Someone give this guy a medal. A dedication to science, hard work and making the best of what is around is what built the US, and what is building China. It seems that as the US is losing it, China is gaining it... I can just hope that I'm wrong on this.
Ah.. I was wondering why this post sounded familiar. You wrote another one just like it. It's just more weasel words that are solely designed to scuttle debate and allow you to escape without having actually contributed anything.
Let's deconstruct your argument, shall we? Your Physics professor was right. You're wrong, however, in your assumption that this is somehow a secret that people don't know about. Instead, this is a necessary and unavoidable result of our limited understanding of the world around us. As long as our knowledge of the world isn't infite, it will be wrong in one way or another.
Again, to repeat myself: your teacher taught you philosophy and scientific method with that sentence. It has no relevance when discussing scientific theories or discoveries, as these are implementations of the fundamental assumption that models can explain the world.
Now for your assertion that the debate about the validity of evolution is still hot: no, it's not. You and some people at school debating the validity of evolution is not the same thing as all evolutionary biologists and chemists debating it. You are correct that I should not accept your assertion - but you are right for the wrong reasons. It is not an assertion that has any grounding in fact or even plausibility. As such, it deserves no consideration.
Now scoot off to your critical thinking class before you get spanked again.
-1, Weaselwords. Why come here if not to debate an argument? Merely stating your beliefs contributes nothing. It sounds like you invited yourself into a debate, but then weaseled out of it by arguing that you're not debating.
FYI - the entire debate around evolution vs creationism hinges on what you believe and how you believe it. As such, your belief system plays a large in the debate, and is open for argumentation. Not so much on content, but certainly on form.
External locus of control. The shooter had it. Why do you think 14 out of 15 victims were female? He was gunning for females, because he was blaming all females for his condition. He blamed them for so much that he thought they collectively deserved to die.
Now the interesting part: pretty much everybody who wants to ban videogames because of events like these believes just as much in an external locus of control as the shooter. Except instead of believing that a group of people is directly harming them, they believe that a group of people is influencing "their" people through violent games. And instead of wanting to shoot the people they accuse, they want to ban their product.
Granted, it's better to ban a product than to shoot someone. But the fundamental drive is the same. It's also the drive that's behind book burnings and conspiracy theories like the protocols of the elders of zion. It's bullshit that makes people feel better and in control - it's not them that's the problem, and there's an easy solution at hand.
I despise both the shooter and the idiots who clamor for video gaming bannings equally. One's more harmful than the other, but that's just because the other is a bigger pansy. I'm convinced that under the right circumstances, the head of the state's police union would be just as willing a shooter as the 17 year old kid.
#1 Difference: we know have to wait for the actual events before we can judge whether abuses happen. Is it still possible for people to be arbitrarily detained? Of course. I prefer process to be abused for a tort to occur rather than a process be instituted so that tort can occur. #2 Difference: Guantanamo will be closed. Can there still be illegal prisons and torture camps? Of course. But again, it will be a matter of individual decisions, and not official strategy.
You might think that appearance and process doesn't count - unfortunately, sometimes, it's the only thing that stands between order and anarchy.
If Obama doesn't change the current approach and still indiscriminately detains people forever, we can talk again. In the meantime, there's at least the chance of the right thing happening. This wasn't there before.
I'm one of the people who voted for Obama. I have to admit though, I became uncomfortable when I heard of his FOIA decision. Now, with the appointment of RIAA lawyers to DOJ positions and their continued support of RIAA positions, I've dropped all hope that change will come in this area.
I have to admit, no change is really no worse than what I would have expected from anyone else, and as such, I don't think that the situation is getting worse. But it certainly isn't improving it, either.
Regarding the change to Guantanamo, that was actually very, very significant. Why? Because there are no more enemy combatants. You're either a prisoner of war subject to the Geneva Conventions, or you're a common prisoner subject to US Laws.
I'm all for some people not seeing the light of day. The problem was that under the Bush administration, Bush got to decided who saw the light of day. Now, it's based on existing laws and processes. If you don't consider that a significant change, I can't help you.
True. After a while, I knew where the mobs would be and where the target would be without ever having set foot in that particular facility. All it took was identifying what the first room looked like, and everything was identical after that.
The plot of the game is actually about foreigner powers exploiting Africa and its people. It's an anti-colonial message really.
Thank you. Someone played the game past the initial demo stage. I get the distinct impression that a lot of the accusation of racism came from the initial trailer and the demo. It's understandable, but I also would have liked to see a better discussion of the plot evolution by the people with a stake in the reception of the game. I think the exploitation aspect is actual an important plot turn, and as such, Capcom probably didn't want to reveal that specific portion. Still, Capcom's PR department could have made a better effort at selling the overall plot rather than defending an incorrect (but understandable) interpretation of the whole game.
