Yes, do explain those things. I'm interested in knowing how you feel they apply in this context. It's been four days now and I've forgotten most of the discussion attached to this post.
You seem to need some assistance so in return, I'll gladly explain the importance of attacking an idea or argument rather than the person stating it:
Attacking the person directly indicates that you disagree with the argument enough that you must strike it down by any means neccessary. When rational avenues are exhausted or aren't decisive however, something must be done to distract the reader from inconclusive or ineffective arguments. This is where the change in focus comes in.
The feigned disinterest by way of inserting a yawning or sighing gesture is a classic, as is insinuating that the other party is of lower intelligence. However neither of these methods are terribly effective because they're quite overused.
This also works the other way around, where someone feels slighted and feels the need to retaliate. In this case they have a tendency to overlook the validity of their arguments, causing much the same result... only it's a side-effect in this case and not intentional.
I'll make a few examples to illustrate:
Analogies are for illustrating ideas. I'm sure you got the idea I was illustrating. Analogies are never exactly the same as you [yawn] pointed out.
Here's the yawn I mentionned, covering for an inconclusive argument. It's especially ineffective here because it seems forced.
As for the argument itself, analogies are indeed for illustrating ideas and do not have to be distinctly the same but they must be consistent in logic and scope. I got the idea you were illustrating, but that was where the problem lay; It was a poor comparison for an analogy. It seemed more like a metaphor due to the inconsistency between both halves, but metaphors aren't a very good basis for arguments.
His argument was based on his own idea of the effect on him. That's stupid. Are you defending it?
Here's a two in one. The veiled insult, and the reversal. The statement "That's stupid" is ambiguous in that it could be a direct insult of intelligence or it could be referring to the argument itself, in which case the supporting evidence behind the statement is missing. The reversal comes in the form of an accusation.
Unfortunately for the argument, you ignored the fact that I said he absolutely should have followed policy, and then asked me if I'm ultimately defending the fact that he ignored policy... This is circular reasoning.
Now, if you mean to ask me if I'm defending his right to make that argument, then you're damn right I am. He may not be right, but he's entitled to his opinion.
And gee, for someone who is so picky about analogies, you sure apply a looser standard to your own arguments: I never suggested that "parents should be absolved of responsibility."
This is another insult/accusation pair. These are a very common method of adding a sting but you really must be more careful with your argument afterward because the pair is no replacement.
My statement about parents and responsibility was a disclaimer for my statement preceeding it, not an argument in of itself.
I didn't invent the concept of using analogy in support of arguments. Some guidelines must be followed or the analogy will result in a flawed argument; it's not a matter of personal preference or "pickyness".
check with your employer's policy: it might very well be exactly your job. I suppose you think you should follow only the rules you want to.
This is true. The law requires employees to enforce these ratings and he absoluely should have done so. This doesn't mean parents should be absolved of responsibility for their children's upbringing, though. That would be completely ludicrous.
I've driven drunk a bunch of times and till now I've never killed anybody, or even had an accident... so, drunk driving should no doubt be legal for me.
Now this is just a poor analogy. When you're driving drunk you're actually engaging in an act that could potentially cause harm and loss of life. A closer comparison would be firing a few random shots with a gun in a populated area. You may not be trying to hurt anyone but it's not unlikely that you will by accident.
Now, if people think playing these kinds of games makes people go out and dangerously misuse a real weapon... what about drinking leading to drunk driving? Hell, video games don't even lower your inhibitions like alcohol does. Perhaps prohibition should be re-instated instead?
My point is that stupid people do stupid things and it's these people who should be punished for their actions, and not responsible consumers of "dangerous"(sarcasm) things video games or alcohol.
You hit it right on the nose. I see similar assumptions all the time and every time it's from economists or executive types. Putting price tags and stock tickers on everything to judge success is great in the businessplace and all, but once you get out of that scope you need to take the blinders off or you'll forever be way off the mark.
They just don't "get" it.:-P
I can go see BSOD'ed machines or illegal op popups with no means to click "ok" at my local supermarket. Kiosks and cash registers are not supposed to fail so often that I can see at least one out of order in that supermarket at any given time on any given day.
