Yes. Misrepresenting someone's argument in order to attack it is called the "Straw-man" fallacy.
I also know that the/. headline is simply parroting the ars one. However, just because ars is a hopelessly biased opinion source, doesn't mean that slashdot needs to be also.
When will the government step in and start controlling these news outlets, eh? Some uncorruptible benevolent commission whose mission is to regulate communication. We'll call it the Federal Communications Commission! They'll solve the problem!
"Any problem caused by a tank can be solved by a tank." -- Peter Griffin and Every Liberal Ever.
If something is not a law, how then can it be "repealed?"
Perhaps all this effort should be focused on the fact that net neutrality "rules" were originally enacted by executive and administrative fiat, and not the legal process, and can therefore be changed on the whim of an administrator.
I agree. Without including important things such as the baseline for "passing" in the general public or the US, isolating it to India is entirely meaningless. While I agree that the old adage is always true: you get what you pay for, and if you pay for cheap Indian workers, you'll get cheap and broken produced software. But that's true everywhere, it only happens to be prevalent in India.
You're not going to develop solar energy in the Sahara unless you have a very strong state involvement
And that's why it won't work. Top-down revolutions have a difficult time taking hold. What works is empowering the individual to increase their livelihood in a way that provides a mutually beneficial relationship with the rest of society. Imposing economic change via dictate or "imminent domain" results in discord, perhaps more so in a place like saharan Africa.
While copy-pasta is an exceptionally dangerous form of code rot, I do agree that the ENTIRE point of good design is to emphasize code reuse. If you've ever come across a section of ugly code you have to fix, just because someone didn't feel like using Perl::DateTime, you know what I mean.
There are a lot of smart people out there. Most of them are smarter than me. (Think about the collective "smartness" of compiler developers every time people think the project should ignore compiler warnings.) I strive to stand on the shoulders of these giants as much as possible when writing code.
This is not a flamebait question: Isn't this the natural course of socialized medicine? Seriously, when I control your health care, how can you be free to choose the treatment you see best, especially if that "best treatment" is a placebo in the form of meditation and sugar pills? How can anyone expect any other outcome?
First, sexual preference is a choice, race is not. BUT whatever, I don't want to feed the trolls and argue that here.
Second, even if it is a so-called "protected" trait (a phrase which itself is an enemy of freedom), we are still talking about SPEECH. It is still not illegal to be a racist. It is likewise not illegal -- or deplorable, for that matter -- for reddit to decide they do not want to support racism. It is equally not illegal to celebrate redefinition of marriage, and completely within the rights of another to not support or advocate that redefinition.
If it's about ethics then I don't see a problem with no supporting/rFatPeopleHate. It's not like they are being silenced, Reddit just declined to offer them a free platform for their content, following their own ethical code.
There is a difference between defending someone's right to say what they like, and actually setting up a soapbox for them. There are people I'd never help spread their message, but I wouldn't want the government to ban them from saying it either. Freedom of speech does not imply an obligation to facilitate other's speech, or listen to it.
Very well said. "Free Speech" means the GOVERNMENT can't make certain speech illegal, or ban books, or silence dissent (even though all those things do happen, even China enshrines free speech in their constitution). It DOES NOT mean I have to support you, or help you disseminate that speech.
(Still with me... you won't be in a moment)
It's the same reason a Jewish printer can turn away business from a pro-Palestinian group, and the same reason a Christian baker can^H^H^H should be able to refuse to make a gay wedding cake.
>> "For the 5th year in a row, potatoe production has far exceeded government estimates!" > Dan Quayle, is that you?
You caught me:)
I was using the odd spelling on purpose, since I was referencing backwards-R russia.
That said, the trailing-e spelling is, and has always been an acceptable spelling of the word. The lib media decided to paint Quayle as an idiot and thus the lie was spread. Similar to how most people think GWB is dumb. 100% manufactured propaganda.
"For the 5th year in a row, potatoe production has far exceeded government estimates!"
"We have now experienced an unprecedented 64 straight months of job growth!"
Government will never fail. Programs are judged by their intentions. Similar to how "businesses" in Frisco can have billion dollar IPOs without any positive revenue, or plans to make any.
The United States (or, more accurately, "These United States" was more common in that era) did not invent slavery, but we did fight a very bloody war to end it. The fact that the founders engaged in a deplorable, yet common agricultural practice in the late 18th century does not invalidate their accomplishments or ideas.
In fact, it was the very wordings of our founding documents that Lincoln used to argue against chattel slavery. In that light, Lincoln was not a radical revolutionary, he was in fact a conservative who argued that we return to our ideals.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. Misrepresenting someone's argument in order to attack it is called the "Straw-man" fallacy.
I also know that the /. headline is simply parroting the ars one. However, just because ars is a hopelessly biased opinion source, doesn't mean that slashdot needs to be also.
Consider the source. They have their agenda and they will achieve it. Facts be damned.
Does the FCC call it a "giveaway to wireless carriers?" If not, why are you injecting your bias into the headline instead of reporting the facts?
It's about time communism got with the program.
After all, the crux of the biscuit, IS THE APOSTROPHE.
REAL programmers use a magnetized needle and a steady hand.
Unsecured debt (e.g. credit cards) dies with you. It cannot be inherited or passed on. That's why you pay 25% interest on those evil plastic cards.
Where are my mod points!
You sound like me about 20 years ago.
The space under Pont Neuf is surprisingly comfortable, if you can convince the local Romani to let you stay there.
