No, you're making yourself look silly by not RTFA! What you're really complaining about is they way that the Slashdot headline presented his view, not what he said. Apparently as is quite common the headline and summary contains spin not present in the original source. This does not make him look silly, it makes you and slashdot's editors look silly.
Fast graphics
Quartz icon X11 for Mac OS X takes advantage of the Mac OS X Quartz graphics system to deliver hardware-accelerated 2D and 3D graphics. Quartz provides snappy scrolling speeds for text, live drag and resize of windows, as well as no-compromise 3D animation through OpenGL Direct Rendering.
There should be an IEEE sarcasm protocol. You know, like in TCP/IP with ACK packets, you should sent an RUSERIOUS packet to which I could send an ACK or NEG. You don't want to have to lose any data if your sarcasm detector isn't receiving properly.
It's just kind of odd that we let the same companies that we spent $N billion dollars splitting up slowly merge back together just because there isn't enough political will to stop it. Yesterday a Baby Bell bought AT&T long distance back.
My only thought: Well, could he possibly be worse than the current Dem leadership?
(As for your other suppositions, it may interest you to know that there are many channels on your television other than Fox News. Try them. Or just try the "off" button.)
No, they can only do this because it's easier for them to detect people that are sharing than people that are downloading. They can easily go out on the net, download a file from someone, record the ip and check if the file is copyrighted to one of their subsidiaries. They cannot (yet) scan everyone in the world's hard drives.
If police would do their jobs instead of sitting on their asses at speed traps, we wouldn't need cell phone laws, or studies like this.
So, by analogy, why do we have drunk driving laws? After all, the police weren't "sitting on the asses" they would see everyone who was driving erraticatically, and...
The reason, of course, is the deterrant value of the law is a much less expensive way to reduce dangerous driving than some sort of omnipresent police presence. You can take this too far, of course, but if this argument here is true then it ought to be used with equal force against absolutely any traffic law, especially drunk driving laws which I think most people would think would be absurd to repeal.
They say that spam accounts for so much lost productivity, but they fail to mention that spam has spawned a whole new race of products and services that keep people employed.
This is like saying arson is great for the construction industry. Not to mention firefighters, they would be in much greater demand with more arsonists.
Graphology is not BS. There are still studies on it published regularly.
The reason it is disdained by some scientists and psychologists is not that it is totally invalid, but that it isn't as valid as other kinds of personality tests that are just as easy to administer. Second, it is often easily distorted by those who don't know what they're talking about see it as a totally subjective interpretive test as you might "read the tea leaves", rather than looking for empirically verified correlates.
for example; "Only half of the students said newspapers should be allowed to publish freely without government approval of stories." That is not surprising as they in thier school newspaper do not have the ability to pubilsh without teacher approval
They should not be drawing an analogy between school adminstration and the Unites States Government. This is the BILL OF RIGHTS we're talking about, one of our (ostensibly) most important civic values. Just because you have to ask permission to go to the bathroom, do students think they have to do that outside of school? Obviously not. This is much more serious than just drawing a specious analogy.
"About half the students said the government can restrict any indecent material on the Internet. It can't" That is not surprising as thier internet use at school is severly restricted in what they can see.
Again, the school administration should not be analogized to the United States government. Do the students think that they will have to take an orange bus to work some day? Obviously they do not. Just because internet access in the school library doesn't mean some huge government agency in the bellows of Washington regulates everything you see and do, like we live in some Orwellian dystopia. This is absurd.
Anouther example is with only 83% of the students saying that expression of unpopular views is acceptible, coming from a very nondemocratic enviorment in schoolI can see how that is easily the situation.
WHY SHOULD THEY THINK WE DON'T LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY? Why should it mean that because a school is nondemocratic, then the government of the United States must be nondemocratic?
Meanwhile, insurance rates in this countly are through the roof for buisness getting sued into the ground becasue someone stupid hurt themselves with their product, because the warning label did not state something that should have been common sense
that's because the insurance company is legally liable for what its insurees do, no matter how stupid. (The whole point of insurance.) Wouldn't it be nice the the government was liable for the ignorance of its people?
Being that Adams himself worked on the movie before he died, it can't by definition be a bastardization of his work. Since the movie itself falls under the category of "his work." Unless you consider it to be a bastardization of itself, but for that you would get a recursion error.
Most movies don't turn out that great. Movies based on books don't suck any more than the average, but the only difference is that they have higher expectations set on them.
As for the Hitcherhiker's Guide movie, Adams himself worked on the script before his tragic and untimely passing, so it can't by definition be a bastardization of his work, since it is in part his work.
While the Guantanamo Bay prison represents a gross miscarriage of justice, it's nothing on the scale of what goes on in China. Thousands of people are executed a year in China for relatively minor crimes. China does a Guantanamo Bay twice every day before breakfast. Guantanamo Bay-type stuff is normal and commonplace for the whole of China.
This isn't comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing an apple to an orchard of apples.
Slashdot Mirror
No, you're making yourself look silly by not RTFA! What you're really complaining about is they way that the Slashdot headline presented his view, not what he said. Apparently as is quite common the headline and summary contains spin not present in the original source. This does not make him look silly, it makes you and slashdot's editors look silly.
Sheesh, chill out dude... I wasn't trying to piss anyone off.
