mingdingo

Yeah if China became like the (highly imperfect) US it would still be a major win.

At the very least I'd start with the more intelligent animals. Pigs in gestation crates is awful.

I totally agree the West needs to improve animal welfare even further. But SOME cruelty laws are better than NONE, which is why I bring up China more. But you're totally right, there's awful stuff going on here, too.

I know, but I don't think very many people know this even exists. That's the worst part about this practice -- it's so horrible that it's too horrible to even share. As much as I hate it, I know I can't share pictures of this on Facebook because people will likely hate me more than they hate what's going on.

As well as put in place some animal cruelty laws. You would hold your head in your hands if you saw what happens. For dogs, for example, they will tie their front legs together BEHIND their back (YES, DISLOCATING THEM), and leave them tied up like that with a tin can over their mouth until they're ready to deal with them. They'll even hold the dogs legs like a "handle" while carrying them around. I've never seen cruelty like it...

I'm not talking immediate damage, just the difference between getting a hip replacement in 10 years versus not.

He was 49 years old. Wouldn't this cause problems for his hips and knees? I'm all for pushing physical limits, but not to the point where it could backfire. Even 20 year-old professional footballers (soccer) are told to take 2 weeks complete rest at the end of a season, and during the season they only train maybe 3-4 days a week.

I hope this guy doesn't regret doing this down the line, because right now it is very inspiring.

It's not really "hurting" it if you make it deeply unconscious, which is the goal of stunning. Can it be botched? Yes. But just like medicine that sometimes doesn't work, or isn't administered properly, the solution is not to stop using the medicine, but to correct the mistakes made when delivering it.

Consider this: When you use a stunner properly, the animal feels a split second of pain before becoming unconscious. At this point, pretty much every vet would say it can't feel pain.

But if you cut its throat while conscious, it can feel the pain of the wound immediately, and continues to feel it until the brain starts shutting down. This can take minutes. Cutting the throat does not cause immediate unconsciousness, and this is the problem.

Compare a properly stunned animal vs. an animal whose throat has been cut by via sechita, and tell me which one reaches unconsciousness faster. Because that is the animal that endures less pain in death.

I didn't leave out details. We are talking about stunning it with a captive-bolt stunner.

Would it be more humane to cut an animal's throat while it was conscious, or unconscious? That's all I'm asking. If that's considered a gotcha question, then we've probably reached an impasse...

Just answer one thing:

Do Jewish slaughter laws call for the animal to be conscious when having its throat cut, and do you think this is preferable to being stunned?

That is, if you HAD to kill your pet dog by cutting its throat, would you want it to be stunned or not?

I probably used Kosher and Halal incorrectly, but suffice it to say that slaughter of conscious animals is widely practiced in the Jewish and Muslim faiths. To ask another question: Do you think western slaughterhouses adopted captive-bolt stunning because they were bored, or because it granted a small reprieve at the end of the farming cycle?

Here's a good article by Christopher Hitchens on freedom of religion: http://www.slate.com/id/2266154. Some examples of where he thinks religion oversteps its bounds:

- Mormon polygamy

- Christian sects that disapprove of medicine

- Ritual circumcision (especially when the mohel sucks off the debris from the penis with his mouth)

I would also add to that list the ritual slaughter of animals. Kosher and Halal both mandate that an animal cannot be stunned with a captive-bolt stunner before having their throats cut, and must be fully conscious. Needless to say, this cruelty only persists because of "freedom of religion".

If you ever want to get away with things you otherwise couldn't get away with, freedom of religion is probably the most potent argument you could unleash.

They'd wonder why we're repeating so many of their mistakes.

Factory farming

For all his brilliance, Erdos was unable to answer the Monty Hall Problem correctly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem.

For those who don't know it, the problem requires no math except a very basic grasp of probability. Personally, I find it somewhat absurd that you can be considered a mathematical legend but still miss that problem. I think it even took Erdos some time (months) to accept the solution, but I don't have a citation for that.

