I know what you mean, it was the same with me... When I was in elementary school the teachers said I shouldn't go to a school with classical education cause they thought I wasn't smart enough. I'm now about to get my master's degree in Biology, probably the only person from my year to do so. Elementary school teachers are themselves generally too stupid to recognize intelligent kids. Even more so if those kids have some sort of learning disability (autism and dyslexia run in our family, but we didn't find out about this until my younger brother got tested).
Ugh... What a bunch of idiots... What's the point of having an annoying system like windows if it's a walled garden? Might as well just get an Android tablet =.= If this happens I'm switching to Linux for my next pc/laptop, I'm no geek, but there's probably plenty of help online so I'll manage.
Some developers are just morons, if I have to pay to get an app installed, I just don't get it. I don't know what I'll be missing anyway. The ones I spend money on are the ones of which you can install a (functional!) part for free and then you have to buy the rest or those with in app purchases for extensions/items. I don't spend money on bagged cats, no thank you, especially when there are plenty of free cats around :P
Race to the bottom? Are you seriously defending hig e-book prices here. Well, then I've got a nice one for you.
Here in the Netherlands I came across a brand new book in a rather well known webshop:
Paperback: 19.90 euros
e-book: 15.95(!) euros
Yeah, that's almost 20 dollars for a goddamn e-book! Race for the bottom?! It's about friggin' time we put an end to the 'the sky is the limit' pricing policies of these demons called publishers!
"The fossil record does not show any missing links. Every time a new fossil is found, it is deemed a new species. We do not have one species as it "evolved" over time. If we do, please cite it for me."
This is in fact logical if you have a clue as to how evolution works. You can even see it now in the world. Some species are hugely succesfull, while others aren't. The ones which are successfull are much more likely to turn into a fossil than those rare species which are less well adapted. And that's where you have to look for your missing link, which you won't find, because the chances of those fossilizing are slim. Furthermore evolution is a punctuated equilibrium, evolution speeds up enormously if large changes in environment take place, which means these 'missing links' aren't around for a long time, making the chance of them fossilizing even smaller. Furthermore, this 'missing link' thing is an unsolvable problem since creationists will just keep asking for more, no matter how many gaps you fill, all they see is two new gaps before and after the 'missing link' you've just found.
"We have skeletons of early man that turn out to be apes. We have DNA in dinosaurs that should should not have survived 65+ million years. Unless of course, the dinosaurs aren't that old."
Who determines when a hominid becomes a human instead of an ape? Exactly, it's just a formality. And your dinosaur DNA turned out to be human. Contamination.
"We age rock layers by the fossils found in them and we age fossils by the rock layer they were found in. Pretty circular logic."
Ahahahaha XD How funny. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The ages of rock layers can only be determined using radioactive isotopes (Uranium or Potassium-Argon dating). What you're talking about here are biomarkers, which have been determined to be abundant during a certain period in time and can therefore be used to determine a rock was from that specific period of time. But this in no way provides an age, it simply places the rock formation in a certain era. You can only attach an AGE to your formation if the age of the layers belonging to that era has been determined using an exact dating method. So why not just do the exact method for all the tiem? 1. The public doesn't want to pay for it. 2. Not all rocks are suitable 3. Biomarkers are faster and easier. A proper geologist knows this.
"The fossil record does not show any missing links. Every time a new fossil is found, it is deemed a new species. We do not have one species as it "evolved" over time. If we do, please cite it for me."
This is in fact logical if you have a clue as to how evolution works. You can even see it now in the world. Some species are hugely succesfull, while others aren't. The ones which are successfull are much more likely to turn into a fossil than those rare species which are less well adapted. And that's where you have to look for your missing link, which you won't find, because the chances of those fossilizing are slim. Furthermore evolution is a punctuated equilibrium, evolution speeds up enormously if large changes in environment take place, which means these 'missing links' aren't around for a long time, making the chance of them fossilizing even smaller. Furthermore, this 'missing link' thing is an unsolvable problem since creationists will just keep asking for more, no matter how many gaps you fill, all they see is two new gaps before and after the 'missing link' you've just found.
"We have skeletons of early man that turn out to be apes. We have DNA in dinosaurs that should should not have survived 65+ million years. Unless of course, the dinosaurs aren't that old."
Who determines when a hominid becomes a human instead of an ape? Exactly, it's just a formality. And your dinosaur DNA turned out to be human. Contamination.
"We age rock layers by the fossils found in them and we age fossils by the rock layer they were found in. Pretty circular logic."
