"When are people going to realize "coding" != "computer science"? (or , or !.equals(), or ne, etc. depending on your flavor). "
I use "is different to".
Otherwise, I'd add "{" somewhere after "When".
And I'd also replace "people" with "pp1". But that's just because I'm a hateful little subhuman monster that enjoys messing with the next person who falls in that code. No... Wait... That's what the previous guy did.
If you don't care about space exploration you're much worse than anti-science. If you care more about "billions of dollars" than about whether humanity populates places outside of the Earth your problem isn't with science, it's with having a tiny point of view. Essentially, not caring about the expansion of humanity through space puts you closer to animals, which only care about eating, reproducing and surviving.
However, it's not the same to consider that it might not be the appropriate moment for space exploration (for example because humanity should first work on discovering better propulsion systems) than to just don't care about it.
Not caring about space exploration is similar to not caring about philosophy, art or history. It just makes you less human and more beast.
>>"You're just applying a different "morale" than the people who actually have the power to take decision in the present world." >"I am guessing English is not your native language, in which case your English is quite good, but "morale" doesnt mean what you think it does." Thank you very much. You're right about English not being my first language and in mine "moral" and "morale" are two concepts for which we use the same word.
>>"You probably also believe that all people should be equal, but you live in a world that clearly disagrees and believes people are valued by their economic value (both possessions and influence in the economy)." >"Cant speak for everyone else, but I dont expect or desire equality in ALL aspects, that would be absurd. People are clearly different economically, for instance. Equality here is neither possible nor desireable. But all people should be equal *politically* - the basic rights of each individual should be protected equally." I agree with the precision. I did mean "equal to the eyes of politics and justice".
I agree it isn't necessary for everyone to be economically equal, as long as their economy doesn't have an effect on their political influence nor their judicial treatment. For instance, economical equality will not appear even after humanity grows beyond scarcity and economy mutates into the production and distribution exclusively of ideas, rather than also of goods and services.
It will be hilarious when someone makes a trojan that accesses file sharing services and leaves the entire country without a connection.
Additional hilarity will ensue when that "someone" is found to be someone related to an new alternative ISP.
And the final belly shaking laughter will come when people start getting popups that explain that unless they send some money to a certain account their internet connection will be cut.
The answer is easy and based on a simple question: What causes more economic loss to a corporation? Rape? Or illegally copying a DVD.
You expect crimes to be judged by humane reasons while they are judged by economic reasons. You're just applying a different "morale" than the people who actually have the power to take decision in the present world.
You probably also believe that all people should be equal, but you live in a world that clearly disagrees and believes people are valued by their economic value (both possessions and influence in the economy).
In some centuries, humans will have stories about the dark ages where the humans were judged by their economic value, just as we do about the times where they were judged by birthright or, even before, by brute force.
And these humans will probably live in a society with it's set of flaws, to be corrected in the further future.
The only important objectives, as a society, are to survive and to improve. As long as we're doing both, everything's fine.
You change cars so much more often than desktop computers? Are you implying that desktop computer component builders should stop their line of work, because they can't compete with Microsoft, Apple, Google?
Maybe your phone's software is tied to your phone, but that's your problem not the new status quo.
And even if you planned to keep the same car for a decade, which may render the hardware obsolete, haven't you ever changed a part of your car?
Automakers could put in computers for passenger/driver use in cars and then also sell upgrades for those computers.
Now a false statement is less false is written in common language?
I think I'll need a list of common language statements that reverse the falsehood of a statement. I'll start the list: - "in" = "by using": e.g.: "Yes, your honor, we found child porn IN his computer."
I recently read a comment in slashdot that had a bizarre structure. The author gave his opinion by telling a story about how he gave that same opinion to a friend of his.
Imagine a conference room with a salesman, a CEO and a bunch of politicians. Who do you propose they use to check whether the machine is actually capable of giving a negative?
Oh I forgot, a smartphone is the biggest ego-boosting gadget out there.
