Completely OT, but thats a latte not a coffee. Damn Starbucks corrupting the word, when I order coffee I mean a cup of hot black bitter stuff, not that odd tan stuff that tastes like milky sugar.
Do I smell double standards? Your peace must be much more important than anyone else could ever be. If my father is is bad straights and only has a short time to live, I just might want to go to the hospital and see him before he dies. I'm sorry is text messaging in a restaurant all that disruptive to your meal? I leave my cell phone on vibrate, if I get a call in a place that is not convenient, I can go outside and call the person back if I deem the call important enough. There are legitimate uses for cell phones (or why else would they exist?) so perhaps a better way of going about this whole situation is to block everyone's cell phone, but rather to just ask those who are being overly rude to stop what they are doing. Many will comply, and those who don't will be a problem with or without a cell phone.
Doubtful. They basically tune the pulse frequency to the resonant frequency of the virus's protein shell to break it. So it really needs to be tuned to a specific frequency to kill a specific thing. I would think white blood cells, activated or not, are too similar to be differentiated this way. Though I am no biologist, so correct if I am wrong - and I hope I am wrong because this would be an amazing breakthrough not just in autoimmune diseases but also cancer.
Wait, have you asked some Iraqis? I think it would be pretty neat if there were a chat room where 'average' Americans and Iraqis could talk. Though I don't know how you would do that with translation and such as I am sure not all Iraqis speak English and I know few Americans speak Arabic. Also, I am not sure how many accessible computers there are in Iraq, either. But I think it would be a neat idea, as I am sure we could learn alot from each other.
No, but the GP has a point. Processor speed will have a large impact on the appearant bandwidth, which is all consumers would care about for mobile browsing.
That is an even worse analogy. If you game is f'ed up, you can reinstall it. If the firmware kills the iPhone, you may not every be able to reflash it, so it is useless for all practical purposes. Plus, unlocking the iPhone is not like moding the game for invincibility. You are not trying to gain an advantage over other iPhone users by unlocking it(assumed immoral similar to invincibility cheats), you are attempting to allow your device to be used with another carrier which is supported by law. To be honest, the real question in this all is, will any bricking be intentional on Apple's part. My bet is on Apple doing it intentionally, but not getting dragged through the mud for it because the common belief is that Apple is 'not evil', but that is just my guess.
It didn't look like he was handcuffed by the time they tased him. And I wouldn't consider someone 'subdued' by the police until they are either calm , handcuffed, or completely immobile. He was neither, as you could easily wee in the video. Sure he couldn't walk, but watch the police move as he pushes and kicks them. He was pretty hopped up on adrenaline at that point and it is probably pretty difficult to handcuff someone who is moving wildly, so they used the taser to subdue him long enough to handcuff him. It looks like a textbook example by their rules of when to use a taser to me.
It says it is a CD single, which I would assume would be in CD format (uncompressed digitally speaking). It's no great leap of logic there, but you have a very good point about questioning the DRM free part. Everyone remembers where the Sony rootkit was installed from right? But think about this, it is 3 versions of the same song. Is that worth $6-7?
This is easily the most well thought out comment I have read so far in this whole thread. You have pointed out much of what is concerning the NAB, where others have failed to see.
The Incas had no golden rule, nor did the Maya civilization. Now that I've done what you wanted, you'll weasel the question around and move the goal posts, no doubt.
There, see? That's all you had to the do the first time, instead of making the parent prove his point, and providing a pointless 'rebuttal'.
You are begging the question.
I must apologize, I did not fully elaborate on what I meant by that. There is social behavior and individual (animalistic) behavior, often these two conflict. Humans are generally a social creature. Do you disagree? "The idea that theft is wrong is encouraged by religion and is not found in nature. Animals steal from each other all the time. It is beneficial to the thief.", but it is detrimental to the victim of the theft. We have to look at both the thief and victim in a social situation (assuming both are in the same society), therefore the idea that theft is wrong is found in the very nature of human society.
You have not provided proof that socialization is causaul of our dominance.
It is not the only cause, but would you argue that it is not an important factor?
Besides, not all of us are trying to be more social. You do not speak for everyone.
We are speaking of generalizations, surely you realize that. I'll assume you just said that to nitpick and try to distract from the topic at hand.
We keep weak, sick, damaged people alive. There is no evolutionary benefit to that
True. But would you kill your mate (a breeder) just because they have a cold? Broken arm? Missing arm (you can still contribute heavily to society without an arm, ex. Stephen Harking)? How about the flu? Ebola? Cancer? Where do you draw the line? In extreme cases, it is likely an overextension of societal preservation, which is a whole other long argument.
