I have used Macs since I grew up, was a loyal 'Mac Evangelist' back in the '90's, but the company's decision and the recent connection to Trust Computing have had me wondering if I will stick with the old Apple from now on. What are your thoughts?
My thoughts are that you are crazy. Religion of any kind turns me off, so do people who enjoy being called an "evangelist".
I think I will be in the market for a Mac soon, and if the Intel based solution is good, I will buy it.
that this article is actually an argument against the death penalty? Notice how the one on Slate begins...
"If we execute murderers, why don't we execute the people who write computer worms? It would probably be a better investment."
*IF* we execute murderers. I totally agree with him, as he's playing the devil's advocate. But, I am against the death penalty, because I think that killing is wrong. In discussions, I often advance arguments like these to demonstrate the absurdity in giving the system enough power to kill its citizens.
A lot of hardware and wires won't ever be easy to organize or look good. No offense, and assuming this is for home use and not your work environment (you seem to suggest that), if I was you, I would think about if I seriously need to horde all the home networking, cables and hardware and network storage at home? You need to make a decision if you want your place to be nice and sleek and simple, or to look like the place of a guy who never goes on dates. Milk crates for organizing my stuff as has been suggested, WTF? Lovely but no, thanks.
My apartment contains exactly one laptop. I also have a cable modem, wireless router, and Airport Express under the sofa. That's it. It's sleek and it allows me to do just about anything, shop, work, watch movies, learn, read, get news, download music, geek out, without actually looking like a mega-nerd. If I have to print something, I do it at work.
But if you go the guy-in-basement route, you will always have a mess. Been there, done that for too long.
Well if the item doesn't match the description (i.e. it's a bootleg instead of the real DVD), can't you get back your money and leave negative feedback? Why not only buy from sellers with a good number of positive feedback?
But I agree with your main point. If I was eBay, I would experiment with a flagging system, like Craigslist does, but more sophisticated.
I see his points and agree with some of them, but I think his "rational scientist" is more a "technology enthusiast". He is so in love with his ideas. But many of them sound absurd/dangerous. Engineering an microbe that attacks a certain invasive species and then dies out? Is there anyone who would want to let this genie out of the bottle? A central "World nuclear waste reprocessing plant?" Yea, coz that's gonna happen.
'scuse my Buddhist slant, but "doing nothing" is also an action, and often times it is the right action. Meaning in this case, that *not* coming up with high-tech solutions for low-tech problems.
Instead of engineering freak plants that produce their own herbicides, we could simply think about how to not use herbicides at all, and give at least as much money to the research of organic and IPM agriculture as goes into GM crops.
Yeah um... this cuts both ways. Your statements in your original post are far from being scientific evidence.
To me it seems that your concept of social superiority is too rigid. Who says that operating on the basis of groups/hierarchies (=certain individuals being 'above' or 'below' others) is superior to not giving a damn about any of these things? Actually if you ask me, the "pack leader" concept of dogs / wolves (and the alpha male, pecking order, etc. concepts of other animals) seem pretty primitive to me, when compared to the complex relationships cats can have with each other and other animals as well (including humans). These relationships include wild and feral cat colonies BTW. I don't need a science book for this. I have befriended many a cat in my life and maybe you should try it as well sometine. One tip: let go of concepts such as "stronger", "group leader", "superior" etc. and you will have a much easier time.
You have to win the friendship of a cat, which is different from winning obedience in a dog (since friendship between humans and dogs always starts out with "showing them who's the boss" first, right?). Cats won't be forever devoted to you, once you sufficiently demonstrate your power over them. Instead, they will hate you forever for it. Dunno, to my little non-scientist brain, this seems the more evolved way to live and to perceive others around me. At least *I* and people close to me, certainly operate this way.
If this is not scientific enough for you, oh well. I'm not a psychologist, I'm just someone who tries to keep an open mind. Your original post claimed that cats are not aware of their surroundings and that the only thing they can do is to hunt and groom themselves; these are obviously false statements. Peace.
I've never met a cat that cared two licks about any other sentient create around it, including cats. (I think they care about one lick). I honestly don't think cats have as much social intelligence as, say, dogs, people, orangutans, or octopuses. They just aren't as 'aware' of 'others' as other animals are.
Yeah right, buddy, that's quite a statement there. You really are the expert on cats, that I can tell right away... You hate cats and you have never met one that cared about her environment? You perhaps made them feel that you hate cats (trust me, cats are HIGHLY sensitive creatures to things like that) and so (rightly) they didn't adore you like a dog would, getting an instant orgasm when you move your little finger. So you conclude that, "All cats seem to be able to do is groom and hunt."
Let me tell you that there is no such cat you describe, OK? (Unless she has some mental screwup - done to her by humans most of the time). All cats are very aware of and extremely interested in their environment. Just observe how cats strategically choose to lounge on the spot in the house where they can observe the most rooms and people.
You could argue that they are aware, but they don't care -- I disagree.
I argue that they are very aware and they care very much. You just perhaps don't perceive it because their behavior is much more subtle than you would expect from a "dumb cat", eh? And you disagree on what grounds? You certainly don't seem to have enough experience to have a qualified opinion on this topic - all you have is prejudice.
There's a quote by Mark Twain: "It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions. You made me think of it.
Slashdot Mirror
I have used Macs since I grew up, was a loyal 'Mac Evangelist' back in the '90's, but the company's decision and the recent connection to Trust Computing have had me wondering if I will stick with the old Apple from now on. What are your thoughts?
