Well, I was taught that our hills and valleys are basically what happens when glaciers carry sediments to a location and their melting creates rivers that carve up the landscape.
Moraines and such, you know? If that's wrong, blame my teachers.
My year of birth is 1981 and I went to school in Switzerland.
I think you hit the problematic nail on the proverbial head: Attention span and learning by heart a bunch of dates.
See, I don't know whether an abstracted simulation of historical and social events is a good tool but let's not act like our schools (there are exceptions, of course) did a swell job of teaching us much of true interest.
I feel like I had to go over the Roman empire three or four times. My wife has similar trauma with the French revolution. However, nobody ever took the time to actually, truly teach what led to them and what consequences they had. Hell, in geography we had to mark rivers and towns and cities... Had they tied that in with history it might actually have led to an understanding of WHY our world is the way it is. Hell, rather than rivers they should have taught us about highways, at least that way we'd have some practical use for the knowledge.
It's good to know that hills were made by glaciers but that one sentence would have been enough information in that regard.
We had to become adults and be interested in history to learn that Celts weren't actually barbarians enlightened by the Roman empire but rather were providing fine jewelry and soaps on a quality level the Romans had a hard time achieving. And these were the people who were our forefathers. Instead we glorified the conquerors.
We had to find out much later that while the French revolution was, more or less, the founding of todays understanding of democracy and the people's power, the people leading it were just as much opportunistic aristocrats as the ones who ended up on the guillotine (and nobody ever told us how many innocents were killed that way either!).
It's the same thing with people like Magellan or your very own Columbus. So much of what we were taught about these people was so very wrong it's appalling.
Frankly, I believe we should take kids when they enter school, show them how google works an ask them to tell us their opinion (!) on how much their book might be wrong about certain events in history.
Children are so very inquisitive and they can be like freaking drug sniffing dogs when they feel they're being lied to. Let's use that! It'll teach them to gather information and build an opinion just as much as how to question that which kinda feels too comfortable to be the absolute truth.
Jeez, what a surefire way to be wrong you've chosen. Others already commented on the infinite time frame you've chosen but I'd like to add that "cost effective" is pretty relative.
There just needs to be a shortage of material found on an asteroid that is either life threatening or lowers our quality of life enough for people to decide they're going to try it.
And why should this never be cost effective? Robotic mining equipment needs to be deployed once. And without much gravity to speak off, all you need to do is launch the mined material in the direction of a desert every few days.
Yes, well, what does a keyboard with trackpoint add in cost? I'd be happy to pay the ten bucks the sales people make out of the 50 cents material cost.
If I can deactivate the trackpad and have a trackpoint available, I'm happy. It cannot possibly be this hard.
Then again, nobody makes sensible smartphones with hardware keyboards (where I'd love to have a trackpoint instead of a touchscreen tbh) anymore, so perhaps it IS hard...
In my opinion, there are two factors at play here: One is people thinking that their actions will gain them something and psychopaths.
For the first, you "only" (it's hard...) need to make sure that people have something to live for. And you need to make sure that they don't risk losing that. In my opinion, terrorists succumb to the fundamentalist dogma because their lives are shit and/or they do not feel appreciated enough by their peers without proving themselves.
Modern Christianity is often about the love of Jesus and therefor the love for your neighbor. When this is actually lived, I doubt very much that someone growing up like that will ever become a terrorist. Much too often it's about something else, though. Too often it's about "if you do X, which I don't like and I believe Jesus does not like, surely Jesus will stop loving you and therefore I will stop loving you because I love Jesus more than I love you".
Imagine a child growing up like that knowing that their parents, and later their peers, will oust them unless they conform. The need for your peers' approval is strong in humans.
We're all about individuality today but only as long as it's the individuality we approve of. Look at what happens if someone honestly says they feel uncomfortable around blacks, jews or what have you. Instead of saying "That's okay. As long as you let them live in peace, you are entitled to not liking them" we want them in therapy and/or sensitivity training, the earlier the better.
Hell, look at the pedophile witch hunts. Instead of recognizing what poor bastards those people are, never going to be able to enjoy their sexuality because it inherently conflicts with the well-being of others... what happens instead is we even make cartoon drawings uf underage people illegal to sexualize. I mean deny the starving man his rotten potatoes, why don't we.
