And this where you can pretty much sort out the critical thinkers from the rest. The best? Debatable. Better than Bush? Absolutely. And yet the politics of fear and division won the day. The absence of memory of crimes committed, of lies told, of violations of the Constitution already wrought, combined with an absence of a viable public forum for discussion of the issues and dissemination of ideas caused the worst possible outcome -- the reelection of George Bush and the seeming validation of his policies.
Which is, semi-offtopic, why I won't support the other Clinton this time around. She's said little to nothing regarding the issues of copyright, she's good friends with big media, and, well, let's just say I don't find her particularly credible, either in sincerity or knowledge.
She's also for expanding globalization efforts and removing the cap for H1B visas, so yeah, she's *very* corporately involved.
And in your mind, the alternative candidate is...... ?
Now, I intercept the photon from fig. 1 in such a way to make a very obvious change to it. i.e change its electron spin dramatically etc.
You got the concepts right, but the implementation wrong. Photons don't have electrons. If you're going to change the spin state of an electron, then you'd need two entangled electrons suspended in some fashion as to not interact with their surroundings and destroy the entanglement. So long as none of their states are altered, they remain entangled. Think of them as resonant and therefore occupying the same informational "space" but separate physical space. Once one's spin is altered, the other is similarly altered, and entanglement is lost.
But now here's my question to the general public: is it possible alter one attribute of a particle and leave the entanglement in place for other attributes of the particle?
In order for any object to span the length the space elevator would need to, it needs to have a density similar to that of graphite and a tensile strength no less than 65 GPa. And that's just to support itself. This is with the optimized shape.
The 62.5GPa (not 65 GPa) is for a constant width cable. With a tapered cable it's far less.
Science is like the blind man laughing at the man who can see color, in denial of their own lack of perception.
No, science is like the seeing man who laughs at the man who is told he's surrounded by angels and then, fearful of his own lack of "faith", claims to actually see them. Science man measures every level of EM radiation in area and finds no proof of the existence of any such beings and decides that, until such proof can be provided, the angels aren't there. Religious man fears his doubt will lead to the ultimate punishment and convinces himself that the only proof he needs is the certainty that they are there. Blind faith begets that which faith is placed upon. Credo ergo fiet.
The objective does not build upon the subjective. The subjective usually builds upon the objective, with religious tradition being the most extreme refutation of that principle.
Now having said all that, it might surprise you to know that I do believe in God. I just don't believe anyone can know with any level of certainty what God is, and if God thinks, what God thinks, feels, believes, wants, expects, etc. To claim that you do, and then beat me about the head and neck with your religious fantasies, is just ridiculous. And to try to subvert science with religion is like pretending that pouring antifreeze into wine makes it a more "complete" beverage.
15-20K in a summer!? What the hell were you doing as a teenager. I have 9-5 doing as a sysadmin/ the tech support for a manufacturing company and will make just a little more than that in a year.
No crap! If you figure a summer is 3 months, that's $60-$80k per year. Either he was an exotic dancer or he was selling drugs...
On the reverse, if you're a sysadmin making less than six figures, you need to shop around. Or take up stripping on the side...
He may not be a man of science, but he is a man of God and his religious faith was enough to tell him sacrificing all those poor babies to allow a few godless heathens to avoid going to hell for a few months is a bad idea.
I'm not sure, is that sarcasm? Since it's not obvious, I'll assume it's not.
You must be kidding. "Poor babies"? They are clumps of 180 cells. You throw away more every time you flick a booger. It's not a baby. It's not even a growth because it wouldn't have implanted yet. Every time a fertility clinic does an in-vitro procedure, afterward it throws away thousands of similar clumps of cells, just flushes them down the drain.
Y'know, I just reread your message, and now I'm sure -- it must have been a joke...
What gets me is liberal people bash bush when he is more liberal than some democrats.
