So incredibly off-topic...anyone who gives parent post positive mod points is just as bad. This is a by-the-book flamebait.
This post was rated 'insightful'...yeah about as insightful as those 'bad bush' fad t-shirts during the election.
I hate Bush's policies and admin. style probably MORE than parent poster, but there is absolutely NO WAY anyone on the other side will listen as long as this bullshit:
Bush Logic: Since the Terorrists hate our freedoms, perhaps we should take away the freedom of Americans. That will show that Bin Laden.
"If you picked the word 'jihad' out of a conversation," Tice said, "the technology exists that you focus in on that conversation, and you pull it out of the system for processing."
I'm not defending the intelligence community's tactis, per se, Americans deserve to know why warrants weren't requested.
OTOH, if all they were doing is looking for jihadists, then I'm not going to march on Washington just yet. I'm concerned about the word 'terrorist' being expanded to include people who smoke weed, bitch about the government, and download.mp3s 'illegally'.
We need to clean up the process, or if there is some classified reason why warrants just could not be requested...well, that needs to be declassified, explained, and reviewed by the media, congress, etc.
dude, these are former soviets...these kind of jokes are funny to them...that doesn't mean their product is going to suck...you are culturally illiterate my friend
ok, of all the people who responded to my post, you win the gold start for relevancy: thanks
Now, I do agree that any applications that one installs on ones computer should be very explicit about any information that is transmitted to ANYWHERE
this is where you and i are in total agreement...it is DECEPTIVE
technical issues aside, this is the heart of my problem with this itunes feature
so I understand what the issue is. Just think the original author is being very chicken little'esque in his stance.
i disagree...chicken little isn't being paranoid if the sky really is falling...it's just a question of HOW FAST the sky is falling (ok done w/ this analogy)
in my view, it is bad to see apple doing this. of course alot of other sites do EXACTLY the same thing...but they're not apple. apple comes off as this enlightened, forward-thinking company (i support apple's corporate philosophy as advertised, but as another poster said, they are a company like everyone else...a publicly traded company
being a publicly traded company means your stock must go up or you (CEO, etc.) are history. That mentality instills a 'make more money' ideal as first priority from the top-down.
yes you may argue that b/c the general business world works that way doesn't automatically mean apple works that way, indeed, but apple is competing in a marketplace...a big marketplace with heavy-handed players...people at apple probably face choices between being a deceptive, evil corporation or a moral, sustainable corporation every day. In the final analysis, I would like to think that people at apple try to make responsible choices, but the DECEPTIVENESS issue must be hard to ignore...
why care about something like this, right? just turn it off for god's sake you moron!!!! well, the thing is, this feature is an indicator of where apple's corporate morals lie...no pun intended...it shows how deceptive they are willing to be
so, one MAY deduce that apple implementing this feature in such a way is an indicator that apple will continue do use similar deceptive practices unless the marketplace reacts negatively and costs them money
so, therefore, this issue is relevant, and bad news...whether it's one file at the start of the playlist or the whole playlist...at least the issue is relevant to anyone who heeds 'caveat emptor'
which almost completely renders moot the original thesis
how does that fact render any point moot about apple invading privacy? please explain, because, whether it's just one song you click on to start a playlist or every song that itunes plays is irrelevant.
The parent's point was that itunes is 1. sending information to apple about you without your express consent, and 2. using that information to sell you something. If microsoft was doing this, you'd be flinging your poop like an angry baboon.
Please adress the above salient (i numbered them for you) issues
If you have any doubts about that, try speculating about the nature of the "Intelligent Designer" in front of the ID set, and see if they appreciate your curiosity and open-mindedness or simply set you straight about who they know him to be.
I'm taking you at your word...those people you talked to who 'simply set you straight' are assholes
I don't know what else i can say. I'm a pastor, and if you want to ask me any questions, feel free. I promise to give you straight-up, succinct answers as much as possible, and i won't try to convince you. I can't convince anyone, b/c really whether you become a Christian isn't up to me at all. All I can do is be honest in my answers.
