P1: One can consider a fertilized egg (an embryo) a living human being. P2: Killing human beings is wrong. C: Embryonic stem cell research is wrong.
or if you think an embryo isn't a human yet... one can say denying the development of a potential human being is wrong.
Those agruments, of course, are totally based on someone's code of ethics or morals. If someone do not agree with them, then that someone won't understand the argument since a postulate is (to that person) in itself false.
You also need to agree on the definition of a human being.
You can argue without any reference to killing a human being though...
P1: There are other methods of obtaining stem cells that have as much potential as embryonic stem cells (bone marrow, and they are found throughout pregnant/post-pregnant women for a time). P2: It is best to upset the least amount of people in a society. C: It is best not to conduct/endorse embryonic stem cell research.
But then again, we don't know the full potential of embryonic stem cells compared to others... so that last argument only half holds.
I don't necessarily agree with those arguments, but am merely passing them along.
Even if youwere talking about this overall design flaw, your prior analogies presented were still wrong. Not eveyrone can explot them. Not every exploit will cause your computer to be destroyed. I have fixed at least 5 computers that have been effected by this recent exploit and all were recovered with minimal to no data loss.
The comments I made were not personal attacks. They were pointing out that your analogies were wrong and you need guidance on creating ones in the future. The comment about improper English was just a shot at another possible explanation for the cause. The exageration was still there.
You need to take some classes / read some books in logical reasoning.
Your ramblings make you seem uninformed and comfused. You misrepresent the real facts, you still exagerate the reason for the flaw... and now you're not even making analogies. Perhaps you don't understand english well.
I would review your posting and tell you point by point what is wrong with your statements, but that would be a horrible waste of time.
Please do yourself a favor and logical reasoning, intro to logic, or any other related class.
Don't downplay the security problems with IE. It's not just a matter of the lock being picked. The security problems in IE are structural, and their failure can destroy your operating system and all your data which would metaphorically require you to replace the car.
Again, stop exaggerating.
Their failure allows someone to access your computer and arbitrarily do what they want. The problem with lock will not destroy your car... but the person breaking has that potential. Someone breaking in could even clean your car and replace your locks so no one else could break in (just like the exploit), but that probably won't happen.
But if you insist... not only can the lock be picked, but every car uses the same key and they successfully fought off a lawsuit on the grounds that it's inconvenient to have to cut different keys for each car... and have refused to fix the lock after several years
Again, an exaggeration.
Realistically, (FYI) the same key can open multiple cars (my brother's keys could open each other's escorts). Same with your remote door unlock.
But back on the point... that analogy is even worse.
1) You make it seem that anyone with a key (basically ANYONE) can break into your car. But they can't. You have to have knowledge of how to pick a lock, or obtain a universal key. Not anyone can break into your computer... they have to know how to do it themselves or be a script kiddie and get the solution from someone else (...the universal key).
2) Bringing in the lawsuit is another exaggeration. I don't think I need to explain why.
3) You say they ignore it because it is inconvenient. Microsoft is addressing this issue and will be fixed in the next service pack.
4) You say they have refused to fix the problem, but Microsoft has given instructions on how to set your security settings so you will not be affected by this. They even have a patch that will change these settings automatically (see recent slashdot article or the microsoft website).
Basically that last analogy you gave did not have a single valid point. Either you do not understand the situation at all, or are just absolutely horrible at making analogies.
The real problem with analogies is that it's hard to come up with one that really describes the level of absurdity in Microsoft's behaviour without it sounding ridiculously exagerated.
There's no problem with analogies... just with some people who attempt to make them - especially when their view of the situation is skewed to begin with.
Perhaps a better analogy would be if they made safety belts out of tissue paper, and then said "you can always replace them with safety belts that work".
No, it's like someone coming along and picking the lock to your car and stealing it after Ford knows that you can pick the lock to the car, but there's always the option to getting PATS or some other, after-market active anti-theft system. Or just a different type of lock.
More interesting is that he predicted the Y2K bug all the way back in 1971!
Well if you were a programmer who understood how the date structure worked... you too would know about the Y2K bug.
Even when they decided on the "standard" they knew that it would have problems come the turn of the century, but they just thought that a new standard would be made by then and they wouldn't have to worry.
