So, you reply to this post with a suggestion that he kill himself, and completely ignore doing so to This Post ?
Come now, please spread the death wishes evenly.
And I don't think there's anything wrong with the way they're approaching the problem: Remember, cows eat grain too.
Yes, cows eat grain, and when that grain is harvested, the same quantities of small animals die in the harvesting process. However, I know animals die so I can eat and I have no problem with it. The moral vegans claim animals don't die for them to eat, and that is simply not the case. In my opinion, a fallacious argument is invalid.
If everyone suddenly turned vegetarian, we'd have a huge surplus of grain left over.
From my understanding, if everyone suddenly went veganm we'd all starve to death because a majority of the grain that is grown ad fed to livestock is of a variety not suited for human consumption.
There's also the fact that no single form of plant can sustain humans. So we can't just switch over to one type and free up lots of farmland, we'll have to have the farmeers grow enough of the right mix of types that people don't start dying of malnutrition while eating normally. Then there's the fact that the land that we use to grow the low-quality or specially bred grains for cattle may not be suited to grow grain and other plants for humans.
See what I mean about not understanding? The arguments just don't seem to make sense to me. However, I do thank you for responding with some helpful information.
"Peoples Republic of China" just has too many silly bulls to really work in the context of a properly phrased homage to a good "Capitalist America" joke.
I am not a vegan, but I understand why someone would want to be
Could you explain it to me? I've never heard a single, rational argument for vegetarianism that made me even consider wanting to give up meat. Most of them seem to be argued from some emotional standpoint that may ignore the law of unintended consequences (eg Saying things such as: "Animals don't have to die for me to eat" when vast amounts of animals die during our harvesting processes for various grains.).
No one attempts to make the students "advance their knowledge" at any rate other than what is comfortable for them.
The rest of your post directly contradicts this. I believe a more accurate phrasing would be: "No one attempts to make the students 'advance their knowledge' at any rate faster than what is comfortable with the slowest student in the class. Those students who find this pace uncomfortably slow should slow down and stop being such little know-it-alls."
Admittedly, nobody can, or should, expect you to hav to teach 4 chapters at the same time, or assis students with 3 different assignments because some are faster or slower learners than others. The fact still remains that those who rapidly grasp the concepts being taught will become bored while the teacher continues to bring the average and slow students up to speed, and those average and fast students will become (more) bored while the teachers assist the slowest students in class.
Throughout most of my school years, I've always wondered why I was being punished for being smarter (not that I am, but I felt that way) than everyone else in class. I couldn't even do something else silently (such as reading) becuase apparently my not plodding along at a pace the other students could handle was a distraction.
I'm getting somewhat off the subject so let me get back to it: I was certainly forced to "advance my knowledge" at a rate I found uncomfortable: it was too slow. I became so bored and fed up with it that I simply refused to play along with the game, did my work then sat back and did nothing in defiance.
I don't have a workable solution for you, but the method we use currently does nothing but punish overachievers and frustrate teachers who have to teach overcrowded classrooms of increasingly bored, fidgeting, students.
put a broadcast station on earth, constantly transmitting to the broadcast station on mars. each station uses the other station as a reference point when aiming the transmit beam. both stations would have to be orbital though so they can constantly see each other. Then you get the problem of what to do when the earth and mars have the sun between them.
Slashdot Mirror
Apparently the mods:
A) Have no sense of humor today.
B) Don't know to what you were referring.
C) Hate you.
So, you reply to this post with a suggestion that he kill himself, and completely ignore doing so to This Post ? Come now, please spread the death wishes evenly.
You sir, have obviously stolen my mind. Please return it at the earliest convenient time as I am lost without it. Thank you, and have a nice day.
no comment. but let's just say, you may be sick in the head, but that doesn't make you wrong.
I can see how you couldn't justify $650 for a 10 inch monitor when the 17 was such a great deal at $400. :]
And I don't think there's anything wrong with the way they're approaching the problem: Remember, cows eat grain too.
Yes, cows eat grain, and when that grain is harvested, the same quantities of small animals die in the harvesting process. However, I know animals die so I can eat and I have no problem with it. The moral vegans claim animals don't die for them to eat, and that is simply not the case. In my opinion, a fallacious argument is invalid.
