I can sort of see being modded "Interesting," but insightful? What the hell is this? White guilt? China is a hugely repressive and opressive country and being originally a non-American from a country, which shares its border with China, I can tell you first hand that Americans are not the only way to feel this way. Just because you visited China and things looked dandy does not mean they are. Perhaps you need to visit countries like India, Nepal, or hell China as a non-tourist...
I hate everytime someone tells me about the wonders of Flash, especially in designing a whole freakin' site or all the interface out of it. What about open standards? Oh, you say Flash is an open standard -- funny, but I get the feeling it's only slighlty more "open" than say Java. This isn't just typical Slashdot "open" fanboyism -- open source and open architechture unarguably matters to the WWW and the Internet at large. Flash is not only not very open, but it's also annoying. So much so that there are tools to block just flash! I've even had clients tell me "Oh, and no Flash", because many people are figuring out that Flash is annoying and it is a user-friendly and accessiblity hindrance.
I'll stick with my XHTML and CSS thank you very much, and yeah, maybe I'll use some JavaScript/ECMAScript when I'm forced to. But, until a client very specifically asks for Flash (hasn't happened yet!), Flash can burn in hell.
Any time we think that we can really have a big impact on nature, we're proven wrong. We've spent billions of dollars on levees for New Orleans, yet one small category 3 hurricane is all it takes to breech them.
I'm sure this wasn't your point, but the levees built in New Orleans were just pieces of crap. Furthermore, there was a cost benefit analysis done where they assumed it would not have to deal with a "serious" hurricane. Now honestly, if you're going to be in a city that is already below sea level, you may as well go the extra mile in getting more expensive levees (and it never quite hit the billion dollar level). Alas, it was not so. Additionally, along with poor engineering choices, it would appear the actual levee construction was poorly done.
Wow, you are so wrong and misguided it isn't even funny.
The war against India was not imperialistic at all; it was a border dispute that India was getting too agressive about; we attacked them, taught them a lesson, and backed out. If we were so imperialistic, why don't we hold any Indian territory today? In fact those same territories that were under dispute then are still under dispute now.
Wow, guess who else is so wrong and misguided? Have you picked up a history book or bothered to look at multiple sources of history to see what actually happened in the 1962 Sino-Indian War? It was completely because of imperialistic desires; among other things, it provided a "bridge" into Tibet, which China claims as its own. There were protests in India and China over this occupation. Ethinically and geographically it belongs to either Tibet (a free one) or India -- definitely not China. Are you even aware of what China said was its valid reason for conquering the territory? It was to "liberate three million Tibetans from imperialist aggression, to complete the unification of the whole of China, and to safeguard the frontier regions of the country." What utter nonsense!
And guess who started the war? Like you said, the Chinese. First, the Chinese took over whatever it felt necessary (Tibet) and started heading towards the Indian border. Second, India put up a military to safegaurd what was clearly its boundary -- a good bit behind what China already claimed at that point. Then, the Chinese decided that border patrol was an act of agression and felt validated conquering MORE territory. And, no they haven't left, yet? Hence the "dispute". So why did India not press itself militaristically? Because India did not have a military set up that China already did in the region; it is hard terrain that India has to play cath up with. So, it remains a "border dispute" that China guards agressively.
The current Chinese foriegn policy towards India dictates, basically, containment. Yeah... no imperialism there! I wouldn't be surprised if you more of your post has it "so" wrong; heads up moderators -- the parent is spouting bullshit.
I listen to my iPod so I don't have to listen to the craptastic radio. I really have a hard time understanding what kind of person listens to the terrible and limited selection of popular music. You like that popular music? Great, you can now have up to a gig of it, in a variety you choose as opposed to some jackass DJ and not be limited by choice. Get the iPods with more storage and can give a huge F-U to the radio.
No, some of it is indeed thought out.
IE is ghetto Yes, this can be a refrence to long forgotten, but still present, bugs or the lack of support of modern web starndards. Or both. It's a ghetto in the sense that it's old and not updated; definitely lacking modern features (even beyond tabs). Maybe the magic of IE7 will fix all this, but it's yet to appear for mass public consumption.
