That's what it used to be like, back in the good old days (i.e., 1999). We even had links to web servers running on PIC chips, which makes an iPhone look like a ridiculously oversized muscle car by comparison. But for some reason people are less willing to roast their iPhones than a PIC chip and a couple of resistors.
I put it down to the kids these days, they're just not as adventurous as when I was a lad (i.e., 1999) and used to walk to work in the snow, uphill, both ways, with only a roasting Slashdotted PIC-based webserver for warmth.
You're confused. The problem with Bush is that he indulges in stupid posturing and bad diplomacy. Try to make sure your high testosterone level doesn't interfere too much with your brain function.
Find God? which one? Zeus? The Muslim god? The christian god? Dagon? Thor? Endovelicus? The Spaguetti monster? Santa Claus? The tooth fairy?
Geez, haven't you been paying any attention to physics for the last fifty years? Just as atoms (or protons, neutrons and electrons) can be used to create any kind of matter, so the God particle can be used to create any kind of god. Once they isolate the God particle, they'll be able to create a god who actually likes science. Or create a god who isn't always short of cash, so doesn't need to raise money via telethons. Or the ultimate challenge: create a god that doesn't exist.
so if i make a post in this thread will it appear back in time in the other thread too?
Absolutely. In fact, I'm posting this comment to a thread belonging to a future dupe of the dupe you posted to, and you should be able to read it back in the past (i.e. your present). Don't bother looking at the timestamp, Slashcode's handling of time travelling comments used to be a bit weird, although they fixed it shortly after that incident with the time-travelling trolls who were exploiting page-widening bugs that had already been fixed.
now i dont mean any disrespect to Einstein (as i'm clearly not worthy to do so), but i personally think his work with quantum physics is a rather dark spot on his personality.
That's rather harsh, one might almost say a dark spot on your personality. It's also a perspective which depends very much on hindsight. Think about what humanity's knowledge of the universe was like before Einstein invented both the special and general theories of relativity, and explained the photoelectric effect. We had various disparate theories about things like gravity and space and time and matter. Then Einstein came along and utterly revolutionized our understanding of the universe in so many ways.
As someone who did more to explain and tie together different aspects of space, time, and matter than most other individuals, it is not unreasonable for him to have believed that he could still do better. Quantum theory, however, appeared to lead away from the kind of unification and simplification that Einstein's theories had introduced. It's reasonable to conclude, as Einstein did, that perhaps quantum theory is missing something important. Even today, string theorists essentially believe the same thing: that there is a deeper theory which explains the intuitively contradictory characteristics of quantum theory.
It was exactly this kind of thinking that led to Einstein's most famous discoveries. Such thinking isn't necessarily right every time, but if no-one followed such intuitions, important new theoretical discoveries would be rare. To conclude that Einstein's perspective on quantum theory -- a field which was still new, incomplete, and developing at the time -- was "a dark spot on his personality" does a rather spectactular disservice to Einstein.
So, Mr. thePsychologist, what's the psychology of looking at a list, making a dumb mistake in interpreting it and coming to he conclusion that the list shouldn't be trusted? Me no understand thing, thing bad?
I'm curious about what benefits of U.S. citizenship you're thinking of. Being a permanent resident in the U.S., i.e. a green card holder, allows you to "enjoy pretty much all the rights that citizens enjoy (except voting)".
Perhaps the biggest negative of not being a citizen is that you could, in theory, still be subject to cancellation of your green card and deportation if you did something very bad. Or, if you're as wealthy as someone like Rupert Murdoch and have substantial business interests in the U.S., becoming a citizen may have tax and business benefits, but these don't apply to ordinary people.
I have got the impression that people in the US embrace citizenship more for the convenience than for the love of their host country.
I suspect your impression may be based on confusing illegal immigrants with legal immigrants. Many illegal immigrants will understandably jump at opportunities to become legal, whether via some kind of path to citizenship or otherwise.
