Think of all those quirky eccentric people studying journalism in college. They're all grown up and controlling the proles now.
Remember, he who has the gold makes the rules. Determining the politics of a news organization by studying the journalists is like determining the politics of General Motors by studying the United Auto Workers.
Ending of UW1 (Spoiler... if anyone cares; this is from memory, so may not be exactly correct):
When you find and kill the guy who kidnapped the princess, he tells you, as he dies, that he was in the process of summoning a demon. Killing him fouls up the spell, and you have to banish the demon. In the process, you end up being gated back to Earth -- you never do get to go through the sealed door you started by.
The maker of the certification should care. So should anyone interested in acquiring the certification, or evaluating an application from someone who has it.
Why is it an argument against Windows?
Maybe not so much against Windows as against Microsoft. They're promoting a certification for their own product; if this certification isn't meaningful, it's because they don't care much about making it so. In a way, this is an indirect form of poor product support, like printing badly-written reference manuals.
Microsoft is responsible for making sure that only quality software (err... let's ignore stuff like Kabuki Warriors, eh? All consoles have to have their share of stinkers...) is released for their console. Otherwise, we'd be right back in 1984 and the last video game crash. A major contributing factor was Atari's lack of certification for games, and the subsequent glut of pure crap. Do we want to go back to that? I know I don't.
The comparison is specious. The modern computer game market lacks certification without suffering from this problem; the primary barrier to entry in today's market is not licensing but rather the cash required to make a graphically modern game.
At some point I discovered that blowing per se wasn't nearly as effective as simply breathing out slowly through my mouth as if I were trying to fog up a mirror. This was a much more consistent method, but also accelerated the corrosion process even more.
As far as I can tell, it's the water condensation itself that makes the "blow and pray" trick work.
how do you know that? maybe private roads would work better.
I'm not the one you're responding to, but I doubt that. Pretty soon we'd see something a lot like the old railroad trusts. Over time some entities would acquire the critical mass of highway ownership which it would use to squeeze smaller competitors out of business. The ones big enough to survive would either merge or form cartels, either of which would result in absence of competition and prices just enough lower than air-freight to be worth using.
ObModeratorBait: I know it's hard to resist moderating up someone who mixes unfounded insults with impressive-looking links, but please, show some restraint.
From the referenced article:
About 12 percent of the queries received by the root server on Oct. 4, were for nonexistent top-level domains, such as ".elvis", ".corp", and ".localhost".
When you're looking for an unfamiliar TLD, you ask the root server. That's what the root servers point to -- TLDs.
He was saying that if SCO submitted patented code to a GPLd project than SCO loses the rights to enforce that patent.
Sigh.
He said no such thing. The comment to which you responded was itself a response to someone asking whether this was a copyright or patent issue, and the section to which you object was laying out the reasons why the claim would be related to patents, not copyright.
If nobody important gets hurt then the fight is meaningless
Got the nail on the head, there! The worg-rider fight is meaningless. Having a character falling off a cliff and surviving is so ridiculously cliched that even the filmmakers didn't take it seriously -- compare the treatment of that scene to Gandalf's. (Using the same device twice was a serious mistake, especially when the execution was less cliched the first time.) The fact that "being knocked out is always a good excuse for a flashback" is exactly why a good author won't use it casually... but then, no one's claimed that the scriptwriters for the movie were good authors.
Unless you have a plausible alternative hypothesis, experiments that agree with your hypothesis tell you essentially nothing.
This observation is meaningful only in hindsight. An experiment like this one has the potential to disconfirm the hypothesis as well. The fact that it did not do so is significant, albeit not so significant as the alternative.
The slur against physicists is unjustified, particularly the "elevate it to dogma" line. If you want to test a hypothesis, you first assume that it is correct, then try to prove the assumption wrong. If you have a better method, please share it.
All you see (actually - all you think that you see) is just your imagination.
If so, that's the universe: space and time and energy and matter existing as imagining makes them. If everything is imaginary, then imagination is real.
A fair comment for the first half but goes downhill into its own troll from there. No one just "drops his views" when changing political parties, and the Republican party of today is not the Party of Lincoln any more than the Democratic party is the Party of Jefferson. These days, it's the Republican party that tends to offer the racists a more favorable climate.
Mental conditions have physical origins. Every mental state is a product of the underlying physical state of the brain; we just don't understand either type of state well enough to describe the connections in detail. Thus, every mental condition is a physical condition.
All right, those are simple assertions, and I'm not able to support them -- but anyone who contests them should have a better explanation for where mental states come from.
It would never work in court, and for good reason. Fair use for reporting purposes is meant for the purpose of reporting on the material being quoted: that is, if you're reviewing a song, it's acceptable to quote sections of the lyrics. You obviously don't need this to "report" something as unrelated as your phone calls.
Stupid explanations aren't entertaining -- they're distracting. If the screenwriters didn't have a good reason for why humans were being kept alive, they should have just said, "No one knows why they keep humans alive." It would have left a mystery much more interesting than the implausible and unnecessary explanation given.
Interesting. When you list "genres" he's invented, it seems that they're incremental evolutionary stages -- which is exactly the point of the sentence you quoted.
You can overcome any bad card genetics throws your way by having a strong will and a quick mind....Which you wouldn't have without favorable genetics. "Mind over matter" is a fraud in a universe where minds are made of matter.
Slashdot Mirror
That post didn't say what you think it said. It was referring to one of multiple articles under which impeachment was attempted.
Think of all those quirky eccentric people studying journalism in college. They're all grown up and controlling the proles now.
Remember, he who has the gold makes the rules. Determining the politics of a news organization by studying the journalists is like determining the politics of General Motors by studying the United Auto Workers.
In all honesty, ad hominem attacks do nothing to advance your argument.
