"Welcome to the beginning of the end of the Great American Experiment!"
The end? The end? Perhaps you are right. However, I have a little hope left for my American brothers. I believe the revolution begins next December. Let me see... oh yes December. Right after GW rigs the next election.
The term linux distro is starting to become a misnomer as more distros include support for mulitple kernels. Two popular distro's are debian which I believe has support for linux, the hurd, and one of the bsd's I believe. Then there is gentoo. There are projects to run gentoo on just about everything including other distros. I think the term unix distro is more appropriate
If any one wants to keep up with the latest KDE-CVS but doesn't want to compile KDE 3 times a week check out my site.Bi-weekly binary and source snapshots of CVS-HEAD.
People naturally stereotype people. We have to. It is simply not possible to live without putting people into boxes. Where I live I assume that anyone I meet will speak English. This could very possible be not true but none the less I do not enquire what language someone would prefer to converse in I just speak English. Similarly, I assume that when it comes to computers people are idiots. I know very well that some are not but it has been my overwhelming experience that it is easier to assume stupidity and work up. Stereotyping is a fact of life. GET OVER IT!
I would wager that these contracters do not stereotype your wife out of any superiority complex, sexism, or any other nefarius motive. Rather my money says that it has merely been their experience that women ARE generally less competent than men when it comes to construction. Is this really so hard to believe? They discriminate as a matter of efficiency and accuracy not to serve their egos.
woosh. (the sound of my karma being flushed down the toilet)
As far as I can tell this is the assumption upon which you build your argument that we should build "a true democracy." However, if this is shown to be false then your argument falls.
There is a saying, "In any sufficiently large group of, the vast majority of people are stupid." While, most people are capable of being quite intelligent, especially when confronted with a problem in their area of expertise, they can also make very very stupid decisions. People often act let their passions, their distrust rule over their reason. For an example we only need to look to the prisoners dillemma.
Furthermore, while an individual my be very intelligent on ones own. He may act rationaly all his life, however, when a whole bunch of rational individuals are put together the groups intelligence is only as high as the lowest member. The group can very quickly become a mob. Our intelligent individual soon become neither of those things. Instead he becomes the exact opposite.
What does all this have to do with your "true democracy?"
In your version of democracy we would have mob rule. It is that simple. If it were up to a vote would The U.S. have had the revolution? Only 1/3 of the population supported revolution the others where either indifferent or loyalists. Would we have universal sufferage? I strongly doubt it. Would slavery have been abolished?
These problems with your "true democracy" have been known since the time of Aristotle. In his republic he argues against democracy on these very grounds! Instead he argues for a Polity. A polity is much like we may understand western democracy.
However, as you say there is no longer a technological problem. I can only hope that we are wise enough to see that there IS still a philisophical one.
This is an amazing victory for free speech. The COS is a rich dangerous cult that is amazingly adept at using the courts to silence its victims. It really is incredable that the good guys won in this case.
happens everytime you go to a website. Creating a copy of the content is the primary means of internet communication. I don't see how google caching the pages is any different than me viewing it in my browser. It's not like google takes the credit for the content. If it were so, there would be no way for any web search to work without owning all the searchable content.
"If you care about the enviroment, and Nader is 100% good for the enviroment, Gore is 50% good for the enviroment, and Bush is 0% good for the enviroment, you should only vote for Nader if you think he has a greater than 50% chance of winning in order to maximize the benefit to the issue you care about"
This may be true in the short term. This holds for one election. However, in four(five? - sorry I am Canadian) years there will be another election, then another and another and another. To maximize support you should think long term over many elections. This election if you vote Democrat you are one of x million people voting for any number of y reasons. This may increase the prevalance of the "green issue" in the party to a very small degree. However, if you vote green, although they may not win, as you are one of a much smaller number you are helping to ensure the long term survivability of the Green Party. This will have a much greater long term effect than if you vote democrat. So don't give in to short term thinking. Vote for who you want in office not "the lesser of two evils." There are a hell of a lot more than two evils to choose from:-)
I posted on both message boards. I thought slashdot might be interested in my posts.
