And this computer has all these extra buttons my old Winston typewriter didn't have! It even has a separate l and 1 key! All I ever needed was those 40-some keys..anything more, who can figure it out.
talented rock guitarists like John Satriani as are worthy of praise as Yehudi Menuhin, and Jimi Hendrix is to the 20th century what Franz Liszt is to the 19th
sounds like someone hasn't actually played the violin, or paid attention to liszt. where anywhere in modern music do we have a paganini, or the transcendental etudes?
Slashdot seems to go through themes with its user-submitted content - the latest one is "what good is ___ because it excludes/isn't done/isn't useful/doesn't suit me/etc"
Web accessibility is already very well-trodden ground, in terms of development !!!
Making your page accessible doesn't require any new development, just using the ample tool sand mechanisms in existence today! Does this mean development for WWW things is done? no, of course not! It just means we don't need to keep adding junk for disabled peoples..and can do more interesting things.
Now, that most pages aren't accessible..that is a matter ofwebmaster-education more than technology
that's funny..when I hear 'american culture,' I think of Aaron Copland's "Hoedown" or charles wysocki or walt whitman or any number of great american cultural producers.
You plug in some random junk someone gives someone else at christmas - what does Windows do? it pops up one series of dialogs carefully charted out by the manufacturer somewhere that people can follow to get Dancin' Santa USB to shuck and jive in concordance with their mp3s.
Linux doesn't even HAVE dancin' santa USB drivers.
he long-term theory is to create self-replicating, self-powering nanobots
doesn't that seem like an awfully large problem, though? can we even make useful robots at normal scale that self-replicate? this seems like the barrier of the sort of faster-than-light travel. possible intheory, but so far remved from what we can do that it pushes the things beyond it into the realm of pure speculation. (which is, of course, a fine activity, but let's not confuse it with things connected to thereal world.)
if it weren't for the internet, I'd know practically nothing.
man, you must not know a lot of things of lasting value! Have you tried reading philosophy or history on internet? Viewing art? Listening to music? Experiencing culture? Yes it's good for reading about programming languages but what a cramped world to live in
and there's the rub. If you've ever spent any time around scientician-types at all, you'll see that there are very, very, very few who could be 'legitimate' under that definition. people are a lot more fallible than the idea of clean and pure scientific explanation.
There was some tv show on discovery or TLC a few years back that actually did report on a big-name university doing studies in remote-viewing/telepathy, with very interesting results that most sciencey-skeptic types would try to dismiss through experimental error/etc. I think it was done through stanford, and I want to say the air force was in on it, so you might try googling on that, but it's been a while and I can't remember a damn thing with this infrasound from the pipe organ they installed in the garbage truck outside.
Slashdot Mirror
And this computer has all these extra buttons my old Winston typewriter didn't have! It even has a separate l and 1 key! All I ever needed was those 40-some keys..anything more, who can figure it out.
MR OBOBO STEVENS
so can all our 419 spam get list-separated out on its own? ;)
After how many years of development? By the 1940s, film technology had been in the works for many decades...
I was looking for my -1 Obvious or -1 Unhelpful moderation option, but there are too damn many clicks here!
sounds like someone hasn't actually played the violin, or paid attention to liszt. where anywhere in modern music do we have a paganini, or the transcendental etudes?
bah! we're crotchety and elitist for a reason.
Web accessibility is already very well-trodden ground, in terms of development !!!
Making your page accessible doesn't require any new development, just using the ample tool sand mechanisms in existence today! Does this mean development for WWW things is done? no, of course not! It just means we don't need to keep adding junk for disabled peoples..and can do more interesting things.
Now, that most pages aren't accessible..that is a matter ofwebmaster-education more than technology
what are they, if not just that?
bah!
It's very eastern...
Plato might disagree.
Linux doesn't even HAVE dancin' santa USB drivers.
THAT is the different!
doesn't that seem like an awfully large problem, though? can we even make useful robots at normal scale that self-replicate? this seems like the barrier of the sort of faster-than-light travel. possible intheory, but so far remved from what we can do that it pushes the things beyond it into the realm of pure speculation. (which is, of course, a fine activity, but let's not confuse it with things connected to thereal world.)
Please pay attention! The bug only affects Panther!! The bug only affects Panther!!!! Use jaguar, as I am, and it does not affect you!!!!
... fish post?
cause OO.org runs on more than just linux?
Who's the REII?
They do..but not in these schools.
wow. nice username. :)
if it weren't for the internet, I'd know practically nothing.
man, you must not know a lot of things of lasting value! Have you tried reading philosophy or history on internet? Viewing art? Listening to music? Experiencing culture? Yes it's good for reading about programming languages but what a cramped world to live in
do we really need to be notified every time an asteroid is within a percentage of a collision course?
Yes..and we're checking it every second.
Because, as has been said before, you don't know that he's just had a look around.
would it be fair to call it illegal?
it is not an activity fit for consideration in criminal courts, to be sure. and maybe that is what you meant.
and there's the rub. If you've ever spent any time around scientician-types at all, you'll see that there are very, very, very few who could be 'legitimate' under that definition. people are a lot more fallible than the idea of clean and pure scientific explanation.
There was some tv show on discovery or TLC a few years back that actually did report on a big-name university doing studies in remote-viewing/telepathy, with very interesting results that most sciencey-skeptic types would try to dismiss through experimental error/etc. I think it was done through stanford, and I want to say the air force was in on it, so you might try googling on that, but it's been a while and I can't remember a damn thing with this infrasound from the pipe organ they installed in the garbage truck outside.
I, for one, welcome our new overlords who want to screw me,