You are, of course, right about our cultural norm.
I had written out a long response, but I've decided to not waste so much of 'our' time. It's a complex, philosophical topic and we will not conquer it here.
Suffice to say, that I hold the opinion that not only are our cultural norms fairly absurd in many cases, but I think what you suggest leans a bit far towards the 'permission' end of the 'you can ask for permission or you can ask for forgiveness' spectrum for what I think would promote a well-adjusted and emotionally developed society.:)
Unfortunately, for those who are ill-equipped or disinclined (by disposition) to debate, an attempt to engage in rational and or critical analysis and discussion can be treated as if it were offensive. People who don't 'get' debate and or who do very poorly at it (against those who have the faculties and abilities) often get pretty steamed when you (perhaps) inadvertently make it clear how baseless and or ill-informed their positions are.:)
Is it? I don't think you can say that empirically.
I happen to think I would be perfectly content to have a nice quiet neighborhood wherein some of the very few sounds would include the sound of a distracted texter or inattentive daydreamer yelping in pain as they bounce to the tarmac.
Putting aside the considerations for blind persons, which is a topic I have not resolved in my own mind so I have no opinion, I am SICK AND TIRED of dumbing down everything in existence to the lowest common denominator. We do too much to protect that tiny fraction of people who would otherwise deservedly suffer the wrath of natural selection -or- fulfill a statistical probability. Shit happens. Don't turn my world into a freakin' idiot-proof padded room to save a *few* lives. We have too many people as it is. I'll take days and days of quiet for the infinitesimal chance of one person having a bad day. Even if it's me.
I disagree that "nearly everybody LEARNS" from having fallen for one hoax. There are plenty of people who might come to recognize one kind of deception, only to fall prey to another. It's healthy skepticism combined with the faculty for critical thinking that reduces that probability. While I can agree that the internet is a good source of information or fact that a person can avail themselves of for debunking things, and that a person can develop their thinking skills by using internet resources, there is something more fundamental about a society-wide disinterest in doing such that I am on about.
I was not trying to beat you up about anything. I was making a point about how learning happens. Just being exposed to knowledge is not enough for learning, especially deeper levels of learning. If you can't appreciate that, then's there not much more to be said here.
As to the rest of your response, which amounts to undeserved personal attack and or threat, you do yourself a disservice. You seem to condone social pressure or violence against people who voice views and opinions that make you feel an unpleasant emotion.
That whole notion of 'you're only saying that because you're hiding behind your computer' thing? That's kind of funny. In a sad way. You're trotting out a tired, half-assed taunt that is intended to suggest that I am a coward. You have no idea who I am or how I conduct myself.
As for 'rejection', I don't fear being rejected by people who can't have a rational discussion, including disagreement and critical analysis, such that their statements or opinions might come to question or disproof, without acting as you have done here.
As for 'physical insult' part, wow. So, would you like to punch me in the face because you are feeling ouchy inside? Impressive.
For the record; it's true I don't have a lot of friends. The friends I do have are of a caliber that suits my sensibilities. They don't tend to get all pissy when we disagree or critique each others' ideas or positions. They can hold their own in conversations and discussions without slinging arrows.
With my spotty memory faculties, I also see/use the 'net as a source of information that I might otherwise retain in my head.
I, too, am constantly humbled by the real genius out there. And then, 2 minutes later, I am lifted so high by the idiocy out there.:)
I also think that the 'net can lead to intellectual laziness. People who are already predisposed to not caring about deeper levels of knowledge and understanding, of the kind that lead to the ability to extrapolate from what they already know to new ideas for example, will continue to acquire and regurgitate mere information, leaving real thought and exploration behind.
If I give you a nail gun and wood and tell you to build a house but instead you discover that shooting at cans with the nail gun and burning the wood in a bonfire is more entertaining than shelter... who's fault is that?
I just had to say; I really liked this illustration. I've met people who would shoot the cans and have a fire.
The real crime in our modern world? That we prop these people up and help them survive - subverting natural selection.;-\
"The net teaches us to be very good at discerning bullshit from true facts"
No, the 'net doesn't teach us anything. We teach ourselves, as and if we choose to expose ourselves to knowledge and choose to incorporate it into how we experience and process our existence.
More specifically, while "the 'Net" can be used to debunk falsehoods, it doesn't *teach* discernment. That still involves a capacity for critical thought and an interest in not being easily susceptible to bullshit. Just because the 'Net offers information and or facts, does not mean people will magically be shown how to good use of them, when they might. You still need a person to think, even a little, on their own.
