And even there, a lot of the brown bread is just colored white bread; the mild taste and soft texture of white bread, and the healthy feeling of brown bread (win / "win"!).
No killer app, and I'm not so sure about a generation 2 or 3. Without game developers getting behind it, VR is going to have a hard time getting anywhere. The problem is that it takes a lot of work to make a game do 3D properly, and most don't seem to want to invest.
For now it is looking similar to the 3D gaming from a few years ago. That tech never matured and quietly died.
I love to play games on my 3D tv, but it usually takes me a whole evening to configure just one game right. Same thing with many games on VR.
What I meant to say is that believing is fundamental to religion, but not to science. Depending on your definition, believing means that you accept something as truth without proof. And science is pretty much the opposite of that. A lot of people nowadays seem to have embraced "science" as an alternative religion. The accept a lot of things without thinking, just because "science" says so.
A philosophy is not something to believe in either. Philosophies are studies. The philosophy of science is a study of topics like "what is this science thing and what is it good for?" This does mean that you can reject parts of science as being trustworthy or meaningful, but if you are building a rocket, then you are using still using science. You're assuming all those formulas and things like aerodynamics will work once more.
This rocket man is actually doing his own research and is questioning the principles of science. He is a scientist and a philosophist. He chooses not too stand on the shoulders of the great scientists and philososophers before him. That makes all this rather strange and redundant, but I respect him more than those people who make fun of him "because he is an idiot who doesn't believe in science".
I have located your problem: you're assuming a man who believes that the Earth is flat has reason.
I am not, care to guess again?
You are placing your trust in the ancient greeks and western philosophy and reasoning. That is ok, so do I. But not taking those things for granted and trying to see for yourself, even when starting from a completely different viewpoint, is not anti-science.
Well, I mostly agree with you. Believing that you can learn from your senses and experience certainly helps to get you started on a scientific career.
But you can practise science even when you say that you do not believe in it.Science doesn't depend on believing. Science thrives on questioning beliefs. Some people see scientists as an organized group with a specific agenda. And then they do all kinds of experiments to prove "the scientists" wrong. Those are the first steps to science.
How is being nuts relevant to whether you are a scientist or not?
I don't understand this reasoning. Science is not something to believe in, it is not a religion. It is like saying you don't need to believe in dough to be a good pastry chef. As an engineer you are building on science. If you are building a rocket that can go 500 MpH, you are definately using science.
He's not conjuring up a rocket out of thin air is he? He's building something, predicting the what it will do, testing and evaluating the results, improve and repeat. Science.
Furthermore, he is questioning the assumption that the earth is round. He is going to test his assumption that it is flat. Science.
It surprises me that you think that they sell that as used. I guess you never worked in retail. No, it is checked and repackaged and sold "as new". Note that hardly any store explicitely sells something as "new, never been touched before". And rightfully so in my opinion. It is still the exact same product. Also, brick and mortar stores do exactly the same. If a returned product doesn't clearly show signs of use, it goes right back on the shelves.
Speaking at someone who has worked at at least a dozen on- and offline stores.
I have another reason: Returning items online is easier than returning to a brick and mortar store nowadays. So I prefer to buy higher risk items online AND I take more risks when buying something online. When in doubt, in a brick and mortar store I will probably not buy. Online, I will.
Result: "Shoppers more likely to return items online". It is a feature, and it is why online shopping is winning.
Over here several online clothing stores actually advertise with this. They encourage you to order several items and try them on. The package has the return label already included.
It is selfish in the same way as using the fitting room in a store. "the rent of the floor space has to be paid from the sales. All customers pay the same, even the ones who do not use the fitting room".
So why not give him that price in writing? I went through the same thing a while ago. Called several dealerships, they gave prices. I told them I was going to ask around. They immediately offered a lower price on the condition that I took the offer right away. I told them I would consider the lower price if they'd mail it to me AND that I wouldn't even consider a new offer if their first offer was much higher than their competitors.
They all mailed me much lower prices than the best offer they made by phone. I forwarded the best offer to the other dealerships. Most offered slightly lower prices, some said they couldn't match. I went with the original best offer because the difference was marginal and I felt best about it (because their first offer seemed fair as the others didn't go much lower). Which I also told them and they seemed to appreciate. Got friendly and helpful service.
