Aside - I have two traditional hard drives in my PC. They've been spinning almost-nonstop since 2003. Any idea how much longer I have until they crash?
You should check your machine, because they just did.
I also know that regarding situation #1, China won't put up with that shit. If Scientology had started in China this problem would have been solved and over with DECADES ago.
Yeah, because the Tibetan Buddhists no longer exist, and have no global influence whatsoever, right?
So YES, the government of France has effectively decided that the tenets of Scientology are somehow LESS TRUE than the tenets of every recognized religion.
What the fuck? The case had nothing to do with judging the truthiness of Scientology's religious beliefs, it was about fraud (for cold, hard cash) which they committed. They are being judged exactly the same as any other organization that commits fraud.
No. Non-Christians pretending to be Christians ("wolves in sheep's clothing") used Christianity to perpetrate some of the worst atrocities in history for their own personal, evil ends, usually money and power. That includes George Bush; nothing he did marks him as a Christian, no matter that he does in fact profess to be one.
Such a bullshit argument. Ever heard of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy? Unfortunately, you don't get to disown members of your group/clan/religion because they did something bad. The truth is that many actual Christians were involved in committing terrible atrocities.
All Christianity is, is belief in (a certain interpretation) of God. That's all it takes. You can be criminally insane, a brutal dictator, whatever - you can still be a Christian if you believe. And many perpetrators of crimes against humanity did believe.
Obviously Scientology is a laughable pile of dog shit, but how is it any worse than any of the other superstitious cults out there, like Christianity or Islam?
It's not. But Christianity and Islam are pretty fucking evil, so I'm not sure how that gets Scientology off the hook.
It's just like a government response to people putting "Jedi" on their census form - "we've seen the movies too so we know you are bullshitting us".
Well, that response from government would be misguided. The people who put "Jedi" on the census form may be making a joke, but they aren't really bullshitting much. Those people actually do treat Science Fiction as a religion, and the government would be stupid to simply dismiss that societal trend. Especially as it is a census, which is meant to reflect such trends.
Reminds me of people who stop liking a band because its achieved commercial success or stop drinking a craft brew because it's starting to catch on with many people. Pointless, self-defeating, and yes elitist.
As opposed to the profoundly meaningful and useful work you're doing here on slashdot, I suppose?
Does anyone actually "line up" to see a movie when it's first released anymore? Especially these days, Hollywood is putting out utter drivel, so does it really matter if you see it today or in four weeks' time?
I think this might backfire on them. People who might be influenced by marketing buzz to see a movie right away, might forget about it by the time it reaches rental. But if they rent it during the new-release period, they might actually decide to buy it later.
Since when is it "apple hardware" all a mac is, is just a pc parts in a flashy case with the apple logo stamped on it.
A flashy case? I don't think so. Apple uses minimalist, understated case designs. A "flashy case" would be a gamer rig with neon lights and transparent sides, or that Ferrari laptop that goes "vrooom vrooom" when you start it up.
So, it's reasonable to reward someone who has waged war and genocide with exclusive control of the land, but not reasonable to reward exclusive control to someone who cures a disease? Why, just because you say so?
The OSDV is working with multiple jurisdictions, activists, developers and other organizations to bring together 'the best and brightest in technology and policy' to create 'guidelines and specifications for high assurance digital voting services.'
So... ahh... good luck with that. Sounds a lot like swimming through sewerage to me, but I guess somebody has to do it.
But the alternative to calling yourself a Libertarian is not calling yourself a Democrat or Republican. That's a false trichotomy. Why do you have to call yourself anything at all? Defining the term "libertarian" as "not one of the two major parties" voids it of any meaning it might have had. In any case, your position sounds more liberal than it does libertarian. Is that too tainted a term as well?
Slashdot Mirror
Aside - I have two traditional hard drives in my PC. They've been spinning almost-nonstop since 2003. Any idea how much longer I have until they crash?
You should check your machine, because they just did.
You realize that "sheeple" has been in use for more than fifty years?
And how does that make it any better? The word "nigger" has been used for a lot longer than 50 years, too. Both words are about equally tasteful.
You don't walk into a store and tell the janitor what products that the store should stock.
Actually, some people do...
So, you're arguing that crazy fundamentalists and cultists are actually contributing to science today? Good luck with that.
I also know that regarding situation #1, China won't put up with that shit. If Scientology had started in China this problem would have been solved and over with DECADES ago.
Yeah, because the Tibetan Buddhists no longer exist, and have no global influence whatsoever, right?
