Conversely, I was taller than most kids my age, so I got shoved into basketball, despite never done more than take a couple shots at a basket before. Meanwhile, my peers had been playing for years (7th grade), so I was the tall guy, but couldn't shoot, move the ball well, etc. Certainly I would have improved, had I kept pushing to learn, but it wasn't something I chose, it was chosen for me. As a result, I had to deal with both the problems inherent with being a poor player, as well as those inherent with "being a quitter". . On the upside, I probably would've spent more time in sports, and less time honing my computer skills, and now I have a decent job, whereas I might have hoped to play professional basketball, and in the long term, likely have had those dreams crushed, which would've probably more damaging to my psyche in the long run. . So things seem to have turned out well, but I would have rather avoided it all in the first place.
I believe it, too. I've also noticed that that viciousness also tends to be directed from a group a girls towards any other girls who are perceived to have an [percieved] advantage of one sort or another. Nothing is more bloody (from a mental standpoint, at least) than a pretty woman walking into a room full of ugly, overweight women, especially if there are men in the equation. The claws that come out make anything us guys do look pretty tame in comparison.
And if my memory is correct, while everybody enjoyed a good fight between guys in school, the fights between girls were the more violent ones. We generally ended up with a bloody nose or a few bruises, while the girls usually ended up with less hair and scratches on their faces. Our wounds were badges, theirs were meant to scar and embarrass.
Whoever decided women were the fairer sex never saw one girl put her foot on another girls shoulder and rip out two fistfuls of hair, that's for sure!
Proof? On Slashdot?!! There must be a rip in the fabric of space-time.
As for proof, there isn't much research done in this area, at least directly relating to humans. I imagine it wouldn't make someone too popular (or more importantly attract funding) to tell people who likely had kids at a young age that having those kids at an earlier age not only opened them up to early-puberty troubles but also potentially shortened their overall lifespans. If it were (or was) done, you can bet various groups would jump on it to show it was biased against the poor, racist, etc. The little bit of research I found that makes these implications tends to originate form oganizations promoting various conservative ideals, religious or otherwise, and that would only distract from the debate.
That said, there is a lot of research done on the subject in a more general sense, namely with domestication of animals. They are specifically bred to reach puberty at an earlier age, in order to increase output. Some of this is done by increasing the quality of their diet, adding various nutrients and hormones so various organs develop faster, reducing stress, and a lot of money is spent on other means of finding ways to speed up the process. However, the primary means of lowering the age of puberty for breeding livestock is simply to mate younger maturing individuals with each other. There are limiting factors obviously, or we'd have animals hitting puberty shortly after fertilization by now.
So, to respond, the available research goes down your gullet every day, provided your personal biases allow for us still belonging in the animal kingdom to some degree.:)
>>I mean, who uses Windows 98 these days anyway? . That would be funny, except I know too many people who still use it, with (totally serious) questions like: "Do you mean I have to upgrade to a 233 megabyte harddrive before I can update my browser?" . If you understand on how many levels that is funny, I pity you.:) . These are the same people who are "gonna get a new computer" but don't want to buy one that's going to be outdated as soon as they buy it...
Oh come on, the average Slashdotter is more than capable of Googling the definition of obscure words like those. It only took me a couple minutes and a similar number of websites before I developed a fair understanding of what they refer to, and the largest portion of that time was getting around the nannyware my parents put on this computer. You'd think they'd stop bugging me with that stuff, now that I'm over 30.:)
Might be the cattle hormones, but I lean more toward the theory that the children of younger parents tend to mature earlier than those of parents who were 30-40+, especially when it's compounded by multiple generations. That said, I think there are a lot more people with a cattle-like mindset today, which might have something to do with the aforementioned dairy hormones.:)
Not really, because when you narrow it down, the comments aren't so much about his being fired, but that he was so surprised, astonished, etc. The guy complains about his employer in a worldwide forum, and expects nothing to come from it? It would be more surprising if Sony did nothing about it.
