is that it both increases and lowers your risk of cancer. vitamin d production and all that.
but about OP's comment that he'll stay on the skeptic's side of the fence for now, doesn't that just mean you're not going to let someone put an infrared helmet on you until further tests have been done? or are you going to walk around actively disbelieving it?
Making the same electronic functionality smaller is a cost issue. See Mac fanatics about how the Mac mini is incredibly cheap. Price is an issue when you're talking about form factor.
2... The View has a removable battery? Nope.
GAAAAH!!! *ahem* Touche.:-)
Despite your disclaimer - you have only brought subjective complaints to an objective discussion.
Yes, and GGP (or whoever replied to me originally) introduced logical fallacy. And (s)he argued with me about components that I wasn't referring to. On the A&F crap: I thought I was entitled to my blowhardy opinion. This is, in fact, slashdot. No? Speech curtailed, suits AC whims! Articles omitted! Slashdot more concise! News at 11!
What do we get? A device almost exactly twice as thick as the thickest Nano.
Correlation != Causation, so it doesn't prove a point. The Sansa costs significantly less than the Nano, and it's 2 years old. I'm not talking about the FM radio or the multimedia card. I'm talking about the user-replaceable battery, which shouldn't add more than a 0.1" at most. Add a bezel for the casing to hook to, and use indented screws at the other end. It's simple engineering, so your claim that it adds size is ridiculous. Open up your Sansa, and you'll see that it's not the casing or the battery that necessitates the thickness. Open your Nano, and... Oh, wait, you can't.
And have you seen the Sansa View? It's 0.35" while the nano is 0.27". I'm not mathermaflitian, but I think that that's not double.
The Sansa e200 series is more appropriately sized for (my) pocket space than the new Nano, anyway. Just not thinner. Oh, and with the Sansa, I don't have to feel guilty about buying into an A&F-esque pop culture load of hot hooey. But that's just my personal preference.
That was more or less what I was going for. But the question was 'I don't want to use solution A that is provided for me. Are there other solutions?' And my answer was, 'Of course! Solutions B through Z!'
But I was dabbling in a bit of jerkofferry, I admit.
Would you like your ipod to be 1/8" thicker just to add a latch for the battery?
These Sansa e200 things have these neat little beveled screws that add approximately.04 microns to the width of the device. I actually WOULDN'T want a latch on my MP3 player that disengaged the battery, thank you very much. But beveled screws...I'm so excited about where this new technology will take pioneers like Apple!
Oh, by the way, dude: If I sell you a computer, and you then purchase hardware from someone other than me, you must pay me 25 cents per person-device-year. Sounds pretty fucking stupid to me. But I suppose if businesses want to do business with people like Microsoft, it serves them right.
How about if your credit score is low enough, then the government is required to pay your bill with tax money? Does it sound like a bad enough idea now? Credit scores on a consistent basis are inaccurate representations of reality, like IQ tests. Or polygraph tests. So we'd be paying for tons of the wrong people to get care. The same way many who can pay would be denied care.
Doctors are similarly reliable in the current system. It used to be that medical care cost a reasonable amount, but now a normal person can't pay out of pocket to be seen. The medical industry is out of control. The AMA has a monopoly on what is considered Health Care, and the whole goddamn thing is a racket. Inject into that the insurance companies and you have a giant, evil cake (analogies are like a comfortable hat to me). And unfortunately, sometimes you need them. Giving them one more point of leverage to fuck people is sort of a really really bad idea. It sucks that you can't just deal directly with doctors anymore.
What's everyone's credit score here, anyway? Mine is 780, and I have no money. No real way to get money, either. Curious. (credit scores range from 300 to 850)
while not strictly my first gaming experience (my brother's friend had an atari), the hidden gun shop that my brother assured me was down the last pit of the first level of super mario bros. is my most memorable. my brother has always been able to convey a sense of wisdom and honor when explaining things to people, and the subsequent enjoyment of watching him dupe all of our other friends into jumping into that hole is easily one of the highlights of my childhood.
no dude, really. guns. down the hole. you'll be sorry later if you don't.
