Oh boy, do I want Windows 8 to be a massive failure!
Unfortunately, I think that Microsoft has enough resources hedge their bets. Like when Intel (another giant) made the crappy Pentium 4, but they didn't collapse, because they had a team in Israel developing a good alternative micro-architecture.
Still, I think we should concentrate efforts now - by evangelizing Ubuntu and Chrome/Firefox.
And how many people voted for Obama because he is black?
Yes. They would have to take into account a higher vote among blacks, a higher turnout of blacks, and the white progressives who thought it would be awesome to have a black president - meaning that some progressives who would previously not be bothered to vote decided to get out their vote.
Besides, a correlation between "nigger" searches and poor Obama voting does _not_ imply causation.
Other explanations exist. For example, maybe people who hate Obama's left-wing policies could become so angry at him that they would irrationally offend him by calling him "nigger". So the causation is in the other direction. And I think this is much more likely.
A correlation between "nigger" searches and poor Obama voting does _not_ imply causation.
Other explanations exist. For example, maybe people who hate Obama's left-wing policies could become so angry at him that they would call him the most offensive name they could come up with - and that is "nigger". In fact, I think this is much more likely.
The last claim is true. Sexuality is confusing, and a lot of teenagers might think they're X when really they're Y, or even Z. Having more knowledge about the spectrum of human sexual behaviour just helps them solve their confusion quicker. Everything else in that paragraph is just plain bullshit.
How so? Simply claiming "bullshit" doesn't do.
If homosexuals/bisexuals were not forced by public opinion into hiding and marginalizing their sexual behaviour (and despite how gay and free the big cities are, it's still a thing in most countries, even the most progressive ones), it would be safer, much more like heterosexual dating patterns.
What's the evidence for that? And, in fact, male-on-male sex has a much greater chance of transmitting diseases than normal sex.
Anyone with basic comprehension skills will realize within moments of reading/watching an "It Get's Better" testimonial that it has NOTHING to do WHATSOEVER with "converting" or "corrupting" young people into trying something they might not normally do, and EVERYTHING to do with telling young LGBT people who need to deal with fuckhead parents and communities with attitudes like yours, that they shouldn't despair, and definitely SHOULD NOT commit suicide, but rather soldier on till they become independent adults, then GTFO that cow town, and into the big city.
Having seen videos in their website, it does tell that "coming out" is good. That obviously encourage confused teens to engage in sexual acts they currently think would be fun.
Or cut down on population. Which is doable without resorting to war or murder (but, I repeat myself). Put the money into sex ed uncontaminated by religion, free prophylactics, and rewards for not having children. Positive reinforcements, not negative like China did.
There is no global overpopulation. Some places (such as Japan) are already experiencing population aging and decline, which is bad in many ways. Other places (such as the USA and specially Europe) already have sub-replacement fertility rates, and their population only grows because of demographic lag and immigration. It is predicted the the European Union population (now at 503M) will reach zero natural population increase by 2015 and zero total population increase in 2035 (at 520M), then start declining.
The USA will grow from 310M in 2010 to 403M in 2050. [1] Asia will increase from 4.2B in 2010 to 5.1B in 2050, then start declining. [2]
The only region that is really growing is Africa. It will increase from 1B in 2010 to 2.2B in 2050. [2] Then its population density will be 67/km2. [3] Compare that to the current population density in Portugal (115/km2), in South Korea (487/km2) and in Taiwan (641/km2). [4]
Global population is predicted to grow from 7B in 2011 to 9B in 2050 and 10B in 2100 [5] and start falling soon after [6].
And according to [7], 40-50% of America-produced food is thrown away. According to [8], 1/3 of the world food is thrown away. And this does not take into account that people eat, just for pleasure, excessive quantities of resource-intensive food (such as meat). If Americans/Europeans want to help the poor, an easy way would be to decrease (say, by 30%) their diet of meat. This will immediately reduce food demand and, for double bonus, the saved money can be donated to charity. And much arable land is wasted on subsidized inefficient corn-based ethanol. You can lobby your government to stop that.
Plus, there does not seem to be a negative correlation between population density and GDP per capita. [9]
African hunger is not caused by overpopulation. It is caused by corrupt and authoritarian governments, and by guerrillas/terrorists motivated by Marxism, Islamism, ethnic hate or simply greed.
Overpopulation fear-mongering is very old - at least as old as Malthus. One of its more recent incarnations was the 1968 book "The Population Bomb", which predicted mass starvation to occur in the 1970s.
Anyway, for better or for worse, there is already strong action taken by individuals, foundations, and Western governments, to restrict fertility in Africa.
Why don't you ever try to quote your arguments, or paraphrase the gist of them?
Because I don't think such a complex topic could be summarized to a paragraph.
Why do you just place cryptic links full of wordspam agreeing with your world-veiw?
