it's not just that. Deaf culture is different from mainstream Anglo-American culture, in the same way that Latino culture or Quebecois culture is different from it. Deaf people have different experiences from what you do.
That said, I think this could be a great boon to people who are hard of hearing, rather than deaf. They've been raised in a speaking culture and it's not fair or reasonable to expect them to assimilate into Deaf culture without having, for instance, learned ASL.
Also, there's extensive cortical reorganization that goes on when you are Deaf - auditory centres get recruited into visual systems; visual systems get recruited into language systems. You're not just going to wind up finding someone who is Deaf (particularly congenitally so), giving them stem cells, and having them be able to hear normally again. At best it is going to take a long, long time, because the neural pathways haven't grown that way.
The best application of this kind of technology would be Hearing people who have lost their ability to do so.
and when I was a student at a large school with large classes, I found those discussion sections terribly personalizing, and remained silent during them - not because I wasn't interested or wasn't smart (I'm doing a PhD right now), but because I am an introvert. I never felt like I learned very much in them, because I'd absorbed the material during the giant lecture; eventually I stopped going to them.
I don't think you have to view embryos as non-human in order to be pro-choice. You may recognize that embryos are human, but that the mother's right to self-determination trumps their potential right to be born; or you might think that abortions are going to happen anyway (because they will) and you would rather that women had safe options at their disposal.
You can think that abortion is a tragedy that should be prevented through contraception, not legal sanction, and still be pro-choice.
You only think that they're making situations sexual when they say that they're gay because it makes you think about their sexual behaviours. It doesn't need to. The above sentence doesn't.
I bet you're also male, and probably also white. You probably never think about your gender or your race, because they are viewed by you and the rest of society as the default - you are presumed straight until proven otherwise.
The fact that you never have to critically assess your gender, sexuality or race are all reflections of privilege. Minorities, especially of the non-visible kind, need to disclose the information that they fall into a particular minority group - because otherwise, it's very easy to demonize them. If you don't know several gay men, it's easy to believe that all gay men are pedophiles.
You don't "need to know" that people you know and love are gay; *they* need you to know that.
I'd agree with you, except that police harassment is used to stifle dissent, often. There's an activist in Montreal (Canada, not an oppressive militant dictatorship) by the name of Jaggi Singh. In a city where jaywalking is illegal, but the norm, he has been given citations, and apparently also beaten in the process, several times. For giving speeches at protests, he has been arrested on charges of "inciting a riot."
Protesters at summits often face pepper spray and attack dogs. "Free speech zones" are not. Beyond this, though, minorities often face prejudice at the hands of the police - imagine how your life would be, if every time you drove to your high-paying job, you were stopped by the police because they didn't believe you could possibly own that nice a car.
The police don't really care about what's right and wrong; they care about enforcing order. Order favours the status quo. When police are given new powers, and this extends to powers that fundamentally breech citizens' rights to privacy, they invariably abuse them in order to maintain the status quo. We can't tolerate this in a civil society.
I guess it would work ok if the display were constantly changing, but static images on the retina fade pretty quickly. You might not notice it, but your eye is constantly moving (this is called saccadic movement) so that you keep being able to see things. Otherwise, you're not going to be able to see the stuff on these displays, because it will fade from vision like the blood vessels between your retina and your cornea.
I am SHOCKED at how often companies will ask for your SSN to do a credit check. Want a cell phone? SSN. Want Cox Cable Internet? SSN. Want any number of services for which a company is not becoming your creditor? SSN.
When I first found out that Cox wanted my SSN to allow me to sign up as a customer, I emailed to ask them how they would be storing my SSN, and for how long, and what security measures they had in place to prevent the theft of my SSN. They couldn't answer these questions. They just kept telling me that providing my SSN would allow them to determine whether I needed to pay a deposit before I started service. Well, if you're not competent enough to answer those questions for me, I'm not forking over my SSN........
