When you purchase food at the store, you are leading to the inflation of price of tomatoes and cucumbers, thereby leading to the starvation of those who cannot afford it. Even if you're only enjoying your food in private, you're still supporting a culture of food-lovers.
And before you start with the "but food is a necessity" schtick, purchasing food is not a necessity. You could grow your own and avoid adding to the human misery!
Film cameras are still objectively "better" than digital cameras, when you consider contrast and colour-balance and all that.
Hardly. Modern SLR's are every bit as capable as any old film camera, and they're a thousand times more convenient, versatile, and forgiving. I can go out, snap 500 pictures, come back home, throw them on to the computer in RAW format, throw out the pics I don't want, adjust the colour balance on the ones I like without any quality loss, and have a dozen excellent quality snaps, all in an hour or two. And I guarantee that if we compared the pics between a film camera and a digital SLR, you either wouldn't be able to distinguish between the two, or you'd pick the digital photos as being the better of the bunch. Anyone who's worked in photography will tell you that digital is the only way to go.
Ditto for tube amps. It's true that right now the majority of artists still use them, but the main reasons for it is that:
a) Most of them grew up with analog equipment
b) The majority of the brand-name amps are analog, and in the music biz image counts for as much as sound
c) Indie bands which are just starting out can't afford brand-new equipment, so they end up with stuff that's 15+ years old (hence, analog).
I guarantee you could get just as good a sound out of digital equipment as you can out of analog, but due to the nature of the music industry there isn't all that much demand for digital equipment. This is changing, of course, as more younger artists enter the business, and more and more technicians become comfortable working with digital equipment. I guarantee that in 30 years tube amps will be a rarity.
Since when have government agencies ever needed a GOOD reason to do something?
Just because I think it's idiotic to go off on an "DEY JUST WANT TO CONTROL US THRU FEER!!!" rant doesn't mean I agree with their implementation of the system. I think it's a waste of money. But someone, somewhere, thinks that this is an effective way to defend airliners, and that it's a worthwhile investment. We should be discussing the benefits/drawbacks of the system, not launching into paranoia-mode.
It is just about fear and using fear to control you.
You were doing fine untill you hit that particular bit of nonsense.
It seems to be a good general rule of thumb that any time the words "fear" and "control" appear in a slashdot comment, the author turns out to be a drooling moron.
Seriously, wtf is wrong with you? How many people do you know of who are scared to death of the life-jacket under their seat? Real effective form of control there! Don't you think stormtroopers with assault rifles might work a bit better?
It never ceases to amaze me that this kind of crap gets modded insightful. Yes, absolutely, you're right, the US government has nothing better to do than try and scare you. That's the primary goal of all military ventures. You've foiled our secret plans!
This is where we all slink away muttering "We would have gotten away for it if it wasn't for those meddling kids!"
HEY! Don't you know ANYTHING?? NEVER let facts get in the way of a good jew-bash! Everything can be blamed on the JOOO...I mean THE ISRAEL LOBBY! Including the faking of the moon landing. Damn jooo...err, zionists!
While science can invent the atom bomb and describe its effects, it cannot say whether or not we should use it.
Neither can religion. In fact, science does a much better job of it than religion ever could - it lets us study statistics and probabilities, allowing us to make a logical choice about whether using or withholding the bomb would bring us closer to our aims. All religion can tell us is the opinion of some guy in a funny hat.
Extremist (e.g. literal biblical belief) christian religous views are SO common in America that it's hard to see this getting turned around - instead the culture will decline as other empires (europe, asia) that more value rationality and intellectualism will rise.
:lol:
I know you weren't trying to be funny, but damn, you couldn't have done a better job of it. Even ignoring the nonsense about "extremist religious views" being extremely common in America, the rest of your rant is just....right out there! Europe's full of idiots who believe in everything from psychics to miracle healing. The middle east and africa are full of religious zealots. South America is still on it's communism schtik. And the Asians are some of the most superstitious bastards on this planet!
Face it, the world's full of moron's, and the US is no exception. The only difference is what particular brand of stupidity the group under discussion happens to believe in. If you truly think that there's some sort of resurgence in religious thought which is about to destroy the US, then I've got some nice beach-side property in Nunavut to sell you...
"One of my pet peeves has always been the religious-nut atheists who won't admit that a fanatical belief that there is no possible way that there could be a God is just as much an act of faith as a fanatical belief that there has to be a God."
