Irrational? No. Maybe you could argue for misguided. Or optimistic. Or deluded. But irrational? No, it's _entirely_ rational to desire this state of affairs.
Regarding smartphone manufacturers having a clue. Way back in the day before Linux people made the same arguments about servers and desktops and laptops. Before Android people made the same argument about smartphones. Heck now there's even an open hardware server consortium. These processes always seem impossible right up until the point they become reality and then they were the most obvious thing in the world.
Smartphone makers employ engineers and engineers give enough of a 'shit' about Ubuntu, ergo smartphone makers give enough of a 'shit' about Ubuntu.
This 'silly fantasy world' you speak of. It's called mutual cooperation. It's called trust. It's called sharing the load. It's called socially responsible. It's called not being hostile to your users and customers. The only hurt I see is the current situation. A mirage of short-term gains for longer-term whatever the opposite of benefits is (what's the opposite of benefits again? aaargh, stupid brain).
Statistically insignificant? 75% of smartphones run a more or less free and open-source OS. Oh, there's that word silly again. And shit. And fucking silly. And... Oh dear I'm having a hard time digesting your argument (you do have an argument, don't you) what with all the childish insults you're dropping. Tell you what, when you grow up and want to have an adult conversation with us I'm all ears, until then any chance you could stay away from that keyboard of yours and not waste our time. You come across like you're aged 14 and so do the people who upvoted you.
Bizarro that you'd post all this anonymously. Also, an easier way to show that there are no inherent human rights, that in fact there are only those that we assert and cling to is to ask exactly where these rights reside and what extra-human agency grants them. I mean they're obviously not corporeal, so maybe they're spirit-like, like souls. To me, the universal declaration of human rights is more like a optimistic aspirational wish-list than an enumeration of "i don't where they are but they must be there somewhere" inherent rights.
And (at least according to one program I saw on TV a while back) the silting up of key mediterranean harbors due to upstream deforestation for crop production leading to soil erosion which also led to poorer soil conditions on top of silted up harbors.
They may be nutritionally similar but the point of some GM stuff is that it is crippled in some way. I don't give a rat's ass about the nutritional content of this modern technology but I do care about patenting gene sequences or farmers having to go back every year to purchase new seeds or whatever trickery these companies are up to. It would be one thing if they are just making better grain or better rice. But they're not just doing that, we all know that they're trying to extract profit all along the food pipeline. I think the consumer should know whether a foodstuff is GM so that they can, if they so choose, be able to avoid sanctioning agri-business tactics they do not ethically agree with. It is _false_ that there are no meaningful differences between GM foods and non-GM foods.
Uh, don't you mean draw a line? Crossing that line is a whole other ball game if you'll allow me to wantonly mix metaphors. Other than that, you have my blessing, and I'll keep you in my prayers.
Here in Ireland local councils have been trying to get waste incinerators built for years but because of NIMBYism it still hasn't happened yet. Environmental concerns are also cited (prions I think?). So the good folk of Ireland are against incineration, nuclear, fracking, wind farms to name but a few 20th century technologies. And we import all our energy and export our waste. We don't have the climate for solar. And they don't want us to burn fossil fuels - but indeed we burn the peat from our bogs. What a depressing country, no wonder so many emigrate and never return. Yay, go Ireland!
These are demonyms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonym FTL: The word demonym comes from the Greek word for "populace" ( demos) with the suffix for "name" (-onym).
"The term _cybernetics_ stems from Ancient Greek (kybernts), meaning "steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder" (the same root as government)." and it is the "Science concerned with the study of systems of any nature which are capable of receiving, storing and processing information so as to use it for control." (—A. N. Kolmogorov) or "A branch of mathematics dealing with problems of control, recursiveness, and information, focuses on forms and the patterns that connect." (—Gregory Bateson) so clearly cybernetics is computer-related. "cyber" is a back-formation from cybernetics.
Why the secrecy then? Why not legislate for this type of killing out in the open if it's all so reasonable and dandy?
Mistakes happen. Death is irreversible. Oopsies, sowwy.
Besides, the Global War on Terror is open-ended, the battlefield is everywhere.