I don't understand how this came to be the accepted norm in this country. It seems like a horrendous violation of privacy. It's just BEGGING to be abused.
Like most big corporations, one side of Bell doesn't know what the other side is doing. The side that made that decision is likely in a different city than the call-centre that handles support calls.....
can't you just have it embedded into the prompt that you can type something like "what" to find out what programs you can run? It's no more intuitive to have to click a series of buttons, really.
Like a prompt that goes something like
User user in Directory directory. Type 'what' for full program list:>
Uhhh. Look. Just because you're using this narrow definition of "purpose" doesn't mean that everybody is. Nor, that because science hasn't posited a value for your n term, it says we have no purpose.
It has nothing to say about the purpose of humanity or the universe. It has no evidence about the purpose of either. All the anthropomorphic "Science" has to say about the purpose of the universe and humanity is: "Oooo, this (humanity, the Universe, Marshmallow Fluff) is kinda neat, why don't we try to understand the mechanisms that underpin it?" Science looks at things. It describes and predicts the behaviours of things. It does NOT answer the question "why" in any meaningful way, beyond "to be understood."
Kind of. Writing horizontally, it's a left-to-right language, but writing vertically, it's right-to-left..... ie, the lines start on the left-hand side of the page and then wrap successively rightwards.
But I don't think that's how it's usually displayed in computerized type......
the reason, I think, is homeostasis..... we can easily burn stored energy to maintain a 98 F core temperature in a 72 degree environment...... but the second law of thermodynamics makes it so that bringing our temperature down in an environment around 98 F is difficult/impossible modulo some kind of heat sink......
On the other hand, look at reptiles and other cold-blooded things: they thrive at much warmer temperatures than do humans/warm-blooded animals.... they also become VERY docile at temperatures that humans enjoy, typically.....
given that Comedy Central's media player sucks monkey balls and is probably turning a whole bunch of potential viewers off of watching their content there, they don't just outsource this to Youtube? Can't they come to some sort of profit-sharing agreement? Youtube has a model that works. They have fairly unobtrusive ads that don't wind up crashing my computer (unlike CC). People already go to Youtube. I've never heard anyone say they like CC's site. CC could, if it wanted to, post the Youtube content on their site.
So why can't they just negotiate some sort of a deal where Youtube can host the content and CC takes a large chunk of the ad revenue?
Why can't they leave Youtube alone?
*ahem* I do. I also live in the nanny-state called Canada.
But that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to engage in a little despotic counterfactual thinking every time my bus is late because of people wrapped in chunks of metal, who are also late because they were wrapped in chunks of metal.
we could invest in public transportation and abrogate people's stupid, life-risking civil liberties by takin' way their cars.
SERIOUSLY. If we invested the amount of money people spend on Cars, Car Insurance and Gasoline into public transportation, we'd have some sort of awesome, pneumatic tube public transportation system a la Futurama. The reason there's so much congestion is because people have decided they each need to get to work INDIVIDUALLY WRAPPED in LARGE CHUNKS OF CARBON-BURNING METAL.
That's more true than your 'funny' moderation would imply. Quebec is subject to the Civil Code of Quebec whereas the rest of Canada is subject to Common Law. Unfortunately, since I'm not a lawyer I don't know if that has any bearing on the case at hand.
but it sounds to me as though your body was accustomed ("conditioned") to getting a sugar rush whenever it consumed soda, and prepared for it even when you were drinking diet soda, which contains no sugar. Your body adapts to expected influxes of blood-glucose by increasing insulin production - BEFORE the intake of the expected substance. If you don't ACTUALLY ingest any sugar, then the insulin works on the sugar already present in your blood and you wind up feeling AWFUL.
It's kind of the same reason you get headaches if you skip meals, or have them at later times; or why eating a snack at an unexpected time when you're not really hungry will make you feel nauseous. The unpleasant side of hunger isn't because your body doesn't have enough energy to sustain itself - you're made up of meat, for god's sake, you have enough stored calories to go on for a very long time without eating - it's just because it's preparing for an expected meal and if you don't get it, in the short term it depletes the nutrients from your bloodstream.
