The guy I was replying to did use such language and attitude.
I don't mind the requirement that all products display their complete ingredients on the package. I always look at those before buying. It's easy to avoid trans fats and hfcs (and whatever else) by doing this. My real concern is what happens when enough of these carved out exceptions cause the floodgates to slam open, and we get bloombergs trying to ban and/or punitively tax everything except broccoli and carrots just to save obamacare a few bucks. The FDA will go there if we remove the restraints. No thanks..
Is my position alarmist? In a vacuum I'd say yes. In today's political climate? It's quite a reasonable assumption.
That doesn't mean they should be banned. Informed consumers can make their own choices. You've chosen to ban them from your diet and that's fine. Allow others the same choice.
It's not the transfats themselves that're at issue here. It's the precedent banning them giving the government yet another inroad on liberty.
In typical leftist style, here you are telling us what we should and shouldn't complain about while misrepresenting what was actually complained about.
Well informing is not the same as banning. I don't mind the former, but the latter encourages a nasty anti-liberty path. There's a huge list of foods and foodstuffs the leftists would love to ban and/or ultratax. I don't want these soccer mom associations deciding limits on my freedom. As long as the packages are clearly marked, I can make my own decisions.
That's a pretty bandwagon you've hopped on there. I know a lot of people hop on that one because it makes them look so proper and 'sophisticated', but do you have rational justifications for equating homosexuality with inter-racial marriage/procreation?
No, he's not. He doesn't say you shouldn't judge him. He says you should judge what he says on its own merits (or lack thereof). This includes literary and other works.
I guess it depends how you (and him) define rights. He thinks gays are destroying the fabric of society and thus he thinks is doing the right thing. Obviously, you don't think this and think you are doing the right thing. I think you both should have the free speech right to talk about it publicly, which defends both your human right to free speech. I find it interesting that you mentioned human rights while advocating the removal of his.
You might be right if it was 'buggerers', but it's not. Perhaps the term is unimaginative, however, in the context of the story, it might be that it was coined by grunts during the first war, making it perfectly plausible vernacular.
Questioning the position of left wing gay rights activists is not fear of homosexuals, so no. Seeing men kissing is not desirable for the majority of the male population. Grossed out != anxiety. It does not mean it is an 'disorder' that should be 'treated' by the 'gentle' ministrations of the state. Basically, the term 'homophobia' is an ad hominem attack.
People are not, nor should they be, obligated to tolerate you or any specific behaviors you engage in. Deal with it. Talk about entitlement syndrome..
Since it's impossible to have infinite tolerance, it is a fact that not all people are going to tolerate you. Attempts to purify this will result in a police state.
Here's another theory for you: Most of the negative feedback this book receives is motivated by disagreement with card's politics. Lots of people read the book as youths and enjoyed it. I doubt many of these kids thought it's a totally awesome story worthy of 'classic' status, but just that it was a fun, thought provoking read. Then, as young adults, they found out about card's politics and realized they 'had' to change their opinions of the book to suit their own, newfound, post ivy-league indoctrinated politics, lest they be considered 'hate' enablers by their peers. I'll bet a good number of these people still like the story but will never admit it publicly. Ah, the power of peer pressure.
Hey, I like movies made by loony lefties, and I'm not a leftist or a neocon. The politics of the author don't stop me from enjoying their works on their own merits. Of course, you're welcome to your position and choice, but I think it's a little irrational.
Depends on what point those diminishing returns start to diminish for you. Having a high framerate is nice, while having max texture and shader detail turned on at the same time. You don't need the million dollar sports car to get you to work, but that doesnt' mean it isn't nice.
People like you always fall back on the 'if it's deemed legal, it's ok' excuse. This is what the government does. We both know that while 'unreasonable' is left undefined, it's obviously being expanded constantly towards the meaning of "do whatever you want."
Multiple 'wrongs' can and do make a 'right'. It just depends on the subjective definitions of each. Besides, governments engaging in illegal activities have not business calling other people traitors. It just compounds the lie.
