That's precisely what I'm getting at: "obviousness" is relative. You argue that the distinction between discovery and invention is "obviousness to someone in the field." That's a metric, sure, but still an arbitrary one.
What I mean is, there's a difference between something seeming like it "makes sense" like the obviousness rule, and an actual definable distinction. All I'm saying is that wherever you draw that line, it will always be arbitrary.
First I was going to say that the Obama administration should hold no sway over the DoJ's actions, but then I saw this. I can scarcely imagine who would be running that place with McCain/Palin in control.
All inventions can be interpreted as discoveries of already existing natural phenomena. It's not like inventors come along and rewrite the laws of physics in our universe, people just string together things that work.
To that extent, observing that such and such DNA controls such and such process in the body is not conceptually distinct from discovering that such and such arrangement of black plastic and magic smoke forms an LM741.
Arguably, no one ever invents anything. People just pick some arbitrary level of complexity of a discovery and say "when the system is simpler than this, it's a discovery, when it's more complex, it's an invention." Or something like that.
Personally, I think deconstructing the human genome is somewhat more complex than designing an opamp, but hey, that's just me.
No, put this on the growing list of pointless complaints about Facebook. If people didn't post idiocy on the internet, they wouldn't have to be so afraid of people seeing their idiocy.
I don't feel any guilt about complaining and not voting. There's absolutely no reason why I lose my right to express my political views just because I chose not to participate in an obviously broken system. I don't even know how people can make that argument. It's a total non sequitur, but no one can seem to see it.
And no one come up and say something idiotic like "Maybe everyone else is crazy and you're the only one who can see the truth, or, more likely, you're crazy and every one else is sane," that's not an argument, that's a personal attack. It certainly doesn't provide any material support for the position that non-voters can't complain.
Why can't I complain if I don't vote? There's absolutely no way that follows. If I know voting makes no difference whatsoever, then I know not voting makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.
There's no reason I can't complain. The ones who can't complain are the ones who did vote knowing their candidate would lose, because they directly contribute to the continued farce of our "democracy."
Aren't you just using the fact that you vote as an excuse not to take personal action for the realization of your own political views? Seems to me voting just lets you pretend the horrible political situation isn't really your fault, when you know full well that voting doesn't make a difference.
I didn't vote for McCain, because we'd have ended up with crazy crap like federal funding for abstinence only sex education, overt legal battles to maintain Don't Ask Don't Tell when the judiciary has deemed it unconstitutional, and the gutting of major NASA programs. And all this while multinational corporations buy more and more legislation in their favor to protect their "IP."
I didn't vote for Obama and I got the same thing.
I didn't vote for a third party candidate because not voting is just as effective.
I didn't vote for local representatives because my locality is heavily set as democratic, and no one else ever wins anything.
Isn't recycling a net loss for the environment? It's not a stretch to recognize that we spend more energy reprocessing waste than making the original stuff in the first place. Thus, it's better for the environment not to recycle. Maybe when resources become more scarce, it'll be better all around to mine a landfill than a mountain. Until then, recycling is the choice that damages us all.
Landfills are a safe and proven technology. Recycling is a demonstrable net loss, economically and environmentally.
Why do you recycle? Do you hate the earth!?! Stop killing mother earth with your evil recycling plants!
Why is it anyone's "fault?" Who cares? It's Facebook for science's sake! It's all just pictures of people's kids and crap, it doesn't matter at all if someone logs on as me and posts nonsense!
Jedidiah likely meant a neutral observing watching someone use an iPad. Loading mp3s onto your little Apple toy is the same as loading mp3s onto your little Apple toy, regardless of where those mp3s came from.
Slashdot Mirror
That's precisely what I'm getting at: "obviousness" is relative. You argue that the distinction between discovery and invention is "obviousness to someone in the field." That's a metric, sure, but still an arbitrary one.
What I mean is, there's a difference between something seeming like it "makes sense" like the obviousness rule, and an actual definable distinction. All I'm saying is that wherever you draw that line, it will always be arbitrary.
First I was going to say that the Obama administration should hold no sway over the DoJ's actions, but then I saw this. I can scarcely imagine who would be running that place with McCain/Palin in control.
All inventions can be interpreted as discoveries of already existing natural phenomena. It's not like inventors come along and rewrite the laws of physics in our universe, people just string together things that work.
To that extent, observing that such and such DNA controls such and such process in the body is not conceptually distinct from discovering that such and such arrangement of black plastic and magic smoke forms an LM741.
