That's one poll, it's not clear if it's accurate or not. Given that both Obama and McCain came out against legalized gay marriage in their political campaigns, I'm guessing they didn't sense the winds of the nation particularly blowing in that direction yet. (Taking a cynical view of politicians.)
Why are children and animals unable to give consent? What if they enjoy it? I'm playing the devil's advocate, but curious if you have a substantial answer beyond "that's the law". You said it was so asinine that you couldn't help but point it out, so I assume this should be easy for you.:)
Absolutely -- being embarrassed in the locker room crowd at your high school is a problem that is temporary, limited, and soon forgotten by everybody involved. SpreadingSantorum.com is on the internet, known about by millions of people, and is permanently on the record. But maybe you are thinking Savage could have been called a worse profanity or something, which I certainly agree could be true.
With that said, there certainly are cases like you reference where due to depression, extreme social isolation, etc. students commit suicide or are otherwise seriously messed up psychologically; and I won't make light of that with regard to homosexuals or any other people who are picked on. But Savage appears to have emerged from his youth fairly intact, so my opinion stands.
But that's just the thing -- Dan Savage didn't call out Rick Santorum for being a hate-monger here. Instead, he publicy called Santorum a piece of excrement that is a by-product of indecent acts (understand that I refer to indecency there in the common legal sense of "for public display", I don't care what people do in their bedrooms).
Are you really so dense? Do you not see the difference between gratuitous insults versus rational discourse and argument?
All right, since you seem to be struggling with this, let's do a little mental exercise -- suppose that somebody launched an internet campaign to associate some vulgar, racist profanity with President Obama, and through a widespread google bombing campaign, brought it to the top of Google's search results. At that point, the person has used the force multiplier of the internet to exercise power over a politician, at least in a certain respect. And just like schoolyard bullying, it comes of "just being a d**k". I think most people would agree that Dan Savage's malicious and hateful internet campaign can be described the same way.
Rick Santorum is not my first choice by a long shot for the presidency, but it would be ironic if he got the nomination and then won the election because most Americans are fair-minded enough to actually be swayed the other way by Savage's malicious hatefulness and disgusting behavior. I don't think Savage is really doing Obama any net favors at this point.
Given that the "threat" is merely one of political conservatism, i.e. maintaining the status quo and not allowing the creation of a completely new (and in most people's view, radical) social institution of gay marriage, I find your scary words unnecessarily sensational. It's not like Rick Santorum is waving a pipe wrench over Dan Savage's head. Even Obama came out against gay marriage, remember? So is Obama a threat to Dan Savage, too?
I don't think Santorum called same sex marriage a form of bestiality or pedophilia, which is a statement that doesn't even make sense. I think he used the latter (B & P) to illustrate that "Whatever people want to do sexually doesn't always have to be considered OK under the law" -- which is a true principle, though you may disagree as to the particulars of application.
Parent is insightful. Savage claims to have been bullied in high school for his sexual orientation. But I guarantee you he didn't undergo anything as publicly humiliating as his own malicious and hate-filled public attack on Rick Santorum. Dan Savage has personally exemplified the negative human behaviors he writes against in his columns, and destroyed his credibility as a spokesperson for tolerance and coexistence.
I don't think directly or indirectly threatening the Chinese government is in Apple's best interests. All the government would have to do is threaten to shut down Apple's Chinese manufacturing facilities and they'd be back to square one. Given how defensive Apple is about their own trademarks, I do find the whole spectacle amusing now that they've been caught in hypocrisy on that count. With that said, I'm sure they'll work out a backroom deal of some kind, everybody will save face in some way, and life will go on.
Except that unlike x86 Windows, Windows 8 ARM is likely to be locked down, i.e. it's doubtful whether an ordinary consumer can install their own copy on generic ARM hardward. I don't think Microsoft wants to subsidize the cheap Android tablet hardware market.
Actually, there's a good answer for that: One of the really fulfilling and profounding affirming activities for nerds to engage in on a tech / "news for nerds" site is to complain about articles that don't fit that profile. But the problem is that if there never were any irrelevant articles, nobody would have anything to complain about, and thus we would have a compromised experience. It's paradoxical, but everything seems to be going according to plan.
