I meant this as a funny comment, but as there were so many inqueries I can give some more info.
My job pays over 75k/year (pre-tax unfortunately), I am 24, have no debts (already paid off college), own a 1 year old car, and play a decent number of sports. I'm an old fashioned guy, would never cheat on anyone, and have decent manners. My flaws (that I can think of, since no girl will tell you the true reason she won't date you) are that I am pretty awkward until one gets to know me, I tend to be right too much, and maybe I believe in saving sex for marriage (maybe the ladies want sex?).
Tried POF, never had any luck. I have been on OKCupid for almost a year, and have had a few first dates, many fewer second dates, and no serious relationship. I've sent probably close to 250 messages over the course of the year, maybe got 25 girls that actually responded, maybe 10 of those turned into first dates, and only about 5 into second dates. All my messages were personalized and unique.
The real problem for me is living in a small town decently far from any metro area. If I lived in a populated area, I'm sure I'd get more matches, but sadly my well paying job is not in a major city.
Also my standards have not been high thus far, and I've only ruled out drug users and single mothers at this point. But if they can't spell it doesn't attract me (yes, I'm a grammar nazi...). But I'm sure there is someone out there for me.
In summary, if there are any single ladies on Slashdot that are interested in living in a medium sized town in Ohio. Let me know. (but really, who am I kidding?)
You know, I've heard this repeated so many times, but I can't even get a response from girls on dating websites despite not only having a job, but a well paying job. Yes, I'm a nerd, but still. You'd think I could at least get a response... I'm going to go cry into a wad of cash now.
You idiots are arguing about a pointless tribulation. The original poster was correct that to roll 10 sixes in a row will on average happen once for every ten million rolls. However, this is a totally meaningless statement as it is looking retrospectively. Probabilistically, there was a 100% chance he rolled 10 sixes in a row, because he did. The chances of the next die being rolled a six is still 1 in 6.
Probability can be used to analyze past data to predict future trends, which is impossible using truly random event (such as rolling a dice). What you are arguing about is whether or not rolling a six 10 times in a row has any effect on the next roll, and the original poster wouldn't disagree, but he wasn't arguing that. He was discussing a "null hypothesis scenario" where if you did roll a six 10 times in a row, then what is the probability the dice are loaded. That is a completely different question.
Yet you keep comparing warming to what is "natural" and that we need to keep humans from affecting the climate. I don't care what the past contained either. Let's look forward. We have 3 possibilities: 1) The earth gets colder 2) The earth stays the same 3) The earth gets warmer
The likelihood of (2) is extremely small on any significant time scale. (1) would be very bad for most people alive on this planet. (3) has the potential to be very bad for some people on this planet, but overall, it increases the livable landmass on the Earth.
Globabl warming may or may not be happening, and it may or may not be caused by humans. Regardless of either of those, I think warming would be good for humanity on the whole.
Not only is that an amazingly awesome point (it would be like being worried about putting a drop of food coloring in an ocean and expecting a color change). But we don't have to launch it at our sun. We can launch it at Alpha Centauri, or any other star for that matter, or heck a black hole (the garbage disposals of the universe). Even better, the material probably won't even be radioactive anymore by the time it gets there in a few millions years.
You forget that there IS a shortage of the raw materials needed to make solar panels. Solar panels do not grow out of the desert. They need to be manufactured with a lot of the same materials that go into modern electronics. There is only a limited supply of the semiconductors and rare metals needed to make current panels. There might not even be enough easily accessible materials on the planet to cover a fifth of the Sahara.
And people always seem to forget that solar panels don't grow in the desert. There is also mining associated with the metals necessary for solar panels, and in many cases those are much more rare metals that are mined in china with much more loose regulations regarding the environment (as well as safety).
If you read that you'll note that the difference is between who has power. In a republic, it's the individuals. In a democracy, it's the group (the government in this case).
The government is well beyond the bounds of the Constitution and has exceeded it's allowed powers. There is a reason that the Constitution spells out powers that the government has and explicitly states, "Hey, if it ain't in here, you can't do it without an amendment". But somehow that got forgotten.
Though I must agree with you, I don't think there should be political parties. I don't think they should be illegal, but their power over primaries and controlling debates is an obvious conflict of interest.
Yes, as a Libertarian, I am not worried about my personal freedom at the moment. I try to avoid the airport at all costs though.
Now what I am worried about is my retirement savings being "disappeared" because of government spending. Can we work on that first? When the government has a tiny budget, the personal freedoms will follow.
