Of all those things, I'm surprised you even bring up assassination. If you're going to invade someone's country and depose them anyway, assassinating them to start off with is just good tactics. Why is it okay to slaughter thousands of soldiers but you can't kill the one guy in charge?
He already said socialists. (If there's a difference between the Green Party As Commandeered By Ralph Nader and socialism, I'll be fascinated to listen to the socialists split hairs about it. After all, God knows we need all 600 different socialist parties we have, all of which were founded over doctrinal disputes about whether or not to be Trotskyite or Maoist or both.)
And that's precisely our problem. The people running this country have no clue when it comes to technology, which puts us in a bad situation when you consider that they are charged with regulating and stimulating the growth of this technology.
Expecting our politicians to care about whether their websites use ASP or PHP is like expecting Eisenhower to care about whether his car engine is based on the Otto cycle or the Atkinson cycle. These are exactly the technical details that, while accessible to laypeople, aren't significant at the upper policy levels. What is needed is an upper-level appreciation that these things are important--Eisenhower was smart enough to figure out we needed interstate freeways, but I doubt he knew or cared what a SPUI was.
Creationism is essentially the same, and "intelligent design" is just a code word for creationism--and most creationists aren't even consistent enough with themselves to meaningfully state a consistent theory. If you've argued with them you know what I mean. It's essentially just a selective denial of evolutionary theory.
A lot of it was just plain plagiarism and taking shit over. If you became pharoah and there was a monument that said, "THIS IS PLACED HERE IN MEMORY OF THE GREAT PHAROAH JOE, WHO WAS A REALLY SWELL GUY AND MADE EGYPT POWERFUL AND PROSPEROUS", you would scratch out "Joe" and write in your own name. All of a sudden you have all the monuments, with no cost to you!
Of course the departure of the Mexicans would be noticed. But did Egypt have as many Hebrews as we have Mexicans? If the Salvadorians all left, would we notice? It would be forgotten even if we did want to record it at the time.
That's not very feasible--the slaves were sort of mixed together, and interbred with Indians and whites, so they didn't have much of a sense of their single ethnicity. This is why most black Americans have only oral history (at best) to trace back where, exactly, in Africa they are from, other than the less-than-helpful clues that they were probably from west Africa--as that's the part of Africa that traded slaves--and that their ancestors managed to lose a war to some other African tribe (as that's how slaves were taken). Of course, given the high demand for slaves, there was a lot of war, so pretty much everyone managed to lose a few and have their people taken prisoner and sold into slavery.
Well, the African slaves were all mixed together so they didn't remember well after a generation or two which type of African they were, but before the American colonies started importing from Africa, they bought slaves from the Indians. So imagine, in ancient colonial times, one Indian tribe that lost a war and got sold to white plantation owners decided to up and leave, and were "guided by God" across the Mississippi River to what is now Kansas. That would have been noticed, yes, but not particularly disastrous to whoever owned all those slaves, especially if they had lots of other slaves, and the ability to start importing from Africa. Over time, no one would notice or remember the difference, except the tribe that made the exodus. It's like if all the Salvadorian immigrants to the U.S. decided to up and leave right now--it would make headlines, but those headlines would be lost in the crapflood of history 10 years from now.
Even by that metric I think corporations win. Except the US government has vastly more power in and of itself than all US corporations put together (this is why corporations try to control the government)--so if you go by quantity of power, comparing one government to several companies is correct.
If anyone is terrified at virtualization, it's Apple. They are the only OS that you can't run in a VM without resorting to 3rd party hacks that may or may not work with your hardware.
Doesn't that mean Apple is bullish about, not terrified at, virtualization? You just outlined in one simple sentence why you should use Mac OS X as your base OS.
Contrary to popular belief, insurance rates are determined by the frequency/cost of medical claims far more than the cost of auto body repair work... because medical claims are, by comparison, astronomical.
Car insurance pays for medical claims? Will my medical insurance pay to repair my car if it's damaged in an accident? I'm not calling bullshit on you, just commenting on how fucked up things are. Of course, now that most people use medical insurance as some sort of magical pay-for-all-my-medical-expenses-for-less-money-tha n-they-cost machine, I guess you need something else to pay for emergency medical expenses.