On forums.gentoo.org ---- I have read most of Zach's rant and it disturbs me. Much of what Zach is complaining about seems to be dealt with by the Gentoo top-level management structure proposal. However, the most important part of his claims, the "business" part, are not. I of course will hear D. Robbins out as well.
Regardless, I think the Gentoo project needs to CLEARLY establish what is bussiness and what is not. This should, hopefully, prevent these claims frum being made in the future.
The way I see it this whole affair is nothing but bad news. I hope and pray it all works out. ---- and on forums.zynot.org ---- I have read most of Zach's rant and it disturbs me. Much of what Zach is complaining about seems to be dealt with by the Gentoo top-level management structure proposal. However, the most important part of his claims, the "business" part, are not. I of course will hear D. Robbins out as well.
Regardless, I think the Gentoo project needs to CLEARLY establish what is bussiness and what is not. This should, hopefully, prevent these claims frum being made in the future.
The way I see it this whole affair is nothing but bad news. I hope and pray it all works out. ---- I will not sleep well tonight.
Discalaimer: I've posted this before but am posting it again because I think it is an important point. Oh and because I am a karma whore.
----
It has been my experience that creationists such as Guillermo Gonzalez can be divided into 3 catagories.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that God created the earth and everything on it in 6 days because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found in almost any church.
2) Those that believe that God created the earth in 6 days because that is what the bible says and that is good enough for them. These people are completely unwilling to even consider even the consider the possibility that they are wrong. Often they ignore sound science and instead rely on sudo science to try and convince otherse and themselves that they are right and everyone else is wrong. They ignore all contradictory evidence and are as unscientific as can be. Thse people do both thier faith and their theories a disservice. These people can also be found in most any church and are very vocal. Often people beleive that this group are the only proponants of Intelegent design or creationism. An example of this group can be found at www.icr.org
3) Those that beleive that God created the earth and all life on earth but not neccisarily in 6 days(as we would know them). These people "assume" (they do not really assume rather these they rely on these "assumptions" based on other evidence and experiences) that both the scientific record and the bible are 100% correct. Therefore, there should be complete agreement between the two. If there is an aparent disagrement either the scientific record has been interpreted wrong OR the bible has been misinterpreted or mis translated. This group is generally willing to examine its theories for weakness and to modify its theories to better fit the available facts. This group is as scientific as any evolutionist group and if more creationists were like them perhaps they would not be seen in such a bad light. Unfortunalty, this group is rather small but growing. An example of this group can be found at reasons.org
Likewise, evolutionists generally fall into one of three parallel groups.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that man evolved by natural processes because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found almost anywhere.
2) Those that belieleve in evolution because they are unwilling to consider even looking at any evidence that perhaps there is a god. They would rather blindly believe a theory with known problems than consider an alternative. They have evolution taught in schools as fact even though it is only a theory. They do not want children to be taught that some people do not agree with evolution. These people do both their "religion" (atheism/naturalism) and their theory a disservice. These people are very vocal and are just as unsientific as a creationist in group 2. They also can be found most anywhere.
3) Those that believe in evolution (or some other naturalist theory) because they genuinly believe that it fits the facts. They are willing to look at alternative theories. They are also examine their theories for weekness and are willing to modify their theories to better fit the known facts. These people can be found inside the bona fide scientific community.
It is a shame that there are so many group 1 & 2 people in this world.
In conclusion, no theory is pseudoscientific. It only becomes sudoscience once it is conclusivly disproven yet is still passed off as scientific fact.
Will this work something like nice? I run Gentoo and quite often I am compling in the background. I set the nice level of the compile to 15 so I usually don't have much problem with apps being sluggish. However, quite often xmms will 'skip' even though I always start it with a nice of -5. Will these patches have an interactive level I can set when I start the app? If so that would be wonderfull.
As a citizen of this banana^H^H^H^H^H^H^H wonderful republic (I don't know anymore) of united states, I just have to give you my unbiased opinion:
I'm biased.
It seems lately I've developed a knee-jerk reaction to anything Microsoftian and/or coming from this two-bit^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H democratically elected leadership. When I see stupidity, I really dislike it. Unfortunately, it looks like it's on the rise.