Actually, what the game is suggesting (and I understand the confusion, because this comes out as the story plays out) is that the area is used as the test ground for a 3rd generation Plagas bio-agent: subjects are highly-functioning and highly violent, but very obedient and with much higher residual intelligence than past infected hosts.
That's why you see the violence in the beginning town: most of the residents have already been infected with the parasite, but not all. Bloodshot eyes are not a requirement anymore.
The only issue I have is with the white, blonde girl being dragged off in the first level. I think though that that has more to do with japanese ideals of beauty and innocence than with racism. There's also some merit to the point that Sheva is not very African in either name or looks. But at that point, it's really nit-picking.
Coconut oil? For fuck's sake, please stop advocating food sources as energy sources. Do not mention anything based on foodstuff as even being an option for energy production. The stupidity of creating ethanol from corn is already costing us millions. Why? Because corn prices spiked so heavily that pig farmers, who used feed their pigs corn, had to switch at some point to trail mix.
While this is modded funny and comes from an AC, I'd seriously put this out there as an option.
Here's why: 1) It's cheap. 2) It requires little time. 3) It requires little handywork - no time spent soldering minuscule circuitry or machining micrometer spec aluminum. 4) It's results are almost immediate. 5) It produces very cool data. 6) It touches a lot of different areas: atmospheric physics, electronics, photography, telemetry. All of which can be understood by anybody who's been outside and played with some electronics and software.
What you describe is the Anthropic Principle, and far from never being seriously thought about, it's been debated to death all over the internet.
You make it sound like this discussion started when the Internet became available to the world. Far from it. This has been debated to death ever since people looked up at the stars and asked "Why?"
For the record, I'm firmly in Kant's camp: arguing that the world is made for us is like arguing that the cheese was made for the worm to eat.
... whoever posted this is supremely dedicated to trolling. I had no idea that some people would go to such lengths to generate something that is just such a completely and utterly useless, pointless waste of space and time.
Technically, the solutions you mention already exist: the Driver's license test and moving vehicle fines. Sadly, the test is a joke compared to any other country, and fines are used as a revenue generation tool, not a habit changer.
As you said, it's a question of attitude, not a technical or legislative problem.
Interesting approach. I thought that paragraph sounded familiar. But....
Depend upon it there comes a time when for every addition of knowledge you forget something that you knew before.
While Sir Arthur Conan Doyle might have gotten a lot of things right, he also got a lot of things wrong. Including the assumption that memorizing one fact elbows out another.
I think there's some merit to the description that specialists are, well, specialized. After all, there's the joke about studying so much until you know everything about nothing. And there's nothing wrong with that. What is wrong, however, is to assume that what you don't know doesn't matter, or that your opinion on a subject you don't know matters as much as the opinion of someone who has studied that matter.
To me, the troubling aspect is not that people don't know how much water covers the earth. It is that they assume their incomplete knowledge is actually true, or that anyone who knows it is wasting his/her time.
I don't mind Anonymous trolls. Mainly because you can't stop crazy. But the fact that others apparently feel inclined to mod this informative points to crazy being more mainstream than I'm comfortable wtih.
The best part of the rant: collaboration between Nazis and Communists. The only thing missing in that attack on the Red White and Blue is gays and Mexicans. That's some delusion at work there.
Well, the way the story is told is that during the reign of Louis XIV, people used to say sacre-dieu (god damn). Somehow, Louis XIV took umbrage to that, being that his status derived directly from god, blasphemy, etc. So he forbade people to say sacre-dieu. The people, ever inclined to poke fun at his royal highness, instead realized that the name of the king's dog, Bleu, was close enough to the current swear that not much change in habit was required.
So instead of sacre-dieu, people started to say sacre-bleu.
I know, the parent missed the joke, but I figure if we're on the topic of explaining something, we might as well be serious about it.
Agreed on shitty hours and high divorce rate. But paycheck? Where I live, cops START at a 100K a year, and it goes up from there. This is on top of awesome benefits and a retirement age in the 50s.
Being a cop is an awesome job, if you can stomach its inherent shittyness.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone give this guy a medal. A dedication to science, hard work and making the best of what is around is what built the US, and what is building China. It seems that as the US is losing it, China is gaining it... I can just hope that I'm wrong on this.
Ah.. I was wondering why this post sounded familiar. You wrote another one just like it. It's just more weasel words that are solely designed to scuttle debate and allow you to escape without having actually contributed anything.
Let's deconstruct your argument, shall we?
