I understand why they're getting a weak signal here on Earth, where most craters will have long since been erased by erosion and surface remodeling. But I'll bet we could get a much stronger signal from the Moon, particularly the far side. Do we have the ability to get dates for craters there from orbiting probes, or is that something we'd have to collect physical samples to do?
Theromes do exist but always with a defined set of starting axioms and therefore a theorome when applied to the physical world becomes a theory.
Theorems and theories are two different things. You're quite right, that proving a theorem requires a well-defined set of axioms; the natural world, unfortunately, doesn't provide us with such axioms*, which is why we have to use theories to describe it.
*Well, maybe. "The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics" argues that maybe there is some axiomatic Truth at the basis of reality. But if so, we have no idea what it is yet, and anyone who tells you they know is lying.
Ah, I see you've recently discovered a Philosophy 101 list of logical fallacies. Come back when you learn enough to understand what the bullet points actually mean.
you'll frequently hear claims that the science is settled
No, you don't. Science is, by definition, always ready to accept a better theory. Nothing is settled. It's just that there are, at this moment, no better theories to explain observations.
Very true. You do, however, frequently hear claims along the lines of "Warmists say it's all 'settled science!' Stupid warmists, nothing is ever settled in science!" This article does an excellent job of addressing that particular straw man.
Is it petty of me to wish that people who accuse their political opponents of being Nazis, Communists, etc., could live for a little while in the world of their paranoid fantasies? If they survived the experience, a month in the actual USSR under Stalin, for example, might give them much more perspective.
Claiming that a topic is "settled" is, typically, a tactic to shut a viewpoint down as no longer being a live option the community will consider in its collective deliberations.
And claiming that the other side is claiming "the topic is settled" is almost always a strawman.
One could argue that it's a thin veil over the military victor's (the North's) version of history.
Nice job of concealing your ideological looniness until the end of the post.
If he were in his mid 20s he'd never have used his real name or outted himself because he'd understand how privacy works (or rather, doesn't work) with respect to the internet.
In my mid-40s, and having been active online since my teens, I understand that using a pseudonym is no guarantee of privacy.
I have such fond memories of when this site wasn't such a blatant tool of spin doctors for certain industry interests...
Meh. Slashdot stories have long reported Gartner's dodgy numbers at face value, even though pretty much every single such story contains multiple comments pointing out how absurd those numbers are.
When I take a CPR class and use a mannequin to practice, is that a game? No.
Unless you get points for how you give the mannequin CPR, in which case the answer is "yes." Not all games are simulations, and not all simulations are games, but the area of overlap is pretty large.
Note that I'm not saying that making CPR classes into games is a good idea. In fact I think it's a lousy idea. But I have the feeling it's happening whether we like it ot not.
I'm not sure people from most other countries understand the "think of the CHIIIIILDREN!" hysteria that grips the Anglophone world on a regular basis. We seem to have developed this bizarre idea that people are supposed to be completely sheltered from the world until they reach the age of legal adulthood... at which point they're supposed to know in every particular how to deal with the responsibility that entails.
It took no math or science to build the Erie Canal, the Hoover Dam or the Panama Canal.
Unfortunately, I had to read the rest of your post three times to make sure you weren't seriously claiming this. It's amazing the number of self-proclaimed nerds who don't seem to understand that technology actually does predate computers.
Sweet reason, or even simple politeness, doesn't work with the kind of self-righteous ideological nutballs who make up NCPPR. "Fuck off" is the only kind of response that will get through to them.
This is just the free market fighting back against heavy-handed socialist regulation. We should all cheer a scrappy little company like Syngenta for their struggle for liberty against Hayes, who like all government "scientists" is just a shill for the multibillion-dollar environmental lobby.
Depends on how you define "human." The people who left these footprints would probably be recognizable to us as, well, people, i.e. genus Homo, but would also recognizably very different from any people living today, i.e. Homo sapiens sapiens. The vast bulk of evidence points to successive waves of hominins arising in Africa and migrating outward, with the last such group being us. And since Homo is about two and a half million years old as best we can tell, there's was plenty of time for members of the species that left these footprints, probably Homo antecessor, to do just that.
The "jollyforcongress.com" site: (a) doesn't ask for money, (b) immediately redirects to a page that has "floridadems" in the URL, and (c) looks nothing like Jolly's actual campaign site. So please stop pretending there's some kind of equivalence here. There isn't.
The point is that the NHS has existed for decades, but this "push-button access to everybody's medical conditions" is new. It's not inherently a single-payer problem; it's a government-not-respecting-people's-rights problem.
If your favorite restaurant were about to go away, wouldn't you want to have a couple of last meals there? Preserving the discussion system is what the protest against beta is all about; we might as well enjoy it while we can.
I'll happily join in the "Slashcott." (I suspect I'll get more work done next week as a result.) Until then, I'll post about the story at hand, about the awfulness of beta, or about whatever else seems appropriate.
I'm suspicious you are all shills, and confused why on posting, you all get straight to "score:2".
We'll network about that murder strategy of yours, X. I think it has potential for impactfulness, but we need to cover all the modalities for rapid corpsification.
I think you meant to ask, "What methodology did you use to leverage Procter & Gamble(tm) Pepto-Bismol(tm) to ensure stakeholder regurgative response return?" Remember, in today's fast-moving web forum environment, you have to upgrade regularly to best-of-breed communicational strategies for the optimal user experience.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand why they're getting a weak signal here on Earth, where most craters will have long since been erased by erosion and surface remodeling. But I'll bet we could get a much stronger signal from the Moon, particularly the far side. Do we have the ability to get dates for craters there from orbiting probes, or is that something we'd have to collect physical samples to do?
