prev <-> next
[2005-09-23 11:47:16] - http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/09/21.html#a5055 bill o'reilly blows up again... - mig
[2005-09-23 11:38:16] - hence giving the approval of whatever nonsense (from my perspective) he spouts from his mouth. - mig
[2005-09-23 11:37:31] - dave: i would, given the fact that most conservatives did vote for him. - mig
[2005-09-23 11:32:00] - a: you don't respect conservatives less when Bush says something you think is ridiculous? -dave
[2005-09-23 11:24:24] - association -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:23:52] - a: Assuming it wasn't you (because I know you're not expressing your true feelings), I would respect the people who used the arguments (and by associate, possibly everybody in the movement) less, yes. -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:21:49] - paul: so if i started going off about how all prochoice people were inbread and babykillers, then you'd respect the prolife movement less? ~a
[2005-09-23 11:21:36] - Dave: I probably have to agree that the Spurs look like the favorites right about now. I don't see any other teams that I think have a good chance of knocking them off. -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:20:28] - a: I agree that it doesn't make their arguments any less valid, but I do think it makes me respect them a lot less. There's absolutely no need to start going off about how these guys are ignorant and inbred and rednecks or whatever else. I absolutely hate it when people start arguing like that. -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:16:33] - a: I know what you're trying to say, and maybe even somewhat agree with you to a certain extent, but cmon, that statement's just funny -dave
[2005-09-23 11:15:50] - a: haha -dave
[2005-09-23 11:13:30] - paul: just because some pro-snake people have bad arguments doesn't mean that the pro-snake side should be faulted. ~a
[2005-09-23 11:12:42] - Paul: I think the Spurs probably still win over them though, they have an amazing amount of name power now too. What's amusing is that the name power they acquired is probably all off the bench -dave
[2005-09-23 11:12:32] - a: Yes. -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:11:46] - a: It gets a lot worse than that. Later on people suggest that the guy who wanted the snake killed might try to beat his wife later. -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:11:32] - Paul: <nod nod> -dave
[2005-09-23 11:10:48] - paul: did you click on the last picture? ~a
[2005-09-23 11:10:32] - Dave: The problem is that the media made them out to be some unbeatable team. I remember reading some article right after Malone and Payton signed which (only half jokingly) said we should just award the trophy to them now and not bother with the season. -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:10:22] - paul: "You freak me out. I think I'll chop your head off."
~a[2005-09-23 11:09:18] - Geez, the more I read that thread, the more I'm really hating the pro-snake crowd. They just keep getting more mean-spirited and irrational while the poster somehow manages to keep his cool. I know I wouldn't have the same patience as he does. -paul
[2005-09-23 11:06:42] - mig: funny that you would have me fix my link before you even fixed the original ~a
[2005-09-23 11:06:13] - Paul: I think that lakers team gets a bad rep anyways, because they did make it all the way to the finals -dave
[2005-09-23 11:04:28] - paul: well, now that I think more about it, I guess it is rather comparable to the old Lakers -dave
[2005-09-23 11:03:58] - Dave: That's pretty much the same as my analysis, and I figure that Malone is a bigger name (more legendary) but Walker and Williams might be able to contribute more (more in their prime). -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:03:46] - a: link to angrypeons is now http://angrypeons.com:8080/ - mig
[2005-09-23 11:03:14] - Dave: That's what I keep wondering. It's all well and good to compare the snake to a kitten or dog, but how about spiders or ants? -Paul
[2005-09-23 11:02:39] - paul: well, shaq and payton are the same. I roughly match wade with kobe (although that's probably not even), so then you have malone vs jason williams and antoine walker. -dave
