There's plenty of very widely published empirical evidence bolstering arguments that there is a God, I can think of a couple of huge tomes full. When I was in Uppsala Cathedral last week, I even saw with my own eyes the fingernail of St. Bogosius - it doesn't get more real than that.
(And before you reply, reread the above, and make sure you've understood what I've written, and why.)
""" We live in interesting times. Dark matter, dark energy have burst on the scene. Neutrinos have a mass. Neutrinos might go faster than the speed of light (negative mass?). The LHC has failed to find the Higgs -- again -- in a great deal of the range which -- again -- it was claimed that it would/might/should be found. Magnetic monopoles are rarely found, but never reproducibly, and hover around on the boundary of believability. Gravity remains a cruel puzzle, a deep inconsistency between quantum theory and general relativity. We still have no direct evidence concerning whether antiparticles are gravitationally attracted to particles or repelled by them! Hell, if neutrinos do have negative mass, and negative mass gravitationally repels ordinary mass, then the neutrino content of a galaxy is conceivably the missing "dark matter".
I sure as hell don't know what is really going on with all of that. One of many reasons I read/. The only way I can pay it forward is to try to post informative stuff on the little patches I've studied pretty deeply and mostly understand. """
So how come you overlooked the fact that neutrinos being tachions would imply that they have negative *mass squared*, not negative mass?
You've posted a whole lot of technical sounding stuff, but a fundamental and obvious chink like that makes it hard to trust if any of it is reliable.
I'm curious to what problem smart meters are the solution. Call where I live backward, but I take the meter readings myself approximately monthly, and submit them through the power company's web page. They might do random spot checks maybe once every few years, or when there's a change of owner. Personally I like taking the meter readings, as I type them into a spreadsheet and can see whether what I have done to optimise my power usage has had any effect.
Maybe 10-15 years ago, I know that meter manufacturers were desperately trying to reduce the cost of the kit in the meters - I did consultancy for one, and we managed to save them 4 cents per meter, and they were over the moon! This seems to be a step in the opposite direction.
Quite the opposite, it appears, you're right. However, they are not the same proportions of water/alcohol as the body of the wine, so my earlier point stands - looking at the tears is different from looking at the liquid as swirled.
Nice graphic. For some inexplicable reason it reminded me of those cartoon fights where it's just a big cloud of smoke with occasionally something (a limb, or a weapon) sticking out of it.
You either have incredible patience! I'm quite the opposite, I think I always disagree if I hear nonsense being spouted (my field's beer, rather than wine). And by heck, if you were at a beer tasting that I'd organised I'd damn well want you to disagree if you thought I was hallucinating about something!
I love the thesis he's presenting, but that study is flawed in several ways. It confuses what they sense, and what they *claim* they sense. The claims are obviously bullshit, but that doesn't mean the sensory side is incapable of detecting differences. It's a psychology test, not a physiology one.
I'm a beer taster, much of my spare time is devoted to beer. I hang around with a lot of people who share the same hobby. It is absolutely impossible to pigeon-hole them all together. Some are very insightful, and I always like hearing their views, yet others are clearly full of crap who would be exposed to a double-blind test instantly. I obviously rate myself above average in this field - but that's because I *do* go out of my way to set up double-blind tests - and I'll have the beer multiple times, sometimes years apart, recording scores and descriptions each time, and my rating of a beer is very often identical. (I have a memory like a sieve, there's no way I could recall what I've written in the past.)
I'm prepared to believe there's the same level of variation in wine tasters, and that pigeon-holing them is sloppy. Which of course doesn't counter the argument that a fair proportion of people involved in the wine world are full of crap. It's probably a minority but certainly a very visible minority, as I suspect that the ones most in the public eye are the worst offenders. I'd trust the sommelier at my local big hotel's restaurant much more than I'd trust any of the wine journalists I've seen in newspapers, certainly. (Partly because it's interactive - I can probe him and see if he responds to the right stimuli.)
Not quite. The tears are condensed vapours. They have a different composition from the wine itself, as the different components have different volatilities. He specifically wanted to view the viscosity of the liquid itself, and for that, looking at the viscosity of condensed vapours would be useless.
If you open a bottle of wine and let is stand for half an hour, you will affect about the top 2mm at the surface.
I was at a dinner party where your claim was made, and an industrial chemist pounced on the claim, proceeding to scribble half a dozen formulae, and do some quick calculations. There is vastly more aeration from pouring than from even hours of standing.
Do a double-blind test to compare. Include a third sample that's been poured into a decanter, and then poured out again.
You're probably enjoying the wine more due to the anticipation.
Good example, as I know I've seen MAC in the last month or so. Painful at first, but amusing after the explanation of why he was using the wrong name went completely over his head.
"I have never come across a resistive screen that I liked using"
Thank you for proving my exact point. Sheesh.
"keyboard... not durable"
I still use a proto that's about 30 months old as my primary device. And the keyboard's fine still. I use my device for text entry more than anything else.
"I'd love to know how you have used your N900s keyboard for "about 3 years""
No you wouldn't, as it would puncture your self-perceived cleverness. The N900, and the N9 after it, is my job. So, yes, I've also been using the N9 for about 2 years. And, yes, my preference is for the N900 with its resistive touch screen and keyboard over the N9 with its capacitive screen and no keyboard.
"Im not an audiophile"
Clearly. Then why did you go out of your way to spout crap about audio quality?
"I guess that must mean I'm not allowed any sort of opinion on anything smartphone related ever again."
Your error is that you are confusing your clearly biased opinion with facts.
