Why is it our media (even this post) always seems to portray Hamas in a positive light?
This conflict would end the SECOND Hamas stopped their aggression. The moment Hamas stops shooting, IDF stops shooting, period. Hamas lies and has no moral honor, they betray everything, and want nothing less than to wipe other people off the face of the earth. How is that humanitarian and moral? And yet the western media doesn't portray that side of the story!
You completely missed the point of my argument, which is that arguing if it is human caused or not is MISSING the point. We should be good stewards of the earth because it is RIGHT, not because of some weak correlations.
However, to respond to your argument, it is quite simple: Correlation does not equal Causation.
There have been many predictions made in the last 100 years, all across the spectrum (from frozen to heated). We cannot just cherry pick what predictions we like, and then claim "see, they were right!"
Fact: The current climate is in a warming trend. Fact: The sun is hotter now than it was. Fact: Mars is warmer now than it was.
Do we have enough evidence to say the climate change is warming because of the sun? NO. For the same reason we don't have enough evidence to say it is human caused. The fact of the matter we are talking geological times, and we need thousands of years of measurements to truly understand geological trends. We don't have that. We cannot get that in any reliable means.
So cut it already with the fallacious arguments, and lets get on with being good stewards, because it is the right thing to do.
Everybody can agree the climate is changing, in a warming trend. However, the breakdown in logic is the immediate correlation that it must be human caused. The fact of the matter is the world's climate changes all the time, in massive geological cycles.
We must be good stewards of our planet, this is also undeniable.
The problem I have with "Global Warming" fanatics, is they have flawed logic (human caused) an then go into bizarre, egregious means to deal with it like carbon credits, and whatnot. The fact of the matter is we should definitely work to be more responsible for our world--but NOT because it is in a warming trend. We should do it simply because IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. By disassociating the reason from morality, and tying it to a flawed premise (human caused) we are hurting the entire effort--and meanwhile corporations and the government continue to act irresponsibly.
I'm for rational, logical use of our planet. We are creatures of this planet, just like every other creature. We should treat it carefully, only using our share. We are not here to "preserve" the planet, as it is here to be used. But we should use it properly, wisely, and in a manner that helps future generations of all planetary denizens (human and all others).
The article is close, but just barely misses the mark.
People don't mind creativity on its surface, but what they dislike is the change that inevitably comes from it. People resist change, for all the reasons outlined in the article. People like things to stay the same, not change. And creativity drives change.
Because OSC had the gall to speak out, he is being lamblasted, mocked, taunted, boycotted and frankly many of the things people claim are hate crimes are being enacted upon him.
Everybody says it is because of his actions.
So effectively, what you are saying is if he just kept his opinions to himself, it would be Okay. Hypocritical?
What I am hearing is it is okay to speak out, boycott, make a big stink, as long as it aligns with the liberal left. But if it is in disagreement, then you are blasted for being an ignorant, religious uneducated fool.
I think Tolerance is exactly what is needed here. People need to understand that our society is founded on disagreeing and allowing disagreements. Why are people trying to stifle somebody's opinion that disagrees with them?
Why does the "anonymous" original poster hate people who disagree with his perspective, so much so that he has to behave like a religious zealot and try to rally a boycott of OSC's work? Do you want to suggest a book burning next? Do you realize the OP sounds just as hateful as what is being presented?
Just because OSC has differing views does not mean they are somehow less valuable than your views.
To think so is to lower yourself below the other person.
Not my quote, but applicable: "Humility is the ability to not think you are right, and to consider other opinions."
The Hubris of our world is increasing, and it scares me. Even if you don't agree with his perspectives, if you lower yourself to "boycotts" and astroturfing the web with hate against OSC (go look at the ridiculous vitriol on the IMDB comments), then you are as bad as the Westboro's.
And of course the $3 doctor gives the same level of service, has the same training, and maintains the same level of medical cleanliness as the $50 US doctor.
I can assure you this is not the case. I have a friend who was unfortunately in the mix of "Chinese Doctors" when he was nearly killed by what we'd consider malpractice. To be a doctor there you can go open a shop and claim to be a doctor. Training? Pshaw. Cleanliness? Why bother, that takes more time.
