Actually, anti-vaccination evangelists use them as a "proof" that vaccines are dangerous when they try to recruit new parents to their groups. It's particularly impressive if you embed the video to hide any negative feedback.
But what if I feel the risk of my child growing to be a evil criminal is greater than the risk of damaging him by hitting him with a hammer? Maybe I see the benefit of strict authoritarian discpline, even if you don't.
The problem is while the government is stepping on the rights of the parents, they're doing so to protect the rights of the children. There's no room for "feeling" about the risks of a vaccine. The risks are either there or not. The fact that some people feel safer by endangering their children and everyone else's through inaction doesn't make it right.
Here's the thing: Vaccinations are usually given shortly before the effects of autism become apparent in children regardless of whether they've been vaccinated.
If 1% of children develop autism and vaccation is near universal at 95% then 95% of children with autism had a vaccination shortly before they developed autism, as did 95% of the children who didn't develop autism.
Actually Americans per person may be more productive, but it's because they spent more time working than most other countries. You've got high productivity but not the highest efficiency. Of course, you've also slipped recently, according to the latest figures Luxumbroug, Norway and Belgium lead the productivity pack now. The United States isn't the "wealthiest" country in the world, that'd be Luxemburg. You're sixth on the list after Equatorial Guinea, United Arab Emirates, Norway and Ireland. You're army that is "comparable to the rest of the world combined" is unable to secure a single country in the middle east without stretching itself to the breaking limit. In reality, China has twice as many active troups and that's a single country. India, North Korea, and Russia all have almost as many troops as the U.S. Now the U.S. spends less a percentage of GDP on their military than most countries, but also spends more in real dollars than any other country.
Of course, in war games both the Canadian and Australian military tend to trounce the Americans because they the American military expects overwhelming firepower to win any conflict. I remember a capture the flag excercise where the Americans quit the field of battle because they'd already lost 3 times in the first day of a 3 day exercise. Apparently the Canadian troops weren't "playing fair" against the American troops who had better equipment and more people. They kept using "stealth and subterfuge" against the American troops and stole the flag (3 times) before the Americans were "ready" for the war games to start despite the fact that he games had already started. This was no "disinformation campaign", it was just the Canadian forces using the American strengths (size and preparedness for traditional warfare) against them.
Now in a firefight, you want to be on the American side because they've got the biggest and best guns there. But in less straight forward military situations, the American forces aren't very adapatable, partly because their leaders tend to be pampered with as much money as they need. They don't need to be as efficient or cagey because they've got numbers and equipment on their side in most battles.
You don't really read what I write do you? At no point did I say everything in the Bible is false. The Bible is composed of myths and stories interwoven with actual history because that makes the fairy tales more believable and the fairy tales are there to put the historical events into the proper context to justify the writer's beliefs.
It's a very old con artist trick, if you tell people the truth some of the time, they're less likely to catch you out when you're actually making stuff up.
No seriously. Microsoft doesn't do anything to benefit anyone other than itself. We know that. We've seen that time and time again. Micheal Bay is just illustrating another reason that Microsoft has to back HD-DVD. Essentially if HD-DVD wins, Microsoft wins because it will hurt Sony who is a competitor, and get Microsoft some license money on their HD-DVD technology. If both formats loose then Microsoft still wins because they'll be peddling an HD download service to fill the gaps between the formats.
We know Microsoft is paying off people to support HD-DVD, now we know a little more about why they're doing it and what their back up plans are.
Microsoft is quite obviously betting it will. In fact, they've been telling people that's the future that Microsoft will bring for years now. I went to a "Digital Home" show that was nothing more than Microsoft shilling their Digital Home products under a different name.
Throw in the added benefit of taking some of the wind out of the PS3 and it seems like a very cheap way for Microsoft to purchase marketshare in several different markets (Console, DVD Downloads, Home Electronics).
Actually, there isn't. There's quite a bit of handwaving by people who claim to be scientists and claim that they have some "thing" which is absolutely true and completely unexplainable by "scientists" which therefore proves that the "other scientists" are wrong. Generally the explanation of these "unexplainable phenomenon" are rife with inaccuracies, dubious assumptions, and misrepresentations.
I tried to read a single article on the site you referenced, but I couldn't get past the second paragraph without being vaguely offended by the derision heaped upon anyone who disagrees with the author, and the face that there were multiple, blatantly wrong, assertions about the "unexplainable phenomenon". In this case, the mystery of oxygen! The evolutionists worst nightmare! Boo!
econd, the bible isn't a collection of fairy tales. There is quite a bit in it that has been historically documented and we have archaeological evidence to show they happened. This is absolutely correct, I know for a fact that Athens exists and therefore Hercules, the Legendary Journeys is absolute truth because no one would even think of basing fictional stories on real locations.
