It could also be because (they|we) say "Oh, that? Yeah we can make that two second change for you. It will take six weeks, and we'll need to ramp up three offshore development resources; as well as temporarily increase QA headcount to ensure we can perform a full regression. As soon as you run that through formal scoping, and get it slotted for a release we'll hop right on it for you."
and don't try to connect the two without any proof beyond your say-so.
Why can't he? Haven't you just got through saying that right and wrong are merely people's opinions?
Right and wrong are a what a given society agrees to be right and wrong. This had nothing to do with the basic logical fallacies present in his argument; nor his statement as fact the opinion of hs Catholic subculture.
For as long as the general public accepts politicians describing tax cuts as money that is lost, they will continue to believe that this is money they are owed.
Wow, honesty from a politician - who would have thought it could happen.
and find in real-time information on the Senator's positions on current political topics
You see that? That right there is a candid admission that he changes positions with the blowing of the political winds (perhaps more so when they are north-north-west but stays stable when the wind is southerly?) and that an app is required to keep up with these shifting views. Well done!
I read between the lines and came away with this : blah blah security threats blah blah worse every day blah blah mcaffee blah blah most secure blah blah blah even withstood anonymous blah blah scary cybermercs coming blah blah buy from us blah blah
What do you do when your friend's father is given the green light to commit suicide, but your mother who has the same illness but is advanced to the point where she is in a painful vegetative state and can no longer choose for herself?
--
Your mother (and everyone else) should familiarize herself with the concept of the living will.
In a world where 'suicide' is legal, the government decides who has a 'right' to die,
See, that's the basic flaw in the arguments you keep making. In the world where suicide is legal, the government has decided that it will not interfere with *any* individual's right to die as they see fit. Somehow, though, you keep making that into variations of the government picking and choosing who must die, without every explaining how you got from point A to point B.
The short of it is suicide is and should be illegal because it is immoral , if you don't believe in morality then there is no foundation for any law
There are two arguments here, and both are incorrect. First:
The short of it is suicide is and should be illegal because it is immoral
Immoral according to whom?
Second:
if you don't believe in morality then there is no foundation for any law
That's just silly. Law is how an orderly society is best maintained - all agree to the same social contract that is law, and abide by those rules. Attempting to codify your morality into law is certainly not uncommon, but don't confuse it with law - and don't try to connect the two without any proof beyond your say-so.
Personally I would rather not see research limited so narrowly. Stem cell research is just one avenue, and it's not yet known whether it's the panacea many are hoping for. Certainly more research is needed here; but not at the expense of other paths.
The starting point for these evils is the liberal and materialistic view that man is the owner of his life; that he is free to choose the moment and manner of his death. Those who hold this view define suicide as “the last liberty of life.”
Free will my friend. Your religion my decide that my suicide is a sin; that does NOT deprive me of the right to commit that final sin. That right and decision is mine alone. Even if you prove correct, and i have indeed stolen that life from your God, judgment is his. It is not yours, not the Church's and most certainly not the State's.
If we adopt a law holding that a person has the right to kill himself, soon we will also adopt euthanasia; because if the individual has the right to say when his life is no longer worth living, soon society will claim this right as well.
Wait what? This is a pretty egregious logic fail - even for a religious organization. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are nearly diametrically opposed. One leaves the final decision in my hands; the other in the hands of society. Stating that there is a connection between the two is not sufficient to prove that connection.
Sorry, I stopped reading once I realized that the remainder of that "article" is based on both conflating the two actions, and upon the false premise that under your religion I do not have free will to sin or not.
I've sat with someone as they died.I don't care to repeat and so will choose not to watch this. Nonetheless Pratchett will raise a lot of awareness this way - awareness of how the government is trying to dictate the terms of a person's death, and in its infinite wisdom is determining what can only be a very personal decision. I applaud this action; if it is the end of a slippery slope argument, I fail to see how - this isn't The Weakest Mind where the loser wins a free public suicide. Sure, there will be twisted fucks who take some weird pleasure in it. And there will be other twisted fucks who think the aforementioned game show is the next big thing -- when *they* succeed I'll concede we're at the bottom of that slope. (But not that it's a bad thing - after all it is your choice, and such commercialism can ease or eliminate the massive expenses you otherwise accumulate and leave behind when facing a fatal disease. ) But in this action today,I see bravery - to the ends of making this choice available freely. (we're always a hair's edge from outlawing assisted suicide here in he US and some states already have - so I'm interested in ramifications from tht angle too.)