That "make your own music compilation CD" machine is down more than it's up.:p
Windows 2k can't hot-swap cpus and the like, so what's your point? Hell, you can't even add or change a driver without rebooting.. which is something you can do under Linux and xBSD.
Also, hot-swappable processors are more of a hardware issue. There's nothing stopping anyone from making hot-swap capable sockets (or even sockets-on-hotswappable-expansion-cards) and writing a kernel module to take advantage of processors as they become available.
The only thing you need really worry about under the various unices is wether or not the hardware will short out and burst into flames when installed with the power on.:-P
That was quite a lengthy post... It also bears mentioning that low power consumption and low heat generation tend to go hand in hand.
If you're drawing less power, you have less energy overall that can be turned into heat. Efficiency of the use of that energy also helps though.:)
Just use junkbuster as a proxy for your favorite browser. You can masquerade as whichever browser you want and avoid unwanted cookies/ad banners at the same time.
> We should thank them - Linux would not exist if it were not for their efforts.
Not really... Linux was created to be a free personal (as in, Linus was making it entirely for himself at first) UNIX work-alike that would run on an intel 386 cpu. It wasn't due to the influence of any of those companies you say we should thank.
I don't think even intel or the manufacturer of his 386 PC are to thank either, as I bet he would have written the OS regardless of what his PC was comprised of.
Linux would probably be different if it weren't for those companies, but I doubt its very existance is owed to them.
I guess they could just vent the plasma into a cyclic pattern like a turbine... or maybe there's a way to draw off the charge directly like a giant plasma battery.
The difference with movies and other theatrical productions is that it's much easier to estimate and keep track of the time it will take to produce. Movie production doesn't have to deal with bugs, or abstract constructs like code which are difficult to quantify.
If a particular actor doesn't have enough time to practice or do enough takes, that actor's performance will just seem a little lackluster in the finished product. If one piece of code in a program isn't absolutely perfect the entire program is likely to go to hell in a handbasket the second that code is called. It's a similar situation with say, construction. One flawed support will ruin your entire skyscraper. Even worse if there are people in it when it collapses.:-P
Execute directory -- > looks for standardly named binary file inside the directory that takes charge of launching the application. Then there'd be no need for package managment on the application side of things, except for versioning issues....
Does this remind anyone else vaguely of a.out? ---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
Absolutely. I've got a pentium 120 (pre-mmx) with 32mb EDO ram here that runs XFree86 4.0 and Blackbox. The whole thing starts in about 3-4 seconds.
3.3.6 used to take 10-15 seconds to start so I think it's safe to say X4 hasn't been slowing down from bloat. ---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
While XFree86 decided to change only the minor revision number, the additions are still pretty signifigant... Especially the alpha channel support. ---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
click here to bring up the comment with moderations listed. Moderation totals are listed under the prev/next comment links. ---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
I always check off "No Score +1 Bonus" for the same reason I never post as the Anonymous Coward. If you take a look you'll find that for some reason someone decided the comment was underrated. ---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
Actually, both stories got rejected within an hour of submitting each. My second one got the rejection stamp after less than 5 minutes, and there were over 230 submissions ahead of it. I dunno, maybe someone decided to flush the queue without really going over them.
Now this story comes up and isn't credited to anyone, which means Taco probably got it from the xfree86.org homepage rather than from the submission queue. Perhaps slashdot needs more descriptive rejection messages, like "rejected by timothy - reason: already submitted" so people aren't left wondering how their submissions are being used. ---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, do explain those things. I'm interested in knowing how you feel they apply in this context. It's been four days now and I've forgotten most of the discussion attached to this post.
You seem to need some assistance so in return, I'll gladly explain the importance of attacking an idea or argument rather than the person stating it:
Attacking the person directly indicates that you disagree with the argument enough that you must strike it down by any means neccessary. When rational avenues are exhausted or aren't decisive however, something must be done to distract the reader from inconclusive or ineffective arguments. This is where the change in focus comes in.
