I don't avoid classics because they're boring. I avoid them because they're pointless. I didn't learn one thing from Slaughterhouse Five. Now, Max Bohm's book Einstein's Theory of Relativity which I read around the same time was fascinating.
When I read, I *want* to learn. That's why I read non-fiction mostly. It's full of facts, you know things that actually happen. Fiction is full of made up stuff, which can be entertaining, but not really informative.
The worst is when people try to interpret fiction. As if there were some other meaning than what's on the page. I don't understand, if the author meant something else, why didn't he write that? If you write something, and two PhDs in the field can't agree on what you meant, that's a failure of communication. Why is it that the people who seem to love the language most can't express themselves unambiguously?
Why don't open source zealots see piracy as an actual problem for games console manufacturers?
Because the biggest pirates are also the biggest customers. I will not buy a platform until it is well and truly cracked. As long as DRM is intact, they get zero dollars from me. Once a platform is cracked, I can try all sorts of games and buy the ones I like. Then they get as much money as I can afford to spend on it. How is that a problem for anyone?
Then there's always the Emperor's New Clothes phenomenon. All these smart people love the classics, so I have to like them too or I won't be seen as smart. But in reality, so many of the classics survive on reputation alone. The only reason to read them is to be able to say you have read them. What exactly is a person supposed to get from a book like Ethan Frome? I mean besides nauseous.
I'll say it. I don't get fiction. As far as I can tell it serves no purpose besides idle entertainment*. When I express this opinion, I often have people saying that they pity me. That's exactly the response you'd expect from someone who believes in magical invisible robes. I for one am not afraid to point out that the emperor is bare ass naked.
*a short fable (like the Emperor's New Clothes) can be useful to illustrate a point. But please, keep it short and to the point. In most cases you're better off writing an essay or treatise if you want to communicate a point.
If Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft didn't lock down their devices, Datel wouldn't have to sell lock picks to restore control of these devices to their owners. Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are the bad guys here.
Obviously Datel should credit the authors of the Pandora battery software. But otherwise, their products serve a need (which has been ignored or refused by the manufacturers). When the manufacturers disable these device, blame them, not Datel.
I thought microSD was small. I'm going to lose this stuff for sure!
Re:Prosecuting corporations for crimes is asinine.
on
The Short Arm of the Law
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Yes, being able to profit from illegal acts while being shielded from the consequences is a big motivator. But I don't see why we should allow this to happen. The "corporate veil" encourages illegal acts and should be abolished.
Re:Prosecuting corporations for crimes is asinine.
on
The Short Arm of the Law
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
If my boss tells me to kill a person, and I do, I should go to jail for murder. My boss also goes to jail for murder. Why should it be any different for employees of a corporation?
because someone texting may not be appear to be driving recklessly
Anyone taking their eyes off the road appears to be driving recklessly. It's easy to eat using only proprioception, so you're not taking your eyes off the road. You can't text without taking your eyes off the road, AFAICT.
Copyright is irrelevant here. Facts are not copyrightable. This data from Facebook is no different than the collection of data in the phone book. Republishing a page from Facebook or the phone book is illegal. Republishing facts sourced from those pages is not.
Would you disagree that Farmville is pretty banal? I don't think there's any real strategy to the game. From what I've read, there's not even any supply/demand dynamic to consider.
And yeah, I'm stereotyping. There's nothing wrong with using generalizations when we realize that's what they are. There are always exceptions, but that doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to recognize trends.
I think you misread me. Gun collections and sports are equally worthy of being obsessed over as a virtual farm, none of are particularly nerdy though. Amateur astronomy, ham radio, programming, etc. are worthy of being obsessed over too. But the technical complexity of the subjects drive away people who aren't nerds.
Everyone gets obsessed over the things that interest them. Nerds just obsess over more complex things. I hope that's a less inflammatory way of phrasing it.
Have to agree with you about Jeff Goldblum -- in a single afternoon -- deciphering the alien equivalent of TCP/IP and hacking up a computer virus capable of running on alien hardware. Beyond ridiculous.
Obviously the aliens used Apple hardware. Fortunately for us, they believed the hype that Apple software was immune to viruses.
Oh sure, mistakes happen. Breaking 5 dishes in one sitting isn't a mistake. Either you're being careless, or you have parkinsons. In the former case you're obviously negligent. In the latter, you probably shouldn't offer to do the dishes at all. I just don't think the dishes question is a very good one.
The other question, concerning poison is a much better question and illustrates the point very well.
That's the difference between normal people and nerds. Normal people get obsessed over things too. But it's banal, uninteresting shit they get obsessed over. Sports, soap operas, miniature figurines, gun collections, etc. Nerds get obsessed over things that are actually interesting because they requires some thought. Normal people can't relate to it, so they label it and shun it as weird, geeky, nerdy, etc.
I don't see how adding another dimension can magically allow two objects to become linked when they were unable to be linked in a lower dimension. Two circles on a piece of paper cannot physically merge with each other if you assume their boundaries are solid and cannot pass through each other.
Two circles on a piece of paper might be the 2d projection of a 3d object like a torus. Imagine a cross section through a donut. Two circles in 2d, but one continuous solid in 3d.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't avoid classics because they're boring. I avoid them because they're pointless. I didn't learn one thing from Slaughterhouse Five. Now, Max Bohm's book Einstein's Theory of Relativity which I read around the same time was fascinating.
When I read, I *want* to learn. That's why I read non-fiction mostly. It's full of facts, you know things that actually happen. Fiction is full of made up stuff, which can be entertaining, but not really informative.