My guess is that LulzSec == government entities (joint or not is no matter) looking to discredit Anonymous. The real Anonymous of yore wouldn't point their cannons in such arbitrary manners.
Eh? They would not? How do you know? Do you claim to speak for anon? Oh right, anybody can speak for anon. Perhaps you can begin to see the problem here...
Thanks for posting this. I had been so focused on a cms as the obvious solution for my own needs that it didn't even occur to me look for this type of answer - easy to maintain and eliminates significant security risks.
Ever see a master carpenter make a house with no tools? Ever try to write code on punchcards? How about executing code witjout a computer in such a way that it produces meaningful and useful results? Of course you have to know what these tools do to use them effectively; but using them in no way makes you less of a craftsman. It is understanding of underlying principles combined with the *effective* use of the tools at your disposal that elevate you to the rank of master.
When was the last time you heard of a craftsman getting praised for practicing his craft with only rudimentary tools when he could have done it in half the time using complex tools? (please don't cite the Amish - while the tools they use are not "modern", they are also far from rudimentary.)
We have these things at our disposal. Powerful machines capable of processing millions of instructions per second. Sitting on the other side of these devices we have us - the humans. Slow, prone to typos, not as good at storing reference data in a 100% lossless fashion. Logic - something we humans excel at - tells us that while it is important for us to understand our chosen professional fields, these devices are far more capable of handling the repetitive minutia such as telling us when we spelled something wrong, helpfully providing reference documentation specifically relevant to what we're typing at a given moment in time, or even suggesting appropriate variables to use based on data type. This does not excuse us from knowing what we are doing - but it does let us get it done much faster and with fewer flaws than otherwise.
Yes, these tools are no substitution for knowledge and understanding of a subject matter. But if you have that knowledge and understanding but refuse to use tools that make it easier an faster for you to do your job... I'd have to wonder if you were as skilled as you thought you were. If you worked for me I would have to start working for somebody who took more pride in creating a good design quickly using all available tools than in how the aesthetic perfection of his manually-created code demonstrates his superior knowledge.
See a problem? Solve it by putting a new law on the books! Bonus points if that law adds more work for compliant companies and people, while remaining practically unenforceable against those who don't comply.
Perhaps mdsolar believes his solar rental business can compensate to the extent of replacing nuclear power, or perhaps his motives truly are born of desire to help. The latter would also explain multiple anti-nuke power submissions per day, along with many comments at the nytimes green blog along the same lines -- but wait, so would the former.
Given the info at this page and the seeming MLM-scheme detailed on this page I'm rather inclined to believe the less altruistic motivation, but I could be mistaken. Ah, well. At least his commentary is generally well-written.
That's the crux of the college bubble. A lot of people believe that the massive investment in college education (both in time and money) is almost certain to pay off in the long run with higher paying jobs. Just like they believed that an investment in housing or tech stocks was a "sure thing".
I think you're missing GP's point. It's more like it pays off by providing a foot in the door, and convincing potential employers that they should look at your resume. Often these employers won't (especially now) if your education stops at high school. I was fortunate in that I entered the market in the early-mid 90s, with a decade of hacking behind me and a "programming" degree from a 1 yr tech school. That's really no longer enough except for the one-off jobs you find on Craigslist. Those Craigslist jobs don't add up either - a string of two-week "contract" jobs is no more appealing to employers than a high school diploma.
The choice is becoming one of "working at a job that lets you make minimum payments and eventually get ahead" and "unemployed with no college loans to pay off".
In fact, just the idea of self-awareness and personal growth seem to be looked down upon, as there is no immediate cash value to them
I'd say to re-evaluate the circles you travel in if you're an American and this is the only attitude you find. I don't encounter it much at all (except for people complaining about it in forums;) - even growing up in the middle of West Nowhere and working on a farm during the summers. I"m not saying it doesn't exist - clearly in places it does - only that it's not as pervasive as you might think.
