Yes, evolution, it's just that instead of natural environmental forces determining fitness, it's the scientist. Darwin certainly saw artificial selection (animal breeding) as a form of evolution, and even used it as an example.
Here's a hint. Genes have no brains. They have no way of knowing that they're being selected for or against by, say, colder winters, or because a scientist is invoking an arbitrary set of standards. In either case, it is evolutionary forces shaping the hereditary units.
There's no denying India has a long way to go, but those who follow her history know that she has come a long way. Instead of turning into basket cases like Pakistan and Bangladesh, India has maintained a civil, democratic government even in the face of substantial hardship. Unlike so many other of the former British possessions India has not turned into a basket case, and has steadily been improving.
There were and remain solid reasons to remain in good stead with India. It's the country that's going to keep the schizophrenic state, Pakistan, in line and is also the only substantial military and economic competitor to China in the region. As well, there is over a half a century of reasonablly good relations between the two countries.
The Japanese leadership wasn't prepared to surrender even after Hiroshima, and was still hesitant to do so after Nagasaki, and it was the direct intervention of the Emperor that finally forced the Japanese government's hand.
Bullshit stories about Japan seeking a peaceful resolution in the weeks leading up to the attacks are pretty easily falsified by the behavior of the Japanese government at the time, which even after spectacular attacks on two of its cities still needed the Emperor to basically force the issue for them to raise the white flag.
Because India is a democratic country (for the most part) which has no intentions of using such a delivery system to unilaterally attack its neighbors. Anyone with any knowledge of the region can figure out pretty fast that the development of ICBMs is a message straight at Beijing, which India still has unresolved territorial disputes with.
And PJ has never hid her bias towards open source. That's why Groklaw was founded, for goodness sake. Sadly, she is also the favorite whipping boy (girl, sorry PJ) of every shill and astroturfer, particularly when they're outed. She's been honest from the beginning, but these guys, well, they're paid liars.
And generally where there is a conflict, a journalist should say so right from the outset. But we've seen this time and time again, mainly because guys like Mueller are not actually journalists at all. They're shills.
By giving Mueller a free pass and attacking PJ instead. PJ's done a helluva lot of good, and what the fuck has Mueller ever done other than be an apologist for companies that should taken out back and beaten for their conduct.
I've just got to ask, are you mentally handicapped, because the article demonstrates that Mueller's pro-Oracle articles have an explanation. He's in their employ.
These are all pretty obscure acts that the for-profit guys won't touch, so what exactly is the problem? And if it does give some of these acts greater exposure why are you upset? If the big media companies wouldn't touch these acts, then they've lost nothing.
Unless they're scares the A&R guys are now as pointless as testicles on a hen, and talent is being ignored in favor of the talentless dreck they foist on everyone.
They also have this tendency to fuck artists over, which is why even very big acts have to haul their thieving asses into court over unpaid royalties and other contract breaches. Anyone who praises record companies should review Robert Fripp's multi-year campaign to get Universal/UMG to provide accurate royalty figures and explain how King Crimson songs had got onto Universal-affiliated download services width out the rights holders' permission (and again being unable to report sales).
Oh BS. These asshole have no problem when it's CBC radio broadcasting jazz or Classical, which it's been doing longer than any of the guys have been around. If they had a problem why didn't they go after CBC 20 years ago?
I suppose the only thing holding companies like Apple back is the fact that entertainment is a risky business. Look at the $200 million hit Disney took on John Carter. Still, I think as the studios continue to play hardball, it is inevitable that eventually guys like Apple and Amazon will just give Hollywood a big "f you" and forge their own course. And it isn't a bad thing. The big studios haven't had meaningful competition other than their own incestuous cabal for decades. Might be just what they needed.
At some point it isn't going to matter. When you get a company like Apple with vast amounts of cash reserves and basically it's own distribution system, the lights will go on and the decision will be made to start creating more content. While the networks and the major studios try to control when you can watch something and where you can watch it, the new media will simply come in, start delivering people what they want, and it will be irrelevant.
These guys are literally fiddling while Rome burns. Each step along the way they make themselves more and more irrelevant. Hell, I haven't actually sat down and watched an actual TV show from our satellite in a couple of weeks, and the wife and I are seriously contemplating just ditching it entirely. We're paying like a $100 a month for bad TV, boring sports and the same movies shown again and again and again.
Spoken like someone who isn't a writer. I lost the first half of a story I wrote to the evils of hard drive failure, and while I had my plot notes, it never came out as good as the first time.
Slashdot Mirror
Or Google could just block access to YouTube from German IPs and let them see what they've really won.
Yes, evolution, it's just that instead of natural environmental forces determining fitness, it's the scientist. Darwin certainly saw artificial selection (animal breeding) as a form of evolution, and even used it as an example.
Here's a hint. Genes have no brains. They have no way of knowing that they're being selected for or against by, say, colder winters, or because a scientist is invoking an arbitrary set of standards. In either case, it is evolutionary forces shaping the hereditary units.
