"You cannot possibl(y) be so stupid" is not actually an insult is it. I am accusing you of posting as if you are far more stupid than you actually are instead of accusing you of stupidity. Comments such as the following are obviously far beneath you:
I think perhaps the goal is to change STEM into another version of the veterinarian field, where men are becoming pretty scarce.
So if you want to pretend to be an idiot you should be able to put up with a mild rebuke as a consequence. In you don't like it then there's an easy fix - stop pretending to be an idiot just to try and turn a storm into a teacup into some kind of insane global conspiracy.
As for your anecdote - yes high school was a shitty time for anyone other than the head of the football team - so consider your anecdote and have some empathy with the girl who posted the story because she was picked on a bit more due to a teacher's fuckup. That's all there is to see here - no global conspiracy.
Are you really telling me you can't tell the difference between this fuckup where the teacher made things difficult for the girls in the class and that? You can? Then what is the point of posting it at all? It has fuckall to do with the post we are commenting on. This is not about images of naked women in modern society, this is about kids acting like little shits in a high school class fuelled by a teacher's idiotic fuckup.
"Followed by The Black Swan" Which was in 2007, and his day job was an economist in the finance industry while he was writing those.
Edge cases were considered in science long before an economist picked a new name for a gross oversimplification of old ideas. He's very much an anti-statistician and calls them "pseudoscientists".
What is the motivation of your little luddite sig? To say that the views of any expert are worthless and thus climate science if worthless - or is it something less obvious that makes you want to challenge the authority of anyone with a clue?
Way to get waaaay off the point, and you missed the "Art class? Maybe" above. Deliberate pretence of stupidity is not cute you know. The issue at hand is boys in a class giving a girl a hard time because the teacher fucked up, not ten tons of irrelevant baggage you want to pretend I'm against.
and runs the whole stereotype of men as misogynistic pigs.
The boys in that class probably were (think back to your schooldays) so the search for something that was sourced from a centrefold is a fuckup on several levels.
I think perhaps the goal is to change STEM into another version of the veterinarian field
Did a shock-jock eat your brain? No? Then lay off with the ridiculous over-reaction that insults the intelligence of everyone that reads it. You cannot possible be so stupid as to connect a complaint about porn in the classroom with a vast social conspiracy - shock-jocks had to destroy their brains with years of cocaine abuse to get that far.
True enough By pointing out how a picture of a woman that is rated G
A centrefold with nipples on show rated G in the land of the massive outrage of a nipple at the Superbowl? Not a chance of it being rated G. Mild or not, it's still porn in the CS class and the boys went into Bevis and Butthead mode which upset the girls. It was a fuckup. It's as stupid as rolling out the porn at Sunday school.
The summary above is a complaint FFS and some of the comments here contain complaints. There's no need to bring imaginary factors in, lets just keep things real OK?
The shitbag in the article committed a crime. He should be punished.
At an adult prison? The experts seem to think locking kids up in adult prisons is a very stupid idea, hence my focus on your stupid luddite sig pretending that experts are not experts which seems to indicate that very stupid ideas have found fertile soil.
Because it's a thing from 2007 from an economist FFS - so most scientists haven't even heard of it yet so of course such fringe stuff from left field gets ignored.
Doesn't seem in any way related to your post so maybe you should actually try writing some stuff instead of assuming that people will figure out the unrelated unwritten stuff for themselves. I suspect that's why the mods didn't have the faintest clue what you were writing about and just saw an accusation of a lie that hasn't happened.
The attitude sort of makes sense coupled with the weird sig - not being able to tell the difference between science and economics so not being able to make sense of juvenile versus adult criminal treatment goes with the territory. Yes it's a personal attack but you wanted big boy games with consequences didn't you?
Very strong words - why exactly? Would you like high school CS teachers to discuss porn with their students or do you have some other motivation for your sad attempt at bullying me? It's not the time, place or the person that should be trusted with doing it. By sheer co-incidence I'm currently reading a biography of a radio "shock-jock" who was driven out of high school teaching for having frank discussions about sex with his high school students until 3am (and other stuff that was suspected but not proven). It's not something that should be encouraged since teachers have so much influence over their students.
Yes to all that, but a high school CS class is not the time and place for the full image or the info that it was from Playboy, which is really the issue at hand. Art class? Maybe. They'd probably use something out of copyright though.
We could also just as accurately say that Goldman Sachs stole the Greek economy among many other things. I suppose it could always be argued that the Greek government didn't have to follow their advice, and that "sharp practice" is the American way that they should have been wary of - but it isn't what is supposed to be the American way is it? It's the same with proposing to jail a copyright infringer for longer than a rapist or armed robber - something to be ashamed of. Just because Goldman Sachs execs like to act and think like the English nobility of the 1700s and splash money around to get mere elected representatives to do their bidding is no reason to treat those they see as their enemies as worse than the enemies of society that actually deserve to be locked up (murderers etc).
