Frankly Democrats like to accuse Republicans of stealing elections, yet nearly every single inconsistent and irregular episode of voting has happened in a *Democrat* controlled precinct!
Specious argument.
Assume for a moment that you have the ability to alter the results of an election on a per-precinct basis [remember, in the case of such a conspiracy, you have the ability to get around volunteer workers]. Are you going to alter the results in a precinct where you know you're going to win, or are you going to fudge the numbers where the votes are likely to go to your opposition?
If the courts find Bush violated the law, then yep, he should be punished. But until the courts so find, some folks seem to have forgotten you have to presume he's innoncent.
Doesn't an issue actually have to land in a court of law for determination of guilt or innocence? The key point you're missing here is that there is no judicial oversight for many of the things going on - that's the issue at the core of this argument.
Kudos to the funny comeback however everything about the human body is needed in order for us to survive except for the appendix it seems. We couldn't have one thing develop without having something else as well, which goes against evolution which implies gradual changes. We need all of our organs and all the capabilities that our cells have to differentiate, multiply, copy dna, etc. is all needed at the same time so gradual changes would not suffice for us to exist based solely on evolution.
Come again? I don't know about everyone else but I've read this three times and can't identify either what point you are trying to make or the logic you are using to arrive at it. Please restate for the slower of us?
Not sure why you or the parent were modded troll (unless Opera has never bundled anything that could be considered spyware- if so, someone please reply with information); I cannot find anywhere in the instructions stating that all questions must be fluffy softballs. The man is a CEO fergoshsakes, they deal with hard questions all the time. I am positive that the question won't hurt his feelings too badly. And maybe everyone will feel better if he responds rationally to explain the situation.
I would posit that the biggest obstacle to comfortably using a military exoskeleton would be the the bad guy with an RPG/antitank rocket that sees a large, obvious target walking along with the rest of a column.
You'll want to check out a fan-released fix that remedies many of the memory issues in Civ IV. Google for 'Harkonnen Civ 4 patch'. Instead of crashing every 5-20 minutes, Civ IV now runs smoothly and is fairly stable. And if you can upgrade to a gig of RAM, do so.
The company is just plain meddlesome in all matters regarding the Star Wars license.
LucasArts also torpedoed Decipher's Star Wars CCG, and for somewhat similar reasons. The SWCCG was too different from what was out there, and presumably didn't have the flash-bang action experience they wanted. While I won't claim that it was without fault, the game was killed before its time (even though it was after I stopped playing).
To veer slightly offtopic, they appear to be doing well with their LotR game and have expanded their license stable. Has anyone out there tried out the MegaMan(!) TCG? I'm having a hard time imagining it.
...alumni donations that only happen because the alumni are sports fans...
I'm not sure about the others, but you can scratch the donations bit from your argument. Here's information from a study.
When these donations are made, they're also more likely to be made specifically for the sports program in question, and not academic use.
University executives may not be stupid, but they can fall for the 'common sense' fallacy as well as anyone else.
Use of one technique while denigrating another does not a hypocrite make. However, you are correct in that one's choice of words and constructs does have a tremendous impact on a reader's perception.
does that mean you can put on some BDU's grab a toy rifle and start stopping people on the street?
Can you wear BDU's? Yes. Can you grab a toy rifle and head out into public? Yes. You'll probably become very interesting to police, but still not illegal. Can you stop people in the street? Yes- bums do this all the time. Can you detain them against their will? No. You cannot claim to have police or government authority in the matter either.
Same goes for your police cruiser example: you can certainly paint your Crown Vic black and white - you can't put POLICE on it in big letters. You can add all the legal lights you want, as long as they're not red (reserved for emergency vehicles only), green (volunteer fire brigade), or blue (police). You can even try to pull people over, but you cannot claim to be doing it with the authority of the state.
Wait, so stealing alcohol isn't a crime as long as you're 21 or older?
I do believe that the poster was referring to illegally obtaining alcohol while underage; i.e., paying the creepy guy outside the Safeway to pick up a case of Pabst and a couple Zimas. Stealing isn't the only way to illegally obtain something.
Re:keeping pc gaming alive
on
Ask Sid Meier
·
· Score: 1
Well, that would really get at the heart of the question: if consoles are closing in on PC capabilities, but are a more consistent (easier) and profitable environment for developers, what if anything will keep PC gaming going?
You mean besides the fact that PC gaming is a $1.1 billion a year business, and that companies want a piece of that money? PC game sales may only comprise 15% of the market, but I'm pretty sure that's money that anyone on the chain of game profits doesn't want to throw out. Just because something is only 15% doesn't mean that it's small.
