A bizarre plus to that system is that the mass of people who only make a living from forming new laws, now aren't compelled to keep coming up with new, stupid ones in order to keep their jobs. Instead, they'll be busy reviewing and updating old laws and this will keep them from fucking with us so much. Heck, once the model was in place, they'd be pushing for an even shorter expiry date for laws.;)
I try to support IE6 on a "moderate effort" basis. I'll fix major problems (if there are any) and I'll try to make it fail gracefully as others have said. Basically, if I do a site, I want it to reach people, that's my aim and I don't let my browser snobbery make me forget that. But having said that, this guy says less than 5% of his visitors are using IE at all. So I don't know what site he's running but it's clearly not an average demographic. So yes, he might as well disregard it other than putting up a note on the site itself, perhaps. For the rest of us, we carry on as usual trying to cater to our visitors. This is basically just another piece of Slashdot rabble rousing - it's hardly a real Ask Slashdot" where someone actually needs advice on something.
Poland thought they were going to get the favour of the USA when the missile defence systems were going to be sited there. The moment the US switches foreign policy from sabre-rattling at Russia to appeasing Russia (due in no small part to increasing tension with Iran), the USA dropped Poland like a hot potato. Well it's not all bad - when I say "Poland" I was referring to the government there as most of the people as I understand it didn't want the missile defence systems sited in their country in the first place (wisely, imho). Still, the Polish government has ended up looking like prats and they certainly have a better grasp of how the US treats its allies now. Maybe they'll learn. Or maybe not.
Yes, it's quite bizarre that we're being protected from our own governments by the EU. And yet this is what is happening. Even in other areas this is the case such as Human Rights, Animal Welfare and Envrionmental Standards (I'm not talking global warming in the last one, I'm talking chemical emissions, water pollution, etc). I dislike large government on principle, yet for the EU, it's working out better than our national ones. I've been to the EU parliament as well. And quite frankly, even though its remit is larger, it comes across even in its architecture and fittings, as more in touch and open than the UK parliament and offices.
By saying "will" you're implying that is a real device. Microsoft have already said publicly that the Courier is a character in a fictional concept video. There is not now, never was, and never will be, a Microsoft Courier.
What the Hell? Lacking a citation, much?:D A number of tech news sites are expecting to see it sometime mid-2010. If you know better, you should let them know.
Given that the most desirable feature of tablets for many is the ability to write on them and annotate documents,
No, that is not the most desirable feature. If it were, then Apple would not be outselling all Microsoft Tablet PC's ever sold with every quarter of iPhone sales.
Yeah - read what I wrote. I said "the most desirable feature for many", not everyone. Also, it's a dubious comparison. The markets for a phone size device without laptop functionality that can be frequently included as part of your mobile phone contract is not the same market as a laptop class device that costs several hundred. Different markets. If that failure of logic wasn't bad enough, you're also limiting your comparison to one specific company (Microsoft) not know for their tablet devices and a technology developed today with a technology developed yesterday.
In the first place, the iPad was never even advertised as a laptop replacement.
Never said it was. I said the main reason for a laptop for me is to make notes whilst travelling, and browse / read. The iPad wont meet the first of those needs, but a lightweight tablet with a stylus and decent handwriting recognition might. What are you arguing with?
If you don't like the virtual keyboard, you can use a mechanical keyboard via Bluetooth of the iPod dock connector. Apple's Bluetooth keyboard weighs only a few grams and is very tiny, very thin, yet has full-size keys. But in addition to that, you can draw freely on the iPad screen to take a visual note, with very fine resolution, you can draw very thin lines in many colors. You can annotate photos or documents with hand-drawn arrows, or circle something in a photo. You can write on it with your finger, again in very fine lines, one pixel thin lines are very easy, very accurate, same as on iPhone.
Quite frankly, I don't believe you that writing with a finger on an iPad will be in the same class as using a stylus and you've also skipped over handwriting recognition which I have stated is very important to me. I'll get to see what the interface is like on the iPad when I try it out for my mother when it comes out. Speaking of which, where did you try it out to know all this?
Actually, they would be very happy to hear that. They would be very happy to hear that they brought computing to someone who otherwise could not experience it, or who otherwise would be tortured with a Windows system by their ignorant grandson.
Are you're trying to insult me? I just realised! I said "mother" not "grandmother" and my OS of choice is Gentoo as it happens. The main advantage for the iPad for her is not the OS, but the lightness of the device and the lack of things she needs to plug in to use it (no mouse, no keyboard). As to my torturing anyone, you must get slapped so much less in life now that you can communicate with people over the Internet.
