This has interesting implications for biosphere models during and before the Oxygen Catastrophe of the Siderian period. It also reveals an alternative evolutionary path which with these exceptions was otherwise prevented by those events. It fundamentally changes the possibilities of pre-Siderian life.
Whoever was willing to leak them the video either unencrypted it for them or was probably willing to leak the key too. In for a penny in for a pound.
Re:The end of homebrew
on
The Apple Two
·
· Score: 1
You have the winning point of course, and I would mod you up had I the points.
For my part I could never wrap my head around circuit design. I used to mess around with EEish things when I was a teenager, and I could read schematics and build things from them, but I was hopeless at designing anything from scratch. I've met very, very few people who were good at that kind of work, and I've always moved in nerdy circles. I think as the GP says tech companies are a priesthood, but further I think that is virtually inevitable. At the circuit level complex electronics are inscrutable, and as that complexity has exponentially increased since the glory days of kits back in the 20th century the inscrutability has commensurately increased. Talented EE/CEs are an elite strata of society, and I only can foresee that status deservedly solidifying and increasing.
Re:Apple has made Microsoft look "open".
on
The Apple Two
·
· Score: 2, Informative
It's not a fallacy. There is no proof one way or the other. It is still possible that New Coke was a conspiracy, there are just different camps of people. You want to believe the Coke execs, that's fine. There are many who don't, including me. I think it was one of the earliest triumphs of psychological marketing. Mr Keoughs' quote in the very article you cite alludes to it. As far as I'm concerned, anything they learned after the fact could have, in somebody's mind in the Coke boardroom, have been a predicted result. Somebody there could have been intelligent enough to have known what would happen. Maybe it was a fortuitous mistake, but I'm too cynical to but it. Either way is possible, so there is no fallacy.
(And since this established a precedented effect, changing something like Scrabble or Monopoly would be expected to maybe reproduce it. Too bad you never step into the same river twice, especially in the collective consciousness generations later.)
You're still not getting it. It doesn't matter that you don't agree with these practices, I don't necessarily agree with them either, like I said, I don't think race is important, but that doesn't make these things go away. These are real things in society, they are not going away, and just yelling "bullshit!" at them won't change anything. If anything you make the post-racial mindset look bad.
You say, 'you can't be proud of being Jewish' like you're king of the world. Some people choose to actively separate themselves from their native culture, that's their prerogative, other people relish their culture, that too is their prerogative.
You oversimplify racial/cultural/ethnic pride as simple "belonging". Races/cultures produce particular kinds of visual art, music, literature, architecture, etc. These form a real, physical shared identity that is perpetuated from generation to generation. Apostasy is great, I know, I've done that, but it doesn't mean anything to race. Rejecting labels is only productive insofar as one can look beyond stereotypes, otherwise labels and categories are fundamental to an organized understanding, and standing against your parents' judgement only makes sense when they are wrong. Many teens rebel for the sake of rebellion alone, in in their inexperienced indiscretion burn themselves. None of that has anything to do with race or culture.
Achievements do not happen in vacuums. I'm a hardcore individualist, and while each is due credit for their ultimate products, no man is an island, people are shaped and developed within families, communities, nations, and racial/cultural social constructs. Which segues well into what a terrible example your second point is. Who do you think funds many Olympic athletes? Taxpayers, especially in authoritarian countries. If I paid for everything an athlete has, paid for the coach and the support team, I think perhaps I should share a bit of credit, even if I didn't physically do the task itself. After all, remove all of that, and you don't have a medalist anymore, just another undiscovered raw talent waiting in line to make the median income in a cube farm who maybe plays little league on weekends. People are interconnected, financially, socially, culturally, legally, etc. This doesn't necessarily lead to any entitlements, reduction of freedoms, or creeping responsibility as many liberals would contend, but denial of shared identies/background/experience and the interconnection inherent in human society is nothing short of ignorance or madness.
I agree that there needs to be more "switching up" in literature, if for no other reason than the "core" classics get over-analyzed. There just isn't any more blood in those stones after millions of freshman papers.
It doesn't surprise me that you once labored under the idea that Shakespeare was the only playwright, considering how many people think Anton Chekhov was a guy on Star Trek.
I don't think that 'more modern' is necessarily the answer. There is so much literature from every age that is ignored. Lucian of Samosata wrote a lot of really entertaining (Symposium) and seriously thought-provoking works (Hermotimus), but even in ancient literature classes he is barely touched (I think from habit, as when Western society was more explicitly Judeo-Christian there wasn't much place for Lucian's anti-Christian views and his general irreverent ribaldry). Some ancient works that were once mainstream and considered fundamental are now ignored, such as the second book off of Gutenberg's own press after the Bible: Cicero's De Officiis.
