People go on and on about how intelligent he was. Clearly not so much. He killed his wife. He did a piss poor job of trying to cover it up (so bad he would have been convicted without the body). He refused a plea bargain that would have given him most of his life back. These are not the actions of a rational intelligent person.
You think rational, intelligent people can't fly into a rage?
If you pile enough on someone and they get angry enough, that intelligence doesn't mean a whole lot, because enraged people aren't rational.
Intelligence also doesn't necessarily keep you from panicking once you realize you've done something that can land you in prison (or the electric chair) for the rest of your life.
Now let's hope some fellow inmate does what needs to be done, and puts an end to this vile piece of garbage.
You are no better than him if you are advocating someone murder him. One murder does not justify another.
Well, I think you're both way off.
He killed his wife in a rage because she was leaving with the kids, and he had no shot at getting custody. That's nowhere near as bad as someone who kills out of greed, or out of pleasure. Plus, he has skills that can be put to use. Fifteen years of slavery doesn't seem too lenient.
Killing him would be a waste, and out of proportion.
But, what you've said doesn't make sense either. If someone kills because they're sadistic, or as part of a theft, off them before they kill someone else. It's silly to say "no, all human lives have equal worth, even in extreme cases, so we have to let everyone live".
Opposing views exist in the United States, and censorship is limited to indirect, ineffective measures. I can walk around and ask people their opinions about Bush, and I'll get several different answers, many of which won't be very flattering (to put it lightly). I don't think very many people would tell me that the birds would mourn when his father died. Back when he was popular, one or two people might have said that he was "given directions by God", but it wouldn't have been the view of the general population.
Just because two nations are both imperfect doesn't mean that they're equally flawed.
In the first place, we don't have the proof that the Neanderthals gave away their technology so that the Homo Sapiens could improve it.
Second, you're mixing up military knowledge with copyright laws, which make both closed source and open source possible. No copyright and anybody can hack your software, improve on it and resell it. Therefore, your analogy does not apply.
Third, open source is completely OFF TOPIC in this discussion!!
...The GP post was intended as a joke. That was very obvious, at least to me. Perhaps he's not actually funny, but he's not a troll.
After all, is there a single species on Earth that's anywhere as violent as homo sapiens?
There are quite a few. We're just smart enough to build weapons, and we have the hands for it. Spiders, tasmanian devils, and blue jays aren't really capable of mining metal and forging weapons. Chimps sometimes organize to kill other chimps (and sometimes other neighboring apes).
Why do so many people think that nature is peaceful?
Not just the new IE8 blocking, but all forms of ad blocking? Seems unfair to destroy the business models of so many websites. Maybe it's just me, but ads on sites like Digg or Slashdot don't even remotely bother me. Who am I to block their ads when I'm receiving free content?
Well, if their business model falls apart with everyone staying within the bounds of the law, I'd say it's a flawed model. If it fails, I'll shrug and go on.
I admit I do run a site myself and this sort of thing worries me. I have just two ads per page, both google ads, one leaderboard and a wide skyscraper. They aren't even remotely intrusive, and are there just to pay the bandwidth bills. For those complaining about bloated sites, my biggest page is just 10k without the ads. I'm currently a long way away from being affected by this, as 90% of my users are still using IE6, but it does concern me that I might have to shut down a free service because people can't handle two ads.
If your ads are unobtrusive, very few people are going to take the trouble to block them, because it isn't worth the effort.
Now, if they're the same damn ad again and again, or if they're advertising something offensive to your users, people may eventually get tired of them and nix them. Of course, different people will find different ads offensive.
In summary: If you're advertising servers and gadgets on a tech forum, you're probably in the clear.
If you're advertising webcomics and online games on a webcomic site, you're probably in the clear.
But, if you've got dating ads on an anime site, or BSA ads on a F/OSS forum, then sorry, you lose the game.
Using AdBlockers is theft anyway. Ever wondered why those internet services are free?
*yawn* Ridiculous.
