They have a pretty good ticketed support system. I think it's purely internal at the moment but you might be able to use it if you e-mail phil@stimpy.netroedge.com
Man, go away. Posting the results here is just not right. I could see it being helpful if, say, the site was./'ed, but it isn't.
Wooohoo! My server survived its first slashdotting. Without any particular preparation either (I didn't notice it had made slashdot till a friend told me), and while running all my nice eye-candy too. Kudos to apache...
Computer translation is bound to come of age within a decade or two and then we'll be able to do everything in our native languages, even real-time conversation with someone speaking a different language, and the computer will translate everything.
Re:Banks mainstream books are also good
on
Inversions
·
· Score: 1
I'd like to see someone try to make "Excession" into a film. Given that most of the visuals are either unimportant (spaceships coming and going) or crucial but impossible to depict (a perfect black object connected to infraspace/AND/ ultraspace). And most of the dialogue is pretty much e-mail between space ships (they don't talk to each other in realtime...)
Re:A bad book by Banks' standards
on
Inversions
·
· Score: 1
No, you just missed all the earlier "Culture" indications. For example, in the torturer's dungeon when the doctor administers some "medicine" to the prisoner to put him out of his misery, the guard makes her taste it first. She can deal with it because of the Culture glands she has. And in case you think it really was medicine, notice how she tries to give some to the torturer who she despises..
"Culture" inversion is right (possible SPOILER)
on
Inversions
·
· Score: 1
Yeah. The whole book written in a "Culture inversion", and you notice the way the doctor seems just a little too smart for everyone else on the planet? And how at the end she disappears off the face of the world from inside a locked room on a ship? *cough cough* displaced out? I think so. He did something similar in (IIRC) one of the short stories in State of the Art, where there were a few culture agents on Earth undetected by the population at large and then they left suddenly. This setup's a bit more involved, and nicer in the way it leaves a lot unanswered at the end, but it's the same sort of thing. Really good book, but then I enjoy all his stuff. I think "Use of Weapons" is my favourite. Lovely sting in the tail of that one.
... the porn servers start embedding shitloads of common 5-word phrases in their pages so every 404 takes you straight to "101 pussies for today" or wherever.
If you're talking about linux, why should it have this trait? Most people still use a stock kernel from their distribution. That's a lot of people using the Redhat binary kernel, say, which will be identical for every person using it.
Sure, you can play with the config or use patches or whatever, but a lot of the code will come out the same. It's not like the compiler puts some kind of unique fingerprint on the kernel you build.
Yeah, I vote for these modules too. It's always nice to know that your server is running within spec. And it always annoyed me that Windows could do this but Linux couldn't.:)
Many people feel that the Bible's exceptional unity (you try telling a story over two thousand years) is evidence of exceptional divine involvement in its creation. I tend to agree that this is the case.
Why? There are some bits which get repeated. But presumably the later authors were sometimes just a bit familiar with what the previous ones had written, so maybe a hint of plagiarism crept in? At least subconsciously since they all believed roughly the same thing. And there are lots of bits that are different too.
Nonono; perhaps my phrasing was off whack. What I meant was: they have to decide what they know, deep down, to be right. There is nothing special about people who aren't disabled that gives them the right to decide that someone else's life isn't worth supporting. But people need to realise this when they decide to continue someone's life so that the person they're supporting is a valuable part of their experience, not just a chore and a drain on the taxpayers' money. If there is one thing that would really make my life hell, and I guess does make the lives of handicapped people hell, it is being thought of as a waste of space, unworthy even of the chance of existence; it is the attitudes of "normal" people, much more than physical disability or pain, that would hurt and upset me.
Also there are the sheer medical costs that are required to care for an extremely handicapped person. Although parents should be able to care for the child if they can afford to, most such parents aren't so well off, and thus the costs necessary for care are sent to insurance or the governemnts health care program, and as a result the average American citizen. I don't have anything personal against disabled people, but it is outrageous that a fair share taxes I pay should be used by the government to subsidize the exhorbant medical costs of someone who cannot pay for them by themselves. I don't mind giving charity, but tax money should not be diverted towards such a resultless cause. The benefit of
Regardless of the real arguments in this debate on both sides, I find it extremely outrageous -- and would find it more so were I the parent of such a child -- that you think yourself fit to condemn someone to euthanasia purely on a financial basis. Who are you to decide whether these people represent a resultless cause? Now perhaps you yearn for the days of Stalin's Russia or the third reich; perhaps you worship at Landover Baptist church, but last time I looked your views have no more weight than those of the disabled, the "resultless cause" to which you refer. Perhaps we should also euthanise the unemployed, since your tax dollar goes to providing them with subsistence, and maybe illegal immigrants should be sent to the chair because you have to pay a small amount towards building them crappy, mean housing tenements.
the average person outweighs the need of a single lesser individual. In effect,
Er. Again, how do you choose to regard these people as "lesser"? Do you think their views are of no worth (and I include here the non-Stephen Hawkings, the ones who think of nothing higher than dressing themselves or eating their next meal)? But you yourself share these views at least part of the time.
such programs disrupt natural selection, where those incapable of independant survival are weeded out by failure to fend for oneself. Instead, the capable are being brought down by the needs of the disabled. Lastly, promoting the disabled population will ultimately lead to a continued abundance of highly disabled indivuals, as their genes will be passed on down, thus creating future struggles with disability as well.