And one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
And... finally, who trained Osama Bin Laden - former head of al Queda - so conveniently disposed of without a day in court, hmm? Oh yeah, fealty is so fickle... Might makes right, nothing to see here, move along, say... you sound sympathetic to the enemy, don't want to end up on our list now...
If you had read the book you'd know that the reason put forward by Jared Diamond for the fact that the Incas did not develop guns is because crop-farming techniques and species can spread east-west and not north-south. As the Americas are aligned north-south and Asia/Europe is aligned east-west it is a pure lucky accident of geography that Asia/Europe got a competitive advantage in farming thereby leading to dense populations with disease resistance. Plus Asia/Europe is bigger. It does not matter that Mexico is fertile, it matters that it is part of a continent that is aligned north-south. For instance wheat can be grown at roughly similar latitudes and so if someone works out wheat tech it can only really spread east-west. Corn Most other techs can spread to anywhere and are not so geographically dependent. So well done for pointing out that aboriginal Americans were not completely wiped out but not so well done with your other rebuttals. Of course, this is assuming that Jared Diamond's hypotheses are correct but that's another story.
In what way are you a philosopher? Do you lecture in philosophy? Have you published philosophical books? If you have merely studied philosophy or read some philosophical texts that does not make you a philosopher.
I'm going to take issue with what you wrote. Because of the way you've blended several different ideas together in your post this make take a little while.
1) An understanding of philosophy is no indicator of ones moral temperament. How could it be? So stating that you are a philosopher doesn't answer any questions. In fact it raises some because I doubt most philosophers would suggest that there could be any kind of link.
2) And then this moral relativism "true north" business. We punish those who do wrong, we reward those excel. In what way is intentionally drugging another human being (and doing so against their will) excellent behavior that should be rewarded? How can that be a humorous thing to say, why would anyone say something like that tongue in cheek, is that the kind of thing you'd find a philosopher saying? I don't think so.
3) And then this drifting off into the territory of pointing out that we should take the context into account. Ok. I'm sure the system will, it's designed to do that. What's that got to do with your initial statement? All it does it seems to me is divert attention away from your previous points.
So tell us, in what way are you a philosopher? Just saying so doesn't make it so.
Point 1) I don't think it matters that the report is four years old.
Point 2) the Perhaps means circa not maybe.
Point 3) Judge the content, not the author; certainly not the founder. Disclaimer: the author is F. William Engdahl, apparently a peak oil skeptic and perhaps believes in the abiogenic origin of petroleum. I am not saying that I am or I do.
Point 4) I am not trying to refute peak-oil. I am trying to say that it is possible that speculation could have driven the price of oil up. It's not inconceivable you know, I find it plausible that big money could be gaming the energy markets. If housing/property bubbles can happen, why not commodities/futures bubbles?
I have nothing against the theory of peak oil and have no problem getting my head around the idea that we could someday slowly reach the end of a finite resource and that at that point in time demand would outstrip supply bumping the price of oil (and its futures) up. I don't think that there is any conclusive evidence that we are at peak-oil (or gas) and I don't even think that it would be a bad thing if we were: solar, wind, hydro, nuclear get relatively cheaper - we may enter into a period of global recession while we transition, but we'll get out the other side with some nice tech.
The iRiver H320 and H340 play.ogg, have a radio, have a colour screen and the battery life is okay (maybe ~8 hours, long enough for most journeys, just keep it topped up)
Slashdot Mirror
Irrational? No. Maybe you could argue for misguided. Or optimistic. Or deluded. But irrational? No, it's _entirely_ rational to desire this state of affairs.
Regarding smartphone manufacturers having a clue. Way back in the day before Linux people made the same arguments about servers and desktops and laptops. Before Android people made the same argument about smartphones. Heck now there's even an open hardware server consortium. These processes always seem impossible right up until the point they become reality and then they were the most obvious thing in the world.
Smartphone makers employ engineers and engineers give enough of a 'shit' about Ubuntu, ergo smartphone makers give enough of a 'shit' about Ubuntu.