Theft is theft. Advertising is advertising. Adblocking is adblocking. Blocking ads is not theft, advertising is not theft (as a responder to you tried to claim), and asking you if have the time is not theft.
If I don't want your ads sent down my line, I'm perfectly free to block them. If you don't like the fact that ads can be blocked, you're perfectly free to charge for your content, or take it down.
Yes, and geometry translates as "the measurement of the earth". The name's largely a relic. Unfortunately, this relic is in English, so people often take it at face value.
Bigwigs in CS occasionally complain about the inaccuracy of the name and the confusion it causes. Plus, it causes CS departments get hit with a lot of incoming freshmen who really should be in CIS or IT.
Soon to get modded down as offtopic or troll, but why exactly is it that CS students think they're the smartest? What is it about knowing how to use a computer that makes for elitism?
Why do you think it's mostly CS? I think I see more physics and biology students with that attitude than CS majors.
Also, "knowing how to use a computer" isn't CS... It isn't even a simplification of CS. Did you have a nasty run-in with an IT guy or something?
welcome to the internet, if you don't like it skip it!
No. There comes a point when it takes so much time to skip the crap that anything of value that you manage to find just isn't worth it.
When articles are properly categorized so that the fluff is denoted as fluff, and I can choose to never view the "fluff" section, it's not so bad. When the fluff is displayed as genuine content, it dilutes the site.
Picture a grocery store with every aisle half-filled with candy corn, despite the aisle's label. Sure, you don't have to get the candy corn, but it makes finding the real food harder.
if a brain is transplanted, are you legally the person the brain came from or the person the body came from?
If there's any sanity in the legal system, you would be the person the brain came from. While hormones from other organs can influence behavior, consciousness and decisions come from the brain, and that's where memories are stored.
this one reminds me of a crazy doctor (i don't remember his name) that replaced a monkey's head and the the operation was a success. But it was still seen as immoral so no more replacing monkey heads. And in my opinion it was one big painful fist in the face of creationists.
It was a (presumably sane) doctor named Robert White, in Ohio.
It was a "success" in the sense that the monkey's head stayed alive and conscious for a few days. The nerves were still severed and it could not control the body it was transplanted to. Even so, I found it amazing.
Of course, that's quite different from the facial transplant in the article. Not surprisingly, spinal nerves are harder to repair than the smaller ones in your face.
Why don't you provide the statistics that show how many white men date black women, I'll betcha it reflects your "statistic" (i.e. not many) because white men don't date black women as a general rule, so rapes will follow that curve as well.
If rapes followed that curve, there were still be a lot more than TEN of them per year.
Oh, so when looking deeper, that makes your argument a straw man as well.
Nope, see above. And if it did, it would only be one point out of several. The points dealing with other crimes, and with rape in general, would still stand.
The black crime rate is definitely higher. The real debate should be about why, but that can't happen until enough people admit the former. The few who do admit it generally want to blame it on the income gap or a revenge motive (which I shot down in my first post). Others try to avoid talking about whenever they can because "it helps the racists"
It's past 2 AM where I am. If you want to continue tomorrow through email or some IM system, let me know.
I could give a crap about your fucking "statics", that's a canard to cloud the real issue of fighting racism as it happens.
Please, do tell me what I'm trying to hide. I wonder if it's as serious as widespread murder, robbery, and rape.
I my town, whites commit 90% of the rapes, so using "statics", in my town whites are bad?
You've built quite a strawman. For one, I didn't say blacks were bad. Secondly, I'm not misusing statistics, like your counter-example is.
If whites in your town commit 90% of the rapes, and they're 90% of the population, it's to be expected. If whites in your town commit 90% of the rapes and they're less than half of the population, it's a sign that something is seriously fucked up. I'd say that the whites in this hypothetical town need to figure out why their youth has such a tendency towards rape.
You're both emotional as hell. Couldn't you tell the original post was just intended to disrupt conversation?
As far as the poster you're replying to here, whether he's a troll or not, the rape statistic is correct. White on black rapes are often in the single digits, per year.