You can lead a horse to drink but he can still be a gullible ignoramus.
I will punish comcast by never signing up for their service.
If only that were possible where I live.
It is always possible to no sign up for Comcast. Simply don't do it. Of course, you may be too addicted or otherwise obsessed with LOLCATZ or whatever to *want* to do without what Comcast gives you.:)
My former employer suffered more than one very serious work-stoppage (lost scores of manhours) over the whole LAN due to problems caused by a developer whose Windows Domain account (and primary login on the local PC) has Administrator rights on the Domain and (thus) on the local machine. (This is due to Devs *not* being experts in networking, security, application and service mgmt, windows domain policies, etc. If they were, they would not have needed a Windows SA, right?) It was only after this fiasco that the mgmt folks acceded to my plan.
Put Dev boxes on their own network segment in their own Windows domain.
Use GPOs for various security/software settings, including Windows Firewall rules.
Give them VMs on local machines for development\local testing. (Cloning/Point-in-time images are AWESOME!)
Give them VMs on the network for shared work/testing.
Give them two accounts on their XP machines, one with elevated privileges. (Their 'admin' account)
Have them use "RunAs" and their 'admin account' to elevate privs for tasks, like installing software and changing system settings
It was a lot of work to set up, and a lot of pain the first couple of weeks to train/handhold the Devs, but it started to really work. Oh, it should be mentioned we has somewhat unusually high security requirements due to being in the financial sector and handling customer credit/debit card data, etc. But, really, most of this was designed and implemented to actually improve work processes and uptime. And it did.
I was thinking pretty much the same thing. I suspect that there are a lot of overstimulated ADHD kids (people under 35) out there for whom silence is a pretty uncomfortable thing.
I don't use Facebook to expand my existing social network. I use it to have a sort of 'chat room' amongst my friends where we can keep each other updated on the things we are doing with our lives. It's a one-to-many 'sharing' environment. I post about the book I am reading. All my Friends can see that. Maybe someone is reading the same book and has a remark. Or they had meant to read it but forgot the name of it and my posting it reminded them. Or a thousand other options. I can say that I plan to go to that Goth/SM club tomorrow and since it's only Friends that can see that, it's cool - and maybe they want to go with me. But the point is, something like Facebook is a way to stay connected. To deepen connections. To know what is going on with each other without having to make 100 phone calls or address an email to 100+ people, etc.
When people send me a Friend invite, I have an easy choice; is this someone I already know or someone I'm acquainted with that I want to know better *and* do I care what they are doing with their life? If yes, I accept the invite. If not, I mostly don't.
I don't use Facebook to find old friends. If they are old friends, we probably drifted apart for a good reason - with I think exactly 2 exceptions out of 100+ on my list so far.
So it makes perfect sense to me to want to have the option to NOT put up my pic or location to strangers. That said, I do think that having JUST the picture can be forced. That way I can confirm if this is the John Smith I think it is.
But, for me, the real, true bottom line is this. GIVE ME THE FUCKING OPTION to control what information I see fit. If I clamp it down so that no one can find me, that might be exactly what I WANT.
While I totally appreciate what it's like to have to expend some adrenaline to stop when I was not planning to, I think we all know that any accidents caused by Car A stopping and Car B hitting car Car A in the rear are completely the fault of the driver of Car B, in cases such as we are discussing.
If you are a) following at a safe distance and b) paying attention to the car in front of you, there's no reason to get into an accident. But most people follow too closely and or are doing other things with their attention, like daydreaming, texting, yelling at the brats in back, etc.
Whether or not that guy in Car A is overreacting and slamming on his brakes when he really does not need to is irrelevent to a conversation about the cause of such an accident. The guy in Car B screwed up.
But, our is a culture that wants to blame everyone else for what we create. *shrug*
So, I am genuinely curious here when I ask; Are you a troll or is your English really this poor?
I counted no less than 7 errors in spelling, punctuation and grammar. And I am no expert.
Is English your first language? Are you over the age of 12? Oh, never mind.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you for expressing this so articulately.
You are, of course, right about our cultural norm.
I had written out a long response, but I've decided to not waste so much of 'our' time. It's a complex, philosophical topic and we will not conquer it here.
