No happy slapping there then...
Printable View
No happy slapping there then...
I could not have made the Fort Hood story up if I tried. I am writing up some cynical commentary on it this morning as I post.
I think the question remains, was this man deranged or was he a true believer terrorist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jozanny
Setting the profile issue aside, for the moment, if his military evaluations were so poor, I think an important question is why was he being deployed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Stereotyping is a dangerous thing, but these cycles of confirming the worst of latent fears do not help.
While there are lots of billets and tours in the military that are more competitive and better for your career, deployments don't really work that way.Quote:
Setting the profile issue aside, for the moment, if his military evaluations were so poor, I think an important question is why was he being deployed?
Unless he was being sent as an IA (individual augmentee...basically if you have a certain skill set needed overseas, you get attached to a unit over there without being sent with your own unit), he would just be deploying with whatever unit he was attached to. With the operational tempo being what it is, getting deployed to Iraq/Afghanistan has a very high likelihood.
This hits really close to home for me. I hope we get to the bottom of this quickly and this guy gets the worst our legal system can give.
Why wouldn't he be deployed? He had actually gotten out of being deployed since he was in the service. With all troops doing multiple deployments, he got away with not going for years. Perhaps he should not have been in the service in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jozanny
From what I'm hearing today, this guy was not deranged at all. He expressed ideological ideas both in person and on the internet. He proably is not connected to any terrorist organizations, but this was a cold, calculated terrorist act.
From what I have been following on the aftermath, none of this makes sense. I started writing something for a blog submission to a news magazine, if they take it, but I am going off on another tangent and not attempting to offer any insights. He was devout, and apparently lacked the degree of professionalism one normally expects from American medical personnel, but no one saw this coming, from what I can gather.
Posted especially for Virgil :D
A recent study by the University of Bath has shown that cyclists are more likely to be hit by other road users if they're wearing a helmet. The less professional you appear, the more room you're given on the road. Info here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/5334208.stm
Disturbing news as I cycle to work each day. I'm not going to give up wearing it though. My wife has decribed the common cyclist's injury - the scalp. Unpleasant.
:lol: Thanks. Why would motorist pass closer if they're wearing a helmet is beyond me. I frankly think cycling in traffic is just way too dangerous, helmet or not. But then I live in a big city with complicated traffic. Be safe Fifth. I still think you should wear a helmet. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFifthElement
I read recently that cycle lanes on roads cause motorists to drive too close to cyclists and cause accidents. The reason given was that the motorist starts to note the lane and not the cyclist. We don't have many here in Coventry, so it's not too much of a problem. I still tend to use the backstreets when I'm off across town.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
I think you need to think about it the other way around - motorists are more likely to give someone who appears to be an inexperienced cyclist a wider berth.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Oh I agree about traffic and the city. If I cycled through a city I'd definitely wear a helmet, though the likelihood is I wouldn't choose to cycle at all. Too dangerous. It's very quiet and very sedate where I live :)
What? Are you trying to bump me off ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Just the other day we had in the news how New York City has the most pedestrian deaths in the US. I'm not sure if that was based on shear quantity of deaths or as a percentage of the population. We probably have three times the population of any other city, so just going by total is not a correct measurement. But it can be hectic. It doesn't seem like it's any different to me than any other city, except perhaps the number of high traffic streets might be more than others. The traffic in London seemed about the same as New York. The traffic in Rome seemed worst!Quote:
Originally Posted by TheFifthElement
Makes sense on the wider berth.
No, I only wish the best for people. :)Quote:
What? Are you trying to bump me off ;)
Winston Churchill's iconic "fight them on the beaches" speech did not make the grade when it was marked by a computer system, exam experts have said.
And extracts from modern classics such as Lord of the Flies by William Golding and a novel by Ernest Hemingway also failed to impress the computer.
All were marked down by a US program designed to assess students' essays.
UK exam boards and the qualifications development agency are experimenting with similar procedures.
At the moment, in the UK, computers are used only to mark some GCSE multiple-choice exam papers, in which there are right and wrong answers.
But exam boards are working on systems which would allow pupils to sit their exams online and for them to be marked by computer.
The agency responsible for developing such things - QCDA - has also run trials.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8356572.stm
So much for valuing the judgemental abilities of computers. I think spell-check also should go the way of the dodo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
And in news of the completely bizarre kind, corpses are to be caned before burial as a warning to the living.
It's not the computer, it's the programming. perhaps there's an interesting correllation between the attitude to literature of computer scientists, and the judgements of the computer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Computers marking literature exams are less sophisticated than chess-playing computers a decade before Big Blue beat Garry Kasparov.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
Assessing writing is so subjective, which might also be a plus in some respects for computer marking. It's certainly time consuming. I suppose a human would be better at assessing more experimental pieces, and probably humourous content too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gladys
I suspect that the reason that the ability to write good prose and good dialogue go hand in hand is simply that a good writer knows how to listen. Qualities that a computer does not have.
How would the computer gauge the emotion within the writing? It's not just writing but context, cultural context. A human being from a different culture may not even see the impact of Churchill's fight them on the beaches speach. I suspect a comnputer cannot capture and quantify the emotion and context within the writing.
By the way, that's such a great speech it deserves quoting:
http://www.putlearningfirst.com/lang...het/chill.htmlQuote:
We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender, and even if, which I do not for a moment believe, this Island or a large part of it were subjugated and starving, then our Empire beyond the seas, armed and guarded by the British Fleet, would carry on the struggle, until, in God's good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."