Your rose tinted glasses have a few blind spots on them.
Seriously? Provide one bit of evidence beyond your emotive trolling and maybe you can edge towards credibility, but the reality is America's workers are/nowhere near/ "slave labor practices." America's workers are in the lap of LUXURY. How horrible is it for an employer to expect you to actually work an honest day's work for the hours you are paid? There is no constitutional right guaranteeing you a job, so get over it.
s/Fox/Mass Market News/
I believe all news agencies are factually wildly inaccurate. Pick your poison. Why call out Fox when CBS or CNN just as bad. NBC? Good night.
And this doesn't frighten ANY of the privacy advocates here on slashdot? Were this any other government organization people would be screaming to the hills, so why is Obama given a free pass for this sort of privacy incursions?
Please take your own advise. When you get to an income bracket where you can itemize taxes, suddenly you will have a new realization that our system is very screwed up. Itemizing is not "dodging taxes", that is just the oppositions tagline. He has paid millions in taxes every year, he does everything legally, and on top of that pays millions more to charity. This last round he didn't even claim everything he could potentially claim, and he's still lamblasted for it. It is laughable how ridiculously illogical his opposition is.
Glad to see you can join in the choir, and complain about others.
The cry that he doesn't have details is merely a tactic, because they have so little else of "meat" to argue. The Obama camp's responses have descended to schoolyard "liar!" and "I know you are but what am I" type responses. This is what happens when somebody has already lost the argument.
The reality is, you don't WANT to get into the weeds of how it'll work right now because doing so would preclude the entire concept of bi-partisanship. If you want to leave the door open for bi-partisanship, you define a direction (which Romney has done) and you define core principals that will be used as a guide (which Romney has done). Arguing that there are no details is frankly getting hoodwinked by the Obama campaign, it is short-sighted and ignorant, and more people need to wake up and recognize it for the sleight of hand tactic that it is.
Consider this, if he came out and outlined a plan that was 100% palpable to every voter and it was detailed with clarity, the Obama campaign would then argue that he is not being bi-partisan, because they didn't have a chance to give input! Plus, they would argue that he has changed direction in some random way, because it doesn't match word for word some comment made six years ago!
The latter is laughable. Is it really a BAD THING if somebody changes their position after listening to both sides and carefully considering the options? I would think this is a GOOD THING, yet for some reason the political system (both sides) have used it over and over as a cry that somebody is somehow a bad person if they change their opinion over time, and they keep shouting this over and over in hopes that eventually enough people will believe it!
Answer me this: have you EVER changed your mind? On any topic? Are you a horrible person because of this?
The sad thing is, because of how human psychology works, despite the facts, many people just listen to the "party line" and stick with it, without taking the time to do the proper research (getting away from the "party" propaganda sites), as did the 2nd parent.
Rather than dredging up the distant past for skeletons that are scary, why not look for positive things more recent? Not that slashdot has ever claimed to be neutral in its journalism (hah), but this is a bit leaning in a biased article. How about discussing all the technology that the Obama camp has killed, at least to balance it out?
I would love to sign the petition on whitehouse.gov, but there is no chance I'll give that presidency my info. Next thing I know I'll be bombarded by political info I don't care about.
Funny to see this comment from slashdot, since the rest of the world often things the same thing of the fanatic and horridly biased opensource slashdot topics and commentators.
All of these arguments I've seen from people comparing Sun vs random 3rd party intel servers obviously have never used a Sun. The best explanation comes from an immediate case experience. We have 70+ sun servers. We buy a sun server, open the box, turn it on, it works. Recently we picked up two AMD based servers from a linux/bsd 'open' source rack-server provider (name left out for their own sake). The RAID flakes out (thanks Adaptec for the crappy zero-channel raid card!), the thing is unreliable. We've replaced one motherboard, and had problems with both systems weekly. The amount of time we've spent trouble shooting these POS servers far outweighs any cost benefit. If sun had the new intel boxes on the market at the time, we would have bought them without a second thought. There is something to be said for the level of quality sun ships in their servers, even their low cost ones. This alone makes them uncomparable IMHO.