Suffice to say, that I hold the opinion that not only are our cultural norms fairly absurd in many cases, but I think what you suggest leans a bit far towards the 'permission' end of the 'you can ask for permission or you can ask for forgiveness' spectrum for what I think would promote a well-adjusted and emotionally developed society. :)
Unfortunately, for those who are ill-equipped or disinclined (by disposition) to debate, an attempt to engage in rational and or critical analysis and discussion can be treated as if it were offensive. People who don't 'get' debate and or who do very poorly at it (against those who have the faculties and abilities) often get pretty steamed when you (perhaps) inadvertently make it clear how baseless and or ill-informed their positions are. :)
So, I suspect that Christians would dearly hope that God's FB account is not limited to 5,000 friends....
Is it? I don't think you can say that empirically.
I happen to think I would be perfectly content to have a nice quiet neighborhood wherein some of the very few sounds would include the sound of a distracted texter or inattentive daydreamer yelping in pain as they bounce to the tarmac.
Putting aside the considerations for blind persons, which is a topic I have not resolved in my own mind so I have no opinion, I am SICK AND TIRED of dumbing down everything in existence to the lowest common denominator. We do too much to protect that tiny fraction of people who would otherwise deservedly suffer the wrath of natural selection -or- fulfill a statistical probability. Shit happens. Don't turn my world into a freakin' idiot-proof padded room to save a *few* lives. We have too many people as it is. I'll take days and days of quiet for the infinitesimal chance of one person having a bad day. Even if it's me.
Sheesh.
"Until people learn..." Sounds like natural selection to me. :)
Yes, you have that right. It's called natural selection.
...swedish schoolgirls... ...hard... ....bigger....
Uhhuh
*jog head* What were we talking about?
Jonathan Livingston Seagull was fiction. You know that, right? :)
I disagree that "nearly everybody LEARNS" from having fallen for one hoax. There are plenty of people who might come to recognize one kind of deception, only to fall prey to another. It's healthy skepticism combined with the faculty for critical thinking that reduces that probability. While I can agree that the internet is a good source of information or fact that a person can avail themselves of for debunking things, and that a person can develop their thinking skills by using internet resources, there is something more fundamental about a society-wide disinterest in doing such that I am on about.
I was not trying to beat you up about anything. I was making a point about how learning happens. Just being exposed to knowledge is not enough for learning, especially deeper levels of learning. If you can't appreciate that, then's there not much more to be said here.
As to the rest of your response, which amounts to undeserved personal attack and or threat, you do yourself a disservice. You seem to condone social pressure or violence against people who voice views and opinions that make you feel an unpleasant emotion.
That whole notion of 'you're only saying that because you're hiding behind your computer' thing? That's kind of funny. In a sad way. You're trotting out a tired, half-assed taunt that is intended to suggest that I am a coward. You have no idea who I am or how I conduct myself.
As for 'rejection', I don't fear being rejected by people who can't have a rational discussion, including disagreement and critical analysis, such that their statements or opinions might come to question or disproof, without acting as you have done here.
As for 'physical insult' part, wow. So, would you like to punch me in the face because you are feeling ouchy inside? Impressive.
For the record; it's true I don't have a lot of friends. The friends I do have are of a caliber that suits my sensibilities. They don't tend to get all pissy when we disagree or critique each others' ideas or positions. They can hold their own in conversations and discussions without slinging arrows.
With my spotty memory faculties, I also see/use the 'net as a source of information that I might otherwise retain in my head.
I, too, am constantly humbled by the real genius out there. And then, 2 minutes later, I am lifted so high by the idiocy out there. :)
I also think that the 'net can lead to intellectual laziness. People who are already predisposed to not caring about deeper levels of knowledge and understanding, of the kind that lead to the ability to extrapolate from what they already know to new ideas for example, will continue to acquire and regurgitate mere information, leaving real thought and exploration behind.
If I give you a nail gun and wood and tell you to build a house but instead you discover that shooting at cans with the nail gun and burning the wood in a bonfire is more entertaining than shelter ... who's fault is that?
I just had to say; I really liked this illustration. I've met people who would shoot the cans and have a fire. The real crime in our modern world? That we prop these people up and help them survive - subverting natural selection. ;-\
"The net teaches us to be very good at discerning bullshit from true facts"
No, the 'net doesn't teach us anything. We teach ourselves, as and if we choose to expose ourselves to knowledge and choose to incorporate it into how we experience and process our existence.