Perhaps we should just weed out everyone who's not blonde, blue-eyed and 6 foot? I'm sure it wouldn't take you long to re-open Dachau, Treblinka and Auschwitz. The point is, we won't end up with a population of monsters; comparatively few of the extremely disabled live long enough or get the chance to have children. If you're talking about those that do: the blind, those with crippled legs, etc. then I'm pretty saddened.
I know this may sound inhumane, but I'm sure the severly disabled aren't exactly living in a state of bliss.
Why does everyone these days seem to think that unless it's possible to live in a state of eternal happiness then life's not worth living? Of all the trillions of creatures alive right now, and all the trillions of trillions that have ever lived, how many do you think have been happy for even a majority of their life? Life still goes on. Now, that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for greater happiness in our lives. If however this mythical state of happiness can't be achieved, there's nothing bad or wrong in that; we shouldn't kill someone purely because they don't have the same capacity for a comfortable life that we do. Each person is just as perfect as each other person, regardless of appearance or disability or morality. To try to set yourself up as more perfect, and in a position to judge whether others are worth helping or not, is a very dangerous game to play.
The argument about the guy who would have died in a car crash through wearing a seatbelt is flawed, because far more people die through not wearing them than do through wearing them.
People should just do what they really believe to be right. It doesn't really matter whether the baby lives or dies, just as it doesn't really matter if the civilised world blew itself up next week. In a few thousand years the result would be the same anyway. But to lose touch with your instinct for right and wrong in an endless moral dilemma is a real waste of time. I'm not saying the baby should die, or that it should live --- the only people who can make that decision are the parents. But their decision ought to be the true decision.
Slashdot Mirror
keymaps calls it "numbersign"
Check out the LM-sensors project.
They have a pretty good ticketed support system. I think it's purely internal at the moment but you might be able to use it if you e-mail phil@stimpy.netroedge.com
So you're a libertarian and yet you're moaning because Microsoft do what the hell they please? That sounds kinda stoopid to me. Duh...
'm reasonably up on U.S gun control laws, having purchased one a few weeks back..
;-)
So how much does a gun control law cost, and how many senators do you have to "purchase" it from?
Man, go away. Posting the results here is just not right. I could see it being helpful ./'ed, but it isn't.
if, say, the site was
Wooohoo! My server survived its first slashdotting. Without any particular preparation either (I didn't notice it had made slashdot till a friend told me), and while running all my nice eye-candy too. Kudos to apache...
Adrian.
Computer translation is bound to come of age within a decade or two and then we'll be able to do everything in our native languages, even real-time conversation with someone speaking a different language, and the computer will translate everything.
Their money tips the scales again...
I'd like to see someone try to make "Excession" into a film. Given that most of the visuals are either unimportant (spaceships coming and going) or crucial but impossible to depict (a perfect black object connected to infraspace /AND/ ultraspace). And most of the dialogue is pretty much e-mail between space ships (they don't talk to each other in realtime...)
No, you just missed all the earlier "Culture" indications.
For example, in the torturer's dungeon when the doctor administers some "medicine" to the prisoner to put him out of his misery, the guard makes her taste it first. She can deal with it because of the Culture glands she has.
And in case you think it really was medicine, notice how she tries to give some to the torturer who she despises..
Yeah. The whole book written in a "Culture inversion", and you notice the way the doctor seems just a little too smart for everyone else on the planet? And how at the end she disappears off the face of the world from inside a locked room on a ship?
*cough cough* displaced out? I think so. He did something similar in (IIRC) one of the short stories in State of the Art, where there were a few culture agents on Earth undetected by the population at large and then they left suddenly. This setup's a bit more involved, and nicer in the way it leaves a lot unanswered at the end, but it's the same sort of thing.
Really good book, but then I enjoy all his stuff. I think "Use of Weapons" is my favourite. Lovely sting in the tail of that one.
... the porn servers start embedding shitloads of common 5-word phrases in their pages so every 404 takes you straight to "101 pussies for today" or wherever.
I'm wgetting all the restricted stuff, it'll appear somewhere later
Who gives a toss about the Cabbage Patch kids? They sucked. The Garbage Pail kids were much better.
axolotl
On second thoughts, no. Mr Clete and the Musicians' guild had nothing on the RIAA (and the MPAA come to that). Bastards.
If you're talking about linux, why should it have this trait? Most people still use a stock kernel from their distribution. That's a lot of people using the Redhat binary kernel, say, which will be identical for every person using it.
