Do those mines employ child labor or dump toxic chemicals or prop up evil dictators? I hope not, but I don't actually know. What's more, there's no practical way for me to find out.
I think what you mean to say is "I don't care enough to try to find out." I don't disagree with the central thrust of your post. Shareholders shouldn't face liability for their corporation's actions. However, I can't believe that a publicly traded company has no mechanism for finding out which companies they're dealing with. What you're really saying is that it's not worth the hassle to find out if your stock money has a little blood on it.
Here is what I saw when I read your post: "I invest in GoldCo. GoldCo may or may not deal with some of the worst, exploitative elements of humanity. However, it would be quite an undertaking to find out what sort of mining companies GoldCo deals with, and then look to some NGOs to find out these mining companies' reputations. And I'm just trying to make a little money here." That mentality is a complete abdication of social responsibility. That sort of apathy, that unwillingness to see where your money is actually coming from, enables some horrible activities when it transfers to a large scale.
I'm not trying to beat you down with a burst of self-righteousness here. I just think that stockholders wield a bit more power, and have access to more information, than you give them credit for.
If a bunch of little punks had tried that sort of bullshit back in Omaha, they'd have likely gotten the living hell beat out of them. But Europe's a different place. People don't dare to fight back against these youth, as they will assuredly be convicted of committing a "hate crime".
Eh, maybe not. Eight punks tried slapping a salesman in Brighton, and found out to their dismay that he was a former amateur boxer. The guy knocked one of the slappers out and sent another to the hospital. I'm guessing that this particular group of delinquents will stick to slapping women in the future.
In most of America, I can shoot anybody who threatens me or my property, and be pretty safe from lawsuits
You might want to take a stroll down to your local law library before you start firing at trespassers. The laws governing self-defense vary from state to state, but no state in the Union permits the use of deadly force in defense of property. You might think you can shoot at the local teen who's stealing your lawn gnome, but the rest of the civilized world disagrees.
If anyone thinks lying about credentials doesn't matter, you're wrong. My Master of Divinity degree required learning to read Latin, German, Koine Greek, and Biblical Hebrew, then basing research conclusions on the linguistic and historical setting of documents written in those languages.
Sorry Essjay, but reinventing yourself on slashdot isn't going to work. I appreciate that you scaled down your credentials from a PhD to a Masters degree, and that you're now indignant about forged credentials, but I'm not buying it.
As a former skateboarder, I've got to say I'm a fan of municipal skateparks for a few reasons: 1. Most towns have municipal ordinances essentially prohibiting skateboarding anywhere but your driveway. Give the kids somewhere to go, it keeps them out of trouble. 2. Similar to the first, kids that get constantly hassled by police for skateboarding, yet have no officially approved place to skate, tend to develop a dismal view of law enforcement. It's never good to foster a disrespect for the law when you can otherwise avoid it. 3. I've never been to a township-operated park that didn't charge admission. Skateparks aren't *that* expensive to build, and I'd be willing to bet that most of them recoup their investment within 5-10 years. That's not counting the non-financial benefits, such as developing as sense of pride in your community.
Well, all's well that ends well. A group of fools sought to impose their foolish views on others, they were thrown out of office, and their handiwork was undone. I'm happy with the result and not really too concerned that the initial unrest was caused by *gasp* inattention to school board elections.
Hah, I remember skipping the snake warp once or twice, just to see what I was warping through. That snake level got ridiculously hard towards the end. Mistiming a jump and landing on spikes? Ugh.
But that level where you had to outrun the gear took the cake. It was seriously impossible to beat. All this time, I just wanted to get to the end so I could fight the brunette in the bikini that had been trying to kill me and Zitz ^_^
I am really wondering why they are the targets so much. Are they the most likely group to repeat their crimes?
Yes, sex offenders are far more likely to reoffend than other criminals. At the time Megan's Law was enacted in New Jersey, statistics indicated that sex offenders were five times as likely as violent offenders, and six times more likely than other offenders, to reoffend with another sex offense. (I'm getting that statistic from Doe v. Poritz, 142 NJ 1 - the NJ Supreme Court case that upheld Megan's Law. If you're interested in these issues, read the decision, or do a search for sex offender recidivism rates.)
