When things break in Linux its embarrassing and you get pointed to a shoddy workaround. When apple breaks things it is done on purpose and is hailed as a feature. THAT is the difference.
http://www.dalailama.com/news.42.htm I'm going to assume you have a source better than the dalai lama on his desires? Try not to flame when you are wrong:/
Massacres??? I tend to keep up with the news. I hope you have some proof to back up this very strong news. I think i'll assume you are referring to tibet.
Its funny when you see human rights violations in the US people go thats shameful, we are better than this. Alot of people blaming corporations. Or saying theres nothing that can be done. When there are rights abuses in china, there is no question, the country is the embodiment of the devil. You are so harsh and judging, final in your judgment.
And the suggestions flow forth, cancel the games! Oh because that would help, that way china wont be under the scrutiny of millions of visitors and they don't have to worry about having to bend to the will of all the countries that visit. They WANT to make a good impression otherwise they wouldnt be hosting the games. So let them try, its foolish to do otherwise.
Then lets sanction them! Oh wait, that will hurt the whole world as much or more than China. And the harm it will do in China, make the poor poorer. Make technology like internet/phones/cameras beyond the reach of most people. Because we wouldn't want the average person to have access to these things, take it away as punishment. To what end? Force an unarmed rebellion? The idea is laughable, you'll just be aiding in the starvation of 100s of thousands of civilians. But sanctions have worked so well in N.Korea, Iran, Cuba, Palestine... Oh yeah, it hasnt, its just given the countries reason to hate. Its killed civilians and lowered the std of life for millions of people. The reasons sanctions are in place isnt a noble one, its a war measure used to starve enemies to death. A veritable siege on whole countries.
Don't get me started on Tibet. The country has basically been under Chinese rule until 1904 where the brits invaded. Tibet signed a treaty with the brits seperate from China. Then China retook the area in 1950. The country has been under chinese control currently LONGER than it had ever been apart from China. The dalai lama doesn't even want independence. But people have taken the publicity of the olympic games to try and incite riots and insurrection. I can't imagine the average person in tibet even wants this anymore. Those riots are what have caused the recent deaths in China. Not the government going in execution style. I'm not saying China doesn't have a big part in it. But the rioters are looting and burning down homes, lighting cars on fire. OBVIOUSLY this is something the police should try to quell even if they are doing a messy job of it. The rioters are trying to make martyrs of themselves. Infact they are doing the exact same things people in palestine do, but when it happens there its terrorism.
This blatant racism and moral superiority disgusts me. Keep an open mind and pretend it was the states shooting terrorists. I'm not saying human rights in china are as good as in the US at all. I'm not saying they don't need to be changed. But china isn't the devil nor is communism. You aren't making things better by viewing things this way.
"I said there is *no* relationship, not that there is one in the other direction." That IS what I said, if there is no relationship that would show "intelligent people are equally prone to immoral decisions"....
And then you go to list a small group of people again. And in situations where they are paid massive sums of money to be immoral. The fact that they need a million dollar a year wage is a good sign. The reason i suggested a study is because allegory gets you nowhere, i've seen a monk punch a guy in the face, that doesn't mean monks are angry violent people. The only studies i found showed a.2 correlation between intelligence and morality
And "Being smart isn't some kind of righteousness card" I never said anything of the sort! I said there was a correlation, It is NOT so black and white, being smart does NOT prohibit evil, it just makes it a little less likely.
How about this, if a stupid person gets sent to prison for something theres a certain chance he'll do it again. If a smart person gets imprisoned the chance of him doing it again are lower. Agree/Disagree?
I take back what i said about modding you down. While i still think your post was unrelated to the parent it was related to the article. And i do agree with your post... partially. I do agree that faith in religion can be beneficial, and it gives people some extra drive. However i disagree with the first paragraph in its entirety.
You start by saying the faith in Christianity does not accept fact without evidence. But then in the post you talk about how Christians are able to understand the evidence (of evolution). But then disregard the fact they were just taught in favour of Christianity since it makes them feel better. Especially in the last paragraph you say that simply teach christians the truth is not enough to get them to change their faith as they are too comforted by the warm arms of unchanging religion.
"In fact, the faith the Bible extols is never accepting something as fact despite a lack of evidence."
I'd like to see some quotes from the bible where God chides someone for believing in him without first having a well founded basis for belief in him involving experimentation or logical deduction.
And though really unrelated, if you google a word and click 'Results 1 - 10 of about 199,000,000 for faith [definition]. (0.10 seconds) ' you goto the definition i used. The point i was trying to make was that you admonished a poster for saying religion was faith based and faith was bad. By the definition i gave that seems perfectly acceptable whether or not there are other interpretations.
