What about the animal? The poor thing will be the only one of its species in existence. No chance of reproduction (unless it's close enough to an elephant to mate), no herd to grow up in, no point to its life other than for us to ooh and aah over.
I remember from the early parts of the book Influence: the Science and Practice (awesome book, by the way) that the author pointed out that we're wired to participate in society as efficiently as possible... well, by "we" I don't necessarily mean slashdotters.
Anyway, our brain takes shortcuts to make our interaction with those around us be mostly smooth and beneficial for everyone. These shortcuts can be taken advantage of by bad people to gain our compliance to things we shouldn't comply with. We get conned.
But the author makes a point that these shortcuts are generally a good thing and mostly necessary... we should just beware when something seems fishy.
That's why it bothers me when people use some poor sap that gets taken advantage of to prove that you need to be greedy or a jerk or self-centered to make it through life without being screwed. To hell with that, continue to be kind, self-less, helpful, and trusting... but also listen to those warning bells in the back of your mind that might appear from time to time.
That's a pretty brazen FU to their consumers and to the law. I can't believe they got away with it for 5 years. What are the chances that $585M is going to find its way back to the consumers that were taken advantage of?
Is this one of those studies where they tabulate how many positive things are said abotu each side and if it's anything other than even-steven it's evidence of bias?
"On the broadcast network newscasts, evaluations of Barack Obama and Joe Biden have been over twice as favorable as evaluations of John McCain and Sarah Palinâ" 65% positive versus 35% negative for the Democratic ticket compared to 31% positive verus 69% negative evaluations of the Republican ticket."
What if the Democrats have a better platform and better ideas than the Republicans? Should the networks still say just as many bad things about both sides as they do good things? Should we start asking our journalists to approach politics like they do science - any opposing viewpoint regardless of merit gets equal time? I know slashdotters love how science gets reported on the news...
Maybe there are more negative things said about McCain because he deserves them.
I think that's a viewpoint that is shared by a lot of conservatives. They don't want to be a part of a system that helps a wide range of people if it means some of those people don't deserve to be helped.
I think a viewpoint shared by most liberals is that it's best to help out a broad range of people to ensure everyone who needs help gets it at the risk of maybe helping out some people that don't deserve it.
Are you one of those people that thinks the only good beer has at least a metric buttload of hops per glass?
It always seems beer snobbery is focused solely on finding the most bitter, thickest, darkest, heaviest, can-only-drink-one-at-a-time, strongest beer possible.
Is Guinness all that exciting? No. Is it about 6 brazilian better than Coors Light? You bet. And you can drink them all night too.
Here's the thing about science: conclusions are based on data. Much like open source, the data is available for people to go through and examine themselves to see if they come to the same conclusions. If a scientist were to make a radical claim like the world is ending while the data shows otherwise, that person wouldn't be a scientist much longer.
Science is open to prevent things like that from happening. The system is set up to prevent rogue scientist or scientist pushing an agenda.
"OK, now come at me like you're going to grab me. No no, try to grab my arms... no, not like that, come up from behind me like this... ok, now grab my arms... a little higher... no, like on the bicep..."
Then they twirl you into a submission hold and feel all proud.
The reason right wingers startle more easily is because they know their view of the world is a very selfish one and that makes them feel guilty. They go around expecting that eventually someone's going to jump out and call them on it so they're always on the defensive.
I understand your point and I agree that while some event might be newsworthy and even interesting, with a little tweak here or a little adjustment there, it could be stupendous and earth-shaking news. The temptation is too great for some journalists to bear.
But I hardly think one side of the political spectrum has a corner on the market.
One of the big reasons that emo gets made fun of a lot is that it's an easy target. Low hanging fruit. I mean really, what redeeming qualities does emo have?
It was my understanding that Iran was developing some pretty strong pro-western feelings, especially with the younger people. Some observers thought it would only be a matter of a couple of decades before Iran became a very open and free country.