You can debate the effectiveness of these registration systems, but the rationale for having them - the high recidivism rates of sex offenders - is pretty well established.
Jurors heard how the men, who had never met, came across each other in an incest chatroom.
God bless the internet for letting hobbyists meet like-minded hobbyists. But haven't these upstanding citizens realized that that pervy-old-man-chat.com and such are filled with law enforcement guys? And that they probably shouldn't spell out the details of their plot in a public "incest chat"?
In unrelated news, can we get a summary slightly more neutral than "just how misguided is this"?
...a little odd that a settlement has already been reached ? As several posters have already alluded, it's almost like it was pre-arranged ?
This conspiracy theory is a bit preposterous. I don't give Boston officials much credit, but I doubt they were complicit in shutting down an interstate highway for the sake of a movie promotion. What do city officials get out of it - $1million to cover costs incurred and $1million in emergency response funds? And the pleasure of being denounced as fools by the entire world?
Turner had good reason to want this thing settled as quickly as possible. They're not paying the city because their advertisements were mistaken for bombs; they're paying the city because the fiasco went on for about 8 hours before someone thought to call the PD and say "oh yeah, that's one of our ads." Also, the only real defense to Turner - blaming the Boston PD for grossly overreacting - is simply off the table. Can you imagine any company telling law enforcement "Hey, you're taking this terrorism thing too seriously" in today's political climate?
I hear what you're saying. However, the game didn't have much atmosphere to speak of - like the reviewer says, it has a cool concept but never feels immersive. If I felt immersed in the game's world, I wouldn't mind my energy draining while I try to figure out the map. It would've made sense and added a sense of urgency.
As it was, it just felt like a design flaw. It didn't help that the map wasn't exactly a model of clarity. Why should I be losing health while I try to figure out a muddled map?
I played the game a few times, had a little fun, and haven't really gone back to it since. There's nothing that really pulls me back to the game.
Shooting bugs is fun, but the storyline makes no sense and the cut scenes are long and boring (although fortunately skippable). The "heat/health" system is poorly implemented; your heat continues to run when you press select to check your (unhelpful) map.
I also agree that the hero is unlikeable, although I can't believe that anyone would refer to the hero of Dead Rising as more likeable than anyone else. That guy was like a skinny, more annoying Fred Durst.
When's the last time Capcom made a good game, barring the first 1/5th of Resident Evil 4?
I thought there was "uniform concensus" among scientists that humans were responslble for climate change. Now it is only 90% certain.
The "90%" can be a little misleading. The IPCC actually says that "human activities since 1750 have very likely exerted a net warming influence on climate". In this context, "very likely" represents a range of 90% to 99%. When you consider how many scientists were involved with the IPCC report, and how difficult it is to build a consensus among such a large group, 90-99% certainty is pretty damn certain.
During Tuesday's hearing, additional evidence came from Rick Piltz, who resigned from his position as senior associate with the administration's Climate Change Science Program (CCSP) in 2005 over what he saw as repeated instances of interference in the program's reporting process - often with pressure coming from two conservative think tanks that have spearheaded efforts to debunk global warming.
This statement is in the passive voice. No one is directly referred to here. The problem with this? The poster makes a statement and forces assumptions on who has been putting this pressure of censorship. I am not sure which is worse--deliberate censorship or subtle trickery as is in the first line of the "summary." I am not some Republican good buddy here to bash global warming theory or anything, but the summary is nothing but flamebait.
I'm not sure if it's poor form to respond directly to this sort of thing, but I will anyway. I'm not a big fan of the passive voice, but there are certain occasions when it is appropriate. And I felt this was one of them. Any time you hear someone blame a problem on "the Bush administration", they're essentially placing blame on Bush himself. It's the same with any presidency; "the administration" is a proxy for one individual.
