No really. Exploitation and dehumanization are at the very core of what Marxism is about
All you have to do is say it once more, and you'll prove it! You may think that's its effect, but it is entirely the opposite of what it's about under any reasonable definition of about.
Re:Not so funny when/if the seller commits suicide
on
Online Revenge
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No chance of that. If the original owner is not Amir, he has nothing to complain about (except the theft itself) since its not his info thats posted on the internet. If Amir is the original owner and the laptop was stolen from him by some 3rd party and sold on ebay, Amir would be telling people that instead of claiming it worked when he sold it.
No its not. Something like pregnancy is an example of a task that is not parallelizable. Only a single person can gestate a baby. Generating articles for Wikipedia is highly parallelizable. Different people can work on different articles concurrently. Wikipedia's problems arise from the quality of work being contributed, not the number of people contributing.
Regardless of whether or not it's retarded, that the basic idea behind marriage. Its literally what you promise to do in most marriage ceremonies. Hence the "as long as you both shall live" phrase. You don't have to agree with it, you don't have to like it, and you don't have to do it, but it is what it is. Of course often it doesn't work out. It may be an unrealistic expectation. But marriage is a promise, and like any promise, there's little point in making it if you don't at least have the intention of attempting to fullfill it.
Which part are you calling BS: his description of how things were before labor laws and anti-trust legislation, or his assertion that if we remove these things it will be that way again? The former is widely documented and can be read about in virtually any history of the industrial revolution. The latter is pretty much just common sense.
By getting married, you are promising to accept them however they change. Thats what that 'for richer and for poorer, in sickness and in health' stuff is really about. If you aren't willing to do that, you really shouldn't get married.
Re:Does anyone know if they fixed the chatzilla bu
on
SeaMonkey 1.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
According to this its a bug in Firefox 1.5 (look under Developer Comments). Here's the bugzilla entry: 318419
I doubt it. These companies aren't sucking this info from some public data source. They obtain the information from pretending to be the phone owner and getting the company to tell them that phone's history.
Re:I don't want to be stuck with one..
on
Pro C#
·
· Score: 1
Lol, too bad for you, you missed the dot com bubble. I don't know how that stacks up to starting salaries now, but it peanuts to what we were paying kids at the startup I worked at in 99;)
The reality is that the climate changes over time, it has in the past and will in the future.
Regardless of the cause, the problem isn't the change in temperature, its the speed at which it is changing. In the past even rapid changes occured over thousands of years. Current models predict a much faster change. Sure the ecosystem will adjust eventually, but alot of people will be screwed in the process.
What people need to start working on is getting self sustaining colonies off this planet.
Don't you think you think it'd be easier to figure out how to not fuck up this planet (or at least how to deal with its changes) than how to survive on another planet? The earth at its worst is a hell of a lot more hospitable than any other spot in the solar system.
True, they are not equivalent, but that does not mean privacy is not a right. In the US its considered covered under the 4th amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated More on this here.
Because I can't bear to see this cycle acted out again, I'm going to spell this out: The cod eat smaller fish, which in turn eat plankton. The poster is suggesting that by locating concentrations of plankton, they are likely to find the plankton eaters, and thereby locate the cod which are eating them in turn. Now please, both of you, stop posting!
Eclipse is not just an IDE, its a framework for implementing IDEs. While Java is a natural fit since Eclipse is a Java app, you can download tools for developing in other languages. And while there aren't a lot of Java apps running on the desktop, a few good ones have cropped up recently that show its possible. I like JEdit, Eclipse, Intellij, and Poseidon. I think performance issues are what's really slowed acceptance of Java on the desktop, but improvements in JVMs and Moore's law seem to be taking care of that.
To me usenet was an addiction. Having to read every post and draw out a flamewar till the bitter end. I'm not sad to see less ISPs sporting it.
Sounds to me like the problem is the way you are using the medium, not the medium itself. If you go around arguing with the net kooks, you'll find yourself under attack - in any forum. If you are going to do stuff like that, you should take precautions - like not putting up your resume with full contact info on the web (hint hint).
The most interesting thing about HIV tests is that they actually check for AIDS instead! The most common test, the one claimed to be false-positive proof, works by counting your white blood cells. If you have HIV but not AIDS (Yet?) it will read negative. If you are feeling under the weather due to job stress and the flu, it will read positive. If you have lukemia, positive. If you have been exposed to radiation, positive. If you are taking certain herbal anti-fungal agents that supress the immune system, positive. In other words, it is all but useless.
It does sound all but useless, which makes me wonder whether you got the facts right. I did a quick google, and found this link, showing effectiveness of different tests. None of these look like simple white cell counts. Doesn't say anything about which is the most common, but this page from the FDA would seem to have all the common ones - note the one that was withdrawn because it was unreliable. So where did you see this information about using white blood cells?
hmm i don't think so, someone who has some songs on their phone would probably not see the need for another device for songs in their pocket..
