Slashdot Mirror

For those who want to pretend they understand:

It has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it. Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to Ï or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man. You might say the "hand of God" wrote that number, and "we don't know how He pushed his pencil." We know what kind of a dance to do experimentally to measure this number very accurately, but we don't know what kind of dance to do on the computer to make this number come out, without putting it in secretly!
                On the numerical value of α[ed: alpha], the fine-structure constant, p. 129

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Richard_Feynman

PS - Whiners may wish to note Taco's response to a question in yesteday's Reddit AMA regarding lack of Unicode on Slashdot:

Ihmhi 3 points 2 days ago

One last one because I can't resist!
Why did you guys get rid of ASCII/unicode support? Sure there were some nasty ASCII posts, but it also removed the possibility for creativity. It seems a bit stifling at times, and it's funny to me that there's a website in 2012 that can't handle, say, Japanese characters.

CmdrTaco 4 points 2 days ago

Jerks ruined it for everyone.

ref

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#Chapter_1

That's like blaming someone for using so much water to put out a house fire after the previous tenant left it in flames.

I kind of which Bush could have had another term, just to see how he would have handled things differently. This was an administration that literally said "deficits don't matter", and was happy to bring in tax cuts that sent the government budget far into deficits instead of surpluses that could have been used to slowly pay down debt. Was the economy better off with lower taxes and a nearly bankrupt government? It's debatable. But there's no sign in 2 terms of Bush that they had any intention or interest in actually closing the deficit gap or paying down debt. None at all. So why should people trust that the philosophy has suddenly changed?

Clearly you don't know what tarmac is.

Humm really? I wasn't talking about Tarmack or the other creepy meaning for used for preversions?

Oh the definition of preversions you can find here and don't use the one at Urban Dictionary. It's an abuse of tomatoes!

The IRS is a perfect example of. A simple 10% flat tax would remove ALL the loop-holes.

It'd also remove all the definitions and clarity of the current system. [...]

I could make the comment that removing all the clarity of the current system would leave the current system mostly untouched :)

However, I mostly agree. As per Einstein's Razor "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." (Which seems to actually be a paraphrase of

It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.

WikiQuote Arguably the paraphrase is a nicely recursive demonstration of itself.)

Some sots of flat tax seem to work quite well. VAT/GST with no exceptions, rather than the U.K. nightmare.. Poll Tax is wonderfully simple too. But not such a good idea.

I doubt a flat 10% tax would work. That doesn't mean the US Tax regime couldn't be improved.

You misunderstand. The GOP head is currently neo-con controlled. There is a 3-way battle going on within the party. Basically, you have the reagan/W neo-cons who are only interested in their party (hate to use it, but 1930's Germany should sound familiar). They constantly use patriotism to appeal to Americans to follow them. Likewise, they will SAY the right thing, such as promising to balance the budget.. Yet, if you look, reagan inherited a minor deficit/debt and then ran it up massively. W inherited a balanced budget and then destroyed it (and our economy). Under both, they built up the military and sent trillions to their friends. For example, re-doing battleships was worthless. B1 was a disaster. Likewise, DARPA is a useful defense R&D. Basically, it does loads of advanced R&D. Under W, the money was shifted from Cheap University R&D, into expensive Businesses. It is extremely wasteful. At any rate, the neo-cons are about power and making sure that they remain in power.

The religious right wingers here have a goal of making us into a theocracy. Like the neo-cons, they wrap themselves in the flag, but also the cross. They scream that they are opposed to abortions, but then work hard to deny access to Birth Control. Likewise, if a single girl has a child, then the mother AND the child are punished. These ppl are idealists simply to AQ. You do what they want, or some of them WILL kill you. Pat Roberts comes to mind. Likewise groups like Focus on the Family. Oddly, these kinds of ppl love to scream that God is punishing Gays, etc. and therefore caused Katrina. So, now with Focus on the Family area being massively burned, I am waiting patiently to hear what Robert and FotF will now claim? Perhaps that God hates liars?