The Old Testament of the Bible was a set of myths and legends that explained why things were as they were when it was written. It documented the claims of the jewish people to their land and explained why they were better then their neighbours (Hint: because their God said so). The new testament is a collection of fairy tales about Jesus written decades after his death by people who had talked to people who were there, or people who had talked to the people who had talked to the people who were there.
Accuracy should not be expected from anecdotal tales told decades after the fact and gathered through hearsay and rumours.
The music industry has been pushing crap for decades.
I seriously doubt the music industry is "dying". As far as I understand their sales are slipping a bit from the last media upgrade cycle, but that's not surprising. Their sales have also been off a bit because of a large pool of not very good music they've been pushing. They'be been trying to boost profits by widening the appeal of individuals CDs so they can sell more of individual CDs and produce fewer CDs per year.
Now, the important thing to remember is that profit != revenue. You have to expect revenues to fall as the music industry moves from physical to digital distribution. Why? Because costs have dropped. There's no little plastic case for the music, no plastic wrap, no fuel costs for shipping, no boxes to put the CDs in, no broken CDs because of accidents during shipping. There are fewer middle-men and the new middle-men are cheaper than the old ones. Think of it this way: when a CD sold for $15 with 15 tracks, the record label got less than $15 from that sale. Now they get close to $0.60 for each track from iTunes. But their fixed costs and marginal costs are much, much lower.
I sincerely doubt the record labels are going to die, they're just loosing the barriers to entry that prevented competitors from entering the market. As other people have said, they can be the one-stop turnkey solution for recording, promotion and digital distribution. They just have to get used to selling individual songs instead of full cds, and developing effective niche marketing strategies. In reality the digital distribution revolution opens up some new economies of scale.
Profits are likely to decline in the short term while they adjust the new environment and while up and new entrants will be snagging sections of the market that the old behemoths aren't adaptive enough to nail down. It's a loss of prestige and power but it's only going to result in the death of a record label if they decide to fight the changes to the bitter end.
Seriously, black and white rules always fail to deliver satisfactory results. There needs to be some wiggle room in the rules or you end up with the Tyranny of Rules as opposed to the Tyranny of Chaos. Normally, people live between the extremes.
Those accounts haven't been suspended yet, because they haven't been "reported" enough as violating the terms of service. Please remember, YouTube isn't a person. YouTube doesn't even employ video screeners who watch all videos as they are uploaded. The screeners only look at videos that have been reported for violating the terms of service and there are also multiple different screeners who may have slightly different standards and must make judgement calls on what gets pulled and what doesn't. I doubt an account gets banned until it has been reported for multiple ToS violations across multiple videos.
Having said that I can't agree with YouTube's decision. It seems to me that there should be enough flexibility in the rules to keep users and videos that violate the terms of service but do so for good reasons. Exposing oppression and exploitation is good for humanity, and what's good for humanity should be good for YouTube.
He's talking about the creationists rejecting education in general, as opposed to Paul who embraced it.
Specifically creationist fundamentalists are afraid of ideas, because they're afraid it will hurt the status of their religion. It's a way of pitting people against governments and science. In the end it's nothing more than a play for power over people's lives. They literally view science as a competing religion because science education reduces credulity and that makes any religion based on divine revelation weaker (because you're less likely to take it on faith).
Tell ya what, they'll stop doing it, when other people's "spiritual beliefs" stop insulting their intelligence and making the world a dumber place. Creationism is anti-science and anti-intellectual. That's the whole point of the movement, you know.
A friend brought this up to me one day, and I just laughed at him. He told me "calorie measures are useless because they burned the food in a fire to determine the calories". Do you know why I laughed? Because he fell into the old trap of thinking no yardstick was better than an inaccurate one.
Calories might not be perfect, but they're the measure we have. A better measurement would be useful, but I'm not sure if we can come with something that more accurate and isn't potentially abused. I mean this whole left-handed versus right-handed sugar thing seems right for exploitation by any company wanting to market "diet" products. Just fudge the percentage of sugars that aren't digestible to reduce the apparent calorie count.
Personally, I find I'm amused by the idea that they think all users will stay at the site after it prompts them to download and install some application. Personally, I'd be looking for "cancel" and figuring they were some type of scam operation. Anyone else who's bought stuff online before should know that you don't need to install any applications to use an SLL connection.
