It doesn't work well. I fucking hate the PS? controllers, they all hurt my hands. Nintendo controllers (though stereotyped as small) are comfier, more durable, and much more intuitive.
My philosophy professor once amused our class by recounting the results of a poll on the Constitution. Apparently, some polling company decided to ask middle to upper middle class people a bunch of questions about what exactly appears in the constitution. Nearly 30% thought "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was in the Constitution, and another 25% or so weren't sure.
People still get real educations abroad. My dad was transferred to India when I was in 8th grade and was transferred back last year - the family moved with him both times. Watching my brother struggle with the administration to take "advanced" courses made me thank my stars I was able to take the IB diploma with no hassle. That program is much like the one you describe, Shakespeare and poetry by grade nine (IB diploma is 11,12, but almost all the 9 and 10 systems have this) and calculus and basic modern algebra in grade 12.
About your sig - I don't know if you're going for the paradoxical effect, but that's a statement with a well defined value, False. I translate it as for every A, not A. Butthe statement A or not A is logically true, so there exists A, not (not A).
b) Many people on Slashdot seem to use it non-humorously, and I haven't found anything online to indicate it's a joke. I didn't realize you were an exception. I hope that you realize that some people do tatke it seriously to avoid any future confusion.
c) The epithet, as you point out, has an underlying idea. In an informal forum like Slashdot, the epithet is shorthand for the idea. Rejecting the epithet and shorthand and expecting people to write long explanations of the idea shows your bias against the underlying idea.
Well, I'm glad those two aren't mainstream - I just accepted my (feminist) TA's characterization of them. And please don't patronize me. I have personal friends who are feminist, maybe even feminazis, and I've certainly engaged in genuine discussions of these topics with them. Finally, about Summers, his comments raised the possibility that nature is more powerful than nurture. He made a conjecture based on his personal opinion, in a speech that emphasized the need for further research and investigation. You also misrepresent this conjecture, as do many in the media, by saying that men are better than women at science. More proper statements would be to say that, on average, men have a higher aptitude for science than women do, or that the variance of men's science aptitude exceeds that of women, so we can expect to find more men at the highest - and lowest - levels than women. These statistical semantics are important, since they give the lie to the claims that these statements are discriminatory. The average man and the average women are very poor scientists - different means are no reason to discriminate. They can, however, be used to show that imbalance in science departments attributed to discrimnation may be better attributed to greater population variance.
What you;re hearing is completely different from what the guy said. What about all the things before the abortion views? I'm pretty rabidly pro-choice, and I agree with the previous points. I'd have to say that anyone who outright rejects a woman's choice to stay at home or refuses to entertain any thought of men having some natural advantages (while accepting women's better verbal and social skills) is a feminazi.
a) It's called Godwin's Law.
b) Godwin's Law is fucking idiotic. I'm sick of self-righteous Usenet freaks "calling Godwin's Law" on someone.
c) How about arguing for your ideas, instead of just dismissing others'?
I'm not saying 'feminazi' is a valid term to use in an actual argument - ad hominem attacks don't usually fly too well anyway - but Slashdot is hardly a formal forum. I would call a feminazi someone who dogmatically disregards all sex-related differences between men and women and stifles any possible debate on the matter. For example, the MIT biologist who felt "physically ill" when Larry Summers considered hypothetical differences between men and women is, in my opinion, a feminazi. I would also add people like Andrea Dworkin and Catherine McKinnon who take ridiculously radical stands on issues like pornography and the morality of sex. It's not a hard and fast thing; I think the best way to look at my mental categories would be to consider Rawls' distinction between rational and reasonable people.
As for feminazis in academia, perhaps you're lucky enough not to have to deal with such people. I'm an undergrad at Stanford, and I've had a few feminazi TAs, and there's a seemingly endless parade of feminazi speakers. More importantly, in our required freshman humanities classes, people like Dworkin and McKinnon were used to represent a large part of the feminist movement, which leads me to believe that their ideas have substantial currency.
What about "tiny minority of people who should not be taken seriously, but whose influence in academia and general culture is so disproportionate to their stature as to color their whole movement"? And that's after granting they are a tiny minority of feminists - I don't.
Re:Intelligence isn't everything. Not even close.
on
The Prodigy Puzzle
·
· Score: 1
I consider myself somewhat bright, so maybe this will shed some light on your genius friends' point of view. My personal goal is nothing more than to have a happy life; a number of smart people around me think the same way. I think it comes of philosophizing about life and trying to cut through the social pressure to work and achieve ambitions. I'm not saying this is the only answer or the one true attitude to have - I'm just saying it's a remarkably tempting answer that many people who bother to think about the issue adopt.