The feigned disinterest by way of inserting a yawning or sighing gesture is a classic, as is insinuating that the other party is of lower intelligence. However neither of these methods are terribly effective because they're quite overused.
This also works the other way around, where someone feels slighted and feels the need to retaliate. In this case they have a tendency to overlook the validity of their arguments, causing much the same result... only it's a side-effect in this case and not intentional.
I'll make a few examples to illustrate:
Analogies are for illustrating ideas. I'm sure you got the idea I was illustrating. Analogies are never exactly the same as you [yawn] pointed out.
Here's the yawn I mentionned, covering for an inconclusive argument. It's especially ineffective here because it seems forced.
As for the argument itself, analogies are indeed for illustrating ideas and do not have to be distinctly the same but they must be consistent in logic and scope. I got the idea you were illustrating, but that was where the problem lay; It was a poor comparison for an analogy. It seemed more like a metaphor due to the inconsistency between both halves, but metaphors aren't a very good basis for arguments.
His argument was based on his own idea of the effect on him. That's stupid. Are you defending it?
Here's a two in one. The veiled insult, and the reversal. The statement "That's stupid" is ambiguous in that it could be a direct insult of intelligence or it could be referring to the argument itself, in which case the supporting evidence behind the statement is missing. The reversal comes in the form of an accusation.
Unfortunately for the argument, you ignored the fact that I said he absolutely should have followed policy, and then asked me if I'm ultimately defending the fact that he ignored policy... This is circular reasoning.
Now, if you mean to ask me if I'm defending his right to make that argument, then you're damn right I am. He may not be right, but he's entitled to his opinion.
And gee, for someone who is so picky about analogies, you sure apply a looser standard to your own arguments: I never suggested that "parents should be absolved of responsibility."
This is another insult/accusation pair. These are a very common method of adding a sting but you really must be more careful with your argument afterward because the pair is no replacement.
My statement about parents and responsibility was a disclaimer for my statement preceeding it, not an argument in of itself.
I didn't invent the concept of using analogy in support of arguments. Some guidelines must be followed or the analogy will result in a flawed argument; it's not a matter of personal preference or "pickyness".
check with your employer's policy: it might very well be exactly your job. I suppose you think you should follow only the rules you want to.
This is true. The law requires employees to enforce these ratings and he absoluely should have done so. This doesn't mean parents should be absolved of responsibility for their children's upbringing, though. That would be completely ludicrous.
I've driven drunk a bunch of times and till now I've never killed anybody, or even had an accident... so, drunk driving should no doubt be legal for me.
Now this is just a poor analogy. When you're driving drunk you're actually engaging in an act that could potentially cause harm and loss of life. A closer comparison would be firing a few random shots with a gun in a populated area. You may not be trying to hurt anyone but it's not unlikely that you will by accident.
Now, if people think playing these kinds of games makes people go out and dangerously misuse a real weapon... what about drinking leading to drunk driving? Hell, video games don't even lower your inhibitions like alcohol does. Perhaps prohibition should be re-instated instead?
My point is that stupid people do stupid things and it's these people who should be punished for their actions, and not responsible consumers of "dangerous"(sarcasm) things video games or alcohol.
You hit it right on the nose. I see similar assumptions all the time and every time it's from economists or executive types. Putting price tags and stock tickers on everything to judge success is great in the businessplace and all, but once you get out of that scope you need to take the blinders off or you'll forever be way off the mark. :-P
They just don't "get" it.
The selection/price-browsing kiosks are just picturepad-driven machines bringing up lists from the supermarket's web page in IE.
;)
So yeah, I guess I could attribute that to the designers of the software doing a shitty job... but you said it, not me.
I can go see BSOD'ed machines or illegal op popups with no means to click "ok" at my local supermarket. Kiosks and cash registers are not supposed to fail so often that I can see at least one out of order in that supermarket at any given time on any given day.
:p
That "make your own music compilation CD" machine is down more than it's up.