Ahahahaha XD How funny. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The ages of rock layers can only be determined using radioactive isotopes (Uranium or Potassium-Argon dating). What you're talking about here are biomarkers, which have been determined to be abundant during a certain period in time and can therefore be used to determine a rock was from that specific period of time. But this in no way provides an age, it simply places the rock formation in a certain era. You can only attach an AGE to your formation if the age of the layers belonging to that era has been determined using an exact dating method. So why not just do the exact method for all the tiem? 1. The public doesn't want to pay for it. 2. Not all rocks are suitable 3. Biomarkers are faster and easier. A proper geologist knows this.
Re: ...little more than an exercise in vindictiveness...
True, but it SHOULD bother the people living in these countries who get stuck with these utterly useless and vindictive programs because the retards in charge are being bought by the entertainment industry.
Why don't you go flush your savings down the toilet.
Weird suggestion?
It's the same though, you take something finite and waste it completely. Does that make sense? No. That's why taxing a finite resource like fossil fuels does make sense if people refuse to use it responsibly. Somehow people often become a lot more responsible if you hit them in their wallets.
Actually it's true that if you want to make an article available for free as a researcher, you have to pay a (hefty) one time fee to get it online.
And I do agree that it seems to make more sense to have people pay to see what they want to read, but costs are currently ridiculous. I came across an article while searching for info for my master thesis this week where you had to pay $25(!) for access for ONE STINKING DAY. If the journals were the least bit reasonable I don't think there would even be an open access debate.
I do think that articles should be free after a while though, articles over 20 years old are either basic things you should just be able to read or outdated stuff which is only interesting because it's part of the history of a field, you shouldn't have to pay for things like that.
It's true that the whole situation is messed up, but I still don't have any pity for these brats. Don't get me wrong, I do care about recent changes in society and I don't like em. It's not just in the USA either, here in the Netherlands it's pretty bad too. But there's a difference between just being obnoxious and not doing what you're supposed to do and sexually harrassing an old lady.
Also, 'children'? This lot? I think if you can spout crap like that they can be treated as adults. I'm not saying everyone should go send death threats to them or that doing so is normal behaviour, but I sure as hell don't pity them.
I don't give a damn if these kids get death threats, as long as nobody actually does what they're threatening to do those little pieces of shit deserve every threatening phonecall, email, text and whatever else they've gotten.
Another example of how low humans can sink. I don't care how their parents raised them, whether the old lady should have done something or any crap like that. They brought this on themselves and are now being treated like the fucked up psychos they are.
On the post: DailyDirt: How Do You Solve A Problem Like... Academia?
Re: Re:
On the post: Game Developers Concerned About A Potentially Closed Windows 8
=_=
On the post: TPP Text On Fair Use Leaks; US Proposals Are Really About Limiting Fair Use, Not Expanding It
On the post: App Developer: Android OS Built For Piracy And Consumer Choice Sucks
On the post: Defensive Posturing: E-Book Author Takes On The 'Old Guard' At Crime Writing Festival [UPDATED]
Re: Re: Re:
Here in the Netherlands I came across a brand new book in a rather well known webshop:
Paperback: 19.90 euros
e-book: 15.95(!) euros
Yeah, that's almost 20 dollars for a goddamn e-book! Race for the bottom?! It's about friggin' time we put an end to the 'the sky is the limit' pricing policies of these demons called publishers!
On the post: Would US Education Be Better If We Replaced Algebra Requirements With Stats & Logic?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Real world skills
On the post: Would US Education Be Better If We Replaced Algebra Requirements With Stats & Logic?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Real world skills
This is in fact logical if you have a clue as to how evolution works. You can even see it now in the world. Some species are hugely succesfull, while others aren't. The ones which are successfull are much more likely to turn into a fossil than those rare species which are less well adapted. And that's where you have to look for your missing link, which you won't find, because the chances of those fossilizing are slim. Furthermore evolution is a punctuated equilibrium, evolution speeds up enormously if large changes in environment take place, which means these 'missing links' aren't around for a long time, making the chance of them fossilizing even smaller. Furthermore, this 'missing link' thing is an unsolvable problem since creationists will just keep asking for more, no matter how many gaps you fill, all they see is two new gaps before and after the 'missing link' you've just found.
"We have skeletons of early man that turn out to be apes. We have DNA in dinosaurs that should should not have survived 65+ million years. Unless of course, the dinosaurs aren't that old."
Who determines when a hominid becomes a human instead of an ape? Exactly, it's just a formality. And your dinosaur DNA turned out to be human. Contamination.
"We age rock layers by the fossils found in them and we age fossils by the rock layer they were found in. Pretty circular logic."
