Do all the people in the world deserve the same amount of food? That's what capitalism decides. It's allocation based on buying power, which is based on wealth, which is determined (ideally) by your use to society.
Highly educated and well-employed folk get more food to make things like rice chips and cookies and other high-grade manufactured stuff cheaply, while the random poverty-stricken African who forages for trash for a living gets straight rice, and less of it.
From a strictly social-engineering amoral standpoint, this benefits society because it rewards education and those people who become better contributors to society. If there is some kind of problem giving everyone in Africa a shot at schooling that's an education problem, not a capitalist one.
Then again, somebody's gotta clean the CEO's toilets. There aren't enough Liberal Arts majors in one country alone to do that.
If people weren't gathering around drunks, lots of bad shit wouldn't happen. It's gotta be a pretty purile mind that believes the best women can be found in bars getting plastered on screwdrivers.
There's nothing boring or wrong with finding a great high-quality girl and screwing her monogomously for years.
Forcing the labelling of things that have no bearing on the actual makeup of the food is asinine at best and punishes businesses for their particular means when the end is the same in all cases. None of these altered genes change the makeup of the food. Were you to do a spectrograph analysis of the food it would be identical to non-GM food of the same species.
We might as well force labelling of the ethnicity of the company owner on every product because it has just as much bearing on the food itself as these genes do, present or not. IE, none, zero.
The press coverage has been woefully bad with respect to explaining that these are not your average run-of-the-mill viruses, but rather are bacteriophages that can only infect bacteria. Expect some mild hysteria over this and some nuts demanding labelling.
The slippery slope argument is a proveable fallacy. Please do not pollute otherwise reasonable posts with it. Thanks.
Re:In truth, it seems like a non-issue to me.
on
It's OK to keep AIMing
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Latin may not be widely spoken, nor the first language of anyone as far as I am aware, but I assure you it is quite widely used in print, and is not nearly as "dead" as you think. With each passing decade and with new, modern language teaching methods, more and more students are picking up Latin, myself among them.
A lot of the problems with teaching Latin come from the fact that many modern IE languages have lost their inflection (in the case of English, almost entirely) and rely on prepositions and word order to do what word endings did before. It is arguably easier to teach Latin to a Serbian (which still has an extensive case system) than an Italian for this reason.
In any event, besides the Vatican, there exist many resources for and modern uses of Latin online. The Nova Roma association is one, while Finland's government is also publishing official announcements in Latin. There is also an online daily newscast in Latin out of Finland.
I apologize if this post is not completely together, but it is 3am and while I am awake, I am insomniac, and my thought processes are not quite up to par.
Home invasion isn't assault, it's B&E. If you actually assault someone in the home, it's assault too. If you threaten or confine them against their will, or rob them, then it's uttering threats, illegal confinement, and robbery, respectively.
Stop trying to equate one dissimilar thing with another.
Uh, actually, watts sucked per hour/minute/etc has been very easy to measure for many decades now. There is no reason why chip wattage drawn should be difficult to gauge in the slightest.
So buy some cheap land and go farm it. Be self-sufficient. Nobody is forcing you to buy-in to the American capitalist dream, only yourself. "It's not realistic"? Yeah right. Only because you discount it as a possibility from the get-go.
How do you know that every nation must necessarily follow the American developmental model, and thus, China's situation can be nicely explained by referring back to it?
A big problem with western society today is this: We have seen how corrupt and untrustworthy people can be, and we attempt to codify what we want in our laws such that the reading of them is infallible enough to keep these corrupt and untrustworthy people from doing harm.
It doesn't work.
No law can be rigid enough to be interpreted flawlessly by everyone and yet be flexible enough to catch the exceptions that eventually crop up.
It requires human judgement to really tell if something contravenes the spirit of the law, and yet we tie the judges' hands with specific, rigid definitions of how to judge the case. We attempt to remove human judgement from the equation because we do not trust it. This is utterly stupid.
The only way to get Net Neutrality to work is to establish an ideal scenario of how the Internet should work, and giving judges the leeway to decide whether certain cases that crop up go against those established ideals. Yes, this also means selective enforcement, which is only a bad thing if you have bad people making the enforcement decisions.
If people would stop electing corrupt and otherwise untrustworthy invidviduals to positions of power, we would not have to worry so much about these things. It is the responsibility of the people to weed out the political landscape and leave only the trustworthy. Obviously we have been slack.
Judgement calls in cases like Net Neutrality are necessary, and if made by trustworthy and integrous people, will solve a lot of these bickering problems we have trying in vain to construct a law so perfectly worded that it can bend both ways backwards at the same time.