Guess what... It's 2004 and I know of a new Y2K+30something bug! (forget the exact year... 2036?)
I'm not suprised that they are funded by microsoft...
Not because they are anti open source, but because they probably bought microsoft products because they don't like open source. This, in turn, led to them getting discounts and other perks because they purchased lots of licenses from Microsoft.
Call it funding... but I call it bulk discount.
If you're anti open source, why wouldn't you seek funding in some sort from an alternative company if you agree to exclusively use their software? It's just good business sense.
Not to be a flame, but why don't you just try to listen to their arguments instead of saying "Look! They use microsoft products! They must be biased! Ha ha ha ha. Open Source wins again."
2) Posting here even with a registered user name is pretty anonymous. This is the first I've ever even mentioned about my intelligence anyway.
3) Spellings are arbitrary. Who cares? I could have easily ran it through a spell check but... again... who cares?
4) You complain about my spelling when you yourself are far from perfect... I don't really care but I just thought you might.
5) Your entire argument is fallacious and misguided. My entire post was about not being arrogant or a prima donna, yet somehow you came to the conclusion that my big plan was to go around gloating - trumpeting - about my intelligence.
You call me an idiot but obviously don't even understand what I say. You're like a midgit making fun of someone 5'9".
You'll go out and find you aren't as special as you think you are. Yes, I was the same way... and still am. I have a 3.92, graduated HS with lots of honors (higher gpa though... could have been higher if i didn't slack off my soph year), got all the comments about intelligence, genius, whatever. Now i'm a junior in college and work too.
I have a co-op job and work with some people I concider not as intelligent as I am or they just don't grasp things like I do... but I don't care. They know things that I don't, they think differently than I do, but they're engineers, they're smart too. You can be gifted in many different ways (I used to work at a bagle shop and had an awesome General Manager there. He was gifted in his own right and I highly respect him).
At work I have it setup where I get daily dilbert when I log into my computer... odly enough last week was pretty much all about the "prima donna" of the office. And now my only advice to you is to try not to be that guy.
Even in classes the same rule applies. Don't be that guy who thinks he's god's gift to the classroom/lecture hall. I've seen plenty of those, and no one likes them.
Who did we like or admire? The guy who got close to the higest grade on all the exams but kept to himself. He was bright, and not an ass hole.
Sure you might have the gifts for science, computers, art, music, or whatever you like... but what you really need to keep up in the real world is to have the social skills.
I'm guessing that a lot of those PHD's independent projects have something to do or might eventually be integrated into google
My bets are that anything that can be related to google, will be...
I work as a Systems Engineer at a wire harness supplier for... one of the big three. I'm just a co-op right now, but they even made me sign a contract saying that any research or patents I may do regarding anything that relates to wire harnesses or the like will be property of [Insert Company Here].
If Google does the same thing, the little extra time they give their employees will definately be beneficial for them.
(No down speak of Google was intended in this post... I agree with the contract I signed, and I did get to sign off a few ideas I had prior to working with said company).
For so many years games were designed around the fact that you have to shoot your way through everything... not climb out windows.
Sure games like Splinter Cell and such require you to do that, but still.
Can't expect someone to shoot their way through 30 terrorists, throwing gernades, maybe even pulling out a knife to finish a few off.... then opt to climb out a window just because there's more resistance.
Slashdot Mirror
There are many areas one can be intelligent in. Sure, they are better at English and other "humanities" types of skills...
...so I conclude that Engineers, the ones good in math and science, use PCs.
This study doesn't say anything about the level of intelligence, but merely the type of person that uses x computer.
Yes.
P1: One can consider a fertilized egg (an embryo) a living human being.
P2: Killing human beings is wrong.
C: Embryonic stem cell research is wrong.
or if you think an embryo isn't a human yet... one can say denying the development of a potential human being is wrong.
Those agruments, of course, are totally based on someone's code of ethics or morals. If someone do not agree with them, then that someone won't understand the argument since a postulate is (to that person) in itself false.
You also need to agree on the definition of a human being.
You can argue without any reference to killing a human being though...
P1: There are other methods of obtaining stem cells that have as much potential as embryonic stem cells (bone marrow, and they are found throughout pregnant/post-pregnant women for a time).
