Me personally? Not very much, unless you have kids and are teaching your kids not to wear one by not wearing one. But keep in mind that when someone else refuses to wear their seatbelt and then ends up in the hospital taking up a bed that someone else might need, then they're affecting others.
I have NEVER had an intelligent conversation about this topic where everyone didn't conceed that any valid reason to run a red light would make the fine anything other than a nuisance.
Yeah, but then again you have to remember that these are probably the same people who refuse to wear seatbelts because they've heard a horror story where a person was killed in an accident *because* of the seatbelt. Even though the circumstances might be that for every 100 fatal car accidents, 1 was because of the seatbelt and the other 99 were due to not wearing a seatbelt.
Now think of the 2nd ball. Since it's all repeating itself, think about going FORWARD in time for a whole cycle minus a year. You have just "travelled back in time"..
That's assuming that everything happens the exact same way each cycle. If you're wrong, you could find yourself in the cold blackness of open space. Or worse, in the heart of a star.
>it means that space goes on forever! An infinite number of civilizations....
....that conclusion of yours has nothing to do with what was being discussed...
And it does actually mean that it is a sphere that is expanding from a single point.... it just returns to that point when it collapses in again.
Space (by its basic definition) does go on forever. That has been accepted for a long time. You are thinking that matter expands forever. This theory says nothing of the sort, but instead the opposite...
...did you even read the article?!
Yes, I read the article before it was mentioned on Slashdot.
We're not talking about the universe being a sphere in this new theory. An analogy: Two infinitely long, FLAT sheets of paper run parallel to each other. They draw near each other and collide like cymbals every time the universes become "empty" (heat death). Then they seperate again. Each sheet is its own universe. That's where the proposed "dark matter" that pulls on our universe resides.
The big bang proposes the 4-D balloon what you speak of. In this new "Big Clang" theory, there is no contraction, just "stagnation" and expansion. I guess you could picture the new theory as a balloon within a balloon, but it's harder to conceptualize infinitely large nested spheres and those balloon layers don't ever shrink to a small point.
And what's this nonsense about matter expanding? If you got that silly idea it wasn't from me. If space goes on forever like this new theory proposes, the Big Clang makes pure energy (that becomes matter) at every point in that infinite universe. That means that somewhere out there there happens to be a section of space that developed just like ours did and is almost identical to ours. It's like looking for "214159265358979323846" in PI. It's in there, somewhere. Any finite number sequence can be located in PI.
Here's a little advice: Before asking someone if they actually read the article, make sure you understand it yourself.
Whoa... think about what this means. This would mean that space is not like a sphere expanding from a point of almost nothing into the fourth dimension, it means that space goes on forever! An infinite number of civilizations, and an infinite number of civilizations that are almost exactly like ours. And how many civilizations in the last cycle tried in vain to survive heat death and the next Big Clang?
What if the sheets "roll" across space together? If this could happen before heat death in our area, we'd all just be wiped out like a rat on a beach caught in a title wave.
(It would also mean this exact post has been posted on a much superior Slashdot, far far away.)
Yeah, the only real problem is that hydrogen is a gas, not a liquid like gas. So everyone you talk to at the Hydrogen Station will have squeeky voices.
How would that make us special? We just are. It wasn't until Freud and Jung that people accepted on a mass scale that ailments could lie in the mind/psyche as well as the body. How long will it be before we learn that there is yet another layer beyond the mind?
Body... Mind... Spirit... ???
The thing that amazes me is that people will absolutely insist there is only the body. Then, someone shows them the mind,
Who are these people who only believe in the body? If you're thinking historically, the general thought process was that a person is composed of a body and a spirit. Then we began to learn about the brain. We're still trying to phase out the 'spirit' concept. Most people hear the word mind and sort of mash both spirit and brain into the definition.
and they say, "Okay, I accept I was wrong about the body thing. There is a mind. But there's nothing beyond the mind. I'm positive!"
Spare us the dramatics. Skeptics don't typically wander around with a puffed-up chest, saying "There is only the body and the brain, and that is that!" We say "What is this 'spirit' you speak of and how can you show that it exists independently of the brain?" If the idea of a spirit has been set up so that it's impossible to disprove, it cannot stand on it's own merits. If there has been damage to the physical brain and it affects the spirit, how do you know that there's nothing other than the brain?
Any idea that can't get past the balony detection kit is probably balony.
At each step they admit they were wrong and revise their beliefs, yet they fall right back into insisting their new theories are correct
Yes. This is known as "science". When better evidence comes along we take up new ideas. Some people refer to it as progress.
Example: The idea of black holes is currently being challenged by that of gravastars. Both fit most of the data, but debate will continue over it perhaps indefinitely or until the evidence for and logic behind one has swayed over most if not every mind in the relevant fields.
beyond all doubt and that there is nothing else.