Your understanding of ID, creation, and your characterization of people who believe in creation are all just wrong...and it is Christians who are to blame
"Hey, God makes bees fly. Since I already know the real reason, there's no real reason to keep studying it." In fact, some of them will probably even go so far as to dismiss the findings as false because it conflicts with their notion that God must be responsible
I was raised in the kind of places where people LOVE ID theories, and I've studied at their universities too, and I have NEVER heard anyone make statements anywhere near your characterization above.
The problem is, most of the Christians you see in the media are the most ultra-arch-fundamentalists they can find, because it makes for better television in News producer's minds. It is those Christians, like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to name a few, who are responsible for giving you this false impression, and giving all the rest of us a very bad name.
'Intelligent Design' itself is misunderstood in the science community. Rather, it's misinterpreted. ID is basically a buzzword that some dumbass came up with to help get media exposure to 'Christian' ideas of how the world started into politics. Christians do not talk about ID...only Republicans ever talk about it.
I believe, as most others I know do, that true science and God's Word will always be in agreement in the final analysis. For believers like us, science is a tool to understand God's gift to us: creation...not a way to somehow 'prove' God's existance...that's improvable by any human logic/methods.
I support using science to understand our reality as much as it will allow, and almost all Christians I have ever known...hundreds of thousands...would say the same thing.
yeah, i just checked out the bio's on the website...it's a small word. I have been a snowboarding instructor at Breckenridge Ski Resort (next door to Keystone, where Josh Caldwell was a ski instructor) for the last 4 years.
Now I really think these guys are lame...they should know better!
I'm going to go off-topic, since probably only you and I are reading these posts. I am not an underprivalidged kid. My parents were, but I never really knew true want growing up, and I always felt secure that my work would be rewarded eventually with dollar signs.
I do not know the filmakers as you do, but it is not too much of a guess that they had at the worst, an upbringing similar to mine. Maybe abuse changes things, but as far as ability to use their talents, well, I see them on roughly a level field with myself (I know it's conjecture, but i'm pretty much right...c'mon at least humor me). What I'm talking about is access...these guys pretty much have equal or greater access to develop their abilities as myself.
What makes a truly underprivalidged kid, especially my hypothetical orphans, is that they do not have access near where myself and the two filmakers probably have. In my profession, education, the disparities in access become much more real, and I know it seems that people like me are just 'player hating' or taking out our life-frustrations on successful people. I assure you this is not the case for me...like I said, I'm not underprivalidged, but I have enough experience to know (know by doing and living...1st hand, not 2nd hand) that I have no way to properly contextualize the experience a truly underprivalidged person has in America. I do get all hot and bothered when I think that others like myself are purposefully choosing to be ignorant of their privalidge and how much easier it makes things for them.
Exposing and exploring these types of inequities, as well as other contemporary issues of human existance, is where a film goes beyond just mind candy and makes it something truly real for the viewer.
Now, I'm sure they do good deeds along their spectacular segway sprint across america...hell, i bet they draw attention to some good causes. Put a yellow ribbon on the segway...whatever... Bottom line for me though, I expect more. A fun mid-life-crisis trip that includes a visit to some poor people as part of an adventure is just not socially conscious enough for me to be interested. Compared to other genre films I enjoyed...it's not entertaining (like, say, Super Size Me), and it's not infoming me (like Murderball).
but anyway, i'm sure your editing was very conscious and enlightened...why else would you defend this film so passionately?
way to support this movie. if I ever put out a lame movie, or any movie for that matter, I am hiring you to be my PR person. you rock! (no sarcasm here)
I've read your comments, and I still feel the same way. There's nothing I see here that hasn't been done better elsewhere. And furthermore, like the other poster on this thread, I know or have heard of many people doing 'journies' like this who deserve to have a flim with a sweeping score and dramatic backdrops made about them way more than these guys.
