If he wants to do science with 1500 chemicals, he should rent a space in an industrial park. Then the fire department can use Fire Codes to force him to properly label and store his shit according to the appropriate guidelines.
The number of chemicals indicates nothing as far as the how hazardous his lab was.
By your logic, cooking should be limited to industrial parks as well, or even isolated bunkers, since your average pot of stew's going to be made with ingredients containing TENS OF THOUSANDS of different chemicals. What's important is not how many chemicals, but which ones, and in what quantities.
The fact that people saw fit to mod you insightful despite your display of such blatant ignorance astounds me.
I wish I had mod points for this, I've had the same experience.
Also, I'm just going to f***ing say it, I'm not the least bit afraid of some guy building a bomb or buying an "assault weapon", and killing me with it. Yes, it could happen, but I could also be struck by lightning, get hit by a car, or any number of other things (all of which would probably be more likely), taking chances is simply part of life.
What I am afraid of is our growing police state. Right now its disarmament of the population, and overly restrictive laws that can be enforced at the governments discretion, all made possible by the gradual repealing and (appalling) reinterpretation of protections designed to guard us against this sort of thing, God knows where all this is going.
Come to think about it, I'd feel a hell of alot safer if all my neighbors possessed bombs and actual assault weapons (select fire).
I agree with some of what you've said, but I think your overlooking a very significant difference between Africa and the developed world, RESOURCES. A good proportion of the land in Europe, America, and even china to some extent is fertile, and contains resources like wood metal, and oil. This often isn't the case in Africa. People don't live there because they chose it, they live there because nothing's killed them off yet.
No amount of temporary aid can change the simple fact that a populations standard of living will be roughly equivalent to the hospitality of its environment and its ability to adapt, as well as inversely proportional to its population density.
The only way I see of helping these people is to provide a means of learning, that they may more readily and effectively adapt to their environment. Material Aid will do no more than ease the pressures that could otherwise effect positive change.
Encryption using public and private keys has its place, but can only identify machines, as the keys can't (reasonably) be memorized by humans, thus, at some point, humans will always have to be in the loop.
We're free to drop our weapons whenever we like, but there are plenty of adversaries that wouldn't hesitate to (meteorically) walk up to us and shoot us where we stand, provoked or not.
I realize its not terribly abstract, but I'm referring to nations and societies, not actual soldiers.
Here, let me retool that analogy,/. style: You and a bunch of other drivers are driving around smashing into each other, demolition derby style, both offensively and defensively. Everyone could theoretically just stop, and minimize the total damage, but assuming a random distribution of the other drivers willingness to do so as well, its in each drivers best personal interest to continue smashing.
Right, except you can't make that decision for everyone.
We're free to drop our weapons whenever we like, but there are plenty of adversaries that wouldn't hesitate to (meteorically) walk up to us and shoot us where we stand, provoked or not.
Use of force is the ultimate decider, any entity that lacks the will or capability to use it will be at the mercy of those that do not. This is not a fact of humanity, but a fact of nature.
Your analogy implies that the original argument was that people who can't code have no business using software or complaining when it doesn't work. Whereas the OP claimed only that non coders have no business designing software.
A more accurate analogy would be: "people who can't cook have no business plating and decorating food"
The story was alright, but the puzzles were definitely better than the originals, I almost beat it Monday night, but had to call it quits at 6am,
btw, I should mention that real flash version is what got me to buy portal to begin with. If you haven't played it, you should, it's alot of fun as well.
The bonus levels are definitely more challenging, but really aren't of the same caliber as the story mode levels. A lot of the extra levels don't require and additional problem solving, just crazy midair trick shots and acrobatics, which for me got old quick.
What about massive reforestation projects? There's a lot of people starving and doing nothing all over the world. Let's feed them and put them to work planting trees (and other related and necessary elements of a sustainable ecology.)
Yes, except that standing forests don't absorb any co2 once their fully grown.
Tree's and vegetation absorb co2 when they grow, but release it again when they die and decompose. Thus, standing forests are carbon neutral.
What we could do is institute expansive sustainable logging programs, so as to store the co2 away in the form of wood. This would have the added benefit of providing building material, which could be sold to make the whole system profitable.
IMHO, the simplest solution would be to tax pollution producers. If we could find a way to fairly charge for pollution what it costs to clean, things would improve dramatically. We wouldn't even have to get developing nations like china on board, as, if they refused, we could simple add terifs for it to their products.
These days, I often see the reverse happening, ie, console games being made into crappy PC ports, look at Gears of War (the king of quick and dirty PC ports) and Mass Effect, for instance.
With the exception of COD4, the PC version of which is actually pretty slick, most of the modern console ports I've played on PC have been rough at best.
In theory, this could work really well, but realistically speaking, I wonder how many voters would even read the bills before voting on them. Not to mention how short sighted people tend to be when it comes to politics.
