I remember when I went to school, we came across one or two of those teachers I'd call unfit to participate in society. Interestingly enough, those along with those who didn't know shiot about the subject they taught (another interesting fact: it happened quite often that when either of the statements were true, the other wasn't that far off either...) were the only ones to catch serious flack from students.
Of course students don't like homework... but most of them aren't inherently stupid, you know. They do realize why they have to do it and also they realize that unless there's serious trouble with a teacher you have no chance to get rid of them anyway. Those idiots who start slandering people because they did something the idiots didn't like are in the minority even among students.
What I'm asking myself how that experience will be for people like me. I have about normal sight in my left eye but the right one is thoroughly fucked. Not only is it only about 20% as strong as the left eye but it also is several degrees off to the right. Now I can deal with never actually watching 3D (normal movies for me are quite realistic... I don't see more depth in the real world anyway) but I'm a tad scared what I'd do if they all started shooting in 3D only. I tried the crappy paper glasses once and all I got was a red or green image or the distorted blurry picture you see without them. It hurt.
I'd like to use this opportunity to show my sincere appreciation for what you are doing. Although many a joke has been made about lawyers and humans, and especially them not being the same thing, it gives me hope that there obviously are lawyers who take law seriously and do have people's well-being in mind. On top of that you take the time to inform and update us on the state of affairs with an insight that we'd otherwise sorely lack.
I do believe that you are one of those people who will have an actual positive impact on society. And for that, I'm very grateful.
This statement is only partly correct. When I was on medication I started eating as little as one sandwich a day over the course of weeks. Yet, I didn't considerably lose weight.
You can't just say fat people are eating too much. The truth is more likely that they're eating the wrong combination of nutritions, fats and so on. On top of that, every body reacts differently to exercise and foods.
But I have to say even if exercise didn't do squat against obesity (which, for most, it doesn't do unless their eating healthy as well), the other aspects of it should be considered as well. For me, it just feels good to exercise and I feel that I have become healthier and less prone to catching a cold every other day.
I agree with you only partially. In the end, it will makes matters for Non-Simon-Says people much harder while not doing much against the terrorists. Here is why I believe that:
I am one of those people who love to pose uncomfortable questions and defend unpopular ideas. I might be one of those people who suddenly spend hours checking into a flight overseas. At first it might be considered a coincidence but perhaps I'll rethink that when suddenly every routine traffic inspection takes, like, an hour until I can resume my travel.
Terrorists will not have that problem because they will hail their target governments with every breath they have. They will be model citizens. They will go to school or work every day, never be late, read all the 'right' papers and magazines and they won't do a single thing that will get them 'Sauron's attention'.
The difference lies herein:
I want to live my life as a free man. I want to make myself heard when I ask for the rights that were supposed to be given me. I want to raise awareness that something is amiss. I WILL draw attention to my person. The terrorsit has other goals. He doesn't care that much about awareness. He doesn't believe that the people will change anything anyway. He has his plan in his head that he wishes to complete with every fiber of his being. He will lay low, lie about his beliefs and do all the things he hates so much for effing YEARS if he has to until his great day comes when he walks into a government building, yells his trademark warcry and pushes the trigger that takes 15 people along with him to hell.
THAT is why this whole fuck-up will do crap to stop any terrorism. If anything, it will mute the part of the society that tries to bring up alternative points making society as a whole more balanced in their dealings with the group he 'represents'. If anything, this will make the whole situation worse because the terrorists will use this regime like treatment of its people to point at the governments and say 'See?! They're showing their true colors. THAT is the beast we are fighting!'
Since I cannot believe that any politician can be stupid enough to not see this I have to ask myself: What do they gain from this... really?
So what you are basically saying is that we differ from rats in just 0.0075% of the genes that count? Well, great but those measly 0.0075% in genetic difference managed to impact in terms of size, weight, looks, average age at death, preferred food, social structure, mating rituals etc. etc. So please excuse me for wanting to see studies conducted on humans before I feel safe consuming something...
Hmmm... I'm a gun-nut as well (Swiss, by the way) I can understand when people feel that privately owned guns are a dangerous thing. Because they are. Not everyone want's to have a gun for the aesthetics of the tool. Some need the power rush and that can lead to trouble.
But what certainly isn't okay is to just break and enter homes in search of suddenly illegal material. As if people should have known all along that buying those things would be illegal soon, anyway. And yes, I think him voting for that bill (haven't read the text myself so I'm just going with the info you gave. Should that have been wrong my opinion might differ accordingly) leaves a foul taste in my mouth...