You make assertions left and right, but you never provide any evidence for them.
Ok, for a recent example of baddies causing a banding together of people in a society: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11 Societies exist to support a common goal, often for the purpose of supporting its members, protection included.
If you believe that, then no act is ever truly wrong, it's just committed in the wrong society.
Ok, name any single act that is universally wrong. I can add circumstances that make it morally right for the situation. It's all relative to the circumstances and associated social rules and the judge. Are human sacrifices wrong? Who are you asking? Is letting someone bleed to death wrong? Again who are you asking. In a foreign country someone was run over by a train and it severed their legs. The Americans present wanted to help that person because it was the 'right' thing to do. The locals would not let the Americans do that because it was not 'right' to interfere with natural processes. I personally would have helped them and seen that as the 'right' thing to do, but the locals would think I was a bad person. And I am sorry if you view me as a monster for that.
There are so many loose ends in your argument, I don't know where to begin. I'll just hit a few quick points.
3. The golden rule is universal - Please provide a few pieces of evidence for this. I don't believe your assertion.
Believe what you want, beliefs aren't usually a good argument. Anywho, the burden of proof is on you to find a counterexample.
Animals steal from each other all the time.
The idea here is that we are trying to be more social than your average animal.
In the same way, any act to protect weaker people from stronger is counter to evolutionary theory and thus does not come from nature. From where does it arise?
Answer: diversity. Now look up evolutionary theory as to why this is important. Example: Have you ever known any skinny guys who couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag, but could do more calculus before breakfast than you can do all day?
Many people are murderously psychotic - Not statistically.
We only need a few, we don't need this to be a norm for it to have a significant impact on how we create societies.
Society was formed to protect people - That was only one benefit. Actually, farming did more than banding together for protection.
I would argue that protection from hunger is important too. Besides, this only counts for agrarian cultures anyway.
Thieves are unwelcome in societies - Not particularly.
Uh, as a general rule: yes they are. Especially if I'm not completely sure they won't steal from my society, and if they have done it before to someone else, why wouldn't they do it again to me?
You are assigning the viewpoint to me that society was formed for religious reasons.
No. He is simply stating that there is a non-religious basis for society.
All moral codes have their roots in religion.
No, all moral codes have their roots in society. You keep confusing religion and society. Society is not a construct of religion, rather religion is a construct of society.
These things are societal constructs, not natural laws as you have repeatedly attempted to assert.
I think you misread much of what he was saying. If anything he is saying they are natural laws of society.
People do not always act in a manner consistent with their best advantage.
Maybe not in an obvious way, but you have to realize that as a societal creature we view society as very important, and as such we may sometimes sacrifice ourselves (not directly in our individual best interest) for the society (in our species and offspring's best interest).
It doesn't matter whether it benefits you or not, you cannot steal if you are moral
Not always true. Often societal rules are much much more complex. For example, if I steal a gun from someone who was going to go on a random shooting rampage, is that immoral?
Answer this question: Are morals absolute or relative?
Yes. (hey, I had to throw in a little humor) But seriously, morals are relative to the society as different societies are structured differently and have different needs. Though, societies seem to be homogeneous, so we can afford to make generalizations.
Final answer: morality is about the balance between serving your self interest and societies interest.
Scotch.
Higher alcohol concentration, better tasting. I personally recommend Scapa, or for something a little more spicy, try Belvenie http://www.balvenie.com/. And if you get really sick, try Jagermeister (it'll either kill all the germs, or cause you to throw up all of the germs).
I wonder if anyone makes a phone case / carrier that's made with wire mesh or tinfoil to stop signal.
Or, you could turn your cell phone off. Depending on how paranoid you are, you could even take out the battery....unless my browser is filtering out the sarcasm tags, in which case I apologize.
I think the flamebait mods you received seem to indicate that your post is conceived by some as blasphemy. For anyone who wonders why there is such animosity towards 'Apple fanboys', there might be an explanation right here.
I like how on the order page, the verified by Visa and Mastercard mastercode logos (which should have links from them to verify their authenticity) are just pictures on the site. Very fishy indeed.
If Bill Gates sent you a letter claiming that you hit his car and asking for $3K in repairs, would you just settle because you are "scared of a big corporation" even when you know you are innocent?
Has Bill Gates been found to sue individuals who didn't settle but do not even own a car? Has Gates been known to rack up thousands in lawyer fees only to try to drop the case when he found out he was wrong? Has Gates been known to do this hundreds or thousands of times with a high settlement rate, even for innocent people?
'No' you say? Well, then I guess your analogy might have missed a few assumptions...
