And I have control of my emotions, what you read was the the results of complete astonishment at how you could have managed to pull "damaging to intelligent design" from my post.
But I guess you gave another anecdote to why evolution is a science and intelligent design isn't.
If DNA had shown (or we discover something in the future giving the same conclusion) that people, and monkeys and dogs and fruit flies and sharks were fundamentally different then the "common descent" part of evolution (which is the big claim, we see natural selection and mutation in the lab every day after all) would be disproved. In other words it is falsifiable.
That same result would have no effect on intelligent design because that would just be God being creative and diverse instead of being into object oriented software reuse. So it isn't falsifiable and makes no predictions and hence isn't science (at least in that particular small area).
But this has very little to do with global warming:)
And why would you think I claimed it has any relevance to intelligent design at all?
Since I don't mention intelligent design in any way at all, where did you pull this "damaging" bit from?
Do you really have such a blinded view of the world that if two things are in conflict then everything in the universe that supports one must damage the other? Wow!
Let me guess, when the guy from the political party you don't support supports something it must be bad?
Obviously gravity is a theory - in fact it is more than one.
Sure there's "Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation", but we *know* it is incorrect since it does not match observations. Just like we know "Newtons Laws of Motion" are incorrect.
Why not try reading the tiny amount of context, you know the thread my post was 4th post in.
Do you often just ignore the context of conversations and butt in with the insults because you heard the tail of end something and misunderstood it completely? You must be great at parties!
If not, please point out exactly where in that article it talks about an old bomb not detonating when they blow up 5kg of TNT next to it and then detonating later.
That is pretty much the standard way to detonate such devices - you know the "So we decided to detonate the bomb" part of your irrelevant article - after all.
Evolution is pretty easily falsified, of course a lot of the things which could have done so didn't.
Universal common descent could have been shown to be false when DNA was discovered and sequenced. Of course it didn't instead it matched common descent perfectly.
Finding a species that doesn't use DNA, would be a pretty big hit to evolution, at least the universal descent part.
Finding that the Earth is "young" would kill evolution dead.
But that article says busy rinks can need flooding every hour. But I wouldn't expect them to be "busy" 24 hours a day anyway.
The propane one is $3 so you need 29000 runs to break even, so 5-6 years or so depending on how "busy" the rink is. Of course the time value of money means that depending on what interest rates are it'll be a bit longer.
Of course not running a propane/gasoline burning machine in an enclosed area will be of benefit all by itself and might be the worth the extra up-front cost.
I was using an el-cheapo USB flash drive as the system drive - it had/usr,/var,/etc, and so on. It was just running a upnp to server video from 4 RAID5ed USB hard drives.
And yes performance was awful (though good enough to manage that simple task) and I'm no longer using it. But the flash drive didn't die.
Because being able to interact with people who you don't actually like is useless and not part of anything kids should be picking up sometime before they turn into serial killers.
That wasn't the point being made, the point made was there are 30 people and at least two (most likely more) racks worth of servers. So probably more servers than people.
Which if they do any sort of hosting or "software as a service" provision, isn't strange at all.
glacial - adj 1. (Earth Sciences / Geological Science) characterized by the presence of masses of ice 2. (Earth Sciences / Geological Science) relating to, caused by, or deposited by a glacier 3. extremely cold; icy 4. cold or hostile in manner a glacial look 5. (Chemistry) (of a chemical compound) of or tending to form crystals that resemble ice glacial acetic acid 6. very slow in progress a glacial pace
Slashdot Mirror
The your first sentence was poorly chosen.
And I have control of my emotions, what you read was the the results of complete astonishment at how you could have managed to pull "damaging to intelligent design" from my post.
But I guess you gave another anecdote to why evolution is a science and intelligent design isn't.
If DNA had shown (or we discover something in the future giving the same conclusion) that people, and monkeys and dogs and fruit flies and sharks were fundamentally different then the "common descent" part of evolution (which is the big claim, we see natural selection and mutation in the lab every day after all) would be disproved. In other words it is falsifiable.
That same result would have no effect on intelligent design because that would just be God being creative and diverse instead of being into object oriented software reuse. So it isn't falsifiable and makes no predictions and hence isn't science (at least in that particular small area).
But this has very little to do with global warming :)
No, since the one from 1941 didn't say "on the internet" or "with a computer".
What does that have to do with anything?
