Will a naked picture of Natalie Portman, with hot grits all over her body get 10^6 hits a day? I wonder. If so, I can see his plan working, though I am not sure what the visual studio has got to do with jpegs.
Especially when speculators start inflating bubbles
- speculators do not inflate bubbles.
Bubbles inflate due to mis-allocation of resources (and we mostly see government being the culprits there, with borrowing and money printing, so inflating the money supply and so more and more fiat currency units end up chasing the same productive output), and then, once the government overheats some asset class due to various government 'insurance' policies, coupled with loose money (0% interest, money printing, borrowing forever), then speculators move in.
Sure, it's easy for governments to blame the speculators for rising prices, but speculators are not causing the prices to go up, increased demand (and demand is in this case amount of money chasing the goods given specific policies towards some asset classes) causes rising prices.
Basically government causes inflation and destruction of the fiat currency and this in turns causes some sectors to heat up, for the last 15 or so years these have been commodities (and housing) and speculators obviously move in, as there is easy money and the money is being debased.
Often enough speculators provide liquidity that even smooths away the spikes in prices (up or down), but sometimes speculators do cause uneven spikes. However again, they are not the actual cause of this, they are a symptom.
pension funds feel they have to invest in it, otherwise they lag the overall market index. While the fund managers might know that the company is overvalued, there's no way that they're going to say it for fear of getting hounded out of their jobs.
- yet another sign of a failed government - the type that taxes your income instead of living on a much smaller budget, that could be financed through alcohol/vice/excise taxes and pretends that it's giving you security by forcing you into these 'pension plans', which are terrible if you actually want to have a pension.
1987-89 - 'programming' on paper, I lived in former USSR and didn't own a computer. 89-91 - college in Ukraine, finally got to use actual hardware and even a network. Won a number of programming contests there. 92 - technical school of electronics in Israel. Got my own IBM 386, it was wonderful, was building anything, programming nightly, since I had to work as well. 94 - Dawson college (cegep) in Montreal - we had 'computer' classes there, mostly touch typing. Worked for a prof there on some fax drivers and a drawing app, all built in C and Assembly 1995 - UofT, went for comsci and astronomy. 1996 - first job in the chosen profession at a company called 'Davinci Technologies', was second person hired, built Bell Mobility's 'Invoice on Line' and 'Instant Activation' systems, and then 5 years more of various stuff for various projects and companies from Davinci. Davinci is now defunct, was bought out by CSG. Got the degree in 2000 and moved on to contracts, working anywhere that paid a minimum of 75/hour (sometimes getting to twice that much, but that's rare.)
Last 1.5 years working on my own completely, no salary, nothing, trying to build a business based on a set of systems I built for retail management, supply chain management, store management, warehouse management, integration of all the systems between stores, warehouses, main offices, suppliers and manufacturers.
I may or may not succeed in building a profitable business, but my systems are now used by a small store chain and 50 suppliers.
--
Now, what I wanted to say is this: the path one takes does not have to be exactly the same as everybody else's. There is nothing wrong with going to university (for me it was useful, because I was an immigrant and needed to learn the culture and communications skills most of all), but I also enjoyed nearly half of my courses at the university.
But if I had to do this over again, given the current environment of debt slavery, I would not continue past the second year of university if I did find the job in the field by then (which in my case did happen, I got lucky, since the company hired me out of 88 other applicants, but apparently I showed the most interest in the field and that became the deciding factor, not to mention that I was raking in an amazing 12.50CAD/hour then, so offering my services at that low low price helped me to get that first real job in my chosen field).
I don't know what analogies you used and what your tutoring abilities are, but I knew a number of people, who excessively used analogies in every day lives, always trying to describe the most mundane things with these analogies, which most of the time were terrible, and by using analogies they made things worse, not better.
-- Anyway, if somebody asked me to explain that piece of code (a function takes in 2 parameters, returns a value equal to the multiple of the two, has no effect on scope of global variables, has no side effects on the values of the parameters to the function), I would not use any analogies beyond this: a = 1 * 2, and everything else has to be explained precisely, without any analogies.
