If anyone isn't aware of how FPTP has hosed democracy, they should start here.
The primary concern I recognize is that FPTP collapses your system into a two-party system and makes third parties non-viable. Just try voting for Nader or Kucinich.
A vegetarian who is one for health reasons won't be terribly interested in eating meat, regardless of it's origins.
That's one impetus for vegetarianism, as you say. So I don't mean this kind of vegetarian. And the foundation of veganism is not anti-meat, it's anti-animal suffering, so I do mean vegan. ("[T]he word 'veganism' denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude -- as far as is possible and practical -- all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals...") And this is also why I say it'll be the confounding of dogmatic vegans. Because dogma dictates prohibition of meat and animal products, whereas the deeper and truer philosophy regards animal suffering.
And I'm on board with the ethical stance of minimizing suffering for anything that can feel. Which is why I say that I "love" everyone. In the context of this conversation, though, it's appropriate to include a double meaning of "love" for piggies. Mm.
Regarding Hofstadter's quote, it might be considered simplistic. It's not mere sentience we should be valuing, but sentience that's well. Positive experience. A sentience that is suffering greatly and will always suffer greatly? I would annihilate it because I care.
Nice. Now that I'm laughing at the curmudgeons who are rationalizing objections to match their ornery feelings about computer voting I'm made to think that we should be careful in mocking them. All critiques should be welcomed! Only the attitude of "mumble mumble... there's still something wrong with it I bet" should be ruthlessly denigrated.
25? That seems like a lot. I hope your setup uses short circuiting?
I did a lot of research to find good lists. That means vanishingly small false positive ratios, clear and reasonable methodology that agrees with my philosophies, good organizations behind them, and good coverage in union. I use Spamhaus XBL and SpamCop SCBL. Independently they're great. Adding them together nets an additional 4.4% with just the one additional DNS lookup, totalling, I think it was, 86% (hm, must have had other measures added into that, XBL shouldn't get 82%). Adding other lists got rapidly diminishing returns so I didn't bother.
I used Al Iverson's stats resource back when it was operational to give me a leg up on finding DNSBLs and checking their performances.
Now that I'm looking at it I can't remember why I didn't choose the combined Spamhaus SBL-XBL instead of XBL.
Running a small system with users who are fine with it, I get to implement greylisting as well. Which seems to augment DNSBL effectiveness.
I'm not sure which one that is. Maybe you found an F-Scale test? That's outdated. You might try the survey from Altemeyer's paper, I think it's in Chapter 1: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
So, no, it really had nothing to do with being "overly punitive", and that characterization is really not accurate at all.
"It"? If you clarify your antecedent there you'll likely discover that "simplistic and damaging law-making [getting] traction" isn't what you're addressing, though it's what I was addressing. Like AC pointed out.
Otherwise, "a very thinly veiled cheap shot at a certain group of political opponents" deserves some attention here. I can understand your being sensitive to the issue as it seems to be denigrating of your political views. Please believe me that my interest isn't against your politics so much as it's against the pathology that happens to be correlated with your politics. Not everyone with your political beliefs is messed up in the head this way, though it tends to be the case. Indeed, there are crazy folk of a similar stripe on the other end of the political spectrum. (Granted, it happens far less.) I am addressing the insanity, not the politics. I try not to engage in in-group v. out-group fighting. That "Us v. Them" reflex is just more evidence of the pathology I'm talking about, so it's telling that you perceive yourself as attacked and need to attack me in return (and to identify me as a member of your out-group).
I highly recommend that you read The Authoritarians and grasp it. However, I expect instead you will emotionally reject it and provide rationalizations for doing so. I don't mean that as a slight, only an observation that might hopefully spur you to rise above such emotionalism, but it would be totally understandable for you to take offense. If you take the RWA survey to identify your level of RWA, it'll help you determine your degree of correlation with the various traits discussed in the paper. That stuff is pretty solid science. You could learn some things about your tendencies.
So by now we all (?) know that the Mayans didn't claim anything about the world ending, but did they believe that the rollover of a major calendrical cycle would be a time of great change? Google that for me?