I do hate negotiating, but when it's about a lot of money I feel I have no choice.
Incidently, a little while later, as I was still in a negotiating "rush", I tried to negotiate the price on groceries and it actually worked. I felt like a cheapskate and probably won't do that again, but it really surprised me how this is possible while most people won't even think about it.
My children like broccoli too. Actually they like all vegetables. I think it depends on the way they are prepared. A lot of people treat vegetables as a necessary evil which has to be boiled down to a mush and has to be eaten to be granted the reward of a big chunk of meat.
Don't get me wrong, I love meat. But I love vegetables too. You just have to prepare them well. For example broccoli is easy to overcook and you cannot keep it fresh for more than a few days.
I'm not convinced that this solution works until I see it in Kerbal Space Program.
Also, I'm a bit dissapointed that the solution is presented as an animation which is constantly sped up and down and rotated and with music playing. I would have liked something a bit more scientific, for example a narrator explaining the most important events and HOW they actually reached this solution and why it is so special (better than the others).
Hehe, I think you're on to something. Why don't we skip the hassle of splitting a keyboard and arguing about which keys go where? Let's just use two complete keyboards, one for each hand.
Although I own a car I never use it for shopping. I can pack one week of groceries for five people on my bike. Although I usually go shopping twice a week so I can eat more fresh food. If I need extra capacity I can take a family member to carry the rest. The shopping mall is two miles from my home, but I used to live in a different place where the nearest decent shops were 10 miles away. It never bothered me to go shopping by bike. Get some fresh air, exercise, relaxation and save on gas and parking.
Studded tyres are actually illegal to use here in The Netherlands. We don't get a lot of snow and in the high density areas the roads are salted everytime there is a notion of snow. Unlike most other european countries it isn't even required to use winter tyres during the winter.
They will experiment on how to add traction and say they might add sand or gravel if they can't solve this problem with just plastic. On the topic of degradation they claim that plastic is being used outdoors a lot already without problems. I am not sure if the circumstances are comparable though.
These questions remain largely unanswered. It is mostly just an idea, I wouldn't even call it a concept just yet. There is more information in dutch here: http://www.kws.nl/nl/innovatie...
They claim it is weatherproof and can handle temperatures from -40 to +80 degrees Celcius, but I cannot find any science to back this up. They haven't worked out how to link the segments yet. No word about damage repair, but they do mention they want to use it for bicycle roads first. On the subject of fire they say they are looking into a fireproof coating (which I think is highly dubious).
True, however skimming the articles I skipped your post because the capital MURICAN. It might be my loss because I missed a potentially brilliant insight, but then again, you are the one broadcasting the message and you're missing listeners because of the way you write
I thought I'd help out a bit and look it up. FACT: something said to be true or supposed to have happened. So it's a fact that the uber passenger experience is nicer, because Noah Haders said so, and I agree with him. The fact may be proven wrong, but that's beside the point. After all, we're just arguing semantics...
I'm afraid your post won't get much notice here, buried a few comment layers deep off the front page. It's unfortunate that you didn't provide this background with your question, because it would probably have led to a more interesting discussion.
Anyway, I think it has been sufficiently pointed out to you that the universe will come to an end if you equal divide by zero to zero. However, I do feel your frustration. I too work on reporting tools which have very unreliable inputs and making sure the program catches all the errors takes up a large chunk of my time. I have much respect for your position to try to cater to anyone.
Yet it would still be a very bad idea. You just can't know what people will do with your statistics, even though you don't think they are important at the time you make them available. Most likely they will make decissions based on your statistics (otherwise why would they want them) and when they're not correct things can go very bad.
As others pointed out, there are plenty of occasions where zero will be an acceptable solution, but this should always be a conscious decission.
Exactly. I've seen boring, annoying and even silly articles on Slashdot, but this one and the divide by zero are a completely different breed. I feel like I'm being subtly trolled. It's reassuring to see at least a few posts like yours.
Slashdot Mirror
And even there, a lot of the brown bread is just colored white bread; the mild taste and soft texture of white bread, and the healthy feeling of brown bread (win / "win"!).
Not only the guests... it could be an undocumented feature. Or maybe someone could hack Samsung and update the software.
