I wonder whether we'd be getting faster productivity increases if Gordon Moore had included an extra term in his observational Law to accommodate acceleration of the rate, not just the rate, of transistor density increases. Moore's Law is partly self-fulfilling (as an upper limit), because it's the highest consensus rate expectation, especially among managers who control budgets.
When a Tennessee National Guardsman in Iraq told Rumsfeld his troop didn't have enough body armor, Rumsfeld told him "you go to war with the army you've got, not the army you want".
The Iraq guerrillas attacking our troops have also gone to war with the army they've got.
When someone posts "To be fair, you go to war with the Secretary of Defense you have, not the one you want or need, to paraphrase Rummy himself.", it's fair to point out that Rumsfeld didn't need to go to war in Iraq, but went anyway - with the army he had: not the one with the body armor we'd want.
There's no excuse for that. Especially after we learned from Vietnam that the best equipped, most heavily armored, most "ready" troops that this country ever had wasn't enough. We also needed war to be a last resort, not an indulgence in warmongering, and for the Secretary of Defense to aim for victory with a victory strategy, not just an endless war.
Support our troops with a competent Sect'y of Defense with a victory strategy. And sufficient body armor - not just better than ever before, but adequate to the new fight at hand. Thousands of maimed Iraq veterans would agree.
No, Slashdot's original purpose was for its nerds owners to publish stories they thought interesting. And it's more popular than ever. The political stories are among the most popular, with the most comments - most of which are by nerds, as is obvious from their content. The fact is that stories about tech in politics is interesting to nerds. Especially to that nerd subspecies, the wonk, which is a "policy geek". This story does involve both policy and tech. And its implications, 24 hour propaganda machine from the universal surveillence Pentagon, are hot news for nerds, as other stories on Slashdot attest.
If you don't want to read political stories on the Slashdot front page, you can opt out of them. That setup was produced after Slashdot learned that some Slashdotters didn't want to be reminded of politics on the front page.
So all your reasons for disliking it are wrong. And you don't need a separate politics website to ignore, or any special functions of your browser to split the site. So it's clear that what you don't like is the political events themselves, and are just blaming the messenger instead of getting the messenger to ignore them. And you're turning around and trying to get the messenger to ignore them for everyone, rather than just your own sensitive self. You're free to marginalize yourself, but don't imagine you're in the mainstream.
Slashdot covers those Wall Street tech stories, too. The Slashdot editors have an enormously popular website, despite their differences with your editorial preferences.
So quoting the Secretary of Defense is the way to alienate the Slashdotters who elected his boss? Maybe Rumsfeld shouldn't say the things that piss you off - then you wouldn't have an excuse to kill the messenger.
Slashdot rarely covers "technical articles". It covers lots of technical issues, but rarely links to an actual scientific paper or engineering report. Rumsfeld's policy statement talks about communications technology, a huge new expenditure on American communications technology. That's news for nerds. Even if Rumsfeld's words could have come out of a Gestapo officer's mouth. Or maybe especially if so.
Or could it be that nerds have actually learned to care about politics, even though you haven't? If the political stories weren't news to nerds, they wouldn't generate pageviews. And any look thru the extremely high numbers of posts in response shows that the people discussing the stories are nerds.
President VP Cheney obviously has the real nuclear football and launch codes. There's no way he'd let a guy who can't even handle a bike or a pretzel handle that job. And there's no way he'd pass up the chance to gloat over it like a palantir in his undisclosed bunker.
I'm not assuming. And I don't care about your troll opinions. You've made your ignorance of the nature science, the points in my posts, anything relevant in this discussion, very clear. Your blather is part of how the rape of minds of children is covered up - just as the rape of your mind when you were a child was covered up by people in your place before you. Confronting you with your incompetence in these matters, your inconsistencies, merely results in your exercising violent fantasies about sidetracking issues rather than deal with the issues. Your childish strategy, to which you return, of claiming not to support "either side" is also worthless.
You are a troll who knows no better than the kind of politically correct propaganda that ID fake science passes for. Thanks for making exposing you so easy.
Rumsfeld should try the new strategy of doing something right, then telling the truth to independent reporters. Then "the good news" will "be believed".
