Seeing as this has been invented by a Japanese dude and keeping in mind what the Japanese porn industry thinks is french kissing... this device seems perfectly capable of simulating that.
With the public already this annoyed with our 'elite', I don't think the host will have to worry much as the body will turn against the parasites soon enough.
I think I will live to see the day when managers dangle from trees, strung up with their own neckties.
Disclaimer: I am NOT advocating the killing of people. I am just saying I expect it to happen.
In Switzerland, we order half a litre of coke by saying we want five deci coke. Now don't try that in Germany, they'll just look at you like you've gone crazy...
Strange, my uncle, who lives in Canada and does construction, always measures in Imperial. I was pretty taken aback by that, but he said that was common place.
When talking about relatively large surface areas, media tends to 'convert' to n * soccer fields. Now how would the equivalent in the US work? American Football fields? And how would we do the conversion from soccer to football fields?!;)
Imperial doesn't exactly conform to the decimal system we so widely use, does it? For me as a Swiss, Imperial is akin to the economy in the Harry Potter books.
The problem is that most people mostly or even completely stopped preparing their own meals. Show me the processed food that does not contain taste enhancers.
If you prepare most of your meals from scratch, you're probably not having much of a problem.
And by preparing from scratch I don't mean putting the Eggo into the toaster;). I also don't mean taking the cookie dough out of the can and putting it in the oven (a concept that SERIOUSLY grosses me out for some reason...). I am talking about mixing fresh ingredients together, seasoning it with pure seasonings instead of pre-made mixes and so on.
Re:This is not the logic you are looking for
on
Is Sugar Toxic?
·
· Score: 1
At a certain point, a lot of what we eat falls under this category. I'm betting he's technically right, but what does that mean for your life expectancy?
I didn't RTFA but TFS is geared towards getting attention: "What you eat every day might kill you!!!111!" I resent that. I will also continue to provide my body with just enough (and in some cases too much) toxin to keep it on its toes and myself a happy fella.
Doing bad things is more often than not fun. We just need to relearn to moderate our fun intake;).
Sure, no arguments there. But people act as if a big, evil monster was lurking there and to go there was certain death.
That's just not the case. Yeah, in Bavaria you should still be careful about eating mushrooms. It's far from ideal but it also won't kill us. Life will, mostly, go on as before in a few months already.
This does not mean we shouldn't be looking for alternatives... but a being a bit more level-headed would do many people a lot of good.
It is not Chernobyl, but still a level 7 disaster with 1/8 the amount of radiation leaked (very very large). Chernobyl is so radioactive that it can't be inhabited for at least a few centuries.
The Germans have a saying: Nichts wird so heiss gegessen, wie es gekocht wird. Nothing's ever eaten as hot as it's been cooked. After all the media gets its claws out of this, some people will go back, others won't. Life will go on.
If making them compete would work, how is there the cliché of the nerd who gets pummelled at dodge-ball? How are there jocks if the existence of jocks, following your logic, would motivate the nerds to go pump iron, shoot some b-ball and get better at sports? It works the other way, too: If the existence of one super-math-genius would motivate the jocks to keep up, how exactly do you explain the stupid jock cliché?
Yes, I know, they're clichés, but still... Isn't there some truth to this? Do people not specialize?
While the coddling that is going on in some schools surely is a bad idea, kicking the kids' egos in the dirt with every graded test is a sure road to hell. Everyone has different skillsets. That is not only okay, it's a great thing. We call it diversity.
What we need is a system that puts together people with similar strengths and ambitions. Focus on the stuff they like and are good at (the former often results in the latter). Give them the basics in the rest, but don't have them forcibly wrap their brains around concepts that just aren't for them.
Don't make people compete in foreign fields. I mean, come on, would you like your wife expecting you to be the best car fixer, TV repairman, plumber and so on? Give yourself and everyone else a break. Life after school sees you having one field of profession. Sometimes it's a mix of different things if that's to your liking, but never does our society expect you to know everything. Why would you expect it of our offspring?
The question is not whether it's that cut and dry legally. The point is it is that cut and dry LOGICALLY. The whole problem in the first place is that the law does not follow logic.
I buy ten CDs, mix a song from each to a new CD and loan THAT to a friend. She enjoyed that very much. But I am still in possession and able to use my original and paid-for music while she is ALSO able to listen to at least parts of that music.
If I make available my music collection to the world, I will still be able to listen to my music, while others partake of it as well, without paying the music industry. Just like in TFA.