Or were you suggesting that everyone is going to relegate their PCs to email/word processing and buy a game system? As consoles have approached PC capabilities, their prices have approached PC prices. They add DVD players and internet connectivity for games- my PC already has those. When consoles have all PC capability... I'll already have a PC so don't need to buy one.
Not to mention adaptability- a graphics card that will run modern games on decent settings runs $150 or so at any given time. This will last 2-3 years. The current next-gen consoles will run $400-500. Each console gets more expensive than the last, and you are stuck with the internals it ships with- absolutely static hardware for 4 years or so until the next console.
I'm willing to bet that a large number of people don't really care about the distinction between PC and console (I'll go way out on a limb and wager that comes to about 85% of gamers) and just get the easiest thing. And I have no problem with that. But PC gaming isn't about to dry up and disappear.
If everybody had an IQ of 200, everyone would have an IQ of 100.
Leaving the inherent flaws of the scale out of it, isn't IQ a variable scale, where 100 IQ points is the mean IQ, and every 15 points represents one standard deviation from that mean? i.e., only 16% of population has IQ over 115, only 2% over 130, approximately.1 over 145?
Then play at the brick and mortar casinos. Most poker rooms have gone non-smoking
However, the casinos themselves have not.
So while you can play poker without having a smokestack next to you, there is nothing keeping copious amounts of smoke wafting over from the slot zombies, who are positioned 5 feet outside of the poker room at all entries.
Not to mention that you have to walk through the entire casino (with at least 25% of the clientele smoking) to get to the poker room. The local casino here has a "smoke free" cardroom but I still need to wash my clothes after a session because of the stench that insinuates itself into them.
I would disagree that junkcannibal was putting words in your mouth. Why use the negatively-associated word 'exploit' rather than the more neutral 'utilize'? It seems slightly disingenuous to suggest that there was no judgment in your post.
exploit
1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage: exploit one's talents.
2. To make use of selfishly or unethically: a country that exploited peasant labor. Synonym: manipulate.
If you were after Def. 1 as you likely will claim, this alternative fits better, and without the underlying negativity:
utilize
1. To put to use, especially to find a profitable or practical use for.
And what happens when they internalize this lesson, and then generalize the idea as they grow up? In twenty years, you have a large, human-looking animal.
Pain is the quickest and easiest solution for a parent, but it is not the most effective (i.e., long-lasting) training option. In order of efficacy (from memory, so correct with a cited source if I'm wrong), the best training methods are:
Positive Reinforcement:
Giving subject something they like after exhibiting desired behavior (e.g., candy bar) Positive Punishment:
Giving subject something they don't like after exhibiting behavior to be extinguished (e.g., sharp smack to rump) Negative Punishment:
Taking away something disliked by subject after exhibiting desired behavior (e.g., extend curfew for good grades) Negative Reinforcement:
Inverse of the above (e.g., grounding)
You're obscuring the intended argument. The post was dealing with ideas (which are contained in books - I recommend them) rather than physical objects.
Perhaps you don't care, but I certainly want to be aware of what ideas somebody thinks I should be "protected" against. Ideas deserve to be propogated based on their merits, not the values of somebody who holds physical power over me (and if someone is able to enforce such a ban, they already have a foot on my throat). I'll grant that some really stupid stuff gets widespread acceptance due to publishing freedoms, but it's not my job to tell someone what they should think.
Why do pretentious Americans ALWAYS write 'ad hominem' when they mean 'personal'? Do you ALL get taught the same shite in your crapulous public schools?
Despite the trollish nature of the parent post, it does contain a valid question. Dictionary.com has a pretty good
summary. It is a tactic frequently used in debate by the party with the weaker argument - rather than focusing their assaults on the ideas being discussed, they focus them on the person presenting those ideas. It's also a good indicator of when someone has lost the argument before it's over. Unfortunately the appeal to pathos is very effective in situations where people aren't equipped/don't care to evaluate the merits of each argument.
Oddly enough, this sort of argument is widespread during election years.
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly Democrats like to accuse Republicans of stealing elections, yet nearly every single inconsistent and irregular episode of voting has happened in a *Democrat* controlled precinct!
Specious argument.
Assume for a moment that you have the ability to alter the results of an election on a per-precinct basis [remember, in the case of such a conspiracy, you have the ability to get around volunteer workers]. Are you going to alter the results in a precinct where you know you're going to win, or are you going to fudge the numbers where the votes are likely to go to your opposition?
" ...total lack of comprehension of British humor... "
"...The absolute worst was the !)@#!ing 2+ minute opening scene of jumping dolphins..."
