It may be stupid [*], but it's bloody catchy. I don't know how to measure the 'goodness' of a term, but if catchy = good, then it's really hard to come up with something better.
[*] Come on, the day that really changed the world and you call it A NUMBER? All those other days have good names like Bloody Sunday, but a number... It sounds so empty, so devoid of emotions. Or maybe that's why it's used -- to show the world that America wasn't shaken, that the Star Spangled Banner is still waving (is that why the flag found in the ruins of WTC was shown in Salt Lake City?) and so on.
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you cat fanatics? I've been sitting here on my sofa in front of a cat (a sealpoint siamese) for about 20 minutes now while attempting to get it's attention away from a bug on the floor. 20 minutes. At home, with my labrador cross, which by all standards should be a lot dumber than this cat, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
You're just bitching because the cat doesn't give a rat's ass about you. Accept it, get over it and quit staring at the cat and go see what's this racket the dogs are causing in the kitchen (they're probably just trying to get your attention).
Cat addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a cat over other faster, cheaper, more affectionate animals.
I can't find a pet shop that would sell me a dragon.
Well, I guess they do this to prisoners everywhere. But I don't think there's any big problems with prison workshops putting 'ordinary decent people' out of work. I mean, there aren't too many things you can produce using quite low-tech tools and not too skilled workforce (though they can make weapons out of nothing).
Hmm. In the 17th century, they put madmen and beggars and criminals to work for no pay in some manufacture or workshop, putting other people (who got paid for working) out of work. History repeating?
Under capitalism, people ONLY CARE about their OWN property
Whereas, in the case of socialism/communism, everything belongs to the state, therefore to nobody, so nobody cares about it (those who are in power don't care, as everything belongs to the people? I dunno, but they don't care, that's a fact.).
So, things like pollution and illegal waste disposal are FAR WORSE under capitalism.
No kidding? Have you been to Chernobyl lately? Or swimming in the Aral sea (should be renamed Arid, as there's not much of it left)? OK, maybe these examples are a bit too drastic, but there's no way that there's less pollution under communist rule. Reason - just the same as in the case of factories and other non-private property. Almost nobody cares about the environment.
<cynical> Socialism, in the form seen in the 20th century, would theoretically do the environment some good, too. I mean, it'd be just the right thing to use against overpopulation...</cynical>
The constitution is a piece of document. A great document but nevertheless a document. It can be manipulated by those in power.
Example number three: Soviet Union had a very nice constitution. Very friendly. The problem was, that, like the other laws, it didn't have much power. Hence they called it the longest anecdote ever written.
It is my view that a revolution will only happen if the middle class is weak or does not exist.
Well, of course it won'y happen if people aren't poor. I mean, why fight if you don't have anything to fight for? But then again, what are you fighting for? (And, most importantly, what the hell is my problem? No idea...).
About these mythical classes. I tend to agree with Bourdieu who said, that classes are just constructs that don't exist in reality, although their "existence" is used as an argument in many cases. I remember this survey that was done here (here = Estonia) some years ago. It turned out that an awful lot of people (maybe even half of them, I don't remember the exact numbers) though they were middle class, although in reality were struggling to get by (it was not too long after the breakup of the SU).
Should the "middle class" in America lose their wealth, I don't think they will start a revolution. They didn't do it in 1930's, when Communists were much stronger, it's even less probable they would do it now.
Computers will "destroy human brain" only if they learn to think and learn by themselves. I mean, completely by themselves, with no human intervention whatsoever. Even if computers can become as parallel as human brain, they still need a human to write their code, etc (I don't think computers will ever reach the level of sophistication where you tell the computer to write a cool FPS, and it will). They will still remain just number-crunchers.
But that, of course, is only my very uninformed (I don't really know much about computer architecture or neurology) opinion.
*sigh* My post was meant as a joke, I didn't expect anyone to take it seriously. Maybe it was because I really don't understand what you mean -- my tap water comes almost straight from a well...