'The mob'? Interesting choice of vocabulary. One of the definitions of mob is "a secret organized group of criminals." I think that applies more to people, like feinstein, who are members of the two big elite parties, and the last few administrations, than it does to snowden, or ordinary americans who are rightfully angry over having their freedoms, rights, and liberty taken away a piece at a time. You're right. There's a big case of narcissistic, histrionic elitism here, but you've wrongly identified the 'patients.'
They're supposed to monitor foreign activity. They're not supposed to spy on civilian americans. Everyone working there knows that, which makes just about all of them traitors.
Uh no. If the warranty is 5 years, I expect it to last at least that long, if not longer. If the drive fails within 5 years, I expect a new drive since I purchased a guarantee of uninterrupted operation for 5 years. If I didn't get it with the first drive, or the second, or the third, then I expect them to keep sending me drives until they get it right or refund my money. If they go out of business doing this with too many customers too much of the time, then they should have as their products suck.
That is how you honor warranties the right way. Of course, companies cheap out on them now, and it's getting real bad with things like computer components, notably, motherboards, video boards, and hard disks. A new product was paid for, and it was faulty, and they send a refurb? I did not buy a refurb! Many times the refurb shows up half broken (motherboard manufacturers are famous for using 3rd party 'fufillment centers' that do this) or as DOA as the one sent in. It's such a damn hassle get them to act honorably. Of course, this drives me to say 'fuck it' and buy the ultra cheap ones with the expectation of early failure, but then I'm supporting the anti-quality trend in the consumer market. Really, the constant cross shipping and down time costs both manufacturer and consumer more money than getting it right in the first place would.
Barring a RARE fluke, there's no reason every hard disk shouldn't last at least 5 years now, but again they cheap out on the manufacturing process to save a few pennies. There was a time when getting 10 years out of a quality disk was reasonable.
Slashdot Mirror
openRC supports both already. Last I checked, none of the bsds use it, and the only linux distro to use it as a default is gentoo.
awesome.. sign me up.
Are you nuts?
The guy I was replying to did use such language and attitude.
I don't mind the requirement that all products display their complete ingredients on the package. I always look at those before buying. It's easy to avoid trans fats and hfcs (and whatever else) by doing this. My real concern is what happens when enough of these carved out exceptions cause the floodgates to slam open, and we get bloombergs trying to ban and/or punitively tax everything except broccoli and carrots just to save obamacare a few bucks. The FDA will go there if we remove the restraints. No thanks..
Is my position alarmist? In a vacuum I'd say yes. In today's political climate? It's quite a reasonable assumption.
That doesn't mean they should be banned. Informed consumers can make their own choices. You've chosen to ban them from your diet and that's fine. Allow others the same choice.
Because taxes should not be used as punitive measures. That's what gets people to hate them.
It's not the transfats themselves that're at issue here. It's the precedent banning them giving the government yet another inroad on liberty.
In typical leftist style, here you are telling us what we should and shouldn't complain about while misrepresenting what was actually complained about.
Well informing is not the same as banning. I don't mind the former, but the latter encourages a nasty anti-liberty path. There's a huge list of foods and foodstuffs the leftists would love to ban and/or ultratax. I don't want these soccer mom associations deciding limits on my freedom. As long as the packages are clearly marked, I can make my own decisions.
That's a pretty bandwagon you've hopped on there. I know a lot of people hop on that one because it makes them look so proper and 'sophisticated', but do you have rational justifications for equating homosexuality with inter-racial marriage/procreation?
The problem is that it's used as an ad hominem attack on those who question the need/effects of 'homophilic' activists and their politics.
You should be able to judge his character separate from the works he produces. This is a key part of objectivity, something today's society lacks.
No, he's not. He doesn't say you shouldn't judge him. He says you should judge what he says on its own merits (or lack thereof). This includes literary and other works.
I guess it depends how you (and him) define rights. He thinks gays are destroying the fabric of society and thus he thinks is doing the right thing. Obviously, you don't think this and think you are doing the right thing. I think you both should have the free speech right to talk about it publicly, which defends both your human right to free speech. I find it interesting that you mentioned human rights while advocating the removal of his.
You might be right if it was 'buggerers', but it's not. Perhaps the term is unimaginative, however, in the context of the story, it might be that it was coined by grunts during the first war, making it perfectly plausible vernacular.