We use Tomcat on Solaris in a large production environment (10,000,000 hits daily). We use Solaris over Linux or BSD because it isn't any cheaper to run the Opensource options (consider v100 servers in a load-balanced server farm), and you get the benefit of a more robust OS. We also have a cluster which runs weblogic, and to be honest tomcat has a LONG ways to go to be comparable to some of the features of weblogic (such as session mirroring), but I believe it'll get there some day.
One of the best little known firewalls to be found, and it is FREE on Solaris. This thing kicks the snot out of PIX and many other firewalls in a standalone configuration (it isn't too great for a large deployment of firewalls because it has no distributed management capability, ohwell). It has a real firewall front-end and frankly is one of the worst cases of mis-marketted technology next to the Alpha CPU. If you have Solaris 8, go download a copy of sunscreen and try it out, it rocks.
So if you wanted a GOOD firewall, cheap; dont think linux, BSD or any other variant. Until recently you could get x86 solaris with sunscreen.
I've used 6, 7 and 8; and 8 is by far the most superior IMHO, because it is the most 'mob standard compliant' (so to speak). It is more like the GPL world of unix, it includes bash and apache by default for hells sake. Yes, it changes things around from sol7--this is a GOOD THING. They are trying to cleanup the years of crud which has builtup in the dark corners of the OS. yes, crle was a royal PITA, ohwell.
Frankly, I cant wait for sol9; it is supposed to dump openwindows (finally) and CDE is to be moved to a 'deprecated' state in lieu of Gnome. Can anybody who has used the early release version validate this?
The intention would be to supplement the existing human workforce, not replace it. Currently there is just too much information for even a large team of individuals to handle well; a system like this would supplement their efforts and massage them into something more manageable for both sending AND RECEIVING alerts (I would love to receive alerts from other people about anomolous behaviour from my network)
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it our media (even this post) always seems to portray Hamas in a positive light?
This conflict would end the SECOND Hamas stopped their aggression. The moment Hamas stops shooting, IDF stops shooting, period. Hamas lies and has no moral honor, they betray everything, and want nothing less than to wipe other people off the face of the earth. How is that humanitarian and moral? And yet the western media doesn't portray that side of the story!
You completely missed the point of my argument, which is that arguing if it is human caused or not is MISSING the point. We should be good stewards of the earth because it is RIGHT, not because of some weak correlations.
However, to respond to your argument, it is quite simple: Correlation does not equal Causation.
There have been many predictions made in the last 100 years, all across the spectrum (from frozen to heated). We cannot just cherry pick what predictions we like, and then claim "see, they were right!"
Fact: The current climate is in a warming trend.
Fact: The sun is hotter now than it was.
Fact: Mars is warmer now than it was.
Do we have enough evidence to say the climate change is warming because of the sun? NO. For the same reason we don't have enough evidence to say it is human caused. The fact of the matter we are talking geological times, and we need thousands of years of measurements to truly understand geological trends. We don't have that. We cannot get that in any reliable means.
So cut it already with the fallacious arguments, and lets get on with being good stewards, because it is the right thing to do.
Everybody can agree the climate is changing, in a warming trend. However, the breakdown in logic is the immediate correlation that it must be human caused. The fact of the matter is the world's climate changes all the time, in massive geological cycles.
We must be good stewards of our planet, this is also undeniable.
The problem I have with "Global Warming" fanatics, is they have flawed logic (human caused) an then go into bizarre, egregious means to deal with it like carbon credits, and whatnot. The fact of the matter is we should definitely work to be more responsible for our world--but NOT because it is in a warming trend. We should do it simply because IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. By disassociating the reason from morality, and tying it to a flawed premise (human caused) we are hurting the entire effort--and meanwhile corporations and the government continue to act irresponsibly.
I'm for rational, logical use of our planet. We are creatures of this planet, just like every other creature. We should treat it carefully, only using our share. We are not here to "preserve" the planet, as it is here to be used. But we should use it properly, wisely, and in a manner that helps future generations of all planetary denizens (human and all others).
The article is close, but just barely misses the mark.
People don't mind creativity on its surface, but what they dislike is the change that inevitably comes from it. People resist change, for all the reasons outlined in the article. People like things to stay the same, not change. And creativity drives change.