If some loner isn't bothering anyone and slowly dying inside, we might have him ostracized even more by punishing the bullies but when was the last time you saw someone sitting down with the kid and having a hot-dog with them and talking about life in general?
My opinion is that we are too preoccupied with categorizing people on race, sexuality, gender, money, religion and so on, we just don't have the time and mental energy to just walk over there and provide company. Hell, the debates I've had in my head on how it may look if I went and did X right now, even though X was a perfectly human comfort to offer. I myself have been trained so much to never show weakness and never offend, I am almost incapable of what I've written about here.
YMMV. I hear in the US people re actually much friendlier, if more superficial, than around here.
And some day, we'll just be interesting fauna for sentient machines to keep around. Frankly, the way we're going, I'm not sure I object.
We're not even able to see the signs of automation. The some who do want basic income and the rest is only able to scoff at the paradigm change but has no alternatives... I would even say they aren't convinced at all that we're going to run into a massive problem.
Well, not if you pump gas in Switzerland. We finance a lot of the roads through gas prices. Fortunately for y'all freeloaders, it usually is possible to pump gas outside the country and drive through;). (I'm not saying it's cheaper in other countries, though, that's just a way to not have to pay for the roads;))
I would be willing to bet hard cash that you are not content with the skill these parents nowadays show when it comes to morals, ethics and social behavior. Yet you think they should teach these values. Do you see where I'm going with this?
We must get away from this thinking that everybody needs to be self-sufficient and skilled at everything. We need to diversify education and stop putting so much stock in marketable skills. That way lies slavery and cultural ruin.
Human minds are too valuable to let them all be mined for productivity.
I mean, let's be serious here. Would this world be a better place if that fidgety child back when had been given ritalin and told to sit still instead of being sent to dance lessons and grow up to become the choreographer behind Cats and Phantom of the Opera? She's a millionaire, by the way. I expect she doesn't cry herself to sleep that she never got that fancy career in HR that might otherwise have been open to her.
Depends. If you come across him before he gets the killing machine rolling full tilt and you have the chance to kill him but not many other options, then no, killing him is not bad.
If you have him in custody and at your mercy and you start thinking about how you can make his execution a bit more painful yet then yes, you're in a similar territory.
I could even argue that the Nazis were, usually, more "humane" than that because they optimized their gas chambers for efficiency, not maximum suffering. In my opinion, the gas chambers are not the main reason the Nazis were monsters. The work camps are much worse in my not so humble opinion and in that regard, the Nazis are hardly unique.
Some people are more sensitive than others. Telling all of those to GTFO will lead in a lot of resources wasted. Because, believe you me, the power hungry assholes usually aren't the great contributors to society they want you to think they are.
See, I have this prejudice against people who can't handle their grammar just as much as you have your prejudices against people using substances.
Also, I've met enough people not on drugs whom I wouldn't want to have cleaning my house much less in charge of something important.
If someone is able to hold a job for years while using... something has already proven that he or she is capable of self-control. More so than somebody who needs abstinence in order to function.
As someone who usually drinks very little alcohol, I've started using the substance for my benefit. I seldom go into the cinema without a beer or two in my hands. That way, I can get my brain out of overdrive and much more importantly out of nag-mode. It allows me to actually enjoy the damn things instead of constantly finding flaws in them.
The wife and I also use it to unwind on particularly stressful days with the twins instead of lying in bed awake for hours on end because our brains just wont shut up.
If that makes us unreliable in your eyes, then I guess it's a good thing we don't work for you. On the other hand, if you keep that grammar up, I'd probably strangle you after half a year at the latest.
While I agree that being pissed off is not a reason the use a firearm, it still brings up a good point: If you stage a kidnapping next to me and I am armed, I will, if I have the guts, draw said firearm and try to stop you.
With these kinds of asshole pranks, one wonders how little these people think their actions through.
Or they trust in that everyone else will show the restraint they themselves lack. Problem with that is if enough people abuse my restraint? Yeah, at some point, that restraint will shatter.
That's why good leeches on society don't tolerate too many other leeches.
Yes, if that is the case then it should be addressed. But like your parent poster said, the aversities did not stop him. Why do you have reason to believe that the aversities minorities face are so much worse for them that the same concept cannot apply to them?