I've never actually met that type of atheist. I mean, I'm sure they exist, but judging by my experience they must be pretty rare. Most of the atheists I know seem to agree that the default position on all subjects should be scepticism. In other words, if you want me to believe that God exists, then show me some evidence. Ockham's Razor also plays a part in it. Overall most of us agree that there's no way to answer the question, which is why we consider it a pointless subject. It's like two blind men sitting around discussing the colour of the sky.
Replace 'male-centered' with 'self centered', and I think that she pretty much hit it right on the nose. Really, I'm sorry that you were 'scarred' by your 'book carrying event' but men and women both say stupid things all the time. Have you ever even considered that you scared her and she was searching for a reason to explain it?
From the PP:
"The woman in 1993 was just a jerk. The Florida State Women's Studies prof who defended her and not once expressed a sentiment of 'yes, she was a jerk'? She was the right-wing caricature of a feminazi."
You've attempted not only to defend the original sexist jerk, but you've also attempted to defend the professor who was defending her. Congrats, Red, you fit the description of "right-wing caricature of a femenazi" even better than that prof did.
An AC already gave you the answer you deserve, but he got modded down as flamebait, so I thought I'd give it a shot:
Completing a purchase and downloading a file online is a "digital sale". All aspects of the transaction are carried out through a digital medium. You walking down to the local music shop, on the other hand, is most definitely not digital. Unless you're walking on your toes or fingers:)
The same reason that tires for my car would have cost me $800+ in Canada, but I got them for $550 in the US. Namely, most things are more expensive in Canada. I'm guessing here, but if our personal level of taxation is anything to go by, the companies are probably getting raped too and passing the cost on to customers.
How many people die in traffic accidents per year? 41,000 or so? How many people in the US die of terrorism in the US per year? Let's average over a decade to account for 911. Over the past ten years, an estimated 410,000 died on our roadways, yet only 3000 by terrorists. So nearly 137 times the number of people in the last 10 years died on the road vs. terrorism, and yet how much money is spent on traffic safety vs. Homeland (In)Security? Am I missing something here?
No, you're perfectly right. In the same vein, tens of millions of women have sex every day in the united states, while only a few thousand are raped. Clearly rape isn't really a problem.
I haven't been able to fly for years without hassles, I suspect because of my vaguely mediterranian appearance.
You're welcome to suspect whatever you want, but I'm white with blonde hair and blue eyes, and I've been "randomly selected" for the rubber-glove treatment on every flight I've taken since 9/11. The only thing that's saved my ass (pun fully intended) is being able to flash my military ID at the screeners, and being able to speak to them without being nervous.
There are some very clear signs you can look for. Any soldier who's ever manned a checkpoint in Iraq or Afghanistan should be able to give you examples of what to look for when screening for suicide bombers. Is it effective 100% of the time? Of course not - nothing is. But you'd be surprised how many bombings you can prevent simply by watching for (for example) nervous clean-shaven muslims wearing a white cotton shirt.
Exactly. I have *always* used google to find wikipedia articles. You can't beat google with a 'site:' prefix. As a matter of fact, I have the following firefox bookmark stashed under the "wik" keyword"
Slashdot broke your URL. For anyone attempting to create a similar keyword, simply replace "%25s" with %s".
Slashdot Mirror
So....in other words, your beliefs aren't falsifiable, only some of the minor details are. Interesting.
When you purchase food at the store, you are leading to the inflation of price of tomatoes and cucumbers, thereby leading to the starvation of those who cannot afford it. Even if you're only enjoying your food in private, you're still supporting a culture of food-lovers.
And before you start with the "but food is a necessity" schtick, purchasing food is not a necessity. You could grow your own and avoid adding to the human misery!
Ditto for tube amps. It's true that right now the majority of artists still use them, but the main reasons for it is that:
a) Most of them grew up with analog equipment
b) The majority of the brand-name amps are analog, and in the music biz image counts for as much as sound
c) Indie bands which are just starting out can't afford brand-new equipment, so they end up with stuff that's 15+ years old (hence, analog).
I guarantee you could get just as good a sound out of digital equipment as you can out of analog, but due to the nature of the music industry there isn't all that much demand for digital equipment. This is changing, of course, as more younger artists enter the business, and more and more technicians become comfortable working with digital equipment. I guarantee that in 30 years tube amps will be a rarity.
Since when have government agencies ever needed a GOOD reason to do something?