As for the government angle, all Sony did was fire him. They didn't take away his ability to continue to trash the company, nor did they execute him for doing so. Slight difference.:)
If you were his employers, perhaps you could have found a way to deal with this better? Sure, you could chat with him, but quotes from the various interviews seem to indicate he had no interest in working things out. In fact, we haven't heard anything from Sony on the matter (which we likely never will, because discussing former employee situations is generally verbotin, from a legal standpoint), so assuming Sony is just "the evil employer" is just a little biased as well.
Who knows, perhaps his manager(s) tried to reconcile the situation with him, and he gave them an attitude. Perhaps they asked him for input on how they could improve, and he refused. Perhaps it's just a matter of him not getting the review/salary increase he thought he deserved, or passed over for a promotion, or any of the other things that lead people to badmouth their employers.
Regardless, just because people tend to think the guy brought his situation upon himself doesn't necessarily mean the same people are doing so because they worship "$CORPORATION". It simply means they have opinions, and the right and ability to express them. So did the guy in the story, and the result was that he got fired. So do you, and the result is that you come across a little clueless in your own right.:)
Maybe it's just me, but that's the kind of threat my friend's 4 year old son might make. I can't help but agree with you, and to be honest, I wonder if his supposed wonderful new job is actually that great, because if his situation is truly improved, why is he still complaining?
A better analogy might be comparing those Rolls Royces and Ferraris to a Hyundai, as long as the Hyundai came with your driver's license, and those better cars only seemed to be driven by the folks who spend every weekend working on their cars. Many of that crowd would never switch, even if both cars were free (or the Rolls and Ferraris were "freer" in the sense that you didn't have to pay for your driver's license if you drove them, also), no matter how much better they were.
Remember, there are a lot of really, really, really, really, really, really, lazy and ignorant people out there...:)
Lol! Let's see, this is a little like asking for the records of all alchohol and tobacco, "to protect the children from underage purchases". Of course, the fact that google's got all these searches all wrapped up in one place (versus the hassle of taking every mom and pop party store to court) has nothing to do with it, huh? . I wonder if they saved those "old german crosses" and eagles, because if this "information gathering" continues unchecked, they might come in handy soon. On the upside, it's understandable that a bunch of old folks with arthritis might enjoy marching and saluting without having to bend their knees and elbows...
>>You are not a true geek. You sound like the kind of fuckup who works in a telemarketing dept or something. Reading between the lines of your post is easy, you are an end user through and through. Get off my internets.
>>You're a bit off on your timescales. The southern icecap on Mars is melting because it is spring there:
As are you, taking an non-contextual quote as an argument against proven long-term observation, and convieniently mixing it with [Pluto's] seasonal periods [14 years] to make the long-term observational data regarding Mars appear to be less convincing. Cheers!:)
On behalf of Americans worldwide, I'd like to accept this award, and while my fellow Americans could not be present to receive this award, we'd like to thank those who have contributed to our success in global warming, starting with China, India, our brothers in South America and the old Soviet bloc...
Which begs the point, why stop at that point and declare results? Sounds a bit convienient. Why not dig a bit further? Say 700,000, 750,000, 1 million, then present results that show discrete fluctuations over those timeframes? Perhaps I'm cynical from MS-marketing "studies", but the point in time seems to be too convienient as compared to the results. Heck, who financed the study -- and not just the Uni that provided the researchers, either?
If you really want to know how damaging our activities on earth are, you need to carefully examine the relevant data from a larger perspective. As observational data proves, not only are we harming our own environment, but careful analysis shows that over the last couple decades of observation, the polar icecaps on Mars have been shrinking as well. So for the love of God, please, everyone, stop doing everything you're doing now! Not only are you killing life on Earth, you're killing life on Mars as well!
