To continue Godwinning, what percentage of Jews - sorry fraction of a percent of Jews were incarcerated in Germany in 1933? It started with a fraction of a percent being detained on what would normally be considered illegitimate evidence, and ballooned into what we saw at the end of WW2. And the Germans who spoke out against it were ridiculed for standing up against it.
The US is absolutely not Germany in 1944, but any step down the road Germany took should be pointed out and squashed mercilessly before it becomes something worse.
Just pointing out that white males are the most likely to claim a country offering "almost complete freedom". The germans who looked like you in 1933 didn't have anything to worry about either. You aren't being targetted, and so don't feel the effects of any movements towards fascism your government may be making.
No, it's not as bad as Nazi Germany, but neither do people making comparisons "disgust me" - by recognizing how some actions are similar to oppressive regimes, maybe we can recognize when we've gone too far.
True, but recognizing a cause does not automatically make one consider oneself a victim. This knee-jerk crying of "culture of victimhood" whenever a new root cause is found helps no one.
With that attitude, Linux is no more secure than windows. Look at NIMDA - "Oh - so a web/security expert could custom-make a URL that takes over my computer? You're paranoid!".
If your model of security is "I'll use what no one else is using, regardless of any actual security holes" - then you're not secure at all.
"Obey the laws of physics" is probably best restated as the Law of Least Astonishment. If you're incapable of jumping over a 1' ridge, that's pretty astonishing, but physics is just a small subset of these types of problems.
What about having multiple viewpoints? Even just a "Hillary Clinton (D) - page for Democrats/page for Republicans" could cut down on vandalism, since you know your viewpoint is out there somewhere. It would also allow for knocking down your opponent, but provide a forum for countering those allegations.
The problem with politics is that it's actually quite abstract. Did the candidate "Vote for bill X which allowed company Y to replace acres of natural wild with a mini-mall, reducing the habitat of the Cute Wide-eyed Fuzzy-Mouse", or did they "Vote for bill X which allowed company Y to replace acres of useless fields with a center of economic development, creating hundreds of jobs and increasing tourism"?
The answer is "both", but to keep all of the viewpoints and arguments/counterarguments on a single page just won't work. Even without the rabid partisan environment, the nature of the subject itself simply doesn't work in wiki format without special consideration to the nature of the subject matter.
Good points, but your identity is no longer your identity if someone is manipulating it. If you suddenly have a criminal record - is your identity "yours" anymore?
That aside, I do agree that Identity Fraud is probably a better term.
Atheism isn't a belief in no god, it's a disbelief in god. We don't evangelize any more than a Christian goes about telling everyone that there is no Zeus, no Klingons, no Boogieman. You don't have to evangelize your disbeliefs.
So any charity that does not espouse a belief in god is an atheist (lit. "no god") charity. They don't need to label themselves as such - they are simply atheist by definition until they pick a God and stick with it.
If that's the case, where did his bogoscience global warming movies come from?
Huh? What does this have to do with it? His knowledge of the internet and his knowledge of global warming are completely unrelated.
I find it far more plausible... Right - you're trusting your gut to tell you the truthiness of the situation when the only thing GPP has is some historical fact.
The whole article was rather blah, but worth the time because of this blurb on "Huygen's Disclosure":
Spoiler Warning: Each point of an advancing wave front is in fact the center of a fresh disturbance and the source of a new train of waves; and the advancing wave as a whole may be regarded as the sum of all the secondary waves arising from points in the medium already traversed. Sign us up!
Now that's pretty cool. They're saying "Hey! Mate with me! I've got a giant tail weighing me down and I still haven't been eaten!"
Re:And this is indeed a serious problem with EBay.
on
How to Win on Ebay: Snipe
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Maximum is probably just above what you're comfortable paying. So if your "maximum" is 10, and you think "I wouldn't quite be comfortable paying 12 for this", bid 12.
The chances of it going right up to 12 and stopping are pretty unlikely. If you get it for less, you'll feel good about yourself. If you lose by 10 cents, then you're happy you didn't end up paying 12, since you weren't comfortable with that anyway. If you get it dead on 12, then it's a small loss - but it's the least-likely result. There's generally a narrow range between "worth it" and "uncomfortable paying this".
I'd rather have my max picked out ahead of time than bother with sniping. It's not a game, it's not hunting - it's a purchase.
Like so many other things, the answer is probably "it depends" - for 90% of people, maybe it will never be a problem. For the other 10%, it's not a problem 90% of the time.
But when those two 10%'s intersect, you have a problem.
Good points about tutorials/previous tests. I remember passing one exam on a fairly difficult subject (quantum physics for engineers) simply because the exam questions were almost identical to the tests and tutorials. I'd skipped a bunch of classes and expected to fail that one.
My laziness aside, it goes to show that this can be a phenomenal study method.
I appreciate the message about decreasing population, but my fear is that that's not sustainable. If desire to have children is genetic, then it's only a matter of time before a small group of incredibly horny and fertile people start to overwhelm the rest of us.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on what you mean by "Shock and Awe".
To continue Godwinning, what percentage of Jews - sorry fraction of a percent of Jews were incarcerated in Germany in 1933? It started with a fraction of a percent being detained on what would normally be considered illegitimate evidence, and ballooned into what we saw at the end of WW2. And the Germans who spoke out against it were ridiculed for standing up against it.
The US is absolutely not Germany in 1944, but any step down the road Germany took should be pointed out and squashed mercilessly before it becomes something worse.