Also what are you going to do about other minority members? A common theme in rap songs is how the homies peer pressured them into being gansta rather than scholars. When your peers actually and actively try to herd you away from legal careers, how does it become white people's fault when these people don't go into legal upper middle class careers?
Now I wouldn't know how prevalent the problem truly is but I do get the impression minorities do a pretty good job of keeping the status quo alive themselves. How are you going to change that doozie of a roadblock?
Let me get this straight: Does that mean someone at SAP just left a debug option turned on that essentially is a big honking barn door to the internet?
I see an outcry of epic proportions coming where some schmuck gets fired and nobody of value (meaning CxOs) gets into trouble.
The science is pretty obvious here. The more you chew your food, the more surface area you generate for the enzymes in your saliva to work. The more you chew, the more time the enzymes have to preprocess.
The book I've read stated, and I think this plausible, that chewing actually generates signals your body uses to determine how sated you are.
Frankly it's astounding to see how off I was in calculating how much energy my body needs.
I can crosscheck one interesting fact: I have to use bloodthinner, namely vitamin K antagonist. This means the more Vitamin K is in my blood, the more medication I need to take to block the vitamin K from aiding in clotting.
Well, since I started chewing thoroughly and eating much less food, my need for medication has gone up, not down. Meaning that while my intake of food has gone down, I seem to actually be absorbing more of it into my metabolism.
This gives credence, IMO, to what I've always been saying: It's not as simple as counting calorie intake, subtracting supposed daily calories burnt and as long as you are negative, you'll lose fat. It's just not that simple.
Slashdot Mirror
And by the way: Thank you for concentrating on the important part of my post. Appreciated.
Well, I was taught that our hills and valleys are basically what happens when glaciers carry sediments to a location and their melting creates rivers that carve up the landscape.
Moraines and such, you know? If that's wrong, blame my teachers.
My year of birth is 1981 and I went to school in Switzerland.
I think you hit the problematic nail on the proverbial head: Attention span and learning by heart a bunch of dates.
See, I don't know whether an abstracted simulation of historical and social events is a good tool but let's not act like our schools (there are exceptions, of course) did a swell job of teaching us much of true interest.
I feel like I had to go over the Roman empire three or four times. My wife has similar trauma with the French revolution. However, nobody ever took the time to actually, truly teach what led to them and what consequences they had. Hell, in geography we had to mark rivers and towns and cities... Had they tied that in with history it might actually have led to an understanding of WHY our world is the way it is. Hell, rather than rivers they should have taught us about highways, at least that way we'd have some practical use for the knowledge.
It's good to know that hills were made by glaciers but that one sentence would have been enough information in that regard.
We had to become adults and be interested in history to learn that Celts weren't actually barbarians enlightened by the Roman empire but rather were providing fine jewelry and soaps on a quality level the Romans had a hard time achieving. And these were the people who were our forefathers. Instead we glorified the conquerors.
We had to find out much later that while the French revolution was, more or less, the founding of todays understanding of democracy and the people's power, the people leading it were just as much opportunistic aristocrats as the ones who ended up on the guillotine (and nobody ever told us how many innocents were killed that way either!).
It's the same thing with people like Magellan or your very own Columbus. So much of what we were taught about these people was so very wrong it's appalling.
Frankly, I believe we should take kids when they enter school, show them how google works an ask them to tell us their opinion (!) on how much their book might be wrong about certain events in history.
Children are so very inquisitive and they can be like freaking drug sniffing dogs when they feel they're being lied to. Let's use that! It'll teach them to gather information and build an opinion just as much as how to question that which kinda feels too comfortable to be the absolute truth.
So corruption isn't really an issue in Greece?
Well, you learn something new every day.
What?
This is about review sites. People who earn money by reviewing stuff so YOU don't have to.
I'm not sure how you were able to misunderstand the concept.
If Amazon wants to keep selling (and not just shipping), then someone's got to buy and for that to happen, the very same people need to be paid.
The people demanding raises don't just do so because they need more luxury, you know. Some? Sure! But certainly not all and probably not most.
There's going to be some interesting times ahead.
Jeez, what a surefire way to be wrong you've chosen. Others already commented on the infinite time frame you've chosen but I'd like to add that "cost effective" is pretty relative.
There just needs to be a shortage of material found on an asteroid that is either life threatening or lowers our quality of life enough for people to decide they're going to try it.