You're living in the past. They are no longer smartphones, they're just phones. And to boost your ego you'd need something not every seven year old has.
The consensus is that a tablet is expensive enough and big enough to have an excuse to show it at all times.
Just don't post location data or activities if you're engaging in protests... disable location services on your phone. You're giving data to a public database and then crying about privacy... just don't give them information.
How can you be sure that everyone who's participating in that same protest followed your advice?
They don't need the information you post if they already have the information other people post about you.
Sounds like you need some medical attention if you think a company producing a bunch of ones and zeros is equivalent to any of that.
Don't play dumb. He's saying they are equivalent in the "stealing a lot and then giving a little back" and if you don't want to address that argument you have the option of not replying..
The majority of the world will continue to rightly look at Bill Gates as a successful businessman doing charity work with his (for the most part) deserved riches.
We agree in that the majority of the world believes that. We disagree in the part about the deserved riches.
Next time, you could just reduce your argument to "He's not robbing because he deserves the riches he has for these reasons:..."
Slashdot Mirror
The terrorist attack reaction procedure must be launched!
Quickly! Kill some random guy in the underground! There's no time to lose or teh tarrorists win!
I've seen that movie. It was really a wormhole!
And in the wormhole lived a groundhog. And if it was cloudy when he emerged...
The losses to the mobile phone industry if that invention was released would be incalculable.
It would be like creating regenerative cars or eternal batteries.
"When are people going to realize "coding" != "computer science"? (or , or ! .equals(), or ne, etc. depending on your flavor). "
I use "is different to".
Otherwise, I'd add "{" somewhere after "When".
And I'd also replace "people" with "pp1". But that's just because I'm a hateful little subhuman monster that enjoys messing with the next person who falls in that code. No... Wait... That's what the previous guy did.
If you don't care about space exploration you're much worse than anti-science. If you care more about "billions of dollars" than about whether humanity populates places outside of the Earth your problem isn't with science, it's with having a tiny point of view. Essentially, not caring about the expansion of humanity through space puts you closer to animals, which only care about eating, reproducing and surviving.
However, it's not the same to consider that it might not be the appropriate moment for space exploration (for example because humanity should first work on discovering better propulsion systems) than to just don't care about it.
Not caring about space exploration is similar to not caring about philosophy, art or history. It just makes you less human and more beast.
>>"You're just applying a different "morale" than the people who actually have the power to take decision in the present world."
>"I am guessing English is not your native language, in which case your English is quite good, but "morale" doesnt mean what you think it does."
Thank you very much. You're right about English not being my first language and in mine "moral" and "morale" are two concepts for which we use the same word.
>>"You probably also believe that all people should be equal, but you live in a world that clearly disagrees and believes people are valued by their economic value (both possessions and influence in the economy)."
>"Cant speak for everyone else, but I dont expect or desire equality in ALL aspects, that would be absurd. People are clearly different economically, for instance. Equality here is neither possible nor desireable. But all people should be equal *politically* - the basic rights of each individual should be protected equally."
I agree with the precision. I did mean "equal to the eyes of politics and justice".
I agree it isn't necessary for everyone to be economically equal, as long as their economy doesn't have an effect on their political influence nor their judicial treatment. For instance, economical equality will not appear even after humanity grows beyond scarcity and economy mutates into the production and distribution exclusively of ideas, rather than also of goods and services.
It will be hilarious when someone makes a trojan that accesses file sharing services and leaves the entire country without a connection.
Additional hilarity will ensue when that "someone" is found to be someone related to an new alternative ISP.
And the final belly shaking laughter will come when people start getting popups that explain that unless they send some money to a certain account their internet connection will be cut.
All generalizations are either false or useless, except this one.
The answer is easy and based on a simple question: What causes more economic loss to a corporation? Rape? Or illegally copying a DVD.
You expect crimes to be judged by humane reasons while they are judged by economic reasons. You're just applying a different "morale" than the people who actually have the power to take decision in the present world.