This 'silly fantasy world' you speak of. It's called mutual cooperation. It's called trust. It's called sharing the load. It's called socially responsible. It's called not being hostile to your users and customers. The only hurt I see is the current situation. A mirage of short-term gains for longer-term whatever the opposite of benefits is (what's the opposite of benefits again? aaargh, stupid brain).
Statistically insignificant? 75% of smartphones run a more or less free and open-source OS. Oh, there's that word silly again. And shit. And fucking silly. And ... Oh dear I'm having a hard time digesting your argument (you do have an argument, don't you) what with all the childish insults you're dropping. Tell you what, when you grow up and want to have an adult conversation with us I'm all ears, until then any chance you could stay away from that keyboard of yours and not waste our time. You come across like you're aged 14 and so do the people who upvoted you.
Lucky resourceful Norwegians :)
Off-topic: Why did you link to that book in your sig?
No, not that IBM; the other IBM that still has a metric (not imperial) shitload[1] of assets.
[1] http://www.ibm.com/products
Bizarro that you'd post all this anonymously. Also, an easier way to show that there are no inherent human rights, that in fact there are only those that we assert and cling to is to ask exactly where these rights reside and what extra-human agency grants them. I mean they're obviously not corporeal, so maybe they're spirit-like, like souls. To me, the universal declaration of human rights is more like a optimistic aspirational wish-list than an enumeration of "i don't where they are but they must be there somewhere" inherent rights.
I too would give this fine person 10 of my non-existent mod points.
minor nitpick, re: (1) ... depends if you pronounce h as aitch or haitch - both are current usage where I come from :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H
And (at least according to one program I saw on TV a while back) the silting up of key mediterranean harbors due to upstream deforestation for crop production leading to soil erosion which also led to poorer soil conditions on top of silted up harbors.
I am a fan of your work and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Yeah? Complete hokum sir.
They may be nutritionally similar but the point of some GM stuff is that it is crippled in some way. I don't give a rat's ass about the nutritional content of this modern technology but I do care about patenting gene sequences or farmers having to go back every year to purchase new seeds or whatever trickery these companies are up to. It would be one thing if they are just making better grain or better rice. But they're not just doing that, we all know that they're trying to extract profit all along the food pipeline. I think the consumer should know whether a foodstuff is GM so that they can, if they so choose, be able to avoid sanctioning agri-business tactics they do not ethically agree with. It is _false_ that there are no meaningful differences between GM foods and non-GM foods.
Horoscopes? Give us a break.
Uh, don't you mean draw a line? Crossing that line is a whole other ball game if you'll allow me to wantonly mix metaphors. Other than that, you have my blessing, and I'll keep you in my prayers.
Here in Ireland local councils have been trying to get waste incinerators built for years but because of NIMBYism it still hasn't happened yet. Environmental concerns are also cited (prions I think?). So the good folk of Ireland are against incineration, nuclear, fracking, wind farms to name but a few 20th century technologies. And we import all our energy and export our waste. We don't have the climate for solar. And they don't want us to burn fossil fuels - but indeed we burn the peat from our bogs. What a depressing country, no wonder so many emigrate and never return. Yay, go Ireland!
Neapolitan/Napoletano/a.
Oslovian.
These are demonyms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonym
FTL: The word demonym comes from the Greek word for "populace" ( demos) with the suffix for "name" (-onym).
The one I've heard is more succinct, "there's money in s#!t".
> [...] and stopping the flow of money to a55h0le muslim countries.
> Does anyone else feel this way?
Why yes; yes they do. All of the other ignorant bigots.
fyi :)
What you wrote is incomprehensible.
Iran's economy is mainly held back by sanctions.
i refute it thus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norbert_Wiener
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_McCulloch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_Macy,_Jr._Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macy_Conferences
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cybernetics
"The term _cybernetics_ stems from Ancient Greek (kybernts), meaning "steersman, governor, pilot, or rudder" (the same root as government)." and it is the "Science concerned with the study of systems of any nature which are capable of receiving, storing and processing information so as to use it for control." (—A. N. Kolmogorov) or "A branch of mathematics dealing with problems of control, recursiveness, and information, focuses on forms and the patterns that connect." (—Gregory Bateson) so clearly cybernetics is computer-related. "cyber" is a back-formation from cybernetics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back_formation
Care to play again?