I'd say the grandparent post is right. Buying a CD (or a vinyl) is analogous to buying bottled water, tap water is like music downloaded from Kazaa or whatever. All those different flavours of the tap water are the analogies of different media formats (wma, mp3, ogg vorbis). And though tap water and bottled water taste differently, it doesn't change the fact that they both are H2O on the inside...
If the asteroid had hit, it would have probably been called "Look!" by popular consent (or actually "Look, Mummy!", but this would sound too wimpy even for astronomers (oh the horrors these brave people have to face from day to day, looking at the stars through their telescopes -- even thinking of it makes me shiver) to utter, not to mention journalists).
PS. I wonder, what did the dinosaurs call the asteroid that (supposedly) killed them?
There aren't actually that many different models of human cognition (or other things). The reason why there are different ones is, that models are models, simplifications, they can't explain everything. At the same time, one model may explain the same thing as another, only from a different angle. And at the same time, one of them is just as valid as the other.
The reasons why the situation is as it is are many. One of them is the complexity of the matter researched - psychology is supposed to be the science of human mind, but it's not even clear what exactly is the object it is studying.
The other reason (connected with the first) may be, that psychology (and other "soft" sciences) haven't exactly had a fundamental basis to what they are studying, whereas the "hard" sciences could rely on physics (and mathematics?) as the basis to everything. Some claim that semiotics (the study of signs) could be the "physics of the 21st century", I wouldn't mind at all if it were so.
Even Christians & Satanists are at least two sides of the same coin.
It's weird that people always talk about two sides of a coin, but they never think of the fact that all coins are (at least) three-dimensional. Nobody ever says "Hey, if two things are two sides of the same coin, then what's on the rim?" And what's inside it? I mean, there's practically nothing (usually it's air or the linings of your pocket or other coins) on the outer sides of the coin, everything interesting is inside it...
Have you considered the possibility that some categories may overlap? For instance, this post belongs to at least three (bullshit, goatse, ??? profit):
Come to think of it, maybe being actually aware of that are all those satellites and things up there should be added to the (kind of) definition of 'living in the space age'. Those tribes who still live in the stone age somewhere deep in the Amazonian rain forests have never heard of rockets or astronauts (and noone has never heard of themselves, either), so while they live in our era, they don't live in the space age. Whereas, let's say, Bulgarians (I seem to use Bulgaria as an arbitrary country a lot lately...), who didn't have satellite dishes (I don't want to narrow the definition down to the use of technology) 20 years ago, were still living in the space age then, as they had probably heard of Yuri Gagarin and the Americans on the moon).
But riding a cab shows you belong to the age of the motorcar, sending email shows you are a part of the Internet boom, despite the fact that you may even not have your personal website, not to mention running a server or coding. So, launching a satellite with the help of Russia and UK qualifies as joining the space age.
Or, alternatively, you could say that all the world has been living in the space age from the day when Soviet Union launched the Sputnik.
Though they may be closely related, it's not the same thing (as you may see from the moderation done to you - probably a Vulcan Supreme Moderator got angry). Vulcans are actually a spin-off group of Pollocks (though nobody can exactly say why - but they all agree it was one helluva reason). Your comparison was just as offensive and tactless as saying "Catholic or Protestant, it's the same thing" in Northern Ireland...
It's not a name, it's a magical formula. Using the correct algorithm, which is conveniently missing (oh, that'd make a wonderful plot for a horror movie), this word can be turned into a magical incantation. After a hundred years of experimenting, a secret sect of Bulgarian (why the hell not?) Egyptologists have managed to reverse engineer the algorithm, published the source under GPL. It's actually quite easy - just say all the anagrams of the name:
sebek, sbeek, skeeb, skebe, sbkee, skbee, sekbe, sebke, eebsk, ebesk, ebsek, ebske, eskbe, eksbe, ebkse, ebeks, ebesk, ekesb etc (I'm not going to list them all here, as I'm more than a bit sleepy and would miss some of them). If you happen to say them in the correct order, mystical and magic(k)al things will happen. If the order is wrong, however, then you will have just wasted a part of your life doing nothing.
