How about this. Since you're making the assertion, why don't you provide evidence? Show me some evidence that by and large Poles don't identify with black people.
I'm not playing semantics. I'm explaining what I meant.
And I'm explaining why "catering to racial preference" in the form of removing black people from photos cannot be construed as anything other than racist. Again, if your assertion is that the "cultural preference" of Poles is a lack of black people, how is that anything other than racist?
But continue to attack my person (as you perceive it) rather than my comments. It makes you sound confident in your line of reasoning.
Note that I didn't say that cultures don't exist. Race is not culture. Race is a set of arbitrary and constantly shifting guidelines of membership based on pseudoscience and imperial tradition.
When the "white race" was invented, the Irish, Spanish, Italians and Slavs were not "white". Neither, in fact, were any Africans "black"â"they were hundreds of nations and further categorized into dozens of colonies. Asians were "Mongolians". Race does not exist, it's a social construct and a harmful one at that.
Now, again, when you're talking about cultural preferences of black Atlantans, what exactly are the preferences you're referring to?
Note that the issue that prompted this is the premise that, apparently, Polish people "culturally prefer" people who are not black. That was the cultural targeting in the ad in question.
I don't understand. You're saying it's not racist to alter marketing to reflect that "there aren't a heck of a lot of black guys in Poland" (as the argument goes, for "identification with" the characters in the imagery), but clearly they're not removing everything there isn't a lot of in Poland. How many people are going to identify with a Macbook? Race is at the center of the alteration, no matter how you slice it.
No, there's no law. Businesses exploit the atrocious racial history of the US that is prominent in our cultural consciousness, to gain favor through marketing by assuaging that consciousness with imagery of "racial harmony". This plays better in some markets than others, so you're more likely to see it in technology (which is strongest in dense urban populations and where better strides toward equal representation were made in the 70s and 80s) than, say, agriculture.
You mean... anti-Semites aren't racist? And before you start splitting hairs about how Jews aren't a "race", I'd like some scientific evidence for race in the first place.
"non-free but gratis" is pretty clearly shorthand for "... but free as in beer", the latter of which is not only more annoying to type but more annoying to read. I was pleased when I read it. It's good to self-regulate pedantry by thinking about what someone meant first.
Anyway, it's a difference of 8 characters in JSON's favor. Unlike XML attributes, no whitespace between JSON properties is necessary. And for that matter, while they can be shoehorned to present the same information, they can serve somewhat different purposes. But really, as a data format, the advantages that JSON sways me with are:
- JSON is identical in text form to the same data structure in JS, which is great since JS is where I do most of my work - JSON is a hell of a lot more readable, particularly as the data grows (it is also less annoying to write, for whatever little you may be writing either) - Parsing JSON is dead simple in every language I work with, which is not the case for XML
Yes, it also has marginal bandwidth benefits, but that's not the only thing one looks for in a data format.
What you've demonstrated is not a thought/reflex dichotomy, but a simple/complex thought dichotomyâ"or to be more clear, the difference between being able to use known solutions to observed dangers, or being able to develop complex strategies and compound behaviors to develop.
How can you know that by species alone? Suppose a person has a nervous disorder that blocks the pain sensation. And at any rate, you can't know whether said person is actually a person or a "simple robot" designed to "act as if it's in terrible pain".
9_9
Every time I take part in, read or hear this argument, I can't help but view it as an abuse of the scientific principles and a sociopathic disregard for the suffering of other living creatures. And before we go jumping to any conclusions, I eat meat. I just prefer to be honest with myself: I am a predator and an omnivore by nature; but I certainly cause pain and suffering in animals to enjoy their flesh.
"Anything you read into it beyond that is your hangup, not mine."
Hangup? Because I read the comment above yours and took it as context?
"Anyway, you're becoming angry"
No I'm not. "Fuck" is a comma.
"and offensive"
You're *offended* by "fuck"? It wasn't even "fuck you" or "fuck your mom";) it was the equivalent of an exclamation point. What sheltered world do you live in?
(I tried to make the font of the wink larger so as to emphasize the jokingness of my comment, but Slashdot no like.)
Slashdot Mirror
So are you going to post evidence, or just keep repeating the assertion?
How about this. Since you're making the assertion, why don't you provide evidence? Show me some evidence that by and large Poles don't identify with black people.
I'm not playing semantics. I'm explaining what I meant.
And I'm explaining why "catering to racial preference" in the form of removing black people from photos cannot be construed as anything other than racist. Again, if your assertion is that the "cultural preference" of Poles is a lack of black people, how is that anything other than racist?
But continue to attack my person (as you perceive it) rather than my comments. It makes you sound confident in your line of reasoning.
Note that I didn't say that cultures don't exist. Race is not culture. Race is a set of arbitrary and constantly shifting guidelines of membership based on pseudoscience and imperial tradition.