What gets me is when people lump Democrats in with liberals. It's true that most Democrats tend to be progressive -- which is different from being "liberal" -- but George W. Bush is neither, period, end of story. That kind of generalization would be similar to saying that Republicans shoot each other in the face with shotguns, lie constantly while arranging to have innocents murdered by the thousands, kick the poor in the teeth after stealing the food from their babies mouths, give higher priority to the jobs of foreigners than the jobs of citizens, would sell off all our natural resources just to enrich themselves, would ignore the most wanted terrorist in the world until he hijacked two commercial airliners and used them as missiles to kill as many people as possible, etc. I have friends and family who are Republicans, and I love and them and respect their opinions, even if I don't agree with all of them, and not one of those generalizations fits them. Those generalizations only apply to George Bush and his staff.
And about "Bush Bashing": it's not bashing if it's true. As Harry S. Truman so famously said, "They think I'm giving them hell. I'm not giving them hell, I'm just telling the truth on them and they think it's hell." Well, when you hear someone "bashing" Bush, it's not bashing. You're just hearing an unpleasant truth, and you think it's bashing because you voted for him.
No future promotions or raises. Cross promotions to jobs that are in some way unpleasant. When they make these moves they can vaguely site his poor job performance.
I think you missed the part where he said it was a "government job." There's no such thing as bad job performance. Everyone gets a raise, regardless. Promotions are typically based on seniority, not good job performance.
Personally, I'd print the email and file it away, install the software, and bitch about how much better open source software would be over M$ Office every day to everyone. But that's just me....
Personally, and I my opinion may be skewed just because I despise Bush, I think oil prices tend to follow, not lead. Oil prices are low, and 2/3rds of Americans still hate Bush and believe he lied about Iraq. I don't feel an energy crunch, so I'm not even sure what you're referring to. There are no rolling blackouts, no fuel oil shortages, and I can fill my car anytime I want.
NASA isn't at the top of Bush's agenda because his administration has been anti-science from the beginning. Not just NASA, but all sciences.
And to roll my next reply into this one, I think there is a definite scientific value in setting up a permanent base on the moon to test technologies that will allow us to go to other planets. It's closer, and the conditions are more severe. On the flip side, we should be leveraging the ISS as not just a science outpost but as a LEO construction site, building larger ships than we can push off the earth in one step and space "hotels" for housing teams of astronauts or even tourists. The third piece of the puzzle, in my estimation, is a space elevator.
Why do you think there aren't any aliens? At some point, every sufficiently advanced society makes the same stupid mistake and disappears into a blast of gluons, quarks, and gamma radiation. It's God's way of weeding out the wise from the smart.
While I respect what you're doing, I still can't see the same kind of quick reaction time or fast organic growth that Wikipedia experiences. The two of you sound like you'll be competitors in the same space, like to Altavista and Google.
I would beg to argue the point of whether an article is "better" or not based solely on the existence of an executive board. I seem to recall a review not to long ago that found that Wikipedia was, by and large, more accurate than Encyclopedia Britannica. That's a rather high bar, and not one that Citizendium is likely to clear by an appreciable margin. Secondly, I can't imagine an "executive board" that could vet new information as quickly as it becomes available, so I have to guess that your qualification about "articles we intend to have" indicates your knowledge base will equate to a subset of Wikipedia's offerings.
According to the SMBIOS/DMI specification, which was eventually supersetted by CIM and other technologies, it's possible to query the BIOS for an astounding range of information about your PC. The dmidecode utility, for which the source is available, illustrates the detail that can be determined if a BIOS adheres to the standards set out by Intel and Microsoft. WMI uses DMI as a starting point when scanning the hardware on a machine during startup.
Wikipedia will always, by nature, be more reactive to world events than Citizendium. Minutes after a major event occurs, the related wikis are updated. Once articles have been tied down and relegated to an editor, it falls to the editor to react to changes in content relevance. If that "editor" consists of the entire earth's population (minus jerkweeds that have been banned), high, real-time relevance is maintained. Thus, Wikipedia becomes an extension of news media, adding immense value to a news story by supplying rich background information and hypertext access to related material.