Just pointing out that white males are the most likely to claim a country offering "almost complete freedom". The germans who looked like you in 1933 didn't have anything to worry about either. You aren't being targetted, and so don't feel the effects of any movements towards fascism your government may be making.
No, it's not as bad as Nazi Germany, but neither do people making comparisons "disgust me" - by recognizing how some actions are similar to oppressive regimes, maybe we can recognize when we've gone too far.
True, but recognizing a cause does not automatically make one consider oneself a victim. This knee-jerk crying of "culture of victimhood" whenever a new root cause is found helps no one.
Let me guess....white male?
With that attitude, Linux is no more secure than windows. Look at NIMDA - "Oh - so a web/security expert could custom-make a URL that takes over my computer? You're paranoid!".
If your model of security is "I'll use what no one else is using, regardless of any actual security holes" - then you're not secure at all.
"Obey the laws of physics" is probably best restated as the Law of Least Astonishment. If you're incapable of jumping over a 1' ridge, that's pretty astonishing, but physics is just a small subset of these types of problems.
Every single person on this planet has the same rights. It's just that their local government may not recognize them.
I'm amazed that you can speak with such certainty over an arbitrary human construct.
Not "same sentence" - "same clause".
"The US government hates Al Quaida" = same sentence
"The US government and terrorists hate gays" = same clause
And no - they are *not* often mentioned in the same clause.
Good point! I'm convinced.
For the record, I agree. It's a joke until you realize it happens every day.
...after all the "Politicians editing there candidates wikipedia pages" scandals.
Sorry to be a grammar nazi, but shouldn't that be "editing them there wikipedia pages"?
What about having multiple viewpoints? Even just a "Hillary Clinton (D) - page for Democrats/page for Republicans" could cut down on vandalism, since you know your viewpoint is out there somewhere. It would also allow for knocking down your opponent, but provide a forum for countering those allegations.
The problem with politics is that it's actually quite abstract. Did the candidate "Vote for bill X which allowed company Y to replace acres of natural wild with a mini-mall, reducing the habitat of the Cute Wide-eyed Fuzzy-Mouse", or did they "Vote for bill X which allowed company Y to replace acres of useless fields with a center of economic development, creating hundreds of jobs and increasing tourism"?
The answer is "both", but to keep all of the viewpoints and arguments/counterarguments on a single page just won't work. Even without the rabid partisan environment, the nature of the subject itself simply doesn't work in wiki format without special consideration to the nature of the subject matter.
Of course, you don't have to not evangelize your disbeliefs either.
Good points, but your identity is no longer your identity if someone is manipulating it. If you suddenly have a criminal record - is your identity "yours" anymore?
That aside, I do agree that Identity Fraud is probably a better term.
Atheism isn't a belief in no god, it's a disbelief in god. We don't evangelize any more than a Christian goes about telling everyone that there is no Zeus, no Klingons, no Boogieman. You don't have to evangelize your disbeliefs.
So any charity that does not espouse a belief in god is an atheist (lit. "no god") charity. They don't need to label themselves as such - they are simply atheist by definition until they pick a God and stick with it.
Doc: Then tell me, "future boy," who is president in the United States in 2006?
Marty: Arnold Schwartzeneggar
Doc: Arnold Schwartzeneggar? The actor?! Who's vice president? Rodney Dangerfield?
If that's the case, where did his bogoscience global warming movies come from?
...
Huh? What does this have to do with it? His knowledge of the internet and his knowledge of global warming are completely unrelated.
I find it far more plausible
Right - you're trusting your gut to tell you the truthiness of the situation when the only thing GPP has is some historical fact.
The whole article was rather blah, but worth the time because of this blurb on "Huygen's Disclosure":
Spoiler Warning: Each point of an advancing wave front is in fact the center of a fresh disturbance and the source of a new train of waves; and the advancing wave as a whole may be regarded as the sum of all the secondary waves arising from points in the medium already traversed. Sign us up!
Now that's pretty cool. They're saying "Hey! Mate with me! I've got a giant tail weighing me down and I still haven't been eaten!"
Maximum is probably just above what you're comfortable paying. So if your "maximum" is 10, and you think "I wouldn't quite be comfortable paying 12 for this", bid 12.
The chances of it going right up to 12 and stopping are pretty unlikely. If you get it for less, you'll feel good about yourself. If you lose by 10 cents, then you're happy you didn't end up paying 12, since you weren't comfortable with that anyway. If you get it dead on 12, then it's a small loss - but it's the least-likely result. There's generally a narrow range between "worth it" and "uncomfortable paying this".
I'd rather have my max picked out ahead of time than bother with sniping. It's not a game, it's not hunting - it's a purchase.
Like so many other things, the answer is probably "it depends" - for 90% of people, maybe it will never be a problem. For the other 10%, it's not a problem 90% of the time.
But when those two 10%'s intersect, you have a problem.
Good points about tutorials/previous tests. I remember passing one exam on a fairly difficult subject (quantum physics for engineers) simply because the exam questions were almost identical to the tests and tutorials. I'd skipped a bunch of classes and expected to fail that one.
My laziness aside, it goes to show that this can be a phenomenal study method.
hopefully designers will build in a simple, easily exploitable flaw so that an out-of-control swarm could be easily deactivated. ...or controlled.
I appreciate the message about decreasing population, but my fear is that that's not sustainable. If desire to have children is genetic, then it's only a matter of time before a small group of incredibly horny and fertile people start to overwhelm the rest of us.