You pay a fee for cable, and still have to cope with ads on most channels. Sure, the movie channels don't interrupt the film, but even they're not ad-free.
Seems to me that your objections can just as easily be applied to timeshifting television, thus:
. . . but the whole point in TV isn't just sports, sitcoms and soaps. Sales and ads are what drives TV, on location remotes and everything can get people to places to look at a promotion and help out a business.
What this will do is let people skip ads and the stations will lose revenue and bad stuff could happen.
I can see both sides of this but I mostly think it could be bad for TV in the long run.
Actually, it's a reason to not go plunging willy-nilly into a modular doc project.
Yes, it takes a bunch of creativity and up-front effort to pull it off. But the payoff comes when it's time to put out a new version of a large doc set, or if you have to publish in multiple formats. We have a system we developed in-house (using Framemaker as the foundation) that we can use to pump out printed manuals, PDFs, raw HTML, compiled HTML (.CHM), and Windows Help, all from one set of source files. We could do other formats (RTF or raw TXT, for example) with minimal effort.
But if you're doing a one-off doc, you're probably better off to just crank it out.
The potato clock is just a battery, not a fuel cell. You stick two dissimilar metals into any electrolyte (such as the juice in a potato) and you get current. Heck, with one of those kits, you could stick the electrodes into your mouth and generate current.
On a related note, because the amalgam fillings in your mouth contain two dissimilar metals (silver and mercury), and saliva is an electrolyte, you could conceivably power your cell phone with your fillings. I am NOT making this up, there are documented medical cases where galvanic reactions involving amalgam fillings have been observed, e.g.: "Dr. William Cheshire, a physician at the Mayo Clinic, reports on a case where a woman's trigeminal neuralgia (tic douloureux) was traced to a galvanic reaction between an amalgam filling and an adjacent gold-alloy crown. Consumption of tomatoes and other acidic foods produced intense jolts described as being like those of an 'electrical battery'." (The abstract is here.
I've always thought NASA should hold a raffle as a fund raiser. First prize, a trip to space. I'd shell out $10 for a shot at a shuttle ride, and I sincerely doubt that I'm the only one.
AFAIK, it's really hard to postulate about "other forms of life" (not carbon-based/H20 dependant) because life, even so-called "simple" life forms are complicated. I mean, look at the ATP molecule works for example (http://www.arn.org/docs/mm/atpmechanism.htm). This sucker is the "engine" that fuels basic metabolism in most all the life we know of. (Don't know if the sulphur-eaters by those deep-ocean vents use ATP.)
Yeah, science fiction has postulated silicon-based life (the kind Kirk almost killed in ST:TOS), or chlorine breathers (like the Kloros in that Asimov story, C-Chute), but I haven't heard that anyone has postulated any plausible biochemical processes (akin to ATP) that could support such life. Anyone got any pointers?
I looked at the screenshots, and my first question was "How does this help me get my stuff done?"
Eye candy is all well and good, unless it gets in the way of that simple little thing: getting my stuff done. It's such a basic concept, but that's what it boils down to: The interface should not interfere with the task. Using the interface is NOT the task.
People who prefer to use GUIs or CLIs do so because they've found that they're the best way to get their stuff done, not because of the eye candy (or lack thereof).
...that is, the idea that life on earth was seeded from space, is this: Where did that life come from?
OK, I haven't read much of what Hoyle himself said about this, but I'd think you'd have to confront that question right off. Otherwise, you've got the same sort of problem as the flat-earth myth: What is the earth sitting on? Four elephants. What are the elephants standing on? The back of a giant turtle. What is the turtle standing on? You get the picture.
Actually, researchers are finding that ASC (Adult Stem Cells) can be amazingly "plastic"--that is, they can be persuaded to become several different types of cells. There are currently many treatments being developed using these cells. (See CURRENT CLINICAL APPLICATIONS OF ADULT STEM CELLS at http://www.stemcellresearch.org/info/currentaps.pd f, and POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS of ADULT STEM CELLS at http://www.stemcellresearch.org/info/potentialaps. pdf.)
Thus far, the results of medical trials using ESC (Embryonic Stem Cells) has not been living up to the hype. In fact, some of the results have been rather frightening, for example: tumors of hair, bone and other tissue forming because the ESC are able to become ANY type of cell.
So, when does conciousness and self-awareness begin? Can you even find a consensus among scientists about what those two things _are_, much less when they begin?
Can you measure when they begin? Do they begin in infancy, or early childhood? If an infant doesn't have "conciousness" or "self-awareness," does that mean it isn't a human life, and that we should feel free to harvest tissue from it? The notion turns my stomach.
In my opinion, a human being comes into existence when the ovum and sperm come together. It has a great deal of developing and maturing to do, but its stage of development or maturity has nothing to do with its humanity.
I don't know of any other hard line that can be drawn. Talk of "ensoulment" is interesting theologically, but useless because answers about when that takes place--or if it takes place, for that matter--are all over the place, depending on whom you ask. Conciousness and self-awareness is similar. Physiological development, such as the formation of the central nervous system, are equally weak. How much of a nervous system does it take?