So basically, we have a choice between (more) intelligent and informed representatives working towards their own personal, and sometimes detrimental goals. And the well intentioned idiots that generally put more thought into their votes for American idol than their votes in national elections.
By changing the label, all your doing is attempting to label piracy with an word that is less specific, and already has a negative connotation THAT IT DIDN'T GET FROM PRIACY.
Personally, I prefer to refer to it as copyright infringement, as that had no connotation to begin with. If it's interpreted positively now, that's only a reflection of cultural opinion of the subject.
No offense, but comparing the kidnapping and killing of unrelated innocents to the bombing of an outwardly aggressive, war participating country that had been warned, and given the chance to surrender peacefully is pretty much the definition of pseudo-argument.
While the hawkeye certainly isn't perfect, I almost guarantee that its at least a few orders of magnitude more accurate than the human eye.
I don't see where the controversy is, the rules are simple, the ball is either in, or its out, theirs nothing left to human discretion, so nothing is lost by removing the human element.
Why this shouldn't be used whenever its available?
I never said I haven't played it, I've played almost all successful shooters that have come out for the 360 for a few days at least, halo1's just the only console shooter besides ghost recon 1 and vegas II that I ever got seriously into. Most of the games I play competitively, I play on PC.
Almost all weapons, in all major console FPS's have auto aim, period.
Only two of the weapons in halo 3 may have noticeable auto aim, but I guarantee they all have some.
There are several types of auto-aim, and most games use a combination, for instance, its common to reduce your aiming sensitivity when you pass your croshairs over any enemy, making your reticule stick to them a bit, also, as you mentioned, some games will curve projectiles towards your enemy, register hits on near misses, or even follow targets with your crosshairs a bit.
Need an example of extremely subtle but effective auto aim? look at halo 1 (sorry, its the only console shooter I played seriously), the game feels as if it has none, yet sometime when your playing, try to shoot a teammate with your sniper rifle, you can still hit them, but its a hell of alot harder, as your crosshairs wont stick to them at all.
Slashdot Mirror
If he wants to do science with 1500 chemicals, he should rent a space in an industrial park. Then the fire department can use Fire Codes to force him to properly label and store his shit according to the appropriate guidelines.
The number of chemicals indicates nothing as far as the how hazardous his lab was.
By your logic, cooking should be limited to industrial parks as well, or even isolated bunkers, since your average pot of stew's going to be made with ingredients containing TENS OF THOUSANDS of different chemicals. What's important is not how many chemicals, but which ones, and in what quantities.
The fact that people saw fit to mod you insightful despite your display of such blatant ignorance astounds me.
I wish I had mod points for this, I've had the same experience.
Also, I'm just going to f***ing say it, I'm not the least bit afraid of some guy building a bomb or buying an "assault weapon", and killing me with it. Yes, it could happen, but I could also be struck by lightning, get hit by a car, or any number of other things (all of which would probably be more likely), taking chances is simply part of life.
What I am afraid of is our growing police state. Right now its disarmament of the population, and overly restrictive laws that can be enforced at the governments discretion, all made possible by the gradual repealing and (appalling) reinterpretation of protections designed to guard us against this sort of thing, God knows where all this is going.
Come to think about it, I'd feel a hell of alot safer if all my neighbors possessed bombs and actual assault weapons (select fire).
Don't know the reason behind the abortion stance. Maybe because it's too hard to joke about tastefully.
Thats where South Park comes in.
I agree with some of what you've said, but I think your overlooking a very significant difference between Africa and the developed world, RESOURCES. A good proportion of the land in Europe, America, and even china to some extent is fertile, and contains resources like wood metal, and oil. This often isn't the case in Africa. People don't live there because they chose it, they live there because nothing's killed them off yet.
No amount of temporary aid can change the simple fact that a populations standard of living will be roughly equivalent to the hospitality of its environment and its ability to adapt, as well as inversely proportional to its population density.
The only way I see of helping these people is to provide a means of learning, that they may more readily and effectively adapt to their environment. Material Aid will do no more than ease the pressures that could otherwise effect positive change.
Encryption using public and private keys has its place, but can only identify machines, as the keys can't (reasonably) be memorized by humans, thus, at some point, humans will always have to be in the loop.
We're free to drop our weapons whenever we like, but there are plenty of adversaries that wouldn't hesitate to (meteorically) walk up to us and shoot us where we stand, provoked or not.
I realize its not terribly abstract, but I'm referring to nations and societies, not actual soldiers.
Here, let me retool that analogy, /. style:
You and a bunch of other drivers are driving around smashing into each other, demolition derby style, both offensively and defensively. Everyone could theoretically just stop, and minimize the total damage, but assuming a random distribution of the other drivers willingness to do so as well, its in each drivers best personal interest to continue smashing.
If I had mod points, I'd seriously give up my other comments to mod this up
Let's stop killing each other.
Right, except you can't make that decision for everyone.