Bookmarks Work. Bookmark organization in FF is just infinitely easier, and it's handy to have my "Live bookmarks," i.e. RSS feeds. Importing and exporting comes down to a simple HTML file. There are some things that do need to improved, but it's already better than IE. Again, this has to primarily to do with the UI.
IE lacks quality and polish Most improvements, security or otherwise, has a very just-taped-on feel to it.
FF is a mainstream product - and IE isn't I'll agree with you on this... IE's pretty mainstream.
Security isn't annoying. Security on IE still sucks and it's annoying with all sorts of messages and warnings flying about everywhere that hinder the user experience.
This is very much a joke people. In case you didn't get it when they offered leaded gasoline and "purple disele, just read the About Us page, I quote:
Just in case you are an American, or possibly drive a car made by Suzuki, we will spell the purpose of Petrol Direct out to you in simple terms. This is a spoof. A parody. We do not sell petrol or any other fuels, and certainly not plutonium or antimatter. Sorry. This site is strictly for laughs only.
Well, I can't explain it any better than my parents couldn't explain it to me. One day you'll know it too, and won't be able to explain it either.
I was fully expecting to get moderated down, and I did. But mark my words, one day nearly every one of you will be sitting somewhere with a pained expression, drinking tea and talking about the weather. And it won't be because you were expected to or forced to. Something doesn't have to be explainable for it to be completely, incontrovertibly true.
It's because you will have sold your soul. No hippy immitation here; I know plenty of people who still have theirs and some might even term them "yuppie".
Yes, Microsoft has a good deal of well-deserved bad karma. That you could consider this to be a failing of their software is ridiculous, though. If this is an embarassment to Microsoft, many Free, Open software packages of every sort, from Apache to Linux to OpenBSD to OpenSSH have been so embarassed.
Yeah... you were doing great until you mentioned OpenBSD; it's pretty damn secure.
I don't think the Emperor cares about the Vader, but needs him to rule the galaxy. Not to mention that the Emperor seems to "feed" on the Force powers of Anakin/Vader.
I realize the Jedi seem kinda dull, but it may make sense to think of them as ascetic monks. They may be mislead/confused themselves, as I implied in another posting.
This is a lovely explaination and I've seen many other Star Wars fans explain the "balance" similar ways. It doesn't work, though. It's contradictory.
In the same movie that you cite, I'm going to cite that fact that it's made glaringly obvious that Anakin did not bring balance to the Force. I mean for one, the Sith essentially rule the galaxy.
SPOILER ALERT
Then there's the fact that Obi-Wan yells at Anakin as he's chopped Anakin down. You were supposed to bring balance, bring it to light, etc., etc. but instead you brough it to darkness. Quite obviously, Obi-Wan does not think Anakin brought balance.
Additionally, Yoda said that perhaps the prophecy was misread. It was very strongly implied that, yeah, it was misunderstood. Was it another Skywalker who was to bring "balance" (whatever the hell it means)? Just not Anakin, but rather Luke?
You know, and this may be blasphemy, someone at work once suggested that both sides are actually flawed. The Jedi order fell because it was arrogant and to content in its position. I'm not saying it actually tried to take over the Republic, but they were too complacent with themselves.
To the Jedi, balance to the Force can mean two things: peace or getting rid of the Sith entirely. In this case, "balance" seems to deviate from the Asian religious/philisophical ideals that the Jedi seem to be based on and rather leans toward the meaning of Greco-Roman/Western religious and philisopical ideals. Thus, "balance" means pure good. Of course, this calls into question of whether the Jedi are flawed themselves -- pure goodness?
Lastly, more on topic with the primary discussion, perhaps the Sith are not destroyed and that's how Episode VII through IX will work out. I know that in the books it actually has to do with alien life forms not connected to the Force, but somehow, I don't see that getting integrated into the Star Wars movies. I don't know where the Sith would survive though, but if it's really clever than future episodes might be decent. Of course, this is despite the fact that the whole Jedi-Sith thing is getting kinda old. Alas, I can see George taking the easy way out if there were going to be anymore episodes...