P2: It is best to upset the least amount of people in a society.
C: It is best not to conduct/endorse embryonic stem cell research.
But then again, we don't know the full potential of embryonic stem cells compared to others... so that last argument only half holds.
I don't necessarily agree with those arguments, but am merely passing them along.
There's no argument against stem cell research in general, just the specific research that uses stem cells from embryos.
And arguing against destroying embryos doesn't have be be religion-based... it can simply be ethics.
This is, by the way, the only stem cell research that the government won't fund... not all stem cell research in general.
Please refer to previous posts to refresh yourself on what I was/am objecting to in your statements. I don't know how to make it any clearer.
Even if youwere talking about this overall design flaw, your prior analogies presented were still wrong. Not eveyrone can explot them. Not every exploit will cause your computer to be destroyed. I have fixed at least 5 computers that have been effected by this recent exploit and all were recovered with minimal to no data loss.
The comments I made were not personal attacks. They were pointing out that your analogies were wrong and you need guidance on creating ones in the future. The comment about improper English was just a shot at another possible explanation for the cause. The exageration was still there.
You need to take some classes / read some books in logical reasoning.
Your ramblings make you seem uninformed and comfused. You misrepresent the real facts, you still exagerate the reason for the flaw... and now you're not even making analogies. Perhaps you don't understand english well.
I would review your posting and tell you point by point what is wrong with your statements, but that would be a horrible waste of time.
Please do yourself a favor and logical reasoning, intro to logic, or any other related class.
Don't downplay the security problems with IE. It's not just a matter of the lock being picked. The security problems in IE are structural, and their failure can destroy your operating system and all your data which would metaphorically require you to replace the car.
Again, stop exaggerating.
Their failure allows someone to access your computer and arbitrarily do what they want. The problem with lock will not destroy your car... but the person breaking has that potential. Someone breaking in could even clean your car and replace your locks so no one else could break in (just like the exploit), but that probably won't happen.
But if you insist... not only can the lock be picked, but every car uses the same key and they successfully fought off a lawsuit on the grounds that it's inconvenient to have to cut different keys for each car... and have refused to fix the lock after several years
Again, an exaggeration.
Realistically, (FYI) the same key can open multiple cars (my brother's keys could open each other's escorts). Same with your remote door unlock.
But back on the point... that analogy is even worse.
1) You make it seem that anyone with a key (basically ANYONE) can break into your car. But they can't. You have to have knowledge of how to pick a lock, or obtain a universal key. Not anyone can break into your computer... they have to know how to do it themselves or be a script kiddie and get the solution from someone else (...the universal key).
2) Bringing in the lawsuit is another exaggeration. I don't think I need to explain why.
3) You say they ignore it because it is inconvenient. Microsoft is addressing this issue and will be fixed in the next service pack.
4) You say they have refused to fix the problem, but Microsoft has given instructions on how to set your security settings so you will not be affected by this. They even have a patch that will change these settings automatically (see recent slashdot article or the microsoft website).
Basically that last analogy you gave did not have a single valid point. Either you do not understand the situation at all, or are just absolutely horrible at making analogies.
The real problem with analogies is that it's hard to come up with one that really describes the level of absurdity in Microsoft's behaviour without it sounding ridiculously exagerated.
There's no problem with analogies... just with some people who attempt to make them - especially when their view of the situation is skewed to begin with.
Perhaps a better analogy would be if they made safety belts out of tissue paper, and then said "you can always replace them with safety belts that work".
No, it's like someone coming along and picking the lock to your car and stealing it after Ford knows that you can pick the lock to the car, but there's always the option to getting PATS or some other, after-market active anti-theft system. Or just a different type of lock.
Do not exagerate your analogies.
No, it's just that IE recognises the security level as being local, hence you can open the file directly.
I thought UBI was a canadian company...
More interesting is that he predicted the Y2K bug all the way back in 1971!
Well if you were a programmer who understood how the date structure worked... you too would know about the Y2K bug.
Even when they decided on the "standard" they knew that it would have problems come the turn of the century, but they just thought that a new standard would be made by then and they wouldn't have to worry.