And why should this never be cost effective? Robotic mining equipment needs to be deployed once. And without much gravity to speak off, all you need to do is launch the mined material in the direction of a desert every few days.
Can't be that hard to accomplish.
Yes, well, what does a keyboard with trackpoint add in cost? I'd be happy to pay the ten bucks the sales people make out of the 50 cents material cost.
If I can deactivate the trackpad and have a trackpoint available, I'm happy. It cannot possibly be this hard.
Then again, nobody makes sensible smartphones with hardware keyboards (where I'd love to have a trackpoint instead of a touchscreen tbh) anymore, so perhaps it IS hard...
In my opinion, there are two factors at play here: One is people thinking that their actions will gain them something and psychopaths.
For the first, you "only" (it's hard...) need to make sure that people have something to live for. And you need to make sure that they don't risk losing that. In my opinion, terrorists succumb to the fundamentalist dogma because their lives are shit and/or they do not feel appreciated enough by their peers without proving themselves.
Modern Christianity is often about the love of Jesus and therefor the love for your neighbor. When this is actually lived, I doubt very much that someone growing up like that will ever become a terrorist. Much too often it's about something else, though. Too often it's about "if you do X, which I don't like and I believe Jesus does not like, surely Jesus will stop loving you and therefore I will stop loving you because I love Jesus more than I love you".
Imagine a child growing up like that knowing that their parents, and later their peers, will oust them unless they conform. The need for your peers' approval is strong in humans.
We're all about individuality today but only as long as it's the individuality we approve of. Look at what happens if someone honestly says they feel uncomfortable around blacks, jews or what have you. Instead of saying "That's okay. As long as you let them live in peace, you are entitled to not liking them" we want them in therapy and/or sensitivity training, the earlier the better.
Hell, look at the pedophile witch hunts. Instead of recognizing what poor bastards those people are, never going to be able to enjoy their sexuality because it inherently conflicts with the well-being of others... what happens instead is we even make cartoon drawings uf underage people illegal to sexualize. I mean deny the starving man his rotten potatoes, why don't we.
If some loner isn't bothering anyone and slowly dying inside, we might have him ostracized even more by punishing the bullies but when was the last time you saw someone sitting down with the kid and having a hot-dog with them and talking about life in general?
My opinion is that we are too preoccupied with categorizing people on race, sexuality, gender, money, religion and so on, we just don't have the time and mental energy to just walk over there and provide company. Hell, the debates I've had in my head on how it may look if I went and did X right now, even though X was a perfectly human comfort to offer. I myself have been trained so much to never show weakness and never offend, I am almost incapable of what I've written about here.
YMMV. I hear in the US people re actually much friendlier, if more superficial, than around here.
Wait, you think rich people adding their money to their weight to throw around is something new and thus noteworthy?
If the Moto Z had front facing speakers and if they produce a battery case with hardware slide out keyboard I'd buy this.
HTC had such a good setup with the Desire Z. Can it be so hard to do something similar in phablet size with front facing speakers?
And some day, we'll just be interesting fauna for sentient machines to keep around. Frankly, the way we're going, I'm not sure I object.
We're not even able to see the signs of automation. The some who do want basic income and the rest is only able to scoff at the paradigm change but has no alternatives... I would even say they aren't convinced at all that we're going to run into a massive problem.
Well, not if you pump gas in Switzerland. We finance a lot of the roads through gas prices. Fortunately for y'all freeloaders, it usually is possible to pump gas outside the country and drive through ;). (I'm not saying it's cheaper in other countries, though, that's just a way to not have to pay for the roads ;))
Can't speak for other countries' airports but Zurich is pretty well at capacity... or at least the people living around it are ;)
I would be willing to bet hard cash that you are not content with the skill these parents nowadays show when it comes to morals, ethics and social behavior. Yet you think they should teach these values. Do you see where I'm going with this?
We must get away from this thinking that everybody needs to be self-sufficient and skilled at everything. We need to diversify education and stop putting so much stock in marketable skills. That way lies slavery and cultural ruin.
Human minds are too valuable to let them all be mined for productivity.
I mean, let's be serious here. Would this world be a better place if that fidgety child back when had been given ritalin and told to sit still instead of being sent to dance lessons and grow up to become the choreographer behind Cats and Phantom of the Opera? She's a millionaire, by the way. I expect she doesn't cry herself to sleep that she never got that fancy career in HR that might otherwise have been open to her.
