"At the outset, let me state that Buddhism is not atheistic as the term is ordinarily understood. It has certainly a God, the highest reality and truth, through which and in which this universe exists. However, the followers of Buddhism usually avoid the term God, for it savors so much of Christianity, whose spirit is not always exactly in accord with the Buddhist interpretation of religious experience"
Atheists don't believe in a deity, but they might still have some spiritual component
Yes, but that's because the word "spiritual" is completely fucking useless, and can mean absolutely anything.
Buddhists are atheists, for example.
No, they're not. You may have noticed that the word "atheism" contains the word "theism". I know, it's hard to see, but it's in there.
Funny enough, the ancient Greeks used to refer to Christians as atheists, because they didn't believe in the Greek Gods. If you're going to use such a limited definition of the word, you're making the same mistake the Greeks did.
Heh. It's funny that you can completely accept that Maltheus was overreacting because he failed to allow for the advancement of technology, and in the same breath claim that we're all doomed because we're running out of X. Maltheus would have been proud.
Yeah, I've seen those. They're a friggin' pain to get working. Plus the NTFS driver is read-only. There is a RW driver available out there, but I haven't been able to get it working. And I did manage to get read/write support for NTFS on Solaris, so it's not (just) a question of me being incompetent:)
I'm not entirely sold on the self-esteem would explain this: the elderly could be more pessimistic, perhaps they had a more negative experience during childhood (WWII anyone?) that they can better relate to, or perhaps they're cranky that they're about to die and jealous of the kids that can actually go out and have fun.
More likely it's biological. At younger ages we're evolved to desire risk, adventure, and a change in the status quo. Such behavior generally gives us a better chance at surviving as a species, and we select for those traits through our choice of mates. As you get older, though, you're less able to cope with change. The status-quo becomes desirable because it generally provides you with a better chance of living a long and comfortable life. Taking pleasure in the folly of youth is just an extension of that - it helps reassure you that things aren't going to change, and that "your way" really is "the best way". I doubt "experiences" have anything to do with it, otherwise we'd see old people in other cultures behaving in completely different ways.
Sure, mistakes happen in war. We know now, however, what the price in civilian lives has been for our "war". We know how many civilians have been killed, how many times we've screwed up and had friendly fire accidents, etc. It helps the civilian population decide that at some point, the cost of policing some other country isn't worth the number of soldiers we've lost plus the number of civilians we've accidentally killed.
No, it doesn't. Do you honestly think that an American who, up to this point, had supported the war is suddenly going to think:
"OMFG! We've killed 537 civilians, not 483! How could they hide that from us??? END THE WAR NOW!!"
I seriously doubt that you're stupid enough to believe something so ridiculous, so why pretend? Those - like you - who have been opposed to the war from day one will continue to oppose it, while those who have supported it will continue to support it. Meanwhile those civilians you're so concerned about will now be at greater risk, and less likely to cooperate with us. This whole thing is just mind-numbingly crazy. It's as if we're in upside-down land, where trying to help people is a bad thing, and trying to harm them is considered gallant and brave.
When I open the lid, it wakes up. Every time. Why can't Windows do this?
I dunno. My windows installation does it all the time. I haven't actually "shut down" my laptop in over a month - I always use the hybernate feature.
The question I have is why cant my stupid MacBook read NTFS? Or at least ext3? What kind of a jackass sells an OS designed to be unable to share data with other OS's?
And yes, the more people know what their governments are doing, the more likely it is they'll step up and say "stop it" when the government starts bombing hospitals.
Any person who didn't already know that civilian casualties occur in wars would have to be a drooling moron. What new information did wilikeals bring to the table? What do we know now about wars that we didn't know before Pope Assange the First graced us with his presence?
That's right: nothing. We didn't learn a goddamn thing. All his actions did was stir up controversy, needlessly endanger lives, negatively impact ongoing operations, and, apparently, get him laid. If you could point to just one positive effect to come out of the whole mess, you might have a point. As it is, you're just pissing in the wind.
