Then you're an imbecile. If we default, the economy will tank, and it will become that much harder to pay off the debt. We have to accrue more debt while working to reduce the deficit, both by spending cuts and revenue increases.
You stupid fucker. You think CEOs pay their employees out of pocket? Hell no. Corporations pay peoples' salaries. Raising taxes on the rich has absolutely no impact on this. But they've drummed their lies into your head enough that you're now afraid to tax them, which is why hedge fund managers pay a lower tax rate than their IT staff, despite earning about 50 times as much.
I think the idea here is to use it with very young kids, maybe down to three years old. Save the breadboarding until they're old enough to use wirecutters without removing an earlobe. It's like training wheels or tee ball. Obviously inferior to the real thing, but an accessible start. Little kids are used to playing with playdough. If you can sneak in some learning, all the better.
The article is a wiki, so you can fix it. I'd do it myself, but I haven't actually made the playdough (yet!) and I want to see for myself if the LEDs further along in the circuit don't shine as bright. My gut says that the current author didn't actually try it and was just writing what he expected to happen, since I can't think of any reason for it to be true, but it wouldn't be the first time a circuit has surprised me.
I don't see how. There are only three ways I know of to make a diode. You can use semiconductors, quantum tunneling, or the old vacuum tube method. I can't see how varying the resistivity of the dough could replicate any of those.
What you could do is make a moderately resistive dough, and create a potentiometer. Battery+ -> wire -> dough -> LED -> Battery-. Roll the dough into a thin strand, and the light gets dim. Clump it into a big ball, and the light gets bright. Bonus points if you explain pulse width modulation to your kid and get them to control the brightness the right way.
No, he is the quivering mass of jelly. His enemies just really, really don't want to touch him. Neither do his friends, come to mention it. But toss a pair of glasses on him, and he becomes a mild-mannered Democratic congressman!
And this is why it failed. Because the courts aren't stupid, and were able to recognize this "religion" for what it is. A mockery of real religions by assholes who just want an excuse to steal things.
Clue at least shared a plot with the game. Mr. Body is murdered, and all the characters from the game need to run around the mansion trying to figure out whodunit. With Space Invaders and Battleship, what plot is there to share? Are the Space Invaders going to be fended off by a single ship that can only move horizontally? Will Battleship be about a naval battle in which all the radars stop working and all the crew are suddenly stricken blind?
This is a good thing. The people need an immediate reminder about why they like the government, to cut through all the demagogy. If the government shut down background services, it would fester unseen and unaddressed for months.
You're just guessing. I was simply pointing out the failure in logic that if you can take something out, it must be possible to put something in. I'm not saying it's impossible to put something in, only that this doesn't prove (or even suggest) anything.
The "huge splash" is an unrelated coronal mass ejection. There is no actual splash, or "collision" in the sense we would imagine it. Which should be obvious when you stop to think about it, because the Sun is really freaking hot. The comet evaporated when it got too close.
Still, a pretty cool video. It's always cool to see how tiny things look when they get close to the Sun. In the first video, you'll probably have to watch it a few times before you even notice the comet.
That doesn't follow at all. As a passenger, I can walk out of an airport at any time without a security screening. I could conceivably steal something and leave. That doesn't mean I can easily smuggle things into an airport.
Right, cause if any scientist, ever, anywhere is wrong, then every scientist is wrong forever. Fuck your anti-intellectual bullshit. It's not even worthwhile to debunk your lies because they're so goddamn baseless. Do you even know how much a climatologist makes? Do you know how much Rush Limbaugh makes while filling your head with lies about the aforementioned scientists? Do you know how many orders of magnitude the two salaries are apart?
Stop filling your head with poison, and learn something.
Personally, I think that the fact that it's coming from a lawyer makes it more convincing (and frightening). Note that he's saying you need to get legally creative. That sounds like not-so-subtle code for no-knock raids and extraordinary rendition. I don't care how well written your malware is. It's not gonna help you one bit if when a multibillion dollar corporation convinces the Russian police to disappear you and your buddies.
"Windows" is not a generic term for a computer operating system, any more than "Apple" is for a computer company. "App Store" for a store that sells apps, however...
English had the dumb luck to be on top when globalization kicked in. It's entrenched to the point that it will be damn near impossible to replace barring some major, unprecedented upheaval in the world order. And no, the Chinese becoming a leading economy is not a major upheaval.
