Slashdot Mirror

Clearly you haven't been to the internet lately. Cats are everything and nothing, the alpha and the omega, predators and noms...

Original "has": http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/01/11/i-can-has-cheezburger-3/

"Haz" would have been way funnier here, though.

"I CAN BE HAZ MAT?!"

Has anyone noticed this before.... just sayin.

Joe LIEberman is retiring...

Don't you mean Senator Palpatine?

So we've found the people that posted a lot of pics on Vladurday? http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/tag/vladurday/

... but unfortunately that doesn't stop individual Sith Senators from trying to use their influence to curb free speech.

Ironically, some of his speeches on Iran would probably have to be censored if he had his way. I guess YouTube already won't host his Beach Boys parody, BOMB-BOMB-BOMB BOMB-BOMB-IRAN.

Your cats have, or are, businesses?

New to the internet? Let me introduce you to http://icanhascheezburger.com/

Also, I expected to see a story about their newfangled contraption actually eating homework, given the title. Instead, all we get is a dirty words list (tee hee).

The article states that he "is legally blind, with vision roughly 1/100th of that of a person with normal sight." Now, I would assume that that means 20/2000 as opposed to 20/20. Relatively-but-not-entirely-undisgraced former New York Governor David Paterson has 20/400 vision, if I remember correctly, and signed his name like this: http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/tag/david-paterson/ I think it's safe to say the man wasn't watching for the video (though he may enjoy listening). You aren't wrong; legally blind is absolutely different from completely blind. But in this case, the distinction is essentially trivial.

There's only one explanation.

Hmmm? This comes to mind: This is what happens Larry... But seriously, hacking for the sake of hacking brought us where we are today.

http://totallylookslike.icanhascheezburger.com/2010/02/04/justin-bieber-totally-looks-like-ellen-page/

Stackoverflow use Gravatar. Which is why my SO account still has the default picture.

But said default picture is not an anonymous picture.

Just because it means I can't recognize your picture from another location.. say if you had uploaded a profile picture to facebook and used that same profile picture on gravatar, and then let a service like TinEye loose on it, doesn't mean your information isn't there.

Just as an example - I just posted to ICanHazCheesburger under the pseudonym of OneFineKitty. The page with the comment - if approved - is here:
http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/04/13/funny-pictures-videos-kitten-jump-fail-2/#comment-1151745

The e-mail address I used - thinking the domain would be invalid or used by some squatter or whatever - is gravataratexmapledotcom (substitute where appropriate, and yes.. that's deliberately misspelled although apparently that domain does exist).

The URI it serves is:
0.gravatar.com/avatar/afef1d846a548af79a624df820c3535a?s=32&d=identicon&r=G

Note that this isn't just some blank query causing Gravatar to serve up a default image - the 'afef1d846a548af79a624df820c3535a' part is the md5.

So once that comment is approved, if anybody knew that e-mail address, they need but do a web search for that MD5 and ICHC should pop right up, exposing that I - or at least somebody using that e-mail address - posted there and what I posted there.

So if at one point in your life you were posting under the name "dhasjkj" but used your e-mail address, putting false trust in the website author to never expose that e-mail address (and using md5 in a resource query is a form of exposure!), but long since started posting under "qhoqdw" and believe that everybody looking for "qhoqdw" would never find "dhasjkj".. well, think again. Gravatar enables exactly that.

The more I think about it, the more I wonder if these kinds of services - or rather the sites that implement them - aren't in violation of EU privacy directives - which don't assume that everything you enter online is public by default and -do- require service operators to do their due diligence in protecting private information.

http://totallylookslike.icanhascheezburger.com/2008/09/29/vint-cerf-totally-looks-like-the-architect/

Interesting coincidence I found out recently. Might be well known to those who is familiar with him, but it got a laugh out of me.

Crossing over into the technology field

For the true elite, "education" must be avoided ( homeschool instead!! ),
because it is so profoundly destructive to one's potential.

LEARNING, however, MUST be pursued...

THIS is partly a product of "education":
http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/2010/11/17/political-pictures-graveyard-of-america/

The reason for that, is that anyone with true genius, or true integrity,
who is in the possession of the education establishment is felt to be a threat to its authority,
and is crushed/broken.

John Taylor Gatto, NY State award winning teacher:
~you can't manipulate a child who is certain of their validity
into performing in ways that make the institution important:
only an insecure, dependent child can be so manipulated~

"The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" ( Stephen R. Covey ) pointed out, bluntly,
that before the civil war, it was CHARACTER that people cared to push their development of,
but after either the civil war or WW1 ( can't remember which ),
that changed from character/integrity to personality-status.