I could go on and name others, but alas I have a train to catch.
That does not remove that fact that Christian and atheist Jews were killed by the nazis because of perceived racial heritage. Even if that were not a valid construction, which by itself is retarded and bigoted, like saying Koreans aren't a race because they've been overrun by the Japanese and Chinese too many times and there is no "Korean gene", it would not alter the fact that they were treated as a race by others and treat themselves as a race. They are a de facto race, even if your own parameters do not allow it, and that is expressed in positive and negative ways throughout social history.
I find it quite refreshing for a movie based on a book to be dependent on that book. Rather than rewrite for the sake of convenience (which is done in almost every other case), the viewer must either get it visually (as is the medium) or read the book (which they should anyway). Also, the movie doesn't need a soundtrack or exposition (and on that note, never read C.J. Cherryh, you would hate her). Though I agree the wailing is annoying as hell.
Races do exist, regardless of "purity". I don't think race is important, even in a positive sense let alone a negative, but that doesn't mean that races do not exist or are irrelevant. Society makes them relevant (call it bullshit if you like, that just means any social construction is bullshit, which is most everything, so enjoy your world view). Jews (mixed or not) look at their racial/ethnic background as a unifying force and something positive of which to be proud. Antisemites look at that background (once again, mixed or not , plenty of people who were barely Jewish at all went to the camps) as something to be hated an feared. Society makes these positive and negative perspectives real (whether or not they should be counted important), and you ignore them at your own ignorant peril.
2001: A Space Odyssey remains one of the greatest science fiction movies ever made. I'm sorry that it didn't have enough lasers going PEW PEW and ships roaring loudly through space (which is, you know, impossible in a vacuum) to hold your interest.
Shakespeare is over-rated to be sure, but as I've grown older I have begun to realize that it's kind of like the Bible, even if you don't like the corpus it is so foundational to the Western culture that you can't allow yourself to be ignorant of it. Do you know how many phrases of Shakespeare you are probably using without realizing it?
I still don't like Shakespeare, but I respect the impact that he and Bacon have had on the fundamentals of English-speaking culture. He is for better or for worse to us what Homer was to the Greeks.
If I had overheard that, they would have turned to find out what the loud smacking sound was... I probably would have facepalmed hard enough to leave a mark. And I don't even like LOTR.
Of course, institutionalized, systemic neglect during captivity that was intended to be fatal is so obviously different from direct lethal action. Thanks for pointing it out.
Well, in all fairness, she didn't 'just' die in a war, she is an example of one of the millions of *civilians* that got slaughtered, based solely on religion.
What manner of deficient and/or revisionist history are you being taught? She and others like her were killed because of race, not religion. Christians and atheists who were ethnically Jewish were killed right along with the orthodox Jews.
While as Pliny the Younger said, "Nullum esse librum tam malum ut non aliqua parte prodesset." ("No book is so bad that no part of it is useful.") That is a terribly low bar for classics.
If you believe as you appear to say that literary mistakes must be read in order to avoid literary mistakes, I suggest you try to teach art from the scribblings of toddlers. Of course when experience presents us with our own mistakes or the observation of others' mistakes in natural course certainly one should try to learn from those, but to seek out mistakes for their own sake? A waste of time, especially since there are scores of mediocre works in every era for each masterpiece.
Google did nothing but make something possible, something which responsible adults might have actually wanted to do. It just so happened that an unsupervised child that didn't know what she was doing (or didn't care) made use of that feature. Not Google's fault, the end. I don't think that/.ers would be any more or less bothered if some random unsupervised kid made use of a feature offered by MS or AOL. This isn't about coolness, it's about responsibility. So long as Google is not arbitrarily tossing contacts around without some kind of user initiation/authorization (which they are not), there is no issue here.
According to testimony in the trial of Guadalupe Gomez, he was unable to shift his Camry into neutral or turn off his engine. His experience was symptomatically quite similar to John Saylor's, except that he managed to survive the eventual impact (though those he hit did not, hence the trial). It's likely that the same thing happened to John Saylor, but he didn't live to provide an account.
Slashdot Mirror
This has interesting implications for biosphere models during and before the Oxygen Catastrophe of the Siderian period. It also reveals an alternative evolutionary path which with these exceptions was otherwise prevented by those events. It fundamentally changes the possibilities of pre-Siderian life.
That does not eliminate simply handing the video over with the encryption already removed. That just seems like the Occam's razor to this question.