We're free to drop our weapons whenever we like, but there are plenty of adversaries that wouldn't hesitate to (meteorically) walk up to us and shoot us where we stand, provoked or not.
Use of force is the ultimate decider, any entity that lacks the will or capability to use it will be at the mercy of those that do not. This is not a fact of humanity, but a fact of nature.
Dam, I wish I had mod points for this.
I think you've hit the nail right on the head
Your analogy implies that the original argument was that people who can't code have no business using software or complaining when it doesn't work. Whereas the OP claimed only that non coders have no business designing software.
A more accurate analogy would be: "people who can't cook have no business plating and decorating food"
Thanks for the recommendation, I just beat it :-)
The story was alright, but the puzzles were definitely better than the originals, I almost beat it Monday night, but had to call it quits at 6am,
btw, I should mention that real flash version is what got me to buy portal to begin with. If you haven't played it, you should, it's alot of fun as well.
Portal: The Flash Version
The bonus levels are definitely more challenging, but really aren't of the same caliber as the story mode levels. A lot of the extra levels don't require and additional problem solving, just crazy midair trick shots and acrobatics, which for me got old quick.
What about massive reforestation projects? There's a lot of people starving and doing nothing all over the world. Let's feed them and put them to work planting trees (and other related and necessary elements of a sustainable ecology.)
Yes, except that standing forests don't absorb any co2 once their fully grown.
Tree's and vegetation absorb co2 when they grow, but release it again when they die and decompose. Thus, standing forests are carbon neutral.
What we could do is institute expansive sustainable logging programs, so as to store the co2 away in the form of wood. This would have the added benefit of providing building material, which could be sold to make the whole system profitable.
IMHO, the simplest solution would be to tax pollution producers. If we could find a way to fairly charge for pollution what it costs to clean, things would improve dramatically. We wouldn't even have to get developing nations like china on board, as, if they refused, we could simple add terifs for it to their products.
These days, I often see the reverse happening, ie, console games being made into crappy PC ports, look at Gears of War (the king of quick and dirty PC ports) and Mass Effect, for instance.
With the exception of COD4, the PC version of which is actually pretty slick, most of the modern console ports I've played on PC have been rough at best.
God, I wish I had mod points for this.
In theory, this could work really well, but realistically speaking, I wonder how many voters would even read the bills before voting on them. Not to mention how short sighted people tend to be when it comes to politics.
So basically, we have a choice between (more) intelligent and informed representatives working towards their own personal, and sometimes detrimental goals. And the well intentioned idiots that generally put more thought into their votes for American idol than their votes in national elections.
**sigh**
Thats a bit short sighted, don't you think?
By changing the label, all your doing is attempting to label piracy with an word that is less specific, and already has a negative connotation THAT IT DIDN'T GET FROM PRIACY.
Personally, I prefer to refer to it as copyright infringement, as that had no connotation to begin with. If it's interpreted positively now, that's only a reflection of cultural opinion of the subject.
effectively giving the government a free hand in silencing bloggers
Because we've all seen how heavily the current regime has been burdened by civil rights laws in the past
No offense, but comparing the kidnapping and killing of unrelated innocents to the bombing of an outwardly aggressive, war participating country that had been warned, and given the chance to surrender peacefully is pretty much the definition of pseudo-argument.
While the hawkeye certainly isn't perfect, I almost guarantee that its at least a few orders of magnitude more accurate than the human eye.
I don't see where the controversy is, the rules are simple, the ball is either in, or its out, theirs nothing left to human discretion, so nothing is lost by removing the human element.
Why this shouldn't be used whenever its available?
and even if you have ups's for both, your house could be destroyed, better have a back up house,
but make sure its not in the same neihborhood as your primary...
I never said I haven't played it, I've played almost all successful shooters that have come out for the 360 for a few days at least, halo1's just the only console shooter besides ghost recon 1 and vegas II that I ever got seriously into. Most of the games I play competitively, I play on PC.
Almost all weapons, in all major console FPS's have auto aim, period.
Only two of the weapons in halo 3 may have noticeable auto aim, but I guarantee they all have some.
There are several types of auto-aim, and most games use a combination, for instance, its common to reduce your aiming sensitivity when you pass your croshairs over any enemy, making your reticule stick to them a bit, also, as you mentioned, some games will curve projectiles towards your enemy, register hits on near misses, or even follow targets with your crosshairs a bit.
Need an example of extremely subtle but effective auto aim? look at halo 1 (sorry, its the only console shooter I played seriously), the game feels as if it has none, yet sometime when your playing, try to shoot a teammate with your sniper rifle, you can still hit them, but its a hell of alot harder, as your crosshairs wont stick to them at all.
Not necessarily, but stating the obvious and posting flamebait aren't mutually exclusive.
Alright, I spent the last 45 minutes googling, but I can't find the page I read the explanation on. I'll reply again if I find it.