True, but the reply to Tim was not reactive to what Tim actually said. Tim was referring to government spending, as opposed to actual income. He's still wrong, but the opposing argument was off-track.
While I agree 100% that we have major issues, please don't say
The result was an estimate that 48% of all published reports use cooked, trimmed or totally falsified data.
and then say that because of this
None of them work well.
None of them have an impartial infrastructure to make them work well. It is commonly understood that the upper echelons of the ivory tower are very political.
Then you follow this up with the straw man argument that
Neither work
After all, this comment is based on (now I am assuming something to be true, as I haven't actually researched the NOVA study) a peer reviewed finding that shows that an estimated 52% of the time, it does work.
(Also, "neither" should only be used when you have two items. "None" is used for more, as you used in the previous line.)
The only potential problem I see with your post, is that your projectile cost is listed as $500. We should also include repairs and maintenance, since that much force is very hard on the weapon. This probably pushes the cost up by two orders of magnitude, still far cheaper than the cruise missile.
Initial cost comparison against life of the weapon should also be analyzed for a true gauge of its cost.
Then again, that 500 USD may be an estimated cost per shot with all factors included. Correct me if that is the case!
I really wish I had mod points! This needs some funny mod in there too....Like oh my gawd, I already knew/.ers think everything is self evident, I can't believe I haven't seen a poll on that.
My favorite thing about this whole situation is that many times the middle-man *is* getting cut out. It is kind of amusing to me. Many moons ago, that was the norm - going to the source for most of your goods. Then regional and global economics became a big thing for more than just the affluent, allowing the middle man to prosper as brokers of goods and services. Thanks to the advent of the global economy, we are often able to go to the source now, with a global reach. The only middlemen that I see really profiting in the future are those that consolidate certain disposable goods and food into one place (like Wal-mart), that is, unless someone figures out how to get replicators to work, a la Star Trek. *rambles on for another 10 minutes, but deletes it all as it gets way off-topic*
Well-trolled *cough*, I guess I'll bite:
I know plenty of well-informed non-fundies that read/listen/watch content from The News Corporation, including Fox. Why, because they also read/listen/watch liberal stations. There is plenty to take seriously from each side, the effort is spent sifting through the fallacies and weighing out bias to get at the heart of the matter and from there deciding what your stance on the issue will be.
Remember, the truth is more easily found when most conflict is filtered out. There are exceptions - i.e. the big issues, in which the points of view of either side perfectly cancel out. These are fundamental differences and will determine your stances on other things. *shrug* Go with what you feel comfortable with, I just try not to have a herd mentality.
iirc, it was more an issue of Warden (the anti-cheat software)not being able to work properly within Linux, even with WINE. It wasn't written for pseudo-windows, but for integration into the registry, for enhanced permissions and scanning capability and therefore inoperable by that standard in WINE.
If anyone can explain that more clearly, be my guest!
I don't even like the man, but give it a rest. It isn't true, according to prominent people within the very cross-section of which he is supposedly racist. If that isn't enough for you, think of it this way: You know the guy less than they; therefore, your argument is much less valid and merely hearsay.There's enough vitriol to go around. Just ignore him. Attack the rabid supporters. They're the scary ones.
Y'know, I was thinking: "What about all the blind people," when I was training the software to recognize my voice (DNS9) and, I wondered why they wouldn't allow the program read you the phrase you are to use as you speak. Headsets would make this a snap, as there would be no noise from audio output.
1. 99% accuracy rate is actually pretty bad in the real world. In a typical document, you might expect 12-15 words per line - so you have one error every 7 lines or so.
2. 99% accuracy rate is only achievable under ideal circumstances - ie. using a top quality microphone hooked up to a good soundcard in an environment with very little background noise and no echo. Basically, circumstances you only get in a half-decent recording studio. In the real world, you seldom get this.
3. Unless you happen to be blessed with amazing self-discipline (and/or can guarantee that nobody is going to approach you while you're working). Otherwise you get back to work after a distraction and find yourself having to delete a conversation you just had with a co-worker.
4. If you're in an open-plan office (that's probably about 99% of UK offices these days) your colleagues will not thank you for spending all day talking.
1. This is very true, but if you have a good enough grasp of the language and proper pronunciations, the product can achieve much better than 99% accuracy. that 99% is really based on you having an accent that will diverge from proper pronunciation. Another important thing is enunciation! Move those lips and tongues! (A nice side effect of this is that people will understand you more clearly than ever in your social and home lives.)
2. Ideal circumstances are not necessary if you have a good mic, and it doesn't have to be top of the line either. I have a $120 headset that has excellent noise cancellation (of course it was on special, but there is always a special somewhere). I did also buy a $50 Andrea Stereo USB adapter that does some really nice filtering and signal conversion, as well.
3. All you really have to do for this is have that nice noise cancellation mic and tell it to sleep and then launch into your convo.
