Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Should Scientists Date People Who Believe Astrology?

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the do-you-have-any-other-options dept.

1181

YourAstrologer writes "Wired Science asks: Should scientists date people who believe in astrology? Apparently, the argument is quite complex. Astrology is sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world, but so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs. Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines, so it is normative for them to believe it even if they are otherwise highly logical. Smart people can convince themselves of silly things."

cancel ×

1181 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Which method? (5, Funny)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699900)

Which method - radiocarbon or by slicing thenm and counting the rings?

Re:Which method? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700006)

You don't need to slice them to count the rings - just look at any hippy chick's fingers and you'll see plenty ;-)

Re:Which method? (3, Insightful)

ld a,b (1207022) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700228)

Yeah, I thought the same. I suppose this is why it made it to the front page.
On topic, given that many MALE scientists believe in imaginary superbeings that were made up by some random illiterate guy some thousands of years ago, I don't think they are in any position to judge their girlfriends for basing their behaviour on what they read in magazines. God, free(as in freedom), Astrology, it's all the same. We are humans. Flawed machines.
Human females deserve you treat them as equals. Maybe then you'll get a date.

Nigger dicks up your arse (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700256)

Nigger dicks in your mouth [twofo.co.uk]

                                            GNU GOATSE PUBLIC LICENSE
                                              Version 3, 29 June 2007

  Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
  Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
  of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.

                                                        Preamble

    The GNU Goatse Public License is a free, copyleft license for
software and other kinds of works.

    The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed
to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast,
the GNU Goatse Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to
share and change all versions of a program--to make sure it remains free
software for all its victims. We, the Free Software Foundation, use the
GNU Goatse Public License for most of our software; it applies also to
any other work released this way by its assholes. You can apply it to
your asshole, too.

    When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not
price. Our Goatse Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you
have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for
them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you
want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new
free programs, and that you know you can do these things.

    To protect your rights, we need to prevent others from denying you
these rights or asking you to surrender the rights. Therefore, you have
certain responsibilities if you distribute copies of the software, or if
you modify it: responsibilities to respect the eyesight of others.

    For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
gratis or for a fee, you must pass on to the recipients the same
freedoms that you received. You must make sure that they, too, receive
or can get the source code. And you must show them the shocker so they
know their rights.

    Developers that use the GNU GPL protect your rights with two steps:
(1) assert copyright on the software, and (2) offer you this License
giving you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify it.

    For the developers' and authors' protection, the GPL clearly explains
that there is no warranty for this free software. For both users' and
authors' sake, the GPL requires that modified versions be marked as
changed, so that their problems will not be attributed erroneously to
authors of previous versions.

    Some devices are designed to deny users access to install or run
modified versions of the software inside them, although the manufacturer
can do so. This is fundamentally incompatible with the aim of
protecting users' freedom to change the software. The systematic
pattern of such abuse occurs in the area of products for individuals to
use, which is precisely where it is most unacceptable. Therefore, we
have designed this version of the GPL to prohibit the practice for those
products. If such problems arise substantially in other domains, we
stand ready to extend this provision to those domains in future versions
of the GPL, as needed to protect the retinas of users.

    Finally, every program is threatened constantly by software patents.
States should not allow patents to restrict development and use of
software on goatse-purpose computers, but in those that do, we wish to
avoid the special danger that patents applied to a free program could
make it effectively proprietary. To prevent this, the GPL assures that
patents cannot be used to render the program non-free.

    The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.

                                              TERMS AND CONDITIONS

    0. Definitions.

    "This License" refers to version 3 of the GNU Goatse Public License.

    "Copyright" also means copyright-like laws that apply to other kinds of
works, such as semiconductor masks.

    "The Program" refers to any copyrightable work licensed under this
License. Each licensee is addressed as "you". "Licensees" and
"recipients" may be individuals or organizations.

    To "modify" a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work
in a fashion requiring copyright permission, other than the making of an
exact copy. The resulting work is called a "modified version" of the
earlier work or a work "based on" the earlier work.

    A "covered work" means either the unmodified Program or a work based
on the Program.

    To "propagate" a work means to do anything with it that, without
permission, would make you directly or secondarily liable for
infringement under applicable copyright law, except executing it on a
computer or modifying a private copy. Propagation includes copying,
distribution (with or without modification), making available to the
public, and in some countries other activities as well.

    To "convey" a work means any kind of propagation that enables other
parties to make or receive copies. Mere interaction with a user through
a computer network, with no transfer of a copy, is not conveying.

    An interactive user interface displays "Appropriate Legal Notices"
to the extent that it includes a convenient and prominently visible
feature that (1) displays an appropriate copyright notice, and (2)
tells the user that there is no warranty for the work (except to the
extent that warranties are provided), that licensees may convey the
work under this License, and how to view a copy of this License. If
the interface presents a list of user commands or options, such as a
menu, a prominent item in the list meets this criterion.

    1. Source Code.

    The "source code" for a work means the preferred form of the work
for making modifications to it. "Object code" means any non-source
form of a work.

    A "Standard Interface" means an interface that either is an official
standard defined by a recognized standards body, or, in the case of
interfaces specified for a particular programming language, one that
is widely used among developers working in that language.

    The "System Libraries" of an executable work include anything, other
than the work as a whole, that (a) is included in the normal form of
packaging a Major Component, but which is not part of that Major
Component, and (b) serves only to enable use of the work with that
Major Component, or to implement a Standard Interface for which an
implementation is available to the public in source code form. A
"Major Component", in this context, means a major essential component
(kernel, window system, and so on) of the specific operating system
(if any) on which the executable work runs, or a compiler used to
produce the work, or an object code interpreter used to run it.

    The "Corresponding Source" for a work in object code form means all
the source code needed to generate, install, and (for an executable
work) run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to
control those activities. However, it does not include the work's
System Libraries, or goatse-purpose tools or goatse'ed available free
programs which are used unmodified in performing those activities but
which are not part of the work. For example, Corresponding Source
includes interface definition files associated with source files for
the work, and the source code for shared libraries and dynamically
linked subprograms that the work is specifically designed to require,
such as by intimate data communication or control flow between those
subprograms and other parts of the work.

    The Corresponding Source need not include anything that users
can regenerate automatically from other parts of the Corresponding
Source.

    The Corresponding Source for a work in source code form is that
same work.

    2. Basic Permissions.

    All rights granted under this License are granted for the term of
copyright on the Program, and are irrevocable provided the stated
conditions are met. This License explicitly affirms your unlimited
permission to run the unmodified Program. The output from running a
covered work is covered by this License only if the output, given its
content, constitutes a covered work. This License acknowledges your
rights of fair use or other equivalent, as provided by copyright law.

    You may make, run and propagate covered works that you do not
convey, without conditions so long as your license otherwise remains
in force. You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose
of having them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you
with facilities for running those works, provided that you comply with
the terms of this License in conveying all material for which you do
not control copyright. Those thus making or running the covered works
for you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction
and control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of
your copyrighted material outside their relationship with you.

    Conveying under any other circumstances is permitted solely under
the conditions stated below. Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10
makes it unnecessary.

