Thank you for pointing that out. From the outside, many countries look like homogeneous collections of people, but the vast majority are not. China's ethnic tensions are not limited to Tibet, and many minorities feel their cultural identity is being threatened. The Chinese government isn't as self-serving and evil as they are often portrayed in the media. Once you actually learn (SO out of vogue, I know) about things there, it becomes pretty clear that their motives are, yes, to preserve central government power, because the alternative isn't just letting everybody be happy and free, it's quite the opposite: Outright civil war in a nuclear-armed and global economic pillar. It would be hell for the billion plus people within its borders, and very bad for everyone else on Earth.
...nations like the United States are headed down a path that leads there, ultimately, if we don't stop and look at where we're going!
I think it's important to note that it's the natural tendency of any nation to head down that path regardless of its particular system of governance, ideology or economy. Some get there faster than others, but without constant, conscious and vigilant course corrections by the people as a whole, they'll get there sooner or later.
Your reply assumes you are in the role of the faculty member who asked me, so you can not say what you would have asked or expected. Had it been you and I knew you as well as I do the person I spoke with, I may have been more explicit.
I tempered my opinion, but this person got the meaning behind my words. It's called "reading between the lines." And it is not a lie, because her teaching style does not work for me, and even the professor in question agrees that the textbook is not very good. A slim number of students find that her style works well for them. That's fantastic, but unfortunately not my experience. I did explain further some of the problems I had with her methods, but I framed them within the context of "When she gives examples of X as Y, it doesn't work for me, so I rework it as Z, because I find that more straightforward."
The elaboration to my reply would have been that I don't believe she's a good instructor, which I don't feel is an opinion I should express to her peers. It isn't constructive, and is in fact judgmental and not the words I want getting back to her. Had it been a friend who asked, I would have elaborated.
There are times as an adult where one will need to temper one's opinion, even when prompted for it. Total honesty sounds like a wonderful, hippy-nirvana fields of flowers paradigm, but face it, being totally honest all of the time is going to cause you and others much grief.
This is something to keep in mind next time you're asked "Do these make me look fat?" Go ahead, be totally honest.
I think that expectation pervades most professional courses of study. I'm in school for engineering, and certainly the engineering profession wishes to project a competent, professional image. Engineers are the people behind innumerable critical systems that people trust their lives to every day, and are expected to behave as such.
I was recent asked by a faculty member in an one-on-one meeting about another professor. My personal opinion is that this professor is among the worst I've ever had, as attending her lectures obfuscates more than it enlightens, and she has given blatant misinformation at times. The student body in general agrees that she's hardly qualified to teach high school, much less at the level she is.
But, in answering, I took responsibility for my contribution to the relationship I have with any teacher. I simply said that I felt her teaching style and my learning style did not mesh well, and that I personally found the text in use to be of questionable value. My point was made, this faculty member knew exactly what I was talking about, and I did not make myself look disrespectful or that I was not taking any responsibility for any problems that I might have with the professor or course.
But, I suppose that's what a little maturity does for you.
If Tennessee considers software property, then don't you legally own that software, the same as one would own a house or a car? Would this not fly in the face of most EULAs, where you've only purchased the right the use the software, but never actually own it?
No, I don't regret that so-called "wasted" time. That sense of having all the time in the world and feeling no real pressure to do much more than simply enjoy being alive and young and foolish is what makes my fondly remember those years. The moment you realize your lifetime is a finite resource is the moment you're really an adult.
I doubt it would get stuck there forever. I'm sure the Chinese will be more than happy to pull it out and bring it back to Earth so it can be kept at the Beijing Smithsonian.
You're thinking of the UCI and the world hour record, which is done on a track by a single rider who goes as far as they can in an hour. The International Cycling Union have officially reinstated the world hour record to Belgian great, Eddy Merckx, who rode 49.432 kilometres in 1972 in Mexico. They have renamed the current record (56.375 kilometres set by Chris Boardman) as the "Best Performance Over the Hour" while Merckx's record is the "UCI Hour Record".
The distinction was deemed necessary due to the technical improvements to the bicycle and position that made Boardman's hour so fast. The so-called 'superman' position developed by Scot Graeme Obree was outlawed in 1997, bringing to an end an era where the hour record was a battle of technology as well as the rider versus the wind.