No killer app, and I'm not so sure about a generation 2 or 3. Without game developers getting behind it, VR is going to have a hard time getting anywhere. The problem is that it takes a lot of work to make a game do 3D properly, and most don't seem to want to invest.
For now it is looking similar to the 3D gaming from a few years ago. That tech never matured and quietly died.
I love to play games on my 3D tv, but it usually takes me a whole evening to configure just one game right. Same thing with many games on VR.
Heh. Slashdot caught me by surprise and I was actually going along with it, until "created it for use on Mars".
What I meant to say is that believing is fundamental to religion, but not to science. Depending on your definition, believing means that you accept something as truth without proof. And science is pretty much the opposite of that. A lot of people nowadays seem to have embraced "science" as an alternative religion. The accept a lot of things without thinking, just because "science" says so.
A philosophy is not something to believe in either. Philosophies are studies. The philosophy of science is a study of topics like "what is this science thing and what is it good for?" This does mean that you can reject parts of science as being trustworthy or meaningful, but if you are building a rocket, then you are using still using science. You're assuming all those formulas and things like aerodynamics will work once more.
This rocket man is actually doing his own research and is questioning the principles of science. He is a scientist and a philosophist. He chooses not too stand on the shoulders of the great scientists and philososophers before him. That makes all this rather strange and redundant, but I respect him more than those people who make fun of him "because he is an idiot who doesn't believe in science".
I have located your problem: you're assuming a man who believes that the Earth is flat has reason.
I am not, care to guess again?
You are placing your trust in the ancient greeks and western philosophy and reasoning. That is ok, so do I. But not taking those things for granted and trying to see for yourself, even when starting from a completely different viewpoint, is not anti-science.
True, so we agree!
An apple is not an orange, it is not a banana... Just because something is an orange, doesn't make it a banana.
Well, I mostly agree with you. Believing that you can learn from your senses and experience certainly helps to get you started on a scientific career.
But you can practise science even when you say that you do not believe in it.Science doesn't depend on believing. Science thrives on questioning beliefs. Some people see scientists as an organized group with a specific agenda. And then they do all kinds of experiments to prove "the scientists" wrong. Those are the first steps to science.
How is being nuts relevant to whether you are a scientist or not?
I don't understand this reasoning. Science is not something to believe in, it is not a religion. It is like saying you don't need to believe in dough to be a good pastry chef. As an engineer you are building on science. If you are building a rocket that can go 500 MpH, you are definately using science.
He's not conjuring up a rocket out of thin air is he? He's building something, predicting the what it will do, testing and evaluating the results, improve and repeat. Science.
Furthermore, he is questioning the assumption that the earth is round. He is going to test his assumption that it is flat. Science.
He is also nuts, but that is hardly relevant.
It surprises me that you think that they sell that as used. I guess you never worked in retail. No, it is checked and repackaged and sold "as new". Note that hardly any store explicitely sells something as "new, never been touched before". And rightfully so in my opinion. It is still the exact same product. Also, brick and mortar stores do exactly the same. If a returned product doesn't clearly show signs of use, it goes right back on the shelves.
Speaking at someone who has worked at at least a dozen on- and offline stores.
I have another reason:
Returning items online is easier than returning to a brick and mortar store nowadays. So I prefer to buy higher risk items online AND I take more risks when buying something online. When in doubt, in a brick and mortar store I will probably not buy. Online, I will.
Result: "Shoppers more likely to return items online". It is a feature, and it is why online shopping is winning.
Over here several online clothing stores actually advertise with this. They encourage you to order several items and try them on. The package has the return label already included.
It is selfish in the same way as using the fitting room in a store. "the rent of the floor space has to be paid from the sales. All customers pay the same, even the ones who do not use the fitting room".
It's part of my morning routine. Wake up, take a shower, eat a sandwich, do some jackhammering, go to work. Isn't his how everyone does it?
So why not give him that price in writing? I went through the same thing a while ago. Called several dealerships, they gave prices. I told them I was going to ask around. They immediately offered a lower price on the condition that I took the offer right away. I told them I would consider the lower price if they'd mail it to me AND that I wouldn't even consider a new offer if their first offer was much higher than their competitors.