[2005-09-23 11:01:08] - Paul: I don't see what would be wrong with killing it. Snakes freak me out as well. I wonder if the people who defend the snake dont' kill bugs in their house, or mice -dave
[2005-09-23 10:53:04] - At the same time, I think it got to be a little much later on when everyone was basically calling the guy and his friend total morons and unworthy to have children and various other things. -Paul
[2005-09-23 10:51:12] - Personally, snakes freak me out and I have no problem with the guy killing it and I was surprised that so many people lept to the snake's defense. At the same time, it seems like the pro-snake people had some good arguments in their favor too. -Paul
[2005-09-23 10:49:22] - http://episteme.arstechnica.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/34709834/m/111006883731/r/111006883731#111006883731 Thread about a guy who killed a seeming non-poisonous snake that he found. I was wondering which side of the debate you all would come down on. -Paul
[2005-09-23 10:48:44] - Dave: Hard to say. The Lakers probably had more "legends" but the Heat this year seem to have more good players in their relative prime as opposed to players arguably past their prime. -paul
[2005-09-23 10:48:22] - http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B4AA02389%2DCC09%2D40A2%2DB9D0%2DA6E3C27BFC9A%7D&siteid=mktw&dist= MS to split into 3 companies? -dave
[2005-09-23 10:40:58] - errr, don't they even have -dave
[2005-09-23 10:40:46] - Paul: debatably, don't know they even more 'big' names than last time? -dave
[2005-09-23 10:17:07] - Dave: Sounds like the Lakers of two years ago... -Paul
[2005-09-23 08:25:59] - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2169443 payton pairs up with shaq again -dave
[2005-09-23 02:58:19] - ... at least, that's how I see it. - pierce
[2005-09-23 02:58:10] - "Geek" implies a certain obsessiveness about a specific subject which doesn't necessary conflict with being a normal person otherwise. "Nerd" is the same except implying that it does conflict with being a normal person. And "dork" implies that one has failed to be a normal person, but without the offsetting benefit of being talented in a particular field. - pierce
[2005-09-23 02:54:23] - sam: if they meant it to be offensive, then it would come across that way and I would. But "geek" in particular is basically neutral these days. In terms of offensiveness, I think geek < nerd < dork. - pierce
[2005-09-22 23:28:38] - Sam: I wouldn't be. I would probably take it as a compliment. -Paul
[2005-09-22 20:36:58] - to all... if someone called you a geek or a nerd, would you be offended? -sam
[2005-09-22 19:20:17] - the commercial referenced in the title makes me pity the "celebrities" involved. Wasn't Jason Alexander making like a million dollars per episode of Seinfeld near the end? Why does he need to do utter crap now? Retire and do Shakespeare for fun, you can afford it! - pierce
[2005-09-22 17:12:39] - i'm not sure if i like the new firefox beta. ~a
[2005-09-22 17:06:48] - a: I don't think I've upgraded firefox in a couple of weeks at least. -Paul
[2005-09-22 17:01:38] - haha. the exploit was fixed already. yay for negative one day (-1 day) fixes. ~a
[2005-09-22 16:32:53] - http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2005/09/exploit_release.html Exploit Released for Firefox, Netscape Flaw -Paul
[2005-09-22 16:29:54] - Dave: Unless it's a humpback whale, because an alien probe is going to destroy Earth unless we have humpback whales in the future. -Paul
[2005-09-22 16:21:07] - Paul: after all, I appreciate your tv more than any whale -dave
[2005-09-22 16:20:23] - Paul: we need to find a sponsor to give matching funds for the save-paul's-tv fund -dave
[2005-09-22 16:20:04] - Paul: save the tv! -dave
[2005-09-22 16:18:45] - Dave: I'm going to force the government to evacuate my TV if there is ever a reason to evacuate Reston,
-Paul[2005-09-22 16:16:54] - haha, I guess I misread it. they want to allow pets to be evacuated so that more people will leave -dave
[2005-09-22 16:15:59] - http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/22/katrina.pets.ap/index.html oh - my - word. bill requires pets to be evacuated too -dave
[2005-09-22 16:13:04] - Paul: yes, he doesn't know how close he came to dying that night, mwahaha -dave
[2005-09-22 16:12:09] - Dave: The bastard.