Why would you move to a state with a higher crime rate? Another homeschool fail?
There are so many things wrong with your brief post, it's hard to know where to start. First, in terms of violent crime commission rate over population, Washington state is in fact worse than Wyoming, per http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank21.html (maybe that's changed over the last few decades, maybe it hasn't). Second, if you had thought things through a little more deeply before posting, you would realize that even if Wyoming had a higher crime rate than Washington, GP's family could have improved their situation by moving to a town or county with a low crime rate. A state-to-state comparison is really meaningless, which observation by itself permits us to classify you as an idiot in this situation. Third, your phrase "another homeschool fail" indicates ignorance of the success rate of homeschooling in general, which tends to eat other modes of education for lunch in comparative studies.
Full disclosure -- I was homeschooled K-12 as well, and am just getting started homeschooling my own kids. It's not for everybody, but when you do it right, it rocks.
Not saying there isn't great potential for good there, but I don't expect to see it. Unfortunately, the Islamists in Libya and Egypt would like nothing better than to use technology the same way Iran does -- to stifle any dissent from the political/religious straightjacket that is Islamic fundamentalism. I hope for the best, but don't like some aspects of the political momentum I see in the "Arab spring". It seems like they are dumping corrupt secular dictators, just to prop up theoretically less corrupt, but still abjectly fascist slave masters wielding Sharia law.
Also (while I seriously doubt this applies to the OP), the world of 3D will be an interesting place when the CV and AI academic communities start recognizing a bunch more objects and create the ability to much more accurately annotate and infer 3D within a scene. Currently 3D can be added by a difficult manual process, which is certainly too time intensive to do thoroughly and well for anything movie-length, hence the annoyingly partial jobs we've seen up to now. We haven't yet seen the theoretical limits of 2D to 3D stereoscopic conversion (which don't get me wrong, the limits may remain unacceptable aesthetically; just saying that we haven't yet seen them).
Let's say you have a video camera poked out of the side window of your car, and you're driving down a road alongside a wide field. The field is sparsely populated with trees, and there are mountains far off in the background.
With the use of video in such a case, the depth information can be pretty accurately inferred from the parallax effect, due to the fact that your car (and camera) are moving along the road. It's a difficult problem, but by comparing frame with frame, an algorithm might piece a somewhat reasonable stereoscopic render of such a scene. There are many other scenes where that approach is futile, but your assertion that all depth is lost is not accurate for the case of (some) video (under ideal conditions). Let's not oversimplify the issue.
Clarification -- Arduino doesn't suck, just paraphrasing the unfortunate mentality of a bunch of posters on this article. It is bewildering to me that on a "news for nerds" site, people are disparaging somebody from undertaking what could turn out to be a cool tech project, even if it is known in advance that the end result isn't going to be "Avatar". And even if the best of 3D is a bomb in the theater, that doesn't mean it isn't a lot of fun to play with, as a school project, etc. I enjoyed messing with this stuff in physics lab in college.
Contra my provocative subject, Arduino is an excellent choice for serious hobbyists. And similarly, there is nothing wrong with playing around with 3D video techniques and even being willing to try rolling one's own algorithm.
Get a (homebrew friendly) life, slashdotters!
(If the OP clarifies that he's working on a big Hollywood title, I'll take this back. Until then...)
Slashdot Mirror
Also, I believe you just called President Obama a bigot. You're definitely in the minority in holding that view.
That's one poll, it's not clear if it's accurate or not. Given that both Obama and McCain came out against legalized gay marriage in their political campaigns, I'm guessing they didn't sense the winds of the nation particularly blowing in that direction yet. (Taking a cynical view of politicians.)
You may forget about it, but the people on the receiving end, we never do. We try to deal with it, because we have to, but we never forget.
So... u mad at Dan Savage for his santorum-obscenity website, bro? Or what? I'm confused which side of this issue you're on.