Then Bush said some pretty adversarial things about them right before an election which gave a good deal of momentum to the conservatives and led to the current state of saber rattling, etc.
So yes, a lot of blame can be laid at the feet of Bush and his "cowboy politics".
I guess I don't really follow what you're saying... are you suggesting that the iPhone is like the Ford Taurus and is being unfairly compared to a BMW Z8? Or are you suggesting that the BMW Z8 should be allowed a certain number of failures because it's complex while the Ford Taurus should remain failure-free because it's simpler?
Because I'm pretty sure people would be pretty pissed if their Z8 was in the shop as much as a Ford (Fix Or Repair Daily) Taurus.
If we can't make fun of the semi-literate ravings of lunatics on the mostly anonymous world wide web, then who ARE we allowed to make fun of? No really, who?
I don't think people are using the right tool for the job in this instance. There are plenty of other technologies that allow you to get messages to people without interacting with them and allowing them to access the message on their own terms.
Maybe my next entrepreneurial adventure will be a service that you can call from your mobile phone, leave a message, and my staff will hand write the message on decent stationary and snail mail it the recipient.
What have we become as a country when we're talking about finding a law that expands our government's ability to spy on us with little oversight unconstitutional in spite of having a "conservative" leaning Supreme Court?
Slashdot Mirror
What about the animal? The poor thing will be the only one of its species in existence. No chance of reproduction (unless it's close enough to an elephant to mate), no herd to grow up in, no point to its life other than for us to ooh and aah over.
Just because we can doesn't mean we should.
I'm trying to repress any memories of seeing that movie. Thanks for sending me back to square one. Jerk.
I remember from the early parts of the book Influence: the Science and Practice (awesome book, by the way) that the author pointed out that we're wired to participate in society as efficiently as possible... well, by "we" I don't necessarily mean slashdotters.
Anyway, our brain takes shortcuts to make our interaction with those around us be mostly smooth and beneficial for everyone. These shortcuts can be taken advantage of by bad people to gain our compliance to things we shouldn't comply with. We get conned.
But the author makes a point that these shortcuts are generally a good thing and mostly necessary... we should just beware when something seems fishy.
That's why it bothers me when people use some poor sap that gets taken advantage of to prove that you need to be greedy or a jerk or self-centered to make it through life without being screwed. To hell with that, continue to be kind, self-less, helpful, and trusting... but also listen to those warning bells in the back of your mind that might appear from time to time.
That's a pretty brazen FU to their consumers and to the law. I can't believe they got away with it for 5 years. What are the chances that $585M is going to find its way back to the consumers that were taken advantage of?
Is this one of those studies where they tabulate how many positive things are said abotu each side and if it's anything other than even-steven it's evidence of bias?
"On the broadcast network newscasts, evaluations of Barack Obama and Joe Biden have been over twice as favorable as evaluations of John McCain and Sarah Palinâ" 65% positive versus 35% negative for the Democratic ticket compared to 31% positive verus 69% negative evaluations of the Republican ticket."
What if the Democrats have a better platform and better ideas than the Republicans? Should the networks still say just as many bad things about both sides as they do good things? Should we start asking our journalists to approach politics like they do science - any opposing viewpoint regardless of merit gets equal time? I know slashdotters love how science gets reported on the news...
Maybe there are more negative things said about McCain because he deserves them.
"Voting just legitimises a corrupt system."
Say what? We should really have a non-corrupt system like a monarchy or a dictatorship.
Are you unsure what the the term "voting" means?
I think that's a viewpoint that is shared by a lot of conservatives. They don't want to be a part of a system that helps a wide range of people if it means some of those people don't deserve to be helped.
I think a viewpoint shared by most liberals is that it's best to help out a broad range of people to ensure everyone who needs help gets it at the risk of maybe helping out some people that don't deserve it.
Yeah, that's bull.
