Expose 'Radical' Professors || Pixar || and More
Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
UCLA Students Urged to Expose 'Radical' Professors: "Re:Bias in academia
(Score:5, Interesting)
by killjoe (766577) Alter Relationship on Saturday January 21, @08:11PM (#14529718)
'Arguing that all the smart people are liberals is amazing ignorant.'
Statistically speaking people with collage educations are more likely to be liberals. Oddly enough the people with passports tend to overwhelmingly liberals. Furthermore a study showed that on average the viewers of the John Stewart show (liberal) were better educated and made more money then the viewers of Bill Oreilly.
I am afraid the facts disagree with you. Sure there are educated conservatives but the majority of people with degrees as liberals by a long shot.
--
evil is as evil does"
================
"I did not say that conservatives tend to be stupid people. I said that stupid people tend to be conservative."
-John Stuart Mill
-----------------------
<van@i2pmail.org> on Saturday January 21, @07:52PM (#14529609) Here's a bit from the article itself (for those that haven't read it..)
" The Web site of the Bruin Alumni Association also includes a "Dirty Thirty" list of professors considered by the group to be the most extreme left-wing members of the UCLA faculty, as well as profiles on their political activities and writings."
This story was covered a few days ago by one of the local radio programs here. Despite what the slashdot headline says about these guys going after "both sides," in reality it's a conservative witch-hunt... McCarthy would be proud of these clowns. Someone should send them a stuffed jesus doll to cuddle up with at night.
==============
A link to the site in question would help:
http://uclaprofs.com/ [uclaprofs.com]
Not to be confused with the professor review site at http://uclaprofessors.com/ [uclaprofessors.com]
-================
Re:Read my ...
(Score:5, Interesting)
on Saturday January 21, @09:30PM (#14530181) (http://despairat.blogspot.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 26, @11:30AM)
Disclosure: I am a conservative. I am not a republican. I have never voted republican in a national election. I've also never voted democrat. I think national politics in America is an institution rotten to its core.
- Powerful and continuing nationalism - check, but this isn't new to Bush.
- Disdain for the recognition of human rights - check, and this one makes me sad. Even if the administration was angelic in every other respect, this is an unforgivable fault.
- Identifying enemies or scapegoats as a unifying cause - check, but the enemy is real. That's a matter of convenience, I know, but something still has to be done.
- Supremacy of the military - check, I'll give this one, but it's sort of overstated in the flash. As a conservative, I recognize the need for a military.
- Rampant sexism - no, not really, although it seems unneeded for fascism anyway.
- Controlled mass media - again, no. Sure, some media outlets lean the same way as the president. Others don't. It's a pretty good mix, in my opinion. On the other hand, I'm not like most people, which is to say I don't suffer from the disease of wanting to have my opinions parroted back at me. Overall, the media sells what people want to buy.
- Obsession with national security - check, but once again, the enemy is real.
- Religion and government are intertwined - no, not really. As a devout atheist, I'd probably notice. The President spouting personal religious beliefs does not a religious government make.
- Corporate power is protected - half a check. Corporate power is certainly huge, but that's the nature of corporations. I personally don't believe in beating businesspeople down just for doing business in any case, but that won't be a popular sentiment on a site that is so anti-people-making-money-for-themselves.
- Labor power is suppressed - half a check. There's not a tremendous amount of supression going on, and the power labor is losing is more related to globalization than anything else. Interestingly, the fix requires more of number 1.
- Disdain for intellectuals and the arts - I don't see this one. I think it's elitism, frankly. Disdain for the Dixie Chicks was shown, and that's fine by me, but I've thought they sucked from their inception. (I'm being facetious with my example.)
- Obsession with crime and punishment - half a check. Outside of the national security angle, this one is surprisingly lowkey for a Republican administration. In the flash it is said that the "police are given almost limitless powers to enforce the laws." A case could be made, particularly regarding the USA PATRIOT act, but right now, it's just not entirely true. Right on the ledge, though. A short consolidation of federal and state powers would do this trick quickly.