Now either that's okay or it's not from an ethical standpoint. The scale of this thing does not come into play yet. That woman endorses two mutually exclusive concepts. And that's funny and sad at the same time. Ironic all around.
Errr... TFS says it's about savegames with download content activated. If you have a pirated version, you obviously won't have download content in them (at least I'd assume).
OTOH, if you have no download content, TFS implies that everything should have been fine, even with a legitimate copy.
Now I know what the submitter felt. I've had the same problem with my Settlers 7 easter weekend, where the servers sucked donkey ass. OTOH, one must lay part of the blame at our own feet. First we bought the stuff. Then we wasted hours trying to get it to work and getting annoyed instead of doing the right thing: Do something else while the problem gets fixed. It's not like Settlers 7 or in this case DA:O is the only game out there. It's also not like we're sealed into our rooms and couldn't go outside doing something that involves no computers.
Sure, we bought it and are thus entitled to being able to play it. BUT the way we react to it (being whiny crybabies vs. adults with lives [I know, I know... Slashdot...]) says a lot about our characters and often, it isn't good (not excluding myself from that, obviously).
I know, too late again, but how the heck does this get modded +5 Insightful?
Your parent poster said this is a problem for 45 Million Americans. I don't know where he got that number or whether it's accurate... but if it's true, that's what? 20%-ish?
That's a significant number of people whose cinema experience is shot to hell for the rest. Ever think about that?
I wouldn't say anything if there were enough cinemas to show movies in 2D, but in Switzerland, they all ride the hype-wave. It's become quite difficult to watch movies in their original language and now the constraint of 2D on top of that? I haven't been to the movies in months...
The important question is this: Does this new gimmick attract enough new people that the hit of those getting headaches or not seeing 3D is going to be evened out? No, not only that: The cost of the new tech must be made up as well... That's a pretty hefty gamble IMO.
I have yet to talk to any pro-nuclear person that is against shutting off old reactors in favour of new ones.
We've just been polarized... if an anti-nuclear person hears me saying I am pro, they believe, just like you do, I am in love with the way it is. That's bullshit. The way it is is freaking dangerous. But as long as we nuclear-huggers aren't allowed to replace our aged 386 reactors with shiny new Core i7 reactors and no alternative means of generating energy (that DON'T have MASSIVE disadvantages when built for this amount of power generation)appear on the horizon, how on earth do you propose we go on?
Is it really, truly a good idea to jump the shark just to get rid of these reactors? Couldn't we just, for once, stick our heads together and come to a good decision? You know, as in though through?
Exactly. I am not opposed to shutting down all our nuclear reactors if we have a real alternative in place. Heck, we have a few in Switzerland that are old enough for a T-Rex to have humped their cooling tower.
BUT just because a 40 year old design has flaws does not mean the idea is flawed. But tell that to the people. Most of them don't have the knowledge (I don't blame them... you can't be knowledgeable about everything around you...) and our news outlets are decidedly not helping.
Talking about 'nuclear' as if there was exactly one fuel and one reactor design involved is like thinking a Prius, a Tesla and a '69 Corvette all work the same way.
Maybe, just maybe, the answer doesn't lie behind the question of whether we want nuclear power or not. Perhaps we should think about nuclear alternatives. I still say "Yay for LFTR!"
If you're on good terms with a Peugeot dealer, chances are you'll be driving a Peugeot, even if the GM dealer is closer.
Most people think they get better deals from friends. Sometimes they are right, often they're the same and sometimes they're worse. In most cases, though, people feel better going to someone they know. That is not a nefarious scheme, it's human nature.
And besides, Google doesn't want their employees to sell this. There is nothing to sell here. It's a move to get the function more widespread acknowledgement and thus a bigger userbase (to which they custom-tailor ads).
Frankly, I have a very hard time seeing how this is supposed to be Evil (TM).
What is your point? The product is one part of Google's overall portfolio and thus its success. It will contribute to ONE PART of the employees' bonuses.
Google has a pretty large staff spread across the world. If each one of them can just make one other person aware of the new feature and of those half tell someone else, you've just kickstarted a pretty hefty viral marketing.
Where is the problem with tying part of an employees bonus to the company's success? Isn't that what bonuses are all about? If they're not tied to the company's success, it's called a salary, you know.
Slashdot Mirror
Why? Because the knowledge could be abused? If you go with that, what information would be left to share?
O tempora, o mores!
Or:
Einstein is correct, as, so far, usual.
Very ugly either way...
