I'm with you 90% of the way but you can't criticize racism yet say we should sabotage "all muslim countries in general", you really can't. Iran may be a dark place, practicing Islam, but Islam didn't make it that way and their flavor isn't representative of the religion as a whole.
I think AppleScript is a great way to get an unexperienced someone some experience. It's easy enough to sit in front of your mac, open and screw around with a random script from your computer, and actually get some meaningful results, while introducing you to basic concepts that would make learning something else much easier. A gateway language, if you will. Automator defeats the purpose in my mind - it's easier and is kind of like AppleScript for dummies, but takes out a lot of the growthful learning required.
That probably makes it much easier to teach. Learning mathematica was wonderful but you gotta buy the book or deal with the (truly excellent at times but always boring) help. If you can just say "Hey, do this" and be told what the proper command is, that goes a long way toward being able to learn the language. If there's a negative about most programming languages, it's that if you haven't had any formal training it can be a real pain to figure out the quirks.
Perhaps, but compared with Mathematica 3 or 4, 6 and 7 had some pretty nifty stuff that required an internet connection. Graphing data, etc. is, of course, where the money is, but there's a lot you can do with Mathematica that goes beyond making confusing diagrams. The best example I can think of was astronomy. With a wealth of data about the planets, we actually did some hefty gravity modeling. Or analyze the stock market, whatever suits your fancy, but you nicked it from the web. I'm sure you know all this but the point is that being more than just a fancy-schmancy calculator programming language means being more useful outside of that small world, which at this point honestly means more cloud.
Think of it like an old picture or video. Sure, the home video may be of you as a 2 year old, but the fact that you're significantly older now won't change the video.
You're right, they should totally allow massive copyright infringement on the fifth or sixth most popular website in the world. That would totally be more fair.
If you don't like a law, change the law, not the law-abiding citizens.
You don't need to be a totalitarian community to have enemies. Wikimedia, Slashdot, 4chan, these places are all pretty open, and all have plenty of enemies. WR is largely out to get Wikipedia, which is really all you need as a definition.
I won't criticize your comments about Wales or Essjay, but to be honest neither of those people are immensely relevant anymore, except as a learning tool for the community.
This was a study done on 82 Canadian men; apologies if I don't find the findings immediately appropriate. Maybe women are more likely to find meat agitating? Moreover, it's a really weird study. The conclusion that meat is calming comes from not punishing someone for sorting a meat picture - that's just too far removed from reality.
You shouldn't conflate copyright and patent law. They are two separate concepts governed by different laws, which by a freak coincidence happen to be just as messed up as each other.
I know I'm taking the bait here, but the second amendment does come into play. The same people who say that it doesn't say gay marriage in the Constitution or wonder where Separation of Church and State is actually mentioned will notice the following about the Constitution:
- No mention of file sharing - No mention of 3D printers - I get guns
Is it naive? Yes. Is it ignorant? Yes. Does it happen all the time? Yes.
It may not be the worst thing to come our way yet, but light pollution is tragic. Back in the day the Milky Way and Jupiter cast shadows, so it's no wonder everyone thought they were gods. If we had a better view of the stars (even our most unspoiled land is a pittance comparatively) I guarantee more people would give more thought to them.
No, seriously, this is key. What's to stop someone from making a rule saying "change all books into adult fiction" or "change all video games into GTA?" I'm not really one to say we should be keeping that content away from people, but seriously, let the parents decide. This kind of things makes ESRB and movie ratings pointless, which is a Bad Idea.
Popular students go to more parties, where they can booze, blaze, and bang? Groundbreaking. Even more astounding
On the bright side, the survey found that almost a quarter of students engaged in zero texting (22.5 percent) or social networking (22.2 percent), and that they likewise had better health.
Unpopular kids don't get the chance to play with the cool kids.
That page has got to be faulty. Go to the main link, http://panopticlick.eff.org/ - the results are staggeringly different. That tells me I'm unique out of everyone (>1.2 million) whereas the link given in GP says I'm 1 out of around 85k.
1. More people pay up because then it's for real. 2. Price goes down. 3. Repeat.
That's all they really need to get an industry jump-started, and get capital flowing in. With six passengers on board, each flight is worth 1.2 million USD. It's not hard to iterate that to get a significant operating budget.
No kidding. There's nothing to distinguish this headline from one a character might see in any scifi novel. The concept of a private company building a factory solely to build spaceships (albeit 60km ones) is staggering.
I wouldn't use the word bogus, but it IS essentially one man's whine about how his stuff was deleted. The last two sentences sum it up for me:
That shows our freedom of speech is better protected when bought and paid for. The web is censored and manipulated in more ways than we know.