True i suppose i assumed they wouldnt be too rediculous. If led bulbs were to become standard they would be used in millions of homes, considering the fact that they use NO special materials, are simple and based on something thats already manufactured in the billions... i figured under 20$ is a safe bet taking the worst case. They last around 40~50 years and are near 50x as efficient as incandescents. Although it might take 3years to pay for itself i'm sure not having to change bulbs, going to the store w/e will overcome that. Also i was taking it from my POV, so i'm safe to assume no1 is stealing bulbs from my kitchen nvm ripping piping and wire out of the walls. I agree though, i don't think they'd be the best choice where those things do happen.
BUT we are left with the current problem of brightness. Current LED lights i've seen are simply not bright enough to bother using in place of cfl/incandescent.
FAITH - "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence."
Hmmmmm amazing you got modded up when you didn't touch on his comment. Instead you just said christianity relies on reasoning. While he said faith is not and religion is FAITH BASED. You could have said something related to his arguement.
Polarization isnt bad in your cited example. I find it fun to watch religious idiots disagree with science and get disproven every few dozen years. Then watch them all recant their views. I didn't see anything on that site about how the earth is flat and science is ignoring that. Or that the earth is the center of the universe. I guess they just forgot to mention that.
Agreed and I see what you mean. Personally I hope wikileaks evolves into a fact site. NOT a news site, which tend to asume you'll trust them since they have a reputation.
Wikileaks could have every 'fact' verified and backed up with multiple sources. Then the readers can draw their own conclusions. The scope of just leaks is too small i think, while valuable i think it should use its publicity and repuatation to launch said fact site.
Though honestly what i really want is to tag politicians whenever i see them on the news. A well backed up news site could do. Plus if no conclusions are made NPOV isn't even a problem.
You said you see no relationship then go on to show how much more pressure the smart are under to be unethical. Chemical weapons and spam bots are handy examples HOWEVER this isn't common. There are only a few major bot-nets and even less chemical weapons in the world. This means only a few of the i'm sure many capable intelligent people have taken those paths. You would need to show a study showing intelligent people are equally prone to immoral decisions (a cursory googling found me no study for either side). But i find i'm comfortable betting that stupid people would be more willing to murder, rape, rob a bank or beat their wifes than intelligent people. Reason being, all those things are stupid things to do.
Bull, smarts gives you foresight. Foresight gives you ethics. Before you decide "how should I accomplish what I want to do?" you have to ask "What do i want to do?" and you'll make a better choice if you are smarter. I'm not saying this is 100% of course, but on average smarter people make better more ethically sound decisions.
smart > stupid when it comes to ethics. The only problem is the smart while maybe more ethical have the ability to do alot more harm. While the stupid are relatively powerless with the exception of the president of course.
Georg W Bush used to meet with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard every monday. Well did until the guy got thrown out when he got caught doing drugs with his young male prostitute. Nobody seemed to care about that though.
Yes it brings to mind Saddam Hussein's mock trial. One judge was removed in response to his refusal to refer to 'the accused' or 'the defendant' as a tyrant. Whilst in a normal court if a judge called an insane serial killer anything other than the defendant the whole trial would be setback. There seems to be a tendency to label things black and white in recent times. That combined with the un-Americanism of questioning the rules builds quite an interesting layman's lexicon.
Something commonly found on the internet increases in growth exponentially.
Seriously it would be emberassing if it werent. The # of people who have seen goatse has gone up 1000s of times in the last year. That doesnt make distended anuses cool. Ty for the non-news.
Ah but see. The democrats are anti-torture while the republicans are pro-torture. While i might want to smoke pot. The cahnces of that becoming legal are verrry slim. Whilst my vote for dems to make torture illegal has much more use.
If you always, ALWAYS vote for the lesser of the two evils. The theory is that: a you wont be throwing away votes. And b the other party will have to become less evil to compete. For some reason though the states seems to prefer the two evils to take turns regardless.
I think thats a great idea. I'd find it amusing a bunch of female terrorist whipping out their strap-ons and proceding to shoot the place up. THAT would be a sight to behold. Guerrila warriors with Boob-bombs. While i'm sure this scanner would be used in conjuntion with other tech my image would make a great traditional war painting.
*shrug* i do safety votes. Rather have the lesser of two evils than throw my vote away (don't blame me i voted for kodos). But i would love to see proportional representation so that this type of vote isn't needed.... In canada proportional rep. makes sense, in the US it would seem too big a jump.
Slashdot Mirror
When things break in Linux its embarrassing and you get pointed to a shoddy workaround. When apple breaks things it is done on purpose and is hailed as a feature. THAT is the difference.
http://www.dalailama.com/news.42.htm :/
I'm going to assume you have a source better than the dalai lama on his desires? Try not to flame when you are wrong
You've haven't been to MIT have you? ... English skills is definitely NOT a priority.