It just isn't interesting...now, take two inner-city orphans who have never seen a corn field in person, let alone the whole country, and put them on the journey across america on a segway with the two frat-tastic clowns who made this movie. Then you will see a journey of self-discovery....as the two rich privalidged guys see how much experience they have taken for granted in their lives while they witness the orphans seeing their country for the first time...
If your dream is to make a movie, why make one so insignificant? Aren't there many more stories out there that are much more worthy to tell? I can crap in a jar and call it a film...literally
ok, so it was 12.5 or 10mph...i'm not nitpicking about the speed, i'm wondering why anyone cares that someone did this on a segway in the first place...but hey, it's your movie...i wish you financial success
and, i should say 'props' to you guys getting some sponsorship...seriously, if you can get it for this project, then the rest of us have hope
these guys are really lame, their concept sucks, and any company who would sponsor them is a joke.
Why? Because it seemed they had the 'screw the working world' thing a little too planned. What was the original concpet anyway? 'Dude, i wanna ride a segway across the country?' Or, 'Dude we could make a ton of money if I take my trust fund and made a film of you riding your segway across the country on a journey of self-discovery.'
It was more like a business venture than a journey of self-discovery. Plus, does it even count as a journey of self-discovery if they had it all paid for in advance? And, do documentaries do 're-shoots' regularly?
And, c'mon...a Segway??? They could have at least put a little bit of technical information about their trip...did the guy actually ride the thing at 10mph the entire trip? If so, how did he manage to actually do that? If not, how did they mod?
I realize most/.'ers have no training in education, so let me...um...educate you.
This is not about creating a utopia, feeding the hungry, etc. Most of the anti-$100-laptop posts here focus on those red herrings.
Bottom line, this is about the digital divide. The internet provides access to more information than has ever been collectd in the history of humankind (wiki, etc). Right now, only those with a certain level of wealth have ready access to the internet. Now, don't you say 'they can go the library' or some other lame counterpoint cabal BS...we all know how important using the internet in your time and space is, and telling poor people to just go to the library or whatever is a joke and lame.
As far as the uses in the classroom...what a joke of a counterpoint! There are inifinite possibilities, use your damned imagination. I am a teacher, adn I envision a classroom with.ppt-type aids with every lesson, which can be instantly transfered to the student's laptops, or emailed to absent students. What am I saying...if you can't see how much these would benefit the education process, just put a bullet in your head, you nazi cow...
encyclopedias are meant to be concise and to the point
You're missing the boat completely. The internet has virtually unlimited storage space theoretically, there are no boundaries, being 'concise' is not longer necessary.
For example a civil war article. Wikipedia can have a 'concise and to the point' introduction to its civil war article, and then go into as much detail as it wants, linking to all known history and primary sources about the civil war and the era. Paper encyclopedias would do that if they could, but the 'civil war' article would end up taking up volumes itself. I agree that longer does not equal 'better' in any absolute sense, but longer USUALLY means more, and more is typically better when it comes to information.
Your claims are impossible to back up, and you sound like a travel brochure...a desperate travel brocure
The fact is, Canadians that I've known bitch more about their government (with good reason, they vote for parties, not candidates in the national election) than Americans, and that is saying alot.
BC bud is the best??? yeah b/c the Candian government grows it and sells it illegally...what if the US government did that? yeah we'd have the best bud...besides we can get anything here that you have...most of it goes here anyway
Health care, blah blah...it's not like your system is perfect. Besides, Americans are too smart for free health care, we'd learn how to work the system. That's the thing...Americans are too smart to let some bastard in an office in some far away city to make their decisions for them.
As for your fascist point...you're wrong. Fundamentalist Mormons that are driven out of local communities in America for practicing poligamy move to where??? Canada...because it is tolerant of bigamy and child slavery i guess...where's your liberal high horse now???
