No. But that does sound like it's worth reading. Never read as much Asimov as most of the other "classic" SF. Probably tried getting into stuff that was too deep too quickly when I first tried him. Left a bad taste. I really do need to get him in the queue.
This one was more campy. And it was a clear Holmes-spoof.
Back before kids, when TNG was on every day right after work, my wife and I decided that ST:TNG only had seven plots. They just kept re-using them. Hmm. Let's see how many I can remember...
1. Time loop/paradox
2. Established character has a complete personality change
3. Misunderstanding with newly-encountered species
That's all I can come up with now. We really should have written that list down.
But to be fair, not every episode was a standard-plot. Just 90+%.
When Voyager started and something like 3 out of the first 5 episodes were Standard Plot #1, I gave up right then.
Didn't somebody do exactly that once? Actually, a short story. Some kind of Sherlock Holmes takeoff. Something about the weird timezones on Mars being the crucial mistake the killer made.
However, there are *plausible* pseudo-scientific explanations for the sounds. Think about why "the sound" propagates at the speed of light and what happens when it reaches a solid surface, like a ship hull.
Let's be fair, there is *zero* empirical evidence surrounding giga-ton explosions in a vacuum. Any statement on what happens is conjecture.
One of the things that Star Wars had over Star Trek is the fact that the science, or lack of it, was never a critical point of the story. Nothing wrong with bad science with your fantasy, but Star Trek tried making the bad science part of the plotline which was idiotic. Making up a particle that causes some problem, then making up another particle that fixes the problem caused by the first fake particle is beyond stupid. You don't gain anything from it.
Yeah. 'Cuz Star Wars never had a plot that depended on a fictional technology (force fields and, erm, force fields) with blatant plot holes (the most important control panel on the huge-freaking ship is in the most obscure, out-of-the-way, unguarded spot on the ship or the force field generator is on a populated moon that doesn't seem to orbit anything {and has the solar-cycle of a planet} which is guarded by a small force of second-rate troops with no heavy weapons*).
*No AT-STs are not heavy weapons. Looking at what we've seen of the Empire's technology, they're equivalent to, maybe, an M-60. Squad weapons. In fact the Empire should have really looked into developing planetary fighters. Would have made a lot of their exploits easier. Searching Tatooine, Hoth, Endor,... And maybe invent frickin' IR scopes to put in those stupid helmets.
Um. Not really. You're distinction implies that Greedo had fair warning that Han was drawing on him.
What Han did was not so different than having Chewie sneak up behind Greedo. It was not what would typically be considered an "honorable" showdown. Han won by guile.
All that tells us is that you are not ADD or ADHD. That's normal impulse-control. We all have to learn that our actions have consequences. I know that. But, it doesn't have anything to do with my ADD. Knowing the consequences and being able to exhibit impulse-control are not the same thing.
Um, ditto.
I'll go one farther. ADD and ADHD are *VERY* different diagnoses. One of the major problems in this debate is lumping them together.
The "classic" childhood ADHD case is a rambunctious child who can't settle down and pay attention. Often described by some as "a typical boy". Ritalin (or such) immediately calms him down and he seems to be an average student on it.
However, ADD often manifests as "the kid who just doesn't live up to his potential". At least when I was in middle-school (30 years ago), the ADD behavior was considered purely a behavior/disciple problem. Not a disease or condition, just a kid who wasn't trying.
We frustrate teachers because one day we'll blow away the class on a lesson/test/whatever. We're focused on the subject and *nobody* focuses like us. Other days, we're not focused on anything.
Some recent research (references not handy) indicate that many ADD people have learned to self-"medicate" with fidgety habits. This isn't the can't-sit-still of ADHD (or youth). This is a semi-conscious effort to engage part of our brains/bodies in a distraction to allow our primary focus to stay on the subject at-hand. However, most teachers object to students playing with a small toy, disassembling pens or listening to headphones during class. These are some of the techniques I still use to help me.
It's very hard for us to stay focused on only one thing*. But, the secondary item usually needs to be semi-automatic. A slinky works great for me.
*Unless we get engrossed in hyper-focus mode. Then it's very hard for us to remember that the rest of the world exists. This can be a real problem for someone with blood-sugar stability issues. While hyper-focused, I can skip meals for way too long. Done over 24 hours in college. However, as soon as I come out of it, the plummeting blood-sugar hits. Not fun.
Except on HP-UX where even that won't work. Nothing like rebooting a production server because of stale zombies and improperly closed Oracle connections.
Never (at least on HP-UX (at least around 1995)) use kill -9 on a Pro*C process with open connections to the DB.
government has a role and a government that can't protect its citizens on basic issues of physical security and competence in the face of disaster is a government that doesn't deserve the consent of the governed.
And people who expect their government to "protect its citizens on basic issues of physical security and competence" end up with the government they deserve.