Guess what... It's 2004 and I know of a new Y2K+30something bug! (forget the exact year... 2036?)
Don't touch the fahrenheit system.
I like the metric system, but for climate temperature, fahrenheit is just more intuitive.
Well, at least Europe with their metric system didn't totally loose track of Beagle 2....
...oh wait...
I'm not suprised that they are funded by microsoft...
Not because they are anti open source, but because they probably bought microsoft products because they don't like open source. This, in turn, led to them getting discounts and other perks because they purchased lots of licenses from Microsoft.
Call it funding... but I call it bulk discount.
If you're anti open source, why wouldn't you seek funding in some sort from an alternative company if you agree to exclusively use their software? It's just good business sense.
Not to be a flame, but why don't you just try to listen to their arguments instead of saying "Look! They use microsoft products! They must be biased! Ha ha ha ha. Open Source wins again."
Use a frekin firewall.
You're a linux user, but you're pretty stupid.
...you just change your perspective and they'll stand out like a sore thumb.
That actualy doesn't work anymore... unless you haven't patched Win2k?
Also... that's a problem with printf() mainly... not windows.
1) Slashdot is hardly public
2) Posting here even with a registered user name is pretty anonymous. This is the first I've ever even mentioned about my intelligence anyway.
3) Spellings are arbitrary. Who cares? I could have easily ran it through a spell check but... again... who cares?
4) You complain about my spelling when you yourself are far from perfect... I don't really care but I just thought you might.
5) Your entire argument is fallacious and misguided. My entire post was about not being arrogant or a prima donna, yet somehow you came to the conclusion that my big plan was to go around gloating - trumpeting - about my intelligence.
You call me an idiot but obviously don't even understand what I say. You're like a midgit making fun of someone 5'9".
Don't be arrogant.
You'll go out and find you aren't as special as you think you are. Yes, I was the same way... and still am. I have a 3.92, graduated HS with lots of honors (higher gpa though... could have been higher if i didn't slack off my soph year), got all the comments about intelligence, genius, whatever. Now i'm a junior in college and work too.
I have a co-op job and work with some people I concider not as intelligent as I am or they just don't grasp things like I do... but I don't care. They know things that I don't, they think differently than I do, but they're engineers, they're smart too. You can be gifted in many different ways (I used to work at a bagle shop and had an awesome General Manager there. He was gifted in his own right and I highly respect him).
At work I have it setup where I get daily dilbert when I log into my computer... odly enough last week was pretty much all about the "prima donna" of the office. And now my only advice to you is to try not to be that guy.
Even in classes the same rule applies. Don't be that guy who thinks he's god's gift to the classroom/lecture hall. I've seen plenty of those, and no one likes them.
Who did we like or admire? The guy who got close to the higest grade on all the exams but kept to himself. He was bright, and not an ass hole.
Sure you might have the gifts for science, computers, art, music, or whatever you like... but what you really need to keep up in the real world is to have the social skills.
I'm guessing that a lot of those PHD's independent projects have something to do or might eventually be integrated into google
My bets are that anything that can be related to google, will be...
I work as a Systems Engineer at a wire harness supplier for... one of the big three. I'm just a co-op right now, but they even made me sign a contract saying that any research or patents I may do regarding anything that relates to wire harnesses or the like will be property of [Insert Company Here].
If Google does the same thing, the little extra time they give their employees will definately be beneficial for them.
(No down speak of Google was intended in this post... I agree with the contract I signed, and I did get to sign off a few ideas I had prior to working with said company).
For so many years games were designed around the fact that you have to shoot your way through everything... not climb out windows.
Sure games like Splinter Cell and such require you to do that, but still.
Can't expect someone to shoot their way through 30 terrorists, throwing gernades, maybe even pulling out a knife to finish a few off.... then opt to climb out a window just because there's more resistance.
It's just a conflict of game play.
someone should delete this post. It could cause some trouble...
Pro microsoft doesn't mean anti-linux. It just means ant-everythingelse. Same with being pro-linux... you're anti-everything_that_isn't_linux.
So the moon is made out of Hydrogen and Helium now?
No... it's cheese. But if you feed cheese to certian people, large quantities of gas are expelled.
You overcomplicate things... good job, dick.