Thank-you for a) understanding the research that I've alluded to and b) not being too superior to engage the argument.
However, free will and decisions are different things. You may be free to will all day long, but that doesn't mean what you will will translate into a corresponding action. Naturally, what we attempt and what we do are seldom the same. What we need and want differs further, and what we want and do are miles apart still. And even under the "free won't" model, you're still not free of subconscious interference, since the stopping of the action itself is an action.
How this ties into the parent subject is that, if we are driven by basic behavior as much as anything else, even an intelligent person will constantly do stupid things. In other words, more intelligence will not translate to more good decisions.
...because people are not rational. We are sometimes temporarily capable of rationality, but the other 99% of the time we're ruled by subconscious forces. We arrogantly think in terms of making intelligent choices, but modern brain science is showing that decisions are an illusion, that there is only behavior, and that our behavior is out of our conscious control.
So smart-schmart. Intelligence has nothing to do with it.
You know, as someone who owns and uses both a Mac and a PC (thereby insuring my lack of bias), I have been saying for a while that the difference between using the two is only slightly more acute than the difference between Coke and Pepsi. Both OS's are very stable (for me), and I'm thrilled that OS's have matured to where they're at.
I also have to say that nearly ALL of the zealotry I see on a daily basic comes from the Mac side, and most of the time it's obvious the Mac person does not use a PC, since their claims about the Mac's superiority and the PC's tendency to crash then burst into flames are so comically absurd. Not having a preference either way constantly gets me labeled as a Mac basher or a Windows zealot. Constantly.
Mac people are geekier about their brand. I've had many an argument devolve into the Mac person saying, "well, I guess I love the Mac, and you love the PC," to which I reply, "let's get something straight. I don't love my computers. They are machines that help me work, that's all." I've long since suspected that Mac users are trying to justify to themselves all extra money they've shelled out for their machines.
"The problem is that a distribution industry has been built up by otherwise worthless leeches who have convinced artists that they are necessary in order to dole out the artist's works to a wider audience of people."
Correction: The distribution industry was built by entrepreneurs, captains of their industry who took chances and competed and did something special. These leeches are just in charge of that system now; they haven't built anything. They just own it.
Though I have spilled an entire cup of coffee right on a keyboard before, spilling food directly on a keyboard isn't the danger. The danger/annoyance is getting food on your fingers, then having to type. When I eat at the computer, I eat left-handed and type with my right. Anybody else do this?
I really won't get any more ridiculous than one-hand typing, because let's face it - it's geeky to an ugly degree if you can't leave the computer for the ten minutes or so it takes to eat. Fatass.
It's fitting that the RIAA, the same bastards who settled for price gouging us for hundreds of millions of dollars, are now the ones sueing us for creating another means of getting our music. It's the circle of life.
God, why is this illegal cartel still functioning?
No, it's called standing up to a bully. It's a shame more Americans can't tell off these moth*rf*ck*rs, who know that they can strongarm a guy whether or not he is breaking the law - a regular Joe can't afford a lawsuit.
I actually agree with Dvorak about the current iMac design, and I was just looking at one about two hours ago. The new iMac looks like something Dell or Sony would come out with, not Apple.
Even if we had an off-planet colony, how would we populate it? We can't even get a hundred people into space let alone a thousand, let alone a million, let alone a billion.
"Listen, to each their own. I simply find it funny that so many people can defend something, even to the extent of deriding the alternative, when they know NOTHING about it for themselves."
Well, stating a simple and well-recognized fact is not what I'd call "deriding the alternative". In fact, I have nothing against OS X, as suggested in my post. And I've owned Macs here and there in the past, always for specific applications, so I'm also not totally ignorant to its vices and virtues.
"Windows, for the average user, is NOT better than OS X. Mac's, for the average user, are NOT more expensive than the standard windows box."
Here's where we differ. Assuming a Mac is cheaper for the "average user", whoever he is, that has nothing to do with me.
"Mac's hold their value much better, and run generally longer. And on the professional level, don't even get me started. Windows is more popular because it is more widely invested in. That, unfortunately, is the only requisite some individuals have when determining value."
Lots of assumptions in there and frankly most of them are filled with comtempt. Sounds a bit zealous to me.
I repeat: I haven't switched mainly because of the Mac's high price.
Re:I want animated program icons
on
Longhorn Preview
·
· Score: 1
I'm gonna have to go ahead and...disagree with you there.
See, I don't think that's the problem. I think it's pure partisanship. There's nothing Microsoft could do or not do to bulwark complaints from some users (especially Apple users). It's fair to say Apple routinely makes rather large claims about its products (iCal, its usefullness, and its potential impact on the future of the western world comes to mind), but since they are essentially only an 800-gram gorilla (vs. Microsoft's, well, you know), they get away with it.
For some, Microsoft is evil, and that's the end of it. I don't disagree with that part; I just think they are all a bit evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank-you for a) understanding the research that I've alluded to and b) not being too superior to engage the argument.
However, free will and decisions are different things. You may be free to will all day long, but that doesn't mean what you will will translate into a corresponding action. Naturally, what we attempt and what we do are seldom the same. What we need and want differs further, and what we want and do are miles apart still. And even under the "free won't" model, you're still not free of subconscious interference, since the stopping of the action itself is an action.
How this ties into the parent subject is that, if we are driven by basic behavior as much as anything else, even an intelligent person will constantly do stupid things. In other words, more intelligence will not translate to more good decisions.
"Yes, it said that last week in the journal of "Modern Brain Science.""
