Aaah you are confused by basic diplomacy and the workings of the international community. As has been pointed out, they get their turn at the head. As it also turns out, this is how countries work together to improve one of their ranks. How should human rights be improved in Saudi Arabia? By blocking SA from the Human Rights committee? Or by forcing them to sit in the corner while everyone berates them? Or maybe - just maybe - show their delegates what human rights are, why they are important, and show the improvements of human rights in the various countries the UN is active in?
Get a new argument - yours merely lets everyone know you prefer being angry over being correct.
So without evidence you are leaping to an unfounded conclusion that condemns millions of people to a miserable, frequently dangerous future. I hope if you and your loved ones are in need people don't judge the ever-loving shit out of you the same way you seem more than happy to do to others.
Islamist != Muslim. You conflating the two (whether accidentally through ignorance or on purpose) is a rather large red flag that you might not know what you're talking about. Also you forgetting the rampant violence carried out in Christianity's name (but not condemning Christianity) reeks of a double standard. I get it - you aren't particularly knowledgeable about this - but don't try to fix your ignorance by drowning it in hate. The future won't thank you.
Probably more that we should use our brains instead of leaping to inane conclusions based on prejudice. The best tool to fix whatever ills are present in Islam is moderate Muslims. This pathetic ranting against Islam is pushing those people further and further away. It's precisely because the world has seen what happens when this irrational reaction is allowed or even encouraged that we should strive to not repeat the mistakes of the past. To just wave one's hands in the air and equate Islam with terrorism is ensuring we make these same mistakes again and again and again.
Yes, it's easy to pin the blame on Islam, but it's logically bankrupt and inherently dangerous to do so.
The number of casualties from terrorism in Europe is tiny. Really, really small. Even including the attack you mention, it's still minuscule. Getting scared over a statistical blip and then using that fear to condemn over a billion people with a crude, childish, scared judgement is pathetic.
Because terrorism is a motive and not an action. If you don't figure that out, your confusion will continue. When people burn down an immigration home they are engaging in terrorism, as they are using terror to coerce political will. In the case of storming a ferry, they are simply trying to storm a ferry - their actions were not designed or intended to carry further than that. This stuff really isn't difficult to figure out, provided one has the will.
Human brains are wired to follow a conversation (hence humans frequently participating in them). When one only hears half a conversation, the absence of a second party is actively noticeable by those listening (or accidentally overhearing) the conversation. Also, phone calls will tend to make people talk louder (than they would to their friend sat next to them), which increases the already-disturbing half-conversation. I can understand why you'd think it would logically be little or no different, but it's a bit more complicated than you seem to realise.
Yes, but if people think mobiles exist (which is not unreasonable, as they do exist), then people will be expecting them to work, or at least not expecting someone actively jamming them. It might take some time to figure out that/all/ phones are not working, delaying the response. Before mobiles people knew mobiles weren't a thing and wouldn't reach for one to raise the alarm. You might as well say that an entire city blackout is no big deal as people used to use signal fires to send messages.
Translation: "I don't understand science. I don't want to understand science. I assume all scientists are corrupt, because they are saying things I don't like to hear, even though their methods have increased my life expectancy massively, and provided me this computer which I use to loudly proclaim how wrong they are."
A desire to be right stronger than their intellectual faculties, I imagine. No-one would knowingly wade into a discussion they care about shouting "I AM OUT OF MY DEPTH! I AM OUT OF MY DEPTH!", which is eerily similar to what this guy's been doing this entire thread.
1. Polar bears need cycles of weather to survive. You might as well say people don't need oxygen because they aren't always breathing. It shows you either fundamentally don't understand this, or that you are quite happy to distort the truth to make a point. It has nothing to do with heat exhaustion, but changes to their hunting grounds which renders life far less easy, which decreases the population. Call bullshit if you want, but you are only calling bullshit on your stunted understanding of the situation.
2. You seem to have no problem with land becoming unsuitable for farming, decreasing nutritional yield of crops, feedback cycles increasing the rise in temperature, instability of fish stocks, higher storm surges which threaten the hubs of civilization (the major cities responsible for the global economy, which frequently lie on the coast), the spread of pests & disease through the newly-comfortable climes, and so on.
You'd be able to solve your ignorance rather quickly, but it seems you'd rather spend that time on Slashdot showing everyone just how proud you are of not understanding this thing you are so loudly condemning.
Every time you mention the "hiatus" you are letting everyone know you aren't abreast of the actual scientific findings. The "hiatus" was a pause in the increase in warming, and has since been accounted for.
Read the IPCC reports. This is all covered in great depth. Instead of being angry with the discussion, be angry at your lack of effort in educating yourself.
You can get an idea if you spend a few minutes perusing the relevant literature. This stuff is not too difficult, and will fix the falsehoods you seem to be entertaining.
I think this discussion is pretty good evidence of the challenges facing minorities in tech. It's not about registering, it's about getting to the point in one's career when one can register. That is the part more difficult for under-represented groups. This has nothing to do with blame or vengeance, just fixing something obviously wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
Aaah you are confused by basic diplomacy and the workings of the international community. As has been pointed out, they get their turn at the head. As it also turns out, this is how countries work together to improve one of their ranks. How should human rights be improved in Saudi Arabia? By blocking SA from the Human Rights committee? Or by forcing them to sit in the corner while everyone berates them? Or maybe - just maybe - show their delegates what human rights are, why they are important, and show the improvements of human rights in the various countries the UN is active in?