Re:So what about Vonage Canada and Vonage UK?
on
The End for Vonage?
·
· Score: 1
I don't know, per se, but if you're in Quebec, I'd suggest ditching Vonage and going with Videotron's phone-over-cable. It's so much cheaper than Vonage or Bell that it's laughable anyone goes with either of those options. Seriously. My apartment is filled with a bunch of students who phone home fairly often and the phone portion of our "multi-media" bill is never more than about $21. Add on to that that it's not eating up your internet bandwidth and that it gets you a discount on delicious digital cable and, well, there's nothing that can argue against it.
It even works in a blackout.
I wonder if Rogers and Shaw have anything like this......
(caveat, I am an undergraduate linguist at one of the most "myopically chomskian" programs in North America)
you're both right, kind of.
UG used to be regarded as a set of innate principles and parameters - principles which were cross-linguistically invariant, and parameters which could be set provided that the input conditions were sufficient. Yes, these were supposedly the result of particular brain structures.
Bizarrely, outside of the field of acquisition some people think that UG is not innate and has nothing to do with acquisition; I've had fights with friends (while drunk) because they claim it is nothing about human cognition, and that no one claims that these things are innate, just that they continually occur cross-linguistically.
The fallacy of UG is that acquisition people think that universal features of language cross-linguistically are a product of the language faculty; on the other hand, it's perfectly reasonable to me for these to be non-innate and related more to shared properties of the environment. Tense dominates the verb, not nouns, because actions are temporally bound whereas objects tend to be fairly constant etc....
I wonder whether the "universal morals" account might be to some degree environmentally bound....
Slashdot Mirror
it's not just that. Deaf culture is different from mainstream Anglo-American culture, in the same way that Latino culture or Quebecois culture is different from it. Deaf people have different experiences from what you do.
That said, I think this could be a great boon to people who are hard of hearing, rather than deaf. They've been raised in a speaking culture and it's not fair or reasonable to expect them to assimilate into Deaf culture without having, for instance, learned ASL.
Also, there's extensive cortical reorganization that goes on when you are Deaf - auditory centres get recruited into visual systems; visual systems get recruited into language systems. You're not just going to wind up finding someone who is Deaf (particularly congenitally so), giving them stem cells, and having them be able to hear normally again. At best it is going to take a long, long time, because the neural pathways haven't grown that way.
The best application of this kind of technology would be Hearing people who have lost their ability to do so.
and when I was a student at a large school with large classes, I found those discussion sections terribly personalizing, and remained silent during them - not because I wasn't interested or wasn't smart (I'm doing a PhD right now), but because I am an introvert. I never felt like I learned very much in them, because I'd absorbed the material during the giant lecture; eventually I stopped going to them.
Large class sizes have their benefits.
I don't think you have to view embryos as non-human in order to be pro-choice. You may recognize that embryos are human, but that the mother's right to self-determination trumps their potential right to be born; or you might think that abortions are going to happen anyway (because they will) and you would rather that women had safe options at their disposal.
You can think that abortion is a tragedy that should be prevented through contraception, not legal sanction, and still be pro-choice.
"This is my wife, Jill. We have three children."
You only think that they're making situations sexual when they say that they're gay because it makes you think about their sexual behaviours. It doesn't need to. The above sentence doesn't.
I bet you're also male, and probably also white. You probably never think about your gender or your race, because they are viewed by you and the rest of society as the default - you are presumed straight until proven otherwise.
The fact that you never have to critically assess your gender, sexuality or race are all reflections of privilege. Minorities, especially of the non-visible kind, need to disclose the information that they fall into a particular minority group - because otherwise, it's very easy to demonize them. If you don't know several gay men, it's easy to believe that all gay men are pedophiles.
You don't "need to know" that people you know and love are gay; *they* need you to know that.
