something the US used to have with its "equal time" rule, but that Clinton cravenly abandoned.
Because the 'equal time' laws were constitutionally unconscionable. Hard to believe that some slashdot poster, who would no doubt claim to be for free speech, would support government control of political discourse.
BBC isn't free. Their charges are simply less direct, and not optional. In fairness, it is hard for private industry to compete with a company who's product is illegal not to purchase.
You're gullible if you don't think FOX lies and decieves. You're PAINFULLY gullible if you think FOX lies and deceives any more than the other news networks.
Oh, I know we are far from having a complete and certain understanding of the mechanisms of the brain. And I certainly don't mean to suggest that quantum mechanics gives some mystic answer to the mind/body problem. Rather, just that quantum mechanics is a physical phenomenon that is exploited by the brain, just as chemistry and electricity is.
It's not arbitrary. Computer memory HAS to be measured in powers of two. You could say 2^10 was arbitrary as opposed to 2^12, for instance; but you could say that about any value selected. What you can't argue is that RAM should be measured in base 10 units.
And since we have an established and unchangeable requirement to measure RAM in base 2, it would make no sense to measure memory of a device used to store the contents of RAM in different units.
Of course, when they have power, they don't need to heat themselves, and when they need to heat themselves, they won't have power.
Melting snow takes a LOT of energy. It would be cheaper, I think, to buy more snowplows. This idea fails a lot of different smell tests. Developing cheap solar-energy roofing materials seems smarter; it covers more area, and roofs don't have MILLIONS OF CARS DRIVING ON THEM.
It's not that free will is a sham. It's that it's so poorly defined that discussion over breaks down into nonsensical pseudo-philosophical mumbo-jumbo.
Personally, I think the problem with self-determination was solved once we discovered chaos theory, and iterative functions. The processes in the brain are either fully or partly deterministic; it doesn't really matter. The important point is that it is a chaotic system that cannot be accurately modeled. The ONLY way to know with certainty what the reaction to a certain stimuli is to present that person with a stimuli and see what they do.
In other words... behavior is probably deterministic, but is unpredictable. The brain, processes all input in a way that is unique to that individual, and responds in a way that is unique to that individual. Since the mind IS the brain, and the person IS the mind, that's equivalent to saying that when John sees things, John will react in the way that is determined by everything that John is. That's free will enough to satisfy me. It doesn't absolve John from responsibility or guilt, because John isn't a different entity than his mind.
That's obviously true. However, I think in the case of the brain, it's even more explicit. There are mechanisms in place that act to massively amplify signals, specifically geared to utilize quantum effects. It's going to be one of the difficulties in building an actual replica of the human brain in software; emulation at the level of the neuron is insufficient. There are quantum effects that need to be simulated within the inner structure of a single neuron.
You want to know how I know you are full of shit? Because I occasionally get my ass out from behind a computer screen and actually meet and talk to people. It's really not that hard - it just takes a personality and a bit of heart - and they will talk to you. Go to any shit ass business, and there are hundreds of them w/i a couple of square miles of where you stand, and ask people about their health insurance. Or lack of it. And realize what a stupid, self-absorbed blow hole you have been.
Do you often deliberately lose arguments by undercutting yourself like this? Your paragraph means NOTHING next to actual statistics.
Yeah, the Wii controllers are far more precise for aiming and shooting than a standard gamepad. Not necessarily better; but they're the closest thing a console has to a mouse. The Wii should be the console of choice for FPS; I think it isn't, mainly because FPS fans tend to be absolute graphic whores.
Umm, FPS games are by definition, not typically "Designed" for consoles.
Obviously not true. There are FPS games, successful ones, that have never been ported to the pc.
Nobody said mice are better, but they are much better at controlling first person shooters for obvious reasons.
I would dispute this, also. Mice are more accurate at controlling first person shooters. Better is something different, entirely.
For a racing game when you don't have a joystick/wheel, or a fighter, I'd much rather a controller than a keyboard+mouse. It's very simple, called "use the right tool for the job".
I somewhat agree with this; but you have to realize, that when a FPS is designed from the ground up to USE a certain control scheme, that control scheme IS the right tool for the job. Playing the DOOM mods that allow mouse input SUCKS compared to the original keyboard scheme.
Round hole, round peg. Easy comparison to your own: ever tried playing quake on a g1 or an iphone? It's kind of, you know, pretty hard to do. some interfaces work for certain things.
Quake wasn't designed for an iPhone. That's a square peg and round hole, using a touch screen fake a mouse + wasd scheme. I think a FPS built specifically FOR an iPhone could control perfectly well.