They clearly did not think it was okay to kill their classmates. What they did think was that their lives were a living hell because of their classmates, and saw murder as their only method of revenge and and suicide as the only way to escape.
Is it about the decline or morals in society? I think it's more a society desensitized and unable to empathize with other people, living in a pressure-cooker where being different is bad and leads to being ostracized. And at 17 years old, being ostracized can seem to be a fate worse than death.
I thought I'd join the masses (and give up my ability to mod this!) and say congratulations, Rob! Best of luck and happiness to you both for, well, the rest of your lives.
So, are we all invited to the wedding? I mean, we were here for the proposal, it's only appropriate to invite us!
(Remember, the more people you invite, the more gifts you'll get.);)
Re:Mental Illness and the media.
on
A Beautiful Mind
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Quite insightful. It's true, and sad, that even in the 21st century, people harbor views of mental illness that date back to the 19th century. People do believe that a person can 'fight back' or 'snap out of' schizophrenia. People also believe clinical depression is about being 'sad' and a person just needs to 'cheer up'. These are just a couple of the more common examples.
There is a negative stigma attached to mental illness that makes the public's perception of HIV look flattering. Imagine the backlash if the media started calling AIDS the 'gay cancer' again. Hollywood may be ignorant, but in perpetuating this stereotype of the mentally ill as people who just need to 'help themselves' they are doing real harm to real people.
Interesting to note is the removal of maps of the site from http://www.ymp.gov/reference/maps/index.htm
Didn't the Soviets classify maps too, to "minimize the risk of providing potentially sensitive information that could result in adverse impacts to National security"? (Quote from the site.)
Brave new world, indeed! Am I the only one who misses September 10th?
I think the cult-ish following is what makes it hard for Lucas to actually be creative and do much more than rehash what he's already done without upsetting his fan base.
I think part of that is because the first SW movie came out in 1977. Most of us who were even born then had to have our parents drive us to the movies to see it. And then we prayed for a ton of SW stuff for birthdays and X-Mas so we could make our own version of the SW universe in the living room with our best friend. Now let those memories sit in the nostalgia machine for 20 years, you've got some powerful mojo working there.
So now, when we think 'new Star Wars movie' we relate it to when we were little kids and in absolute awe of these movies. It's like it's YOUR movie, and it's still your own universe for you and your best friend. So, one is highly polarized about the subject, there's very little middle ground. Aspects of these new movies are either loved or hated, and people get very vocal, especially since we're all so easily heard on the 'net.
At least that's what I think. Me, I'm still kicking myself for not keeping all the original Star Wars toys I got as a kid.:P
It's not like they were going to be in the whole movie. I think if Lucas had just done it and not let anyone tell the press, it would end up being one of those cool 'trivia' entries at IMDb:
"* 30 seconds into the first scene, the boy-band N*Sync can bee seen to the right of the transport. 5 seconds later, they are blown to bits."
Oh well. I mean, I hate all those processed-pop bands, but it would have been cool in retrospect if it had been done tounge in cheek. I mean, after all, 'Attack of the clones' and boy bands? Who can't see the irony?
I know, I'll probably get flamed/modded down for saying anything in defense of MS, but... So what? The article is anti-MS FUD.
So, out of 1.5 million units, a few hundred are bad. As the article even states, this is in line with the industry average, even compared to Nintendo who has more console building experience than anyone else in the market hands-down.
XBox has been out about what, 7 weeks? Is it so surprising that the new player on this market might have a few snags with third-party customer service companies? Haven't you ever chosen to do business with someone only to find out your needs are not in harmony with their service? That is the real issue here. If MS had been in the console business for at least a year or two and people were have endless problems with customer support, then maybe it would be a big deal. Just because it's Microsoft doesn't mean their problems with third party CS companies equate to a poor product or a general neglect of their customers. This molehill is not that mountain.
I agree the video game market has always been a dyad. However, I think the XBOX is not in direct opposition to the GameCube and PS2, but rather directly against the PS2, with the GC aiming for a slightly different market.
XBOX shoots for the PS2 demographic of people willing to drop large bills on a console, who want the latest, greatest performance and features. Hard core, serious gamers in essence. GC appears to be aiming for the more casual gamer and/or a younger audience. This of course could change in the future. The price point alone reflects this difference, as does XBOX's hardware spec. People buying an XBOX get a gaming PC replacement with titles optimized for that exact hardware config, instead of spending twice as much on a PC and hoping their hardware will work with the games they'll want to buy for the next two years.