You've got it backwards. The majority of the Wii target audience aren't gamers, the proper question is "Why would they start buying games"?
The "big games" are still all aimed at the PS3 and the 360 because that's where the gamers will end up. The Wii could end up moving the most hardware, but end up selling fewer games than the PS3 or the 360. That's the danger of selling your console to a very, very casual set of gamers who might never feel the need to buy another game for their console after they've found one they enjoy diddling with.
While that may be true, if you read the rest of the comments you'd note a couple of things:
The only people who get to go the party are people who went "above and beyond" their normal work duties. Essentially, these parties are the carrot for unpaid overtime. It may, in fact, save more money than it costs.
You obvious disapprove of your sister's decision, however, I couldn't say for sure that I would blame her for her decision. It sounds like she may have quit her job to spend more time with her child, though you seem to make it sound like she's a lazy slut. Perhaps you think she is and perhaps she actually is, who's to know? However, your statement about not contributing to society is an interesting one. Is there no economic benefit from a raising a child properly? Or do you have some magic formula that equates teeth cleaned and time spent on children that shows that the teeth that your sister isn't cleaning are somehow worth more than her child? I mean it certainly would make economic sense for her to quit her job, if her income is going to rise because her job income minus the welfare payments is smaller than the cost of daycare for her child.
It seems to me that welfare, despite failing in a minority of cases, does contribute to the progress of society. It gives the most unfortunate people something other than crime to allow them to survive. That means less "productive" people are killed during crimes. Combined with public education, it prevents the growth of an underclass of unemployable, untalented and uneducated people.
Sure, it can be abused, but the chief beneficiaries are people who are genuinely in need of help.
By the way, why on earth don't they have a "Remove User Account" functionality in their account-management? Because people would use it and not come back after they quit.
I challenge you to try to come up with a quest, any quest, that can not be boiled down to those simple constituents. (note that escort quests can be simplified as 'delivery' quests, and any sort of quest that can have you steal/manipulate things with can be simplified to 'item' for example). Explore an area? Craft an item (not buy)? Race to a different location?
Or how about any quest where you have a choice? The only choice in most quests in WoW is to complete or not complete the quest. There worst consequence to completing a quest is a loss of faction with an opposing group, which you never really have to care about anyway.
The only real choice is Aldor or Scyer, where you choose which of 2 different quests you'd like to complete.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, anti-vaccination evangelists use them as a "proof" that vaccines are dangerous when they try to recruit new parents to their groups. It's particularly impressive if you embed the video to hide any negative feedback.
But what if I feel the risk of my child growing to be a evil criminal is greater than the risk of damaging him by hitting him with a hammer? Maybe I see the benefit of strict authoritarian discpline, even if you don't.
The problem is while the government is stepping on the rights of the parents, they're doing so to protect the rights of the children. There's no room for "feeling" about the risks of a vaccine. The risks are either there or not. The fact that some people feel safer by endangering their children and everyone else's through inaction doesn't make it right.
No, but what it lacks in quality it certainly makes up for in quantity!
Here's the thing: Vaccinations are usually given shortly before the effects of autism become apparent in children regardless of whether they've been vaccinated.
If 1% of children develop autism and vaccation is near universal at 95% then 95% of children with autism had a vaccination shortly before they developed autism, as did 95% of the children who didn't develop autism.
3.7% is the current figure not including nuclear weapons, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Actually Americans per person may be more productive, but it's because they spent more time working than most other countries. You've got high productivity but not the highest efficiency. Of course, you've also slipped recently, according to the latest figures Luxumbroug, Norway and Belgium lead the productivity pack now. The United States isn't the "wealthiest" country in the world, that'd be Luxemburg. You're sixth on the list after Equatorial Guinea, United Arab Emirates, Norway and Ireland. You're army that is "comparable to the rest of the world combined" is unable to secure a single country in the middle east without stretching itself to the breaking limit. In reality, China has twice as many active troups and that's a single country. India, North Korea, and Russia all have almost as many troops as the U.S. Now the U.S. spends less a percentage of GDP on their military than most countries, but also spends more in real dollars than any other country.
Of course, in war games both the Canadian and Australian military tend to trounce the Americans because they the American military expects overwhelming firepower to win any conflict. I remember a capture the flag excercise where the Americans quit the field of battle because they'd already lost 3 times in the first day of a 3 day exercise. Apparently the Canadian troops weren't "playing fair" against the American troops who had better equipment and more people. They kept using "stealth and subterfuge" against the American troops and stole the flag (3 times) before the Americans were "ready" for the war games to start despite the fact that he games had already started. This was no "disinformation campaign", it was just the Canadian forces using the American strengths (size and preparedness for traditional warfare) against them.