I've got the Kinesis Freestyle, which allows me to readjust it throughout the day, and I've found that's a very good compromise between super-awesome freaky keyboard and cheap. I think the greater the angle, the better.
But what the other guy said about if the pain goes away, it worked. That's the way to tell.:-)
Dude, but if you're using a freaking LASER to read your vinyl, you'd damn well better have those $8000 speaker cables. I hear they make the music more "danceable."
Ahem. This is my excuse from now on when people criticize my dancing.
I know several people are already refuting your point, but I have to point out that something that merely can be construed as a threat is not a threat. See the "We're here to shoot a pilot" comment above. Or I'll slit your throat. Cheers, Nathan
If we've got shaking and body heat down as energy sources, I think we've just discovered vibrators that run forever.
And with solar power, we have at least one argument to get girls to masturbate outside.:-)
Re:This Could Be The Worst Thing For KDE
on
KDE 4.0 Is Out
·
· Score: 1
Bottom line, this should have been a Beta and it should have clearly been advertised as such, not via comments on some mailing list but clearly visible within the main announcement.
That's true, but I'm installing it on Ubuntu right now, and it's not part of the kubuntu-desktop package. More than that, the kde4 packages specifically state they're not the finished product. So Joe Average will probably use his package manager, and his package manager shouldn't upgrade the kde package tree to version 4 until it's ready. Unless he's running Arch. In which case, he's not Joe Average.
Anyway, I didn't know Joe Average could read in this country.:-)
All that research that gets done on medicines to establish safety and effectiveness, when they could just ask you 'do you feel comfortable injecting this into your child' and save all that time and effort...
I appreciate your point, but what little experience I have had with doctors doesn't make me want to trust them. And the extensive experience I've had second-hand through my brother and ex-girlfriend is even more damning. So really, the research is great, and I can take it with a grain of salt if I don't trust it. We end up being fed and injected with a lot of things that turn out to not be so good for us.
Be your own primary care physician, and treat everyone else as a specialist, and you'll be a lot safer than not. Especially if you are good at perceiving the limits of your abilities, and the limits of others. For the most part, doctors know more than I do, but couldn't give a rat's ass. I find that caring is oftentimes a more crucial component to treating someone than posessing a mass of dormant, apathetic book-learning.
I never said research was no good, however. Just because a study concludes something is safe, doesn't mean you're stupid for not eating it.
"What I would like to know is just how much research have people like you done into the issue?" Ad hominem attack. I would note that, as conspiracy theories are an area of special interest to me, I take great pains to research not only the nutbag nonsense, but the real science behind any claims.
it's only ad hominem if it's rhetorical. and it didn't read that way to me. And calling something a "Conspiracy Theory" when it has nothing to do with a conspiracy is like saying evolution is just a theory: it's using semantic bias to preempt the need for a premise.
"Because I know a hell of a lot people, including some within the vaccine industry, who, if they posted here, could destroy every single one of your arguments." Appeal to authority. If you can't make your own argument, then kindly keep your mouth shut.
let's drop the links from TFA, then, no?
"Most of the so called "fallcies" you claim are far from that." Caught two already.
You caught one.
"The people I know who are anti-vaccine generally tend to be more intelligent, better educated and questioning than the people who aren't." I'm a bit rusty on my fallacies, for I've misremembered the name of this one--but no, you cannot claim that because your particular group is somehow 'smarter' your argument is automatically correct. It's a non sequitur.
Right, if he'd dropped the "intelligent" part, this statement stands fine on its own.
"If you had a child who was suffering from autism" Appeal to emotion, another fallacy.
Right, it should have read, "It makes sense that a parent of a child suffering from autism..." A fallacy doesn't in a prepositional clause doesn't invalidate the rest of the sentence. What fallacy is that?