-Paul[2005-09-22 16:11:28] - paul: who knows, I mighta worked for a's company, but he didn't give me an interview, so we'll never know -dave
[2005-09-22 16:10:47] - sam: I can't think of an obvious way offhand to destroy a hurricane with a nuclear weapon, no. -dave
[2005-09-22 16:10:12] - sam: ironically, the company I worked for sold my company to another. Now I'm working for the company that sold my old company, most amusing -dave
[2005-09-22 16:09:18] - sam: I worked part time through grad school -dave
[2005-09-22 15:58:36] - do you think it's possible to destroy a hurricane with a nuclear weapon? -sam
[2005-09-22 15:24:41] - Dave: Yeah, there are a lot of good answers, but I think I still stand by POTUS as being the top of the ladder for most people. -Paul
[2005-09-22 15:24:00] - a: Same here. I notice he didn't want to work for you either.
-Paul[2005-09-22 15:14:48] - sam: i was at the vt career fair in blacksburg (looking for applicants) the same day he was there (looking for jobs).
~a[2005-09-22 15:13:45] - sam: i'll answer for him. dave got his job after grad school. he might have had a different job while at grad school, but i didn't know of one. ~a
[2005-09-22 15:10:34] - dave: so, did you get your job after grad school? or did you go to grad school while working? -sam
[2005-09-22 15:09:59] - Paul: well the other possiblities would probably be like CEO, celebrity, sports star, etc. But in terms of pure power in so many areas, it's hard to match POTUS. I mean cmon, not many other positions let you have martial authority to order a nuclear strike -dave
[2005-09-22 15:06:57] - amy: hehe, what a great way of saying it, about the masses that is -dave
[2005-09-22 15:02:37] - a: a lot of newer cars have built in capability for it though -dave
[2005-09-22 15:02:08] - sam: I went to grad school right after undergrad, and I definitely am glad I did. I also think that it's definitely not for everyone though -dave
[2005-09-22 14:10:07] - sam: i had a friend in college with xm. it had really good reception but he had to have something mounted on the roof of his car. ~a
[2005-09-22 13:43:00] - my cousin has sirius. i've seen him use it and it and the reception seems good. i can only speak from my limited observations though. - mig
[2005-09-22 13:39:30] - does anyone have satellite radio? if so, how are the receptions? -sam
[2005-09-22 13:26:09] - Amy: I didn't really think of it that much. I just figured that most people would probably associate POTUS with "most prestigious job". -Paul
[2005-09-22 13:12:20] - Yeah, I was sort of kidding. I mean, Harvard is a prestigious school and it gets made fun of all the time. I guess it depends on what "prestigious" means -- does it mean held in respect by a lot of people, or acknowledged as having great power, or acknowledged to be a title only a select few are worthy of... etc. -amy
[2005-09-22 13:10:30] - Amy: Well, I'm thinking in general (and not specifically who the president is now). I personally don't think the job of president is very prestigious but I imagine most people would think it to be the most prestigious job in the world right now. -Paul
[2005-09-22 13:09:56] - i mean even if your term is over, you'll get VIP treatments everywhere you go... -sam
[2005-09-22 13:09:49] - amy: not everybody thinks very highly of mr. bush in particular, but many in this country do hold the office of the president in high regard (i don't however). - mig
[2005-09-22 13:09:03] - paul: well... POTUS is probably winner... -sam
[2005-09-22 13:09:00] - sam: i'd go back to grad school when i decide for sure what i'd want to study in it and was completely ready for a change in career. -amy
[2005-09-22 13:08:08] - Paul: Yeah, everybody looks up to President Bush ,) -amy
[2005-09-22 13:07:46] - what about world famous athlete? -sam
[2005-09-22 12:49:46] - Sam: President of the United States? -Paul
[2005-09-22 12:49:23] - Sam: I've given it some thought a couple of times but until I figure out what I want to go back for, I don't think I'll do it. -Paul
[2005-09-22 12:49:10] - what do you guys think is the most prestigious job? -sam
[2005-09-22 12:39:15] - sam: my mom keeps pestering me about it, but for me, IMO i don't think it will be worth it. - mig
[2005-09-22 12:34:21] - has any of you thought about going to a grad school? if so, when do you think you will go? -sam
[2005-09-22 12:07:13] - how many times are we going to do 20 november? ~a
[2005-09-22 12:06:58] - http://www.lewrockwell.com/tucker/jetsons.html some interesting observations about "The Jetsons". - mig
[2005-09-22 11:23:24] - a: we are going to do max 300 like 300 times - aaron
[2005-09-22 11:19:35] - Dave: If he's trying to do what he considers to be the correct thing, then I would say he should nominate somebody who he believes would make a good justice (whatever that entails). -Paul
[2005-09-22 11:17:46] - Dave: It depends on what Bush is trying to accomplish. If he's trying to please people, then it probably makes sense to nominate someone moderate since his base is going to support him no matter what and the left will hate him no matter what so he might as well try to get the center. -Paul
[2005-09-22 10:59:02] - babe. ~a
[2005-09-22 10:58:50] - aaron: looks like it's just you and me. ~a
[2005-09-22 10:53:13] - we shan't be attending DDR today. sorry folks - vamy
[2005-09-22 10:40:45] - Amy: Yeah, you could've easily pulled the wool over my eyes. Now, I know better.
