Because God is a free market pro business republican to these people. Ask any southern white Christian? It is taught at the pulpit and all the religious figures endorse him because he has an R next to his name.
That's fine that you have your beliefs about how things are and all, except when you deliberately misinterpret their motivations like that, (well let's not sugarcoat it: you're outright lying about it) then not only do they pay even less attention to you, but people who might be on the fence about it might look at how you and other anti-Trump protesters are behaving in an even more irrational manner than those who you proclaim to be the bad guy. And if they observe that, then who does that make you think they're more likely to vote for?
Everybody who has a pet cause behaves that way. For example, if I defend GMO technology, people come out of the woodwork (usually left leaning) with irrational and baseless shit ranging from "it causes cancer" to assume irrelevant gibberish about Monsanto. The more I call them out on their stupidity, the more steadfast in their stupidity that they become.
The more people like him insult the people that support politicians like Trump, the more effort they'll put into making sure their candidate gets elected.
That said, I really doubt they'll be able to pull off "one digital europe". Why? Because France will complain if they can't regionally ban any service that doesn't have a certain percentage of Frenchmen in it (assuming, of course, that anybody besides France would care to watch that to begin with.)
Even though I staunchly support freedom of speech, part of the first amendment in the US also means you have freedom of association. That means that a private organization can squelch whatever speech they want so long as it's within their own domain. Censorship is only when somebody who is within a public domain or are outside of a domain that you control is curtailing your speech while you are in said domain.
Because slashdot is neither a public domain, nor a domain that you control, then nothing anybody can do to you can be considered censorship.
If something is bullshit, I'm going to call it bullshit. There's no emotion in it, it's just how I'm calling it. What term would you prefer I use instead? Bologna? I just like using the word bullshit.
From the study: "In the heart, exposure to GSM or CDMA modulations of RFR in male rats resulted in a statistically significant, positive trend in the incidence of schwannomas. "
One of its conclusions: "Under the conditions of these 2-year studies, the hyperplastic lesions and glial cell neoplasms of the heart and brain observed in male rats are considered likely the result of whole-body exposures to GSM- or CDMA-modulated RFR."
One of the three reviewers (all three of whom agreed with the study's conclusions): https://cvm.ncsu.edu/directory... [ncsu.edu]
What they are saying could well be true.
I think you're not quite getting what the reviewers were agreeing with.
The female rats were exposed to the same thing, and yet they didn't have any of that happen to them. At the end of the day, what's fundamentally different from male and female? In the case of mammals in particular, it's fundamentally genetics. That is a very strong indicator that what is happening in these rats is likely only relevant to this strain of rat, and then only the males of this strain of rat. Remember, the females were exposed to the same thing, so ask yourself, why isn't this happening to them? And what makes you think this would happen to anything besides these particular male rats but not the female ones?
In other words, the message being put across by the media is like saying that if you feed avocado to your dog, and it kills your dog, it could very well be toxic to humans as well. Nope, wrong, try again. What persin does to affect dogs (and many other animals) isn't even relevant to humans. This is also similar to how Bt is highly toxic to invertebrates but harmless to anything else. Am I making sense to you?
Anyways back to the cell phone radiation study: If this also affected the females, then they might be on to something for any organism besides this strain of rat, and it would warrant more investigation. But basically, within their own study, they've already shown that what happened to these rats likely isn't relevant to anything else.
As for your three reviewers, I'm sure that their conclusion that this is relevant to these particular male rats is likely correct.
I think what's most important for Jimmy Wales is that he receives enough suckers that he can guilt into believing that wikipedia just doesn't have enough funding and needs more of it, even though that's a load of crap and his nonprofit company spends somewhat lavishly.
Let's not even get into the fact that most wikipedia articles are biased towards a pan-European, North American, and Australian viewpoint, in spite of claiming that they have strict "NPOV" rules, or the fact that administrators will simply delete a wikipedia page that covers a notable subject whose very existence they disagree with.
The point that AC is making is that you can't buy poker chips at Wal-Mart and expect to use them at the casino.
It's a really poor point to make then, because nobody is talking actual poker chips. Poker chips is just an analogy. If you set up a game in your house with using poker chips in lieu of money, then you declare something like this: Red chips are worth $1, white chips are worth $3, and blue chips are worth $5.
And guess what? Everybody suddenly values them at what you said they're worth, and they'll trade them as such. This is, in principle, the same thing as a fiat currency. Within the US, only the dollar is legal tender that can be used to satisfy all debts. But suppose you wanted to settle them with euro? A euro does have value somewhere, just not within the court room that you're standing in if such a matter arises. Guess what else shares something in common? Bitcoin.