More specifically, while "the 'Net" can be used to debunk falsehoods, it doesn't *teach* discernment. That still involves a capacity for critical thought and an interest in not being easily susceptible to bullshit. Just because the 'Net offers information and or facts, does not mean people will magically be shown how to good use of them, when they might. You still need a person to think, even a little, on their own.
You can lead a horse to drink but he can still be a gullible ignoramus.
If only that were possible where I live.
It is always possible to no sign up for Comcast. Simply don't do it. Of course, you may be too addicted or otherwise obsessed with LOLCATZ or whatever to *want* to do without what Comcast gives you. :)
But to say that spinning disks will go away is kinda short sighted... You meant long-sighted. FTFY :)
IT IS A DEAD PEER NET (better meter for 'par-rot')
a TV commercial won't give me a virus or steal my identity or make my TV almost unusable
My former employer suffered more than one very serious work-stoppage (lost scores of manhours) over the whole LAN due to problems caused by a developer whose Windows Domain account (and primary login on the local PC) has Administrator rights on the Domain and (thus) on the local machine. (This is due to Devs *not* being experts in networking, security, application and service mgmt, windows domain policies, etc. If they were, they would not have needed a Windows SA, right?) It was only after this fiasco that the mgmt folks acceded to my plan.
It was a lot of work to set up, and a lot of pain the first couple of weeks to train/handhold the Devs, but it started to really work. Oh, it should be mentioned we has somewhat unusually high security requirements due to being in the financial sector and handling customer credit/debit card data, etc. But, really, most of this was designed and implemented to actually improve work processes and uptime. And it did.
I was thinking pretty much the same thing. I suspect that there are a lot of overstimulated ADHD kids (people under 35) out there for whom silence is a pretty uncomfortable thing.
I don't use Facebook to expand my existing social network. I use it to have a sort of 'chat room' amongst my friends where we can keep each other updated on the things we are doing with our lives. It's a one-to-many 'sharing' environment. I post about the book I am reading. All my Friends can see that. Maybe someone is reading the same book and has a remark. Or they had meant to read it but forgot the name of it and my posting it reminded them. Or a thousand other options. I can say that I plan to go to that Goth/SM club tomorrow and since it's only Friends that can see that, it's cool - and maybe they want to go with me. But the point is, something like Facebook is a way to stay connected. To deepen connections. To know what is going on with each other without having to make 100 phone calls or address an email to 100+ people, etc. When people send me a Friend invite, I have an easy choice; is this someone I already know or someone I'm acquainted with that I want to know better *and* do I care what they are doing with their life? If yes, I accept the invite. If not, I mostly don't. I don't use Facebook to find old friends. If they are old friends, we probably drifted apart for a good reason - with I think exactly 2 exceptions out of 100+ on my list so far. So it makes perfect sense to me to want to have the option to NOT put up my pic or location to strangers. That said, I do think that having JUST the picture can be forced. That way I can confirm if this is the John Smith I think it is. But, for me, the real, true bottom line is this. GIVE ME THE FUCKING OPTION to control what information I see fit. If I clamp it down so that no one can find me, that might be exactly what I WANT.
Perhaps you'd prefer a nice game of chess or maybe global thermonuclear war?
While I totally appreciate what it's like to have to expend some adrenaline to stop when I was not planning to, I think we all know that any accidents caused by Car A stopping and Car B hitting car Car A in the rear are completely the fault of the driver of Car B, in cases such as we are discussing.
If you are a) following at a safe distance and b) paying attention to the car in front of you, there's no reason to get into an accident. But most people follow too closely and or are doing other things with their attention, like daydreaming, texting, yelling at the brats in back, etc.
Whether or not that guy in Car A is overreacting and slamming on his brakes when he really does not need to is irrelevent to a conversation about the cause of such an accident. The guy in Car B screwed up.
But, our is a culture that wants to blame everyone else for what we create. *shrug*
My copy of Firefox 2.0.0.6 on Win32 shows:
r - 2
network.http.max-connections - 24
network.http.max-connections-per-server - 8
network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-serve
So, I am genuinely curious here when I ask; Are you a troll or is your English really this poor? I counted no less than 7 errors in spelling, punctuation and grammar. And I am no expert. Is English your first language? Are you over the age of 12? Oh, never mind.
Damn.. no mod points today
+1 Insightful !
You've never worked for, or had non-trivial interactions with, a company with over, say, 5000 employees, have you?
:)
It's near impossible to have the left hand know what the right hand is up to when you have SO MANY arms.