"But spam is even worse than all these other forms of advertising because you cannot ignore spam"
As others have said, spam is easily ignored. Save the hyperbole for someone else. I ignore spam every day, and if it's not from a trusted address, it expires and disappears.
"Oh wait, don't most of us get our work done despite some minor lost productivity during the day?"
I thought the same thing. The idea that spam costs in productivity assumes people would use the time to be productive, rather that playing solitaire or visitng Amazon.
I never claimed I didn't use an ad-hominem attack. I use them frequently. If you are an idiot I will tell you. Consider it my public service. It's one reason I don't cite logical fallacies, they're not widely studied (which explains why you aren't any good at recognizing them), and turns the discussion into a pedantry contest.
More importantly, you failure to address my reference to YOUR ad-hominem is interesting. Why avoid your mistake? Are you ashamed because you didn't bother to review your own post before saying something stupid? You should be. You tried to use a fallacy, but you clearly don't know enough about them, so now you look like a fool. It only stings for a little while.
For someone who attempted to take the high-road, you failed when you let yourself fall into hypocracy. It's ok, it happens to the best of us.
"Additional note - my reference to you being a fanboy has nothing at all to do with being a "linux fanboy"..."
See, here you prove you don't know what ad-hominem is. It doesn't matter what kind of fanboy you meant, because it's still an ad-hominem attack. Also, I NEVER claimed you said I was a linux fanboy. Stop making things up, it's sad.
What the hell does that mean? How do you justify making stupid shit up to start an argument? If you disagree, you shouldn't have to tell lies (like you did) to prove it.
Two things. Making accusations of ad-hominem attacks after calling me a "fanboy" is cute. Perhaps you should examine your own arguments before attempting to pick mine apart with freshman year rhetoric.
Second, ad-hominem implies I'm attacking you and not your argument. The fact that you checked my history and concluded I was a fanboy speaks directly to your inability to accurately and completely check information. It's not ad-hominem because it's about YOUR ARGUMENT and not you.
Why try to talk about logical fallacies when you don't know what the hell you're talking about?
And I have no respect for assholes who are too stupid to argue facts, so they put words in other peoples mouths.
That's what YOU did.
I never said "if you deny it it must be true" or anything related. Argue the facts, stop making shit up.
And my question is still perfectly valid fanboy, why should anyone give a crap what some code writer thinks? He's not the fucking messiah people, you don't have to hang on his every pontification.
I knew all about HARRP. The first thing I thought when I read this story was "neat, the military just got that much closer to destroying the world." Now I'm no peacenik (really, check my history) but the whole concept of fucking around with the atmosphere bothers me.
That being said, would anyone really want the night sky lit up with Budweiser ads? Movies, though I could see that.
Congratulations, you made an entire post, yet failed to give ONE example of why Linus' views on this matter. He's not an expert, he has no more experience in the field than thousands of others, yet his opinion counts more. It shouldn't, yet you won't examine why it does.
As far as the fanboy goes, bullshit. I USE linux (several varieties) but you'll never find more than a grudging approval of the goals. I strongly feel that for many things, all versions of Linux are inadequate. How you reached your conclusion I don't know, but it speaks volumes about your clear inability to analyze information.
"There is no way to fix this except by having two completely separate sets of documentation"
How about making everything work correctly the FIRST time. No documentation needed.
Ask yourself this question. How mucj does a "grandma" need to consult the documentation with OSX. I'm no fanboy, but that's both secure AND simple. So it can be done.
Re:"The facts depend on where you are coming from.
on
MSN Search Has Arrived
·
· Score: 1
Thank you. I wasn't looking for long winded diatribes on the definiton of truth, I wanted to know if there were facts my students may use that are inaccurate.
"the facts depend on where you are coming from"
I imagine when Bill said this he was referring to his Anti-trust case. Or the higher quality ratings of Apple. Honestly, though this idea is idiotic. Facts are not relative, as there is always a single description that is accurate. The account (you say summary) is NOT fact, but opinion. How people confuse the two is difficult for me to understand.
My thoughts on the whole article. This is one frigging guy we're talking about. Nothing about him makes his opinion special or important, except to fanboys.
And if you're about to post a snide rebuttal, then YOU are one of those fanboys.
"Furthermore, you appear to have missed my point that the parents may be the ones to decide about rights"
No, I assumed we all knew this to be true. The fact that you don't indicates how little you know about the current system.
And since your original post was about how ironic it is that your kids see the abuse of "rights", I wonder why you don't KNOW who decides. I do.
As far as the rest of your post, you are rambling. You appear to be incapable of addressing my point, so after two attempts to get you to support your poorly thought out position, I'm calling it a conversation.
Ok, apart from your opinion (which is very well thought out, but useless) does any PROOF of bias exist.