Whoever was willing to leak them the video either unencrypted it for them or was probably willing to leak the key too. In for a penny in for a pound.
You have the winning point of course, and I would mod you up had I the points.
For my part I could never wrap my head around circuit design. I used to mess around with EEish things when I was a teenager, and I could read schematics and build things from them, but I was hopeless at designing anything from scratch. I've met very, very few people who were good at that kind of work, and I've always moved in nerdy circles. I think as the GP says tech companies are a priesthood, but further I think that is virtually inevitable. At the circuit level complex electronics are inscrutable, and as that complexity has exponentially increased since the glory days of kits back in the 20th century the inscrutability has commensurately increased. Talented EE/CEs are an elite strata of society, and I only can foresee that status deservedly solidifying and increasing.
Here you go.
I am, by the way, as anti-Apple as you can find, but you must be lazy as fuck. I mean seriously, Google + 5 min and done.
Apple fanbois must be out in force for things like this to get modded flamebait.
Spaceballs 2: The Search for More Money.
Ahem... I meant 'too cynical to buy it'
It's not a fallacy. There is no proof one way or the other. It is still possible that New Coke was a conspiracy, there are just different camps of people. You want to believe the Coke execs, that's fine. There are many who don't, including me. I think it was one of the earliest triumphs of psychological marketing. Mr Keoughs' quote in the very article you cite alludes to it. As far as I'm concerned, anything they learned after the fact could have, in somebody's mind in the Coke boardroom, have been a predicted result. Somebody there could have been intelligent enough to have known what would happen. Maybe it was a fortuitous mistake, but I'm too cynical to but it. Either way is possible, so there is no fallacy.
(And since this established a precedented effect, changing something like Scrabble or Monopoly would be expected to maybe reproduce it. Too bad you never step into the same river twice, especially in the collective consciousness generations later.)
You're still not getting it. It doesn't matter that you don't agree with these practices, I don't necessarily agree with them either, like I said, I don't think race is important, but that doesn't make these things go away. These are real things in society, they are not going away, and just yelling "bullshit!" at them won't change anything. If anything you make the post-racial mindset look bad.
You say, 'you can't be proud of being Jewish' like you're king of the world. Some people choose to actively separate themselves from their native culture, that's their prerogative, other people relish their culture, that too is their prerogative.
You oversimplify racial/cultural/ethnic pride as simple "belonging". Races/cultures produce particular kinds of visual art, music, literature, architecture, etc. These form a real, physical shared identity that is perpetuated from generation to generation. Apostasy is great, I know, I've done that, but it doesn't mean anything to race. Rejecting labels is only productive insofar as one can look beyond stereotypes, otherwise labels and categories are fundamental to an organized understanding, and standing against your parents' judgement only makes sense when they are wrong. Many teens rebel for the sake of rebellion alone, in in their inexperienced indiscretion burn themselves. None of that has anything to do with race or culture.
Achievements do not happen in vacuums. I'm a hardcore individualist, and while each is due credit for their ultimate products, no man is an island, people are shaped and developed within families, communities, nations, and racial/cultural social constructs. Which segues well into what a terrible example your second point is. Who do you think funds many Olympic athletes? Taxpayers, especially in authoritarian countries. If I paid for everything an athlete has, paid for the coach and the support team, I think perhaps I should share a bit of credit, even if I didn't physically do the task itself. After all, remove all of that, and you don't have a medalist anymore, just another undiscovered raw talent waiting in line to make the median income in a cube farm who maybe plays little league on weekends. People are interconnected, financially, socially, culturally, legally, etc. This doesn't necessarily lead to any entitlements, reduction of freedoms, or creeping responsibility as many liberals would contend, but denial of shared identies/background/experience and the interconnection inherent in human society is nothing short of ignorance or madness.
I agree that there needs to be more "switching up" in literature, if for no other reason than the "core" classics get over-analyzed. There just isn't any more blood in those stones after millions of freshman papers.
It doesn't surprise me that you once labored under the idea that Shakespeare was the only playwright, considering how many people think Anton Chekhov was a guy on Star Trek.
I don't think that 'more modern' is necessarily the answer. There is so much literature from every age that is ignored. Lucian of Samosata wrote a lot of really entertaining (Symposium) and seriously thought-provoking works (Hermotimus), but even in ancient literature classes he is barely touched (I think from habit, as when Western society was more explicitly Judeo-Christian there wasn't much place for Lucian's anti-Christian views and his general irreverent ribaldry). Some ancient works that were once mainstream and considered fundamental are now ignored, such as the second book off of Gutenberg's own press after the Bible: Cicero's De Officiis.