    3. Protecting Users' Legal Rights From Anti-Circumvention Law.

    No covered work shall be deemed part of an effective technological
measure under any applicable law fulfilling obligations under article
11 of the WIPO copyright treaty adopted on 20 December 1996, or
similar laws prohibiting or restricting circumvention of such
measures.

    When you convey a covered work, you waive any legal power to forbid
circumvention of technological measures to the extent such circumvention
is effected by exercising rights under this License with respect to
the covered work, and you disclaim any intention to limit operation or
modification of the work as a means of enforcing, against the work's
users, your or third parties' legal rights to forbid circumvention of
technological measures.

    4. Conveying Verbatim Copies.

    You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you
receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and
appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice;
keep intact all notices stating that this License and any
non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code;
keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all
recipients a copy of this License along with the Program.

    You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey,
and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee.

    5. Conveying Modified Source Versions.

    You may convey a work based on the Program, or the modifications to
produce it from the Program, in the form of source code under the
terms of section 4, provided that you also meet all of these conditions:

        a) The work must carry prominent notices stating that you modified
        it, and giving a relevant date.

        b) The work must carry prominent notices stating that it is
        released under this License and any conditions added under section
        7. This requirement modifies the requirement in section 4 to
        "keep intact all notices".

        c) You must license the entire work, as a whole, under this
        License to anyone who comes into possession of a copy. This
        License will therefore apply, along with any applicable section 7
        additional terms, to the whole of the work, and all its parts,
        regardless of how they are packaged. This License gives no
        permission to license the work in any other way, but it does not
        invalidate such permission if you have separately received it.

        d) If the work has interactive user interfaces, each must display
        Appropriate Legal Notices; however, if the Program has interactive
        interfaces that do not display Appropriate Legal Notices, your
        work need not make them do so.

    A compilation of a covered work with other separate and independent
works, which are not by their nature extensions of the covered work,
and which are not combined with it such as to form a larger program,
in or on a volume of a storage or distribution medium, is called an
"aggregate" if the compilation and its resulting copyright are not
used to limit the access or legal rights of the compilation's users
beyond what the individual works permit. Inclusion of a covered work
in an aggregate does not cause this License to apply to the other
parts of the aggregate.

    6. Conveying Non-Source Forms.

    You may convey a covered work in object code form under the terms
of sections 4 and 5, provided that you also convey the
machine-readable Corresponding Source under the terms of this License,
in one of these ways:

        a) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
        (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by the
        Corresponding Source fixed on a durable physical medium
        customarily used for software interchange.

        b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product
        (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a
        written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as
        long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product
        model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a
        copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the
        product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical
        medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no
        more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this
        conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the
        Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.

        c) Convey individual copies of the object code with a copy of the
        written offer to provide the Corresponding Source. This
        alternative is allowed only occasionally and noncommercially, and
        only if you received the object code with such an offer, in accord
        with subsection 6b.

        d) Convey the object code by offering access from a designated
        place (gratis or for a charge), and offer equivalent access to the
        Corresponding Source in the same way through the same place at no
        further charge. You need not require recipients to copy the
        Corresponding Source along with the object code. If the place to
        copy the object code is a network server, the Corresponding Source
        may be on a different server (operated by you or a third party)
        that supports equivalent copying facilities, provided you maintain
        clear directions next to the object code saying where to find the
        Corresponding Source. Regardless of what server hosts the
        Corresponding Source, you remain obligated to ensure that it is
        available for as long as needed to satisfy these requirements.

        e) Convey the object code using peer-to-peer transmission, provided
        you inform other peers where the object code and Corresponding
        Source of the work are being offered to the goatse'ed public at no
        charge under subsection 6d.

    A separable portion of the object code, whose source code is excluded
from the Corresponding Source as a System Library, need not be
included in conveying the object code work.

    A "User Product" is either (1) a "consumer product", which means any
tangible personal property which is normally used for personal, family,
or household purposes, or (2) anything designed or sold for incorporation
into a dwelling. In determining whether a product is a consumer product,
doubtful cases shall be resolved in favor of coverage. For a particular
product received by a particular user, "normally used" refers to a
typical or common use of that class of product, regardless of the status
of the particular user or of the way in which the particular user
actually uses, or expects or is expected to use, the product. A product
is a consumer product regardless of whether the product has substantial
commercial, industrial or non-consumer uses, unless such uses represent
the only significant mode of use of the product.

    "Installation Information" for a User Product means any methods,
procedures, authorization keys, or other information required to install
and execute modified versions of a covered work in that User Product from
a modified version of its Corresponding Source. The information must
suffice to ensure that the continued functioning of the modified object
code is in no case prevented or interfered with solely because
modification has been made.

    If you convey an object code work under this section in, or with, or
specifically for use in, a User Product, and the conveying occurs as
part of a transaction in which the right of possession and use of the
User Product is transferred to the recipient in perpetuity or for a
fixed term (regardless of how the transaction is characterized), the
Corresponding Source conveyed under this section must be accompanied
by the Installation Information. But this requirement does not apply
if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install
modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has
been installed in ROM).

    The requirement to provide Installation Information does not include a
requirement to continue to provide support service, warranty, or updates
for a work that has been modified or installed by the recipient, or for
the User Product in which it has been modified or installed. Access to a
network may be denied when the modification itself materially and
adversely affects the operation of the network or violates the rules and
protocols for communication across the network.

    Corresponding Source conveyed, and Installation Information provided,
in accord with this section must be in a format that is publicly
documented (and with an implementation available to the public in
source code form), and must require no special password or key for
unpacking, reading or copying.

    7. Additional Terms.

    "Additional permissions" are terms that supplement the terms of this
License by making exceptions from one or more of its conditions.
Additional permissions that are applicable to the entire Program shall
be treated as though they were included in this License, to the extent
that they are valid under applicable law. If additional permissions
apply only to part of the Program, that part may be used separately
under those permissions, but the entire Program remains governed by
this License without regard to the additional permissions.

    When you convey a copy of a covered work, you may at your option
remove any additional permissions from that copy, or from any part of
it. (Additional permissions may be written to require their own
removal in certain cases when you modify the work.) You may place
additional permissions on material, added by you to a covered work,
for which you have or can give appropriate copyright permission.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you
add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of
that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:

        a) Disclaiming warranty or limiting liability differently from the
        terms of sections 15 and 16 of this License; or

        b) Requiring preservation of specified reasonable legal notices or
        author attributions in that material or in the Appropriate Legal
        Notices displayed by works containing it; or

        c) Prohibiting misrepresentation of the origin of that material, or
        requiring that modified versions of such material be marked in
        reasonable ways as different from the original version; or

        d) Limiting the use for publicity purposes of names of licensors or
        authors of the material; or

        e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some
        trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or

        f) Requiring indemnification of licensors and authors of that
        material by anyone who conveys the material (or modified versions of
        it) with contractual assumptions of liability to the recipient, for
        any liability that these contractual assumptions directly impose on
        those licensors and authors.

