You have no question, you're only seeking to try and argue with a good suggestion to generate noise. Yes, you missed my point, and you're trying to twist it to your advantage. It won't work. Thank you, drive through.
Who says it's a good suggestion? And why is my questions just noise - any more than yours is?
Ah but we KNOW there have been asteroids that have come very close to earth already, some were thought to be or were on a collision course. In the past, we know debris from outer space harmed life on earth. It's logical to assume something else might come and hit us. Why not scan for it? It's a good idea, and your posts are nothing but nonsense aimed to generate noise/argument.
Yes - we also know there are lots of other, more pressing problems than killer asteroids. This all started when the parent poster remarked about how he was terribly frightened by the fact that our civilization might fall in the 878 years before the meteor in question hits. I pointed out that maybe there are more timely issues on earth to be frightened about. Issues we KNOW are going to be a problem.
It just seems like we aren't inventing stuff as quickly as in the past because we can't step back and see the long term view. When I think of everything that has happened technologically in my lifetime, I'm amazed : personal computers, cloning, the internet, the list goes on...
That could be useful if it was cold outside. You could use the remote to start it up early and get warmed up, then drive it right up to the front door...
Okay, so now you are worried about an asteroid that might hit in 878 years, which we might not stop due to the fact that we might have had a war or mass plagues?
I think you need to focus more on things within your zone of control, man.
They are organizing a real world protest of the fact that McDonalds is in the game, or are they planning an online protest at the McDonalds that is in the game (or both)? The second is what came to mind first, reading the article. And that'd be more funny.
Note : I haven't read the article, as it seems to be/.'d.
Don't you think contributing your processor time to a distributed cancer-cure research project is a bit more productive? I think your odds of getting killed by cancer is a bit higher than that of an asteroid.
I think the idea is : if the asteroid is big enough that if you break it up into 20 pieces that are _each_ big enough to destroy civilization, you haven't really solved the problem, because only one needs to get through.
I dunno, I've had the opposite experience with Win2K and 98. I have a Win98 machine at home, I rarely have to reboot, and when I do, it's generally because I'm running a piece of buggy software.
However, at work, I have a Win2K machine. It freezes constantly, and I have nothing odd running on it. I didn't set this one up myself, but I would imagine the IT staff at my work must be at least as good as setting up a system as I am, more likely better, so I'm mystified as to why it's less stable than my home system.
I must say, though, I had a WinXP laptop, and it ran great, with occasional lock-ups, but I'm 99% certain those were because it was a low-end Toshiba, not because of WinXP. They almost always happened during games, and when the case felt very hot.
A while back, Nintendo reps stated that they were selling Gamecubes for a profit... but this was in the news _before_ the price drop, so maybe they aren't now. Also, they could have been lying, I guess.
No, either something is in the past, present or future. At least until we discover time travel - that's the whole point of Back to the Future. They have to get "back" to the future, since for them (in the past), the future is their present. However, I never traveled in time, so anything in the past is still most definitely the past.
Again, if you are thinking in terms of the browser metaphor, you are going forward, since you can always click the 'back' button to go to the last thing you saw. But since I was speaking in terms of time, the browser metaphor is really inappropriate.
If it was going forward, it would either be on the front page, or it would be something yet to be posted to the front page.
If it's no longer on the front page, you have to go back to look at it.
As far as re-reading/., I read the front page once or twice a day. I'm not going to go back and re-read old stories. If I miss or forget a story, oh well.
Also note, by clicking on a link, you'd be going forward, not back.
Wow, you are really stretching for that one. Or you are a huge nerd that thinks about grammar in terms of the browser metaphor.
"I'm not about to go back and re-read old/. posts."
"Back", "re-read" and "old/. posts" would mean the past. As in old posts on/., that I am not going to re-read. Considering the fact that old posts are, by definition, from the past, that would be going back to re-read them.
I used to see something REALLY similar to this for sale at flea markets and stuff... It was obviously a bootleg product. Is this official/legit, or just another bootleg? The picture on the site looks authentic, but that doesn't mean anything, I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
You have no question, you're only seeking to try and argue with a good suggestion to generate noise. Yes, you missed my point, and you're trying to twist it to your advantage. It won't work. Thank you, drive through.
Who says it's a good suggestion? And why is my questions just noise - any more than yours is?
Ah but we KNOW there have been asteroids that have come very close to earth already, some were thought to be or were on a collision course. In the past, we know debris from outer space harmed life on earth. It's logical to assume something else might come and hit us. Why not scan for it? It's a good idea, and your posts are nothing but nonsense aimed to generate noise/argument.
Yes - we also know there are lots of other, more pressing problems than killer asteroids. This all started when the parent poster remarked about how he was terribly frightened by the fact that our civilization might fall in the 878 years before the meteor in question hits. I pointed out that maybe there are more timely issues on earth to be frightened about. Issues we KNOW are going to be a problem.
