Also worthy of note is that insulting Muslims, Christians, Blacks or Whites is perfectly allowed and legal in this country, as long as you don't insult them for being Muslims, Christians, Blacks or Whites.
That's retarded. I can understand trying to prevent people from spreading hate based on race, even if I disagree with it... but punishing people for insulting an ideology??? Are you also not allowed to insult someone for being a communist? Or a capitalist? If you're not allowed to insult peoples ideas and beliefs, what ARE you allowed to insult?
I live in NY... and you'll hear lots of people saying they were proud to vote for a black man for President, but those same people moved when blacks started encroaching on their white neighborhoods, send their kids to mostly white private schools, etc. While they publicly talk a good game, they still don't want to be around "those kind of people" privately.
That's complete nonsense. They don't live in those neighborhoods and send their children to those schools because they want racial segregation - they do it because those neighborhoods and those schools are upper-class environments where their children can prosper without having to worry excessively about crime or violence, and because those schools tend to offer a better quality of education. Parents who can afford to send their kids to a private school don't start the selection process by saying "hrm, let's see which school has the fewest negros" - they send their children to the best school they can find. Unfortunately, due to the economic discrepancy between the races, those schools tend to have fewer black students, but you're confusing correlation with causation.
You know, it's like you went out to a rich neighborhood, looked at the kind of cars most of them drive, and then concluded that rich people must be massively pro-German. It makes no sense.
As for the whole "proud to vote for a black man" thing... that IS racist. If you're more proud to vote for a particular candidate due to his race, you're a bigot, regardless of whether he's black, white, green, or purple.
Yeah, that's the guy, Hopey-Wan Kenobi. If there was ever a president elected for purely emotional reasons, he's The One.
And, while I appreciate you wishing me well, I don't need any luck with the 2012 election since I'm not a US citizen. I'll extend your regards to my American acquaintances, though.
He's telling you how his day-to-day job works, you moron!
Right, why don't you scroll up and re-read my last message. You clearly didn't get it the first time.
If a pilot told you, in all seriousness, that most aircraft are actually flown by blind gophers on LSD, what the hell basis would you have to disagree with him? How often have you been in a cockpit?
Every day. Even without that experience, though, I'd know that he's full of shit. That's because I'm not a gullible fool - unlike you, I know how to evaluate and verify data in order to reach a rational conclusion. I also know how to fact-check; it's not that difficult to ask other pilots for verification, or to verify the facts through personal observation.
I work on "high end military hardware", so I'm rather unimpressed by your explanation. There's a massive difference between maintaining an aircraft fleet which is constantly in use, and maintaining an ICBM fleet which is never used. You give me a couple hundred aircraft which never have to fly and I'll give you a 99% mission-capable fleet on a constant basis. The kind of figures you're quoting don't even occur on fleets in regular use, let alone ones which are never operated.
A 25% unserviceability rate, and a 50% malfunction rate? Maybe in Mexico! If you actually want to have an accurate estimate, you need to use figures which are at last somewhat realistic.
would you bet that the current administration won't launch a surprise attack against Russia as soon as their nuclear arsenal can be taken care of with the US antimissile defenses? I know that I wouldn't...
Then you're a fool. Sorry for the ad-hom, but there's really no other way to respond to such an irrational statement. If you think Obama is interested in Nuking the Russians, you're either an idiot or a lunatic.
Well, if a pilot told me that most aircraft are actually flown by blind gophers on LSD, I'd tell him to fuck off, too.
Some claims can be substantiated with an Argument From Authority - others can not. That's why when "Dr." Stephen Jones tells me that he's found "thermate residue" in the wreckage of the twin towers, I can laugh in his face and say "that's rust and sulfur, you fucking moron!". The fact that he has the letters "PhD" beside his name doesn't necessarily mean that he has any clue what he's talking about. Some claims are just retarded and wrong (aka "unsupported"), regardless of how many degrees their proponents manage to accrue. That's the whole reason behind the peer-review process.
The insight is in his detailed explanation of just HOW wrong the other person was. For instance, he pointed out that not only was numbnuts wrong in the present tense, but also in the past, and most likely in the future. Don't you see how insightful that is? Without that commentary I would have never seen the temporal implications of the original comments wrongness.
Bush never would have never been able to lie the US into Iraq
Are people still seriously repeating that nonsense? I mean, I understand repeating such ridiculous hyperbole in order to score political points, but I thought it would stop after Obama got elected.