Blacks comitted 48% of the rape, half of the robberies, and two thirds of the robberies involving injury. Crimes like simple assault were closer to the proportion that they should be (considering each group's percentage of the total population), but were still biased towards black offenders.
While the black poverty rate is higher than that of whites and hispanics, there are still twice as many whites below the poverty line in the US as there are blacks. Income isn't even the primary factor, much less a dominating one.
Now for trademarks they are for protecting "idenity" of the company say a Logo or a Name. A company I use to work for has the Hourglass Nebula part of their logo which is trademarked. Although they have never enforced it they could have sued Perljam as they used that Nebula for one of their covers. Or they may have gone against say some small astronomy club who used a picture of it for their logo.
There are more limits on trademarks than you seem to think. The company would have no case, especially against the astronomy club.
Otherwise you'd have Cisco Networks suing the Cisco Boiler Company, Sun Microsystems suing Frito-Lay over Sun Chips, et cetera.
"I'm most proud of the bed. It's very humane, like an ambulance," Kang says. He points to the power-driven metal stretcher that glides out at an incline. "It's too brutal to haul a person aboard," he says. "This makes it convenient for the criminal and the guards."
So, basically, it makes it easier to ignore the fact that you're killing someone.
I'm not against capital punishment, but I think that there should be a certain amount of raw reality involved in it. No coat of sugar.
Ranking by total medials is absurd, because it gives equal weight to bronze as gold. If you believe that, why award medals at all, or bother to count them?
Considering that dozens of swimming, kayaking, etc events all give separate gold medals, you might as well.
By the way, the easy answer is to rank by all medals, but give gold more weight than silver, and silver more weight than bronze.
Actually no. Let's say you can, through observation, prove that energy appears spontanously,then you would have scientific proof of something supernatural.
Or at least proof that something outside our existence is feeding our reality with energy. Which would be supernatural enough for me.
Well, you're just using different definitions of the same word. Such a discovery would just mean "nature" (in the sense of the word that scientists use) is bigger than we thought it was.
If I fire up a virtual machine, I may think of it and describe as being "my machine" or "a process running on my machine" depending on the context.
If there were free will, then why in the world do so many people do things that are simply not in their best interest? If there were free will, why are so many people screwed up by their own "choices"?
This part of your post confuses me. What does whether someone's decisions are in their best interest or not have to do with that person having or not having free will?
I mean, if the two are related at all, I would say that they're related in the opposite direction. Within limits (eg, involuntary responses taking over or fear preventing it) I can choose to do something on a whim that isn't in my best interest, even when no one is prompting me to do so.
Well, they've already violated the Shining and the Phantasy Star series. Romance of the Three Kingdoms and the Strike (Desert, Jungle, Urban, etc) games have been run into the ground on the PS2. Microsoft already made a ridiculous new Shadowrun video game. I'm not even going to talk about any Sonic games after 3D Blast.
That leaves Syndicate, Tyrants, and Warsong, off the top of my head.
How long before we see net communities where everyone shares 2,999 songs and 199 movies?
Well, considering the article is only about one state in Germany, I wouldn't expect that any time soon. Also, once people started doing that in an organized fashion, the prosecutors would probably go after them anyway, since the damage would be above the threshold.
Slashdot Mirror
You think rational, intelligent people can't fly into a rage?
If you pile enough on someone and they get angry enough, that intelligence doesn't mean a whole lot, because enraged people aren't rational.
Intelligence also doesn't necessarily keep you from panicking once you realize you've done something that can land you in prison (or the electric chair) for the rest of your life.
Well, I think you're both way off.
He killed his wife in a rage because she was leaving with the kids, and he had no shot at getting custody. That's nowhere near as bad as someone who kills out of greed, or out of pleasure. Plus, he has skills that can be put to use. Fifteen years of slavery doesn't seem too lenient.
Killing him would be a waste, and out of proportion.