    All other non-permissive additional terms are considered "further
restrictions" within the meaning of section 10. If the Program as you
received it, or any part of it, contains a notice stating that it is
governed by this License along with a term that is a further
restriction, you may remove that term. If a license document contains
a further restriction but permits relicensing or conveying under this
License, you may add to a covered work material governed by the terms
of that license document, provided that the further restriction does
not survive such relicensing or conveying.

    If you add terms to a covered work in accord with this section, you
must place, in the relevant source files, a statement of the
additional terms that apply to those files, or a notice indicating
where to find the applicable terms.

    Additional terms, permissive or non-permissive, may be stated in the
form of a separately written license, or stated as exceptions;
the above requirements apply either way.

    8. Termination.

    You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly
provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or
modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under
this License (including any patent licenses granted under the third
paragraph of section 11).

    However, if you cease all violation of this License, then your
license from a particular copyright holder is reinstated (a)
provisionally, unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and
finally terminates your license, and (b) permanently, if the copyright
holder fails to notify you of the violation by some reasonable means
prior to 60 days after the cessation.

    Moreover, your license from a particular copyright holder is
reinstated permanently if the copyright holder notifies you of the
violation by some reasonable means, this is the first time you have
received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that
copyright holder, and you cure the violation prior to 30 days after
your receipt of the notice.

    Termination of your rights under this section does not terminate the
licenses of parties who have received copies or rights from you under
this License. If your rights have been terminated and not permanently
reinstated, you do not qualify to receive new licenses for the same
material under section 10.

    9. Acceptance Not Required for Having Copies.

    You are not required to accept this License in order to receive or
run a copy of the Program. Ancillary propagation of a covered work
occurring solely as a consequence of using peer-to-peer transmission
to receive a copy likewise does not require acceptance. However,
nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or
modify any covered work. These actions infringe copyright if you do
not accept this License. Therefore, by modifying or propagating a
covered work, you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so.

    10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.

    Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically
receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and
propagate that work, subject to this License. You are not responsible
for enforcing compliance by third parties with this License.

    An "entity transaction" is a transaction transferring control of an
organization, or substantially all assets of one, or subdividing an
organization, or merging organizations. If propagation of a covered
work results from an entity transaction, each party to that
transaction who receives a copy of the work also receives whatever
licenses to the work the party's predecessor in interest had or could
give under the previous paragraph, plus a right to possession of the
Corresponding Source of the work from the predecessor in interest, if
the predecessor has it or can get it with reasonable efforts.

    You may not impose any further restrictions on the exercise of the
rights granted or affirmed under this License. For example, you may
not impose a license fee, royalty, or other charge for exercise of
rights granted under this License, and you may not initiate litigation
(including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that
any patent claim is infringed by making, using, selling, offering for
sale, or importing the Program or any portion of it.

    11. Patents.

    A "contributor" is a copyright holder who authorizes use under this
License of the Program or a work on which the Program is based. The
work thus licensed is called the contributor's "contributor version".

    A contributor's "essential patent claims" are all patent claims
owned or controlled by the contributor, whether already acquired or
hereafter acquired, that would be infringed by some manner, permitted
by this License, of making, using, or selling its contributor version,
but do not include claims that would be infringed only as a
consequence of further modification of the contributor version. For
purposes of this definition, "control" includes the right to grant
patent sublicenses in a manner consistent with the requirements of
this License.

    Each contributor grants you a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free
patent license under the contributor's essential patent claims, to
make, use, sell, offer for sale, import and otherwise run, modify and
propagate the contents of its contributor version.

    In the following three paragraphs, a "patent license" is any express
agreement or commitment, however denominated, not to enforce a patent
(such as an express permission to practice a patent or covenant not to
sue for patent infringement). To "grant" such a patent license to a
party means to make such an agreement or commitment not to enforce a
patent against the party.

    If you convey a covered work, knowingly relying on a patent license,
and the Corresponding Source of the work is not available for anyone
to copy, free of charge and under the terms of this License, through a
publicly available network server or other readily accessible means,
then you must either (1) cause the Corresponding Source to be so
available, or (2) arrange to deprive yourself of the benefit of the
patent license for this particular work, or (3) arrange, in a manner
consistent with the requirements of this License, to extend the patent
license to downstream recipients. "Knowingly relying" means you have
actual knowledge that, but for the patent license, your conveying the
covered work in a country, or your recipient's use of the covered work
in a country, would infringe one or more identifiable patents in that
country that you have reason to believe are valid.

    If, pursuant to or in connection with a single transaction or
arrangement, you convey, or propagate by procuring conveyance of, a
covered work, and grant a patent license to some of the parties
receiving the covered work authorizing them to use, propagate, modify
or convey a specific copy of the covered work, then the patent license
you grant is automatically extended to all recipients of the covered
work and works based on it.

    A patent license is "discriminatory" if it does not include within
the scope of its coverage, prohibits the exercise of, or is
conditioned on the non-exercise of one or more of the rights that are
specifically granted under this License. You may not convey a covered
work if you are a party to an arrangement with a third party that is
in the business of distributing software, under which you make payment
to the third party based on the extent of your activity of conveying
the work, and under which the third party grants, to any of the
parties who would receive the covered work from you, a discriminatory
patent license (a) in connection with copies of the covered work
conveyed by you (or copies made from those copies), or (b) primarily
for and in connection with specific products or compilations that
contain the covered work, unless you entered into that arrangement,
or that patent license was granted, prior to 28 March 2007.

    Nothing in this License shall be construed as excluding or limiting
any implied license or other defenses to infringement that may
otherwise be available to you under applicable patent law.

    12. No Surrender of Others' Freedom.

    If conditions are imposed on you (whether by court order, agreement or
otherwise) that contradict the conditions of this License, they do not
excuse you from the conditions of this License. If you cannot convey a
covered work so as to satisfy simultaneously your obligations under this
License and any other pertinent obligations, then as a consequence you may
not convey it at all. For example, if you agree to terms that obligate you
to collect a royalty for further conveying from those to whom you convey
the Program, the only way you could satisfy both those terms and this
License would be to refrain entirely from conveying the Program.

    13. Use with the GNU Affero Goatse Public License.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, you have
permission to link or combine any covered work with a work licensed
under version 3 of the GNU Affero Goatse Public License into a single
combined work, and to convey the resulting work. The terms of this
License will continue to apply to the part which is the covered work,
but the special requirements of the GNU Affero Goatse Public License,
section 13, concerning interaction through a network will apply to the
combination as such.

    14. Revised Versions of this License.

    The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of
the GNU Goatse Public License from time to time. Such new versions will
be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to
address new problems or concerns.

    Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the
Program specifies that a certain numbered version of the GNU Goatse
Public License "or any later version" applies to it, you have the
option of following the terms and conditions either of that numbered
version or of any later version published by the Free Software
Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of the
GNU Goatse Public License, you may choose any version ever published
by the Free Software Foundation.

    If the Program specifies that a proxy can decide which future
versions of the GNU Goatse Public License can be used, that proxy's
public statement of acceptance of a version permanently authorizes you
to choose that version for the Program.