"How many medical experts have you spoken to about vaccines?" Appeal to authority, again. Namedropping the various folks at various departments of health whom I've spoken with about this will not 'prove' anything. The argument should stand on its own, without recourse to celebrity.
Right, but it could be argued that he's trying to establish that you are just a mechanical logician who possesses no facts and purely argues based on form. But that would be ad hominem abusive, huh?
"How many books have you read? How many studies have you read?" Many, including those disproving the only study to have claimed the aformentioned alleged 'link'.
My lord. You CAN answer a question! Ahem... Appeal to authority. If you can't make your own argument, shut up.
"Anyone who is at least interested in educating themselves"...would do far better to take a course in basic logic and biology, like I said before, rather than reading that crackpot bit of nonsense.
See, this is straight up ad hominem abusive, and adds zero content to the argument. BRAVO!
"I realise I am wasting my time here," Then why post?
At the point he wrote that, he had admittedly gotten pretty far into his post. Maybe he's obsessive-compulsive. Whatever. Anyway, your rhetorical question smacks of another passive-aggressive ad hominem attack. Thanks again.
" I am sick of uneducated people bashing those who are anti-vaccine when they're uninformed. " Ad hominem, again.
Nope. Or at least it contains content that the OP was communicating, unlike all of your ad hominem attacks, which exist solely to discredit OP without adding anything to your message.
That's all, I'm tired. And the rest of it is innocuous enough. Have a good one. Inject your children. It's at worst quite improbably dangerous. Whatever you please.
It's not a conspiracy theory if the theory isn't about a conspiracy. In other words, software piracy is not software piracy if the tenants of piracy are not being observed in its execution. And copyright infringement is not stealing.
Now you can argue the accuracy of the experiment involved
yes, I can.
at which point it becomes far more sensible to spend your time and resources worrying about things far more likely to harm your child like riding in automobiles or getting E.coli in bad beef.
Worrying doesn't get a damn thing done. It makes sense to not inject things into your children that you feel uncomfortable injecting into them. My parents ignored the medical advice they got when I was a child, and they didn't put me on Ritalin. Good for them, good for me.
However, I don't think it makes me a fuckwit to argue against someone who's condemning someone for not googling everything they reference. And also pointing out that some stuff remains ungoogleable. And goddammit, sometimes I have no scientific backing and people make fun of me for saying things that 3 years later turn out to have scientific backing.
"But dude! Scientific backing doesn't make something true!" some may reply to the above. True. Quote not, lest ye be quoted, I say.
Still, my viewpoint on the world is consistently validated years after observations that I mostly passively make (meaning, I don't beat people over the head with) are pretty consistently validated. Things I feel more strongly about tend to be more true. I don't have that big of an emotional attachment to either side, but people like belittling and demeaning people who disagree with them.
If the above makes me a fuckwit, that's cool. At least I'm a super-awesome, compassionate and self-empowered fuckwit, and that's good enough for me. Cheers, Nathan
So correlation equals causation? If it causes 12 cases of autism per year, then that would not register in their statistics. What was their statistical tolerance? Was it zero?
References? How about it? Let us know, please. Holding my breath, Nathan
Slashdot Mirror
is that it both increases and lowers your risk of cancer. vitamin d production and all that.
but about OP's comment that he'll stay on the skeptic's side of the fence for now, doesn't that just mean you're not going to let someone put an infrared helmet on you until further tests have been done? or are you going to walk around actively disbelieving it?
Making the same electronic functionality smaller is a cost issue. See Mac fanatics about how the Mac mini is incredibly cheap. Price is an issue when you're talking about form factor.
GAAAAH!!!
*ahem*
Touche.
Yes, and GGP (or whoever replied to me originally) introduced logical fallacy. And (s)he argued with me about components that I wasn't referring to. On the A&F crap: I thought I was entitled to my blowhardy opinion. This is, in fact, slashdot. No? Speech curtailed, suits AC whims! Articles omitted! Slashdot more concise! News at 11!