I suspect you don't know how to break tempered glass. Smack the tip of this knife into your window and you're good to go.
Also, starting posts with "idiot..." is a sign of general inability and it undermines discourse. If your objective is more to be ornery than it is to learn things, you might end up fairly ignorant.
If we're inclined to snide and inaccurate allegations, we would do well to also be accountable for them. When we're accountable things can improve and ultimately the whole world has to endure less misinformation and assholery.
... but, interestingly, this excision had a catastrophic effect on its progeny's ability to evolve...
... or some other "oh, you didn't expect that" scenario, a là "Jurassic Park", a là "Frankenstein", a là "chaos", a là the incessantly repeating mythologem of man's hubris wherein some knowledge is mistaken for a holistic grasp or short-sightedness fails to promote a wariness about tangential effects, folks tread (or fly) incautiously, and then the shit hits the fan.
Slashdot Mirror
Among the others, enabling a non-FPTP system.
If anyone isn't aware of how FPTP has hosed democracy, they should start here.
The primary concern I recognize is that FPTP collapses your system into a two-party system and makes third parties non-viable. Just try voting for Nader or Kucinich.
Magical pig?
Make it go fast?
A correction to your quibble, pardon me:
A vegetarian who is one for health reasons won't be terribly interested in eating meat, regardless of it's origins.
That's one impetus for vegetarianism, as you say. So I don't mean this kind of vegetarian. And the foundation of veganism is not anti-meat, it's anti-animal suffering, so I do mean vegan. ("[T]he word 'veganism' denotes a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude -- as far as is possible and practical -- all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals...") And this is also why I say it'll be the confounding of dogmatic vegans. Because dogma dictates prohibition of meat and animal products, whereas the deeper and truer philosophy regards animal suffering.
And I'm on board with the ethical stance of minimizing suffering for anything that can feel. Which is why I say that I "love" everyone. In the context of this conversation, though, it's appropriate to include a double meaning of "love" for piggies. Mm.
Regarding Hofstadter's quote, it might be considered simplistic. It's not mere sentience we should be valuing, but sentience that's well. Positive experience. A sentience that is suffering greatly and will always suffer greatly? I would annihilate it because I care.
OMG this almost drew me into the fray.
You guys knock it off. You ain't coming to terms.
How about you discuss where your ethical systems meet and try to encourage one another in those ways.
In vitro meat will be the confounding of dogmatic, righteous vegans everywhere.
For the more reasonable vegans it'll be that long-lost opportunity to finally eat some goddamned bacon again. Mm... I love the piggies.
I haven't seen any of their actual arguments, but from the sound of it "quirky" may not be the right word.
Is there any way to provide some negative conditioning for misinformation spreaders?
Slashdotters: Remember Cenzic lies.
Why would a bunch of sedentary muscle affect your metabolic rate if it's not *doing* anything?
Muscle_tone :
Unconscious nerve impulses maintain the muscles in a partially contracted state.
Be careful, when ignorant, of how forcefully you push your opinion.
Potatoes rank highly.
If you to maximize sense of being full while lowering energy density, you might look at sites that deal with "Fullness Factor".
http://www.google.com/search?q=fullness%20factor
Okay, I get it. "Psychoacoustic Simulation" means he compressed it with MP3. See? It's not the same anymore.
One might call this the "lame" defense.
http://openvotingconsortium.org/
Please support.
;)
Nice. Now that I'm laughing at the curmudgeons who are rationalizing objections to match their ornery feelings about computer voting I'm made to think that we should be careful in mocking them. All critiques should be welcomed! Only the attitude of "mumble mumble... there's still something wrong with it I bet" should be ruthlessly denigrated.
Hear hear!
I believe FPTP is killing our political system by making it a constantly devolving lesser-of-two-evils non-choice.
Getting a well-working computerized voting system is a first step to implementing something more sensible than First Past The Post.
25? That seems like a lot. I hope your setup uses short circuiting?