I'd agree with you, except that police harassment is used to stifle dissent, often. There's an activist in Montreal (Canada, not an oppressive militant dictatorship) by the name of Jaggi Singh. In a city where jaywalking is illegal, but the norm, he has been given citations, and apparently also beaten in the process, several times. For giving speeches at protests, he has been arrested on charges of "inciting a riot."
Protesters at summits often face pepper spray and attack dogs. "Free speech zones" are not. Beyond this, though, minorities often face prejudice at the hands of the police - imagine how your life would be, if every time you drove to your high-paying job, you were stopped by the police because they didn't believe you could possibly own that nice a car.
The police don't really care about what's right and wrong; they care about enforcing order. Order favours the status quo. When police are given new powers, and this extends to powers that fundamentally breech citizens' rights to privacy, they invariably abuse them in order to maintain the status quo. We can't tolerate this in a civil society.
I guess it would work ok if the display were constantly changing, but static images on the retina fade pretty quickly. You might not notice it, but your eye is constantly moving (this is called saccadic movement) so that you keep being able to see things. Otherwise, you're not going to be able to see the stuff on these displays, because it will fade from vision like the blood vessels between your retina and your cornea.
it's spreading from the past into the future and the rate at which it spreads is greater than the rate at which time progresses.
mod parent up, I also had to memorize designs of nuclear weapons and reactors in 10th grade science in Ontario. Not very complicated.
I am SHOCKED at how often companies will ask for your SSN to do a credit check. Want a cell phone? SSN. Want Cox Cable Internet? SSN. Want any number of services for which a company is not becoming your creditor? SSN.
When I first found out that Cox wanted my SSN to allow me to sign up as a customer, I emailed to ask them how they would be storing my SSN, and for how long, and what security measures they had in place to prevent the theft of my SSN. They couldn't answer these questions. They just kept telling me that providing my SSN would allow them to determine whether I needed to pay a deposit before I started service. Well, if you're not competent enough to answer those questions for me, I'm not forking over my SSN........
I don't understand how this came to be the accepted norm in this country. It seems like a horrendous violation of privacy. It's just BEGGING to be abused.
Like most big corporations, one side of Bell doesn't know what the other side is doing. The side that made that decision is likely in a different city than the call-centre that handles support calls.....
can't you just have it embedded into the prompt that you can type something like "what" to find out what programs you can run? It's no more intuitive to have to click a series of buttons, really.
Like a prompt that goes something like
User user in Directory directory. Type 'what' for full program list:>
So how'd Saudi Arabia get off the hook?
Yeah, well, if that's the case, maybe you men-folk would like to shoulder the burden this time of the underpaid, powerless secretary position.
Uhhh. Look. Just because you're using this narrow definition of "purpose" doesn't mean that everybody is. Nor, that because science hasn't posited a value for your n term, it says we have no purpose.
It has nothing to say about the purpose of humanity or the universe. It has no evidence about the purpose of either. All the anthropomorphic "Science" has to say about the purpose of the universe and humanity is: "Oooo, this (humanity, the Universe, Marshmallow Fluff) is kinda neat, why don't we try to understand the mechanisms that underpin it?" Science looks at things. It describes and predicts the behaviours of things. It does NOT answer the question "why" in any meaningful way, beyond "to be understood."
Kind of. Writing horizontally, it's a left-to-right language, but writing vertically, it's right-to-left..... ie, the lines start on the left-hand side of the page and then wrap successively rightwards.
But I don't think that's how it's usually displayed in computerized type......
didn't look at the article first and thought "man, how small is that thing if it's going to fit--" but no, Toyota has not developed a rolling Sybian.
the reason, I think, is homeostasis..... we can easily burn stored energy to maintain a 98 F core temperature in a 72 degree environment...... but the second law of thermodynamics makes it so that bringing our temperature down in an environment around 98 F is difficult/impossible modulo some kind of heat sink......