There's no denying India has a long way to go, but those who follow her history know that she has come a long way. Instead of turning into basket cases like Pakistan and Bangladesh, India has maintained a civil, democratic government even in the face of substantial hardship. Unlike so many other of the former British possessions India has not turned into a basket case, and has steadily been improving.
There were and remain solid reasons to remain in good stead with India. It's the country that's going to keep the schizophrenic state, Pakistan, in line and is also the only substantial military and economic competitor to China in the region. As well, there is over a half a century of reasonablly good relations between the two countries.
I expect the current Kim is walking a tightrope, and at least until he's a bit older, will basically be doing what he's told.
The Japanese leadership wasn't prepared to surrender even after Hiroshima, and was still hesitant to do so after Nagasaki, and it was the direct intervention of the Emperor that finally forced the Japanese government's hand.
Bullshit stories about Japan seeking a peaceful resolution in the weeks leading up to the attacks are pretty easily falsified by the behavior of the Japanese government at the time, which even after spectacular attacks on two of its cities still needed the Emperor to basically force the issue for them to raise the white flag.
Because India is a democratic country (for the most part) which has no intentions of using such a delivery system to unilaterally attack its neighbors. Anyone with any knowledge of the region can figure out pretty fast that the development of ICBMs is a message straight at Beijing, which India still has unresolved territorial disputes with.
The UK has had no problem selling its citizens' rights up the river before, why would this time be any different?
And when you can prove that PJ is an IBM employee...
Bullshit, you liar. Time and time again this accusation has been made, but not once has anyone ever proven it.
Go back to using your SCO stock to wipe your ass, mouth, and anywhere else the excrement leaks out.
And PJ has never hid her bias towards open source. That's why Groklaw was founded, for goodness sake. Sadly, she is also the favorite whipping boy (girl, sorry PJ) of every shill and astroturfer, particularly when they're outed. She's been honest from the beginning, but these guys, well, they're paid liars.
And generally where there is a conflict, a journalist should say so right from the outset. But we've seen this time and time again, mainly because guys like Mueller are not actually journalists at all. They're shills.
Ah look, another disgruntled SCO investor shooting the messenger.
By giving Mueller a free pass and attacking PJ instead. PJ's done a helluva lot of good, and what the fuck has Mueller ever done other than be an apologist for companies that should taken out back and beaten for their conduct.
I've just got to ask, are you mentally handicapped, because the article demonstrates that Mueller's pro-Oracle articles have an explanation. He's in their employ.
As to you, well, it's clear you're just a moron.
These are all pretty obscure acts that the for-profit guys won't touch, so what exactly is the problem? And if it does give some of these acts greater exposure why are you upset? If the big media companies wouldn't touch these acts, then they've lost nothing.
Unless they're scares the A&R guys are now as pointless as testicles on a hen, and talent is being ignored in favor of the talentless dreck they foist on everyone.
They also have this tendency to fuck artists over, which is why even very big acts have to haul their thieving asses into court over unpaid royalties and other contract breaches. Anyone who praises record companies should review Robert Fripp's multi-year campaign to get Universal/UMG to provide accurate royalty figures and explain how King Crimson songs had got onto Universal-affiliated download services width out the rights holders' permission (and again being unable to report sales).
Oh BS. These asshole have no problem when it's CBC radio broadcasting jazz or Classical, which it's been doing longer than any of the guys have been around. If they had a problem why didn't they go after CBC 20 years ago?
And when she gets to court and the extent of her own misdeeds and mental issues are revealed and the case is thrown out.
Except it's likely a fabrication and she's a con artist and a mental case.
I suppose the only thing holding companies like Apple back is the fact that entertainment is a risky business. Look at the $200 million hit Disney took on John Carter. Still, I think as the studios continue to play hardball, it is inevitable that eventually guys like Apple and Amazon will just give Hollywood a big "f you" and forge their own course. And it isn't a bad thing. The big studios haven't had meaningful competition other than their own incestuous cabal for decades. Might be just what they needed.
At some point it isn't going to matter. When you get a company like Apple with vast amounts of cash reserves and basically it's own distribution system, the lights will go on and the decision will be made to start creating more content. While the networks and the major studios try to control when you can watch something and where you can watch it, the new media will simply come in, start delivering people what they want, and it will be irrelevant.
These guys are literally fiddling while Rome burns. Each step along the way they make themselves more and more irrelevant. Hell, I haven't actually sat down and watched an actual TV show from our satellite in a couple of weeks, and the wife and I are seriously contemplating just ditching it entirely. We're paying like a $100 a month for bad TV, boring sports and the same movies shown again and again and again.
Spoken like someone who isn't a writer. I lost the first half of a story I wrote to the evils of hard drive failure, and while I had my plot notes, it never came out as good as the first time.
Darwin never advocated Social Darwinism. Look elsewhere for the eugenicists.
And the fact that your contributing to the breaking of herd immunity hasn't entered your equation, I gather.