Massacres??? I tend to keep up with the news. I hope you have some proof to back up this very strong news. I think i'll assume you are referring to tibet.
Its funny when you see human rights violations in the US people go thats shameful, we are better than this. Alot of people blaming corporations. Or saying theres nothing that can be done. When there are rights abuses in china, there is no question, the country is the embodiment of the devil. You are so harsh and judging, final in your judgment.
And the suggestions flow forth, cancel the games! Oh because that would help, that way china wont be under the scrutiny of millions of visitors and they don't have to worry about having to bend to the will of all the countries that visit. They WANT to make a good impression otherwise they wouldnt be hosting the games. So let them try, its foolish to do otherwise.
Then lets sanction them! Oh wait, that will hurt the whole world as much or more than China. And the harm it will do in China, make the poor poorer. Make technology like internet/phones/cameras beyond the reach of most people. Because we wouldn't want the average person to have access to these things, take it away as punishment. To what end? Force an unarmed rebellion? The idea is laughable, you'll just be aiding in the starvation of 100s of thousands of civilians. But sanctions have worked so well in N.Korea, Iran, Cuba, Palestine... Oh yeah, it hasnt, its just given the countries reason to hate. Its killed civilians and lowered the std of life for millions of people. The reasons sanctions are in place isnt a noble one, its a war measure used to starve enemies to death. A veritable siege on whole countries.
Don't get me started on Tibet. The country has basically been under Chinese rule until 1904 where the brits invaded. Tibet signed a treaty with the brits seperate from China. Then China retook the area in 1950. The country has been under chinese control currently LONGER than it had ever been apart from China. The dalai lama doesn't even want independence. But people have taken the publicity of the olympic games to try and incite riots and insurrection. I can't imagine the average person in tibet even wants this anymore. Those riots are what have caused the recent deaths in China. Not the government going in execution style. I'm not saying China doesn't have a big part in it. But the rioters are looting and burning down homes, lighting cars on fire. OBVIOUSLY this is something the police should try to quell even if they are doing a messy job of it. The rioters are trying to make martyrs of themselves. Infact they are doing the exact same things people in palestine do, but when it happens there its terrorism.
This blatant racism and moral superiority disgusts me. Keep an open mind and pretend it was the states shooting terrorists. I'm not saying human rights in china are as good as in the US at all. I'm not saying they don't need to be changed. But china isn't the devil nor is communism. You aren't making things better by viewing things this way.
I think its safe to say whether 7.5M or 7.5B years it happened a long time ago in a galaxy far away...
"I said there is *no* relationship, not that there is one in the other direction."
.2 correlation between intelligence and morality
That IS what I said, if there is no relationship that would show "intelligent people are equally prone to immoral decisions"....
And then you go to list a small group of people again. And in situations where they are paid massive sums of money to be immoral. The fact that they need a million dollar a year wage is a good sign. The reason i suggested a study is because allegory gets you nowhere, i've seen a monk punch a guy in the face, that doesn't mean monks are angry violent people. The only studies i found showed a
And "Being smart isn't some kind of righteousness card" I never said anything of the sort! I said there was a correlation, It is NOT so black and white, being smart does NOT prohibit evil, it just makes it a little less likely.
How about this, if a stupid person gets sent to prison for something theres a certain chance he'll do it again. If a smart person gets imprisoned the chance of him doing it again are lower. Agree/Disagree?
I take back what i said about modding you down. While i still think your post was unrelated to the parent it was related to the article. And i do agree with your post... partially. I do agree that faith in religion can be beneficial, and it gives people some extra drive. However i disagree with the first paragraph in its entirety.
You start by saying the faith in Christianity does not accept fact without evidence. But then in the post you talk about how Christians are able to understand the evidence (of evolution). But then disregard the fact they were just taught in favour of Christianity since it makes them feel better. Especially in the last paragraph you say that simply teach christians the truth is not enough to get them to change their faith as they are too comforted by the warm arms of unchanging religion.
"In fact, the faith the Bible extols is never accepting something as fact despite a lack of evidence."
I'd like to see some quotes from the bible where God chides someone for believing in him without first having a well founded basis for belief in him involving experimentation or logical deduction.
And though really unrelated, if you google a word and click 'Results 1 - 10 of about 199,000,000 for faith [definition]. (0.10 seconds) ' you goto the definition i used. The point i was trying to make was that you admonished a poster for saying religion was faith based and faith was bad. By the definition i gave that seems perfectly acceptable whether or not there are other interpretations.