You're not morons - that's your phrase. No, you ID fake scientists are child molesters, raping their minds much like the pedophile priests you defend. I understand that you were likewise mindraped yourself as a child, but it's your responsibility as an adult to heal yourself and not spread it to another generation.
What views? That they're gay Catholics? That they have pride? How does that compare to the church, whose parade "forces their views" that Jesus was the messiah on the public, shutting down my city for a day? Neither side is forcing their views on anyone, certainly not you. Except their view that they are gay Catholics, which is the truth, though it might upset you. And that they are proving they can't be excluded from society because they're gay, which they were for centuries. Much like "colored" people were excluded, until they forced their view that they were to be included, and proud of it.
What does the Peoria HS marching band have to do with St Patrick, Jesus, Catholicism? Aren't they proud? Pride doesn't mean superiority, and "Gay Pride" people don't say they're superior to nongays. And of course they're not constantly reminding you of it. Gays remind you of their sexuality as frequently as Catholics remind you of their religion, but you're not complaining about their parade, or their pride. You do seem to care about gay sexuality much more than other groups' common characteristic.
I basically agree with you. And in fact, I basically believe that the actual scientific flavor crystals embedded in ID require we examine the universe for an alien intelligence "creator". Discarding evidence that can be explained by simpler, more mundane events.
But ID itself does not do that. ID starts with christianity, or rather the Jewish book of Genesis interpreted through American protestant Christianity. Then it searches evolution for unexplained phenomena, even inventing fake arguments against some sound evolutionary explanations, coopting those "holes" and filling them with a metaphysical (unproveable) creator. As a way to get schools to indoctrinate children into that Christian mythology - an audience which is typically required to accept teaching on faith (or really belief, for proveable but not actually personally proven teachings). That's what both the landmark federal ruling kicking "Creationism" out of schools found. And what the recent Pennsylvania ruling found for the new brand, ID: a covert attempt by a religious faction to indoctrinate children under a cover of fake science.
SETI is not a religion. As you point out, it's not quite a science (where's the control?), but it does apply the scientific method of disproving its hypothesis whenever possible. That skepticism is totally missing from ID. Because ID isn't really religion either - it's politics, which does not tolerate skepticism ever. It's one "wedge issue" that has been produced by the christocrats who have infiltrated the government since the Christian Coalition started in 1980, it's plan to send a candidate from the (I think I recall) 32,000 to fill each of the 29,000 elected offices in the entire US, from dogcatchers to president.
That's why this issue of "political correctness" is so much more important than whether SETI is a science or not. The troll's argument was just a shot fired on the christocrat culture war. Christocrats who will take the US into a dark age as surely as the pope led Rome into a dark age 1500 years ago, and kept it going for 1000 years. And as surely as their soulmates, the Taliban/Wahabi/local-tyrant have kept Muslims in a dark age for the past 800 years. I will not go quietly.
bush+nasa+((website "big+bang") OR "global warming") blackwell ohio vote black disenfranchised africa aids unfunded bush "coretta scott king "funeral republican outrage" bush "war is peace" bush ((nsa surveillance) OR guantanamo OR rendering OR torture) bush ((education budget cuts) OR (faith budget))
Those are some pretty simple searches. The problem you're having, apart from your inability to distinguish between government ownership of corporations and corporate ownership of government, is that "the facts are obviously biased against the Bush administration".
Oh, and the "current treachery" you Googled refers to some photos offered by some of the most fucked-up Republicans, the gay ones, taken about 20 years ago. It was pretty easy to tell that the search you offered indicated association at odds with your characterization. My searches were simple and represented accurately for people to draw their own conclusions. Which is that Bush is a fascist - not to be confused with a communist.
Yes. And one time I literally crossed paths with Giuliani outside City Hall. He was ahead of his body guards. As I passed him, I shouted in his face "NO DANCING!!" He jumped, and I dashed down the subway. Fucking fascist.
I gave Google a workout so lazy Slashdotters don't have to do anything to see citations for my politically incorrect (but factually correct) facts.
As for the topic, the rest of the post were examples of factually correct facts that are nevertheless politically incorrect under the Bush political regime.
The title of this discussion is "The Politically Incorrect Science Fair", and the topic of my post is "Political Correction", as I pointed out that the story's example of "politically incorrect" ID (fake) science is in fact politically correct, though factually incorrect.