- Rampant cronyism and corruption - check. That's called politics. It exists everywhere there are politicians. That's not an excuse, of course.
- Fraudulent elections - nope. Sorry, there's never been anything produced that points a clear finger toward election fraud. This drum will be beat for a long time, I'm sure, but there's just no evidence.
Re:Hey, the right to speek freely...
(Score:5, Insightful)Intelligent Design claims that complex natural life forms can only be created by something it terms a designing intelligence. OK... so, let's contemplate that for a bit.
If we allow the creating intelligence to be natural, by our original premise, it too must have a creating intelligence that created it, and so on. We're left with an infinite regress. So, how to go about breaking it?
Well, maybe we could posit a supernatural creating intelligence. But, if we take that option we instantly take Intelligent Design outside the realm of science, and thus automatically forfeit equal status to scientific theories. So, that's no good.
The other option, is to accept that intelligence can arise solely out of natural processes, which clearly contradicts the original premise of Intelligent Design, so that's out the door too.
Dang it. No matter what we do, Intelligent Design ends up being self-contradictory, or non-scientific.
So chew on that.==========
==========[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Firefox AJAX Debugger
(Score:5, Informative)"FireBug is a new tool that aids with debugging Javascript, DHTML, and Ajax. It is like a combination of the Javascript Console, DOM Inspector, and a command line Javascript interpreter."
thanks http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/2006
=========================[][][][][][][][]
Re:a company of "almosts"
(Score:5, Insightful)Someone should write a book on how Sun blew it with client-side Java. They gave the product away and spent tens of millions marketing it. In a marketing sense, they succeeded; everybody has a Java interpreter on their desktop. Yet almost nobody uses them any more. Why?
Part of the problem is that Sun's top technical people, including Joy, never really figured out GUIs. Sun went through three bad in-house window systems before finally giving up and going with X-Windows. Then in the Java era, they went through the AWT and Swing eras, both of which combine complexity with poor performance.
So Sun ended up as a "server company", the place SGI went after they failed to survive the transition to low-cost graphics.
=====================
Re:Hey, the right to speek freely...
(Score:5, Insightful)Intelligent Design claims that complex natural life forms can only be created by something it terms a designing intelligence. OK... so, let's contemplate that for a bit.
If we allow the creating intelligence to be natural, by our original premise, it too must have a creating intelligence that created it, and so on. We're left with an infinite regress. So, how to go about breaking it?
Well, maybe we could posit a supernatural creating intelligence. But, if we take that option we instantly take Intelligent Design outside the realm of science, and thus automatically forfeit equal status to scientific theories. So, that's no good.
The other option, is to accept that intelligence can arise solely out of natural processes, which clearly contradicts the original premise of Intelligent Design, so that's out the door too.
Dang it. No matter what we do, Intelligent Design ends up being self-contradictory, or non-scientific.
So chew on that.==========
==========[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Firefox AJAX Debugger
(Score:5, Informative)"FireBug is a new tool that aids with debugging Javascript, DHTML, and Ajax. It is like a combination of the Javascript Console, DOM Inspector, and a command line Javascript interpreter."
thanks http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/2006
=========================[][][][][][][][]
Re:a company of "almosts"
(Score:5, Insightful)Someone should write a book on how Sun blew it with client-side Java. They gave the product away and spent tens of millions marketing it. In a marketing sense, they succeeded; everybody has a Java interpreter on their desktop. Yet almost nobody uses them any more. Why?
Part of the problem is that Sun's top technical people, including Joy, never really figured out GUIs. Sun went through three bad in-house window systems before finally giving up and going with X-Windows. Then in the Java era, they went through the AWT and Swing eras, both of which combine complexity with poor performance.
So Sun ended up as a "server company", the place SGI went after they failed to survive the transition to low-cost graphics.
=====================
Re:Hey, the right to speek freely...
(Score:5, Insightful)Intelligent Design claims that complex natural life forms can only be created by something it terms a designing intelligence. OK... so, let's contemplate that for a bit.
