There's such a thing as morals-- the collective judgement of society that has decided if something is right or wrong.
Infanticide is immoral. We do not need a discussion on it's advantages.
Suggesting that there should be a reasoned discussion of it is bullshit. In the same way that have a reasoned discussion on the advantages of slavery is bullshit.
And your argument--that an infant is equivalent to a stray dog--is also bullshit.
performance enhancing drugs in sport, genetic screening, early abortion, late-term abortion, sex-selective abortion, embryonic stem cell research, hybrid embryos, saviour siblings, therapeutic cloning, reproductive cloning, genetic engineering of children for higher IQs, eugenics, and organ markets.
Far from being sophisticated and profound, all of Savulescu’s arguments run on the same rails. Why shouldn’t we do transgressive action X? he demands. X hurts no one. X is an expression of autonomy. X is my right. Do you object that X is against human nature? No such thing, buddy. Therefore, X is ethical. Let us, then, be courageously transgressive.
Now, if Professor Savulescu were a mere philosopher, rather than an Oxford Bioethicist, he would be laughed offstage. To paraphrase George Orwell, some ideas are so stupid that only a bioethicist could promote them.
He also found time to defend an article he edited advocating "after-birth abortions":
What is disturbing is not the arguments in this paper nor its publication in an ethics journal. It is the hostile, abusive, threatening responses that it has elicited. More than ever, proper academic discussion and freedom are under threat from fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society.
What the response to this article reveals, through the microscope of the web, is the deep disorder of the modern world. Not that people would give arguments in favour of infanticide, but the deep opposition that exists now to liberal values and fanatical opposition to any kind of reasoned engagement.
No one said anything about killing Youtube. In fact, it's going in the right direction (they've increased revenue substantially).. so that would be stupid.
But just because something is going in the right direction, does not make it a success.
So if you weed out schizophrenia, for example, to create a superior being.. you could simply be creating non-creative people, who will never invent anything new.
Honestly, we don't understand the human mind and how it works... how can we choose what human attributes are safe to discard?
They paid 1.65 billion for it in 2006, and only in July 2012 (in the earnings call that Page missed) did Google say Youtube was finally profitable. And they refused to say by how much.
So 6 years have passed.. they still haven't earned back their money.
And you're saying: Motorola is going to work out because Youtube worked out? Is that some kind of joke?
What you've highlighted is proof of the injustice in the corporate tax code.
The lowest US corporate tax bracket is 15%, yet your chart shows 13.4%. How is that possible?
By giving large business tax breaks and loopholes that no small business could ever take advantage of.
It's destroying small businesses. Just one more way of ensuring small businesses cannot compete with large companies.
If 13.4% is really all we collect, then we should wipe the slate clean. Get rid of all of the tax loopholes, and let everyone pay 13.4% or create new brackets without any loopholes that average out to 13.4% (or even 15%, or 18%... this is still less than what small businesses pay).
Because otherwise, we're just taking from the individuals who are trying to build something for themselves/community/etc.. while giving away money to companies that offshore jobs and layoff workers, to give the CEO and executives a bonus on top of their extravagant salaries.
Right, they weren't "taking countries". However they were " dividing a bunch of them up at random paying no attention to existing tribal lines" which was the SECOND HALF OF THE FIRST SENTENCE.
Please, please.. if you're going to critic my post with details from another post.. read more than the first few words.
but most of the "country-taking" happened in the previous century. The poster was talking about country-taking.
The poster also talked about dividing up the areas...which happened in 1945.
How old would someone alive in 1945 be today
Yes, it's a real mystery.. too bad there's no way of figuring that out.
And btw.. there are over 1.7 million WWII veterans still alive in the US alone. If they were old enough to fight in a war, they were old enough to remember the mess the British (and other empires) created at the end of it.
Also.. you have some nerve dismissing colonialism while at the same time bringing up the middle east.
After WWI when the Ottoman Empire collapsed, the Europeans moved in and claimed the area for themselves.. The British and French divided it up under the Sykes–Picot Agreement.
Syria - French Lebanon - French Northern Iraq - French Transjordan - British Palestine - British Southern Iraq - British
Then in 1945, they just drew some lines on a map, called them countries, and left the whole region.