The concepts are many: there is the 'int', so data structure must be explained, there is the '*', so the operator must be explained, there are the '{' and '}', so the scope must be explained, there is the 'return', so this has to be explained (it's equivalent to the '=' in math.)
int - an integer between lower and upper bound
* - a multiplication operator, this should be understood from math and use of calculators (if nothing else)
{} - are scope, which is equivalent to () in math
return - equivalent of '=' in math.
-- If the student was struggling with different notations, that's one thing, if he was struggling with understanding of math, that's another problem altogether.
Silver is on a steady uptrend, and has been for a decade. But this is not because silver in itself is becoming somehow more valuable, it's because the Fed is inflating the money supply, nothing more than that.
If you measure monetary metals like gold and silver against commodities, you will find that they are holding the same proportion steady that they always held, and any deflation in prices of commodities against monetary metals are due to real increase in supply (and there is huge supply of oil, obviously).
When you say that silver fell from highest peak, tell me why would anybody hold dollars, which lost 3/4 of value since 2003, rather than holding silver/gold, which gained in fiat denominated values by large factors?
You are right about one thing: there is a glut of oil.
You are wrong about something else: the prices are not going up, they are falling.
What? What did I say?
The prices for oil are falling. They are falling in real money. In gold and silver the prices of oil are lowest they have ever been in history right now.
1 US dime (10 cents), minted prior to 1968 costs about 4 USD. 1 gallon of gas in US costs about 4 USD.
The cheapest gas on the record in USA was 25 cents. Today gas is cheaper than that (though they don't have attendants at the stations, that's because US law prohibits paying below minimum wage, while there are millions of unemployed people out there.)
The real reason the oil prices are going up in USD is because the value of USD is disappearing into the thin air - thank Fed and the Treasury and Congress and politicians and your fellow citizens who like to be bought with fake money for that.
pass in log inet proto tcp from any to $ext_if port ssh pass out log inet proto tcp from any to $ext_if port ssh pass log quick proto tcp from $SSH_ALLOW_IPs to $ext_if port ssh \
flags S/SA keep state pass log quick proto tcp from any to $ext_if port ssh \
flags S/SA keep state \
(max-src-conn 15, max-src-conn-rate 5/3, \
overload <bruteforce> flush global)
/., please, please, please, please, can I have moderation points and can you add -10000 FUCKING IDIOT option to the moderation? At least one time, for this particular fucking idiot over there?
I have a nice new laptop now, W510 (thanks to my brother), and I have Ubuntu 11.04 on it.
In the 3 weeks that I have it, it crashed on me about 5-6 times. It gets stuck, the keyboard/mouse stop responding. I can't ssh into it either, so I have to shut it down with the power button (ouch).
Also this is my first experience with 11.04 and I am hating it. Except for Unity (which I don't use, to me the benchmark is like this: switch to classic), I am finding all sorts of real problems with this distro.
It is amazing that ssh crashes so often now. Yes, the ssh client stops responding 1 in 3 times that I use it, it is an embarrassment for a GNU/Linux distro. I switched to Debian on another machine already and it looks more and more now that I won't be able to keep Ubuntu on this one either.
You know, I do have B.Sc. in computer science, if grammar is a hack in human languages, then how do you explain the fact that grammar is the absolute necessity in computer languages, and the fact that we have math describing it? It's called formal language theory and it requires formal grammar, which can be explained as rules, that describe whether a particular sequence of characters is legal in a sentence and what it is that the sequence does.
I think grammar is a necessary condition for a language, not a hack.
1. Presumption of innocence holds. 2. Was he convicted of anything? 3. Even if he was convicted of anything, again, there supposed to be presumption of innocence.
grammar exists so you can come up with yet another 'legal' (proper) way of saying something that maybe was never even said previously.
Grammar is about correct stringing of words in a sentence, which communicates more ideas than just giving names to things.
Giving names to things is important, of-course, but it does not constitute a language, and I already mentioned that robots are not things that need a language (well, not yet anyway.) They don't need it for themselves, so they won't be creating one. We can give them a language, but that's not the same.
this raises a question: are we inside one of their emulations right now? Just emulating away, so that some company can put together yet another universe-detailed-resolution-video-card on the hyper market?
