As a flat-footed, American alcoholic I would have some difficulty holding up my end of that colloquy.
I didn't say it was good satire, I merely pointed out that it doesn't particularly require a label and that only the hyper-literalist slashdotterei, or certain religious coteries, could confuse this with *news*.
I poke at Maxine Hong Kingston's running-boy and his sententious whinge.
Thanks, but even your decrepit source acknowledges:
. ..which has been discredited in its absolute form, although recognised as being partly accurate.
The part recognized as accurate being the part I referred to: that phylogenetic patterns are identifiable within ontogenetic patterns; this is a forceful and immediate representation of the interpretive value of the theory of evolution. For an ID adherent, these extensive coincidences are prefectly fortuitous.
Show me a single-celled organism evolve into a multi-celled organism.
zygote ==> blastocyte.
It is exactly parallel to some essential evolutionary steps, and it happens to everyone!
There are these leaps in evolution that requires some magical altering of how life works at all that evolution just can't explain.
This claim is completely baseless. The leaps of evolution are exactly what does explain how life works. It is, so far, the only theory that adequately explains empirical data on speciation and the differentiation of lifeforms. Just the patterns that ID loves to refer to as *designed*, just the challenges that ID refers to as *irreducible* are the strongest corroboration of the theory of evolution.
You can't expect anyone to believe that you have flowers that rely on bees to fertilize them and bees that rely on flowers to feed on that have managed to "evolve" from some roots.
There are several problems here, beginning with the expectation of belief. No one expects you to *believe* anything. You believe in a God, you accept a theory. An essential insight that you miss is the fact that evolution is opportunistic, not deterministic. Bees eat flower sap because it is there and few other organisms compete for it. Thousands of species of flowers have nothing to do with bees, relying on beetles, ants or birds.
How droll that we are still having this pseudo-debate. I thought this subject tired and thoroughly vanquished thirty years ago in high-school. Now we are further behind than ever. America has been ever superstitious and resistant to authority (scientific or political, even religious). It is the infantile wing of American anti-authoritarianism, and the charlatans that do not scruple to pander to it, which feeds this disease of faith-based doubting.
Lawyers have no monopoly on precision in language, despite their claims to the contrary. In fact, a fair amount of legal effort is expended in cleaning up imprecision because Law continues to rely on natural language. That is as it should be, as Law is a humane discipline.
The difficulty of legal jargon stems not from some greater degree of specificity, but rather from too great a reliance upon conventional (legal, precedential) usage. A good 85% of legal usage persists for its hoary connotative value (pointing to roots in Common or Roman law) and its ability to deter the uninitiated.
My statement was vis the adverts, not the game; I had already pointed out they are not allowed games. The gist of my post is that it is impossible to insulate kids from this shit and there is nothing Congress, ratings boards or concerned parents can do about it. As long as the casuistry of the marketplace condones taking advantage of the base instincts of children and young adults, this is the culture we get.
Making the hookers Arabs will appease a certain wing of the KulturKampfer's but it makes no difference.
I am a parent and a gamer. Even I can't keep up with the blizzard of titles and venues and I am not without clue. I can't keep tabs on every entertainment industry outlet, vet their rating boards, watch their films, read their books and play their games and decide what's appropriate and what's not. I am working for a living as well as raising a family.
I don't have time to vet the standards of the standards boards and I don't trust them; I disagree with them most of the time. For these reasons, the default answer in my family is *no*. No TV, no computer, no games. That only works because the children are not yet school age.
I must emphasize that the majority of marketing is directed at kids and the young adults kids envy because they are the ones simple enough to imagine that you can buy a lifestyle, sex-appeal, entertainment, et. al. Until the entertainment and marketing industries stop targeting my kids they will not be above legislative oversight. I don't trust Congress or the FCC to raise my kids any more than I trust Madison Av or Hollywood.
And no, Slashdot Kids, you can't turn off the feed. Its incessant and ubiquitous. Billboards, newspapers, magazines, kiosks: every available surface spattered with promos for generalized and depersonalized SEX and VIOLENCE. I wouldn't let my kids watch the ads for GTA, let alone play the game.
In order to provide the functionality described herein, the word processing application program 10 may operate in conjunction with a numeric search plug-in dynamically linked library ("DLL"). As will be described in greater detail below, the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 integrates with the word processing application program 10 and provides functionality for emphasizing all of the numerical data within an electronic document 28. The numeric search plug-in DLL 26 also provides functionality for de-emphasizing all of the numerical data within an electronic document 28. To provide these functions, the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 utilizes a program code for breaking sentences into words. Once the sentences have been broken into words, the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 compares the words to the contents of the numeric search table 28 to determine if numerical data is contained in the document. The numeric search table 28 identifies to the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 all of the numerical data that should be located in each of the supported languages. Additional details regarding the structure and operation of the numeric search plug-in DLL 26, including the structure of the numeric search table 28 are provided below.