Yeah, he's being smeared / discredited by a hardline feminist member of the far-left organization which invited him to speak in Sweeden in the first place. Right. Makes perfect sense.
All available evidence suggests that these deaths are related to the increasing use of prescription drugs, especially opioid painkillers, among people during the working years of life. A CDC study showed a correlation on the state level between usage of opioid painkillers and drug overdose death rates.
Make cocaine / heroin / opium legal, and you might see a decrease in "prescription" overdoses, but it'll be due to these same people switching to the recently legalized "over-the-counter" cocaine, instead.
I'm in favor of legalizing drugs, but I think the argument you guys are making here is just silly.
That experiment was garbage. Zimbardo - intentionally or not - set up an environment in which the participants were expected to behave in a sadistic fashion, and then expressed surprise when they actually did. How is that a shock? Human behavior is shaped by the societies which they inhabit - if you create a society where abuse and sadism are encouraged, that's what you're going to get.
The Milgram experiment was a bit more interesting, but it really has nothing to do with what's being discussed here.
You know, your ideas are fairly good, and your arguments are generally sound. Yet when you use phrases like "liberal lefties" and "liberal hippies", you sound like a complete fucking moron. I agree with you, yet even I would probably mod you "troll". Are you trying to come across as a dimwitted jackass, or do you honestly have no clue how to act any other way?
Honestly, yes, the feeling is a huge part of it. I spend a LOT of time on the road. Spending 6 hours nonstop in a car you enjoy driving is a lot different than spending the same amount of time in one you don't. It's that whole "5 minutes with a pretty girl or 5 seconds on a hot stove" thing.
There are other considerations, too - being able to carry a lot of stuff without bogging down, being able to pass quickly and efficiently on single-lane highways, etc. But yeah, just being able to enjoy driving is the main selling point. Perhaps if I spent less time on the road, I wouldn't worry about it so much, but as it is....
You simply can't get a small car without any bells and whistles anymore.
"The 2010 Kia Rio Base trim lives up to its name. It provides a seriously spartan experience at a rock-bottom price. While its styling and engine are shared with other, up-market Rios, the Base is conspicuously lacking even the most basic amenities in a quest to offer the best price possible.
The Rio Base is available only as a four-door sedan and rides on small, 14-inch wheels with narrow tires. Power steering isn't even offered as an option, and the only available transmission is a five-speed manual. The driving experience is quite basic, with minimal sound deadening and a noticeable lack of grip from the puny tires.
The interior of the Rio Base continues the bare-bones theme with manual windows, locks, and mirrors and no air conditioning, even as an option. A basic AM/FM CD stereo is at least standard and offers an auxiliary input jack."
You know, as much as I enjoy being able to destroy someones arguments with a simple cut-and-paste, I'd REALLY be much happier if people would just start checking their own assumptions before making these claims.
Unless, of course, you consider a 110hp engine and a basic CD player to be "bells and whistles". In which case, you're right - you can't buy a 1980's style shitbox any more, unless you're buying used. You also can't buy a brand new Commodore 64.
I'd say the shipping costs would be quite low, actually. Fast delivery times too. You could place your order, grab a baseball glove, head out to the back yard, and receive your package 5 minutes later.
Certainly some of the purchasing decisions are influenced by the "keeping-up-with-the-Joneses" syndrome. However, writing off the desire for larger/more comfortable vehicles in such simplistic terms is silly. I drive a Dodge Charger. I can honestly say that image and popularity didn't play the slightest role in my decision to make that purchase (although they are nice perks, in retrospect). When I first went looking for a new car, I test drove:
1. Kia Rio 2. Pontiac G5 3. Mazda 3 4. Mazda 6
I loved the price tag and the fuel efficiency on the Rio, but the engine was so underpowered and the car so cramped that my hopes for it were decimated only minutes after getting behind the wheel. The G5 was better, but still under-powered, and it just didn't feel good. The Mazda 3 was a SWEET ride - fast, maneuverable, a joy to drive - but didn't have the capacity I needed. The Mazda 6 wasn't quite as much fun to drive, but I still enjoyed it, and it had plenty of room. I almost ended up buying it, until I realized that it's fuel efficiency figures were identical to a 3.5L Charger which I had seen listed at a bankruptcy sale for a much lower price. At no point in the process did I consider what other people would think of my car, or what "they" say I should buy. I simply chose the vehicle in my price range which best suited my needs and desires.