No, I meant Patrick Moore, actually. Though I garbled what I said a little due to the vagueries of recollection. He is one of the founding members of Greenpeace, not "The Founder" as I falsely stated. He was also at one point a director of Greenpeace. I think they hate him now. He still works in environmentalism but has a pro-Nuclear power stance. Paul Watson, as far as I know, is mainly focused on anti-hunting (especially whaling) and I can respect that. I don't think he actually advocates or does violence toward people, but he's certainly fine with property damage if it will save a creature he views as an intelligent creature. I think he got kicked out of Greenpeace because of a mix of being a bit too Direct Action for them and, probably more so, for not getting along with the personality politics Greenpeace is riddled with.
Anyway, as you can probably tell, I have no great love for the organization and this is coming from someone who is not against direct action (if non-violent). They co-opt the name "environmentalist" so that the rest of us who care about the environment get tarred with the same brush. Many people in Greenpeace care a lot about the environment and I respect that. And some of their campaigns I agree with. But I think it is largely populated by "lifestyle environmentalists" who just want to get even with someone.
Anyway, I acknowledge I misremembered the exact details a little in my earlier post. Thanks,
H.
Maybe I am just getting out of touch with reality...
No, you're trying to stay in touch with reality, and the mainstream media is trying to stop you. It's the same in much of the UK - personality politics as a distraction from substance. 'Look at what I'm saying, not at what I'm doing,' is the general intent.
Ok, then one more point the environmental movement has:
I can understand this comment, but there are many of us who consider ourselves environmentalists who are very pro-Nuclear. And we are pro-Nuclear because we care about the environment. Believe me, Greenpeace loudly shouting on behalf of "environmentalists" irritates people like me far more than it irritates the Nuclear industry (probably). If they want to protect whales from being hunted, I'm fine with that - I'll even support them. But they should shut the fuck up about things they know nothing about. Even their founder has long since disowned them.
Good points. That probably has more to do with it than bandwidth. I didn't have a DVD player (let alone a DVD drive) back then. It's astonishing how much things have changed.
As is my habit, I now "Friend" you for correcting me.:)
This isn't me being argumentative, I'm genuinely asking. Why would you do this? Macs seems to cost more for the same amount of power that you'd get in a non-Mac machine. So the primary reason for buying a Mac as far as I can see if for the OS. Why would you replace it with Windows? Wouldn't you be better off buying a windows machine in the first place?
I don't see why you were modded Redundant for that. Nobody else has said they'd marry me on here.:(;)
To be fair to the original researcher, he didn't make any actual conclusions like this. They were tacked on by Ars Technica and then repeated in the Slashdot summary. Neither bear much relation to what is essentially an extended sampling of a single torrent network.
Your scenario could be accurate, but I think the more likely one is that DRM is sold to the company by the DRM maker and the company simply falls for it. The average high-level manager at a big company probably isn't an expert on software. When a company shows up and says they have a technology that can protect their property and has the tech-speak to back it up, then they'll bite. And honestly, DRM doesn't always fail. It took a while for Blu-Ray to be cracked after all, and even now it's still a hassle for most people to get round.
It's not like Ars did the research themselves [freedom-to-tinker.com].
No, but read the article you linked. You'll find that it's a sampling of data with the sole conclusion being that copyright infringement appears to be "widespread" amongst bit torrent users. The big implication that DRM free music purchasable online has reduced the amount of music piracy appears to have been tacked on solely by the Ars Technica article and then blown up further by the Slashdot summary. The research itself is interesting. The conclusions Ars Technica added, their own invention. I'm not really familiar with Ars Technica though I know the name. Do they have a good reputation because this article and the logic therein isn't something I'd expect to see on a decent website.
Sorry to pick on your post in particular, but how many years will it be before Slashdotter's stop trusting the editors and reading the contents of the article.
So that should be "start reading the article". Didn't mean to imply I was new here.;)
How many more years of this before other industries like software (SecuROM anyone?) come away with the obvious conclusion as well?
Sorry to pick on your post in particular, but how many years will it be before Slashdotter's stop trusting the editors and reading the contents of the article. We're quick enough to pounce on poor logic when some poor creationist wanders in here, but things like this get waved through? For the benefit of those that are article-phobic, the methodology used is as follows: Count all the files available on a torrent network (not accounting for quantity of downloads at all, mind you, just whether they're available) and classify them according to type. Notice that music makes up 10% of the counted file types and movies and TV shows 46% of the file types. State that music can be purchased DRM free online and state that movies cannot be, and conclude that this is the reason why. There are various other throwaway misdirections such as "music used to be the only reason to use P2P". Well, we didn't used to have the bandwidth to download DVD rips, did we?