So if I had to prognosticate, I'd say we may be looking at a future with a triad of consoles on the market, each with it's own pros and cons. And as far as M$ failing in this market, does anyone really think that will happen? While Gates and company may be snakes in the grass, they aren't fools, and I don't think they'd get into the market if they weren't damn sure they could dominate it.
When this issue comes up in the context of movies, music, or video games, we keep hearing about "protecting the children". This seems to come from parents who end up being labeled as 'lazy' for not playing an active role in their child's development. Obviously, when kids can build bombs in their parents' garage and stockpile weapons without Mom and Dad ever knowing, someone is more out of touch with their kids than can be explained by simple teenage rebellion and parental alienation.
What occurs to me though, is perhaps support of ratings systems by parents is more of a call for help from the parents themselves. The people with teenagers today are among the first generation who were raised on TV, former latchkey kids whose own parents were rarely there. Thus, with no role model who could offer guidance in the transition from childhood to the real world and all it's horrible truths, they also do not know how to guide their own children and are scared to death about making mistakes. A rating system offers them a quick, easy way to say 'No Johnny, see it says you have to be 18 to play that'. Unfortunately, they are passing down this lack of parenting skill to their children, who will find themselves dependent on an 'authority' to decide what is and is not appropriate for them to see, read, hear or play, and eventually what is approriate for their own children.
Even though I am in Canada, I find this whole snowballing IP situation very disturbing. I frankly don't care about getting an MP3 copy of some copyrighted song. I've been very pleasantly surprised at the quality and sheer quantity of music you can download from artists who actually want you to do so.
I have pretty much sworn off buying CD's from any record company associated with the RIAA. Movies I almost never go out to see anymore, although I used to, but now I feel my money should not be going to the MPAA who wishes only to destroy entire other industries (ISP's, PC hardware, software) so they don't have to reconfigure their business model to work in the digital age.
Unfortunately, it seems the entertainment industry is writing the law freely, and consumers are the ones getting the shaft, and people are losing rights, well, left and right. I wonder about the connection between our entertainment-centric society where people are obsessed with celebrities and this power the industry seems to have now to do whatever they please.
Maybe it's just me, but in looking at the large photo attached to the article, it actually looks rather lens-like in the lower left quad. Now, am I just imagining things, or is this actually an effect from gravitational lensing?
A simpler method may be simply to install nose radar in *all* sizable airplanes, and automatically engage the autopilot when flying within 1000m of an object (building, mountain, etc.) to avoid it. We have the technology, folks.
As a pilot, I feel I should respond to this suggestion. Anytime you take control of an aircraft from the pilot you are going to have serious problems in certain situations. Let us say you install some sort of "terrain avoidance" system. Sounds like a good idea, nobody can fly too close to objects, as the aircraft will steer away from them.
Now say we have a 757 in distress. Upon takeoff, the number one engine disassembles itself, and in the process renders the flaps and ailerons on the left side useless. Now we have a plane near stall speed, at low altitude with reduced control. Perhaps there is enough speed and power to take the plane around and put it back on the runway. Keep in mind we are dealing with a fully fueled and loaded aircraft. If in bringing the craft back around, the terrain avoidance system decides it is too close to a line of buildings or a ridge, what does it do? Turn away? A sharper turn increases the stall speed of an aircraft. Stall a 757 at low altitude, and it is in the ground. Does it pull up? Again, it could easily stall a slow moving, fully loaded aircraft. Or if the pilot's only option is a "controlled crash" in a nice big flat field, does the avoidance system again try to prevent that?
There are countless other situations where such a system could cost lives. In addition, if the system went haywire mid-flight, can the pilot override it? If the pilot can override it, so can a trained hijacker. Even on autopilot, you can grab the yoke and push the plane around. Somehow, I don't think anybody would feel happy with a system that is capable of completely ignoring the pilot's input.
The problems in such a system outweigh the benefits. And frankly, I doubt we'll ever see commercial airplanes used as missiles again.
Man... Then we'll have to put up with overclockers who accidentally "let the smoke out" and level the neighborhood. However, hydrogen fusion computers goes great with those consumer hydrogen fuel cells!
