I don't run with the NRA crowd, though I support gun rights. Can you give me some examples where personal firearms were used to secure the bearer's free speech rights?
The reason that more people didn't volunteer for the Continental Army was simply that the pay and provisioning was meager and sporadic, and life in the colonies was for most tenuous and near subsistence. People largely could not afford to abandon their work and their families to go off and harry the British. I would not call that cowardice of any color.
Yet you call cowards the people who don't want the public to know they signed a controversial petition, because they fear losing their job or job prospects, and destruction of their property -- economic reasons? Hey, people are having a hard time surviving today, just like they were in 1776.
When I was in high school, there was a class called Space Tech. It was a combination shop and science class. We built our own telescopes, learned about the inverse square law, how to calculate the age of the universe, build a container for instruments that were supposed to withstand heat and cold, and used image processing programs to look for unusual geological features on images of the planets.
The final was a shuttle simulation. The class was broken into teams. One team build robotic arms to perform actions in space, another was the crew that spent the night in an old room converted to a shuttle simulation, and a few other teams I can't remember. I was on the media team, and it was our job to talk to the different crews and make press releases. We released them on K12 newgroups. Back in 1994, this was really awesome, and I had no idea what we were doing. Little did we know, the teacher had some students from another of his classes send us an email claiming to be from the FAA advising us to take our vehicle out of airspace, or something to that effect. It was 1994, I had no internet savvy -- this was before spam and everything -- so I took it to the teacher. He laughed.
It was a great class. Go Mr. Donelson at Gahanna Lincoln!
I beg to differ. The first two definitions google comes up with have fact as information or assertions:
Google "define: fact"Definitions of fact on the Web:
a piece of information about circumstances that exist or events that have occurred; "first you must collect all the facts of the case"
a statement or assertion of verified information about something that is the case or has happened; "he supported his argument with an impressive array of facts"
an event known to have happened or something known to have existed; "your fears have no basis in fact"; "how much of the story is fact and how much fiction is hard to tell"
I don't know the source of ideas. I'm willing to accept that ideas are physical objects ( a state of a bundle of nuerons, etc. ). I haven't seen evidence of this, but when I do, I'll change my tune:) So I don't really know that facts are not objects:)
Your laptop is a laptop. That it's a laptop is fact -- which is a supposition about its existence and nature; an idea. A fact is an idea.
Still disagree? Post a picture of a fact. Give any kind of measurement of a fact. Try to do either of these, and you'll soon discover a fact is not a physical thing.
Young children are thirsty for knnowledge. Anyone who has had any exposure to a 6-8 year old in the "why daddy" stage knows this. The problem is this is not fostered in many kids. If, at this stage, children are taught how to answer their own questions, using the tools available to them, then it will foster a lifetime of learning.
I don't really think kids are interested in how things work at this stage. They want *answers*, not *understanding*. What I believe is happening at this stage, in terms of evolutionary psychology, is that they are becoming enculturated into the cosmology of their tribe, so that they are on the same page with everyone else. They want parents or someone to just give them the answers. And this is as it should be. Then they can start having adult conversations with people, using the same vocabulary and realm of ideas. So then when someone says, "I got sick", they can properly reply, "Oh, are you using hand sanitizer?" or "Did you pick up a bad spirit?" and share the same cosmology with your fellow tribes-person.
Critical thinking, theorizing, self-learning, and understanding comes later, in the teenage years, where kids start saying, "Nuh uh, you're wrong, and I can prove it. What did grandpa ever know about stars anyway?" It's an act of rebellion and saying no, as in "No, I don't think so, I don't buy it." Kids in they "Why, why?" readily believe any fool thing you tell them.
What's even nicer about this is that, once we know where they are, we can observe them with even better and better instruments for the next tens or hundreds of thousands of years.
In archaeology, they will leave parts of sites unexcavated, so that future people with better technology will be able to excavate it and learn more about the people. This has already paid off with stuff like ground-penetrating radar and pollen analysis. But the ultimate problem there is that the site is going to be used up, sooner or later. Not so with the stars:D
"Mr. Obama"? Oh come on. He's not an evil mastermind, just a charming politician who won a national election. This kind of thing would be done by the CIA or another spy/counter-intelligence organization, not a dopey president.