Let's say that tomorrow, the entirety of the United States blinked out of existence. A year later, a Chinese businessman meets with an Indian. What language do you think they'll speak? English. Because they've both learned it, because it's a standard. Even if America was dead and gone, people would learn English because English is spoken everywhere, which makes it the most useful language to learn, which makes it spoken everywhere.
Also, the notion that you need to learn Spanish to reach certain markets is silly. You need to hire Spanish speakers, but you, personally, don't need to know Spanish. If that were true, the CEO of McDonald's would need to be the world's greatest polyglot.
English is the world language. Complaining about English speakers only speaking English is silly. An analogous situation is the metric system. The metric system is the world standard. If I want to do business outside of America, I need to learn metric. But I don't then insist that everyone learn our convoluted system of yards and gallons and acres. I recognize that there is a world standard, and I use it, without complaint or resentment.
You say that if you want to do business in China, "English helps, but Chinese can be better." Okay, fair enough. But what about when you want to do business in India? Or Japan? Or the Philippines? Or France? Or Germany? Or Russia? Do you learn every one of those languages, or do you just communicate in English? And what about when a Filipino wants to do business with an India, and gets help from a Vietnamese contractor? Does everyone learn every language? Of course not. Standards exist for a reason.
I have been to Taiwan, which is (kinda) China. There have been rare communication difficulties. For example, while trying to communicate with one of my cabbies, we ultimately settled on hand signals and me point. And even then, there was confusion, because the way they make a "four" with their fingers is different from how we do it. But when it comes time for business, everyone I've dealt with has spoken fantastic English, and there were never any problems.
I think you're right, that if I were to live there, I would have to learn the local language. But as a visitor and business colleague, it really isn't necessary. And for the record, I have also worked with Japanese, (South) Koreans, Vietnamese, Indians, Filipinos, and Burmese. The experience has been the same everywhere. Everyone I've worked with has spoken good English, and has been mostly friendly. There were a few people I didn't entirely get along with, but that's true of my American coworkers too. The notion that people will resent you if you don't speak their native tongue is silly, and really sort of insulting to the character of foreigners.
You seem to think time is infinite. While my competitor was learning to speak fluent Mandarin, I was investing those same hours in developing a better business. I get the contract, because I had the better product at the better price.
Or perhaps you think Chinese businessmen are so incompetent and shallow that they would make their decisions based on who speaks their native tongue. If that's so, then I have nothing to worry about, because they will never, ever succeed in a competitive market.
Yeah, sure, if I could learn a language with zero effort, I would do so. But the utility in learning a language whose speakers I can already communicate with is minimal. There are better uses for my far-too-finite time.
False equivalency bullshit, as usually from Fox apologists. There's a difference of scale. Fox, and right-wing pundits in generally, are far more likely to demagogue than their left-wing counterparts. These are the people who actively pushed the idea that the Democrats were trying to set up "death panels" to kill off the elderly. Find me something on Rachel Maddow that is even remotely on par with that.
It ties back to the same fallacy that people always seem to fall for. The first half of an S curve looks a lot like an exponential curve, so we just assume it is one. Computers get faster? The singularity draws near! The Dow Jones Industrial going up? It'll be at 36,000 in no time! Travel gets faster? Where's my warp drive?! I grew from 1 foot to 6 feet in my first 16 years? I'll be two miles high by the time I die!
Whenever anything is advancing rapidly, we assume it will be that way forever, when in reality it inevitably slows down.
You're assuming they all share the same regional dialect. Unless you're dealing with some Mom & Pop business that sprung up in a single area, they won't. I have a couple of Chinese coworkers who can't understand each others' accents -- in English or Mandarin -- because their regional dialects are so different.
End result, learn Chinese. Worst case, you expand your knowledge. Best case, you(more likely your children) don't become a slave.
More accurately: Worst case, you waste countless hours of your all-too-short life learning a skill you never use. Best case, you can communicate with people that you'd be able to communicate with anyway -- every single Chinese student who wants a college degree has to become fluent in English to pass the CET (College English Test) and high scores are necessary for many top jobs.
English has become the world's language. There's no reason to learn another language, except as a hobby. A better use of your time is to learn to understand thick accents. There are classes you can take on that, and they will likely be far more useful. Also useful would be studying Eastern cultures, as cultural context is very important in communication.
And as an aside, it's extremely hyperbolic to suggest that people who don't speak Chinese will become slaves. That's like saying Frenchmen who didn't learn English are slaves.
Slashdot Mirror
Then you're an imbecile. If we default, the economy will tank, and it will become that much harder to pay off the debt. We have to accrue more debt while working to reduce the deficit, both by spending cuts and revenue increases.