Now, we have the tea party. It is NOT what it looks like. Many will claim that it is Libertarian (which is what I am still registered as, but increasingly, I am 'l' and not as much 'L'), but it really is not. The teaparty has multiple leaders. It was created by the Koch brothers and Rove (yes, the great evil one has his hands all over this one). The problem is, that many of the younger congress is supported and related to it. For example, Cantor is a major tea* member. When Obama and Boehner were close to a deficit deal, cantor came in and killed it. Why? Because it allowed tax cuts to expire, which Cantor is sworn to prevent (google for grover norquist).

Now, have you noticed the older GOPers leaving office and saying that they can not solve things? That is NOT about the dems. They have and could easily work with dems. They were typically about working on AMERICA's needs. Their problem is that their party REFUSES to work with dems, libertarians, etc. All 3 of these groups have sworn that they will NOT COMPROMISE. Gov. is all about compromise. Without it, well, we have a situation in America.

Goldwater had many things to say about groups like this
But probably the best one, would be:
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.

At this time, the GOP is a party of some of the worse of America, that is hard at work trying to do the same to America.
Sadly, the dems are loaded with idiots at the top.
We desperately need a 3rd party that is composed of social moderates to liberals, but with STRONG fiscal conservative and a strong sense of who are nation is.

IOW, your assessment of the GOP is pretty much accurate.

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they allow disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children now are tyrants, not the servants of their households. [...] They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.” ... attributed to Socrates.

This quote gets trotted out on every story like this, but it's actually misattibuted. The quotation is from a play called "The Clouds" which lampoons the intellectual traditions of Athens. The CHARACTER called Socrates in this play says the quote, but it has nothing to do with the HISTORICAL Socrates/writings of Plato about Socrates/etc.

Here you go:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tench_Coxe

The power of the sword, say the minority..., is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for The powers of the sword are in the hands of the yeomanry of America from sixteen to sixty. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when compared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresistible. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress has no power to disarm the militia. Their swords and every terrible implement of the soldier are the birthright of Americans. The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but where, I trust in God, it will always remain, in the hands of the people.

"Believe nothing until it has been officially denied" - Claud Cockburn. And it's especially believable when it has been denied with such weasel words.

When William Tecumseh Sherman said "War is Hell," he wasn't talking about a place, but an emotional state, and yet Hell is properly capitalized in all instances of this phrase.

confirmed:

War is Hell.

• This quote originates from his address to the graduating class of the Michigan Military Academy (19 June 1879); but slightly varying accounts of this speech have been published:

• I’ve been where you are now and I know just how you feel. It’s entirely natural that there should beat in the breast of every one of you a hope and desire that some day you can use the skill you have acquired here.
  Suppress it! You don’t know the horrible aspects of war. I’ve been through two wars and I know. I’ve seen cities and homes in ashes. I’ve seen thousands of men lying on the ground, their dead faces looking up at the skies. I tell you, war is Hell!

Letter to the City Council of Atlanta (12 September 1864)

• You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out. I know I had no hand in making this war, and I know I will make more sacrifices to-day than any of you to secure peace. But you cannot have peace and a division of our country. If the United States submits to a division now, it will not stop, but will go on until we reap the fate of Mexico, which is eternal war. The United States does and must assert its authority, wherever it once had power; for, if it relaxes one bit to pressure, it is gone, and I believe that such is the national feeling.

source

Sherman wasn't talking about the address of Hell, he was talking about an emotional state, as is verified by his previous statements about war. "Hell" and "Heaven" are proper nouns, even when not recognized as such by those that insist on making up their own rules of the English language. They are both properly captialized, and incorrectly uncapitalized.