Your Physics professor was right. You're wrong, however, in your assumption that this is somehow a secret that people don't know about. Instead, this is a necessary and unavoidable result of our limited understanding of the world around us. As long as our knowledge of the world isn't infite, it will be wrong in one way or another.
Again, to repeat myself: your teacher taught you philosophy and scientific method with that sentence. It has no relevance when discussing scientific theories or discoveries, as these are implementations of the fundamental assumption that models can explain the world.
Now for your assertion that the debate about the validity of evolution is still hot: no, it's not. You and some people at school debating the validity of evolution is not the same thing as all evolutionary biologists and chemists debating it. You are correct that I should not accept your assertion - but you are right for the wrong reasons. It is not an assertion that has any grounding in fact or even plausibility. As such, it deserves no consideration.
Now scoot off to your critical thinking class before you get spanked again.
-1, Weaselwords. Why come here if not to debate an argument? Merely stating your beliefs contributes nothing. It sounds like you invited yourself into a debate, but then weaseled out of it by arguing that you're not debating.
FYI - the entire debate around evolution vs creationism hinges on what you believe and how you believe it. As such, your belief system plays a large in the debate, and is open for argumentation. Not so much on content, but certainly on form.
External locus of control. The shooter had it. Why do you think 14 out of 15 victims were female? He was gunning for females, because he was blaming all females for his condition. He blamed them for so much that he thought they collectively deserved to die.
Now the interesting part: pretty much everybody who wants to ban videogames because of events like these believes just as much in an external locus of control as the shooter. Except instead of believing that a group of people is directly harming them, they believe that a group of people is influencing "their" people through violent games. And instead of wanting to shoot the people they accuse, they want to ban their product.
Granted, it's better to ban a product than to shoot someone. But the fundamental drive is the same. It's also the drive that's behind book burnings and conspiracy theories like the protocols of the elders of zion. It's bullshit that makes people feel better and in control - it's not them that's the problem, and there's an easy solution at hand.
I despise both the shooter and the idiots who clamor for video gaming bannings equally. One's more harmful than the other, but that's just because the other is a bigger pansy. I'm convinced that under the right circumstances, the head of the state's police union would be just as willing a shooter as the 17 year old kid.
#1 Difference: we know have to wait for the actual events before we can judge whether abuses happen. Is it still possible for people to be arbitrarily detained? Of course. I prefer process to be abused for a tort to occur rather than a process be instituted so that tort can occur.
#2 Difference: Guantanamo will be closed. Can there still be illegal prisons and torture camps? Of course. But again, it will be a matter of individual decisions, and not official strategy.
You might think that appearance and process doesn't count - unfortunately, sometimes, it's the only thing that stands between order and anarchy.
If Obama doesn't change the current approach and still indiscriminately detains people forever, we can talk again. In the meantime, there's at least the chance of the right thing happening. This wasn't there before.
I'm one of the people who voted for Obama. I have to admit though, I became uncomfortable when I heard of his FOIA decision. Now, with the appointment of RIAA lawyers to DOJ positions and their continued support of RIAA positions, I've dropped all hope that change will come in this area.
I have to admit, no change is really no worse than what I would have expected from anyone else, and as such, I don't think that the situation is getting worse. But it certainly isn't improving it, either.
Regarding the change to Guantanamo, that was actually very, very significant. Why? Because there are no more enemy combatants. You're either a prisoner of war subject to the Geneva Conventions, or you're a common prisoner subject to US Laws.
I'm all for some people not seeing the light of day. The problem was that under the Bush administration, Bush got to decided who saw the light of day. Now, it's based on existing laws and processes. If you don't consider that a significant change, I can't help you.
Too bad I replied before I saw this waste of a post. Otherwise I could have modded this to where it belongs.
That said, there's always meta moderation.... but yes, Sony fanbois are truly getting pathetic.
And yet, the attach rate (ratio of software sales to hardware sales) is about 8:1 for the xbox360, and about 5:1 for the PS3.
The only thing more annoying than gloating MS fanbois are panicky (and anonymous) Sony fanbois.
True. After a while, I knew where the mobs would be and where the target would be without ever having set foot in that particular facility. All it took was identifying what the first room looked like, and everything was identical after that.
Other than that, the game was damn near perfect.
The plot of the game is actually about foreigner powers exploiting Africa and its people. It's an anti-colonial message really.
Thank you. Someone played the game past the initial demo stage. I get the distinct impression that a lot of the accusation of racism came from the initial trailer and the demo. It's understandable, but I also would have liked to see a better discussion of the plot evolution by the people with a stake in the reception of the game. I think the exploitation aspect is actual an important plot turn, and as such, Capcom probably didn't want to reveal that specific portion. Still, Capcom's PR department could have made a better effort at selling the overall plot rather than defending an incorrect (but understandable) interpretation of the whole game.