See how easy it is to say correct facts, as I do, which are not only politically incorrect, as my moderations and Anonymous politico Coward flamers indicate, but which are spun as factually incorrect by people with political agendas?
You've got some agenda that has nothing to do with the scientific fraudulence of ID or the scientific validity of SETI. I can tell, because you're harping on the strawman you introduced, the agenda of ID Creationists, and dismissing the subject of this thread that I'm sticking to, the political correctness of ID despite its scientific fraudulence. You're a cryptocreationist, just like the fake ID scientists you're trying to boost in comparison to the strawman SETI scientists you introduced to discredit.
I didn't say that SETI would disprove alien intelligence by not finding it. I said that SETI disproves alien intelligence origin of signals by finding other explanations. And that the signals left unexplained, except perhaps by alien intelligence, still aren't proven until the alien or some other irrefutable evidence is produced. That's science. Your reaction is just a contrived attempt to get me to ascribe scientific properties to unscientific activities that might surround SETI. An attempt that failed, and showed your Creationist hand. Especially since you've ignored all the examples of how fake ID science is really just a cover for Creationism, which has been defeated politically, even after it can't win scientifically - because it's obvious that it's not science.
BTW, the "observation=influence" quantum theories are the absolute mainstream of modern physics, even if they don't fit whatever is your personal agenda. Unless you insist that the "mainstream" is the mainstream of your Creationist church.
In fact, since you're insisting on making untrue statements like the ones about quantum theories and various strawman arguments, and manipulating the direction of the discussion along only your agenda, which you insist conform to some predictable reactions, it's become clear that you are a troll. No more free insights from me - go tune into your creator for help instead.
The fake ID science doesn't have an "emotion", nor did I say it does. The closet Creationists have the "emotions", if you want to call it that, of fraud, which is why they're pulling political stunts to force ID teaching as a politically correct version of Creationism, which is politically incorrect, having been thrown out of classrooms by judges, its brand name tarnished.
ID is fake science, because it fails to include all the data. It starts with the conclusion, that an "intelligent designer" (god) created life with an expectation literally "in mind", a "purpose" other than survival (and consequent reproduction). Then fake ID science includes only the data consistent with that foregone conclusion. Other data, like witnessed evolution, is excluded. Fundamental scientific principles, like the requirement that hypotheses be disproveable - testable - to be scientific, are ignored when inconvenient. Show me an ID "scientist" who acknowledges that alien creators are a reasonable ID "designer", while the biblical god is not. You can't - ID is Creationism, dressed up in science.
SETI is real science, because its hypothesis, that alien intelligence elsewhere than the Earth can be found in radio signals, is disproveable. In fact, the operations of SETI consist of finding signals that could be sent by alien intelligence, and then searching for any other explanation that doesn't require an alien intelligence. Sure, many people think those signals that aren't otherwise explained are alien signals, but they're not scientists. SETI scientists won't accept that a signal is of alien intelligence origin until the alien is produced, or otherwise irrefutable (not just unrefuted) evidence is obtained. In the meantime, SETI scientists aren't insisting that American children be taught that these signals indicate evidence of alien intelligence. They certainly don't insist that children be taught that sources such as background radiation, sunspots, supernovas, etc are weaker explanations, though they're not 100% proven, than an alien intelligence explanation.
Fake ID scientists, though, do so insist. They're not real scientists, it's not real science, it's just politics. And it's a problem, because it's the thin edge of a wedge for Creationists to hijack American schools into indoctrinating children into their mythology. They're not satisfied with taxfree churches - they want theocracy. So they also indulge fake politics, to replace it with theocracy. They don't resent just science for the power it's taken from their culture over the past few hundred years - they resent reality-based politics, and anything else that stands in their way. Ignore them or trust them at your peril.
You have my thanks for all those Soviet bullets and bombs you took in the Cold War. But remember that Reagan's awarding more medals to our Grenada invaders than there were soldiers was pretty expensive.
Slashdot Mirror
I wonder whether we'd be getting faster productivity increases if Gordon Moore had included an extra term in his observational Law to accommodate acceleration of the rate, not just the rate, of transistor density increases. Moore's Law is partly self-fulfilling (as an upper limit), because it's the highest consensus rate expectation, especially among managers who control budgets.