Don't get me started on that ever-so-foolish notion of "viability."
We ARE talking about destroying a life. An embryo, or a blastocyst (which is just another word for an embryo at a certain stage), or even a zygote is not "potential" human life, it is a human life, by all biological definitions. It is a genetically distinct, living human.
On the other hand, by all biological definitions, an ovum is not a human, nor is a sperm.
It assumes that human life has instrumental value, but not intrinsic value.
In other words, your value as a human has to do with what you are capable of doing. Thus, those who are disabled in any way become of less worth than the whole. Is that where you want to go?
Frito: Jim Carrey
Dildo: Christopher Lloyd
Moxie: Paul Reubens
Pepsi: Bill Murray
Spam: Bill Murray
Serutan: John Lithgow
Gimlet, son of Groin: John Belushi or (I know, he's dead, but he'd be perfect.)
Schlob: Rosanne
Tim Benzedrine: Robin Williams
And you forget that what those people feel is irrelevant until the current copyright laws are nullified. Under current US (and international) law, information can be and is owned.
Why should this cost "quite a lot of $$$"? They're going to ring it up and see if it answers. What's the cost of that? It isn't like they're sending a manned mission to take some publicity shots of the thing. There hasn't been any maintenance done to it.
Besides, if they're still getting data from this thing, isn't there any value in that?
(Since you seem most concerned about Christianity...) About the same as I'd feel if I lived in a culture that shoves Hinduism (as in many regions of India), or Islam (as in Pakistan or a few other countries), or any other religion, or _atheism_ (as happened in most of the Communist countries) down my throat. On the other hand, I have no problem with someone who would attempt to persuade me, through a polite dialog, that Hinduism, or Islam, or atheism is The One True Way (TM).
For something not meant to be flamebait, you sure opened with an inflammatory subject line.
What I originally said does not necessarily imply what you concluded. I don't know whether A&E (sorry, but the first time I read that, I thought you were talking about the cable network, and I'm still giggling about THAT image) had sex prior to the fall, because the Bible is silent on that. I don't know why they wouldn't have; they were created male and female for a reason. Sex did not spring into being after they ate the fruit.
Slashdot Mirror
You pay a fee for cable, and still have to cope with ads on most channels. Sure, the movie channels don't interrupt the film, but even they're not ad-free.
Or did I misunderstand you?
Actually, it's a reason to not go plunging willy-nilly into a modular doc project.
Yes, it takes a bunch of creativity and up-front effort to pull it off. But the payoff comes when it's time to put out a new version of a large doc set, or if you have to publish in multiple formats. We have a system we developed in-house (using Framemaker as the foundation) that we can use to pump out printed manuals, PDFs, raw HTML, compiled HTML (.CHM), and Windows Help, all from one set of source files. We could do other formats (RTF or raw TXT, for example) with minimal effort.
But if you're doing a one-off doc, you're probably better off to just crank it out.
"You are STUUUPID! You are STUUUPID! Oh, and don't forget: You are STUUUPID!"
The potato clock is just a battery, not a fuel cell. You stick two dissimilar metals into any electrolyte (such as the juice in a potato) and you get current. Heck, with one of those kits, you could stick the electrodes into your mouth and generate current.
On a related note, because the amalgam fillings in your mouth contain two dissimilar metals (silver and mercury), and saliva is an electrolyte, you could conceivably power your cell phone with your fillings. I am NOT making this up, there are documented medical cases where galvanic reactions involving amalgam fillings have been observed, e.g.: "Dr. William Cheshire, a physician at the Mayo Clinic, reports on a case where a woman's trigeminal neuralgia (tic douloureux) was traced to a galvanic reaction between an amalgam filling and an adjacent gold-alloy crown. Consumption of tomatoes and other acidic foods produced intense jolts described as being like those of an 'electrical battery'." (The abstract is here.
I've always thought NASA should hold a raffle as a fund raiser. First prize, a trip to space. I'd shell out $10 for a shot at a shuttle ride, and I sincerely doubt that I'm the only one.
Why did you have to remind us of that abomination! Aaaaaagh! Now I have to pour Lysol in my ears!
Yes! It really was that horrible!
AFAIK, it's really hard to postulate about "other forms of life" (not carbon-based/H20 dependant) because life, even so-called "simple" life forms are complicated. I mean, look at the ATP molecule works for example (http://www.arn.org/docs/mm/atpmechanism.htm). This sucker is the "engine" that fuels basic metabolism in most all the life we know of. (Don't know if the sulphur-eaters by those deep-ocean vents use ATP.)
Yeah, science fiction has postulated silicon-based life (the kind Kirk almost killed in ST:TOS), or chlorine breathers (like the Kloros in that Asimov story, C-Chute), but I haven't heard that anyone has postulated any plausible biochemical processes (akin to ATP) that could support such life. Anyone got any pointers?
I looked at the screenshots, and my first question was "How does this help me get my stuff done?"
