That's kind of my progression. I'm just so tired of Firefox, now. I've got Chrome loaded on one machine, Opera on another, and I'm kind of seeing which to switch to. I'm leaning Opera.
If the explanation is a correct application of gravity to galactic structure, then it's right. It doesn't need to explain away all unexplained large-scale structure and motion. It just needs to adequately and convincingly explain one part. That shrinks the unexplained domain that justifies dark matter.
It is entirely possible that there are more than one mechanism at work here. Even if dark matter exists, it may not be the answer to all unexplained phenomena here. It almost surely isn't. It doesn't need to be replaced by a comprehensive theory that explains everything; it can be refined over and over by new theories that each explain just one thing.
I think that in general, a warmer climate will be a good thing, both for humanity and for the global ecosystem. However, a rapid warming may lead to some turbulent social-economic periods as humanity readjusts to a new equilibrium. In other words, there's going to be some southern nations eying that bountiful breadbasket, Siberia, and so on.
How long did it take in this case? A few decades? Evolution can occur pretty quickly. How long did Darwin's finches take? Not hundreds of thousands of years
I can never tell if these posts are intended to be funny or not. Ten years ago, I would have assumed this was satire. Now, I think more people actually think this way.
You're modded down because you consistently sound insane and obsessive. Trying to win a one-man crusade on a website where people disagree with you at a rate of probably 100,000::1 is tough; made tougher by your inability to articulate any sort of decent argument.
It was certainly a good idea on your part to always post as anonymous coward. Everybody still knows it's you, but at least you don't have karma loss to deal with. If you stay away from your obsession with your real account, that might not get modded to oblivion.
It could just be confirmation bias, but I tend to see *far* more name calling directed against the "left" than I do against the "right."
It's almost certainly confirmation bias. I feel like I see much more obnoxious and rude behavior from the left. Compare the behavior of those at a tea party to those at an occupy rally, for instance. However, I have to remember that I'm probably reacting more strongly to those whose opinions seem silly to me.
The other possibility is that liberals tend to be young, and tend to be urban... both segments of the population that are [generally] more obnoxious. So maybe I'm picking up on a simple demographic issue...
Except that's not true. I've never heard a tea party activist refer to themselves using the term teabagger. I've only heard it from people like you, who wish to use a term with sexual connotations to insult the group. There are other ways to refer to tea partiers without using a term that's nearly a slur... but the people that use 'tea baggers' are obviously trying to avoid any non-derogatory term.
It's kind of self-defeating, though. It makes the critics, those using the term, seem ignorant; as if they don't understand the history of the united states, and only know current slang. It reminds me of the people who think 'Nimrod' is an insulting name, or who think 'republitard' or 'dumbocrat' are funny.
You can analyze the fractal dimension of any image or sub-image, and I've been meaning to try applying that technique to shoops to see if the manipulated areas tend to have a different dimension than the raw areas.
I think recycling is a decent idea, but it will not make substantial inroads until it is cheap and completely automated. Some people will do the extra work to save somebody else some money, but you can't count on that being universal behavior. No amount of guilt-tripping will overcome the economics of the situation.
Besides, garbage is about the most concentrated form of raw materials you'll find. The future will mine our garbage dumps for cheap resources, once we develop the techniques to separate all these materials. This problem will fix itself as technology advances.
His deep insight that true chaos devolves from ordered deterministic processes (e.g. cellular automatia) across all of nature is nothing short of astounding
This is pretty much what everybody already knew since the 80's, and the investigation of chaos theory and iterative algorithms. It's important to know, but by now I'd look askance at any scientist who didn't accept this decades ago.
Much of the reason the pay is so low, and demands so high, is because the illegal immigrant population exists. Of course, if the agricultural industry tries to high legal citizens with no change in conditions and pay, they'll fall short. They have no reason to improve compensation when they have a cheap, under-the-table workforce... or when their competitors in other states have that access. If illegal immigrants were eliminated, conditions would improve to the point that they would attract enough legal employees (or they would go out of business, due to competition from outside the country).
This isn't a panacea... it would cause food prices to rise. Whether that would be worth the increased employment is up for debate.
Absolutely. Runequest may be the most elegant RPG system ever made (I prefer the 3rd edition). It is both simpler and more realistic than any of the editions of D&D. You can download the core rules free from a number of sites... take a look, everybody, if you're interested in RPGs.
A lot of people might be familiar with the system without realizing it, because Chaosium uses a simplified version of it for many of their games, including Call of Cthulhu.
Efficiency always destroys jobs, that's the whole point of it, replacing one process with another one that needs less resources.