Arguably, no one ever invents anything. People just pick some arbitrary level of complexity of a discovery and say "when the system is simpler than this, it's a discovery, when it's more complex, it's an invention." Or something like that.
Personally, I think deconstructing the human genome is somewhat more complex than designing an opamp, but hey, that's just me.
You don't have to post drunk, half naked pictures of yourself on the internet. If you want something private, keep it private.
No, put this on the growing list of pointless complaints about Facebook. If people didn't post idiocy on the internet, they wouldn't have to be so afraid of people seeing their idiocy.
Rule of thumb: Coffee first, attempts to form coherent sentences second.
I don't feel any guilt about complaining and not voting. There's absolutely no reason why I lose my right to express my political views just because I chose not to participate in an obviously broken system. I don't even know how people can make that argument. It's a total non sequitur, but no one can seem to see it.
And no one come up and say something idiotic like "Maybe everyone else is crazy and you're the only one who can see the truth, or, more likely, you're crazy and every one else is sane," that's not an argument, that's a personal attack. It certainly doesn't provide any material support for the position that non-voters can't complain.
He had no chance of winning, but if enough people start refusing to buy into the two-bad-options system, then we might someday see reform.
That's what people said about E.V. Debs. Look at all the political parties we have now.
Ya, this plan has worked great over the past 100 years, I mean, heck, look at all the major parties we have now!
Wait, no, that's right. You're an idiot.
Why can't I complain if I don't vote? There's absolutely no way that follows. If I know voting makes no difference whatsoever, then I know not voting makes absolutely no difference whatsoever.
There's no reason I can't complain. The ones who can't complain are the ones who did vote knowing their candidate would lose, because they directly contribute to the continued farce of our "democracy."
Aren't you just using the fact that you vote as an excuse not to take personal action for the realization of your own political views? Seems to me voting just lets you pretend the horrible political situation isn't really your fault, when you know full well that voting doesn't make a difference.
Oh, don't be confused. They still refer to the same people. Us Americans just don't have anyone further left than the "right-wing" folks.
I don't vote.
I didn't vote for McCain, because we'd have ended up with crazy crap like federal funding for abstinence only sex education, overt legal battles to maintain Don't Ask Don't Tell when the judiciary has deemed it unconstitutional, and the gutting of major NASA programs. And all this while multinational corporations buy more and more legislation in their favor to protect their "IP."
I didn't vote for Obama and I got the same thing.
I didn't vote for a third party candidate because not voting is just as effective.
I didn't vote for local representatives because my locality is heavily set as democratic, and no one else ever wins anything.
It's not voter apathy. It's voter impotence.
Isn't that an incredibly vague - and in consequence unbelievably stupid - response?
Isn't recycling a net loss for the environment? It's not a stretch to recognize that we spend more energy reprocessing waste than making the original stuff in the first place. Thus, it's better for the environment not to recycle. Maybe when resources become more scarce, it'll be better all around to mine a landfill than a mountain. Until then, recycling is the choice that damages us all.
Landfills are a safe and proven technology. Recycling is a demonstrable net loss, economically and environmentally.
Why do you recycle? Do you hate the earth!?! Stop killing mother earth with your evil recycling plants!
Why is it anyone's "fault?" Who cares? It's Facebook for science's sake! It's all just pictures of people's kids and crap, it doesn't matter at all if someone logs on as me and posts nonsense!
[/perspective]
Or a little less than a typical Kessel Run.
That's odd. I use Chrome and I've never had that issue. I'm on Windows 7, what's your OS?
Sidenote - What is up with this comment not showing up when I wasn't registered. That's stupid and annoying.
It did. Now who's stupid and annoying? I mean, besides me.
Actually, I much prefer Slashdot's HTML style comment system. Maybe you should just not be lazy.
No, like you said, you're in the US. You can only win a lawsuit here if you're a multi-billion dollar corporation. Sorry.
Ya, and if I define "killing someone because I hate their stupid arguments" as "not murder," then I can kill you and it's not murder.
Just because you don't think copyright infringement isn't theft doesn't mean that copyright infringement isn't actually theft.
I believe he was referring to this particular conversation.
What are the other two? Rich Libertarians and Dirty Hippies?
Of course, I guess that depends on your definition of "style." I would probably have labeled that axis "wealth."
Jedidiah likely meant a neutral observing watching someone use an iPad. Loading mp3s onto your little Apple toy is the same as loading mp3s onto your little Apple toy, regardless of where those mp3s came from.