Hey, I'm an American. Can I ask you a favor? Every time someone in America who supports government healthcare talks about how great it works for Canada, can I send them up there to live with you?
Now I don't know if you like your healthcare or not, or heck if it's even socialist. What I do know is that I like my choice, and that is what my country is founded on. If they like Canadian healthcare so much, then why do they not move to Canada? If I like free market healthcare, where do I go?
Please note that the United States is NOT a democracy. It is a republic. As such it is designed such that the general population has little political power. However, also note that per our Constitution, the government is supposed to have little political power as well.
Freedom is not having the government control my life... Whether the people, a dictator, or bought and paid for politicians are controlling me is moot, I have lost my freedom.
I disagree. Giving into the status quo is not maturity. Knowing the consequences of your actions is maturity. Most people end up giving into the status quo because of the severe consequences of standing up for your rights. Many mature people stand up for rights, but only if they know they can handle the consequences.
On an aside note: our government is NOT mature. If they do realize the consequences of their actions, they are all assholes (on another aside note, they could still be assholes if they don't know the consequences).
I'm glad somebody agrees with me. The other thing that annoyed me about the system was, when I was bored in ME1, I'd just be shooting my gun just for the fun of it. Didn't hurt anything, didn't really do anything productive, but sure helped kill the time walking for long periods.
I also agree with your GP about it screwing over snipers. I was a sniper/pistol person in ME1, and the sniper rifle was almost useless in ME2 just because a sniper with essentially one clip can't even take out a wave of troops without running out of cover to find more "ammo".
I loved that in Dante's Peak as well... A truck with no tires (burned off by a previous drive through a lava flow obviously) driving on ash, manages to outrun a pyroclastic flow and then rams into a mine entrance which conveniently seals itself behind while not completely crushing the vehicle. Score -1 for physics in movies.
The inventory system was definitely too complicated in ME1, but the numbering system helped out. In ME2, it seemed like none of it mattered because it was so dumbed down.
The change that upset me most was the switch from heat weapons to ammo weapons. "Heat cartridges" was complete and utter bull they made up because they had already explained the heat system so well in ME1. Plus the heat cartridges were crazy stupid... Wait, what? Picking up one gives you cartridges for all your guns, but they aren't interchangeable? Why can't I use pistol cartridges in my rifle if they are just heat batteries? Doesn't that seem kinda dumb? Or was it really a poor excuse to force you to have to keep using different weapons rather than continually use your best one?
I really hope they go back to the original cool down system, as to me it made the game much more enjoyable. And I used the weapon that was appropriate for my situation, rather than having to worry about ammo.
Stop wasting your time. These are all rich American assholes... They have enough time to waste posting on Slashdot (as do I) and are privileged enough to have access.
They have just been taken in by the media, who constantly tells them about the horrible poverty in America, where the poor just barely survive with cable TV, a cell phone, 22" rims, and just can't afford to save for an emergency.
It's not their fault that they don't understand probability and planning and have an emergency fund set up to act as a contingency in case of job loss or an injury. The government keeps telling them that spending more than you take in is an excellent idea, and you don't need to plan for the future.
They believe that if they lose their job, we should help them get back on their feet, because we planned ahead, and they did not. The little pigs all will run to the brick house when the wolf comes.
P.S. When you find John Galt, put in a good word for me.
They chose? People at the bottom of the socio-economic scale don't have a lot of choice in jobs. And in fact, it might be partly his fault for people's lack of job opportunities depending on how he votes, etc.
Yes, they choose. There are plenty of well paying, in demand, low skill jobs out there. Believe me, I managed a whole bunch of people (many Mexicans) because so many Americans won’t even look at a good job because it’s “beneath them”. Tough shit, my grandpa did some pretty dangerous, dirty, and disgusting jobs and your ancestors probably did too. But now everything thinks they have to work in an office.
I never suggested everybody needs to be made the same. Just that we shouldn't be so cruel as to let people die in the street if they can't afford insurance. I'm not sure where you are getting this idea that I think people should be "made the same" from.
He never suggested we let people die in the street. He just said that he believes charities do a much better job than the government. Most people dying in the street do so willingly because they refuse to give up drinking and drugs (which private charities refuse to support).
Bullshit. Many rich people have never taken a risk in their lives. Did Paris Hilton work really hard and take risks to get all of her money? Also, it's generally the poorer workers who help make the rich people's fortune.