Republicans favor far less government? The USA PATRIOT Act guys? The warrantless wiretap guys? Seriously?
Are you one of those people that thinks the only good beer has at least a metric buttload of hops per glass?
It always seems beer snobbery is focused solely on finding the most bitter, thickest, darkest, heaviest, can-only-drink-one-at-a-time, strongest beer possible.
Is Guinness all that exciting? No. Is it about 6 brazilian better than Coors Light? You bet. And you can drink them all night too.
Here's the thing about science: conclusions are based on data. Much like open source, the data is available for people to go through and examine themselves to see if they come to the same conclusions. If a scientist were to make a radical claim like the world is ending while the data shows otherwise, that person wouldn't be a scientist much longer.
Science is open to prevent things like that from happening. The system is set up to prevent rogue scientist or scientist pushing an agenda.
Reminds me of my martial arts nerd friends:
"OK, now come at me like you're going to grab me. No no, try to grab my arms... no, not like that, come up from behind me like this... ok, now grab my arms... a little higher... no, like on the bicep..."
Then they twirl you into a submission hold and feel all proud.
This is sure to be a well reasoned discussion.
The reason right wingers startle more easily is because they know their view of the world is a very selfish one and that makes them feel guilty. They go around expecting that eventually someone's going to jump out and call them on it so they're always on the defensive.
There, that's a good start.
Obviously the kid's a hack. No working prototype? Psh...
Now, where'd I set that remote....?
Wow, way to disprove the slashdot stereotype.
Yeesh... someone likes their right-wing blogs.
I understand your point and I agree that while some event might be newsworthy and even interesting, with a little tweak here or a little adjustment there, it could be stupendous and earth-shaking news. The temptation is too great for some journalists to bear.
But I hardly think one side of the political spectrum has a corner on the market.
A little ridiculous? How about very ridiculous?
One of the big reasons that emo gets made fun of a lot is that it's an easy target. Low hanging fruit. I mean really, what redeeming qualities does emo have?
It was my understanding that Iran was developing some pretty strong pro-western feelings, especially with the younger people. Some observers thought it would only be a matter of a couple of decades before Iran became a very open and free country.
Then Bush said some pretty adversarial things about them right before an election which gave a good deal of momentum to the conservatives and led to the current state of saber rattling, etc.
So yes, a lot of blame can be laid at the feet of Bush and his "cowboy politics".
So we just rely on the huge military power to be benevolent?
Unchecked power is a pretty bad thing.
So maybe a few lives are saved, but are those lives worth living if they are lived in subjugation?
I guess I don't really follow what you're saying... are you suggesting that the iPhone is like the Ford Taurus and is being unfairly compared to a BMW Z8? Or are you suggesting that the BMW Z8 should be allowed a certain number of failures because it's complex while the Ford Taurus should remain failure-free because it's simpler?
Because I'm pretty sure people would be pretty pissed if their Z8 was in the shop as much as a Ford (Fix Or Repair Daily) Taurus.
Uh, what?
If we can't make fun of the semi-literate ravings of lunatics on the mostly anonymous world wide web, then who ARE we allowed to make fun of? No really, who?
Looks like Joe's is a KDE shop... where would I go for Gnome support?
How much would they have to pay you to interact with the company that makes Real Player?
Our fellow countrymen have gone so far as to use the word "intellectual" as a slur. WTF is that all about?
We're in dire straits indeed if we're expected to feel ashamed of being smart.
I don't think people are using the right tool for the job in this instance. There are plenty of other technologies that allow you to get messages to people without interacting with them and allowing them to access the message on their own terms.
Maybe my next entrepreneurial adventure will be a service that you can call from your mobile phone, leave a message, and my staff will hand write the message on decent stationary and snail mail it the recipient.
What have we become as a country when we're talking about finding a law that expands our government's ability to spy on us with little oversight unconstitutional in spite of having a "conservative" leaning Supreme Court?