Because random absurdity has no place in British humor? And now for something completely different...
If the courts find Bush violated the law, then yep, he should be punished. But until the courts so find, some folks seem to have forgotten you have to presume he's innoncent.
Doesn't an issue actually have to land in a court of law for determination of guilt or innocence? The key point you're missing here is that there is no judicial oversight for many of the things going on - that's the issue at the core of this argument.
Possibly you mean 21st Century Digital Boy, from Bad Religion? [lyrics]
Great song, but wow you sure did muff up the lyrics.
Kudos to the funny comeback however everything about the human body is needed in order for us to survive except for the appendix it seems. We couldn't have one thing develop without having something else as well, which goes against evolution which implies gradual changes. We need all of our organs and all the capabilities that our cells have to differentiate, multiply, copy dna, etc. is all needed at the same time so gradual changes would not suffice for us to exist based solely on evolution.
Come again? I don't know about everyone else but I've read this three times and can't identify either what point you are trying to make or the logic you are using to arrive at it. Please restate for the slower of us?
Not sure why you or the parent were modded troll (unless Opera has never bundled anything that could be considered spyware- if so, someone please reply with information); I cannot find anywhere in the instructions stating that all questions must be fluffy softballs. The man is a CEO fergoshsakes, they deal with hard questions all the time. I am positive that the question won't hurt his feelings too badly. And maybe everyone will feel better if he responds rationally to explain the situation.
I would posit that the biggest obstacle to comfortably using a military exoskeleton would be the the bad guy with an RPG/antitank rocket that sees a large, obvious target walking along with the rest of a column.
You'll want to check out a fan-released fix that remedies many of the memory issues in Civ IV. Google for 'Harkonnen Civ 4 patch'. Instead of crashing every 5-20 minutes, Civ IV now runs smoothly and is fairly stable. And if you can upgrade to a gig of RAM, do so.
The company is just plain meddlesome in all matters regarding the Star Wars license. LucasArts also torpedoed Decipher's Star Wars CCG, and for somewhat similar reasons. The SWCCG was too different from what was out there, and presumably didn't have the flash-bang action experience they wanted. While I won't claim that it was without fault, the game was killed before its time (even though it was after I stopped playing).
To veer slightly offtopic, they appear to be doing well with their LotR game and have expanded their license stable. Has anyone out there tried out the MegaMan(!) TCG? I'm having a hard time imagining it.
...alumni donations that only happen because the alumni are sports fans...
I'm not sure about the others, but you can scratch the donations bit from your argument. Here's information from a study.
When these donations are made, they're also more likely to be made specifically for the sports program in question, and not academic use.
University executives may not be stupid, but they can fall for the 'common sense' fallacy as well as anyone else.
acronym != shorthand != IM lingo != text symbol
Use of one technique while denigrating another does not a hypocrite make. However, you are correct in that one's choice of words and constructs does have a tremendous impact on a reader's perception.
This is about giving people choices, I thought that was a good thing.
Your children aren't people?
does that mean you can put on some BDU's grab a toy rifle and start stopping people on the street?
Can you wear BDU's? Yes.
Can you grab a toy rifle and head out into public? Yes. You'll probably become very interesting to police, but still not illegal.
Can you stop people in the street? Yes- bums do this all the time. Can you detain them against their will? No. You cannot claim to have police or government authority in the matter either.
Same goes for your police cruiser example: you can certainly paint your Crown Vic black and white - you can't put POLICE on it in big letters. You can add all the legal lights you want, as long as they're not red (reserved for emergency vehicles only), green (volunteer fire brigade), or blue (police). You can even try to pull people over, but you cannot claim to be doing it with the authority of the state.
A trireme needed a lot of skilled oarsmen. That's why they used slaves. The slaves knew they would be freed after the battle.
Help me out here - how do they keep a solid force of skilled oarsmen if they released them after each battle?
The rest looks reasonable but this detail is making me question the credibility of the entire post.
Wait, so stealing alcohol isn't a crime as long as you're 21 or older?
I do believe that the poster was referring to illegally obtaining alcohol while underage; i.e., paying the creepy guy outside the Safeway to pick up a case of Pabst and a couple Zimas. Stealing isn't the only way to illegally obtain something.
Well, that would really get at the heart of the question: if consoles are closing in on PC capabilities, but are a more consistent (easier) and profitable environment for developers, what if anything will keep PC gaming going?