Take a look at the list of the richest people in the United States: 1) Bill Gates, not born rich 2) Warren Buffett, not born rich 3) Larry Ellison, not born rich 4) Christy Walton, born rich, but Sam Walton was not 5) Charles Koch, not born rich Paris Hilton is the descendent of Conrad Hilton who was not born rich. He left most of his estate to a charitable foundation.
In addition, it is complete bullshit that company founders get rich by making their workers poor. Henry Ford did not make his workers poor by paying them enough to buy a car. People who create businesses create wealth. Are more people poor because Facebook exists? Well Mark Zuckerberg is rich now, where did that money come from?
So, that's going to solve all the problem, private charities? It doesn't appear to be working very well.
Habitat for Humanity does a very good job at providing low cost housing and getting families out of poverty. Welfare? Not so much.
Oh, threat of violence. That's funny. You live quite comfortably isolated from the actual threat of violence, while the poor deal with it as a daily threat. By "threat of violence" you actually mean "a few dollars of my taxes."
No, he means threat of violence. A few dollars of taxes maybe (or more likely a few thousand) or the government shows up at your door with guns and steals your property. Or maybe even if you are honest and paying, you didn’t fully understand the hundreds of thousands of pages of tax code, and they arrest you for tax evasion. And I don’t fear terrorists nearly as much as I fear unnecessary wars, TSA searches, and inflation destroying my future.
Except for the roads, the fire departments, health services, etc? Do you know what happened when fire departments were privately-run? They went around starting fires to get business. Public health services seem to do quite well outside the US, lowering costs for everybody.
Citation Needed? The problem with government programs is, they can easily make it look cheaper than private because they can hide their costs. How much money gets spent on healthcare in Canada? You can only see what they report. Which if they report anything like my doctor does to my insurance, it’s a big ol’ round number pulled out of their ass.
So, how is government stopping people from doing that now? It's pretty clear that people don't always take care of themselves
Slashdot Mirror
I meant this as a funny comment, but as there were so many inqueries I can give some more info.
My job pays over 75k/year (pre-tax unfortunately), I am 24, have no debts (already paid off college), own a 1 year old car, and play a decent number of sports. I'm an old fashioned guy, would never cheat on anyone, and have decent manners. My flaws (that I can think of, since no girl will tell you the true reason she won't date you) are that I am pretty awkward until one gets to know me, I tend to be right too much, and maybe I believe in saving sex for marriage (maybe the ladies want sex?).
Tried POF, never had any luck. I have been on OKCupid for almost a year, and have had a few first dates, many fewer second dates, and no serious relationship. I've sent probably close to 250 messages over the course of the year, maybe got 25 girls that actually responded, maybe 10 of those turned into first dates, and only about 5 into second dates. All my messages were personalized and unique.
The real problem for me is living in a small town decently far from any metro area. If I lived in a populated area, I'm sure I'd get more matches, but sadly my well paying job is not in a major city.
Also my standards have not been high thus far, and I've only ruled out drug users and single mothers at this point. But if they can't spell it doesn't attract me (yes, I'm a grammar nazi...). But I'm sure there is someone out there for me.
In summary, if there are any single ladies on Slashdot that are interested in living in a medium sized town in Ohio. Let me know. (but really, who am I kidding?)
You know, I've heard this repeated so many times, but I can't even get a response from girls on dating websites despite not only having a job, but a well paying job. Yes, I'm a nerd, but still. You'd think I could at least get a response... I'm going to go cry into a wad of cash now.
No, some fuels work by converting energy from one form to another. Chemical bonds don't have any mass, yet they release energy when broken.
Correct me if I am wrong though, but isn't science supposed to be based on experiments, not statistics?
You idiots are arguing about a pointless tribulation. The original poster was correct that to roll 10 sixes in a row will on average happen once for every ten million rolls. However, this is a totally meaningless statement as it is looking retrospectively. Probabilistically, there was a 100% chance he rolled 10 sixes in a row, because he did. The chances of the next die being rolled a six is still 1 in 6.
Probability can be used to analyze past data to predict future trends, which is impossible using truly random event (such as rolling a dice). What you are arguing about is whether or not rolling a six 10 times in a row has any effect on the next roll, and the original poster wouldn't disagree, but he wasn't arguing that. He was discussing a "null hypothesis scenario" where if you did roll a six 10 times in a row, then what is the probability the dice are loaded. That is a completely different question.