We're not supporting our troops with enough body armor.
When a Tennessee National Guardsman in Iraq told Rumsfeld his troop didn't have enough body armor, Rumsfeld told him "you go to war with the army you've got, not the army you want".
The Iraq guerrillas attacking our troops have also gone to war with the army they've got.
When someone posts "To be fair, you go to war with the Secretary of Defense you have, not the one you want or need, to paraphrase Rummy himself.", it's fair to point out that Rumsfeld didn't need to go to war in Iraq, but went anyway - with the army he had: not the one with the body armor we'd want.
There's no excuse for that. Especially after we learned from Vietnam that the best equipped, most heavily armored, most "ready" troops that this country ever had wasn't enough. We also needed war to be a last resort, not an indulgence in warmongering, and for the Secretary of Defense to aim for victory with a victory strategy, not just an endless war.
Support our troops with a competent Sect'y of Defense with a victory strategy. And sufficient body armor - not just better than ever before, but adequate to the new fight at hand. Thousands of maimed Iraq veterans would agree.
No, Slashdot's original purpose was for its nerds owners to publish stories they thought interesting. And it's more popular than ever. The political stories are among the most popular, with the most comments - most of which are by nerds, as is obvious from their content. The fact is that stories about tech in politics is interesting to nerds. Especially to that nerd subspecies, the wonk, which is a "policy geek". This story does involve both policy and tech. And its implications, 24 hour propaganda machine from the universal surveillence Pentagon, are hot news for nerds, as other stories on Slashdot attest.
If you don't want to read political stories on the Slashdot front page, you can opt out of them. That setup was produced after Slashdot learned that some Slashdotters didn't want to be reminded of politics on the front page.
So all your reasons for disliking it are wrong. And you don't need a separate politics website to ignore, or any special functions of your browser to split the site. So it's clear that what you don't like is the political events themselves, and are just blaming the messenger instead of getting the messenger to ignore them. And you're turning around and trying to get the messenger to ignore them for everyone, rather than just your own sensitive self. You're free to marginalize yourself, but don't imagine you're in the mainstream.
Slashdot covers those Wall Street tech stories, too. The Slashdot editors have an enormously popular website, despite their differences with your editorial preferences.
So quoting the Secretary of Defense is the way to alienate the Slashdotters who elected his boss? Maybe Rumsfeld shouldn't say the things that piss you off - then you wouldn't have an excuse to kill the messenger.
Slashdot rarely covers "technical articles". It covers lots of technical issues, but rarely links to an actual scientific paper or engineering report. Rumsfeld's policy statement talks about communications technology, a huge new expenditure on American communications technology. That's news for nerds. Even if Rumsfeld's words could have come out of a Gestapo officer's mouth. Or maybe especially if so.
Or could it be that nerds have actually learned to care about politics, even though you haven't? If the political stories weren't news to nerds, they wouldn't generate pageviews. And any look thru the extremely high numbers of posts in response shows that the people discussing the stories are nerds.
MTV USA doesn't seem to be slowing down the ChrisTaliban here at home.
When you don't have a warmonger Sect'y Defense like Rumsfeld, you don't go to war when your army isn't ready.
President VP Cheney obviously has the real nuclear football and launch codes. There's no way he'd let a guy who can't even handle a bike or a pretzel handle that job. And there's no way he'd pass up the chance to gloat over it like a palantir in his undisclosed bunker.
I'm not assuming. And I don't care about your troll opinions. You've made your ignorance of the nature science, the points in my posts, anything relevant in this discussion, very clear. Your blather is part of how the rape of minds of children is covered up - just as the rape of your mind when you were a child was covered up by people in your place before you. Confronting you with your incompetence in these matters, your inconsistencies, merely results in your exercising violent fantasies about sidetracking issues rather than deal with the issues. Your childish strategy, to which you return, of claiming not to support "either side" is also worthless.
You are a troll who knows no better than the kind of politically correct propaganda that ID fake science passes for. Thanks for making exposing you so easy.
Rumsfeld should try the new strategy of doing something right, then telling the truth to independent reporters. Then "the good news" will "be believed".
You're not morons - that's your phrase. No, you ID fake scientists are child molesters, raping their minds much like the pedophile priests you defend. I understand that you were likewise mindraped yourself as a child, but it's your responsibility as an adult to heal yourself and not spread it to another generation.
