So in your opinion, if a chimpanzee has nice tits, wears makeup, can talk, and tells you it likes all the same bands you do, you don't have any problem with fucking it? IT'S STILL A FUCKING MONKEY!
Hey, it's an APE! Show some fucking respect!
If Kirk wanted to bang a talking, sentient chimp, I wouldn't find a moral obligation to that. It doesn't mean I'd enjoy seeing this chimp featured on Star Trek, though. Again, you have to apply the Theiss test. In the context of the show, if the alien woman looks hot, this is quite enough.
If this is about me personally (and how did it suddenly become about me, anyway?) - that's not an appealing idea, no. Mainly because I can't picture an anthropomorphic Chimpanzee looking hot. (Maybe because, from a human perspective, a chimp is similar enough to human that its look is defined by the extent to which it's not human...) But in general? The question and only be expressed as a tautology. Will I think X is hot? If I think X is hot, the answer is yes. And there'd be a huge difference between the fantasy and reality, so it's always possible the idea would be appealing only outside of reality.
Nice, you've just contradicted every security researcher over the last however many years. Congratulations on coming across as a fool.
Dude, we disagree. It happens. You don't need to be a douche about it.
Software Engineering is an engineering discipline. That means the principles according to which the product should work are always tempered by the reality of how the work must be conducted. What good is it, for instance, if you have the most secure browser of them all, if nobody uses it? That's an extreme case, of course, in which security concerns are so heavily emphasized that they would compromise some other essential concern (for instance, it could fuck up the release schedule, interfere with work being done to make the software run quickly, or take development resources away from the challenge of trying to make the browser more appealing to its audience...) Obviously there are other intermediate outcomes possible. But generally speaking one can't aim for perfection. If you set out to make something perfect, it never gets done, because it's never perfect. Obviously the bugs should be fixed... But finding and fixing a security flaw before an exploit has made its way into the wild is not necessarily the best use of development resources. It depends on the situation, really.
As Howard the Duck said, "Sorry kid, but I don't date outside my species!"
I'll have to take your word for it... I started up that film but after about three minutes I felt compelled to turn it off.:)
In what way is it not a question of sentience? If we're talking about morality, I think the real question is whether the subject of those sexual advances is capable of making a good decision on their own behalf, and given liberty to refuse the advances. If we're just talking about some generic "ick" factor (i.e. feeling compelled to assert one's normality by rallying against anything "weird") then good god I don't care. All that really matters is, will this alien look hot in a William Ware Theiss costume?
The green chick passes this test. So did Marta from Star Trek VI (in her humanoid form). Really, all of Kirk's women did... Yeah, realistically it seems likely there could be an abundance of reasons why sex with an alien woman would be unappealing - different proportions, odors, differences in physical anatomy - whatever... And I think you have a point that even taking "Protoculture" into account, it doesn't necessarily make sense that cross-breeding could work (especially given the bizarre differences in body chemistry established in the various series). But it is just a TV show after all... All these characters are human actors in silly costumes. Don't worry too much about it.
the very fact that these people know what to do beforehand is proof that app security is generally terrible.
Well, I think you have a very good point there - but on the other hand, the developers do have to prioritize the work they do. Finding and fixing a serious, but hard-to-discover security flaw before this flaw has become widely disseminated may not be worth the effort. In principle "security through obscurity" isn't a good policy but in practice it's often good enough. If the software has a serious flaw but nobody knows about it, that's good enough, at least temporarily.
She's a dirty whore who fucks everyone while you're at work... No really... EVERYONE... check her facebook friends list, you don't get over 9000 friends
Isn't James T. Kirk's habit of dating outside his own species more commonly referred to as "beastiality"???
Actually, this is one of the facets of Star Trek's backstory that isn't frequently spoken about.
Star Trek takes place in the 23rd century, by which time humankind has colonized other worlds, met all kinds of alien life, etc. But in fact all the "alien life" they meet are actually just people in silly costumes and possibly with some makeup on. What happened is that the 22nd century was an era of peaceful exploration. Humankind set out to meet alien life, and they failed. So it became fashionable for individual colonies to adopt their own "alien" customs and styles of dress. In the mid-23rd century this rarely extended beyond some distinctive clothing or some body paint. It was only later in the 23rd century that these rogue colonies really got their act together.