I made my girlfriend sit through and watch all of the original Star Wars. She had previously only watched Episode I and II (and what a craptastic view that must've given her). She reasoned that she would see it in "order," -- I told her that was just absolute nonsense. Darth Vader telling Luke he is Luke's father or Leia is Luke's twin sister is absolutely pointless if you've seen Episode III. They retain none of their magic. I realize Star Wars may be a "geek" thing, but it's permeated culture a lot. It is fairly mainstream, and while it's not Shakespeare or Monet (Ep I and II sure as hell aren't), it is a piece of culture they're just missing out on.
The way TCP/IP works is a transmission is sent, confirmation is returned and then another round trip is made to actually pass on the data. That's 200,000 feet. That's... a little bit over... 200 microseconds... yeah you're right...
I dunno about the rest but 50,000 feet adds a hell lot of latency that isn't very fun. Go even higher, experience even more latency. I know... damn laws of physics.
I just wrote my two state Senators about how displeased I am about the RealID rider attached to the bill. I'm trying to get my dozen other close, close friends to do the same. I've sent them personal e-mails, had IM chat, talked on the phone, etc. It seems damn near impossible to get anyone to even write a fucking letter! You get the usual excuses... they laugh it off, they say they lack the energy, they question what difference it will make anyway, etc. The point is that if people slowly get their freedoms taken from them -- they won't notice it all. Many people whine, but few actually do anything.
Yeah way to fuck America and yourself... I wonder what the Germans thought: Hey, I'm busy living life. Maybe this Hitler guy is onto something. Whatever, it should work out in the end.
I'm sorry, but a vegan web site is not going to convince me. I realize its strong attempt at being "scientifically" credible, alas, I smell bias (and lots of word play). I know the meat-leading-to-large-brain is the generally accepted theory for the moment. Sure it may be debunked and when it is, I'll accept it. I'll certainly listen to those who contend it (and apparently there's many), but I'm not going to just throw away the current theory. This is especailly true with such little evidence (or any).
Also a bigger brain does not necessarily lead to intelligence. Intelligence arises from the ability to form greater and denser neurological connections in the brain. That said I have an extremely hard time believing that the rapid brain alterations did not involve some massive injection of protien and related nutrients (vitamin B12, etc.).
As for the competing theory (which could explain the protien intake and even some of the other nutrients, such as B12), it lacks any evidence... oops.
You seem to be preaching vegetarian superiority without anything to back up your claim. Humans are omnivores, because we're smart (i.e. we learned quickly to evolve in such a manner or we die off). Being an omnivore gives us the best strategy for survival, period.
Indeed eating plants can be more efficient for a human's diet and it certainly provides valueable nutrients not otherwise available. However, our brains evolved to its current state thanks to a compact source of lots of protiens and many calories -- meat.
I'm sure I can Google more out if necessary. We had a natural inclination towards meet as our food stuff became distributed over a wider area. We didn't have the ability to fight for the food stuff with larger animals, so we turned to meet.
I also realize that there is one piece of conflicting evidence to all this. Richard Wrangham and a few of his colleagues have argued that cooked tubers were really responsible for the massive growth of our ancestors' brains. The problem? This massive brain growth was roughly 1.8 million years ago (which Wrangham agrees), but at best we were able to control fire about 300,000 years ago. Quite a disparity. Not to mention that there's no archaelogical proof of such a diet.
I feel that when it came to IBM and its influence over the last few years, she blinded me with science
Yeah, weird science. IBM's architechture is the cause of many modern day computing woes. We are only now moving away from that hacked-together architechture.
I thought "Tiger" was the code name for 10.4.x of OS X -- i.e., that's not its officialy name. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about... after all, coming from the PC world I hear random crap like Memphis, Avalon, Sid, and Longoverdue as code names, not officialy product names.
