Ah ha, but have you have seen a so-called 'particle accelerator' actually 'working' or are you just taking the fact that they exist and work on FAITH from someone else.
Ah ha, ha ha. Another soul saved for the good Lord's work.
Indeed, it's only because I have grown up learning about computers from magazines such as byte that I am able to guess what most of the marketing blurbs surrounding todays products is actually hinting at.
God help anyone trying to learn about what computers/software is and how it works today.
1. The UK has seen far more terrorist activity from Catholics vs Protestants in the last 30 years than from any Islamic groups.
2. Iraq was not harbouring terrorists but it's interesting that you accept the word of Al Qaeda, the terrorists you say you are fighting, that there were. There are more terrorists in Iraq now because the country is completely unstable.
3. You have an interesting method of fighting terrorism then; create a scenario guaranteed to produce more terrorist recruits and ignoring the real original terrorist groups that were the route cause of all this.
I'm fairly sure that dangerous or rogue fusion reactors are quite capable of buring their way through the Earths crust and into the very Centre Of The Earth kicking off a reaction which would kill us all and end life as we know it in the Solar System.
I agree, there's no correlation between reading speed and intelligence that I can see - the main factor would seem to be practice I reckon.
Also I think there's a difference between reading for pleasure and reading to understand something like quantum mechanics, in general it's a really bad idea to study a subject like that by reading a text book from cover to cover.
A far more effective technique ( I have found anyway ) is to scan the book first to get a rough idea of what to expect and the main points you will have to digest, then read a bit more of random sections and only then dive in and actually go through the book trying to learn the subject. By the time you do this you should already have a enough understanding of the text to fit in what you are reading to the bigger picture.
There are some important differences between those movemements and the type of activism hinted at by the previous poster.
The main difference is obviously that these movements had some well defined purpose and although they have began with various kinds of illegal action they ended up joining the political process and thus acheiving their goals.
What the previous poster and now you were envisioning is in fact a fantasy, the only groups snmall enough to acheive your goal would be groups of one which will in any real world situation would be unworkable. Democracy has worked well for the last 300 years or so and there is a good reason for that.
Initially the previous poster was describing how dropping chunks of concrete onto trains was a good way of addressing the problem of pollution from cars. CLearly any sensible person would agree this is not the case.
I am not living in a facist state, anyone else living here who suggests I am should perhaps go and find a real facist state to live in and see where they'd prefer to stay.
I'm going to summarise the first portion of what you have said like this:
I belive... I believe... I believe... I am justified in doing anything I like to further those beliefs.
What you are in fact arguing for here is not a system which weighs everyones views but a system which does what you want it to. This is generally known as a dictatorship.
Can you explain to me why you believe how we are not living in a democracy and why some kind of system based purely on your beliefs would be better for me ?
Really I think you are just drawn to the glamour of "Activism" without having really thought through much of the things you say you believe in.
I have been to a lot of festivals and demonstrations and meet a lot of people like you who are very good at repeating slogans or reading the headlines off the magazine they are trying to sell me but can't ever give convincing explanations or proof that what they are saying is true or offer provide me with any reason to agree with what they are saying. In most cases even Politicians are more credible and honest than this type of activist.
"Honesty is a stupid ideal created by religion. It is not a practical way of getting change."
If that is what you believe then I would expect you to live your life and base your actions on those beliefs, if those aren't your beliefs and you were just lying there to further your own ends then I think you've proved my point.
The problem isn't that you are arguing with "very right wing people", which in fact you're not, it's that you aren't arguing very consistently or very well.
The fact is that we do live in democracy, whether or not you agree with that doesn't change that fact.
The government are your voice but they are also the voice of everyone else, the problem you have here is that your extreme, inconsistent and stupid beliefs are not shared by the majority of people and therefore not directly expressed in government policy.
Essentially you are selfish, you believe you are right and everyone else is wrong and you are willing to use whatever means you can to impose your beliefs on everyone else. Whatever that is it's certainly not democratic.
The fact that you believe it's OK to lie and break any laws you decide are not helpful to your cause should be a wake up call for you to rexamine your personal beliefs and stop behaving in such a self centred and selfish manner.
I think it's fair to say that most people can read a line in way under 2 seconds. Try it, get a stopwatch and time yourself. If you can't it's probably because you are still reading out loud and using your finger.
If you had managed to understand what I'd written you'd notice that I didn't say anything about continous stretches of reading, indeed I specifically used 2 hour segments each day as my example.
Lastly, studies have shown that there is no benefit in reading "slowly" and in fact the faster you can scan text the better you are able to comprehend it. Clearly you'd still be in difficulties no matter how fast you learned to read since you are starting from such a low mental baseline.
So you think the best way to argue to the point that cars can damage is the environment is to drop concrete blocks onto freight trains ?
What you are really saying is that criminal dropping concrete on trains, and quite possibly yourself, hold a particular view and hold anyone elses views on the matter as being irrelevant.
This allows you to then ignore any democratic process and justify ( to yourselves ) any action you believe is necessary to impose your agenda on everyone else.