If everyone suddenly turned vegetarian, we'd have a huge surplus of grain left over.
From my understanding, if everyone suddenly went veganm we'd all starve to death because a majority of the grain that is grown ad fed to livestock is of a variety not suited for human consumption.
There's also the fact that no single form of plant can sustain humans. So we can't just switch over to one type and free up lots of farmland, we'll have to have the farmeers grow enough of the right mix of types that people don't start dying of malnutrition while eating normally. Then there's the fact that the land that we use to grow the low-quality or specially bred grains for cattle may not be suited to grow grain and other plants for humans.
See what I mean about not understanding? The arguments just don't seem to make sense to me. However, I do thank you for responding with some helpful information.
"Peoples Republic of China" just has too many silly bulls to really work in the context of a properly phrased homage to a good "Capitalist America" joke.
I am not a vegan, but I understand why someone would want to be
Could you explain it to me? I've never heard a single, rational argument for vegetarianism that made me even consider wanting to give up meat. Most of them seem to be argued from some emotional standpoint that may ignore the law of unintended consequences (eg Saying things such as: "Animals don't have to die for me to eat" when vast amounts of animals die during our harvesting processes for various grains.).
There were good features in Winamp 3? Where did they hide them?
under file -> -> tools -> good features -> -> No really, they're here -> Actual good features, not that stuff we showed you earlier.
anyone who can't figure out & and who can't look at the page source should really avoid trying to do any 1337 stuff.
Holy crap, you people are boring...
Being pedantic is a disease.
Assuming it makes you boring, it seems that you have caught the disease.
Dear Mr. Moderator,
You hate me, don't you?
Thank you for your time
Sincerely,
> Request to moderators: Mod down anyone who says "I know I'll be modded down for this."
I know I'll be modded down for this.
I know I'll be modded down for this.
I know you'll be modded down for that.
No one attempts to make the students "advance their knowledge" at any rate other than what is comfortable for them.
The rest of your post directly contradicts this. I believe a more accurate phrasing would be:
"No one attempts to make the students 'advance their knowledge' at any rate faster than what is comfortable with the slowest student in the class. Those students who find this pace uncomfortably slow should slow down and stop being such little know-it-alls."
Admittedly, nobody can, or should, expect you to hav to teach 4 chapters at the same time, or assis students with 3 different assignments because some are faster or slower learners than others. The fact still remains that those who rapidly grasp the concepts being taught will become bored while the teacher continues to bring the average and slow students up to speed, and those average and fast students will become (more) bored while the teachers assist the slowest students in class.
Throughout most of my school years, I've always wondered why I was being punished for being smarter (not that I am, but I felt that way) than everyone else in class. I couldn't even do something else silently (such as reading) becuase apparently my not plodding along at a pace the other students could handle was a distraction.
I'm getting somewhat off the subject so let me get back to it:
I was certainly forced to "advance my knowledge" at a rate I found uncomfortable: it was too slow. I became so bored and fed up with it that I simply refused to play along with the game, did my work then sat back and did nothing in defiance.
I don't have a workable solution for you, but the method we use currently does nothing but punish overachievers and frustrate teachers who have to teach overcrowded classrooms of increasingly bored, fidgeting, students.
Exactly, you are dead one with this comment
Don't go giving Big Brother any ideas, they have enough of their own.
Computer is your friend citizen; are you happy?
freedom as in slavery!
ketchup is a vegetable.
I'm guessing the mod would have preferred knots per week?
African or European?
Yes.
For those of use who need to use a real measuring system, none of this Miles/Kilometers stuff, that's 58,460,701.5 rods per day.
Assuming you didn't have to take off, land, accelerate or decelerate, you could circle the earth in pi hours at Mach 10.61.
What's that come to in migrating swallows?
> This is SLDT, not YHOO.
Aaw, FARK!
Watch your language!
So, robots cannot obey the orders of human beings if obeying those orders pose a danger to itsexistance.
put a broadcast station on earth, constantly transmitting to the broadcast station on mars. each station uses the other station as a reference point when aiming the transmit beam. both stations would have to be orbital though so they can constantly see each other. Then you get the problem of what to do when the earth and mars have the sun between them.
Then I won't tell you, but only becuase I'm too lazy to bother.