I've been playing Pokemon lately so I immediately pictured this as a Pokemon attack. "Enemy's SHINX used QUEUE! Enemy's SHINX could be lining up a series of responses!"
What's SHINX? I haven't played Pokemon since around 2000 and back in my day we had 150 Pokemon and we liked it.
Yeah, I too started out playing Red/Blue in the late 1990s, and haven't played it too much since then. (I got Leaf Green on GBA - I skipped most of the other games in the interim because I wanted to be able to collect all my old favorites. The down side is that, even though it's an enhanced version of the old game with some rule changes, etc. it's still basically the same game as it was... So there's no surprises to be had from it, as far as I know.)
I just recently got a DS version of Pokemon... I considered getting the SoulSilver/HeartGold version but I felt like I didn't want to be playing a remake again (even a remake of an old game I didn't play back in the day) - I wanted to play a "new" version. This has been a drag in some ways as there's lots of old favorites I simply can't access until I complete my Pokedex - but on the other hand, it means the game is really fresh from my perspective. When I encounter a Pokemon that I haven't seen in the game before, I really have no idea what it is, so I get the chance to be surprised at some of the things I see. This really wasn't the case when I was originally playing the first game in 1998-1999, because I was watching the TV show and stuff, too, so I was exposed to the entire set of monsters all at once (via the pokemon rap, etc.) as well as a lot of the situations in the game...
Anyway, back to the original question... Shinx is like a blue electric cat thing. It's one of my favorites of what I've collected so far.:)
Something similar happens with FTL communication. An ansible operator tells someone to launch the ship, but in a sufficiently fast frame, the ship launches before the order is given.
I'm afraid I don't get it... I feel like I generally have a pretty good understanding of relativity but I'm obviously missing a piece of it here.
The bridge example - isn't this example of "reversed causality" just a matter of observations made by the FTL traveler appearing to occur in reverse because of the normal lightspeed limit on how fast the information can reach them?
I don't understand the FTL communication example at all... How is causality reversed in that case?
And if the ship did launch before receiving the message to launch, then wouldn't they just be like "Oh, well it's a good thing we launched, then!":)
Autonomous Exploration for Gathering Increased Science
Clearly from the lameness of the title they chose the acronym first and then found a title to fit it. Why anyone would think its appropriate to use the acronym AEGIS for something that doesn't involve defense or a shield I don't know.
Look, Mr. Know-it-all, I know you think it's a lame acronym, but if you've got a rover on Mars, and you want it to gather increased science while it's there, and you've worked out some system that lets it do this autonomously for better efficiency, how else are you gonna acronym that? "Increased Science Gathering Autonomous Exploration System" might sound better, but ISGAES isn't a word at all, is it?
Playmate of the month standing in Iowa cornfield in cutoffs and a red-checked shirt tied around her breasts. She looks into the camera, smiles and says "There's nothing sweeter..."
If they want to slather her naked body with HFCS and offer me the chance to lick it off, then we can talk. Until then...:)
I've been playing Pokemon lately so I immediately pictured this as a Pokemon attack. "Enemy's SHINX used QUEUE! Enemy's SHINX could be lining up a series of responses!"
I'm kind of curious about how much you actually used C64s in school, and if you learned to program on them at school or by yourself at home?
Looking back I think the situation at my school was kind of odd... We primarily had Apple II series computers (middle school in late 80s/early 90s had a lab full of Apple IIe's - and individual classrooms might have an Apple IIc or the occasional IIgs) but there were Commodores around, too... There was one in my homeroom (I don't know what it was ever used for, apart from kids just goofing around with it in free time) and one in the art room (which had a Koalapad)... In high school a lot of the classrooms had a IIgs (for the teachers' use, I guess?) and there was a lab of old TRS-80's used to teach Basic, and some Macs, and their first handful of PCs...
Home computers were very eclectic in the 1980s. I guess the schools just sort of reflected that. Still, I'm not quite clear about when, why, and how they got themselves some C64s. Apple had some kind of established deal to get their computers into the classroom, I believe... So how did they make the decision to acquire some C64s? It's a bit of a mystery from my perspective.