I don't know what internet cafes you're referencing, but the ones I've seen in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Peru are a mish-mash of computers and nobody's doing any disk imaging. It wouldn't be hard at all to grab any number of passwords from keyloggers.
Maybe he's a run-of-the-mill stupid, naive, thinks-he-knows-everything 22-year-old how royally fucked up in the traditional way, being at that age where you have too much power and too little wisdom?
That's one of the things I always hated about politicians. They always think their state is the best
It's not a problem with politicians, it's a problem with the system. The constitution says that a senator represents a state, a congressperson a district. If you want it to be different, we need to have a body that is elected by the American people as a whole.
Don't you rather mean, because he's the democratic candidate? That's the only reason dyed in the wool democrats vote for black candidates. You don't see democrats voting for black republican candidates because they're black, do you?
Is there really big money in catering to sites like cryptome and wikileaks? Only the most non-mainstream of journalists are going to see this as a plus. NYT or WaPo aren't ever going to run afoul of American laws regarding their website; not in a way that would impact their bottom line, I don't think.
Don't get me wrong, I think wikileaks and cryptome are the greatest thing since the printing press. But I would think that if a country wants to be a go-to place for server hosting to make money, they would look at attracting other clienteles.
I thought that one of the anti-AGW arguments was that in general humans can't affect climate
. If a person believes this from the outset, they have an ideology ( "Man can never fly as birds can" "No thing can travel faster than the speed of sound" "Man can never affect the climate" ), and probably no amount of evidence will dislodge them from their position.
If they believe that humans haven't affected climate, then there's hope:)
PBS had a great show called Dimming the Sun and IIRC they delve into showing how the 9/11 air traffic halt raised the temperature in American cities by 1 or 2 degrees. The contrail cover from planes reflect more light from the sun.
I think what he's saying is that the swing vote will go for the white "upstading citizen" when presented an option of him (on the rebpulican ticket) versus the a homeless black guy with a criminal record (who happens to be the democratic candidate).
Gosh, I wonder why the Republican tactic of literally painting democrats as corrupt, welfare-abusing criminals plays so well in some parts of the country, when it seems like a ridiculous joke in other parts? Maybe because Republicans put homeless black criminals up to run as democrats in certain parts of the country.
Yeah. If the situation is happening so fast that you start to react emotionally instead of rationally, it's a system that's not designed with human cognitive needs in mind. It will create panics, flailings, and anxiety-driven behavior.
People will still speculate, but events will play out more slowly and orderly, allowing people time to carefully consider their actions, instead of going into a panic because OMG THE DOW IS DROPPING HOW WILL MY KIDS GO THROUGH COLLEGE SELL SELL SELL!!!!!
We're just going to see that things haven't changed much in 100 years. Corporate colonialism, Guilded capitalism, the American dream, etc. etc. The last 20 years have been a repeat of 120-100 years ago.
but it looks like they basically synthesized an entire bacterial genome
They didn't really synthesize the DNA; they just cut'n'pasted a bunch of existing DNA and inserted it into a new cell. This is like grafting 100 trees together and calling the conglomeration a synthetic tree.
a) I gave you money unsolicited, for your cause. I only give when I can, and want to. Almost NEVER is it due to a solicitation or campaign.
b) Please don't send me unsolicited materials, you are wasting your (our) money and I resent that a portion of my donation is being churned back into solicitations and not the original purpose.
You realize that the reason they do these campaigns is that they work, right? That charities actually raise funds from the tactics that you don't want your donation going towards?
If you don't want charities doing this, then you have to convince their other supporters not to support them via these means, because otherwise it's the only way they can survive.
And donating money doesn't give you a say in the organization, any more than giving someone ten bucks entitles you to tell them how to spend it. If you want to be part of a decision-making process, join the organization or buy shares in a company.
It's true that democrats get the lion's share of their funding from Big Corporations, but they actually create legislation in the interest of the people from time to time, whereas the Republicans create legislation that (IMHO) is a great travesty against the people from time to time. But most of the time it's business as usually.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't run with the NRA crowd, though I support gun rights. Can you give me some examples where personal firearms were used to secure the bearer's free speech rights?
