"A little red hoax. MyNameIsFred writes "In an earlier Slashdot story, it was reported that a student was investigated for requesting Mao's Little Red Book on inter-library loan. It appears that the story was a hoax."
If it smells like bullsh*t, it probably is...
I don't believe this actually even happened. There's nothing in the story that makes it anything more than hearsay. The reporter allegedly knows the name of the student, but the student thinks something bad would happen to him by coming forward? BS. It didn't happen, this is likely made up by the professors interviewed. I'm surprised at the low level of critical thinking exhibited here on Slashdot when it comes to matters of politics. (Flame suit? Check!) If MS comes out and says the sky is blue, four thousand posts (or more) will argue, analyze, nitpick (it's actually periwinkle!) in an exercise of critical thought (and more acurately, critical talk). But the minute any liberal shill comes out with a statement that plays to a grand conspiracy orchestrated by (the government, george bush, karl rove, "insert your least favorite conservative here"), you all jump on the bandwagon with nary a wink at the facts, common sense, or anything remotely representing critical thinking.
Here's an example:
The anti-war left loves to chant that Iraq is a war for oil. Okay, let's assume that statement is true. Now that we "occupy" Iraq, why haven't we gotten our greedy, American pig-dog capitalist hands on it? Why hasn't the worldwide market for oil reflected (via lower, not higher prices) increased supply of oil flowing out of Iraq?
The answer is, because the premise is false. Anyone who takes the time to understand a nit of oil production learns that Iraq's oil reserves are largely untapped because of the difficulty extracting it (Financial Times did a wonderful piece on this in May 2003). At a cost of trillions of dollars to simply prosecute the war and secure the country, if you could somehow extract the oil, it would take decades to earn a return on investment. In short, it would a) financially cheaper, and b) politically more expedient to piss off the environmental kooks and drill in ANWaR than go to war in Iraq if the goal was oil.
But most of you Slashdotters, who otherwise pride yourselves on your smarts, hipness, contrarian thinking and general exclusiveness are eager join the chorus "No War For Oil". Well, all I can say is that is simply lazy thinking. Next time you hear a story about the big bad (the government, george bush, karl rove, "insert your least favorite conservative here"), maybe you'll take a minute to check the facts - apply a little common sense - think about the story, where it's coming from, who's involved and ponder what motivations they might have for furthering that story. And then, God willing, maybe you'll post an intelligent thought about it on Slashdot for others to ponder.
Slashdot Mirror
"A little red hoax. MyNameIsFred writes "In an earlier Slashdot story, it was reported that a student was investigated for requesting Mao's Little Red Book on inter-library loan. It appears that the story was a hoax." If it smells like bullsh*t, it probably is...
I don't believe this actually even happened. There's nothing in the story that makes it anything more than hearsay. The reporter allegedly knows the name of the student, but the student thinks something bad would happen to him by coming forward? BS. It didn't happen, this is likely made up by the professors interviewed. I'm surprised at the low level of critical thinking exhibited here on Slashdot when it comes to matters of politics. (Flame suit? Check!) If MS comes out and says the sky is blue, four thousand posts (or more) will argue, analyze, nitpick (it's actually periwinkle!) in an exercise of critical thought (and more acurately, critical talk). But the minute any liberal shill comes out with a statement that plays to a grand conspiracy orchestrated by (the government, george bush, karl rove, "insert your least favorite conservative here"), you all jump on the bandwagon with nary a wink at the facts, common sense, or anything remotely representing critical thinking.
Here's an example:
The anti-war left loves to chant that Iraq is a war for oil. Okay, let's assume that statement is true. Now that we "occupy" Iraq, why haven't we gotten our greedy, American pig-dog capitalist hands on it? Why hasn't the worldwide market for oil reflected (via lower, not higher prices) increased supply of oil flowing out of Iraq?
The answer is, because the premise is false. Anyone who takes the time to understand a nit of oil production learns that Iraq's oil reserves are largely untapped because of the difficulty extracting it (Financial Times did a wonderful piece on this in May 2003). At a cost of trillions of dollars to simply prosecute the war and secure the country, if you could somehow extract the oil, it would take decades to earn a return on investment. In short, it would a) financially cheaper, and b) politically more expedient to piss off the environmental kooks and drill in ANWaR than go to war in Iraq if the goal was oil.
But most of you Slashdotters, who otherwise pride yourselves on your smarts, hipness, contrarian thinking and general exclusiveness are eager join the chorus "No War For Oil". Well, all I can say is that is simply lazy thinking. Next time you hear a story about the big bad (the government, george bush, karl rove, "insert your least favorite conservative here"), maybe you'll take a minute to check the facts - apply a little common sense - think about the story, where it's coming from, who's involved and ponder what motivations they might have for furthering that story. And then, God willing, maybe you'll post an intelligent thought about it on Slashdot for others to ponder.
Unless it can do 0-60 in 5.2 seconds AND sip gas like it's Maker's Mark, I'm not interested.
What!? It's not THAT kind of hybrid?
Nevermind.