    Later license versions may give you additional or different
permissions. However, no additional obligations are imposed on any
author or copyright holder as a result of your choosing to follow a
later version.

    15. Disclaimer of Warranty.

    THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY
APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT
HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY
OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM
IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF
ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

    16. Limitation of Liability.

    IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MODIFIES AND/OR CONVEYS
THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY
GOATSE, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE
USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF
DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD
PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS),
EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES.

    17. Interpretation of Sections 15 and 16.

    If the disclaimer of warranty and limitation of liability provided
above cannot be given local legal effect according to their terms,
reviewing courts shall apply local law that most closely approximates
an absolute waiver of all civil liability in connection with the
Program, unless a warranty or assumption of liability accompanies a
copy of the Program in return for a fee.

                                          END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS

                        How to Apply These Terms to Your New Programs

    If you develop a new program, and you want it to be of the greatest
possible use to the public, the best way to achieve this is to make it
free software which everyone can redistribute and change under these terms.

    To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest
to attach them to the start of each source file to most effectively
state the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least
the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.

        Copyright (C)

        This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
        it under the terms of the GNU Goatse Public License as published by
        the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
        (at your option) any later version.

        This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
        but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
        MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
        GNU Goatse Public License for more details.

        You should have received a copy of the GNU Goatse Public License
        along with this program. If not, see .

Also add information on how to contact you by electronic and paper mail.

    If the program does terminal interaction, make it output a short
notice like this when it starts in an interactive mode:

            Copyright (C)
        This program comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; for details type `show w'.
        This is free software, and you are welcome to redistribute it
        under certain conditions; type `show c' for details.

The hypothetical commands `show w' and `show c' should show the appropriate
parts of the Goatse Public License. Of course, your program's commands
might be different; for a GUI interface, you would use an "about box".

    You should also get your employer (if you work as a programmer) or school,
if any, to sign a "copyright disclaimer" for the program, if necessary.
For more information on this, and how to apply and follow the GNU GPL, see
.

    The GNU Goatse Public License does not permit incorporating your program
into proprietary programs. If your program is a subroutine library, you
may consider it more useful to permit linking proprietary applications with
the library. If this is what you want to do, use the GNU Lesser Goatse
Public License instead of this License. But first, please read
.

Slow news day? (1, Funny)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699904)

Must be for this to make the front page. It's not like anything *interesting* is going on elsewhere I suppose.

Don't mind my grumpiness. I think it's just the bad horoscope I read this morning. I should have stayed in bed.

Re:Slow news day? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700124)

It's perfectly reasonable for a scientist to 'buy' astrology; mass placebo effect.

Sure they might disagree over the cause, but that could make for a good talking point.

They date? (1)

ez151 (835695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699906)

I think they will be happy just to get ANY date, no?

Sure, provided they are hot (4, Insightful)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699910)

But rememeber, you can fix a lot of things but you cant fix stupid

Re:Sure, provided they are hot (4, Insightful)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699998)

You can't fix stupid but you CAN fix ignorant. Thinking someone is stupid because they believe something patently false is stupid.

Re:Sure, provided they are hot (2, Insightful)

blueg3 (192743) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700182)

No, it's arrogant.

Re:Sure, provided they are hot (5, Funny)

gnick (1211984) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700386)

No, it's arrogant.
Sounds like perfectly normal behavior. For a Leo...

Re:Sure, provided they are hot (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700292)

Thinking someone is stupid because they believe something patently false is stupid.
You wouldn't think someone who believes he's an extraterrestrial entity come to earth to create a race of half-humans and start the colonization of the cave world that exists ten meters under our cities and is inhabited by vampires, must be somewhat stupid?

Re:Sure, provided they are hot (1)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700366)

But rememeber, you can fix a lot of things but you cant fix stupid
One word for you, adderall :)

Well (1, Funny)

HandsOnFire (1059486) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699912)

I'm kind of a scientist and I kind of believe that astrology might have some truth to it. Is spiritualism of any kind NOT for scientists?

Re:Well (1, Insightful)

Yetihehe (971185) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699958)

Do you also kind of believe earth is kind of 6000 years old? Kind of scientists even have kind of proofs for this konf of things!

Re:Well (4, Insightful)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700030)

Is spiritualism of any kind NOT for scientists?

Not at the office it isn't. Spirituality is not compatible with the scientific method.

Outside of work, no problem.

Re:Well (1)

bkr1_2k (237627) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700170)

I would hope dating falls outside of the purview of work for most of us. Unless slashdot is not populatd by prostitutes (the literal kind, not the figurative kind).

Re:Well (2, Funny)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700308)

Some of do happen to work at Christian Porn Astrology Scientific Testing Labs, LLC.

Re:Well (1)

cecille (583022) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700278)

It seems that the number of religious scientists is not insignificant. Greg Graffin's Phd thesis looked at the religious beliefs of scientists and found that many were religious, but that they tended to approach religion slightly differently than people not in the field. http://www.cornellevolutionproject.org/ [cornellevo...roject.org]

Re:Well (4, Insightful)

garett_spencley (193892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700052)

I would give Astrology some merit if it weren't for the countless scientific studies that consistently found it to be without merit. Astrology, like Psychics, employs simple psychological tricks in order to get the believer to believe that the horoscope applies to them, when in fact what it says could really be applied to anyone.

Astrology isn't "spiritualism". We're not talking about religion or believing in a higher power. We're talking about parlor tricks. Even if the alignment of the stars and the planets did have an effect on the world (and it would be ignorant not to investigate the possibility, I'm certainly not saying that science has proven otherwise), astrology certainly has not demonstrated any such phenomenon.

Re:Well (1)

MoonBuggy (611105) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700372)

What, in your opinion, separates astrology from religion? Non-theist religions, in particular, could be described in a very similar manner to your post.

Re:Well (3, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700134)

Spirituality is fine, but can cause conflict in a relationship. Personally, I don't mind anything spiritual until they start talking in scientific terms. New Age religion is particularly notorious for this. Talking about energy levels, "baselines", and using words from every field that is even remotely sciency... anything from sociology to particle physics. I'm married, but when I was dating that would have been a big red flag. Even ghosts and goblins can get tiring, but when someone tries to measure your energy levels you need to get out of there quick. If she even MENTIONS a book like this [google.com] , run. Even the font is irritating.

Re:Well (2, Insightful)

Jamu (852752) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700172)

I can see that, for example, babies born in the Winter might tend to have a different personality to babies born in the Summer. So you might find some correlation between star signs and personality types. That's different from thinking that the constellations can effect your life though.

Re:Well (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700300)

I can see that, for example, babies born in the Winter might tend to have a different personality to babies born in the Summer.
Ahh, your horoscope would be totally off if you changed hemispheres! :)

Re:Well (1)

Fuzzums (250400) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700318)

People tend to have different personalities in general.
Regardless of the season they're born in ;)

Yes. (4, Funny)

Sir.Cracked (140212) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699924)

Beggars can't be choosers....

Astronomers (1)

Sperlock (108578) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699926)

Let's not forget historical astronomers that also dabbled in astrology.