"I don't think an unbiased point of view exists"
Which is the whole reason an encyclopedia deals with facts and not points of view. It's not the editorial page. If there are points of view, I would expect them to be offset by opposing (and equally biased) opinions.
"for my utter disinterest in MSN Search to the extent that I didn't know the URL for it"
Also known as, "I hate MS so I'll say or do whatever I need to in order to make them look bad. In addition, when I make a mistake, I'll blame other people, even though I should have taken an extra five seconds to make sure I got it right".
No offense, but what the fuck does Sweden have to do with the US?
Swedish students are culturally different from American students. They don't behave the same way, so you can't make any claims about how Sweden's would work anywhere else.
Also, you said Swedish schools "run this way" despite the fact that no "way" was discussed apart from freely coming and going. What "way" are you talking about?
You completely dodged the question. Most schools DO NOT run that way, but in fact run on the implied threat of consequences for non-attendance. My point, which you lamely avoided, was that they won't go if there's no consequence.
And spare me that shit about most kids liking school. If it comes down to classrooms or playgrounds, you're a moron if you think the kids would prefer class.
Spoken like someone who thinks manual labor is the only kind that matters. Probably because it's the only kind you're good at.
Incidentally my teaching job requires me to wrestle (and sometimes be assualted by) students with severe emotional and mental disabilities. You couldn't do it. I worked as a roofer for my dad every summer in Florida until I was 17. You couldn't do that either.
"we shouldn't expect anyone to risk their relatively cushy teaching jobs"
As soon as I read this I knew you were insane. Perhaps many teachers are bad at their jobs, but teaching 30 hyped up 7 year olds is as far from cushy as it gets. Were you born stupid or did you work at it?
Slashdot Mirror
"But spam is even worse than all these other forms of advertising because you cannot ignore spam"
As others have said, spam is easily ignored. Save the hyperbole for someone else. I ignore spam every day, and if it's not from a trusted address, it expires and disappears.
Never have to delete a thing.
"Oh wait, don't most of us get our work done despite some minor lost productivity during the day?"
I thought the same thing. The idea that spam costs in productivity assumes people would use the time to be productive, rather that playing solitaire or visitng Amazon.
"There ought to be another term for this. "Fakesearch" or somesuch"
I believe it's called "Business as Usual"
I never claimed I didn't use an ad-hominem attack. I use them frequently. If you are an idiot I will tell you. Consider it my public service. It's one reason I don't cite logical fallacies, they're not widely studied (which explains why you aren't any good at recognizing them), and turns the discussion into a pedantry contest.
More importantly, you failure to address my reference to YOUR ad-hominem is interesting. Why avoid your mistake? Are you ashamed because you didn't bother to review your own post before saying something stupid? You should be. You tried to use a fallacy, but you clearly don't know enough about them, so now you look like a fool. It only stings for a little while.
For someone who attempted to take the high-road, you failed when you let yourself fall into hypocracy. It's ok, it happens to the best of us.
"Additional note - my reference to you being a fanboy has nothing at all to do with being a "linux fanboy"..."
See, here you prove you don't know what ad-hominem is. It doesn't matter what kind of fanboy you meant, because it's still an ad-hominem attack. Also, I NEVER claimed you said I was a linux fanboy. Stop making things up, it's sad.
What the hell does that mean? How do you justify making stupid shit up to start an argument? If you disagree, you shouldn't have to tell lies (like you did) to prove it.
Why lie? You can do better (I hope).
I see the problem. You're talking about the magnetic north pole (stupid me I didn't notice the header) which explains it.
Canada, apparently, owns ONE of the poles, with the other one belonging to no one.
Strange you didn't bother to make this distinction clearer. Why not say "magnetic north"?
After reading the Wikipedia entry, I was right about geographic north.
"There are in fact 770 km of ocean between the pole and Canada's northernmost point"
It goes on to say the area is disputed, by Russia and Denmark, making the point that ownership has yet to be decided.
You should amend your claim to "one of the north poles, for now".
Two things. Making accusations of ad-hominem attacks after calling me a "fanboy" is cute. Perhaps you should examine your own arguments before attempting to pick mine apart with freshman year rhetoric.
Second, ad-hominem implies I'm attacking you and not your argument. The fact that you checked my history and concluded I was a fanboy speaks directly to your inability to accurately and completely check information. It's not ad-hominem because it's about YOUR ARGUMENT and not you.
Why try to talk about logical fallacies when you don't know what the hell you're talking about?
And I have no respect for assholes who are too stupid to argue facts, so they put words in other peoples mouths.
That's what YOU did.
I never said "if you deny it it must be true" or anything related. Argue the facts, stop making shit up.
And my question is still perfectly valid fanboy, why should anyone give a crap what some code writer thinks? He's not the fucking messiah people, you don't have to hang on his every pontification.