On the other hand, look at reptiles and other cold-blooded things: they thrive at much warmer temperatures than do humans/warm-blooded animals.... they also become VERY docile at temperatures that humans enjoy, typically.....
given that Comedy Central's media player sucks monkey balls and is probably turning a whole bunch of potential viewers off of watching their content there, they don't just outsource this to Youtube? Can't they come to some sort of profit-sharing agreement? Youtube has a model that works. They have fairly unobtrusive ads that don't wind up crashing my computer (unlike CC). People already go to Youtube. I've never heard anyone say they like CC's site. CC could, if it wanted to, post the Youtube content on their site. So why can't they just negotiate some sort of a deal where Youtube can host the content and CC takes a large chunk of the ad revenue? Why can't they leave Youtube alone?
*ahem* I do. I also live in the nanny-state called Canada. But that doesn't mean I'm not allowed to engage in a little despotic counterfactual thinking every time my bus is late because of people wrapped in chunks of metal, who are also late because they were wrapped in chunks of metal.
we could invest in public transportation and abrogate people's stupid, life-risking civil liberties by takin' way their cars.
SERIOUSLY. If we invested the amount of money people spend on Cars, Car Insurance and Gasoline into public transportation, we'd have some sort of awesome, pneumatic tube public transportation system a la Futurama. The reason there's so much congestion is because people have decided they each need to get to work INDIVIDUALLY WRAPPED in LARGE CHUNKS OF CARBON-BURNING METAL.
That's more true than your 'funny' moderation would imply. Quebec is subject to the Civil Code of Quebec whereas the rest of Canada is subject to Common Law. Unfortunately, since I'm not a lawyer I don't know if that has any bearing on the case at hand.
but it sounds to me as though your body was accustomed ("conditioned") to getting a sugar rush whenever it consumed soda, and prepared for it even when you were drinking diet soda, which contains no sugar. Your body adapts to expected influxes of blood-glucose by increasing insulin production - BEFORE the intake of the expected substance. If you don't ACTUALLY ingest any sugar, then the insulin works on the sugar already present in your blood and you wind up feeling AWFUL.
It's kind of the same reason you get headaches if you skip meals, or have them at later times; or why eating a snack at an unexpected time when you're not really hungry will make you feel nauseous. The unpleasant side of hunger isn't because your body doesn't have enough energy to sustain itself - you're made up of meat, for god's sake, you have enough stored calories to go on for a very long time without eating - it's just because it's preparing for an expected meal and if you don't get it, in the short term it depletes the nutrients from your bloodstream.
I don't know, per se, but if you're in Quebec, I'd suggest ditching Vonage and going with Videotron's phone-over-cable. It's so much cheaper than Vonage or Bell that it's laughable anyone goes with either of those options. Seriously. My apartment is filled with a bunch of students who phone home fairly often and the phone portion of our "multi-media" bill is never more than about $21. Add on to that that it's not eating up your internet bandwidth and that it gets you a discount on delicious digital cable and, well, there's nothing that can argue against it.
It even works in a blackout.
I wonder if Rogers and Shaw have anything like this......
(caveat, I am an undergraduate linguist at one of the most "myopically chomskian" programs in North America)
you're both right, kind of.
UG used to be regarded as a set of innate principles and parameters - principles which were cross-linguistically invariant, and parameters which could be set provided that the input conditions were sufficient. Yes, these were supposedly the result of particular brain structures.
Bizarrely, outside of the field of acquisition some people think that UG is not innate and has nothing to do with acquisition; I've had fights with friends (while drunk) because they claim it is nothing about human cognition, and that no one claims that these things are innate, just that they continually occur cross-linguistically.
The fallacy of UG is that acquisition people think that universal features of language cross-linguistically are a product of the language faculty; on the other hand, it's perfectly reasonable to me for these to be non-innate and related more to shared properties of the environment. Tense dominates the verb, not nouns, because actions are temporally bound whereas objects tend to be fairly constant etc....
I wonder whether the "universal morals" account might be to some degree environmentally bound....