Ad hominem.
An easy summary of what your link has to say is this:"I am a gay man, and therefore I speak for all gays;
I don't see how you could think that this is what the text means.
And my reply to that argument is: "Riiiiiight... Totally only defensively, and your deeply held religious beliefs TOTALLY have more importance than my life and my freedom
We are talking about the right to freedom of expression (homosexual militants are very keen to criminalize Christian viewpoints as "hate speech"), freedom to choose who will take care of your children (homosexual militants are keen to criminalize workplace "prejudice" based on sexual acts or sexual "Identity" - this means that if the teacher of your 10-yeard-old decides to work dressed like a drag queen, you are forbidden by law to do anything about it).
The whole strategy of the Left in the marriage debate is to shout out their opponents with attacks of "idiocy" and "bigotry". Since you have walked down that path, I see no point in arguing with you. As Aristotle used to say, meaningful debate requires both sides to seek the Truth.
IF the argument stood on its own then it wouldn't need to title "A Gay man decries gay rights". Why does it matter that the guy is gay?
Because some people have the worldview that heterosexuals hate homosexuals. So they never read anything pro-traditional-marriage written by a heterosexual. That text, having the title it has, could destroy that barrier and actually be _read_ by people, so they can think for themselves.
For women, earning the same as men. Not having our right over our own bodies and choice over childbirth being decided by men. Not having a government run by mostly men. Not being discriminated against in the workforce. Better healthcare. Elimination of the rape culture.
I have seen no evidence that women and men who have the same education, the same work experience and the same priorities are paid differently. On the contrary, I have seen studies that say that women who are paid less than men actually chose that - because, when they negotiate working agreements, they prefer better working conditions (such as not having to work overtime, having more time for their children) than high salary.
Regarding abortion, you should know that the percentage of pro-lifers is equal among women and men.
Regarding "government run by men". Most women don't seem to have a problem with that, given that they vote for men. Women are a majority of the voters.
And "rape culture"? Last I checked, rapists are the most despised criminals in the world. Even other criminals _hate_ them.
I know right? Like how you apparently support them! And apparently it's just the militant ones you don't like, because apparently they're giving the media this idea that they're poor victims! How dare those kids kill themselves after years of homophobic bullying, they're giving the world the wrong impression about how much they are respected!
Plus of course society is still riddled with homophobia. They may not lock you up but they can be pretty horrible to you.
I don't think so. The vast majority of people respect homosexuals. The homosexual militancy tries to project an image of poor victims, but, in 2012, that is not so. Not in America or Europe. I think that, just like the feminist movement, the homosexual militancy has already achieved its reasonable goals and all they have left are unreasonable goals.
In places like Iran, though, homosexuals are unfortunately treated awfully.
I meant promoting a agricultural monoculture. Like having three strains of wheat instead of 3 thousand, each with huge genetic variability inside of them.
I don't think your fear makes sense. As I said, there are many private companies and public institutions performing genetic engineering around the world. Each of then will probably have many strains of wheat, designed for different climatic/economic conditions.
Add to that, the fact that organic food is growing fast [1]. Multiple strains of organic wheat will be grown for the organic market.
And if all that wasn't enough... the solution would be to lobby governments to keep a small reserve backup for each important strain of wheat.
Therefore, using "monoculture" as an argument against GMO is absurd.
The bizarre part is that some people, who seam not to have used Emacs for years, still claim it is slow. It _was_ slow, back when 8 Megabytes was a lot of memory. These days it is fast.
And I say that as a guy who used to remove every unneeded byte from his riced Gentoo box. Even though I now use Ubuntu, I still have some speed-freakery inside.
Slashdot Mirror
Please go spam somewhere else.
We will not buy your product because of spam.
There should be a -1 SPAM mod, which would take TWO points out of Karma.
Oh boy, do I want Windows 8 to be a massive failure!
Unfortunately, I think that Microsoft has enough resources hedge their bets.
Like when Intel (another giant) made the crappy Pentium 4, but they didn't collapse,
because they had a team in Israel developing a good alternative micro-architecture.
Still, I think we should concentrate efforts now - by evangelizing Ubuntu and Chrome/Firefox.
If good gives up, evil prevails.
And how many people voted for Obama because he is black?
Yes. They would have to take into account a higher vote among blacks, a higher turnout of blacks, and the white progressives who thought it would be awesome to have a black president - meaning that some progressives who would previously not be bothered to vote decided to get out their vote.
Besides, a correlation between "nigger" searches and poor Obama voting does _not_ imply causation.
Other explanations exist. For example, maybe people who hate Obama's left-wing policies could become so angry at him that they would irrationally offend him by calling him "nigger". So the causation is in the other direction. And I think this is much more likely.
A correlation between "nigger" searches and poor Obama voting does _not_ imply causation.
