Sci fi has never been about what is or isn't possible to me. It's just a way of emphasizing different aspects of the way people work.
That's probably why the only Sci Fi I read anymore is William Gibson and Thomas Pynchon. Larry Niven's books remind me of the retarded kid in my gradeschool that would stomp around the playground pretending to be a robot.
Whether it's murder depends on how you're defining murder. There are many cases in which murder is morally ok with me. Abortion, for example, is very very ok with me. Self defense makes many killings acceptable. Some killings in some wars.
What you are describing to me sounds acceptable at first blush. However, I think human cloning is bad just because it's guaranteed to create a few human children born that die painfully due to poorly developed vital organs, or something, and it could be easily avoided by not doing the cloning. But that seems morally equivalent to the scenario you describe. So I am at a logical impasse. Dunno what to say.
There are certain problems where we clearly have a problem both in software and in hardware. Moore's law will play a role in solving some of our problems in AI.
Of course your point still stands. I'm just saying.
Orson Scott Card wrote a short story in which people go back in time and die, using a feature on their time machines that allow them to undie as they return to the current time.
Not a good short story at all. But his mechanisms would have had a similar result to what you describe.
Good job. You have correctly identified the reason that my joke is funny. You should apply to the Tonight Show to work as the dude who turns on the "Laughter" sign.
Ooh. Upon cursory investigation, the dive they took this morning is on the heels of them poking the top of their 52 week range yesterday.
I'd guess that the drop was due to folks squeamish about Apple's chances at continued success, and also the "buy on the rumor; sell on the news" rule.
I think there's money in AAPL right now. (No, I don't hold any stock in AAPL or any other company, nor do I have savings to put there. I'm just saying.)
3) The response time on the store seems to be pretty good. The uptake on the new Windows version will probably be a lot slower than it was for the Mac version (hundreds of thousands of the Windows faithful are NOT waiting anxiously for Steve to say "it's available today".)
Yeah, but hundreds of thousands of the MacOS faithful are sitting at their PCs and ARE waiting anxiously for Steve to say "it's available today."
So I disagree. I think their Windows launch will go over a lot bigger than their MacOS launch. They've sold at least as many iPods to Windows folks as Mac folks already. Before there was decent iPod software for Windows.
The response time on the store is probably due to the fact that they've already ironed out all the kinks with Akamai.
This is a grand slam home run on Apple's part. They're going to make a fucking fortune. Their stock price took a dive this morning on kindof heavy volume. Maybe the market knows something we don't know, or... maybe there's some money to be made on them right now. Dunno dunno.
I've just been playing around with iTunes on my Win2K box, and I can't find any part of it that is less slick than on my Mac. It's RAD.
Yeah. They also joke about how EGM uses the space invaders monsters on their website. Either the kids are faithful EGM readers and know all about video games, or this whole article has to be made up.
No. It doesn't need to be scientific at all in order to convince me. They should listen to the component and compare it to something else. They shouldn't know which is which. Then, when they reveal which audio source is which, they can make their analysis.
I don't doubt their honesty so badly as I doubt their biases.
Yes. You did state facts. So did Michael (maybe) and CNN (definitely). Your word choices are not objectionable to me either.
Your choice of facts is selective though. I was trying to point out that there are pertinent facts that you are leaving out: There are still students that are told to recite the pledge. They are probably not told that it isn't required. To be obedient students, they should comply.
That is exactly what is (or isn't) objectionable to atheists in this matter. It is also not implied by "setting aside" time to recite the pledge. If that were all that happened, the atheists making complaint would be holding a much less reasonable position. CNN spun too far one way, Michael spun too far the other. You, again, spun the issue in response.
I'm sorry if I was a dick about it. I really do feel that you were misleading in a similar manner to Michael, all though not by the same degree.
And your post spins as well. There are still students that are told to recite the pledge. Whether or not it is required is not likely discussed.
You imply that the teacher gets up in front of class and says, "Now we have some time so that you may recite the pledge of allegiance. Go ahead if you like."
That's absurd. Unspin yourself, or go a little easier on Michael.
