it involves God. We object to creationism because there is no evidence for it. Any theory that is well supported by evidence belongs in a science class. Any theory that is not, does not.
I hope they like losing in Federal court.
Fact: A society that's not reproducing at or above its own death rate is a moribund society, in decline and destined to fail.
Who defines failure? If the individuals in that society are happy with their decision not to have children, that's a success. If the society comes to an end, at least it's a happy ending.
If someone is perpetuating the species
That's their choice. I choose not to. Neither choice is "right". The perptuation of the species is irrelevant really. What matters is that individuals make free choices. If those free choices lead to perpetuation of the species, that's OK. If those choices lead to the species dying out, that's OK too.
If anything, it's the people who think the Earth needs another little them to suck up resources, and who think they deserve a big chunk of time off, who are conceited and entitled.
You joke, but it's really not fair that people who choose to have kids get leave that the rest of us don't. I have to work harder to pick up the slack because of your lifestyle choice.
It's also worth pointing out that providing the same amount of leave to childfree individuals would decrease discrimination to some extent. Surely when employers are interviewing women of child bearing ages, some of them are hesitant to hire because they expect to have to deal with a major leave of absence in the future. Giving everyone the ability to take a leave of absence would level the playing field.
If you can't see the difference, does it matter?
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, er uh, can't get fooled again.
Plus, in Alaska you get a really sweet view of Russia.
No one thinks he intentionally blew up his fertilizer plant to kill 14 people.
Did he intentionally blow it up? No, but he intentionally neglected the safety precautions that would have prevented it from blowing up in order to increase his profits. That's not any better than deliberately tossing bombs at people, and on the whole employer negligence is a much, much bigger threat to the people of this country than terrorism is. Accordingly, it should be a higher law enforcement priority.
Lets suppose for the sake of argument that I would blame the teachers if this child had blown herself up. Does it follow from that that the only reasonable response is to charge this child with felonies?
If the casino places a mirror behind the dealer, and that gives me an unfair advantage, that's the casino's fault. That's exactly analogous to what happened here.
No one is saying it's OK. We're saying it's not a felony. Make the kid clean up the mess and suspend her for a week. Problem solved.
Excessive criminalization is a much bigger threat to us all than kids with drano bombs.
Proportionality. That's what the kid with a BB gun has to do with this. An accidental death caused by a white boy gets no punishment. An accidental chemical hazard that kills no one, but is caused by a black girl gets charged with felonies. That's disproportionate. What exactly is the non-racist explanation for that lack of proportionality?
Of course we should reform the system. But that's not going to happen unless we make powerful people, like those who run corporations, suffer like the rest of us. If you want to reform the CFAA, we need organziations like the ESEA on our side. Congress is a lot more likely to listen to them than to us.
Consider this: Which part of this "April Fool's joke" was supposed to actually be FUNNY?
I ask myself that every time I visit /. on April 1st.
14 people died in the West Texas fertilizer plant explosion last week. 3 people died in the Boston Bombings. One sparked a citiy wide lock down and door to door manhunt for the responsible party. In the other, the responsible party is well known, and remains a free man. I don't have to tell you which is which.
Granted, you can definitely engage in forms of trespass that are much worse than this, but for something like this situation, which was promptly handled, had no major ill effects, and was responded to in a way that indicates it truly was a mistake, I don't see why anyone should be up for prison time, whether as an individual or a part of a company.
They deserve to face prison time because Aaron Swartz, Andrew Auernheimer, Matthew Keys, Eric McCarty, Stefan Puffer, Bret McDanel all faced prison time for less malicious activites. Either you throw the book at everyone, throw the book at no one, or you have a farcical justice system.
he instead used his fingers and eyes to write a mental program which moved his fingers in order to exploit an initialization bug in the software
And if I use my fingers and eyes to write a mental program that allows me to beat the house at blackjack(e.g. card counting), is that hacking too? No, it's strategy.
He really is using a software exploit and 'hacking' the software.
Bullshit. He's playing the game as it is implemented. He found a strategy that allowed him to win more than the casino intended. The game might be unfairly balanced against the casino, but that's the casino's fault.
The technical details of how his strategy works doesn't change the fact that it's a strategy. And discovering winning strategies is the whole point of playing games.