If they like some things about it but are frustrated by its lack of capacity, they're likely to upgrade to an ipod. If they hate the device altogether, they're less likely to do so. Doesn't seem a clever strategy to me.
this does add up my friend, another article like this was available the day after the crappy rokr came out.
The number of articles making a claim doesn't add to the logic of the claim.
You are free to believe anyhting you want. But lets draw the line at trying to dictate the world of reality.
You're asking the impossible. If someone see a difference between their beliefs and reality, in what sense do they believe? Do you see the differences between your beliefs and reality? Or do you believe that you don't have beliefs?
The listed issues you stated (name one country that does not have skeletons and I'll show you a 1 hour old government), have nothing to do with internet supervision, or even control of the internet.
That was pretty much my point, which you missed despite my adding: Just to be clear, I'm not saying that these scandals make the US untrustworthy for this job, just that your saying that the UN is less untrustworthy because of one scandal is silly.
What I will say is actually a question, Where can you go today, that you will be unable to reach if the U.N. controls it? Opinion -- anywhere that a member country says it doesn't want you to go.
I don't think you really understand what's at issue here. Its about administering top level domains, not control over content. There's no way that you can turn off Nazi images or Saab ads by manipulating the top level domains.
So, it should stay in the hands of United States government, which remains untainted by any hint of corruption? You don't follow current events very closely, do you? Here's a few keywords for you to google: Halliburton, Enron, Abu Ghraib, Valerie Plame, Frist, Delay, Jack Abramoff, Iraqi WMD, no bid contract, Guantanamo. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that these scandals make the US untrustworthy for this job, just that your saying that the UN is less untrustworthy because of one scandal is silly. In general, the right's pointing to the oil-for-food scandal as proof that the UN is completely corrupt is ironic and absurd given the numerous corruption scandals it is currently suffering from.
Yes, clearly the authors of the study have bought into that idealistic position that emprical evidence allows you to reach conclusions. I guess they must be part of that reality based community. They take the fact that the few hints of a connection cited before the invasion were not substantiated by the thourough investigation that occured afterward, to suggest that the evidence for the connection was somehow lacking. Its almost as if they think one opinion is not as valid as another just because its not supported by the facts.
Quite frankly, as a professional scientist, the argument that computers and probes make better scientists than us human beings offends me
I think he's saying that robots make better explorerers than do scientists. Nobody is suggesting the robot should analyize the data itself or decide what to analyize. Nor construct hypotheses or design tests to validate them for that matter. And quite frankly I'm suprised that you, a professional scientist, should have jumped to such a conclusion.
Slashdot Mirror
No really. Exploitation and dehumanization are at the very core of what Marxism is about
All you have to do is say it once more, and you'll prove it! You may think that's its effect, but it is entirely the opposite of what it's about under any reasonable definition of about.
No chance of that. If the original owner is not Amir, he has nothing to complain about (except the theft itself) since its not his info thats posted on the internet. If Amir is the original owner and the laptop was stolen from him by some 3rd party and sold on ebay, Amir would be telling people that instead of claiming it worked when he sold it.
No its not. Something like pregnancy is an example of a task that is not parallelizable. Only a single person can gestate a baby. Generating articles for Wikipedia is highly parallelizable. Different people can work on different articles concurrently. Wikipedia's problems arise from the quality of work being contributed, not the number of people contributing.
Regardless of whether or not it's retarded, that the basic idea behind marriage. Its literally what you promise to do in most marriage ceremonies. Hence the "as long as you both shall live" phrase. You don't have to agree with it, you don't have to like it, and you don't have to do it, but it is what it is. Of course often it doesn't work out. It may be an unrealistic expectation. But marriage is a promise, and like any promise, there's little point in making it if you don't at least have the intention of attempting to fullfill it.
Which part are you calling BS: his description of how things were before labor laws and anti-trust legislation, or his assertion that if we remove these things it will be that way again? The former is widely documented and can be read about in virtually any history of the industrial revolution. The latter is pretty much just common sense.
Do you trust that your partner will never change?
By getting married, you are promising to accept them however they change. Thats what that 'for richer and for poorer, in sickness and in health' stuff is really about. If you aren't willing to do that, you really shouldn't get married.
According to this its a bug in Firefox 1.5 (look under Developer Comments). Here's the bugzilla entry: 318419
I doubt it. These companies aren't sucking this info from some public data source. They obtain the information from pretending to be the phone owner and getting the company to tell them that phone's history.
Lol, too bad for you, you missed the dot com bubble. I don't know how that stacks up to starting salaries now, but it peanuts to what we were paying kids at the startup I worked at in 99 ;)
The reality is that the climate changes over time, it has in the past and will in the future.
Regardless of the cause, the problem isn't the change in temperature, its the speed at which it is changing. In the past even rapid changes occured over thousands of years. Current models predict a much faster change. Sure the ecosystem will adjust eventually, but alot of people will be screwed in the process.
What people need to start working on is getting self sustaining colonies off this planet.
Don't you think you think it'd be easier to figure out how to not fuck up this planet (or at least how to deal with its changes) than how to survive on another planet? The earth at its worst is a hell of a lot more hospitable than any other spot in the solar system.