You probably also believe that all people should be equal, but you live in a world that clearly disagrees and believes people are valued by their economic value (both possessions and influence in the economy).
In some centuries, humans will have stories about the dark ages where the humans were judged by their economic value, just as we do about the times where they were judged by birthright or, even before, by brute force.
And these humans will probably live in a society with it's set of flaws, to be corrected in the further future.
The only important objectives, as a society, are to survive and to improve. As long as we're doing both, everything's fine.
You change cars so much more often than desktop computers? Are you implying that desktop computer component builders should stop their line of work, because they can't compete with Microsoft, Apple, Google?
Maybe your phone's software is tied to your phone, but that's your problem not the new status quo.
And even if you planned to keep the same car for a decade, which may render the hardware obsolete, haven't you ever changed a part of your car?
Automakers could put in computers for passenger/driver use in cars and then also sell upgrades for those computers.
That's a very interesting point of view and I have no mod points.
Now a false statement is less false is written in common language?
I think I'll need a list of common language statements that reverse the falsehood of a statement. I'll start the list:
- "in" = "by using": e.g.: "Yes, your honor, we found child porn IN his computer."
No problem. My number is (555) 3214427 ... *2^t/18m
I recently read a comment in slashdot that had a bizarre structure. The author gave his opinion by telling a story about how he gave that same opinion to a friend of his.
They, Allegedly, walked away.
Without video proof, we can't be sure they didn't strolled, strutted or even rambled away.
I must see too much SF because this seems intuitively too easy.
500m and HD video is an hdpro in a transparent sphere with springs. The landing itself will make it move more than 500m.
I rationally know that sending a 300g mass to the moon isn't trivial, but it does look easy.
Now that I think on it, GoPro (the company) should try shooting a couple thousand of their cameras to the moon just for PR reasons.
Hard to sell.
Imagine a conference room with a salesman, a CEO and a bunch of politicians. Who do you propose they use to check whether the machine is actually capable of giving a negative?
Oh I forgot, a smartphone is the biggest ego-boosting gadget out there.
You're living in the past. They are no longer smartphones, they're just phones. And to boost your ego you'd need something not every seven year old has.
The consensus is that a tablet is expensive enough and big enough to have an excuse to show it at all times.
Just don't post location data or activities if you're engaging in protests... disable location services on your phone. You're giving data to a public database and then crying about privacy... just don't give them information.
How can you be sure that everyone who's participating in that same protest followed your advice?
They don't need the information you post if they already have the information other people post about you.
I repeat: If you don't have arms and legs and you are in a coma, you continue being a human
That's right. You "CONTINUE" being human, if you ever were one.
If you don't have arms nor legs and you're in a coma, but you alse were never born, you're not a human.
Exactly the same as if you have no arms legs no consciousness and are a story character.
Being born is really kind of a big point in the "unBORN" argument, you know?
Sounds like you need some medical attention if you think a company producing a bunch of ones and zeros is equivalent to any of that.
Don't play dumb. He's saying they are equivalent in the "stealing a lot and then giving a little back" and if you don't want to address that argument you have the option of not replying..
The majority of the world will continue to rightly look at Bill Gates as a successful businessman doing charity work with his (for the most part) deserved riches.
We agree in that the majority of the world believes that. We disagree in the part about the deserved riches.
Next time, you could just reduce your argument to "He's not robbing because he deserves the riches he has for these reasons: ..."
Time to move to a more interesting game you can also play in your phone.
Have you ever played go?
(disclaimer: I have nothing to do with the game nor the server creators).
After that I didn't work so hard....
This should be a lesson to you: next time don't work so hard from the beginning.
Exactly. Make it impossible to underpay you; achieve negative productivity.
Don't put up with that shit. Vote with your feet and quit your job. Stop being a bitch.
Or, depending on your region work opportunities and your physical appearance, start being one.
Or bombing the car of the guy who proposed it.
But a union is better.
And if it comes to it, a union can hire the bomb guy.