I guess this is more akin to Warty Warthog? Even then, though, would that be an "official" name of an Ubuntu distribution -- one that they could be sued over?
Selfish? You bet. But nature has created more selfish beings than egalitarian ones. Nature favors pragmatism.
I don't know about the rest of the commentary, but in that part you're getting dangerously close to social Darwinism. Social Darwinism has been proven untrue. Darwins theories of evolution do not necessary apply to human society. What nature favors is self-survival, and less importantly, survival of one's own species. That could mean being purely selfish or working in a completely non-selfish, communal fashion. Modern American and European societies tend to be a hybrid. But I digress...
Why is this marked as flaimbait, really? I realize the post stereotypes and exaggerates -- but there is some truth. I realize that a $100 laptop for eastern Europe would be great, and all the social benefits that this would create (i.e. increased communication, cooperation, etc.). However, as a Bengali-American, let me tell you that $100 is still a LOT of money for much of the developing world.
It'd be like telling an American that, guess what, I've made you a $10,000 device that will revolutinize your life. Yeah, well it truly may. That doesn't change the fact that no one except the upper crust is going to be able to afford it AND no one except the upper crust is going to see the promise of such a device.
Slashdot Mirror
I can sort of see being modded "Interesting," but insightful? What the hell is this? White guilt? China is a hugely repressive and opressive country and being originally a non-American from a country, which shares its border with China, I can tell you first hand that Americans are not the only way to feel this way. Just because you visited China and things looked dandy does not mean they are. Perhaps you need to visit countries like India, Nepal, or hell China as a non-tourist...
I'll stick with my XHTML and CSS thank you very much, and yeah, maybe I'll use some JavaScript/ECMAScript when I'm forced to. But, until a client very specifically asks for Flash (hasn't happened yet!), Flash can burn in hell.
I'm sure this wasn't your point, but the levees built in New Orleans were just pieces of crap. Furthermore, there was a cost benefit analysis done where they assumed it would not have to deal with a "serious" hurricane. Now honestly, if you're going to be in a city that is already below sea level, you may as well go the extra mile in getting more expensive levees (and it never quite hit the billion dollar level). Alas, it was not so. Additionally, along with poor engineering choices, it would appear the actual levee construction was poorly done.
Sources:
http://jeffsadow.blogspot.com/2005/09/shoddy-lev ee-work-shows-were-stuck-on.html
Investigations Into La. Levee Breaks Mount, Associated Press article by Brett Martel published Th. Nov. 10, 9:27pm
http://www.reason.com/rauch/091905.shtml
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/art icle/2005/10/08/AR2005100801458_pf.html
they have sex, they rebel, and they think and talk all the time! Dag nab teenagers...
Dude! You don't get it! We can play Doom with this latest incarnation! How far away is Halo?!
Wow, you are so wrong and misguided it isn't even funny.
The war against India was not imperialistic at all; it was a border dispute that India was getting too agressive about; we attacked them, taught them a lesson, and backed out. If we were so imperialistic, why don't we hold any Indian territory today? In fact those same territories that were under dispute then are still under dispute now.
Wow, guess who else is so wrong and misguided? Have you picked up a history book or bothered to look at multiple sources of history to see what actually happened in the 1962 Sino-Indian War? It was completely because of imperialistic desires; among other things, it provided a "bridge" into Tibet, which China claims as its own. There were protests in India and China over this occupation. Ethinically and geographically it belongs to either Tibet (a free one) or India -- definitely not China. Are you even aware of what China said was its valid reason for conquering the territory? It was to "liberate three million Tibetans from imperialist aggression, to complete the unification of the whole of China, and to safeguard the frontier regions of the country." What utter nonsense!