There is no conflict if you are a Catholic and still only discuss the truth of God's existence when you are not teaching fourth graders. Similarly, a fourth grader is perfectly able to be a Catholic without being told to recite a pledge of allegiance to our nation under God.
The opposite is not true. There is a conflict for an atheist fourth grader whom is told to pledge his allegiance to our nation under God.
You must see that there is a conflict in one way and not the other. You must see that this is not "making a law respecting the establishment of the religion of athiesm."
Personally, I think this is the stupidest thing that the Supreme Court could possibly waste their time with. However. I also think that it is wrong for children to be told to recite our current pledge of allegiance in a public school. It made me uncomfortable on my first day in sixth grade, when kids next to me told me that I was going to get in trouble if I didn't say the pledge. It was no big deal, obviously, but the separation of church and state is a doctrine I believe in firmly. This is such. Not the establishment of atheism. To say otherwise seems disingenuous.
Slashdot Mirror
Sci fi has never been about what is or isn't possible to me. It's just a way of emphasizing different aspects of the way people work.
That's probably why the only Sci Fi I read anymore is William Gibson and Thomas Pynchon. Larry Niven's books remind me of the retarded kid in my gradeschool that would stomp around the playground pretending to be a robot.
Whether it's murder depends on how you're defining murder. There are many cases in which murder is morally ok with me. Abortion, for example, is very very ok with me. Self defense makes many killings acceptable. Some killings in some wars.
What you are describing to me sounds acceptable at first blush. However, I think human cloning is bad just because it's guaranteed to create a few human children born that die painfully due to poorly developed vital organs, or something, and it could be easily avoided by not doing the cloning. But that seems morally equivalent to the scenario you describe. So I am at a logical impasse. Dunno what to say.
There are certain problems where we clearly have a problem both in software and in hardware. Moore's law will play a role in solving some of our problems in AI.
Of course your point still stands. I'm just saying.
You can already do that. Make a trust, and make the computer property of the trust.
Unfortunately, I think you still need a human "trustee" but they probably can only do things according to the trusts founding documents.
But I think you could already approximate your SPARC Workstation scenario.
Orson Scott Card wrote a short story in which people go back in time and die, using a feature on their time machines that allow them to undie as they return to the current time.
Not a good short story at all. But his mechanisms would have had a similar result to what you describe.
What makes a human? A lump of cells with homosapien DNA? Or a functioning brain with accumulated memories? The latter I'd say.
I'd say the lump of cells is more accurately (literally) described as a human lifeform.
But I'm still pro-choice. I would advocate against unplugging certain types of AI. I consider myself a humanist. Oh, and I'm anti-death penalty.
You should see me explain all these philosophies so that they don't conflict with each other. It works, too. Mostly.
Good point.
Handsome Cute
Smart Clever
Natural Leader Napolean Complex
Strong Wiry
Tall folks are perfectly aware of the shit y'all have to go through. Either that or they're morons. (And no, they don't have a monopoly on morons.)
Good job. You have correctly identified the reason that my joke is funny. You should apply to the Tonight Show to work as the dude who turns on the "Laughter" sign.
That will work if you can get the botfeed created articles published in a major medical journal.
Otherwise, totally not an issue.
Dude, do you know anything about copyright law?
Copyright lasts for the life of the author + 90 years. Unless you're saying that God has been dead for 90 years...
Ooh. Upon cursory investigation, the dive they took this morning is on the heels of them poking the top of their 52 week range yesterday.
I'd guess that the drop was due to folks squeamish about Apple's chances at continued success, and also the "buy on the rumor; sell on the news" rule.
I think there's money in AAPL right now. (No, I don't hold any stock in AAPL or any other company, nor do I have savings to put there. I'm just saying.)
3) The response time on the store seems to be pretty good. The uptake on the new Windows version will probably be a lot slower than it was for the Mac version (hundreds of thousands of the Windows faithful are NOT waiting anxiously for Steve to say "it's available today".)