The reason that more people didn't volunteer for the Continental Army was simply that the pay and provisioning was meager and sporadic, and life in the colonies was for most tenuous and near subsistence. People largely could not afford to abandon their work and their families to go off and harry the British. I would not call that cowardice of any color.
Yet you call cowards the people who don't want the public to know they signed a controversial petition, because they fear losing their job or job prospects, and destruction of their property -- economic reasons? Hey, people are having a hard time surviving today, just like they were in 1776.
When I was in high school, there was a class called Space Tech. It was a combination shop and science class. We built our own telescopes, learned about the inverse square law, how to calculate the age of the universe, build a container for instruments that were supposed to withstand heat and cold, and used image processing programs to look for unusual geological features on images of the planets.
The final was a shuttle simulation. The class was broken into teams. One team build robotic arms to perform actions in space, another was the crew that spent the night in an old room converted to a shuttle simulation, and a few other teams I can't remember. I was on the media team, and it was our job to talk to the different crews and make press releases. We released them on K12 newgroups. Back in 1994, this was really awesome, and I had no idea what we were doing. Little did we know, the teacher had some students from another of his classes send us an email claiming to be from the FAA advising us to take our vehicle out of airspace, or something to that effect. It was 1994, I had no internet savvy -- this was before spam and everything -- so I took it to the teacher. He laughed.
It was a great class. Go Mr. Donelson at Gahanna Lincoln!
Google "define: fact"Definitions of fact on the Web:
I don't know the source of ideas. I'm willing to accept that ideas are physical objects ( a state of a bundle of nuerons, etc. ). I haven't seen evidence of this, but when I do, I'll change my tune :) So I don't really know that facts are not objects :)
Your laptop is a laptop. That it's a laptop is fact -- which is a supposition about its existence and nature; an idea. A fact is an idea.
Still disagree? Post a picture of a fact. Give any kind of measurement of a fact. Try to do either of these, and you'll soon discover a fact is not a physical thing.
Young children are thirsty for knnowledge. Anyone who has had any exposure to a 6-8 year old in the "why daddy" stage knows this. The problem is this is not fostered in many kids. If, at this stage, children are taught how to answer their own questions, using the tools available to them, then it will foster a lifetime of learning.
I don't really think kids are interested in how things work at this stage. They want *answers*, not *understanding*. What I believe is happening at this stage, in terms of evolutionary psychology, is that they are becoming enculturated into the cosmology of their tribe, so that they are on the same page with everyone else. They want parents or someone to just give them the answers. And this is as it should be. Then they can start having adult conversations with people, using the same vocabulary and realm of ideas. So then when someone says, "I got sick", they can properly reply, "Oh, are you using hand sanitizer?" or "Did you pick up a bad spirit?" and share the same cosmology with your fellow tribes-person.
Critical thinking, theorizing, self-learning, and understanding comes later, in the teenage years, where kids start saying, "Nuh uh, you're wrong, and I can prove it. What did grandpa ever know about stars anyway?" It's an act of rebellion and saying no, as in "No, I don't think so, I don't buy it." Kids in they "Why, why?" readily believe any fool thing you tell them.
Facts are a type of idea. Thus their very existence depends on *someone* believing them. They have almost *everything* to do with what you believe.
Don't buy it? Go out and try to find a fact, and pick it up in your hands. When you finally do find it, post a picture of it on the internet.
What's even nicer about this is that, once we know where they are, we can observe them with even better and better instruments for the next tens or hundreds of thousands of years.
:D
In archaeology, they will leave parts of sites unexcavated, so that future people with better technology will be able to excavate it and learn more about the people. This has already paid off with stuff like ground-penetrating radar and pollen analysis. But the ultimate problem there is that the site is going to be used up, sooner or later. Not so with the stars
"Mr. Obama"? Oh come on. He's not an evil mastermind, just a charming politician who won a national election. This kind of thing would be done by the CIA or another spy/counter-intelligence organization, not a dopey president.