Graffiti will always be a known issue, but the very fact that Wikipedia has a huge volume of contributors ensures that graffiti will be short-lived. If traffic fell, it would have to employ the same artifice as Citizendium, locking down articles because there aren't enough to people passing through every section of the database to keep graffiti life expectancy to a minimum.
Dude.... What kind of books are you used to reading? I love to read, I've ready all kinds of books, good and bad, but I've never had a story attempt to murder me and suck out my disembodied spirit. Maybe it's time to stop reading computer game promos and get some sunlight, ya think?
Square, noisy light = bad. Round, peaceful light in sky = good. Pizza farts = bad. Fresh air = good. Using thumbs and occasionally twitching your head for hours at a time = bad. Using legs to walk through park = good.
1987: Wrote software and macros that allowed the users to work with a single interface to pull real estate data from Dataquick, parse it out, blow it into a database application and spreadsheet, and generate reports and alerts. And everyone in the office was connected using the $25 Network software for sharing drives and printers at a time when Novell Netware was ungodly expensive. Ah, yeah, those were the days....
Slashdot Mirror
Granted, Kerry wasn't the best candidate. By far.
And this where you can pretty much sort out the critical thinkers from the rest. The best? Debatable. Better than Bush? Absolutely. And yet the politics of fear and division won the day. The absence of memory of crimes committed, of lies told, of violations of the Constitution already wrought, combined with an absence of a viable public forum for discussion of the issues and dissemination of ideas caused the worst possible outcome -- the reelection of George Bush and the seeming validation of his policies.
But I've written pages and pages about this already.
Which is, semi-offtopic, why I won't support the other Clinton this time around. She's said little to nothing regarding the issues of copyright, she's good friends with big media, and, well, let's just say I don't find her particularly credible, either in sincerity or knowledge.
She's also for expanding globalization efforts and removing the cap for H1B visas, so yeah, she's *very* corporately involved.
And in your mind, the alternative candidate is...... ?
Now, I intercept the photon from fig. 1 in such a way to make a very obvious change to it. i.e change its electron spin dramatically etc.
You got the concepts right, but the implementation wrong. Photons don't have electrons. If you're going to change the spin state of an electron, then you'd need two entangled electrons suspended in some fashion as to not interact with their surroundings and destroy the entanglement. So long as none of their states are altered, they remain entangled. Think of them as resonant and therefore occupying the same informational "space" but separate physical space. Once one's spin is altered, the other is similarly altered, and entanglement is lost.
But now here's my question to the general public: is it possible alter one attribute of a particle and leave the entanglement in place for other attributes of the particle?
It's not the size that matters. It's how you use it.
That's not what your girlfriend told me last night...
(sorry, couldn't resist...)
In order for any object to span the length the space elevator would need to, it needs to have a density similar to that of graphite and a tensile strength no less than 65 GPa. And that's just to support itself. This is with the optimized shape.
The 62.5GPa (not 65 GPa) is for a constant width cable. With a tapered cable it's far less.
Sources, please?
(Slashdot editors: And for the record, if I only need 2 seconds to create a message of two words, why do I have to wait 30 seconds before I post it?)
we wouldn't do something as stupid as voting one of them to become our leader...
Oh. Now that hurt. How can you say that when it was the dumb half of the nation that voted for him? The more erudite citizens voted for the winners...
Science is like the blind man laughing at the man who can see color, in denial of their own lack of perception.
No, science is like the seeing man who laughs at the man who is told he's surrounded by angels and then, fearful of his own lack of "faith", claims to actually see them. Science man measures every level of EM radiation in area and finds no proof of the existence of any such beings and decides that, until such proof can be provided, the angels aren't there. Religious man fears his doubt will lead to the ultimate punishment and convinces himself that the only proof he needs is the certainty that they are there. Blind faith begets that which faith is placed upon. Credo ergo fiet.
The objective does not build upon the subjective. The subjective usually builds upon the objective, with religious tradition being the most extreme refutation of that principle.
Now having said all that, it might surprise you to know that I do believe in God. I just don't believe anyone can know with any level of certainty what God is, and if God thinks, what God thinks, feels, believes, wants, expects, etc. To claim that you do, and then beat me about the head and neck with your religious fantasies, is just ridiculous. And to try to subvert science with religion is like pretending that pouring antifreeze into wine makes it a more "complete" beverage.
