ANSWER: By being one of the people being racist at...
http://idle.slashdot.org/story/09/08/25/2015205/Microsoft-Poland-Photoshops-Black-Guy-To-White-One
........
Um, no.
I am a white American living in Japan. I've been here about 10 years. People say racist things to me all the time. No, they don't mean any offense (usually), but that doesn't mean that I don't get offended. But I didn't used to.
When I first got here, little comments like "Oh! You can use chopsticks!" and "Wow, you can write kanji just like a Japanese person!" and "everyone move over; Klein needs space" (even though I am a very little guy), I thought it was quaint.
Now when those comments are made, it makes me feel excluded. As if I can never be treated normally, just because of my brown hair and blue eyes. The novelty has worn off.
A woman complemented me on my amazing Japanese a few months ago when I used a word I literally learned in my first semester of Japanese study. It bummed me out the rest of the day.
Then there's the "special" treatment you get from cops. And drunks.
Maybe at one point I thought minorities in the US were being oversensitive, but I think that after 10 years, I finally get it. Finding hateful racist people is getting harder every day, thank god, but when you're a minority, everything is just a little racist. You're treated differently, and it doesn't have anything to do with how you act or what you can or can't do. It just comes down to your physical attributes, and you can't change those. It just gets... tiring.
But I have it better than minorities in the US or Canada or wherever. This is not my home country. If I ever get totally sick of it (and I'll be honest, there are some things happening these days that are really making me question if it's worth being here--the cops' treatment is getting more special by the day), I can go home to the US where I'll be just another regular white guy. But a regular black guy in the US can't go anywhere. It's his home, and his life is one of being treated differently every single day. I understand why some people get touchy. I'm getting touchy, and I don't have it anywhere near as bad as black people in the US.
So there's the perspective of a white guy who has figured it out without any brainwashing.
Watch your mouth, people. It sucks when the main thing people remember about you is your race.
..........
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Monday, August 24, 2009
Simple useful sed commands
Here is the Ultimate sed command list ;)
- Replace all A's by B's and write file
sed -i 's/A/B/g' file
sed -i 's|A|B|g' file
- Insert a # at the first of the line with the pattern
sed -o 's/.*A.*/#&/g'
- Delete all lines containing ABC
sed -i '/ABC/d' file
- Show only lines containing ABC (like grep) (Dangerous if you use the -i flag)
sed '/ABC/!d' file
sed -n '/ABC/p' file
- Delete all blank lines
sed -i '/^$/d'
- Delete third line
sed -i '3d' file
- Delete from second to third line
sed -i '2,3d' file
- Delete all but line 3 to line 5 (Keeping lines 1,2,5,6 ...)
sed -i '3,5!d' file
- Delete from first to first ocurrence of ^$ (Blank line)
sed -i '1,/^$/d' file
- Find all ABC and append a line with ZZZ after that
sed -i '/ABC/aZZZ' file
- Find all ABC and insert a line before ZZZ
sed -i '/ABC/iZZZ' file
- Find all ABC change ALL the line for a ZZZ (Be warned!)
sed -i '/ABC/cZZZ' file
- Print line number and line with A
sed -n '/A/{=;p}' file
- Print all line numbers before all lines
sed '=' file
- Just like head... Print the 10 first lines of a file
sed 10q file
- Group commands
sed -i 's|A|B|g;s|Z|Y|g' file
sed -i '
s|A|B|g
s|Z|Y|g' file
PD: be carefull with especial characters (*,.,;, etc), change them to \* \. \; . Always check your pattern with sed -n "/PATTERN/" file
- Replace all A's by B's and write file
sed -i 's/A/B/g' file
sed -i 's|A|B|g' file
- Insert a # at the first of the line with the pattern
sed -o 's/.*A.*/#&/g'
- Delete all lines containing ABC
sed -i '/ABC/d' file
- Show only lines containing ABC (like grep) (Dangerous if you use the -i flag)
sed '/ABC/!d' file
sed -n '/ABC/p' file
- Delete all blank lines
sed -i '/^$/d'
- Delete third line
sed -i '3d' file
- Delete from second to third line
sed -i '2,3d' file
- Delete all but line 3 to line 5 (Keeping lines 1,2,5,6 ...)
sed -i '3,5!d' file
- Delete from first to first ocurrence of ^$ (Blank line)
sed -i '1,/^$/d' file
- Find all ABC and append a line with ZZZ after that
sed -i '/ABC/aZZZ' file
- Find all ABC and insert a line before ZZZ
sed -i '/ABC/iZZZ' file
- Find all ABC change ALL the line for a ZZZ (Be warned!)
sed -i '/ABC/cZZZ' file
- Print line number and line with A
sed -n '/A/{=;p}' file
- Print all line numbers before all lines
sed '=' file
- Just like head... Print the 10 first lines of a file
sed 10q file
- Group commands
sed -i 's|A|B|g;s|Z|Y|g' file
sed -i '
s|A|B|g
s|Z|Y|g' file
PD: be carefull with especial characters (*,.,;, etc), change them to \* \. \; . Always check your pattern with sed -n "/PATTERN/" file
Thursday, August 13, 2009
Why I don't trust scientific facts
These are the steps of how science is made (for those of you who still don't know)
1. Some scientist applies the scientific method to his/her are of knowledge. He/She writes a hipotesis, tests data, and writes a report with results with results and conclusions. A paper is born.