Other explanations exist. For example, maybe people who hate Obama's left-wing policies could become so angry at him that they would call him the most offensive name they could come up with - and that is "nigger". In fact, I think this is much more likely.
The last claim is true. Sexuality is confusing, and a lot of teenagers might think they're X when really they're Y, or even Z. Having more knowledge about the spectrum of human sexual behaviour just helps them solve their confusion quicker. Everything else in that paragraph is just plain bullshit.
How so? Simply claiming "bullshit" doesn't do.
If homosexuals/bisexuals were not forced by public opinion into hiding and marginalizing their sexual behaviour (and despite how gay and free the big cities are, it's still a thing in most countries, even the most progressive ones), it would be safer, much more like heterosexual dating patterns.
What's the evidence for that?
And, in fact, male-on-male sex has a much greater chance of transmitting diseases than normal sex.
Anyone with basic comprehension skills will realize within moments of reading/watching an "It Get's Better" testimonial that it has NOTHING to do WHATSOEVER with "converting" or "corrupting" young people into trying something they might not normally do, and EVERYTHING to do with telling young LGBT people who need to deal with fuckhead parents and communities with attitudes like yours, that they shouldn't despair, and definitely SHOULD NOT commit suicide, but rather soldier on till they become independent adults, then GTFO that cow town, and into the big city.
Having seen videos in their website, it does tell that "coming out" is good. That obviously encourage confused teens to engage in sexual acts they currently think would be fun.
Or cut down on population. Which is doable without resorting to war or murder (but, I repeat myself). Put the money into sex ed uncontaminated by religion, free prophylactics, and rewards for not having children. Positive reinforcements, not negative like China did.
There is no global overpopulation. Some places (such as Japan) are already experiencing population aging and decline, which is bad in many ways. Other places (such as the USA and specially Europe) already have sub-replacement fertility rates, and their population only grows because of demographic lag and immigration. It is predicted the the European Union population (now at 503M) will reach zero natural population increase by 2015 and zero total population increase in 2035 (at 520M), then start declining.
The USA will grow from 310M in 2010 to 403M in 2050. [1]
Asia will increase from 4.2B in 2010 to 5.1B in 2050, then start declining. [2]
The only region that is really growing is Africa. It will increase from 1B in 2010 to 2.2B in 2050. [2] Then its population density will be 67/km2. [3] Compare that to the current population density in Portugal (115/km2), in South Korea (487/km2) and in Taiwan (641/km2). [4]
Global population is predicted to grow from 7B in 2011 to 9B in 2050 and 10B in 2100 [5] and start falling soon after [6].
And according to [7], 40-50% of America-produced food is thrown away. According to [8], 1/3 of the world food is thrown away.
And this does not take into account that people eat, just for pleasure, excessive quantities of resource-intensive food (such as meat). If Americans/Europeans want to help the poor, an easy way would be to decrease (say, by 30%) their diet of meat. This will immediately reduce food demand and, for double bonus, the saved money can be donated to charity. And much arable land is wasted on subsidized inefficient corn-based ethanol. You can lobby your government to stop that.
Plus, there does not seem to be a negative correlation between population density and GDP per capita. [9]
African hunger is not caused by overpopulation. It is caused by corrupt and authoritarian governments, and by guerrillas/terrorists motivated by Marxism, Islamism, ethnic hate or simply greed.
Overpopulation fear-mongering is very old - at least as old as Malthus. One of its more recent incarnations was the 1968 book "The Population Bomb", which predicted mass starvation to occur in the 1970s.
Anyway, for better or for worse, there is already strong action taken by individuals, foundations, and Western governments, to restrict fertility in Africa.
1 : esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_11.htm
2 : esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_2.htm
3 : According to [2], Africa will have 2.2B people in 2050, and according to Google[10] and Wikipedia [11], the area of Africa is 30,221,532 km2
4 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density
5 : esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_1.htm
6 : esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Analytical-Figures/htm/fig_6.htm
7 : http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?id=56376-us-wastes-half
8 : http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/74192/icode/
9 : http://sanamagan.wordpress.com/2011/03/10/population-population-density-gdp-per-capita-ppp/
10 : https://www.google.com.br/search?q=africa+area
11 : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Africa
Why don't you ever try to quote your arguments, or paraphrase the gist of them?
Because I don't think such a complex topic could be summarized to a paragraph.
Why do you just place cryptic links full of wordspam agreeing with your world-veiw?
Ad hominem.
An easy summary of what your link has to say is this:"I am a gay man, and therefore I speak for all gays;
I don't see how you could think that this is what the text means.