I don't think you understand what that means.
You make the point exactly. if somebody disagrees with your view, you mock and curse them.
You are not a model of tolerance, you are a model of intolerance.
Because OSC had the gall to speak out, he is being lamblasted, mocked, taunted, boycotted and frankly many of the things people claim are hate crimes are being enacted upon him.
Everybody says it is because of his actions.
So effectively, what you are saying is if he just kept his opinions to himself, it would be Okay. Hypocritical?
What I am hearing is it is okay to speak out, boycott, make a big stink, as long as it aligns with the liberal left. But if it is in disagreement, then you are blasted for being an ignorant, religious uneducated fool.
I think Tolerance is exactly what is needed here. People need to understand that our society is founded on disagreeing and allowing disagreements. Why are people trying to stifle somebody's opinion that disagrees with them?
Why does the "anonymous" original poster hate people who disagree with his perspective, so much so that he has to behave like a religious zealot and try to rally a boycott of OSC's work? Do you want to suggest a book burning next? Do you realize the OP sounds just as hateful as what is being presented?
Just because OSC has differing views does not mean they are somehow less valuable than your views.
To think so is to lower yourself below the other person.
Not my quote, but applicable: "Humility is the ability to not think you are right, and to consider other opinions."
The Hubris of our world is increasing, and it scares me. Even if you don't agree with his perspectives, if you lower yourself to "boycotts" and astroturfing the web with hate against OSC (go look at the ridiculous vitriol on the IMDB comments), then you are as bad as the Westboro's.
Think about it.
And of course the $3 doctor gives the same level of service, has the same training, and maintains the same level of medical cleanliness as the $50 US doctor. I can assure you this is not the case. I have a friend who was unfortunately in the mix of "Chinese Doctors" when he was nearly killed by what we'd consider malpractice. To be a doctor there you can go open a shop and claim to be a doctor. Training? Pshaw. Cleanliness? Why bother, that takes more time. Your rose tinted glasses have a few blind spots on them.
Seriously? Provide one bit of evidence beyond your emotive trolling and maybe you can edge towards credibility, but the reality is America's workers are /nowhere near/ "slave labor practices." America's workers are in the lap of LUXURY. How horrible is it for an employer to expect you to actually work an honest day's work for the hours you are paid? There is no constitutional right guaranteeing you a job, so get over it.
s/Fox/Mass Market News/ I believe all news agencies are factually wildly inaccurate. Pick your poison. Why call out Fox when CBS or CNN just as bad. NBC? Good night.
And this doesn't frighten ANY of the privacy advocates here on slashdot? Were this any other government organization people would be screaming to the hills, so why is Obama given a free pass for this sort of privacy incursions?
Please take your own advise. When you get to an income bracket where you can itemize taxes, suddenly you will have a new realization that our system is very screwed up. Itemizing is not "dodging taxes", that is just the oppositions tagline. He has paid millions in taxes every year, he does everything legally, and on top of that pays millions more to charity. This last round he didn't even claim everything he could potentially claim, and he's still lamblasted for it. It is laughable how ridiculously illogical his opposition is.
Glad to see you can join in the choir, and complain about others.
The cry that he doesn't have details is merely a tactic, because they have so little else of "meat" to argue. The Obama camp's responses have descended to schoolyard "liar!" and "I know you are but what am I" type responses. This is what happens when somebody has already lost the argument.
The reality is, you don't WANT to get into the weeds of how it'll work right now because doing so would preclude the entire concept of bi-partisanship. If you want to leave the door open for bi-partisanship, you define a direction (which Romney has done) and you define core principals that will be used as a guide (which Romney has done). Arguing that there are no details is frankly getting hoodwinked by the Obama campaign, it is short-sighted and ignorant, and more people need to wake up and recognize it for the sleight of hand tactic that it is.
Consider this, if he came out and outlined a plan that was 100% palpable to every voter and it was detailed with clarity, the Obama campaign would then argue that he is not being bi-partisan, because they didn't have a chance to give input! Plus, they would argue that he has changed direction in some random way, because it doesn't match word for word some comment made six years ago!