> as long as they give you the necessary VAT-receipt slip.
In what universe does a hooker add value to anything?
When will the government step in and start controlling these news outlets, eh? Some uncorruptible benevolent commission whose mission is to regulate communication. We'll call it the Federal Communications Commission! They'll solve the problem!
"Any problem caused by a tank can be solved by a tank." -- Peter Griffin and Every Liberal Ever.
That's why the workers need to seize control of the means of production... right?
Or are you one of those delusional people who think they're going to be on the handle side of those pitchforks?
If something is not a law, how then can it be "repealed?"
Perhaps all this effort should be focused on the fact that net neutrality "rules" were originally enacted by executive and administrative fiat, and not the legal process, and can therefore be changed on the whim of an administrator.
That said, "Net Neutrality," is not.
Mod parent up. Stories like this are why I rarely read /. anymore.
There are plenty of sites for political flamewars. It would be nice if this site went back to being one for only tech-y political flamewars.
I agree. Without including important things such as the baseline for "passing" in the general public or the US, isolating it to India is entirely meaningless. While I agree that the old adage is always true: you get what you pay for, and if you pay for cheap Indian workers, you'll get cheap and broken produced software. But that's true everywhere, it only happens to be prevalent in India.
You're not going to develop solar energy in the Sahara unless you have a very strong state involvement
And that's why it won't work. Top-down revolutions have a difficult time taking hold. What works is empowering the individual to increase their livelihood in a way that provides a mutually beneficial relationship with the rest of society. Imposing economic change via dictate or "imminent domain" results in discord, perhaps more so in a place like saharan Africa.
While copy-pasta is an exceptionally dangerous form of code rot, I do agree that the ENTIRE point of good design is to emphasize code reuse. If you've ever come across a section of ugly code you have to fix, just because someone didn't feel like using Perl::DateTime, you know what I mean.
There are a lot of smart people out there. Most of them are smarter than me. (Think about the collective "smartness" of compiler developers every time people think the project should ignore compiler warnings.) I strive to stand on the shoulders of these giants as much as possible when writing code.
This is not a flamebait question: Isn't this the natural course of socialized medicine? Seriously, when I control your health care, how can you be free to choose the treatment you see best, especially if that "best treatment" is a placebo in the form of meditation and sugar pills? How can anyone expect any other outcome?
First, sexual preference is a choice, race is not. BUT whatever, I don't want to feed the trolls and argue that here.
Second, even if it is a so-called "protected" trait (a phrase which itself is an enemy of freedom), we are still talking about SPEECH. It is still not illegal to be a racist. It is likewise not illegal -- or deplorable, for that matter -- for reddit to decide they do not want to support racism. It is equally not illegal to celebrate redefinition of marriage, and completely within the rights of another to not support or advocate that redefinition.
These are not two different rights.
If it's about ethics then I don't see a problem with no supporting /rFatPeopleHate. It's not like they are being silenced, Reddit just declined to offer them a free platform for their content, following their own ethical code.
There is a difference between defending someone's right to say what they like, and actually setting up a soapbox for them. There are people I'd never help spread their message, but I wouldn't want the government to ban them from saying it either. Freedom of speech does not imply an obligation to facilitate other's speech, or listen to it.
Very well said. "Free Speech" means the GOVERNMENT can't make certain speech illegal, or ban books, or silence dissent (even though all those things do happen, even China enshrines free speech in their constitution). It DOES NOT mean I have to support you, or help you disseminate that speech.
(Still with me... you won't be in a moment)
It's the same reason a Jewish printer can turn away business from a pro-Palestinian group, and the same reason a Christian baker can^H^H^H should be able to refuse to make a gay wedding cake.
>> "For the 5th year in a row, potatoe production has far exceeded government estimates!"
> Dan Quayle, is that you?
You caught me :)
I was using the odd spelling on purpose, since I was referencing backwards-R russia.
That said, the trailing-e spelling is, and has always been an acceptable spelling of the word. The lib media decided to paint Quayle as an idiot and thus the lie was spread. Similar to how most people think GWB is dumb. 100% manufactured propaganda.
"For the 5th year in a row, potatoe production has far exceeded government estimates!"
"We have now experienced an unprecedented 64 straight months of job growth!"
Government will never fail. Programs are judged by their intentions. Similar to how "businesses" in Frisco can have billion dollar IPOs without any positive revenue, or plans to make any.
We live in bizzaro-world.
The United States (or, more accurately, "These United States" was more common in that era) did not invent slavery, but we did fight a very bloody war to end it. The fact that the founders engaged in a deplorable, yet common agricultural practice in the late 18th century does not invalidate their accomplishments or ideas.
In fact, it was the very wordings of our founding documents that Lincoln used to argue against chattel slavery. In that light, Lincoln was not a radical revolutionary, he was in fact a conservative who argued that we return to our ideals.
You know, from a British perspective, the US flag is a rebel flag as well. Just sayin.
True. I doubt it flies above any government buildings in the United Kingdom, but I bet you can still buy one at TESCO!
Yep: http://www.tesco.com/direct/us...
Search google for "confederate flag" and click the "shopping" tab.
https://www.google.com/#q=conf...
Now replace "confederate" with just about any other potentially offensive term (nazi, communist, rhodesia) and you get plenty of results.
(NOTE: I don't support flying the flag. It's a rebel flag and I don't like it. But banning it from the marketplace? That seems rather self-defeating)