To the world out there, I can only say a couple of things:
1. What do you expect of a country where the Prez does not believe HIV causes AIDS?
2. What do you expect of a country where the government telecommunications monopoly is so bad that more people have cellphones than landlines?
3. What do you expect of a country where everyone votes for the same party, regardless whether they messed up, promise to mess up or promise not to mess up again then mess up?
To the couple of Americans who are reading this I just want to say:
1. Hoesit!
2. I recommend Prozac, and in large doses.
3. Keep our humour, it's the only national emblem we have.
That's it. Sit back and watch the show people, I can guarantee you will be entertained!
I didn't really miss a group. you really fit into the fourth group. Not a perfect fit but you can't steriotype anyone exactly. Anyway, I know exactly the theory you are talking about. I once held that view. The illusion theory is a powerfull one because by deffinition it cannot be disproven. It also reconsiles the apparent diunity between faith and science. However, there is one (as far as I can tell only one) problem with this theory. It requires that God lie. God by nature can not lie. Many argue that God would not be lying per se but the way I see it It is lying. This theory is "acceptable" in my books however I think that the theories taught by hugh ross are better so I generally believe what he teaches.
It has been my experience that creationists such as Guillermo Gonzalez can be divided into 3 catagories.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that God created the earth and everything on it in 6 days because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found in almost any church.
2) Those that believe that God created the earth in 6 days because that is what the bible says and that is good enough for them. These people are completely unwilling to even consider even the consider the possibility that they are wrong. Often they ignore sound science and instead rely on sudo science to try and convince otherse and themselves that they are right and everyone else is wrong. They ignore all contradictory evidence and are as unscientific as can be. Thse people do both thier faith and their theories a disservice. These people can also be found in most any church and are very vocal. Often people beleive that this group are the only proponants of Intelegent design or creationism. An example of this group can be found at www.icr.org
3) Those that beleive that God created the earth and all life on earth but not neccisarily in 6 days(as we would know them). These people "assume" (they do not really assume rather these they rely on these "assumptions" based on other evidence and experiences) that both the scientific record and the bible are 100% correct. Therefore, there should be complete agreement between the two. If there is an aparent disagrement either the scientific record has been interpreted wrong OR the bible has been misinterpreted or mis translated. This group is generally willing to examine its theories for weakness and to modify its theories to better fit the available facts. This group is as scientific as any evolutionist group and if more creationists were like them perhaps they would not be seen in such a bad light. Unfortunalty, this group is rather small but growing. An example of this group can be found at reasons.org
Likewise, evolutionists generally fall into one of three parallel groups.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that man evolved by natural processes because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found almost anywhere.
2) Those that belieleve in evolution because they are unwilling to consider even looking at any evidence that perhaps there is a god. They would rather blindly believe a theory with known problems than consider an alternative. They have evolution taught in schools as fact even though it is only a theory. They do not want children to be taught that some people do not agree with evolution. These people do both their "religion" (atheism/naturalism) and their theory a disservice. These people are very vocal and are just as unsientific as a creationist in group 2. They also can be found most anywhere.
3) Those that believe in evolution (or some other naturalist theory) because they genuinly believe that it fits the facts. They are willing to look at alternative theories. They are also examine their theories for weekness and are willing to modify their theories to better fit the known facts. These people can be found inside the bona fide scientific community.
It is a shame that there are so many group 1 & 2 people in this world.
In conclusion, no theory is pseudoscientific. It only becomes sudoscience once it is conclusivly disproven yet is still passed off as scientific fact.
Slashdot Mirror
"Welcome to the beginning of the end of the Great American Experiment!"
... oh yes December. Right after GW rigs the next election.
The end? The end? Perhaps you are right. However, I have a little hope left for my American brothers. I believe the revolution begins next December. Let me see
dude. Thats just the karma bonus. It's not a bug.
The term linux distro is starting to become a misnomer as more distros include support for mulitple kernels. Two popular distro's are debian which I believe has support for linux, the hurd, and one of the bsd's I believe. Then there is gentoo. There are projects to run gentoo on just about everything including other distros. I think the term unix distro is more appropriate
No darl I still won't give you $699!