Oh no, please don't... seriously, how long do you think it would take before the leaders of this new belief would start claiming complete objectivity? You know what would happen? Free speech would get a kick in the balls because those oh so highly objective people would not allow "wrong" beliefs to stand.
Only very few people are really objective... try bringing up hot topics with an unpopular opinion. Like be pro war when everyone is against it. Or be against homosexuals when everyone around you is for it. You don't even have to actually have that opinion but you'll see how fast some of them will turn around and leave any kind of civilized level that instant. You can believe me on this one... been there, done that numerous times. It ain't pretty, especially when it's people you thought were really intelligent...
On my iPod 100% of the music is DRM free. Most tracks are CD rips. Almost none are illegally acquired mp3s anymore. And all the shite I buy on iTunes is burned to a CD and ripped to mp3.
Now if only I could find a better way than to waste good CDs... seriously, is there no way? If there was a CD burner emulator that acted like a normal burner in Windows (and could thus be used by iTunes) that wrote ISO-files directly it would make my DRM free life much easier.
Sadly enough, in a democracy this is actually the job oif the government. The government should always have our best interest in mind. Yet the RIAA's behaviour is accepted. Does that mean democracy is dead?
All that would do is them trying to force even more ridiculous laws on us. Do you think they'll ever start taking the blame for decreasing sales? That'll be the day...
They will never raise the CD price to 34$. That is not their intention with this statement. The record companies know damn well how the market works and they know damn well what we have been saying for months and years.
But the problem is going the new routes and trying a new business model is somewhat risky. So the put up such statements in the hopes that people believe the bullshit and they can get away with it a bit longer. They don't want to raise prices... they just want to feed us bullshit in order for us to be quiet and be happy that it isn't even worse than it already is. It's a question of relativity.
I don't think that any form of encapsulation however strong and robust will solve that problem. With g forces 100 thousand times greater than normal this means that even a 1 mg chip suddenly equals 100 kg of weight. So you'd have to develop a circuit board that could take 100 kg on one square millimeter or something like that.
We'll either have to build every part of the electronics to withstand an elephant stepping on it or we'll have to make an encapsulation that can negate the g-forces. An antigrav field perhaps?
The More interesting thing to note is that Hoffmann LaRoche itself stated that they didn't know whether Tamiflu could do squat against bird flu. And still the Swiss government ordered like tons of the stuff. You have to ask yourself what's really behind all this crap.
I do believe that a civilized country does not have a death penalty. That said, I also believe that not every country that has no death penalty is civilized either.
So your logic therefore is that since he looked arab and had an arab name chances that a backpack was loaded with explosives were high enough to warrant him being subdued (no matter whether he resisted in the first place).
So by your logic, if I'm scared of people with you facial features and your last name, then I thereby have the right to knock you out for the greater good if you should happen to be wearing or carrying anything that might be used to conceal a weapon?
You are an idiot and a stupid one at that... I think your parent poster is right to believe that we all would be better off if your kind just went away... though I, for one, would prefer it if you just went away quietly... lest we need to taser you away from our planet...
I take it you have never met the business end of a taser, right?
I haven't either. But I have had my share of high voltage meet and greets, if you will allow that figure of speech. You just don't walk straight after you got some thousand volts. It's just not done. Or at least it's not done on a regular basis. Shocking someone 5 times, in my eyes, is attempted murder. A shock weakens the heart. Doing so five consecuitive times can easily prove fatal.
The fact that this guy rather moderates a radio show instead of actually meeting his patients and spending time with them to actually analyze a problem didn't let you doubt that he might be overdoing it a bit to get ratings, no?
That whole "abused as a child" clusterfuck gives me the creeps and makes me angry at the same time. That phrase has been abused so many times that it's save to say it's become FUD. And what is the outcome of that? Real victims have a harder time getting people to believe them. False victims destroy lives of innocent people and the population has one more thing to be scared of in the wrong places and in a vastly exagerated magnitude...
This argument you are presenting is very dangerous as well: "See, the doctor says you are sick so it doesn't matter whether you believe that you are fine and feel great. Deep down you are hurting. Here take these pills and all will be better..." Doctors are only human. They make mistakes and their characters aren't angelic and pure by default. Just because someone holds the title of a doctor doesn't mean shit. How do you know his daddy just bought that one for the guy?
So, in short, I find it questionable to put the word of a doctor who analyzes patients over the phone alone above the word of the patient.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know why that would be modded funny. The sad thing is he's absolutely right.
You'd be surprised.
I remember when I went to school, we came across one or two of those teachers I'd call unfit to participate in society. Interestingly enough, those along with those who didn't know shiot about the subject they taught (another interesting fact: it happened quite often that when either of the statements were true, the other wasn't that far off either...) were the only ones to catch serious flack from students.