Isn't the ability of your car to kill other people also a factor? And...a bigger factor (as that goes into your LIABILITY insurance?)
You go back to the store, get a refund for the $500 you just spent on a luxury item, and spend a good while thinking about how maybe you should have used that money to pay off your debts, you fucking deadbeat:P
Thus, the proper anger should be about why the phone company needs to run a credit check on you
Because they are extending credit to you each month and need to ensure you won't welch on it. Just like everyone else who needs to run a credit check on you.
and/or why a social security number is required to do so.
It isn't--you can get a code from someone at AT&T and input that instead.
very low inertia per unit of power (USA president can lose his power easier than owner of the $1 B company)
We've had one US President for 6 years now. In 6 years, how many CEO's have been fired? How many companies have failed, or have lost revenue or value while their competitors have grown?
At this very time, the United States is involved in an illegal war of aggression in the Middle East (and losing), its federal government has asserted to itself the power to tap any phone and take prisoner any person in the world without judicial oversight, a system of internal travel controls is being implemented, a national ID card is being implemented, the current administration, as well as almost every presidential candidate from one of the two major political parties have publicly endorsed the use of torture, elections are easier to fix than they have ever been in history, and you're complaining that people don't stand up against the music industry for overzealously protecting their copyrights?
But implementing Marxism makes "dumbasses" very happy that they finally have Marxism, even if they have to work twice as long in the potato mines and are starving.
Most of the body of philosophy was done by professional, full-time philosophers who were employed at universities. The "monastic tradition" did not produce much philosophy--spiritual introspection, perhaps. Theology, perhaps. Scholarship, certainly. But not philosophy. Of course, if you want to measure by "person-hours spent engaged in philosophical inquiry" (instead of, for instance, "body of unique work produced in philosophy"), and further if you want to use your nebulous idea of "philosophy" which in almost no way corresponds to the real thing, I'm going to bet that "people stoned on drugs" far outnumber, in person-hours, the monks.
Well ok, there is no formal fallacy like this...though some lines of reasoning which are both false and popular get labeled "fallacy" anyway. Like, for example, the "gambler's fallacy."
Just because something isn't a "formal" or "logical" fallacy doesn't mean it can't be a...statistical fallacy.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're savvy enough to disable JavaScript, are you going to be using IE? I don't think so.
Of all those things, I'm surprised you even bring up assassination. If you're going to invade someone's country and depose them anyway, assassinating them to start off with is just good tactics. Why is it okay to slaughter thousands of soldiers but you can't kill the one guy in charge?
He already said socialists. (If there's a difference between the Green Party As Commandeered By Ralph Nader and socialism, I'll be fascinated to listen to the socialists split hairs about it. After all, God knows we need all 600 different socialist parties we have, all of which were founded over doctrinal disputes about whether or not to be Trotskyite or Maoist or both.)
Expecting our politicians to care about whether their websites use ASP or PHP is like expecting Eisenhower to care about whether his car engine is based on the Otto cycle or the Atkinson cycle. These are exactly the technical details that, while accessible to laypeople, aren't significant at the upper policy levels. What is needed is an upper-level appreciation that these things are important--Eisenhower was smart enough to figure out we needed interstate freeways, but I doubt he knew or cared what a SPUI was.
Creationism is essentially the same, and "intelligent design" is just a code word for creationism--and most creationists aren't even consistent enough with themselves to meaningfully state a consistent theory. If you've argued with them you know what I mean. It's essentially just a selective denial of evolutionary theory.
A lot of it was just plain plagiarism and taking shit over. If you became pharoah and there was a monument that said, "THIS IS PLACED HERE IN MEMORY OF THE GREAT PHAROAH JOE, WHO WAS A REALLY SWELL GUY AND MADE EGYPT POWERFUL AND PROSPEROUS", you would scratch out "Joe" and write in your own name. All of a sudden you have all the monuments, with no cost to you!
Of course the departure of the Mexicans would be noticed. But did Egypt have as many Hebrews as we have Mexicans? If the Salvadorians all left, would we notice? It would be forgotten even if we did want to record it at the time.