If we allow the creating intelligence to be natural, by our original premise, it too must have a creating intelligence that created it, and so on. We're left with an infinite regress. So, how to go about breaking it?
Well, maybe we could posit a supernatural creating intelligence. But, if we take that option we instantly take Intelligent Design outside the realm of science, and thus automatically forfeit equal status to scientific theories. So, that's no good.
The other option, is to accept that intelligence can arise solely out of natural processes, which clearly contradicts the original premise of Intelligent Design, so that's out the door too.
Dang it. No matter what we do, Intelligent Design ends up being self-contradictory, or non-scientific.
So chew on that.==========
==========[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Firefox AJAX Debugger
(Score:5, Informative)"FireBug is a new tool that aids with debugging Javascript, DHTML, and Ajax. It is like a combination of the Javascript Console, DOM Inspector, and a command line Javascript interpreter."
thanks http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/2006
=========================[][][][][][][][]
Re:a company of "almosts"
(Score:5, Insightful)Someone should write a book on how Sun blew it with client-side Java. They gave the product away and spent tens of millions marketing it. In a marketing sense, they succeeded; everybody has a Java interpreter on their desktop. Yet almost nobody uses them any more. Why?
Part of the problem is that Sun's top technical people, including Joy, never really figured out GUIs. Sun went through three bad in-house window systems before finally giving up and going with X-Windows. Then in the Java era, they went through the AWT and Swing eras, both of which combine complexity with poor performance.
So Sun ended up as a "server company", the place SGI went after they failed to survive the transition to low-cost graphics.
=====================
Re:Super Q
(Score:5, Funny)and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope....
I don't want to fit in, I just don't want to stand out
================
Yes, because being the owner of the world's largest collection of turtle necks is an expensive hobbyIf he manages to pull Disney out of their spiral of mediocrity, he'll have earned every penny...
===============
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood [wikipedia.org]
----------------------------
What the..? Now Apple is going to own All Media?
(Score:4, Interesting)"For the entire month of December 2005, there was a new iPod being sold every 2 seconds!!"
--The idea, of course, being that iPods are suddenly this brand-new giant ten million user-huge market which Apple has unique content-control over, which in turn, it is supposed by the media gods, means that ten million people are just begging to be advertised at. Sadly, the logic is pretty solid. Ad driven content is on the way. (In economic bubble-form of course, which naturally will burst in a big messy splotch, but not before Apple has ballooned into something larger and even stranger than it already is. .
So Jobs now has a controlling hand over at Disney? When the heck did Apple become a world-shaping media-production company? Why wasn't I paying attention. Pixar kind of just crept up all quiet-like. When a big media company starts making good movies, it pays to watch out, because there's some big sneeze coming along a few years down the road!
And what a world it will be! Media and Advertising already smack of the same dumbed-down, candy-coated, lowest-common-denominator brain-goo which Apple has been peddling since the first Mac graced the scene. --That is, to people who like big glossy companies to do their thinking for them. (Ooooh, it's so hard to plug an inexpensive hard drive into an IDE port. Bite me.)
--And while we're at it, gag me with an iPod. What's next? Nuclear Devastation of a large American city at the hands of some Pentagon-funded fake-Islamic covert group? Well, yeah, but. . .
So unless it runs Linux in some flavor, Apple can go blow. I can't stand the idea of Apple having a direct line into the public subconscious. Ugh.
Think:
If you own and love your iPod, does that make you a, "Pod Person"? Well, duh. Of course it does. If the term 'Pod' doesn't twang the creepy-chord deep in your belly, then you're simply not paying attention, or you are and you've chosen to ignore the queezy body-snatchers vibe and opt into Stepford-ville with your eyes open. Congrats! --Anybody who doesn't respect metaphysical etymology is missing a whole mess of clues. . . iPod = "The Aliens have gained control of my brain by implanting a small device on my head. I am now very submissive. Allow me mod points, beloved overlord, in service of the empire. Fantastic Lad irritates us."
--------------
posted by USSSlavebation @ 1/23/2006 09:31:00 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home