(Letters from satisfied customers will follow after I've had some sleep.)
My dear AC. As a legend goes, there was a time (Ed. note: no there wasn't) when everyone spoke the same language (and lived in peace and harmony, as there were no grammar nazis). Unfortunately, good old Yahweh screwed everything up with this Towergate affair in Babylon. And so it happened that my English is still far from perfect
I'm sorry for torturing your poor language (it has suffered enough even without me...) and causing you both mental and physical pain. There's no excuses for this. Yet, deep in my heart I know you would return the favour any time.
The writer may want to convey an exact meaning, but good books (and films etc) always have more meaning in them than the author originally intended. That's why good books are read even after centuries - they still produce a meaning even long after they were written (and also why some authors are discovered only after they have died). What you find to be the meaning of a book may not be the same the next time you read it. If a book (or a movie or whatever) produces exactly the same meaning every time, you read (or "read") it, it's probably not too good, or has died.
Slashdot Mirror
[*] Come on, the day that really changed the world and you call it A NUMBER? All those other days have good names like Bloody Sunday, but a number... It sounds so empty, so devoid of emotions. Or maybe that's why it's used -- to show the world that America wasn't shaken, that the Star Spangled Banner is still waving (is that why the flag found in the ruins of WTC was shown in Salt Lake City?) and so on.
You're just bitching because the cat doesn't give a rat's ass about you. Accept it, get over it and quit staring at the cat and go see what's this racket the dogs are causing in the kitchen (they're probably just trying to get your attention).
Cat addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a cat over other faster, cheaper, more affectionate animals.
I can't find a pet shop that would sell me a dragon.
Ya uzhe kak-to ponimayu, a slishkom ploho. Nado bol'she chitatj i Nautilusa poslushatj ili chto-to...
Ignoring something will not make it go away, no matter how you may wish it be so. You can't stop a conflict by not reporting on it anymore.
Because they have surrendered their weapons and are out of the terrorism "business"?
Well, I guess they do this to prisoners everywhere. But I don't think there's any big problems with prison workshops putting 'ordinary decent people' out of work. I mean, there aren't too many things you can produce using quite low-tech tools and not too skilled workforce (though they can make weapons out of nothing).
Hmm. In the 17th century, they put madmen and beggars and criminals to work for no pay in some manufacture or workshop, putting other people (who got paid for working) out of work. History repeating?
Whereas, in the case of socialism/communism, everything belongs to the state, therefore to nobody, so nobody cares about it (those who are in power don't care, as everything belongs to the people? I dunno, but they don't care, that's a fact.).
So, things like pollution and illegal waste disposal are FAR WORSE under capitalism.
No kidding? Have you been to Chernobyl lately? Or swimming in the Aral sea (should be renamed Arid, as there's not much of it left)? OK, maybe these examples are a bit too drastic, but there's no way that there's less pollution under communist rule. Reason - just the same as in the case of factories and other non-private property. Almost nobody cares about the environment.
<cynical> Socialism, in the form seen in the 20th century, would theoretically do the environment some good, too. I mean, it'd be just the right thing to use against overpopulation...</cynical>
Example number three: Soviet Union had a very nice constitution. Very friendly. The problem was, that, like the other laws, it didn't have much power. Hence they called it the longest anecdote ever written.
It is my view that a revolution will only happen if the middle class is weak or does not exist.
Well, of course it won'y happen if people aren't poor. I mean, why fight if you don't have anything to fight for? But then again, what are you fighting for? (And, most importantly, what the hell is my problem? No idea...).
About these mythical classes. I tend to agree with Bourdieu who said, that classes are just constructs that don't exist in reality, although their "existence" is used as an argument in many cases. I remember this survey that was done here (here = Estonia) some years ago. It turned out that an awful lot of people (maybe even half of them, I don't remember the exact numbers) though they were middle class, although in reality were struggling to get by (it was not too long after the breakup of the SU).