He's not alone, either. Lots of mathematicians miss that problem, which makes me wonder about the fundamentals of a Math education.

Maybe it's the press not doing their jobs, but I never really read about how moderate mosques put out any statements against flag burning, which I think they should be doing every time it happens in their country (like Britain very recently).

If it does, and it's just not reported, then I'm wrong.

The Koran burning fiasco generated a lot of criticism by peaceful muslims, but I wonder if they also criticize the myriad flag/effigy burnings by angry muslims across the world?

Terry Jones was just plain dumb to propose burning the Koran (not least because he would be up in arms if the Bible were to be burned). But in my view, muslims who are offended by Koran burnings should be equally as offended when people burn American flags and effigies in the name of Islam. Yet somehow I think their concern dies down for the latter, and I view it as a real problem.

But I have to say, the muslim clerics defending the Islamic center in NYC are really a credit to their religion when they oppose the Koran burning not on religious grounds, but because it will endanger American troops.

I really don't think Diaspora was ever on their radar. They'll have far more credible threats in the future.

Yeah, I know a fair number of people who say they have no interest in gaming, but that sc2 replays are damn entertaining to watch. Given how balanced the game is, and how good it looks, I hope sc2 can start attracting some serious sponsorship and advertising money.

Both HD and Husky's channels have over 100k subscribers, Day9 is quite popular, and even non-competitive show matches can attract over 5k users on ustream. I'm a huge football (soccer) fan, but I honestly enjoy watching competitive sc2 matches more.

EDIT: What I should add is that the commentators add serious entertainment value when they cast the matches.

I think it's more than some people, unfortunately. It's probably the de facto way.

“One can measure the greatness and the moral progress of a nation by looking at how it treats its animals” - Mahatma Gandhi

Most nations do poorly on this test, although there is slow progress. The funny thing is, at least 7 out of 10 people would not be happy with factory farming practices, but they still dominate agriculture in this country. It deeply troubles me that you can keep pigs in pens where they cannot even turn around, even though they're about as intelligent as dogs. Other animals can be equally as unlucky.

A very valid point. I don't think people make a serious effort to eat vegetables in a healthy way. Mashed potatoes? That's a vegetable serving. Broccoli that has been boiled for 20 minutes? Another vegetable serving. I bet most of these vegetable servings were in the form of some highly cooked and highly processed dish. How healthy is a salad if it's smothered in Ranch dressing? I could be wrong, but my observations strongly suggest that most people don't eat raw or lightly steamed vegetables

And you're absolutely right: some vegetables are a lot more beneficial than others. I bet most people eat the tastier vegetables (potatoes) while avoiding the healthier ones (cauliflower).

I think work itself started way back in 2001, but 2004 may have been the first time it was publicly usable.

Can't you have multiple wives in some Arab nations?

Ah, I see. Guess I wasn't familiar with the HN editing procedures. Shame the comments were lost though...

What happened to the old article that was just here? It seems the points remain but the comments are all gone. Also, it's been reposted by pg...

Speaking of lost visionaries, check out Daniel Lewin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_M._Lewin).

He co-founded Akamai and was killed on American Airlines Flight 11, possibly while trying to stop a hijacker. A very smart and influential guy who died tragically.

Did Hulu beat Veoh to all the copyrighted content?

"google blocked old browsers in favor of html5"

Why is this a negative thing? The old browsers are a pain in the ass and the web will be far richer once they are gone and new ones replace them.

Looks like it's to protect domestic Chinese films, as the 3-D version is still playing in theaters.

Alternate point of view:

"According to a report in the Hong Kong newspaper Apple Daily, the move was made at the urging of propaganda officials who are concerned that "Avatar" is taking too much market share from Chinese films and drawing unwanted attention to the sensitive issue of forced evictions."

Apparently only 20 foreign movies are allowed to be shown in Chinese theaters every year.

Regardless of the reasons, it's still a very fenced-in society.

This was posted here yesterday...