They should make sure none of those students are studying law. It might make a great case for use in class. Suddenly there's a world class lawyer advising the residents.
The idea is that PI never stops and every possible number sequence (including the complete music catalog of Metallica in MP3 format) is in there somewhere.
The use of 'hacking' in the older sense extended well beyond MIT in 1975. Yes, it may be stretching things to call fixing a fender Red Green style hacking, but it certainly doesn't necessarily involve criminal activity.
I didn't make any claim that the scientific method is invalid (quite the contrary). Likewise, prove irrefutably to the pope that Jesus never was, even as a parable and perhaps the church will change it's mind.
Meanwhile, I don't think either of us would like to see science judged based on the crackpots that claim to be scientists...
I find it unlikely that quantum loop gravity, string theory, pilot waves, and the Copenhagen all hold true. That doesn't mean they're all junk or that the people proposing the various theories are somehow dishonest or fools.
I'm certainly not demanding that you believe any of it. It would, however, be reasonable to show a little respect for those who do. At least for the ones willing to reciprocate.
Once third parties can be damaged, it is no longer the business' call. Sure, it's their right to ignore the risk that their A/C could get shut off, or that their corporate bank account could be hoovered. However, if the hack could flood neighborhoods with sewage, it is no longer their call, it's up to the people who might get flooded.
That depends on who it costs if the security is breached. If it is JUST the company that stands to lose, fine. But if their customers also stand to lose (for example, credit card info, medical records, etc), then no. It is no longer the company's risk to take and their customers have every right to know how poorly their data is being guarded.
WRT Christ, it's about as likely as string theorists all throwing up their hands and declaring their field to be bunk.
Or since you said core belief, what are the odds of an announcement that the scientific method is a dead end?
But consider, Only some denominations believe in confession, purgatory, etc. Some believe a private prayer is enough to be absolved of sin, others believe works are necessary. Even within Baptists there is disagreement on the holy trinity (a fairly central belief). Meanwhile, the Jews do not believe in Jesus. The Buddhists do not believe in God.
Of course that leads to the 64 thousand dollar question: Does 3D advance or hinder storytelling? It's a worthwhile question since we've known how to do 3D for a very long time but it is rarely used well. Most 3D is used on bad to mediocre movies. Even when used on a good movie, many question the value 3D adds.
Perhaps there isn't a lot of good content in 3D because 3D doesn't make for good content. After all, it's been 60 years now, if it made for good content, surely there would be more of it.
I wouldn't count that as "adaptability" of religions, though. More as a kind of evolution with some of them dying out.
It has been observed more than once that the revolutions in science become mainstream as the old guard literally die off. In between, there is a steady refinement and enlargement upon the working theory.
Consider string theory. Over the years, it has gained several additional dimensions, morphed into M theory, several branches were realized to be exactly equivalent and merged, etc. All that and it has yet to make a testable prediction that earlier models don't also make.
None of that is meant as a criticism of science. It's part of the process. It is simply meant as a reminder that things are messy sometimes and that it's not fair to expect from religion what science cannot manage either.
The Apocrypha is a group of disputed books of the Bible. Different denominations have different opinions on their canonicity. Some leave them out of their edition of the Bible entirely. Compare to the differing interpretations of quantum mechanics.
Compare the Catholic church, various Orthodox churches, the variety of protestant denominations, the recent fundamentalist churches and the Mormon church and you will see a great deal of differences in fairly fundamental beliefs. Some are more tolerant of other beliefs than others.
The polarized light version is superior to the colored glasses, but already the fad is fading again. There were one or two good 3D movies made and a bunch of mediocre fake 3D conversions done and now it's going away.
It's cool that you got a few nice dates out of it but I'd say part was the novelty, and part was that there was enough interest between you that you were already on a date.
This is actually the 3rd try at 3d TV. The first two were special broadcasts using the colored glasses (given out for free). Not bad, but didn't generate enough interest to keep going.
Unless the phone is a randomly shaped blob with razor sharp spikes and a morse code only interface that doesn't actually connect to anything, someone will have their hand out for royalties anyway.
The Apocrypha, the entirely discarded ancient Roman and Greek beliefs, etc.