You miss the point. The candle is there to create the appropriate mood for said heating.
If any one wants to keep up with the latest KDE-CVS but doesn't want to compile KDE 3 times a week check out my site.Bi-weekly binary and source snapshots of CVS-HEAD.
The kicker is you must run gentoo.
WTF! Why would a bill signed by Clinton affect a 19 year old Canadian living in Victoria BC?
Here is why.
People naturally stereotype people. We have to. It is simply not possible to live without putting people into boxes. Where I live I assume that anyone I meet will speak English. This could very possible be not true but none the less I do not enquire what language someone would prefer to converse in I just speak English. Similarly, I assume that when it comes to computers people are idiots. I know very well that some are not but it has been my overwhelming experience that it is easier to assume stupidity and work up. Stereotyping is a fact of life. GET OVER IT!
I would wager that these contracters do not stereotype your wife out of any superiority complex, sexism, or any other nefarius motive. Rather my money says that it has merely been their experience that women ARE generally less competent than men when it comes to construction. Is this really so hard to believe? They discriminate as a matter of efficiency and accuracy not to serve their egos.
woosh. (the sound of my karma being flushed down the toilet)
"The common man is not stupid."
As far as I can tell this is the assumption upon which you build your argument that we should build "a true democracy." However, if this is shown to be false then your argument falls.
There is a saying, "In any sufficiently large group of, the vast majority of people are stupid." While, most people are capable of being quite intelligent, especially when confronted with a problem in their area of expertise, they can also make very very stupid decisions. People often act let their passions, their distrust rule over their reason. For an example we only need to look to the prisoners dillemma.
Furthermore, while an individual my be very intelligent on ones own. He may act rationaly all his life, however, when a whole bunch of rational individuals are put together the groups intelligence is only as high as the lowest member. The group can very quickly become a mob. Our intelligent individual soon become neither of those things. Instead he becomes the exact opposite.
What does all this have to do with your "true democracy?"
In your version of democracy we would have mob rule. It is that simple. If it were up to a vote would The U.S. have had the revolution? Only 1/3 of the population supported revolution the others where either indifferent or loyalists. Would we have universal sufferage? I strongly doubt it. Would slavery have been abolished?
These problems with your "true democracy" have been known since the time of Aristotle. In his republic he argues against democracy on these very grounds! Instead he argues for a Polity. A polity is much like we may understand western democracy.
However, as you say there is no longer a technological problem. I can only hope that we are wise enough to see that there IS still a philisophical one.
I call bullshit. I just bought a brand new dvd drive. I had never fiddled with video before. It took three commands and 5 min to start watching a dvd.
/dev/scsi/host1/bus0/target0/lun0/cd
/dev/scsi/host1/bus0/target0/lun0/cd isn't exactly intuative but hey.
emerge mplayer
ln -sf
mplayer dvd://1
Ok the ln -sf
Gentoo Games did this first!
This is an amazing victory for free speech. The COS is a rich dangerous cult that is amazingly adept at using the courts to silence its victims. It really is incredable that the good guys won in this case.
It is actually more like the boss who doesn't give you a raise because he knows it will push you into the next tax bracket.
happens everytime you go to a website. Creating a copy of the content is the primary means of internet communication. I don't see how google caching the pages is any different than me viewing it in my browser. It's not like google takes the credit for the content. If it were so, there would be no way for any web search to work without owning all the searchable content.
"If you care about the enviroment, and Nader is 100% good for the enviroment, Gore is 50% good for the enviroment, and Bush is 0% good for the enviroment, you should only vote for Nader if you think he has a greater than 50% chance of winning in order to maximize the benefit to the issue you care about"
:-)
This may be true in the short term. This holds for one election. However, in four(five? - sorry I am Canadian) years there will be another election, then another and another and another. To maximize support you should think long term over many elections. This election if you vote Democrat you are one of x million people voting for any number of y reasons. This may increase the prevalance of the "green issue" in the party to a very small degree. However, if you vote green, although they may not win, as you are one of a much smaller number you are helping to ensure the long term survivability of the Green Party. This will have a much greater long term effect than if you vote democrat. So don't give in to short term thinking. Vote for who you want in office not "the lesser of two evils." There are a hell of a lot more than two evils to choose from
I posted on both message boards. I thought slashdot might be interested in my posts.