-Paul[2005-09-22 10:37:44] - a: and now they found it! - aaron
[2005-09-22 10:30:32] - Paul: damn, I shouldn't have said anything ^_^; -amy
[2005-09-22 10:28:08] - men in the land of samurai already had their feminine side. ~a
[2005-09-22 10:23:29] - Amy: Ah, I thought you had come up with it yourself.
-Paul[2005-09-22 10:14:47] - Paul: I phrase I actually retained from HS history. -amy
[2005-09-22 10:08:20] - Amy: Heh, I like your way of saying it better. -Paul
[2005-09-22 10:08:04] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/21/AR2005092102434.html Men in Land of Samurai Find Their Feminine Side. -Paul
[2005-09-22 10:05:38] - Paul: The masses are asses ,) -amy
[2005-09-22 10:05:21] - Amy: I agree, Democracy sucks.
-Paul[2005-09-22 09:59:29] - i personally would not like the idea of a poll, as i probably disagree with the majority of americans on most issues. -amy
[2005-09-22 09:34:06] - dave: bush is (imo) a pretty moderate conservative. i don't think he'd like nominating someone more extreme than he is. ~a
[2005-09-22 09:16:46] - do you think some people are just born with generous and kind personality? or do you think generous and kind people were rasied to be that way? -sam
[2005-09-22 08:59:50] - good. i hope he does that. -sam
[2005-09-22 08:51:35] - sam: it would be nice if bush observed the constitution when making any decision. - mig
[2005-09-22 08:44:00] - sam: there's also the fact that the congressmen we elect vote on whether to approve/disapprove the candidate he chooses -dave
[2005-09-22 08:42:37] - sam: well, he is taking our opinions into his decision in that he wants higher approval ratings, wants the country to elect a congress that will work with him in a year or two, and of course the fact that we elected him in the first place -dave
[2005-09-22 08:17:21] - it would be nice if bush takes a poll and takes our opinions into his decision. -sam
[2005-09-22 08:03:05] - or does he try not to nominate someone more extreme and hope that the left won't practically raise too much resistance, as with Roberts -dave
[2005-09-22 08:02:32] - the reasoning being that he would excite his base with a more extreme one and that the left won't be satisfied even if he nominated a more moderate candidate -dave
[2005-09-22 08:01:53] - was reading an article talking about the next supreme court nomination, and it stated an interesting dilemma - is it better for Bush to nominate a more extreme conservative, or a less extreme conservative? -dave
[2005-09-21 17:25:56] - Pierce: The lefty pinko Democrats hurts my brain. -Paul
[2005-09-21 17:14:12] - paul: copy and paste into word then. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:46:05] - Pierce: The white text on black background hurts my eyes. -Paul
[2005-09-21 16:37:45] - forgive me if I've posted this before, but I love this blog... it's by the screenwriter who wrote the remake of War of the Worlds. http://hucksblog.blogspot.com/ - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:26:37] - Pro of the increasing gas price: gives that much more momentum towards a self-sufficient U.S. energy economy. Con: that momentum largely comes at the price of giving lotsandlots of money to some of the worst governments in the world, ideologically. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:22:14] - Dave: I don't think it'll go much higher than $3.50 or so. -Paul
[2005-09-21 16:19:58] - dave: I don't want to do that. in fact, I'm going to fill up on the way home from work tonight even though I have half a tank left. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:17:08] - so who wants to take bets on how high gas prices will go if Rita hits? -dave
[2005-09-21 16:14:11] - a: multiple indirection ftw!