4. I work in an open-plan office in the US. I translate text using this (English to Spanish) and no one in the office speaks a lick of it. It's funny though, it suppresses the idle chatter and more work gets done. Everyone seems to be able to tune me out fairly well, until I after I take calls. (*curses* Tachar las últimas diez líneas! *curses*) My coworkers all know what "tachar" means now;D. I really have to remember to turn off the software before answer any tech support calls that come my way. I just get calls infrequently enough that I spaz out when my headset rings! (Yes, I wear that hat too.)
I hope you realize that you didn't reply to me, rather you are restating yourself in more detail. I do not disagree with you in content, you see, rather in delivery.
You see, my contention in the previous post was solely to inform you that your cry of "fallacy" in relation to the idea of smarts is in fact, inaccurate.
Additionally, I would propose that advocating an option as the only one is the fallacy here. You see, there are always multiple options for any given sociological problem. Each solution has a segment of the population to which it would seem the best option. Sometimes the best choice is to use mulitple options, each targeting a specific segment of the population. Other times, research into the most statistically appropriate choice for the whole, or for larger segments, is necessary.
This is not true. Smart and informed are not the same thing. Perhaps your perception of the words colors this for you.
True, many people use it to refer to someone who is knowledgeable, but it means mentally alert. To better illustrate and define this concept: a smart person is someone that pays more attention to the annotation and connotation of things, whereas few people bother to pay attention to the latter.
You can raise the mental alertness of people through education to a certain degree. But there are limits, based on biochemistry, to the ability of a person's brain to make connections.
I wish they cost less than a comparable windows system. They're acting like they are giving you a free OS, when they're really getting more money off of the Linux machines. Maybe they feel they incurred a greater cost finding and paying people that could support it? *shrug*
Might as well continue building my own.
Actually, I have a second cousin that can write from the middle of a sentence out with both hands. Insane, but true.
Now, since that is far from common, I'll address the real issue with your post: limited creativity. Humans use their hands for multiple purposes quite often. Hands are actually designed for independent use. Your example of rubbing your stomach and patting your head at the same time is more of a question of how the arms are designed to work in tandem, this is more of a balance-oriented feature than anything else. Your arms are more used to moving the same way or in opposite ways, but not so much in an orthogonal way, for example. Also, your familiarity with space relations come into play.
In conclusion, there are a lot of little things that come into play. Don't let your limitations color your creativity. Also, I'm betting you need to work on your micro.
I was going to mod this up as funny, but the tone seemed wrong. I checked your profile and see that you seem to be a Win-kid. Nothing wrong with that until you say things like the above post. I don't think you read the original post, or your reading comprehension is shot. He just said that the code works properly *only* on IE, so he isn't coding to the standards to which he should be coding, for the very reason that IE is so market-dominant.
The point of all of this is that Microsoft is hurting the general market by telling those that conform to the standards to fuck off and enjoy being shut out (but not to fuck off too far, because we want you around so we can claim that we aren't a monopoly) because we are too powerful and big to care about your wimpy little "standards." Microsoft doesn't want to be the standard, because that would require them to expose some proprietary code for the sake of everyone's product working the same way.
*shrug* Basically they are being blazing assholes. They know it and don't care.
Slashdot Mirror
True, but the reply to Tim was not reactive to what Tim actually said. Tim was referring to government spending, as opposed to actual income. He's still wrong, but the opposing argument was off-track.
Then you follow this up with the straw man argument that After all, this comment is based on (now I am assuming something to be true, as I haven't actually researched the NOVA study) a peer reviewed finding that shows that an estimated 52% of the time, it does work. (Also, "neither" should only be used when you have two items. "None" is used for more, as you used in the previous line.)
You probably are referring to the Java Man
In my case, the answer would be yes. But then, I'm frequently told that I am strange, even among geeks.
The only potential problem I see with your post, is that your projectile cost is listed as $500. We should also include repairs and maintenance, since that much force is very hard on the weapon. This probably pushes the cost up by two orders of magnitude, still far cheaper than the cruise missile.
Initial cost comparison against life of the weapon should also be analyzed for a true gauge of its cost.
Then again, that 500 USD may be an estimated cost per shot with all factors included. Correct me if that is the case!
I really wish I had mod points! This needs some funny mod in there too. ...Like oh my gawd, I already knew /.ers think everything is self evident, I can't believe I haven't seen a poll on that.
My favorite thing about this whole situation is that many times the middle-man *is* getting cut out. It is kind of amusing to me. Many moons ago, that was the norm - going to the source for most of your goods. Then regional and global economics became a big thing for more than just the affluent, allowing the middle man to prosper as brokers of goods and services. Thanks to the advent of the global economy, we are often able to go to the source now, with a global reach. The only middlemen that I see really profiting in the future are those that consolidate certain disposable goods and food into one place (like Wal-mart), that is, unless someone figures out how to get replicators to work, a la Star Trek. *rambles on for another 10 minutes, but deletes it all as it gets way off-topic*
Princess Bride!
Well-trolled *cough*, I guess I'll bite: I know plenty of well-informed non-fundies that read/listen/watch content from The News Corporation, including Fox. Why, because they also read/listen/watch liberal stations. There is plenty to take seriously from each side, the effort is spent sifting through the fallacies and weighing out bias to get at the heart of the matter and from there deciding what your stance on the issue will be. Remember, the truth is more easily found when most conflict is filtered out. There are exceptions - i.e. the big issues, in which the points of view of either side perfectly cancel out. These are fundamental differences and will determine your stances on other things. *shrug* Go with what you feel comfortable with, I just try not to have a herd mentality.