Good on you, and I agree completely. We should not be in the business of censoring viewpoints. If they are unpopular, unpopularity will do that for us.
The article in question seems inflammatory but is making arguments based on known facts. Yes, Mohammed took very young girls as wives. Why doesn't this make him a pedophile? Why is it hateful to suggest it? Line up any other big figure in politics or religion and show him or her having sex with a 12-year old and tell me they wouldn't be judged a pedophile. Now ask the question: why do we forbid this judgement because a person was the founder of a religion? Why should he be immune from common sense?
You must speak a different version of english than I do. I live in Canada.
We pronounce 'i' in penis just as we would in the word 'is' (the s is different though).
We pronounce the 'a' in 'ass' as we would in 'apple'.
We pronounce 'aah' ("open your mouth and say aaah for the tongue depressor, little johnny") as the a in 'father'. Nasalized a bit.
Thus I don't understand your analogy. Pronouncing the A in PNAS as the 'a' in 'ass' results in something very close to 'penis', whereas pronouncing the A as in the 'a' in 'father' results in something more ambiguous and much less like the word being avoided. Note that none of these vowels in Canadian english sound like a schwa.
Heh, let me guess, that book is used as a textbook in university. Otherwise I don't see why it would sell for more than $40. I'm greatly interested in such topics but to feed the money-grabbing textbook publishing machine seems almost tragic.
It's also immensely disrespectful to our ancestors of well over a million years' span, to deny their existence because it just might, maybe rock the boat a little.
How many thousands of generations of people lived and died over the millennia so that we might be where we are today? And some would deny their very existence. Shame on you!
If 30 seconds of reading can turn up these sorts of mistakes, the only explanations for errors in the article summary text are laziness or incompetence.
Slashdot Mirror
Do all the people in the world deserve the same amount of food? That's what capitalism decides. It's allocation based on buying power, which is based on wealth, which is determined (ideally) by your use to society.
Highly educated and well-employed folk get more food to make things like rice chips and cookies and other high-grade manufactured stuff cheaply, while the random poverty-stricken African who forages for trash for a living gets straight rice, and less of it.
From a strictly social-engineering amoral standpoint, this benefits society because it rewards education and those people who become better contributors to society. If there is some kind of problem giving everyone in Africa a shot at schooling that's an education problem, not a capitalist one.
Then again, somebody's gotta clean the CEO's toilets. There aren't enough Liberal Arts majors in one country alone to do that.
And the lesson of the day kids? Don't hang out in bars with drunk people! Amazing, morality will keep you out of trouble!
If people weren't gathering around drunks, lots of bad shit wouldn't happen. It's gotta be a pretty purile mind that believes the best women can be found in bars getting plastered on screwdrivers.
There's nothing boring or wrong with finding a great high-quality girl and screwing her monogomously for years.
Forcing the labelling of things that have no bearing on the actual makeup of the food is asinine at best and punishes businesses for their particular means when the end is the same in all cases. None of these altered genes change the makeup of the food. Were you to do a spectrograph analysis of the food it would be identical to non-GM food of the same species.
We might as well force labelling of the ethnicity of the company owner on every product because it has just as much bearing on the food itself as these genes do, present or not. IE, none, zero.
"They're putting bird flu in our food!"
The press coverage has been woefully bad with respect to explaining that these are not your average run-of-the-mill viruses, but rather are bacteriophages that can only infect bacteria. Expect some mild hysteria over this and some nuts demanding labelling.
The slippery slope argument is a proveable fallacy. Please do not pollute otherwise reasonable posts with it. Thanks.
Latin may not be widely spoken, nor the first language of anyone as far as I am aware, but I assure you it is quite widely used in print, and is not nearly as "dead" as you think. With each passing decade and with new, modern language teaching methods, more and more students are picking up Latin, myself among them.
A lot of the problems with teaching Latin come from the fact that many modern IE languages have lost their inflection (in the case of English, almost entirely) and rely on prepositions and word order to do what word endings did before. It is arguably easier to teach Latin to a Serbian (which still has an extensive case system) than an Italian for this reason.
In any event, besides the Vatican, there exist many resources for and modern uses of Latin online. The Nova Roma association is one, while Finland's government is also publishing official announcements in Latin. There is also an online daily newscast in Latin out of Finland.
I apologize if this post is not completely together, but it is 3am and while I am awake, I am insomniac, and my thought processes are not quite up to par.
Home invasion isn't assault, it's B&E. If you actually assault someone in the home, it's assault too. If you threaten or confine them against their will, or rob them, then it's uttering threats, illegal confinement, and robbery, respectively.