Now in a firefight, you want to be on the American side because they've got the biggest and best guns there. But in less straight forward military situations, the American forces aren't very adapatable, partly because their leaders tend to be pampered with as much money as they need. They don't need to be as efficient or cagey because they've got numbers and equipment on their side in most battles.
You don't really read what I write do you? At no point did I say everything in the Bible is false. The Bible is composed of myths and stories interwoven with actual history because that makes the fairy tales more believable and the fairy tales are there to put the historical events into the proper context to justify the writer's beliefs.
It's a very old con artist trick, if you tell people the truth some of the time, they're less likely to catch you out when you're actually making stuff up.
...
Maybe you're a gullible fool.
No seriously. Microsoft doesn't do anything to benefit anyone other than itself. We know that. We've seen that time and time again. Micheal Bay is just illustrating another reason that Microsoft has to back HD-DVD. Essentially if HD-DVD wins, Microsoft wins because it will hurt Sony who is a competitor, and get Microsoft some license money on their HD-DVD technology. If both formats loose then Microsoft still wins because they'll be peddling an HD download service to fill the gaps between the formats.
We know Microsoft is paying off people to support HD-DVD, now we know a little more about why they're doing it and what their back up plans are.
Microsoft is quite obviously betting it will. In fact, they've been telling people that's the future that Microsoft will bring for years now. I went to a "Digital Home" show that was nothing more than Microsoft shilling their Digital Home products under a different name.
Throw in the added benefit of taking some of the wind out of the PS3 and it seems like a very cheap way for Microsoft to purchase marketshare in several different markets (Console, DVD Downloads, Home Electronics).
Actually, there isn't. There's quite a bit of handwaving by people who claim to be scientists and claim that they have some "thing" which is absolutely true and completely unexplainable by "scientists" which therefore proves that the "other scientists" are wrong. Generally the explanation of these "unexplainable phenomenon" are rife with inaccuracies, dubious assumptions, and misrepresentations.
I tried to read a single article on the site you referenced, but I couldn't get past the second paragraph without being vaguely offended by the derision heaped upon anyone who disagrees with the author, and the face that there were multiple, blatantly wrong, assertions about the "unexplainable phenomenon". In this case, the mystery of oxygen! The evolutionists worst nightmare! Boo!
The Old Testament of the Bible was a set of myths and legends that explained why things were as they were when it was written. It documented the claims of the jewish people to their land and explained why they were better then their neighbours (Hint: because their God said so). The new testament is a collection of fairy tales about Jesus written decades after his death by people who had talked to people who were there, or people who had talked to the people who had talked to the people who were there.
Accuracy should not be expected from anecdotal tales told decades after the fact and gathered through hearsay and rumours.
You're all idiots.
The music industry has been pushing crap for decades.
I seriously doubt the music industry is "dying". As far as I understand their sales are slipping a bit from the last media upgrade cycle, but that's not surprising. Their sales have also been off a bit because of a large pool of not very good music they've been pushing. They'be been trying to boost profits by widening the appeal of individuals CDs so they can sell more of individual CDs and produce fewer CDs per year.
Now, the important thing to remember is that profit != revenue. You have to expect revenues to fall as the music industry moves from physical to digital distribution. Why? Because costs have dropped. There's no little plastic case for the music, no plastic wrap, no fuel costs for shipping, no boxes to put the CDs in, no broken CDs because of accidents during shipping. There are fewer middle-men and the new middle-men are cheaper than the old ones. Think of it this way: when a CD sold for $15 with 15 tracks, the record label got less than $15 from that sale. Now they get close to $0.60 for each track from iTunes. But their fixed costs and marginal costs are much, much lower.
I sincerely doubt the record labels are going to die, they're just loosing the barriers to entry that prevented competitors from entering the market. As other people have said, they can be the one-stop turnkey solution for recording, promotion and digital distribution. They just have to get used to selling individual songs instead of full cds, and developing effective niche marketing strategies. In reality the digital distribution revolution opens up some new economies of scale.
Profits are likely to decline in the short term while they adjust the new environment and while up and new entrants will be snagging sections of the market that the old behemoths aren't adaptive enough to nail down. It's a loss of prestige and power but it's only going to result in the death of a record label if they decide to fight the changes to the bitter end.
Personally, I draw it at #999999.