You mean besides the fact that PC gaming is a $1.1 billion a year business, and that companies want a piece of that money? PC game sales may only comprise 15% of the market, but I'm pretty sure that's money that anyone on the chain of game profits doesn't want to throw out. Just because something is only 15% doesn't mean that it's small.
Or were you suggesting that everyone is going to relegate their PCs to email/word processing and buy a game system? As consoles have approached PC capabilities, their prices have approached PC prices. They add DVD players and internet connectivity for games- my PC already has those. When consoles have all PC capability... I'll already have a PC so don't need to buy one.
Not to mention adaptability- a graphics card that will run modern games on decent settings runs $150 or so at any given time. This will last 2-3 years. The current next-gen consoles will run $400-500. Each console gets more expensive than the last, and you are stuck with the internals it ships with- absolutely static hardware for 4 years or so until the next console.
I'm willing to bet that a large number of people don't really care about the distinction between PC and console (I'll go way out on a limb and wager that comes to about 85% of gamers) and just get the easiest thing. And I have no problem with that. But PC gaming isn't about to dry up and disappear.
If everybody had an IQ of 200, everyone would have an IQ of 100.
.1 over 145?
Leaving the inherent flaws of the scale out of it, isn't IQ a variable scale, where 100 IQ points is the mean IQ, and every 15 points represents one standard deviation from that mean? i.e., only 16% of population has IQ over 115, only 2% over 130, approximately
Then play at the brick and mortar casinos. Most poker rooms have gone non-smoking
However, the casinos themselves have not.
So while you can play poker without having a smokestack next to you, there is nothing keeping copious amounts of smoke wafting over from the slot zombies, who are positioned 5 feet outside of the poker room at all entries.
Not to mention that you have to walk through the entire casino (with at least 25% of the clientele smoking) to get to the poker room. The local casino here has a "smoke free" cardroom but I still need to wash my clothes after a session because of the stench that insinuates itself into them.
I would disagree that junkcannibal was putting words in your mouth. Why use the negatively-associated word 'exploit' rather than the more neutral 'utilize'? It seems slightly disingenuous to suggest that there was no judgment in your post.
exploit
1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage: exploit one's talents.
2. To make use of selfishly or unethically: a country that exploited peasant labor. Synonym: manipulate.
If you were after Def. 1 as you likely will claim, this alternative fits better, and without the underlying negativity:
utilize
1. To put to use, especially to find a profitable or practical use for.
And what happens when they internalize this lesson, and then generalize the idea as they grow up? In twenty years, you have a large, human-looking animal.
Pain is the quickest and easiest solution for a parent, but it is not the most effective (i.e., long-lasting) training option. In order of efficacy (from memory, so correct with a cited source if I'm wrong), the best training methods are:
Positive Reinforcement:
Giving subject something they like after exhibiting desired behavior (e.g., candy bar)
Positive Punishment:
Giving subject something they don't like after exhibiting behavior to be extinguished (e.g., sharp smack to rump)
Negative Punishment:
Taking away something disliked by subject after exhibiting desired behavior (e.g., extend curfew for good grades)
Negative Reinforcement:
Inverse of the above (e.g., grounding)
Efforts are currently underway to exhume Miyamoto Musashi as well in order to prosecute him for his blatant disregard of this law.
Don't pay $80 for a 160 GB HD. If you have a Fry's in the area, they have recently carried a 200 GB HD for $80, with a $30 or $40 rebate.
You're obscuring the intended argument. The post was dealing with ideas (which are contained in books - I recommend them) rather than physical objects.
Perhaps you don't care, but I certainly want to be aware of what ideas somebody thinks I should be "protected" against. Ideas deserve to be propogated based on their merits, not the values of somebody who holds physical power over me (and if someone is able to enforce such a ban, they already have a foot on my throat). I'll grant that some really stupid stuff gets widespread acceptance due to publishing freedoms, but it's not my job to tell someone what they should think.
Why do pretentious Americans ALWAYS write 'ad hominem' when they mean 'personal'? Do you ALL get taught the same shite in your crapulous public schools?
Despite the trollish nature of the parent post, it does contain a valid question. Dictionary.com has a pretty good summary. It is a tactic frequently used in debate by the party with the weaker argument - rather than focusing their assaults on the ideas being discussed, they focus them on the person presenting those ideas. It's also a good indicator of when someone has lost the argument before it's over. Unfortunately the appeal to pathos is very effective in situations where people aren't equipped/don't care to evaluate the merits of each argument.
Oddly enough, this sort of argument is widespread during election years.
I doubt they would presume to ban you from letting your friend read your ebook on your own computer, so, please, enough with the FUD.
parable (n.)
A simple story illustrating a moral or religious lesson.