When you are about to make a stupid purchase, it praises you on your decision, by use of a popup, and suggests you add a few more of the same item to your shopping cart.
Hey, wait a minute... You'd better be careful - Amazon has a patent on that technology already.
Actually... The fastest growing/selling segement of the auto industry is the so-called 'compact SUV', i.e. Nissan XTerra, Ford Escape, et al. See? common sense sinks in eventually. Or it's just the cost of gas for the last year that's done it.:P
But to be on topic, I don't see the big deal about a 4 pound laptop vs. a 7 pound laptop. Mine weighs in at around 7, and unless I'm taking it up Everest or riding it on my back in the Tour de France, those 3 extra pounds don't mean much.
Slashdot Mirror
It would have taken just a few seconds longer to sign the petition, even if also creating an account to do so.
Bingo. Heck, with Chrome autofill, it took less time to register and sign than it did to type out this reply.
Thank you for pointing that out. From the outside, many countries look like homogeneous collections of people, but the vast majority are not. China's ethnic tensions are not limited to Tibet, and many minorities feel their cultural identity is being threatened. The Chinese government isn't as self-serving and evil as they are often portrayed in the media. Once you actually learn (SO out of vogue, I know) about things there, it becomes pretty clear that their motives are, yes, to preserve central government power, because the alternative isn't just letting everybody be happy and free, it's quite the opposite: Outright civil war in a nuclear-armed and global economic pillar. It would be hell for the billion plus people within its borders, and very bad for everyone else on Earth.
...nations like the United States are headed down a path that leads there, ultimately, if we don't stop and look at where we're going!
I think it's important to note that it's the natural tendency of any nation to head down that path regardless of its particular system of governance, ideology or economy. Some get there faster than others, but without constant, conscious and vigilant course corrections by the people as a whole, they'll get there sooner or later.
Your reply assumes you are in the role of the faculty member who asked me, so you can not say what you would have asked or expected. Had it been you and I knew you as well as I do the person I spoke with, I may have been more explicit.
I tempered my opinion, but this person got the meaning behind my words. It's called "reading between the lines." And it is not a lie, because her teaching style does not work for me, and even the professor in question agrees that the textbook is not very good. A slim number of students find that her style works well for them. That's fantastic, but unfortunately not my experience. I did explain further some of the problems I had with her methods, but I framed them within the context of "When she gives examples of X as Y, it doesn't work for me, so I rework it as Z, because I find that more straightforward."
The elaboration to my reply would have been that I don't believe she's a good instructor, which I don't feel is an opinion I should express to her peers. It isn't constructive, and is in fact judgmental and not the words I want getting back to her. Had it been a friend who asked, I would have elaborated.
There are times as an adult where one will need to temper one's opinion, even when prompted for it. Total honesty sounds like a wonderful, hippy-nirvana fields of flowers paradigm, but face it, being totally honest all of the time is going to cause you and others much grief.
This is something to keep in mind next time you're asked "Do these make me look fat?" Go ahead, be totally honest.
I think that expectation pervades most professional courses of study. I'm in school for engineering, and certainly the engineering profession wishes to project a competent, professional image. Engineers are the people behind innumerable critical systems that people trust their lives to every day, and are expected to behave as such.
I was recent asked by a faculty member in an one-on-one meeting about another professor. My personal opinion is that this professor is among the worst I've ever had, as attending her lectures obfuscates more than it enlightens, and she has given blatant misinformation at times. The student body in general agrees that she's hardly qualified to teach high school, much less at the level she is.
But, in answering, I took responsibility for my contribution to the relationship I have with any teacher. I simply said that I felt her teaching style and my learning style did not mesh well, and that I personally found the text in use to be of questionable value. My point was made, this faculty member knew exactly what I was talking about, and I did not make myself look disrespectful or that I was not taking any responsibility for any problems that I might have with the professor or course.
But, I suppose that's what a little maturity does for you.
Anyone with legal kung-fu in the house?
No, I don't regret that so-called "wasted" time. That sense of having all the time in the world and feeling no real pressure to do much more than simply enjoy being alive and young and foolish is what makes my fondly remember those years. The moment you realize your lifetime is a finite resource is the moment you're really an adult.
I doubt it would get stuck there forever. I'm sure the Chinese will be more than happy to pull it out and bring it back to Earth so it can be kept at the Beijing Smithsonian.