In a personality-status system, the highest quality people can't win, to begin with,
because the game doesn't reward integrity, it rewards personality-status!

Did you know that Benjamin Franklin had only a couple of years of "education"?

Read John Taylor Gatto's in-depth book on how "education" was engineered
( based on the Hindu lower-caste "education" designed to PREVENT threat to upper-caste status)
and why:
http://johntaylorgatto.com/chapters/index.htm

More pervasive "education" is proven ( through draft records ) to LOWER literacy,
( actually read some of the stuff written by uneducated slaves,
and you will be challenged to match some of them!
Learning was pervasive, but "education", or manufactured dumbing-down, wasn't. )
and the education system was paid-for, originally, by the coal industry,
which wanted to wipe out independence/initiative from the worker pool.

If you want to hire the best for the company
& the best for the work,
you have to

1. accept that you can't change their character/nature, but can change someone's skillset
2. find the ones with the character/nature who are good
3. find, of those, who can, with training/education, do the work, &
4. challenge 'em
"trial by fire" -- "Corps Business: the 30 MANAGEMENT PRINCIPLES of the US Marines"
( David H. Freedman, senior Forbes editor )
to discover who's really right to invest in.

The western paradigm that people should be hired if they've the skill,
and fired if their character/nature doesn't change to become convenient to the administration,
is defective.

The Japanese paradigm ( European, to some extent, too ), that
you aren't going to change anyone's nature,
you've got to start with the right people,
and then train 'em up to having the skillset needed of them...
is more a long-term/strategic kind of thinking....

The Marines consider HR to be what controls the quality of the corps's future,
so ONLY superstars are allowed to do hiring work, as a strategic determination.

Normal culture, among the Americas, however,
is that one shovel the worthless ones into HR,
and deal with the consequences with arbitrary firings & waves of layoffs.

Which ALSO is a product of the institutional mentality "education".

Reap what you sow!

As for how anyone could succeed without a degree, nowadays, simply get & work through a copy of
"The Definitive Business Plan, 2nd edition" ( Richard Stutely ),
and its companion book on the definitive financials, what smart managers do with the numbers,
"Presenting to Win, 2nd edition" ( Jerry Weissman )
Corps Business ( listed above )
"Organizing from the Inside Out" ( Julie Morgenstern )
"The New D

Science is not an explanation. It's a process. And it works. Bitches.

a coming of hipsters who flaunt around their consistent use of the "advanced reading level only" setting when they search things.

That piqued my curiosity, so I searched for "i can haz cheezburger" at the "Advanced" reading level to see what search results would pop up.

Behold! Emeril, and a rather dense description of anorexia nervosa.

This is probably correct. PubMed: 98% advanced

Nature: 61% advanced

Science: 94% advanced

PNAS: 99% advanced

Can anyone figure out why science is so much more "advanced" than Nature? Both seem pretty similar to me.

Oh, and by way of a control group:

I Can Has Cheez Burger, surprisingly 11% intermediate

Why, I'm glad you asked: http://icanhascheezburger.com/2008/12/01/funny-pictures-oldest-ever-lolcat-found/

I want to know what the first FAIL was. Were any photos taken in 1912 of the Titanic sinking?

But now I want to see the first photo of a cat. Ideally one with a caption.

Here you go, from 1905, the "What Delaying My Dinner?" cat:

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2008/12/01/funny-pictures-oldest-ever-lolcat-found/

Yeah, long baselines work. I was working on the assumption that at any given frequency there will be gaps in what you can know because of absorption so by changing frequency you can change what gaps there are. (Since you can't tell in a noisy signal whether the gap is due to noise swamping the data or there really being a gap.)

As for hamburgers, I think that anything moving would prefer something more substantial. :)

Althouhg

O, HAI!

See also:

• icanhascheezburger
• LOLCats.com
• LOLCats on Know Your Meme
• LOLCODE
• Speak LOLspeak
• Uncyclopedia article on Engrish

• /b/ (NSFW (That means "Not safe for work" (since you appear to have trouble with Internet memes)))

• Wikipediaarticle on "meme"

U has got it nao?
HTH.
KTHXBAI!

    You know, despite the contrary responses, you are right. A kid is a kid, and should be given kid appropriate toys. A kid at 18 months doesn't know the difference between a Frisbee and an iPad, except the iPad probably makes more interesting smashey noises when they're done with it.