Just because I think it's idiotic to go off on an "DEY JUST WANT TO CONTROL US THRU FEER!!!" rant doesn't mean I agree with their implementation of the system. I think it's a waste of money. But someone, somewhere, thinks that this is an effective way to defend airliners, and that it's a worthwhile investment. We should be discussing the benefits/drawbacks of the system, not launching into paranoia-mode.
It seems to be a good general rule of thumb that any time the words "fear" and "control" appear in a slashdot comment, the author turns out to be a drooling moron.
Seriously, wtf is wrong with you? How many people do you know of who are scared to death of the life-jacket under their seat? Real effective form of control there! Don't you think stormtroopers with assault rifles might work a bit better?
It never ceases to amaze me that this kind of crap gets modded insightful. Yes, absolutely, you're right, the US government has nothing better to do than try and scare you. That's the primary goal of all military ventures. You've foiled our secret plans!
This is where we all slink away muttering "We would have gotten away for it if it wasn't for those meddling kids!"
HEY! Don't you know ANYTHING?? NEVER let facts get in the way of a good jew-bash! Everything can be blamed on the JOOO...I mean THE ISRAEL LOBBY! Including the faking of the moon landing. Damn jooo...err, zionists!
I know you weren't trying to be funny, but damn, you couldn't have done a better job of it. Even ignoring the nonsense about "extremist religious views" being extremely common in America, the rest of your rant is just....right out there! Europe's full of idiots who believe in everything from psychics to miracle healing. The middle east and africa are full of religious zealots. South America is still on it's communism schtik. And the Asians are some of the most superstitious bastards on this planet!
Face it, the world's full of moron's, and the US is no exception. The only difference is what particular brand of stupidity the group under discussion happens to believe in. If you truly think that there's some sort of resurgence in religious thought which is about to destroy the US, then I've got some nice beach-side property in Nunavut to sell you...
"One of my pet peeves has always been the religious-nut atheists who won't admit that a fanatical belief that there is no possible way that there could be a God is just as much an act of faith as a fanatical belief that there has to be a God."
I've never actually met that type of atheist. I mean, I'm sure they exist, but judging by my experience they must be pretty rare. Most of the atheists I know seem to agree that the default position on all subjects should be scepticism. In other words, if you want me to believe that God exists, then show me some evidence. Ockham's Razor also plays a part in it. Overall most of us agree that there's no way to answer the question, which is why we consider it a pointless subject. It's like two blind men sitting around discussing the colour of the sky.
Ok, fine, since you think that theology is falsifiable, explain to me what it would take to prove that there is no God.
"The woman in 1993 was just a jerk. The Florida State Women's Studies prof who defended her and not once expressed a sentiment of 'yes, she was a jerk'? She was the right-wing caricature of a feminazi."
You've attempted not only to defend the original sexist jerk, but you've also attempted to defend the professor who was defending her. Congrats, Red, you fit the description of "right-wing caricature of a femenazi" even better than that prof did.
Next time you find yourself wondering why no woman will sleep with you, refer back to this comment.
cute :)
An AC already gave you the answer you deserve, but he got modded down as flamebait, so I thought I'd give it a shot: Completing a purchase and downloading a file online is a "digital sale". All aspects of the transaction are carried out through a digital medium. You walking down to the local music shop, on the other hand, is most definitely not digital. Unless you're walking on your toes or fingers :)
The same reason that tires for my car would have cost me $800+ in Canada, but I got them for $550 in the US. Namely, most things are more expensive in Canada. I'm guessing here, but if our personal level of taxation is anything to go by, the companies are probably getting raped too and passing the cost on to customers.
Thank you. I hope you get modded +5 insightful.
Thank you Captain Obvious, for pointing out that cops make mistakes! Clearly the only solution is to disband the police force. Let anarchy reign!
Or did you actually have a point to make?
There are some very clear signs you can look for. Any soldier who's ever manned a checkpoint in Iraq or Afghanistan should be able to give you examples of what to look for when screening for suicide bombers. Is it effective 100% of the time? Of course not - nothing is. But you'd be surprised how many bombings you can prevent simply by watching for (for example) nervous clean-shaven muslims wearing a white cotton shirt.
Not quite. In Canada it's pronounced more like "sawder". At least, it was when I went through basic electronics :)
Slashdot broke your URL. For anyone attempting to create a similar keyword, simply replace "%25s" with %s".