Beyond all doubt? Of course not. But there are an infinite number of fictional scenarios that have about the same amount of evidence behind them that can make this doubt grow to any rational size. If there is no evidence whatsoever for a phenomenon, it's my policy not to believe anything. We should accept what we can describe and verify. Anything else is beyond the bounds of science and not obligated to be subject to scrutiny -- they're someone else's beliefs, after all.
Here's a general rule to go by: Does it make you feel good to believe it? Is it what you want to believe? Then double up on your skepticism. If people are making large profits off of it, double it again. We need to be very careful. The people we fool the most easily are ourselves.
Here's a response I was given to an email I wrote the Ad-Aware team about the issue:
"We have taken steps for this, Please update your reference file for AdAware.
Current Version
AdAware 5.0 release 5.71 build 2899
Current reference file 108-23-04-02 This update targets Radlight"
Dropping even one instruction is going to cause a massive amount of compiler work. I suspect in ten years we will see x86-256 or some other such thing before we see an entirely new instruction set.
Even when you're placing new ones alongside a redundant one? (Say a 64-bit operation of the same type instead of the 32)
I've come across a lot of people saying that x86 is outdated, but people aren't willing to move to the next level. Isn't there some way to cut out old instructions slowly? Say make some new instructions to replace certain ones and then promote a standard where the software is labeled "exclusive version X support" and those instructions are used instead. Applications could run both at once but those "exclusive" applications could still run once another processor is released supporting the rest of the updates and dropping the rest of the originals. I'm not all that familiar with CPU workings, but tell me, is it possible upgrade a CISC chip line by replacing the codes in two stages?
Slashdot Mirror
My thoughts exactly. Moderators, please moderate parent post up!
everythings always about windows,
:)
WINDOWS, WINDOWS, WINDOWS!
No, no, no! You've got it all wrong. Everything is about the developer! DEVELOPERS, DEVELOPERS, DEVE-- er, sorry.
Me personally? Not very much, unless you have kids and are teaching your kids not to wear one by not wearing one. But keep in mind that when someone else refuses to wear their seatbelt and then ends up in the hospital taking up a bed that someone else might need, then they're affecting others.
even the latest-greatest MS OS can't justify the need for this kind of iron.
I think you're vastly underestimating Microsoft's talent for bloat.
I'll bet Microsoft plans to use the money to develop some compund of gold that is liquid at room temperature for Gate's swimming pool.
Either that, or they're going to repave One Microsoft Way real fancy-like.
The article cited jammed film. Why aren't they using digital cameras?
I have NEVER had an intelligent conversation about this topic where everyone didn't conceed that any valid reason to run a red light would make the fine anything other than a nuisance.
Yeah, but then again you have to remember that these are probably the same people who refuse to wear seatbelts because they've heard a horror story where a person was killed in an accident *because* of the seatbelt. Even though the circumstances might be that for every 100 fatal car accidents, 1 was because of the seatbelt and the other 99 were due to not wearing a seatbelt.
Selfish, selective reasoning.
Not that 165,000 jobs will be cut....
Nah. Those jobs won't be lost until Fiorna drives the company into the ground.
I'd estimate one, perhaps two years.
Now think of the 2nd ball. Since it's all repeating itself, think about going FORWARD in time for a whole cycle minus a year. You have just "travelled back in time"..
:)
That's assuming that everything happens the exact same way each cycle. If you're wrong, you could find yourself in the cold blackness of open space. Or worse, in the heart of a star.
Happy travels.
>it means that space goes on forever! An infinite number of civilizations....
....that conclusion of yours has nothing to do with what was being discussed...
And it does actually mean that it is a sphere that is expanding from a single point.... it just returns to that point when it collapses in again.
Space (by its basic definition) does go on forever. That has been accepted for a long time. You are thinking that matter expands forever. This theory says nothing of the sort, but instead the opposite...
...did you even read the article?!
Yes, I read the article before it was mentioned on Slashdot.
We're not talking about the universe being a sphere in this new theory. An analogy: Two infinitely long, FLAT sheets of paper run parallel to each other. They draw near each other and collide like cymbals every time the universes become "empty" (heat death). Then they seperate again. Each sheet is its own universe. That's where the proposed "dark matter" that pulls on our universe resides.
The big bang proposes the 4-D balloon what you speak of. In this new "Big Clang" theory, there is no contraction, just "stagnation" and expansion. I guess you could picture the new theory as a balloon within a balloon, but it's harder to conceptualize infinitely large nested spheres and those balloon layers don't ever shrink to a small point.
And what's this nonsense about matter expanding? If you got that silly idea it wasn't from me. If space goes on forever like this new theory proposes, the Big Clang makes pure energy (that becomes matter) at every point in that infinite universe. That means that somewhere out there there happens to be a section of space that developed just like ours did and is almost identical to ours. It's like looking for "214159265358979323846" in PI. It's in there, somewhere. Any finite number sequence can be located in PI.
Here's a little advice: Before asking someone if they actually read the article, make sure you understand it yourself.