Costs in the corporate world tend to be inflated due to tons of overhead. The lovebug worm managed to cost "billions" in under a week.
Windows 2k can't hot-swap cpus and the like, so what's your point? Hell, you can't even add or change a driver without rebooting.. which is something you can do under Linux and xBSD.
:-P
Also, hot-swappable processors are more of a hardware issue. There's nothing stopping anyone from making hot-swap capable sockets (or even sockets-on-hotswappable-expansion-cards) and writing a kernel module to take advantage of processors as they become available.
The only thing you need really worry about under the various unices is wether or not the hardware will short out and burst into flames when installed with the power on.
That was quite a lengthy post... It also bears mentioning that low power consumption and low heat generation tend to go hand in hand. :)
If you're drawing less power, you have less energy overall that can be turned into heat. Efficiency of the use of that energy also helps though.
Just use junkbuster as a proxy for your favorite browser. You can masquerade as whichever browser you want and avoid unwanted cookies/ad banners at the same time.
> We should thank them - Linux would not exist if it were not for their efforts.
Not really... Linux was created to be a free personal (as in, Linus was making it entirely for himself at first) UNIX work-alike that would run on an intel 386 cpu. It wasn't due to the influence of any of those companies you say we should thank.
I don't think even intel or the manufacturer of his 386 PC are to thank either, as I bet he would have written the OS regardless of what his PC was comprised of.
Linux would probably be different if it weren't for those companies, but I doubt its very existance is owed to them.
If it had sufficiently concentrated and pure carbon at its core... which isn't very likely.
Damn 120-character limit.
Whoops. No wonder it seemed to not read quite right. :-p
Thanks for the correction.
Assuming the software is all on optical media and not on magnetic or electrical storage, of course.
British, not American. :)
Which makes it a little more appropriate given Bond's nationality.
Not to nitpick, but the device is of British design, not American.
I guess they could just vent the plasma into a cyclic pattern like a turbine... or maybe there's a way to draw off the charge directly like a giant plasma battery.
Seeing as we ALREADY use fusion for war I suppose the chances of finding something good to do with it are higher now.
The difference with movies and other theatrical productions is that it's much easier to estimate and keep track of the time it will take to produce. Movie production doesn't have to deal with bugs, or abstract constructs like code which are difficult to quantify.
:-P
If a particular actor doesn't have enough time to practice or do enough takes, that actor's performance will just seem a little lackluster in the finished product. If one piece of code in a program isn't absolutely perfect the entire program is likely to go to hell in a handbasket the second that code is called. It's a similar situation with say, construction. One flawed support will ruin your entire skyscraper. Even worse if there are people in it when it collapses.
Execute directory -- > looks for standardly named binary file inside the directory that takes charge of launching the application. Then there'd be no need for package managment on the application side of things, except for versioning issues....
Does this remind anyone else vaguely of a.out?
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
Absolutely. I've got a pentium 120 (pre-mmx) with 32mb EDO ram here that runs XFree86 4.0 and Blackbox. The whole thing starts in about 3-4 seconds.
3.3.6 used to take 10-15 seconds to start so I think it's safe to say X4 hasn't been slowing down from bloat.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
While XFree86 decided to change only the minor revision number, the additions are still pretty signifigant... Especially the alpha channel support.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
click here to bring up the comment with moderations listed. Moderation totals are listed under the prev/next comment links.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
I always check off "No Score +1 Bonus" for the same reason I never post as the Anonymous Coward. If you take a look you'll find that for some reason someone decided the comment was underrated.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.
Actually, both stories got rejected within an hour of submitting each. My second one got the rejection stamp after less than 5 minutes, and there were over 230 submissions ahead of it. I dunno, maybe someone decided to flush the queue without really going over them.
Now this story comes up and isn't credited to anyone, which means Taco probably got it from the xfree86.org homepage rather than from the submission queue. Perhaps slashdot needs more descriptive rejection messages, like "rejected by timothy - reason: already submitted" so people aren't left wondering how their submissions are being used.
---
Where can the word be found, where can the word resound? Not here, there is not enough silence.