The highlighting is incidental; the essential innovation they are attempting to patent is the programmatic identification of numeric data in tokenized strings of non-numeric characters. A multi-lingual lookup table of numeric representations.
FScott was thinking of the aplomb with which the preps he schooled with, and was so jealous of, pulled off the contradiction between their upbringing and their *progressive* values and their slumming tastes; that they weren't flustered by the illogic, mischronic or myopic.
I believe I smell sarcasm.
Derrida, who contradicts himself constantly, shares that ". . . coherence within contradicion always indicates the force of desire."
that the distinction you draw is a matter of opinion. Have a glance at Alain Badiou's work and get back to me. Opinion is a much more general notion that you credit. Anything that is not a raw tautology enters into the realm of opinion and differential evaluation; becomes more or less subject to the vagaries of intersubjective judgement.
The POTUS endorses a lot of things, it is his job. He is not uncomfortable looking foolish or inconsistent. Most of my fallow Merkins have no illusions as to his powers of reasoning.
The point is that it's not news for nerds and neither is the inevitable *informed debate* that our slashdotterei will conduct about this insipid semantic question.
Actually, all *opinions* are of equal interpretive value, it is facts which are of differential significance. Opinions are distinguished only by their political or social value.
Ya, the oppressive regime imagined here is the oppression of the established order, *global capitalism*, mass marketing, et. al.
This regime is not exclusive to the West and, ironically, within the purview of the Party in China. But let's be honest, it is only a matter of time before a scalable darknet becomes essential for any honest, upright antizen, whatever their nationality.
That is the real threat to the potential everyone here can plainly see. Watch out when the Republicans propose to mandate broadband service, generously intending to *bridge the digital divide* and *enfranchise the less fortunate*. When your feed becomes a utility delivered by protected monopolies as electric service is now, you are fscked royally.
The most tangible threat at the moment is the mentality of the FCC, which leads directly to Orwell's squawk-box, but with a sweet HDTV screen.
I'm not saying the threats aren't real. But the potential is just as real. The parent poster is afraid of their massing power, but the wiglomerates are just as vulnerable to fragmenting markets as they ever have been. The railroad lobby hasn't been keeping anyone awake at night lately, has it?
You mean to say you need to be a deranged psychopath to not want to eat what they're putting on your plate? There is nothing to satisfy your entertainment needs than shrink-wrapped, genre head-cheese from M. P. Ass. A. member wiglomerates?
The reality is that Hollywood, Madison Av., and their ilk are focus-grouping themselves into oblivion. Mass-market values are a symptom of industrial production. There is no more mass. There is no more market, at least as understood by the behemoths.
Its a generational shift and its taking place now, before your eyes.
Why not consider raising the bar. Rather than firewall Chinese IP blocks, make it a boycott. Block all traffic originating in China. Publicize it and while you're at it, boycott Cisco, Oracle, Bill Clinton and all the freedom loving US corporations and politicians that enabled the Great Firewall of China. Put those bastards behind a global TCP/IP boycott and we can move them off their totalitarian ways right quick.
I think that's true. Joseki are a dry hole until you are at least 15k. Then, learn two or three thoroughly through their variations and then forget about them and play a few thousand more games. Then study joseki in earnest.
Its not a cop-out, its my point. There is no professional market for poetry. There is a market for poetry instruction and that is where the preponderance of working poets earn their keep. A few are scattered in other professions. Wallace Stevens was an insurance executive, as is the current Poet Laureate.
The best periodical venues for published poetry pay a nominal fee per line, enough to cover postage and a celebratory pizza and pitcher. The top-tier of poets (fewer than ten) can move from 3-5 thousand copies of a book. Billy Collins is in a class by himself, moves 10,000 units and makes a living teaching. Any publishing executive will tell you that 10,000 is a minimal break-even point; that is, the best-selling author of literary poetry in America is just able to cover cost. There is no market for bound, trade books of poetry. Houses do it for the odor of literary quality it gives their other lines, or they are university presses operating at a loss.
The best selling volume of lyric verse in history (by an order of magnitude) is by Jewel, a collection of adolescent, navel-picking pseudo-verse. She made money on the book, but it is my understanding that she has another career.
Slashdot Mirror
this symbol must be scalar.
Unless the moon is gibbous.
As a flat-footed, American alcoholic I would have some difficulty holding up my end of that colloquy.
I didn't say it was good satire, I merely pointed out that it doesn't particularly require a label and that only the hyper-literalist slashdotterei, or certain religious coteries, could confuse this with *news*.
I poke at Maxine Hong Kingston's running-boy and his sententious whinge.
Cultures not dominated by humorless prigs and literalists don't require flags to signal humor.
This particular form is called satire and is widely used to call attention to self-importance or arrogance.