Stop trying to equate one dissimilar thing with another.
Define "traumatized".
The only traumatic pranks to play are the ones that maim and kill.
Uh, actually, watts sucked per hour/minute/etc has been very easy to measure for many decades now. There is no reason why chip wattage drawn should be difficult to gauge in the slightest.
So buy some cheap land and go farm it. Be self-sufficient. Nobody is forcing you to buy-in to the American capitalist dream, only yourself. "It's not realistic"? Yeah right. Only because you discount it as a possibility from the get-go.
Using Firefox 1.5.0.4 on WinXp, with the NoScript JS-blocker extension. I saw no popups.
How do you know that every nation must necessarily follow the American developmental model, and thus, China's situation can be nicely explained by referring back to it?
A big problem with western society today is this: We have seen how corrupt and untrustworthy people can be, and we attempt to codify what we want in our laws such that the reading of them is infallible enough to keep these corrupt and untrustworthy people from doing harm.
It doesn't work.
No law can be rigid enough to be interpreted flawlessly by everyone and yet be flexible enough to catch the exceptions that eventually crop up.
It requires human judgement to really tell if something contravenes the spirit of the law, and yet we tie the judges' hands with specific, rigid definitions of how to judge the case. We attempt to remove human judgement from the equation because we do not trust it. This is utterly stupid.
The only way to get Net Neutrality to work is to establish an ideal scenario of how the Internet should work, and giving judges the leeway to decide whether certain cases that crop up go against those established ideals. Yes, this also means selective enforcement, which is only a bad thing if you have bad people making the enforcement decisions.
If people would stop electing corrupt and otherwise untrustworthy invidviduals to positions of power, we would not have to worry so much about these things. It is the responsibility of the people to weed out the political landscape and leave only the trustworthy. Obviously we have been slack.
Judgement calls in cases like Net Neutrality are necessary, and if made by trustworthy and integrous people, will solve a lot of these bickering problems we have trying in vain to construct a law so perfectly worded that it can bend both ways backwards at the same time.
Not to rain on your parade, but establishing a new domain for your number system does not make 5 fall between 3 and 4 in the real numbers domain.
Serious science has existed only for about 200 years. It is definitely by itself not part of human nature.
Good on you, and I agree completely. We should not be in the business of censoring viewpoints. If they are unpopular, unpopularity will do that for us.
The article in question seems inflammatory but is making arguments based on known facts. Yes, Mohammed took very young girls as wives. Why doesn't this make him a pedophile? Why is it hateful to suggest it? Line up any other big figure in politics or religion and show him or her having sex with a 12-year old and tell me they wouldn't be judged a pedophile. Now ask the question: why do we forbid this judgement because a person was the founder of a religion? Why should he be immune from common sense?
You must speak a different version of english than I do. I live in Canada.
We pronounce 'i' in penis just as we would in the word 'is' (the s is different though).
We pronounce the 'a' in 'ass' as we would in 'apple'.
We pronounce 'aah' ("open your mouth and say aaah for the tongue depressor, little johnny") as the a in 'father'. Nasalized a bit.
Thus I don't understand your analogy. Pronouncing the A in PNAS as the 'a' in 'ass' results in something very close to 'penis', whereas pronouncing the A as in the 'a' in 'father' results in something more ambiguous and much less like the word being avoided. Note that none of these vowels in Canadian english sound like a schwa.
Heh, let me guess, that book is used as a textbook in university. Otherwise I don't see why it would sell for more than $40. I'm greatly interested in such topics but to feed the money-grabbing textbook publishing machine seems almost tragic.
"IMHO Xena is a name that more people know that all the name you gave"
Uh, Nike?
That was quite profound. Thanks for the link.
It's also immensely disrespectful to our ancestors of well over a million years' span, to deny their existence because it just might, maybe rock the boat a little.
How many thousands of generations of people lived and died over the millennia so that we might be where we are today? And some would deny their very existence. Shame on you!
Don't forget Star Wars Galaxies. And Everquest I/II depending on how jaded you've become.
If 30 seconds of reading can turn up these sorts of mistakes, the only explanations for errors in the article summary text are laziness or incompetence.
The incubation period for the Flu is from 24 to 72 hours.
d Overview.htm
Source: http://www.yale.edu/yhp/departments/health_ed/Col
The incubation period for the Common Cold is from 2 to 3 days.
Source: http://medplant.nmsu.edu/Diseases/cold/cold.htm
Mod parent down as Wrong.