As I said, religion is arbitrary, you can claim whatever you want, so it is easy to come up with more arguments. But those arbitrary arguments are certainly not reasonable.
And here this is a good thing, because you cannot reason with religious believers. This is why those guys usually have a big advantage: They are not bound by logic or reason, they can say the most crazy things and their followers swallow it dutifully. The only way to argue against them is to make fun of them. Which is what Coyne did.
They do it for security. It's OK if you don't understand it. You apparently don't like Google. That's OK as well. But neither is a good reason for posting hate-speech.
Of course it's not an excuse and not a defense. The same applies to the Muhammad-Cartoons, they hurt people and the author should have known that. But in both cases hurting people wasn't the primary goal, it was more like accepted collateral damage.
Please don't twist the facts, there wasn't any personal harassment of the living, none of them was even mentioned.
Maybe they took it personally, but that's up to them and that applies in both cases.
This was spite aimed at hurting the recently bereaved.
Not aimed at hurting. He wanted to make fun or maybe just draw attention. There is no reason to assume he intended to hurt those people. He didn't even know them.
It's similar to the Muhammad cartoons: Somebody makes fun about a dead guy, offending people who care deeply about that guy. So if those cartoons are considered Free Speech the same should apply here. Even more so because here we hurt maybe a few dozen people, with Muhammad it was many millions.
This merely says they are unable to filter out all the noise. Producing huge numbers of bits isn't a particularly remarkable achievement. I guess there is far less than 1% actual information in that bit stream.
That law in Oregon requires you to be lucid, and it requires inevitable death within 6 month. With Alzheimer's you aren't lucid 6 month before death, so this law isn't an option.
... if done The Right Way.
But as usual, the people in charge all have their personal interests, which do not match The Right Way. So this will become yet another nuisance.
No doubt, there are plenty of reasons why removing wireless connectivity from schools is a good idea. The danger of radiation hazard just isn't one of them. There is not even a 1% risk.
Girls are much more sensible here. They just don't do this, at least not without reason, and even then they are more subtle. Which is why they are more affected by this.
Could you elaborate on why the reasons don't make sense?
Metered Internet is fair in the sense that you pay for whatever bits hit your wire. If grandma reads email every once in a while, and her neighbor downloads movies all day its only fair if this one pays less than that one.
Additionally, we get rid of those "abuse" claims against power users.
There is a clear distinction: Religion claims to know 'right' and 'wrong'. Science doesn't care about that, instead science aims at being useful.
actually Sociology, Philosophy, Theology, Religion for the most part do have a very useful place in the world.
You didn't give any justification for this. Maybe a few centuries ago this used to be true. If you could support that statement for recent times I would be very interested.
the month of your birth has an impact on your outlook on life,
Probably. The date of your birth correlates in some way with the habits of your parents. And the habits of your parents certainly correlate with your outlook on life. No surprise here.
In other countries they have Sociology, Philosophy, Theology instead, which are equally useless nowadays. Useless in the sense that they don't produce useful results.
Slashdot Mirror
As I said, religion is arbitrary, you can claim whatever you want, so it is easy to come up with more arguments. But those arbitrary arguments are certainly not reasonable.
Coyne is unreasonable ...
And here this is a good thing, because you cannot reason with religious believers. This is why those guys usually have a big advantage: They are not bound by logic or reason, they can say the most crazy things and their followers swallow it dutifully. The only way to argue against them is to make fun of them. Which is what Coyne did.
They do it for security. It's OK if you don't understand it. You apparently don't like Google. That's OK as well. But neither is a good reason for posting hate-speech.
They had better come up with alternative proposals what to do with the babies when there is no full-time Nanny around.
Of course it's not an excuse and not a defense. The same applies to the Muhammad-Cartoons, they hurt people and the author should have known that. But in both cases hurting people wasn't the primary goal, it was more like accepted collateral damage.
Projecting it on a mosque is harassment.
Not if they ask everybody to publish their opinion there.
Please don't twist the facts, there wasn't any personal harassment of the living, none of them was even mentioned. Maybe they took it personally, but that's up to them and that applies in both cases.
The Muslims didn't ask for it. The people here did by inviting everybody to post his opinion.
This was spite aimed at hurting the recently bereaved.
Not aimed at hurting. He wanted to make fun or maybe just draw attention. There is no reason to assume he intended to hurt those people. He didn't even know them.
It's similar to the Muhammad cartoons: Somebody makes fun about a dead guy, offending people who care deeply about that guy. So if those cartoons are considered Free Speech the same should apply here. Even more so because here we hurt maybe a few dozen people, with Muhammad it was many millions.
... they just want to use the info you put on google plus to market to you. The more info, the better the marketing. never ever ever.
And that's why I *like* Google+. I actually prefer tailored marketing as compared to random toothpaste advertising.
This merely says they are unable to filter out all the noise. Producing huge numbers of bits isn't a particularly remarkable achievement. I guess there is far less than 1% actual information in that bit stream.
That law in Oregon requires you to be lucid, and it requires inevitable death within 6 month. With Alzheimer's you aren't lucid 6 month before death, so this law isn't an option.
... if done The Right Way. But as usual, the people in charge all have their personal interests, which do not match The Right Way. So this will become yet another nuisance.
No doubt, there are plenty of reasons why removing wireless connectivity from schools is a good idea. The danger of radiation hazard just isn't one of them. There is not even a 1% risk.
Girls are much more sensible here. They just don't do this, at least not without reason, and even then they are more subtle. Which is why they are more affected by this.
This website is different. The women there feel hurt in the first place, and they claim to state facts.
Could you elaborate on why the reasons don't make sense? Metered Internet is fair in the sense that you pay for whatever bits hit your wire. If grandma reads email every once in a while, and her neighbor downloads movies all day its only fair if this one pays less than that one. Additionally, we get rid of those "abuse" claims against power users.
Sociology obviously does.
Does it? Any example?
actually Sociology, Philosophy, Theology, Religion for the most part do have a very useful place in the world.
You didn't give any justification for this. Maybe a few centuries ago this used to be true. If you could support that statement for recent times I would be very interested.
the month of your birth has an impact on your outlook on life,
Probably. The date of your birth correlates in some way with the habits of your parents. And the habits of your parents certainly correlate with your outlook on life. No surprise here.
Science should be useful. Astrology isn't.
In other countries they have Sociology, Philosophy, Theology instead, which are equally useless nowadays. Useless in the sense that they don't produce useful results.
And good luck for this endeavor. A success here would allow us to get rid of at least a bit of patent headache.