Jump to content

Ishtara Rothschild

Resident
  • Content Count

    6,348
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

47 Excellent

About Ishtara Rothschild

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. PS: Whatever happened to the planned avatar script limits? We need those back in 2008. I spend half of my SL time asking people to reduce their script load and helping them figure out which part of their resizeable no-mod junk or multimegatooldoohickeys runs 500 scripts and eats up 40 MB of memory. Not that it helps with recent lag issues, mind you. Why go through all this trouble as a sim owner if you might as well move to a mainland parcel, AR your neighbors for resource abuse and let LL figure it out? People buy full sims to get more value and less lag, not the other way around. They also
  2. Has any other sim owner noticed an unusual amount of lag in the last days? I run a public sim and always have 20-35 visitors, but until recently, the sim ran just fine. I haven't rezzed any new content as of late. On the contrary, I've removed a lot of content and replaced older builds with newer low prim content a few months ago. Afterwards, the sim ran smoother than ever before. Until now, that is. I can't do anything when the lag hits. The estate tools don't load and neither does the About Land dialog, so I'm unable to identify and notify or ban script-heavy avatars. I can't rez a script im
  3. You continue to misinterpret my position as genetic determinism. Gene-environment interaction is the opposite of determinism. The fact that environmental influences enable or disable parts of our DNA means that the environment is a much better predictor of human behavior and development than the genome of a person. But once again, the environment can only work with what is already there. So what you see as a contradiction is in fact one and the same point of view. Anyway, sorry that I don't reply to your points in more detail, but it's getting late here and frankly, I'm sick and tired of the
  4. Maryanne Solo wrote: And what of those who disregard scientific fact & for whatever spiritual reason, choose partners, being close relatives, whereby permanent genetic damage is the result? Will this behaviour lead to genetic screening as the human race hurtles forward or has this type of belief already bought the advocates of this process their ticket to extinction? I don't think anybody wants forced genetic screening. Nature handles the natural selection part quite well, so let's just sit back and see which traits happen to be successful. The result might be quite counter-intuitiv
  5. Deltango Vale wrote: "I personally think it's naive to claim that we can alter human behavior at will by means of education." -------------------------------------------------- I think everyone would agree that the hard-nature and hard-nurture positions are equally untenable. Perhaps where you and I differ would be over the effectiveness of propaganda. I think it would be hard to deny that a government-sponsored campaign of propaganda is ineffective in shaping the beliefs, attitudes and behavior of the population. I think it would also be hard to deny that religious proselytizers, withou
  6. Celestiall Nightfire wrote: Ishtara Rothschild wrote: I'm not suggesting that less aggressive cultures are somehow "better" than the more aggressive ones. As far as technological and economic success goes, the more aggressive cultures have clearly faired better and achieved a lot more. Ishy, you've missed the point of my comment. There are no "less aggressive" or "more aggressive" cultures. There only more and less successful ones. All cultures, around the globe throughout human history, have displayed aggressiveness, including raiding, attacking, warring, and conquering.
  7. Void Singer wrote: Ishtara Rothschild wrote: Would you disagree that all neural behavior is coded into the DNA of our neurons? How could these cells do anything that is not part of their DNA? you continue to surprise me, I really did not expect a reductionist argument. but ok, I'll play along. are the instructions for neural behavior of a cell different between say, a mouse, and an elephant? nope. so what is different? both the way they are put together, and the environment they inhabit. The connections that they form and the interactions between them determine a different pattern,
  8. These reverse-engineered grids are still small compared to the the SL grid, with less content, less infrastructure, a smaller user base and less functionality. Should they ever become a serious competition for SL, Linden Lab's lawyers will find ways to have them closed down.
  9. Tofu? :matte-motes-bored: Bad boys eat veal. Raw and still attached to the puppy-eyed calf.
  10. Well, there are Doms and Doms (especially when it comes to Dommes). Some are simply not compatible to people who don't agree with everything they say and think, and find that all other Dom(me)s they come across are wannabes and fakes. The other type doesn't turn BDSM into a religion and simply likes to have some kinky fun.
  11. Kenbro Utu wrote: I'm not a creep, but I am a weirdo. What the hell am I doing here. I don't belong here. That's my theme song.
  12. Melita Magic wrote: Ishtara Rothschild wrote: But I'm getting off topic. The Mexican culture doesn't differ that much from, say, the North American Catholic culture. Besides, the USA is a melting pot of cultures to begin with, so it's easy to fit into an existing cultural niche. An example for a vastly different culture would be Native Americans, who are still preserving their own unique culture(s) to a considerable extent even after several centuries. Ishtara, not to be rude, but where are you getting some of this stuff? Not sure what you mean by the "North American Catholic culture.
  13. Syo Emerald wrote: Again Ish just wants to look more intelligent than anybody else and try to point out that Europeans were the bad guys Don't think too much about it. That's a very profound argument which clearly disproves everything I've said. (That was sarcasm of course. If you think that it was my aim to paint Europeans as the bad guys, you haven't understood any of my posts. There is no "good" or "bad" here. It's all a matter of situational context).
  14. Dillon Levenque wrote: Yes, that was sort of where I was going with my comment, which was offered mostly in jest. Almost everyone agrees that observable characteristics are a combination of environmental influence and genetic makeup. But only because environmental influence actively alters (the functionality of our existing) genetic makeup and neural structure. Almost nobody, it seems, agrees on exactly how much of each is involved in any particular case. There is no "how much of each" It's gene-environment interaction all the way down.
  15. I'm not suggesting that less aggressive cultures are somehow "better" than the more aggressive ones. As far as technological and economic success goes, the more aggressive cultures have clearly faired better and achieved a lot more. I mean, more peaceful or not, I wouldn't want to live in a Bushman tribe. I'm glad that the ongoing conquering efforts of my ancestors have led to huge nations and a great deal of cultural and technological exchange, even though our more aggressive traits can lead to social problems in times of peace. And as I said, if we were to completely lose these traits, we'd
×
×
  • Create New...