So... you are saying that Dan Savage committed suicide in high school? But that means.... *gasp*... that he's a ZOMBIE!!! AAAAAAAAUUUGH!!!!!
But I bet you, sir, were never bullied. And since you were never bullied, I suspect you were the bully...
Logic! (What do they teach in these schools, anyway?)
Why are children and animals unable to give consent? What if they enjoy it? I'm playing the devil's advocate, but curious if you have a substantial answer beyond "that's the law". You said it was so asinine that you couldn't help but point it out, so I assume this should be easy for you. :)
Really? You can guarantee that?
Absolutely -- being embarrassed in the locker room crowd at your high school is a problem that is temporary, limited, and soon forgotten by everybody involved. SpreadingSantorum.com is on the internet, known about by millions of people, and is permanently on the record. But maybe you are thinking Savage could have been called a worse profanity or something, which I certainly agree could be true.
With that said, there certainly are cases like you reference where due to depression, extreme social isolation, etc. students commit suicide or are otherwise seriously messed up psychologically; and I won't make light of that with regard to homosexuals or any other people who are picked on. But Savage appears to have emerged from his youth fairly intact, so my opinion stands.
But that's just the thing -- Dan Savage didn't call out Rick Santorum for being a hate-monger here. Instead, he publicy called Santorum a piece of excrement that is a by-product of indecent acts (understand that I refer to indecency there in the common legal sense of "for public display", I don't care what people do in their bedrooms).
Are you really so dense? Do you not see the difference between gratuitous insults versus rational discourse and argument?
All right, since you seem to be struggling with this, let's do a little mental exercise -- suppose that somebody launched an internet campaign to associate some vulgar, racist profanity with President Obama, and through a widespread google bombing campaign, brought it to the top of Google's search results. At that point, the person has used the force multiplier of the internet to exercise power over a politician, at least in a certain respect. And just like schoolyard bullying, it comes of "just being a d**k". I think most people would agree that Dan Savage's malicious and hateful internet campaign can be described the same way.
Rick Santorum is not my first choice by a long shot for the presidency, but it would be ironic if he got the nomination and then won the election because most Americans are fair-minded enough to actually be swayed the other way by Savage's malicious hatefulness and disgusting behavior. I don't think Savage is really doing Obama any net favors at this point.
Given that the "threat" is merely one of political conservatism, i.e. maintaining the status quo and not allowing the creation of a completely new (and in most people's view, radical) social institution of gay marriage, I find your scary words unnecessarily sensational. It's not like Rick Santorum is waving a pipe wrench over Dan Savage's head. Even Obama came out against gay marriage, remember? So is Obama a threat to Dan Savage, too?
I don't think Santorum called same sex marriage a form of bestiality or pedophilia, which is a statement that doesn't even make sense. I think he used the latter (B & P) to illustrate that "Whatever people want to do sexually doesn't always have to be considered OK under the law" -- which is a true principle, though you may disagree as to the particulars of application.
Parent is insightful. Savage claims to have been bullied in high school for his sexual orientation. But I guarantee you he didn't undergo anything as publicly humiliating as his own malicious and hate-filled public attack on Rick Santorum. Dan Savage has personally exemplified the negative human behaviors he writes against in his columns, and destroyed his credibility as a spokesperson for tolerance and coexistence.
I don't think directly or indirectly threatening the Chinese government is in Apple's best interests. All the government would have to do is threaten to shut down Apple's Chinese manufacturing facilities and they'd be back to square one. Given how defensive Apple is about their own trademarks, I do find the whole spectacle amusing now that they've been caught in hypocrisy on that count. With that said, I'm sure they'll work out a backroom deal of some kind, everybody will save face in some way, and life will go on.
Except that unlike x86 Windows, Windows 8 ARM is likely to be locked down, i.e. it's doubtful whether an ordinary consumer can install their own copy on generic ARM hardward. I don't think Microsoft wants to subsidize the cheap Android tablet hardware market.
*pushes Tristan out the door*
Sorry for the disturbance, folks. The fellow had a little too much schnapps and was starting to bother people.