They all mailed me much lower prices than the best offer they made by phone. I forwarded the best offer to the other dealerships. Most offered slightly lower prices, some said they couldn't match. I went with the original best offer because the difference was marginal and I felt best about it (because their first offer seemed fair as the others didn't go much lower). Which I also told them and they seemed to appreciate. Got friendly and helpful service.
I do hate negotiating, but when it's about a lot of money I feel I have no choice.
Incidently, a little while later, as I was still in a negotiating "rush", I tried to negotiate the price on groceries and it actually worked. I felt like a cheapskate and probably won't do that again, but it really surprised me how this is possible while most people won't even think about it.
My children like broccoli too. Actually they like all vegetables. I think it depends on the way they are prepared. A lot of people treat vegetables as a necessary evil which has to be boiled down to a mush and has to be eaten to be granted the reward of a big chunk of meat.
Don't get me wrong, I love meat. But I love vegetables too. You just have to prepare them well. For example broccoli is easy to overcook and you cannot keep it fresh for more than a few days.
I'm not convinced that this solution works until I see it in Kerbal Space Program.
Also, I'm a bit dissapointed that the solution is presented as an animation which is constantly sped up and down and rotated and with music playing. I would have liked something a bit more scientific, for example a narrator explaining the most important events and HOW they actually reached this solution and why it is so special (better than the others).
Hehe, I think you're on to something. Why don't we skip the hassle of splitting a keyboard and arguing about which keys go where? Let's just use two complete keyboards, one for each hand.
Although I own a car I never use it for shopping. I can pack one week of groceries for five people on my bike. Although I usually go shopping twice a week so I can eat more fresh food. If I need extra capacity I can take a family member to carry the rest. The shopping mall is two miles from my home, but I used to live in a different place where the nearest decent shops were 10 miles away. It never bothered me to go shopping by bike. Get some fresh air, exercise, relaxation and save on gas and parking.
Studded tyres are actually illegal to use here in The Netherlands. We don't get a lot of snow and in the high density areas the roads are salted everytime there is a notion of snow. Unlike most other european countries it isn't even required to use winter tyres during the winter.
http://www.kws.nl/nl/innovatie... (dutch)
They will experiment on how to add traction and say they might add sand or gravel if they can't solve this problem with just plastic. On the topic of degradation they claim that plastic is being used outdoors a lot already without problems. I am not sure if the circumstances are comparable though.
These questions remain largely unanswered. It is mostly just an idea, I wouldn't even call it a concept just yet. There is more information in dutch here: http://www.kws.nl/nl/innovatie...
They claim it is weatherproof and can handle temperatures from -40 to +80 degrees Celcius, but I cannot find any science to back this up. They haven't worked out how to link the segments yet. No word about damage repair, but they do mention they want to use it for bicycle roads first. On the subject of fire they say they are looking into a fireproof coating (which I think is highly dubious).
True, however skimming the articles I skipped your post because the capital MURICAN. It might be my loss because I missed a potentially brilliant insight, but then again, you are the one broadcasting the message and you're missing listeners because of the way you write
I thought I'd help out a bit and look it up. FACT: something said to be true or supposed to have happened. So it's a fact that the uber passenger experience is nicer, because Noah Haders said so, and I agree with him. The fact may be proven wrong, but that's beside the point. After all, we're just arguing semantics...
I'm afraid your post won't get much notice here, buried a few comment layers deep off the front page. It's unfortunate that you didn't provide this background with your question, because it would probably have led to a more interesting discussion.
Anyway, I think it has been sufficiently pointed out to you that the universe will come to an end if you equal divide by zero to zero. However, I do feel your frustration. I too work on reporting tools which have very unreliable inputs and making sure the program catches all the errors takes up a large chunk of my time. I have much respect for your position to try to cater to anyone.
Yet it would still be a very bad idea. You just can't know what people will do with your statistics, even though you don't think they are important at the time you make them available. Most likely they will make decissions based on your statistics (otherwise why would they want them) and when they're not correct things can go very bad.
As others pointed out, there are plenty of occasions where zero will be an acceptable solution, but this should always be a conscious decission.
Exactly. I've seen boring, annoying and even silly articles on Slashdot, but this one and the divide by zero are a completely different breed. I feel like I'm being subtly trolled. It's reassuring to see at least a few posts like yours.