I'm arguing that there are better areas to focus our engergies - studies that will actually further society. I'm arguing that in this area not only would we "not benefit" from this, but that it would "add problems" because of the reasons I mentioned earlier.
Your debate tactics are just as questionable. Lookie here! You didn't argue any of this! All you did was post a sarcastic comment which might as well have been modded "flamebait"
It is intellectually dishonest to take an argument against a particular scientific advancement and generalize it as an argument against any scientific advancement. It is ludicrous to assume that I, a Computer Scientist, want to hinder scientific advancement.
You want it both ways? Your original comment was overgeneralizing the matter of cloning to an absurd level. Ludicrous to assume? Am I supposed to do more research on a reply to a stupid comment than the original poster did on the subject? Besides, as a computer scientist myself, I know that CS (in the mainstream CS degrees) is a pseudo-science, so I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if some so-called computer scientists didn't value, say, the scientific method.
Please focus on my core contention.
That was my point! You didn't have any valid core contention. All you had was an inflammatory and uninsightful comment. I responded in kind with a comment that was meant to make you see how stupid you are. Now you're entering a justification phase, i.e. YOU KNOW YOUR COMMENT SUCKED, BUT NOW YOU WANT OTHERS TO THINK IT DIDN'T. And look! You got a score of 5, Insightful, from the slashdotters! Congrats! It's especially ironic how your sig, "Give me freedom, or give me death", so dramatically shouts against your argument, though, unless you're just masochistic.
The real counter point to your argument is, "Who are YOU to say what a researcher can work on?", especially if he or she thinks it is valid. You're the limiter of freedom. You're the blockade to real science. Do you want to see Niven's organlegging society? Do you see that as superior to cloning? What's up with people like you limiting MY freedom?
Congrats again on beating a system, which should have branded your original post "Troll" or "Flamebait".
Wow! I sometimes hear crap like this from people who don't think it through, but on Slashdot? Really, now! Individuals who make decisions solely because of society are not thinking things through. If you were against cutting down the forests in the US, would you freeze to death, rather than start a fire if you were stranded in the wilderness?
Heck, your argument is the same kind of argument that says, "Why develop the integrated circuit, when I have a slide rule?". Can you SEE how the argument you are using has NO BEARING on the issue you are arguing against? Why advance science when people lived just fine in the stone age?
Slashdot would be much nicer if people would please please please please please use their minds just every once in a while.
In perl, "foreach" is an alias for "for". They do the exact same thing, except that one might read easier in the source code. Not really any point here, just thought you'd think it was interesting.
Whoa, dude! I wasn't shankin' on YOUR analogy. I was saying that the guy who I replied to used an analogy that didn't hold water. I realize yours was different, and he misinterpreted it. Oh, well.
Wow, google's really running slow today, huh? I usually get all my latest CNN stories from there, then I post back to slashdot from another cached google page.
You're right about Zaphod, at least, and probably Fenchurch (but I never liked that bitch anyways). But the guide winked itself out of existence when the earth was destroyed (presumably in all timelines).
Thanks for making me see the light! Why would I want to support a band who doesn't want me to listen to their music? I really mean it.
For some reason, this issue WAS pissing me off, but now I see so clearly that if I let the RIAA tell me what to listen to, then I am clearly part of the problem.
Actually, copying for personal use is still illegal under U.S. law. Besides, the analogy you think is great is really stupid. There's no REAL legitimate reason to copy a U.S. dollar, and that's why copying it is illegal.
Besides, I emphatically believe letting people copy music is good for the *talented* artists. Sorry, backstreet boys. I just went to a concert last night of a band whose albums I've never bought. I don't think I would have gone to the concert if they were as big of assholes about the whole mp3 thing as Metallica.
Copying U.S. money is ALWAYS a bad deal for the US government, so you can see why the analogy doesn't hold water to rational thought. Yes, I know this is slashdot, but I still believe rational thought *should* win arguments, even if you can't understand why.
I imagine if I could switch places with ESR, I'd be much pickier than him. He's a living, breathing, person with real needs. Love him! Adore him! Stalk him! Wait, nix that last one. But above all, let ESR be ESR!
> If you're willing to pay more, you increase the
> overall number of artists, but you typically also
> lower the standard of 'exceptional talent.'
You remind me of the musical guest on Conan O'Brien two nights ago. Dilated Peoples. I truly believed they were a "joke band", and that Conan was going to come out afterwards and say, "Wow, That Sucked!" It turns out that they are this real rap group. If their album sounded like their performance, they'd never sell a copy. Summary: Terrible live performance + Terrible Lyrics + A Gig on a Nationally Broadcast Show = Proof that 'exceptional talent' in field has lowered.
