No shit sherlock. Why do people always repeat this stuff? Everyone knows the reasons. They're obvious. It's almost like you expect this to make everyone feel better about it. How is intel's power/money grab is supposed to make us happier about the fact we're losing more and more control over the computing products we buy?
you try soldering 1500 tiny pins to a board without fucking up your $300 chip. I'm pretty good at smt soldering by hand, but that's way out of the question.
Hey you know what, if that's how you reason, then why the fuck do you post to sites like slashdot anyway? Go play with your fisher price tablets and locked bootloader firmware. Just don't come crying to the rest of us when
1. your hardware no longer does what you want the way you want because of some after-sale marketing driven firmware update. 2. you can't even find hardware that suits your needs without ludicrous overspending on unneeded featuresets decided by useless marketing droids. 3. 1+2 apply to the software that comes crypto locked with the hardware as well.
Seriously, people like you are 'the' reason this bullshit goes unchecked. The joe sixpack users buy whatever you tell them to.
Their position may be unscientific, but that's not the reason to distrust the status quo. It's not the vaccines themselves, it's the motivations of those distributing them. The FDA is far from a perfect entity, and they let all kinds of stupid shit slide for political, social, and economic reasons. There are plenty of recalls for deadly toxins that were sold as cures on record. I would not be first in line to take version 1.0 of any vaccine offered. There IS a health risk factor to be concerned about as well even from well established vaccines, esp the 'live virus' ones.
Speak for your own bloody self. I think people who think like I do are called "adults".
Adults don't resort to calling people names because they can't make a case for their position.
She sure as hell is responsible. Maybe not as responsible as the parents who refuse to vaccinate, but she's still responsible for lying to people and misleading them.
No, she isn't. I agree, she's stupid and useless, but she isn't responsible for the choices of others just as others aren't responsible for her stupid choices. We are our own volition and agency. Just because some asshole says something doesn't mean you rush to comply without thinking about it.
Again, what in the fuck are you talking about? There's nothing wrong with the current vaccines. They work and complaining about "big pharma" is just so much bullshit. Or did you have some actual scientific data behind your paranoia?
I never said vaccines don't work. They do work, most of the time. Do you have any idea how much bullshit the FDA lets slide because of politics, ineptitude, or lack of resources? I never said I was anti vaccine, but these days, the technology exists to abuse them, which changes things drastically. There is also huge incentive to push stuff out the door before it's ready.
They aren't abused yet, but they will be soon. It's too easy a vector with today's advances in micro sized technology. The track records of those at the top speak volumes about their lack of interest in our interests. Because of this, you wouldn't let someone in the industry or government pull a driveby on your computer, would you? So why would you trust them with your body just because of some spooky language you heard from them on tv?
There are two camps I'm referring to here: the group that irrationally thinks they cause all sorts of maladies, and the group who knows they work but also understands there's good reason to distrust the motivations of those at the top.
well because people who think like you do are often the ones demanding that the law should force artificial 'responsibility' for speech instead of holding the people who took the action accountable instead. speech is just words. Action is different. jenny mccarthy doesn't kill kids with her words. guardians not giving some kids vaccines may cause some to die. Then again, giving them half baked vaccines shoved out the door by big pharma can also kill. If you want to blame mccarthy for it, then you also have to blame the relevant state agencies and big pharma.
it's not that people don't trust science, it's that they don't trust the motivations of the people practicing it. In this case I can't blame them because the relevant parties at the top have clear track records of not giving a fuck about the well being of us peons at the bottom.
no, you are taking a false dichotomy and labeling anyone who disagrees as 'butthurt.' It's you who's butthurt apparently about jenny mccarthy. I agree, she's worthless and stupid, but that doesn't explain your stupidity.
with your style of reasoning, EVERYONE kills kids.. you know what? YOU kill kids too, every time you buy food to eat, you condemn some starving kid in ethiopia to starvation.