>"However the money collected in taxes mostly gets back to the Canadian people in some form, whereas in the US taxes paid go mostly to giant corporations with fat government contracts"<
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Canada is the modern nation it is today because of America. Yes our corporate structure is faulty, I hate it too, but you can't make valid points about it because your country would be trapping furs if it wasn't for American corporations. If they're so evil, why doesn't the soooo democratic and enlightend Canadian government pass laws that are strictly anti-corporate (ALL corporations, not just the ones from the U.S.)...another thing, most of the really 'evil' corporations are globally owned and operated, so it's not just the U.S...it's rich people in every country
Yeah, Canada...why try to be something that you're not??? just take the U.S. dollar and you can apply for statehood...we'll even let quebec speak french...
Seriously, this is good news. The rovers planned later should send some nice live pictures for the kids at home. The sooner we use resources off-planet the better.
i'm with you. i said 'private funding' because that is how it has been reported in the mainstream media because he won the x-prize, so by my estimation, that's what's bringing Rutan attention in the first place. His business prowess. I didn't know Rutan's company made those eerily Terminator-like UAV's...
Rutan? He's not near the same level. His accomplishments are not about space travel, but about private funding of space travel. He did not orbit, as I've said before on here, he just used updated X project technology...rocket plane dropped from a bigger plane.
mod parent down...this is flame and it is inaccurate. What possible definition of 'poverty' did poster use? What statistics? Are these official Chinese Government stats?
Blind quotaions of random flame statistics such as this should be detected by moderators as flame already...mod down mod down mod down
<i>The next president, whether Republican or Democrat, is likely to terminate the remains of the US manned program. Except perhaps a few flights using Russian hardware.</i><br<br>
what support do you have for this argument? You provided none. I know these issues well, and I cannot think of any reasons to support this statement.
or, to say more correctly, technological advancements partially justify manned space programs.
you said in a previous post:
"Hey, all you entrepreneurs working on technologies to satisfy actual human desires: STOP. Give us money so we can show the Ruskies where it's it."
Do you deny the strategic advantages of space? Do you have any doubt that Russia was seeking to gain power and eventually dominion over the U.S. in some way? You can validly say that the U.S. space program was run very ineffiently, but to say that it was ONLY about beating the Russians, well, that's just wrong. Here's where I link this to your latest comment...nothing on a macro scale is monocausative.
You assume that there is always ONE central reason for something happening. Especially on the international stage, this is a fatal assumption.
And you shouldn't say "Space research is good because it gets us better computers."
Why not???
It was the computer research that produced the benefit, irrespective of whether that research is "for space" or not. Don't use peripheral gains to justify a different goal.
You wish the people in power would just:
Just say what you mean
Well my friend, especially in America, things are NOT THAT SIMPLE. It's just a reality of our American system of business, government, and research. Did we go to the moon for exploration? Yes. Did we go there to enrich texas businesses? Yes. Did we go there to prove to the Russians that we are dominant? Yes. Did we go there for science? Yes. Did we go there to advance computer technology? Yes.
We went to the moon (culmination of space race, btw) for myriad reasons because that is how America works, by consensus. Different groups with different, sometimes overlapping, interests get together for common good. The more we get together, the more we accomplish...the individual stick is weaker than a bundle of....yeah you get the idea.
So, your criticism of 'going to space just for research' is invalid...b/c whenever we go to space, there are many reasons, not one...we never went to space just for research.
Slashdot Mirror
So incredibly off-topic...anyone who gives parent post positive mod points is just as bad. This is a by-the-book flamebait.
...is considered 'insightful'
This post was rated 'insightful'...yeah about as insightful as those 'bad bush' fad t-shirts during the election.
I hate Bush's policies and admin. style probably MORE than parent poster, but there is absolutely NO WAY anyone on the other side will listen as long as this bullshit:
Bush Logic: Since the Terorrists hate our freedoms, perhaps we should take away the freedom of Americans. That will show that Bin Laden.