And guess who started the war? Like you said, the Chinese. First, the Chinese took over whatever it felt necessary (Tibet) and started heading towards the Indian border. Second, India put up a military to safegaurd what was clearly its boundary -- a good bit behind what China already claimed at that point. Then, the Chinese decided that border patrol was an act of agression and felt validated conquering MORE territory. And, no they haven't left, yet? Hence the "dispute". So why did India not press itself militaristically? Because India did not have a military set up that China already did in the region; it is hard terrain that India has to play cath up with. So, it remains a "border dispute" that China guards agressively.
The current Chinese foriegn policy towards India dictates, basically, containment. Yeah... no imperialism there! I wouldn't be surprised if you more of your post has it "so" wrong; heads up moderators -- the parent is spouting bullshit.
Some sources:
Asia Times: India in China
The battle for the border
The Sino-Indian War
1962 Sino-Indian War: An Overview
I listen to my iPod so I don't have to listen to the craptastic radio. I really have a hard time understanding what kind of person listens to the terrible and limited selection of popular music. You like that popular music? Great, you can now have up to a gig of it, in a variety you choose as opposed to some jackass DJ and not be limited by choice. Get the iPods with more storage and can give a huge F-U to the radio.
No, some of it is indeed thought out. IE is ghetto Yes, this can be a refrence to long forgotten, but still present, bugs or the lack of support of modern web starndards. Or both. It's a ghetto in the sense that it's old and not updated; definitely lacking modern features (even beyond tabs). Maybe the magic of IE7 will fix all this, but it's yet to appear for mass public consumption. Bookmarks Work. Bookmark organization in FF is just infinitely easier, and it's handy to have my "Live bookmarks," i.e. RSS feeds. Importing and exporting comes down to a simple HTML file. There are some things that do need to improved, but it's already better than IE. Again, this has to primarily to do with the UI. IE lacks quality and polish Most improvements, security or otherwise, has a very just-taped-on feel to it. FF is a mainstream product - and IE isn't I'll agree with you on this... IE's pretty mainstream. Security isn't annoying. Security on IE still sucks and it's annoying with all sorts of messages and warnings flying about everywhere that hinder the user experience.
This is very much a joke people. In case you didn't get it when they offered leaded gasoline and "purple disele, just read the About Us page, I quote:
Just in case you are an American, or possibly drive a car made by Suzuki, we will spell the purpose of Petrol Direct out to you in simple terms. This is a spoof. A parody. We do not sell petrol or any other fuels, and certainly not plutonium or antimatter. Sorry. This site is strictly for laughs only.
Yeah... you were doing great until you mentioned OpenBSD; it's pretty damn secure.
I realize the Jedi seem kinda dull, but it may make sense to think of them as ascetic monks. They may be mislead/confused themselves, as I implied in another posting.
In the same movie that you cite, I'm going to cite that fact that it's made glaringly obvious that Anakin did not bring balance to the Force. I mean for one, the Sith essentially rule the galaxy. SPOILER ALERT
Then there's the fact that Obi-Wan yells at Anakin as he's chopped Anakin down. You were supposed to bring balance, bring it to light, etc., etc. but instead you brough it to darkness. Quite obviously, Obi-Wan does not think Anakin brought balance.
Additionally, Yoda said that perhaps the prophecy was misread. It was very strongly implied that, yeah, it was misunderstood. Was it another Skywalker who was to bring "balance" (whatever the hell it means)? Just not Anakin, but rather Luke?
To the Jedi, balance to the Force can mean two things: peace or getting rid of the Sith entirely. In this case, "balance" seems to deviate from the Asian religious/philisophical ideals that the Jedi seem to be based on and rather leans toward the meaning of Greco-Roman/Western religious and philisopical ideals. Thus, "balance" means pure good. Of course, this calls into question of whether the Jedi are flawed themselves -- pure goodness?
Lastly, more on topic with the primary discussion, perhaps the Sith are not destroyed and that's how Episode VII through IX will work out. I know that in the books it actually has to do with alien life forms not connected to the Force, but somehow, I don't see that getting integrated into the Star Wars movies. I don't know where the Sith would survive though, but if it's really clever than future episodes might be decent. Of course, this is despite the fact that the whole Jedi-Sith thing is getting kinda old. Alas, I can see George taking the easy way out if there were going to be anymore episodes...