True i suppose i assumed they wouldnt be too rediculous. If led bulbs were to become standard they would be used in millions of homes, considering the fact that they use NO special materials, are simple and based on something thats already manufactured in the billions... i figured under 20$ is a safe bet taking the worst case. They last around 40~50 years and are near 50x as efficient as incandescents. Although it might take 3years to pay for itself i'm sure not having to change bulbs, going to the store w/e will overcome that. Also i was taking it from my POV, so i'm safe to assume no1 is stealing bulbs from my kitchen nvm ripping piping and wire out of the walls. I agree though, i don't think they'd be the best choice where those things do happen.
BUT we are left with the current problem of brightness. Current LED lights i've seen are simply not bright enough to bother using in place of cfl/incandescent.
Cost isn't a real concern when they last 1000x as long as traditional bulbs... Wattage is an issue though.
FAITH - "Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence."
Hmmmmm amazing you got modded up when you didn't touch on his comment. Instead you just said christianity relies on reasoning. While he said faith is not and religion is FAITH BASED. You could have said something related to his arguement.
Polarization isnt bad in your cited example. I find it fun to watch religious idiots disagree with science and get disproven every few dozen years. Then watch them all recant their views. I didn't see anything on that site about how the earth is flat and science is ignoring that. Or that the earth is the center of the universe. I guess they just forgot to mention that.
...tag politicians 'citation needed' whenever i...
... a tag so /. viewed it as meaningless code
Sorry about that, i put the tag in
Agreed and I see what you mean. Personally I hope wikileaks evolves into a fact site. NOT a news site, which tend to asume you'll trust them since they have a reputation.
Wikileaks could have every 'fact' verified and backed up with multiple sources. Then the readers can draw their own conclusions. The scope of just leaks is too small i think, while valuable i think it should use its publicity and repuatation to launch said fact site.
Though honestly what i really want is to tag politicians whenever i see them on the news. A well backed up news site could do. Plus if no conclusions are made NPOV isn't even a problem.
You said you see no relationship then go on to show how much more pressure the smart are under to be unethical. Chemical weapons and spam bots are handy examples HOWEVER this isn't common. There are only a few major bot-nets and even less chemical weapons in the world. This means only a few of the i'm sure many capable intelligent people have taken those paths. You would need to show a study showing intelligent people are equally prone to immoral decisions (a cursory googling found me no study for either side). But i find i'm comfortable betting that stupid people would be more willing to murder, rape, rob a bank or beat their wifes than intelligent people. Reason being, all those things are stupid things to do.
Bull, smarts gives you foresight. Foresight gives you ethics. Before you decide "how should I accomplish what I want to do?" you have to ask "What do i want to do?" and you'll make a better choice if you are smarter. I'm not saying this is 100% of course, but on average smarter people make better more ethically sound decisions.
Awesome so all i have to do is be in denial about the harm and i can do another 30hrs of wow.
smart > stupid
when it comes to ethics. The only problem is the smart while maybe more ethical have the ability to do alot more harm. While the stupid are relatively powerless with the exception of the president of course.
Georg W Bush used to meet with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard every monday. Well did until the guy got thrown out when he got caught doing drugs with his young male prostitute. Nobody seemed to care about that though.
Yes it brings to mind Saddam Hussein's mock trial. One judge was removed in response to his refusal to refer to 'the accused' or 'the defendant' as a tyrant. Whilst in a normal court if a judge called an insane serial killer anything other than the defendant the whole trial would be setback. There seems to be a tendency to label things black and white in recent times. That combined with the un-Americanism of questioning the rules builds quite an interesting layman's lexicon.
Something commonly found on the internet increases in growth exponentially.
Seriously it would be emberassing if it werent. The # of people who have seen goatse has gone up 1000s of times in the last year. That doesnt make distended anuses cool. Ty for the non-news.
Ah but see. The democrats are anti-torture while the republicans are pro-torture. While i might want to smoke pot. The cahnces of that becoming legal are verrry slim. Whilst my vote for dems to make torture illegal has much more use.
If you always, ALWAYS vote for the lesser of the two evils. The theory is that: a you wont be throwing away votes. And b the other party will have to become less evil to compete. For some reason though the states seems to prefer the two evils to take turns regardless.
Oddly enough this post showed up as 4th on google right after your post. Time loop?
lol you would be making a deal with the company not insuring each individual bolt. so cost per unit doesnt come into play.
I think thats a great idea. I'd find it amusing a bunch of female terrorist whipping out their strap-ons and proceding to shoot the place up. THAT would be a sight to behold. Guerrila warriors with Boob-bombs. While i'm sure this scanner would be used in conjuntion with other tech my image would make a great traditional war painting.
*shrug* i do safety votes. Rather have the lesser of two evils than throw my vote away (don't blame me i voted for kodos). But i would love to see proportional representation so that this type of vote isn't needed. ... In canada proportional rep. makes sense, in the US it would seem too big a jump.