2. Now that he/she is sure of the paper. He starts communicating to other scientist about the idea. Other people confirm it (or not)
3. The paper is published, or not.
4. Science boards study the paper providing a answer to the matter. Is it good? or is it flawed?
5. When some time has passed, 10 years or 20 years (who knows), scientists have being studying the matter for quite a time. New theories have emerged over this paper. Science, can be said, accept the Theory in the paper as true.
6. After a theory is found out to be "true". There are legal and cultural implications. All people on the world "must" believe what the scientific theory says.
I am sure there other in-step steps I am missing. But this is pretty much the way the system in science goes.
So, what's the catch?. The problem is that this is an special technocracy alienated to be like democracy. And we now that in democracy "consensus" can be, and almost always is, fabricated by the massive media. Here is a bunch of people, deciding what the rest of the world should be thinking. We, the normal people, don't have a clue on that, and should accept as faith what they had said. ¿Sounds awful isn't it?. So here is the list again but seen how the complex reality really is.
1. This scientist, influented by the normal paradigms of his class, the years listening to the same theories several times a day proposes a new experiment with the interpretation guided by thouse theories.
2. His other fellow scientist have the same paradigms, beliefs systems. They will agree based on his common paradigms.
3. The magazine editor publishes the work, only if it is going to be good for the scientific magazine. Scientific public, "The buyers", must like the content of the magazine. If it is based on bad evidence it can be bad for sales. Finally the paper is only published when there's a high chance that it will be a lasting paper.
4. Science boards. Same as point 2, but with higher reputation involved. Reputation means be accord the paradigms.
5. 10, 20 years later. The theories repeated multiple times, they get the status of true in this society.
6. The rest of the world accepts the theory and make cultural and legal changes. We can't argue to it because we're not "ENTITLED" to have an disent opinion. But don't worry the massive media will do its job to make you believe what you should believe.
"...Pues habiendo conocido a Dios, no le glorificaron como a Dios, ni le dieron gracias, sino que se envanecieron en sus razonamientos, y su necio corazón fue entenebrecido. Profesando ser sabios, se hicieron necios, y cambiaron la gloria del Dios incorruptible en semejanza de imagen de hombre corruptible ..." Romanos 1:21-23
"...because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man ..." Romans 1:21-23
1. Some scientist applies the scientific method to his/her are of knowledge. He/She writes a hipotesis, tests data, and writes a report with results with results and conclusions. A paper is born.
2. Now that he/she is sure of the paper. He starts communicating to other scientist about the idea. Other people confirm it (or not)
3. The paper is published, or not.
4. Science boards study the paper providing a answer to the matter. Is it good? or is it flawed?
5. When some time has passed, 10 years or 20 years (who knows), scientists have being studying the matter for quite a time. New theories have emerged over this paper. Science, can be said, accept the Theory in the paper as true.
6. After a theory is found out to be "true". There are legal and cultural implications. All people on the world "must" believe what the scientific theory says.
I am sure there other in-step steps I am missing. But this is pretty much the way the system in science goes.
So, what's the catch?. The problem is that this is an special technocracy alienated to be like democracy. And we now that in democracy "consensus" can be, and almost always is, fabricated by the massive media. Here is a bunch of people, deciding what the rest of the world should be thinking. We, the normal people, don't have a clue on that, and should accept as faith what they had said. ¿Sounds awful isn't it?. So here is the list again but seen how the complex reality really is.
1. This scientist, influented by the normal paradigms of his class, the years listening to the same theories several times a day proposes a new experiment with the interpretation guided by thouse theories.
2. His other fellow scientist have the same paradigms, beliefs systems. They will agree based on his common paradigms.
3. The magazine editor publishes the work, only if it is going to be good for the scientific magazine. Scientific public, "The buyers", must like the content of the magazine. If it is based on bad evidence it can be bad for sales. Finally the paper is only published when there's a high chance that it will be a lasting paper.
4. Science boards. Same as point 2, but with higher reputation involved. Reputation means be accord the paradigms.
5. 10, 20 years later. The theories repeated multiple times, they get the status of true in this society.
6. The rest of the world accepts the theory and make cultural and legal changes. We can't argue to it because we're not "ENTITLED" to have an disent opinion. But don't worry the massive media will do its job to make you believe what you should believe.
"...Pues habiendo conocido a Dios, no le glorificaron como a Dios, ni le dieron gracias, sino que se envanecieron en sus razonamientos, y su necio corazón fue entenebrecido. Profesando ser sabios, se hicieron necios, y cambiaron la gloria del Dios incorruptible en semejanza de imagen de hombre corruptible ..." Romanos 1:21-23
"...because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man ..." Romans 1:21-23
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)