How often do you hear money mentioned in any TV show?
People like to paste convenient labels on other people's ideas. It's glib and mentally lazy. There's no poverty on Star Trek, so of course they're advocating socialism. Roddenberry probably had something more like the Johnson-era welfare state in mind, but of course to the right wing that's socialism too. Anything that doesn't fit their ideal of a pure market economy (something that never really existed) is "socialism".
You could just as easily argue that the Trekverse is the ultimate triumph of capitalism: everybody's rich. And rich people consider it vulgar to talk about money. That would cover Data's poker sessions. If there's no money, what are they playing for?
I started to watch that. I couldn't get past the first five minutes. Would somebody please tell James Cawley that all that head motion looks really, really phony?
Also, his barber really needs to find a new line of work.
Please. Socialism is about distributing wealth equally. Since there's no scarcity (everybody just gets what they need from the nearest replicator) there's no wealth either. Arguably that's Communism, except that government doesn't seem to have withered away. Supposedly all our social problems have gone away because everybody's "more evolved". Except that explanation is scientifically naive: evolution requires natural selection (which we stopped doing when we invented civilization), and doesn't necessarily make individuals morally better. Often the opposite.
I'd call it Roddenberianism, which is defined as a system that makes everybody happy, but which nobody can tell you exactly how it works.
Kinda looks like it. I just went to the web site. First thing I wanted to see was the trailer. Not only is the trailer not available as a stream, it's bundled in a zip file. No competent webmaster does stuff like that, and if they haven't hired a webmaster, they're obviously a long, long way from a deployable game.
The trailer itself is not encouraging. Except for a few brief scenes of people getting phasered and transported, none of it shows actual game play. The rest was just animated eye candy, obviously not part of the game.
Oh yeah, and they showed the warp nacelles trailing some kind of glowing smoke. Somebody's not a Real Trekkie(tm)!
I could quibble with your definitions of "blog" and "guest", but it doesn't really matter. Misinformation is misinformation, whether it's from a blog or a newspaper. People have a right, even a duty, to complain about somebody who sloppily shares "facts" that are really nonsense. It's not "whining", any more than it's "whining" to complain about a rock thrown through your window.
In order to argue a flat earth you'd have to deny pretty much everything we know about the physical sciences.
That assumes that you actually know anything about the physical sciences. Most people do not.
The scientifically literate find it easy to sneer at the stupidity of people who claim to have proven that the earth is flat or that Pi is a rational number. But if you don't have the right background, the difference between science and pseudo-science is less than obvious. Science isn't just a collection of facts, it's a complex and subtle collection of theories. If you don't have the skill or training to understand these theories, the way that unscientific ideas are rejected out of hand can seem pretty arbitrary.
Even within the scientific community, people tend to get a little silly when they wander out of their depth. Consider Cold Fusion. Despite some bad theories and lack of solid evidence, there are hundreds of scientists at reputable institutions working on it. But to the best of my knowledge, none of these scientists are physicists, who all consider the whole idea to be a combination of sloppy lab work and wishful thinking.
Dude, did you happen to notice that manwillneverfly.com is tongue-in-cheek? The leader of this organization describes himself as "Chairman of the Bored".
Role playing for the fun of it is no big deal, even when it gets as intense as this It's just a game. Somebody who can stay in character as an imaginary person for a whole weekend couldn't do it without a lot of work. Doing that is showing a healthy awareness of the distinction between fantasy and reality.
Unfortunately, many trekkies are not quite so self-aware. They never wear anything except Star Fleet uniforms, and adopt naval ranks that everybody who addresses them is required to use. To them, Star Trek is not an entertainment, it's a utopian ideal.
You're reading too much into that bit about the patrol car. Somebody saw the balloon, freaked, hit 911, meaning the cops had to check it out. They did, and quickly decided it was no big deal. Happens a lot.