Why do you consider negative numbers to be smaller than positive numbers? Most people usually equate the relative size of a number to its absolute value. So the smallest prime is two, and has been known for a long time.
Shouldn't a grammar nazi know the difference between a ratio and a ration? Anyways, his comment seems to be bunk. A high quality photograph or print can be both very reflective and very absorbant (light-wise).
Besides, pictures look different on all of todays monitors because the colors and brightness of the phosphors (or LCD pixel) can vary a lot. I don't care to guess about the output of a cheap color printer, but I know that print shops can put out a much greater range of color than a computer screen.
Debian could benefit from a finer grained system, and I believe they are working on it. For instance, a person running "stable" might want some packages from the unstable branch (knowing it is not approved for stability), but would want the system otherwise stable.
As a Debian zealot, I claim that there's a sort of zen when using Debian. It has a sense of completeness, once installed, that I've never felt with another distribution. I like to think that if debian blatantly copied the RedHat or Mandrake installer program, then it would be the distribution to beat.
This is so late after this article that nobody will ever read it, but Wavicle's comment is pure crap. If he ever went to local concerts, he would know that there are tons of artists all around him that make money only doing concerts, not concert "tours". These bands can be very good, and they are all below Rosen's radar. Correction, they can make a lot of money from selling CDs, but this is not eaten by the RIAA, since they sell them themselves, and I include selling CDs at concerts as part of the concert profits.
Hillary Rosen can say anything she wants to, and she can have convincing data, too. But she's wrong! Most bands play concerts to make money, and yes, most bands are at the very least amateur artists.
If you are a band and you're only doing cover songs, please be more creative! The more creative you are, the less control the RIAA has over you.
Nice take on the Music "Industry". Most artists of any kind make money off exhibitions of their art. "Recording" artists are no different. The recording "industry" is a made up "industry" which exists only to justify its own existence these days. Let us all download music freely, and let the artists STILL make their money from concerts! The RIAA can go straight to hell!
It's obvious. These technology managers are clueless as to how many of their servers are currently running Linux. The article is a survey of executives. Since they can ask subordinates "Is it stable, scalable and does it run our applications well?", they never think to ask about the operating systems. They are clueless, and good for them. So I'll wager there's a whole lot of Linux that ain't in the survey.
>The college I work at exclusively uses Windows computers
I feel sorry for them if this college has any Computer Science students (Without knowing which college it is). If you disagree with me, then perhaps you should consider how many computer science jobs out there mention "Linux". I have looked, and Linux/UNIX is a valuable skill to have. If CS students are not taught at least some on this technology, they might regret the choice of college later. end.rant.
Agreed. I truly believe that if terrorists attacked MicroSoft Headquarters (they attacked an MS office in Nevada), and vaporized all the source code to all MS Software, that the Marketing Department would still turn a profit. Then, Bill Gates would set his lawyers on bin Laden, and the whole mess would be over. (I can dream, can't I?)
Slashdot Mirror
The real counter point to your argument is, "Who are YOU to say what a researcher can work on?", especially if he or she thinks it is valid. You're the limiter of freedom. You're the blockade to real science. Do you want to see Niven's organlegging society? Do you see that as superior to cloning? What's up with people like you limiting MY freedom?
Congrats again on beating a system, which should have branded your original post "Troll" or "Flamebait".
Wow! I sometimes hear crap like this from people who don't think it through, but on Slashdot? Really, now! Individuals who make decisions solely because of society are not thinking things through. If you were against cutting down the forests in the US, would you freeze to death, rather than start a fire if you were stranded in the wilderness?
Heck, your argument is the same kind of argument that says, "Why develop the integrated circuit, when I have a slide rule?". Can you SEE how the argument you are using has NO BEARING on the issue you are arguing against? Why advance science when people lived just fine in the stone age?
Slashdot would be much nicer if people would please please please please please use their minds just every once in a while.
Yeah, I always feel like typing that extra letter, too. I just thought I'd put in a comment before someone tries to rip on you.
In perl, "foreach" is an alias for "for". They do the exact same thing, except that one might read easier in the source code. Not really any point here, just thought you'd think it was interesting.
Your comment touches me deep inside my belly button.
Whoa, dude! I wasn't shankin' on YOUR analogy. I was saying that the guy who I replied to used an analogy that didn't hold water. I realize yours was different, and he misinterpreted it. Oh, well.
Each "flavor" will be a different color, but will have the exact same internals, just like they do with their other products.
Sorry, I was running the website off of my palm pilot, and the battery ran out! D'oh!
Wow, google's really running slow today, huh? I usually get all my latest CNN stories from there, then I post back to slashdot from another cached google page.
No.
You're right about Zaphod, at least, and probably Fenchurch (but I never liked that bitch anyways). But the guide winked itself out of existence when the earth was destroyed (presumably in all timelines).