The part of the GPLv3 that they are repudiating here is the part which might allow someone to claim that they can redistribute Microsoft code as open source by relying on the GPLv3.
Setting aside the fact that the grandparent was just a joke (I guess I hoped that the funny mods might blind people to the logical flaws), rights to code are not the real issue here. There's no serious argument here that could lead to Windows code becoming subject to the GPLv3. However, Microsoft's patent rights are another story. Note Microsoft's statement in the eWeek story: "Furthermore, Microsoft does not grant any implied or express patent rights under or as a result of GPLv3".
More generally, Microsoft just wants to avoid being perceived as somehow having agreed to be bound by GPLv3, or endorsing it.
RMS is not the law.
Er, as head of the Church of Emacs, RMS is the equivalent of either a god or a pope (although with characteristic modesty, he designates himself a mere saint, Saint IGNUcius). As such, RMS most certainly is the law. Bow down before Him, infidel!
Microsoft used to warn anyone who would listen about the GPL being viral. Touching it might give you free software cooties, and worse, infect your own intellectual property. But apparently Microsoft has found the solution to that, and is embracing the new, non-viral GPLv3!
Canonical is out of range of Microsoft's patent arsenal.
Note that Shuttleworth originally got rich with a similar strategy: by developing and selling cryptographic products out of the range of U.S. laws which controlled such products. This similarity is, presumably, not lost on Shuttleworth.
Right, but that hurricane season wasn't worse than 2005. If e.g. sea temperatures become unusually warm, then an unusually intense hurricane can form and transfer that energy elsewhere, which returns temperatures to equilibrium and makes further hurricanes less intense. With higher average temperatures overall, i.e. more energy in the sea, this balancing process is disturbed, and you get more, stronger hurricanes on average.
There is no "real" money in science research... if they were doing it for Profit!, they wouldn't be spending their days being ridiculed by the likes of you - they'd be out shorting stock for flood insurance companies.
It's funny you mention this. I was just in a meeting yesterday, where one of the topics related to catastrophe insurance. Insurers who are affected by this kind of stuff are running scared, because they see the actual loss numbers. But they won't come out in public and say "we're screwed", because of the impact on the stock price. So instead, the just adjust the kinds of things they'll cover, increase premiums, and business carries on as normal. I wonder whether people will start accepting global warming once they discover they can't get insurance for extreme weather events, at any price? As Steven Colbert puts it, the market has spoken: global warming is real.
The fact that we notice an increasing trend in average global temperatures, and that we know from basic subjects like physics that this increased energy will translate into more severe weather, doesn't mean that we suddenly become perfect weathermen able to predict the next 6 months with perfect accuracy. The failure of a short-term prediction like that has absolutely no bearing on the validity of the global warming phenomenon.
2006 may have been normal, but 2005 was the most active Atlantic hurricane season in recorded history. It doesn't make sense to base decisions about the future of the human race on what amounts to one lucky year. There'll be more lucky years in future, too. But at the same time, the incidence of Katrina-like years, and worse, is going to go up. And that's just one of the effects that will be felt.
Prepare for more disappointment in life: humans in general are dumb.
I'm old enough to have noticed that already, but that's a big reason why watching something like the Sopranos holds so little attraction for me. I'm not very interested in what drives such people. I'm sure monkeys also have interesting inner lives, from a certain perspective, but I wouldn't watch more than about a 45-minute documentary about that. Hmm... reminds me of the reality shows, which I similarly don't enjoy. OK, it's starting to make sense now.
Um, have you paid any attention to the current war we're in?
At least the stakes in that case are big enough to be interesting. So maybe part of the attraction of the Sopranos is that it's stupidity on a human scale, not on the global unsolveable kilodeath scale of Iraq and the Middle East.
Thanks for the reply. But you've tangentially hit on exactly why I don't find the classic fictional Sicilian mob very interesting: they're dumb. They physically hurt or kill each other for no good reason, or for reasons which only make sense in their twisted reality frame. They don't seem able to rise above this dumbness, no matter what happens. They're uncivilized, literally: they haven't quite figured out that "do unto others..." doesn't mean "do others before they do you".