Seeing as this has been invented by a Japanese dude and keeping in mind what the Japanese porn industry thinks is french kissing... this device seems perfectly capable of simulating that.
With the public already this annoyed with our 'elite', I don't think the host will have to worry much as the body will turn against the parasites soon enough.
I think I will live to see the day when managers dangle from trees, strung up with their own neckties.
Disclaimer: I am NOT advocating the killing of people. I am just saying I expect it to happen.
In Switzerland, we order half a litre of coke by saying we want five deci coke. Now don't try that in Germany, they'll just look at you like you've gone crazy...
Strange, my uncle, who lives in Canada and does construction, always measures in Imperial. I was pretty taken aback by that, but he said that was common place.
That just reminded me of something:
When talking about relatively large surface areas, media tends to 'convert' to n * soccer fields. Now how would the equivalent in the US work? American Football fields? And how would we do the conversion from soccer to football fields?! ;)
Imperial doesn't exactly conform to the decimal system we so widely use, does it? For me as a Swiss, Imperial is akin to the economy in the Harry Potter books.
But that is AFTER you bought it, isn't it. How are you going to return it after you determined that it's unsuitable?
The problem is that most people mostly or even completely stopped preparing their own meals. Show me the processed food that does not contain taste enhancers.
If you prepare most of your meals from scratch, you're probably not having much of a problem.
And by preparing from scratch I don't mean putting the Eggo into the toaster ;). I also don't mean taking the cookie dough out of the can and putting it in the oven (a concept that SERIOUSLY grosses me out for some reason...). I am talking about mixing fresh ingredients together, seasoning it with pure seasonings instead of pre-made mixes and so on.
At a certain point, a lot of what we eat falls under this category. I'm betting he's technically right, but what does that mean for your life expectancy?
I didn't RTFA but TFS is geared towards getting attention: "What you eat every day might kill you!!!111!" I resent that. I will also continue to provide my body with just enough (and in some cases too much) toxin to keep it on its toes and myself a happy fella.
Doing bad things is more often than not fun. We just need to relearn to moderate our fun intake ;).
Sure, no arguments there. But people act as if a big, evil monster was lurking there and to go there was certain death.
That's just not the case. Yeah, in Bavaria you should still be careful about eating mushrooms. It's far from ideal but it also won't kill us. Life will, mostly, go on as before in a few months already.
This does not mean we shouldn't be looking for alternatives... but a being a bit more level-headed would do many people a lot of good.
It is not Chernobyl, but still a level 7 disaster with 1/8 the amount of radiation leaked (very very large). Chernobyl is so radioactive that it can't be inhabited for at least a few centuries.
And yet people live there. Sure, they're not supposed to, but they do. http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,412954,00.html
The Germans have a saying: Nichts wird so heiss gegessen, wie es gekocht wird. Nothing's ever eaten as hot as it's been cooked. After all the media gets its claws out of this, some people will go back, others won't. Life will go on.
This is not well thought through...
If making them compete would work, how is there the cliché of the nerd who gets pummelled at dodge-ball? How are there jocks if the existence of jocks, following your logic, would motivate the nerds to go pump iron, shoot some b-ball and get better at sports? It works the other way, too: If the existence of one super-math-genius would motivate the jocks to keep up, how exactly do you explain the stupid jock cliché?
Yes, I know, they're clichés, but still... Isn't there some truth to this? Do people not specialize?
While the coddling that is going on in some schools surely is a bad idea, kicking the kids' egos in the dirt with every graded test is a sure road to hell. Everyone has different skillsets. That is not only okay, it's a great thing. We call it diversity.
What we need is a system that puts together people with similar strengths and ambitions. Focus on the stuff they like and are good at (the former often results in the latter). Give them the basics in the rest, but don't have them forcibly wrap their brains around concepts that just aren't for them.
Don't make people compete in foreign fields. I mean, come on, would you like your wife expecting you to be the best car fixer, TV repairman, plumber and so on? Give yourself and everyone else a break. Life after school sees you having one field of profession. Sometimes it's a mix of different things if that's to your liking, but never does our society expect you to know everything. Why would you expect it of our offspring?
D'uh! That's exactly what his post was about, dude...
You, sir, are completely missing the point.
The question is not whether it's that cut and dry legally. The point is it is that cut and dry LOGICALLY. The whole problem in the first place is that the law does not follow logic.
I buy ten CDs, mix a song from each to a new CD and loan THAT to a friend. She enjoyed that very much. But I am still in possession and able to use my original and paid-for music while she is ALSO able to listen to at least parts of that music.