I don't know what internet cafes you're referencing, but the ones I've seen in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Peru are a mish-mash of computers and nobody's doing any disk imaging. It wouldn't be hard at all to grab any number of passwords from keyloggers.
Maybe he's a run-of-the-mill stupid, naive, thinks-he-knows-everything 22-year-old how royally fucked up in the traditional way, being at that age where you have too much power and too little wisdom?
That's one of the things I always hated about politicians. They always think their state is the best
It's not a problem with politicians, it's a problem with the system. The constitution says that a senator represents a state, a congressperson a district. If you want it to be different, we need to have a body that is elected by the American people as a whole.
Don't you rather mean, because he's the democratic candidate? That's the only reason dyed in the wool democrats vote for black candidates. You don't see democrats voting for black republican candidates because they're black, do you?
Is there really big money in catering to sites like cryptome and wikileaks? Only the most non-mainstream of journalists are going to see this as a plus. NYT or WaPo aren't ever going to run afoul of American laws regarding their website; not in a way that would impact their bottom line, I don't think. Don't get me wrong, I think wikileaks and cryptome are the greatest thing since the printing press. But I would think that if a country wants to be a go-to place for server hosting to make money, they would look at attracting other clienteles.
I thought that one of the anti-AGW arguments was that in general humans can't affect climate
. If a person believes this from the outset, they have an ideology ( "Man can never fly as birds can" "No thing can travel faster than the speed of sound" "Man can never affect the climate" ), and probably no amount of evidence will dislodge them from their position.
:)
If they believe that humans haven't affected climate, then there's hope
PBS had a great show called Dimming the Sun and IIRC they delve into showing how the 9/11 air traffic halt raised the temperature in American cities by 1 or 2 degrees. The contrail cover from planes reflect more light from the sun.
I think what he's saying is that the swing vote will go for the white "upstading citizen" when presented an option of him (on the rebpulican ticket) versus the a homeless black guy with a criminal record (who happens to be the democratic candidate).
Gosh, I wonder why the Republican tactic of literally painting democrats as corrupt, welfare-abusing criminals plays so well in some parts of the country, when it seems like a ridiculous joke in other parts? Maybe because Republicans put homeless black criminals up to run as democrats in certain parts of the country.
It is common knowledge the sun has seasons, like the hearth. But they take 11 years to cycle.
Yeah. my hearth is cold in the summer, and warm in the winter.
Yeah. If the situation is happening so fast that you start to react emotionally instead of rationally, it's a system that's not designed with human cognitive needs in mind. It will create panics, flailings, and anxiety-driven behavior.
People will still speculate, but events will play out more slowly and orderly, allowing people time to carefully consider their actions, instead of going into a panic because OMG THE DOW IS DROPPING HOW WILL MY KIDS GO THROUGH COLLEGE SELL SELL SELL!!!!!
We're just going to see that things haven't changed much in 100 years. Corporate colonialism, Guilded capitalism, the American dream, etc. etc. The last 20 years have been a repeat of 120-100 years ago.
but it looks like they basically synthesized an entire bacterial genome
They didn't really synthesize the DNA; they just cut'n'pasted a bunch of existing DNA and inserted it into a new cell. This is like grafting 100 trees together and calling the conglomeration a synthetic tree.
a) I gave you money unsolicited, for your cause. I only give when I can, and want to. Almost NEVER is it due to a solicitation or campaign.
b) Please don't send me unsolicited materials, you are wasting your (our) money and I resent that a portion of my donation is being churned back into solicitations and not the original purpose.
You realize that the reason they do these campaigns is that they work, right? That charities actually raise funds from the tactics that you don't want your donation going towards?
If you don't want charities doing this, then you have to convince their other supporters not to support them via these means, because otherwise it's the only way they can survive.
And donating money doesn't give you a say in the organization, any more than giving someone ten bucks entitles you to tell them how to spend it. If you want to be part of a decision-making process, join the organization or buy shares in a company.
Maybe it's less "head-scratching" and more "face-palm".
It's true that democrats get the lion's share of their funding from Big Corporations, but they actually create legislation in the interest of the people from time to time, whereas the Republicans create legislation that (IMHO) is a great travesty against the people from time to time. But most of the time it's business as usually.