Well, all the lawyers can rest easy that either way, you too will die.
Well, seeing as how I'll be a lawyer in less than two years, I just hope that other people die first. That way, some of the survivors can enlist me to sue the scientists who brought about our retrovirus microlords (whom I, for one, welcome).
I don't think we have a tautology. When saying, "It's not intolerant to be intolerant of intolerance," the first and second "intolerant"s do not mean the same thing. The first is the typical meaning of "intolerance"; i.e., to reject with malice. The second "intolerant" is being used to mean "to reject." No malice is imputed in the second one. A paraphrasing would be: It's not intolerant/malicious to discourage intolerance.
Sort of like the sentence, "A cool person is not cool," where the first usage is the colloquial "cool" and the second means "aloof." The false tautology comes from the fact that words have more than one meaning. However, when stating the tautology, "A equals A," A must mean the same thing both times. In our case, we're really saying, "It's not A[0] to be A[1] of A[0]."
I live in an apartment complex and this particular hacking technique is quite relevant go mGREETINGS. MY NAME IS MUTAX31337. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. APARTMENT 169R IS TEH GHEY lollolololllol
Agreed. If inhaling in college has been such a big issue, imagine what would happen if some 60 year old ran for president, and his opponents discovered that while in high school he had called someone a "fucking bitch." I mean, come on, hasn't everyone here been in a flame war on the net before? I think that the only electable people in the future are going to be jocks who never participated in online forums at all.
Allow me to elucidate copyright law in the US for you: In IRC chats, we have text. Prose, if you will. The relevant requirements for copyright in the text of your chats are: (1)that it is fixed in a tangible medium of expression, (2) can be trasmitted/understood by recipients, and (3) is of one of a few categories.
(1) The Supreme Court of the US has ruled that storage in RAM counts as a fixed medium. (2) clearly English text can be understood by recipients and reproduced. (3) chat text counts as literature: 17 USC 101 says:
Literary works are works, other than audiovisual works, expressed in words, numbers, or other verbal or numerical symbols or indicia, regardless of the nature of the material objects, such as books, periodicals, manuscripts, phonorecords, film, tapes, disks, or cards, in which they are embodied.
Now that's a pretty cursory explanation of how what I say on IRC is copyrighted; therefore a logbot is infringing in the same way that a person downloading Halo 3 is pirating. The only difference is what damages I can recoup.
No. It's just a famous graffito from an Austrian subway. Someone had sprayed "God is dead. --Nietzsche" onto a wall. Then, someone else had come by and sprayed "Nietzsche is dead. --God". It's an example of people doing what we consider unconventional things (vandalism) and creating a hilarious display of participatory culture.
And yes, I said famous. I have a quotes encyclopedia (Yale Book of Quotations?) that even lists it.
Team play is VASTLY overrated, and is generally for pussies who need to be carried.
Yes, because clearly human society is based on one individual living in isolation, never having to deal with people. Similarly, I'm appreciative of your astute observation that we all work alone and never, ever, ever have to know how to deal with other people when in a stressful situation. Clearly, competitive sports don't teach any of those skills and I welcome your attempts to enlighten the world with the light of a thousand suns!
And axiomatic mathematical a priori reasoning is relevant to this topic... because?
Because, until about the 1930s, mathematics was classified as a philosophy, not a science. See, e.g., the Pythagoreans.
I cite as a source (albeit a difficult-to-vet source) my philosophy and math professors at university. I was told many times that math used to be considered a philosophy falling into the liberal arts rather than natural sciences. In fact, some of my older professors still bemoan the switch to a science designation.
Some people are smart+athletic, some are just smart, some are just athletic, and some are neither.
But seeing as how we're all evolved from a line of hunters, I posit that the population of people who are not inclined to be athletic is incredibly small. Now, there is a huge group of lazy people, but very few truly non-athletic people. I find that many people who suggest that there is a large group of non-athletic people in this world are either (1) nerds who were bullied by jocks, or (2) lazy, fat people.
To clarify: I accuse you of neither, RopBebop. Je accuse, I was in groups one and two in junior high, but got out of both groups in high school with tennis (solved problem two) and theater (solved problem one).
I would assume that our definitions of "athletic" are different; you might be using the word to mean "more athletic than the mean." However, if this were the case, you wouldn't have taken the time to point out such a tautology "some people are just more athletic than the mean." I'm using the word "athletic" to mean something along the lines of "person with the natural capacity [cf. current ability] to participate in physical activities more strenuous than walking [e.g., sports, running, weightlifting, or dancing]."
Similarly, we would hardly suggest that there is more than a small group of humans who cannot learn to do simple mathematics or read a book. Sure, there are those who have learning disabilities just as there are people who are (born) physically disabled, but we definitely cannot state accurately that there is anything more than a small group of such people, considering the large population of the world.
Abortion and many other topics, however, need to be addressed federally because they are constitutional issues. States cannot be allowed to pass laws that violate the constitution, including the separation of church and state.
I think that your implied assertion that the only justifications for banning abortion are religious is ill-founded. This would imply that no atheist in existance opposes abortion, and I'm fairly certain that this is not the case. No stats, but I'm always hesitant to say any position is only justified by religion.