In fact what you're saying here is that you are basically prepared to lie whenever you feel like it might further your agenda which rather throws your statements earlier about how trustworthy your journalistic posts to Indymedia are into doubt doesn't it.
I have decided and no the UK is not an oppressive country.
I don't think this is in anyway a dangerous precedent, if people are going to be posting details of their crimes on peoples servers and then the owners of those servers refuse to co-operate in a subsequent Police investigation then really the Police are perfectly within their rights to force the issue and attempt to gain the evidence they are sure is there.
If this was a Police state then I might view things differently but it isn't and we need to trust both the Police and ourselves ( the voters ) to use what powers they have responsibly and support them when they do.
I don't understand what the difference would be between the Police looking for these log files and an Independant organisation. In both cases they are going to be taking copies of the entire disks to use as evidence and to ensure that they are able to properly recover any log information which may be on there.
Despite some peoples beliefs that the Police are simply the jack booted thugs of the Facist state they are in fact there to protect people like train drivers from crimes such as having large chunks of concrete dropped on their heads. I am confident that this is what their investigation will concentrate on rather than it being used as a tool to harrass Indymedia in which case the best people to retain the evidence and examine it are clearly the Police.
On a slight tangent. Sources for the intelligence services are probably committing serious crimes but it's unlikely that the intelligence services would ever be forced to reveal them.
I've never understood the need for these marches and must admit that I find the concept of "marching season" fairly amusing.
We should just ban them and be done with and in fact a much better law than this Religious Hatred Bill would be a law which banned any public display or expression of religious belief in circumstances where non religious or people of opposite religions may be exposed to it.
You may get a bit of whining to start with but in the long run it would be a good thing.
In actual fact the idea that you are able to comprehend more by reading slowly is incorrect, the faster you can read the quicker your brain can get a impression as to what is going on and this enables you concentrate on the meaning of the sentances and paragraphs rather than each individual word in a sentance.
Obviously if you are just skipping through reading the first couple of words in a paragraph then you are not really reading the entire book.
Slashdot Mirror
Ah ha, but have you have seen a so-called 'particle accelerator' actually 'working' or are you just taking the fact that they exist and work on FAITH from someone else.
Ah ha, ha ha. Another soul saved for the good Lord's work.
Indeed, it's only because I have grown up learning about computers from magazines such as byte that I am able to guess what most of the marketing blurbs surrounding todays products is actually hinting at.
God help anyone trying to learn about what computers/software is and how it works today.
If the GP was scary then you are terrifying.
1. The UK has seen far more terrorist activity from Catholics vs Protestants in the last 30 years than from any Islamic groups.
2. Iraq was not harbouring terrorists but it's interesting that you accept the word of Al Qaeda, the terrorists you say you are fighting, that there were. There are more terrorists in Iraq now because the country is completely unstable.
3. You have an interesting method of fighting terrorism then; create a scenario guaranteed to produce more terrorist recruits and ignoring the real original terrorist groups that were the route cause of all this.
I'm fairly sure that dangerous or rogue fusion reactors are quite capable of buring their way through the Earths crust and into the very Centre Of The Earth kicking off a reaction which would kill us all and end life as we know it in the Solar System.
Seriously, like who here hasn't already done this themselves anyway. At least it's not a dupe I suppose !
Ladytech would the /. readers equivalent.
Hmm yes, like all those other stupid inventions which have totally ruined our idyllic cavemen lives !
You know, other people have already made numerous comments to this effect. How hard is it for YOU to check the comments before YOU post?
Yeah, no hypocrisy here . . .
Over here they're Nimbys
No need to apologise but thanks anyway !
I agree, there's no correlation between reading speed and intelligence that I can see - the main factor would seem to be practice I reckon.
Also I think there's a difference between reading for pleasure and reading to understand something like quantum mechanics, in general it's a really bad idea to study a subject like that by reading a text book from cover to cover.
A far more effective technique ( I have found anyway ) is to scan the book first to get a rough idea of what to expect and the main points you will have to digest, then read a bit more of random sections and only then dive in and actually go through the book trying to learn the subject. By the time you do this you should already have a enough understanding of the text to fit in what you are reading to the bigger picture.
There are some important differences between those movemements and the type of activism hinted at by the previous poster.
The main difference is obviously that these movements had some well defined purpose and although they have began with various kinds of illegal action they ended up joining the political process and thus acheiving their goals.
What the previous poster and now you were envisioning is in fact a fantasy, the only groups snmall enough to acheive your goal would be groups of one which will in any real world situation would be unworkable. Democracy has worked well for the last 300 years or so and there is a good reason for that.
Initially the previous poster was describing how dropping chunks of concrete onto trains was a good way of addressing the problem of pollution from cars. CLearly any sensible person would agree this is not the case.
I am not living in a facist state, anyone else living here who suggests I am should perhaps go and find a real facist state to live in and see where they'd prefer to stay.
What software analogy ?