"If you picked the word 'jihad' out of a conversation," Tice said, "the technology exists that you focus in on that conversation, and you pull it out of the system for processing."
.mp3s 'illegally'.
I'm not defending the intelligence community's tactis, per se, Americans deserve to know why warrants weren't requested.
OTOH, if all they were doing is looking for jihadists, then I'm not going to march on Washington just yet. I'm concerned about the word 'terrorist' being expanded to include people who smoke weed, bitch about the government, and download
We need to clean up the process, or if there is some classified reason why warrants just could not be requested...well, that needs to be declassified, explained, and reviewed by the media, congress, etc.
the jokes tell YOU!
Moscow is the capital of Russia
dude, these are former soviets...these kind of jokes are funny to them...that doesn't mean their product is going to suck...you are culturally illiterate my friend
ok, of all the people who responded to my post, you win the gold start for relevancy: thanks
Now, I do agree that any applications that one installs on ones computer should be very explicit about any information that is transmitted to ANYWHERE
this is where you and i are in total agreement...it is DECEPTIVE
technical issues aside, this is the heart of my problem with this itunes feature
so I understand what the issue is. Just think the original author is being very chicken little'esque in his stance.
i disagree...chicken little isn't being paranoid if the sky really is falling...it's just a question of HOW FAST the sky is falling (ok done w/ this analogy)
in my view, it is bad to see apple doing this. of course alot of other sites do EXACTLY the same thing...but they're not apple. apple comes off as this enlightened, forward-thinking company (i support apple's corporate philosophy as advertised, but as another poster said, they are a company like everyone else...a publicly traded company
being a publicly traded company means your stock must go up or you (CEO, etc.) are history. That mentality instills a 'make more money' ideal as first priority from the top-down.
yes you may argue that b/c the general business world works that way doesn't automatically mean apple works that way, indeed, but apple is competing in a marketplace...a big marketplace with heavy-handed players...people at apple probably face choices between being a deceptive, evil corporation or a moral, sustainable corporation every day. In the final analysis, I would like to think that people at apple try to make responsible choices, but the DECEPTIVENESS issue must be hard to ignore...
why care about something like this, right? just turn it off for god's sake you moron!!!! well, the thing is, this feature is an indicator of where apple's corporate morals lie...no pun intended...it shows how deceptive they are willing to be
so, one MAY deduce that apple implementing this feature in such a way is an indicator that apple will continue do use similar deceptive practices unless the marketplace reacts negatively and costs them money
so, therefore, this issue is relevant, and bad news...whether it's one file at the start of the playlist or the whole playlist...at least the issue is relevant to anyone who heeds 'caveat emptor'
which almost completely renders moot the original thesis
how does that fact render any point moot about apple invading privacy? please explain, because, whether it's just one song you click on to start a playlist or every song that itunes plays is irrelevant.
The parent's point was that itunes is 1. sending information to apple about you without your express consent, and 2. using that information to sell you something. If microsoft was doing this, you'd be flinging your poop like an angry baboon.
Please adress the above salient (i numbered them for you) issues
If you have any doubts about that, try speculating about the nature of the "Intelligent Designer" in front of the ID set, and see if they appreciate your curiosity and open-mindedness or simply set you straight about who they know him to be.
I'm taking you at your word...those people you talked to who 'simply set you straight' are assholes
I don't know what else i can say. I'm a pastor, and if you want to ask me any questions, feel free. I promise to give you straight-up, succinct answers as much as possible, and i won't try to convince you. I can't convince anyone, b/c really whether you become a Christian isn't up to me at all. All I can do is be honest in my answers.
you can reach me here: globaljustin06@yahoo.com
Your understanding of ID, creation, and your characterization of people who believe in creation are all just wrong...and it is Christians who are to blame
"Hey, God makes bees fly. Since I already know the real reason, there's no real reason to keep studying it." In fact, some of them will probably even go so far as to dismiss the findings as false because it conflicts with their notion that God must be responsible
I was raised in the kind of places where people LOVE ID theories, and I've studied at their universities too, and I have NEVER heard anyone make statements anywhere near your characterization above.