If people would learn to wipe their own asses without government assistance, maybe they wouldn't be stuck without any resources. If you live in a river delta, below sea-level, you should have emergency stores on hand for this kind of problem. If you don't, don't expect your sugar-daddy^Wgovernment to rescue you.
Yes. This was a huge storm. Yes. The loss of life is catastrophic. No! The government shouldn't be prepared to save every taxpayer (and tax spender, er, welfare recipient) from any possible trouble.
The government doesn't, and shouldn't, have an obligation to protect the well-being, let alone property, of any individual. If you think otherwise, you really need to do a little research.
I prefer to go with the less-desirable-than-your-car approach.
That's why I drive a ten-year-old car with almost 200K miles on it. I frequently leave the windows open on a hot day, if I don't have anything valuable in the car.
Anybody desperate enough to steal it needs it more than I do. Its not even fast enough to attract joyriders.
But, it does it get me around just fine. And, I bought it outright for about 3 monthly new car payments.
Back in my day I had to write games in BASIC, on a 4.7Mhz computer with no hard disk and 128K of RAM. And I was grateful
This is the first time I have ever seen a tagline of this form that I could agree with and feel was a reasonable statement. Aren't these supposed to be ridiculously overstated?
once your code is out there in GPL the version that's licensed under GPL will always be available under GPL
Um, well, no. If a court were to rule that the code was released under the GPL without the authority of the proper copyright holders, then the GPL release would be voided.
Any license is only valid if the party releasing the material under that license, had a right to do so.
Unfortunately, I can't see the Treasury Department putting some sort of Braille marker or other deliniating factor into future money production.
Definately not likely.
For that matter, when was the last time you saw an "old-style" 20 from before the last redesign?
Anywhere from two to six a week. I work waiting tables in a restaraunt on the weekends. In two shifts a week I usually see a few. Probably one in ten of the twenties I handle.
It's amazing what percentage of the population buys lunch on a credit card. Though check cards are the majority of them.
Slashdot Mirror
(It doesn't explain why one side's ships have orange bolts and the other side has green, though. That never made sense to me.)
Hmm. Just conjecturing here. Different mineral composition of the "ammo" due to different planets supplying it.
No. But that does sound like it's worth reading. Never read as much Asimov as most of the other "classic" SF. Probably tried getting into stuff that was too deep too quickly when I first tried him. Left a bad taste. I really do need to get him in the queue.
This one was more campy. And it was a clear Holmes-spoof.
I also may be mixing up two stories in my head.
Back before kids, when TNG was on every day right after work, my wife and I decided that ST:TNG only had seven plots. They just kept re-using them. Hmm. Let's see how many I can remember...
1. Time loop/paradox
2. Established character has a complete personality change
3. Misunderstanding with newly-encountered species
That's all I can come up with now. We really should have written that list down.
But to be fair, not every episode was a standard-plot. Just 90+%.
When Voyager started and something like 3 out of the first 5 episodes were Standard Plot #1, I gave up right then.
Didn't somebody do exactly that once? Actually, a short story. Some kind of Sherlock Holmes takeoff. Something about the weird timezones on Mars being the crucial mistake the killer made.
Anybody know what I'm babbling about?
For all intensive purposes
"whom" is no longer a word
These two next to each other. That just makes me smile.
Yes.
However, there are *plausible* pseudo-scientific explanations for the sounds. Think about why "the sound" propagates at the speed of light and what happens when it reaches a solid surface, like a ship hull.
Let's be fair, there is *zero* empirical evidence surrounding giga-ton explosions in a vacuum. Any statement on what happens is conjecture.
One of the things that Star Wars had over Star Trek is the fact that the science, or lack of it, was never a critical point of the story. Nothing wrong with bad science with your fantasy, but Star Trek tried making the bad science part of the plotline which was idiotic. Making up a particle that causes some problem, then making up another particle that fixes the problem caused by the first fake particle is beyond stupid. You don't gain anything from it.
Yeah. 'Cuz Star Wars never had a plot that depended on a fictional technology (force fields and, erm, force fields) with blatant plot holes (the most important control panel on the huge-freaking ship is in the most obscure, out-of-the-way, unguarded spot on the ship or the force field generator is on a populated moon that doesn't seem to orbit anything {and has the solar-cycle of a planet} which is guarded by a small force of second-rate troops with no heavy weapons*).
*No AT-STs are not heavy weapons. Looking at what we've seen of the Empire's technology, they're equivalent to, maybe, an M-60. Squad weapons. In fact the Empire should have really looked into developing planetary fighters. Would have made a lot of their exploits easier. Searching Tatooine, Hoth, Endor,... And maybe invent frickin' IR scopes to put in those stupid helmets.
Wow. Couldn't even be bothered to read the /. summary let alone RTFA.