On forums.gentoo.org
----
I have read most of Zach's rant and it disturbs me. Much of what Zach is complaining about seems to be dealt with by the Gentoo top-level management structure proposal. However, the most important part of his claims, the "business" part, are not. I of course will hear D. Robbins out as well.
Regardless, I think the Gentoo project needs to CLEARLY establish what is bussiness and what is not. This should, hopefully, prevent these claims frum being made in the future.
The way I see it this whole affair is nothing but bad news. I hope and pray it all works out.
----
and on forums.zynot.org
----
I have read most of Zach's rant and it disturbs me. Much of what Zach is complaining about seems to be dealt with by the Gentoo top-level management structure proposal. However, the most important part of his claims, the "business" part, are not. I of course will hear D. Robbins out as well.
Regardless, I think the Gentoo project needs to CLEARLY establish what is bussiness and what is not. This should, hopefully, prevent these claims frum being made in the future.
The way I see it this whole affair is nothing but bad news. I hope and pray it all works out.
----
I will not sleep well tonight.
"How much training DOES it take to make a Big Mac?"
...
2 four hour shifts.
I think I am going to go cry now.
Since when does having a better chance at being selected for a science experiment that will probably kill you count as an "advantage?"
Discalaimer: I've posted this before but am posting it again because I think it is an important point. Oh and because I am a karma whore.
----
It has been my experience that creationists such as Guillermo Gonzalez can be divided into 3 catagories.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that God created the earth and everything on it in 6 days because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found in almost any church.
2) Those that believe that God created the earth in 6 days because that is what the bible says and that is good enough for them. These people are completely unwilling to even consider even the consider the possibility that they are wrong. Often they ignore sound science and instead rely on sudo science to try and convince otherse and themselves that they are right and everyone else is wrong. They ignore all contradictory evidence and are as unscientific as can be. Thse people do both thier faith and their theories a disservice. These people can also be found in most any church and are very vocal. Often people beleive that this group are the only proponants of Intelegent design or creationism. An example of this group can be found at www.icr.org
3) Those that beleive that God created the earth and all life on earth but not neccisarily in 6 days(as we would know them). These people "assume" (they do not really assume rather these they rely on these "assumptions" based on other evidence and experiences) that both the scientific record and the bible are 100% correct. Therefore, there should be complete agreement between the two. If there is an aparent disagrement either the scientific record has been interpreted wrong OR the bible has been misinterpreted or mis translated. This group is generally willing to examine its theories for weakness and to modify its theories to better fit the available facts. This group is as scientific as any evolutionist group and if more creationists were like them perhaps they would not be seen in such a bad light. Unfortunalty, this group is rather small but growing. An example of this group can be found at reasons.org
Likewise, evolutionists generally fall into one of three parallel groups.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that man evolved by natural processes because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found almost anywhere.
2) Those that belieleve in evolution because they are unwilling to consider even looking at any evidence that perhaps there is a god. They would rather blindly believe a theory with known problems than consider an alternative. They have evolution taught in schools as fact even though it is only a theory. They do not want children to be taught that some people do not agree with evolution. These people do both their "religion" (atheism/naturalism) and their theory a disservice. These people are very vocal and are just as unsientific as a creationist in group 2. They also can be found most anywhere.
3) Those that believe in evolution (or some other naturalist theory) because they genuinly believe that it fits the facts. They are willing to look at alternative theories. They are also examine their theories for weekness and are willing to modify their theories to better fit the known facts. These people can be found inside the bona fide scientific community.
It is a shame that there are so many group 1 & 2 people in this world.
In conclusion, no theory is pseudoscientific. It only becomes sudoscience once it is conclusivly disproven yet is still passed off as scientific fact.
So if the gun crashes and fires acidentally do you get to see the blue sceen of death?
Will this work something like nice? I run Gentoo and quite often I am compling in the background. I set the nice level of the compile to 15 so I usually don't have much problem with apps being sluggish. However, quite often xmms will 'skip' even though I always start it with a nice of -5. Will these patches have an interactive level I can set when I start the app? If so that would be wonderfull.