The problem is, most of the Christians you see in the media are the most ultra-arch-fundamentalists they can find, because it makes for better television in News producer's minds. It is those Christians, like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson to name a few, who are responsible for giving you this false impression, and giving all the rest of us a very bad name.
'Intelligent Design' itself is misunderstood in the science community. Rather, it's misinterpreted. ID is basically a buzzword that some dumbass came up with to help get media exposure to 'Christian' ideas of how the world started into politics. Christians do not talk about ID...only Republicans ever talk about it.
I believe, as most others I know do, that true science and God's Word will always be in agreement in the final analysis. For believers like us, science is a tool to understand God's gift to us: creation...not a way to somehow 'prove' God's existance...that's improvable by any human logic/methods.
I support using science to understand our reality as much as it will allow, and almost all Christians I have ever known...hundreds of thousands...would say the same thing.
yeah, i just checked out the bio's on the website...it's a small word. I have been a snowboarding instructor at Breckenridge Ski Resort (next door to Keystone, where Josh Caldwell was a ski instructor) for the last 4 years.
Now I really think these guys are lame...they should know better!
I look forward to seeing your crap film
That sounds like a dare...
I'm going to go off-topic, since probably only you and I are reading these posts. I am not an underprivalidged kid. My parents were, but I never really knew true want growing up, and I always felt secure that my work would be rewarded eventually with dollar signs.
I do not know the filmakers as you do, but it is not too much of a guess that they had at the worst, an upbringing similar to mine. Maybe abuse changes things, but as far as ability to use their talents, well, I see them on roughly a level field with myself (I know it's conjecture, but i'm pretty much right...c'mon at least humor me). What I'm talking about is access...these guys pretty much have equal or greater access to develop their abilities as myself.
What makes a truly underprivalidged kid, especially my hypothetical orphans, is that they do not have access near where myself and the two filmakers probably have. In my profession, education, the disparities in access become much more real, and I know it seems that people like me are just 'player hating' or taking out our life-frustrations on successful people. I assure you this is not the case for me...like I said, I'm not underprivalidged, but I have enough experience to know (know by doing and living...1st hand, not 2nd hand) that I have no way to properly contextualize the experience a truly underprivalidged person has in America. I do get all hot and bothered when I think that others like myself are purposefully choosing to be ignorant of their privalidge and how much easier it makes things for them.
Exposing and exploring these types of inequities, as well as other contemporary issues of human existance, is where a film goes beyond just mind candy and makes it something truly real for the viewer.
Now, I'm sure they do good deeds along their spectacular segway sprint across america...hell, i bet they draw attention to some good causes. Put a yellow ribbon on the segway...whatever... Bottom line for me though, I expect more. A fun mid-life-crisis trip that includes a visit to some poor people as part of an adventure is just not socially conscious enough for me to be interested. Compared to other genre films I enjoyed...it's not entertaining (like, say, Super Size Me), and it's not infoming me (like Murderball).
but anyway, i'm sure your editing was very conscious and enlightened...why else would you defend this film so passionately?
What's with all the PETA flame??? Do people really think using mice in this way is unethical?
/.'er: is this a common opinion among people who post on /., or are those posts just PETA red herrings?
Question for the frequent
Really, do we need to debate the use of labratory mice for experiments such as this?
If your answer is 'yes'...don't expect a response from me...other posters on this thread have said it better than I could already
is that parent is modded +5 Insightful
/. for things like this
I love
hey,
way to support this movie. if I ever put out a lame movie, or any movie for that matter, I am hiring you to be my PR person. you rock! (no sarcasm here)
I've read your comments, and I still feel the same way. There's nothing I see here that hasn't been done better elsewhere. And furthermore, like the other poster on this thread, I know or have heard of many people doing 'journies' like this who deserve to have a flim with a sweeping score and dramatic backdrops made about them way more than these guys.