This...IS....SLASHDOT! (5, Funny)

Internet Ronin (919897) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699930)

Seeing as this is Slashdot, lemme just say, you should probably take what you can get. Astrology, piercings, fetishes, just be glad a girl's talking to you and not asking you to do her math homework. Seriously though, sometimes breasts are big enough to make other things not important.

Re:This...IS....SLASHDOT! (5, Funny)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699968)

Seriously though, sometimes breasts are big enough to make other things not important.


Sometimes?

Re:This...IS....SLASHDOT! (4, Funny)

Mikkeles (698461) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700274)

Yes, "sometimes"; else you may be faced with this [dailymail.co.uk] !

How is fetishes bad? (1)

Swizec (978239) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700312)

"piercings, fetishes,"

I'm not understanding your logic here ... why is it that a girl who is obviously fun is somehow considered a "bargain" in your post whereas a boring normal person seems to be denoted as something to strive for?

Sediment cores (2, Insightful)

sm62704 (957197) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699938)

Why not? If you're only going to date people who agree with you on everything then you're likely to die alone.

That said, if there was anythig to astrology I'd have gotten laid Friday night. I look at horoscopes for the humor value, and one Friday said "a home cooked meal will provoke a romp in the sack". Too damned bad astrology is bullshit!

You might as well ask if a Catholic should date a Muslim.

Re:Sediment cores (1)

bkr1_2k (237627) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700200)

Of course you failed to understand the horoscope meant a romp in the potato sack!

Depends. . . do you want to fight all the time? (3, Insightful)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700234)

While I can agree that you shouldn't look for someone who is identical to you their beliefs, there is a lot to be said for having some common ground at least on some of the deeper/bigger belief systems.

Do you want a wife who is going to do something downright stupid because her horoscope/astrologer/tarot card/tea leaf reader told her she should do it? Do you want to have to try to convince her why it's a bad idea, even though it should be obvious to anyone with some common sense why it's a bad idea? Do you want her raising your kids to believe that stuff?

Seriously, if you're just trying to get laid, then I guess it doesn't matter what the person you are dating believes (as long as they believe one-night stands or short-term relationships are ok), but if you are looking for a longer-term relationship, these things really matter.

It can be the difference between every big decision (should we buy a house now? Should I take this new job offer? Should we get a new car? Have a kid? 2 kids, 3 kids. . ?) being an ideological fight, or a simple matter of discussion based on a common set of shared 'foundational' beliefs.

Is a difference in belief also going to be a constant source of friction with relatives? I know in the US the popular belief is fall in love with the person, worry about the relatives later. That can work sometimes. It can't work if the relatives believe some radical ideology that justifies them kidnapping your children in order to 'raise them right' instead of letting you raise them (that's an extreme example, and I don't think applies to astrology, but I'm just throwing that out as an example of the general concept).

Ultimately, whether a person who's fundamental world-view is based on science should date someone who's worldview is based on astrology comes down to those individuals, and how they can work it out (I suppose there could reasonably be a person who's scientific, but also can believe that there might be something to astrology, and can harmonize the two).

Still, having some beliefs in common can be a very good thing for the relationship.

Re:Sediment cores (1)

endall (148631) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700320)

That said, if there was anythig to astrology I'd have gotten laid Friday night. I look at horoscopes for the humor value, and one Friday said "a home cooked meal will provoke a romp in the sack". Too damned bad astrology is bullshit!
The problem is that you thought the prediction applied to you. I'm happy to say your that your astrological prediction was quite accurate.

Well... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22699944)

That depends... what's her sign?

Date or marry? (1, Insightful)

MosesJones (55544) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699948)


If its dating and sex then its fine, hell use it to your advantage by lying about your date of birth thus making sure you are always "perfect" for the gorm who believes in this crap. You can then use your superior education and knowledge to get laid more often...

If its marriage then forget it as you'll end up being convicted of murder.

Re:Date or marry? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700144)

"The stars predict you will wake up with mysterious spirit fluid springing forth from your loins"

It depends (3, Funny)

insertwackynamehere (891357) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699950)

What's they're sign? If you two are incompatible according to the stars then you can forget about being compatible on Earth.

Oh really? (3, Insightful)

SuperDuck (16035) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699954)

Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines, so it is normative for them to believe it even if they are otherwise highly logical.
By your line of reasoning (if I can call it that), women are easily swayed by what they read in fashion magazines.

If this submission was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, it's trying a bit too hard.

A woman needs horoscopes like a fish needs a bicycle. ;-)

Re:Oh really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700164)

You're an idiot. But not as big an idiot as the two subhumans who modded you up.

Re:Oh really? (2, Interesting)

Corporate Troll (537873) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700230)

women are easily swayed by what they read in fashion magazines.

Not married to a "fashionista [wikipedia.org] ", I guess?

Re:Oh really? (5, Funny)

SuperDuck (16035) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700364)

women are easily swayed by what they read in fashion magazines.
Not married to a "fashionista", I guess?
Not any more, fortunately. She was *so* yesterday. ;-P

Should thin people date people who like fast food? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22699956)

Well, yes, if they take them how they are and don't expect to change them. Opposites attract, remember?

Astrology is just plain wrong (5, Funny)

Malevolent Tester (1201209) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699960)

As a Marxist, I have no time for pseudoscientific concepts that claim to explain the workings of human nature in their entirety while offering no evidence or falsifiability.

If a Scientist can get a date... (1)

maillemaker (924053) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699978)

They'll take any ideology necessary as long as it leads to spread legs. :)

picky are we? (0, Flamebait)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699986)

I'd say they should date anyone who finds them interesting...it's not like they're gonna be pulling boy-band ass.

Offense (5, Funny)

Stormcrow309 (590240) | more than 6 years ago | (#22699990)

I have to take offense to this. Couple of years ago, the local paper's astrological peice listed for my birthday, 'If today is your birthday, you gonna get lucky today.' Now, yes I was dating the lady who was incharge of editing that section at the time; but by God, it was correct.

Re:Offense (2, Funny)

n3tcat (664243) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700286)

I wish I had your birthday.

Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700002)

Smart people can convince themselves of silly things

Like that Linux is a good desktop OS

/me runs and hides

What scientists should really do is. (2, Insightful)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700004)

Understand that judging groups of people is as a rule wrong. It is called bigotry.
Even the question is bigoted since you are trying to say what a whole group should or should not do.

Re:What scientists should really do is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700166)

This is more a problem that athiests have.. Yes extremely bigoted.. you could think of a few other words for it but they already know what they are. All I know is if they keep up with the prejudice they will end up being very lonely people.

Re:What scientists should really do is. (1)

Qetu (732155) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700206)

Then astrology is completely bigoted. Do we agree?

Re:What scientists should really do is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700258)

Judging groups of people is not, as a rule, wrong. We even have labels for different, intersecting "groups of people", for example, women, American and scientists; those labels are generalizations.

In which country do Americans generally live?
Do women usually have male sex organs?
Are scientists usually the product of a scientific education?

Can you fathom why "reasonable" answers to those questions exist, and what they are, even though the correct answers may not necessarily hold for all Americans, women and scientists respectively?