I might not be the biggest iOS fan in existence, but you'd be hard pressed to find me a company besides Apple that would have been capable of generating demand for a new computing form factor and a new OS for the paradigm at the same time. If Microsoft released WindowsRT back in 2004 and had capacitive touch and 802.11g and an App Store and an unlocked EDGE cellular modem and sold it at $499...it would have bombed then too because the immediate reaction would be "running Office 2003/Quickbooks/AutoCAD/$WINDOWS_SOFTWARE doesn't work!" or similar complaints regarding hitting 16x16 pixel toolbar icons with a finger and being productive.

It all comes down to a particularly relevant quote from Alan Kay [1]:
"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware."

Apple is able to create demand because they aren't beholden to anyone to invent the future. Sure they won't sell products for which technology doesn't yet exist, but Microsoft as a pure software venture has been willfully *blind* to what's possible. (this is changing for them in a big way - Kinnect, but probably not fast enough for them to maintain dominance in computing).

[1] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Kay

Modeling isn't a instrument, its closer to guessing.

"All models are wrong, but some are useful. -- George E. P. Box

The part that you're forgetting is that Gates never said it:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Misattributed

Einstein didn't say that. Besides the fact that it's a stupid thing to say (it doesn't even remotely match any scientifically acceptable "definition" of insanity) Einstein was always much more positive about the advancement of knowledge; this quote doesn't sound like him at all!

This quote is from a novel by Rita Mae Brown, and Brown and the character saying it probably based if off material published by Narcotics Anonymous... in 1981, twenty six years after Einstein's death.

If we go back to the late 1950s, the Soviet success in being first to orbit a satellite served as a powerful wakeup call. The risk of being placed in a position where we would be virtually powerless against a deluge of Soviet ICBMs was too much to contemplate. In hindsight, Goldwater did have a pragmatism that would now be viewed as treasonous by many current Republicans. Among other things, he made the following astute observation: "Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them." ( http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Dean ) . It is really strange that, although I thought he was a lunatic at the time he was running for president, I now find myself in agreement with many of his views.

I know of no one who said [heavier than] air vehicles were impossible.

Wow, you should look this stuff up. Lord Kelvin wasn't exactly a light-weight in the world of science. Politically he was the most powerful scientist in Britain, if not the world, at that time.

The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

- John Gilmour

The quotes above (GP's, P's, and mine) are from the movie My Big Fat Greek Wedding.

Checked out the link... interesting read. Interesting because, considering the plethora of stupid shit that man said in his 8 years as President, people actually bother to take time to make stuff up. Anyway, thanks for the update, I'll remove that notion from my vernacular immediately.

Wikiquote seems to disagree (although it mentions it was said behind closed doors...).

Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

Checked out the link... interesting read.

Interesting because, considering the plethora of stupid shit that man said in his 8 years as President, people actually bother to take time to make stuff up.

Anyway, thanks for the update, I'll remove that notion from my vernacular immediately.

Free is better than spending ~$5000 a year to get the same level of service. (IMHO)

"Free comes with a dick up your ass." - Future

That is cold comfort to those who want to publish video in WebM format.

Alas, the avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.

See it right here!

Torquemada - How we doin', any converts today?
Guards- Not a one, nay nay nay.
Torquemada - We've flattened their fingers, we've branded their buns, nothing is working...send in the nuns!

There is nothing wrong with "flipflopping". One of the most successful chancellors of Germany is often quoted with "What do I care about my chitchat from yesterday?".

If new information changes the situation, if one gets convinced that the own stance was misguided, why not make up your mind and change your opinion? People unable to react if circumstances change and old concepts cede to work should not be the masters of our fate.

It's easy to quit smoking. I've done it hundreds of times.

Sorry i can't remember the quote exactly or whom it was from but it went along the lines of "Give me two sentences written by a truly innocent man and I will find something with which to hang him"

It's attributed to Cardinal Richelieu, see here.

There is no genuine meaningful support for any theocratic movement in the United States except in the fever swamps of the imagination on the left and among some deluded atheists.