Incorrect. Image number 4 for me in a search for "lena soderberg" was this: http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://std3.ru/57/a9/1382360119-57a9226b58e2e1baa311e9f0f6fa0728.jpg&imgrefurl=http://imgarcade.com/1/lena-soderberg-original/&h=700&w=384&tbnid=sHNdiBO8gK9_6M:&zoom=1&docid=G3OImPX1TScqOM&ei=g8VFVbHPAYTsmAXfoICwBA&tbm=isch&client=firefox-a&ved=0CB8QMygDMAM
Don't bother with the long URL just do the search yourself. So a fuckup by the teacher. Maybe an irrelevant storm in a teacup but the image does come up.
I got a good laugh out of your "grow up" post in response to a teacher's obvious fuckup in telling kids slightly younger than yourself to do a classroom google search for something that's likely to lead to Playboy magazine. It's pretty good advice kid, but you should try following it yourself before unleashing such a torrent of shit on someone who's just posting about an amusing classroom fuckup.
You're not a kid? Why haven't you grown up mentally then? Why are you picking on little girls?
Don't have to go so far - people are just complaining about the source of the material and not the content. They don't want their kids searching for stuff connected to Playboy magazine as part of their schoolwork.
If it was Runaway1956's "girl on beach" in the same pose etc and you'd managed to get it in a gallery they'd have no problems bringing school groups into the gallery. Since it's a Playboy centrefold that brings in extra baggage and implied support of that baggage, which in a school setting just sends the kids off into Bevis and Butthead mode. The only fuckup was getting the kids to search for the image instead of supplying it. The "they don't like their own bodies" is way off the planet since the whole discussion is about some kid finding it funny that his homework is from a centrefold.
Looks like people aren't even bothering to read the summary before posting "with certainty" these days. A teacher fucked up and told them to search. They didn't just get the "face", they got the info that it was a centrefold and suddenly all the baggage that comes with that became an issue. Storm in a teacup but even if taken seriously it's still very different to "That any classroom that has a woman's face in it is a hostile work environment" deliberate idiocy.
Slashdot Mirror
So if you want to pretend to be an idiot you should be able to put up with a mild rebuke as a consequence. In you don't like it then there's an easy fix - stop pretending to be an idiot just to try and turn a storm into a teacup into some kind of insane global conspiracy.
As for your anecdote - yes high school was a shitty time for anyone other than the head of the football team - so consider your anecdote and have some empathy with the girl who posted the story because she was picked on a bit more due to a teacher's fuckup. That's all there is to see here - no global conspiracy.
Are you really telling me you can't tell the difference between this fuckup where the teacher made things difficult for the girls in the class and that?
You can?
Then what is the point of posting it at all? It has fuckall to do with the post we are commenting on.
This is not about images of naked women in modern society, this is about kids acting like little shits in a high school class fuelled by a teacher's idiotic fuckup.
"Followed by The Black Swan"
Which was in 2007, and his day job was an economist in the finance industry while he was writing those.
Edge cases were considered in science long before an economist picked a new name for a gross oversimplification of old ideas. He's very much an anti-statistician and calls them "pseudoscientists".
What is the motivation of your little luddite sig? To say that the views of any expert are worthless and thus climate science if worthless - or is it something less obvious that makes you want to challenge the authority of anyone with a clue?
Fair enough, but this current situation looks analogous to the Mafia calling in the cops because an accountant was taking a bit on the side.
Way to get waaaay off the point, and you missed the "Art class? Maybe" above.
Deliberate pretence of stupidity is not cute you know.
The issue at hand is boys in a class giving a girl a hard time because the teacher fucked up, not ten tons of irrelevant baggage you want to pretend I'm against.
Not even in the top 100 for me. Google must know you like porn.
I'm in Australia so maybe they've decided we're not terrified of nipples in this part of the world.
No. Cookies are off. It doesn't know me from anyone.
The boys in that class probably were (think back to your schooldays) so the search for something that was sourced from a centrefold is a fuckup on several levels.
Did a shock-jock eat your brain? No? Then lay off with the ridiculous over-reaction that insults the intelligence of everyone that reads it. You cannot possible be so stupid as to connect a complaint about porn in the classroom with a vast social conspiracy - shock-jocks had to destroy their brains with years of cocaine abuse to get that far.