Why the secrecy then? Why not legislate for this type of killing out in the open if it's all so reasonable and dandy?
Mistakes happen. Death is irreversible. Oopsies, sowwy.
Besides, the Global War on Terror is open-ended, the battlefield is everywhere.
And one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
And ... finally, who trained Osama Bin Laden - former head of al Queda - so conveniently disposed of without a day in court, hmm? Oh yeah, fealty is so fickle ... Might makes right, nothing to see here, move along, say ... you sound sympathetic to the enemy, don't want to end up on our list now ...
If you had read the book you'd know that the reason put forward by Jared Diamond for the fact that the Incas did not develop guns is because crop-farming techniques and species can spread east-west and not north-south. As the Americas are aligned north-south and Asia/Europe is aligned east-west it is a pure lucky accident of geography that Asia/Europe got a competitive advantage in farming thereby leading to dense populations with disease resistance. Plus Asia/Europe is bigger. It does not matter that Mexico is fertile, it matters that it is part of a continent that is aligned north-south. For instance wheat can be grown at roughly similar latitudes and so if someone works out wheat tech it can only really spread east-west. Corn Most other techs can spread to anywhere and are not so geographically dependent. So well done for pointing out that aboriginal Americans were not completely wiped out but not so well done with your other rebuttals. Of course, this is assuming that Jared Diamond's hypotheses are correct but that's another story.
In what way are you a philosopher? Do you lecture in philosophy? Have you published philosophical books? If you have merely studied philosophy or read some philosophical texts that does not make you a philosopher.
I'm going to take issue with what you wrote. Because of the way you've blended several different ideas together in your post this make take a little while.
1) An understanding of philosophy is no indicator of ones moral temperament. How could it be? So stating that you are a philosopher doesn't answer any questions. In fact it raises some because I doubt most philosophers would suggest that there could be any kind of link.
2) And then this moral relativism "true north" business. We punish those who do wrong, we reward those excel. In what way is intentionally drugging another human being (and doing so against their will) excellent behavior that should be rewarded? How can that be a humorous thing to say, why would anyone say something like that tongue in cheek, is that the kind of thing you'd find a philosopher saying? I don't think so.
3) And then this drifting off into the territory of pointing out that we should take the context into account. Ok. I'm sure the system will, it's designed to do that. What's that got to do with your initial statement? All it does it seems to me is divert attention away from your previous points.
So tell us, in what way are you a philosopher? Just saying so doesn't make it so.
Ok. Points taken. I offer a slight rebuttal.
Point 1) I don't think it matters that the report is four years old.
Point 2) the Perhaps means circa not maybe.
Point 3) Judge the content, not the author; certainly not the founder. Disclaimer: the author is F. William Engdahl, apparently a peak oil skeptic and perhaps believes in the abiogenic origin of petroleum. I am not saying that I am or I do.
Point 4) I am not trying to refute peak-oil. I am trying to say that it is possible that speculation could have driven the price of oil up. It's not inconceivable you know, I find it plausible that big money could be gaming the energy markets. If housing/property bubbles can happen, why not commodities/futures bubbles?
I have nothing against the theory of peak oil and have no problem getting my head around the idea that we could someday slowly reach the end of a finite resource and that at that point in time demand would outstrip supply bumping the price of oil (and its futures) up. I don't think that there is any conclusive evidence that we are at peak-oil (or gas) and I don't even think that it would be a bad thing if we were: solar, wind, hydro, nuclear get relatively cheaper - we may enter into a period of global recession while we transition, but we'll get out the other side with some nice tech.
It is apparently $4 for gas because of oil speculation: http://www.globalresearch.ca/perhaps-60-of-today-s-oil-price-is-pure-speculation/8878
Speculation accounts for 60% of the cost of gas they say. Bit of a long read but I'm convinced.
The iRiver H320 and H340 play .ogg, have a radio, have a colour screen and the battery life is okay (maybe ~8 hours, long enough for most journeys, just keep it topped up)
Modders, mod this guy up, he seems to be involved in the project!