In the programming world, I always got the impression that, collectively, we respected the self-taught coder more than one who spent four years in school being spoon fed how to code.
In the programming world, I find that that education levels almost never come up in day to day discussions. You can either design, code, debug, think -- or you can't. I've encountered people capable of all of the above -- and don't find out for weeks, months, years (or ever) whether they have a degree or not.
Slashdot Mirror
Company names are almost always singular. A company name is not a collection of people, it is a proper name for a singular entity.
It could also be because (they|we) say "Oh, that? Yeah we can make that two second change for you. It will take six weeks, and we'll need to ramp up three offshore development resources; as well as temporarily increase QA headcount to ensure we can perform a full regression. As soon as you run that through formal scoping, and get it slotted for a release we'll hop right on it for you."
and don't try to connect the two without any proof beyond your say-so.
Why can't he? Haven't you just got through saying that right and wrong are merely people's opinions?
Right and wrong are a what a given society agrees to be right and wrong. This had nothing to do with the basic logical fallacies present in his argument; nor his statement as fact the opinion of hs Catholic subculture.
Valid point.I hadn't read your comment as closely as I should have and missed that you were talking about reversal of damage.
For as long as the general public accepts politicians describing tax cuts as money that is lost, they will continue to believe that this is money they are owed.
and find in real-time information on the Senator's positions on current political topics
You see that? That right there is a candid admission that he changes positions with the blowing of the political winds (perhaps more so when they are north-north-west but stays stable when the wind is southerly?) and that an app is required to keep up with these shifting views. Well done!
I read between the lines and came away with this : blah blah security threats blah blah worse every day blah blah mcaffee blah blah most secure blah blah blah even withstood anonymous blah blah scary cybermercs coming blah blah buy from us blah blah
What do you do when your friend's father is given the green light to commit suicide, but your mother who has the same illness but is advanced to the point where she is in a painful vegetative state and can no longer choose for herself? --
Your mother (and everyone else) should familiarize herself with the concept of the living will.
In a world where 'suicide' is legal, the government decides who has a 'right' to die,
See, that's the basic flaw in the arguments you keep making. In the world where suicide is legal, the government has decided that it will not interfere with *any* individual's right to die as they see fit. Somehow, though, you keep making that into variations of the government picking and choosing who must die, without every explaining how you got from point A to point B.
The short of it is suicide is and should be illegal because it is immoral , if you don't believe in morality then there is no foundation for any law
There are two arguments here, and both are incorrect. First:
The short of it is suicide is and should be illegal because it is immoral
Immoral according to whom? Second:
if you don't believe in morality then there is no foundation for any law
That's just silly. Law is how an orderly society is best maintained - all agree to the same social contract that is law, and abide by those rules. Attempting to codify your morality into law is certainly not uncommon, but don't confuse it with law - and don't try to connect the two without any proof beyond your say-so.
Personally I would rather not see research limited so narrowly. Stem cell research is just one avenue, and it's not yet known whether it's the panacea many are hoping for. Certainly more research is needed here; but not at the expense of other paths.
The starting point for these evils is the liberal and materialistic view that man is the owner of his life; that he is free to choose the moment and manner of his death. Those who hold this view define suicide as “the last liberty of life.”
Free will my friend. Your religion my decide that my suicide is a sin; that does NOT deprive me of the right to commit that final sin. That right and decision is mine alone. Even if you prove correct, and i have indeed stolen that life from your God, judgment is his. It is not yours, not the Church's and most certainly not the State's.
If we adopt a law holding that a person has the right to kill himself, soon we will also adopt euthanasia; because if the individual has the right to say when his life is no longer worth living, soon society will claim this right as well.
Wait what? This is a pretty egregious logic fail - even for a religious organization. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are nearly diametrically opposed. One leaves the final decision in my hands; the other in the hands of society. Stating that there is a connection between the two is not sufficient to prove that connection.
Sorry, I stopped reading once I realized that the remainder of that "article" is based on both conflating the two actions, and upon the false premise that under your religion I do not have free will to sin or not.
Wait what?