Does Slashdot have a maximum post size, or shall I list the reasons what's wrong with all this article? Any statisticians want to take some cheap shots?:)
I posted this elsewhere, but the only person I can think of that the iPad is particularly suited to, is my mother who is smart but not very experienced in computer usage and would find one of Apple's well-thought out interfaces (I'll give them that) a plus and, due to a bit of arthritis, would benefit from something light and not requiring a keyboard. The people the iPad ought to appeal to such as myself who want to be able to scrawl notes conveniently and quickly on the move, it fails on numerous grounds (closed nature, lack of stylus, being no cheaper than a laptop with very limited advantage to me).
I wonder if Apple realises that they've accidentally targeted the Older Parent demographic rather than the Art Guppie market with this device. On the plus side, she does get the hip retro-sixties / seventies look. Of course, it's not retro with her. I love my mum.:D
Decent handwriting recognition? Surely you jest. Handwriting is inherently slower than typing and less accurate.
Certainly for a decent touch-typist like me that's true. Yet even I really want handwriting recognition. Why? Because:
Typing one-handed isn't faster than writing and there are a number of situations where I want to do this. No - I don't mean that:) I mean for example, lying in bed or curled up in an armchair or sitting back against a tree in a par, cooped up in a plane or train without real space to set up a keyboard, etc.
When I want to write in particular places in an application, e.g. annotating a diagram or PDF. It's very nice to scrawl things wherever I want.
Basically, I could ask you why you would ever use a pen and notepad to write something down instead of typing things in and in every scenario you listed that this was more convenient for you, I'd like to be able to lift up my tablet and do the same thing. Imagine having those notebooks that you use automatically datestamping every page as you fill it and making the contents indexable. Fantastic! And all this is from someone who, whilst not secretary standard, is a fairly decent typist.
I've wondered about the handwriting recognition; you just don't see/hear much about it anymore. But then, would you end up going back to a stylus or something? Handwriting with just your finger isn't going to be the same as if you're holding a pen. But I'd bet dollars to donuts Hell would freeze over before Apple includes any sort of stylus peripheral with one of their products!
The Microsoft Courier will use a stylus (actually it appears to accept both touch and stylus). Given that the most desirable feature of tablets for many is the ability to write on them and annotate documents, I'd say this puts it in a strong position over things like the iPad for any "serious" usage. At least if the Courier has enough processing power and OS support for these things. I'm assuming that it will inherit Windows 7's hand-writing recognition technology so potentially this could be a great device. I'm holding off from getting a laptop until I see it as the main reason for a laptop for me is making notes and reading / browsing whilst travelling. The iPad falls down very badly on the first of those.
Oddly, although I've been slating the iPad since it was demo'ed, I may actually end up buying one. Not for me, but for my mother who whilst very bright, isn't experienced with computers and also has less strength and mobility in her hands than she used to. I'm thinking that for her purposes (browsing, light emails), an iPad is pretty older parent friendly. Still overpriced, but if it's the best thing for her, it's what I'll get. I'm not sure Apple would be happy to know that I've finally found their target audience though - technologically inexperienced parents with slight arthritis. She does wear turtlenecks sometimes, though.
In fact, they could replace the tag-line with it. "Nerds" is a derogatory term. "Stuff that Matters" leaves out some fun things. But in this day and age, "Not Ultra-Stupid" is starting to sound like a selling point.
Heh! You've been watching Contact.:D (Actually, one of my favourite movies, so my comment is a joke, not an allegation). I take your point about the kinship of "True Believers". But what I was highlighting was that whilst what you say may be correct in comparing say, Richard Dawkins or other affirmed atheist with a priest, it does not apply to the lower case "believer" who chooses to believe in some aspect of scientific theory when you try to compare them with someone who believes in God. They are different natures of belief. I guess I was questioning whether it was appropriate to classify the people you were describing as "True Believers" or merely as "believers".
Anyway, I am myself a religious person (albeit lacking a religion) so I can understand your point and I suspect on all practical questions we take the same approach. I merely enjoy debating logic and classification.
In that case, yes. Like electric vehicles. I think the GP contradicted you because he presumed that you must be disagreeing with the person you replied to (as is normal Slashdot procedure) and because the parent post was correct, attempted to find a way to show yours was wrong. In fact, you are both correct and we have TWO bad situations of artificial constraint.