Of course, there's the slight chance that CO2 levels have always been higher during "ice ages". (It's a percentage/total amount argument, typically ignoring the accreation of mass for our planet.) Regardless, it's freakin' snowing and in the 'teens here in Michigan, so bring on the heat!:)
Possibly, as they generally are put together by Linux fans, whereas MS seems destined to buy it's positive studies. From another standpoint, it's one thing to have "educated, well known, and well respected" fans produce a study, and a whole other thing to have to pay good money to get anybody to put their reputation on the line to back your product. As well, Linux studies tend to present considerable supplemental data for others to repeat their studies on their own, whereas MS's studies tend to do little more than announce a vague result the entire IT world is supposed to accept. Part of this is simply because the paid-for study house requires payment for detailed explainations of methods and results, but that's not very convincing (reeks of mail-order scams, to me, at least -- "Send in your money, and we'll make you successful!").
Part of the problem for MS, especially regarding studies, is that they are selling a "one size fits all" solution, whereas Linux allows numerous variations to best achieve your goals. MS is facing a tough battle, trying to convience everyone that they are the best solution for all situations (read as: easy to use for uncaring sheep), yet technically appealing to even the most distinct niche users.
As Mike Warnke once said as the moral of a long story: "If you try to please everyone, you're going to lose your ass." (How's that for an obscure reference?)
>>When I bring hardware home, it works! Try getting those wireless usb devices working in Linux. Possible, sure! Do you just plug it in the slot and put in the CD and it works, not *even* close. Audio on Linux? You've got to be fucking kidding me. What fantasy world does the poster live in where Linux is easier to use than Windows?
What fantasy world do you live in where installing Windows and several additional third-party drivers is "easy"? At least with linux, you can generally avoid most of the driver installs -- they are included in the kernel, and are found automatically, but you might need to tweak a couple things before they work (or work perfectly). I'm amazed when I watch friends talk about Linux being difficult to use, meanwhile they'll spend hours reloading windows (and drivers, etc.) every couple months, if not more often.
More frustrating, if that's the right word, is that people complain about how "difficult" it is to research/make fixes for Linux, but don't even try to fix problems in Windows, opting for a reinstall instead. Kind of an apples and oranges thing, when you think about it.
Primary/Secondary schooling: Tests you willingness to learn under pressure from adults. (Translation: As long as you're walked through the steps necessary to do your job, and there are enough people to make sure you do as you're told, you'll be a highly trained button-monkey.)
College: Simply a way to test your willingness to learn on your own. (Translation: On occasion, with enough peer pressure, you might be willing to learn spend a little of your free time learning how to do your job.)
Graduate school: Tests your willingness to learn when the majority of your peers have given up on their education for the remainder of their lives. (Translation: Given enough incentive/money, you are willing to spend considerable time and effort to be successful in your career.)
Post-Graduate school: Tests your willingness to expand upon what is currently understood and taught at lower levels. (Translation: You are willing to show others how to improve in their chosen career, but it's gonna cost 'em!)
Continuing education: Tests your willingness to continue learning when most of your peers are worm food. (Translation: You're mildly psychotic.):)
The possible failure of the theories taught to you makes no difference in the outcome of your education, because you have proven that you aren't willing to put forward a serious effort to learn at the level you attempted. Had you been taught said "correct" theories, the outcome of your grades would most likely have remained the same, as your alcohol, drug, social and sexual indulgences during this time had no bearing on your belief that the items taught were facts. As such, your failure to learn them only reinforces the fact that you don't care about your own success in life. (Translation: You're a twit for asking something this redundant on Slashdot!)
Slashdot Mirror
Luckily, once you grow up... :)
.
Um, never mind.
Not to mention, less money for college...
Conversely, I was taller than most kids my age, so I got shoved into basketball, despite never done more than take a couple shots at a basket before. Meanwhile, my peers had been playing for years (7th grade), so I was the tall guy, but couldn't shoot, move the ball well, etc. Certainly I would have improved, had I kept pushing to learn, but it wasn't something I chose, it was chosen for me. As a result, I had to deal with both the problems inherent with being a poor player, as well as those inherent with "being a quitter".