The latter is laughable. Is it really a BAD THING if somebody changes their position after listening to both sides and carefully considering the options? I would think this is a GOOD THING, yet for some reason the political system (both sides) have used it over and over as a cry that somebody is somehow a bad person if they change their opinion over time, and they keep shouting this over and over in hopes that eventually enough people will believe it!
Answer me this: have you EVER changed your mind? On any topic? Are you a horrible person because of this?
The sad thing is, because of how human psychology works, despite the facts, many people just listen to the "party line" and stick with it, without taking the time to do the proper research (getting away from the "party" propaganda sites), as did the 2nd parent.
Kudos to you AlphaWold_JK.
How dare you speak facts and reason!
What do you think is "enough"?
I suspect he pays more in taxes than you, based on $$ amount alone.
Rather than dredging up the distant past for skeletons that are scary, why not look for positive things more recent? Not that slashdot has ever claimed to be neutral in its journalism (hah), but this is a bit leaning in a biased article. How about discussing all the technology that the Obama camp has killed, at least to balance it out?
I may actually go back to Fedora. Once it switched to GNOME3, I dropped it in lieu of CentOS6.
I am insanely curious to know what kindof hit they had on users after GNOME3 was integrated. There has to be a drop.
I would love to sign the petition on whitehouse.gov, but there is no chance I'll give that presidency my info. Next thing I know I'll be bombarded by political info I don't care about.
Funny to see this comment from slashdot, since the rest of the world often things the same thing of the fanatic and horridly biased opensource slashdot topics and commentators.
All of these arguments I've seen from people comparing Sun vs random 3rd party intel servers obviously have never used a Sun. The best explanation comes from an immediate case experience. We have 70+ sun servers. We buy a sun server, open the box, turn it on, it works. Recently we picked up two AMD based servers from a linux/bsd 'open' source rack-server provider (name left out for their own sake). The RAID flakes out (thanks Adaptec for the crappy zero-channel raid card!), the thing is unreliable. We've replaced one motherboard, and had problems with both systems weekly. The amount of time we've spent trouble shooting these POS servers far outweighs any cost benefit. If sun had the new intel boxes on the market at the time, we would have bought them without a second thought. There is something to be said for the level of quality sun ships in their servers, even their low cost ones. This alone makes them uncomparable IMHO.
As other eareas also have this, so does SLC, Utah:
http://commuterlink.utah.gov/nav.htm
We use Tomcat on Solaris in a large production environment (10,000,000 hits daily). We use Solaris over Linux or BSD because it isn't any cheaper to run the Opensource options (consider v100 servers in a load-balanced server farm), and you get the benefit of a more robust OS. We also have a cluster which runs weblogic, and to be honest tomcat has a LONG ways to go to be comparable to some of the features of weblogic (such as session mirroring), but I believe it'll get there some day.
One of the best little known firewalls to be found, and it is FREE on Solaris. This thing kicks the snot out of PIX and many other firewalls in a standalone configuration (it isn't too great for a large deployment of firewalls because it has no distributed management capability, ohwell). It has a real firewall front-end and frankly is one of the worst cases of mis-marketted technology next to the Alpha CPU. If you have Solaris 8, go download a copy of sunscreen and try it out, it rocks.
So if you wanted a GOOD firewall, cheap; dont think linux, BSD or any other variant. Until recently you could get x86 solaris with sunscreen.
I've used 6, 7 and 8; and 8 is by far the most superior IMHO, because it is the most 'mob standard compliant' (so to speak). It is more like the GPL world of unix, it includes bash and apache by default for hells sake. Yes, it changes things around from sol7--this is a GOOD THING. They are trying to cleanup the years of crud which has builtup in the dark corners of the OS. yes, crle was a royal PITA, ohwell.
Frankly, I cant wait for sol9; it is supposed to dump openwindows (finally) and CDE is to be moved to a 'deprecated' state in lieu of Gnome. Can anybody who has used the early release version validate this?
The intention would be to supplement the existing human workforce, not replace it. Currently there is just too much information for even a large team of individuals to handle well; a system like this would supplement their efforts and massage them into something more manageable for both sending AND RECEIVING alerts (I would love to receive alerts from other people about anomolous behaviour from my network)