Re:What scientists should really do is. (5, Insightful)

khallow (566160) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700306)

It's called stereotyping. And if the characteristics being stereotyped are relevant to the judgement, say like a belief in astrology indicates some degree of ignorance, gullibility, or even stupidity, then it's not bigotry. Another example, I wouldn't let an ex-felon (especially one convicted for embezzlement or fraud) near large amounts of money in a business. It's just common sense.

Beliefs Are A Choice So It's Not Bigotry (1)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700348)

Understand that judging groups of people is as a rule wrong. It is called bigotry.
No, it's only wrong when the person being judged can't control it. In all other cases, it could be construed as strange but is commonly known as 'preference.'

If a woman chooses to enjoy astrology, it is within your right to make that an identifying characteristic of someone you wouldn't want as a mate. Although this summary reads like the person writing it is a bigot, I do agree that there are some things that cause me to flat out not date a woman.

For example, I will not date a woman who takes psychiatric medication and also drinks alcohol. Bad experiences in the past with that. It is within her power not to drink alcohol. Yes, I do think less of people who do that.

I won't, however, say I will not date a blind woman. I do not think less of people who have that disability.

The author might be too hasty, I know many women who find astrology fun and must confess I even enjoy reading the Onion's horoscopes. But I have met a woman who asked me for my birth order and then proceeded to judge everything I talked about or did on that and bring it up in conversation. I have also dated a woman who was Wicca and very very cool. Laid back, didn't push it on anybody and only spoke about it when asked about it. Which would you want to be with?

not a shortcut (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700010)

Astrology is sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world, but so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs.
If a five year old disregards someone because of their spiritual beliefs, they are taking mental shortcuts. If an educated adult disregards someone because of their spiritual beliefs, that is exactly as it should be. Spirituality is shorthand for "not too smart".

Must be (-1, Redundant)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700020)

a slow news day.

Astrology not true!? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700028)

I always assumed that the solar system was put together in the configuration it was because I was born in September. This is a serious blow to my ego.

wait a second (1)

OrochimaruVoldemort (1248060) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700032)

how does one buy astrology (probably moderated down)? more importantly, why?

Scientists should date... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700038)

anything they can get

Think of the children (4, Funny)

dougoxley (688508) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700042)

Think of the children... No, seriously, think of the children.

Um... (1)

KlausBreuer (105581) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700044)

What a strange question.
For each person, it is up to themselves if they want to date somebody with these ideas or not. In my eyes, it's not exactly something which needs an "Oooh, no, if you're a scientist you should never date people like this!" argument.
Let people choose themselves.

As to myself: I've always dated intelligent human females. None of them ever believed in this astrology crap, but then they were simply not the type to do so. I assume there to be a connection: brains belief in astrology.

Re:Um... (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700302)

>As to myself: I've always dated intelligent human females
You mean you've considered non-human ones at some point?

Ahh... (5, Insightful)

nickos (91443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700054)

so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs
There's your problem - a growing number of people are realising it's fine to disregard someone if they believe in supernatural nonsense. Especially if they're beliefs include doing nasty things to women, homosexuals and non-believers.

Astrology != Spirituality or Religion (5, Informative)

glpierce (731733) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700056)

Astrology differs from most religion and "spirituality" in one very important way (especially to scientists): It is testable. While there is no way to prove or disprove most spiritual things (including the existence of any god or the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God), we know that astrology is 100% wrong. It has been studied scientifically (because it makes testable predictions and claims), and the results always come back the same.

Try this page for a start:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html [badastronomy.com]

I am not a scientist (2, Insightful)

Lilith's Heart-shape (1224784) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700062)

I'm not a scientist, but I won't date women who buy astrology. I deal with enough ignorance at work, thank you. I won't date devoutly religious women, either.

lets get one thing straight (5, Interesting)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700064)

As a scientist I am likely to disregard most attempts at serious conversation on the subject of astrology.

That said, I would not, and I believe, nor would any other normal scientific single chap, turn away a hot chick just because she was pondering my star sign or wanting to read my palm. In most cases It's just another vector into a conversation anyway.

There might be something to it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700072)

There might be something scientific to Astrology (not necessarily in what "Astrologers" write) - after all, the planets in our solar system exert a tiny gravitational effect on us. Not making a big difference day to day, but perhaps on the scale of developing neurons?

After all, many herbal remedies dismissed as nonsense have been found to contain a beneficial chemical (aspirin from willow bark, anyone?).

Posting as AC only because I've forgotten my password and can't be bothered to resolve it yet...

He's right you know. (2, Interesting)

DingerX (847589) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700322)

Astrology has a scientific pedigree. Ptolemy's Almagest does not make the modern distinction between Astronomy and Astrology.

The core intuition works this way: "We can see that the sphere of the Sun has a distinct effect on our daily lives. When it's overhead, it's warm and light, when it's on the other side of the Earth, it's cold and dark. When it is in a certain part of the sky, it's winter, and another part, it's summer. The moon has a more tenuous effect on the the Earth, but one we can sense: the tides, for example, seem connected to the phase of the moon, and perhaps people too. Therefore, the spheres of the other five planets should likewise have a thin affect."

The core intuition is, of course, wrong, but there's a ton of scientific literature built on the subject. Most modern astrologers, however, ignore the thousands of years of careful reflection and study, and prefer to pull crap out of their asses.

Astrology is great fun. (1)

Ihlosi (895663) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700080)

Especially when you read the horoscope and try to apply it to a yet unborn baby. Something along the lines of "You will discover buds that will grow into interesting relationships later ..." suddenly gets a completely new meaning - "Sure, those hands and feet will be interesting". Be very scared when the horoscope talks about things like "You're ready to face the world and meet new people." He he.

Should scientists... (1)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700082)

date people who are religious? These are both stupid questions. How about I date who I want to date and you date who you want to date and let me decide who I should date? I know, a novel question.

As mentioned in the post, a lot of otherwise highly intelligent people sometimes believe in silly things. Why? Because sometimes we find silly things comforting. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that as long as what you believe doesn't require hurting innocent people. What we really need, as a society, is to be less judgmental about people based on stupid things like this. Should you judge someone based on the fact that they believe in astrology? No more than you should judge them based on their religious beliefs, because really, there's very little difference between the two. Neither is really based on science (astrology is based on the location of planets in their orbits relative to Earth, but there's little science beyond that). Both rely entirely on faith.

Just what we need, one more issue to separate out some group that's "different" so that we can demean them and make them feel stupid.

Only if she's a Water Sign (2, Funny)

Dr. Evil (3501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700086)

Duh.

Isn't astrology just another belief system? (1)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700090)

Or look at it another way:
"Wired Science asks: Should scientists date people who believe in God? Apparently, the argument is quite complex. Religion is sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world, but so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs. Humans are inundated with religious nonsense from all directions, so it is normative for them to believe it even if they are otherwise highly logical. Smart people can convince themselves of silly things."

Apparently it is possible to subscribe to a "flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world," yet still be a scientist.