The difference in this case is that the dollar is declared legal tender in the US, backed by law. In this country, offer something in exchange for a stated price, you must accept payment in dollars or face court action. Bitcoin has no such legal standing. It's not officially money ( yet ).
So then how is a bitcoin different from a euro in this regard?
Or, you're posting to a US based website, hence it is going to focus more on events in the US, just like any other domestic website in any other country would do.
Well, it just goes to show how far robots have come in the last couple of months. Remember it was only back in March that they were trying to launch a second holocaust.
A bullshit study is a bullshit study, no matter who calls out the fact that it is bullshit. The fact that this only happens to the males and not the females is basically a dead ringer for it being a part of the rat's genome and that it's not being influenced by any environmental or other outside factors. I'm not even a scientist and that fact sticks out like a sore thumb to me. Then when you read deeper into the methodology used, and they didn't even use enough subjects to be able to come anywhere close to being able to meet statistical significance, that this is just another one of those bogus health related studies that come around every now and then because somebody is ideologically opposed to something everybody does or uses, and sets out to prove a point rather than to investigate. This is similar to studies that come around every now and then to attempt to prove that take your pick of any one of meat, GMO, vaccination, or aspartame is bad for you.
Other countries with legal ownership of firearms don't have the same murder rate as the US. I think this is more of a cultural phenomenon than anything else. Namely, I'm talking about these kind of people:
And a true redneck wouldn't want to work for any pansy-ass shop that expects everyone to talk like they're from up north all day long. And they sure as hell aren't going ballin' to their congresscritters to make folks hire 'em regardless of how they sound.
Actually they often do, sans the complaining to congresscritters.
Not sayin' that rednecks don't reform and learn how to talk like the rest of the world so they can get a job, just that they aren't really rednecks anymore after they do that.
I think it's more than the accent that makes somebody a redneck. A redneck is anybody who likes at least 5 of the following:
- NASCAR - Moonshine - Country music - Dukes of Hazard - Hunting - Grits - Dip - Fishing - Working on engines - Trailers
None of those things somehow excludes also doing any high tech or expert level work.
You use old beater machines instead of virtual machines? God I remember when I did that... So much clutter due to holding on to old computer parts that I'd usually never end up using, but still keeping them "just in case". My last move was so much easier without packing up a garage partially filled with that shit to bring to the next house.
I think what GP may be referring to is the actual underlying story here, which the BGR article linked seems to have wrong. Omar Famuyide was in fact brandishing a gun and pointed it at the victim's head, and said gun was found abandoned in the car (a white BMW) two days later.
When rednecks are being denied employment from jobs they desire, because they're readily identifiable as a redneck;
when rednecks are being denied entry to social clubs and bars they desire entry to, because they're readily identifiable as a redneck
Actually yes, that does happen, quite often. For example, practically no IT shop will hire you if you have a strong southern accent. Some will, but it's pretty rare.
IIRC windmodems didn't come out until way late in the 33.6k era, (almost 56k era) and were the result of their builder going with a cheaper software based controller, which meant a fatter, more complex driver. That also meant they were slower in some situations, hence I avoided them anyways (they were also only about $20 or so cheaper.)
I also remember hearing about the struggle to get them to work in Linux, and IIRC it took so long for the Linux kernel to finally support them that they already became irrelevant to most of us since that was about the time that broadband became mainstream.
Being a good member of society usually means you don't discriminate, bully, etc.
That's nice and all, but it occurs to me that the message lately has been that you the only people you don't discriminate against are legally protected groups, and it's perfectly fine to discriminate against anybody else. For example, it's cool to bash rednecks, even though all of the ones I've met are some pretty honest working guys that are actually pretty fun to have a beer with, even though I don't like beer, or country music, or any of the other stuff they're in to. I mean shit, if rednecks were a minority group, people would shame you for using the term redneck.
So really, this is no different than treating nicotine addiction with more nicotine (ie. gums and patches, etc).
There's a reason we don't treat alcoholics with whiskey.
Actually in some very rare cases you might do exactly that. Sudden alcohol cessation can have fatal consequences, even more dangerous than quitting opiates cold turkey.
Slashdot Mirror
Because God is a free market pro business republican to these people. Ask any southern white Christian? It is taught at the pulpit and all the religious figures endorse him because he has an R next to his name.
That's fine that you have your beliefs about how things are and all, except when you deliberately misinterpret their motivations like that, (well let's not sugarcoat it: you're outright lying about it) then not only do they pay even less attention to you, but people who might be on the fence about it might look at how you and other anti-Trump protesters are behaving in an even more irrational manner than those who you proclaim to be the bad guy. And if they observe that, then who does that make you think they're more likely to vote for?