The worst is when people try to interpret fiction. As if there were some other meaning than what's on the page. I don't understand, if the author meant something else, why didn't he write that? If you write something, and two PhDs in the field can't agree on what you meant, that's a failure of communication. Why is it that the people who seem to love the language most can't express themselves unambiguously?
If as a gamer your not willing to accept their sandbox, you are always free to skip the device and buy something else.
I'm also free to unlock my property and use it as I see fit.
Why don't open source zealots see piracy as an actual problem for games console manufacturers?
Because the biggest pirates are also the biggest customers. I will not buy a platform until it is well and truly cracked. As long as DRM is intact, they get zero dollars from me. Once a platform is cracked, I can try all sorts of games and buy the ones I like. Then they get as much money as I can afford to spend on it. How is that a problem for anyone?
A lot of those books are simple and boring as hell to modern readers, just like music from 1950 will sound simple and cheesy to most modern listeners.
Music by Charlie Parker or Louis Armstrong sounds as fresh today as it did in the 30s. Why can't literature do the same?
Then there's always the Emperor's New Clothes phenomenon. All these smart people love the classics, so I have to like them too or I won't be seen as smart. But in reality, so many of the classics survive on reputation alone. The only reason to read them is to be able to say you have read them. What exactly is a person supposed to get from a book like Ethan Frome? I mean besides nauseous.
I'll say it. I don't get fiction. As far as I can tell it serves no purpose besides idle entertainment*. When I express this opinion, I often have people saying that they pity me. That's exactly the response you'd expect from someone who believes in magical invisible robes. I for one am not afraid to point out that the emperor is bare ass naked.
*a short fable (like the Emperor's New Clothes) can be useful to illustrate a point. But please, keep it short and to the point. In most cases you're better off writing an essay or treatise if you want to communicate a point.
If Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft didn't lock down their devices, Datel wouldn't have to sell lock picks to restore control of these devices to their owners. Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are the bad guys here.
Obviously Datel should credit the authors of the Pandora battery software. But otherwise, their products serve a need (which has been ignored or refused by the manufacturers). When the manufacturers disable these device, blame them, not Datel.
Everyone who is in the US and saw the premiere last night please raise your hand now in a two fingered salute
If you're in the US, you're probably more familiar with the one fingered salute.
I thought microSD was small. I'm going to lose this stuff for sure!
Yes, being able to profit from illegal acts while being shielded from the consequences is a big motivator. But I don't see why we should allow this to happen. The "corporate veil" encourages illegal acts and should be abolished.
"I was just following orders" does not work. Ever.
Apparently, it does.
If my boss tells me to kill a person, and I do, I should go to jail for murder. My boss also goes to jail for murder. Why should it be any different for employees of a corporation?
because someone texting may not be appear to be driving recklessly
Anyone taking their eyes off the road appears to be driving recklessly. It's easy to eat using only proprioception, so you're not taking your eyes off the road. You can't text without taking your eyes off the road, AFAICT.
Nice idea, but you can run MAME on pretty much anything. Putting together a mini-MAME cabinet would run you less than the iPad to begin with.
Reckless driving is already an offense in every state I know of. Why not just enforce that law?
Copyright protections are important
Copyright is irrelevant here. Facts are not copyrightable. This data from Facebook is no different than the collection of data in the phone book. Republishing a page from Facebook or the phone book is illegal. Republishing facts sourced from those pages is not.
Would you disagree that Farmville is pretty banal? I don't think there's any real strategy to the game. From what I've read, there's not even any supply/demand dynamic to consider.
And yeah, I'm stereotyping. There's nothing wrong with using generalizations when we realize that's what they are. There are always exceptions, but that doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to recognize trends.
I think you misread me. Gun collections and sports are equally worthy of being obsessed over as a virtual farm, none of are particularly nerdy though. Amateur astronomy, ham radio, programming, etc. are worthy of being obsessed over too. But the technical complexity of the subjects drive away people who aren't nerds.
Everyone gets obsessed over the things that interest them. Nerds just obsess over more complex things. I hope that's a less inflammatory way of phrasing it.
Have to agree with you about Jeff Goldblum -- in a single afternoon -- deciphering the alien equivalent of TCP/IP and hacking up a computer virus capable of running on alien hardware. Beyond ridiculous.
Obviously the aliens used Apple hardware. Fortunately for us, they believed the hype that Apple software was immune to viruses.
Seeing the White House destroyed was pretty awesome, wasn't it.
That government which governs best, governs least. If he's playing Farmville, he can't be doing too much to interfere with people's lives.
Oh sure, mistakes happen. Breaking 5 dishes in one sitting isn't a mistake. Either you're being careless, or you have parkinsons. In the former case you're obviously negligent. In the latter, you probably shouldn't offer to do the dishes at all. I just don't think the dishes question is a very good one.
The other question, concerning poison is a much better question and illustrates the point very well.
That's the difference between normal people and nerds. Normal people get obsessed over things too. But it's banal, uninteresting shit they get obsessed over. Sports, soap operas, miniature figurines, gun collections, etc. Nerds get obsessed over things that are actually interesting because they requires some thought. Normal people can't relate to it, so they label it and shun it as weird, geeky, nerdy, etc.
So, can someone explain the hover comment in that one?
I don't see how adding another dimension can magically allow two objects to become linked when they were unable to be linked in a lower dimension. Two circles on a piece of paper cannot physically merge with each other if you assume their boundaries are solid and cannot pass through each other.
Two circles on a piece of paper might be the 2d projection of a 3d object like a torus. Imagine a cross section through a donut. Two circles in 2d, but one continuous solid in 3d.
In my opinion, moralizing is harmful. And therefore immoral.