Yeah, but hundreds of thousands of the MacOS faithful are sitting at their PCs and ARE waiting anxiously for Steve to say "it's available today."
So I disagree. I think their Windows launch will go over a lot bigger than their MacOS launch. They've sold at least as many iPods to Windows folks as Mac folks already. Before there was decent iPod software for Windows.
The response time on the store is probably due to the fact that they've already ironed out all the kinks with Akamai.
This is a grand slam home run on Apple's part. They're going to make a fucking fortune. Their stock price took a dive this morning on kindof heavy volume. Maybe the market knows something we don't know, or... maybe there's some money to be made on them right now. Dunno dunno.
I've just been playing around with iTunes on my Win2K box, and I can't find any part of it that is less slick than on my Mac. It's RAD.
</Apple Fanboy>
Yeah. They also joke about how EGM uses the space invaders monsters on their website. Either the kids are faithful EGM readers and know all about video games, or this whole article has to be made up.
It's still funny, but... I don't buy it.
Aw, Jesus. You just gave me an opening for so many different jokes that my brain seized.
Do I make fun of Virtuosity? Episodes 1 & 2? The Replacements? The Fighting Temptations? (Any Cuba Gooding Jr. movie since A Few Good Men?)
Let's not and say we did.
Making "Event Horizon" the best of any category is a mistake.
I could have written a better script if I stuck a felt tip marker up my ass and then played twister for a few hours.
No. It doesn't need to be scientific at all in order to convince me. They should listen to the component and compare it to something else. They shouldn't know which is which. Then, when they reveal which audio source is which, they can make their analysis.
I don't doubt their honesty so badly as I doubt their biases.
For the record, that link was originally to a gold glitter pen. I swear. It worked for at least several hours after I posted it.
See, it was funny.
Ack. Crap.
It was a link to a gold glitter pen. I swear.
Yes. You did state facts. So did Michael (maybe) and CNN (definitely). Your word choices are not objectionable to me either.
Your choice of facts is selective though. I was trying to point out that there are pertinent facts that you are leaving out: There are still students that are told to recite the pledge. They are probably not told that it isn't required. To be obedient students, they should comply.
That is exactly what is (or isn't) objectionable to atheists in this matter. It is also not implied by "setting aside" time to recite the pledge. If that were all that happened, the atheists making complaint would be holding a much less reasonable position. CNN spun too far one way, Michael spun too far the other. You, again, spun the issue in response.
I'm sorry if I was a dick about it. I really do feel that you were misleading in a similar manner to Michael, all though not by the same degree.
And your post spins as well. There are still students that are told to recite the pledge. Whether or not it is required is not likely discussed.
You imply that the teacher gets up in front of class and says, "Now we have some time so that you may recite the pledge of allegiance. Go ahead if you like."
That's absurd. Unspin yourself, or go a little easier on Michael.
There is no conflict if you are a Catholic and still only discuss the truth of God's existence when you are not teaching fourth graders. Similarly, a fourth grader is perfectly able to be a Catholic without being told to recite a pledge of allegiance to our nation under God.
The opposite is not true. There is a conflict for an atheist fourth grader whom is told to pledge his allegiance to our nation under God.
You must see that there is a conflict in one way and not the other. You must see that this is not "making a law respecting the establishment of the religion of athiesm."
Personally, I think this is the stupidest thing that the Supreme Court could possibly waste their time with. However. I also think that it is wrong for children to be told to recite our current pledge of allegiance in a public school. It made me uncomfortable on my first day in sixth grade, when kids next to me told me that I was going to get in trouble if I didn't say the pledge. It was no big deal, obviously, but the separation of church and state is a doctrine I believe in firmly. This is such. Not the establishment of atheism. To say otherwise seems disingenuous.
Did you follow my link?
Numbers lie? Maybe.
Double-blind tests don't lie. We'll take audiophile seriously when double-blind tests play more prominent a role in their analysis.
It makes a well recorded track sound almost 3 dimensional with only 2 channels...and give far less ear fatigue than many SS amps I've found.
If you are getting ear fatigue, I suggest putting your amp on a table or shelf.