Strange. I looked and looked, but everywhere I checked said that either Denmark or more often no one "owns" the north pole.
Of course, since it's not land anyway, I'm not sure anyone could truly own it.
Do you have a source I could see?
I knew all about HARRP. The first thing I thought when I read this story was "neat, the military just got that much closer to destroying the world." Now I'm no peacenik (really, check my history) but the whole concept of fucking around with the atmosphere bothers me.
That being said, would anyone really want the night sky lit up with Budweiser ads? Movies, though I could see that.
Congratulations, you made an entire post, yet failed to give ONE example of why Linus' views on this matter. He's not an expert, he has no more experience in the field than thousands of others, yet his opinion counts more. It shouldn't, yet you won't examine why it does.
As far as the fanboy goes, bullshit. I USE linux (several varieties) but you'll never find more than a grudging approval of the goals. I strongly feel that for many things, all versions of Linux are inadequate. How you reached your conclusion I don't know, but it speaks volumes about your clear inability to analyze information.
"There is no way to fix this except by having two completely separate sets of documentation"
How about making everything work correctly the FIRST time. No documentation needed.
Ask yourself this question. How mucj does a "grandma" need to consult the documentation with OSX. I'm no fanboy, but that's both secure AND simple. So it can be done.
Thank you. I wasn't looking for long winded diatribes on the definiton of truth, I wanted to know if there were facts my students may use that are inaccurate.
"the facts depend on where you are coming from"
I imagine when Bill said this he was referring to his Anti-trust case. Or the higher quality ratings of Apple. Honestly, though this idea is idiotic. Facts are not relative, as there is always a single description that is accurate. The account (you say summary) is NOT fact, but opinion. How people confuse the two is difficult for me to understand.
"why is it news"
My thoughts on the whole article. This is one frigging guy we're talking about. Nothing about him makes his opinion special or important, except to fanboys.
And if you're about to post a snide rebuttal, then YOU are one of those fanboys.
Because I'm right, and you're not.
Why is Linus Torvalds' opinion on this issue news?
"Furthermore, you appear to have missed my point that the parents may be the ones to decide about rights"
No, I assumed we all knew this to be true. The fact that you don't indicates how little you know about the current system.
And since your original post was about how ironic it is that your kids see the abuse of "rights", I wonder why you don't KNOW who decides. I do.
As far as the rest of your post, you are rambling. You appear to be incapable of addressing my point, so after two attempts to get you to support your poorly thought out position, I'm calling it a conversation.
Ok, apart from your opinion (which is very well thought out, but useless) does any PROOF of bias exist.
"I don't think an unbiased point of view exists"
Which is the whole reason an encyclopedia deals with facts and not points of view. It's not the editorial page. If there are points of view, I would expect them to be offset by opposing (and equally biased) opinions.
"for my utter disinterest in MSN Search to the extent that I didn't know the URL for it"
Also known as, "I hate MS so I'll say or do whatever I need to in order to make them look bad. In addition, when I make a mistake, I'll blame other people, even though I should have taken an extra five seconds to make sure I got it right".
"but I'd hardly call Encarta unbiased either"
Is there evidence of this? I'd like to see it if there is, I occasionally use Encarta in my class (my students do actually).
Or is this more anti-Microsoft bullshit? Please tell me you do have proof, because what you said would be incredibly irresponsible otherwise.
No offense, but what the fuck does Sweden have to do with the US?
Swedish students are culturally different from American students. They don't behave the same way, so you can't make any claims about how Sweden's would work anywhere else.
Also, you said Swedish schools "run this way" despite the fact that no "way" was discussed apart from freely coming and going. What "way" are you talking about?
You completely dodged the question. Most schools DO NOT run that way, but in fact run on the implied threat of consequences for non-attendance. My point, which you lamely avoided, was that they won't go if there's no consequence.
And spare me that shit about most kids liking school. If it comes down to classrooms or playgrounds, you're a moron if you think the kids would prefer class.
"A TEACHING JOB IS COMPLETELY CUSHY"
Spoken like someone who thinks manual labor is the only kind that matters. Probably because it's the only kind you're good at.
Incidentally my teaching job requires me to wrestle (and sometimes be assualted by) students with severe emotional and mental disabilities. You couldn't do it. I worked as a roofer for my dad every summer in Florida until I was 17. You couldn't do that either.
"What place does a "discussion" of oral sex have in high school?"
Hygeine and disease prevention?
Or are facts and reason not welcome in your world?
"we shouldn't expect anyone to risk their relatively cushy teaching jobs"
As soon as I read this I knew you were insane. Perhaps many teachers are bad at their jobs, but teaching 30 hyped up 7 year olds is as far from cushy as it gets. Were you born stupid or did you work at it?
So, oh wise one, explain how school could be run when students don't have to go. In case you are wondering, free association is a right as well.