.
On the upside, I probably would've spent more time in sports, and less time honing my computer skills, and now I have a decent job, whereas I might have hoped to play professional basketball, and in the long term, likely have had those dreams crushed, which would've probably more damaging to my psyche in the long run.
.
So things seem to have turned out well, but I would have rather avoided it all in the first place.
I believe it, too. I've also noticed that that viciousness also tends to be directed from a group a girls towards any other girls who are perceived to have an [percieved] advantage of one sort or another. Nothing is more bloody (from a mental standpoint, at least) than a pretty woman walking into a room full of ugly, overweight women, especially if there are men in the equation. The claws that come out make anything us guys do look pretty tame in comparison.
And if my memory is correct, while everybody enjoyed a good fight between guys in school, the fights between girls were the more violent ones. We generally ended up with a bloody nose or a few bruises, while the girls usually ended up with less hair and scratches on their faces. Our wounds were badges, theirs were meant to scar and embarrass.
Whoever decided women were the fairer sex never saw one girl put her foot on another girls shoulder and rip out two fistfuls of hair, that's for sure!
Proof? On Slashdot?!! There must be a rip in the fabric of space-time.
:)
As for proof, there isn't much research done in this area, at least directly relating to humans. I imagine it wouldn't make someone too popular (or more importantly attract funding) to tell people who likely had kids at a young age that having those kids at an earlier age not only opened them up to early-puberty troubles but also potentially shortened their overall lifespans. If it were (or was) done, you can bet various groups would jump on it to show it was biased against the poor, racist, etc. The little bit of research I found that makes these implications tends to originate form oganizations promoting various conservative ideals, religious or otherwise, and that would only distract from the debate.
That said, there is a lot of research done on the subject in a more general sense, namely with domestication of animals. They are specifically bred to reach puberty at an earlier age, in order to increase output. Some of this is done by increasing the quality of their diet, adding various nutrients and hormones so various organs develop faster, reducing stress, and a lot of money is spent on other means of finding ways to speed up the process. However, the primary means of lowering the age of puberty for breeding livestock is simply to mate younger maturing individuals with each other. There are limiting factors obviously, or we'd have animals hitting puberty shortly after fertilization by now.
So, to respond, the available research goes down your gullet every day, provided your personal biases allow for us still belonging in the animal kingdom to some degree.
>>I mean, who uses Windows 98 these days anyway? :)
.
That would be funny, except I know too many people who still use it, with (totally serious) questions like: "Do you mean I have to upgrade to a 233 megabyte harddrive before I can update my browser?"
.
If you understand on how many levels that is funny, I pity you.
.
These are the same people who are "gonna get a new computer" but don't want to buy one that's going to be outdated as soon as they buy it...
Oh come on, the average Slashdotter is more than capable of Googling the definition of obscure words like those. It only took me a couple minutes and a similar number of websites before I developed a fair understanding of what they refer to, and the largest portion of that time was getting around the nannyware my parents put on this computer. You'd think they'd stop bugging me with that stuff, now that I'm over 30. :)
Might be the cattle hormones, but I lean more toward the theory that the children of younger parents tend to mature earlier than those of parents who were 30-40+, especially when it's compounded by multiple generations. That said, I think there are a lot more people with a cattle-like mindset today, which might have something to do with the aforementioned dairy hormones. :)
No that can't be a good comparison. Microsoft software usually takes far longer to reach beta than most of it's peers. :)
Not really, because when you narrow it down, the comments aren't so much about his being fired, but that he was so surprised, astonished, etc. The guy complains about his employer in a worldwide forum, and expects nothing to come from it? It would be more surprising if Sony did nothing about it.