You're thinking of the UCI and the world hour record, which is done on a track by a single rider who goes as far as they can in an hour. The International Cycling Union have officially reinstated the world hour record to Belgian great, Eddy Merckx, who rode 49.432 kilometres in 1972 in Mexico. They have renamed the current record (56.375 kilometres set by Chris Boardman) as the "Best Performance Over the Hour" while Merckx's record is the "UCI Hour Record".
The distinction was deemed necessary due to the technical improvements to the bicycle and position that made Boardman's hour so fast. The so-called 'superman' position developed by Scot Graeme Obree was outlawed in 1997, bringing to an end an era where the hour record was a battle of technology as well as the rider versus the wind.
They clearly did not think it was okay to kill their classmates. What they did think was that their lives were a living hell because of their classmates, and saw murder as their only method of revenge and and suicide as the only way to escape.
Is it about the decline or morals in society? I think it's more a society desensitized and unable to empathize with other people, living in a pressure-cooker where being different is bad and leads to being ostracized. And at 17 years old, being ostracized can seem to be a fate worse than death.
I thought I'd join the masses (and give up my ability to mod this!) and say congratulations, Rob! Best of luck and happiness to you both for, well, the rest of your lives.
;)
So, are we all invited to the wedding? I mean, we were here for the proposal, it's only appropriate to invite us!
(Remember, the more people you invite, the more gifts you'll get.)
Quite insightful. It's true, and sad, that even in the 21st century, people harbor views of mental illness that date back to the 19th century. People do believe that a person can 'fight back' or 'snap out of' schizophrenia. People also believe clinical depression is about being 'sad' and a person just needs to 'cheer up'. These are just a couple of the more common examples.
There is a negative stigma attached to mental illness that makes the public's perception of HIV look flattering. Imagine the backlash if the media started calling AIDS the 'gay cancer' again. Hollywood may be ignorant, but in perpetuating this stereotype of the mentally ill as people who just need to 'help themselves' they are doing real harm to real people.
Interesting to note is the removal of maps of the site from http://www.ymp.gov/reference/maps/index.htm
Didn't the Soviets classify maps too, to "minimize the risk of providing potentially sensitive information that could result in adverse impacts to National security"? (Quote from the site.)
Brave new world, indeed! Am I the only one who misses September 10th?
I think the cult-ish following is what makes it hard for Lucas to actually be creative and do much more than rehash what he's already done without upsetting his fan base.
:P
I think part of that is because the first SW movie came out in 1977. Most of us who were even born then had to have our parents drive us to the movies to see it. And then we prayed for a ton of SW stuff for birthdays and X-Mas so we could make our own version of the SW universe in the living room with our best friend. Now let those memories sit in the nostalgia machine for 20 years, you've got some powerful mojo working there.
So now, when we think 'new Star Wars movie' we relate it to when we were little kids and in absolute awe of these movies. It's like it's YOUR movie, and it's still your own universe for you and your best friend. So, one is highly polarized about the subject, there's very little middle ground. Aspects of these new movies are either loved or hated, and people get very vocal, especially since we're all so easily heard on the 'net.
At least that's what I think. Me, I'm still kicking myself for not keeping all the original Star Wars toys I got as a kid.
It's not like they were going to be in the whole movie. I think if Lucas had just done it and not let anyone tell the press, it would end up being one of those cool 'trivia' entries at IMDb:
"* 30 seconds into the first scene, the boy-band N*Sync can bee seen to the right of the transport. 5 seconds later, they are blown to bits."
Oh well. I mean, I hate all those processed-pop bands, but it would have been cool in retrospect if it had been done tounge in cheek. I mean, after all, 'Attack of the clones' and boy bands? Who can't see the irony?
I know, I'll probably get flamed/modded down for saying anything in defense of MS, but... So what? The article is anti-MS FUD.
So, out of 1.5 million units, a few hundred are bad. As the article even states, this is in line with the industry average, even compared to Nintendo who has more console building experience than anyone else in the market hands-down.
XBox has been out about what, 7 weeks? Is it so surprising that the new player on this market might have a few snags with third-party customer service companies? Haven't you ever chosen to do business with someone only to find out your needs are not in harmony with their service? That is the real issue here. If MS had been in the console business for at least a year or two and people were have endless problems with customer support, then maybe it would be a big deal. Just because it's Microsoft doesn't mean their problems with third party CS companies equate to a poor product or a general neglect of their customers. This molehill is not that mountain.
