Re:Developers, developers, developers!
on
CNet on WinFS
·
· Score: 1
I just want the morons to stop changing things every time they get even close to actually making the damned bloatware work properly. Do you realise there's a "fix" at their update site for all the things XP SP1 broke? Only it won't download because something else is broken. These folks are all idiots. Certifiable, institutionalizable, garden variety idiots. They need to put the damned OS on the shelf and start selling software that isn't tied into it just because that's the only way people will buy it.
Every version they've cranked out has been the "ultimate." So why is it they keep having to "improve" it? Next they'll want to go back to decimal computing just to confuse the developers even more.
Do you really think that if these brown shirts think they're going to lose (with or without electronic tampering) there'll BE an election? You may want to think about voting for Wesley Clark. At least if they try to shaft him he'll have some friendly assets in the military. If the army can keep the Moslem loonies out of the government in Turkey, maybe they should keep the Christian loonies out over here.
"But just as society has come to understand that a "software pirate" is not a guy with an eye-patch and a parrot on the shoulder with a treasure of stolen MS Windows boxes."
You mean I didn't have to spend $200 for this damned parrot that keeps crapping on my shoulder? Damn!
Seriously though, Ashcroft is a whacko who thinks the skies are going to open up and the angel of the lord is going to blow his trumpet and shout "Game's over, suckers!" The guy belongs in a mental institution and anybody who would appoint him secretary of anything has to have the IQ of a half-eaten taco (no offense, Taco). That his benighted bat-winged minions don't know the difference between an ISP and an interview by a reporter is just another sign of the meaninglessness of the "justice" in Justice Department. Might as well call it the Ministry of Truth and be done with it.
Dear moderator: What bridge did you crawl out from under to call me a "troll"? Damned lot of nerve Mr. 12-year-old script kiddie. Maybe we should do some age verification around here. We might want to check addresses too--just to see if these characters live under bridges.
Like, duh, you've never heard of the internet? Prohibitively expensive? Let's see: set up a website with jobs about to be given to foreigners; wait 30 days for applications; no aplications?; you can bring someone in; otherwise, forget it Mr. CEO Bossman.
This argument would fall under the rubrick of tissue of lies if were even that substantial.
My great grandfather moved halfway around the world to sell fruit off of a wagon in Sioux City, Iowa. Don't give me this sob story about moving your entire family.
Imagine a group of religious cuckoos setting up a set of speakers on a street corner and blasting religious music at the inhabitants of the apartments on the other side of the street at 10.00 at night. This is not hypothetical. I have seen it happen. Are these cretins exercising their right to free speech? Of course not. They do not have the right to force me to listen to them.
Never could get WinAmp to work right. And deinstalling it seemed to go on forever. I'm still finding little pieces of it randomly strewn about my computer. The Real Player seems to do everything much better than any of the other Mickey Mouse players out there. Can't for the life of me figure what the big deal is. As for Mozilla, well, I think it's all a matter of beating a dead horse. MS has won the browser game until somebody comes up with something entirely different. Kind of like all those guys out there re-enacting some Civil War battle or other. Give it a rest already. Nobody's ever going to take Cemetery Ridge no matter how many times they play it over again.
Re:Improve upon our faults. OCing the Human Brain?
on
The Rights of GM Humans
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Considering the pathetically low intelligence quotient of the average human these days it wouldn't be a bad idea to "enhance" the thinking capacity of the average country music fan to the point where they could at least add two and two and get four and maybe even wrap their brains around the concept that the guy with the most votes gets to be president. Of course you could probably accomplish the same thing by sterilizing everybody who goes to football games. Why is there always a high tech solution for the simplest problems with the simplest solutions? Damned geeks. Yeah I'm a troll. What's it to yah?;-)
In case you guys and gals haven't noticed, "google" is just an intentional misspelling of "googol," a perfectly good English word for a one followed by 100 zeroes, 1,000,000,000...[88 0's]...000. The misspelling results from the fact that the word is already generic--it's a noun. So the lawsuit is not over the word "google," it's over the replacement of the third "o" with an "e" and its transposition across the letter "l". Talk about an overly litigenous society. Does this mean I can trademark the word "slashdaht"? How about "Santy Claus"? "MacDonalds"? "Blue cheese"? Where does this stupidity end?