Somalia - British colony until 1960 Pakistan - British until 1947 Zimbabwe - British until 1980 Myanmar - British until 1948 Palestine/Israel - British until 1948
You can't just deprive people of managing their own affairs, drain their country of wealth, hold them down under your thumb, and then when they FINALLY get free of your tyranny.. wash your hands of everything you've done and say: look how terrible and violent these people are.
Many of the colonies have serious problems, and the fact that they were colonies was a big part of that.
Hold on for a second. You're saying the AC was not alive in 1945? How the hell do you know that.
The british empire began to fall apart after WWII... there are hundreds of millions of people still alive who remember British rule around the world. There are millions right here in the US.
It may not be relevant to this discussion.. but you don't get to pretend history from 65 years ago is ancient history.
If I walk down a street, anyone within a block or two can see me, and we all agree there was no right to privacy... after all I went out in public.
But you put a transmitter in your pocket that broadcasts your location to everyone within 45 miles.. and suddenly you're shocked other people know where you are?
You've got to be kidding me.
It's your phone. It's your transmitter.
STOP transmitting your location to the whole city if you don't want people to know where you are.
Knight was saved from collapse on Aug. 6, when it received a $400 million cash infusion through the sale of convertible securities to a consortium of investors.
Getco LLC, Blackstone Group LP, brokerages Stifel Nicolaus & Co. and TD Ameritrade Holding Corp., as well as Stephens Inc. and Jefferies Group Inc. invested in the rescue funding for knight, according to the Jersey City, New Jersey-based company. The investment will give the firms a 73 percent stake in Knight once the shares are converted into common stock.
So there you go... they were forced to give away control of their company to a number of outside investors.
claim 1 was not quoted in it's entirety above. The full claim 1 is:
1. A system for providing an operating system over a network to a local device, comprising: a base image server configured to transmit a base image of the operating system; a preferences image server configured to transmit at least one preferences image; and an image loader configured to combine the base image and the at least one preferences image into a combined image at the local device in order to provide a full version of the operating system on the local device and automatically remove the full version of the operating system from the local device when logging off or exiting the full version of the operating system on the local device.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the image loader is further configured to determine at least one of an appropriate base image or an appropriate preferences image for the local device.
3. The system of claim 1, further comprising a synchronizer configured to synchronize a base image on the local device with a base image on the base image server in order to provide a synchronized version of the full version of the operating system on the local device.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the local device includes a Basic Input/Output System (BIOS), and the BIOS on the local device loads the image loader at boot time.
5. The system of claim 1, comprising a boot loader configured to boot load the combined image on the local device.
Slashdot Mirror
spend 1.65 billion
don't make a penny in profit
but someday they will (hopefully)
and you think that's success? I see why you posted anonymously.
There's such a thing as morals-- the collective judgement of society that has decided if something is right or wrong.
Infanticide is immoral. We do not need a discussion on it's advantages.
Suggesting that there should be a reasoned discussion of it is bullshit. In the same way that have a reasoned discussion on the advantages of slavery is bullshit.
And your argument--that an infant is equivalent to a stray dog--is also bullshit.
Any mention of this guy deserves a footnote.
He's also in favor of:
performance enhancing drugs in sport, genetic screening, early abortion, late-term abortion, sex-selective abortion, embryonic stem cell research, hybrid embryos, saviour siblings, therapeutic cloning, reproductive cloning, genetic engineering of children for higher IQs, eugenics, and organ markets.
Far from being sophisticated and profound, all of Savulescu’s arguments run on the same rails. Why shouldn’t we do transgressive action X? he demands. X hurts no one. X is an expression of autonomy. X is my right. Do you object that X is against human nature? No such thing, buddy. Therefore, X is ethical. Let us, then, be courageously transgressive.
Now, if Professor Savulescu were a mere philosopher, rather than an Oxford Bioethicist, he would be laughed offstage. To paraphrase George Orwell, some ideas are so stupid that only a bioethicist could promote them.