Well, right after the sept 11th attacks, the internets was pretty useless. I had access to a T3 at the time, and no news sites took less than a minute to reload.
On the other hand, I didn't even bother checking the news sites. I was logged into an IRC network, getting news reports relayed from something like 20 different cities. The internet still worked fine for disseminating information.
From what we know atm and in the cases I'm thinking of in general, it's more like the speedometer crapped out and the cruise control disengaged
I know that on Slashdot it's considered poor form to expect others to actually read the article, but you could have at LEAST read the summary. "Cascading systems failure" is a little more serious that a malfunctioning speedometer.
In this case the judgement of Captain Human was to try a borderline stall (test flight, remember?) during the final approach instead of at high altitude because Captain Computer would save him, right?
Oh, so you're an air-accident investigator, AND a psychic? Wow. You're my hero.
Speculation is all fine and good, but please don't pull ideas out of your ass and then try to pass them off as fact.
I never said that all pilots were idiots, just that the average quality is deteriorating
I think you meant "flight computer" rather than autopilot. But yeah, I hear ya. Also, WAY too many drivers these days have problems operating their car when the throttle sensor craps out, the brake-lines bleed dry, and the steering wheel snaps off.
Now Fred Flinstone... THERE was a REAL driver! Ah, how I long for the Good Old Days....
Airbus has taken enough damage from their delays with the A400M - Boing hardly needs to heap on. Not to mention that your conspiracy-theory train of thought it beyond absurd.
Yes, because what we really need is pilots who can program in assembly while rewiring the control panel with their toes. Blindfolded. At mach 15.
You've watched one too many holywood flicks. If your computers crap out while airborne, you don't have time to troubleshoot and diagnose. You just follow the preset procedures, and hope that one of them works before you hit the ground.
A disease, by definition, is something abnormal. Since all living things age and die, she IS abnormal. Saying that all living things are diseased and she's the only normal one would just be silly.
Of course, the other problem is that she probably IS aging. There's not enough info in the article, and I haven't been able to find any details online, but the story does suggest that parts of her body are aging and developing at different paces. Also, they say that there's nothing unusual about her chromosomes/DNA, meaning, I assume, that the telomeres in her DNA are no different than yours or mine. That would mean that, assuming she doesn't die early from disease or a complication of her condition, she'll probably die at the same age as the rest of us - she just won't develop into an adult first.
Slashdot Mirror
That's retarded. I can understand trying to prevent people from spreading hate based on race, even if I disagree with it ... but punishing people for insulting an ideology??? Are you also not allowed to insult someone for being a communist? Or a capitalist? If you're not allowed to insult peoples ideas and beliefs, what ARE you allowed to insult?
That's complete nonsense. They don't live in those neighborhoods and send their children to those schools because they want racial segregation - they do it because those neighborhoods and those schools are upper-class environments where their children can prosper without having to worry excessively about crime or violence, and because those schools tend to offer a better quality of education. Parents who can afford to send their kids to a private school don't start the selection process by saying "hrm, let's see which school has the fewest negros" - they send their children to the best school they can find. Unfortunately, due to the economic discrepancy between the races, those schools tend to have fewer black students, but you're confusing correlation with causation.
You know, it's like you went out to a rich neighborhood, looked at the kind of cars most of them drive, and then concluded that rich people must be massively pro-German. It makes no sense.
As for the whole "proud to vote for a black man" thing ... that IS racist. If you're more proud to vote for a particular candidate due to his race, you're a bigot, regardless of whether he's black, white, green, or purple.
Yeah, that's the guy, Hopey-Wan Kenobi. If there was ever a president elected for purely emotional reasons, he's The One.
And, while I appreciate you wishing me well, I don't need any luck with the 2012 election since I'm not a US citizen. I'll extend your regards to my American acquaintances, though.
Right, why don't you scroll up and re-read my last message. You clearly didn't get it the first time.
Every day. Even without that experience, though, I'd know that he's full of shit. That's because I'm not a gullible fool - unlike you, I know how to evaluate and verify data in order to reach a rational conclusion. I also know how to fact-check; it's not that difficult to ask other pilots for verification, or to verify the facts through personal observation.