Virgil. Another of my favourites was:
"After the end of the First World War, there opened up in the life of the German people a tremendous void. And after a pause, there strode into that void a maniac of ferocious genius, the repository & self-expression of the most virulent hatred that has ever corroded the human breast. Corporal Hitler!"
I wonder if that computer would give Pygmalion an F. :p
Oh one could have an endless list of great Churchill quotes.Quote:
Originally Posted by MANICHAEAN
I have this one committed to memory:
Quote:
Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never in nothing great or small, large or petty never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense.
Virgil. Do you know the one when he addressed the troops in North Africa?
" I speak to you today from this famous ampitheatre in Carthage, where once the air was rent by the screams of Christian virgins as they were devoured by the Roman lions"
" Upon reflection, I may not be a lion. But then I am certainly not a virgin!"
Can you even imagine any of our current day politicians coming out with that?
Similarly, when he crossed the Rhine during the last big do, he had all the Chiefs of Staff line up and pee in that great river. He turned to Field Marshall Allenbrooke and said: " I've been meaning to do that for a long time!'
Ha ha!Quote:
Originally Posted by MANICHAEAN
Once Lady Astor said to Churchill:
"If you were my husband I would feed you poison"
Chuchill replied:
"Madam, if you were my wife then I would surely eat it."
(Paraphrased -not a direct quote).
In William Manchester's book, either " The Last Lion" or "The Lion At Bay" he outlines when after the war a ruling Labour Party member attacked Churchill in the House of Commons in what is termed "unparliamentary language" The then Prime Minister Clement Attlee told the errant MP to apologise to Churchill. He duly proceeded to the great mans country seat in Chartwell and was instructed by the butler to take a seat while Churchill was found. The butler, eventually found Winston in the toilet. Knocking on the door, he said: "Mr Churchill, Mr x is here to see you". Churchill replied from behind the door: " He will have to wait. I can only deal with one sh-t at a time".
:lol: :lol: No I don't know either of those!!! :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by MANICHAEAN
:lol: Oh I just love him. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by MANICHAEAN
Just happened to notice a report about flooding in Great Britain and Ireland.
How are my friends across the pond are doing?
:lol: Love it; apparently, Churchill was not always long-winded and rather dull:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
The flooding susided last week in Cumbria, but we've hardly heard a thing about Ireland. (The TV news and press is terribly blinkered here. We hardly hear anything about important Euro events, or Ireland.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilliatt Gurgle
The cleanup began pretty quickly, but a lot of the bridges were washed out or damaged. A policeman was unfortunately killed directing traffic over a bridge, but there weren't any more casualties.
There has been no substantial change in the number of adult brain tumours since mobile phone usage sharply increased in the mid-1990s, Danish scientists say.
The Danish Cancer Society looked at the rates of brain tumours among 20 to 79 year olds from Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.
They found that trends in cancer rates had not altered from the period before mobiles were introduced.
But they say longer follow-up studies are needed.
The research, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, says radio frequency electromagnetic fields emitted from mobile phones have been proposed as a risk factor for brain tumours, but a biological mechanism that could explain the potential effects has not been identified.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8393884.stm
But, also this year, from Sweden: http://environment.about.com/od/heal...ncerphones.htm, and from the WHO: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technolog...to-cancer.html.
Dating and social network site BeautifulPeople.com has axed some 5,000 members following complaints that they had gained weight.
The members were singled out after posting pictures of themselves that reportedly showed they had put on pounds over the holiday period.
The site allows entry to new members only if existing members vote them as sufficiently attractive to warrant it.
The US, the UK, and Canada topped the list of excluded members.
The site has always been unrepentant about its selection process, calling itself "the largest network of attractive people in the world".
The move was reportedly prompted by members themselves, who police the membership of the site to maintain a high - if highly subjective - standard of attractiveness.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8439495.stm
Perhaps there should be a itspersonalitythatmatters.com or a borderlineugly.com or even a talktomefirst.comQuote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
I think I'd get in the borderlineugly.com ok - I think ...
Looking at your avatar, I know you are simply being -too- humble (or even might be fishing for compliments!)Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
:p
No - best to say it before someone else does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Choosing a name for your baby is already difficult enough - but now researchers have upped the stakes by claiming that the right decision could add up to ten years to a child's life.
Psychologists have determined that your first initial has a major affect on your longevity, with people whose names begin with A significantly outliving those beginning with D.
And, they claim, it could all be down to a subconscious link to school grades, where A represents high achievement and D near failure.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ears-life.html
It's not the D it's the names beginning with D. Dennis, Derek, Desmond, Demetrius, Darren, Daffy, Derren, Daisy, Dilly, Dodo...
Watch out David Cameron.:lol:
Attractive women may have the competitive edge by letting their temper flair more, research suggests.
Researchers found women who rated themselves as pretty displayed a war-like streak when fighting battles to get their own way.
The University of California interviewed 156 female students to gauge their temperament and how they handled conflict.
The findings appear in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
In the study, the women who believed they were good looking were more likely to respond angrily in disputes than those who rated themselves as less attractive.
Attractive women also had higher expectations of what they deserved.
Survival of the fittest
These were strategies that appeared to work because the same women were better at resolving situations in their favour.
When the researchers, led by Dr Aaron Sell, scrutinised the findings further, they found how attractive other people rated the women also tallied.
And so did hair colour - with blondes rated as more attractive than brunettes and redheads, as reported in an earlier version of this story.
However, Dr Sell insisted to the BBC that this link was less strong and his research had not set out to test this.
The researchers believe the findings have an evolutionary basis, ensuring that the "fittest" people mate and have offspring.
In men, they found a similar link but with physical strength rather than attractiveness per se.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8464990.stm