But, what you've said doesn't make sense either. If someone kills because they're sadistic, or as part of a theft, off them before they kill someone else. It's silly to say "no, all human lives have equal worth, even in extreme cases, so we have to let everyone live".
Opposing views exist in the United States, and censorship is limited to indirect, ineffective measures. I can walk around and ask people their opinions about Bush, and I'll get several different answers, many of which won't be very flattering (to put it lightly). I don't think very many people would tell me that the birds would mourn when his father died. Back when he was popular, one or two people might have said that he was "given directions by God", but it wouldn't have been the view of the general population.
Just because two nations are both imperfect doesn't mean that they're equally flawed.
There are quite a few. We're just smart enough to build weapons, and we have the hands for it. Spiders, tasmanian devils, and blue jays aren't really capable of mining metal and forging weapons. Chimps sometimes organize to kill other chimps (and sometimes other neighboring apes).
Why do so many people think that nature is peaceful?
Well, if their business model falls apart with everyone staying within the bounds of the law, I'd say it's a flawed model. If it fails, I'll shrug and go on.
If your ads are unobtrusive, very few people are going to take the trouble to block them, because it isn't worth the effort.
Now, if they're the same damn ad again and again, or if they're advertising something offensive to your users, people may eventually get tired of them and nix them. Of course, different people will find different ads offensive.
In summary:
If you're advertising servers and gadgets on a tech forum, you're probably in the clear.
If you're advertising webcomics and online games on a webcomic site, you're probably in the clear.
But, if you've got dating ads on an anime site, or BSA ads on a F/OSS forum, then sorry, you lose the game.
*yawn* Ridiculous.
Theft is theft. Advertising is advertising. Adblocking is adblocking. Blocking ads is not theft, advertising is not theft (as a responder to you tried to claim), and asking you if have the time is not theft.
If I don't want your ads sent down my line, I'm perfectly free to block them. If you don't like the fact that ads can be blocked, you're perfectly free to charge for your content, or take it down.
Yes, and geometry translates as "the measurement of the earth". The name's largely a relic. Unfortunately, this relic is in English, so people often take it at face value.
Bigwigs in CS occasionally complain about the inaccuracy of the name and the confusion it causes. Plus, it causes CS departments get hit with a lot of incoming freshmen who really should be in CIS or IT.
Why do you think it's mostly CS? I think I see more physics and biology students with that attitude than CS majors.
Also, "knowing how to use a computer" isn't CS... It isn't even a simplification of CS. Did you have a nasty run-in with an IT guy or something?
No. There comes a point when it takes so much time to skip the crap that anything of value that you manage to find just isn't worth it.
When articles are properly categorized so that the fluff is denoted as fluff, and I can choose to never view the "fluff" section, it's not so bad. When the fluff is displayed as genuine content, it dilutes the site.
Picture a grocery store with every aisle half-filled with candy corn, despite the aisle's label. Sure, you don't have to get the candy corn, but it makes finding the real food harder.
No. Not all students cheat. Those who do certainly like to tell themselves that, though.
If there's any sanity in the legal system, you would be the person the brain came from. While hormones from other organs can influence behavior, consciousness and decisions come from the brain, and that's where memories are stored.
It was a (presumably sane) doctor named Robert White, in Ohio.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/1263758.stm
It was a "success" in the sense that the monkey's head stayed alive and conscious for a few days. The nerves were still severed and it could not control the body it was transplanted to. Even so, I found it amazing.
Of course, that's quite different from the facial transplant in the article. Not surprisingly, spinal nerves are harder to repair than the smaller ones in your face.
If rapes followed that curve, there were still be a lot more than TEN of them per year.
Nope, see above. And if it did, it would only be one point out of several. The points dealing with other crimes, and with rape in general, would still stand.
The black crime rate is definitely higher. The real debate should be about why, but that can't happen until enough people admit the former. The few who do admit it generally want to blame it on the income gap or a revenge motive (which I shot down in my first post). Others try to avoid talking about whenever they can because "it helps the racists"
It's past 2 AM where I am. If you want to continue tomorrow through email or some IM system, let me know.