Actually, what the game is suggesting (and I understand the confusion, because this comes out as the story plays out) is that the area is used as the test ground for a 3rd generation Plagas bio-agent: subjects are highly-functioning and highly violent, but very obedient and with much higher residual intelligence than past infected hosts.
That's why you see the violence in the beginning town: most of the residents have already been infected with the parasite, but not all. Bloodshot eyes are not a requirement anymore.
The only issue I have is with the white, blonde girl being dragged off in the first level. I think though that that has more to do with japanese ideals of beauty and innocence than with racism. There's also some merit to the point that Sheva is not very African in either name or looks. But at that point, it's really nit-picking.
Coconut oil? For fuck's sake, please stop advocating food sources as energy sources. Do not mention anything based on foodstuff as even being an option for energy production. The stupidity of creating ethanol from corn is already costing us millions. Why? Because corn prices spiked so heavily that pig farmers, who used feed their pigs corn, had to switch at some point to trail mix.
While this is modded funny and comes from an AC, I'd seriously put this out there as an option.
Here's why:
1) It's cheap.
2) It requires little time.
3) It requires little handywork - no time spent soldering minuscule circuitry or machining micrometer spec aluminum.
4) It's results are almost immediate.
5) It produces very cool data.
6) It touches a lot of different areas: atmospheric physics, electronics, photography, telemetry. All of which can be understood by anybody who's been outside and played with some electronics and software.
What you describe is the Anthropic Principle, and far from never being seriously thought about, it's been debated to death all over the internet.
You make it sound like this discussion started when the Internet became available to the world. Far from it. This has been debated to death ever since people looked up at the stars and asked "Why?"
For the record, I'm firmly in Kant's camp: arguing that the world is made for us is like arguing that the cheese was made for the worm to eat.
... whoever posted this is supremely dedicated to trolling. I had no idea that some people would go to such lengths to generate something that is just such a completely and utterly useless, pointless waste of space and time.
And I responded to it. Go figure.
Technically, the solutions you mention already exist: the Driver's license test and moving vehicle fines. Sadly, the test is a joke compared to any other country, and fines are used as a revenue generation tool, not a habit changer.
As you said, it's a question of attitude, not a technical or legislative problem.
Funny? I wish. This is more +1, Sadly Prophetic. Especially the part about sports games not working when a real game is on.
And I'm pretty sure that Apple's profit is much higher than Sansa's.
Part of scientific literacy is knowing how to pull the good ideas out of the sea of Woo Woo.
I think this is one of the best quotes to come out of the entire discussion. And the anecdote was illuminating as well. Thanks.
Interesting approach. I thought that paragraph sounded familiar. But....
Depend upon it there comes a time when for every addition of knowledge you forget something that you knew before.
While Sir Arthur Conan Doyle might have gotten a lot of things right, he also got a lot of things wrong. Including the assumption that memorizing one fact elbows out another.
I think there's some merit to the description that specialists are, well, specialized. After all, there's the joke about studying so much until you know everything about nothing. And there's nothing wrong with that. What is wrong, however, is to assume that what you don't know doesn't matter, or that your opinion on a subject you don't know matters as much as the opinion of someone who has studied that matter.
To me, the troubling aspect is not that people don't know how much water covers the earth. It is that they assume their incomplete knowledge is actually true, or that anyone who knows it is wasting his/her time.
I don't mind Anonymous trolls. Mainly because you can't stop crazy. But the fact that others apparently feel inclined to mod this informative points to crazy being more mainstream than I'm comfortable wtih.
The best part of the rant: collaboration between Nazis and Communists. The only thing missing in that attack on the Red White and Blue is gays and Mexicans. That's some delusion at work there.
Well, the way the story is told is that during the reign of Louis XIV, people used to say sacre-dieu (god damn). Somehow, Louis XIV took umbrage to that, being that his status derived directly from god, blasphemy, etc. So he forbade people to say sacre-dieu. The people, ever inclined to poke fun at his royal highness, instead realized that the name of the king's dog, Bleu, was close enough to the current swear that not much change in habit was required.
So instead of sacre-dieu, people started to say sacre-bleu.
I know, the parent missed the joke, but I figure if we're on the topic of explaining something, we might as well be serious about it.
Agreed on shitty hours and high divorce rate. But paycheck? Where I live, cops START at a 100K a year, and it goes up from there. This is on top of awesome benefits and a retirement age in the 50s.
Being a cop is an awesome job, if you can stomach its inherent shittyness.
I read. Do you?