- pierce[2005-09-21 16:13:10] - dave: yeah, I guess we can't have that. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:13:02] - "07248 - 2-23-01 2:12a - 6876 - 2-23 12:49a - i'd probably sock you a good one if you were saying that to my face - aba this one's going into my hall of fame. i've rarey been more proud of my forensic ability.
-- xpovos" ~a[2005-09-21 16:10:44] - pierce: we'd be doing those future doctoral candidates a favor -dave
[2005-09-21 16:10:29] - nah. we'll let google etch their entire cache into clay tablets. ~a
[2005-09-21 16:08:46] - I think we should take a few years and etch the entire msgboard archives onto clay tablets, and bury them. then, eight thousand years from now there will be entire doctoral dissertations on our bickering. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:07:22] - a: oh. well fine then. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:06:29] - pierce: the archive doesn't seem to archive all of the past entries. ~a
[2005-09-21 16:06:17] - a: I gotta give you credit, this message board has had some incredible longevity, and I think a large part of that is a credit to your skills (and another part is our laziness and opinionation). Kudos! - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:06:08] - pierce: we'll print it out and bury it with you -dave
[2005-09-21 16:05:55] - Pierce: I dunno, for whatever reason I would see us arguing opposite sides now assuming we found something to disagree with regarding marriage at all.
-Paul[2005-09-21 16:05:11] - aww well it didn't spider out into fun's links - aaron
[2005-09-21 16:04:39] - http://web.archive.org/web/20010502045416/aporter.dhs.org/fun/ oh no! - aaron
[2005-09-21 16:04:26] - paul: why is that strange? those are the positions I'd expect you to take now, more or less. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:04:20] - Pierce: Just not necessarily more electable politicians. -Paul
[2005-09-21 16:03:47] - whether the future is eager to elect "better" politicians is a very very different question. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:03:38] - a: Strange to find you arguing for marriage and see me seemingly arguing against it.
-Paul[2005-09-21 16:03:12] - dave: well I think there are enough people not wasting their days on online forums at the moment that we'll have a good reserve of blank slates. but I think there's a strong case that the people who do open their beliefs to critical analysis now will make better politicians in the future. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:03:04] - Ah, the good ole graphical representation of recent number of posts... -Paul
[2005-09-21 16:02:06] - no followup questions! - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:01:57] - dave: you make a good point. I've... uh... just arranged that in the event of my untimely demise, my blackmail file will be... uhh.... used, somehow. - pierce
[2005-09-21 16:01:43] - it'll probably be really interesting then, to see candidates in like 40 years or so who have this enormous electronic history to deal with -dave
[2005-09-21 16:00:12] - *** dave makes not to self to knockoff pierce
[2005-09-21 16:00:04] - a: since the aporter.org/msg wayback archive has cached versions of the "entries" links, I didn't think that was necessary. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:59:44] - http://web.archive.org/web/20010201073000/http://aporter.dhs.org/ giggle. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:59:22] - wow, I'm impressed, you can actually go around and even click on all the links and it archived those too. the links of ur history at least -dave
[2005-09-21 15:58:39] - pierce: don't forget http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://aporter.dhs.org/ ~a
[2005-09-21 15:58:06] - plus I have a full copy of the archives in my "blackmail" file. buwhahahaha. ahem. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:57:46] - dave: yes. you can do your own by downloading http://aporter.org/msg/msgboard.zip ~a
[2005-09-21 15:57:35] - they must have a massive amt of storage to store every new thing on the net for forever -dave
[2005-09-21 15:57:25] - http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.aporter.org/msg - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:57:04] - mig: yeah, I guess google probably does -dave
[2005-09-21 15:56:46] - a: haha, do you really do offsite backups? -dave
[2005-09-21 15:56:36] - dave: ... also web.archive.org and google.com (google cache). ~a
[2005-09-21 15:56:01] - dave: well google is cacheing this message board as we speak, i believe. - mig
[2005-09-21 15:56:01] - dave: offsite dvd backups. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:54:04] - pierce: I'm sure every politician has had people go back and erase or make 'unfindable' stuff from their past -dave
[2005-09-21 15:53:20] - pierce: yeah, I guess. I wonder whether this info is stored permanently anywhere besides a's machine. If it isn't, all you'd have to do is destroy his HD -dave