You stupid fucker. You think CEOs pay their employees out of pocket? Hell no. Corporations pay peoples' salaries. Raising taxes on the rich has absolutely no impact on this. But they've drummed their lies into your head enough that you're now afraid to tax them, which is why hedge fund managers pay a lower tax rate than their IT staff, despite earning about 50 times as much.
This website is neither about slashes nor dots! I am outraged and will bring this up at every single opportunity!
Signed,
Every European to ever use the internet
I think the idea here is to use it with very young kids, maybe down to three years old. Save the breadboarding until they're old enough to use wirecutters without removing an earlobe. It's like training wheels or tee ball. Obviously inferior to the real thing, but an accessible start. Little kids are used to playing with playdough. If you can sneak in some learning, all the better.
The article is a wiki, so you can fix it. I'd do it myself, but I haven't actually made the playdough (yet!) and I want to see for myself if the LEDs further along in the circuit don't shine as bright. My gut says that the current author didn't actually try it and was just writing what he expected to happen, since I can't think of any reason for it to be true, but it wouldn't be the first time a circuit has surprised me.
I don't see how. There are only three ways I know of to make a diode. You can use semiconductors, quantum tunneling, or the old vacuum tube method. I can't see how varying the resistivity of the dough could replicate any of those.
What you could do is make a moderately resistive dough, and create a potentiometer. Battery+ -> wire -> dough -> LED -> Battery-. Roll the dough into a thin strand, and the light gets dim. Clump it into a big ball, and the light gets bright. Bonus points if you explain pulse width modulation to your kid and get them to control the brightness the right way.
No, he is the quivering mass of jelly. His enemies just really, really don't want to touch him. Neither do his friends, come to mention it. But toss a pair of glasses on him, and he becomes a mild-mannered Democratic congressman!
And this is why it failed. Because the courts aren't stupid, and were able to recognize this "religion" for what it is. A mockery of real religions by assholes who just want an excuse to steal things.
Clue at least shared a plot with the game. Mr. Body is murdered, and all the characters from the game need to run around the mansion trying to figure out whodunit. With Space Invaders and Battleship, what plot is there to share? Are the Space Invaders going to be fended off by a single ship that can only move horizontally? Will Battleship be about a naval battle in which all the radars stop working and all the crew are suddenly stricken blind?
This is a good thing. The people need an immediate reminder about why they like the government, to cut through all the demagogy. If the government shut down background services, it would fester unseen and unaddressed for months.
Key Word: "Probably"
You're just guessing. I was simply pointing out the failure in logic that if you can take something out, it must be possible to put something in. I'm not saying it's impossible to put something in, only that this doesn't prove (or even suggest) anything.
The "huge splash" is an unrelated coronal mass ejection. There is no actual splash, or "collision" in the sense we would imagine it. Which should be obvious when you stop to think about it, because the Sun is really freaking hot. The comet evaporated when it got too close.
Still, a pretty cool video. It's always cool to see how tiny things look when they get close to the Sun. In the first video, you'll probably have to watch it a few times before you even notice the comet.
That doesn't follow at all. As a passenger, I can walk out of an airport at any time without a security screening. I could conceivably steal something and leave. That doesn't mean I can easily smuggle things into an airport.
Right, cause if any scientist, ever, anywhere is wrong, then every scientist is wrong forever . Fuck your anti-intellectual bullshit. It's not even worthwhile to debunk your lies because they're so goddamn baseless. Do you even know how much a climatologist makes? Do you know how much Rush Limbaugh makes while filling your head with lies about the aforementioned scientists? Do you know how many orders of magnitude the two salaries are apart?
Stop filling your head with poison, and learn something.
And if it's cloudy, it's gonna rain! Duh! Why waste money on meteorology, when we can just buy raincoats for everyone?
Science and technology are a tad more advanced than your soundbites.
Personally, I think that the fact that it's coming from a lawyer makes it more convincing (and frightening). Note that he's saying you need to get legally creative. That sounds like not-so-subtle code for no-knock raids and extraordinary rendition. I don't care how well written your malware is. It's not gonna help you one bit if when a multibillion dollar corporation convinces the Russian police to disappear you and your buddies.
"Windows" is not a generic term for a computer operating system, any more than "Apple" is for a computer company. "App Store" for a store that sells apps, however...
English had the dumb luck to be on top when globalization kicked in. It's entrenched to the point that it will be damn near impossible to replace barring some major, unprecedented upheaval in the world order. And no, the Chinese becoming a leading economy is not a major upheaval.