I work on "high end military hardware", so I'm rather unimpressed by your explanation. There's a massive difference between maintaining an aircraft fleet which is constantly in use, and maintaining an ICBM fleet which is never used. You give me a couple hundred aircraft which never have to fly and I'll give you a 99% mission-capable fleet on a constant basis. The kind of figures you're quoting don't even occur on fleets in regular use, let alone ones which are never operated.
I think you misspelled "Barrack Obama" ... aka "Hopey Changey".
A 25% unserviceability rate, and a 50% malfunction rate? Maybe in Mexico! If you actually want to have an accurate estimate, you need to use figures which are at last somewhat realistic.
Then you're a fool. Sorry for the ad-hom, but there's really no other way to respond to such an irrational statement. If you think Obama is interested in Nuking the Russians, you're either an idiot or a lunatic.
Thank you. That was the most insightful comment on here, by far.
Well, if a pilot told me that most aircraft are actually flown by blind gophers on LSD, I'd tell him to fuck off, too.
Some claims can be substantiated with an Argument From Authority - others can not. That's why when "Dr." Stephen Jones tells me that he's found "thermate residue" in the wreckage of the twin towers, I can laugh in his face and say "that's rust and sulfur, you fucking moron!". The fact that he has the letters "PhD" beside his name doesn't necessarily mean that he has any clue what he's talking about. Some claims are just retarded and wrong (aka "unsupported"), regardless of how many degrees their proponents manage to accrue. That's the whole reason behind the peer-review process.
Let me get this straight .... you claim to be a scientist ... and then claim that the scientific method is junk?
Awesome. That's like your dentist saying "you know, I really have no idea what I'm doing here ... but let me go get my pliers".
The insight is in his detailed explanation of just HOW wrong the other person was. For instance, he pointed out that not only was numbnuts wrong in the present tense, but also in the past, and most likely in the future. Don't you see how insightful that is? Without that commentary I would have never seen the temporal implications of the original comments wrongness.
Are people still seriously repeating that nonsense? I mean, I understand repeating such ridiculous hyperbole in order to score political points, but I thought it would stop after Obama got elected.
On the other hand, I didn't even bother checking the news sites. I was logged into an IRC network, getting news reports relayed from something like 20 different cities. The internet still worked fine for disseminating information.
I know that on Slashdot it's considered poor form to expect others to actually read the article, but you could have at LEAST read the summary. "Cascading systems failure" is a little more serious that a malfunctioning speedometer.
Oh, so you're an air-accident investigator, AND a psychic? Wow. You're my hero.
Speculation is all fine and good, but please don't pull ideas out of your ass and then try to pass them off as fact.
[citation needed]
I think you meant "flight computer" rather than autopilot. But yeah, I hear ya. Also, WAY too many drivers these days have problems operating their car when the throttle sensor craps out, the brake-lines bleed dry, and the steering wheel snaps off.
Now Fred Flinstone ... THERE was a REAL driver! Ah, how I long for the Good Old Days ....
Airbus has taken enough damage from their delays with the A400M - Boing hardly needs to heap on. Not to mention that your conspiracy-theory train of thought it beyond absurd.
Yes, because what we really need is pilots who can program in assembly while rewiring the control panel with their toes. Blindfolded. At mach 15.
You've watched one too many holywood flicks. If your computers crap out while airborne, you don't have time to troubleshoot and diagnose. You just follow the preset procedures, and hope that one of them works before you hit the ground.
+50 Pedantic
Man, if you'd been born in the 1910's, you could have made a hell of contribution to the German research programs.
What the heck did that have to do with anything?
Yes, natural selection had no reason to select for long life spans. So what? That's completely unrelated to this girl's condition.
Psh. When we create a new universe, we're leaving all you pessimists behind.
You're an asshole, but I laughed anyway :)
Is your argument really "let's keep her alive because she's a useful lab-animal"?
A disease, by definition, is something abnormal. Since all living things age and die, she IS abnormal. Saying that all living things are diseased and she's the only normal one would just be silly.
Of course, the other problem is that she probably IS aging. There's not enough info in the article, and I haven't been able to find any details online, but the story does suggest that parts of her body are aging and developing at different paces. Also, they say that there's nothing unusual about her chromosomes/DNA, meaning, I assume, that the telomeres in her DNA are no different than yours or mine. That would mean that, assuming she doesn't die early from disease or a complication of her condition, she'll probably die at the same age as the rest of us - she just won't develop into an adult first.