Everybody who has a pet cause behaves that way. For example, if I defend GMO technology, people come out of the woodwork (usually left leaning) with irrational and baseless shit ranging from "it causes cancer" to assume irrelevant gibberish about Monsanto. The more I call them out on their stupidity, the more steadfast in their stupidity that they become.
Speaking as an atheist here, I truly can't fathom what the fuck makes you think Trump is after a religious cause.
The more people like him insult the people that support politicians like Trump, the more effort they'll put into making sure their candidate gets elected.
For what it's worth, some within the west don't like any cultures other than their own taking over:
https://entertainment.slashdot...
That said, I really doubt they'll be able to pull off "one digital europe". Why? Because France will complain if they can't regionally ban any service that doesn't have a certain percentage of Frenchmen in it (assuming, of course, that anybody besides France would care to watch that to begin with.)
^
Even though I staunchly support freedom of speech, part of the first amendment in the US also means you have freedom of association. That means that a private organization can squelch whatever speech they want so long as it's within their own domain. Censorship is only when somebody who is within a public domain or are outside of a domain that you control is curtailing your speech while you are in said domain.
Because slashdot is neither a public domain, nor a domain that you control, then nothing anybody can do to you can be considered censorship.
Why the emo?
If something is bullshit, I'm going to call it bullshit. There's no emotion in it, it's just how I'm calling it. What term would you prefer I use instead? Bologna? I just like using the word bullshit.
From the study:
"In the heart, exposure to GSM or CDMA modulations of RFR in male rats resulted in a statistically significant, positive trend in the incidence of schwannomas. "
One of its conclusions:
"Under the conditions of these 2-year studies, the hyperplastic lesions and glial cell neoplasms of the heart and brain observed in male rats are considered likely the result of whole-body exposures to GSM- or CDMA-modulated RFR."
One of the three reviewers (all three of whom agreed with the study's conclusions):
https://cvm.ncsu.edu/directory... [ncsu.edu]
What they are saying could well be true.
I think you're not quite getting what the reviewers were agreeing with.
The female rats were exposed to the same thing, and yet they didn't have any of that happen to them. At the end of the day, what's fundamentally different from male and female? In the case of mammals in particular, it's fundamentally genetics. That is a very strong indicator that what is happening in these rats is likely only relevant to this strain of rat, and then only the males of this strain of rat. Remember, the females were exposed to the same thing, so ask yourself, why isn't this happening to them? And what makes you think this would happen to anything besides these particular male rats but not the female ones?
In other words, the message being put across by the media is like saying that if you feed avocado to your dog, and it kills your dog, it could very well be toxic to humans as well. Nope, wrong, try again. What persin does to affect dogs (and many other animals) isn't even relevant to humans. This is also similar to how Bt is highly toxic to invertebrates but harmless to anything else. Am I making sense to you?
Anyways back to the cell phone radiation study: If this also affected the females, then they might be on to something for any organism besides this strain of rat, and it would warrant more investigation. But basically, within their own study, they've already shown that what happened to these rats likely isn't relevant to anything else.
As for your three reviewers, I'm sure that their conclusion that this is relevant to these particular male rats is likely correct.
I think what's most important for Jimmy Wales is that he receives enough suckers that he can guilt into believing that wikipedia just doesn't have enough funding and needs more of it, even though that's a load of crap and his nonprofit company spends somewhat lavishly.
Let's not even get into the fact that most wikipedia articles are biased towards a pan-European, North American, and Australian viewpoint, in spite of claiming that they have strict "NPOV" rules, or the fact that administrators will simply delete a wikipedia page that covers a notable subject whose very existence they disagree with.
I wish. Unfortunately my money is only worth what other people think it's worth.
Well, not exactly. That really depends if you're the buyer or the seller.
Suppose you wanted to sell a pair of shoes. How much money would you accept for them? That's what money is worth to you.
The point that AC is making is that you can't buy poker chips at Wal-Mart and expect to use them at the casino.
It's a really poor point to make then, because nobody is talking actual poker chips. Poker chips is just an analogy. If you set up a game in your house with using poker chips in lieu of money, then you declare something like this: Red chips are worth $1, white chips are worth $3, and blue chips are worth $5.
And guess what? Everybody suddenly values them at what you said they're worth, and they'll trade them as such. This is, in principle, the same thing as a fiat currency. Within the US, only the dollar is legal tender that can be used to satisfy all debts. But suppose you wanted to settle them with euro? A euro does have value somewhere, just not within the court room that you're standing in if such a matter arises. Guess what else shares something in common? Bitcoin.
The difference in this case is that the dollar is declared legal tender in the US, backed by law. In this country, offer something in exchange for a stated price, you must accept payment in dollars or face court action. Bitcoin has no such legal standing. It's not officially money ( yet ).