That being the case, I thought that "scientists have been pressured" was a much fairer statement than "the Bush administration has been pressuring scientists". Some of the pressure has indeed been part of an institutional policy to marginalize global warming, but it can also be traced to individuals exercising their own discretion. (I'm thinking here of George Deutsch.) Therefore, it made more sense to say "this is what's happening", and let the reader decide for himself where to place the blame.
In short, I was deliberately trying to avoid finger-pointing when I used the passive voice. (You'll note that the CSM story I linked to made the same decision, and also employed the passive voice.) This cautiousness was probably unwarranted on my part; by any objective standard, the current administration's policy has been to minimize the dangers posed by global warming. However, I didn't want this submission to be seen as a political hatchet job. These sorts of issues are too important to get bogged down by partisan bickering.
Eye damage is identified as the biggest concern, but the military claims this has been thoroughly studied... Tests on monkeys showed that corneal damage heals within 24 hours, the reports claim.
That's all the reassurance I need. Start frying those protesters, boys!
"A speculum was needed to hold the eyes open to produce this type of injury because even under anesthesia, the monkeys blinked, protecting the cornea," the report says.
If this isn't just the height of ingratitude. Here these poor weapon-makers are, just trying to blast a drugged monkey in the eyes with a heat ray, and the brute keeps shutting his eyes! If the monkey had any sense of decency, he'd keep his chin up and help progress roll forward, instead of forcing these upstanding citizens to tape his eyelids open.
What are you talking about? Every gamer misses system exclusivity. When I was a kid, I couldn't enjoy a Super Nintendo game unless I knew the kids with SEGAs couldn't play it. Sure, I was a little miffed when I found out that not only could the SEGA kids play Mortal Kombat, they could do real fatalities. But hey: it just made playing Battletoads that much sweeter.
In all fairness, while this quote made this designer look like a jack-ass, I didn't see the original context. (The link to the article goes to a video? No thanks.) But given that he's getting paid to keep his product limited to one system, I don't much care for his opinion on the matter anyway.
Overall, spelling and grammar shouldn't count towards moderation points (as much as it grieves some), since not everyone is as deliberate when they type.
Mod parent -1, troll: everyone is singular, and thus requires a singular possessive pronoun.
Keep the partisan bull-droppings off of Slashdot, and especially out of stories about politically neutral topics like space.
Since when is space exploration apolitical? The U.S. space program was created as a new front for the Cold War, and it's been a political beast ever since. Think of Reagan and Star Wars, or international treaties banning the weaponization of space. Funding decisions such as this one are especially political: think of the struggle to get the Hubble Telescope funded, or Kennedy drumming up support for the Apollo missions.
I agree with you that the comment about global warming was entirely unnecessary, but there is absolutely no way that space is a "politcally neutral topic".
Well, our environment is crapping itself, we're all trying to kill each other, and we still won't grant marriages to every couple who wants one.
I heard a distant strain of the Sesame Street song "One of these things is not like the others" when I read this. Kids, can you figure out which one of these things is not like the others?
-We're destroying our life-supporting environment -We have nuclear weapons, capable of destroying most human life, on hair trigger -Gay people have to go to Canada to get married
Prius and Civic hybrids get 55 and 50 MPG combined, respectively. I wish. I have an '06 Civic hybrid, and drive about 100 miles a day. About 80 of those miles are on a toll highway with no traffic, where I'm cruising at 67 mph. (Any faster, my fuel efficiency decreases drastically; any slower, I'm a danger to other drivers by slowing down traffic.) Over the past 8 months, I've never, ever averaged more than 47.2 mpg over 100 miles - and that's optimal conditions. Good weather, no additional weight, very few stops for lights, staying at a consistently low speed with little accelerating, etc. (I'm also a fuel-efficient driver - no slamming on the gas pedal the second the light turns green, that sort of thing.)
Anything outside of those optimal conditions, and my highway miles are in the low 40s. If I'm doing mostly city driving, I'm usually between 37-40 mpg. (I realize the Civic isn't as efficient as the Prius for city driving; unlike the Prius, the Civic never runs on solely the electric engine. But I just couldn't bring myself to drive a car as ugly as the Prius.)