The increased efficiency reduces the amount of labor to create a certain product. That increases supply and reduces the cost of the product (giving people more money to spend on other things), along with freeing up people to create new things. More demand + more cash + more labor is what breeds new jobs.
There has never been, and probably never will be, a shortage of 'stuff to do'. The only shortage is in 'stuff to do that people are willing to do for what people are willing to pay for'. As efficiency increases, so does the crazy or obscure stuff that people get paid to do. Hence, 'organic farms', 'cupcake boutiques', and 'wedding planners'.
That's not how it works. If we increase productivity 100%, that doesn't mean one person gets to freeload off another's work. Instead, it gives those who work a far better lifestyle to purchase with their labor. No matter how much productivity increases, you aren't entitled to another's property if aren't willing to trade effort for payment.
Picture a desert island with two people. At first they both work all day long to survive. Later, they improve their lot, to where they each only have to work half the time to survive. The other half can be spent loafing, or working to get more comfortable. Is one of them entitled to relax and do nothing while the other needs to work all day long to support them? Of course not. Each person has the option of working full time to improve their position, part time to simply survive, or they may die. They aren't owed anything.
Some do, some don't. Many great games have less plot then most Zynga games. What's the plot of QIX?
I don't think Zynga makes very good games, but the elitist snobbery of gamers against them is irritating. It's like more 'hardcore' videogamers are trying to redefine the definition of the entire media so as to exlude Zynga just because they don't like them.
The percentage of Americans actively working on growing food has shrunk from approximately 90% to around 5%, and that 5% is producing far more food. That's an increase of efficiency of at least 18 times, probably more like 30 or 40 times.
And yet, we don't have an 85% unemployment rate. The efficiency didn't reduce jobs, it created jobs. It freed people up to work on other things. Better software tech will do the same thing. The worst effect is a temporary period of unrest while employees adapt to new circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
That's kind of my progression. I'm just so tired of Firefox, now. I've got Chrome loaded on one machine, Opera on another, and I'm kind of seeing which to switch to. I'm leaning Opera.
If the explanation is a correct application of gravity to galactic structure, then it's right. It doesn't need to explain away all unexplained large-scale structure and motion. It just needs to adequately and convincingly explain one part. That shrinks the unexplained domain that justifies dark matter.
It is entirely possible that there are more than one mechanism at work here. Even if dark matter exists, it may not be the answer to all unexplained phenomena here. It almost surely isn't. It doesn't need to be replaced by a comprehensive theory that explains everything; it can be refined over and over by new theories that each explain just one thing.
You just don't care that everybody's correcting you, do you?
I think that in general, a warmer climate will be a good thing, both for humanity and for the global ecosystem. However, a rapid warming may lead to some turbulent social-economic periods as humanity readjusts to a new equilibrium. In other words, there's going to be some southern nations eying that bountiful breadbasket, Siberia, and so on.
How long did it take in this case? A few decades? Evolution can occur pretty quickly. How long did Darwin's finches take? Not hundreds of thousands of years
You can't give up on the crusade, can you? Even on a story that has nothing to do with space travel...
I fear your obsession is turning malignant.
I can never tell if these posts are intended to be funny or not. Ten years ago, I would have assumed this was satire. Now, I think more people actually think this way.
You're modded down because you consistently sound insane and obsessive. Trying to win a one-man crusade on a website where people disagree with you at a rate of probably 100,000::1 is tough; made tougher by your inability to articulate any sort of decent argument.
It was certainly a good idea on your part to always post as anonymous coward. Everybody still knows it's you, but at least you don't have karma loss to deal with. If you stay away from your obsession with your real account, that might not get modded to oblivion.
It could just be confirmation bias, but I tend to see *far* more name calling directed against the "left" than I do against the "right."
It's almost certainly confirmation bias. I feel like I see much more obnoxious and rude behavior from the left. Compare the behavior of those at a tea party to those at an occupy rally, for instance. However, I have to remember that I'm probably reacting more strongly to those whose opinions seem silly to me.
The other possibility is that liberals tend to be young, and tend to be urban... both segments of the population that are [generally] more obnoxious. So maybe I'm picking up on a simple demographic issue...
Except that's not true. I've never heard a tea party activist refer to themselves using the term teabagger. I've only heard it from people like you, who wish to use a term with sexual connotations to insult the group. There are other ways to refer to tea partiers without using a term that's nearly a slur... but the people that use 'tea baggers' are obviously trying to avoid any non-derogatory term.
It's kind of self-defeating, though. It makes the critics, those using the term, seem ignorant; as if they don't understand the history of the united states, and only know current slang. It reminds me of the people who think 'Nimrod' is an insulting name, or who think 'republitard' or 'dumbocrat' are funny.