I disagree. The question is why doesn't EA treat its software like any other game maker who puts out a PC title.
Because it's flatly not possible for EA to do that. The console manufactures have strict guidelines about online play, and without their authorization, a game doesn't get published. It's possible for Sony, MS, and Nintendo to allow it; but it would be an unlikely exception.
I don't think that's true. One platform might be at an advantage over the other, but that is an entirely different matter than being better. For instance, it's quite obvious a mouse has a competitive advantage over a gamepad in a FPS... but that doesn't mean a mouse/keyboard is necessarily a better input device. A gamepad is more ergonomic and can be played more easily from the couch, for instance.
A FPS designed for a console is best played on a console. One designed for a pc is best played on a pc. One designed for BOTH is probably equally bad on either.
No. The different consoles have different requirements for online play, and they aren't necessarily compatible. XBox live requires play through MS's servers and a live account. Sony requires companies to host their own. Nintendo has friend code requirements. It's not nearly as simple as the summary makes out.
Nope. In a free society, people are free to be as immoral as they want, as long as they don't infringe upon somebody else's rights. I'm saying that a government that has no power other than to protect human rights, but that does a good job protecting human rights, has no 'favors' to sell to corporations (the excesses of capitalism), and no means of seizing property for 'the state' (the excesses of socialism). The biggest reason our senators and executives are corrupt is because we've foolishly let them have more and more power to be corrupt WITH.
Personally, my belief is that a system of government that gives maximum freedom, while protecting basic human rights (life, property, speech, etc.), will inevitably lead to capitalism, because that's the economic structure that is inherent in free choice. However, that's a side effect. A government in a truly free country couldn't nationalize an industry if they wanted to, nor stop people from sharing their wealth.
A more fitting American example might be states which have a government-ran lottery and video poker, but ban gambling? Although that's the same principle, gambling policy is obviously less critical than violence/free speech, though.
The reaction to the situation in Honduras is mind-boggling. I disagree with Obama quite a bit, but I believe he is certainly a smart fellow. Yet there is absolutely NO way to look at the situation in Honduras and think that Zelaya should be put back in power. He has no legal claim, no moral claim, and no practical claim to retaining leadership. Yet Obama, along with nearly every other major nation's leaders, are supporting him. Thankfully, the support is fairly tentative, not military. How does one get one's viewpoint so absolute ass-backwards?
Not quite a catchy as the GP, but probably more accurate. I'd also throw in that in a sufficiently free society, the capitalistic/socialist tendencies of the government become irrelevant.
Yes, I'm sure Flickr has a full-time staff of people whose job it is to sift through random photos all day long, looking for ones that fall under several categories of things to get politically upset about, e.g.:
Then answer this: Why did they lie about a DMCA and take the image down, while leaving up worse images based on Bush?
I don't think it's necessarily a liberal bias; I think it's even more damaging... a sense that it's not ok to make fun of THIS president.
No, I bet he thinks Fox news is right leaning, and the rest, making up the majority, are left leaning. Are you lumping all media outlets in with Fox? Be sensible.
You're spouting that it's not. I find your spout less believable.
I thought that after this last campaign cycle, nobody with open eyes would doubt the bias of the majority of major press outlets. Their behavior was just pathetic. Although, to be fair, I don't believe it's strictly a Democratic bias; a lot of it was just self-serving shallow groupthink. It tends to benefit the Dems more, but occasionally benefits the Reps (like after 9/11).
Exposing porn is just one part of the problem. Searching through bookmarks is just a broken approach for the location bar. It's exactly the sort of "helpful nuisance" that we hate when it comes from Microsoft.
The location bar should behave sensibly. Bringing up a drop-down box with a history of items previously typed into that textfield that begin with the same characters you've typed is sensible; that behavior can be replicated all throughout the UI and it will work, intuitively.
Searching through bookmarks, browsing history, and in the MIDDLE of words is odd, unpredictable, and unintuitive behavior. It sounds neat at first; just the sort of thing a Marketing droid would love. But it's broken. It changes in unpredictable ways. It is an exception; no other text field would ever behave the same way.
Plus, it was crammed down our throats. The option to turn it off in the 3.0 beta was removed. People had to resort to add-ons to disable it. Since then, they've at least added more options to reduce its presence, but they're still buried in the about:config settings, not in the Option menu. The Awesomebar should have been an optional add-on from the very beginning. That's how many of the new features should be handled.
Slashdot Mirror
something the US used to have with its "equal time" rule, but that Clinton cravenly abandoned.
Because the 'equal time' laws were constitutionally unconscionable. Hard to believe that some slashdot poster, who would no doubt claim to be for free speech, would support government control of political discourse.