Of course students don't like homework... but most of them aren't inherently stupid, you know. They do realize why they have to do it and also they realize that unless there's serious trouble with a teacher you have no chance to get rid of them anyway. Those idiots who start slandering people because they did something the idiots didn't like are in the minority even among students.
What I'm asking myself how that experience will be for people like me. I have about normal sight in my left eye but the right one is thoroughly fucked. Not only is it only about 20% as strong as the left eye but it also is several degrees off to the right.
Now I can deal with never actually watching 3D (normal movies for me are quite realistic... I don't see more depth in the real world anyway) but I'm a tad scared what I'd do if they all started shooting in 3D only. I tried the crappy paper glasses once and all I got was a red or green image or the distorted blurry picture you see without them. It hurt.
I'd like to use this opportunity to show my sincere appreciation for what you are doing. Although many a joke has been made about lawyers and humans, and especially them not being the same thing, it gives me hope that there obviously are lawyers who take law seriously and do have people's well-being in mind.
On top of that you take the time to inform and update us on the state of affairs with an insight that we'd otherwise sorely lack.
I do believe that you are one of those people who will have an actual positive impact on society. And for that, I'm very grateful.
This statement is only partly correct. When I was on medication I started eating as little as one sandwich a day over the course of weeks. Yet, I didn't considerably lose weight.
You can't just say fat people are eating too much. The truth is more likely that they're eating the wrong combination of nutritions, fats and so on. On top of that, every body reacts differently to exercise and foods.
But I have to say even if exercise didn't do squat against obesity (which, for most, it doesn't do unless their eating healthy as well), the other aspects of it should be considered as well. For me, it just feels good to exercise and I feel that I have become healthier and less prone to catching a cold every other day.
Ahh, you mean like the "OMFG terrorist!" and "OMFG pedophile!" scares? ;)
"we voted in a new House and Senate" Yeah, you go on believing that if it makes you sleep better ;).
"Seconded. But sadly for humans, ethical values don't seem to matter that much."
;).
When you fix something, do it right
I agree with you only partially. In the end, it will makes matters for Non-Simon-Says people much harder while not doing much against the terrorists. Here is why I believe that:
I am one of those people who love to pose uncomfortable questions and defend unpopular ideas. I might be one of those people who suddenly spend hours checking into a flight overseas. At first it might be considered a coincidence but perhaps I'll rethink that when suddenly every routine traffic inspection takes, like, an hour until I can resume my travel.
Terrorists will not have that problem because they will hail their target governments with every breath they have. They will be model citizens. They will go to school or work every day, never be late, read all the 'right' papers and magazines and they won't do a single thing that will get them 'Sauron's attention'.
The difference lies herein:
I want to live my life as a free man. I want to make myself heard when I ask for the rights that were supposed to be given me. I want to raise awareness that something is amiss. I WILL draw attention to my person.
The terrorsit has other goals. He doesn't care that much about awareness. He doesn't believe that the people will change anything anyway. He has his plan in his head that he wishes to complete with every fiber of his being. He will lay low, lie about his beliefs and do all the things he hates so much for effing YEARS if he has to until his great day comes when he walks into a government building, yells his trademark warcry and pushes the trigger that takes 15 people along with him to hell.
THAT is why this whole fuck-up will do crap to stop any terrorism. If anything, it will mute the part of the society that tries to bring up alternative points making society as a whole more balanced in their dealings with the group he 'represents'. If anything, this will make the whole situation worse because the terrorists will use this regime like treatment of its people to point at the governments and say 'See?! They're showing their true colors. THAT is the beast we are fighting!'
Since I cannot believe that any politician can be stupid enough to not see this I have to ask myself: What do they gain from this... really?
So what you are basically saying is that we differ from rats in just 0.0075% of the genes that count? Well, great but those measly 0.0075% in genetic difference managed to impact in terms of size, weight, looks, average age at death, preferred food, social structure, mating rituals etc. etc. So please excuse me for wanting to see studies conducted on humans before I feel safe consuming something...
Hmmm... I'm a gun-nut as well (Swiss, by the way) I can understand when people feel that privately owned guns are a dangerous thing. Because they are. Not everyone want's to have a gun for the aesthetics of the tool. Some need the power rush and that can lead to trouble.
But what certainly isn't okay is to just break and enter homes in search of suddenly illegal material. As if people should have known all along that buying those things would be illegal soon, anyway. And yes, I think him voting for that bill (haven't read the text myself so I'm just going with the info you gave. Should that have been wrong my opinion might differ accordingly) leaves a foul taste in my mouth...