When the "white race" was invented, the Irish, Spanish, Italians and Slavs were not "white". Neither, in fact, were any Africans "black"â"they were hundreds of nations and further categorized into dozens of colonies. Asians were "Mongolians". Race does not exist, it's a social construct and a harmful one at that.
Now, again, when you're talking about cultural preferences of black Atlantans, what exactly are the preferences you're referring to?
Note that the issue that prompted this is the premise that, apparently, Polish people "culturally prefer" people who are not black. That was the cultural targeting in the ad in question.
So, like, watermelon and fried chicken? What?
Race doesn't exist, friend.
Yes, I think it is. It's racially motivated stereotyping.
I don't understand. You're saying it's not racist to alter marketing to reflect that "there aren't a heck of a lot of black guys in Poland" (as the argument goes, for "identification with" the characters in the imagery), but clearly they're not removing everything there isn't a lot of in Poland. How many people are going to identify with a Macbook? Race is at the center of the alteration, no matter how you slice it.
No, there's no law. Businesses exploit the atrocious racial history of the US that is prominent in our cultural consciousness, to gain favor through marketing by assuaging that consciousness with imagery of "racial harmony". This plays better in some markets than others, so you're more likely to see it in technology (which is strongest in dense urban populations and where better strides toward equal representation were made in the 70s and 80s) than, say, agriculture.
Yes, positive racial/national/cultural stereotyping does fall under racism, and yes it can be harmful.
You mean... anti-Semites aren't racist? And before you start splitting hairs about how Jews aren't a "race", I'd like some scientific evidence for race in the first place.
Wait what? It's more racist to point out racism than to market to it? How the fuck does that work?
Sure they can sell Office. They simply can't sell it with docx support.
"non-free but gratis" is pretty clearly shorthand for "... but free as in beer", the latter of which is not only more annoying to type but more annoying to read. I was pleased when I read it. It's good to self-regulate pedantry by thinking about what someone meant first.
Ow! My freakin' eyes!
{"name":"Jack (\"Bee\") Nimble","format":{"type":"rect","width":1920,"height":1080,"interlace":false,"frame rate":24}}
<o name="Jack ("Bee") Nimble"><format type="rect" width="1920" height="1080" interlace="false" frame_rate="24"/></o>
Anyway, it's a difference of 8 characters in JSON's favor. Unlike XML attributes, no whitespace between JSON properties is necessary. And for that matter, while they can be shoehorned to present the same information, they can serve somewhat different purposes. But really, as a data format, the advantages that JSON sways me with are:
- JSON is identical in text form to the same data structure in JS, which is great since JS is where I do most of my work
- JSON is a hell of a lot more readable, particularly as the data grows (it is also less annoying to write, for whatever little you may be writing either)
- Parsing JSON is dead simple in every language I work with, which is not the case for XML
Yes, it also has marginal bandwidth benefits, but that's not the only thing one looks for in a data format.
What you've demonstrated is not a thought/reflex dichotomy, but a simple/complex thought dichotomyâ"or to be more clear, the difference between being able to use known solutions to observed dangers, or being able to develop complex strategies and compound behaviors to develop.
Mod parent up
How can you know that by species alone? Suppose a person has a nervous disorder that blocks the pain sensation. And at any rate, you can't know whether said person is actually a person or a "simple robot" designed to "act as if it's in terrible pain".
9_9
Every time I take part in, read or hear this argument, I can't help but view it as an abuse of the scientific principles and a sociopathic disregard for the suffering of other living creatures. And before we go jumping to any conclusions, I eat meat. I just prefer to be honest with myself: I am a predator and an omnivore by nature; but I certainly cause pain and suffering in animals to enjoy their flesh.
nVidIA duh
The only CS3 app I use is Photoshop, but it works just fine in 10.5. What CS3 apps have problems on 10.5, and what are the problems?
Care to explain?
"Anything you read into it beyond that is your hangup, not mine."
Hangup? Because I read the comment above yours and took it as context?
"Anyway, you're becoming angry"
No I'm not. "Fuck" is a comma.
"and offensive"
You're *offended* by "fuck"? It wasn't even "fuck you" or "fuck your mom" ;) it was the equivalent of an exclamation point. What sheltered world do you live in?
(I tried to make the font of the wink larger so as to emphasize the jokingness of my comment, but Slashdot no like.)
This is what you replied to:
>> Now he just needs to find a way to get the land back that the jews stole from his people.
This is what you said:
> Of course, the idea of a particular person owning a particular piece of land is a bit crazy to begin with.
if you're not saying that the Palestinian can't own the land--and therefore that it wasn't stolen--what the fuck are you saying?
And *seriously*, what do you mean I'm "projecting"?
Forgot to add: especially in the context of the Palestinians displaced by Israeli colonization!
I didn't say *you* implied it, I said your *comment* implied it. It is the logical conclusion of the concept.