Ending of UW1 (Spoiler... if anyone cares; this is from memory, so may not be exactly correct):
When you find and kill the guy who kidnapped the princess, he tells you, as he dies, that he was in the process of summoning a demon. Killing him fouls up the spell, and you have to banish the demon. In the process, you end up being gated back to Earth -- you never do get to go through the sealed door you started by.
Who cares if incompetents get certified?
The maker of the certification should care. So should anyone interested in acquiring the certification, or evaluating an application from someone who has it.
Why is it an argument against Windows?
Maybe not so much against Windows as against Microsoft. They're promoting a certification for their own product; if this certification isn't meaningful, it's because they don't care much about making it so. In a way, this is an indirect form of poor product support, like printing badly-written reference manuals.
Microsoft is responsible for making sure that only quality software (err ... let's ignore stuff like Kabuki Warriors, eh? All consoles have to have their share of stinkers ...) is released for their console. Otherwise, we'd be right back in 1984 and the last video game crash. A major contributing factor was Atari's lack of certification for games, and the subsequent glut of pure crap. Do we want to go back to that? I know I don't.
The comparison is specious. The modern computer game market lacks certification without suffering from this problem; the primary barrier to entry in today's market is not licensing but rather the cash required to make a graphically modern game.
At some point I discovered that blowing per se wasn't nearly as effective as simply breathing out slowly through my mouth as if I were trying to fog up a mirror. This was a much more consistent method, but also accelerated the corrosion process even more.
As far as I can tell, it's the water condensation itself that makes the "blow and pray" trick work.
It's too readable for the poster you're responding to.
it may be useful for me to point out that the second amendment is largely useless at this point.
Not particularly, no. This "analysis" isn't worthy of the name.
If the damage had been found to be serious, the shuttle could have docked with the International Space Station
This much is clearly wrong; as other posts have noted, the shuttle was not equipped to dock with the ISS.
how do you know that? maybe private roads would work better.
I'm not the one you're responding to, but I doubt that. Pretty soon we'd see something a lot like the old railroad trusts. Over time some entities would acquire the critical mass of highway ownership which it would use to squeeze smaller competitors out of business. The ones big enough to survive would either merge or form cartels, either of which would result in absence of competition and prices just enough lower than air-freight to be worth using.
Ah hell. I totally misinterpreted the current article title.
Sorry.
ObModeratorBait: I know it's hard to resist moderating up someone who mixes unfounded insults with impressive-looking links, but please, show some restraint.
From the referenced article:
About 12 percent of the queries received by the root server on Oct. 4, were for nonexistent top-level domains, such as ".elvis", ".corp", and ".localhost".
When you're looking for an unfamiliar TLD, you ask the root server. That's what the root servers point to -- TLDs.
This is a problem with absentee voting in general, not Internet voting per se.
He was saying that if SCO submitted patented code to a GPLd project than SCO loses the rights to enforce that patent.
Sigh.
He said no such thing. The comment to which you responded was itself a response to someone asking whether this was a copyright or patent issue, and the section to which you object was laying out the reasons why the claim would be related to patents, not copyright.
If nobody important gets hurt then the fight is meaningless
Got the nail on the head, there! The worg-rider fight is meaningless. Having a character falling off a cliff and surviving is so ridiculously cliched that even the filmmakers didn't take it seriously -- compare the treatment of that scene to Gandalf's. (Using the same device twice was a serious mistake, especially when the execution was less cliched the first time.) The fact that "being knocked out is always a good excuse for a flashback" is exactly why a good author won't use it casually... but then, no one's claimed that the scriptwriters for the movie were good authors.
Unless you have a plausible alternative hypothesis, experiments that agree with your hypothesis tell you essentially nothing.
This observation is meaningful only in hindsight. An experiment like this one has the potential to disconfirm the hypothesis as well. The fact that it did not do so is significant, albeit not so significant as the alternative.
The slur against physicists is unjustified, particularly the "elevate it to dogma" line. If you want to test a hypothesis, you first assume that it is correct, then try to prove the assumption wrong. If you have a better method, please share it.
All you see (actually - all you think that you see) is just your imagination.
If so, that's the universe: space and time and energy and matter existing as imagining makes them. If everything is imaginary, then imagination is real.
I can easily invalidate your entire comment.
Do it, then.
(All you're advocating -- and not proving -- is that a Ph.D in "Theoretical Computer Science" is irrelevant, not the Ph.D in general.)
A fair comment for the first half but goes downhill into its own troll from there. No one just "drops his views" when changing political parties, and the Republican party of today is not the Party of Lincoln any more than the Democratic party is the Party of Jefferson. These days, it's the Republican party that tends to offer the racists a more favorable climate.
Mental conditions have physical origins. Every mental state is a product of the underlying physical state of the brain; we just don't understand either type of state well enough to describe the connections in detail. Thus, every mental condition is a physical condition.
All right, those are simple assertions, and I'm not able to support them -- but anyone who contests them should have a better explanation for where mental states come from.
It would never work in court, and for good reason. Fair use for reporting purposes is meant for the purpose of reporting on the material being quoted: that is, if you're reviewing a song, it's acceptable to quote sections of the lyrics. You obviously don't need this to "report" something as unrelated as your phone calls.
Stupid explanations aren't entertaining -- they're distracting. If the screenwriters didn't have a good reason for why humans were being kept alive, they should have just said, "No one knows why they keep humans alive." It would have left a mystery much more interesting than the implausible and unnecessary explanation given.
Interesting. When you list "genres" he's invented, it seems that they're incremental evolutionary stages -- which is exactly the point of the sentence you quoted.
You can overcome any bad card genetics throws your way by having a strong will and a quick mind. ...Which you wouldn't have without favorable genetics. "Mind over matter" is a fraud in a universe where minds are made of matter.