Thanks for making me see the light! Why would I want to support a band who doesn't want me to listen to their music? I really mean it.
For some reason, this issue WAS pissing me off, but now I see so clearly that if I let the RIAA tell me what to listen to, then I am clearly part of the problem.
Actually, copying for personal use is still illegal under U.S. law. Besides, the analogy you think is great is really stupid. There's no REAL legitimate reason to copy a U.S. dollar, and that's why copying it is illegal.
Besides, I emphatically believe letting people copy music is good for the *talented* artists. Sorry, backstreet boys. I just went to a concert last night of a band whose albums I've never bought. I don't think I would have gone to the concert if they were as big of assholes about the whole mp3 thing as Metallica.
Copying U.S. money is ALWAYS a bad deal for the US government, so you can see why the analogy doesn't hold water to rational thought. Yes, I know this is slashdot, but I still believe rational thought *should* win arguments, even if you can't understand why.
I imagine if I could switch places with ESR, I'd be much pickier than him. He's a living, breathing, person with real needs. Love him! Adore him! Stalk him! Wait, nix that last one. But above all, let ESR be ESR!
> If you're willing to pay more, you increase the
> overall number of artists, but you typically also
> lower the standard of 'exceptional talent.'
You remind me of the musical guest on Conan O'Brien two nights ago. Dilated Peoples. I truly believed they were a "joke band", and that Conan was going to come out afterwards and say, "Wow, That Sucked!" It turns out that they are this real rap group. If their album sounded like their performance, they'd never sell a copy. Summary: Terrible live performance + Terrible Lyrics + A Gig on a Nationally Broadcast Show = Proof that 'exceptional talent' in field has lowered.
Why do you consider negative numbers to be smaller than positive numbers? Most people usually equate the relative size of a number to its absolute value. So the smallest prime is two, and has been known for a long time.
Shouldn't a grammar nazi know the difference between a ratio and a ration? Anyways, his comment seems to be bunk. A high quality photograph or print can be both very reflective and very absorbant (light-wise).
Besides, pictures look different on all of todays monitors because the colors and brightness of the phosphors (or LCD pixel) can vary a lot. I don't care to guess about the output of a cheap color printer, but I know that print shops can put out a much greater range of color than a computer screen.
Debian could benefit from a finer grained system, and I believe they are working on it. For instance, a person running "stable" might want some packages from the unstable branch (knowing it is not approved for stability), but would want the system otherwise stable.
As a Debian zealot, I claim that there's a sort of zen when using Debian. It has a sense of completeness, once installed, that I've never felt with another distribution. I like to think that if debian blatantly copied the RedHat or Mandrake installer program, then it would be the distribution to beat.
This is so late after this article that nobody will ever read it, but Wavicle's comment is pure crap. If he ever went to local concerts, he would know that there are tons of artists all around him that make money only doing concerts, not concert "tours". These bands can be very good, and they are all below Rosen's radar. Correction, they can make a lot of money from selling CDs, but this is not eaten by the RIAA, since they sell them themselves, and I include selling CDs at concerts as part of the concert profits.
Hillary Rosen can say anything she wants to, and she can have convincing data, too. But she's wrong! Most bands play concerts to make money, and yes, most bands are at the very least amateur artists.
If you are a band and you're only doing cover songs, please be more creative! The more creative you are, the less control the RIAA has over you.
Nice take on the Music "Industry". Most artists of any kind make money off exhibitions of their art. "Recording" artists are no different. The recording "industry" is a made up "industry" which exists only to justify its own existence these days. Let us all download music freely, and let the artists STILL make their money from concerts! The RIAA can go straight to hell!
It's obvious. These technology managers are clueless as to how many of their servers are currently running Linux. The article is a survey of executives. Since they can ask subordinates "Is it stable, scalable and does it run our applications well?", they never think to ask about the operating systems. They are clueless, and good for them. So I'll wager there's a whole lot of Linux that ain't in the survey.
It's good! Lots of your problems with Mandrake and Red Hat don't exist in Debian.
Just a thought from a Debian zealot...
>The college I work at exclusively uses Windows computers
I feel sorry for them if this college has any Computer Science students (Without knowing which college it is). If you disagree with me, then perhaps you should consider how many computer science jobs out there mention "Linux". I have looked, and Linux/UNIX is a valuable skill to have. If CS students are not taught at least some on this technology, they might regret the choice of college later. end.rant.
Agreed. I truly believe that if terrorists attacked MicroSoft Headquarters (they attacked an MS office in Nevada), and vaporized all the source code to all MS Software, that the Marketing Department would still turn a profit. Then, Bill Gates would set his lawyers on bin Laden, and the whole mess would be over. (I can dream, can't I?)