the blame chain game always ends the same way: tyranny. maybe you're from a country that doesn't respect free speech because it doesn't understand the difference between speech and action?
saying that 'jenny mccarthy kills kids' is about as fallacious as it gets. she has no control over anyones' kids. their parents do. the choice lies with them, not her, and choosing to give or not give their kids a particular vaccine does not automatically mean death. You're no more rational than many of the people you accuse..
well the 'pro-science' crowd misrepresents the issues as well. it's not that the 'anti-science' crowd distrusts science, they distrust the motivations of the people using the science. That I can understand. It seems like any good thing these days comes with a boatload of do-not-want 'features' designed to make it easier for the providers to use it as a vector for consumer hostile activities. This is especially true when it's difficult to understand technology where the details are naturally obfuscated from most people who lack understanding and equipment to analyze them.
While I'm not anti vaccine in principle, lets just say I'm not going to be the first one to rush out and get the latest version 1.0 vaccines pushed by medical corporations and politicians with clear track records of not giving a fuck about my well being. Just like with nutrition, I want to know for sure what the fuck I'm putting in my body before I do it.
uh no a libertarian would support both the business right to embed the ad AND the consumer right to block it on his equipment. please get a clue about what libertarians are about instead of getting your definitions from the new york times and cnn.
fuck you.. we paid for our bandwidth, you pay for yours.. we aren't required to jump through your hoops to prop up your business model. go get a real job and get off the net. For the last time, the internet is not fucking cable television
I don't care.. they can take their balls and go home.. I paid for my bandwidth so they can pay for theirs. I am not obligated to prop up someone's buisness model. If they hate it so much they can take their stupid shit off the fucking public network and put it behind a paywall.
technology is based on science, which is based on objective measurement of the truth. Things like race/gender/culture shouldn't apply because if they are made to, that means someone with a superior position is excluded because of these irrelevant attributes. This is terrible for science. If there is a bias across such attributes, then that suggests there's a bias of ability, not of discrimination. There is nothing wrong with this.
I'll bet if there were NO white males giving presentations, no one would raise an eyebrow thanks to the embedded discrimination caused by so called 'diversity' policy.
maybe this maybe that.. blah blah.. fallacy this fallacy that.. blah blah.. if the conference organizers want it 'diverse', then make it blind to it. The best way to do that is to focus on the given presentations based on merit instead of artificially 'balancing' them on skin color and gender parts. will there be discrimination? probably, welcome to human life. The question I have is why is it ok to OPENLY discriminate against one group just to shield another from POSSIBLE discrimination?
I do'nt know why it turned out that way.. maybe instead of jumping right to politics you should investigate and then tell the truth regardless as to whether it lines up with your emotionally defined ideology. A scientist must set his feelings aside. who knows, maybe men are better at this statistically and that's part of the reason?
In new haven ct, a bunch of non white firefighters failed an aptitude test, so they sued. It turned out they all just didn't fucking study hard enough. The fact that 'diversity' activists want to throw out clearly objective tests when they make their precious protected classes look bad speaks volumes about how little their position is based on reality.
yet of course our supposed 'age of diversity' didn't stop you from stereotyping and discriminating against white males in your post.. this is the problem with 'diversity' programs.. they teach hate of whites while preaching 'equality.' It's bullshit hypocrisy.
uh no. by 1996 we had the voodoo1 3dfx chip for gaming, and it was far superior to the n64. the only thing the n64 had over it was 24bit framebuffer, but who really cares when it's running at 320x240?
so that means one can only use the resource in accordance with the additive restrictions of 1/n tax payers.. basically any resources funded by the public are useless under this assumption because everyone is gonna have different and conflicting expectations of use.
Slashdot Mirror
No shit sherlock. Why do people always repeat this stuff? Everyone knows the reasons. They're obvious. It's almost like you expect this to make everyone feel better about it. How is intel's power/money grab is supposed to make us happier about the fact we're losing more and more control over the computing products we buy?
you try soldering 1500 tiny pins to a board without fucking up your $300 chip. I'm pretty good at smt soldering by hand, but that's way out of the question.