Re:Sounds like me during Exams!
on
Slacker or Sick
·
· Score: 1
Study skills help. My schedule was insane (20 units + newspaper work + grading) until I forced myself to set definite times for everything. Give it a try; those skills that you never needed in high school actually become useful in college. Took me a bit to figure that out.
The thing is, you can just get the signal off of the air. No unlocking required. No licenses, no restrictions (in theory, barring IP things) on what you DO with the signal, how you listen to it, etc. You can build your own radio without violating the DCMA. You can't really do that with a DVD player.
By all means, companies have the right to charge what they want. But I miss the old days, when buying something meant you owned it, and the US Government didn't mandate technology switches to help companies.
Looks like Congress is bribing the public to go along with their policy of locking down media distribution. I wonder how long it's going to take before the only way to listen to the radio will be to pay the RIAA (or fronts) $29.95 a month.
You probably won't have to swing your WHOLE ARM to aim. If your wrist-finger skills are that much better, hold your arm still, perhaps on a comfortable surface, and just move your wrist. Practice now with a laser pointer.
Did you even play beyond Outset Island? The game's style gets much more epic as it goes along, culminating in an absolutely fabulous final battle against Gannondorf. Link and Zelda fight for their lives and the future while old Hyrule dies around them... But apparently that's not epic.
And for people who complain the game was too easy, give me a break. Yes, it was easy. On the other hand, so was every other Zelda game. If you want a really difficuly challenge, you don't play Zelda. Just because something's not really that hard doesn't mean it isn't amazingly fun.
I'd be a card-carrying member of the ACLU if they stuck to their core mission of defending the Bill of Rights. I agree with a lot of their positions, but don't want to sponsor political advocacy on welfare reform ("Rights of the Poor"), stifle legitimate discussion of gender differences (Women's Rights Project's letter to Summers), health care advocacy (subsidizong abortions for poor women http://www.aclu.org/ReproductiveRights/Reproductiv eRightslist.cfm?c=146). I'm opposed to their racial politics as well. I think the ACLU is one of the better liberal-interest groups (from a classical liberal's (think libertarian) point of view), but it's hard to deny their political nature.
Slashdot Mirror
It's more about the trampling in the rush to exit (so it is actually proscribable speech).
It doesn't work well. I fucking hate the PS? controllers, they all hurt my hands. Nintendo controllers (though stereotyped as small) are comfier, more durable, and much more intuitive.
Oh, I think they compare to Cal.
Intro CS at Stanford uses Java and the ACM libraries, it's very painless.
My philosophy professor once amused our class by recounting the results of a poll on the Constitution. Apparently, some polling company decided to ask middle to upper middle class people a bunch of questions about what exactly appears in the constitution. Nearly 30% thought "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" was in the Constitution, and another 25% or so weren't sure.
Yeah, we're basically screwed.
People still get real educations abroad. My dad was transferred to India when I was in 8th grade and was transferred back last year - the family moved with him both times. Watching my brother struggle with the administration to take "advanced" courses made me thank my stars I was able to take the IB diploma with no hassle. That program is much like the one you describe, Shakespeare and poetry by grade nine (IB diploma is 11,12, but almost all the 9 and 10 systems have this) and calculus and basic modern algebra in grade 12.
About your sig - I don't know if you're going for the paradoxical effect, but that's a statement with a well defined value, False. I translate it as for every A, not A. Butthe statement A or not A is logically true, so there exists A, not (not A).
Corroborating evidence for these kindler, gentler genocides?
b) Many people on Slashdot seem to use it non-humorously, and I haven't found anything online to indicate it's a joke. I didn't realize you were an exception. I hope that you realize that some people do tatke it seriously to avoid any future confusion.
c) The epithet, as you point out, has an underlying idea. In an informal forum like Slashdot, the epithet is shorthand for the idea. Rejecting the epithet and shorthand and expecting people to write long explanations of the idea shows your bias against the underlying idea.
Well, I'm glad those two aren't mainstream - I just accepted my (feminist) TA's characterization of them. And please don't patronize me. I have personal friends who are feminist, maybe even feminazis, and I've certainly engaged in genuine discussions of these topics with them. Finally, about Summers, his comments raised the possibility that nature is more powerful than nurture. He made a conjecture based on his personal opinion, in a speech that emphasized the need for further research and investigation. You also misrepresent this conjecture, as do many in the media, by saying that men are better than women at science. More proper statements would be to say that, on average, men have a higher aptitude for science than women do, or that the variance of men's science aptitude exceeds that of women, so we can expect to find more men at the highest - and lowest - levels than women. These statistical semantics are important, since they give the lie to the claims that these statements are discriminatory. The average man and the average women are very poor scientists - different means are no reason to discriminate. They can, however, be used to show that imbalance in science departments attributed to discrimnation may be better attributed to greater population variance.