That's all.
My point is that there are problems that we KNOW exist right now that are worth being frightened about...
My comparison was finding aliens which may not exist vs. asteroids, obviously you missed it.
No, I did not. My question stands, and it applies to Seti@home as well, actually.
What we DON'T have is an asteroid distributed computing project. It doesn't exist. Why not make one?
Because there are more pressing problems on Earth than a killer asteroid that may not exist?
Also, is there any reason you are making your comment bold? It is a bit distracting.
yeah, i think there was, too...
It just seems like we aren't inventing stuff as quickly as in the past because we can't step back and see the long term view. When I think of everything that has happened technologically in my lifetime, I'm amazed : personal computers, cloning, the internet, the list goes on...
And there is a lot left to invent.
Morgan Freeman was in Changing Lanes? I didn't see it, but I thought it was Sam Jackson.
That could be useful if it was cold outside. You could use the remote to start it up early and get warmed up, then drive it right up to the front door...
Okay, so now you are worried about an asteroid that might hit in 878 years, which we might not stop due to the fact that we might have had a war or mass plagues?
I think you need to focus more on things within your zone of control, man.
They are organizing a real world protest of the fact that McDonalds is in the game, or are they planning an online protest at the McDonalds that is in the game (or both)? The second is what came to mind first, reading the article. And that'd be more funny.
/.'d.
Note : I haven't read the article, as it seems to be
You are seriously frightened about something that might happen 878 years from now?
I don't know you, but I'm SURE you probably have bigger issues in your life to worry about than that.
Don't you think contributing your processor time to a distributed cancer-cure research project is a bit more productive? I think your odds of getting killed by cancer is a bit higher than that of an asteroid.
I think the idea is : if the asteroid is big enough that if you break it up into 20 pieces that are _each_ big enough to destroy civilization, you haven't really solved the problem, because only one needs to get through.
A nice radioative meteor shower into the upper atmosphere.
Great idea.
Maybe you haven't heard, but there are these things called "testing computers".
Again, just because it's self balancing doesn't mean you cannot crash.
yeah, i guess that's probably it... my machine is older, but not the cheapest possible parts available. it was pricey when I bought it.
I dunno, I've had the opposite experience with Win2K and 98. I have a Win98 machine at home, I rarely have to reboot, and when I do, it's generally because I'm running a piece of buggy software.
However, at work, I have a Win2K machine. It freezes constantly, and I have nothing odd running on it. I didn't set this one up myself, but I would imagine the IT staff at my work must be at least as good as setting up a system as I am, more likely better, so I'm mystified as to why it's less stable than my home system.
I must say, though, I had a WinXP laptop, and it ran great, with occasional lock-ups, but I'm 99% certain those were because it was a low-end Toshiba, not because of WinXP. They almost always happened during games, and when the case felt very hot.
I don't think that's dumping, either... As I understand it, as long as your prices are consistant in all markets you are not dumping.
A while back, Nintendo reps stated that they were selling Gamecubes for a profit... but this was in the news _before_ the price drop, so maybe they aren't now. Also, they could have been lying, I guess.
No, either something is in the past, present or future. At least until we discover time travel - that's the whole point of Back to the Future. They have to get "back" to the future, since for them (in the past), the future is their present. However, I never traveled in time, so anything in the past is still most definitely the past.
Again, if you are thinking in terms of the browser metaphor, you are going forward, since you can always click the 'back' button to go to the last thing you saw. But since I was speaking in terms of time, the browser metaphor is really inappropriate.
If it's in the past, you are going back.
/., I read the front page once or twice a day. I'm not going to go back and re-read old stories. If I miss or forget a story, oh well.
If it was going forward, it would either be on the front page, or it would be something yet to be posted to the front page.
If it's no longer on the front page, you have to go back to look at it.
As far as re-reading
Also note, by clicking on a link, you'd be going forward, not back.
/. posts."
/. posts" would mean the past. As in old posts on /., that I am not going to re-read. Considering the fact that old posts are, by definition, from the past, that would be going back to re-read them.
Wow, you are really stretching for that one. Or you are a huge nerd that thinks about grammar in terms of the browser metaphor.
"I'm not about to go back and re-read old
"Back", "re-read" and "old
It was linked to in the Slashdot summary. [slashdot.org] You really can't read, after all; I guess truth is stupider than fiction.
/. posts." I guess you can't read.
Note this line from my comment : "And I'm not about to go back and re-read old
That wasn't on the Avon site. And I'm not about to go back and re-read old /. posts.
I used to see something REALLY similar to this for sale at flea markets and stuff... It was obviously a bootleg product. Is this official/legit, or just another bootleg? The picture on the site looks authentic, but that doesn't mean anything, I guess.