As much as I hate to say it, odds are any person or corporation that found such a solution would go and patent it. :P
XBOX shoots for the PS2 demographic of people willing to drop large bills on a console, who want the latest, greatest performance and features. Hard core, serious gamers in essence. GC appears to be aiming for the more casual gamer and/or a younger audience. This of course could change in the future. The price point alone reflects this difference, as does XBOX's hardware spec. People buying an XBOX get a gaming PC replacement with titles optimized for that exact hardware config, instead of spending twice as much on a PC and hoping their hardware will work with the games they'll want to buy for the next two years.
So if I had to prognosticate, I'd say we may be looking at a future with a triad of consoles on the market, each with it's own pros and cons. And as far as M$ failing in this market, does anyone really think that will happen? While Gates and company may be snakes in the grass, they aren't fools, and I don't think they'd get into the market if they weren't damn sure they could dominate it.
What occurs to me though, is perhaps support of ratings systems by parents is more of a call for help from the parents themselves. The people with teenagers today are among the first generation who were raised on TV, former latchkey kids whose own parents were rarely there. Thus, with no role model who could offer guidance in the transition from childhood to the real world and all it's horrible truths, they also do not know how to guide their own children and are scared to death about making mistakes. A rating system offers them a quick, easy way to say 'No Johnny, see it says you have to be 18 to play that'. Unfortunately, they are passing down this lack of parenting skill to their children, who will find themselves dependent on an 'authority' to decide what is and is not appropriate for them to see, read, hear or play, and eventually what is approriate for their own children.
I have pretty much sworn off buying CD's from any record company associated with the RIAA. Movies I almost never go out to see anymore, although I used to, but now I feel my money should not be going to the MPAA who wishes only to destroy entire other industries (ISP's, PC hardware, software) so they don't have to reconfigure their business model to work in the digital age.
Unfortunately, it seems the entertainment industry is writing the law freely, and consumers are the ones getting the shaft, and people are losing rights, well, left and right. I wonder about the connection between our entertainment-centric society where people are obsessed with celebrities and this power the industry seems to have now to do whatever they please.
Either way, it's a great photo.
As a pilot, I feel I should respond to this suggestion. Anytime you take control of an aircraft from the pilot you are going to have serious problems in certain situations. Let us say you install some sort of "terrain avoidance" system. Sounds like a good idea, nobody can fly too close to objects, as the aircraft will steer away from them.
Now say we have a 757 in distress. Upon takeoff, the number one engine disassembles itself, and in the process renders the flaps and ailerons on the left side useless. Now we have a plane near stall speed, at low altitude with reduced control. Perhaps there is enough speed and power to take the plane around and put it back on the runway. Keep in mind we are dealing with a fully fueled and loaded aircraft. If in bringing the craft back around, the terrain avoidance system decides it is too close to a line of buildings or a ridge, what does it do? Turn away? A sharper turn increases the stall speed of an aircraft. Stall a 757 at low altitude, and it is in the ground. Does it pull up? Again, it could easily stall a slow moving, fully loaded aircraft. Or if the pilot's only option is a "controlled crash" in a nice big flat field, does the avoidance system again try to prevent that?
There are countless other situations where such a system could cost lives. In addition, if the system went haywire mid-flight, can the pilot override it? If the pilot can override it, so can a trained hijacker. Even on autopilot, you can grab the yoke and push the plane around. Somehow, I don't think anybody would feel happy with a system that is capable of completely ignoring the pilot's input.
The problems in such a system outweigh the benefits. And frankly, I doubt we'll ever see commercial airplanes used as missiles again.
Man... Then we'll have to put up with overclockers who accidentally "let the smoke out" and level the neighborhood. However, hydrogen fusion computers goes great with those consumer hydrogen fuel cells!
Hey, wait a minute... You'd better be careful - Amazon has a patent on that technology already.
But to be on topic, I don't see the big deal about a 4 pound laptop vs. a 7 pound laptop. Mine weighs in at around 7, and unless I'm taking it up Everest or riding it on my back in the Tour de France, those 3 extra pounds don't mean much.