I did a lot of research to find good lists. That means vanishingly small false positive ratios, clear and reasonable methodology that agrees with my philosophies, good organizations behind them, and good coverage in union. I use Spamhaus XBL and SpamCop SCBL. Independently they're great. Adding them together nets an additional 4.4% with just the one additional DNS lookup, totalling, I think it was, 86% (hm, must have had other measures added into that, XBL shouldn't get 82%). Adding other lists got rapidly diminishing returns so I didn't bother.
I used Al Iverson's stats resource back when it was operational to give me a leg up on finding DNSBLs and checking their performances.
Now that I'm looking at it I can't remember why I didn't choose the combined Spamhaus SBL-XBL instead of XBL.
Running a small system with users who are fine with it, I get to implement greylisting as well. Which seems to augment DNSBL effectiveness.
Key management is a hassle for most folks. I still think people can be trained, though. Just need simple enough metaphors.
Meanwhile, here's an easy Thunderbird plug-in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enigmail
I'm not sure which one that is. Maybe you found an F-Scale test? That's outdated. You might try the survey from Altemeyer's paper, I think it's in Chapter 1: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
So, no, it really had nothing to do with being "overly punitive", and that characterization is really not accurate at all.
"It"? If you clarify your antecedent there you'll likely discover that "simplistic and damaging law-making [getting] traction" isn't what you're addressing, though it's what I was addressing. Like AC pointed out.
Otherwise, "a very thinly veiled cheap shot at a certain group of political opponents" deserves some attention here. I can understand your being sensitive to the issue as it seems to be denigrating of your political views. Please believe me that my interest isn't against your politics so much as it's against the pathology that happens to be correlated with your politics. Not everyone with your political beliefs is messed up in the head this way, though it tends to be the case. Indeed, there are crazy folk of a similar stripe on the other end of the political spectrum. (Granted, it happens far less.) I am addressing the insanity, not the politics. I try not to engage in in-group v. out-group fighting. That "Us v. Them" reflex is just more evidence of the pathology I'm talking about, so it's telling that you perceive yourself as attacked and need to attack me in return (and to identify me as a member of your out-group).
I highly recommend that you read The Authoritarians and grasp it. However, I expect instead you will emotionally reject it and provide rationalizations for doing so. I don't mean that as a slight, only an observation that might hopefully spur you to rise above such emotionalism, but it would be totally understandable for you to take offense. If you take the RWA survey to identify your level of RWA, it'll help you determine your degree of correlation with the various traits discussed in the paper. That stuff is pretty solid science. You could learn some things about your tendencies.
Actually, either's valid.
Here's a book review that might interest you: http://www.salon.com/books/review/2009/10/25/lexicographers_dilemma/
This simplistic and damaging law-making gets traction because of the people who are overly punitive.
That trait of excessive eagerness to punish is often coupled with these other traits:
Authoritarian Personality WP article
"The Authoritarians" paper
So by now we all (?) know that the Mayans didn't claim anything about the world ending, but did they believe that the rollover of a major calendrical cycle would be a time of great change? Google that for me?
A knife's no good for breaking out a window...
I suspect you don't know how to break tempered glass. Smack the tip of this knife into your window and you're good to go.
Also, starting posts with "idiot..." is a sign of general inability and it undermines discourse. If your objective is more to be ornery than it is to learn things, you might end up fairly ignorant.
Gee, I carry a knife.
Bueller?
If we're inclined to snide and inaccurate allegations, we would do well to also be accountable for them. When we're accountable things can improve and ultimately the whole world has to endure less misinformation and assholery.
Well, proteins are getting folded into containers all the time. Check out ferritin.
Then there are beta barrels ..., which act as kinds of containers.
Doc would listen to any kind of nonsense and change it for you into a kind of wisdom. His mind had no horizon and his sympathy had no warp.
... Unlike Doc Ricketts, you are not improving the situation; you are being petty and malicious.
Down the road:
... but, interestingly, this excision had a catastrophic effect on its progeny's ability to evolve ...
... or some other "oh, you didn't expect that" scenario, a là "Jurassic Park", a là "Frankenstein", a là "chaos", a là the incessantly repeating mythologem of man's hubris wherein some knowledge is mistaken for a holistic grasp or short-sightedness fails to promote a wariness about tangential effects, folks tread (or fly) incautiously, and then the shit hits the fan.