In future, you should probably wait for someone else to post a reply when you want to agree with someone, that way you can reply to the second person's post enabling you to both support the GP that you think is right and honour the Slashdot protocol of only posting to correct someone.
The basis of your argument in your first paragraph appears to be that belief is equal, regardless of what that belief is in. E.g. Whether someone believes in "Science" or believes in "Religion X", it is still belief and those holding those beliefs share a "kinship". This seems false to me. Why should belief separate from that which is believed in be the unit of comparison? Doesn't it make more sense to say that "belief in X" should be compared with "belief in Y" without the object of belief being discarded? If so, then there are important distinctions between a belief in science and a belief in a religion. Namely an evidential basis.
Now I don't see science and religion as exclusive. I am both myself for example. But I don't think you can pick two hypothetical people who strongly believe in something and equate those beliefs without considering what they believe in. At least not usefully. That sort of relativism is dangerous.
Just this once, I'm going to take a pass on backing up everything I say. Trying to support information gathered over many years of interest in costuming, art and anthropology in a "source" just isn't worth my time for an off-hand Slashdot post. So, "bah" all you like. If you're genuinely interested, do some reading and see what conclusions you come to.
Slashdot Mirror
A bizarre plus to that system is that the mass of people who only make a living from forming new laws, now aren't compelled to keep coming up with new, stupid ones in order to keep their jobs. Instead, they'll be busy reviewing and updating old laws and this will keep them from fucking with us so much. Heck, once the model was in place, they'd be pushing for an even shorter expiry date for laws.
I try to support IE6 on a "moderate effort" basis. I'll fix major problems (if there are any) and I'll try to make it fail gracefully as others have said. Basically, if I do a site, I want it to reach people, that's my aim and I don't let my browser snobbery make me forget that. But having said that, this guy says less than 5% of his visitors are using IE at all. So I don't know what site he's running but it's clearly not an average demographic. So yes, he might as well disregard it other than putting up a note on the site itself, perhaps. For the rest of us, we carry on as usual trying to cater to our visitors. This is basically just another piece of Slashdot rabble rousing - it's hardly a real Ask Slashdot" where someone actually needs advice on something.
Poland thought they were going to get the favour of the USA when the missile defence systems were going to be sited there. The moment the US switches foreign policy from sabre-rattling at Russia to appeasing Russia (due in no small part to increasing tension with Iran), the USA dropped Poland like a hot potato. Well it's not all bad - when I say "Poland" I was referring to the government there as most of the people as I understand it didn't want the missile defence systems sited in their country in the first place (wisely, imho). Still, the Polish government has ended up looking like prats and they certainly have a better grasp of how the US treats its allies now. Maybe they'll learn. Or maybe not.
Yes, it's quite bizarre that we're being protected from our own governments by the EU. And yet this is what is happening. Even in other areas this is the case such as Human Rights, Animal Welfare and Envrionmental Standards (I'm not talking global warming in the last one, I'm talking chemical emissions, water pollution, etc). I dislike large government on principle, yet for the EU, it's working out better than our national ones. I've been to the EU parliament as well. And quite frankly, even though its remit is larger, it comes across even in its architecture and fittings, as more in touch and open than the UK parliament and offices.
What the Hell? Lacking a citation, much? :D A number of tech news sites are expecting to see it sometime mid-2010. If you know better, you should let them know.
Yeah - read what I wrote. I said "the most desirable feature for many", not everyone. Also, it's a dubious comparison. The markets for a phone size device without laptop functionality that can be frequently included as part of your mobile phone contract is not the same market as a laptop class device that costs several hundred. Different markets. If that failure of logic wasn't bad enough, you're also limiting your comparison to one specific company (Microsoft) not know for their tablet devices and a technology developed today with a technology developed yesterday.
Never said it was. I said the main reason for a laptop for me is to make notes whilst travelling, and browse / read. The iPad wont meet the first of those needs, but a lightweight tablet with a stylus and decent handwriting recognition might. What are you arguing with?
Quite frankly, I don't believe you that writing with a finger on an iPad will be in the same class as using a stylus and you've also skipped over handwriting recognition which I have stated is very important to me. I'll get to see what the interface is like on the iPad when I try it out for my mother when it comes out. Speaking of which, where did you try it out to know all this?