Correlation != Causation, so it doesn't prove a point. The Sansa costs significantly less than the Nano, and it's 2 years old. I'm not talking about the FM radio or the multimedia card. I'm talking about the user-replaceable battery, which shouldn't add more than a 0.1" at most. Add a bezel for the casing to hook to, and use indented screws at the other end. It's simple engineering, so your claim that it adds size is ridiculous. Open up your Sansa, and you'll see that it's not the casing or the battery that necessitates the thickness. Open your Nano, and... Oh, wait, you can't.
And have you seen the Sansa View? It's 0.35" while the nano is 0.27". I'm not mathermaflitian, but I think that that's not double.
The Sansa e200 series is more appropriately sized for (my) pocket space than the new Nano, anyway. Just not thinner. Oh, and with the Sansa, I don't have to feel guilty about buying into an A&F-esque pop culture load of hot hooey. But that's just my personal preference.
imagine how many energies must be just waiting to fly violently out of that battery at high speeds, and damage plane parts. those damn energies.
That was more or less what I was going for. But the question was 'I don't want to use solution A that is provided for me. Are there other solutions?' And my answer was, 'Of course! Solutions B through Z!'
But I was dabbling in a bit of jerkofferry, I admit.
These Sansa e200 things have these neat little beveled screws that add approximately
I think you will find a satisfactory solutution by clicking this link
yeah, I'm not sure what they're charging for.
Oh, by the way, dude: If I sell you a computer, and you then purchase hardware from someone other than me, you must pay me 25 cents per person-device-year. Sounds pretty fucking stupid to me. But I suppose if businesses want to do business with people like Microsoft, it serves them right.
And I have a terrible idea:
How about if your credit score is low enough, then the government is required to pay your bill with tax money? Does it sound like a bad enough idea now? Credit scores on a consistent basis are inaccurate representations of reality, like IQ tests. Or polygraph tests. So we'd be paying for tons of the wrong people to get care. The same way many who can pay would be denied care.
Doctors are similarly reliable in the current system. It used to be that medical care cost a reasonable amount, but now a normal person can't pay out of pocket to be seen. The medical industry is out of control. The AMA has a monopoly on what is considered Health Care, and the whole goddamn thing is a racket. Inject into that the insurance companies and you have a giant, evil cake (analogies are like a comfortable hat to me). And unfortunately, sometimes you need them. Giving them one more point of leverage to fuck people is sort of a really really bad idea. It sucks that you can't just deal directly with doctors anymore.
What's everyone's credit score here, anyway? Mine is 780, and I have no money. No real way to get money, either. Curious.
(credit scores range from 300 to 850)
You can all use my DNS servers. Like, whenever you want. It's cool.
-thegnu
while not strictly my first gaming experience (my brother's friend had an atari), the hidden gun shop that my brother assured me was down the last pit of the first level of super mario bros. is my most memorable. my brother has always been able to convey a sense of wisdom and honor when explaining things to people, and the subsequent enjoyment of watching him dupe all of our other friends into jumping into that hole is easily one of the highlights of my childhood.
no dude, really. guns. down the hole. you'll be sorry later if you don't.
I didn't know it was possible to type in Dvorak AND have friends.
Can anyone explain why Decabet redirects to SNL on Wikipedia? (how fucking weird would that sentence sound to someone in 1908?)
I've got the Kinesis Freestyle, which allows me to readjust it throughout the day, and I've found that's a very good compromise between super-awesome freaky keyboard and cheap. I think the greater the angle, the better.
:-)
But what the other guy said about if the pain goes away, it worked. That's the way to tell.
If I'm not mistaken, that "Hey Momma" song by The Black Eyed Peas as performed by Cher produced by MF Doom.
It's curious how it comes out that way. Some branches of the physical sciences are beyond me.
Dude, but if you're using a freaking LASER to read your vinyl, you'd damn well better have those $8000 speaker cables. I hear they make the music more "danceable."
Ahem. This is my excuse from now on when people criticize my dancing.
