That said, I agree that his confrontational style may be ineffective at getting people to like him.
Confrontational? Arguing calmly, rationally, factually and logically is "confrontational"? BS. Dawkins is in fact very effective at getting to the people there's still hope for: The fence sitters. I used to be one of them myself, until I started listening to Dawkins. He sure convinced me.
Why is it when ID is brought up the immediate, knee jerk reaction is, "they are an idiot, mod them down, don't want to hear it".
Because IDiots lie. They have nothing what so ever of value to contribute with, as they have proven time and time again. Remember rule #1: Creationists lie.
The simple fact that you pig fuckers call yourself scientists
Who does? Everyone on Slashdot? Far from it.
So you don't agree with ID, big fucking deal. I don't agree with evolution. Likewise, BIG FUCKING DEAL.
It is a big deal because IDiots are actively trying to undermine the scientific method and scientific progress.
Neither side of the debate will prove to be correct so long as one wants to silence the other.
No one wants to silence anyone, you fucking moron. Just because IDiots are unable to get their unscientific, religious crap forced into science doesn't mean that they are being silenced.
Many great scientists have come and gone that were religious people. Why now is it offensive to be both a scientist, and a religious person?
It isn't. Well known Evolution supporters like Ken Miller are religious. The problem is when religious people start lying and deceiving in order to undermine science, which is what IDiots always do.
He didn't mean "stupid" as an insult. He meant it as a description of Stein's ignorance. And Stein clearly IS ignorant. Well, ignorant or extremely dishonest, in which case insulting him shouldn't be a problem. But Dawkin thought that he was honestly ignorant.
Dawkins is no longer a scientist, if he ever was, but a theologian and evangelist of atheism.
Atheism is nothing apart from lack of belief in God, so no one can be a "theologian and evangelist of atheism".
And, from what I can tell from the couple of books of his I've read and miscellaneous interviews and articles, he's far more judgmental and intolerant than most Christians.
How? Please give me a specific example. Just because he doesn't blindly accept empty claims doesn't mea that he is "judgemental and intolerant".
he presents a one sided view that does not allow for the open exchange of ideas
How does he not allow for that, exactly? Just because he is able to argue logically, factually and rationally for his position doesn't mean that he doesn't allow for the open exchange of ideas. And what do you mean by "one sided view"? Are you saying that he shouldn't express his own opinions?
I thought we were passed this. It felt like only yesterday that linux distrobutions were playing the "Ha Ha we're going to one-up your distrobution with our version number" game.
So you don't think the version number should reflect the amount of changes from one version to the next?
Who cares? The browser doesn't have to be bundled with the OS. It can be bundled by the OEM or whoever you buy a PC from. Or you can get one from your ISP, local PC shop, whatever.
In general, Microsoft has made great strides to make its OS more transparent and more 'fair' than ever
Not really, and not without being dragged the short way they've come, kicking and screaming.
A lot of people give Microsoft crap over UAC, but the truth is, if you're a standard user, your life has never been better
LOL. Every single one of my "standard PC user" friends hates UAC in Vista with a passion.
Considering there was no real money for MS to make with their browser it made sense to include it with the OS because it meant they could leverage it for other OS-related purposes such as rich help files and things like Windows Update.
You are making them sound like innocent angels that just happened to do wrong by mistake. The truth is that they had a conscious and clear strategy to kill the browser market because they considered browsers to be a threat to their OS dominance.
I think a lot of this "look what they did 15 years ago" stuff is pretty meaningless now.
15 years ago? Excuse me? Recent actions include killing ECMAScript 4 because it was a threat to Silverlight, and stalling the CSS Working Group in W3C! They are still at it!
Now, imagine FireFox implements some features from HTML5 because that is the kind of stuff that the people want, and it's well received and well used.
Then everyone will know that HTML5 could change, so relying on it is a bad idea, unless you are willing to update your site. So yes, Mozilla will change the implenentation if the finished recommendation makes this necessary.
He isn't really a "real" press spokesperson. That is, it's not like he was hired for big money to speak on their behalf. He just happened to be better at expressing himself than the other TPB admins, so he just ended up as the one speaking on behalf of TPB in public. He's just a "regular guy", so it shouldn't come as a surprise that he expresses himself like one.
This is not automated indexing. It is people ripping copyrighted content and manually uploading it into nicely arranged categories for people to browse.
There is nothing automatic about the system.
The system is automatic. And no copyrighted content is uploaded. Only torrent files are uploaded.
The "Small Screen" aka the home is becoming more and more competitive with the theater.
Great, so there's an entire industry out there making home theater equipment which benefits greatly from people watching movies at home. Guess what, they can fund movies too! If they do, people will have stuff to watch at home, and will buy more equipment.