I could go on and name others, but alas I have a train to catch.
That does not remove that fact that Christian and atheist Jews were killed by the nazis because of perceived racial heritage. Even if that were not a valid construction, which by itself is retarded and bigoted, like saying Koreans aren't a race because they've been overrun by the Japanese and Chinese too many times and there is no "Korean gene", it would not alter the fact that they were treated as a race by others and treat themselves as a race. They are a de facto race, even if your own parameters do not allow it, and that is expressed in positive and negative ways throughout social history.
I find it quite refreshing for a movie based on a book to be dependent on that book. Rather than rewrite for the sake of convenience (which is done in almost every other case), the viewer must either get it visually (as is the medium) or read the book (which they should anyway). Also, the movie doesn't need a soundtrack or exposition (and on that note, never read C.J. Cherryh, you would hate her). Though I agree the wailing is annoying as hell.
Races do exist, regardless of "purity". I don't think race is important, even in a positive sense let alone a negative, but that doesn't mean that races do not exist or are irrelevant. Society makes them relevant (call it bullshit if you like, that just means any social construction is bullshit, which is most everything, so enjoy your world view). Jews (mixed or not) look at their racial/ethnic background as a unifying force and something positive of which to be proud. Antisemites look at that background (once again, mixed or not , plenty of people who were barely Jewish at all went to the camps) as something to be hated an feared. Society makes these positive and negative perspectives real (whether or not they should be counted important), and you ignore them at your own ignorant peril.
The religion is Judaism. The ethnicity is Jewish.
2001: A Space Odyssey remains one of the greatest science fiction movies ever made. I'm sorry that it didn't have enough lasers going PEW PEW and ships roaring loudly through space (which is, you know, impossible in a vacuum) to hold your interest.
Shakespeare is over-rated to be sure, but as I've grown older I have begun to realize that it's kind of like the Bible, even if you don't like the corpus it is so foundational to the Western culture that you can't allow yourself to be ignorant of it. Do you know how many phrases of Shakespeare you are probably using without realizing it?
I still don't like Shakespeare, but I respect the impact that he and Bacon have had on the fundamentals of English-speaking culture. He is for better or for worse to us what Homer was to the Greeks.
If I had overheard that, they would have turned to find out what the loud smacking sound was... I probably would have facepalmed hard enough to leave a mark. And I don't even like LOTR.
Of course, institutionalized, systemic neglect during captivity that was intended to be fatal is so obviously different from direct lethal action. Thanks for pointing it out.
Well, in all fairness, she didn't 'just' die in a war, she is an example of one of the millions of *civilians* that got slaughtered, based solely on religion.
What manner of deficient and/or revisionist history are you being taught? She and others like her were killed because of race, not religion. Christians and atheists who were ethnically Jewish were killed right along with the orthodox Jews.
While as Pliny the Younger said, "Nullum esse librum tam malum ut non aliqua parte prodesset." ("No book is so bad that no part of it is useful.") That is a terribly low bar for classics.
If you believe as you appear to say that literary mistakes must be read in order to avoid literary mistakes, I suggest you try to teach art from the scribblings of toddlers. Of course when experience presents us with our own mistakes or the observation of others' mistakes in natural course certainly one should try to learn from those, but to seek out mistakes for their own sake? A waste of time, especially since there are scores of mediocre works in every era for each masterpiece.
Yeah, because all of this could be done with plain HTML, obviously. Of course it's scripted. What do people expect?
Do you know what she's called? Incontinentia...
...Incontinentia Buttocks!
Google did nothing but make something possible, something which responsible adults might have actually wanted to do. It just so happened that an unsupervised child that didn't know what she was doing (or didn't care) made use of that feature. Not Google's fault, the end. I don't think that /.ers would be any more or less bothered if some random unsupervised kid made use of a feature offered by MS or AOL. This isn't about coolness, it's about responsibility. So long as Google is not arbitrarily tossing contacts around without some kind of user initiation/authorization (which they are not), there is no issue here.
I think it's a joke name, sir, like 'Sillius Soddus' or 'Bigus Dickus'.
... I know.
But I have a vewy gweat fwiend in Wome named 'Bigus Dickus'!
Low hanging fruit
According to testimony in the trial of Guadalupe Gomez, he was unable to shift his Camry into neutral or turn off his engine. His experience was symptomatically quite similar to John Saylor's, except that he managed to survive the eventual impact (though those he hit did not, hence the trial). It's likely that the same thing happened to John Saylor, but he didn't live to provide an account.