    My daughter is about 3.5 years old now. Sure, I have a plenty of computer gear for her to play with. I've given her pretty much anything she is interested in. Folks have given her all kinds of presents. For Christmas, she was more interested in playing with the boxes, and coloring on them, than the actual contents. Really, despite the cool packaging, most of the toys sucked.

    Right now, her favorite toys, in order of interest, are....

    Crayons or markers and blank paper. She can do a pretty decent job of basic shapes (lines, circles, triangles, and squares).

    Coloring books, until she gets bored with the actual pictures, and draws what she wants over them. She's fascinated by car washes ("car showers" in her terms), even though she's afraid of them. That's one of the things she draws frequently. That and "daddy's car". It's not a technically accurate depiction, but it does have wheels and something resembling a body over it.

    Digital cameras. She loves taking pictures, and being able to see the picture right away. She likes *her* picture taken more though, so she'll make me take the picture and show her what it is.

    She's interested in computers, but only as far as seeing daddy type 100wpm, so she bangs on old keyboards to type along.

    She loves her etch-a-sketch. She can draw, and make it go away so she can start over. She likes to see me draw and write, so when I write things on it, I spell it out, and say the word.

    And I made the tragic mistake of showing her http://icanhascheezburger.com/. She wants to see the kitties doing silly things. It's not just seeing them, she has a commentary about each one. It's nice hearing what she sees in the picture, rather than what us adults have learned to see in them.

    She has a few shows that she likes on TV, and is amazed that I can show her the same ones on the computer. It just sucks to have a kid take away *MY* toy. :)

    On, and on the car, she loves telling me how to drive. "Green light daddy!", even if it's red. She's not confused about the colors, she just likes me to drive fast. For the sake of safety, I just stay in a lower gear so she can hear the engine roar. "Fast" to her is where the engine is running faster, not how fast we're actually driving. :)

    Then there's balls, blocks, and other assorted kids toys.

    Her grandmother got her a Disney toy that hooks to the TV. She lost interest in that in less than 5 minutes. She likes to dance on it though, even though she's not playing the game right. Hey, whatever, she's having fun, and I didn't waste the money on it.:) It doesn't even need to be hooked up to the TV for her to enjoy herself. :)

    She likes to be read to also. She talks about the pictures in the book more than trying to comprehend the reading.

    So, for any kid, give them the opportunity to do anything they want (that they can do safely), and you'll appreciate them more.

The concept of funny captioned cat pictures is a bit over 100 years old at least:

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2008/12/01/funny-pictures-oldest-ever-lolcat-found/

He's always reminded me of "Cane" from the Poltergeist movies. I went to find a pair of pics to illustrate the similarity, but someone like-minded beat me to it: http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/completestore/2009/4/10/128838250977137803.jpg

Mouse is clear enough, but bicycle?

Invisible bike.

Check out dis funny picture of cat.

Actually I think it reveals our stupidity.

But the real issue here is that the article doesn't really address "Does the Internet Make Humanity Smarter Or Dumber?". Instead it should be entitled: "Does distraction, largely in part to the internet, make some individuals process information differently?". Sure distractions are always "bad":

When we're constantly distracted and interrupted, as we tend to be online, our brains are unable to forge the strong and expansive neural connections that give depth and distinctiveness to our thinking. We become mere signal-processing units, quickly shepherding disjointed bits of information into and then out of short-term memory.

But does a fragmented short term memory have permanent effects? He talks in the article about

In another experiment, recently conducted at Stanford University's Communication Between Humans and Interactive Media Lab, a team of researchers gave various cognitive tests to 49 people who do a lot of media multitasking and 52 people who multitask much less frequently. The heavy multitaskers performed poorly on all the tests. They were more easily distracted, had less control over their attention, and were much less able to distinguish important information from trivia.

To me, what led those people to do media multitasking in the first place? Perhaps the media did not engineer some level of "multitaskness" (not a word, I know) but that this multi-tasking ability was inherent to those individuals' respective personalities. This brings be back to my first point that the internet reveals our stupidity AND perhaps just our personality in general.

And the captioned photo form - WITH THE CAPTION BEING SOMETHING THAT THE CAT IS "SAYING" (pretty much the definition of modern lolcats) - predates even your link: http://icanhascheezburger.com/2008/12/01/funny-pictures-oldest-ever-lolcat-found/

I'm not an expert with LOLCODE, but I've seen an image macro of a cat or two. I'm thinking that the visible keyword probably has a counterpart named after, or is at least a reference to, the "invisible" meme.