This would explain all those weird things I dream about at night, where everything seems to consist of only polygons with no rendered surfaces.
Beyond that: the guy was going to participate in elections in France, right? So at the very minimum, there is that. Also I don't know anything else about his life and his enemies, and he is/was the head of a powerful organization dealing with tons of money. Just saying.
What is the motive for a robot to do anything? What does it 'need'? People solve various problems in their lives, because we have instinct of self preservation, curiosity, various other motivators, like hunger, thirst, cold, heat, health issues, etc.
What do robots need and why would they be developing a language if they don't have any needs? For a robot to realize a need, it has to have some form of motivating factors, have some form of 'feelings', that would force it to do things. If people don't eat, they die, etc. People don't want to die.
Why does a robot care if it has energy to do things or it doesn't have that energy, if its parts are falling apart or not, if the robot does not have a concept of itself being a one thing, and not a bunch of separate parts with no particular reason for those parts from robot's point of view, which is limited to just the program, which is not forcing the robot to have motivating factors, which arise from necessity to survive/procreate.
The real question becomes: until robots can actually procreate, and create other robots, pushing forward some form of robot evolution through copying itself, what is the reason for a robot to survive? Can it have an intelligence developed for reasons that have nothing to do with survival and procreation?
However in humans languages developed out of need.
Do these machines need anything? Do they understand that they need anything?
Unless there is some need, that the machines are experiencing, understanding it and trying to solve it, they won't be developing anything more complex than hash keys to areas, exactly as programmed.
No, I think grammar is about legality of the sequences of letters within a sentence, not about the sequence, of exchanges of sentences between communicating parties.
Slashdot Mirror
wow, that got one funny but also one troll moderation. What, are WIVES moderating here?
That explains EVERYTHING!
Will a naked picture of Natalie Portman, with hot grits all over her body get 10^6 hits a day? I wonder. If so, I can see his plan working, though I am not sure what the visual studio has got to do with jpegs.
Your comment is good except for the last part:
Especially when speculators start inflating bubbles
- speculators do not inflate bubbles.
Bubbles inflate due to mis-allocation of resources (and we mostly see government being the culprits there, with borrowing and money printing, so inflating the money supply and so more and more fiat currency units end up chasing the same productive output), and then, once the government overheats some asset class due to various government 'insurance' policies, coupled with loose money (0% interest, money printing, borrowing forever), then speculators move in.
Sure, it's easy for governments to blame the speculators for rising prices, but speculators are not causing the prices to go up, increased demand (and demand is in this case amount of money chasing the goods given specific policies towards some asset classes) causes rising prices.
Basically government causes inflation and destruction of the fiat currency and this in turns causes some sectors to heat up, for the last 15 or so years these have been commodities (and housing) and speculators obviously move in, as there is easy money and the money is being debased.
Often enough speculators provide liquidity that even smooths away the spikes in prices (up or down), but sometimes speculators do cause uneven spikes. However again, they are not the actual cause of this, they are a symptom.
pension funds feel they have to invest in it, otherwise they lag the overall market index. While the fund managers might know that the company is overvalued, there's no way that they're going to say it for fear of getting hounded out of their jobs.
- yet another sign of a failed government - the type that taxes your income instead of living on a much smaller budget, that could be financed through alcohol/vice/excise taxes and pretends that it's giving you security by forcing you into these 'pension plans', which are terrible if you actually want to have a pension.
1987-89 - 'programming' on paper, I lived in former USSR and didn't own a computer.
89-91 - college in Ukraine, finally got to use actual hardware and even a network. Won a number of programming contests there.
92 - technical school of electronics in Israel. Got my own IBM 386, it was wonderful, was building anything, programming nightly, since I had to work as well.
94 - Dawson college (cegep) in Montreal - we had 'computer' classes there, mostly touch typing. Worked for a prof there on some fax drivers and a drawing app, all built in C and Assembly
1995 - UofT, went for comsci and astronomy.