Like you, I support the "green movement" when it makes sense. Using CFL's instead of incandescents, buying efficient appliances, using mass transit when practical... I'm all for it. On the other hand, I'm not going to create problems for myself just so I can feel like I'm "doing something for the environment". If you expect people to use "green" technology, you have to make it suit their needs - otherwise you're just wasting resources on products that most people won't have any interest in.
When they see some 1983 Honda Civic sporting MPG of 50 (or whatever it was, certainly higher than today) they compare that to today's Civic and wonder, WTF happened?
What happened is they got roomier, more powerful, more comfortable, and safer. Air conditioning, airbags, sturdier frames, triple the horsepower... all of these things add weight and higher fuel requirements. Hell, some of the old Civics didn't even have a tachometer!
Maybe you're the kind of guy who prefers to have nothing but a box on 4 wheels. Maybe you also prefer to have a 19 inch CRT television instead of a 55 inch LCD. You are, however, in the minority, and people like you don't make up a large enough market segment to matter. I'm sorry that you're unhappy about it, but that's the reality.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_in_Buddhism#Zen_and_the_Absolute
One sample:
"At the outset, let me state that Buddhism is not atheistic as the term is ordinarily understood. It has certainly a God, the highest reality and truth, through which and in which this universe exists. However, the followers of Buddhism usually avoid the term God, for it savors so much of Christianity, whose spirit is not always exactly in accord with the Buddhist interpretation of religious experience"
You going to pull the no-true-Scotsman card now?
RUN FOR YER LIVEZ!!!!!!!!!
Atheists don't believe in a deity, but they might still have some spiritual component
Yes, but that's because the word "spiritual" is completely fucking useless, and can mean absolutely anything.
Buddhists are atheists, for example.
No, they're not. You may have noticed that the word "atheism" contains the word "theism". I know, it's hard to see, but it's in there.
Funny enough, the ancient Greeks used to refer to Christians as atheists, because they didn't believe in the Greek Gods. If you're going to use such a limited definition of the word, you're making the same mistake the Greeks did.
Heh. It's funny that you can completely accept that Maltheus was overreacting because he failed to allow for the advancement of technology, and in the same breath claim that we're all doomed because we're running out of X. Maltheus would have been proud.
You mean they'll stop erroneously pointing to Hitler, Stalin, and Mao, and point to this guy for a change?
Oh noes. What shall we ever do.
Um, if he has religious convictions regarding nature, then by definition he can not possibly be an atheist.
Yeah, I've seen those. They're a friggin' pain to get working. Plus the NTFS driver is read-only. There is a RW driver available out there, but I haven't been able to get it working. And I did manage to get read/write support for NTFS on Solaris, so it's not (just) a question of me being incompetent :)
Shh! You're interrupting the general narrative of this entire page. What are you trying to do - kill all your Karma?
DOWN WITH THE "OFFICIAL" PRESS! FREEDOM THROUGH LEAKS! LONG LIVE HIS HOLINESS, POPE ASSANGE THE FIRST!
I'm not entirely sold on the self-esteem would explain this: the elderly could be more pessimistic, perhaps they had a more negative experience during childhood (WWII anyone?) that they can better relate to, or perhaps they're cranky that they're about to die and jealous of the kids that can actually go out and have fun.
More likely it's biological. At younger ages we're evolved to desire risk, adventure, and a change in the status quo. Such behavior generally gives us a better chance at surviving as a species, and we select for those traits through our choice of mates. As you get older, though, you're less able to cope with change. The status-quo becomes desirable because it generally provides you with a better chance of living a long and comfortable life. Taking pleasure in the folly of youth is just an extension of that - it helps reassure you that things aren't going to change, and that "your way" really is "the best way". I doubt "experiences" have anything to do with it, otherwise we'd see old people in other cultures behaving in completely different ways.