I respectfully disagree. A plurality of the voting populace wanted a man who literally said he spoke to God and believed he was divinely inspired or on a mission from God in the office of President, and to lead the country in a fashion after that ideal. Theocracy is a form of government in which the official policy is to be governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided. We elected such a person... twice... into the role of President. Therefore, there is meaningful support for a theocracy in the United States. Q.E.D.

None.*

According to the Nixon Principle

Well, when the President does it, that means that it is not illegal.

And since the VP and the White House CoS are operating entirely on delegated Presidential authority, it applies to them too.

*It is left as an exercise for the Reader to discern if I am being serious or merely trolling.

In the long run it should work out that wealth is redistributed to those willing to take risk on new ideas.

Keynes was right about the long run, too.

Chekov: Course heading, Captain?
Kirk: Second star to the right... and straight on till morning.

...i.e. his final orders, quoting Peter Pan.

Very nice summary!

Here is an interesting quote on liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism:

"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. I think conservatism is really a misnomer just as liberalism is a misnomer for the liberals -- if we were back in the days of the Revolution, so-called conservatives today would be the Liberals and the liberals would be the Tories. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is. Now, I can't say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals. The strongest man on the block will run the neighborhood. We have government to ensure that we don't each one of us have to carry a club to defend ourselves. But again, I stand on my statement that I think that libertarianism and conservatism are traveling the same path."

Guess who said that and when !?

From interview published in Reason (1 July 1975)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan

--
The solution to politics is to remove ALL money -- if parties want to be kept then they can pool their lobbying funds so that EVERYONE gets an equal chance to buy off the public with the pros / cons of their position.

First quote: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_West_Wing#Pilot

"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power." -Benito Mussolini

Besides the fact that Mussolini's use of the term "corporate" in other contexts does not refer to businesses in the sense we use it, this particular quote seems to be spurious and it's likely that he said no such thing. Please don't perpetuate false quotations.

No less than RMS has said you can sell software if you want.

He says it, but he doesn't live it. He doesn't make a living writing software, he doesn't make a living selling software ... and the fact is he never did. He also thinks spam is perfectly okay.

I didn't receive the DEC message, but I can't imagine I would have been bothered if I have. I get tons of uninteresting mail, and system announcements about babies born, etc. At least a demo MIGHT have been interesting.

any of a number of things the lady started bringing to the poorest of the poor when no-one else would

Like what? Hoarding gifts and financial aid? Sick, delusional fascination with suffering misconstrued as care ("I think it is very good when people suffer. To me, that is like the kiss of Jesus.")? Go fuck yourself and take your catholic "saints" with you.

Really? How do you square that with:

• "God does not play dice with the universe.", OR
• "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"?

Try finding out what Einstein meant by God. Hint: it's utterly alien to your apparent conception or that of anyone who cleaves to ID or indeed to any of today's major religions.

In 1929, Einstein was asked in a telegram by Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein whether he believed in God. Einstein responded by telegram: "I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings."

You'll find that quote and references to it in lots of places, including Wikipedia's articles on Baruch Spinoza, on pantheism, and on Albert Einstein, among others. In fact, it's hard to see how you avoided the linked article on Einstein's religious views where he described himself as being agnostic since the age of twelve, and also stated the year before his death:

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly.

Or maybe it's not so hard, as even the most superficial inquiry would have devastated your position.

Really? How do you square that with:

• "God does not play dice with the universe.", OR
• "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"?

When someone says "I want a programming language in which I need only say what I wish done," give him a lollipop.

from: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Alan_Perlis

true democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner (usually attributed to Ben Franklin)

It's actually incorrectly attributed to Ben Franklin (see misattributed section).

Think about it - would one of the founders of arguably the most modern basis for democratic rule consider it rule by gunpoint / weight of numbers?

And yes, I've heard the usual "America isn't a Democracy, it's a Republic" etc - but a Republic and a Democracy are not othogonal concepts.