To the tune of...M-I-K...K-I-E...M-O-W-S...
Think I'll start a music award called the Grannys...
Gee, I wish *I* had access to the ultimate truth like *you* do. It must be nice being omnipotent and omnipresent. You arrogant bozo. Considering the history of governmental lying and ass covering in this country, it's not surprizing that someone would doubt the veracity of these characters. Do you seriously think even through your fog of post 9/11 patriotism that these guys would release the left wing if it showed them to be criminally culpable? Do even you with your sycophantic belief in the superiority of the engineering mentality think that anyone at NASA would tell you the truth if it made them look like a bunch of backwoods schoolboys? Grow up, Sonny. This is Teddy Roosevelt's Amerika. Even down to the troops in the Philippines.
That's the ideal of Science, as religions have ideals that if followed would lead to peace on Earth and good will toward men, blah blah blah. I am talking practical reality here, where "scientists" cook the data to fit their preconceived notions, and sightings of UFOs by major telescopes are chucked in the trash can. Give me a break here, fellow. I am not an 12-year-old who believes what his science teacher tells him about the wonderful objective and incorruptible scientists.
As for crumbling, no, Science does not crumble because it has a real penchant for turning the folks they vilified into genuine Heros of Science when they turn out to be right. This has nothing to do with objectivity. It has to do with major league ass-covering by the protectors of the Scientific paradigm.
No, actually something along the lines of a control system, as Jacques Vallee theorizes. Whether this has a physical component is still in question, but the continual ridicule of morons like you is not in the best interests of science nor mental health in general. What always amazes me is the folks who so easily laugh at UFOs are strangely silent when some lunatic in a black robe starts telling people they're going to live in the sky when they die. I guess it's just another case of the old magic trick, the incredible disappearing balls.
Actually, the original Ken Arnold saucer wasn't saucer shaped either. It was kind of a cross between a crescent and an echelon. (How's that for historical foreshadowing?) It was only after the media picked up the term "flying saucer" that people started seeing saucer-shaped objects. This type of evolution would tend to indicate something other than nuts and bolts.
I have done extensive personal research over many years and the most striking thing I have learned about the UFO phenomenon is that it changes depending on what is expected of it, in a manner similar to the way the properties of hypnosis have evolved since its discovery by Mesmer. What does this mean? I don't know. But it might be a good idea to keep in mind the old saw about watching what you wish for, or in this case watching what you believe they are. Vallee thinks it's some kind of control system, a homeostatic device like a thermostat. More likely, it just adapts to its surroundings--or the mental state of those around it.
And folks who spell it Phenomina are also inherently suspicious.;-)
Seriously though, there is a qualitative difference between simulacra, which are complex, fractal-like entities in which people see similarities to other complex, fractal-like entities, and geometrical shapes. Much has been made of the supposed face on Mars, but there are many half-spherical mounds nearby that are much more interesting in that natural objects tend not to be geometrical. With the exception of basic crystalization of molecules, there are very few things in the world that are geometric and not living. On earth, the presence of geometrical shapes is normally taken as evidence of the presence of man, as in block walls and perfectly round shrubs. Yet when something geometrical is found on Mars, there is a mad dash to see who can come up with the first "explanation" of its natural origin.
"Phenomina that disappear when you take a closer look are inherantly suspicious."
Yes, they are. If I walked past an abandoned red gas station and a week later it was blue, I would be highly suspicious indeed. And not of my own sanity, either. I would surmise, almost assuredly correctly, that someone had painted it. That the face on Mars has changed over an extremely short period of time would indicate to me--not that there was something inherently wrong with the original images--but that someone had changed it. There is something here that smacks of the medieval notion that different laws applied to the celestial sphere than applied to the Earth. On Earth, the blue gas station would be evidence of the presence of intelligent beings, but on Mars it is evidence of the falsity of the original redness of the place. This was the essence of the medieval notion, that the sky was perfect and eternal, unlike the Earth where things changed.