:)
:)
As for the government angle, all Sony did was fire him. They didn't take away his ability to continue to trash the company, nor did they execute him for doing so. Slight difference.
If you were his employers, perhaps you could have found a way to deal with this better? Sure, you could chat with him, but quotes from the various interviews seem to indicate he had no interest in working things out. In fact, we haven't heard anything from Sony on the matter (which we likely never will, because discussing former employee situations is generally verbotin, from a legal standpoint), so assuming Sony is just "the evil employer" is just a little biased as well.
Who knows, perhaps his manager(s) tried to reconcile the situation with him, and he gave them an attitude. Perhaps they asked him for input on how they could improve, and he refused. Perhaps it's just a matter of him not getting the review/salary increase he thought he deserved, or passed over for a promotion, or any of the other things that lead people to badmouth their employers.
Regardless, just because people tend to think the guy brought his situation upon himself doesn't necessarily mean the same people are doing so because they worship "$CORPORATION". It simply means they have opinions, and the right and ability to express them. So did the guy in the story, and the result was that he got fired. So do you, and the result is that you come across a little clueless in your own right.
Maybe it's just me, but that's the kind of threat my friend's 4 year old son might make. I can't help but agree with you, and to be honest, I wonder if his supposed wonderful new job is actually that great, because if his situation is truly improved, why is he still complaining?
A better analogy might be comparing those Rolls Royces and Ferraris to a Hyundai, as long as the Hyundai came with your driver's license, and those better cars only seemed to be driven by the folks who spend every weekend working on their cars. Many of that crowd would never switch, even if both cars were free (or the Rolls and Ferraris were "freer" in the sense that you didn't have to pay for your driver's license if you drove them, also), no matter how much better they were.
:)
Remember, there are a lot of really, really, really, really, really, really, lazy and ignorant people out there...
Lol! Let's see, this is a little like asking for the records of all alchohol and tobacco, "to protect the children from underage purchases". Of course, the fact that google's got all these searches all wrapped up in one place (versus the hassle of taking every mom and pop party store to court) has nothing to do with it, huh?
.
I wonder if they saved those "old german crosses" and eagles, because if this "information gathering" continues unchecked, they might come in handy soon. On the upside, it's understandable that a bunch of old folks with arthritis might enjoy marching and saluting without having to bend their knees and elbows...
>>You are not a true geek. You sound like the kind of fuckup who works in a telemarketing dept or something. Reading between the lines of your post is easy, you are an end user through and through. Get off my internets.
:)
Funny...for an end user.
Agreed, because we all know that beaches only form where, um, water meets land...
>>You're a bit off on your timescales. The southern icecap on Mars is melting because it is spring there:
:)
As are you, taking an non-contextual quote as an argument against proven long-term observation, and convieniently mixing it with [Pluto's] seasonal periods [14 years] to make the long-term observational data regarding Mars appear to be less convincing. Cheers!
>>[My english is better than most other people's german, so please point out mistakes politely. Thank you.]
:)
"Storys" should be "story's".
On behalf of Americans worldwide, I'd like to accept this award, and while my fellow Americans could not be present to receive this award, we'd like to thank those who have contributed to our success in global warming, starting with China, India, our brothers in South America and the old Soviet bloc...
Which begs the point, why stop at that point and declare results? Sounds a bit convienient. Why not dig a bit further? Say 700,000, 750,000, 1 million, then present results that show discrete fluctuations over those timeframes? Perhaps I'm cynical from MS-marketing "studies", but the point in time seems to be too convienient as compared to the results. Heck, who financed the study -- and not just the Uni that provided the researchers, either?
Well, now that you mention it, the Burger King just started selling chili cheese fries a couple days ago. That might account for some of it... :)
If you really want to know how damaging our activities on earth are, you need to carefully examine the relevant data from a larger perspective. As observational data proves, not only are we harming our own environment, but careful analysis shows that over the last couple decades of observation, the polar icecaps on Mars have been shrinking as well. So for the love of God, please, everyone, stop doing everything you're doing now! Not only are you killing life on Earth, you're killing life on Mars as well!
