"Freedom and personal responsibility." Those are great ideals. Bravo!!!
"almost utopian style of government" Be careful how you use Utopia. People have tried in the past...
"This you cannot do with Christian principles, or most any other religion's principles, for that matter." Religion has been around as long as civilization. It has been at the forefront of many of civilization's triumphs as well as degregation. There are many desireable characteristics of Christianity. Some not so desireable but then, many new sects of Christianity, as well as other religions, have been started to solve these problems and create new ones.
And then, is materalism and aethism not a religion in the strictest definition?
"I call that protection of one individual from another that attempts to subdue his inalienable rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness"
That is a form of morality. Not all Governments past and present equally enforce this form of morality.
m-w.com defines morality as 1 a : a moral discourse, statement, or lesson b : a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson 2 a : a doctrine or system of moral conduct b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct 3 : conformity to ideals of right human conduct
So your statement of government morality falls under the explination 3, unless you disagree of course.
On a more serious level, you do have a good point.
As for Michael, it really is hard to come to my own conclusion.
Frankly, his comments seem leading. To me, it sounds like he is telling me what to think. I'd be happier and would probably agree with him more if he wern't as opinionated. Yes, he has the right to express his opinion, but some people will take offense to it.
Im sorry for telling you to shut up. It was rash and stupid.
Did I say I'm the job description manager of Slashdot?
And yes, we are allowed to complain about an "editorial". Michael seems like the "editor" to make an "editorial" out of these pieces.
This makes him an attractive target of flak. Here's my "editorial". I think editors should leave the discussion to the discussers. At least leave an interesting point to chew on. Dont outright tell them how to think. That seems like leading a discussion. Let me make my own conclusionsions on this matter.
"Anyways... don't like Slashdot? Start your own website." What if I told you this? If you dont like the Pledge, move to France. These statements are not helpful at all.
BTW, I don't think you should move to France unless you want to...
Slamming the mods on their own web page is like going to someone's house and smacking them because you don't like their curtains.
I disagree./. is not Michael's house. It is a place for discussion about current issues. If we don't like something, we are allowed to complain. Isn't that what/. is based on?
What underlying principles do you use to base the government institutions on?
The government deems killing and stealing as immoral and then takes away certain "rights" of killers and thieves. Every government has to have morality. Even anarchy has a moral code.
You have no right to tell me to shut up. Last time I checked, we have freedom of speech, even on/.
Anyways, Michael's counterpoints should not be an editorial of the article post. His counterpoint should be in the comment section like everybody elses counterpoint.
This is supposed to be a discussion by several different points. Michael basically is making this discussion one-sided.
His role is to just post the article. His role is not the tonesetter of discussion.
Whether you agree with this issue or not, you should take offense when somebody tells you how to think. Michael's editorial makes/. no better than CNN.
A magazine can gain readership by making articles have controversial conclusions. Even scientific journals have stooped to this level.
Would this be posted on/. if Windows 2k3 was faster?
Also the article did not talk much about the methedology of the tests. Anyways are they going to say, "yeah, we doctored these tests to make Samba appear better"?
I just want to see the test results, thats all. The link you provided, http://www.veritest.com/clients/reports /microsoft/ ms_netbench.pdf showed a test you think is doctored. Whats to say the vunet test isnt doctored also?
Aren't we tracked though? We have a SSN, pay taxes, have an address, maybe vote, etc...
As long as this database is accessable to the masses, is this a big brother issue?
Any why not try to attack the "problem" of homelessness on a national level? Yes, its behavior modification, but so is school. I think society will benefit from this. There will be a healthier population, we can find fugitives, find relatives, track the progress of helping the homeless, etc.
It takes a willingness and knowlege. Ben, the homeless man I knew was missing a leg, weak, smelly, had bad eyesight, swollen hands.
His sister kicked him out of the house, punching him and cursing him. It took awhile to even convince him he should try to find his family. Things in life get in the way.
Ben needed help. He needed to go through detox, a prostic leg, new wheelchair, food, and a payee. He needed a healthy environment.
I lost contact with Ben. I don't know if he is alive. He was very sick when I last saw him.
I really think a registry of the homeless will help less of them to slip through the cracks like Ben did.
"If you want to be educated go to an NA meeting or volunteer at a soup kitchen."