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/01/25/invisible-bike-2/

I feel obliged to enlighten you. http://icanhascheezburger.com/

It began, some months back, with the premise that cats are cute, therefore cats with cute captions are cuter. It also included the premise that cats can't spell.

The result really can be quite funny. Personally, I think the site is more amusing to people who are capable of writing correctly than it is to those who can't. I'm sure there are plenty of readers of that site who don't know that some of the words are spelled wrong.

That doesn't impress the cat.

Next year: Laser Cats.

We has it.

People also forget features in web browsers like firefox where no qualified urls are sent to Google's I'm Feeling Lucky page. I haven't typed in htt[://slashdot.org in ages. I just type in slashdot. Firefox sends that to google which returns slashdot.org as the first hit and I see my home page in roughly the same time as typing the extra four characters. To me this feature is the same as a bookmark, the top ranks in google do not change that often it is very unlikely that one day I will be sent to a site other then http://slashdot.org./ However, other users I know do not even understand what is going on and believe they are typing in valid URLs when they go to http://icanhascheezburger.com/ by typing lolcats any number of sites whose url is different then the typical name for the website. I would think that this is a strong argument that search engines still provide a great deal of traffic to major websites.

As an interesting point though. How much more traffic is generated by aggregate websites these days like /. and digg then search engines. I would like to see some numbers on that.

Heh,
      Reminds me of one of my fav lolcats:

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/06/02/im-in-ur-quantum-box/

Why do tens or possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of work just for the chance that you might get payed? It seems absurd.

Perhaps you have become lost on these internets.

I suggest trying this website.
or perhaps this one.

You will likely find them much more aligned with your interests than slashdot.

I made you a cookie, but I eated it.

Y hrdware?

Cuz humenz iz hrdware, not software.

Kitteh jus purrz an humanz go getz cheezburger.

Still it's quite impressive what they have today. "Withstand 2.5 m/s wind gusts" does not mean their ornithopter explodes if the wind exceeds that. It just means that above 2.5 m/s it will have to "go with the flow", and thus will lose a part of it's mobility. It can still control it's speed in 3 other directions though.

I have the impression that birds regularly hit this limit. They try to go against the wind, and it proves too much for them. They simply land and try again 5 seconds later, which usually succeeds.

So the 2.5 m/s wind limit could be quite acceptable, even for outdoor flight. Assuming it can land like a bird (ie. everywhere).

I do see one big problem these devices will have to contend with : Cats (perhaps not the lolcat variant, the regular one). So if you want to secure your house from these spying devices ... buy a cat. Birds, after 3 million years of evolution still haven't quite figured out how to protect themselves against cats, so it seems unlikely these guys will find it in the next month.

I believe in change. I'm hoarding every penny because I'm gonna need it. I'm a rich fat bastard and will be taxed accordingly so with change Icanhazcheezeburgers http://icanhascheezburger.com/ at http://www.mcdonalds.com/ then will come the evil that I will do in the name of Cthulhu http://www.macguff.fr/goomi/unspeakable/vault298.html to feed his insatiable appetite and my lust for power. But I will secretly worship http://www.venganza.org/ his noodly appendage and court disaster if the slimey idiot finds out. I will bow to the holiest president ever or suffer damnation by http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0drwfnGlF_E having to watch that. I shall covet weapons of massive destruction at http://www.schlockmercenary.com/ and I will dwell in the house of oblivion forever! http://www.elderscrolls.com/home/home.php

I will eat your process servers, rape your thugs and gnaw out their hearts and feast! FEAST! I say!

I remember around year 2000 there was am animated search engine that produced linked "bubbles" , with the diameter representing relevance. I guess it was Teoma (not sure). Anyone else remembers?

That got replaced by the well-known LOLCAT technology.

or a species does not "want" to evolve.

Oh, I can think of at least two species who want, very badly, to evolve. At least to the point of not staring and begging for cheezburgers or hotdogz.

Just fvcking grate...

They definitely are.
They also got access to dangerous chemical weapons.

beat ya to it =P http://mine.icanhascheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=3699491 http://mine.icanhascheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=3699515

beat ya to it =P http://mine.icanhascheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=3699491 http://mine.icanhascheezburger.com/view.aspx?ciid=3699515

Your wish is our (edited) command...
lolbat

i can haz spaceflight?

Yes, u can haz.

Spellchecker v5.0
It should be, "You can has chee[z]burger."
Click her for further info.

Gladly.