Eye candy is all well and good, unless it gets in the way of that simple little thing: getting my stuff done. It's such a basic concept, but that's what it boils down to: The interface should not interfere with the task. Using the interface is NOT the task.
People who prefer to use GUIs or CLIs do so because they've found that they're the best way to get their stuff done, not because of the eye candy (or lack thereof).
As someone pointed out, 0 K =273.15 C. But even if they were talking K rather than C, 200 K is colder than 255K.
... dang whippersnappers ...
I always thought that a black hole, by definition, has infinite density, and zero diameter.
Now the size of it's event horizon is a different matter...
That's along the same line as the one about Herford and Berford, the fabulous racing plow-horses. I won't inflict it on you, but the punch-line is:
"Look! A talking dog!"
...that is, the idea that life on earth was seeded from space, is this: Where did that life come from?
OK, I haven't read much of what Hoyle himself said about this, but I'd think you'd have to confront that question right off. Otherwise, you've got the same sort of problem as the flat-earth myth: What is the earth sitting on? Four elephants. What are the elephants standing on? The back of a giant turtle. What is the turtle standing on? You get the picture.
Actually, researchers are finding that ASC (Adult Stem Cells) can be amazingly "plastic"--that is, they can be persuaded to become several different types of cells. There are currently many treatments being developed using these cells. (See CURRENT CLINICAL APPLICATIONS OF ADULT STEM CELLS at http://www.stemcellresearch.org/info/currentaps.pd f, and POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS of ADULT STEM CELLS at http://www.stemcellresearch.org/info/potentialaps. pdf.)
Thus far, the results of medical trials using ESC (Embryonic Stem Cells) has not been living up to the hype. In fact, some of the results have been rather frightening, for example: tumors of hair, bone and other tissue forming because the ESC are able to become ANY type of cell.
So, when does conciousness and self-awareness begin? Can you even find a consensus among scientists about what those two things _are_, much less when they begin?
Can you measure when they begin? Do they begin in infancy, or early childhood? If an infant doesn't have "conciousness" or "self-awareness," does that mean it isn't a human life, and that we should feel free to harvest tissue from it? The notion turns my stomach.
In my opinion, a human being comes into existence when the ovum and sperm come together. It has a great deal of developing and maturing to do, but its stage of development or maturity has nothing to do with its humanity.
I don't know of any other hard line that can be drawn. Talk of "ensoulment" is interesting theologically, but useless because answers about when that takes place--or if it takes place, for that matter--are all over the place, depending on whom you ask. Conciousness and self-awareness is similar. Physiological development, such as the formation of the central nervous system, are equally weak. How much of a nervous system does it take?
Don't get me started on that ever-so-foolish notion of "viability."
We ARE talking about destroying a life. An embryo, or a blastocyst (which is just another word for an embryo at a certain stage), or even a zygote is not "potential" human life, it is a human life, by all biological definitions. It is a genetically distinct, living human.
On the other hand, by all biological definitions, an ovum is not a human, nor is a sperm.
Isn't it? It's defining humanity in terms of what you can do, isn't it? In this case, it's in terms of mental ability, or capability, if you prefer.
Please tell me if you believe people have intrinsic value, or only instrumental value.
It assumes that human life has instrumental value, but not intrinsic value.
In other words, your value as a human has to do with what you are capable of doing. Thus, those who are disabled in any way become of less worth than the whole. Is that where you want to go?
Some more casting suggestions...
Frito: Jim Carrey
Dildo: Christopher Lloyd
Moxie: Paul Reubens
Pepsi: Bill Murray
Spam: Bill Murray
Serutan: John Lithgow
Gimlet, son of Groin: John Belushi or (I know, he's dead, but he'd be perfect.)
Schlob: Rosanne
Tim Benzedrine: Robin Williams
And you forget that what those people feel is irrelevant until the current copyright laws are nullified. Under current US (and international) law, information can be and is owned.
Why should this cost "quite a lot of $$$"? They're going to ring it up and see if it answers. What's the cost of that? It isn't like they're sending a manned mission to take some publicity shots of the thing. There hasn't been any maintenance done to it.
Besides, if they're still getting data from this thing, isn't there any value in that?
(Since you seem most concerned about Christianity...) About the same as I'd feel if I lived in a culture that shoves Hinduism (as in many regions of India), or Islam (as in Pakistan or a few other countries), or any other religion, or _atheism_ (as happened in most of the Communist countries) down my throat. On the other hand, I have no problem with someone who would attempt to persuade me, through a polite dialog, that Hinduism, or Islam, or atheism is The One True Way (TM).
...about the guy who keeps going from planet to planet trying to catch up with Christ?
For something not meant to be flamebait, you sure opened with an inflammatory subject line.
What I originally said does not necessarily imply what you concluded. I don't know whether A&E (sorry, but the first time I read that, I thought you were talking about the cable network, and I'm still giggling about THAT image) had sex prior to the fall, because the Bible is silent on that. I don't know why they wouldn't have; they were created male and female for a reason. Sex did not spring into being after they ate the fruit.