[2005-09-21 15:53:07] - "by the people" -> "by the politician to be" - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:52:40] - I'm sure they'd just comment that it's "allegedly" by the people and the public assumption would be that it was unless the politician-to-be explicitly denied it. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:52:02] - dave: I dunno... the idea that future pundits would disregard the entire content of Livejournal, Blogger, Moveable Type, etc. simply because it doesn't have pen-and-ink signatures associated with it seems unrealistic. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:51:09] - although, i thinking about it further, I doubt either party would hesitate to run ads about what we said here, even if they weren't entirely sure it was us who said it -dave
[2005-09-21 15:49:58] - and it'd be easy to spoof someone else on this board -dave
[2005-09-21 15:49:22] - theoretically, most of the stuff on this board couldn't be tied to us. Like they're only looking at Roberts' memos and stuff that he signed -dave
[2005-09-21 15:47:24] - a: I wasn't making fun of you, I was making the point that engineers do estimation and rule of thumb all the time in their job. Although, I suppose the Brick wall thing was making fun of you. -dave
[2005-09-21 15:40:20] - a: The point that I am running for office? -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:36:22] - paul: i think your last point is the most important one. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:36:15] - Pierce: Then people would ask me if I came from work, and I would say, "No, I'm just running for office". -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:35:38] - Pierce: That's assuming the system ever moves forward. I think it's pretty clear it's stuck in reverse.
-Paul[2005-09-21 15:35:38] - paul: maybe you'd get elected if you dressed better and got a makeover.
- pierce[2005-09-21 15:34:58] - a: I wasn't being weird... I'd copy/pasted paul's message, but it was too long and cut off his name. so then I pasted again and removed my name, but forgot to type /title. then I tried it again and got it right. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:34:46] - Pierce: But then I realize that I've left quite the paper trail behind that it would be so easy to find dirt on me (especially me, because of my odd sense of humor). Also, I would never be able to get elected. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:34:07] - Pierce: I've actually thought of that very thing. I sometimes entertain the notion of running for office under a major party and once I get elected, dramatically ripping off my shirt and revealing a libertarian party shirt underneath. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:33:54] - pierce: this message board will be forever public and it will come back to bite you in the butt many decades from now. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:33:48] - similarly, do you think we'll ever move towards a system where political candidates can be proud of their personally-held views, and maturely recognize the ones that they've had in the past but no longer believe, and retain popular support? - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:33:13] - Pierce: I would put that on my car.
-Paul[2005-09-21 15:32:59] - pierce: when you were accidentally posting messages instead of setting the title, i thought i made a mistake in my title setting code (which changed very recently) so i went back to make sure i didn't mess something up. then i decided you were just being weird. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:32:44] - *** Paul Sticks his butt in
[2005-09-21 15:32:19] - offtopic - do you think we're all boned if any of us decides to run for political office in the future? modern politics seem to put a high value on having a "blank slate". any stand you can be shown to have taken in the past will be used to divorce you from the potential voters who disagree with it... and we've taken an awful lot of stands over the years. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:29:48] - Paul: "Thank goodness we have Pierce here to dictate to us what our opinions should be." is going to be the bumper sticker for my campaign when I run for office. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:28:17] - paul+mig: I know/think you disagree with that, but the point is being made for adrian's sake and I think he agrees. so butt out. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:27:53] - a: we, as a society, cannot reach a true consensus on what the age of consent should be. we have no substantiable evidence proving it to be one thing or another. however, we have to make a generalization somewhere because the absence of one is worse than an arbitrary one. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:25:18] - well fine! you argue for hours, and then in the 30 seconds it takes me to type an end to the argument you settle it for yourselves. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:25:15] - Thank goodness we have Pierce here to dictate to us what our opinions should be. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:25:02] - with the inevitable part. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:24:52] - pierce: i disagree. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:24:32] - there. I hope that settled things.