2 232227/002-9095026-9962462?v=glance
I take it my choice of words was too simple. Maybe I should a intelligized it up for your sake.
Here are some of the links I could find on the subject:
http://scienceweek.com/2004/sa040813-1.htm
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/026
Michael Bolton: You think the pet rock was a great idea?
Tom: Of course it was! The guy made a million dollars!
...because people are not rational. We are sometimes temporarily capable of rationality, but the other 99% of the time we're ruled by subconscious forces. We arrogantly think in terms of making intelligent choices, but modern brain science is showing that decisions are an illusion, that there is only behavior, and that our behavior is out of our conscious control.
So smart-schmart. Intelligence has nothing to do with it.
Oh yes. The trashcan turns into the eject button, just like in life!
Seriously, there is also an eject button on the keyboard.
You know, as someone who owns and uses both a Mac and a PC (thereby insuring my lack of bias), I have been saying for a while that the difference between using the two is only slightly more acute than the difference between Coke and Pepsi. Both OS's are very stable (for me), and I'm thrilled that OS's have matured to where they're at.
I also have to say that nearly ALL of the zealotry I see on a daily basic comes from the Mac side, and most of the time it's obvious the Mac person does not use a PC, since their claims about the Mac's superiority and the PC's tendency to crash then burst into flames are so comically absurd. Not having a preference either way constantly gets me labeled as a Mac basher or a Windows zealot. Constantly.
Mac people are geekier about their brand. I've had many an argument devolve into the Mac person saying, "well, I guess I love the Mac, and you love the PC," to which I reply, "let's get something straight. I don't love my computers. They are machines that help me work, that's all." I've long since suspected that Mac users are trying to justify to themselves all extra money they've shelled out for their machines.
Maybe the future will bring engagement rings topped with viles of AB Negative blood.
"The problem is that a distribution industry has been built up by otherwise worthless leeches who have convinced artists that they are necessary in order to dole out the artist's works to a wider audience of people."
Correction: The distribution industry was built by entrepreneurs, captains of their industry who took chances and competed and did something special. These leeches are just in charge of that system now; they haven't built anything. They just own it.
Though I have spilled an entire cup of coffee right on a keyboard before, spilling food directly on a keyboard isn't the danger. The danger/annoyance is getting food on your fingers, then having to type. When I eat at the computer, I eat left-handed and type with my right. Anybody else do this?
I really won't get any more ridiculous than one-hand typing, because let's face it - it's geeky to an ugly degree if you can't leave the computer for the ten minutes or so it takes to eat. Fatass.
It's fitting that the RIAA, the same bastards who settled for price gouging us for hundreds of millions of dollars, are now the ones sueing us for creating another means of getting our music. It's the circle of life.
God, why is this illegal cartel still functioning?
You're a MORON! How are going to get WORLD DOMINATION when you can't even understand a post before RIDICULING IT? And thanks for the CAPS!
No, it's called standing up to a bully. It's a shame more Americans can't tell off these moth*rf*ck*rs, who know that they can strongarm a guy whether or not he is breaking the law - a regular Joe can't afford a lawsuit.
Yer crazy! Come here, I love you. (Applies headlock)
When a baby babbles randomly, he's learning. When I do it, I'm drunk. Why is there one standard for the baby, another for me?
Everytime I hear "nano", I think of how far ahead of its time "Mork and Myndy" was.
"Amber is hawt." Of course she is. Her freakin' name is Amber.
"The only right that the corporation has that individuals don't is limited liability."
Limited liability is nothing to sneeze at.
I actually agree with Dvorak about the current iMac design, and I was just looking at one about two hours ago. The new iMac looks like something Dell or Sony would come out with, not Apple.
Clear my schedule!
Yeah, like me and Jessica Alba. We'll have the human race up in running in no time.
Even if we had an off-planet colony, how would we populate it? We can't even get a hundred people into space let alone a thousand, let alone a million, let alone a billion.
You're gonna get that chest caught in something if you don't tuck it in.
...pack a' smokes for a mod point.
"Listen, to each their own. I simply find it funny that so many people can defend something, even to the extent of deriding the alternative, when they know NOTHING about it for themselves."
Well, stating a simple and well-recognized fact is not what I'd call "deriding the alternative". In fact, I have nothing against OS X, as suggested in my post. And I've owned Macs here and there in the past, always for specific applications, so I'm also not totally ignorant to its vices and virtues.
"Windows, for the average user, is NOT better than OS X. Mac's, for the average user, are NOT more expensive than the standard windows box."
Here's where we differ. Assuming a Mac is cheaper for the "average user", whoever he is, that has nothing to do with me.
"Mac's hold their value much better, and run generally longer. And on the professional level, don't even get me started. Windows is more popular because it is more widely invested in. That, unfortunately, is the only requisite some individuals have when determining value."
Lots of assumptions in there and frankly most of them are filled with comtempt. Sounds a bit zealous to me.
I repeat: I haven't switched mainly because of the Mac's high price.
I'm gonna have to go ahead and...disagree with you there.
See, I don't think that's the problem. I think it's pure partisanship. There's nothing Microsoft could do or not do to bulwark complaints from some users (especially Apple users). It's fair to say Apple routinely makes rather large claims about its products (iCal, its usefullness, and its potential impact on the future of the western world comes to mind), but since they are essentially only an 800-gram gorilla (vs. Microsoft's, well, you know), they get away with it.
For some, Microsoft is evil, and that's the end of it. I don't disagree with that part; I just think they are all a bit evil.