As an obstetrician having delivered as many children as he has, Ron Paul would be a hypocrite to support abortion.
Wow. That's a pretty harsh statement and logically flawed. Delivering babies and performing abortions are not consistent with any world view? That is, in effect, what you are saying.
What if you don't consider a fetus to be a human until the second trimester? Then I think it's pretty clear that delivering a third-trimester baby and aborting a two-week-old fetus are morally consistent under that view.
I'm not saying I agree with that worldview, but I am saying that your assertion is flawed.
I'd prefer a Ron Paul type....I think also he'd do the most to protect privacy and govern more strictly to the Constitution
One would think that, as he is a pretty strict constructionist, he'd read the Constitution as allowing corporations to trade in your private information. He would only oppose the government doing so.
So, pick your poison, I doubt he'd protect online privacy outside of the government realm. Similarly, I'm fairly sure he's against government meddling in the internet, so he surely doesn't support Net Neutrality. I'm a pretty strong Paul supporter (I used to be a resident in his district, so he's received my vote before), but Net Neutrality has become a very important issue for me, and I don't know what I'll do in the election.
Interesting, but I'm very confused by this, saying that the government has warned that having a fan on in the summer can lead to hypothermia. Is this for real? I've slept all night with a fan trained on me (cheaper than air conditioning) on hot days for years, and I'm pretty sure I've never died of hypothermia.
To me, that passage reads like the US government issuing a report stating that people should not go to Lover's Lane because visits to makeout points lead to a disproportionate number of incidents where lovers look at the car door and find a hook caught on the handle.
#1 I got Central Market and Whole Foods mixed up (Central Market is owned by HEB). My bad, and that's why you got confused.
#2 Of course Whole Foods has locations in TX. It's original location is Austin, TX (where I live). In fact, I can drive to the original Whole Foods store in 15 minutes.
Also, IMO, tomato-based sauces don't work with w.w. pasta. I recommend pesto, cheese, or oil-based mixes.
I suppose it depends on taste. I use whole wheat pasta with various tomato sauces depending on what I've had recently, with a dash of cheese and a drop of olive oil. Then I actually take fresh cherry tomatoes, quarter them, and put them in the pasta. Blows my freakin mind every time.
Thanks for the suggestion about Whole Foods w.w. pasta. I'll keep an eye out next time I'm at HEB (it's less than a block from my house, which makes saying no to sweets that much harder at 11pm).
Harvard School of Public Health says that it's whole-grain pastas that have low glycemic index and are good. Make sure they're whole-grain pastas, not cheapo Wal-Mart or HEB pasta.
I'm sorry, I'm an idiot. They have a "No Salt Added Creamy." Although SWEET JESUS LOOK AT THAT HIGH FAT CONTENT. I dunno, maybe my PB has a high fat content, but I just didn't notice.
I don't have a jar of Smuckers Natural on hand, but their website says you're wrong.
Smucker's Natural Peanut Butter offers an unprocessed robust peanut flavor, made from peanuts and salt. [emphasis added]
You got my hopes up. I always try to buy things with as little salt as possible in them (hypertension and all that). Right now I've been using Central Market Organic Chunky, but I might give Smuckers Natural a try next time if it's low in sodium.
Taubes points out that the current medical orthodoxy that consuming fat makes you fat and exercise makes you thin has no basis in research.
I call bullshit. How is this medical orthodoxy? In my experience, it is uniformly well-known among the exercise community, and anyone who has taken a few biology classes in college, that consuming fat does not make you fat; even friends of mine who are fat (and thus have little to no personal experience with proper nutrition, it seems) but taking a nutrition class in college I've heard spout off about how saturated and trans fats are bad, but unsaturated fats such as omega-3 (polyunsaturated fatty acids are fats, right?) are good for you (e.g., see all the omega-3 supplements available at the store).
Additionally, exercise doesn't make you thin, but it does keep you from getting fatter than no exercise but the same other behaviors. Exercise can make you musclebound, which is obviously not "thin." Would we say Ahnold in his prime was "thin"? Fuck no.
Thus, how are either of those points "medical orthodoxy."
Also, my girlfriend is in med school, and she sure isn't learning this "orthodoxy"!
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think we have a tautology. When saying, "It's not intolerant to be intolerant of intolerance," the first and second "intolerant"s do not mean the same thing. The first is the typical meaning of "intolerance"; i.e., to reject with malice. The second "intolerant" is being used to mean "to reject." No malice is imputed in the second one. A paraphrasing would be: It's not intolerant/malicious to discourage intolerance.
Sort of like the sentence, "A cool person is not cool," where the first usage is the colloquial "cool" and the second means "aloof." The false tautology comes from the fact that words have more than one meaning. However, when stating the tautology, "A equals A," A must mean the same thing both times. In our case, we're really saying, "It's not A[0] to be A[1] of A[0]."