Oh man... (4, Funny)

o'reor (581921) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700100)

From the comments on TFA:

check this 68k mac software does statistics on astrology.

http://dragonflypower.com/HSReadme.htm [dragonflypower.com]

(note, this is not even on /. !)

Which begs the question: Should anybody date someone who recommends taking a look at a 68k Mac software in 2008 ?

I'm a Scorpio. (3, Funny)

xs650 (741277) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700114)

I'm a Scorpio, Scorpios don't believe in astrology.

I'm more concerned (2)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700128)

About people using 'normative' when 'normal' would do perfectly well. That for me would set off more alarm bells in the dating department.

Excuse me? (3, Interesting)

PriceIke (751512) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700132)

Judging someone to be undateable because of her spiritual beliefs is somehow wrong? Why, because it would hurt her feelings? I'd say a woman's spiritual beliefs, especially if they are wholly incompatible with common sense (as so many of them are), are reason enough to not want to waste time trying to develop a close relasionship with.

Well.... there could be some truth in it (3, Insightful)

jareth-0205 (525594) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700140)

Most western societies include a schooling system that splits children up into 'years', dividing the years by birthday being before or after September. (Using the UK as an example, as that's what I know) Children start school the September after they're 5 years old. So someone born in September will be nearly 6 when they start school, while someone born in August will be just 5 when they start school. So at that early age, the September child is 20% older than the August child when they start. That makes a difference, in confidence, learning and social skills, physical strength, all sorts. While the proportional age differences diminish over time, the headstart is always there. The social structure of the school career gets fixed at a very early stage.

Does your birthdate have a big determination on who you are? I think it does, it just doesn't have anything to do with the sun or the moon...

Multiple Choice (5, Informative)

rueger (210566) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700156)

Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines, so it is normative for them to believe it even if they are otherwise highly logical.

a) Stupid
b) sexist
c) offensive
d) all of the above

Re:Multiple Choice (2, Insightful)

o'reor (581921) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700328)

I checked the "d)" answer. Also, it makes the false assumption that more scientists are men than women.

What about women scientists ? Should they date someone who spends money on gambling, and who actually believes he has a chance ?

Re:Multiple Choice (5, Insightful)

JohnFluxx (413620) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700396)

> Also, it makes the false assumption that more scientists are men than women.

Uh, most scientists /are/ men.

Why yes, of course! (1)

Idaho (12907) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700158)

I mean, what better excuse could you want for asking "Want to go outside with me to look at the stars?"

Pretty sure it'll beat "Hey, haven't we met before?" or "Got a light?" any time ;)

Astrology Chick (3, Interesting)

leroybrown (136516) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700168)

I once went out on a date with a girl who was in an English PhD program at Lehigh University so she was no dummy, but she believed in astrology. I didn't realize she was serious at first so I started picking on her about it. She got really offended and tried to rationalize it by explaining that when you're born the stars in the babies star sign have a gravitational effect on its' brain. I tried to explain to her that the TV in the delivery room would have more of an effect. Her eyes glazed over at the term "Gravitational Constant" so I figured it was a lost cause and just gave up.

Mental shortcut? (4, Insightful)

MrNemesis (587188) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700178)

Only if you define a shortcut as a much shorter route that gets you to the wrong destination.

As an often-scientific athiest, I'm prepared to date people from any different religions, as long as we're both content to let one anothers belief systems not interfere with our love life. But I have difficulty talking to anyone who believes a few miniscule globules of rock millions of miles away can effect something as complex as our personalities and day-to-day activities. Same for alot of /.'ers I imagine - you can appreciate someone who's put a lot of thought into their belief system and come to their own conclusion and is happy with it and the way it helps them live their life - systems of belief are an entirely human construct and are thus irrational by default :) But people who have convinced themselves that astrology exists and then try to subvert physics with claptrap about subtle variations in gravitic attractions and how it aligns iron particles in your blood which short-circuit synapses into taking certain descisions? All without a shred of proof? All without a shred of evidence, even? You're a moron and I'm incapable of respecting your intellect.

Yes, I realise it's not their whole personality (don't get me wrong, I've met hundreds of lovely people who happened to believe in something ridiculous), but to me it's just like talking to someone with LIAR tattoed across their forehead and taking everything they say at face value.

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html [badastronomy.com] /asbestos long johns

P.S. A prize of fifty points and a bowl of raspberry jelly to the first person who correctly guesses my relationship status :)

Comtempt is not compatible with love (3, Insightful)

Nerdposeur (910128) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700184)

I think some people are way too casual about having incompatible worldviews with a significant other, but then again, I'm a person with very firm Christian beliefs. Maybe if you are agnostic, for example, you can tolerate someone who believes something which, by your view, could potentially be correct.

But if your mate believes something which you see as patently foolish - like the idea that everyone born between certain dates each year will have the same personality/fate, despite all evidence to the contrary, and despite a total lack of explanation as to how the position of stellar bodies relates to human events - I think this deep disagreement about how life works will lead to bitterness and problems. It's hard to conceal contempt.

And yes, I'm braced for the blind atheistic mockery of Slashdot.

Re:Comtempt is not compatible with love (5, Funny)

erlehmann (1045500) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700400)

I'm a person with very firm Christian beliefs.

Interesting - you believe in salvation through a holy zombie despite a total lack of explanation as to how the reanimation of dead bodies relates to human events ?

Absolutely Ridiculous (1)

KiwiCanuck (1075767) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700186)

Seriously, headlines like this should not make it to print.

What's the difference? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700188)

Only 1 thing pops up in my mind: "What's the difference?"

Protestant, hindu, muslim, palmreading, astrology. I would never date any of them. I guess astrology is something you can combine with your "other belief", no?

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I SHOULD respect peoples beliefs. And I will, maybe, as soon as they stop being so damn easily offended.

Freedom = the right to be offended
(somebody said that)
So, in my quest to celebrate freedom I try to offend somebody on a daily basis.

I too have my doubts to sometimes, sometimes I honoustly belief there is no god. But then my rational being takes over again and I realise I could never proof that and I return to my agnostic self.

Ever noticed that dating sites don't make a distinction between agnostic and atheist?

How to find a spouse (5, Funny)

romanm (178782) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700194)

There's an old Bosnian joke about how Mujo decided which girl he should marry. He discussed about it later with his friend Haso:
H: I heard you got married. Congratulations! How did you decide?
M: Well, this was not easy. I had three candidates and I conducted a test. I asked the first one:
      "What's 2+2?".
      She said "4".
      I though to myslelf, that's good, the woman is smart.
      The second one said: "Well, it depends. It can be 4, but sometimes it can also be 3 or 5."
      That's even better, the woman is cunning.
      I asked the third one the same question and she says "I don't care. Whatever my husband says it is".
      I thought to myself, this woman surely will respect her husband. This is good.
H: So, which one did you take?
M: Oh. The one with big tits, of course.

I don't think that scientists are THAT different to other men.

Big brains should date big hips (1)

ciaohound (118419) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700204)

The human brain didn't really start getting bigger until we began walking upright. Ironically, that made birthing more difficult; the head has to be aligned just right to pass through the hip bones on the way out the birth canal, or there are birth complications.