1996 - first job in the chosen profession at a company called 'Davinci Technologies', was second person hired, built Bell Mobility's 'Invoice on Line' and 'Instant Activation' systems, and then 5 years more of various stuff for various projects and companies from Davinci. Davinci is now defunct, was bought out by CSG.
Got the degree in 2000 and moved on to contracts, working anywhere that paid a minimum of 75/hour (sometimes getting to twice that much, but that's rare.)
Last 1.5 years working on my own completely, no salary, nothing, trying to build a business based on a set of systems I built for retail management, supply chain management, store management, warehouse management, integration of all the systems between stores, warehouses, main offices, suppliers and manufacturers.
I may or may not succeed in building a profitable business, but my systems are now used by a small store chain and 50 suppliers.
--
Now, what I wanted to say is this: the path one takes does not have to be exactly the same as everybody else's. There is nothing wrong with going to university (for me it was useful, because I was an immigrant and needed to learn the culture and communications skills most of all), but I also enjoyed nearly half of my courses at the university.
But if I had to do this over again, given the current environment of debt slavery, I would not continue past the second year of university if I did find the job in the field by then (which in my case did happen, I got lucky, since the company hired me out of 88 other applicants, but apparently I showed the most interest in the field and that became the deciding factor, not to mention that I was raking in an amazing 12.50CAD/hour then, so offering my services at that low low price helped me to get that first real job in my chosen field).
I don't know what analogies you used and what your tutoring abilities are, but I knew a number of people, who excessively used analogies in every day lives, always trying to describe the most mundane things with these analogies, which most of the time were terrible, and by using analogies they made things worse, not better.
--
Anyway, if somebody asked me to explain that piece of code (a function takes in 2 parameters, returns a value equal to the multiple of the two, has no effect on scope of global variables, has no side effects on the values of the parameters to the function), I would not use any analogies beyond this: a = 1 * 2, and everything else has to be explained precisely, without any analogies.
The concepts are many: there is the 'int', so data structure must be explained, there is the '*', so the operator must be explained, there are the '{' and '}', so the scope must be explained, there is the 'return', so this has to be explained (it's equivalent to the '=' in math.)
int - an integer between lower and upper bound
* - a multiplication operator, this should be understood from math and use of calculators (if nothing else)
{} - are scope, which is equivalent to () in math
return - equivalent of '=' in math.
--
If the student was struggling with different notations, that's one thing, if he was struggling with understanding of math, that's another problem altogether.
I don't get it. Why is there a cross near the clock?
Silver is on a steady uptrend, and has been for a decade. But this is not because silver in itself is becoming somehow more valuable, it's because the Fed is inflating the money supply, nothing more than that.
If you measure monetary metals like gold and silver against commodities, you will find that they are holding the same proportion steady that they always held, and any deflation in prices of commodities against monetary metals are due to real increase in supply (and there is huge supply of oil, obviously).
When you say that silver fell from highest peak, tell me why would anybody hold dollars, which lost 3/4 of value since 2003, rather than holding silver/gold, which gained in fiat denominated values by large factors?
You are right about one thing: there is a glut of oil.
You are wrong about something else: the prices are not going up, they are falling.
What? What did I say?
The prices for oil are falling. They are falling in real money. In gold and silver the prices of oil are lowest they have ever been in history right now.
1 US dime (10 cents), minted prior to 1968 costs about 4 USD. 1 gallon of gas in US costs about 4 USD.
The cheapest gas on the record in USA was 25 cents. Today gas is cheaper than that (though they don't have attendants at the stations, that's because US law prohibits paying below minimum wage, while there are millions of unemployed people out there.)
The real reason the oil prices are going up in USD is because the value of USD is disappearing into the thin air - thank Fed and the Treasury and Congress and politicians and your fellow citizens who like to be bought with fake money for that.
Not unless you stick a ninja into it before launch.
I don't know, I use this:
/., please, please, please, please, can I have moderation points and can you add -10000 FUCKING IDIOT option to the moderation? At least one time, for this particular fucking idiot over there?
shit.
I have a nice new laptop now, W510 (thanks to my brother), and I have Ubuntu 11.04 on it.