MS-CHAPv2 not working with their new TCP/IP stack perhaps? *shrug*
Then we're going to have to do some vector addition to come up with its populoqualitative score.
iirc, it was more an issue of Warden (the anti-cheat software)not being able to work properly within Linux, even with WINE. It wasn't written for pseudo-windows, but for integration into the registry, for enhanced permissions and scanning capability and therefore inoperable by that standard in WINE.
If anyone can explain that more clearly, be my guest!
I don't even like the man, but give it a rest. It isn't true, according to prominent people within the very cross-section of which he is supposedly racist. If that isn't enough for you, think of it this way: You know the guy less than they; therefore, your argument is much less valid and merely hearsay.There's enough vitriol to go around. Just ignore him. Attack the rabid supporters. They're the scary ones.
Y'know, I was thinking: "What about all the blind people," when I was training the software to recognize my voice (DNS9) and, I wondered why they wouldn't allow the program read you the phrase you are to use as you speak. Headsets would make this a snap, as there would be no noise from audio output.
2. Ideal circumstances are not necessary if you have a good mic, and it doesn't have to be top of the line either. I have a $120 headset that has excellent noise cancellation (of course it was on special, but there is always a special somewhere). I did also buy a $50 Andrea Stereo USB adapter that does some really nice filtering and signal conversion, as well.
3. All you really have to do for this is have that nice noise cancellation mic and tell it to sleep and then launch into your convo.
4. I work in an open-plan office in the US. I translate text using this (English to Spanish) and no one in the office speaks a lick of it. It's funny though, it suppresses the idle chatter and more work gets done. Everyone seems to be able to tune me out fairly well, until I after I take calls. (*curses* Tachar las últimas diez líneas! *curses*) My coworkers all know what "tachar" means now
I did this for the yahoos at work, and no one has said a thing.
I was going to say, "They probably won't know the difference."
And, although this is true, this crowd tends to stay with what they know, so if they get Linux, they'll probably stick with it.
Either way, the results are the same.
Make that 500,049.
Because people never donate to sources of free . That's why there are no longer any freeware producers out there.
I hope you realize that you didn't reply to me, rather you are restating yourself in more detail. I do not disagree with you in content, you see, rather in delivery. You see, my contention in the previous post was solely to inform you that your cry of "fallacy" in relation to the idea of smarts is in fact, inaccurate. Additionally, I would propose that advocating an option as the only one is the fallacy here. You see, there are always multiple options for any given sociological problem. Each solution has a segment of the population to which it would seem the best option. Sometimes the best choice is to use mulitple options, each targeting a specific segment of the population. Other times, research into the most statistically appropriate choice for the whole, or for larger segments, is necessary.
This is not true. Smart and informed are not the same thing. Perhaps your perception of the words colors this for you. True, many people use it to refer to someone who is knowledgeable, but it means mentally alert. To better illustrate and define this concept: a smart person is someone that pays more attention to the annotation and connotation of things, whereas few people bother to pay attention to the latter. You can raise the mental alertness of people through education to a certain degree. But there are limits, based on biochemistry, to the ability of a person's brain to make connections.
I wish they cost less than a comparable windows system. They're acting like they are giving you a free OS, when they're really getting more money off of the Linux machines. Maybe they feel they incurred a greater cost finding and paying people that could support it? *shrug* Might as well continue building my own.
Actually, I have a second cousin that can write from the middle of a sentence out with both hands. Insane, but true.
Now, since that is far from common, I'll address the real issue with your post: limited creativity. Humans use their hands for multiple purposes quite often. Hands are actually designed for independent use. Your example of rubbing your stomach and patting your head at the same time is more of a question of how the arms are designed to work in tandem, this is more of a balance-oriented feature than anything else. Your arms are more used to moving the same way or in opposite ways, but not so much in an orthogonal way, for example. Also, your familiarity with space relations come into play.
In conclusion, there are a lot of little things that come into play. Don't let your limitations color your creativity. Also, I'm betting you need to work on your micro.
But Venn diagrams supported by supposition and not hard data are more than useless, because you wasted your time to draw such a thing.
I was going to mod this up as funny, but the tone seemed wrong. I checked your profile and see that you seem to be a Win-kid. Nothing wrong with that until you say things like the above post. I don't think you read the original post, or your reading comprehension is shot. He just said that the code works properly *only* on IE, so he isn't coding to the standards to which he should be coding, for the very reason that IE is so market-dominant.
The point of all of this is that Microsoft is hurting the general market by telling those that conform to the standards to fuck off and enjoy being shut out (but not to fuck off too far, because we want you around so we can claim that we aren't a monopoly) because we are too powerful and big to care about your wimpy little "standards." Microsoft doesn't want to be the standard, because that would require them to expose some proprietary code for the sake of everyone's product working the same way.
*shrug* Basically they are being blazing assholes. They know it and don't care.