As a citizen of this banana^H^H^H^H^H^H^H wonderful republic (I don't know anymore) of united states, I just have to give you my unbiased opinion:
I'm biased.
It seems lately I've developed a knee-jerk reaction to anything Microsoftian and/or coming from this two-bit^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H democratically elected leadership. When I see stupidity, I really dislike it. Unfortunately, it looks like it's on the rise.
To the world out there, I can only say a couple of things:
1. What do you expect of a country where the Prez does not believe HIV causes AIDS?
2. What do you expect of a country where the government telecommunications monopoly is so bad that more people have cellphones than landlines?
3. What do you expect of a country where everyone votes for the same party, regardless whether they messed up, promise to mess up or promise not to mess up again then mess up?
To the couple of Americans who are reading this I just want to say:
1. Hoesit!
2. I recommend Prozac, and in large doses.
3. Keep our humour, it's the only national emblem we have.
That's it. Sit back and watch the show people, I can guarantee you will be entertained!
I didn't really miss a group. you really fit into the fourth group. Not a perfect fit but you can't steriotype anyone exactly. Anyway, I know exactly the theory you are talking about. I once held that view. The illusion theory is a powerfull one because by deffinition it cannot be disproven. It also reconsiles the apparent diunity between faith and science. However, there is one (as far as I can tell only one) problem with this theory. It requires that God lie. God by nature can not lie. Many argue that God would not be lying per se but the way I see it It is lying. This theory is "acceptable" in my books however I think that the theories taught by hugh ross are better so I generally believe what he teaches.
It has been my experience that creationists such as Guillermo Gonzalez can be divided into 3 catagories.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that God created the earth and everything on it in 6 days because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found in almost any church.
2) Those that believe that God created the earth in 6 days because that is what the bible says and that is good enough for them. These people are completely unwilling to even consider even the consider the possibility that they are wrong. Often they ignore sound science and instead rely on sudo science to try and convince otherse and themselves that they are right and everyone else is wrong. They ignore all contradictory evidence and are as unscientific as can be. Thse people do both thier faith and their theories a disservice. These people can also be found in most any church and are very vocal. Often people beleive that this group are the only proponants of Intelegent design or creationism. An example of this group can be found at www.icr.org
3) Those that beleive that God created the earth and all life on earth but not neccisarily in 6 days(as we would know them). These people "assume" (they do not really assume rather these they rely on these "assumptions" based on other evidence and experiences) that both the scientific record and the bible are 100% correct. Therefore, there should be complete agreement between the two. If there is an aparent disagrement either the scientific record has been interpreted wrong OR the bible has been misinterpreted or mis translated. This group is generally willing to examine its theories for weakness and to modify its theories to better fit the available facts. This group is as scientific as any evolutionist group and if more creationists were like them perhaps they would not be seen in such a bad light. Unfortunalty, this group is rather small but growing. An example of this group can be found at reasons.org
Likewise, evolutionists generally fall into one of three parallel groups.
1) Those that do not know any better. These people believe that man evolved by natural processes because that is what they have always been taught. They are largely ignorant and have no real interest in looking into the facts. These people can be found almost anywhere.
2) Those that belieleve in evolution because they are unwilling to consider even looking at any evidence that perhaps there is a god. They would rather blindly believe a theory with known problems than consider an alternative. They have evolution taught in schools as fact even though it is only a theory. They do not want children to be taught that some people do not agree with evolution. These people do both their "religion" (atheism/naturalism) and their theory a disservice. These people are very vocal and are just as unsientific as a creationist in group 2. They also can be found most anywhere.
3) Those that believe in evolution (or some other naturalist theory) because they genuinly believe that it fits the facts. They are willing to look at alternative theories. They are also examine their theories for weekness and are willing to modify their theories to better fit the known facts. These people can be found inside the bona fide scientific community.
It is a shame that there are so many group 1 & 2 people in this world.
In conclusion, no theory is pseudoscientific. It only becomes sudoscience once it is conclusivly disproven yet is still passed off as scientific fact.
The rocket guy may be going up...but his server has gone way down!