Don't get me wrong - I love my hybrid, and am generally pleased with the mpg I get. But those EPA estimates are pretty bogus.
How is that Benjamin Franklin quote still marked insightful? I've heard it at least five times a day since GW became president, and it's always in that same smug tone. The person repeating the quote always acts like he's dredging up some obscure bit of wisdom that eerily parallels our times, rather than repeating the same tired quote that's been floating around the zeitgeist for years now.
You're absolutely right. I'd never expect an inferior product from the discerning mind that read the script for Firewall (Ford) and said "OK, let's do it". Or from the guys who did "The Terminal" (Spielberg) and "The Phantom Menace (Lucas). Personally, I think our only real hope for a good Indy flick is to ditch the current crew and sign up Senor Spielbergo (with Bumblebee Man as Indy).
Slashdot Mirror
Here is what I saw when I read your post: "I invest in GoldCo. GoldCo may or may not deal with some of the worst, exploitative elements of humanity. However, it would be quite an undertaking to find out what sort of mining companies GoldCo deals with, and then look to some NGOs to find out these mining companies' reputations. And I'm just trying to make a little money here." That mentality is a complete abdication of social responsibility. That sort of apathy, that unwillingness to see where your money is actually coming from, enables some horrible activities when it transfers to a large scale.
I'm not trying to beat you down with a burst of self-righteousness here. I just think that stockholders wield a bit more power, and have access to more information, than you give them credit for.
This is not the investment you're looking for.
As a former skateboarder, I've got to say I'm a fan of municipal skateparks for a few reasons:
1. Most towns have municipal ordinances essentially prohibiting skateboarding anywhere but your driveway. Give the kids somewhere to go, it keeps them out of trouble.
2. Similar to the first, kids that get constantly hassled by police for skateboarding, yet have no officially approved place to skate, tend to develop a dismal view of law enforcement. It's never good to foster a disrespect for the law when you can otherwise avoid it.
3. I've never been to a township-operated park that didn't charge admission. Skateparks aren't *that* expensive to build, and I'd be willing to bet that most of them recoup their investment within 5-10 years. That's not counting the non-financial benefits, such as developing as sense of pride in your community.
Well, all's well that ends well. A group of fools sought to impose their foolish views on others, they were thrown out of office, and their handiwork was undone. I'm happy with the result and not really too concerned that the initial unrest was caused by *gasp* inattention to school board elections.
Hah, I remember skipping the snake warp once or twice, just to see what I was warping through. That snake level got ridiculously hard towards the end. Mistiming a jump and landing on spikes? Ugh.
But that level where you had to outrun the gear took the cake. It was seriously impossible to beat. All this time, I just wanted to get to the end so I could fight the brunette in the bikini that had been trying to kill me and Zitz ^_^
You can debate the effectiveness of these registration systems, but the rationale for having them - the high recidivism rates of sex offenders - is pretty well established.
In unrelated news, can we get a summary slightly more neutral than "just how misguided is this"?
Turner had good reason to want this thing settled as quickly as possible. They're not paying the city because their advertisements were mistaken for bombs; they're paying the city because the fiasco went on for about 8 hours before someone thought to call the PD and say "oh yeah, that's one of our ads." Also, the only real defense to Turner - blaming the Boston PD for grossly overreacting - is simply off the table. Can you imagine any company telling law enforcement "Hey, you're taking this terrorism thing too seriously" in today's political climate?
I hear what you're saying. However, the game didn't have much atmosphere to speak of - like the reviewer says, it has a cool concept but never feels immersive. If I felt immersed in the game's world, I wouldn't mind my energy draining while I try to figure out the map. It would've made sense and added a sense of urgency.
As it was, it just felt like a design flaw. It didn't help that the map wasn't exactly a model of clarity. Why should I be losing health while I try to figure out a muddled map?
I played the game a few times, had a little fun, and haven't really gone back to it since. There's nothing that really pulls me back to the game.