Please, do tell me what I'm trying to hide. I wonder if it's as serious as widespread murder, robbery, and rape.
You've built quite a strawman. For one, I didn't say blacks were bad. Secondly, I'm not misusing statistics, like your counter-example is.
If whites in your town commit 90% of the rapes, and they're 90% of the population, it's to be expected. If whites in your town commit 90% of the rapes and they're less than half of the population, it's a sign that something is seriously fucked up. I'd say that the whites in this hypothetical town need to figure out why their youth has such a tendency towards rape.
True, but having leeches who live off of others and don't mind wrecking a stranger's life isn't any better.
Someone willing to cheat a fool is probably willing to cheat you too, and there are plenty of fools in positions that will let them do it.
You're both emotional as hell. Couldn't you tell the original post was just intended to disrupt conversation?
As far as the poster you're replying to here, whether he's a troll or not, the rape statistic is correct. White on black rapes are often in the single digits, per year.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus0502.pdf
Table #40 and #42 in the above document.
Blacks comitted 48% of the rape, half of the robberies, and two thirds of the robberies involving injury. Crimes like simple assault were closer to the proportion that they should be (considering each group's percentage of the total population), but were still biased towards black offenders.
While the black poverty rate is higher than that of whites and hispanics, there are still twice as many whites below the poverty line in the US as there are blacks. Income isn't even the primary factor, much less a dominating one.
http://www.statehealthfacts.org/profileind.jsp?rgn=1&cat=1&ind=14
If it's about revenge for past social injustices, then why are black-on-black statistics so high?
Wishing that a problem didn't exist doesn't make it go away.
Hiding information about it just makes the problem harder to fix.
There are more limits on trademarks than you seem to think. The company would have no case, especially against the astronomy club.
Otherwise you'd have Cisco Networks suing the Cisco Boiler Company, Sun Microsystems suing Frito-Lay over Sun Chips, et cetera.
"InPrivate" is alright, as long as it's limited to the proper scope. "Clear tracks" is a fairly common phrase for people to use in reference to this.
http://clear-tracks.qarchive.org/
http://www.softplatz.com/software/clear-tracks/
I don't speak for the software in the links above, just pointing it out...
Amusingly, it looks like it's also the name of a piece of tracking software. So, you can clear your tracks, or you can leave them clearly.
http://www.claritytech.com/software/clarity/cleartracks/
So, basically, it makes it easier to ignore the fact that you're killing someone.
I'm not against capital punishment, but I think that there should be a certain amount of raw reality involved in it. No coat of sugar.
Considering that dozens of swimming, kayaking, etc events all give separate gold medals, you might as well.
By the way, the easy answer is to rank by all medals, but give gold more weight than silver, and silver more weight than bronze.
Well, you're just using different definitions of the same word. Such a discovery would just mean "nature" (in the sense of the word that scientists use) is bigger than we thought it was.
If I fire up a virtual machine, I may think of it and describe as being "my machine" or "a process running on my machine" depending on the context.
This part of your post confuses me. What does whether someone's decisions are in their best interest or not have to do with that person having or not having free will?
I mean, if the two are related at all, I would say that they're related in the opposite direction. Within limits (eg, involuntary responses taking over or fear preventing it) I can choose to do something on a whim that isn't in my best interest, even when no one is prompting me to do so.
Well, they've already violated the Shining and the Phantasy Star series. Romance of the Three Kingdoms and the Strike (Desert, Jungle, Urban, etc) games have been run into the ground on the PS2. Microsoft already made a ridiculous new Shadowrun video game. I'm not even going to talk about any Sonic games after 3D Blast.
That leaves Syndicate, Tyrants, and Warsong, off the top of my head.
Well, considering the article is only about one state in Germany, I wouldn't expect that any time soon. Also, once people started doing that in an organized fashion, the prosecutors would probably go after them anyway, since the damage would be above the threshold.