Um. Not really. You're distinction implies that Greedo had fair warning that Han was drawing on him.
What Han did was not so different than having Chewie sneak up behind Greedo. It was not what would typically be considered an "honorable" showdown. Han won by guile.
And, he *DID* shoot first.
Nonsense. Clearly the universe doesn't exist yet. We are merely the memories of the as-yet-unborn consciousness that defines existence.
NO! NO! NO! NO!
All that tells us is that you are not ADD or ADHD. That's normal impulse-control. We all have to learn that our actions have consequences. I know that. But, it doesn't have anything to do with my ADD. Knowing the consequences and being able to exhibit impulse-control are not the same thing.
Um, ditto. I'll go one farther. ADD and ADHD are *VERY* different diagnoses. One of the major problems in this debate is lumping them together. The "classic" childhood ADHD case is a rambunctious child who can't settle down and pay attention. Often described by some as "a typical boy". Ritalin (or such) immediately calms him down and he seems to be an average student on it. However, ADD often manifests as "the kid who just doesn't live up to his potential". At least when I was in middle-school (30 years ago), the ADD behavior was considered purely a behavior/disciple problem. Not a disease or condition, just a kid who wasn't trying. We frustrate teachers because one day we'll blow away the class on a lesson/test/whatever. We're focused on the subject and *nobody* focuses like us. Other days, we're not focused on anything. Some recent research (references not handy) indicate that many ADD people have learned to self-"medicate" with fidgety habits. This isn't the can't-sit-still of ADHD (or youth). This is a semi-conscious effort to engage part of our brains/bodies in a distraction to allow our primary focus to stay on the subject at-hand. However, most teachers object to students playing with a small toy, disassembling pens or listening to headphones during class. These are some of the techniques I still use to help me. It's very hard for us to stay focused on only one thing*. But, the secondary item usually needs to be semi-automatic. A slinky works great for me. *Unless we get engrossed in hyper-focus mode. Then it's very hard for us to remember that the rest of the world exists. This can be a real problem for someone with blood-sugar stability issues. While hyper-focused, I can skip meals for way too long. Done over 24 hours in college. However, as soon as I come out of it, the plummeting blood-sugar hits. Not fun.
I think to myself every day - if only I had listened to yyxx.
I usually find myself wishing I'd listened to Xyzzy...
You're prediction is horrible. The *VAST* majority of handguns never hurt anyone. Many, however, save people from injury.
Never (at least on HP-UX (at least around 1995)) use kill -9 on a Pro*C process with open connections to the DB.
As opposed to the government controlled ones which are known to have misrepresented their location?
And people who expect their government to "protect its citizens on basic issues of physical security and competence" end up with the government they deserve.
If people would learn to wipe their own asses without government assistance, maybe they wouldn't be stuck without any resources. If you live in a river delta, below sea-level, you should have emergency stores on hand for this kind of problem. If you don't, don't expect your sugar-daddy^Wgovernment to rescue you.
Yes. This was a huge storm. Yes. The loss of life is catastrophic. No! The government shouldn't be prepared to save every taxpayer (and tax spender, er, welfare recipient) from any possible trouble.
The government doesn't, and shouldn't, have an obligation to protect the well-being, let alone property, of any individual. If you think otherwise, you really need to do a little research.
I prefer to go with the less-desirable-than-your-car approach.
That's why I drive a ten-year-old car with almost 200K miles on it. I frequently leave the windows open on a hot day, if I don't have anything valuable in the car.
Anybody desperate enough to steal it needs it more than I do. Its not even fast enough to attract joyriders.
But, it does it get me around just fine. And, I bought it outright for about 3 monthly new car payments.
I have very clear memories of when my hometown (of 100K odd people) got 911 service. And, I'm only in my mid-thirties.
The publication date of the article at http://www.raygirvan.co.uk/apoth/udo.htm might be a slight clue as well.
This is the first time I have ever seen a tagline of this form that I could agree with and feel was a reasonable statement. Aren't these supposed to be ridiculously overstated?
Um, well, no. If a court were to rule that the code was released under the GPL without the authority of the proper copyright holders, then the GPL release would be voided.
Any license is only valid if the party releasing the material under that license, had a right to do so.
IANAL, blah blah blah...
Unfortunately, I can't see the Treasury Department putting some sort of Braille marker or other deliniating factor into future money production.
Definately not likely.
For that matter, when was the last time you saw an "old-style" 20 from before the last redesign?
Anywhere from two to six a week. I work waiting tables in a restaraunt on the weekends. In two shifts a week I usually see a few. Probably one in ten of the twenties I handle.
It's amazing what percentage of the population buys lunch on a credit card. Though check cards are the majority of them.
or when was the first person spammed?
Um, it's rather well known when SPAM started.