Thanks, but even your decrepit source acknowledges:
.which has been discredited in its absolute form, although recognised as being partly accurate.
. .
The part recognized as accurate being the part I referred to: that phylogenetic patterns are identifiable within ontogenetic patterns; this is a forceful and immediate representation of the interpretive value of the theory of evolution. For an ID adherent, these extensive coincidences are prefectly fortuitous.
Thank you, and good night.
Then answer this, smart guy.
Sure, #######.
Show me a single-celled organism evolve into a multi-celled organism.
zygote ==> blastocyte.
It is exactly parallel to some essential evolutionary steps, and it happens to everyone!
There are these leaps in evolution that requires some magical altering of how life works at all that evolution just can't explain.
This claim is completely baseless. The leaps of evolution are exactly what does explain how life works. It is, so far, the only theory that adequately explains empirical data on speciation and the differentiation of lifeforms. Just the patterns that ID loves to refer to as *designed*, just the challenges that ID refers to as *irreducible* are the strongest corroboration of the theory of evolution.
You can't expect anyone to believe that you have flowers that rely on bees to fertilize them and bees that rely on flowers to feed on that have managed to "evolve" from some roots.
There are several problems here, beginning with the expectation of belief. No one expects you to *believe* anything. You believe in a God, you accept a theory. An essential insight that you miss is the fact that evolution is opportunistic, not deterministic. Bees eat flower sap because it is there and few other organisms compete for it. Thousands of species of flowers have nothing to do with bees, relying on beetles, ants or birds.
How droll that we are still having this pseudo-debate. I thought this subject tired and thoroughly vanquished thirty years ago in high-school. Now we are further behind than ever. America has been ever superstitious and resistant to authority (scientific or political, even religious). It is the infantile wing of American anti-authoritarianism, and the charlatans that do not scruple to pander to it, which feeds this disease of faith-based doubting.
Lawyers have no monopoly on precision in language, despite their claims to the contrary. In fact, a fair amount of legal effort is expended in cleaning up imprecision because Law continues to rely on natural language. That is as it should be, as Law is a humane discipline.
The difficulty of legal jargon stems not from some greater degree of specificity, but rather from too great a reliance upon conventional (legal, precedential) usage. A good 85% of legal usage persists for its hoary connotative value (pointing to roots in Common or Roman law) and its ability to deter the uninitiated.
You need to move beyond your reality-based thinking.
My statement was vis the adverts, not the game; I had already pointed out they are not allowed games. The gist of my post is that it is impossible to insulate kids from this shit and there is nothing Congress, ratings boards or concerned parents can do about it. As long as the casuistry of the marketplace condones taking advantage of the base instincts of children and young adults, this is the culture we get.
Making the hookers Arabs will appease a certain wing of the KulturKampfer's but it makes no difference.
I am a parent and a gamer. Even I can't keep up with the blizzard of titles and venues and I am not without clue. I can't keep tabs on every entertainment industry outlet, vet their rating boards, watch their films, read their books and play their games and decide what's appropriate and what's not. I am working for a living as well as raising a family.
I don't have time to vet the standards of the standards boards and I don't trust them; I disagree with them most of the time. For these reasons, the default answer in my family is *no*. No TV, no computer, no games. That only works because the children are not yet school age.
I must emphasize that the majority of marketing is directed at kids and the young adults kids envy because they are the ones simple enough to imagine that you can buy a lifestyle, sex-appeal, entertainment, et. al. Until the entertainment and marketing industries stop targeting my kids they will not be above legislative oversight. I don't trust Congress or the FCC to raise my kids any more than I trust Madison Av or Hollywood.
And no, Slashdot Kids, you can't turn off the feed. Its incessant and ubiquitous. Billboards, newspapers, magazines, kiosks: every available surface spattered with promos for generalized and depersonalized SEX and VIOLENCE. I wouldn't let my kids watch the ads for GTA, let alone play the game.
From the meat of the application:
In order to provide the functionality described herein, the word processing application program 10 may operate in conjunction with a numeric search plug-in dynamically linked library ("DLL"). As will be described in greater detail below, the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 integrates with the word processing application program 10 and provides functionality for emphasizing all of the numerical data within an electronic document 28. The numeric search plug-in DLL 26 also provides functionality for de-emphasizing all of the numerical data within an electronic document 28. To provide these functions, the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 utilizes a program code for breaking sentences into words. Once the sentences have been broken into words, the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 compares the words to the contents of the numeric search table 28 to determine if numerical data is contained in the document. The numeric search table 28 identifies to the numeric search plug-in DLL 26 all of the numerical data that should be located in each of the supported languages. Additional details regarding the structure and operation of the numeric search plug-in DLL 26, including the structure of the numeric search table 28 are provided below.