So people wanting to be paid for their hobby is greed
Corrected that for you. HTH:)
Wanting entertainment for free when you know it costs money to make IS greed.
I use Google for free even though I know it costs money to run. Guess what, Google found a way to make money. Simiarly, artists can find a way to make money too, without living in the middle ages. You can use the internet to get the word out, connect with fans, and then you can make money from concerts and stuff like that. You know, actual work. Not just "play once, pull in the cash forevermore".
Slashdot Mirror
Confrontational? Arguing calmly, rationally, factually and logically is "confrontational"? BS. Dawkins is in fact very effective at getting to the people there's still hope for: The fence sitters. I used to be one of them myself, until I started listening to Dawkins. He sure convinced me.
No, you idiot. Science is a method, not an authority. Scientific knowledge is ever-changing, and is not infallible.
Dawkins argues against irrational beliefs. He does not attack people. Nice try, though.
Yeah, especially when the interview is edited specifically to make you look like an ass. Idiot.
Because IDiots lie. They have nothing what so ever of value to contribute with, as they have proven time and time again. Remember rule #1: Creationists lie.
Who does? Everyone on Slashdot? Far from it.
It is a big deal because IDiots are actively trying to undermine the scientific method and scientific progress.
No one wants to silence anyone, you fucking moron. Just because IDiots are unable to get their unscientific, religious crap forced into science doesn't mean that they are being silenced.
It isn't. Well known Evolution supporters like Ken Miller are religious. The problem is when religious people start lying and deceiving in order to undermine science, which is what IDiots always do.
He didn't mean "stupid" as an insult. He meant it as a description of Stein's ignorance. And Stein clearly IS ignorant. Well, ignorant or extremely dishonest, in which case insulting him shouldn't be a problem. But Dawkin thought that he was honestly ignorant.
Something always has to die. Lots of things have died to keep you alive. You eat biological matter, I presume?
No, it's a rational way of looking at things.
But he does not.
Again, he does not.
You are nothing but a pathetic liar who is attacking Dawkins because you cannot argue factually and rationally against his arguments.
You just described every single IDist/Creationist in the world.
Wow, another idiot creationist without a clue. Go figure.
How?
Why?
Atheism is nothing apart from lack of belief in God, so no one can be a "theologian and evangelist of atheism".
How? Please give me a specific example. Just because he doesn't blindly accept empty claims doesn't mea that he is "judgemental and intolerant".
How does he not allow for that, exactly? Just because he is able to argue logically, factually and rationally for his position doesn't mean that he doesn't allow for the open exchange of ideas. And what do you mean by "one sided view"? Are you saying that he shouldn't express his own opinions?
So you don't think the version number should reflect the amount of changes from one version to the next?
No such problems here. How much RAM have you got? Are you using Opera for mail or newsfeeds?
Says who? That's up to the software author to decide, isn't it?
I don't get what's so innovative about V8. Didn't both Apple and Mozilla do these things long before Chrome was announced?
Who cares? The browser doesn't have to be bundled with the OS. It can be bundled by the OEM or whoever you buy a PC from. Or you can get one from your ISP, local PC shop, whatever.
Not really, and not without being dragged the short way they've come, kicking and screaming.
LOL. Every single one of my "standard PC user" friends hates UAC in Vista with a passion.
You are making them sound like innocent angels that just happened to do wrong by mistake. The truth is that they had a conscious and clear strategy to kill the browser market because they considered browsers to be a threat to their OS dominance.
15 years ago? Excuse me? Recent actions include killing ECMAScript 4 because it was a threat to Silverlight, and stalling the CSS Working Group in W3C! They are still at it!
Then everyone will know that HTML5 could change, so relying on it is a bad idea, unless you are willing to update your site. So yes, Mozilla will change the implenentation if the finished recommendation makes this necessary.
He isn't really a "real" press spokesperson. That is, it's not like he was hired for big money to speak on their behalf. He just happened to be better at expressing himself than the other TPB admins, so he just ended up as the one speaking on behalf of TPB in public. He's just a "regular guy", so it shouldn't come as a surprise that he expresses himself like one.
The system is automatic. And no copyrighted content is uploaded. Only torrent files are uploaded.
Great, so there's an entire industry out there making home theater equipment which benefits greatly from people watching movies at home. Guess what, they can fund movies too! If they do, people will have stuff to watch at home, and will buy more equipment.
Corrected that for you. HTH :)
I use Google for free even though I know it costs money to run. Guess what, Google found a way to make money. Simiarly, artists can find a way to make money too, without living in the middle ages. You can use the internet to get the word out, connect with fans, and then you can make money from concerts and stuff like that. You know, actual work. Not just "play once, pull in the cash forevermore".
Says who? Are you Swedish?