If I make available my music collection to the world, I will still be able to listen to my music, while others partake of it as well, without paying the music industry. Just like in TFA.
Now either that's okay or it's not from an ethical standpoint. The scale of this thing does not come into play yet. That woman endorses two mutually exclusive concepts. And that's funny and sad at the same time. Ironic all around.
Errr... TFS says it's about savegames with download content activated. If you have a pirated version, you obviously won't have download content in them (at least I'd assume).
OTOH, if you have no download content, TFS implies that everything should have been fine, even with a legitimate copy.
Now I know what the submitter felt. I've had the same problem with my Settlers 7 easter weekend, where the servers sucked donkey ass. OTOH, one must lay part of the blame at our own feet. First we bought the stuff. Then we wasted hours trying to get it to work and getting annoyed instead of doing the right thing: Do something else while the problem gets fixed. It's not like Settlers 7 or in this case DA:O is the only game out there. It's also not like we're sealed into our rooms and couldn't go outside doing something that involves no computers.
Sure, we bought it and are thus entitled to being able to play it. BUT the way we react to it (being whiny crybabies vs. adults with lives [I know, I know... Slashdot...]) says a lot about our characters and often, it isn't good (not excluding myself from that, obviously).
I know, too late again, but how the heck does this get modded +5 Insightful?
Your parent poster said this is a problem for 45 Million Americans. I don't know where he got that number or whether it's accurate... but if it's true, that's what? 20%-ish?
That's a significant number of people whose cinema experience is shot to hell for the rest. Ever think about that?
I wouldn't say anything if there were enough cinemas to show movies in 2D, but in Switzerland, they all ride the hype-wave. It's become quite difficult to watch movies in their original language and now the constraint of 2D on top of that? I haven't been to the movies in months...
The important question is this: Does this new gimmick attract enough new people that the hit of those getting headaches or not seeing 3D is going to be evened out? No, not only that: The cost of the new tech must be made up as well... That's a pretty hefty gamble IMO.
I have yet to talk to any pro-nuclear person that is against shutting off old reactors in favour of new ones.
We've just been polarized... if an anti-nuclear person hears me saying I am pro, they believe, just like you do, I am in love with the way it is. That's bullshit. The way it is is freaking dangerous. But as long as we nuclear-huggers aren't allowed to replace our aged 386 reactors with shiny new Core i7 reactors and no alternative means of generating energy (that DON'T have MASSIVE disadvantages when built for this amount of power generation)appear on the horizon, how on earth do you propose we go on?
Is it really, truly a good idea to jump the shark just to get rid of these reactors? Couldn't we just, for once, stick our heads together and come to a good decision? You know, as in though through?
Exactly. I am not opposed to shutting down all our nuclear reactors if we have a real alternative in place. Heck, we have a few in Switzerland that are old enough for a T-Rex to have humped their cooling tower.
BUT just because a 40 year old design has flaws does not mean the idea is flawed. But tell that to the people. Most of them don't have the knowledge (I don't blame them... you can't be knowledgeable about everything around you...) and our news outlets are decidedly not helping.
Talking about 'nuclear' as if there was exactly one fuel and one reactor design involved is like thinking a Prius, a Tesla and a '69 Corvette all work the same way.
Maybe, just maybe, the answer doesn't lie behind the question of whether we want nuclear power or not. Perhaps we should think about nuclear alternatives. I still say "Yay for LFTR!"
Oh come on!
If you're on good terms with a Peugeot dealer, chances are you'll be driving a Peugeot, even if the GM dealer is closer.
Most people think they get better deals from friends. Sometimes they are right, often they're the same and sometimes they're worse. In most cases, though, people feel better going to someone they know. That is not a nefarious scheme, it's human nature.
And besides, Google doesn't want their employees to sell this. There is nothing to sell here. It's a move to get the function more widespread acknowledgement and thus a bigger userbase (to which they custom-tailor ads).
Frankly, I have a very hard time seeing how this is supposed to be Evil (TM).
What is your point? The product is one part of Google's overall portfolio and thus its success. It will contribute to ONE PART of the employees' bonuses.
Where's your problem?
Overreacting much?
Google has a pretty large staff spread across the world. If each one of them can just make one other person aware of the new feature and of those half tell someone else, you've just kickstarted a pretty hefty viral marketing.
Where is the problem with tying part of an employees bonus to the company's success? Isn't that what bonuses are all about? If they're not tied to the company's success, it's called a salary, you know.