Are you're trying to insult me? I just realised! I said "mother" not "grandmother" and my OS of choice is Gentoo as it happens. The main advantage for the iPad for her is not the OS, but the lightness of the device and the lack of things she needs to plug in to use it (no mouse, no keyboard). As to my torturing anyone, you must get slapped so much less in life now that you can communicate with people over the Internet.
Moron.
H.
No, I meant Patrick Moore, actually. Though I garbled what I said a little due to the vagueries of recollection. He is one of the founding members of Greenpeace, not "The Founder" as I falsely stated. He was also at one point a director of Greenpeace. I think they hate him now. He still works in environmentalism but has a pro-Nuclear power stance. Paul Watson, as far as I know, is mainly focused on anti-hunting (especially whaling) and I can respect that. I don't think he actually advocates or does violence toward people, but he's certainly fine with property damage if it will save a creature he views as an intelligent creature. I think he got kicked out of Greenpeace because of a mix of being a bit too Direct Action for them and, probably more so, for not getting along with the personality politics Greenpeace is riddled with.
Anyway, as you can probably tell, I have no great love for the organization and this is coming from someone who is not against direct action (if non-violent). They co-opt the name "environmentalist" so that the rest of us who care about the environment get tarred with the same brush. Many people in Greenpeace care a lot about the environment and I respect that. And some of their campaigns I agree with. But I think it is largely populated by "lifestyle environmentalists" who just want to get even with someone.
Anyway, I acknowledge I misremembered the exact details a little in my earlier post. Thanks,
H.
No, you're trying to stay in touch with reality, and the mainstream media is trying to stop you. It's the same in much of the UK - personality politics as a distraction from substance. 'Look at what I'm saying, not at what I'm doing,' is the general intent.
I can understand this comment, but there are many of us who consider ourselves environmentalists who are very pro-Nuclear. And we are pro-Nuclear because we care about the environment. Believe me, Greenpeace loudly shouting on behalf of "environmentalists" irritates people like me far more than it irritates the Nuclear industry (probably). If they want to protect whales from being hunted, I'm fine with that - I'll even support them. But they should shut the fuck up about things they know nothing about. Even their founder has long since disowned them.
Good points. That probably has more to do with it than bandwidth. I didn't have a DVD player (let alone a DVD drive) back then. It's astonishing how much things have changed.
As is my habit, I now "Friend" you for correcting me.
This isn't me being argumentative, I'm genuinely asking. Why would you do this? Macs seems to cost more for the same amount of power that you'd get in a non-Mac machine. So the primary reason for buying a Mac as far as I can see if for the OS. Why would you replace it with Windows? Wouldn't you be better off buying a windows machine in the first place?
I don't see why you were modded Redundant for that. Nobody else has said they'd marry me on here.
To be fair to the original researcher, he didn't make any actual conclusions like this. They were tacked on by Ars Technica and then repeated in the Slashdot summary. Neither bear much relation to what is essentially an extended sampling of a single torrent network.
Your scenario could be accurate, but I think the more likely one is that DRM is sold to the company by the DRM maker and the company simply falls for it. The average high-level manager at a big company probably isn't an expert on software. When a company shows up and says they have a technology that can protect their property and has the tech-speak to back it up, then they'll bite. And honestly, DRM doesn't always fail. It took a while for Blu-Ray to be cracked after all, and even now it's still a hassle for most people to get round.
I'm sorry. I don't get it. I'm new here...
No, but read the article you linked. You'll find that it's a sampling of data with the sole conclusion being that copyright infringement appears to be "widespread" amongst bit torrent users. The big implication that DRM free music purchasable online has reduced the amount of music piracy appears to have been tacked on solely by the Ars Technica article and then blown up further by the Slashdot summary. The research itself is interesting. The conclusions Ars Technica added, their own invention. I'm not really familiar with Ars Technica though I know the name. Do they have a good reputation because this article and the logic therein isn't something I'd expect to see on a decent website.
So that should be "start reading the article". Didn't mean to imply I was new here. ;)
Sorry to pick on your post in particular, but how many years will it be before Slashdotter's stop trusting the editors and reading the contents of the article. We're quick enough to pounce on poor logic when some poor creationist wanders in here, but things like this get waved through? For the benefit of those that are article-phobic, the methodology used is as follows: Count all the files available on a torrent network (not accounting for quantity of downloads at all, mind you, just whether they're available) and classify them according to type. Notice that music makes up 10% of the counted file types and movies and TV shows 46% of the file types. State that music can be purchased DRM free online and state that movies cannot be, and conclude that this is the reason why. There are various other throwaway misdirections such as "music used to be the only reason to use P2P". Well, we didn't used to have the bandwidth to download DVD rips, did we?