Let's say that tomorrow, the entirety of the United States blinked out of existence. A year later, a Chinese businessman meets with an Indian. What language do you think they'll speak? English. Because they've both learned it, because it's a standard. Even if America was dead and gone, people would learn English because English is spoken everywhere, which makes it the most useful language to learn, which makes it spoken everywhere.
Also, the notion that you need to learn Spanish to reach certain markets is silly. You need to hire Spanish speakers, but you, personally, don't need to know Spanish. If that were true, the CEO of McDonald's would need to be the world's greatest polyglot.
English is the world language. Complaining about English speakers only speaking English is silly. An analogous situation is the metric system. The metric system is the world standard. If I want to do business outside of America, I need to learn metric. But I don't then insist that everyone learn our convoluted system of yards and gallons and acres. I recognize that there is a world standard, and I use it, without complaint or resentment.
You say that if you want to do business in China, "English helps, but Chinese can be better." Okay, fair enough. But what about when you want to do business in India? Or Japan? Or the Philippines? Or France? Or Germany? Or Russia? Do you learn every one of those languages, or do you just communicate in English? And what about when a Filipino wants to do business with an India, and gets help from a Vietnamese contractor? Does everyone learn every language? Of course not. Standards exist for a reason.
I have been to Taiwan, which is (kinda) China. There have been rare communication difficulties. For example, while trying to communicate with one of my cabbies, we ultimately settled on hand signals and me point. And even then, there was confusion, because the way they make a "four" with their fingers is different from how we do it. But when it comes time for business, everyone I've dealt with has spoken fantastic English, and there were never any problems.
I think you're right, that if I were to live there, I would have to learn the local language. But as a visitor and business colleague, it really isn't necessary. And for the record, I have also worked with Japanese, (South) Koreans, Vietnamese, Indians, Filipinos, and Burmese. The experience has been the same everywhere. Everyone I've worked with has spoken good English, and has been mostly friendly. There were a few people I didn't entirely get along with, but that's true of my American coworkers too. The notion that people will resent you if you don't speak their native tongue is silly, and really sort of insulting to the character of foreigners.
You seem to think time is infinite. While my competitor was learning to speak fluent Mandarin, I was investing those same hours in developing a better business. I get the contract, because I had the better product at the better price.
Or perhaps you think Chinese businessmen are so incompetent and shallow that they would make their decisions based on who speaks their native tongue. If that's so, then I have nothing to worry about, because they will never, ever succeed in a competitive market.
Yeah, sure, if I could learn a language with zero effort, I would do so. But the utility in learning a language whose speakers I can already communicate with is minimal. There are better uses for my far-too-finite time.
False equivalency bullshit, as usually from Fox apologists. There's a difference of scale. Fox, and right-wing pundits in generally, are far more likely to demagogue than their left-wing counterparts. These are the people who actively pushed the idea that the Democrats were trying to set up "death panels" to kill off the elderly. Find me something on Rachel Maddow that is even remotely on par with that.
It ties back to the same fallacy that people always seem to fall for. The first half of an S curve looks a lot like an exponential curve, so we just assume it is one. Computers get faster? The singularity draws near! The Dow Jones Industrial going up? It'll be at 36,000 in no time! Travel gets faster? Where's my warp drive?! I grew from 1 foot to 6 feet in my first 16 years? I'll be two miles high by the time I die!
Whenever anything is advancing rapidly, we assume it will be that way forever, when in reality it inevitably slows down.
You're assuming they all share the same regional dialect. Unless you're dealing with some Mom & Pop business that sprung up in a single area, they won't. I have a couple of Chinese coworkers who can't understand each others' accents -- in English or Mandarin -- because their regional dialects are so different.
End result, learn Chinese. Worst case, you expand your knowledge. Best case, you(more likely your children) don't become a slave.
More accurately: Worst case, you waste countless hours of your all-too-short life learning a skill you never use. Best case, you can communicate with people that you'd be able to communicate with anyway -- every single Chinese student who wants a college degree has to become fluent in English to pass the CET (College English Test) and high scores are necessary for many top jobs.
English has become the world's language. There's no reason to learn another language, except as a hobby. A better use of your time is to learn to understand thick accents. There are classes you can take on that, and they will likely be far more useful. Also useful would be studying Eastern cultures, as cultural context is very important in communication.
And as an aside, it's extremely hyperbolic to suggest that people who don't speak Chinese will become slaves. That's like saying Frenchmen who didn't learn English are slaves.