Sure, mistakes happen in war. We know now, however, what the price in civilian lives has been for our "war". We know how many civilians have been killed, how many times we've screwed up and had friendly fire accidents, etc. It helps the civilian population decide that at some point, the cost of policing some other country isn't worth the number of soldiers we've lost plus the number of civilians we've accidentally killed.
No, it doesn't. Do you honestly think that an American who, up to this point, had supported the war is suddenly going to think:
"OMFG! We've killed 537 civilians, not 483! How could they hide that from us??? END THE WAR NOW!!"
I seriously doubt that you're stupid enough to believe something so ridiculous, so why pretend? Those - like you - who have been opposed to the war from day one will continue to oppose it, while those who have supported it will continue to support it. Meanwhile those civilians you're so concerned about will now be at greater risk, and less likely to cooperate with us. This whole thing is just mind-numbingly crazy. It's as if we're in upside-down land, where trying to help people is a bad thing, and trying to harm them is considered gallant and brave.
When I open the lid, it wakes up. Every time. Why can't Windows do this?
I dunno. My windows installation does it all the time. I haven't actually "shut down" my laptop in over a month - I always use the hybernate feature.
The question I have is why cant my stupid MacBook read NTFS? Or at least ext3? What kind of a jackass sells an OS designed to be unable to share data with other OS's?
And yes, the more people know what their governments are doing, the more likely it is they'll step up and say "stop it" when the government starts bombing hospitals.
Any person who didn't already know that civilian casualties occur in wars would have to be a drooling moron. What new information did wilikeals bring to the table? What do we know now about wars that we didn't know before Pope Assange the First graced us with his presence?
That's right: nothing. We didn't learn a goddamn thing. All his actions did was stir up controversy, needlessly endanger lives, negatively impact ongoing operations, and, apparently, get him laid. If you could point to just one positive effect to come out of the whole mess, you might have a point. As it is, you're just pissing in the wind.
Yeah, he's being smeared / discredited by a hardline feminist member of the far-left organization which invited him to speak in Sweeden in the first place. Right. Makes perfect sense.
Hire lesbians.
You could always build your own. Get a lawnmower engine, a lawn-chair, some cardboard and a roll of ductape, and you're good to go :)
The article clearly states:
All available evidence suggests that these deaths are related to the increasing use of prescription drugs, especially opioid painkillers, among people during the working years of life. A CDC study showed a correlation on the state level between usage of opioid painkillers and drug overdose death rates.
Make cocaine / heroin / opium legal, and you might see a decrease in "prescription" overdoses, but it'll be due to these same people switching to the recently legalized "over-the-counter" cocaine, instead.
I'm in favor of legalizing drugs, but I think the argument you guys are making here is just silly.
That experiment was garbage. Zimbardo - intentionally or not - set up an environment in which the participants were expected to behave in a sadistic fashion, and then expressed surprise when they actually did. How is that a shock? Human behavior is shaped by the societies which they inhabit - if you create a society where abuse and sadism are encouraged, that's what you're going to get.
The Milgram experiment was a bit more interesting, but it really has nothing to do with what's being discussed here.
You know, your ideas are fairly good, and your arguments are generally sound. Yet when you use phrases like "liberal lefties" and "liberal hippies", you sound like a complete fucking moron. I agree with you, yet even I would probably mod you "troll". Are you trying to come across as a dimwitted jackass, or do you honestly have no clue how to act any other way?
Honestly, yes, the feeling is a huge part of it. I spend a LOT of time on the road. Spending 6 hours nonstop in a car you enjoy driving is a lot different than spending the same amount of time in one you don't. It's that whole "5 minutes with a pretty girl or 5 seconds on a hot stove" thing.