Some artists I know in San Francisco decided to have some fun with colored chalk and a sidewalk. Nothing illegal about this, but somebody called 911 to report that terrorists were marking targets on the local gas mains. So these guys are chalking away, and a patrol car pulls up. Cop leans out of the car, inspects the artwork, and asks "You guys terrorists?" He's assured that they're not, drives away. No big deal, though I suppose it's just as well that nobody thought to call the FBI.
Yes it does. (Every morning, as I drive to work, I have to change radio stations at 7:50, or else be inflicted with Jim Hightower's ignorant brand of left wing BS. Never seen a Michael Moore movie, never will. I find sloppy thinking all the more intolerable when it's used to express opinions I basically agree with.) But the fact remains, the kind of angry, fact-aversive rant that I associate with terms like "mainstream media" is pretty much the property of the right. The "liberals" or medium left (to be distinguished from the far left: socialists, marxists, syndicalists, etc, have never caught on in the U.S., though they still have big following in other countries) mostly lack the ability to incite strong feelings in their beliefs. That's the specialty of the right, and it's a big reason they've dominated government for the last 30 years.
DOS with XMS memory and a 32 bit extender can access at least 3GB memory on x86 platforms.
It can access it, but it can't address it. Important difference. The real-mode DOS code still has pointers that aren't big enough to point past the 1 MB barrier. The data has to be transferred to and from a buffer within the real-mode memory space.
Actually, I consider the idea of "mainstream media" pure BS. It might mean something if it was coming from some actual fringe journalists. But it mostly comes from right wing journalists with a huge following, who build up this whole mythology of the "Liberal Elite" conspiring to screw over the U.S., with outlets like the NY Times as their media lapdogs. They "prove" by jumping on every real or supposed lapse in accuracy they can find, while being damned careless about their own fact checking.
the 8080 to 808x transition was just as abrupt. 16 bit registers, segments, and more. Again there was a certain backward compatibility, if you converted all the mnemonics and register names, but that was about all.
You're basically correct, but the transition wasn't as abrupt as all that. A 16-bit register can be designed so it looks like an 8-bit register to 8-bit code. And one reason the 808x has memory segments instead of a simple flat memory space is to provide a memory model that works with old 8-bit code; you pointers just refer to an address within a 64K segment instead of a flat 64K address space. I seem to recall that it was possible to run a lot of 8080 assembly code on the 808x simply by reassembling it. You could not, however, use your old binaries because the op codes were different. That lack of binary compatibility is more to the point, transitionwise, than add-on (but backward compatible) features like bigger registers and memory segments.
The 8080/808x transition was certainly more abrupt than subsequent transitions to 80186, 80286, etc., where there was binary compatibility. But it was less abrupt than, say, Motorola's transition from the 6800 to the 68000.
I'm certainly no MS fan I gotta admit that its sort of a compliment that people like XP so much they refuse to upgrade to Vista.
That's like saying having a dog that pees on your rug isn't that bad because at least he doesn't eat your children.
People bought XP for years because they had no alternative they can live with. And that's still true. It's just that the alternatives they can't live with have gotten a little more diverse.
That, and the fact that the DVD player market is pretty saturated. It's not like there's a huge number of people out there who are going to wake up tomorrow and tell themselves, "hey, maybe DVDs aren't a passing fad after all."
Now, one thing I have learned in my life that at some point you do not need the best, biggest and hippest to [do your job|be happy].
Dude, ration the flames. I keep stumbling on you making off-the-lip comments that aren't really fair. Ordinarily, I'd just add you to my red list and forget about you, but you actually seem to have some intelligent comments in your history. Consider rewriting the filter that sorts so many of your fellow Slashdotters into the "pretentious asshole" box.
Slashdot Mirror
If almost everybody gets to breed, then there's no natural selection. Biology 101. What other "selection" are you talking about?
That's so not true. Very often the antagonist was male. This is the 60s, any gayness has to be more subtle than that.
Besides, half the time it was Spock having sex with the antagonist.
If that's true (heh), they've done a lot of cut shots and very little actual programming. Not a good sign.
How often do you hear money mentioned in any TV show?
