"by YOUR definition of "innocent".
Their belief-system has a different version of "innocent" - NOBODY kills an "innocent" in the name of their god."
Barring of course those religions that prefer their sacrificial victims of the innocent kind...
Mod parent up.
Seriously, this cannot be said enough times. Things like this, seemingly reasonable things are the thin end of a very painful wedge.
Perfect example for this - Ex-PM Tony Blair gave himself an effective "veto" to force through his promised ban on fox hunting against the objections of the House of Lords. Most people didn't object - Fox hunting is a horrible thing and needed to go. Later on he used the same mandate of power to take the country into an illegal war that we're still caught up in.
No matter how ressonable something seems you have to look at the long term repercussions - how will somebody abuse it. Supposedly that kind of long term safeguarding is the job of the legislative branch of whichever government you happen to live under. Shame they seem to have forgotten it.
Well I was thinking we'll send our greatest thinkers, our greatest warriors and all our televangelists in 3 seperate ships.
Of course the televangelists' ship will go first, to avoid being eaten by the great space goat...
"If, 4000 years from now, this planet has indigenous intelligent life on it, then I, for one, will concede the Earth could be 6,000 years old if we ignore all the other evidence that it's not."
And if we've managed to go all those 4000 years without destroying ourselves then there might just be something in the universe bigger than human greed and irrationality...
But... he did. After his death his soul, released from the confines of its mortal shell, used a black hole to travel back 7.5 billion years. There it caused two supernovas to crash into each other releasing this radiation event that was timed to reach Earth at the moment of his ascension. Unfortunately he miscaculated the variability of c over the millenia so it arrived a few hours too early.
Finally - I was beginning to despair of people here. It looked like I was actually going to get to the end of a discussion about dirty jobs without a Steve jobs reference.
Thank you sir.
I am and "onsite reboot specialist", but have done 1st line as well. I have to say I prefer to be face-to-face with the user - but then again I am 6'5" and 210 lbs... It's wonderful how much more polite people are when physically faced with someone who looks capable of throwing their "flickery monitor" out the window. With the VGA cable wrapped round a serial whinger's leg...
You talk about bugging your kid's room and installing keyloggers on his PC, and then dare to use that quote as your.sig? How can you not see the painful irony of that - I bet you'd be among the first to complain if your ISP started packet filtering your traffic.
Incorrect, you lose. I know at least a dozen gamer couples and only one of them fits your stereotype. In fact a lot of the girl gamers I know do modelling for alt. fashion/fetish sites. Your idea of gamers seems very rooted in the 80s/early 90's.
"Would you still bang this green chick if she turned out to be a searing gas giant?"
This is SlashDot - size and flatulence issues aren't going to put off most of the hyenas here.
On this basis what absolute proof do you have that the universe existed before you were born, and will continue to exist after you die?
Maybe the whole universe exists only to keep you entertained and bits of it appear and disappear depending on whether you interact with them or not.
Or maybe none of us is _quite_ that important...
"I am still a virgin. I will give undoubtfully give up six for 6 months for a 50in TV"
I know you're desperate, but keep some standards. A cross-dresser with a measurement of 50 inches in any direction is just wrong...
"but this adolescent whining that compares them to real violent criminals who kill, torture and maim people just totally discredits the entire argument, and makes people opposed to the RIAA look like dorks"
A little like comparing people who copy music to real violent criminals who attack peaceful vessels on the sea to kill, torture and maim people completely discredits the RIAA's argument huh?
So... if somebody is known to be a violent bully then your answer to that situation is for nobody to stand up to them because "They knew what was coming to them if they did".
Were/are you a bully yourself by any chance? Your argument is straying perilously close to the Might makes Right viewpoint of such people.
Such a smart and simple idea - it's surprising nobody's thought of it before.
And yet, it's so wrong. The author's hit the nail on the head - journalistic content must be seen to be as free from outside influences as possible whether it's a personal bias, litigious pressure, or (as in this case) finacial incentives. Otherwise, the message becomes diluted as people begin to wonder what they're not being told.
In a way this reminds me of the data systems in Starship Troopers. This system could be adapted easily to provide information instead. But not a hope in hell of that, now the Marketing departments have got their teeth into it.
And yes, I do dislike marketers. Thanks for noticing.
Slashdot Mirror
"by YOUR definition of "innocent". Their belief-system has a different version of "innocent" - NOBODY kills an "innocent" in the name of their god." Barring of course those religions that prefer their sacrificial victims of the innocent kind...