And why would you think I claimed it has any relevance to intelligent design at all?
Since I don't mention intelligent design in any way at all, where did you pull this "damaging" bit from?
Do you really have such a blinded view of the world that if two things are in conflict then everything in the universe that supports one must damage the other? Wow!
Let me guess, when the guy from the political party you don't support supports something it must be bad?
Obviously gravity is a theory - in fact it is more than one.
Sure there's "Newton's Law of Universal Gravitation", but we *know* it is incorrect since it does not match observations. Just like we know "Newtons Laws of Motion" are incorrect.
Why not try reading the tiny amount of context, you know the thread my post was 4th post in.
Do you often just ignore the context of conversations and butt in with the insults because you heard the tail of end something and misunderstood it completely? You must be great at parties!
I take it you are referring to yourself?
If not, please point out exactly where in that article it talks about an old bomb not detonating when they blow up 5kg of TNT next to it and then detonating later.
That is pretty much the standard way to detonate such devices - you know the "So we decided to detonate the bomb" part of your irrelevant article - after all.
Evolution is pretty easily falsified, of course a lot of the things which could have done so didn't.
Universal common descent could have been shown to be false when DNA was discovered and sequenced. Of course it didn't instead it matched common descent perfectly.
Finding a species that doesn't use DNA, would be a pretty big hit to evolution, at least the universal descent part.
Finding that the Earth is "young" would kill evolution dead.
The famous rabbit in the pre-Cambrian.
The fact that they didn't explode means you have 300kg of something that was once an explosive but clearly isn't any longer.
Your years are shorter than mine?
20000 / 24 / 365.25 = 2.3 years.
But that article says busy rinks can need flooding every hour. But I wouldn't expect them to be "busy" 24 hours a day anyway.
The propane one is $3 so you need 29000 runs to break even, so 5-6 years or so depending on how "busy" the rink is. Of course the time value of money means that depending on what interest rates are it'll be a bit longer.
Of course not running a propane/gasoline burning machine in an enclosed area will be of benefit all by itself and might be the worth the extra up-front cost.
No.
It's easier to make large scale devices more efficient or to replace them with ones that don't emit whatever the thing is you don't like this decade.
So it's a valid step if you want "greenness".
Or they have enough evidence to implicate him in being involved according to whatever the French rules are and hence want to arrest him.
I have no idea where on the scale of "I have a hunch" to "I have absolute proof" the French system draws the line for issuing arrest warrants.
The skills needed are to find someone who has the required computer skills and offer them something in exchange for doing a task.
Because people can tag it however the hell they want.
That's your assumption.
My assumption would be that anyone who reads that particular crappy web site is from that town.
I was using an el-cheapo USB flash drive as the system drive - it had /usr, /var, /etc, and so on. It was just running a upnp to server video from 4 RAID5ed USB hard drives.
And yes performance was awful (though good enough to manage that simple task) and I'm no longer using it. But the flash drive didn't die.
"Denial of Service". It's the damn name.
One way is to flood the system, but there are plenty of other ways. The one mentioned for example.
Whereas mine ran for 3 years until I replaced the whole device.
Aren't anecdotes great!
True, but only one person has shown themselves to be an idiot by pointing out that they can't tell the difference between climate and weather.
The others still have the benefit of the doubt as to their retardedness.
It's more vertical integration than diversification.
Why are you expressing interest to a state level representative about a city level thing? Or is said politician on a power trip?
No they change according to the language the author is writing in, in this case given the location American English would be a good assumption.
Or in the language of the publication the writing is placed in, in this case slashdot which is American and hence American English is correct again.
That idiots don't believe something is not a good reason to not do it.
Because being able to interact with people who you don't actually like is useless and not part of anything kids should be picking up sometime before they turn into serial killers.
That wasn't the point being made, the point made was there are 30 people and at least two (most likely more) racks worth of servers. So probably more servers than people.
Which if they do any sort of hosting or "software as a service" provision, isn't strange at all.
glacial - adj
1. (Earth Sciences / Geological Science) characterized by the presence of masses of ice
2. (Earth Sciences / Geological Science) relating to, caused by, or deposited by a glacier
3. extremely cold; icy
4. cold or hostile in manner a glacial look
5. (Chemistry) (of a chemical compound) of or tending to form crystals that resemble ice glacial acetic acid
6. very slow in progress a glacial pace
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged 6th Edition 2003. © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003