I'm going to summarise the first portion of what you have said like this:
I belive
What you are in fact arguing for here is not a system which weighs everyones views but a system which does what you want it to. This is generally known as a dictatorship.
Can you explain to me why you believe how we are not living in a democracy and why some kind of system based purely on your beliefs would be better for me ?
Really I think you are just drawn to the glamour of "Activism" without having really thought through much of the things you say you believe in.
I have been to a lot of festivals and demonstrations and meet a lot of people like you who are very good at repeating slogans or reading the headlines off the magazine they are trying to sell me but can't ever give convincing explanations or proof that what they are saying is true or offer provide me with any reason to agree with what they are saying. In most cases even Politicians are more credible and honest than this type of activist.
"Honesty is a stupid ideal created by religion. It is not a practical way of getting change."
If that is what you believe then I would expect you to live your life and base your actions on those beliefs, if those aren't your beliefs and you were just lying there to further your own ends then I think you've proved my point.
The problem isn't that you are arguing with "very right wing people", which in fact you're not, it's that you aren't arguing very consistently or very well.
The fact is that we do live in democracy, whether or not you agree with that doesn't change that fact.
The government are your voice but they are also the voice of everyone else, the problem you have here is that your extreme, inconsistent and stupid beliefs are not shared by the majority of people and therefore not directly expressed in government policy.
Essentially you are selfish, you believe you are right and everyone else is wrong and you are willing to use whatever means you can to impose your beliefs on everyone else. Whatever that is it's certainly not democratic.
The fact that you believe it's OK to lie and break any laws you decide are not helpful to your cause should be a wake up call for you to rexamine your personal beliefs and stop behaving in such a self centred and selfish manner.
I've met people like you, ill informed nutcases who are unable to hold a rational discussion.
I think it's fair to say that most people can read a line in way under 2 seconds. Try it, get a stopwatch and time yourself. If you can't it's probably because you are still reading out loud and using your finger.
If you had managed to understand what I'd written you'd notice that I didn't say anything about continous stretches of reading, indeed I specifically used 2 hour segments each day as my example.
Lastly, studies have shown that there is no benefit in reading "slowly" and in fact the faster you can scan text the better you are able to comprehend it. Clearly you'd still be in difficulties no matter how fast you learned to read since you are starting from such a low mental baseline.
So you think the best way to argue to the point that cars can damage is the environment is to drop concrete blocks onto freight trains ?
What you are really saying is that criminal dropping concrete on trains, and quite possibly yourself, hold a particular view and hold anyone elses views on the matter as being irrelevant.
This allows you to then ignore any democratic process and justify ( to yourselves ) any action you believe is necessary to impose your agenda on everyone else.
Yeah, if you can't beat them - join them.
In fact what you're saying here is that you are basically prepared to lie whenever you feel like it might further your agenda which rather throws your statements earlier about how trustworthy your journalistic posts to Indymedia are into doubt doesn't it.
"There is no evidence of the crime being committed other than the original post"
So then you should be pleased that the Police are doing their best to gather evidence and establish the facts of the matter.
What is Indymedia doing ? Making things awkward for the Police pursuing their enquiries.
I have decided and no the UK is not an oppressive country.
I don't think this is in anyway a dangerous precedent, if people are going to be posting details of their crimes on peoples servers and then the owners of those servers refuse to co-operate in a subsequent Police investigation then really the Police are perfectly within their rights to force the issue and attempt to gain the evidence they are sure is there.
If this was a Police state then I might view things differently but it isn't and we need to trust both the Police and ourselves ( the voters ) to use what powers they have responsibly and support them when they do.
I don't understand what the difference would be between the Police looking for these log files and an Independant organisation. In both cases they are going to be taking copies of the entire disks to use as evidence and to ensure that they are able to properly recover any log information which may be on there.
Despite some peoples beliefs that the Police are simply the jack booted thugs of the Facist state they are in fact there to protect people like train drivers from crimes such as having large chunks of concrete dropped on their heads. I am confident that this is what their investigation will concentrate on rather than it being used as a tool to harrass Indymedia in which case the best people to retain the evidence and examine it are clearly the Police.
On a slight tangent. Sources for the intelligence services are probably committing serious crimes but it's unlikely that the intelligence services would ever be forced to reveal them.
I've never understood the need for these marches and must admit that I find the concept of "marching season" fairly amusing.
We should just ban them and be done with and in fact a much better law than this Religious Hatred Bill would be a law which banned any public display or expression of religious belief in circumstances where non religious or people of opposite religions may be exposed to it.
You may get a bit of whining to start with but in the long run it would be a good thing.
In actual fact the idea that you are able to comprehend more by reading slowly is incorrect, the faster you can read the quicker your brain can get a impression as to what is going on and this enables you concentrate on the meaning of the sentances and paragraphs rather than each individual word in a sentance.
Obviously if you are just skipping through reading the first couple of words in a paragraph then you are not really reading the entire book.
Moby Dick was a bit like that and ( I think ) the only book I have started and never finished.
If you like endless ill informed speculation about whether whales are fish I'm sure it's a great book.