Really, it does? Where do all the souls come from or go to when the population changes dramatically?
Souls are created some time, aren't they? Eventually they are enlightened and break the cycle. Nothing says a soul comes back right away. That was easy and obvious for anyone not pointedly avoiding a logical solution.
I'm going to have to say, the longer this thread goes, the more it feels like arguing with any fundie out there.
I wouldn't say that. Like 3D, nobody is really going to get any value for their money out of a curved TV. Like 3D, it's a desperate grasping for some way to get people to buy a new TV before the old one dies.
Color TV actually upgraded the viewing experience significantly for a lot of people.
Since 3d has come and gone as a fad multiple times, gimmick is a pretty good word for it.
First, I sit about 9 feet from the TV, not 16.5, so the curvature will be wrong anyway. Second, the price difference is already more than I am willing to pay for the whole TV.
As TFA points out, only one person in the room would get an optimal view anyway.
Finally, if the whole problem is just a bit of geometric distortion, couldn't it be mostly fixed by performing the opposite transform on the image before displaying? That would allow you to optimize for your actual viewing position and come up with a happy average for everyone in the room, or turn it off.
I'm guessing they'll avoid my suggestion like the plague since it doesn't make the TV look expensive enough.
More to the point, we need to reconsider how much autonomy we grant them. For a few examples, toddlers cannot sue people or handle their own money. They certainly aren't allowed to handle anything that could injure someone (or themselves) and they are not permitted to have an actual job outside of the immediate family.
Perhaps if the corporations want to behave like they're two years old, they shouldn't be allowed to be more than a social club. Telecommunications is too important to entrust to a toddler.
Slashdot Mirror
They should make sure none of those students are studying law. It might make a great case for use in class. Suddenly there's a world class lawyer advising the residents.
The idea is that PI never stops and every possible number sequence (including the complete music catalog of Metallica in MP3 format) is in there somewhere.
The use of 'hacking' in the older sense extended well beyond MIT in 1975. Yes, it may be stretching things to call fixing a fender Red Green style hacking, but it certainly doesn't necessarily involve criminal activity.
Because a tribe of cave people looking in awe at a pile of pebbles wouldn't have been very dramatic?!? :-)
I didn't make any claim that the scientific method is invalid (quite the contrary). Likewise, prove irrefutably to the pope that Jesus never was, even as a parable and perhaps the church will change it's mind.
Meanwhile, I don't think either of us would like to see science judged based on the crackpots that claim to be scientists...
I find it unlikely that quantum loop gravity, string theory, pilot waves, and the Copenhagen all hold true. That doesn't mean they're all junk or that the people proposing the various theories are somehow dishonest or fools.
I'm certainly not demanding that you believe any of it. It would, however, be reasonable to show a little respect for those who do. At least for the ones willing to reciprocate.
Once third parties can be damaged, it is no longer the business' call. Sure, it's their right to ignore the risk that their A/C could get shut off, or that their corporate bank account could be hoovered. However, if the hack could flood neighborhoods with sewage, it is no longer their call, it's up to the people who might get flooded.
That depends on who it costs if the security is breached. If it is JUST the company that stands to lose, fine. But if their customers also stand to lose (for example, credit card info, medical records, etc), then no. It is no longer the company's risk to take and their customers have every right to know how poorly their data is being guarded.
The latter is more common than the former.
WRT Christ, it's about as likely as string theorists all throwing up their hands and declaring their field to be bunk.
Or since you said core belief, what are the odds of an announcement that the scientific method is a dead end?
But consider, Only some denominations believe in confession, purgatory, etc. Some believe a private prayer is enough to be absolved of sin, others believe works are necessary. Even within Baptists there is disagreement on the holy trinity (a fairly central belief). Meanwhile, the Jews do not believe in Jesus. The Buddhists do not believe in God.
All sorts of things. A simple example that comes to mind is a patch to add an invisible extra user account with enable privileges.
Read what I have said again.
See the indictment.
The charges were in relation to his disclosure of the information. Yes, there was also some scapegoating going on.
So when do they start prosecuting?
Of course that leads to the 64 thousand dollar question: Does 3D advance or hinder storytelling? It's a worthwhile question since we've known how to do 3D for a very long time but it is rarely used well. Most 3D is used on bad to mediocre movies. Even when used on a good movie, many question the value 3D adds.