So YES, the government of France has effectively decided that the tenets of Scientology are somehow LESS TRUE than the tenets of every recognized religion.
What the fuck? The case had nothing to do with judging the truthiness of Scientology's religious beliefs, it was about fraud (for cold, hard cash) which they committed. They are being judged exactly the same as any other organization that commits fraud.
You, Sir, truly are an Operating Thetan of the highest level with your perspicacity.
No. Non-Christians pretending to be Christians ("wolves in sheep's clothing") used Christianity to perpetrate some of the worst atrocities in history for their own personal, evil ends, usually money and power. That includes George Bush; nothing he did marks him as a Christian, no matter that he does in fact profess to be one.
Such a bullshit argument. Ever heard of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy? Unfortunately, you don't get to disown members of your group/clan/religion because they did something bad. The truth is that many actual Christians were involved in committing terrible atrocities.
All Christianity is, is belief in (a certain interpretation) of God. That's all it takes. You can be criminally insane, a brutal dictator, whatever - you can still be a Christian if you believe. And many perpetrators of crimes against humanity did believe.
Obviously Scientology is a laughable pile of dog shit, but how is it any worse than any of the other superstitious cults out there, like Christianity or Islam?
It's not. But Christianity and Islam are pretty fucking evil, so I'm not sure how that gets Scientology off the hook.
It's just like a government response to people putting "Jedi" on their census form - "we've seen the movies too so we know you are bullshitting us".
Well, that response from government would be misguided. The people who put "Jedi" on the census form may be making a joke, but they aren't really bullshitting much. Those people actually do treat Science Fiction as a religion, and the government would be stupid to simply dismiss that societal trend. Especially as it is a census, which is meant to reflect such trends.
Reminds me of people who stop liking a band because its achieved commercial success or stop drinking a craft brew because it's starting to catch on with many people. Pointless, self-defeating, and yes elitist.
As opposed to the profoundly meaningful and useful work you're doing here on slashdot, I suppose?
I agree about the money portion, but it's already apparently hit the nytimes. Isn't that "main stream media in the states" ?
The New York Times is only read by elitist liberals with advanced degrees. Real Americans get their news from Oprah and American Idol.
Does anyone actually "line up" to see a movie when it's first released anymore? Especially these days, Hollywood is putting out utter drivel, so does it really matter if you see it today or in four weeks' time?
I think this might backfire on them. People who might be influenced by marketing buzz to see a movie right away, might forget about it by the time it reaches rental. But if they rent it during the new-release period, they might actually decide to buy it later.
Since when is it "apple hardware" all a mac is, is just a pc parts in a flashy case with the apple logo stamped on it.
A flashy case? I don't think so. Apple uses minimalist, understated case designs. A "flashy case" would be a gamer rig with neon lights and transparent sides, or that Ferrari laptop that goes "vrooom vrooom" when you start it up.
Good for them.
Huh, why good? I don't think it's good when shady dishonest businesses stay in business.
What the hell does Scott Adams have to do with anything?
So, it's reasonable to reward someone who has waged war and genocide with exclusive control of the land, but not reasonable to reward exclusive control to someone who cures a disease? Why, just because you say so?
You say this:
BUT if it's good then I will buy it.
But then immediately contradict yourself with this:
Just take a gander of what's on my shelf:
- Star Trek TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY, ENT
Only unhappy people are techies
That's not true. I've met some techies who are happy... well, one or two, maybe. Oh god, kill me now.
The OSDV is working with multiple jurisdictions, activists, developers and other organizations to bring together 'the best and brightest in technology and policy' to create 'guidelines and specifications for high assurance digital voting services.'
So... ahh... good luck with that. Sounds a lot like swimming through sewerage to me, but I guess somebody has to do it.
I don't think WinFS has been nuked yet.
No, the Windows Failure System is still going strong.
Engineering a new filesystem is hard and expensive.
It's so hard, it often makes the developers murder their (ex) girlfriends and remove the seats of their cars.
Microsoft obviously wasnt on board for any of this, and without the momentum behind ZFS it never will.
Microsoft is never on board for anything useful, so I'm not sure it really makes any difference.
I thought it referred to "Zaphod, For Sure!" which is Zaphod Beeblebrox's Re-election slogan.
But the alternative to calling yourself a Libertarian is not calling yourself a Democrat or Republican. That's a false trichotomy. Why do you have to call yourself anything at all? Defining the term "libertarian" as "not one of the two major parties" voids it of any meaning it might have had. In any case, your position sounds more liberal than it does libertarian. Is that too tainted a term as well?