What you;re hearing is completely different from what the guy said. What about all the things before the abortion views? I'm pretty rabidly pro-choice, and I agree with the previous points. I'd have to say that anyone who outright rejects a woman's choice to stay at home or refuses to entertain any thought of men having some natural advantages (while accepting women's better verbal and social skills) is a feminazi.
a) It's called Godwin's Law.
b) Godwin's Law is fucking idiotic. I'm sick of self-righteous Usenet freaks "calling Godwin's Law" on someone.
c) How about arguing for your ideas, instead of just dismissing others'?
I'm not saying 'feminazi' is a valid term to use in an actual argument - ad hominem attacks don't usually fly too well anyway - but Slashdot is hardly a formal forum. I would call a feminazi someone who dogmatically disregards all sex-related differences between men and women and stifles any possible debate on the matter. For example, the MIT biologist who felt "physically ill" when Larry Summers considered hypothetical differences between men and women is, in my opinion, a feminazi. I would also add people like Andrea Dworkin and Catherine McKinnon who take ridiculously radical stands on issues like pornography and the morality of sex. It's not a hard and fast thing; I think the best way to look at my mental categories would be to consider Rawls' distinction between rational and reasonable people.
As for feminazis in academia, perhaps you're lucky enough not to have to deal with such people. I'm an undergrad at Stanford, and I've had a few feminazi TAs, and there's a seemingly endless parade of feminazi speakers. More importantly, in our required freshman humanities classes, people like Dworkin and McKinnon were used to represent a large part of the feminist movement, which leads me to believe that their ideas have substantial currency.
What about "tiny minority of people who should not be taken seriously, but whose influence in academia and general culture is so disproportionate to their stature as to color their whole movement"? And that's after granting they are a tiny minority of feminists - I don't.
I consider myself somewhat bright, so maybe this will shed some light on your genius friends' point of view. My personal goal is nothing more than to have a happy life; a number of smart people around me think the same way. I think it comes of philosophizing about life and trying to cut through the social pressure to work and achieve ambitions. I'm not saying this is the only answer or the one true attitude to have - I'm just saying it's a remarkably tempting answer that many people who bother to think about the issue adopt.
Acually, the US is the largest manufacturer in the world. Of course, tha's changing, but still. http://iris.sourceoecd.org/vl=22386847/cl=50/nw=1/ rpsv/scoreboard/gf11c.htm
Study skills help. My schedule was insane (20 units + newspaper work + grading) until I forced myself to set definite times for everything. Give it a try; those skills that you never needed in high school actually become useful in college. Took me a bit to figure that out.
The thing is, you can just get the signal off of the air. No unlocking required. No licenses, no restrictions (in theory, barring IP things) on what you DO with the signal, how you listen to it, etc. You can build your own radio without violating the DCMA. You can't really do that with a DVD player.
By all means, companies have the right to charge what they want. But I miss the old days, when buying something meant you owned it, and the US Government didn't mandate technology switches to help companies.
Looks like Congress is bribing the public to go along with their policy of locking down media distribution. I wonder how long it's going to take before the only way to listen to the radio will be to pay the RIAA (or fronts) $29.95 a month.
You probably won't have to swing your WHOLE ARM to aim. If your wrist-finger skills are that much better, hold your arm still, perhaps on a comfortable surface, and just move your wrist. Practice now with a laser pointer.
Did you even play beyond Outset Island? The game's style gets much more epic as it goes along, culminating in an absolutely fabulous final battle against Gannondorf. Link and Zelda fight for their lives and the future while old Hyrule dies around them... But apparently that's not epic.
And for people who complain the game was too easy, give me a break. Yes, it was easy. On the other hand, so was every other Zelda game. If you want a really difficuly challenge, you don't play Zelda. Just because something's not really that hard doesn't mean it isn't amazingly fun.
Thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you!
Fuck! Time to hide my stuff...
Classical liberal in the sense of Locke and Mill. Decidedly not Ted Kennedy or Minnesota.
I'd be a card-carrying member of the ACLU if they stuck to their core mission of defending the Bill of Rights. I agree with a lot of their positions, but don't want to sponsor political advocacy on welfare reform ("Rights of the Poor"), stifle legitimate discussion of gender differences (Women's Rights Project's letter to Summers), health care advocacy (subsidizong abortions for poor women http://www.aclu.org/ReproductiveRights/Reproductiv eRightslist.cfm?c=146). I'm opposed to their racial politics as well.
I think the ACLU is one of the better liberal-interest groups (from a classical liberal's (think libertarian) point of view), but it's hard to deny their political nature.