People like to paste convenient labels on other people's ideas. It's glib and mentally lazy. There's no poverty on Star Trek, so of course they're advocating socialism. Roddenberry probably had something more like the Johnson-era welfare state in mind, but of course to the right wing that's socialism too. Anything that doesn't fit their ideal of a pure market economy (something that never really existed) is "socialism".
You could just as easily argue that the Trekverse is the ultimate triumph of capitalism: everybody's rich. And rich people consider it vulgar to talk about money. That would cover Data's poker sessions. If there's no money, what are they playing for?
I started to watch that. I couldn't get past the first five minutes. Would somebody please tell James Cawley that all that head motion looks really, really phony?
Also, his barber really needs to find a new line of work.
Please. Socialism is about distributing wealth equally. Since there's no scarcity (everybody just gets what they need from the nearest replicator) there's no wealth either. Arguably that's Communism, except that government doesn't seem to have withered away. Supposedly all our social problems have gone away because everybody's "more evolved". Except that explanation is scientifically naive: evolution requires natural selection (which we stopped doing when we invented civilization), and doesn't necessarily make individuals morally better. Often the opposite.
I'd call it Roddenberianism, which is defined as a system that makes everybody happy, but which nobody can tell you exactly how it works.
Kinda looks like it. I just went to the web site. First thing I wanted to see was the trailer. Not only is the trailer not available as a stream, it's bundled in a zip file. No competent webmaster does stuff like that, and if they haven't hired a webmaster, they're obviously a long, long way from a deployable game.
The trailer itself is not encouraging. Except for a few brief scenes of people getting phasered and transported, none of it shows actual game play. The rest was just animated eye candy, obviously not part of the game.
Oh yeah, and they showed the warp nacelles trailing some kind of glowing smoke. Somebody's not a Real Trekkie(tm)!
That's Picard/Janeway Star Trek. Most of us prefer Kirk Star Trek ("Shields Up! Not chess Mr. Spock, poker!").
I could quibble with your definitions of "blog" and "guest", but it doesn't really matter. Misinformation is misinformation, whether it's from a blog or a newspaper. People have a right, even a duty, to complain about somebody who sloppily shares "facts" that are really nonsense. It's not "whining", any more than it's "whining" to complain about a rock thrown through your window.
In order to argue a flat earth you'd have to deny pretty much everything we know about the physical sciences.
That assumes that you actually know anything about the physical sciences. Most people do not.
The scientifically literate find it easy to sneer at the stupidity of people who claim to have proven that the earth is flat or that Pi is a rational number. But if you don't have the right background, the difference between science and pseudo-science is less than obvious. Science isn't just a collection of facts, it's a complex and subtle collection of theories. If you don't have the skill or training to understand these theories, the way that unscientific ideas are rejected out of hand can seem pretty arbitrary.
Even within the scientific community, people tend to get a little silly when they wander out of their depth. Consider Cold Fusion. Despite some bad theories and lack of solid evidence, there are hundreds of scientists at reputable institutions working on it. But to the best of my knowledge, none of these scientists are physicists, who all consider the whole idea to be a combination of sloppy lab work and wishful thinking.
Dude, did you happen to notice that manwillneverfly.com is tongue-in-cheek? The leader of this organization describes himself as "Chairman of the Bored".
Role playing for the fun of it is no big deal, even when it gets as intense as this It's just a game. Somebody who can stay in character as an imaginary person for a whole weekend couldn't do it without a lot of work. Doing that is showing a healthy awareness of the distinction between fantasy and reality.
Unfortunately, many trekkies are not quite so self-aware. They never wear anything except Star Fleet uniforms, and adopt naval ranks that everybody who addresses them is required to use. To them, Star Trek is not an entertainment, it's a utopian ideal.
Well, if 3-digit users like you aren't gonna participate (6 posts a year!), somebody has to play Village Elder.
You're reading too much into that bit about the patrol car. Somebody saw the balloon, freaked, hit 911, meaning the cops had to check it out. They did, and quickly decided it was no big deal. Happens a lot.