15-20K in a summer!? What the hell were you doing as a teenager. I have 9-5 doing as a sysadmin/ the tech support for a manufacturing company and will make just a little more than that in a year.
No crap! If you figure a summer is 3 months, that's $60-$80k per year. Either he was an exotic dancer or he was selling drugs...
On the reverse, if you're a sysadmin making less than six figures, you need to shop around. Or take up stripping on the side...
He may not be a man of science, but he is a man of God and his religious faith was enough to tell him sacrificing all those poor babies to allow a few godless heathens to avoid going to hell for a few months is a bad idea.
I'm not sure, is that sarcasm? Since it's not obvious, I'll assume it's not.
You must be kidding. "Poor babies"? They are clumps of 180 cells. You throw away more every time you flick a booger. It's not a baby. It's not even a growth because it wouldn't have implanted yet. Every time a fertility clinic does an in-vitro procedure, afterward it throws away thousands of similar clumps of cells, just flushes them down the drain.
Y'know, I just reread your message, and now I'm sure -- it must have been a joke...
What gets me is liberal people bash bush when he is more liberal than some democrats.
What gets me is when people lump Democrats in with liberals. It's true that most Democrats tend to be progressive -- which is different from being "liberal" -- but George W. Bush is neither, period, end of story. That kind of generalization would be similar to saying that Republicans shoot each other in the face with shotguns, lie constantly while arranging to have innocents murdered by the thousands, kick the poor in the teeth after stealing the food from their babies mouths, give higher priority to the jobs of foreigners than the jobs of citizens, would sell off all our natural resources just to enrich themselves, would ignore the most wanted terrorist in the world until he hijacked two commercial airliners and used them as missiles to kill as many people as possible, etc. I have friends and family who are Republicans, and I love and them and respect their opinions, even if I don't agree with all of them, and not one of those generalizations fits them. Those generalizations only apply to George Bush and his staff.
And about "Bush Bashing": it's not bashing if it's true. As Harry S. Truman so famously said, "They think I'm giving them hell. I'm not giving them hell, I'm just telling the truth on them and they think it's hell." Well, when you hear someone "bashing" Bush, it's not bashing. You're just hearing an unpleasant truth, and you think it's bashing because you voted for him.
Try this out: http://views.tgrigsby.com.
Wait a minute -- I got trolled too? Okay, now you can all bite me....
You can't polish a turd.
Stephen King reference aside, apparently, it's already been done: http://www.turdpolish.com/. There's even a line of turd polish that you can purchase to polish your own turds. What a relief!
A band wrote a song about it.
There's a disturbing "artistic suite" that borrows the name.
No future promotions or raises. Cross promotions to jobs that are in some way unpleasant. When they make these moves they can vaguely site his poor job performance.
I think you missed the part where he said it was a "government job." There's no such thing as bad job performance. Everyone gets a raise, regardless. Promotions are typically based on seniority, not good job performance.
Personally, I'd print the email and file it away, install the software, and bitch about how much better open source software would be over M$ Office every day to everyone. But that's just me....
Spoken like a true cheese eating surrender monkey.
Score: 0, Troll
Troll?! Oh come on, that's some funny stuff!
Personally, and I my opinion may be skewed just because I despise Bush, I think oil prices tend to follow, not lead. Oil prices are low, and 2/3rds of Americans still hate Bush and believe he lied about Iraq. I don't feel an energy crunch, so I'm not even sure what you're referring to. There are no rolling blackouts, no fuel oil shortages, and I can fill my car anytime I want.
NASA isn't at the top of Bush's agenda because his administration has been anti-science from the beginning. Not just NASA, but all sciences.
And to roll my next reply into this one, I think there is a definite scientific value in setting up a permanent base on the moon to test technologies that will allow us to go to other planets. It's closer, and the conditions are more severe. On the flip side, we should be leveraging the ISS as not just a science outpost but as a LEO construction site, building larger ships than we can push off the earth in one step and space "hotels" for housing teams of astronauts or even tourists. The third piece of the puzzle, in my estimation, is a space elevator.