And my reply to that argument is: "Riiiiiight... Totally only defensively, and your deeply held religious beliefs TOTALLY have more importance than my life and my freedom
We are talking about the right to freedom of expression (homosexual militants are very keen to criminalize Christian viewpoints as "hate speech"), freedom to choose who will take care of your children (homosexual militants are keen to criminalize workplace "prejudice" based on sexual acts or sexual "Identity" - this means that if the teacher of your 10-yeard-old decides to work dressed like a drag queen, you are forbidden by law to do anything about it).
The whole strategy of the Left in the marriage debate is to shout out their opponents with attacks of "idiocy" and "bigotry".
Since you have walked down that path, I see no point in arguing with you. As Aristotle used to say, meaningful debate requires both sides to seek the Truth.
Being able to redefine "marriage" is not a right.
If that was so, then polygamous/polyandrous/incestuous groups would have the same right.
The whole homosexual militancy is devoid of rational arguments - it is based entirely on
"shut up you ******* bigot, we demand our rights!".
IF the argument stood on its own then it wouldn't need to title "A Gay man decries gay rights". Why does it matter that the guy is gay?
Because some people have the worldview that heterosexuals hate homosexuals. So they never read anything pro-traditional-marriage
written by a heterosexual. That text, having the title it has, could destroy that barrier and actually be _read_ by people, so they can think
for themselves.
For women, earning the same as men. Not having our right over our own bodies and choice over childbirth being decided by men. Not having a government run by mostly men. Not being discriminated against in the workforce. Better healthcare. Elimination of the rape culture.
I have seen no evidence that women and men who have the same education, the same work experience and the same priorities are paid differently. On the contrary, I have seen studies that say that women who are paid less than men actually chose that - because, when they negotiate working agreements, they prefer better working conditions (such as not having to work overtime, having more time for their children) than high salary.
Regarding abortion, you should know that the percentage of pro-lifers is equal among women and men.
Regarding "government run by men". Most women don't seem to have a problem with that, given that they vote for men. Women are a majority of the voters.
And "rape culture"? Last I checked, rapists are the most despised criminals in the world. Even other criminals _hate_ them.
I know right? Like how you apparently support them! And apparently it's just the militant ones you don't like, because apparently they're giving the media this idea that they're poor victims! How dare those kids kill themselves after years of homophobic bullying, they're giving the world the wrong impression about how much they are respected!
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/students-need-protection-from-pro-gay-education
You weren't involved in making America or Europe a better place than Iran, kindly do shut the fuck up about those whose progress you laud.
I think you can do better than that cheap ad hominem.
And in the case of feminists or homosexual militancy, what reasonable goal do they have left?
Arguments stand on their own.
Ad hominem attacks are shameful.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Well I can't say much on the topic because I don't live in the UK, but they still don't allow gay couples to get married, for example.
Please read http://frexpression.wordpress.com/2010/10/20/a-gay-man-decries-gay-rights/. Its author is an atheist homosexual.
Plus of course society is still riddled with homophobia. They may not lock you up but they can be pretty horrible to you.
I don't think so. The vast majority of people respect homosexuals.
The homosexual militancy tries to project an image of poor victims,
but, in 2012, that is not so. Not in America or Europe. I think that,
just like the feminist movement, the homosexual militancy has already
achieved its reasonable goals and all they have left are unreasonable goals.
In places like Iran, though, homosexuals are unfortunately treated awfully.
Even though full equality may be a few steps away
Equality in what sense?
We did it because of American pressure; they refused to cooperate with us if we didn't go along with loony McCarthyism
Why do you call it "loony"?
I meant promoting a agricultural monoculture. Like having three strains of wheat instead of 3 thousand, each with huge genetic variability inside of them.
I don't think your fear makes sense. As I said, there are many private companies and public institutions performing genetic engineering around the world. Each of then will probably have many strains of wheat, designed for different climatic/economic conditions.
Add to that, the fact that organic food is growing fast [1]. Multiple strains of organic wheat will be grown for the organic market.
And if all that wasn't enough... the solution would be to lobby governments to keep a small reserve backup for each important
strain of wheat.
Therefore, using "monoculture" as an argument against GMO is absurd.
1 : http://www.ota.com/organic/mt/business.html
because GMOs are pretty much inherently a monoculture
What? There are many private companies and public institutions performing genetic engineering around the world.
lets just ignore Hitler.
And Stalin,and Mao, who managed to be even worse than Hitler.
Diablo III seems to play fine under Wine: http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=25588
And I heard that netflix works on Android. Presumably you could install Android x86 in a VM.
Eight Megabytes And Constantly Swapping
The bizarre part is that some people, who seam not to have used Emacs for years,
still claim it is slow. It _was_ slow, back when 8 Megabytes was a lot of memory.
These days it is fast.
And I say that as a guy who used to remove every unneeded byte from his
riced Gentoo box. Even though I now use Ubuntu, I still have some speed-freakery
inside.
Emacs does that via TRAMP.