("Censorship is BS and should never be tolerated.")
you say, both anonymously and with delicious irony, on a heavily moderated forum. el oh el.
So... what's your point, again?
Being anonymous isn't censorship. Being moderated down isn't censorship, particularly on a site where one can still read anything that's been moderated down. And, in fact, he hasn't been modded down. So it seems like he's neither in a situation where he'd likely be subject to censorship, nor is he, in fact, being censored. So where's the irony?
If that's the case, why have a Constitution at all? Why enumerate powers? If they can do anything they, not we, deem 'necessary' then they can set the tax rate at 110%, annex all of our homes, and grind up our children for fertilizer.
Those are fairly ridiculous examples. Any of the above would seriously weaken or destroy the country as it currently exists. Individual politicians are motivated to stay in power. Political groups are motivated to maintain and strengthen their influence... And "patriots" in general want the country to be strong and healthy. A move that would kill the country, whether now or in 50 years, isn't something the government would want, because they'd lose their power in the process.
I can see your point about enumerating powers and setting limits - but I think that those powers and limits have to be subject to change as needs change. The limits are constantly being pushed... Anything written in the constitution is basically useless in terms of preventing those limits from being violated. What stops those limits from being violated is when other people (in the government or not) push back.
The basic problem with any government, I think, is that the ones in a position to exert that kind of influence may not necessarily be the ones who really know the best course of action. (I don't think anyone really knows the best course of action - and I don't have much faith in the "wisdom of crowds" to decide how the country should be run)
Slashdot Mirror
(Firewall is subverted...)
Damn you cyber-Mongorians!
So in your opinion, if a chimpanzee has nice tits, wears makeup, can talk, and tells you it likes all the same bands you do, you don't have any problem with fucking it? IT'S STILL A FUCKING MONKEY!
Hey, it's an APE! Show some fucking respect!
If Kirk wanted to bang a talking, sentient chimp, I wouldn't find a moral obligation to that. It doesn't mean I'd enjoy seeing this chimp featured on Star Trek, though. Again, you have to apply the Theiss test. In the context of the show, if the alien woman looks hot, this is quite enough.
If this is about me personally (and how did it suddenly become about me, anyway?) - that's not an appealing idea, no. Mainly because I can't picture an anthropomorphic Chimpanzee looking hot. (Maybe because, from a human perspective, a chimp is similar enough to human that its look is defined by the extent to which it's not human...) But in general? The question and only be expressed as a tautology. Will I think X is hot? If I think X is hot, the answer is yes. And there'd be a huge difference between the fantasy and reality, so it's always possible the idea would be appealing only outside of reality.
Nice, you've just contradicted every security researcher over the last however many years. Congratulations on coming across as a fool.
Dude, we disagree. It happens. You don't need to be a douche about it.
Software Engineering is an engineering discipline. That means the principles according to which the product should work are always tempered by the reality of how the work must be conducted. What good is it, for instance, if you have the most secure browser of them all, if nobody uses it? That's an extreme case, of course, in which security concerns are so heavily emphasized that they would compromise some other essential concern (for instance, it could fuck up the release schedule, interfere with work being done to make the software run quickly, or take development resources away from the challenge of trying to make the browser more appealing to its audience...) Obviously there are other intermediate outcomes possible. But generally speaking one can't aim for perfection. If you set out to make something perfect, it never gets done, because it's never perfect. Obviously the bugs should be fixed... But finding and fixing a security flaw before an exploit has made its way into the wild is not necessarily the best use of development resources. It depends on the situation, really.
As Howard the Duck said, "Sorry kid, but I don't date outside my species!"
I'll have to take your word for it... I started up that film but after about three minutes I felt compelled to turn it off. :)
In what way is it not a question of sentience? If we're talking about morality, I think the real question is whether the subject of those sexual advances is capable of making a good decision on their own behalf, and given liberty to refuse the advances. If we're just talking about some generic "ick" factor (i.e. feeling compelled to assert one's normality by rallying against anything "weird") then good god I don't care. All that really matters is, will this alien look hot in a William Ware Theiss costume?