Oh no, please don't... seriously, how long do you think it would take before the leaders of this new belief would start claiming complete objectivity? You know what would happen? Free speech would get a kick in the balls because those oh so highly objective people would not allow "wrong" beliefs to stand.
Only very few people are really objective... try bringing up hot topics with an unpopular opinion. Like be pro war when everyone is against it. Or be against homosexuals when everyone around you is for it. You don't even have to actually have that opinion but you'll see how fast some of them will turn around and leave any kind of civilized level that instant. You can believe me on this one... been there, done that numerous times. It ain't pretty, especially when it's people you thought were really intelligent...
On my iPod 100% of the music is DRM free. Most tracks are CD rips. Almost none are illegally acquired mp3s anymore. And all the shite I buy on iTunes is burned to a CD and ripped to mp3.
Now if only I could find a better way than to waste good CDs... seriously, is there no way? If there was a CD burner emulator that acted like a normal burner in Windows (and could thus be used by iTunes) that wrote ISO-files directly it would make my DRM free life much easier.
Sadly enough, in a democracy this is actually the job oif the government. The government should always have our best interest in mind. Yet the RIAA's behaviour is accepted. Does that mean democracy is dead?
All that would do is them trying to force even more ridiculous laws on us. Do you think they'll ever start taking the blame for decreasing sales? That'll be the day...
They will never raise the CD price to 34$. That is not their intention with this statement. The record companies know damn well how the market works and they know damn well what we have been saying for months and years.
But the problem is going the new routes and trying a new business model is somewhat risky. So the put up such statements in the hopes that people believe the bullshit and they can get away with it a bit longer. They don't want to raise prices... they just want to feed us bullshit in order for us to be quiet and be happy that it isn't even worse than it already is. It's a question of relativity.
I don't think that any form of encapsulation however strong and robust will solve that problem. With g forces 100 thousand times greater than normal this means that even a 1 mg chip suddenly equals 100 kg of weight. So you'd have to develop a circuit board that could take 100 kg on one square millimeter or something like that.
We'll either have to build every part of the electronics to withstand an elephant stepping on it or we'll have to make an encapsulation that can negate the g-forces. An antigrav field perhaps?
The More interesting thing to note is that Hoffmann LaRoche itself stated that they didn't know whether Tamiflu could do squat against bird flu. And still the Swiss government ordered like tons of the stuff. You have to ask yourself what's really behind all this crap.
I do believe that a civilized country does not have a death penalty. That said, I also believe that not every country that has no death penalty is civilized either.
Yeah, as if that was only possible in Russia...
Are you nuts? Then all the others have to pay for his medication!
So your logic therefore is that since he looked arab and had an arab name chances that a backpack was loaded with explosives were high enough to warrant him being subdued (no matter whether he resisted in the first place).
So by your logic, if I'm scared of people with you facial features and your last name, then I thereby have the right to knock you out for the greater good if you should happen to be wearing or carrying anything that might be used to conceal a weapon?
You are an idiot and a stupid one at that... I think your parent poster is right to believe that we all would be better off if your kind just went away... though I, for one, would prefer it if you just went away quietly... lest we need to taser you away from our planet...
I take it you have never met the business end of a taser, right?
I haven't either. But I have had my share of high voltage meet and greets, if you will allow that figure of speech. You just don't walk straight after you got some thousand volts. It's just not done. Or at least it's not done on a regular basis. Shocking someone 5 times, in my eyes, is attempted murder. A shock weakens the heart. Doing so five consecuitive times can easily prove fatal.
Yeah, I guess when "holding a child's hand" is to receive that honour then I'll finally be able to get over my childhood traumata.
The fact that this guy rather moderates a radio show instead of actually meeting his patients and spending time with them to actually analyze a problem didn't let you doubt that he might be overdoing it a bit to get ratings, no?
That whole "abused as a child" clusterfuck gives me the creeps and makes me angry at the same time. That phrase has been abused so many times that it's save to say it's become FUD. And what is the outcome of that? Real victims have a harder time getting people to believe them. False victims destroy lives of innocent people and the population has one more thing to be scared of in the wrong places and in a vastly exagerated magnitude...
This argument you are presenting is very dangerous as well: "See, the doctor says you are sick so it doesn't matter whether you believe that you are fine and feel great. Deep down you are hurting. Here take these pills and all will be better..." Doctors are only human. They make mistakes and their characters aren't angelic and pure by default. Just because someone holds the title of a doctor doesn't mean shit. How do you know his daddy just bought that one for the guy?
So, in short, I find it questionable to put the word of a doctor who analyzes patients over the phone alone above the word of the patient.