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men." -Woodrow Wilson, after signing the Federal Reserve into existence

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Woodrow_Wilson

There are other examples of this (see above). If you have a conspiracy you strongly support you better be able to find the primary source so people can know how much to trust it. I haven't looked into the Ted turner quote but I can easily believe it is made up or taken out of context. If you cannot source it satisfactorily, you are only doing yourself and your cause a disservice by repeating it, cunir wolf.

Everybody's got an agenda.
There is no fact.

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."

--Phillip K. Dick.

"Give me controll of a nation's money supply and i care who not sets its laws...."

That is a spurious quotation. There's no evidence Rothschild ever said such a thing. And considering that a great many instances of that quotation on the web are from white supremacist websites, by perpetuating it you don't make yourself look too good (though perhaps that's why you're an AC).

it's useful to attach a dollar amount to a human life.

Let me guess: someone in your circle of friends and family works for some company in the automotive business. A major one.

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
(La majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain.)

Anatole France

Your post is very selective about the "facts". If enough people keep thinking your way, we are probably doomed for sure in an age where any disgruntled person can download a plague off the internet and feel justified using it out of either retribution or to achieve some objective that they think will make them "secure" by wiping out most everyone else who might in theory be a threat. Maybe we could try being nice to each other for a change and see how that works out for a while?
http://www.share-international.org/archives/cooperation/co_nocontest.htm

Or:
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker's_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#Prologue
" Many were increasingly of the opinion that they'd all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans.
        And then, one Thursday, nearly two thousand years after one man had been nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, a girl sitting on her own in a small cafe in Rickmansworth suddenly realized what it was that had been going wrong all this time, and she finally knew how the world could be made a good and happy place. This time it was right, it would work, and no one would have to get nailed to anything.
        Sadly, however, before she could get to a phone to tell anyone about it, the Earth was unexpectedly demolished to make way for a new hyperspace bypass, and so the idea was lost, seemingly for ever.
        This is her story."

Were you one of the protesters against the supposedly justified war against Iraq over non-existent weapons of mass destruction. If not, then what moral authority do you speak from? Who was the aggressor there? Hard to accept the implications. Based on your philosophy, how should the USA be labelled for that endeavor, and what should other countries do about that? Can you explain why most other countries consider the USA a far greater threat to world peace than most of the countries it invades?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jun/15/usa.iran

Terrorist attacks have happened many times on US soil, including the US Capitol.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_the_United_States

They have also happened in other countries without those countries losing their democracies.

But sadly, the article suggests the worst terrorism these days seems to be coming *out* of the US Capitol and destroying the fabric of US society both economically and socially. See also:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/
"OK, what's this book about? It's about what's happened to the American government lately. It's about the disastrous decisions that government has made. It's about the corruption that rotted the Congress. It's about how traditional conservatism has nearly been destroyed by authoritarianism. It's about how the "Religious Right" teamed up with amoral authoritarian leaders to push its un-democratic agenda onto the country. It's about the United States standing at the crossroads as the next federal election approaches."

Just think about whether you are helping the terrorists win?

No, no one remembers it. It's an invention of fantasy, not memory.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Gates#Misattributed

Agreed. I'd get myself and my kids (if I ever dare have any) the usual suite of vaccines, but the docs can keep their flu ones. They're a public health risk wrapped in a moneymaking scheme inside a dud (sorry, Sir Winston Churchill).

As much I as I would like to brandish this quote in front of this dumb ass politician... It's most likely fake.

See: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Mein_Kampf

The talk page you directed to appears to indicate that the problem is that someone originally misquoted it as "the children" and then people couldn't find the quote when searching via computer. The last comment says the quote actually is in the book, referring to it as "the child", which is the version GP used.

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

(On a side note, can someone explain the flag icons on the comments? Are Slashdot staff trying to usurp the moderators' job? Do mods simply suck at it that much that they need outside help? Is it generic DMCA/"intellectual property" "protection" bureaucracy crap?)

Monty Python already knew what it was: look here for some quotes.

Well according to the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy the meaning of life the universe and everything is wait for it 42

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aboZctrHfK8