Mod parent up. Seriously, this cannot be said enough times. Things like this, seemingly reasonable things are the thin end of a very painful wedge. Perfect example for this - Ex-PM Tony Blair gave himself an effective "veto" to force through his promised ban on fox hunting against the objections of the House of Lords. Most people didn't object - Fox hunting is a horrible thing and needed to go. Later on he used the same mandate of power to take the country into an illegal war that we're still caught up in. No matter how ressonable something seems you have to look at the long term repercussions - how will somebody abuse it. Supposedly that kind of long term safeguarding is the job of the legislative branch of whichever government you happen to live under. Shame they seem to have forgotten it.
"Oh come now, he can't be the evil genuis who destroyed the Republic AND a blithering idiot" Are we talking about Bush or Palpatine now ...?
Well, if you're going to go around nuking volcanos you may as well fill them with alien dissidents and criminals first...
Considering the All-father's last attempt at eye surgery you might want to think that one out again.
Well I was thinking we'll send our greatest thinkers, our greatest warriors and all our televangelists in 3 seperate ships. Of course the televangelists' ship will go first, to avoid being eaten by the great space goat...
"If, 4000 years from now, this planet has indigenous intelligent life on it, then I, for one, will concede the Earth could be 6,000 years old if we ignore all the other evidence that it's not." And if we've managed to go all those 4000 years without destroying ourselves then there might just be something in the universe bigger than human greed and irrationality...
You obviously haven't been out on a friday night for a while if you're asking that question.
"some of the most egregious examples might approach might approach vexatious litigation"
Foghorn Leghorn, is that you boy?
But... he did. After his death his soul, released from the confines of its mortal shell, used a black hole to travel back 7.5 billion years. There it caused two supernovas to crash into each other releasing this radiation event that was timed to reach Earth at the moment of his ascension. Unfortunately he miscaculated the variability of c over the millenia so it arrived a few hours too early.
Finally - I was beginning to despair of people here. It looked like I was actually going to get to the end of a discussion about dirty jobs without a Steve jobs reference. Thank you sir.
I am and "onsite reboot specialist", but have done 1st line as well. I have to say I prefer to be face-to-face with the user - but then again I am 6'5" and 210 lbs... It's wonderful how much more polite people are when physically faced with someone who looks capable of throwing their "flickery monitor" out the window. With the VGA cable wrapped round a serial whinger's leg...
Don't go to Gencon this year. I'm not giving anything away, just... don't.
You obviously don't look at the same sites I do then.
You talk about bugging your kid's room and installing keyloggers on his PC, and then dare to use that quote as your .sig? How can you not see the painful irony of that - I bet you'd be among the first to complain if your ISP started packet filtering your traffic.
So, you get taken in by all those ads convincing you great new Daz is by telling you how terrible old Daz was..?
Incorrect, you lose. I know at least a dozen gamer couples and only one of them fits your stereotype. In fact a lot of the girl gamers I know do modelling for alt. fashion/fetish sites. Your idea of gamers seems very rooted in the 80s/early 90's.
"Would you still bang this green chick if she turned out to be a searing gas giant?" This is SlashDot - size and flatulence issues aren't going to put off most of the hyenas here.
On this basis what absolute proof do you have that the universe existed before you were born, and will continue to exist after you die? Maybe the whole universe exists only to keep you entertained and bits of it appear and disappear depending on whether you interact with them or not. Or maybe none of us is _quite_ that important...
But he's a cad who's getting some. Which puts him several rungs up the ladder from most of the people here...
"I am still a virgin. I will give undoubtfully give up six for 6 months for a 50in TV" I know you're desperate, but keep some standards. A cross-dresser with a measurement of 50 inches in any direction is just wrong...
"but this adolescent whining that compares them to real violent criminals who kill, torture and maim people just totally discredits the entire argument, and makes people opposed to the RIAA look like dorks" A little like comparing people who copy music to real violent criminals who attack peaceful vessels on the sea to kill, torture and maim people completely discredits the RIAA's argument huh?
So... if somebody is known to be a violent bully then your answer to that situation is for nobody to stand up to them because "They knew what was coming to them if they did". Were/are you a bully yourself by any chance? Your argument is straying perilously close to the Might makes Right viewpoint of such people.
Interesting to see that you and your compatriots have the courage of your convictions, and are prepared to stake your karma on your provocative posts.
Such a smart and simple idea - it's surprising nobody's thought of it before.
And yet, it's so wrong. The author's hit the nail on the head - journalistic content must be seen to be as free from outside influences as possible whether it's a personal bias, litigious pressure, or (as in this case) finacial incentives. Otherwise, the message becomes diluted as people begin to wonder what they're not being told.
In a way this reminds me of the data systems in Starship Troopers. This system could be adapted easily to provide information instead. But not a hope in hell of that, now the Marketing departments have got their teeth into it.
And yes, I do dislike marketers. Thanks for noticing.