Sure, you can play with the config or use patches or whatever, but a lot of the code will come out the same. It's not like the compiler puts some kind of unique fingerprint on the kernel you build.
axolotl
Except, of course, that with the right player LP quality is way better than CD quality. Moron.
axolotl
Yeah, I vote for these modules too. It's always nice to know that your server is running within spec. :)
And it always annoyed me that Windows could do this but Linux couldn't.
Because programmers are stupid.
Many people feel that the Bible's exceptional unity (you try telling a story over two thousand years) is evidence of exceptional divine involvement in its creation. I tend to agree that this is the case.
Why? There are some bits which get repeated. But presumably the later authors were sometimes just a bit familiar with what the previous ones had written, so maybe a hint of plagiarism crept in? At least subconsciously since they all believed roughly the same thing.
And there are lots of bits that are different too.
axolotl
What about a random points expiry time?
FSF then. My vote is cast.
axolotl
Nonono; perhaps my phrasing was off whack. What I meant was: they have to decide what they know, deep down, to be right.
There is nothing special about people who aren't disabled that gives them the right to decide that someone else's life isn't worth supporting. But people need to realise this when they decide to continue someone's life so that the person they're supporting is a valuable part of their experience, not just a chore and a drain on the taxpayers' money.
If there is one thing that would really make my life hell, and I guess does make the lives of handicapped people hell, it is being thought of as a waste of space, unworthy even of the chance of existence; it is the attitudes of "normal" people, much more than physical disability or pain, that would hurt and upset me.
axolotl
Also there are the sheer medical costs that are required to care for an extremely
handicapped person. Although parents should be able to care for the child if they can
afford to, most such parents aren't so well off, and thus the costs necessary for care
are sent to insurance or the governemnts health care program, and as a result the
average American citizen. I don't have anything personal against disabled people, but
it is outrageous that a fair share taxes I pay should be used by the government to
subsidize the exhorbant medical costs of someone who cannot pay for them by
themselves. I don't mind giving charity, but tax money should not be diverted towards
such a resultless cause. The benefit of
Regardless of the real arguments in this debate on both sides, I find it extremely outrageous -- and would find it more so were I the parent of such a child -- that you think yourself fit to condemn someone to euthanasia purely on a financial basis.
Who are you to decide whether these people represent a resultless cause? Now perhaps you yearn for the days of Stalin's Russia or the third reich; perhaps you worship at Landover Baptist church, but last time I looked your views have no more weight than those of the disabled, the "resultless cause" to which you refer. Perhaps we should also euthanise the unemployed, since your tax dollar goes to providing them with subsistence, and maybe illegal immigrants should be sent to the chair because you have to pay a small amount towards building them crappy, mean housing tenements.
the average person outweighs the need of a
single lesser individual. In effect,
Er. Again, how do you choose to regard these people as "lesser"? Do you think their views are of no worth (and I include here the non-Stephen Hawkings, the ones who think of nothing higher than dressing themselves or eating their next meal)? But you yourself share these views at least part of the time.
such programs disrupt natural selection, where those
incapable of independant survival are weeded out by failure to fend for oneself.
Instead, the capable are being brought down by the needs of the disabled. Lastly,
promoting the disabled population will ultimately lead to a continued abundance of
highly disabled indivuals, as their genes will be passed on down, thus creating future
struggles with disability as well.
Perhaps we should just weed out everyone who's not blonde, blue-eyed and 6 foot? I'm sure it wouldn't take you long to re-open Dachau, Treblinka and Auschwitz.
The point is, we won't end up with a population of monsters; comparatively few of the extremely disabled live long enough or get the chance to have children. If you're talking about those that do: the blind, those with crippled legs, etc. then I'm pretty saddened.
I know this may sound inhumane, but I'm sure the severly disabled aren't exactly living in a state of bliss.
Why does everyone these days seem to think that unless it's possible to live in a state of eternal happiness then life's not worth living? Of all the trillions of creatures alive right now, and all the trillions of trillions that have ever lived, how many do you think have been happy for even a majority of their life? Life still goes on. Now, that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for greater happiness in our lives. If however this mythical state of happiness can't be achieved, there's nothing bad or wrong in that; we shouldn't kill someone purely because they don't have the same capacity for a comfortable life that we do.
Each person is just as perfect as each other person, regardless of appearance or disability or morality. To try to set yourself up as more perfect, and in a position to judge whether others are worth helping or not, is a very dangerous game to play.
axolotl
The argument about the guy who would have died in a car crash through wearing a seatbelt is flawed, because far more people die through not wearing them than do through wearing them.
People should just do what they really believe to be right. It doesn't really matter whether the baby lives or dies, just as it doesn't really matter if the civilised world blew itself up next week. In a few thousand years the result would be the same anyway. But to lose touch with your instinct for right and wrong in an endless moral dilemma is a real waste of time.
I'm not saying the baby should die, or that it should live --- the only people who can make that decision are the parents. But their decision ought to be the true decision.
axolotl