Mobster movies never end with a conversion into legitimate business. Casinos don't count, since at least in their fictional representation, they're little more than fronts, an excuse for the same murderous macho silliness in a modern context. Attempts at such a conversion typically end in disaster, presumably as some kind of morality play. So Sicilian screen mobsters are not like the Kennedys, Bushes, Carnegies, or Windsors.
Perhaps it's similar to the fascination with celebrities and rich people having troubled lives: showing that the behavior we can't have doesn't lead to anything good, anyway. But in this case, who ever imagined that it did?
The '80s was just the last time I remember the mob being such a fad-like subject of interest. The Godfather movies may have started the fad, but it continued for years. By the time of Godfather III, the fad aspect was over, and they were probably attempting to revive it or just cash in. Of course, later there were movies like Goodfellas and Casino, but they didn't have the same kind of impact. I was wondering what it was about Sopranos that seems to have reignited the interest in the subject, since it all seems very familiar and quite dated to me.
I'm curious, of the people who watch Sopranos and are old enough to have gone through the previous pop culture obsession with the mob, around the time of The Godfather, what's the attraction still? It all seems so '80s to me.
This probably reads like a troll, but I'm genuinely interested, because I so don't get it. Think of it as a personal failing on my part, and point out the cultural riches I'm missing out on.
The incident in which some new F-22s en route to Japan had to turn back was a real incident, according to the Air Force. What's not clear is what the actual cause was. All the Air Force seems to have said officially are things like "a software issue affecting the aircraft's navigation system was discovered Feb. 11 causing the aircraft to return to Hickam" (from here).
A retired Major General Don Sheppard had more to say on CNN, but gave no details about where his information came from. Although one is presumably supposed to assume he had inside knowledge, he could just have been speculating based on the official reports.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what it used to be like, back in the good old days (i.e., 1999). We even had links to web servers running on PIC chips, which makes an iPhone look like a ridiculously oversized muscle car by comparison. But for some reason people are less willing to roast their iPhones than a PIC chip and a couple of resistors.
I put it down to the kids these days, they're just not as adventurous as when I was a lad (i.e., 1999) and used to walk to work in the snow, uphill, both ways, with only a roasting Slashdotted PIC-based webserver for warmth.
You're confused. The problem with Bush is that he indulges in stupid posturing and bad diplomacy. Try to make sure your high testosterone level doesn't interfere too much with your brain function.
Give me your Visa or Mastercard details, and I'll demonstrate.
You might be interested to know that many hookers accept Visa and Mastercard...
As someone who did more to explain and tie together different aspects of space, time, and matter than most other individuals, it is not unreasonable for him to have believed that he could still do better. Quantum theory, however, appeared to lead away from the kind of unification and simplification that Einstein's theories had introduced. It's reasonable to conclude, as Einstein did, that perhaps quantum theory is missing something important. Even today, string theorists essentially believe the same thing: that there is a deeper theory which explains the intuitively contradictory characteristics of quantum theory.
It was exactly this kind of thinking that led to Einstein's most famous discoveries. Such thinking isn't necessarily right every time, but if no-one followed such intuitions, important new theoretical discoveries would be rare. To conclude that Einstein's perspective on quantum theory -- a field which was still new, incomplete, and developing at the time -- was "a dark spot on his personality" does a rather spectactular disservice to Einstein.
So, Mr. thePsychologist, what's the psychology of looking at a list, making a dumb mistake in interpreting it and coming to he conclusion that the list shouldn't be trusted? Me no understand thing, thing bad?
More generally, Microsoft just wants to avoid being perceived as somehow having agreed to be bound by GPLv3, or endorsing it.Er, as head of the Church of Emacs, RMS is the equivalent of either a god or a pope (although with characteristic modesty, he designates himself a mere saint, Saint IGNUcius). As such, RMS most certainly is the law. Bow down before Him, infidel!