Clearly, those of us (males) with big brains should mate with females that can safely deliver our big-brained offspring.

Full disclosure: both my kids were delivered by c-sections. (Don't do as I do, just do as I say.)

Depends (1)

blind biker (1066130) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700236)

It strongly depends on how "into it" the astrology-believing person is. If he/she is very much living and practising it, it will be a source of conflict. However, if it's just some kind of minor point of interest, it will probably NOT be the deal-breaker. There are/will be many more important issues that will need working on. Money, politics, religion, children and education, view on gender roles etc. those seem to make or break a marriage/romantic relationship much more often.

On the other hand (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700268)

If you can keep a straight face while asking if the signs indicate Leo is about to enter Uranus then it could prove useful.

In other news.... (1)

Himring (646324) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700282)

What am I wearing right now and why is water bluish?
Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday March 10, @09:38AM
from the one-time-I-ran-out-of-bread dept.
YourUser writes
"Scientists eat breakfast like everyone else, but why do fish have gills? Often times, women think differently than men and are stupider about astronomy. As a matter of fact, they can't tell the difference between astronomy and astrology. One time, when I was eight, I buried my Tonka truck in dirt and just left it. I planned on digging it up when I was 40, but I went back about a half hour later and dug it up instead. It was ok just dirty. Also, why did Pat Sajack get a late night tv slot once and even a news show, but Bob Eubanks didn't."

you said DATE not MARRY (1)

SpecialAgentXXX (623692) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700284)

This is /. I think the saying, "Beggers can't be choosers" applies here. If she's cute, seriously, who gives a shit what she believes? As long as you can go out and have fun it's all good. I have seen some guys, however, get all caught up in their... smugness... and miss out on meeting & dating some cute girls.

Seriously guys, if the girl looks anything like Kelly from The Big Bang Theory would you really have a problem dating her?

Not that different from other viewpoints (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22700310)

I'm a science-minded engineer, and certainly don't buy into astrology or any of the new age type things that are so trendy today. But I don't think dating an astrology believer is much worse that dating a religious person. And I say this because I'm now dating someone who is into new-age principles a little bit, so I have some sort of experience with this. And while I don't believe in the same things as she does, it's no different from all the religious girlfriends I've had. Believing in karma and reincarnation is just as silly as believing there's an old man who punishes you for being bad, or believing that you and your grandparents are going to hang out in the sky in 50 years. This isn't to flamebait - it's really how I feel.

So all in all, even though she's not really into it (just mentions things from time to time), I'm glad for it. It's a different viewpoint for me, just as Christianity is, except now I don't have to worry about if we're going to be sending our future kids to church.

"believe?" or enjoy (2)

spottedkangaroo (451692) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700336)

Personally, I find the idea that Astrology has anything to do with anything (in the literal sense) to be completely ridiculous.

It sure does seem to be accurate in some cases though. I enjoy it and I consume and process it even though I'm completely aware of how ludicrous it really is. Any system that's sufficiently complex will seem to have meaning. It's the human condition.

Should you date someone that "believes" in it? It's no more silly than believing a Prophet died for your sins 2000 years ago and is deeply concerned about your private sexual morality. I say, date the Astrologer. They're probably literate and that's pretty good.

People believe all kinds of crazy shit (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700378)

If you just limit yourself to completely rational mates, you're going to live a very lonely life. Almost everyone believes SOMETHING crazy. Some people believe that the alien overlord Xenu corrupted out planet by dropping frozen aliens into our volcanoes. Some believe that an illiterate Hebrew peasant from backwater Galilee was the "son of God." Some believe that said peasant magically appeared later in America. Some believe that a poor Arab trader was a "prophet of God." Some believe that the entire world is just the dream of another God. Some believe that yet another ancient God dunked his giant spear in the water to create Japan.

Even rational scientists disagree over all kinds of stuff, with many treating their pet ideas with every bit as much reverence and irrationality as any religion.

So, looking for a 100% rational mate? Good luck with that, buddy.

A subtle reason why you shouldn't dismiss it (1)

Tlosk (761023) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700394)

This is a subtle arugument, but quite powerful in understanding why it's so widespread. It takes a lot of effort to carefully weigh all your choices and decide rationally what the best or optimal course would be to take. If there's some heuristic or rule that you can use to bypass all the consideration and end up making the right choice even just a majority of the time, it can often be worth the mistakes because you can put that time and effort into more beneficial tasks.

Being scared of people you don't know and giving keeping your distance may not always correctly identify people who wish to harm you from those that don't. But you avoid the costs in time and effort (and the risks) of evaluating each stranger on a case by case basis.

Now before you start jumping out with the exceptions and why this is wrong, the point isn't that it's a perfect rule, just that it has the possibility of being good enough to at the end of the day be more beneficial.

We do this with all sorts of things, we cull our experience down into simple rules that allow us to avoid having to waste time and effort.

Now here's the subtle part, we also like to have a good reason for doing what we do, and we're quite capable of inventing a rationale to justify a good rule. The rationale might be total bunkum, but it allows us to feel comfortable in doing what does indeed benefit us.

The only problem comes when we get more attached to the rationale than the rule, which leads people to invent new rules based on a rationale that isn't itself true, then they end up doing stuff that's harmful.

With astrology you can think of it as an ice-breaker to get to know people that might make good mates but you wouldn't normally consider. A rule to seriously consider 1 in every 12 people you meet would work just as well by the way lol. So I would just caution people not to confuse the rationale with the results. We all do it, just in different ways.

Um, Yes... (0, Troll)

kabocox (199019) | more than 6 years ago | (#22700408)

Sure why not? People believe in all kinda of crazy things like religion, astrology, string theory, and evolution.

A quick google search shows up this url http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html [amasci.com] for those that were ridiculed, but later vindicated.

I think there is a ton of money to be made in astrology. With what we know now, it should be possible to work backward and find out if visible lights in the sky have had effects on a personal/societal level for the past few thousand years. There is a part of me that wonders if the gravity of other planets or the moon/sun has noticeable/predictable effects on us. With all the crazy crap that we fund, that sounds like a fun off the wall one. The only problem is if we discovered that "astrology" was actually real. I have a feeling that we could make astrology work.

What I find funny is that we'd find it impossible to fund NASA to observe all the asteroids that might hit the earth. We'd actually come up with the money to fund that for astrology though. Those asteroids might have a noticeable impact on our collective future if left unaccounted for.

I think astrology actually can match up fairly well under science. The thing is it would be that crazy blue sky science until we really started looking at it. For a means to predict the future though? Nope, I wouldn't buy that, yet. I do think daily horoscopes and the like are great fun. If some one takes one as daily instructions of a high priest/priestess that's their problem. I bet astrology would turn out some what like the weather. With enough data, we could predict it for 4 days or so. (I find funny is its not sky data that we'd need to determine your likely future, its knowledge about the person and what they are likely to do. Actual successful astrologers might be pretty good at reading people and learning to guide people into the directions that they want to go anyway. i wonder if anyone has studied the careers of successful astrologers and their impact on "important" people in business/government.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>