There are other considerations, too - being able to carry a lot of stuff without bogging down, being able to pass quickly and efficiently on single-lane highways, etc. But yeah, just being able to enjoy driving is the main selling point. Perhaps if I spent less time on the road, I wouldn't worry about it so much, but as it is ....
I somehow doubt that there are any diabetics in orbit.
You simply can't get a small car without any bells and whistles anymore.
"The 2010 Kia Rio Base trim lives up to its name. It provides a seriously spartan experience at a rock-bottom price. While its styling and engine are shared with other, up-market Rios, the Base is conspicuously lacking even the most basic amenities in a quest to offer the best price possible.
The Rio Base is available only as a four-door sedan and rides on small, 14-inch wheels with narrow tires. Power steering isn't even offered as an option, and the only available transmission is a five-speed manual. The driving experience is quite basic, with minimal sound deadening and a noticeable lack of grip from the puny tires.
The interior of the Rio Base continues the bare-bones theme with manual windows, locks, and mirrors and no air conditioning, even as an option. A basic AM/FM CD stereo is at least standard and offers an auxiliary input jack."
http://www.cargurus.com/Cars/Overview-t37068-2010-Rio-Base.html
You know, as much as I enjoy being able to destroy someones arguments with a simple cut-and-paste, I'd REALLY be much happier if people would just start checking their own assumptions before making these claims.
Unless, of course, you consider a 110hp engine and a basic CD player to be "bells and whistles". In which case, you're right - you can't buy a 1980's style shitbox any more, unless you're buying used. You also can't buy a brand new Commodore 64.
I'd say the shipping costs would be quite low, actually. Fast delivery times too. You could place your order, grab a baseball glove, head out to the back yard, and receive your package 5 minutes later.
Certainly some of the purchasing decisions are influenced by the "keeping-up-with-the-Joneses" syndrome. However, writing off the desire for larger/more comfortable vehicles in such simplistic terms is silly. I drive a Dodge Charger. I can honestly say that image and popularity didn't play the slightest role in my decision to make that purchase (although they are nice perks, in retrospect). When I first went looking for a new car, I test drove:
1. Kia Rio
2. Pontiac G5
3. Mazda 3
4. Mazda 6
I loved the price tag and the fuel efficiency on the Rio, but the engine was so underpowered and the car so cramped that my hopes for it were decimated only minutes after getting behind the wheel. The G5 was better, but still under-powered, and it just didn't feel good. The Mazda 3 was a SWEET ride - fast, maneuverable, a joy to drive - but didn't have the capacity I needed. The Mazda 6 wasn't quite as much fun to drive, but I still enjoyed it, and it had plenty of room. I almost ended up buying it, until I realized that it's fuel efficiency figures were identical to a 3.5L Charger which I had seen listed at a bankruptcy sale for a much lower price. At no point in the process did I consider what other people would think of my car, or what "they" say I should buy. I simply chose the vehicle in my price range which best suited my needs and desires.
Like you, I support the "green movement" when it makes sense. Using CFL's instead of incandescents, buying efficient appliances, using mass transit when practical ... I'm all for it. On the other hand, I'm not going to create problems for myself just so I can feel like I'm "doing something for the environment". If you expect people to use "green" technology, you have to make it suit their needs - otherwise you're just wasting resources on products that most people won't have any interest in.
When they see some 1983 Honda Civic sporting MPG of 50 (or whatever it was, certainly higher than today) they compare that to today's Civic and wonder, WTF happened?
What happened is they got roomier, more powerful, more comfortable, and safer. Air conditioning, airbags, sturdier frames, triple the horsepower ... all of these things add weight and higher fuel requirements. Hell, some of the old Civics didn't even have a tachometer!
Maybe you're the kind of guy who prefers to have nothing but a box on 4 wheels. Maybe you also prefer to have a 19 inch CRT television instead of a 55 inch LCD. You are, however, in the minority, and people like you don't make up a large enough market segment to matter. I'm sorry that you're unhappy about it, but that's the reality.
And all the citations point straight to your ass.