That's not very feasible--the slaves were sort of mixed together, and interbred with Indians and whites, so they didn't have much of a sense of their single ethnicity. This is why most black Americans have only oral history (at best) to trace back where, exactly, in Africa they are from, other than the less-than-helpful clues that they were probably from west Africa--as that's the part of Africa that traded slaves--and that their ancestors managed to lose a war to some other African tribe (as that's how slaves were taken). Of course, given the high demand for slaves, there was a lot of war, so pretty much everyone managed to lose a few and have their people taken prisoner and sold into slavery.
Well, the African slaves were all mixed together so they didn't remember well after a generation or two which type of African they were, but before the American colonies started importing from Africa, they bought slaves from the Indians. So imagine, in ancient colonial times, one Indian tribe that lost a war and got sold to white plantation owners decided to up and leave, and were "guided by God" across the Mississippi River to what is now Kansas. That would have been noticed, yes, but not particularly disastrous to whoever owned all those slaves, especially if they had lots of other slaves, and the ability to start importing from Africa. Over time, no one would notice or remember the difference, except the tribe that made the exodus. It's like if all the Salvadorian immigrants to the U.S. decided to up and leave right now--it would make headlines, but those headlines would be lost in the crapflood of history 10 years from now.
Would they fall apart full stop, or just on IE? If they only fall apart on IE if JavaScript is somehow not turned on in IE, I'm hardly going to cry.
Even by that metric I think corporations win. Except the US government has vastly more power in and of itself than all US corporations put together (this is why corporations try to control the government)--so if you go by quantity of power, comparing one government to several companies is correct.
Doesn't that mean Apple is bullish about, not terrified at, virtualization? You just outlined in one simple sentence why you should use Mac OS X as your base OS.
I am glad that you, too, are well aware of Delaware.
Car insurance pays for medical claims? Will my medical insurance pay to repair my car if it's damaged in an accident? I'm not calling bullshit on you, just commenting on how fucked up things are. Of course, now that most people use medical insurance as some sort of magical pay-for-all-my-medical-expenses-for-less-money-tha n-they-cost machine, I guess you need something else to pay for emergency medical expenses.
Isn't the ability of your car to kill other people also a factor? And...a bigger factor (as that goes into your LIABILITY insurance?)
You go back to the store, get a refund for the $500 you just spent on a luxury item, and spend a good while thinking about how maybe you should have used that money to pay off your debts, you fucking deadbeat :P
Because they are extending credit to you each month and need to ensure you won't welch on it. Just like everyone else who needs to run a credit check on you.
It isn't--you can get a code from someone at AT&T and input that instead.
Yes but you need to remain backwards compatible to more primitive phones.
Amazing new fact discovered about economics: Prices are determined, not only by cost, but also by what customers are willing to pay!
We've had one US President for 6 years now. In 6 years, how many CEO's have been fired? How many companies have failed, or have lost revenue or value while their competitors have grown?
At this very time, the United States is involved in an illegal war of aggression in the Middle East (and losing), its federal government has asserted to itself the power to tap any phone and take prisoner any person in the world without judicial oversight, a system of internal travel controls is being implemented, a national ID card is being implemented, the current administration, as well as almost every presidential candidate from one of the two major political parties have publicly endorsed the use of torture, elections are easier to fix than they have ever been in history, and you're complaining that people don't stand up against the music industry for overzealously protecting their copyrights?
But implementing Marxism makes "dumbasses" very happy that they finally have Marxism, even if they have to work twice as long in the potato mines and are starving.
Who even uses that? MMS is only useful if you're using a gimped Verizon phone and have no other way to get your pictures off of it.
Most of the body of philosophy was done by professional, full-time philosophers who were employed at universities. The "monastic tradition" did not produce much philosophy--spiritual introspection, perhaps. Theology, perhaps. Scholarship, certainly. But not philosophy. Of course, if you want to measure by "person-hours spent engaged in philosophical inquiry" (instead of, for instance, "body of unique work produced in philosophy"), and further if you want to use your nebulous idea of "philosophy" which in almost no way corresponds to the real thing, I'm going to bet that "people stoned on drugs" far outnumber, in person-hours, the monks.
No, Han Solo was just trying to pull a fast one on Old Ben.
Just because something isn't a "formal" or "logical" fallacy doesn't mean it can't be a...statistical fallacy.