In the 3 weeks that I have it, it crashed on me about 5-6 times. It gets stuck, the keyboard/mouse stop responding. I can't ssh into it either, so I have to shut it down with the power button (ouch).
Also this is my first experience with 11.04 and I am hating it. Except for Unity (which I don't use, to me the benchmark is like this: switch to classic), I am finding all sorts of real problems with this distro.
It is amazing that ssh crashes so often now. Yes, the ssh client stops responding 1 in 3 times that I use it, it is an embarrassment for a GNU/Linux distro. I switched to Debian on another machine already and it looks more and more now that I won't be able to keep Ubuntu on this one either.
Grammar is a hack?
You know, I do have B.Sc. in computer science, if grammar is a hack in human languages, then how do you explain the fact that grammar is the absolute necessity in computer languages, and the fact that we have math describing it? It's called formal language theory and it requires formal grammar, which can be explained as rules, that describe whether a particular sequence of characters is legal in a sentence and what it is that the sequence does.
I think grammar is a necessary condition for a language, not a hack.
1. Presumption of innocence holds.
2. Was he convicted of anything?
3. Even if he was convicted of anything, again, there supposed to be presumption of innocence.
grammar exists so you can come up with yet another 'legal' (proper) way of saying something that maybe was never even said previously.
Grammar is about correct stringing of words in a sentence, which communicates more ideas than just giving names to things.
Giving names to things is important, of-course, but it does not constitute a language, and I already mentioned that robots are not things that need a language (well, not yet anyway.) They don't need it for themselves, so they won't be creating one. We can give them a language, but that's not the same.
this raises a question: are we inside one of their emulations right now? Just emulating away, so that some company can put together yet another universe-detailed-resolution-video-card on the hyper market?
This would explain all those weird things I dream about at night, where everything seems to consist of only polygons with no rendered surfaces.
Presumption of innocence, anybody?
Anybody?
Beyond that: the guy was going to participate in elections in France, right? So at the very minimum, there is that. Also I don't know anything else about his life and his enemies, and he is/was the head of a powerful organization dealing with tons of money. Just saying.
true, I get religious thinking about vaginas.
I asked this already: why?
What is the motive for a robot to do anything? What does it 'need'? People solve various problems in their lives, because we have instinct of self preservation, curiosity, various other motivators, like hunger, thirst, cold, heat, health issues, etc.
What do robots need and why would they be developing a language if they don't have any needs? For a robot to realize a need, it has to have some form of motivating factors, have some form of 'feelings', that would force it to do things. If people don't eat, they die, etc. People don't want to die.
Why does a robot care if it has energy to do things or it doesn't have that energy, if its parts are falling apart or not, if the robot does not have a concept of itself being a one thing, and not a bunch of separate parts with no particular reason for those parts from robot's point of view, which is limited to just the program, which is not forcing the robot to have motivating factors, which arise from necessity to survive/procreate.
The real question becomes: until robots can actually procreate, and create other robots, pushing forward some form of robot evolution through copying itself, what is the reason for a robot to survive? Can it have an intelligence developed for reasons that have nothing to do with survival and procreation?
ÐÑfÑÑÐÐРмÐÑ Ð¼Ð¾ÐÐÑ Ð±ÑÑÑOE ÐÐÐÐ ÐоÑоÑÐ ÑÐм 4 бÑfÐÐÑ: Ñ...ÑfÐ, бÐÑ, Ðб...
Russian swearing can be shorter than 4 letters: hui, bl'a, eb...
this site doesn't support unicode still, and it's 2011
However in humans languages developed out of need.
Do these machines need anything? Do they understand that they need anything?
Unless there is some need, that the machines are experiencing, understanding it and trying to solve it, they won't be developing anything more complex than hash keys to areas, exactly as programmed.
yeah, we used to talk about Natalie Portman here. Either we are out of grits or our standards are slipping or maybe it's the age showing.
No, I think grammar is about legality of the sequences of letters within a sentence, not about the sequence, of exchanges of sentences between communicating parties.
I came up with something that is not sensible to say now, I think it should be said though, it's important history in the making:
If a man can be womanizer, can a man be a mananizer? An onanizer? A nonanizer?
Always thinking.