It's a bit like the case of the student who got a wealthy lawyer to sponsor his university education in law, on the basis that he would hand over the entire proceeds of his first case by way of complete and final recompense. Immediately upon receiving his degree, he signed on the dole and made no attempt to get a job as even a minor partner in a law firm. His sponsor took him to court for breach of contract; the graduate represented himself. Either his sponsor's payoff would amount to nothing (because he had lost his first case); or the decision of the court would be that he didn't have to pay his sponsor anything (if he won the case).
wow, i cant believe the wealthy lawyer didnt see through that one.
And this article was posted to Slashdot AFTER that happened, and there is STILL no "Update: Dell actually apologized before we posted this article, 'cause we're dumb."
You're doing them a huge disservice by letting this stand uncorrected, kdawson.
dont worry, slashdot editors usually include this information by the third dupe.
Whats at stake is more than my stereo or my TV or my kid's bike. What's at stake is my right to peacably own property. What's at stake is the rule of law in our free society. While on the outside its easy to say that a persons life is worth more than a TV, is a person's life worth more that the rights a criminal had to violate in order to take the TV? It is most definitely not.
A criminal is not just taking a TV from me, they are taking away my rights of property ownership. As long as we accept that a criminal is the victim when a burglary goes bad then we have no property rights, and essentially no rights at all since most rights descend from the concept of ownership.
I cannot believe parent was modded insightful. You are exaggerating when you say your right to own property is at stake. Noone is taking away your right to own property, they are just taking away your property. You (and the state) hunt them down, and you (and the state) punish them appropriately. Your property is returned to you, and everything is fine and dandy.
Let me give you a spectrum of varying situations, and tell me if you would employ armed defense in every case. Assume you are a woman on a street, and a strange man:
walks by you
starts jerking off in front of you
stops to talk to you
flirts with you
makes nasty comments about you
pats you on the butt
takes off with your purse
forcibly grabs you off the street
molests you
wounds you
rapes you
tries to kill you
My guess is noone will do so in the first two cases; noone will avoid armed defense in the last two cases either. At each stage, some of your rights are likely being violated (right to privacy, right to life, right to property, right to dignity, etc). The question is: where do you draw the line?
Seriously though, I think China is the major threat to peace and stability in the world today.
the major threat? let me guess: are you from the United States?
i am too, and appreciate the freedoms our country has versus China, but peace and stability are not exactly what the United States is promoting now, is it?
I won't have to battle against the hippie-chick mac users in the coffee shop for one of the tables next to one of the three electrical outlets in the joint!
Are you retarded? Seriously, are you retarded? You want LESS reason to interact with hip coffee shop girls who also happen to have enough cash to buy a Mac? And geeks wonder why they never get laid.... sheesh!
You, sir, must be retarded. Hip girls are not the same as hippie girls. I've seen these young women, and it looks to me they spend all their weekly wages on a Mac and green ribbons for their hair than a subscription to your favourite fashion mag.
umm, the IT in IIT stands for Institute of Technology, as in Georgia/California/Massachusetts Institute of Technology. so let's make that just drinking.
umm.. it is unethical to be bigoted on race because people cant change the color of their skin. similarly, but debatably, they cant change their sexual preference. they might not be able to change a fatness gene, but i think it is certain widespread obesity is not due to genes.
not accepting each others difference also happens to be the basis of most humour. and only when its a i-cant-help-it defect does the humor seem to be in poor taste.
did anyone else read the subject and infer - oil reservoir, axis of evil, lets-get-rich, WMD, and so on and so forth? SOB W, he's got me all worked up.
Computer scientists in universities are well-represented in Wikipedia, because they are known by their students who have all the time in the world. Computer scientists at IBM/Microsoft Research are not all that well-represented, because they are known only by their boss and subordinates, both of who never heard of Wikipedia.
Science is responsible for many, many important things, and it is damned well something we need to emphasize more in schools. It is not, in my opinion, the end-all, be-all of humanity, and you are apparently casting it as such, or nearly so. I know you mean well, so I'm sorry to call you out, but like politicians and clergymen, scientists are starting to grate on me a bit with their attitude of "I know everything".