Hey you know what, if that's how you reason, then why the fuck do you post to sites like slashdot anyway? Go play with your fisher price tablets and locked bootloader firmware. Just don't come crying to the rest of us when
1. your hardware no longer does what you want the way you want because of some after-sale marketing driven firmware update.
2. you can't even find hardware that suits your needs without ludicrous overspending on unneeded featuresets decided by useless marketing droids.
3. 1+2 apply to the software that comes crypto locked with the hardware as well.
Seriously, people like you are 'the' reason this bullshit goes unchecked. The joe sixpack users buy whatever you tell them to.
I suggest you quit misrepresenting what people say to you. It makes you come across as arrogant and stupid as jenny mccarthy.
Their position may be unscientific, but that's not the reason to distrust the status quo. It's not the vaccines themselves, it's the motivations of those distributing them. The FDA is far from a perfect entity, and they let all kinds of stupid shit slide for political, social, and economic reasons. There are plenty of recalls for deadly toxins that were sold as cures on record. I would not be first in line to take version 1.0 of any vaccine offered. There IS a health risk factor to be concerned about as well even from well established vaccines, esp the 'live virus' ones.
Speak for your own bloody self. I think people who think like I do are called "adults".
Adults don't resort to calling people names because they can't make a case for their position.
She sure as hell is responsible. Maybe not as responsible as the parents who refuse to vaccinate, but she's still responsible for lying to people and misleading them.
No, she isn't. I agree, she's stupid and useless, but she isn't responsible for the choices of others just as others aren't responsible for her stupid choices. We are our own volition and agency. Just because some asshole says something doesn't mean you rush to comply without thinking about it.
Again, what in the fuck are you talking about? There's nothing wrong with the current vaccines. They work and complaining about "big pharma" is just so much bullshit. Or did you have some actual scientific data behind your paranoia?
I never said vaccines don't work. They do work, most of the time. Do you have any idea how much bullshit the FDA lets slide because of politics, ineptitude, or lack of resources? I never said I was anti vaccine, but these days, the technology exists to abuse them, which changes things drastically. There is also huge incentive to push stuff out the door before it's ready.
They aren't abused yet, but they will be soon. It's too easy a vector with today's advances in micro sized technology. The track records of those at the top speak volumes about their lack of interest in our interests. Because of this, you wouldn't let someone in the industry or government pull a driveby on your computer, would you? So why would you trust them with your body just because of some spooky language you heard from them on tv?
There are two camps I'm referring to here: the group that irrationally thinks they cause all sorts of maladies, and the group who knows they work but also understands there's good reason to distrust the motivations of those at the top.
well because people who think like you do are often the ones demanding that the law should force artificial 'responsibility' for speech instead of holding the people who took the action accountable instead. speech is just words. Action is different. jenny mccarthy doesn't kill kids with her words. guardians not giving some kids vaccines may cause some to die. Then again, giving them half baked vaccines shoved out the door by big pharma can also kill. If you want to blame mccarthy for it, then you also have to blame the relevant state agencies and big pharma.
it's not that people don't trust science, it's that they don't trust the motivations of the people practicing it. In this case I can't blame them because the relevant parties at the top have clear track records of not giving a fuck about the well being of us peons at the bottom.
no, you are taking a false dichotomy and labeling anyone who disagrees as 'butthurt.' It's you who's butthurt apparently about jenny mccarthy. I agree, she's worthless and stupid, but that doesn't explain your stupidity.
with your style of reasoning, EVERYONE kills kids.. you know what? YOU kill kids too, every time you buy food to eat, you condemn some starving kid in ethiopia to starvation.
the blame chain game always ends the same way: tyranny. maybe you're from a country that doesn't respect free speech because it doesn't understand the difference between speech and action?
