You can count to infinity (though it would take an infinite amount of time). That doesn't mean you are infinite or the number you are counting is. In the same manner, the universe can be expanding forever without ever being infinite.
The observable universe doesn't "exist". It's just a construct, an abstraction we've created to describe what we, here on Earth, can see. It's not material. you could say it's just like a country's frontiers, something that matters for us humans but that doesn't really exist otherwise. The observable universe is finite because of the speed of light and the age of the universe. We cannot see what light cannot bring to us. With time, the observable universe will expand, since light from farther away will be able to reach us. However, the expansion of the universe might stop that light from reaching us, since we know it can be extremely fast for distant objects.
Also, we don't care about the rest of the universe. Only the observable universe matters, at least until we manage to get off this rock and change/expand the observable universe.
You really don't know much do you? The radiation comes from the beginning of the universe, back when everything was a huge soup of particles. It's one of the greater proofs for the big bang theory, since there's no other reason for it to be there than to have one point where the universe was so dense it was irradiating in a nearly uniform manner. By studying the irregularities in the emissions, we can then learn more about that state in the universe's evolution, as well as what happened after that.
There's no distance to speak of because when those were around, they were everywhere and the universe wasn't of the same dimensions. We can measure that the universe is expanding, the big bang theory says there was a time where it was essentially a singularity, thus we can say (with good probability of being right) that the universe is finite.
Is it finite in the sense of a sheet of paper? Probably not. There won't be a wall with "the Universe ends here." written on it. Rather, it might very well be like the flat Earth theories: a loop that uses an additional dimension to complete. Whereas the Earth is a 3D object that was being represented as 2D (so you'd have edges even though they do not actually exist), it's very possible the universe loops around in another higher dimension.
It's more than that. The Internet is anarchist, there's no central power. You can't influence the Internet, only parts of it, often small. Pockets of resistance will always exist.
For somebody whose entire agenda rests on influencing people, that must be scary.
The scary thing is that you can see he's not deluded. He's manipulative. He's omitting facts on purpose to drive his agenda, no matter the cost. He's spinning controversy out of thin air.
He's a terrorist of the true definition. "Any one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation." "Dyslogistically: One who entertains, professes, or tries to awaken or spread a feeling of terror or alarm; an alarmist, a scaremonger."
Debian is not Ubuntu's grandparent, that's a really bad analogy. If anything, Ubuntu's a leech (a very pretty leech, yes) to Debian. It's more of a symbiotic relationship than a true leech, but Ubuntu would have a very hard time to move forward without Debian's foundation and the work done by Debian developers. Chances are a LOT of Debian updates find their way into Ubuntu, so when the former updates, the latter benefits from it.
If Debian died today all the sudden, Ubuntu wouldn't grind to a halt, but it'd be struggling to keep its pace.
It's in those times that it sucks to be on a dumbphone plan in Canada... I had to deactivate SMS because the bloody telcos actually made me pay for incoming messages!
Not necessarily. Curiously enough, Steam seems to be forgotten in a lot of games-related discussion recently, but it's introduced bargain gaming to the PC masses, and not just through cheap indie games. I bought Supreme Commander 2, a big-budget AAA title, for a little over 2 bucks.
Nah, the problem's just that the incumbent consoles and their makers cannot seem to keep up with the leaner markets like mobile and PC. People always call the death of PC, but PC is way too resilient and adaptive to die like that, and mobile's shaping up to be a mini-PC market.
Hence why I said it might be a stretch. If any other tech company actually realized there's a demand for well-rounded products, maybe, just maybe, Apple would truly have a run for its money. As it is they're the only ones that seem to have "gotten it", and even then only to a certain extent. It's very frustrating to see good engineering get wasted by a few key components like UI being hastily thrown into the mix or quality insurance only being covered as an afterthought.
Sorry if I don't put much worth into stocks. Speculation drives the stock exchanges and speculators are so often wrong it's not even funny. Remember they're making Apple stock prices plummet every single damn time Jobs coughs.
Google is going extremely strong because it's ubiquitous. If you asked a random sample of the population what they thought of Google, you'd get largely favorable answers (granted, they might be a little confused and/or ignorant, but "google" has entered the common vocabulary and that should say something). If you did the same for HP, I'm not sure you'd get quite the same results.
You know "engineer" also covers a position known as UI engineer? It might be a stretch to think that Microsoft's execs will actually make a GOOD selection, but it's not absolutely impossible. With experts in all the required fields driving the company, it could just work.
Also, I'd much rather have engineer-driven companies than suit-driven ones. HP took a nosedive with the departure of Hewlett and Sony's products and policies have degraded with time as the founders left key spots. On the flip side, Google is still going extremely strong with Brin and Page having a hand in a large part of the company's operations and, while he has no degree beyond high school, Jobs has grown up as a geek and has a much more engineer-like mindset than traditional CEOs.