Yet you keep comparing warming to what is "natural" and that we need to keep humans from affecting the climate. I don't care what the past contained either. Let's look forward. We have 3 possibilities:
1) The earth gets colder
2) The earth stays the same
3) The earth gets warmer
The likelihood of (2) is extremely small on any significant time scale. (1) would be very bad for most people alive on this planet. (3) has the potential to be very bad for some people on this planet, but overall, it increases the livable landmass on the Earth.
Globabl warming may or may not be happening, and it may or may not be caused by humans. Regardless of either of those, I think warming would be good for humanity on the whole.
Actually, eventually the earth will become uninhabitable by humans and 100% of other species. It's the time scale people disagree on.
Not only is that an amazingly awesome point (it would be like being worried about putting a drop of food coloring in an ocean and expecting a color change). But we don't have to launch it at our sun. We can launch it at Alpha Centauri, or any other star for that matter, or heck a black hole (the garbage disposals of the universe). Even better, the material probably won't even be radioactive anymore by the time it gets there in a few millions years.
You forget that there IS a shortage of the raw materials needed to make solar panels. Solar panels do not grow out of the desert. They need to be manufactured with a lot of the same materials that go into modern electronics. There is only a limited supply of the semiconductors and rare metals needed to make current panels. There might not even be enough easily accessible materials on the planet to cover a fifth of the Sahara.
And people always seem to forget that solar panels don't grow in the desert. There is also mining associated with the metals necessary for solar panels, and in many cases those are much more rare metals that are mined in china with much more loose regulations regarding the environment (as well as safety).
So harvest the algae and convert it into biodiesel... It's a win-win!
How many copies of the Bible exist, and how many people have actually READ the whole thing cover to cover?
Oh my... Imagine a world with 4 colors! (probably not an exact quote, but you know the commercial).
Yeah, I can see where you got that.
See Article 4: Section 4 of the US Constitution. I think that pretty much sums it up. I just cited a source, not a commentary.
http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/repvsdem.htm
If you read that you'll note that the difference is between who has power. In a republic, it's the individuals. In a democracy, it's the group (the government in this case).
The government is well beyond the bounds of the Constitution and has exceeded it's allowed powers. There is a reason that the Constitution spells out powers that the government has and explicitly states, "Hey, if it ain't in here, you can't do it without an amendment". But somehow that got forgotten.
Though I must agree with you, I don't think there should be political parties. I don't think they should be illegal, but their power over primaries and controlling debates is an obvious conflict of interest.
Yes, as a Libertarian, I am not worried about my personal freedom at the moment. I try to avoid the airport at all costs though.
Now what I am worried about is my retirement savings being "disappeared" because of government spending. Can we work on that first? When the government has a tiny budget, the personal freedoms will follow.
Hey, I'm an American. Can I ask you a favor? Every time someone in America who supports government healthcare talks about how great it works for Canada, can I send them up there to live with you?
Now I don't know if you like your healthcare or not, or heck if it's even socialist. What I do know is that I like my choice, and that is what my country is founded on. If they like Canadian healthcare so much, then why do they not move to Canada? If I like free market healthcare, where do I go?
Please note that the United States is NOT a democracy. It is a republic. As such it is designed such that the general population has little political power. However, also note that per our Constitution, the government is supposed to have little political power as well.
Freedom is not having the government control my life... Whether the people, a dictator, or bought and paid for politicians are controlling me is moot, I have lost my freedom.
I disagree. Giving into the status quo is not maturity. Knowing the consequences of your actions is maturity. Most people end up giving into the status quo because of the severe consequences of standing up for your rights. Many mature people stand up for rights, but only if they know they can handle the consequences.
On an aside note: our government is NOT mature. If they do realize the consequences of their actions, they are all assholes (on another aside note, they could still be assholes if they don't know the consequences).
I'm glad somebody agrees with me. The other thing that annoyed me about the system was, when I was bored in ME1, I'd just be shooting my gun just for the fun of it. Didn't hurt anything, didn't really do anything productive, but sure helped kill the time walking for long periods.
I also agree with your GP about it screwing over snipers. I was a sniper/pistol person in ME1, and the sniper rifle was almost useless in ME2 just because a sniper with essentially one clip can't even take out a wave of troops without running out of cover to find more "ammo".
Don't forget a time machine... Powered by steam of course. (Where we're going, we don't need tracks)
I loved that in Dante's Peak as well... A truck with no tires (burned off by a previous drive through a lava flow obviously) driving on ash, manages to outrun a pyroclastic flow and then rams into a mine entrance which conveniently seals itself behind while not completely crushing the vehicle. Score -1 for physics in movies.