Depends. If you come across him before he gets the killing machine rolling full tilt and you have the chance to kill him but not many other options, then no, killing him is not bad.
If you have him in custody and at your mercy and you start thinking about how you can make his execution a bit more painful yet then yes, you're in a similar territory.
I could even argue that the Nazis were, usually, more "humane" than that because they optimized their gas chambers for efficiency, not maximum suffering. In my opinion, the gas chambers are not the main reason the Nazis were monsters. The work camps are much worse in my not so humble opinion and in that regard, the Nazis are hardly unique.
Some people are more sensitive than others. Telling all of those to GTFO will lead in a lot of resources wasted. Because, believe you me, the power hungry assholes usually aren't the great contributors to society they want you to think they are.
Your sample size is astonishing and completely eradicates all doubts we might have had over the validity of your personal observations.
Dude, affect...
See, I have this prejudice against people who can't handle their grammar just as much as you have your prejudices against people using substances.
Also, I've met enough people not on drugs whom I wouldn't want to have cleaning my house much less in charge of something important.
If someone is able to hold a job for years while using... something has already proven that he or she is capable of self-control. More so than somebody who needs abstinence in order to function.
As someone who usually drinks very little alcohol, I've started using the substance for my benefit. I seldom go into the cinema without a beer or two in my hands. That way, I can get my brain out of overdrive and much more importantly out of nag-mode. It allows me to actually enjoy the damn things instead of constantly finding flaws in them.
The wife and I also use it to unwind on particularly stressful days with the twins instead of lying in bed awake for hours on end because our brains just wont shut up.
If that makes us unreliable in your eyes, then I guess it's a good thing we don't work for you. On the other hand, if you keep that grammar up, I'd probably strangle you after half a year at the latest.
While I agree that being pissed off is not a reason the use a firearm, it still brings up a good point: If you stage a kidnapping next to me and I am armed, I will, if I have the guts, draw said firearm and try to stop you.
With these kinds of asshole pranks, one wonders how little these people think their actions through.
Or they trust in that everyone else will show the restraint they themselves lack. Problem with that is if enough people abuse my restraint? Yeah, at some point, that restraint will shatter.
That's why good leeches on society don't tolerate too many other leeches.
Yes, if that is the case then it should be addressed. But like your parent poster said, the aversities did not stop him. Why do you have reason to believe that the aversities minorities face are so much worse for them that the same concept cannot apply to them?
Also what are you going to do about other minority members? A common theme in rap songs is how the homies peer pressured them into being gansta rather than scholars. When your peers actually and actively try to herd you away from legal careers, how does it become white people's fault when these people don't go into legal upper middle class careers?
Now I wouldn't know how prevalent the problem truly is but I do get the impression minorities do a pretty good job of keeping the status quo alive themselves. How are you going to change that doozie of a roadblock?
Isn't FreeBSD the OS where you have to deal with the same incompatibility bullshit as in Linux... just exponentially more so?
Call me pessimistic, but with my luck on Linux I don't even want to try FreeBSD...
Let me get this straight: Does that mean someone at SAP just left a debug option turned on that essentially is a big honking barn door to the internet?
I see an outcry of epic proportions coming where some schmuck gets fired and nobody of value (meaning CxOs) gets into trouble.
The science is pretty obvious here. The more you chew your food, the more surface area you generate for the enzymes in your saliva to work. The more you chew, the more time the enzymes have to preprocess.
The book I've read stated, and I think this plausible, that chewing actually generates signals your body uses to determine how sated you are.
Frankly it's astounding to see how off I was in calculating how much energy my body needs.
I can crosscheck one interesting fact: I have to use bloodthinner, namely vitamin K antagonist. This means the more Vitamin K is in my blood, the more medication I need to take to block the vitamin K from aiding in clotting.
Well, since I started chewing thoroughly and eating much less food, my need for medication has gone up, not down. Meaning that while my intake of food has gone down, I seem to actually be absorbing more of it into my metabolism.
This gives credence, IMO, to what I've always been saying: It's not as simple as counting calorie intake, subtracting supposed daily calories burnt and as long as you are negative, you'll lose fat. It's just not that simple.
Well, had you not left out my last line, then your question would have been pretty redundant.