What views? That they're gay Catholics? That they have pride? How does that compare to the church, whose parade "forces their views" that Jesus was the messiah on the public, shutting down my city for a day? Neither side is forcing their views on anyone, certainly not you. Except their view that they are gay Catholics, which is the truth, though it might upset you. And that they are proving they can't be excluded from society because they're gay, which they were for centuries. Much like "colored" people were excluded, until they forced their view that they were to be included, and proud of it.
What does the Peoria HS marching band have to do with St Patrick, Jesus, Catholicism? Aren't they proud? Pride doesn't mean superiority, and "Gay Pride" people don't say they're superior to nongays. And of course they're not constantly reminding you of it. Gays remind you of their sexuality as frequently as Catholics remind you of their religion, but you're not complaining about their parade, or their pride. You do seem to care about gay sexuality much more than other groups' common characteristic.
I basically agree with you. And in fact, I basically believe that the actual scientific flavor crystals embedded in ID require we examine the universe for an alien intelligence "creator". Discarding evidence that can be explained by simpler, more mundane events.
But ID itself does not do that. ID starts with christianity, or rather the Jewish book of Genesis interpreted through American protestant Christianity. Then it searches evolution for unexplained phenomena, even inventing fake arguments against some sound evolutionary explanations, coopting those "holes" and filling them with a metaphysical (unproveable) creator. As a way to get schools to indoctrinate children into that Christian mythology - an audience which is typically required to accept teaching on faith (or really belief, for proveable but not actually personally proven teachings). That's what both the landmark federal ruling kicking "Creationism" out of schools found. And what the recent Pennsylvania ruling found for the new brand, ID: a covert attempt by a religious faction to indoctrinate children under a cover of fake science.
SETI is not a religion. As you point out, it's not quite a science (where's the control?), but it does apply the scientific method of disproving its hypothesis whenever possible. That skepticism is totally missing from ID. Because ID isn't really religion either - it's politics, which does not tolerate skepticism ever. It's one "wedge issue" that has been produced by the christocrats who have infiltrated the government since the Christian Coalition started in 1980, it's plan to send a candidate from the (I think I recall) 32,000 to fill each of the 29,000 elected offices in the entire US, from dogcatchers to president.
That's why this issue of "political correctness" is so much more important than whether SETI is a science or not. The troll's argument was just a shot fired on the christocrat culture war. Christocrats who will take the US into a dark age as surely as the pope led Rome into a dark age 1500 years ago, and kept it going for 1000 years. And as surely as their soulmates, the Taliban/Wahabi/local-tyrant have kept Muslims in a dark age for the past 800 years. I will not go quietly.
Hence the Oscar nominations for Natalie Portman who is hot, but not a very special actress.
I just watched DARPA's social puppet on TV last month, giving the State of the Union address to Congress.
Hey, my post is our object lesson in political correctness. The mob has spoken - against me, supporting my points.
bush+nasa+((website "big+bang") OR "global warming")
blackwell ohio vote black disenfranchised
africa aids unfunded bush
"coretta scott king "funeral republican outrage"
bush "war is peace"
bush ((nsa surveillance) OR guantanamo OR rendering OR torture)
bush ((education budget cuts) OR (faith budget))
Those are some pretty simple searches. The problem you're having, apart from your inability to distinguish between government ownership of corporations and corporate ownership of government, is that "the facts are obviously biased against the Bush administration".
Oh, and the "current treachery" you Googled refers to some photos offered by some of the most fucked-up Republicans, the gay ones, taken about 20 years ago. It was pretty easy to tell that the search you offered indicated association at odds with your characterization. My searches were simple and represented accurately for people to draw their own conclusions. Which is that Bush is a fascist - not to be confused with a communist.
Yes. And one time I literally crossed paths with Giuliani outside City Hall. He was ahead of his body guards. As I passed him, I shouted in his face "NO DANCING!!" He jumped, and I dashed down the subway. Fucking fascist.
I gave Google a workout so lazy Slashdotters don't have to do anything to see citations for my politically incorrect (but factually correct) facts.
As for the topic, the rest of the post were examples of factually correct facts that are nevertheless politically incorrect under the Bush political regime.