I was actually referring to those areas just barely beneath the surface, where a displaced surface civilization might have moved to escape the obviously quite desolate conditions above ground, or where an alien species, a la Donald Keyhoe, might set up a base, or where the remnants of a previous advanced Earth-based civilization might hide.
There are indications of water flow underground. There are certainly peculiar geometrically shaped objects on the surface, explained away in various ways by the same folks who brought you Kohoutek, the comet of the century. And there are a multitude of indications of vast water flows sometime in the past. The areas actually sampled for (Earthlike) life are miniscule compared to the actual surface area. And there has even been a suggestion that the "canals" reported in earlier times were the result of surface melting of frost from the heat of underground waterways. So it's really how you look at the data that determines whether you see any signs of life or not. Personally, I prefer to remain sceptical of claims of the lack of life on or under the surface of Mars.
What does this have to do with logical reasoning? It has to do with observation and the accurate reporting of observation. The problem is that the scientific establishment has been laughing at anyone who even looks at the evidence for so long that scientists working in observational astronomy are deathly afraid of reporting anything that smacks of forbidden ideas like alien craft in the Solar System. Jacques Vallee has documented the actual destruction of observational data that resulted from this fear. Thankfully, it appears that at least now there is some chance that those who make valid observations will not be afraid of reporting what they have seen.
As to what you believe, I--and science in general--do not care. I am not interested in convincing you of anything. I am not a missionary. What I do wish you and your compatriots would do is stop ridiculing long enough to allow observational science to deal with the phenomena involved. This could very well be quite serious business. One can only imagine what the local witch doctor told the chief when the first European was sighted off the American shore. We need to learn a bit from our own history.
This is the basic premise that science is a belief system. To some degree, it is. What is really scary is the number of people who won't even entertain an idea because some "expert" says it's nutso. The plain bald truth is that no one on Earth, scientist or nonscientist alike, has the foggiest idea what's under the surface of Mars, let alone orbitting alpha-Centauri. Try to keep an open mind, fellows.
One would think that a century after Special Relativity folks would finally have wrapped their brains around the concept of relative. I guess not. Nothing is a good insulator or bad insulator. Things are only good and bad insulators relative to other substances. This is a tautology. It is not open to discussion. If you are under 17 years old, kindly keep your ignorant high school opinions to yourselves.
As for the moron who moderated me as a troll, FUCK YOU, ASSHOLE. If you disagree with me, say so. Don't moderate me to troll because your vocabulary isn't sufficient to make a comprehensible point.
The fact is that trapped air is a good insulator relative to flowing air and to solid objects like lumber. If it's allowed to flow, it aids the transfer of heat as in your fan example. Hence the fans in the aluminum case transfer the heat carried by the air to the aluminum as well as to the outside of the case. Hence the parts of the computer do not have to be connected to the case, though, in fact, they are.
Why is there always somebody who has to argue with the obvious?
"The truth is, however, that unless the hot components are in direct contact with the aluminum, the air will act as a thermal insulator"
Forgive me if I'm missing something here, but the entire case is aluminum (Lian Li PC-68), inside and out. Everything is connected to part of that case and thus to the aluminum. It also has three fans plus the one on the power supply. Now you're going to tell me fans are a misconception too?
"the fact that air is one of the best thermal insulators out there"
Say what? Air is an electrical insulator, and only to relatively low voltages. Vide, e.g., lightning. It is most assuredly not a thermal insulator. Put your hand near a cold window in Winter and see how much insulation you get.
And the main point was, in case you missed it, that the computer was too heavy.
Might I suggest an aluminum case? And perhaps a flat panel display? After all, a CRT monitor is the heaviest part of the average PC, and those steel cases are a bit on the heavy side too, not to mention less able to radiate excess heat.