:)
Of course, there's the slight chance that CO2 levels have always been higher during "ice ages". (It's a percentage/total amount argument, typically ignoring the accreation of mass for our planet.) Regardless, it's freakin' snowing and in the 'teens here in Michigan, so bring on the heat!
Possibly, as they generally are put together by Linux fans, whereas MS seems destined to buy it's positive studies. From another standpoint, it's one thing to have "educated, well known, and well respected" fans produce a study, and a whole other thing to have to pay good money to get anybody to put their reputation on the line to back your product. As well, Linux studies tend to present considerable supplemental data for others to repeat their studies on their own, whereas MS's studies tend to do little more than announce a vague result the entire IT world is supposed to accept. Part of this is simply because the paid-for study house requires payment for detailed explainations of methods and results, but that's not very convincing (reeks of mail-order scams, to me, at least -- "Send in your money, and we'll make you successful!").
Part of the problem for MS, especially regarding studies, is that they are selling a "one size fits all" solution, whereas Linux allows numerous variations to best achieve your goals. MS is facing a tough battle, trying to convience everyone that they are the best solution for all situations (read as: easy to use for uncaring sheep), yet technically appealing to even the most distinct niche users.
As Mike Warnke once said as the moral of a long story: "If you try to please everyone, you're going to lose your ass." (How's that for an obscure reference?)
>>When I bring hardware home, it works! Try getting those wireless usb devices working in Linux. Possible, sure! Do you just plug it in the slot and put in the CD and it works, not *even* close. Audio on Linux? You've got to be fucking kidding me. What fantasy world does the poster live in where Linux is easier to use than Windows?
What fantasy world do you live in where installing Windows and several additional third-party drivers is "easy"? At least with linux, you can generally avoid most of the driver installs -- they are included in the kernel, and are found automatically, but you might need to tweak a couple things before they work (or work perfectly). I'm amazed when I watch friends talk about Linux being difficult to use, meanwhile they'll spend hours reloading windows (and drivers, etc.) every couple months, if not more often.
More frustrating, if that's the right word, is that people complain about how "difficult" it is to research/make fixes for Linux, but don't even try to fix problems in Windows, opting for a reinstall instead. Kind of an apples and oranges thing, when you think about it.
Not a chance.
:)
Primary/Secondary schooling: Tests you willingness to learn under pressure from adults. (Translation: As long as you're walked through the steps necessary to do your job, and there are enough people to make sure you do as you're told, you'll be a highly trained button-monkey.)
College: Simply a way to test your willingness to learn on your own. (Translation: On occasion, with enough peer pressure, you might be willing to learn spend a little of your free time learning how to do your job.)
Graduate school: Tests your willingness to learn when the majority of your peers have given up on their education for the remainder of their lives. (Translation: Given enough incentive/money, you are willing to spend considerable time and effort to be successful in your career.)
Post-Graduate school: Tests your willingness to expand upon what is currently understood and taught at lower levels. (Translation: You are willing to show others how to improve in their chosen career, but it's gonna cost 'em!)
Continuing education: Tests your willingness to continue learning when most of your peers are worm food. (Translation: You're mildly psychotic.)
The possible failure of the theories taught to you makes no difference in the outcome of your education, because you have proven that you aren't willing to put forward a serious effort to learn at the level you attempted. Had you been taught said "correct" theories, the outcome of your grades would most likely have remained the same, as your alcohol, drug, social and sexual indulgences during this time had no bearing on your belief that the items taught were facts. As such, your failure to learn them only reinforces the fact that you don't care about your own success in life. (Translation: You're a twit for asking something this redundant on Slashdot!)
(heh, heh)
Yeah, but it's more fun to irritate Sun cheerleaders by referring to it as D/OS. :)