Seriously, black and white rules always fail to deliver satisfactory results. There needs to be some wiggle room in the rules or you end up with the Tyranny of Rules as opposed to the Tyranny of Chaos. Normally, people live between the extremes.
Occam's Razor:
Those accounts haven't been suspended yet, because they haven't been "reported" enough as violating the terms of service. Please remember, YouTube isn't a person. YouTube doesn't even employ video screeners who watch all videos as they are uploaded. The screeners only look at videos that have been reported for violating the terms of service and there are also multiple different screeners who may have slightly different standards and must make judgement calls on what gets pulled and what doesn't. I doubt an account gets banned until it has been reported for multiple ToS violations across multiple videos.
Having said that I can't agree with YouTube's decision. It seems to me that there should be enough flexibility in the rules to keep users and videos that violate the terms of service but do so for good reasons. Exposing oppression and exploitation is good for humanity, and what's good for humanity should be good for YouTube.
He's talking about the creationists rejecting education in general, as opposed to Paul who embraced it.
Specifically creationist fundamentalists are afraid of ideas, because they're afraid it will hurt the status of their religion. It's a way of pitting people against governments and science. In the end it's nothing more than a play for power over people's lives. They literally view science as a competing religion because science education reduces credulity and that makes any religion based on divine revelation weaker (because you're less likely to take it on faith).
Copying a video and changing the voice over is not a science experiment.
Tell ya what, they'll stop doing it, when other people's "spiritual beliefs" stop insulting their intelligence and making the world a dumber place. Creationism is anti-science and anti-intellectual. That's the whole point of the movement, you know.
A friend brought this up to me one day, and I just laughed at him. He told me "calorie measures are useless because they burned the food in a fire to determine the calories". Do you know why I laughed? Because he fell into the old trap of thinking no yardstick was better than an inaccurate one.
Calories might not be perfect, but they're the measure we have. A better measurement would be useful, but I'm not sure if we can come with something that more accurate and isn't potentially abused. I mean this whole left-handed versus right-handed sugar thing seems right for exploitation by any company wanting to market "diet" products. Just fudge the percentage of sugars that aren't digestible to reduce the apparent calorie count.
Personally, I find I'm amused by the idea that they think all users will stay at the site after it prompts them to download and install some application. Personally, I'd be looking for "cancel" and figuring they were some type of scam operation. Anyone else who's bought stuff online before should know that you don't need to install any applications to use an SLL connection.
I think it would scare many customers away.
You've got it backwards. The majority of the Wii target audience aren't gamers, the proper question is "Why would they start buying games"?
The "big games" are still all aimed at the PS3 and the 360 because that's where the gamers will end up. The Wii could end up moving the most hardware, but end up selling fewer games than the PS3 or the 360. That's the danger of selling your console to a very, very casual set of gamers who might never feel the need to buy another game for their console after they've found one they enjoy diddling with.
While that may be true, if you read the rest of the comments you'd note a couple of things:
The only people who get to go the party are people who went "above and beyond" their normal work duties. Essentially, these parties are the carrot for unpaid overtime. It may, in fact, save more money than it costs.
She's living off welfare and food stamps and she has a barbecue and she's serving steaks, shrimp and lobster? Something's not right about your story.
You obvious disapprove of your sister's decision, however, I couldn't say for sure that I would blame her for her decision. It sounds like she may have quit her job to spend more time with her child, though you seem to make it sound like she's a lazy slut. Perhaps you think she is and perhaps she actually is, who's to know? However, your statement about not contributing to society is an interesting one. Is there no economic benefit from a raising a child properly? Or do you have some magic formula that equates teeth cleaned and time spent on children that shows that the teeth that your sister isn't cleaning are somehow worth more than her child? I mean it certainly would make economic sense for her to quit her job, if her income is going to rise because her job income minus the welfare payments is smaller than the cost of daycare for her child.
It seems to me that welfare, despite failing in a minority of cases, does contribute to the progress of society. It gives the most unfortunate people something other than crime to allow them to survive. That means less "productive" people are killed during crimes. Combined with public education, it prevents the growth of an underclass of unemployable, untalented and uneducated people.
Sure, it can be abused, but the chief beneficiaries are people who are genuinely in need of help.
Or how about any quest where you have a choice? The only choice in most quests in WoW is to complete or not complete the quest. There worst consequence to completing a quest is a loss of faction with an opposing group, which you never really have to care about anyway.
The only real choice is Aldor or Scyer, where you choose which of 2 different quests you'd like to complete.