The highlighting is incidental; the essential innovation they are attempting to patent is the programmatic identification of numeric data in tokenized strings of non-numeric characters. A multi-lingual lookup table of numeric representations.
Eureka!
FScott was thinking of the aplomb with which the preps he schooled with, and was so jealous of, pulled off the contradiction between their upbringing and their *progressive* values and their slumming tastes; that they weren't flustered by the illogic, mischronic or myopic.
I believe I smell sarcasm.
Derrida, who contradicts himself constantly, shares that ". . . coherence within contradicion always indicates the force of desire."
that the distinction you draw is a matter of opinion. Have a glance at Alain Badiou's work and get back to me. Opinion is a much more general notion that you credit. Anything that is not a raw tautology enters into the realm of opinion and differential evaluation; becomes more or less subject to the vagaries of intersubjective judgement.
I am a politics nerd; I am not a bickering-over-semantics nerd.
The POTUS endorses a lot of things, it is his job. He is not uncomfortable looking foolish or inconsistent. Most of my fallow Merkins have no illusions as to his powers of reasoning.
The point is that it's not news for nerds and neither is the inevitable *informed debate* that our slashdotterei will conduct about this insipid semantic question.
Actually, all *opinions* are of equal interpretive value, it is facts which are of differential significance. Opinions are distinguished only by their political or social value.
ZB -- this thread.
Ya, the oppressive regime imagined here is the oppression of the established order, *global capitalism*, mass marketing, et. al.
This regime is not exclusive to the West and, ironically, within the purview of the Party in China. But let's be honest, it is only a matter of time before a scalable darknet becomes essential for any honest, upright antizen, whatever their nationality.
An Undernet is inevitable.
That is the real threat to the potential everyone here can plainly see. Watch out when the Republicans propose to mandate broadband service, generously intending to *bridge the digital divide* and *enfranchise the less fortunate*. When your feed becomes a utility delivered by protected monopolies as electric service is now, you are fscked royally.
The most tangible threat at the moment is the mentality of the FCC, which leads directly to Orwell's squawk-box, but with a sweet HDTV screen.
I'm not saying the threats aren't real. But the potential is just as real. The parent poster is afraid of their massing power, but the wiglomerates are just as vulnerable to fragmenting markets as they ever have been. The railroad lobby hasn't been keeping anyone awake at night lately, has it?
You mean to say you need to be a deranged psychopath to not want to eat what they're putting on your plate? There is nothing to satisfy your entertainment needs than shrink-wrapped, genre head-cheese from M. P. Ass. A. member wiglomerates?
The reality is that Hollywood, Madison Av., and their ilk are focus-grouping themselves into oblivion. Mass-market values are a symptom of industrial production. There is no more mass. There is no more market, at least as understood by the behemoths.
Its a generational shift and its taking place now, before your eyes.
Why not consider raising the bar. Rather than firewall Chinese IP blocks, make it a boycott. Block all traffic originating in China. Publicize it and while you're at it, boycott Cisco, Oracle, Bill Clinton and all the freedom loving US corporations and politicians that enabled the Great Firewall of China. Put those bastards behind a global TCP/IP boycott and we can move them off their totalitarian ways right quick.
Should take about a week or two, by my reckoning.
When the rest of the untied states of a merka put the retard back in the White House.
And we took Isle Royale with us, sorry Michigan.
I think that's true. Joseki are a dry hole until you are at least 15k. Then, learn two or three thoroughly through their variations and then forget about them and play a few thousand more games. Then study joseki in earnest.
The one Go book that has stayed by me from rank beginner to 5k IGS has been Lessons in the Fundamentals of Go.
Its not a cop-out, its my point. There is no professional market for poetry. There is a market for poetry instruction and that is where the preponderance of working poets earn their keep. A few are scattered in other professions. Wallace Stevens was an insurance executive, as is the current Poet Laureate.
The best periodical venues for published poetry pay a nominal fee per line, enough to cover postage and a celebratory pizza and pitcher. The top-tier of poets (fewer than ten) can move from 3-5 thousand copies of a book. Billy Collins is in a class by himself, moves 10,000 units and makes a living teaching. Any publishing executive will tell you that 10,000 is a minimal break-even point; that is, the best-selling author of literary poetry in America is just able to cover cost. There is no market for bound, trade books of poetry. Houses do it for the odor of literary quality it gives their other lines, or they are university presses operating at a loss.
The best selling volume of lyric verse in history (by an order of magnitude) is by Jewel, a collection of adolescent, navel-picking pseudo-verse. She made money on the book, but it is my understanding that she has another career.
Teaching.
. . . is currently a Chancellor of The Academy of American Poets. He lives in California and teaches at the University of California, Berkeley.
You're simply an amateur with hubris.
And I'm not the first amateur to have written a respected book in her chosen field.
There is not one individual in America making a living writing poetry, not one.