Some artists I know in San Francisco decided to have some fun with colored chalk and a sidewalk. Nothing illegal about this, but somebody called 911 to report that terrorists were marking targets on the local gas mains. So these guys are chalking away, and a patrol car pulls up. Cop leans out of the car, inspects the artwork, and asks "You guys terrorists?" He's assured that they're not, drives away. No big deal, though I suppose it's just as well that nobody thought to call the FBI.
Yes it does. (Every morning, as I drive to work, I have to change radio stations at 7:50, or else be inflicted with Jim Hightower's ignorant brand of left wing BS. Never seen a Michael Moore movie, never will. I find sloppy thinking all the more intolerable when it's used to express opinions I basically agree with.) But the fact remains, the kind of angry, fact-aversive rant that I associate with terms like "mainstream media" is pretty much the property of the right. The "liberals" or medium left (to be distinguished from the far left: socialists, marxists, syndicalists, etc, have never caught on in the U.S., though they still have big following in other countries) mostly lack the ability to incite strong feelings in their beliefs. That's the specialty of the right, and it's a big reason they've dominated government for the last 30 years.
DOS with XMS memory and a 32 bit extender can access at least 3GB memory on x86 platforms.
It can access it, but it can't address it. Important difference. The real-mode DOS code still has pointers that aren't big enough to point past the 1 MB barrier. The data has to be transferred to and from a buffer within the real-mode memory space.
Actually, I consider the idea of "mainstream media" pure BS. It might mean something if it was coming from some actual fringe journalists. But it mostly comes from right wing journalists with a huge following, who build up this whole mythology of the "Liberal Elite" conspiring to screw over the U.S., with outlets like the NY Times as their media lapdogs. They "prove" by jumping on every real or supposed lapse in accuracy they can find, while being damned careless about their own fact checking.
Right, because the self-proclaimed sidestream media is such a paragon of truthiness. Fox News seems to think that fact checking is a payroll system.
the 8080 to 808x transition was just as abrupt. 16 bit registers, segments, and more. Again there was a certain backward compatibility, if you converted all the mnemonics and register names, but that was about all.
You're basically correct, but the transition wasn't as abrupt as all that. A 16-bit register can be designed so it looks like an 8-bit register to 8-bit code. And one reason the 808x has memory segments instead of a simple flat memory space is to provide a memory model that works with old 8-bit code; you pointers just refer to an address within a 64K segment instead of a flat 64K address space. I seem to recall that it was possible to run a lot of 8080 assembly code on the 808x simply by reassembling it. You could not, however, use your old binaries because the op codes were different. That lack of binary compatibility is more to the point, transitionwise, than add-on (but backward compatible) features like bigger registers and memory segments.
The 8080/808x transition was certainly more abrupt than subsequent transitions to 80186, 80286, etc., where there was binary compatibility. But it was less abrupt than, say, Motorola's transition from the 6800 to the 68000.
No, you mean it's like saying a dog that doesn't run is OK, because at least it doesn't catch on fire!
That actually sounds pretty cool.
OK then. It's like saying that a car that pisses all over your rug is OK, because at least it doesn't eat your children.
I'm certainly no MS fan I gotta admit that its sort of a compliment that people like XP so much they refuse to upgrade to Vista.
That's like saying having a dog that pees on your rug isn't that bad because at least he doesn't eat your children.
People bought XP for years because they had no alternative they can live with. And that's still true. It's just that the alternatives they can't live with have gotten a little more diverse.
That, and the fact that the DVD player market is pretty saturated. It's not like there's a huge number of people out there who are going to wake up tomorrow and tell themselves, "hey, maybe DVDs aren't a passing fad after all."
Now, one thing I have learned in my life that at some point you do not need the best, biggest and hippest to [do your job|be happy].
[commie|hippie]
Dude, ration the flames. I keep stumbling on you making off-the-lip comments that aren't really fair. Ordinarily, I'd just add you to my red list and forget about you, but you actually seem to have some intelligent comments in your history. Consider rewriting the filter that sorts so many of your fellow Slashdotters into the "pretentious asshole" box.