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/time_to_throw_in_the_towel/
He also found time to defend an article he edited advocating "after-birth abortions":
What is disturbing is not the arguments in this paper nor its publication in an ethics journal. It is the hostile, abusive, threatening responses that it has elicited. More than ever, proper academic discussion and freedom are under threat from fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society.
What the response to this article reveals, through the microscope of the web, is the deep disorder of the modern world. Not that people would give arguments in favour of infanticide, but the deep opposition that exists now to liberal values and fanatical opposition to any kind of reasoned engagement.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/28/journal-defends-its-publication-of-an-article-advocating-after-birth-abortion/
Yes... those damn liberal values that prevent a reasoned discussion on infanticide.
No one said anything about killing Youtube. In fact, it's going in the right direction (they've increased revenue substantially).. so that would be stupid.
But just because something is going in the right direction, does not make it a success.
Do I really need to explain the difference?
The telegraph is always up to slashdot standards.
slashdot: trolling the tech community since 1997
This sounds like an incredibly great idea, that I'm sure will have no down sides.
I mean, if we weed out violence, that can only be a good thing. Nice docile people who won't put up any kind of fight. What could go wrong with that?
Also, aren't mental illness and creativity linked?
https://www.google.com/search?q=creativity+mental+illness
So if you weed out schizophrenia, for example, to create a superior being.. you could simply be creating non-creative people, who will never invent anything new.
Honestly, we don't understand the human mind and how it works... how can we choose what human attributes are safe to discard?
lol... thanks for that.. needed a laugh for today. If that's the standard, then I guess Google is already successful with Motorola. Good job Google!
You're bringing up Youtube?! Why?
They paid 1.65 billion for it in 2006, and only in July 2012 (in the earnings call that Page missed) did Google say Youtube was finally profitable. And they refused to say by how much.
So 6 years have passed.. they still haven't earned back their money.
And you're saying: Motorola is going to work out because Youtube worked out? Is that some kind of joke?
his name goes to his geek.com email address.
Actually.. it's geek.net, ie the company that owns slashdot
http://geek.net/
What you've highlighted is proof of the injustice in the corporate tax code.
The lowest US corporate tax bracket is 15%, yet your chart shows 13.4%. How is that possible?
By giving large business tax breaks and loopholes that no small business could ever take advantage of.
It's destroying small businesses. Just one more way of ensuring small businesses cannot compete with large companies.
If 13.4% is really all we collect, then we should wipe the slate clean. Get rid of all of the tax loopholes, and let everyone pay 13.4% or create new brackets without any loopholes that average out to 13.4% (or even 15%, or 18%... this is still less than what small businesses pay).
Because otherwise, we're just taking from the individuals who are trying to build something for themselves/community/etc.. while giving away money to companies that offshore jobs and layoff workers, to give the CEO and executives a bonus on top of their extravagant salaries.
didn't make this very clear: those are the layers of the disc in order.
aluminum substrate to write on
No. that's not right at all. The aluminum is only used as a reflective layer. A CDR/DVDR is:
1. printed label/printable surface
2. aluminum
3. dye
4. clear plastic substrate
On a blank disc the laser goes through the dye and is reflected by the aluminum.
When the laser writes to the disc, it (basically) burns the dye.
When the burnt area is read by the laser, it is not reflected back by the aluminum. (so now you have 1s and 0s)
Wow.. you're a really talented hacker. But be careful about posting exploits like that or you might be prosecuted for unauthorized computer access.
I can't imagine this is true.. Sony has always been on the cutting-edge of security tech. I mean this is the company that designed the text-based CAPTCHA:
http://pro.sony.com/bbsc/jsp/forms/generateCaptcha.jsp
Right click is disabled so it's impossible to crack.
The British entered an agreement with the French on dividing up the Middle East after WWI in 1918. So saying they were dismantling it isn't correct.
India, like most of the colonies, did not gain independence until after WWII when the British were bankrupt.
Right, they weren't "taking countries". However they were " dividing a bunch of them up at random paying no attention to existing tribal lines" which was the SECOND HALF OF THE FIRST SENTENCE.
Please, please.. if you're going to critic my post with details from another post.. read more than the first few words.
but most of the "country-taking" happened in the previous century. The poster was talking about country-taking.
The poster also talked about dividing up the areas...which happened in 1945.
