I was unaware that it was US soldiers that were blowing themselves up in crowded civilian areas at the behest of bush.
I must not be blinded enough by fundamentalist (extreme? nah...) leftist rhetoric, my bad.
Youre misusing (probably intentionally, but that makes it fit your argument) the popular term "fundamentalist christian" by suggesting they are extremists. Sort of like the extremist (see how I am specific?) muslims that advocate, I mean declared war on all non-muslims, and the non-extremists simply try to convert people.
Good luck with the nuts in your office, if they truly are as radical as you say they are.
Well, the original poster was actually being somewhat agreeable with the pro-life argument that he so fervently opposes by equating war, death row inmates, and unborn babies as more or less the same because "they all end with death".
The houses analogy was to show that despite the end result being the same (burned house), the examples were far from the same event. It doesnt make sense to compare things like that.
When was the last time an anti-abortion, pro-war advocate chatted you up about how awesome it was that innocent civilians were being killed by their own countrymen? The key word separating people here is "innocent".
I dont mean to use your words against you, just to illustrate my point here:
Tell that to the 30,000+ [aborted fetuses] who died for no other reason than being [concieved] in the wrong [woman].
Yeah, so? Burning a house down with a family inside and burning the house down without the family inside both have the same outcome: the house is burned down. That doesnt mean that they are equal events. Speaking of fallacies, the one you brought up would be cum hoc ergo propter hoc. "Pro-Lifers approve of war and the death that results from it, therefore they are hypocrites for being pro-life". Nice.
My first post was just to point out the obvious differences separating your examples, but you choose to work around logic. You can keep pretending everyone you dont agree with is a hypocrite, I dont really care.
Its a self-imposed "requirement" that they met simply to recieve federal funding.
Evil, malevolant Bush never decreed from his mountain that harvesting stem cells from embryos were banned, or sent you to prison, or damned your soul to eternal torment. There is simply no federal funding on the stem cell research when harvested from an embryo.
Scientists actually made new discoveries and made their methods more efficient because of the legislation! Imagine if there were restrictions placed on oil research back when it was first discovered as a fuel source. Either people would have researched other solutions or private investors would have furthered the original research.
Science doesnt come to a complete halt when the US government decides not to pay for it.
There doesnt have to be a problem, some people just like to complain about nothing.
I agree with your thought completely. The science has progressed further because of the "limitation" (that stops no one from doing their own privately-funded research) placed on it, not despite it.
This sounds like another 'PC gaming or no gaming' rant.
These are two completely different markets.
At one time, I played only PC games. Then I played PC and console games. Now I only play console games. Consoles are not wrong, they are just another choice.
PCs are there for people such as yourself that (based on your above post) base their purchases on graphics. Consoles are available for those who dont feel the same way.
Was anyone really expecting this to be a quality film? All the hype I saw was just because the movie was called Snakes on a Plane.
There was no incredible hype for Shaft starring Samuel L Jackson, so I dont think that his involvement really had anything to do with it. I admit that the title is pretty neat, but while I thought the title was neat, I also thought that the plot sounded weak and uninteresting.
Figures, someone who knows what theyre talking about and there are no mods in sight.
But yeah, it is hard to tell with articles like this. I read one a few months back about the army's "SuprNet".
How about in stead of a Wii and five games, or an Xbox2 and two games, or any other combination that comes out at $600, you just buy what you want and then save the rest?
It seems impossible, but thats because it is.
From years of working for the government in IT, I know that it is practically SOP to push some insane requirement on everyone, delay it a few times, and then go into panic mode when everything isnt 100% at the deadline.
This happens ALL the time.
Also, I didnt read the document detailing the agencies affected by this, but "US Government" does not mean everyone. It could simply be a few agencies that must meet this requirement. This probably also wont affect all the branches of military (and if it does, it will be handled by those branches anyway). It is probably a much smaller job than it is made out to be (though like I said, i didnt RTFA).
If you have to spend $50 to purchase Super Mario RPG on ebay, then apparently those few MB from 10 years ago are worth more than the miniscule amount of bandwidth it takes to move them.
The size of the data and age are completely irrelevant. If its worth money, theyre going to sell it for what it is worth, perhaps more, perhaps even a lot less.
Not to say that Nintendo is entirely truthful, but they have a good track record in understating the real-world performance of their consoles. Hell, a gamecube launch title (Rogue Leader) surpassed their pre-launch in-game polygon announcments.
What I find really amazing is that they managed to pack at least double the performance of a Gamecube (this has been known for quite some time) into a chassis even smaller than the Gamecube.
Look at THIS image and marvel at what Nintendo's engineers are capable of.
It would be great for everyone to give what they can to help those in need, but in the end it comes down to solitary individuals making the decision. It cant be helped that people will think of themselves.
But I am not saying it is useless to help others, I'm just saying that you can only do so much. When you are doing what you think you are able, then you need to be able to find gratification in that and not linger unhappily on the fact that you are limited in your means.
Slashdot Mirror
I was unaware that it was US soldiers that were blowing themselves up in crowded civilian areas at the behest of bush.
I must not be blinded enough by fundamentalist (extreme? nah...) leftist rhetoric, my bad.
Youre misusing (probably intentionally, but that makes it fit your argument) the popular term "fundamentalist christian" by suggesting they are extremists. Sort of like the extremist (see how I am specific?) muslims that advocate, I mean declared war on all non-muslims, and the non-extremists simply try to convert people.