- pierce[2005-09-21 15:24:23] - a: sometimes generalizations must be made even in the absence of trustworthy evidence. they are not good generalizations, nor are they desireable, but nevertheless they are inevitable. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:24:20] - paul: your particular generalization is irrational and cannot be validly or usefully applied on the large scale context to which it refers. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:23:59] - i was wrong. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:23:48] - paul: nope. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:22:00] - a: So you don't think all general rules are dumb and useless anymore? -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:19:54] - paul: "like this" is the important part that i didn't emphasise very well. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:19:17] - a: Well, you were also saying that general rules like this were dumb and useless... -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:17:57] - pierce: mostly the second one. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:15:48] - a: and your contention is that rules for the "most" set are not viable guidelines? or is it that unsubstantiated rules for the "most" set are not viable guidelines? - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:15:23] - Pierce: I believe my original point (and I can already guess you're going to disagree
) was that in general, most poor people are not poor simply because they were unlucky, but also because most of them made bad decisions or are lazy relative to others. -Paul[2005-09-21 15:14:37] - dammit... - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:14:30] - I think you're reading too much into Star Trek,
-Paul[2005-09-21 15:14:27] - pierce: "most" ~a
[2005-09-21 15:14:05] - Pierce: I think you're reading too much into Star Trek,
-Paul[2005-09-21 15:13:28] - Paul: forgive me, I came in a bit late. are you trying to make a general rule for the "many" set of poor people, or the "most" set of poor people? - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:13:27] - a: But that's not the same thing as what I was saying. I didn't say that some specific poor person was dumber and lazier than me at all. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:12:34] - a: I think you're right, but that's because the writers never (afaik) put him in a situation where he had to make determinations on such a large scale. In fact, maybe that's why his promotions never "took"... because a captain deals with small-scale conflicts and his gut is important, but an admiral deals with large-scale trends and so logic is important. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:12:18] - pierce: i guess that's the point i should have been making (but in the end didn't). ~a
[2005-09-21 15:12:10] - a: I understand that it's wrong to say that all women like romantic comedies or all men like sports, but I also think it's reasonable to say something like most women like romantic comedies and most men like sports (for example). -paul
[2005-09-21 15:11:25] - paul: no. he was born into the money AND he's saying that you're not only dumber and lazier than him, he's also saying (generally) that you're dumb and lazy. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:11:03] - a: Obviously everybody is themselves and nobody is trying to say that everybody fits into one stereotype. I think you keep forgetting this. I'm just trying to make general rules for how most people act/feel. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:10:17] - ...but I think it's important to note that those conflicts were usually small-scale situations with kirk as a primary player. Gut feelings are important, but kinda fall apart when used for large-scale applications like making claims about socioeconomic trends. - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:09:39] - a: If he said that I was not as successful as him because I was dumber and lazier than he was (and he was a guy who made his own millions and wasn't born into money), then I would think that it was a reasonable assesment. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:08:50] - pierce: i doubt kirk would say that poor people are poor (add in a half-assed "generally") because they're dumb and lazy. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:07:46] - paul: no dave was saying "good thing he's not an engineer" and "no, you're right, Brick Wall > My Head". he's obviously making fun of me so i asked him to please stop. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:06:54] - wasn't the original star trek basically an allegory for the point you're making? there would be some conflict, spock would suggest the logical response, but kirk's human irrationality and gut feelings would win out (and invariably be the "right" action). - pierce
