I'm going to beat the crap out of that 12-year-old as soon as I find him;
I formally declare that from this moment forth, this will be know as "pulling a Jay and Silent bob", watch the movie of the same name if you want to get it;- )
Well, I'm 100% sure they got paid, but I don't know if they were actors reading a script (very likely) or actual people who were more than happy to get paid to be in a national ad just to tell people about how much they like their new computer (less likely, but we don't know for sure).
That microsoft page is clearly a pure marketing construct, on the other hand. Nobody outside of marketing offices speaks like that. And no one would be dumb enough not to notice the Explorer browser that's been included on every new mac for years. Its set as the default browser and every thing.
So, I don't know that the people in the mac ads are "real", I think they most probably aren't, but they very well could be.
In social sciences you don't have "absolute proofs." This is exactly what people like you fail to grasp.
Wrong again, but then, you seem so sure! I do grasp that, bub. Stop telling people what they think for crying out loud.
Do you understand basic statistics? That you did not become more aggressive does in no way invalidate the thesis that a significant amount of the population may.
That brings us back to the original poster's point: The healthy kids won't, the unhealthy ones might. A significant portion of the population is messed up in the head ya know.
But since you know The Truth in all its glory, nothing a mere mortal like me can say will change your mind, so I'm gonna just stop trying rational discourse with you and leave you to your rantings.
Interesting that the world is always black and white on Slashdot.
What a nice wild unsupported claim! : ) Doesn't even makes sense on its own either, does it?
Can you cite any studies?
Why would that matter? Anybody can cite studies, they make studies about every stupid thing and end up with an incredible amount of stupid conclusions. Studies are not absolute proofs!
Why do you find it so obvious that healthy children might not become more aggressive by constantly viewing and engaging in virtual violence?
I can't speak for the original poster, but I was a healthy child "constantly viewing and engaging in virtual violence", as you put it, and it did not make me "more agressive". People attacking me without provocation made me more agressive, but the cartoons/comics/videogames/movies/tv shows/books/radio broadcasts/toys/action figures/rock music/karate classes/"insert any other thing that has in the past been blamed for boys being violent here" did not do it. Sure, I was more interested in violent entertainment afterwards, but the cause and effect relationship makes it quite clear that the entertainment did not cause the violence. Actual violence did.
It says a lot about the ability of most of the Slashdot crowd to grasp the complexity of any problem that isn't hard science that this comment was modded up.
The article doesn't say how the 3D effect is done, but I would venture a guess: Lenticulars.
I used to work for a company that did a bit of research in lenticular software, its pretty neat, but a bitch to align properly.
And we all wanted a lenticular screen;- ) (For those who don't know what lenticulars are, they are those plastick "ribbed" images you often got in cracker jacks boxes and on some toys, erroneously called holograms by 99.9% of the population.)
and you stupidly (or attempting to be funny) made your honeybee comment.
Takes one to know one, stupid.
It's obvious the poster was referring to killer bees
Yes, and therefore only the very stupid would go out of their way to point it out, stupid.
Ok, and I read that article (horrible, horrible web site BTW), and it WAS tremendous stupidity. Some guy shows up on a beehive he doesn't own and knows nothing about, and proceedes on removing the plaques keeping the queens inside. The fact that in his ignorance he didn't see any harm in doing so doesn''t make him, or you, any less stupid.
and your claiming that they are ignorable because killer bees were a mistake is just silly.
And you think that european honeybees are naturally found in man-made beehives? I was pointing out by way of sarcasm that we have already learned to use bees sucesfully, and just because it went wrong once (because somebody as stupid as you interfered in something he shouldn't have because he knew nothing about it, and was stupid) doesn't mean that it will go wrong everytime. I find it annoying that with every single science story you get these guys making dumb post-modern "science is bad" comments. Yes, accidents happen, yes, scientists make deadly mistakes. We know already!
I also find it annoying when stupid people assume that I'm stupid because they didn't understand my comment. I thought about making some witty sarcastic reply but I think this way is better: You, Kelmenson, are very stupid!
BTW you are stupid.
Ah, wasting karma on some stupid retard just because he called me stupid...fun fun fun. kelmenson is stupid, pass the word. (hint to moderators: either +1 funny or -1 Troll;- )
They were invented by combining African bees with European Honeybees, in order to get a honeybee that could thrive in the more tropical regions in Brazil.
That was the plan.
Of course genetic engineering will take the two best features, right?
It wasn't genetic engineering, it was cross breeding...
But no, it picked the two worst. Instead of quickly reproducing gentle honeybees, they got quickly reproducing aggressive attackbees... So, yeah, it was "SUCH a mess".