True, they are not equivalent, but that does not mean privacy is not a right. In the US its considered covered under the 4th amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated More on this here.
Because I can't bear to see this cycle acted out again, I'm going to spell this out: The cod eat smaller fish, which in turn eat plankton. The poster is suggesting that by locating concentrations of plankton, they are likely to find the plankton eaters, and thereby locate the cod which are eating them in turn. Now please, both of you, stop posting!
Eclipse is not just an IDE, its a framework for implementing IDEs. While Java is a natural fit since Eclipse is a Java app, you can download tools for developing in other languages. And while there aren't a lot of Java apps running on the desktop, a few good ones have cropped up recently that show its possible. I like JEdit, Eclipse, Intellij, and Poseidon. I think performance issues are what's really slowed acceptance of Java on the desktop, but improvements in JVMs and Moore's law seem to be taking care of that.
To me usenet was an addiction. Having to read every post and draw out a flamewar till the bitter end. I'm not sad to see less ISPs sporting it.
Sounds to me like the problem is the way you are using the medium, not the medium itself. If you go around arguing with the net kooks, you'll find yourself under attack - in any forum. If you are going to do stuff like that, you should take precautions - like not putting up your resume with full contact info on the web (hint hint).
The most interesting thing about HIV tests is that they actually check for AIDS instead! The most common test, the one claimed to be false-positive proof, works by counting your white blood cells. If you have HIV but not AIDS (Yet?) it will read negative. If you are feeling under the weather due to job stress and the flu, it will read positive. If you have lukemia, positive. If you have been exposed to radiation, positive. If you are taking certain herbal anti-fungal agents that supress the immune system, positive. In other words, it is all but useless.
It does sound all but useless, which makes me wonder whether you got the facts right. I did a quick google, and found this link, showing effectiveness of different tests. None of these look like simple white cell counts. Doesn't say anything about which is the most common, but this page from the FDA would seem to have all the common ones - note the one that was withdrawn because it was unreliable. So where did you see this information about using white blood cells?
hmm i don't think so, someone who has some songs on their phone would probably not see the need for another device for songs in their pocket..
If they like some things about it but are frustrated by its lack of capacity, they're likely to upgrade to an ipod. If they hate the device altogether, they're less likely to do so. Doesn't seem a clever strategy to me.
this does add up my friend, another article like this was available the day after the crappy rokr came out.
The number of articles making a claim doesn't add to the logic of the claim.
You are free to believe anyhting you want. But lets draw the line at trying to dictate the world of reality.
You're asking the impossible. If someone see a difference between their beliefs and reality, in what sense do they believe? Do you see the differences between your beliefs and reality? Or do you believe that you don't have beliefs?
The listed issues you stated (name one country that does not have skeletons and I'll show you a 1 hour old government), have nothing to do with internet supervision, or even control of the internet.
That was pretty much my point, which you missed despite my adding: Just to be clear, I'm not saying that these scandals make the US untrustworthy for this job, just that your saying that the UN is less untrustworthy because of one scandal is silly.
What I will say is actually a question, Where can you go today, that you will be unable to reach if the U.N. controls it? Opinion -- anywhere that a member country says it doesn't want you to go.
I don't think you really understand what's at issue here. Its about administering top level domains, not control over content. There's no way that you can turn off Nazi images or Saab ads by manipulating the top level domains.
So, it should stay in the hands of United States government, which remains untainted by any hint of corruption? You don't follow current events very closely, do you? Here's a few keywords for you to google: Halliburton, Enron, Abu Ghraib, Valerie Plame, Frist, Delay, Jack Abramoff, Iraqi WMD, no bid contract, Guantanamo. Just to be clear, I'm not saying that these scandals make the US untrustworthy for this job, just that your saying that the UN is less untrustworthy because of one scandal is silly. In general, the right's pointing to the oil-for-food scandal as proof that the UN is completely corrupt is ironic and absurd given the numerous corruption scandals it is currently suffering from.
Its meta-vaporware. The project announcement announcement itself is vapor.
Yes, clearly the authors of the study have bought into that idealistic position that emprical evidence allows you to reach conclusions. I guess they must be part of that reality based community. They take the fact that the few hints of a connection cited before the invasion were not substantiated by the thourough investigation that occured afterward, to suggest that the evidence for the connection was somehow lacking. Its almost as if they think one opinion is not as valid as another just because its not supported by the facts.
Stop fucking around reading Slashdot instead of coding and you won't have to spend all those long hours at your computer ;)
Heh, absolutely you're right. Thats a lousy example.
So there will still be money to fund truely useful projects like repairing the Hubble telescope? Really?
Quite frankly, as a professional scientist, the argument that computers and probes make better scientists than us human beings offends me
I think he's saying that robots make better explorerers than do scientists. Nobody is suggesting the robot should analyize the data itself or decide what to analyize. Nor construct hypotheses or design tests to validate them for that matter. And quite frankly I'm suprised that you, a professional scientist, should have jumped to such a conclusion.