I know several people are already refuting your point, but I have to point out that something that merely can be construed as a threat is not a threat. See the "We're here to shoot a pilot" comment above. Or I'll slit your throat.
Cheers,
Nathan
If we've got shaking and body heat down as energy sources, I think we've just discovered vibrators that run forever.
:-)
And with solar power, we have at least one argument to get girls to masturbate outside.
I appreciate your point, but what little experience I have had with doctors doesn't make me want to trust them. And the extensive experience I've had second-hand through my brother and ex-girlfriend is even more damning. So really, the research is great, and I can take it with a grain of salt if I don't trust it. We end up being fed and injected with a lot of things that turn out to not be so good for us.
Be your own primary care physician, and treat everyone else as a specialist, and you'll be a lot safer than not. Especially if you are good at perceiving the limits of your abilities, and the limits of others. For the most part, doctors know more than I do, but couldn't give a rat's ass. I find that caring is oftentimes a more crucial component to treating someone than posessing a mass of dormant, apathetic book-learning.
I never said research was no good, however. Just because a study concludes something is safe, doesn't mean you're stupid for not eating it.
it's only ad hominem if it's rhetorical. and it didn't read that way to me. And calling something a "Conspiracy Theory" when it has nothing to do with a conspiracy is like saying evolution is just a theory: it's using semantic bias to preempt the need for a premise.
let's drop the links from TFA, then, no?
You caught one.
Right, if he'd dropped the "intelligent" part, this statement stands fine on its own.
Right, it should have read, "It makes sense that a parent of a child suffering from autism..." A fallacy doesn't in a prepositional clause doesn't invalidate the rest of the sentence. What fallacy is that?
Right, but it could be argued that he's trying to establish that you are just a mechanical logician who possesses no facts and purely argues based on form. But that would be ad hominem abusive, huh?
My lord. You CAN answer a question! Ahem... Appeal to authority. If you can't make your own argument, shut up.
See, this is straight up ad hominem abusive, and adds zero content to the argument. BRAVO!
At the point he wrote that, he had admittedly gotten pretty far into his post. Maybe he's obsessive-compulsive. Whatever. Anyway, your rhetorical question smacks of another passive-aggressive ad hominem attack. Thanks again.
Nope. Or at least it contains content that the OP was communicating, unlike all of your ad hominem attacks, which exist solely to discredit OP without adding anything to your message.
That's all, I'm tired. And the rest of it is innocuous enough. Have a good one. Inject your children. It's at worst quite improbably dangerous. Whatever you please.
It's not a conspiracy theory if the theory isn't about a conspiracy.
In other words, software piracy is not software piracy if the tenants of piracy are not being observed in its execution.
And copyright infringement is not stealing.
yes, I can.
Worrying doesn't get a damn thing done. It makes sense to not inject things into your children that you feel uncomfortable injecting into them. My parents ignored the medical advice they got when I was a child, and they didn't put me on Ritalin. Good for them, good for me.
Thank you, kind and gentle sir.
However, I don't think it makes me a fuckwit to argue against someone who's condemning someone for not googling everything they reference. And also pointing out that some stuff remains ungoogleable. And goddammit, sometimes I have no scientific backing and people make fun of me for saying things that 3 years later turn out to have scientific backing.
"But dude! Scientific backing doesn't make something true!" some may reply to the above. True. Quote not, lest ye be quoted, I say.
Still, my viewpoint on the world is consistently validated years after observations that I mostly passively make (meaning, I don't beat people over the head with) are pretty consistently validated. Things I feel more strongly about tend to be more true. I don't have that big of an emotional attachment to either side, but people like belittling and demeaning people who disagree with them.
If the above makes me a fuckwit, that's cool. At least I'm a super-awesome, compassionate and self-empowered fuckwit, and that's good enough for me.
Cheers,
Nathan
So correlation equals causation? If it causes 12 cases of autism per year, then that would not register in their statistics. What was their statistical tolerance? Was it zero?
References? How about it? Let us know, please.
Holding my breath,
Nathan