That's not exactly what happened. They were halfway throught the cross breeding program, using hives with metal plaques nailed to the only opening that had a slit wide enough for workers but too narrow for queens, hence preventing "swarming" and the release of reproducting bees in the environment. One weekend, someone came to the hives, removed the plaques using tools found on site and let the bees out.
It wasn't science run amock, it was either willfull sabotage or tremendous human stupidity. Someone made the effort of removing nailed plaques, not the scientist's fault.
while cancer does certainly present in children, the fact remains that children constitute a much smaller cancer population, (even when statistically adjusted for population-size).
Really? I thought it was because of the population size, or the fact that it takes a while to accumulate carcinogens.
as i said before, it was not my intent to offend anyone
Especially given that most cancers are not seen until after people are at an age where they generally have children (you've passed your genes on before you die of cancer).
I've know 2 kids that died of cancer. One of 'em had reached puberty, the other had not.
I'm trying to to loose my cool because this being an emotional issue for me, I take offense at what you said.
So, what I'm saying, is that your ideas are based on faulty data, and therefore your conclusions are equally flawed.
And BTW, small children (up to around 3yrs old) can regenerate small bits (finget tips). Older kids cannot, and adult of course cannot. Yet the liver always regenerates...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm going to beat the crap out of that 12-year-old as soon as I find him;
;- )
I formally declare that from this moment forth, this will be know as "pulling a Jay and Silent bob", watch the movie of the same name if you want to get it
If one day we have an actual cloaking device and warp drive, it will probably be made by trekkies or ex-trekkies.
Since that technology is a far way off, it would most likely be made by descendents of past trekk...er...nevermind.
The game has ruined many a marriage and cost many a geek their job. It is worse than crack.
Maybe they need to put a "CAUTION: Do not play this game under the influence of crack!" warning?
Microsoft spends big when it comes to it's PR and marekting firms. More than on any other single item in the budget.
I dunno, that "Balmer's PCP/cocaine/amphetamine" budget must be pretty big too...
Well, I'm 100% sure they got paid, but I don't know if they were actors reading a script (very likely) or actual people who were more than happy to get paid to be in a national ad just to tell people about how much they like their new computer (less likely, but we don't know for sure).
That microsoft page is clearly a pure marketing construct, on the other hand. Nobody outside of marketing offices speaks like that. And no one would be dumb enough not to notice the Explorer browser that's been included on every new mac for years. Its set as the default browser and every thing.
So, I don't know that the people in the mac ads are "real", I think they most probably aren't, but they very well could be.
The difference is that Apple paid someone to lie on TV and Microsoft put their story in the mouth of an imaginary person. Now who's more honest?
How do you know they paid people to lie? Maybe they paid people to tell the truth?
I remeber people trying to beat the -1 world...
I also remembered being baffled.
If not you, then someone else.
Maybe the chinese...they could cut on building cost by making the biggest human pyramid ever and sending a monkey up carrying the end of the tether.
Mouhahahahaha!
Our time is coming!
Soon the weak will be crushed by the ski-doo riding hordes from the north!
Step 1: Ice age
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Canadian world domination!
what about when six months old, sweaty, covered in coke, chips, and bodily fluids
:- )
Jeez, I'd hate to shate a machine with you!
Anybody else find it disturbing that the task of making soap only comes in at the last show?
Stinky scientists...
In social sciences you don't have "absolute proofs." This is exactly what people like you fail to grasp.
Wrong again, but then, you seem so sure! I do grasp that, bub.
Stop telling people what they think for crying out loud.
Do you understand basic statistics? That you did not become more aggressive does in no way invalidate the thesis that a significant amount of the population may.
That brings us back to the original poster's point: The healthy kids won't, the unhealthy ones might.
A significant portion of the population is messed up in the head ya know.
But since you know The Truth in all its glory, nothing a mere mortal like me can say will change your mind, so I'm gonna just stop trying rational discourse with you and leave you to your rantings.
Interesting that the world is always black and white on Slashdot.
What a nice wild unsupported claim! : )
Doesn't even makes sense on its own either, does it?
Can you cite any studies?
Why would that matter? Anybody can cite studies, they make studies about every stupid thing and end up with an incredible amount of stupid conclusions. Studies are not absolute proofs!
Why do you find it so obvious that healthy children might not become more aggressive by constantly viewing and engaging in virtual violence?
I can't speak for the original poster, but I was a healthy child "constantly viewing and engaging in virtual violence", as you put it, and it did not make me "more agressive".
People attacking me without provocation made me more agressive, but the cartoons/comics/videogames/movies/tv shows/books/radio broadcasts/toys/action figures/rock music/karate classes/"insert any other thing that has in the past been blamed for boys being violent here" did not do it.