What's wrong with being "pro-Palestinian"? At least they aren't the horrendous cunts that Israelis are.
Ah, I see you've been paying attention to the BBC.
BBC isn't free. Their charges are simply less direct, and not optional. In fairness, it is hard for private industry to compete with a company who's product is illegal not to purchase.
If you consider the BBC left wing, then frankly you consider the British population left wing as well.
Well... duh?
Absolutely true.
You're gullible if you don't think FOX lies and decieves. You're PAINFULLY gullible if you think FOX lies and deceives any more than the other news networks.
Oh, I know we are far from having a complete and certain understanding of the mechanisms of the brain. And I certainly don't mean to suggest that quantum mechanics gives some mystic answer to the mind/body problem. Rather, just that quantum mechanics is a physical phenomenon that is exploited by the brain, just as chemistry and electricity is.
It's not arbitrary. Computer memory HAS to be measured in powers of two. You could say 2^10 was arbitrary as opposed to 2^12, for instance; but you could say that about any value selected. What you can't argue is that RAM should be measured in base 10 units.
And since we have an established and unchangeable requirement to measure RAM in base 2, it would make no sense to measure memory of a device used to store the contents of RAM in different units.
Of course, when they have power, they don't need to heat themselves, and when they need to heat themselves, they won't have power.
Melting snow takes a LOT of energy. It would be cheaper, I think, to buy more snowplows. This idea fails a lot of different smell tests. Developing cheap solar-energy roofing materials seems smarter; it covers more area, and roofs don't have MILLIONS OF CARS DRIVING ON THEM.
It's not that free will is a sham. It's that it's so poorly defined that discussion over breaks down into nonsensical pseudo-philosophical mumbo-jumbo.
Personally, I think the problem with self-determination was solved once we discovered chaos theory, and iterative functions. The processes in the brain are either fully or partly deterministic; it doesn't really matter. The important point is that it is a chaotic system that cannot be accurately modeled. The ONLY way to know with certainty what the reaction to a certain stimuli is to present that person with a stimuli and see what they do.
In other words... behavior is probably deterministic, but is unpredictable. The brain, processes all input in a way that is unique to that individual, and responds in a way that is unique to that individual. Since the mind IS the brain, and the person IS the mind, that's equivalent to saying that when John sees things, John will react in the way that is determined by everything that John is. That's free will enough to satisfy me. It doesn't absolve John from responsibility or guilt, because John isn't a different entity than his mind.
That's obviously true. However, I think in the case of the brain, it's even more explicit. There are mechanisms in place that act to massively amplify signals, specifically geared to utilize quantum effects. It's going to be one of the difficulties in building an actual replica of the human brain in software; emulation at the level of the neuron is insufficient. There are quantum effects that need to be simulated within the inner structure of a single neuron.
You want to know how I know you are full of shit? Because I occasionally get my ass out from behind a computer screen and actually meet and talk to people. It's really not that hard - it just takes a personality and a bit of heart - and they will talk to you. Go to any shit ass business, and there are hundreds of them w/i a couple of square miles of where you stand, and ask people about their health insurance. Or lack of it. And realize what a stupid, self-absorbed blow hole you have been.
Do you often deliberately lose arguments by undercutting yourself like this? Your paragraph means NOTHING next to actual statistics.
Yeah, the Wii controllers are far more precise for aiming and shooting than a standard gamepad. Not necessarily better; but they're the closest thing a console has to a mouse. The Wii should be the console of choice for FPS; I think it isn't, mainly because FPS fans tend to be absolute graphic whores.
Umm, FPS games are by definition, not typically "Designed" for consoles.
Obviously not true. There are FPS games, successful ones, that have never been ported to the pc.
Nobody said mice are better, but they are much better at controlling first person shooters for obvious reasons.
I would dispute this, also. Mice are more accurate at controlling first person shooters. Better is something different, entirely.
For a racing game when you don't have a joystick/wheel, or a fighter, I'd much rather a controller than a keyboard+mouse. It's very simple, called "use the right tool for the job".
I somewhat agree with this; but you have to realize, that when a FPS is designed from the ground up to USE a certain control scheme, that control scheme IS the right tool for the job. Playing the DOOM mods that allow mouse input SUCKS compared to the original keyboard scheme.
Round hole, round peg. Easy comparison to your own: ever tried playing quake on a g1 or an iphone? It's kind of, you know, pretty hard to do. some interfaces work for certain things.
Quake wasn't designed for an iPhone. That's a square peg and round hole, using a touch screen fake a mouse + wasd scheme. I think a FPS built specifically FOR an iPhone could control perfectly well.