The title of this discussion is "The Politically Incorrect Science Fair", and the topic of my post is "Political Correction", as I pointed out that the story's example of "politically incorrect" ID (fake) science is in fact politically correct, though factually incorrect.
See how easy it is to say correct facts, as I do, which are not only politically incorrect, as my moderations and Anonymous politico Coward flamers indicate, but which are spun as factually incorrect by people with political agendas?
You've got some agenda that has nothing to do with the scientific fraudulence of ID or the scientific validity of SETI. I can tell, because you're harping on the strawman you introduced, the agenda of ID Creationists, and dismissing the subject of this thread that I'm sticking to, the political correctness of ID despite its scientific fraudulence. You're a cryptocreationist, just like the fake ID scientists you're trying to boost in comparison to the strawman SETI scientists you introduced to discredit.
I didn't say that SETI would disprove alien intelligence by not finding it. I said that SETI disproves alien intelligence origin of signals by finding other explanations. And that the signals left unexplained, except perhaps by alien intelligence, still aren't proven until the alien or some other irrefutable evidence is produced. That's science. Your reaction is just a contrived attempt to get me to ascribe scientific properties to unscientific activities that might surround SETI. An attempt that failed, and showed your Creationist hand. Especially since you've ignored all the examples of how fake ID science is really just a cover for Creationism, which has been defeated politically, even after it can't win scientifically - because it's obvious that it's not science.
BTW, the "observation=influence" quantum theories are the absolute mainstream of modern physics, even if they don't fit whatever is your personal agenda. Unless you insist that the "mainstream" is the mainstream of your Creationist church.
In fact, since you're insisting on making untrue statements like the ones about quantum theories and various strawman arguments, and manipulating the direction of the discussion along only your agenda, which you insist conform to some predictable reactions, it's become clear that you are a troll. No more free insights from me - go tune into your creator for help instead.
The fake ID science doesn't have an "emotion", nor did I say it does. The closet Creationists have the "emotions", if you want to call it that, of fraud, which is why they're pulling political stunts to force ID teaching as a politically correct version of Creationism, which is politically incorrect, having been thrown out of classrooms by judges, its brand name tarnished.
ID is fake science, because it fails to include all the data. It starts with the conclusion, that an "intelligent designer" (god) created life with an expectation literally "in mind", a "purpose" other than survival (and consequent reproduction). Then fake ID science includes only the data consistent with that foregone conclusion. Other data, like witnessed evolution, is excluded. Fundamental scientific principles, like the requirement that hypotheses be disproveable - testable - to be scientific, are ignored when inconvenient. Show me an ID "scientist" who acknowledges that alien creators are a reasonable ID "designer", while the biblical god is not. You can't - ID is Creationism, dressed up in science.
SETI is real science, because its hypothesis, that alien intelligence elsewhere than the Earth can be found in radio signals, is disproveable. In fact, the operations of SETI consist of finding signals that could be sent by alien intelligence, and then searching for any other explanation that doesn't require an alien intelligence. Sure, many people think those signals that aren't otherwise explained are alien signals, but they're not scientists. SETI scientists won't accept that a signal is of alien intelligence origin until the alien is produced, or otherwise irrefutable (not just unrefuted) evidence is obtained. In the meantime, SETI scientists aren't insisting that American children be taught that these signals indicate evidence of alien intelligence. They certainly don't insist that children be taught that sources such as background radiation, sunspots, supernovas, etc are weaker explanations, though they're not 100% proven, than an alien intelligence explanation.
Fake ID scientists, though, do so insist. They're not real scientists, it's not real science, it's just politics. And it's a problem, because it's the thin edge of a wedge for Creationists to hijack American schools into indoctrinating children into their mythology. They're not satisfied with taxfree churches - they want theocracy. So they also indulge fake politics, to replace it with theocracy. They don't resent just science for the power it's taken from their culture over the past few hundred years - they resent reality-based politics, and anything else that stands in their way. Ignore them or trust them at your peril.
You're actually gayer than you think. I think that's funny, too - funnier than your joke :o.
You have my thanks for all those Soviet bullets and bombs you took in the Cold War. But remember that Reagan's awarding more medals to our Grenada invaders than there were soldiers was pretty expensive.