Entitled much? Craigslist is offering a service and if you don't like how their service is run, go elsewhere. But just because the actual customers didn't like your presentation, it doesn't mean CL is a corporate fatcat out to ruin the Constitution. If you want to write about mob rule, write about slashdot, or *chan, or wikipedia, or ancient Athens. As of now, this falls under "stories a friend would tell me that I would nod and smile to and then change the subject."
The "debate" isn't concerned with whether or not nature or nurture affects us - as you say, the answer is of course. The debate is about two things - how much of a role each one plays and how the two roles interact. We get that your diet as an infant can affect how you grow up, but the better question is how that diet actually elicits a change and response in your genetics or general physiology.
I'm with you on the two-party system, but I think the best way to get by it is to start using IRV/STV. Even ignoring the benefits of being a more accurate and representative system, it definitely gives third and fourth parties a chance to actually make a real showing. If candidates truly have to make the most people the most happy, they can't sustain the level of polarized rhetoric we're seeing these days. More candidates + more reasonable opinions + better representations of your vote = better democracy.
Or maybe it's just one pie-in-the-sky idea versus another.
(Also, I've only had a chance to marginally read up on metagovernment so if this is in some way incorporated, awesome!)
Our concept of electors really exists in a way to balance power amongst the states. As you (kind of) point out, a simple majority really doesn't work well on the national level. Sure, it sounds great, but we don't live in an even world. Nine states contain >50% of the population and 25 contain 16.67%. Dump cash into California, Texas, New York, and Florida and you'll be elected. That's why we have electors, so that yes, Rhode Island and Alaska voters have disproportionate power compared to Pennsylvania, but they are still states.
Consensus, as opposed to a majority, is a wonderful idea. Honestly, Wikipedia is probably the best model but, look at it. It's a very creaky process that breeds bureaucracy. There's simply now way we can get that applied on a national level. Hell, the Democrats can barely get consensus when they control two branches of government. Consensus is nice, and for small communities it works, but it cannot apply on the large scale.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm with you 90% of the way but you can't criticize racism yet say we should sabotage "all muslim countries in general", you really can't. Iran may be a dark place, practicing Islam, but Islam didn't make it that way and their flavor isn't representative of the religion as a whole.
I think AppleScript is a great way to get an unexperienced someone some experience. It's easy enough to sit in front of your mac, open and screw around with a random script from your computer, and actually get some meaningful results, while introducing you to basic concepts that would make learning something else much easier. A gateway language, if you will. Automator defeats the purpose in my mind - it's easier and is kind of like AppleScript for dummies, but takes out a lot of the growthful learning required.
That probably makes it much easier to teach. Learning mathematica was wonderful but you gotta buy the book or deal with the (truly excellent at times but always boring) help. If you can just say "Hey, do this" and be told what the proper command is, that goes a long way toward being able to learn the language. If there's a negative about most programming languages, it's that if you haven't had any formal training it can be a real pain to figure out the quirks.
Perhaps, but compared with Mathematica 3 or 4, 6 and 7 had some pretty nifty stuff that required an internet connection. Graphing data, etc. is, of course, where the money is, but there's a lot you can do with Mathematica that goes beyond making confusing diagrams. The best example I can think of was astronomy. With a wealth of data about the planets, we actually did some hefty gravity modeling. Or analyze the stock market, whatever suits your fancy, but you nicked it from the web. I'm sure you know all this but the point is that being more than just a fancy-schmancy calculator programming language means being more useful outside of that small world, which at this point honestly means more cloud.
Sadly, that test is largely meaningless at this point - too many people have heard of it to be effective.
Why does *our frame*
Think of it like an old picture or video. Sure, the home video may be of you as a 2 year old, but the fact that you're significantly older now won't change the video.
You're right, they should totally allow massive copyright infringement on the fifth or sixth most popular website in the world. That would totally be more fair.
If you don't like a law, change the law, not the law-abiding citizens.
You don't need to be a totalitarian community to have enemies. Wikimedia, Slashdot, 4chan, these places are all pretty open, and all have plenty of enemies. WR is largely out to get Wikipedia, which is really all you need as a definition.
I won't criticize your comments about Wales or Essjay, but to be honest neither of those people are immensely relevant anymore, except as a learning tool for the community.
Seeing as neither of them is actually a sysop, I have a hard time believing your third sentence.
This was a study done on 82 Canadian men; apologies if I don't find the findings immediately appropriate. Maybe women are more likely to find meat agitating? Moreover, it's a really weird study. The conclusion that meat is calming comes from not punishing someone for sorting a meat picture - that's just too far removed from reality.