To me, it only makes sense that a company is driven by an expert in the field, be it food products or technology.
I'm a student in Physics and at my university, there's a surprising amount of women-only scientific grants. These are obviously geared towards bringing more women to the disciplines of science to promote gender diversity and etc. The problem, however, is that women aren't interested! In the fields where women do want to be, no promoting was necessary. Medicine is getting dominated by women, even though it was male-only mere decades ago. Physics, however, is stagnating at approximately 30% female.
What this situation does end up doing is that almost any woman asking for a grant gets one, despite there being quite a few men who, on the strict basis of academic performance, should've had them instead. This still doesn't help promoting science for women and discourages men from performing by removing one of the few substantial rewards there are for being good. It's a definitive lose-lose situation which, frankly, irritates me.
I'm all for gender equality, but forcing the hands of women shouldn't be the way to go. Soon, we'll need to put male-only grants to try and stop the climbing drop-out rates that are very much steeper for men than women.
I don't listen to CBC, but the French-speaking pendant, Radio-Canada, actually airs a lot of very interesting shows. I'm more than happy to pay for them. The news is also fairly balanced and well-made.
Maybe what's needed is some investigation in the CBC's funding and choices for shows instead of just destroying it entirely?
Actually, it's the best way to get forged search results. Back when clicks were used in search engines, you could very easily bring up your site's ranking by using bots to click on the link(s) or hell, hiring people from stuff like Amazon's Mechanical Turk.
You're missing the point - the creators are doing this as a prank. They intended it to feel weird because they think people need to realize how much information they're giving away to the entire world on Facebook and other public pages.
Slashdot Mirror
You can count to infinity (though it would take an infinite amount of time). That doesn't mean you are infinite or the number you are counting is. In the same manner, the universe can be expanding forever without ever being infinite.
The observable universe doesn't "exist". It's just a construct, an abstraction we've created to describe what we, here on Earth, can see. It's not material. you could say it's just like a country's frontiers, something that matters for us humans but that doesn't really exist otherwise. The observable universe is finite because of the speed of light and the age of the universe. We cannot see what light cannot bring to us. With time, the observable universe will expand, since light from farther away will be able to reach us. However, the expansion of the universe might stop that light from reaching us, since we know it can be extremely fast for distant objects.
Also, we don't care about the rest of the universe. Only the observable universe matters, at least until we manage to get off this rock and change/expand the observable universe.
You really don't know much do you? The radiation comes from the beginning of the universe, back when everything was a huge soup of particles. It's one of the greater proofs for the big bang theory, since there's no other reason for it to be there than to have one point where the universe was so dense it was irradiating in a nearly uniform manner. By studying the irregularities in the emissions, we can then learn more about that state in the universe's evolution, as well as what happened after that.
There's no distance to speak of because when those were around, they were everywhere and the universe wasn't of the same dimensions. We can measure that the universe is expanding, the big bang theory says there was a time where it was essentially a singularity, thus we can say (with good probability of being right) that the universe is finite.
Is it finite in the sense of a sheet of paper? Probably not. There won't be a wall with "the Universe ends here." written on it. Rather, it might very well be like the flat Earth theories: a loop that uses an additional dimension to complete. Whereas the Earth is a 3D object that was being represented as 2D (so you'd have edges even though they do not actually exist), it's very possible the universe loops around in another higher dimension.
No, because your netbook was never advertised to play BLOPs and you'd have to be really, really misinformed (or yes, dumb) to seriously think so.
This. Mod this up please.
Ubisoft gave AC a second chance and it paid off tremendously. Mirror's Edge is definitely worthy of another shot, too.
It's more than that. The Internet is anarchist, there's no central power. You can't influence the Internet, only parts of it, often small. Pockets of resistance will always exist.
For somebody whose entire agenda rests on influencing people, that must be scary.
The scary thing is that you can see he's not deluded. He's manipulative. He's omitting facts on purpose to drive his agenda, no matter the cost. He's spinning controversy out of thin air.
He's a terrorist of the true definition.
"Any one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation."
"Dyslogistically: One who entertains, professes, or tries to awaken or spread a feeling of terror or alarm; an alarmist, a scaremonger."
It would appear you're new to the writing style of the RockPaperShotgun guys. Playing on words is their motto ;)
Oh and, they're British.
Is this supposed to be sarcastic?