The inventory system was definitely too complicated in ME1, but the numbering system helped out. In ME2, it seemed like none of it mattered because it was so dumbed down.
The change that upset me most was the switch from heat weapons to ammo weapons. "Heat cartridges" was complete and utter bull they made up because they had already explained the heat system so well in ME1. Plus the heat cartridges were crazy stupid... Wait, what? Picking up one gives you cartridges for all your guns, but they aren't interchangeable? Why can't I use pistol cartridges in my rifle if they are just heat batteries? Doesn't that seem kinda dumb? Or was it really a poor excuse to force you to have to keep using different weapons rather than continually use your best one?
I really hope they go back to the original cool down system, as to me it made the game much more enjoyable. And I used the weapon that was appropriate for my situation, rather than having to worry about ammo.
Do I smell smoke?
BeanThere,
Stop wasting your time. These are all rich American assholes... They have enough time to waste posting on Slashdot (as do I) and are privileged enough to have access.
They have just been taken in by the media, who constantly tells them about the horrible poverty in America, where the poor just barely survive with cable TV, a cell phone, 22" rims, and just can't afford to save for an emergency.
It's not their fault that they don't understand probability and planning and have an emergency fund set up to act as a contingency in case of job loss or an injury. The government keeps telling them that spending more than you take in is an excellent idea, and you don't need to plan for the future.
They believe that if they lose their job, we should help them get back on their feet, because we planned ahead, and they did not. The little pigs all will run to the brick house when the wolf comes.
P.S. When you find John Galt, put in a good word for me.
They chose? People at the bottom of the socio-economic scale don't have a lot of choice in jobs. And in fact, it might be partly his fault for people's lack of job opportunities depending on how he votes, etc.
Yes, they choose. There are plenty of well paying, in demand, low skill jobs out there. Believe me, I managed a whole bunch of people (many Mexicans) because so many Americans won’t even look at a good job because it’s “beneath them”. Tough shit, my grandpa did some pretty dangerous, dirty, and disgusting jobs and your ancestors probably did too. But now everything thinks they have to work in an office.
I never suggested everybody needs to be made the same. Just that we shouldn't be so cruel as to let people die in the street if they can't afford insurance. I'm not sure where you are getting this idea that I think people should be "made the same" from.
He never suggested we let people die in the street. He just said that he believes charities do a much better job than the government. Most people dying in the street do so willingly because they refuse to give up drinking and drugs (which private charities refuse to support).
Bullshit. Many rich people have never taken a risk in their lives. Did Paris Hilton work really hard and take risks to get all of her money? Also, it's generally the poorer workers who help make the rich people's fortune.
Take a look at the list of the richest people in the United States:
1) Bill Gates, not born rich
2) Warren Buffett, not born rich
3) Larry Ellison, not born rich
4) Christy Walton, born rich, but Sam Walton was not
5) Charles Koch, not born rich
Paris Hilton is the descendent of Conrad Hilton who was not born rich. He left most of his estate to a charitable foundation.
In addition, it is complete bullshit that company founders get rich by making their workers poor. Henry Ford did not make his workers poor by paying them enough to buy a car. People who create businesses create wealth. Are more people poor because Facebook exists? Well Mark Zuckerberg is rich now, where did that money come from?
So, that's going to solve all the problem, private charities? It doesn't appear to be working very well.
Habitat for Humanity does a very good job at providing low cost housing and getting families out of poverty. Welfare? Not so much.
Oh, threat of violence. That's funny. You live quite comfortably isolated from the actual threat of violence, while the poor deal with it as a daily threat. By "threat of violence" you actually mean "a few dollars of my taxes."
No, he means threat of violence. A few dollars of taxes maybe (or more likely a few thousand) or the government shows up at your door with guns and steals your property. Or maybe even if you are honest and paying, you didn’t fully understand the hundreds of thousands of pages of tax code, and they arrest you for tax evasion. And I don’t fear terrorists nearly as much as I fear unnecessary wars, TSA searches, and inflation destroying my future.
Except for the roads, the fire departments, health services, etc? Do you know what happened when fire departments were privately-run? They went around starting fires to get business. Public health services seem to do quite well outside the US, lowering costs for everybody.
Citation Needed? The problem with government programs is, they can easily make it look cheaper than private because they can hide their costs. How much money gets spent on healthcare in Canada? You can only see what they report. Which if they report anything like my doctor does to my insurance, it’s a big ol’ round number pulled out of their ass.
So, how is government stopping people from doing that now? It's pretty clear that people don't always take care of themselves