Ahahahaha XD How funny. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The ages of rock layers can only be determined using radioactive isotopes (Uranium or Potassium-Argon dating). What you're talking about here are biomarkers, which have been determined to be abundant during a certain period in time and can therefore be used to determine a rock was from that specific period of time. But this in no way provides an age, it simply places the rock formation in a certain era. You can only attach an AGE to your formation if the age of the layers belonging to that era has been determined using an exact dating method. So why not just do the exact method for all the tiem? 1. The public doesn't want to pay for it. 2. Not all rocks are suitable 3. Biomarkers are faster and easier. A proper geologist knows this.
On the post: Would US Education Be Better If We Replaced Algebra Requirements With Stats & Logic?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Real world skills
This is in fact logical if you have a clue as to how evolution works. You can even see it now in the world. Some species are hugely succesfull, while others aren't. The ones which are successfull are much more likely to turn into a fossil than those rare species which are less well adapted. And that's where you have to look for your missing link, which you won't find, because the chances of those fossilizing are slim. Furthermore evolution is a punctuated equilibrium, evolution speeds up enormously if large changes in environment take place, which means these 'missing links' aren't around for a long time, making the chance of them fossilizing even smaller. Furthermore, this 'missing link' thing is an unsolvable problem since creationists will just keep asking for more, no matter how many gaps you fill, all they see is two new gaps before and after the 'missing link' you've just found.
"We have skeletons of early man that turn out to be apes. We have DNA in dinosaurs that should should not have survived 65+ million years. Unless of course, the dinosaurs aren't that old."
Who determines when a hominid becomes a human instead of an ape? Exactly, it's just a formality. And your dinosaur DNA turned out to be human. Contamination.
"We age rock layers by the fossils found in them and we age fossils by the rock layer they were found in. Pretty circular logic."
Ahahahaha XD How funny. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. The ages of rock layers can only be determined using radioactive isotopes (Uranium or Potassium-Argon dating). What you're talking about here are biomarkers, which have been determined to be abundant during a certain period in time and can therefore be used to determine a rock was from that specific period of time. But this in no way provides an age, it simply places the rock formation in a certain era. You can only attach an AGE to your formation if the age of the layers belonging to that era has been determined using an exact dating method. So why not just do the exact method for all the tiem? 1. The public doesn't want to pay for it. 2. Not all rocks are suitable 3. Biomarkers are faster and easier. A proper geologist knows this.
On the post: NZ Copyright Industry Claims New 'Three Strikes' Law Halved Movie Infringements After One Month: So What?
Re: ...little more than an exercise in vindictiveness...
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Suggestion #5 is utter nonsense
Weird suggestion?
It's the same though, you take something finite and waste it completely. Does that make sense? No. That's why taxing a finite resource like fossil fuels does make sense if people refuse to use it responsibly. Somehow people often become a lot more responsible if you hit them in their wallets.
On the post: UK Plans To Make All Government-Funded Research Free To The Public Immediately Upon Publication
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Pro-Copyright Judges Never Drop Cases Over Conflicts, So Why Does Megaupload Judge Have To Step Down?
Re: Re:
On the post: Facebook Engineer Apologizes Via Reddit For Accidentally Blocking Imgur Across Facebook
On the post: UK Plans To Make All Government-Funded Research Free To The Public Immediately Upon Publication
Re:
And I do agree that it seems to make more sense to have people pay to see what they want to read, but costs are currently ridiculous. I came across an article while searching for info for my master thesis this week where you had to pay $25(!) for access for ONE STINKING DAY. If the journals were the least bit reasonable I don't think there would even be an open access debate.
I do think that articles should be free after a while though, articles over 20 years old are either basic things you should just be able to read or outdated stuff which is only interesting because it's part of the history of a field, you shouldn't have to pay for things like that.
On the post: FBI Wants To Make It Easier For You To Tell Your Customers They Might Be Felonious Pirates
If their objective is for me to never buy/watch/read/listen to anything that has that logo on it that is.
On the post: OxyContin Being Tested On Kids... So Drugmaker Can Get 6 More Months Of Patent Protection
Re:
On the post: OxyContin Being Tested On Kids... So Drugmaker Can Get 6 More Months Of Patent Protection
Re: Young
On the post: Epic Win/Fail: Bullied Bus Monitor Sparks Overwhelming Support, But Also Death Threats To Kids
Re: Re:
Also, 'children'? This lot? I think if you can spout crap like that they can be treated as adults. I'm not saying everyone should go send death threats to them or that doing so is normal behaviour, but I sure as hell don't pity them.
On the post: Epic Win/Fail: Bullied Bus Monitor Sparks Overwhelming Support, But Also Death Threats To Kids
Another example of how low humans can sink. I don't care how their parents raised them, whether the old lady should have done something or any crap like that. They brought this on themselves and are now being treated like the fucked up psychos they are.
On the post: Police Ticketing Informal Rideshare Participants Based On No Law, But To Protect Port Authority Revenue
Re:
Next >>