The green chick passes this test. So did Marta from Star Trek VI (in her humanoid form). Really, all of Kirk's women did... Yeah, realistically it seems likely there could be an abundance of reasons why sex with an alien woman would be unappealing - different proportions, odors, differences in physical anatomy - whatever... And I think you have a point that even taking "Protoculture" into account, it doesn't necessarily make sense that cross-breeding could work (especially given the bizarre differences in body chemistry established in the various series). But it is just a TV show after all... All these characters are human actors in silly costumes. Don't worry too much about it.
the very fact that these people know what to do beforehand is proof that app security is generally terrible.
Well, I think you have a very good point there - but on the other hand, the developers do have to prioritize the work they do. Finding and fixing a serious, but hard-to-discover security flaw before this flaw has become widely disseminated may not be worth the effort. In principle "security through obscurity" isn't a good policy but in practice it's often good enough. If the software has a serious flaw but nobody knows about it, that's good enough, at least temporarily.
People know they're supposed to use a condom, and they know how to get one.
Hey, speak for yourself. I was out fishing all day with my OLD ROD and I didn't catch a single one...
Herpes
120 of your friends are members
Join This Group
That's what you think.
Translation:
She's a dirty whore who fucks everyone while you're at work... No really... EVERYONE... check her facebook friends list, you don't get over 9000 friends
(or 8000 in the original Japanese...)
Isn't James T. Kirk's habit of dating outside his own species more commonly referred to as "beastiality"???
Actually, this is one of the facets of Star Trek's backstory that isn't frequently spoken about.
Star Trek takes place in the 23rd century, by which time humankind has colonized other worlds, met all kinds of alien life, etc. But in fact all the "alien life" they meet are actually just people in silly costumes and possibly with some makeup on. What happened is that the 22nd century was an era of peaceful exploration. Humankind set out to meet alien life, and they failed. So it became fashionable for individual colonies to adopt their own "alien" customs and styles of dress. In the mid-23rd century this rarely extended beyond some distinctive clothing or some body paint. It was only later in the 23rd century that these rogue colonies really got their act together.
He could be lining up a series of responses!
I've been playing Pokemon lately so I immediately pictured this as a Pokemon attack. "Enemy's SHINX used QUEUE! Enemy's SHINX could be lining up a series of responses!"
What's SHINX? I haven't played Pokemon since around 2000 and back in my day we had 150 Pokemon and we liked it.
Yeah, I too started out playing Red/Blue in the late 1990s, and haven't played it too much since then. (I got Leaf Green on GBA - I skipped most of the other games in the interim because I wanted to be able to collect all my old favorites. The down side is that, even though it's an enhanced version of the old game with some rule changes, etc. it's still basically the same game as it was... So there's no surprises to be had from it, as far as I know.)
I just recently got a DS version of Pokemon... I considered getting the SoulSilver/HeartGold version but I felt like I didn't want to be playing a remake again (even a remake of an old game I didn't play back in the day) - I wanted to play a "new" version. This has been a drag in some ways as there's lots of old favorites I simply can't access until I complete my Pokedex - but on the other hand, it means the game is really fresh from my perspective. When I encounter a Pokemon that I haven't seen in the game before, I really have no idea what it is, so I get the chance to be surprised at some of the things I see. This really wasn't the case when I was originally playing the first game in 1998-1999, because I was watching the TV show and stuff, too, so I was exposed to the entire set of monsters all at once (via the pokemon rap, etc.) as well as a lot of the situations in the game...
Anyway, back to the original question... Shinx is like a blue electric cat thing. It's one of my favorites of what I've collected so far. :)
Something similar happens with FTL communication. An ansible operator tells someone to launch the ship, but in a sufficiently fast frame, the ship launches before the order is given.
I'm afraid I don't get it... I feel like I generally have a pretty good understanding of relativity but I'm obviously missing a piece of it here.
The bridge example - isn't this example of "reversed causality" just a matter of observations made by the FTL traveler appearing to occur in reverse because of the normal lightspeed limit on how fast the information can reach them?
I don't understand the FTL communication example at all... How is causality reversed in that case?
And if the ship did launch before receiving the message to launch, then wouldn't they just be like "Oh, well it's a good thing we launched, then!" :)
don't read the subject line.
Autonomous Exploration for Gathering Increased Science
Clearly from the lameness of the title they chose the acronym first and then found a title to fit it. Why anyone would think its appropriate to use the acronym AEGIS for something that doesn't involve defense or a shield I don't know.