saying that 'jenny mccarthy kills kids' is about as fallacious as it gets. she has no control over anyones' kids. their parents do. the choice lies with them, not her, and choosing to give or not give their kids a particular vaccine does not automatically mean death. You're no more rational than many of the people you accuse..
well the 'pro-science' crowd misrepresents the issues as well. it's not that the 'anti-science' crowd distrusts science, they distrust the motivations of the people using the science. That I can understand. It seems like any good thing these days comes with a boatload of do-not-want 'features' designed to make it easier for the providers to use it as a vector for consumer hostile activities. This is especially true when it's difficult to understand technology where the details are naturally obfuscated from most people who lack understanding and equipment to analyze them.
While I'm not anti vaccine in principle, lets just say I'm not going to be the first one to rush out and get the latest version 1.0 vaccines pushed by medical corporations and politicians with clear track records of not giving a fuck about my well being. Just like with nutrition, I want to know for sure what the fuck I'm putting in my body before I do it.
if someone put up a site they can't pay the bandwidth bill for that's their problem.
uh no a libertarian would support both the business right to embed the ad AND the consumer right to block it on his equipment. please get a clue about what libertarians are about instead of getting your definitions from the new york times and cnn.
fuck you.. we paid for our bandwidth, you pay for yours.. we aren't required to jump through your hoops to prop up your business model. go get a real job and get off the net. For the last time, the internet is not fucking cable television
I don't care.. they can take their balls and go home.. I paid for my bandwidth so they can pay for theirs. I am not obligated to prop up someone's buisness model. If they hate it so much they can take their stupid shit off the fucking public network and put it behind a paywall.
technology is based on science, which is based on objective measurement of the truth. Things like race/gender/culture shouldn't apply because if they are made to, that means someone with a superior position is excluded because of these irrelevant attributes. This is terrible for science. If there is a bias across such attributes, then that suggests there's a bias of ability, not of discrimination. There is nothing wrong with this.
I'll bet if there were NO white males giving presentations, no one would raise an eyebrow thanks to the embedded discrimination caused by so called 'diversity' policy.
maybe this maybe that.. blah blah.. fallacy this fallacy that.. blah blah.. if the conference organizers want it 'diverse', then make it blind to it. The best way to do that is to focus on the given presentations based on merit instead of artificially 'balancing' them on skin color and gender parts. will there be discrimination? probably, welcome to human life. The question I have is why is it ok to OPENLY discriminate against one group just to shield another from POSSIBLE discrimination?
I do'nt know why it turned out that way.. maybe instead of jumping right to politics you should investigate and then tell the truth regardless as to whether it lines up with your emotionally defined ideology. A scientist must set his feelings aside. who knows, maybe men are better at this statistically and that's part of the reason?
In new haven ct, a bunch of non white firefighters failed an aptitude test, so they sued. It turned out they all just didn't fucking study hard enough. The fact that 'diversity' activists want to throw out clearly objective tests when they make their precious protected classes look bad speaks volumes about how little their position is based on reality.
yet of course our supposed 'age of diversity' didn't stop you from stereotyping and discriminating against white males in your post.. this is the problem with 'diversity' programs.. they teach hate of whites while preaching 'equality.' It's bullshit hypocrisy.
both were slow as shit for their time. the snes especially had performance problems.
uh no. by 1996 we had the voodoo1 3dfx chip for gaming, and it was far superior to the n64. the only thing the n64 had over it was 24bit framebuffer, but who really cares when it's running at 320x240?
what? that's not 'special'. Just because it could do that doesn't mean the system was cutting edge. It was not.
can't wait to play games my 2005 era pc could play.
so that means one can only use the resource in accordance with the additive restrictions of 1/n tax payers.. basically any resources funded by the public are useless under this assumption because everyone is gonna have different and conflicting expectations of use.
yet the drugs and 'tape' the hellburner pilots were using weren't much different..