So then how is a bitcoin different from a euro in this regard?
At the end of the day, any fiat currency is only worth whatever you think it's worth. So you can really identify any money as poker chips.
Or, you're posting to a US based website, hence it is going to focus more on events in the US, just like any other domestic website in any other country would do.
Well, it just goes to show how far robots have come in the last couple of months. Remember it was only back in March that they were trying to launch a second holocaust.
http://www.npr.org/2016/03/27/...
A bullshit study is a bullshit study, no matter who calls out the fact that it is bullshit. The fact that this only happens to the males and not the females is basically a dead ringer for it being a part of the rat's genome and that it's not being influenced by any environmental or other outside factors. I'm not even a scientist and that fact sticks out like a sore thumb to me. Then when you read deeper into the methodology used, and they didn't even use enough subjects to be able to come anywhere close to being able to meet statistical significance, that this is just another one of those bogus health related studies that come around every now and then because somebody is ideologically opposed to something everybody does or uses, and sets out to prove a point rather than to investigate. This is similar to studies that come around every now and then to attempt to prove that take your pick of any one of meat, GMO, vaccination, or aspartame is bad for you.
Other countries with legal ownership of firearms don't have the same murder rate as the US. I think this is more of a cultural phenomenon than anything else. Namely, I'm talking about these kind of people:
http://www.theventureonline.co...
Think about it: If your close friends think that being a petty thug is an awesome career choice, you're probably more likely to do it.
And a true redneck wouldn't want to work for any pansy-ass shop that expects everyone to talk like they're from up north all day long. And they sure as hell aren't going ballin' to their congresscritters to make folks hire 'em regardless of how they sound.
Actually they often do, sans the complaining to congresscritters.
Not sayin' that rednecks don't reform and learn how to talk like the rest of the world so they can get a job, just that they aren't really rednecks anymore after they do that.
I think it's more than the accent that makes somebody a redneck. A redneck is anybody who likes at least 5 of the following:
- NASCAR
- Moonshine
- Country music
- Dukes of Hazard
- Hunting
- Grits
- Dip
- Fishing
- Working on engines
- Trailers
None of those things somehow excludes also doing any high tech or expert level work.
You use old beater machines instead of virtual machines? God I remember when I did that... So much clutter due to holding on to old computer parts that I'd usually never end up using, but still keeping them "just in case". My last move was so much easier without packing up a garage partially filled with that shit to bring to the next house.
I think what GP may be referring to is the actual underlying story here, which the BGR article linked seems to have wrong. Omar Famuyide was in fact brandishing a gun and pointed it at the victim's head, and said gun was found abandoned in the car (a white BMW) two days later.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/u...
He also fired a shot inside of a massage parlor:
http://www.birminghammail.co.u...
And in case you consider those two sources to be somehow less reliable than BGR, here's a third source:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-eng...
So yeah, he did in fact commit these crimes while brandishing a gun, and there are even a few photos of said gun.
When rednecks are being denied employment from jobs they desire, because they're readily identifiable as a redneck;
when rednecks are being denied entry to social clubs and bars they desire entry to, because they're readily identifiable as a redneck
Actually yes, that does happen, quite often. For example, practically no IT shop will hire you if you have a strong southern accent. Some will, but it's pretty rare.
IIRC windmodems didn't come out until way late in the 33.6k era, (almost 56k era) and were the result of their builder going with a cheaper software based controller, which meant a fatter, more complex driver. That also meant they were slower in some situations, hence I avoided them anyways (they were also only about $20 or so cheaper.)
I also remember hearing about the struggle to get them to work in Linux, and IIRC it took so long for the Linux kernel to finally support them that they already became irrelevant to most of us since that was about the time that broadband became mainstream.
Being a good member of society usually means you don't discriminate, bully, etc.
That's nice and all, but it occurs to me that the message lately has been that you the only people you don't discriminate against are legally protected groups, and it's perfectly fine to discriminate against anybody else. For example, it's cool to bash rednecks, even though all of the ones I've met are some pretty honest working guys that are actually pretty fun to have a beer with, even though I don't like beer, or country music, or any of the other stuff they're in to. I mean shit, if rednecks were a minority group, people would shame you for using the term redneck.
So really, this is no different than treating nicotine addiction with more nicotine (ie. gums and patches, etc).
There's a reason we don't treat alcoholics with whiskey.
Actually in some very rare cases you might do exactly that. Sudden alcohol cessation can have fatal consequences, even more dangerous than quitting opiates cold turkey.
I think they meant Asian Massage Parlors increase the load.
Interesting, so does that mean that non capitalist countries already have a cure for every condition he mentioned?