Shooting bugs is fun, but the storyline makes no sense and the cut scenes are long and boring (although fortunately skippable). The "heat/health" system is poorly implemented; your heat continues to run when you press select to check your (unhelpful) map.
I also agree that the hero is unlikeable, although I can't believe that anyone would refer to the hero of Dead Rising as more likeable than anyone else. That guy was like a skinny, more annoying Fred Durst.
When's the last time Capcom made a good game, barring the first 1/5th of Resident Evil 4?
That being the case, I thought that "scientists have been pressured" was a much fairer statement than "the Bush administration has been pressuring scientists". Some of the pressure has indeed been part of an institutional policy to marginalize global warming, but it can also be traced to individuals exercising their own discretion. (I'm thinking here of George Deutsch.) Therefore, it made more sense to say "this is what's happening", and let the reader decide for himself where to place the blame.
In short, I was deliberately trying to avoid finger-pointing when I used the passive voice. (You'll note that the CSM story I linked to made the same decision, and also employed the passive voice.) This cautiousness was probably unwarranted on my part; by any objective standard, the current administration's policy has been to minimize the dangers posed by global warming. However, I didn't want this submission to be seen as a political hatchet job. These sorts of issues are too important to get bogged down by partisan bickering.
If this isn't just the height of ingratitude. Here these poor weapon-makers are, just trying to blast a drugged monkey in the eyes with a heat ray, and the brute keeps shutting his eyes! If the monkey had any sense of decency, he'd keep his chin up and help progress roll forward, instead of forcing these upstanding citizens to tape his eyelids open.
What are you talking about? Every gamer misses system exclusivity. When I was a kid, I couldn't enjoy a Super Nintendo game unless I knew the kids with SEGAs couldn't play it. Sure, I was a little miffed when I found out that not only could the SEGA kids play Mortal Kombat, they could do real fatalities. But hey: it just made playing Battletoads that much sweeter.
In all fairness, while this quote made this designer look like a jack-ass, I didn't see the original context. (The link to the article goes to a video? No thanks.) But given that he's getting paid to keep his product limited to one system, I don't much care for his opinion on the matter anyway.
Mod parent -1, troll: everyone is singular, and thus requires a singular possessive pronoun.
*cough*
Since when is space exploration apolitical? The U.S. space program was created as a new front for the Cold War, and it's been a political beast ever since. Think of Reagan and Star Wars, or international treaties banning the weaponization of space. Funding decisions such as this one are especially political: think of the struggle to get the Hubble Telescope funded, or Kennedy drumming up support for the Apollo missions.
I agree with you that the comment about global warming was entirely unnecessary, but there is absolutely no way that space is a "politcally neutral topic".
My hybrid gets five football fields per gallon.
I heard a distant strain of the Sesame Street song "One of these things is not like the others" when I read this. Kids, can you figure out which one of these things is not like the others?
-We're destroying our life-supporting environment
-We have nuclear weapons, capable of destroying most human life, on hair trigger
-Gay people have to go to Canada to get married
*Cue music*
Anything outside of those optimal conditions, and my highway miles are in the low 40s. If I'm doing mostly city driving, I'm usually between 37-40 mpg. (I realize the Civic isn't as efficient as the Prius for city driving; unlike the Prius, the Civic never runs on solely the electric engine. But I just couldn't bring myself to drive a car as ugly as the Prius.)
Don't get me wrong - I love my hybrid, and am generally pleased with the mpg I get. But those EPA estimates are pretty bogus.
How is that Benjamin Franklin quote still marked insightful? I've heard it at least five times a day since GW became president, and it's always in that same smug tone. The person repeating the quote always acts like he's dredging up some obscure bit of wisdom that eerily parallels our times, rather than repeating the same tired quote that's been floating around the zeitgeist for years now.
You're absolutely right. I'd never expect an inferior product from the discerning mind that read the script for Firewall (Ford) and said "OK, let's do it". Or from the guys who did "The Terminal" (Spielberg) and "The Phantom Menace (Lucas). Personally, I think our only real hope for a good Indy flick is to ditch the current crew and sign up Senor Spielbergo (with Bumblebee Man as Indy).