I've sat with someone as they died.I don't care to repeat and so will choose not to watch this. Nonetheless Pratchett will raise a lot of awareness this way - awareness of how the government is trying to dictate the terms of a person's death, and in its infinite wisdom is determining what can only be a very personal decision. I applaud this action; if it is the end of a slippery slope argument, I fail to see how - this isn't The Weakest Mind where the loser wins a free public suicide. Sure, there will be twisted fucks who take some weird pleasure in it. And there will be other twisted fucks who think the aforementioned game show is the next big thing -- when *they* succeed I'll concede we're at the bottom of that slope. (But not that it's a bad thing - after all it is your choice, and such commercialism can ease or eliminate the massive expenses you otherwise accumulate and leave behind when facing a fatal disease. ) But in this action today,I see bravery - to the ends of making this choice available freely. (we're always a hair's edge from outlawing assisted suicide here in he US and some states already have - so I'm interested in ramifications from tht angle too.)
My guess is that LulzSec == government entities (joint or not is no matter) looking to discredit Anonymous. The real Anonymous of yore wouldn't point their cannons in such arbitrary manners.
Eh? They would not? How do you know? Do you claim to speak for anon? Oh right, anybody can speak for anon. Perhaps you can begin to see the problem here...
damnit. s/working for/looking for
Thanks for posting this. I had been so focused on a cms as the obvious solution for my own needs that it didn't even occur to me look for this type of answer - easy to maintain and eliminates significant security risks.
When was the last time you heard of a craftsman getting praised for practicing his craft with only rudimentary tools when he could have done it in half the time using complex tools? (please don't cite the Amish - while the tools they use are not "modern", they are also far from rudimentary.)
Yes, these tools are no substitution for knowledge and understanding of a subject matter. But if you have that knowledge and understanding but refuse to use tools that make it easier an faster for you to do your job... I'd have to wonder if you were as skilled as you thought you were. If you worked for me I would have to start working for somebody who took more pride in creating a good design quickly using all available tools than in how the aesthetic perfection of his manually-created code demonstrates his superior knowledge.
See a problem? Solve it by putting a new law on the books! Bonus points if that law adds more work for compliant companies and people, while remaining practically unenforceable against those who don't comply.
Given the info at this page and the seeming MLM-scheme detailed on this page I'm rather inclined to believe the less altruistic motivation, but I could be mistaken. Ah, well. At least his commentary is generally well-written.
That's the crux of the college bubble. A lot of people believe that the massive investment in college education (both in time and money) is almost certain to pay off in the long run with higher paying jobs. Just like they believed that an investment in housing or tech stocks was a "sure thing".
I think you're missing GP's point. It's more like it pays off by providing a foot in the door, and convincing potential employers that they should look at your resume. Often these employers won't (especially now) if your education stops at high school. I was fortunate in that I entered the market in the early-mid 90s, with a decade of hacking behind me and a "programming" degree from a 1 yr tech school. That's really no longer enough except for the one-off jobs you find on Craigslist. Those Craigslist jobs don't add up either - a string of two-week "contract" jobs is no more appealing to employers than a high school diploma.
The choice is becoming one of "working at a job that lets you make minimum payments and eventually get ahead" and "unemployed with no college loans to pay off".
In fact, just the idea of self-awareness and personal growth seem to be looked down upon, as there is no immediate cash value to them
I'd say to re-evaluate the circles you travel in if you're an American and this is the only attitude you find. I don't encounter it much at all (except for people complaining about it in forums ;) - even growing up in the middle of West Nowhere and working on a farm during the summers. I"m not saying it doesn't exist - clearly in places it does - only that it's not as pervasive as you might think.
In the programming world, I always got the impression that, collectively, we respected the self-taught coder more than one who spent four years in school being spoon fed how to code.
In the programming world, I find that that education levels almost never come up in day to day discussions. You can either design, code, debug, think -- or you can't. I've encountered people capable of all of the above -- and don't find out for weeks, months, years (or ever) whether they have a degree or not.
A hybrid geek? What's the mileage on those like? And how long does it take to repay the cost of initial investment?
What game console is that?
I think it's Wii U
I we you what?
What's the third gen tech going to be - the "Wii U Mii"? Followed closely by "Thay Wii U Mii"?