This is the funniest "selling point" that I hear Sony fans repeating. "Our console is so expensive it keeps out the riff-raff."
Christ, the PS3 is a great machine, but a lot of their owners have very fragile egos. Reminds me of Apple consumers.
I disagree. The question is why doesn't EA treat its software like any other game maker who puts out a PC title.
Because it's flatly not possible for EA to do that. The console manufactures have strict guidelines about online play, and without their authorization, a game doesn't get published. It's possible for Sony, MS, and Nintendo to allow it; but it would be an unlikely exception.
I don't think that's true. One platform might be at an advantage over the other, but that is an entirely different matter than being better. For instance, it's quite obvious a mouse has a competitive advantage over a gamepad in a FPS... but that doesn't mean a mouse/keyboard is necessarily a better input device. A gamepad is more ergonomic and can be played more easily from the couch, for instance.
A FPS designed for a console is best played on a console. One designed for a pc is best played on a pc. One designed for BOTH is probably equally bad on either.
No. The different consoles have different requirements for online play, and they aren't necessarily compatible. XBox live requires play through MS's servers and a live account. Sony requires companies to host their own. Nintendo has friend code requirements. It's not nearly as simple as the summary makes out.
Nope. In a free society, people are free to be as immoral as they want, as long as they don't infringe upon somebody else's rights. I'm saying that a government that has no power other than to protect human rights, but that does a good job protecting human rights, has no 'favors' to sell to corporations (the excesses of capitalism), and no means of seizing property for 'the state' (the excesses of socialism). The biggest reason our senators and executives are corrupt is because we've foolishly let them have more and more power to be corrupt WITH.
Personally, my belief is that a system of government that gives maximum freedom, while protecting basic human rights (life, property, speech, etc.), will inevitably lead to capitalism, because that's the economic structure that is inherent in free choice. However, that's a side effect. A government in a truly free country couldn't nationalize an industry if they wanted to, nor stop people from sharing their wealth.
A more fitting American example might be states which have a government-ran lottery and video poker, but ban gambling? Although that's the same principle, gambling policy is obviously less critical than violence/free speech, though.
The reaction to the situation in Honduras is mind-boggling. I disagree with Obama quite a bit, but I believe he is certainly a smart fellow. Yet there is absolutely NO way to look at the situation in Honduras and think that Zelaya should be put back in power. He has no legal claim, no moral claim, and no practical claim to retaining leadership. Yet Obama, along with nearly every other major nation's leaders, are supporting him. Thankfully, the support is fairly tentative, not military. How does one get one's viewpoint so absolute ass-backwards?
Not quite a catchy as the GP, but probably more accurate. I'd also throw in that in a sufficiently free society, the capitalistic/socialist tendencies of the government become irrelevant.
Yes, I'm sure Flickr has a full-time staff of people whose job it is to sift through random photos all day long, looking for ones that fall under several categories of things to get politically upset about, e.g.:
Then answer this: Why did they lie about a DMCA and take the image down, while leaving up worse images based on Bush?
I don't think it's necessarily a liberal bias; I think it's even more damaging... a sense that it's not ok to make fun of THIS president.
No, I bet he thinks Fox news is right leaning, and the rest, making up the majority, are left leaning. Are you lumping all media outlets in with Fox? Be sensible.
You're spouting that it's not. I find your spout less believable.
I thought that after this last campaign cycle, nobody with open eyes would doubt the bias of the majority of major press outlets. Their behavior was just pathetic. Although, to be fair, I don't believe it's strictly a Democratic bias; a lot of it was just self-serving shallow groupthink. It tends to benefit the Dems more, but occasionally benefits the Reps (like after 9/11).
Exposing porn is just one part of the problem. Searching through bookmarks is just a broken approach for the location bar. It's exactly the sort of "helpful nuisance" that we hate when it comes from Microsoft.
The location bar should behave sensibly. Bringing up a drop-down box with a history of items previously typed into that textfield that begin with the same characters you've typed is sensible; that behavior can be replicated all throughout the UI and it will work, intuitively.
Searching through bookmarks, browsing history, and in the MIDDLE of words is odd, unpredictable, and unintuitive behavior. It sounds neat at first; just the sort of thing a Marketing droid would love. But it's broken. It changes in unpredictable ways. It is an exception; no other text field would ever behave the same way.
Plus, it was crammed down our throats. The option to turn it off in the 3.0 beta was removed. People had to resort to add-ons to disable it. Since then, they've at least added more options to reduce its presence, but they're still buried in the about:config settings, not in the Option menu. The Awesomebar should have been an optional add-on from the very beginning. That's how many of the new features should be handled.