Perhaps there isn't a lot of good content in 3D because 3D doesn't make for good content. After all, it's been 60 years now, if it made for good content, surely there would be more of it.
I wouldn't count that as "adaptability" of religions, though. More as a kind of evolution with some of them dying out.
It has been observed more than once that the revolutions in science become mainstream as the old guard literally die off. In between, there is a steady refinement and enlargement upon the working theory.
Consider string theory. Over the years, it has gained several additional dimensions, morphed into M theory, several branches were realized to be exactly equivalent and merged, etc. All that and it has yet to make a testable prediction that earlier models don't also make.
None of that is meant as a criticism of science. It's part of the process. It is simply meant as a reminder that things are messy sometimes and that it's not fair to expect from religion what science cannot manage either.
The Apocrypha is a group of disputed books of the Bible. Different denominations have different opinions on their canonicity. Some leave them out of their edition of the Bible entirely. Compare to the differing interpretations of quantum mechanics.
Compare the Catholic church, various Orthodox churches, the variety of protestant denominations, the recent fundamentalist churches and the Mormon church and you will see a great deal of differences in fairly fundamental beliefs. Some are more tolerant of other beliefs than others.
Science too suffers a number of psychoceramics :-)
From his indictment. Have a look at items 14, 17, and 24 of the grand jury charges.
I presume a court document is sufficiently authoritative?
The polarized light version is superior to the colored glasses, but already the fad is fading again. There were one or two good 3D movies made and a bunch of mediocre fake 3D conversions done and now it's going away.
It's cool that you got a few nice dates out of it but I'd say part was the novelty, and part was that there was enough interest between you that you were already on a date.
This is actually the 3rd try at 3d TV. The first two were special broadcasts using the colored glasses (given out for free). Not bad, but didn't generate enough interest to keep going.
To be fair, we-we is about the only thing not patented.
Unless the phone is a randomly shaped blob with razor sharp spikes and a morse code only interface that doesn't actually connect to anything, someone will have their hand out for royalties anyway.
So where are the calls for a trip to gitmo or a life sentence?
BTW, Libby was charged with the disclosure, they needed a fall guy to try.
Pray, tell, where's the Aether of religion?
The Apocrypha, the entirely discarded ancient Roman and Greek beliefs, etc.
Really, it does? Where do all the souls come from or go to when the population changes dramatically?
Souls are created some time, aren't they? Eventually they are enlightened and break the cycle. Nothing says a soul comes back right away. That was easy and obvious for anyone not pointedly avoiding a logical solution.
I'm going to have to say, the longer this thread goes, the more it feels like arguing with any fundie out there.
The last person to out an operative was Scooter Libby. His sentence was commuted so that he served no jail time.
Anonymous whistleblowers tend to have no credibility whatsoever. That's why he didn't hide his identity.
I wouldn't say that. Like 3D, nobody is really going to get any value for their money out of a curved TV. Like 3D, it's a desperate grasping for some way to get people to buy a new TV before the old one dies.
Color TV actually upgraded the viewing experience significantly for a lot of people.
Since 3d has come and gone as a fad multiple times, gimmick is a pretty good word for it.
First, I sit about 9 feet from the TV, not 16.5, so the curvature will be wrong anyway. Second, the price difference is already more than I am willing to pay for the whole TV.
As TFA points out, only one person in the room would get an optimal view anyway.
Finally, if the whole problem is just a bit of geometric distortion, couldn't it be mostly fixed by performing the opposite transform on the image before displaying? That would allow you to optimize for your actual viewing position and come up with a happy average for everyone in the room, or turn it off.
I'm guessing they'll avoid my suggestion like the plague since it doesn't make the TV look expensive enough.
More to the point, we need to reconsider how much autonomy we grant them. For a few examples, toddlers cannot sue people or handle their own money. They certainly aren't allowed to handle anything that could injure someone (or themselves) and they are not permitted to have an actual job outside of the immediate family.
Perhaps if the corporations want to behave like they're two years old, they shouldn't be allowed to be more than a social club. Telecommunications is too important to entrust to a toddler.