Good luck with the nuts in your office, if they truly are as radical as you say they are.
Well, the original poster was actually being somewhat agreeable with the pro-life argument that he so fervently opposes by equating war, death row inmates, and unborn babies as more or less the same because "they all end with death".
The houses analogy was to show that despite the end result being the same (burned house), the examples were far from the same event. It doesnt make sense to compare things like that.
When was the last time an anti-abortion, pro-war advocate chatted you up about how awesome it was that innocent civilians were being killed by their own countrymen? The key word separating people here is "innocent".
I dont mean to use your words against you, just to illustrate my point here:
Tell that to the 30,000+ [aborted fetuses] who died for no other reason than being [concieved] in the wrong [woman].
Yeah, so?
Burning a house down with a family inside and burning the house down without the family inside both have the same outcome: the house is burned down. That doesnt mean that they are equal events. Speaking of fallacies, the one you brought up would be cum hoc ergo propter hoc. "Pro-Lifers approve of war and the death that results from it, therefore they are hypocrites for being pro-life". Nice.
My first post was just to point out the obvious differences separating your examples, but you choose to work around logic. You can keep pretending everyone you dont agree with is a hypocrite, I dont really care.
Yeah, so then "If you have the cash, you can harvest all the stem cells that you want."
Its a self-imposed "requirement" that they met simply to recieve federal funding.
Evil, malevolant Bush never decreed from his mountain that harvesting stem cells from embryos were banned, or sent you to prison, or damned your soul to eternal torment. There is simply no federal funding on the stem cell research when harvested from an embryo.
Scientists actually made new discoveries and made their methods more efficient because of the legislation! Imagine if there were restrictions placed on oil research back when it was first discovered as a fuel source. Either people would have researched other solutions or private investors would have furthered the original research.
Science doesnt come to a complete halt when the US government decides not to pay for it.
There is no government funding of stem cell research. If you have the cash, you can harvest all the stem cells that you want.
There doesnt have to be a problem, some people just like to complain about nothing.
I agree with your thought completely. The science has progressed further because of the "limitation" (that stops no one from doing their own privately-funded research) placed on it, not despite it.
This sounds like another 'PC gaming or no gaming' rant.
These are two completely different markets.
At one time, I played only PC games. Then I played PC and console games. Now I only play console games. Consoles are not wrong, they are just another choice.
PCs are there for people such as yourself that (based on your above post) base their purchases on graphics. Consoles are available for those who dont feel the same way.
Was anyone really expecting this to be a quality film? All the hype I saw was just because the movie was called Snakes on a Plane.
There was no incredible hype for Shaft starring Samuel L Jackson, so I dont think that his involvement really had anything to do with it. I admit that the title is pretty neat, but while I thought the title was neat, I also thought that the plot sounded weak and uninteresting.
Figures, someone who knows what theyre talking about and there are no mods in sight.
But yeah, it is hard to tell with articles like this. I read one a few months back about the army's "SuprNet".
I wonder if they can read this post in China?
I mean, it has the word "freedom" in it. Shouldnt it be blocked?
How about in stead of a Wii and five games, or an Xbox2 and two games, or any other combination that comes out at $600, you just buy what you want and then save the rest?
It's certainly a lot warmer than the ice age that ended due to the industrial revolution 10,000 years ago.
It seems impossible, but thats because it is.
From years of working for the government in IT, I know that it is practically SOP to push some insane requirement on everyone, delay it a few times, and then go into panic mode when everything isnt 100% at the deadline.
This happens ALL the time.
Also, I didnt read the document detailing the agencies affected by this, but "US Government" does not mean everyone. It could simply be a few agencies that must meet this requirement. This probably also wont affect all the branches of military (and if it does, it will be handled by those branches anyway). It is probably a much smaller job than it is made out to be (though like I said, i didnt RTFA).
The new oppo that was just released is $150.
Great deal, especially considering that it seems to be exactly the same insides as the previous version and includes USB and card readers on the face.
I thought it was a joke post until he got to 'dont jack up the brightness 5000%'!
At least you had your submission on the front page, albeit in a molested form.
It is not often that Zonk posts anything that isnt his own discovery.
If you have to spend $50 to purchase Super Mario RPG on ebay, then apparently those few MB from 10 years ago are worth more than the miniscule amount of bandwidth it takes to move them.
The size of the data and age are completely irrelevant. If its worth money, theyre going to sell it for what it is worth, perhaps more, perhaps even a lot less.
"Funny, that. A quick Google search on 'shot in the face' turns up 921,000 entries."
How many of those links were pointing to murders and not porn sites??
If they call it Dope-ass Rap Muthaf*ckas on CD packaging, I'm sure it would sell!
Not to say that Nintendo is entirely truthful, but they have a good track record in understating the real-world performance of their consoles. Hell, a gamecube launch title (Rogue Leader) surpassed their pre-launch in-game polygon announcments.
What I find really amazing is that they managed to pack at least double the performance of a Gamecube (this has been known for quite some time) into a chassis even smaller than the Gamecube.
Look at THIS image and marvel at what Nintendo's engineers are capable of.
It would be great for everyone to give what they can to help those in need, but in the end it comes down to solitary individuals making the decision. It cant be helped that people will think of themselves.
But I am not saying it is useless to help others, I'm just saying that you can only do so much. When you are doing what you think you are able, then you need to be able to find gratification in that and not linger unhappily on the fact that you are limited in your means.