A centrefold with nipples on show rated G in the land of the massive outrage of a nipple at the Superbowl? Not a chance of it being rated G. Mild or not, it's still porn in the CS class and the boys went into Bevis and Butthead mode which upset the girls. It was a fuckup. It's as stupid as rolling out the porn at Sunday school.
The summary above is a complaint FFS and some of the comments here contain complaints. There's no need to bring imaginary factors in, lets just keep things real OK?
At an adult prison? The experts seem to think locking kids up in adult prisons is a very stupid idea, hence my focus on your stupid luddite sig pretending that experts are not experts which seems to indicate that very stupid ideas have found fertile soil.
Because it's a thing from 2007 from an economist FFS - so most scientists haven't even heard of it yet so of course such fringe stuff from left field gets ignored.
Doesn't seem in any way related to your post so maybe you should actually try writing some stuff instead of assuming that people will figure out the unrelated unwritten stuff for themselves. I suspect that's why the mods didn't have the faintest clue what you were writing about and just saw an accusation of a lie that hasn't happened.
The attitude sort of makes sense coupled with the weird sig - not being able to tell the difference between science and economics so not being able to make sense of juvenile versus adult criminal treatment goes with the territory.
Yes it's a personal attack but you wanted big boy games with consequences didn't you?
What's with the pathetic stalking?
I suggest you get off the computer before daddy comes back and sees you have logged into his account.
Very strong words - why exactly? Would you like high school CS teachers to discuss porn with their students or do you have some other motivation for your sad attempt at bullying me?
It's not the time, place or the person that should be trusted with doing it. By sheer co-incidence I'm currently reading a biography of a radio "shock-jock" who was driven out of high school teaching for having frank discussions about sex with his high school students until 3am (and other stuff that was suspected but not proven). It's not something that should be encouraged since teachers have so much influence over their students.
Yes to all that, but a high school CS class is not the time and place for the full image or the info that it was from Playboy, which is really the issue at hand.
Art class? Maybe. They'd probably use something out of copyright though.
We could also just as accurately say that Goldman Sachs stole the Greek economy among many other things.
I suppose it could always be argued that the Greek government didn't have to follow their advice, and that "sharp practice" is the American way that they should have been wary of - but it isn't what is supposed to be the American way is it?
It's the same with proposing to jail a copyright infringer for longer than a rapist or armed robber - something to be ashamed of. Just because Goldman Sachs execs like to act and think like the English nobility of the 1700s and splash money around to get mere elected representatives to do their bidding is no reason to treat those they see as their enemies as worse than the enemies of society that actually deserve to be locked up (murderers etc).
So what exactly was the point? All that is there is something about lying (spin) about OSS.
Incorrect. Image number 4 for me in a search for "lena soderberg" was this:
http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://std3.ru/57/a9/1382360119-57a9226b58e2e1baa311e9f0f6fa0728.jpg&imgrefurl=http://imgarcade.com/1/lena-soderberg-original/&h=700&w=384&tbnid=sHNdiBO8gK9_6M:&zoom=1&docid=G3OImPX1TScqOM&ei=g8VFVbHPAYTsmAXfoICwBA&tbm=isch&client=firefox-a&ved=0CB8QMygDMAM
Don't bother with the long URL just do the search yourself.
So a fuckup by the teacher. Maybe an irrelevant storm in a teacup but the image does come up.
Now that is funny!
Can't discuss things with a real person so you need to go full strawman.
I got a good laugh out of your "grow up" post in response to a teacher's obvious fuckup in telling kids slightly younger than yourself to do a classroom google search for something that's likely to lead to Playboy magazine. It's pretty good advice kid, but you should try following it yourself before unleashing such a torrent of shit on someone who's just posting about an amusing classroom fuckup.
You're not a kid? Why haven't you grown up mentally then? Why are you picking on little girls?
Don't have to go so far - people are just complaining about the source of the material and not the content. They don't want their kids searching for stuff connected to Playboy magazine as part of their schoolwork.
If it was Runaway1956's "girl on beach" in the same pose etc and you'd managed to get it in a gallery they'd have no problems bringing school groups into the gallery.
Since it's a Playboy centrefold that brings in extra baggage and implied support of that baggage, which in a school setting just sends the kids off into Bevis and Butthead mode.
The only fuckup was getting the kids to search for the image instead of supplying it.
The "they don't like their own bodies" is way off the planet since the whole discussion is about some kid finding it funny that his homework is from a centrefold.
Looks like people aren't even bothering to read the summary before posting "with certainty" these days.
A teacher fucked up and told them to search. They didn't just get the "face", they got the info that it was a centrefold and suddenly all the baggage that comes with that became an issue. Storm in a teacup but even if taken seriously it's still very different to "That any classroom that has a woman's face in it is a hostile work environment" deliberate idiocy.