Should the "middle class" in America lose their wealth, I don't think they will start a revolution. They didn't do it in 1930's, when Communists were much stronger, it's even less probable they would do it now.
But that, of course, is only my very uninformed (I don't really know much about computer architecture or neurology) opinion.
*sigh* My post was meant as a joke, I didn't expect anyone to take it seriously. Maybe it was because I really don't understand what you mean -- my tap water comes almost straight from a well...
They don't want to take power. They say that power corrupts.
PS. I wonder, what did the dinosaurs call the asteroid that (supposedly) killed them?
The reasons why the situation is as it is are many. One of them is the complexity of the matter researched - psychology is supposed to be the science of human mind, but it's not even clear what exactly is the object it is studying.
The other reason (connected with the first) may be, that psychology (and other "soft" sciences) haven't exactly had a fundamental basis to what they are studying, whereas the "hard" sciences could rely on physics (and mathematics?) as the basis to everything. Some claim that semiotics (the study of signs) could be the "physics of the 21st century", I wouldn't mind at all if it were so.
It's weird that people always talk about two sides of a coin, but they never think of the fact that all coins are (at least) three-dimensional. Nobody ever says "Hey, if two things are two sides of the same coin, then what's on the rim?" And what's inside it? I mean, there's practically nothing (usually it's air or the linings of your pocket or other coins) on the outer sides of the coin, everything interesting is inside it...
1. Post a goatse link
2. ???
3. Profit!
(In this case, profit = 1, Offtopic)
Come to think of it, maybe being actually aware of that are all those satellites and things up there should be added to the (kind of) definition of 'living in the space age'. Those tribes who still live in the stone age somewhere deep in the Amazonian rain forests have never heard of rockets or astronauts (and noone has never heard of themselves, either), so while they live in our era, they don't live in the space age. Whereas, let's say, Bulgarians (I seem to use Bulgaria as an arbitrary country a lot lately...), who didn't have satellite dishes (I don't want to narrow the definition down to the use of technology) 20 years ago, were still living in the space age then, as they had probably heard of Yuri Gagarin and the Americans on the moon).
Or, alternatively, you could say that all the world has been living in the space age from the day when Soviet Union launched the Sputnik.
Of course here, in civilized West, noone does anything so barbaric. Everybody has a right to live, so we only make them wish they were dead.
Though they may be closely related, it's not the same thing (as you may see from the moderation done to you - probably a Vulcan Supreme Moderator got angry). Vulcans are actually a spin-off group of Pollocks (though nobody can exactly say why - but they all agree it was one helluva reason). Your comparison was just as offensive and tactless as saying "Catholic or Protestant, it's the same thing" in Northern Ireland...
sebek, sbeek, skeeb, skebe, sbkee, skbee, sekbe, sebke, eebsk, ebesk, ebsek, ebske, eskbe, eksbe, ebkse, ebeks, ebesk, ekesb etc (I'm not going to list them all here, as I'm more than a bit sleepy and would miss some of them). If you happen to say them in the correct order, mystical and magic(k)al things will happen. If the order is wrong, however, then you will have just wasted a part of your life doing nothing.
(Letters from satisfied customers will follow after I've had some sleep.)
1) The earlier story was round 0, or
2) the earlier story was the pre-match bragging part, or
3) some other reason (not profit, though)
I'm sorry for torturing your poor language (it has suffered enough even without me...) and causing you both mental and physical pain. There's no excuses for this. Yet, deep in my heart I know you would return the favour any time.
The writer may want to convey an exact meaning, but good books (and films etc) always have more meaning in them than the author originally intended. That's why good books are read even after centuries - they still produce a meaning even long after they were written (and also why some authors are discovered only after they have died). What you find to be the meaning of a book may not be the same the next time you read it. If a book (or a movie or whatever) produces exactly the same meaning every time, you read (or "read") it, it's probably not too good, or has died.