It just isn't interesting...now, take two inner-city orphans who have never seen a corn field in person, let alone the whole country, and put them on the journey across america on a segway with the two frat-tastic clowns who made this movie. Then you will see a journey of self-discovery....as the two rich privalidged guys see how much experience they have taken for granted in their lives while they witness the orphans seeing their country for the first time...
If your dream is to make a movie, why make one so insignificant? Aren't there many more stories out there that are much more worthy to tell? I can crap in a jar and call it a film...literally
well thank you for you response...
ok, so it was 12.5 or 10mph...i'm not nitpicking about the speed, i'm wondering why anyone cares that someone did this on a segway in the first place...but hey, it's your movie...i wish you financial success
and, i should say 'props' to you guys getting some sponsorship...seriously, if you can get it for this project, then the rest of us have hope
these guys are really lame, their concept sucks, and any company who would sponsor them is a joke.
Why? Because it seemed they had the 'screw the working world' thing a little too planned. What was the original concpet anyway? 'Dude, i wanna ride a segway across the country?' Or, 'Dude we could make a ton of money if I take my trust fund and made a film of you riding your segway across the country on a journey of self-discovery.'
It was more like a business venture than a journey of self-discovery. Plus, does it even count as a journey of self-discovery if they had it all paid for in advance? And, do documentaries do 're-shoots' regularly?
And, c'mon...a Segway??? They could have at least put a little bit of technical information about their trip...did the guy actually ride the thing at 10mph the entire trip? If so, how did he manage to actually do that? If not, how did they mod?
Does the author of this article know the difference between an ipod and an mp3 player?
it's possible they don't, since many non-techies call all mp3 players 'ipods'
I find it hard to believe Gates does not own ONE type of mp3 player or another...ipod or not
I realize most /.'ers have no training in education, so let me...um...educate you.
.ppt-type aids with every lesson, which can be instantly transfered to the student's laptops, or emailed to absent students. What am I saying...if you can't see how much these would benefit the education process, just put a bullet in your head, you nazi cow...
This is not about creating a utopia, feeding the hungry, etc. Most of the anti-$100-laptop posts here focus on those red herrings.
Bottom line, this is about the digital divide. The internet provides access to more information than has ever been collectd in the history of humankind (wiki, etc). Right now, only those with a certain level of wealth have ready access to the internet. Now, don't you say 'they can go the library' or some other lame counterpoint cabal BS...we all know how important using the internet in your time and space is, and telling poor people to just go to the library or whatever is a joke and lame.
As far as the uses in the classroom...what a joke of a counterpoint! There are inifinite possibilities, use your damned imagination. I am a teacher, adn I envision a classroom with
encyclopedias are meant to be concise and to the point
You're missing the boat completely. The internet has virtually unlimited storage space theoretically, there are no boundaries, being 'concise' is not longer necessary.
For example a civil war article. Wikipedia can have a 'concise and to the point' introduction to its civil war article, and then go into as much detail as it wants, linking to all known history and primary sources about the civil war and the era. Paper encyclopedias would do that if they could, but the 'civil war' article would end up taking up volumes itself. I agree that longer does not equal 'better' in any absolute sense, but longer USUALLY means more, and more is typically better when it comes to information.
1. why can't you come up with better counterpoints?
2. why do i even bother writing this?
Your claims are impossible to back up, and you sound like a travel brochure...a desperate travel brocure
The fact is, Canadians that I've known bitch more about their government (with good reason, they vote for parties, not candidates in the national election) than Americans, and that is saying alot.
BC bud is the best??? yeah b/c the Candian government grows it and sells it illegally...what if the US government did that? yeah we'd have the best bud...besides we can get anything here that you have...most of it goes here anyway
Health care, blah blah...it's not like your system is perfect. Besides, Americans are too smart for free health care, we'd learn how to work the system. That's the thing...Americans are too smart to let some bastard in an office in some far away city to make their decisions for them.