Let me say also - Entropy is a thorough bitch.
Entropy, huh? And my ex-girlfriend always told me her name was Diane!
Let me say also - Entropy is a thorough bitch.
Entropy, huh? My ex-girlfriend told me her name was Diane, that bitch!
Whoa... think about what this means. This would mean that space is not like a sphere expanding from a point of almost nothing into the fourth dimension, it means that space goes on forever! An infinite number of civilizations, and an infinite number of civilizations that are almost exactly like ours. And how many civilizations in the last cycle tried in vain to survive heat death and the next Big Clang?
What if the sheets "roll" across space together? If this could happen before heat death in our area, we'd all just be wiped out like a rat on a beach caught in a title wave.
(It would also mean this exact post has been posted on a much superior Slashdot, far far away.)
hope they include a "Boss Key" ;O)
Yeah. Just type IDKBA. (I.D. Kick's Bosses Ass)
A German concept, AFAIK. Way more reusable than anything NASA has come up with ... 8-)
Nah. I say we just make a giant slingshot.
Er, like gasoline. Dammit.
Yeah, the only real problem is that hydrogen is a gas, not a liquid like gas. So everyone you talk to at the Hydrogen Station will have squeeky voices.
What does that say about our geek-ness, or lack of it, when we see "H" and think heroin instead of hydrogen?
Yeah, we're not the most educated people.
The symbol for for Heroin is actually Hr.
:p
How would that make us special? We just are. It wasn't until Freud and Jung that people accepted on a mass scale that ailments could lie in the mind/psyche as well as the body. How long will it be before we learn that there is yet another layer beyond the mind?
... Mind ... Spirit ... ???
Body
The thing that amazes me is that people will absolutely insist there is only the body. Then, someone shows them the mind,
Who are these people who only believe in the body? If you're thinking historically, the general thought process was that a person is composed of a body and a spirit. Then we began to learn about the brain. We're still trying to phase out the 'spirit' concept. Most people hear the word mind and sort of mash both spirit and brain into the definition.
and they say, "Okay, I accept I was wrong about the body thing. There is a mind. But there's nothing beyond the mind. I'm positive!"
Spare us the dramatics. Skeptics don't typically wander around with a puffed-up chest, saying "There is only the body and the brain, and that is that!" We say "What is this 'spirit' you speak of and how can you show that it exists independently of the brain?" If the idea of a spirit has been set up so that it's impossible to disprove, it cannot stand on it's own merits. If there has been damage to the physical brain and it affects the spirit, how do you know that there's nothing other than the brain?
Any idea that can't get past the balony detection kit is probably balony.
At each step they admit they were wrong and revise their beliefs, yet they fall right back into insisting their new theories are correct
Yes. This is known as "science". When better evidence comes along we take up new ideas. Some people refer to it as progress.
Example: The idea of black holes is currently being challenged by that of gravastars. Both fit most of the data, but debate will continue over it perhaps indefinitely or until the evidence for and logic behind one has swayed over most if not every mind in the relevant fields.
beyond all doubt and that there is nothing else.
Beyond all doubt? Of course not. But there are an infinite number of fictional scenarios that have about the same amount of evidence behind them that can make this doubt grow to any rational size. If there is no evidence whatsoever for a phenomenon, it's my policy not to believe anything. We should accept what we can describe and verify. Anything else is beyond the bounds of science and not obligated to be subject to scrutiny -- they're someone else's beliefs, after all.
Here's a general rule to go by: Does it make you feel good to believe it? Is it what you want to believe? Then double up on your skepticism. If people are making large profits off of it, double it again. We need to be very careful. The people we fool the most easily are ourselves.
And I just downloaded .641 last night!
| Input command:
> TRADEMARK "FORMAT C:\"
| WARNING! This will cause you to recieve royalties anytime someone decides to uninstall Windows. Are you sure you want to do this?
> Y
| Screwing consumers: 31% complete...
Here's a response I was given to an email I wrote the Ad-Aware team about the issue:
"We have taken steps for this, Please update your reference file for AdAware.
Current Version
AdAware 5.0 release 5.71 build 2899
Current reference file 108-23-04-02 This update targets Radlight"
See my .sig
Dropping even one instruction is going to cause a massive amount of compiler work. I suspect in ten years we will see x86-256 or some other such thing before we see an entirely new instruction set.
Even when you're placing new ones alongside a redundant one? (Say a 64-bit operation of the same type instead of the 32)
I've come across a lot of people saying that x86 is outdated, but people aren't willing to move to the next level. Isn't there some way to cut out old instructions slowly? Say make some new instructions to replace certain ones and then promote a standard where the software is labeled "exclusive version X support" and those instructions are used instead. Applications could run both at once but those "exclusive" applications could still run once another processor is released supporting the rest of the updates and dropping the rest of the originals. I'm not all that familiar with CPU workings, but tell me, is it possible upgrade a CISC chip line by replacing the codes in two stages?