From "embrace and extend"...
The point is that for Microsoft, claiming that the GPLv3 is not viral is as close to a love-fest as it gets.
Microsoft used to warn anyone who would listen about the GPL being viral. Touching it might give you free software cooties, and worse, infect your own intellectual property. But apparently Microsoft has found the solution to that, and is embracing the new, non-viral GPLv3!
...that tax laws don't apply to me. Oh, and those pesky laws about parking and speeding, too.
So the parent is impassioned and hyperbolic. That doesn't make him a troll.
Right, but that hurricane season wasn't worse than 2005. If e.g. sea temperatures become unusually warm, then an unusually intense hurricane can form and transfer that energy elsewhere, which returns temperatures to equilibrium and makes further hurricanes less intense. With higher average temperatures overall, i.e. more energy in the sea, this balancing process is disturbed, and you get more, stronger hurricanes on average.
See El Nino may calm 2006 hurricane season and The 2006 Hurricane Season Was Near Normal for explanations.
The fact that we notice an increasing trend in average global temperatures, and that we know from basic subjects like physics that this increased energy will translate into more severe weather, doesn't mean that we suddenly become perfect weathermen able to predict the next 6 months with perfect accuracy. The failure of a short-term prediction like that has absolutely no bearing on the validity of the global warming phenomenon.
2006 may have been normal, but 2005 was the most active Atlantic hurricane season in recorded history. It doesn't make sense to base decisions about the future of the human race on what amounts to one lucky year. There'll be more lucky years in future, too. But at the same time, the incidence of Katrina-like years, and worse, is going to go up. And that's just one of the effects that will be felt.
Thanks for the reply. But you've tangentially hit on exactly why I don't find the classic fictional Sicilian mob very interesting: they're dumb. They physically hurt or kill each other for no good reason, or for reasons which only make sense in their twisted reality frame. They don't seem able to rise above this dumbness, no matter what happens. They're uncivilized, literally: they haven't quite figured out that "do unto others..." doesn't mean "do others before they do you".
Mobster movies never end with a conversion into legitimate business. Casinos don't count, since at least in their fictional representation, they're little more than fronts, an excuse for the same murderous macho silliness in a modern context. Attempts at such a conversion typically end in disaster, presumably as some kind of morality play. So Sicilian screen mobsters are not like the Kennedys, Bushes, Carnegies, or Windsors.
Perhaps it's similar to the fascination with celebrities and rich people having troubled lives: showing that the behavior we can't have doesn't lead to anything good, anyway. But in this case, who ever imagined that it did?
The '80s was just the last time I remember the mob being such a fad-like subject of interest. The Godfather movies may have started the fad, but it continued for years. By the time of Godfather III, the fad aspect was over, and they were probably attempting to revive it or just cash in. Of course, later there were movies like Goodfellas and Casino, but they didn't have the same kind of impact. I was wondering what it was about Sopranos that seems to have reignited the interest in the subject, since it all seems very familiar and quite dated to me.
I'm curious, of the people who watch Sopranos and are old enough to have gone through the previous pop culture obsession with the mob, around the time of The Godfather, what's the attraction still? It all seems so '80s to me.
This probably reads like a troll, but I'm genuinely interested, because I so don't get it. Think of it as a personal failing on my part, and point out the cultural riches I'm missing out on.
The incident in which some new F-22s en route to Japan had to turn back was a real incident, according to the Air Force. What's not clear is what the actual cause was. All the Air Force seems to have said officially are things like "a software issue affecting the aircraft's navigation system was discovered Feb. 11 causing the aircraft to return to Hickam" (from here).
A retired Major General Don Sheppard had more to say on CNN, but gave no details about where his information came from. Although one is presumably supposed to assume he had inside knowledge, he could just have been speculating based on the official reports.
Although there's not much to distinguish those two songs, in terms of subject matter.