But, but, but. Unlike GWBs and TedHaggards, scientists will stand corrected though when called out on incorrect statements.
Scientific explanations are not being considered as seriously as they need to be, so chest-bashing is not totally out of place. Plus, scientists would never form a government, they would only advise it as they have done so far. The moment they assume power, it is highly likely they would turn political on every issue and not remain the scientific beatific saints they are.
damaging stuff? i read about operation northwoods: this is state-sponsored terrorism by the US govt on its own citizens. too bad terrorism wasnt a buzzword back then.
Did you get the point of my posting? Didnt think so. The word "resolved" was just the garnish of my posting, the meat-and-potatoes being why the proof deserved the award it received. Go troll on yauforums.com or someplace else!
This mathematical proof is clearly interesting from a mathematics-proofs-point-of-view. But I'm surprised it's considered the breakthrough of the year. Its very difficult for most people to relate to.
huh, by that measure, no mathematical proofs would ever make it to the breakthrough of the year. for that matter, the layman is not a technical expert on genetics, but he is happy to discuss the "media-filtered" version of any result: "eye color is not a genetic trait" is interesting pub-conversation.
for that very reason, the Poincare conjecture must have made it to the top, the conjecture is intuitively statable to John Doe. and, oh yeah, it has been resolved after 200 years. good call, Science.
It's really sad that this game would advocate the killing of non-Christians because of their lack of faith. That is in direct conflict with the teachings of Jesus. Rather, it is just like the teachings of Muhammad.
wtf mate? when the hell did you become an authority on islam?
Slashdot Mirror
wow all you debaters are a big bunch of racists! lolz
Let me give you a spectrum of varying situations, and tell me if you would employ armed defense in every case. Assume you are a woman on a street, and a strange man:
- walks by you
- starts jerking off in front of you
- stops to talk to you
- flirts with you
- makes nasty comments about you
- pats you on the butt
- takes off with your purse
- forcibly grabs you off the street
- molests you
- wounds you
- rapes you
- tries to kill you
My guess is noone will do so in the first two cases; noone will avoid armed defense in the last two cases either. At each stage, some of your rights are likely being violated (right to privacy, right to life, right to property, right to dignity, etc). The question is: where do you draw the line?does bush get *anything* right ever?
i bet the US of A already has blimps over all of venezuela, monitoring them for your security.
... the red-light cameras watch you. and that's how it all started in the first place.
thank you for showing me the inside of her nose.
i tried to read your post for relevance to the original article.
*confused*
the 100m sprint record time might go back up!
umm.. it is unethical to be bigoted on race because people cant change the color of their skin. similarly, but debatably, they cant change their sexual preference. they might not be able to change a fatness gene, but i think it is certain widespread obesity is not due to genes. not accepting each others difference also happens to be the basis of most humour. and only when its a i-cant-help-it defect does the humor seem to be in poor taste.
did anyone else read the subject and infer - oil reservoir, axis of evil, lets-get-rich, WMD, and so on and so forth? SOB W, he's got me all worked up.
dude i'll reply to this just noone else is going to^H^H^H^H^H^H^H cause you put so much effort into it.
Computer scientists in universities are well-represented in Wikipedia, because they are known by their students who have all the time in the world. Computer scientists at IBM/Microsoft Research are not all that well-represented, because they are known only by their boss and subordinates, both of who never heard of Wikipedia.
Scientific explanations are not being considered as seriously as they need to be, so chest-bashing is not totally out of place. Plus, scientists would never form a government, they would only advise it as they have done so far. The moment they assume power, it is highly likely they would turn political on every issue and not remain the scientific beatific saints they are.
damaging stuff? i read about operation northwoods: this is state-sponsored terrorism by the US govt on its own citizens. too bad terrorism wasnt a buzzword back then.
Did you get the point of my posting? Didnt think so. The word "resolved" was just the garnish of my posting, the meat-and-potatoes being why the proof deserved the award it received. Go troll on yauforums.com or someplace else!
for that very reason, the Poincare conjecture must have made it to the top, the conjecture is intuitively statable to John Doe. and, oh yeah, it has been resolved after 200 years. good call, Science.