I made my girlfriend sit through and watch all of the original Star Wars. She had previously only watched Episode I and II (and what a craptastic view that must've given her). She reasoned that she would see it in "order," -- I told her that was just absolute nonsense. Darth Vader telling Luke he is Luke's father or Leia is Luke's twin sister is absolutely pointless if you've seen Episode III. They retain none of their magic. I realize Star Wars may be a "geek" thing, but it's permeated culture a lot. It is fairly mainstream, and while it's not Shakespeare or Monet (Ep I and II sure as hell aren't), it is a piece of culture they're just missing out on.
The way TCP/IP works is a transmission is sent, confirmation is returned and then another round trip is made to actually pass on the data. That's 200,000 feet. That's... a little bit over... 200 microseconds... yeah you're right...
I dunno about the rest but 50,000 feet adds a hell lot of latency that isn't very fun. Go even higher, experience even more latency. I know... damn laws of physics.
I just wrote my two state Senators about how displeased I am about the RealID rider attached to the bill. I'm trying to get my dozen other close, close friends to do the same. I've sent them personal e-mails, had IM chat, talked on the phone, etc. It seems damn near impossible to get anyone to even write a fucking letter! You get the usual excuses... they laugh it off, they say they lack the energy, they question what difference it will make anyway, etc. The point is that if people slowly get their freedoms taken from them -- they won't notice it all. Many people whine, but few actually do anything. Yeah way to fuck America and yourself... I wonder what the Germans thought: Hey, I'm busy living life. Maybe this Hitler guy is onto something. Whatever, it should work out in the end.
Also a bigger brain does not necessarily lead to intelligence. Intelligence arises from the ability to form greater and denser neurological connections in the brain. That said I have an extremely hard time believing that the rapid brain alterations did not involve some massive injection of protien and related nutrients (vitamin B12, etc.).
As for the competing theory (which could explain the protien intake and even some of the other nutrients, such as B12), it lacks any evidence... oops.
Wow, how the hell did I misspell "meat" as "meet", twice?
Refrences:
Should American Eat Less Meat
Humans Head Start [it's a PDF!] I'll even concede the meat might've more likely been fish met, but it was meat.
Did African Hominids Eat Meat We're not really natural herbivores at all...
I'm sure I can Google more out if necessary. We had a natural inclination towards meet as our food stuff became distributed over a wider area. We didn't have the ability to fight for the food stuff with larger animals, so we turned to meet.
I also realize that there is one piece of conflicting evidence to all this. Richard Wrangham and a few of his colleagues have argued that cooked tubers were really responsible for the massive growth of our ancestors' brains. The problem? This massive brain growth was roughly 1.8 million years ago (which Wrangham agrees), but at best we were able to control fire about 300,000 years ago. Quite a disparity. Not to mention that there's no archaelogical proof of such a diet.
Yeah, weird science. IBM's architechture is the cause of many modern day computing woes. We are only now moving away from that hacked-together architechture.
I thought "Tiger" was the code name for 10.4.x of OS X -- i.e., that's not its officialy name. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about... after all, coming from the PC world I hear random crap like Memphis, Avalon, Sid, and Longoverdue as code names, not officialy product names. I guess this is more akin to Warty Warthog? Even then, though, would that be an "official" name of an Ubuntu distribution -- one that they could be sued over?
Why is this marked as flaimbait, really? I realize the post stereotypes and exaggerates -- but there is some truth. I realize that a $100 laptop for eastern Europe would be great, and all the social benefits that this would create (i.e. increased communication, cooperation, etc.). However, as a Bengali-American, let me tell you that $100 is still a LOT of money for much of the developing world. It'd be like telling an American that, guess what, I've made you a $10,000 device that will revolutinize your life. Yeah, well it truly may. That doesn't change the fact that no one except the upper crust is going to be able to afford it AND no one except the upper crust is going to see the promise of such a device.