I live in an apartment complex and this particular hacking technique is quite relevant go mGREETINGS. MY NAME IS MUTAX31337. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. APARTMENT 169R IS TEH GHEY lollolololllol
Agreed. If inhaling in college has been such a big issue, imagine what would happen if some 60 year old ran for president, and his opponents discovered that while in high school he had called someone a "fucking bitch." I mean, come on, hasn't everyone here been in a flame war on the net before? I think that the only electable people in the future are going to be jocks who never participated in online forums at all.
In IRC chats, we have text. Prose, if you will. The relevant requirements for copyright in the text of your chats are: (1)that it is fixed in a tangible medium of expression, (2) can be trasmitted/understood by recipients, and (3) is of one of a few categories.
(1) The Supreme Court of the US has ruled that storage in RAM counts as a fixed medium.
(2) clearly English text can be understood by recipients and reproduced.
(3) chat text counts as literature: 17 USC 101 says:Now that's a pretty cursory explanation of how what I say on IRC is copyrighted; therefore a logbot is infringing in the same way that a person downloading Halo 3 is pirating. The only difference is what damages I can recoup.
Well, if it claims to be located at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, then it's clearly a joke. That's the address of the White House!
No. It's just a famous graffito from an Austrian subway. Someone had sprayed "God is dead. --Nietzsche" onto a wall. Then, someone else had come by and sprayed "Nietzsche is dead. --God". It's an example of people doing what we consider unconventional things (vandalism) and creating a hilarious display of participatory culture.
And yes, I said famous. I have a quotes encyclopedia (Yale Book of Quotations?) that even lists it.
I cite as a source (albeit a difficult-to-vet source) my philosophy and math professors at university. I was told many times that math used to be considered a philosophy falling into the liberal arts rather than natural sciences. In fact, some of my older professors still bemoan the switch to a science designation.
To clarify: I accuse you of neither, RopBebop. Je accuse, I was in groups one and two in junior high, but got out of both groups in high school with tennis (solved problem two) and theater (solved problem one).
I would assume that our definitions of "athletic" are different; you might be using the word to mean "more athletic than the mean." However, if this were the case, you wouldn't have taken the time to point out such a tautology "some people are just more athletic than the mean." I'm using the word "athletic" to mean something along the lines of "person with the natural capacity [cf. current ability] to participate in physical activities more strenuous than walking [e.g., sports, running, weightlifting, or dancing]."
Similarly, we would hardly suggest that there is more than a small group of humans who cannot learn to do simple mathematics or read a book. Sure, there are those who have learning disabilities just as there are people who are (born) physically disabled, but we definitely cannot state accurately that there is anything more than a small group of such people, considering the large population of the world.
What if you don't consider a fetus to be a human until the second trimester? Then I think it's pretty clear that delivering a third-trimester baby and aborting a two-week-old fetus are morally consistent under that view.
I'm not saying I agree with that worldview, but I am saying that your assertion is flawed.
So, pick your poison, I doubt he'd protect online privacy outside of the government realm. Similarly, I'm fairly sure he's against government meddling in the internet, so he surely doesn't support Net Neutrality. I'm a pretty strong Paul supporter (I used to be a resident in his district, so he's received my vote before), but Net Neutrality has become a very important issue for me, and I don't know what I'll do in the election.
Interesting, but I'm very confused by this, saying that the government has warned that having a fan on in the summer can lead to hypothermia. Is this for real? I've slept all night with a fan trained on me (cheaper than air conditioning) on hot days for years, and I'm pretty sure I've never died of hypothermia.
To me, that passage reads like the US government issuing a report stating that people should not go to Lover's Lane because visits to makeout points lead to a disproportionate number of incidents where lovers look at the car door and find a hook caught on the handle.
Jack Thompson sues Discovery for portraying video games in a sensible light!
#1 I got Central Market and Whole Foods mixed up (Central Market is owned by HEB). My bad, and that's why you got confused.
#2 Of course Whole Foods has locations in TX. It's original location is Austin, TX (where I live). In fact, I can drive to the original Whole Foods store in 15 minutes.
Thanks for the suggestion about Whole Foods w.w. pasta. I'll keep an eye out next time I'm at HEB (it's less than a block from my house, which makes saying no to sweets that much harder at 11pm).
Harvard School of Public Health says that it's whole-grain pastas that have low glycemic index and are good. Make sure they're whole-grain pastas, not cheapo Wal-Mart or HEB pasta.
I'm sorry, I'm an idiot. They have a "No Salt Added Creamy." Although SWEET JESUS LOOK AT THAT HIGH FAT CONTENT. I dunno, maybe my PB has a high fat content, but I just didn't notice.
Personally, I'd love to reach Bjorn Borg's level of cardiovascular fitness; his resting heart rate was between 30 and 45 bpm.
Additionally, exercise doesn't make you thin, but it does keep you from getting fatter than no exercise but the same other behaviors. Exercise can make you musclebound, which is obviously not "thin." Would we say Ahnold in his prime was "thin"? Fuck no.
Thus, how are either of those points "medical orthodoxy."
Also, my girlfriend is in med school, and she sure isn't learning this "orthodoxy"!
Therefore, I conclude with: bullshit.
It would have been more fitting to recite Mary Had a Little Lamb.