Slashdot Mirror
I just want the morons to stop changing things every time they get even close to actually making the damned bloatware work properly. Do you realise there's a "fix" at their update site for all the things XP SP1 broke? Only it won't download because something else is broken. These folks are all idiots. Certifiable, institutionalizable, garden variety idiots. They need to put the damned OS on the shelf and start selling software that isn't tied into it just because that's the only way people will buy it.
Every version they've cranked out has been the "ultimate." So why is it they keep having to "improve" it? Next they'll want to go back to decimal computing just to confuse the developers even more.
Do you really think that if these brown shirts think they're going to lose (with or without electronic tampering) there'll BE an election? You may want to think about voting for Wesley Clark. At least if they try to shaft him he'll have some friendly assets in the military. If the army can keep the Moslem loonies out of the government in Turkey, maybe they should keep the Christian loonies out over here.
"But just as society has come to understand that a "software pirate" is not a guy with an eye-patch and a parrot on the shoulder with a treasure of stolen MS Windows boxes."
You mean I didn't have to spend $200 for this damned parrot that keeps crapping on my shoulder? Damn!
Seriously though, Ashcroft is a whacko who thinks the skies are going to open up and the angel of the lord is going to blow his trumpet and shout "Game's over, suckers!" The guy belongs in a mental institution and anybody who would appoint him secretary of anything has to have the IQ of a half-eaten taco (no offense, Taco). That his benighted bat-winged minions don't know the difference between an ISP and an interview by a reporter is just another sign of the meaninglessness of the "justice" in Justice Department. Might as well call it the Ministry of Truth and be done with it.
Dear moderator: What bridge did you crawl out from under to call me a "troll"? Damned lot of nerve Mr. 12-year-old script kiddie. Maybe we should do some age verification around here. We might want to check addresses too--just to see if these characters live under bridges.
Like, duh, you've never heard of the internet? Prohibitively expensive? Let's see: set up a website with jobs about to be given to foreigners; wait 30 days for applications; no aplications?; you can bring someone in; otherwise, forget it Mr. CEO Bossman.
This argument would fall under the rubrick of tissue of lies if were even that substantial.
My great grandfather moved halfway around the world to sell fruit off of a wagon in Sioux City, Iowa. Don't give me this sob story about moving your entire family.
Precisely.
Imagine a group of religious cuckoos setting up a set of speakers on a street corner and blasting religious music at the inhabitants of the apartments on the other side of the street at 10.00 at night. This is not hypothetical. I have seen it happen. Are these cretins exercising their right to free speech? Of course not. They do not have the right to force me to listen to them.
Typical Republican. Didn't even read the article. Just like he hasn't read the constitution before he starts waving his silly little flag.
Does he have the right to peer in my window? Enough said.
Never could get WinAmp to work right. And deinstalling it seemed to go on forever. I'm still finding little pieces of it randomly strewn about my computer. The Real Player seems to do everything much better than any of the other Mickey Mouse players out there. Can't for the life of me figure what the big deal is. As for Mozilla, well, I think it's all a matter of beating a dead horse. MS has won the browser game until somebody comes up with something entirely different. Kind of like all those guys out there re-enacting some Civil War battle or other. Give it a rest already. Nobody's ever going to take Cemetery Ridge no matter how many times they play it over again.
Considering the pathetically low intelligence quotient of the average human these days it wouldn't be a bad idea to "enhance" the thinking capacity of the average country music fan to the point where they could at least add two and two and get four and maybe even wrap their brains around the concept that the guy with the most votes gets to be president. Of course you could probably accomplish the same thing by sterilizing everybody who goes to football games. Why is there always a high tech solution for the simplest problems with the simplest solutions? Damned geeks. Yeah I'm a troll. What's it to yah? ;-)
In case you guys and gals haven't noticed, "google" is just an intentional misspelling of "googol," a perfectly good English word for a one followed by 100 zeroes, 1,000,000,000...[88 0's]...000. The misspelling results from the fact that the word is already generic--it's a noun. So the lawsuit is not over the word "google," it's over the replacement of the third "o" with an "e" and its transposition across the letter "l". Talk about an overly litigenous society. Does this mean I can trademark the word "slashdaht"? How about "Santy Claus"? "MacDonalds"? "Blue cheese"? Where does this stupidity end?