My thoughts are that you are crazy. Religion of any kind turns me off, so do people who enjoy being called an "evangelist".
I think I will be in the market for a Mac soon, and if the Intel based solution is good, I will buy it.
It's only computers, geez.
VC's fund companies all the time, and most of those companies will fail.
I don't know why this is newsworthy.
that this article is actually an argument against the death penalty? Notice how the one on Slate begins...
"If we execute murderers, why don't we execute the people who write computer worms? It would probably be a better investment."
*IF* we execute murderers. I totally agree with him, as he's playing the devil's advocate. But, I am against the death penalty, because I think that killing is wrong. In discussions, I often advance arguments like these to demonstrate the absurdity in giving the system enough power to kill its citizens.
A lot of hardware and wires won't ever be easy to organize or look good. No offense, and assuming this is for home use and not your work environment (you seem to suggest that), if I was you, I would think about if I seriously need to horde all the home networking, cables and hardware and network storage at home? You need to make a decision if you want your place to be nice and sleek and simple, or to look like the place of a guy who never goes on dates. Milk crates for organizing my stuff as has been suggested, WTF? Lovely but no, thanks.
My apartment contains exactly one laptop. I also have a cable modem, wireless router, and Airport Express under the sofa. That's it. It's sleek and it allows me to do just about anything, shop, work, watch movies, learn, read, get news, download music, geek out, without actually looking like a mega-nerd. If I have to print something, I do it at work.
But if you go the guy-in-basement route, you will always have a mess. Been there, done that for too long.
Well if the item doesn't match the description (i.e. it's a bootleg instead of the real DVD), can't you get back your money and leave negative feedback? Why not only buy from sellers with a good number of positive feedback?
But I agree with your main point. If I was eBay, I would experiment with a flagging system, like Craigslist does, but more sophisticated.
I see his points and agree with some of them, but I think his "rational scientist" is more a "technology enthusiast". He is so in love with his ideas. But many of them sound absurd/dangerous. Engineering an microbe that attacks a certain invasive species and then dies out? Is there anyone who would want to let this genie out of the bottle? A central "World nuclear waste reprocessing plant?" Yea, coz that's gonna happen.
'scuse my Buddhist slant, but "doing nothing" is also an action, and often times it is the right action. Meaning in this case, that *not* coming up with high-tech solutions for low-tech problems.
Instead of engineering freak plants that produce their own herbicides, we could simply think about how to not use herbicides at all, and give at least as much money to the research of organic and IPM agriculture as goes into GM crops.
Right. Sure seems like the only solution to both of our problems is for Slashdot to STOP BEATING THIS VERY DEAD HORSE.
Fuck!
/. owners are doing /. and are not comedians. This is pathetic.
This is really getting bothersome. There's a reason the
ENOUGH!!!!!
Please... stop wasting my time with posting more FUCKING April's Fool jokes.
Yeah um... this cuts both ways. Your statements in your original post are far from being scientific evidence.
To me it seems that your concept of social superiority is too rigid. Who says that operating on the basis of groups/hierarchies (=certain individuals being 'above' or 'below' others) is superior to not giving a damn about any of these things? Actually if you ask me, the "pack leader" concept of dogs / wolves (and the alpha male, pecking order, etc. concepts of other animals) seem pretty primitive to me, when compared to the complex relationships cats can have with each other and other animals as well (including humans). These relationships include wild and feral cat colonies BTW. I don't need a science book for this. I have befriended many a cat in my life and maybe you should try it as well sometine. One tip: let go of concepts such as "stronger", "group leader", "superior" etc. and you will have a much easier time.
You have to win the friendship of a cat, which is different from winning obedience in a dog (since friendship between humans and dogs always starts out with "showing them who's the boss" first, right?). Cats won't be forever devoted to you, once you sufficiently demonstrate your power over them. Instead, they will hate you forever for it. Dunno, to my little non-scientist brain, this seems the more evolved way to live and to perceive others around me. At least *I* and people close to me, certainly operate this way.
If this is not scientific enough for you, oh well. I'm not a psychologist, I'm just someone who tries to keep an open mind. Your original post claimed that cats are not aware of their surroundings and that the only thing they can do is to hunt and groom themselves; these are obviously false statements. Peace.
I've never met a cat that cared two licks about any other sentient create around it, including cats. (I think they care about one lick). I honestly don't think cats have as much social intelligence as, say, dogs, people, orangutans, or octopuses. They just aren't as 'aware' of 'others' as other animals are.
Yeah right, buddy, that's quite a statement there. You really are the expert on cats, that I can tell right away... You hate cats and you have never met one that cared about her environment? You perhaps made them feel that you hate cats (trust me, cats are HIGHLY sensitive creatures to things like that) and so (rightly) they didn't adore you like a dog would, getting an instant orgasm when you move your little finger. So you conclude that, "All cats seem to be able to do is groom and hunt."
Let me tell you that there is no such cat you describe, OK? (Unless she has some mental screwup - done to her by humans most of the time). All cats are very aware of and extremely interested in their environment. Just observe how cats strategically choose to lounge on the spot in the house where they can observe the most rooms and people.
You could argue that they are aware, but they don't care -- I disagree.
I argue that they are very aware and they care very much. You just perhaps don't perceive it because their behavior is much more subtle than you would expect from a "dumb cat", eh? And you disagree on what grounds? You certainly don't seem to have enough experience to have a qualified opinion on this topic - all you have is prejudice.
There's a quote by Mark Twain: "It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions. You made me think of it.