Sure, I was more interested in violent entertainment afterwards, but the cause and effect relationship makes it quite clear that the entertainment did not cause the violence. Actual violence did.
It says a lot about the ability of most of the Slashdot crowd to grasp the complexity of any problem that isn't hard science that this comment was modded up.
yes, your comment was modded up too, that is sad.
The article doesn't say how the 3D effect is done, but I would venture a guess: Lenticulars.
;- )
I used to work for a company that did a bit of research in lenticular software, its pretty neat, but a bitch to align properly.
And we all wanted a lenticular screen
(For those who don't know what lenticulars are, they are those plastick "ribbed" images you often got in cracker jacks boxes and on some toys, erroneously called holograms by 99.9% of the population.)
and you stupidly (or attempting to be funny) made your honeybee comment.
;- )
Takes one to know one, stupid.
It's obvious the poster was referring to killer bees
Yes, and therefore only the very stupid would go out of their way to point it out, stupid.
Ok, and I read that article (horrible, horrible web site BTW), and it WAS tremendous stupidity. Some guy shows up on a beehive he doesn't own and knows nothing about, and proceedes on removing the plaques keeping the queens inside. The fact that in his ignorance he didn't see any harm in doing so doesn''t make him, or you, any less stupid.
and your claiming that they are ignorable because killer bees were a mistake is just silly.
And you think that european honeybees are naturally found in man-made beehives? I was pointing out by way of sarcasm that we have already learned to use bees sucesfully, and just because it went wrong once (because somebody as stupid as you interfered in something he shouldn't have because he knew nothing about it, and was stupid) doesn't mean that it will go wrong everytime.
I find it annoying that with every single science story you get these guys making dumb post-modern "science is bad" comments. Yes, accidents happen, yes, scientists make deadly mistakes. We know already!
I also find it annoying when stupid people assume that I'm stupid because they didn't understand my comment. I thought about making some witty sarcastic reply but I think this way is better: You, Kelmenson, are very stupid!
BTW you are stupid.
Ah, wasting karma on some stupid retard just because he called me stupid...fun fun fun.
kelmenson is stupid, pass the word.
(hint to moderators: either +1 funny or -1 Troll
Heard of killer bees?
Sure...
They were invented by combining African bees with European Honeybees, in order to get a honeybee that could thrive in the more tropical regions in Brazil.
That was the plan.
Of course genetic engineering will take the two best features, right?
It wasn't genetic engineering, it was cross breeding...
But no, it picked the two worst. Instead of quickly reproducing gentle honeybees, they got quickly reproducing aggressive attackbees... So, yeah, it was "SUCH a mess".
That's not exactly what happened.
They were halfway throught the cross breeding program, using hives with metal plaques nailed to the only opening that had a slit wide enough for workers but too narrow for queens, hence preventing "swarming" and the release of reproducting bees in the environment.
One weekend, someone came to the hives, removed the plaques using tools found on site and let the bees out.
It wasn't science run amock, it was either willfull sabotage or tremendous human stupidity.
Someone made the effort of removing nailed plaques, not the scientist's fault.
while cancer does certainly present in children, the fact remains that children constitute a much smaller cancer population, (even when statistically adjusted for population-size).
Really? I thought it was because of the population size, or the fact that it takes a while to accumulate carcinogens.
as i said before, it was not my intent to offend anyone
Yeah, sorry about that...
This could be the next big extreem sport! Mine Jogging!
The new craze that's sweeping the nation!
Especially given that most cancers are not seen until after people are at an age where they generally have children (you've passed your genes on before you die of cancer).
I've know 2 kids that died of cancer. One of 'em had reached puberty, the other had not.
I'm trying to to loose my cool because this being an emotional issue for me, I take offense at what you said.
So, what I'm saying, is that your ideas are based on faulty data, and therefore your conclusions are equally flawed.
And BTW, small children (up to around 3yrs old) can regenerate small bits (finget tips). Older kids cannot, and adult of course cannot. Yet the liver always regenerates...
If you send people jogging in the mine field with it its mine-finding tech ;- )
What advances have there been in landmine-finding technology in the last thirty years?
This boot.
that this works out better than our last experiment with using bees to our advantage ;)
The whole "making honey" thing? Yeah, that was SUCH a mess! I mean, that never worked, did it?
For shame! Slashdotting these poor good samaritains!
Couldn't you post links to the RIAA or something?
Every day is Anti Microsoft Day on slashdot! : )
Perhaps we are all running in some ultimate program...
Well DUH, we're here to find the Question to the ultimate Awnser!
42!