Questioning the position of left wing gay rights activists is not fear of homosexuals, so no. Seeing men kissing is not desirable for the majority of the male population. Grossed out != anxiety. It does not mean it is an 'disorder' that should be 'treated' by the 'gentle' ministrations of the state. Basically, the term 'homophobia' is an ad hominem attack.
Exactly. The word is an ad hominem attack on those who question gay rights politics and gay behavior, implying the cause for it is fear.
The acronym itself qualifies as a list of subgenres, therefore 'bunch' is a reasonable way to describe it.
Um.. Hydrophobia does in fact mean what it says: A morbid fear of water. Go look it up.
People are not, nor should they be, obligated to tolerate you or any specific behaviors you engage in. Deal with it. Talk about entitlement syndrome..
Since it's impossible to have infinite tolerance, it is a fact that not all people are going to tolerate you. Attempts to purify this will result in a police state.
Here's another theory for you: Most of the negative feedback this book receives is motivated by disagreement with card's politics. Lots of people read the book as youths and enjoyed it. I doubt many of these kids thought it's a totally awesome story worthy of 'classic' status, but just that it was a fun, thought provoking read. Then, as young adults, they found out about card's politics and realized they 'had' to change their opinions of the book to suit their own, newfound, post ivy-league indoctrinated politics, lest they be considered 'hate' enablers by their peers. I'll bet a good number of these people still like the story but will never admit it publicly. Ah, the power of peer pressure.
Hey, I like movies made by loony lefties, and I'm not a leftist or a neocon. The politics of the author don't stop me from enjoying their works on their own merits. Of course, you're welcome to your position and choice, but I think it's a little irrational.
Depends on what point those diminishing returns start to diminish for you. Having a high framerate is nice, while having max texture and shader detail turned on at the same time. You don't need the million dollar sports car to get you to work, but that doesnt' mean it isn't nice.
People like you always fall back on the 'if it's deemed legal, it's ok' excuse. This is what the government does. We both know that while 'unreasonable' is left undefined, it's obviously being expanded constantly towards the meaning of "do whatever you want."
Multiple 'wrongs' can and do make a 'right'. It just depends on the subjective definitions of each. Besides, governments engaging in illegal activities have not business calling other people traitors. It just compounds the lie.
'The mob'? Interesting choice of vocabulary. One of the definitions of mob is "a secret organized group of criminals." I think that applies more to people, like feinstein, who are members of the two big elite parties, and the last few administrations, than it does to snowden, or ordinary americans who are rightfully angry over having their freedoms, rights, and liberty taken away a piece at a time. You're right. There's a big case of narcissistic, histrionic elitism here, but you've wrongly identified the 'patients.'
I think your correlation lacks valid cause-effect.
They're supposed to monitor foreign activity. They're not supposed to spy on civilian americans. Everyone working there knows that, which makes just about all of them traitors.
Uh no. If the warranty is 5 years, I expect it to last at least that long, if not longer. If the drive fails within 5 years, I expect a new drive since I purchased a guarantee of uninterrupted operation for 5 years. If I didn't get it with the first drive, or the second, or the third, then I expect them to keep sending me drives until they get it right or refund my money. If they go out of business doing this with too many customers too much of the time, then they should have as their products suck.
That is how you honor warranties the right way. Of course, companies cheap out on them now, and it's getting real bad with things like computer components, notably, motherboards, video boards, and hard disks. A new product was paid for, and it was faulty, and they send a refurb? I did not buy a refurb! Many times the refurb shows up half broken (motherboard manufacturers are famous for using 3rd party 'fufillment centers' that do this) or as DOA as the one sent in. It's such a damn hassle get them to act honorably. Of course, this drives me to say 'fuck it' and buy the ultra cheap ones with the expectation of early failure, but then I'm supporting the anti-quality trend in the consumer market. Really, the constant cross shipping and down time costs both manufacturer and consumer more money than getting it right in the first place would.
Barring a RARE fluke, there's no reason every hard disk shouldn't last at least 5 years now, but again they cheap out on the manufacturing process to save a few pennies. There was a time when getting 10 years out of a quality disk was reasonable.