You shouldn't conflate copyright and patent law. They are two separate concepts governed by different laws, which by a freak coincidence happen to be just as messed up as each other.
I know I'm taking the bait here, but the second amendment does come into play. The same people who say that it doesn't say gay marriage in the Constitution or wonder where Separation of Church and State is actually mentioned will notice the following about the Constitution:
- No mention of file sharing
- No mention of 3D printers
- I get guns
Is it naive? Yes. Is it ignorant? Yes. Does it happen all the time? Yes.
It may not be the worst thing to come our way yet, but light pollution is tragic. Back in the day the Milky Way and Jupiter cast shadows, so it's no wonder everyone thought they were gods. If we had a better view of the stars (even our most unspoiled land is a pittance comparatively) I guarantee more people would give more thought to them.
No, seriously, this is key. What's to stop someone from making a rule saying "change all books into adult fiction" or "change all video games into GTA?" I'm not really one to say we should be keeping that content away from people, but seriously, let the parents decide. This kind of things makes ESRB and movie ratings pointless, which is a Bad Idea.
Popular students go to more parties, where they can booze, blaze, and bang? Groundbreaking. Even more astounding
On the bright side, the survey found that almost a quarter of students engaged in zero texting (22.5 percent) or social networking (22.2 percent), and that they likewise had better health.
Unpopular kids don't get the chance to play with the cool kids.
That page has got to be faulty. Go to the main link, http://panopticlick.eff.org/ - the results are staggeringly different. That tells me I'm unique out of everyone (>1.2 million) whereas the link given in GP says I'm 1 out of around 85k.
I imagine this:
1. More people pay up because then it's for real.
2. Price goes down.
3. Repeat.
That's all they really need to get an industry jump-started, and get capital flowing in. With six passengers on board, each flight is worth 1.2 million USD. It's not hard to iterate that to get a significant operating budget.
No kidding. There's nothing to distinguish this headline from one a character might see in any scifi novel. The concept of a private company building a factory solely to build spaceships (albeit 60km ones) is staggering.
I look forward to reading this exact same story, except with details, in less than a month.
I wouldn't use the word bogus, but it IS essentially one man's whine about how his stuff was deleted. The last two sentences sum it up for me:
That shows our freedom of speech is better protected when bought and paid for. The web is censored and manipulated in more ways than we know.
Entitled much? Craigslist is offering a service and if you don't like how their service is run, go elsewhere. But just because the actual customers didn't like your presentation, it doesn't mean CL is a corporate fatcat out to ruin the Constitution. If you want to write about mob rule, write about slashdot, or *chan, or wikipedia, or ancient Athens. As of now, this falls under "stories a friend would tell me that I would nod and smile to and then change the subject."
TFA covers it - clothes aren't a huge deal since you're moving around. It's leg position that affects temperature.
The "debate" isn't concerned with whether or not nature or nurture affects us - as you say, the answer is of course. The debate is about two things - how much of a role each one plays and how the two roles interact. We get that your diet as an infant can affect how you grow up, but the better question is how that diet actually elicits a change and response in your genetics or general physiology.
I'm with you on the two-party system, but I think the best way to get by it is to start using IRV/STV. Even ignoring the benefits of being a more accurate and representative system, it definitely gives third and fourth parties a chance to actually make a real showing. If candidates truly have to make the most people the most happy, they can't sustain the level of polarized rhetoric we're seeing these days. More candidates + more reasonable opinions + better representations of your vote = better democracy.
Or maybe it's just one pie-in-the-sky idea versus another.
(Also, I've only had a chance to marginally read up on metagovernment so if this is in some way incorporated, awesome!)
Our concept of electors really exists in a way to balance power amongst the states. As you (kind of) point out, a simple majority really doesn't work well on the national level. Sure, it sounds great, but we don't live in an even world. Nine states contain >50% of the population and 25 contain 16.67%. Dump cash into California, Texas, New York, and Florida and you'll be elected. That's why we have electors, so that yes, Rhode Island and Alaska voters have disproportionate power compared to Pennsylvania, but they are still states.
Consensus, as opposed to a majority, is a wonderful idea. Honestly, Wikipedia is probably the best model but, look at it. It's a very creaky process that breeds bureaucracy. There's simply now way we can get that applied on a national level. Hell, the Democrats can barely get consensus when they control two branches of government. Consensus is nice, and for small communities it works, but it cannot apply on the large scale.
It's a safe bet that most decisions in our society are made to reduce lawsuits.