To the tune of...M-I-K...K-I-E...M-O-W-S...
Think I'll start a music award called the Grannys...
"Kill the lawyers."
Gee, I wish *I* had access to the ultimate truth like *you* do. It must be nice being omnipotent and omnipresent. You arrogant bozo. Considering the history of governmental lying and ass covering in this country, it's not surprizing that someone would doubt the veracity of these characters. Do you seriously think even through your fog of post 9/11 patriotism that these guys would release the left wing if it showed them to be criminally culpable? Do even you with your sycophantic belief in the superiority of the engineering mentality think that anyone at NASA would tell you the truth if it made them look like a bunch of backwoods schoolboys? Grow up, Sonny. This is Teddy Roosevelt's Amerika. Even down to the troops in the Philippines.
"FOAD, thank you for playing."
That's the ideal of Science, as religions have ideals that if followed would lead to peace on Earth and good will toward men, blah blah blah. I am talking practical reality here, where "scientists" cook the data to fit their preconceived notions, and sightings of UFOs by major telescopes are chucked in the trash can. Give me a break here, fellow. I am not an 12-year-old who believes what his science teacher tells him about the wonderful objective and incorruptible scientists.
As for crumbling, no, Science does not crumble because it has a real penchant for turning the folks they vilified into genuine Heros of Science when they turn out to be right. This has nothing to do with objectivity. It has to do with major league ass-covering by the protectors of the Scientific paradigm.
No, actually something along the lines of a control system, as Jacques Vallee theorizes. Whether this has a physical component is still in question, but the continual ridicule of morons like you is not in the best interests of science nor mental health in general. What always amazes me is the folks who so easily laugh at UFOs are strangely silent when some lunatic in a black robe starts telling people they're going to live in the sky when they die. I guess it's just another case of the old magic trick, the incredible disappearing balls.
Actually, the original Ken Arnold saucer wasn't saucer shaped either. It was kind of a cross between a crescent and an echelon. (How's that for historical foreshadowing?) It was only after the media picked up the term "flying saucer" that people started seeing saucer-shaped objects. This type of evolution would tend to indicate something other than nuts and bolts.
I have done extensive personal research over many years and the most striking thing I have learned about the UFO phenomenon is that it changes depending on what is expected of it, in a manner similar to the way the properties of hypnosis have evolved since its discovery by Mesmer. What does this mean? I don't know. But it might be a good idea to keep in mind the old saw about watching what you wish for, or in this case watching what you believe they are. Vallee thinks it's some kind of control system, a homeostatic device like a thermostat. More likely, it just adapts to its surroundings--or the mental state of those around it.
And folks who spell it Phenomina are also inherently suspicious. ;-)
Seriously though, there is a qualitative difference between simulacra, which are complex, fractal-like entities in which people see similarities to other complex, fractal-like entities, and geometrical shapes. Much has been made of the supposed face on Mars, but there are many half-spherical mounds nearby that are much more interesting in that natural objects tend not to be geometrical. With the exception of basic crystalization of molecules, there are very few things in the world that are geometric and not living. On earth, the presence of geometrical shapes is normally taken as evidence of the presence of man, as in block walls and perfectly round shrubs. Yet when something geometrical is found on Mars, there is a mad dash to see who can come up with the first "explanation" of its natural origin.
"Phenomina that disappear when you take a closer look are inherantly suspicious."
Yes, they are. If I walked past an abandoned red gas station and a week later it was blue, I would be highly suspicious indeed. And not of my own sanity, either. I would surmise, almost assuredly correctly, that someone had painted it. That the face on Mars has changed over an extremely short period of time would indicate to me--not that there was something inherently wrong with the original images--but that someone had changed it. There is something here that smacks of the medieval notion that different laws applied to the celestial sphere than applied to the Earth. On Earth, the blue gas station would be evidence of the presence of intelligent beings, but on Mars it is evidence of the falsity of the original redness of the place. This was the essence of the medieval notion, that the sky was perfect and eternal, unlike the Earth where things changed.