:)
Does Slashdot have a maximum post size, or shall I list the reasons what's wrong with all this article? Any statisticians want to take some cheap shots?
I posted this elsewhere, but the only person I can think of that the iPad is particularly suited to, is my mother who is smart but not very experienced in computer usage and would find one of Apple's well-thought out interfaces (I'll give them that) a plus and, due to a bit of arthritis, would benefit from something light and not requiring a keyboard. The people the iPad ought to appeal to such as myself who want to be able to scrawl notes conveniently and quickly on the move, it fails on numerous grounds (closed nature, lack of stylus, being no cheaper than a laptop with very limited advantage to me).
I wonder if Apple realises that they've accidentally targeted the Older Parent demographic rather than the Art Guppie market with this device. On the plus side, she does get the hip retro-sixties / seventies look. Of course, it's not retro with her. I love my mum.
Certainly for a decent touch-typist like me that's true. Yet even I really want handwriting recognition. Why? Because:
Basically, I could ask you why you would ever use a pen and notepad to write something down instead of typing things in and in every scenario you listed that this was more convenient for you, I'd like to be able to lift up my tablet and do the same thing. Imagine having those notebooks that you use automatically datestamping every page as you fill it and making the contents indexable. Fantastic! And all this is from someone who, whilst not secretary standard, is a fairly decent typist.
The Microsoft Courier will use a stylus (actually it appears to accept both touch and stylus). Given that the most desirable feature of tablets for many is the ability to write on them and annotate documents, I'd say this puts it in a strong position over things like the iPad for any "serious" usage. At least if the Courier has enough processing power and OS support for these things. I'm assuming that it will inherit Windows 7's hand-writing recognition technology so potentially this could be a great device. I'm holding off from getting a laptop until I see it as the main reason for a laptop for me is making notes and reading / browsing whilst travelling. The iPad falls down very badly on the first of those.
Oddly, although I've been slating the iPad since it was demo'ed, I may actually end up buying one. Not for me, but for my mother who whilst very bright, isn't experienced with computers and also has less strength and mobility in her hands than she used to. I'm thinking that for her purposes (browsing, light emails), an iPad is pretty older parent friendly. Still overpriced, but if it's the best thing for her, it's what I'll get. I'm not sure Apple would be happy to know that I've finally found their target audience though - technologically inexperienced parents with slight arthritis. She does wear turtlenecks sometimes, though.
In fact, they could replace the tag-line with it. "Nerds" is a derogatory term. "Stuff that Matters" leaves out some fun things. But in this day and age, "Not Ultra-Stupid" is starting to sound like a selling point.
Heh! You've been watching Contact.
Anyway, I am myself a religious person (albeit lacking a religion) so I can understand your point and I suspect on all practical questions we take the same approach. I merely enjoy debating logic and classification.
Always a pleasure,
H.
In that case, yes. Like electric vehicles. I think the GP contradicted you because he presumed that you must be disagreeing with the person you replied to (as is normal Slashdot procedure) and because the parent post was correct, attempted to find a way to show yours was wrong. In fact, you are both correct and we have TWO bad situations of artificial constraint.
In future, you should probably wait for someone else to post a reply when you want to agree with someone, that way you can reply to the second person's post enabling you to both support the GP that you think is right and honour the Slashdot protocol of only posting to correct someone.
HTH,
Harmony.
The basis of your argument in your first paragraph appears to be that belief is equal, regardless of what that belief is in. E.g. Whether someone believes in "Science" or believes in "Religion X", it is still belief and those holding those beliefs share a "kinship". This seems false to me. Why should belief separate from that which is believed in be the unit of comparison? Doesn't it make more sense to say that "belief in X" should be compared with "belief in Y" without the object of belief being discarded? If so, then there are important distinctions between a belief in science and a belief in a religion. Namely an evidential basis.
Now I don't see science and religion as exclusive. I am both myself for example. But I don't think you can pick two hypothetical people who strongly believe in something and equate those beliefs without considering what they believe in. At least not usefully. That sort of relativism is dangerous.
Just this once, I'm going to take a pass on backing up everything I say. Trying to support information gathered over many years of interest in costuming, art and anthropology in a "source" just isn't worth my time for an off-hand Slashdot post. So, "bah" all you like. If you're genuinely interested, do some reading and see what conclusions you come to.
A valid point. I'll word this more precisely if I'm ever called on to state it again. Thanks.