Already did. I tried helping a homeless person. He did stay with me too. I fed him and cleaned him up a few times and tried to get him into the VA.
I tried to get him in all of the programs in the city, but nobody would take him. They said he already went there and would leave when his girlfriend, who is addicted to crack, came to get him. The system gave up on him. The social worker told me to stop taking care of him.
I'm still upset by this whole situation and I was in way over my head. Ben, the homeless man, was afraid to die and wanted to see his family. I could not force Ben to make the right choices. It took alot of energy to try to help and convince him. Ultimately, he didn't make the right choices. He continued to drink and did not stick with any program.
I couldn't force Ben to help himself. Ben needs to make that decision. I could only open the door, not make him walk through it.
I just feel like there is very little return with alot of the homeless. If we invested more in helping people willing to help themselves (like the poverty in foreign countries), we can get a better humanitarian return.
I really don't know what to do about people who don't make the right choices. We can't really help them if they don't put forth the effort to help themselves. It's sad.
Slashdot Mirror
"Freedom and personal responsibility."
Those are great ideals. Bravo!!!
"almost utopian style of government"
Be careful how you use Utopia. People have tried in the past...
"This you cannot do with Christian principles, or most any other religion's principles, for that matter."
Religion has been around as long as civilization. It has been at the forefront of many of civilization's triumphs as well as degregation.
There are many desireable characteristics of Christianity. Some not so desireable but then, many new sects of Christianity, as well as other religions, have been started to solve these problems and create new ones.
And then, is materalism and aethism not a religion in the strictest definition?
"I call that protection of one individual from another that attempts to subdue his inalienable rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness"
That is a form of morality. Not all Governments past and present equally enforce this form of morality.
m-w.com defines morality as
1 a : a moral discourse, statement, or lesson b : a literary or other imaginative work teaching a moral lesson
2 a : a doctrine or system of moral conduct b plural : particular moral principles or rules of conduct
3 : conformity to ideals of right human conduct
So your statement of government morality falls under the explination 3, unless you disagree of course.
On a more serious level, you do have a good point.
As for Michael, it really is hard to come to my own conclusion.
Frankly, his comments seem leading. To me, it sounds like he is telling me what to think.
I'd be happier and would probably agree with him more if he wern't as opinionated.
Yes, he has the right to express his opinion, but some people will take offense to it.
Im sorry for telling you to shut up. It was rash and stupid.
ok, Ill exercise my freedom
shut up!!!
lol
Did I say I'm the job description manager of Slashdot?
And yes, we are allowed to complain about an "editorial". Michael seems like the "editor" to make an "editorial" out of these pieces.
This makes him an attractive target of flak.
Here's my "editorial". I think editors should leave the discussion to the discussers. At least leave an interesting point to chew on.
Dont outright tell them how to think. That seems like leading a discussion. Let me make my own conclusionsions on this matter.
"Anyways... don't like Slashdot? Start your own website."
What if I told you this? If you dont like the Pledge, move to France. These statements are not helpful at all.
BTW, I don't think you should move to France unless you want to...
Slamming the mods on their own web page is like going to someone's house and smacking them because you don't like their curtains.
I disagree. /. is not Michael's house. It is a place for discussion about current issues. If we don't like something, we are allowed to complain. Isn't that what /. is based on?
lol...one of that circular logic things...How dare I make such an illogical statement.
ok...let me rephrase
I take offense when somebody, who's job is to post an article, tells me how to think.
I'm sure other people do also.
What underlying principles do you use to base the government institutions on?
The government deems killing and stealing as immoral and then takes away certain "rights" of killers and thieves. Every government has to have morality. Even anarchy has a moral code.
/. is taking Groupthink to a whole new level.
You have no right to tell me to shut up. Last time I checked, we have freedom of speech, even on /.
Anyways, Michael's counterpoints should not be an editorial of the article post. His counterpoint should be in the comment section like everybody elses counterpoint.
Who made him Dictator of Discussion?
Ummm...no...
/. no better than CNN.
This is supposed to be a discussion by several different points. Michael basically is making this discussion one-sided.
His role is to just post the article. His role is not the tonesetter of discussion.
Whether you agree with this issue or not, you should take offense when somebody tells you how to think. Michael's editorial makes
now he adds his editorial.