I was actually referring to those areas just barely beneath the surface, where a displaced surface civilization might have moved to escape the obviously quite desolate conditions above ground, or where an alien species, a la Donald Keyhoe, might set up a base, or where the remnants of a previous advanced Earth-based civilization might hide.
There are indications of water flow underground. There are certainly peculiar geometrically shaped objects on the surface, explained away in various ways by the same folks who brought you Kohoutek, the comet of the century. And there are a multitude of indications of vast water flows sometime in the past. The areas actually sampled for (Earthlike) life are miniscule compared to the actual surface area. And there has even been a suggestion that the "canals" reported in earlier times were the result of surface melting of frost from the heat of underground waterways. So it's really how you look at the data that determines whether you see any signs of life or not. Personally, I prefer to remain sceptical of claims of the lack of life on or under the surface of Mars.
What does this have to do with logical reasoning? It has to do with observation and the accurate reporting of observation. The problem is that the scientific establishment has been laughing at anyone who even looks at the evidence for so long that scientists working in observational astronomy are deathly afraid of reporting anything that smacks of forbidden ideas like alien craft in the Solar System. Jacques Vallee has documented the actual destruction of observational data that resulted from this fear. Thankfully, it appears that at least now there is some chance that those who make valid observations will not be afraid of reporting what they have seen.
As to what you believe, I--and science in general--do not care. I am not interested in convincing you of anything. I am not a missionary. What I do wish you and your compatriots would do is stop ridiculing long enough to allow observational science to deal with the phenomena involved. This could very well be quite serious business. One can only imagine what the local witch doctor told the chief when the first European was sighted off the American shore. We need to learn a bit from our own history.
This is the basic premise that science is a belief system. To some degree, it is. What is really scary is the number of people who won't even entertain an idea because some "expert" says it's nutso. The plain bald truth is that no one on Earth, scientist or nonscientist alike, has the foggiest idea what's under the surface of Mars, let alone orbitting alpha-Centauri. Try to keep an open mind, fellows.
"Lightning is a ridiculous example."
One would think that a century after Special Relativity folks would finally have wrapped their brains around the concept of relative. I guess not. Nothing is a good insulator or bad insulator. Things are only good and bad insulators relative to other substances. This is a tautology. It is not open to discussion. If you are under 17 years old, kindly keep your ignorant high school opinions to yourselves.
As for the moron who moderated me as a troll, FUCK YOU, ASSHOLE. If you disagree with me, say so. Don't moderate me to troll because your vocabulary isn't sufficient to make a comprehensible point.
"The air gets hot"
If it's an insulator, why does it get hot?
The fact is that trapped air is a good insulator relative to flowing air and to solid objects like lumber. If it's allowed to flow, it aids the transfer of heat as in your fan example. Hence the fans in the aluminum case transfer the heat carried by the air to the aluminum as well as to the outside of the case. Hence the parts of the computer do not have to be connected to the case, though, in fact, they are.
Why is there always somebody who has to argue with the obvious?
"The truth is, however, that unless the hot components are in direct contact with the aluminum, the air will act as a thermal insulator"
Forgive me if I'm missing something here, but the entire case is aluminum (Lian Li PC-68), inside and out. Everything is connected to part of that case and thus to the aluminum. It also has three fans plus the one on the power supply. Now you're going to tell me fans are a misconception too?
"the fact that air is one of the best thermal insulators out there"
Say what? Air is an electrical insulator, and only to relatively low voltages. Vide, e.g., lightning. It is most assuredly not a thermal insulator. Put your hand near a cold window in Winter and see how much insulation you get.
And the main point was, in case you missed it, that the computer was too heavy.
Might I suggest an aluminum case? And perhaps a flat panel display? After all, a CRT monitor is the heaviest part of the average PC, and those steel cases are a bit on the heavy side too, not to mention less able to radiate excess heat.
When did they start using an apostrophe as a replacement for the confusing comma and period variations of the three-zero demarcation point?