Er, "profounding" --> "profoundly"
Actually, there's a good answer for that: One of the really fulfilling and profounding affirming activities for nerds to engage in on a tech / "news for nerds" site is to complain about articles that don't fit that profile. But the problem is that if there never were any irrelevant articles, nobody would have anything to complain about, and thus we would have a compromised experience. It's paradoxical, but everything seems to be going according to plan.
Why would you move to a state with a higher crime rate? Another homeschool fail?
There are so many things wrong with your brief post, it's hard to know where to start. First, in terms of violent crime commission rate over population, Washington state is in fact worse than Wyoming, per http://www.census.gov/statab/ranks/rank21.html (maybe that's changed over the last few decades, maybe it hasn't). Second, if you had thought things through a little more deeply before posting, you would realize that even if Wyoming had a higher crime rate than Washington, GP's family could have improved their situation by moving to a town or county with a low crime rate. A state-to-state comparison is really meaningless, which observation by itself permits us to classify you as an idiot in this situation. Third, your phrase "another homeschool fail" indicates ignorance of the success rate of homeschooling in general, which tends to eat other modes of education for lunch in comparative studies.
Full disclosure -- I was homeschooled K-12 as well, and am just getting started homeschooling my own kids. It's not for everybody, but when you do it right, it rocks.
Three negatives! Did anybody else have trouble parsing that sentence?
I didn't lack any difficulty failing to be unable to misunderstand what they didn't intend to deny.
And interestingly, the link notes that "abject lesson" is an Indian English idiom.
Taking steps toward Sharia law is not taking steps in the right direction. It's just not.
Not saying there isn't great potential for good there, but I don't expect to see it. Unfortunately, the Islamists in Libya and Egypt would like nothing better than to use technology the same way Iran does -- to stifle any dissent from the political/religious straightjacket that is Islamic fundamentalism. I hope for the best, but don't like some aspects of the political momentum I see in the "Arab spring". It seems like they are dumping corrupt secular dictators, just to prop up theoretically less corrupt, but still abjectly fascist slave masters wielding Sharia law.
This.
Also (while I seriously doubt this applies to the OP), the world of 3D will be an interesting place when the CV and AI academic communities start recognizing a bunch more objects and create the ability to much more accurately annotate and infer 3D within a scene. Currently 3D can be added by a difficult manual process, which is certainly too time intensive to do thoroughly and well for anything movie-length, hence the annoyingly partial jobs we've seen up to now. We haven't yet seen the theoretical limits of 2D to 3D stereoscopic conversion (which don't get me wrong, the limits may remain unacceptable aesthetically; just saying that we haven't yet seen them).
Let's say you have a video camera poked out of the side window of your car, and you're driving down a road alongside a wide field. The field is sparsely populated with trees, and there are mountains far off in the background.
With the use of video in such a case, the depth information can be pretty accurately inferred from the parallax effect, due to the fact that your car (and camera) are moving along the road. It's a difficult problem, but by comparing frame with frame, an algorithm might piece a somewhat reasonable stereoscopic render of such a scene. There are many other scenes where that approach is futile, but your assertion that all depth is lost is not accurate for the case of (some) video (under ideal conditions). Let's not oversimplify the issue.
Clarification -- Arduino doesn't suck, just paraphrasing the unfortunate mentality of a bunch of posters on this article. It is bewildering to me that on a "news for nerds" site, people are disparaging somebody from undertaking what could turn out to be a cool tech project, even if it is known in advance that the end result isn't going to be "Avatar". And even if the best of 3D is a bomb in the theater, that doesn't mean it isn't a lot of fun to play with, as a school project, etc. I enjoyed messing with this stuff in physics lab in college.
Contra my provocative subject, Arduino is an excellent choice for serious hobbyists. And similarly, there is nothing wrong with playing around with 3D video techniques and even being willing to try rolling one's own algorithm.
Get a (homebrew friendly) life, slashdotters!
(If the OP clarifies that he's working on a big Hollywood title, I'll take this back. Until then...)