/. seems like a dogmatic platform for Michael to spread his agenda.
Every time Michael makes a post like this,
Do you mean "one nation over God"?
Besides "one nation without god" sounds like a Stalinist Russia or Communist China pledge.
Well Communism is based on materialism which seeks a life without God.
Communism is going the way of the Dodo so the newest wave of materialism is through Secular Humanism.
So by what principles do you build a Secular Humanist society? What governs morality? What do you hold in highest esteem for such a society to work?
Yeah...this kindof defeats the purpose of comments.
Anyways, if Michael can use his position to further his cause, is it ok for moderators to moderate in favor of there causes?
Michael is clearly abusing his power. Wait a minute, abuse of power is something that Michael would complain about in one of his "editorials".
So its ok to abuse power as long as it favors Michael's cause?
A magazine can gain readership by making articles have controversial conclusions. Even scientific journals have stooped to this level.
/. if Windows 2k3 was faster?
s /microsoft/ ms_netbench.pdf
Would this be posted on
Also the article did not talk much about the methedology of the tests.
Anyways are they going to say, "yeah, we doctored these tests to make Samba appear better"?
I just want to see the test results, thats all.
The link you provided,
http://www.veritest.com/clients/report
showed a test you think is doctored. Whats to say the vunet test isnt doctored also?
"why would they lie about any of them?"
Pride, aka pissing contest. People involved with free software seem to have a very strong hatred of Microsoft.
And yes, there are extremists in the open source community.
Besides, the organization making these statements might have a financial interest in Samba.
Thats why you have people going to business school.
I'd like to see the test conditions also.
Anybody can doctor a test, especially a performance test, to make one product appear better than another.
Coupled with the articles obvious bias toward Samba, it really doesnt have much credibility by itself.
You still need the question marks for the Stored Procedures.
How would you insert/update/delete a record?
Great. Now they know what it is like to have to change their number after being harrased over the telephone.
Maybe now they have to tell all their friends to let it ring twice, hand up and call again or something like that.
http://www.go-mono.com/
Aren't we tracked though? We have a SSN, pay taxes, have an address, maybe vote, etc...
As long as this database is accessable to the masses, is this a big brother issue?
Any why not try to attack the "problem" of homelessness on a national level? Yes, its behavior modification, but so is school. I think society will benefit from this. There will be a healthier population, we can find fugitives, find relatives, track the progress of helping the homeless, etc.
I don't see the social harm in doing this.
That's a good idea.
It takes a willingness and knowlege. Ben, the homeless man I knew was missing a leg, weak, smelly, had bad eyesight, swollen hands.
His sister kicked him out of the house, punching him and cursing him. It took awhile to even convince him he should try to find his family. Things in life get in the way.
Ben needed help. He needed to go through detox, a prostic leg, new wheelchair, food, and a payee. He needed a healthy environment.
I lost contact with Ben. I don't know if he is alive. He was very sick when I last saw him.
I really think a registry of the homeless will help less of them to slip through the cracks like Ben did.
"If you want to be educated go to an NA meeting or volunteer at a soup kitchen."
Already did.
I tried helping a homeless person. He did stay with me too. I fed him and cleaned him up a few times and tried to get him into the VA.
I tried to get him in all of the programs in the city, but nobody would take him. They said he already went there and would leave when his girlfriend, who is addicted to crack, came to get him. The system gave up on him. The social worker told me to stop taking care of him.
I'm still upset by this whole situation and I was in way over my head.
Ben, the homeless man, was afraid to die and wanted to see his family. I could not force Ben to make the right choices. It took alot of energy to try to help and convince him. Ultimately, he didn't make the right choices. He continued to drink and did not stick with any program.
I couldn't force Ben to help himself. Ben needs to make that decision. I could only open the door, not make him walk through it.
I just feel like there is very little return with alot of the homeless. If we invested more in helping people willing to help themselves (like the poverty in foreign countries), we can get a better humanitarian return.
I really don't know what to do about people who don't make the right choices. We can't really help them if they don't put forth the effort to help themselves. It's sad.
Very well...
It seems like we're at the crux of the homeless problem then.
Do we help people who "cant help themselves"? What constitutes as "cant help themselves"?
What do we do with people that "nobody want's in their backyard"? What about the crime, drugs, "negative influences", etc?