There should be an IEEE sarcasm protocol. You know, like in TCP/IP with ACK packets, you should sent an RUSERIOUS packet to which I could send an ACK or NEG. You don't want to have to lose any data if your sarcasm detector isn't receiving properly.
Silly poster - I WAS KIDDING
Sheesh, you guys
Now we can finally get rid of those pesky gas taxes!
It's just kind of odd that we let the same companies that we spent $N billion dollars splitting up slowly merge back together just because there isn't enough political will to stop it. Yesterday a Baby Bell bought AT&T long distance back.
BTW, interesting that you like Zell Miller but thought Dean is too "full of venom and hate." I'm starting to doubt that's not a rationalization.
Oh, you think someone could do worse than the outgoing Dem leadership?
My only thought: Well, could he possibly be worse than the current Dem leadership?
(As for your other suppositions, it may interest you to know that there are many channels on your television other than Fox News. Try them. Or just try the "off" button.)
No, they can only do this because it's easier for them to detect people that are sharing than people that are downloading. They can easily go out on the net, download a file from someone, record the ip and check if the file is copyrighted to one of their subsidiaries. They cannot (yet) scan everyone in the world's hard drives.
Plus The Economist did endorse Kerry when it was all said and done...
nobody (hardly) uses macs for webserves. If we had been doing that for the past 15 years, well, perhaps there'd be heaps of *known* exploits
No, but since Macs come with a standard Apache build (v. 1.3.29 currently), and we've been using that for web servers for the past 15 years...
If police would do their jobs instead of sitting on their asses at speed traps, we wouldn't need cell phone laws, or studies like this.
So, by analogy, why do we have drunk driving laws? After all, the police weren't "sitting on the asses" they would see everyone who was driving erraticatically, and...
The reason, of course, is the deterrant value of the law is a much less expensive way to reduce dangerous driving than some sort of omnipresent police presence. You can take this too far, of course, but if this argument here is true then it ought to be used with equal force against absolutely any traffic law, especially drunk driving laws which I think most people would think would be absurd to repeal.
They say that spam accounts for so much lost productivity, but they fail to mention that spam has spawned a whole new race of products and services that keep people employed.
This is like saying arson is great for the construction industry. Not to mention firefighters, they would be in much greater demand with more arsonists.
So, get out there and start some fires, people!
At least cite where you copy-and-pasted from. Ingrate.
That's not funny, it's insightful. Raymond is reputedly a big gun nut.
Graphology is not BS. There are still studies on it published regularly.
The reason it is disdained by some scientists and psychologists is not that it is totally invalid, but that it isn't as valid as other kinds of personality tests that are just as easy to administer. Second, it is often easily distorted by those who don't know what they're talking about see it as a totally subjective interpretive test as you might "read the tea leaves", rather than looking for empirically verified correlates.
I knew people that said that the 2nd amendment meant they had the right to bring guns to work.
for example; "Only half of the students said newspapers should be allowed to publish freely without government approval of stories." That is not surprising as they in thier school newspaper do not have the ability to pubilsh without teacher approval
They should not be drawing an analogy between school adminstration and the Unites States Government. This is the BILL OF RIGHTS we're talking about, one of our (ostensibly) most important civic values. Just because you have to ask permission to go to the bathroom, do students think they have to do that outside of school? Obviously not. This is much more serious than just drawing a specious analogy.
"About half the students said the government can restrict any indecent material on the Internet. It can't" That is not surprising as thier internet use at school is severly restricted in what they can see.
Again, the school administration should not be analogized to the United States government. Do the students think that they will have to take an orange bus to work some day? Obviously they do not. Just because internet access in the school library doesn't mean some huge government agency in the bellows of Washington regulates everything you see and do, like we live in some Orwellian dystopia. This is absurd.
Anouther example is with only 83% of the students saying that expression of unpopular views is acceptible, coming from a very nondemocratic enviorment in schoolI can see how that is easily the situation.
WHY SHOULD THEY THINK WE DON'T LIVE IN A DEMOCRACY? Why should it mean that because a school is nondemocratic, then the government of the United States must be nondemocratic?
Meanwhile, insurance rates in this countly are through the roof for buisness getting sued into the ground becasue someone stupid hurt themselves with their product, because the warning label did not state something that should have been common sense
that's because the insurance company is legally liable for what its insurees do, no matter how stupid. (The whole point of insurance.) Wouldn't it be nice the the government was liable for the ignorance of its people?
Which is why we used to have laws against monopoly. Not the past tense. But what do I know, I'm not a lobbiest.
Being that Adams himself worked on the movie before he died, it can't by definition be a bastardization of his work. Since the movie itself falls under the category of "his work." Unless you consider it to be a bastardization of itself, but for that you would get a recursion error.
Most movies don't turn out that great. Movies based on books don't suck any more than the average, but the only difference is that they have higher expectations set on them.
As for the Hitcherhiker's Guide movie, Adams himself worked on the script before his tragic and untimely passing, so it can't by definition be a bastardization of his work, since it is in part his work.
While the Guantanamo Bay prison represents a gross miscarriage of justice, it's nothing on the scale of what goes on in China. Thousands of people are executed a year in China for relatively minor crimes. China does a Guantanamo Bay twice every day before breakfast. Guantanamo Bay-type stuff is normal and commonplace for the whole of China.
This isn't comparing apples to oranges, it's comparing an apple to an orchard of apples.