Debian is not Ubuntu's grandparent, that's a really bad analogy. If anything, Ubuntu's a leech (a very pretty leech, yes) to Debian. It's more of a symbiotic relationship than a true leech, but Ubuntu would have a very hard time to move forward without Debian's foundation and the work done by Debian developers. Chances are a LOT of Debian updates find their way into Ubuntu, so when the former updates, the latter benefits from it.
If Debian died today all the sudden, Ubuntu wouldn't grind to a halt, but it'd be struggling to keep its pace.
It's in those times that it sucks to be on a dumbphone plan in Canada... I had to deactivate SMS because the bloody telcos actually made me pay for incoming messages!
This is useless to me, unfortunately.
That's it. Obama is Sauron and Biden is Saruman.
I knew it.
The irony of the situation is how appropriate that response is, even in the new context.
Not necessarily. Curiously enough, Steam seems to be forgotten in a lot of games-related discussion recently, but it's introduced bargain gaming to the PC masses, and not just through cheap indie games. I bought Supreme Commander 2, a big-budget AAA title, for a little over 2 bucks.
Nah, the problem's just that the incumbent consoles and their makers cannot seem to keep up with the leaner markets like mobile and PC. People always call the death of PC, but PC is way too resilient and adaptive to die like that, and mobile's shaping up to be a mini-PC market.
Hence why I said it might be a stretch. If any other tech company actually realized there's a demand for well-rounded products, maybe, just maybe, Apple would truly have a run for its money. As it is they're the only ones that seem to have "gotten it", and even then only to a certain extent. It's very frustrating to see good engineering get wasted by a few key components like UI being hastily thrown into the mix or quality insurance only being covered as an afterthought.
Sorry if I don't put much worth into stocks. Speculation drives the stock exchanges and speculators are so often wrong it's not even funny. Remember they're making Apple stock prices plummet every single damn time Jobs coughs.
Google is going extremely strong because it's ubiquitous. If you asked a random sample of the population what they thought of Google, you'd get largely favorable answers (granted, they might be a little confused and/or ignorant, but "google" has entered the common vocabulary and that should say something). If you did the same for HP, I'm not sure you'd get quite the same results.
You know "engineer" also covers a position known as UI engineer? It might be a stretch to think that Microsoft's execs will actually make a GOOD selection, but it's not absolutely impossible. With experts in all the required fields driving the company, it could just work.
Also, I'd much rather have engineer-driven companies than suit-driven ones. HP took a nosedive with the departure of Hewlett and Sony's products and policies have degraded with time as the founders left key spots. On the flip side, Google is still going extremely strong with Brin and Page having a hand in a large part of the company's operations and, while he has no degree beyond high school, Jobs has grown up as a geek and has a much more engineer-like mindset than traditional CEOs.
To me, it only makes sense that a company is driven by an expert in the field, be it food products or technology.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/02/06/1926206/Woman-Gets-Revenge-Courtesy-of-Google-Images#comments
The URL says otherwise...
It can be worse than that.
I'm a student in Physics and at my university, there's a surprising amount of women-only scientific grants. These are obviously geared towards bringing more women to the disciplines of science to promote gender diversity and etc. The problem, however, is that women aren't interested! In the fields where women do want to be, no promoting was necessary. Medicine is getting dominated by women, even though it was male-only mere decades ago. Physics, however, is stagnating at approximately 30% female.
What this situation does end up doing is that almost any woman asking for a grant gets one, despite there being quite a few men who, on the strict basis of academic performance, should've had them instead. This still doesn't help promoting science for women and discourages men from performing by removing one of the few substantial rewards there are for being good. It's a definitive lose-lose situation which, frankly, irritates me.
I'm all for gender equality, but forcing the hands of women shouldn't be the way to go. Soon, we'll need to put male-only grants to try and stop the climbing drop-out rates that are very much steeper for men than women.
I don't listen to CBC, but the French-speaking pendant, Radio-Canada, actually airs a lot of very interesting shows. I'm more than happy to pay for them. The news is also fairly balanced and well-made.
Maybe what's needed is some investigation in the CBC's funding and choices for shows instead of just destroying it entirely?
Then not vaccinating your child is WORSE than giving him cigarettes. That's reinforcing the point of the GP!
Even more obvious: http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=anti-vaccine+deaths&l=1
Actually, it's the best way to get forged search results. Back when clicks were used in search engines, you could very easily bring up your site's ranking by using bots to click on the link(s) or hell, hiring people from stuff like Amazon's Mechanical Turk.
There's a reason why it's NOT used anymore.
You're missing the point - the creators are doing this as a prank. They intended it to feel weird because they think people need to realize how much information they're giving away to the entire world on Facebook and other public pages.
Except Google News is advertised as a news aggregator.
I think nobody would complain if Bing was called a "search aggregator", but it most definitely isn't.
Intelligent design.