How old would someone alive in 1945 be today
Yes, it's a real mystery.. too bad there's no way of figuring that out.
And btw.. there are over 1.7 million WWII veterans still alive in the US alone. If they were old enough to fight in a war, they were old enough to remember the mess the British (and other empires) created at the end of it.
Also.. you have some nerve dismissing colonialism while at the same time bringing up the middle east.
After WWI when the Ottoman Empire collapsed, the Europeans moved in and claimed the area for themselves.. The British and French divided it up under the Sykes–Picot Agreement.
Syria - French
Lebanon - French
Northern Iraq - French
Transjordan - British
Palestine - British
Southern Iraq - British
Then in 1945, they just drew some lines on a map, called them countries, and left the whole region.
Somalia - British colony until 1960
Pakistan - British until 1947
Zimbabwe - British until 1980
Myanmar - British until 1948
Palestine/Israel - British until 1948
You can't just deprive people of managing their own affairs, drain their country of wealth, hold them down under your thumb, and then when they FINALLY get free of your tyranny.. wash your hands of everything you've done and say: look how terrible and violent these people are.
Many of the colonies have serious problems, and the fact that they were colonies was a big part of that.
Hold on for a second. You're saying the AC was not alive in 1945? How the hell do you know that.
The british empire began to fall apart after WWII... there are hundreds of millions of people still alive who remember British rule around the world. There are millions right here in the US.
It may not be relevant to this discussion.. but you don't get to pretend history from 65 years ago is ancient history.
Maybe because the interface for office 2013 has been updated to match Windows 8
If they compared Windows 8 w/ Office 2010, you would have complained about the interfaces not matching.
Stop nitpicking. You were going to hate it anyway, so why even pretend there's a real reason behind it.
That analogy would make sense if cell phone transmitters only operated in public places
Why is that a requirement? If I walk around my home with the windows open, I can't claim a right to privacy if someone sees.
and were untraceable from more than a block or two away.
Because the bigger the broadcast, the more you have a right to privacy???
Did you think at all before posting that?
If I walk down a street, anyone within a block or two can see me, and we all agree there was no right to privacy... after all I went out in public.
But you put a transmitter in your pocket that broadcasts your location to everyone within 45 miles.. and suddenly you're shocked other people know where you are?
You've got to be kidding me.
It's your phone. It's your transmitter.
STOP transmitting your location to the whole city if you don't want people to know where you are.
Knight lost the money, there was no parachute.
You're right.. but how about some details?
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-08-09/knight-says-it-may-face-more-burdensome-costs-from-trade-error
Knight was saved from collapse on Aug. 6, when it received a $400 million cash infusion through the sale of convertible securities to a consortium of investors.
Getco LLC, Blackstone Group LP, brokerages Stifel Nicolaus & Co. and TD Ameritrade Holding Corp., as well as Stephens Inc. and Jefferies Group Inc. invested in the rescue funding for knight, according to the Jersey City, New Jersey-based company. The investment will give the firms a 73 percent stake in Knight once the shares are converted into common stock.
So there you go... they were forced to give away control of their company to a number of outside investors.
claim 1 was not quoted in it's entirety above. The full claim 1 is:
1. A system for providing an operating system over a network to a local device, comprising: a base image server configured to transmit a base image of the operating system; a preferences image server configured to transmit at least one preferences image; and an image loader configured to combine the base image and the at least one preferences image into a combined image at the local device in order to provide a full version of the operating system on the local device and automatically remove the full version of the operating system from the local device when logging off or exiting the full version of the operating system on the local device.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the image loader is further configured to determine at least one of an appropriate base image or an appropriate preferences image for the local device.
3. The system of claim 1, further comprising a synchronizer configured to synchronize a base image on the local device with a base image on the base image server in order to provide a synchronized version of the full version of the operating system on the local device.
4. The system of claim 1, wherein the local device includes a Basic Input/Output System (BIOS), and the BIOS on the local device loads the image loader at boot time.
5. The system of claim 1, comprising a boot loader configured to boot load the combined image on the local device.
BOOTP/NFS does not meet what is described above.
it's not.. maybe you should read the patent?