Get a new argument - yours merely lets everyone know you prefer being angry over being correct.
So without evidence you are leaping to an unfounded conclusion that condemns millions of people to a miserable, frequently dangerous future. I hope if you and your loved ones are in need people don't judge the ever-loving shit out of you the same way you seem more than happy to do to others.
You need help.
Islamist != Muslim. You conflating the two (whether accidentally through ignorance or on purpose) is a rather large red flag that you might not know what you're talking about. Also you forgetting the rampant violence carried out in Christianity's name (but not condemning Christianity) reeks of a double standard. I get it - you aren't particularly knowledgeable about this - but don't try to fix your ignorance by drowning it in hate. The future won't thank you.
Probably more that we should use our brains instead of leaping to inane conclusions based on prejudice. The best tool to fix whatever ills are present in Islam is moderate Muslims. This pathetic ranting against Islam is pushing those people further and further away. It's precisely because the world has seen what happens when this irrational reaction is allowed or even encouraged that we should strive to not repeat the mistakes of the past. To just wave one's hands in the air and equate Islam with terrorism is ensuring we make these same mistakes again and again and again.
Yes, it's easy to pin the blame on Islam, but it's logically bankrupt and inherently dangerous to do so.
The number of casualties from terrorism in Europe is tiny. Really, really small. Even including the attack you mention, it's still minuscule. Getting scared over a statistical blip and then using that fear to condemn over a billion people with a crude, childish, scared judgement is pathetic.
Because terrorism is a motive and not an action. If you don't figure that out, your confusion will continue. When people burn down an immigration home they are engaging in terrorism, as they are using terror to coerce political will. In the case of storming a ferry, they are simply trying to storm a ferry - their actions were not designed or intended to carry further than that. This stuff really isn't difficult to figure out, provided one has the will.
Did you just try to explain why it's fine to discriminate by discriminating? Bizarre.
He disrupted the ability of others to engage in perfectly lawful (if somewhat annoying) behaviour.
Human brains are wired to follow a conversation (hence humans frequently participating in them). When one only hears half a conversation, the absence of a second party is actively noticeable by those listening (or accidentally overhearing) the conversation. Also, phone calls will tend to make people talk louder (than they would to their friend sat next to them), which increases the already-disturbing half-conversation. I can understand why you'd think it would logically be little or no different, but it's a bit more complicated than you seem to realise.
Yes, but if people think mobiles exist (which is not unreasonable, as they do exist), then people will be expecting them to work, or at least not expecting someone actively jamming them. It might take some time to figure out that /all/ phones are not working, delaying the response. Before mobiles people knew mobiles weren't a thing and wouldn't reach for one to raise the alarm. You might as well say that an entire city blackout is no big deal as people used to use signal fires to send messages.
Translation: "I don't understand science. I don't want to understand science. I assume all scientists are corrupt, because they are saying things I don't like to hear, even though their methods have increased my life expectancy massively, and provided me this computer which I use to loudly proclaim how wrong they are."
A desire to be right stronger than their intellectual faculties, I imagine. No-one would knowingly wade into a discussion they care about shouting "I AM OUT OF MY DEPTH! I AM OUT OF MY DEPTH!", which is eerily similar to what this guy's been doing this entire thread.
1. Polar bears need cycles of weather to survive. You might as well say people don't need oxygen because they aren't always breathing. It shows you either fundamentally don't understand this, or that you are quite happy to distort the truth to make a point. It has nothing to do with heat exhaustion, but changes to their hunting grounds which renders life far less easy, which decreases the population. Call bullshit if you want, but you are only calling bullshit on your stunted understanding of the situation.
2. You seem to have no problem with land becoming unsuitable for farming, decreasing nutritional yield of crops, feedback cycles increasing the rise in temperature, instability of fish stocks, higher storm surges which threaten the hubs of civilization (the major cities responsible for the global economy, which frequently lie on the coast), the spread of pests & disease through the newly-comfortable climes, and so on.
You'd be able to solve your ignorance rather quickly, but it seems you'd rather spend that time on Slashdot showing everyone just how proud you are of not understanding this thing you are so loudly condemning.
Did you have to work hard at being this ridiculously confused? It's breathtaking to observe.
Every time you mention the "hiatus" you are letting everyone know you aren't abreast of the actual scientific findings. The "hiatus" was a pause in the increase in warming, and has since been accounted for.
Read the IPCC reports. This is all covered in great depth. Instead of being angry with the discussion, be angry at your lack of effort in educating yourself.
That it's global. The clue is in the name.
You can get an idea if you spend a few minutes perusing the relevant literature. This stuff is not too difficult, and will fix the falsehoods you seem to be entertaining.
In saner countries they already get - like everyone else - their healthcare covered for life.
Your post made me think of this... I have no idea why, beyond "resurrect" and "dead".
I think this discussion is pretty good evidence of the challenges facing minorities in tech. It's not about registering, it's about getting to the point in one's career when one can register. That is the part more difficult for under-represented groups. This has nothing to do with blame or vengeance, just fixing something obviously wrong.
That's not at all what a bait and switch is.
Incorrect. You are thinking of the Bambleweeny 57 Submeson Brain. Your geek card has been revoked :)
It consumes a non-renewable fuel, so it can't possibly be renewable. The clue is right there in the name.
I think they meant "row" as in "noisy acrimonious quarrel" as opposed to "a number of people or things in a more or less straight line".