Why do you think there aren't any aliens? At some point, every sufficiently advanced society makes the same stupid mistake and disappears into a blast of gluons, quarks, and gamma radiation. It's God's way of weeding out the wise from the smart.
While I respect what you're doing, I still can't see the same kind of quick reaction time or fast organic growth that Wikipedia experiences. The two of you sound like you'll be competitors in the same space, like to Altavista and Google.
Good luck.
I would beg to argue the point of whether an article is "better" or not based solely on the existence of an executive board. I seem to recall a review not to long ago that found that Wikipedia was, by and large, more accurate than Encyclopedia Britannica. That's a rather high bar, and not one that Citizendium is likely to clear by an appreciable margin. Secondly, I can't imagine an "executive board" that could vet new information as quickly as it becomes available, so I have to guess that your qualification about "articles we intend to have" indicates your knowledge base will equate to a subset of Wikipedia's offerings.
Didn't you get the updated memo on Slashdot Weights and Measures?
CACHE MEASUREMENTS
MB to metric conversion table
40k = 1 centifuckton
64k = 1.6 centifucktons
400k = 1 decifuckton
640k = 1.6 decifucktons
1 MB = 2.5 decifucktons
1.44 MB = 3.6 decifucktons = 1 floppy
2 MB = 5.0 decifucktons
2.88 MB = 7.2 decifucktons = 2 floppies
3 MB = 7.5 decifucktons
4 MB = 1 fuckton
4.32 MB = 1.8 fucktons = 3 floppies
4 GB = 1 kilofuckton = 2844.44 floppies
Alternative measures:
16 MB = 1 sheeeit
64 MB = 1 whatthefuck
1 GB = 1 nofuckingway
No need to thank me. I'm just glad to be able to help.
According to the SMBIOS/DMI specification, which was eventually supersetted by CIM and other technologies, it's possible to query the BIOS for an astounding range of information about your PC. The dmidecode utility, for which the source is available, illustrates the detail that can be determined if a BIOS adheres to the standards set out by Intel and Microsoft. WMI uses DMI as a starting point when scanning the hardware on a machine during startup.
Wikipedia will always, by nature, be more reactive to world events than Citizendium. Minutes after a major event occurs, the related wikis are updated. Once articles have been tied down and relegated to an editor, it falls to the editor to react to changes in content relevance. If that "editor" consists of the entire earth's population (minus jerkweeds that have been banned), high, real-time relevance is maintained. Thus, Wikipedia becomes an extension of news media, adding immense value to a news story by supplying rich background information and hypertext access to related material.
Graffiti will always be a known issue, but the very fact that Wikipedia has a huge volume of contributors ensures that graffiti will be short-lived. If traffic fell, it would have to employ the same artifice as Citizendium, locking down articles because there aren't enough to people passing through every section of the database to keep graffiti life expectancy to a minimum.
the story will kill you and feast upon your soul.
Dude.... What kind of books are you used to reading? I love to read, I've ready all kinds of books, good and bad, but I've never had a story attempt to murder me and suck out my disembodied spirit. Maybe it's time to stop reading computer game promos and get some sunlight, ya think?
Square, noisy light = bad.
Round, peaceful light in sky = good.
Pizza farts = bad.
Fresh air = good.
Using thumbs and occasionally twitching your head for hours at a time = bad.
Using legs to walk through park = good.
Hey, they're scientists, where are they going to come up with a virgin?
Duh.
They'll grab the smallest among them and throw him in.
(whoosh)
Oh. You were joking. Nevermind...
1987: Wrote software and macros that allowed the users to work with a single interface to pull real estate data from Dataquick, parse it out, blow it into a database application and spreadsheet, and generate reports and alerts. And everyone in the office was connected using the $25 Network software for sharing drives and printers at a time when Novell Netware was ungodly expensive. Ah, yeah, those were the days....