Jackson was murdered by his doctor. It's in bad taste to keep bashing him. Leave him alone.
Nah, he self-destructed, with a little bit of assistance from his doctor (among many others).
You can analyze the fractal dimension of any image or sub-image, and I've been meaning to try applying that technique to shoops to see if the manipulated areas tend to have a different dimension than the raw areas.
If it works, patent office, here I come!!!
I think recycling is a decent idea, but it will not make substantial inroads until it is cheap and completely automated. Some people will do the extra work to save somebody else some money, but you can't count on that being universal behavior. No amount of guilt-tripping will overcome the economics of the situation.
Besides, garbage is about the most concentrated form of raw materials you'll find. The future will mine our garbage dumps for cheap resources, once we develop the techniques to separate all these materials. This problem will fix itself as technology advances.
The 3-body problem is easy to solve computationally. It just has no closed-form solution.
Approximated, not solved. I don't believe you can ever get an exact solution, regardless of how much computational power you throw at it.
His deep insight that true chaos devolves from ordered deterministic processes (e.g. cellular automatia) across all of nature is nothing short of astounding
This is pretty much what everybody already knew since the 80's, and the investigation of chaos theory and iterative algorithms. It's important to know, but by now I'd look askance at any scientist who didn't accept this decades ago.
Much of the reason the pay is so low, and demands so high, is because the illegal immigrant population exists. Of course, if the agricultural industry tries to high legal citizens with no change in conditions and pay, they'll fall short. They have no reason to improve compensation when they have a cheap, under-the-table workforce... or when their competitors in other states have that access. If illegal immigrants were eliminated, conditions would improve to the point that they would attract enough legal employees (or they would go out of business, due to competition from outside the country).
This isn't a panacea... it would cause food prices to rise. Whether that would be worth the increased employment is up for debate.
No, because it's obvious that being deliberately inefficient is a net loss.
Absolutely. Runequest may be the most elegant RPG system ever made (I prefer the 3rd edition). It is both simpler and more realistic than any of the editions of D&D. You can download the core rules free from a number of sites... take a look, everybody, if you're interested in RPGs.
A lot of people might be familiar with the system without realizing it, because Chaosium uses a simplified version of it for many of their games, including Call of Cthulhu.
Nukes which saved us from destruction. You think getting rid of them would have been a good idea?
Efficiency always destroys jobs, that's the whole point of it, replacing one process with another one that needs less resources.
The increased efficiency reduces the amount of labor to create a certain product. That increases supply and reduces the cost of the product (giving people more money to spend on other things), along with freeing up people to create new things. More demand + more cash + more labor is what breeds new jobs.
There has never been, and probably never will be, a shortage of 'stuff to do'. The only shortage is in 'stuff to do that people are willing to do for what people are willing to pay for'. As efficiency increases, so does the crazy or obscure stuff that people get paid to do. Hence, 'organic farms', 'cupcake boutiques', and 'wedding planners'.
That's not how it works. If we increase productivity 100%, that doesn't mean one person gets to freeload off another's work. Instead, it gives those who work a far better lifestyle to purchase with their labor. No matter how much productivity increases, you aren't entitled to another's property if aren't willing to trade effort for payment.
Picture a desert island with two people. At first they both work all day long to survive. Later, they improve their lot, to where they each only have to work half the time to survive. The other half can be spent loafing, or working to get more comfortable. Is one of them entitled to relax and do nothing while the other needs to work all day long to support them? Of course not. Each person has the option of working full time to improve their position, part time to simply survive, or they may die. They aren't owed anything.
If the richest 1% of Americans paid the same tax rates as the middle class, there would be no government budget deficit.
Do the math. That's wrong by a tremendous degree. You can download the data directly from the IRS. Go ahead.
Do you realize that you're more racist than the people you are trying to smear?
Some do, some don't. Many great games have less plot then most Zynga games. What's the plot of QIX?
I don't think Zynga makes very good games, but the elitist snobbery of gamers against them is irritating. It's like more 'hardcore' videogamers are trying to redefine the definition of the entire media so as to exlude Zynga just because they don't like them.
The percentage of Americans actively working on growing food has shrunk from approximately 90% to around 5%, and that 5% is producing far more food. That's an increase of efficiency of at least 18 times, probably more like 30 or 40 times.
And yet, we don't have an 85% unemployment rate. The efficiency didn't reduce jobs, it created jobs. It freed people up to work on other things. Better software tech will do the same thing. The worst effect is a temporary period of unrest while employees adapt to new circumstances.