As for your fascist point...you're wrong. Fundamentalist Mormons that are driven out of local communities in America for practicing poligamy move to where??? Canada...because it is tolerant of bigamy and child slavery i guess...where's your liberal high horse now???
>"However the money collected in taxes mostly gets back to the Canadian people in some form, whereas in the US taxes paid go mostly to giant corporations with fat government contracts"<
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Canada is the modern nation it is today because of America. Yes our corporate structure is faulty, I hate it too, but you can't make valid points about it because your country would be trapping furs if it wasn't for American corporations. If they're so evil, why doesn't the soooo democratic and enlightend Canadian government pass laws that are strictly anti-corporate (ALL corporations, not just the ones from the U.S.)...another thing, most of the really 'evil' corporations are globally owned and operated, so it's not just the U.S...it's rich people in every country
Yeah, Canada...why try to be something that you're not??? just take the U.S. dollar and you can apply for statehood...we'll even let quebec speak french...
mine the moon already!
Seriously, this is good news. The rovers planned later should send some nice live pictures for the kids at home. The sooner we use resources off-planet the better.
props to the NASA team.
i'm with you. i said 'private funding' because that is how it has been reported in the mainstream media because he won the x-prize, so by my estimation, that's what's bringing Rutan attention in the first place. His business prowess. I didn't know Rutan's company made those eerily Terminator-like UAV's...
Rutan at least three in that same period of time.
Rutan? He's not near the same level. His accomplishments are not about space travel, but about private funding of space travel. He did not orbit, as I've said before on here, he just used updated X project technology...rocket plane dropped from a bigger plane.
mod parent down...this is flame and it is inaccurate. What possible definition of 'poverty' did poster use? What statistics? Are these official Chinese Government stats?
Blind quotaions of random flame statistics such as this should be detected by moderators as flame already...mod down mod down mod down
<i>The next president, whether Republican or Democrat, is likely to terminate the remains of the US manned program. Except perhaps a few flights using Russian hardware.</i><br<br>
what support do you have for this argument? You provided none. I know these issues well, and I cannot think of any reasons to support this statement.
or, to say more correctly, technological advancements partially justify manned space programs.
you said in a previous post:
"Hey, all you entrepreneurs working on technologies to satisfy actual human desires: STOP. Give us money so we can show the Ruskies where it's it."
Do you deny the strategic advantages of space? Do you have any doubt that Russia was seeking to gain power and eventually dominion over the U.S. in some way? You can validly say that the U.S. space program was run very ineffiently, but to say that it was ONLY about beating the Russians, well, that's just wrong. Here's where I link this to your latest comment...nothing on a macro scale is monocausative.
You assume that there is always ONE central reason for something happening. Especially on the international stage, this is a fatal assumption.
And you shouldn't say "Space research is good because it gets us better computers."
Why not???
It was the computer research that produced the benefit, irrespective of whether that research is "for space" or not. Don't use peripheral gains to justify a different goal.
You wish the people in power would just:
Just say what you mean
Well my friend, especially in America, things are NOT THAT SIMPLE. It's just a reality of our American system of business, government, and research. Did we go to the moon for exploration? Yes. Did we go there to enrich texas businesses? Yes. Did we go there to prove to the Russians that we are dominant? Yes. Did we go there for science? Yes. Did we go there to advance computer technology? Yes.
We went to the moon (culmination of space race, btw) for myriad reasons because that is how America works, by consensus. Different groups with different, sometimes overlapping, interests get together for common good. The more we get together, the more we accomplish...the individual stick is weaker than a bundle of....yeah you get the idea.
So, your criticism of 'going to space just for research' is invalid...b/c whenever we go to space, there are many reasons, not one...we never went to space just for research.