Slashdot Mirror
Doubtful. They basically tune the pulse frequency to the resonant frequency of the virus's protein shell to break it. So it really needs to be tuned to a specific frequency to kill a specific thing. I would think white blood cells, activated or not, are too similar to be differentiated this way. Though I am no biologist, so correct if I am wrong - and I hope I am wrong because this would be an amazing breakthrough not just in autoimmune diseases but also cancer.
I'm not sure that's a watermelon growing in your stomach...
No, but the GP has a point. Processor speed will have a large impact on the appearant bandwidth, which is all consumers would care about for mobile browsing.
I believe that translates into: Bricked(so far)
That is an even worse analogy. If you game is f'ed up, you can reinstall it. If the firmware kills the iPhone, you may not every be able to reflash it, so it is useless for all practical purposes. Plus, unlocking the iPhone is not like moding the game for invincibility. You are not trying to gain an advantage over other iPhone users by unlocking it(assumed immoral similar to invincibility cheats), you are attempting to allow your device to be used with another carrier which is supported by law. To be honest, the real question in this all is, will any bricking be intentional on Apple's part. My bet is on Apple doing it intentionally, but not getting dragged through the mud for it because the common belief is that Apple is 'not evil', but that is just my guess.
This isn't about warranty. It's about possible legal action. Ford won't just sue you because you changed out the engine, stereo, etc.
Yes, because ATT will likely go under in a couple of months... What?
It almost looks like they were trying to make the game more WoW like. We all saw how that went, so why do people keep insisting on making WoW clones?
It says it is a CD single, which I would assume would be in CD format (uncompressed digitally speaking). It's no great leap of logic there, but you have a very good point about questioning the DRM free part. Everyone remembers where the Sony rootkit was installed from right? But think about this, it is 3 versions of the same song. Is that worth $6-7?
This is easily the most well thought out comment I have read so far in this whole thread. You have pointed out much of what is concerning the NAB, where others have failed to see.
Societies exist to support a common goal, often for the purpose of supporting its members, protection included. Yes, aren't we all. Also, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominim Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer\ Ok, name any single act that is universally wrong. I can add circumstances that make it morally right for the situation. It's all relative to the circumstances and associated social rules and the judge. Are human sacrifices wrong? Who are you asking? Is letting someone bleed to death wrong? Again who are you asking. In a foreign country someone was run over by a train and it severed their legs. The Americans present wanted to help that person because it was the 'right' thing to do. The locals would not let the Americans do that because it was not 'right' to interfere with natural processes. I personally would have helped them and seen that as the 'right' thing to do, but the locals would think I was a bad person. And I am sorry if you view me as a monster for that.
Believe what you want, beliefs aren't usually a good argument. Anywho, the burden of proof is on you to find a counterexample. The idea here is that we are trying to be more social than your average animal. Answer: diversity. Now look up evolutionary theory as to why this is important. Example: Have you ever known any skinny guys who couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag, but could do more calculus before breakfast than you can do all day? We only need a few, we don't need this to be a norm for it to have a significant impact on how we create societies. I would argue that protection from hunger is important too. Besides, this only counts for agrarian cultures anyway. Uh, as a general rule: yes they are. Especially if I'm not completely sure they won't steal from my society, and if they have done it before to someone else, why wouldn't they do it again to me? No. He is simply stating that there is a non-religious basis for society. No, all moral codes have their roots in society. You keep confusing religion and society. Society is not a construct of religion, rather religion is a construct of society. I think you misread much of what he was saying. If anything he is saying they are natural laws of society. Maybe not in an obvious way, but you have to realize that as a societal creature we view society as very important, and as such we may sometimes sacrifice ourselves (not directly in our individual best interest) for the society (in our species and offspring's best interest). Not always true. Often societal rules are much much more complex. For example, if I steal a gun from someone who was going to go on a random shooting rampage, is that immoral? Yes. (hey, I had to throw in a little humor) But seriously, morals are relative to the society as different societies are structured differently and have different needs. Though, societies seem to be homogeneous, so we can afford to make generalizations. Final answer: morality is about the balance between serving your self interest and societies interest.
Scotch.
Higher alcohol concentration, better tasting. I personally recommend Scapa, or for something a little more spicy, try Belvenie http://www.balvenie.com/. And if you get really sick, try Jagermeister (it'll either kill all the germs, or cause you to throw up all of the germs).
Eh, then you just pull out the RFID tag and swap it with someone else, just to mess with 'em.
Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
I like how on the order page, the verified by Visa and Mastercard mastercode logos (which should have links from them to verify their authenticity) are just pictures on the site. Very fishy indeed.