Look, Mr. Know-it-all, I know you think it's a lame acronym, but if you've got a rover on Mars, and you want it to gather increased science while it's there, and you've worked out some system that lets it do this autonomously for better efficiency, how else are you gonna acronym that? "Increased Science Gathering Autonomous Exploration System" might sound better, but ISGAES isn't a word at all, is it?
Guys, I have to offer you this piece of advice. As someone who's been down this road before.
At this point, you should smash your scouter. Stop relying on machines to measure these things, the numbers are only going to psyche you out.
Playmate of the month standing in Iowa cornfield in cutoffs and a red-checked shirt tied around her breasts. She looks into the camera, smiles and says "There's nothing sweeter..."
If they want to slather her naked body with HFCS and offer me the chance to lick it off, then we can talk. Until then... :)
He could be lining up a series of responses!
I've been playing Pokemon lately so I immediately pictured this as a Pokemon attack. "Enemy's SHINX used QUEUE! Enemy's SHINX could be lining up a series of responses!"
Color, I mean content-aware fill me impressed.
Wait, where did you go? I see "impressed" but that's it...
I'm kind of curious about how much you actually used C64s in school, and if you learned to program on them at school or by yourself at home?
Looking back I think the situation at my school was kind of odd... We primarily had Apple II series computers (middle school in late 80s/early 90s had a lab full of Apple IIe's - and individual classrooms might have an Apple IIc or the occasional IIgs) but there were Commodores around, too... There was one in my homeroom (I don't know what it was ever used for, apart from kids just goofing around with it in free time) and one in the art room (which had a Koalapad)... In high school a lot of the classrooms had a IIgs (for the teachers' use, I guess?) and there was a lab of old TRS-80's used to teach Basic, and some Macs, and their first handful of PCs...
Home computers were very eclectic in the 1980s. I guess the schools just sort of reflected that. Still, I'm not quite clear about when, why, and how they got themselves some C64s. Apple had some kind of established deal to get their computers into the classroom, I believe... So how did they make the decision to acquire some C64s? It's a bit of a mystery from my perspective.
They (Viacom) look like a bunch of hypocrites, they want their cake and eat it as well.
Well I know if I had a cake I'd certainly want to eat it...
King Juan Carlos wears "the king of Spain's hat".
Dang! Does the King of Spain know about this?
("Censorship is BS and should never be tolerated.")
you say, both anonymously and with delicious irony, on a heavily moderated forum. el oh el.
So... what's your point, again?
Being anonymous isn't censorship. Being moderated down isn't censorship, particularly on a site where one can still read anything that's been moderated down. And, in fact, he hasn't been modded down. So it seems like he's neither in a situation where he'd likely be subject to censorship, nor is he, in fact, being censored. So where's the irony?
I, for one, say "neato!".
Do you, really? I remain unconvinced. For all I know you could be one of those people who just says that they say "neato!"
I will suffer no claims to my throne.
Don't worry. Since he's not actually on the Moon, the Larkin decision nullifies his claim...
They'd probably continue to cross over the border anyway.
Yeah, but some of them would be blown up.
If that's the case, why have a Constitution at all? Why enumerate powers? If they can do anything they, not we, deem 'necessary' then they can set the tax rate at 110%, annex all of our homes, and grind up our children for fertilizer.
Those are fairly ridiculous examples. Any of the above would seriously weaken or destroy the country as it currently exists. Individual politicians are motivated to stay in power. Political groups are motivated to maintain and strengthen their influence... And "patriots" in general want the country to be strong and healthy. A move that would kill the country, whether now or in 50 years, isn't something the government would want, because they'd lose their power in the process.
I can see your point about enumerating powers and setting limits - but I think that those powers and limits have to be subject to change as needs change. The limits are constantly being pushed... Anything written in the constitution is basically useless in terms of preventing those limits from being violated. What stops those limits from being violated is when other people (in the government or not) push back.
The basic problem with any government, I think, is that the ones in a position to exert that kind of influence may not necessarily be the ones who really know the best course of action. (I don't think anyone really knows the best course of action - and I don't have much faith in the "wisdom of crowds" to decide how the country should be run)