[2005-09-21 15:06:42] - but my original point is valid. stop saying that "most" people are X or "many" people are Y when it's very obvious that everybody is themselves. what if some upper-class person said that the only reason you're middle-class is because you're dumb and lazy. how would you feel? ~a
[2005-09-21 15:05:43] - a: If I'm pigeonholing you, please tell me where I'm wrong. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:05:21] - a: I'm not trying to make fun of you. I'm just trying to explain to Dave what your position on general rules is. -Paul
[2005-09-21 15:04:34] - i tried to make a general rule about general rules and it obviously didn't work very well. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:04:09] - it's pretty obvious that i had trouble getting my point accross. people don't like being pigeonholed and you guys are pigeonholing people left and right. ~a
[2005-09-21 15:03:07] - please stop making fun of me. ~a
[2005-09-21 14:58:11] - Dave: I would think that marketing also uses a lot of intuition and rules of thumb. -Paul
[2005-09-21 14:55:22] - Paul: no, you're right, Brick Wall > My Head -dave
[2005-09-21 14:53:32] - Dave: You're welcome to keep trying, I just figured that I would warn you. -Paul
[2005-09-21 14:53:22] - Paul: or rules of thumb -dave
[2005-09-21 14:53:12] - Paul: good thing he's not an engineer, like one of the most-used skills in engineering is estimation -dave
[2005-09-21 14:52:31] - -sigh- ~a
[2005-09-21 14:52:04] - Paul: Yeah, I guess you're right, I should shut my trap I suppose. It just boggles my mind -dave
[2005-09-21 14:51:44] - a: how about playing poker, that's hugely based on heuristics on your opinion of what you think the other person has / is doing -dave
[2005-09-21 14:50:55] - Dave: You're talking to a guy who believes that he doesn't use generalities in his life at all, though, so I wouldn't bother arguing much with him.
-Paul[2005-09-21 14:50:18] - Dave: There are a couple of definitions, all of which I think are misleading.
-Paul[2005-09-21 14:49:29] - a: sure - I just find it bizarre that you think we could do anything without making general rules of thumb based on our own opinions. You couldn't do squat otherwise -dave
[2005-09-21 14:49:25] - FUD stands for very bad disinformation. i.e. incorrect information based on faulty logic/science. ~a
[2005-09-21 14:49:06] - a: I agree that such a thing can't really be proven, but I disagree that they are useless. I think everybody uses rules like that all the time whether they realize it or not and whether they are true or not. -Paul
[2005-09-21 14:48:52] - (and yes i know i'm making a FUD general rule about what ability is easy to misuse) ~a
[2005-09-21 14:48:40] - a: I don't get what FUD stands for either -dave
[2005-09-21 14:48:19] - dave: it's one of our greatest abilities, and possibly the easiest ability to misuse. ~a
[2005-09-21 14:47:22] - a: the human ability to form hunches / make general rules of thumb is like one of our greatest abilities. Otherwise we're just computers crunching facts / numbers -dave
[2005-09-21 14:47:19] - paul: rules that are based on general FUD are useless rules, yes. i'll reiterate amy's point "I wouldn't say that 'most' [category] people will end up [conclusion]. I would not draw any conclusion about the proportions." ~a
[2005-09-21 14:46:29] - a: or cut X program -dave
[2005-09-21 14:46:25] - a: so it's really just their "opinion" that the company should move into X market -dave
[2005-09-21 14:46:00] - a: Just because you disagree with some of my own personal general rules doesn't mean all general rules are useless, though. -Paul
[2005-09-21 14:45:52] - a: well how about CEOs then, they do a heck of a lot of things based on gut feelings, and you can't make them explicitly prove why they think it's best, they can explain some, but in the end it's a hunch -dave
[2005-09-21 14:44:10] - forecasting the weather is based on actual recorded inputs. at least you're doing something more than turning an opinion into a broadcast. ~a
[2005-09-21 14:43:50] - a: or how about rules like "chinese people like chinese food" that's not always true. but if you're a chinese restaurant, you want to locate yourself where there are more chinese people -dave
[2005-09-21 14:43:32] - dave: when you generalize your own FUD opinions into a freaking rule of thumb, then the whole rule of thumb is FUD. ~a
[2005-09-21 14:42:46] - a: it's like forecasting the weather, they're not right all the time, but people still look up the weather to see what it says -dave
[2005-09-21 14:42:38] - paul: i agree with your firefox post. i don't agree with your second post because YOU DON'T ACTUALLY KNOW. your just spouting FUD. ~a
prev <-> next