Theromes do exist but always with a defined set of starting axioms and therefore a theorome when applied to the physical world becomes a theory.
Theorems and theories are two different things. You're quite right, that proving a theorem requires a well-defined set of axioms; the natural world, unfortunately, doesn't provide us with such axioms*, which is why we have to use theories to describe it.
*Well, maybe. "The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics" argues that maybe there is some axiomatic Truth at the basis of reality. But if so, we have no idea what it is yet, and anyone who tells you they know is lying.
Ah, I see you've recently discovered a Philosophy 101 list of logical fallacies. Come back when you learn enough to understand what the bullet points actually mean.
you'll frequently hear claims that the science is settled
No, you don't. Science is, by definition, always ready to accept a better theory. Nothing is settled. It's just that there are, at this moment, no better theories to explain observations.
Very true. You do, however, frequently hear claims along the lines of "Warmists say it's all 'settled science!' Stupid warmists, nothing is ever settled in science!" This article does an excellent job of addressing that particular straw man.
Stalinism
Is it petty of me to wish that people who accuse their political opponents of being Nazis, Communists, etc., could live for a little while in the world of their paranoid fantasies? If they survived the experience, a month in the actual USSR under Stalin, for example, might give them much more perspective.
Claiming that a topic is "settled" is, typically, a tactic to shut a viewpoint down as no longer being a live option the community will consider in its collective deliberations.
And claiming that the other side is claiming "the topic is settled" is almost always a strawman.
One could argue that it's a thin veil over the military victor's (the North's) version of history.
Nice job of concealing your ideological looniness until the end of the post.
If he were in his mid 20s he'd never have used his real name or outted himself because he'd understand how privacy works (or rather, doesn't work) with respect to the internet.
In my mid-40s, and having been active online since my teens, I understand that using a pseudonym is no guarantee of privacy.
I have such fond memories of when this site wasn't such a blatant tool of spin doctors for certain industry interests...
Meh. Slashdot stories have long reported Gartner's dodgy numbers at face value, even though pretty much every single such story contains multiple comments pointing out how absurd those numbers are.
When I take a CPR class and use a mannequin to practice, is that a game? No.
Unless you get points for how you give the mannequin CPR, in which case the answer is "yes." Not all games are simulations, and not all simulations are games, but the area of overlap is pretty large.
Note that I'm not saying that making CPR classes into games is a good idea. In fact I think it's a lousy idea. But I have the feeling it's happening whether we like it ot not.
I'm not sure people from most other countries understand the "think of the CHIIIIILDREN!" hysteria that grips the Anglophone world on a regular basis. We seem to have developed this bizarre idea that people are supposed to be completely sheltered from the world until they reach the age of legal adulthood ... at which point they're supposed to know in every particular how to deal with the responsibility that entails.
It took no math or science to build the Erie Canal, the Hoover Dam or the Panama Canal.
Unfortunately, I had to read the rest of your post three times to make sure you weren't seriously claiming this. It's amazing the number of self-proclaimed nerds who don't seem to understand that technology actually does predate computers.
Sweet reason, or even simple politeness, doesn't work with the kind of self-righteous ideological nutballs who make up NCPPR. "Fuck off" is the only kind of response that will get through to them.
Have you considered that people approve of Google when it does good things, and disapprove when it does bad things?
No insult meant for you, that is just the sorry state of reality. It's appalling, but true.
Yeah, I know. [sigh]
I thought I was being obviously over-the-top, but Poe's Law strikes again; it's impossible to satirize people who actually think that way.
This is just the free market fighting back against heavy-handed socialist regulation. We should all cheer a scrappy little company like Syngenta for their struggle for liberty against Hayes, who like all government "scientists" is just a shill for the multibillion-dollar environmental lobby.
Depends on how you define "human." The people who left these footprints would probably be recognizable to us as, well, people, i.e. genus Homo, but would also recognizably very different from any people living today, i.e. Homo sapiens sapiens. The vast bulk of evidence points to successive waves of hominins arising in Africa and migrating outward, with the last such group being us. And since Homo is about two and a half million years old as best we can tell, there's was plenty of time for members of the species that left these footprints, probably Homo antecessor, to do just that.
The "jollyforcongress.com" site: (a) doesn't ask for money, (b) immediately redirects to a page that has "floridadems" in the URL, and (c) looks nothing like Jolly's actual campaign site. So please stop pretending there's some kind of equivalence here. There isn't.
The point is that the NHS has existed for decades, but this "push-button access to everybody's medical conditions" is new. It's not inherently a single-payer problem; it's a government-not-respecting-people's-rights problem.
If your favorite restaurant were about to go away, wouldn't you want to have a couple of last meals there? Preserving the discussion system is what the protest against beta is all about; we might as well enjoy it while we can.
I'll happily join in the "Slashcott." (I suspect I'll get more work done next week as a result.) Until then, I'll post about the story at hand, about the awfulness of beta, or about whatever else seems appropriate.
I'm suspicious you are all shills, and confused why on posting, you all get straight to "score:2".
http://www.google.com/search?q=slashdot%20karma%20bonus
We'll network about that murder strategy of yours, X. I think it has potential for impactfulness, but we need to cover all the modalities for rapid corpsification.
(I'm really hoping to get a job with Dice.)
They'll swear off computers forever.
I think you meant to ask, "What methodology did you use to leverage Procter & Gamble(tm) Pepto-Bismol(tm) to ensure stakeholder regurgative response return?" Remember, in today's fast-moving web forum environment, you have to upgrade regularly to best-of-breed communicational strategies for the optimal user experience.
alt.slashdot.refugees?
It optimizes the Web 3.0 paradigm for maximal user experience and audience impactfulness.