However, as great grandparent post demonstrates, "MacOS" is also used to refer to the "Mac OS" by people who don't care about things like changes to kernels. MacOSX is just the X-th generation one, that followed the 9-th generation one. You may care about the internals, not everyone does.
In my experience, there is an inverse correlation between privacy and battery life.
Have you ever had autocomplete suggest a word that you wish was never suggested, perhaps you used it in anger once, or when drunk, or to someone who your wife wouldn't like you communicating with?
That word was suggested because there are daemons sniffing around at everything possible in the device, extracting anything that looks like a word in any program you touch. Those daemons cost battery life. And privacy - I certainly don't want to lend my phone to anyone now, as I really don't want anyone seeing those things.
I'm presuming that you prefer capacitive screens. Those who prefer capacitive screens don't like resistive ones like the n900. Those who prefer resistive screens say the opposite. (And some of us call people who like capacitive screens "swipe and droolers".)
And if you think that the iPhone 3G's *mono* speaker (open it up - there's only one speaker inside) is better than the n900's *two speakers in stereo*, then clearly you've already overdosed on the Koolade already. ("*Back to* my iPhone" is the give-away, you were clearly already predisposed against anything that was different from the almighty iPhone.)
And, having used the n900 keyboard for about 3 years, I think that, no matter what weaknesses it has, it's infinitely better than no keyboard at all.
Anyway, I'm glad to see that you enjoy your swiping. Hopefully that means there's one more 2nd hand n900 on the market for those that want a mobile computer rather than a toy for droolers.
"Nokia never toke MeeGo project seriously. Ever, never."
Totally false. Some Harmattan teams in Nokia lost many developers, good developers at that, who went to work on the MeeGo collaboration.
Just because nothing they got into a product that reached the market, and therefore you aren't aware of it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Could you please not post bullshit pulled straight out of your ass?
Does Fennec understand things like adblock plugins? If so, that will run on the n9. It might even be hiding in the repositories somewhere, just waiting for you to install it. Note, however, that fennec does evil things that it shouldn't do with the X system, so don't be surprised if it breaks your gui.
Root's got nothing to do with it - keep up. Linux has been like that since 1998. Just because your desktop distribution gives you all POSIX capabilities when you become root doesn't mean it and every other distribution ought to.
What's annoying about Aegis is that it doesn't give you a simple way of acquiring those capabilities (unless you're a developer, and even then I'm not so sure).
However, there's no turing test or captcha - the phone can't tell the difference between a user wanting to do something, and malware wanting to do something.
Slashdot Mirror
There's plenty of very widely published empirical evidence bolstering arguments that there is a God, I can think of a couple of huge tomes full. When I was in Uppsala Cathedral last week, I even saw with my own eyes the fingernail of St. Bogosius - it doesn't get more real than that.
(And before you reply, reread the above, and make sure you've understood what I've written, and why.)
"""
/. The only way I can pay it forward is to try to post informative stuff on the little patches I've studied pretty deeply and mostly understand.
We live in interesting times. Dark matter, dark energy have burst on the scene. Neutrinos have a mass. Neutrinos might go faster than the speed of light (negative mass?). The LHC has failed to find the Higgs -- again -- in a great deal of the range which -- again -- it was claimed that it would/might/should be found. Magnetic monopoles are rarely found, but never reproducibly, and hover around on the boundary of believability. Gravity remains a cruel puzzle, a deep inconsistency between quantum theory and general relativity. We still have no direct evidence concerning whether antiparticles are gravitationally attracted to particles or repelled by them! Hell, if neutrinos do have negative mass, and negative mass gravitationally repels ordinary mass, then the neutrino content of a galaxy is conceivably the missing "dark matter".
I sure as hell don't know what is really going on with all of that. One of many reasons I read
"""
So how come you overlooked the fact that neutrinos being tachions would imply that they have negative *mass squared*, not negative mass?
You've posted a whole lot of technical sounding stuff, but a fundamental and obvious chink like that makes it hard to trust if any of it is reliable.
I'm curious to what problem smart meters are the solution. Call where I live backward, but I take the meter readings myself approximately monthly, and submit them through the power company's web page. They might do random spot checks maybe once every few years, or when there's a change of owner.
Personally I like taking the meter readings, as I type them into a spreadsheet and can see whether what I have done to optimise my power usage has had any effect.
Maybe 10-15 years ago, I know that meter manufacturers were desperately trying to reduce the cost of the kit in the meters - I did consultancy for one, and we managed to save them 4 cents per meter, and they were over the moon! This seems to be a step in the opposite direction.
"the Device MUST accept any and all interference."
If that were possible, we'd have infinite bandwidth.
Quite the opposite, it appears, you're right. However, they are not the same proportions of water/alcohol as the body of the wine, so my earlier point stands - looking at the tears is different from looking at the liquid as swirled.
True - and if you start them off, they might never stop.
"I'm so sorry that I hate your product, but that's my right."
So your repertory includes stating the obvious as well as spouting ill-founded nonsense?
Nice graphic. For some inexplicable reason it reminded me of those cartoon fights where it's just a big cloud of smoke with occasionally something (a limb, or a weapon) sticking out of it.
Not 1+4.75+1? There's potentially an extra hop on both sides of the cloud, surely?
Of course, this figure is nonsense, as facebook encourages you to claim that you know people for even the feeblest reasons.
Is Soviet Russia behind the Ironic Curtain?
You either have incredible patience! I'm quite the opposite, I think I always disagree if I hear nonsense being spouted (my field's beer, rather than wine). And by heck, if you were at a beer tasting that I'd organised I'd damn well want you to disagree if you thought I was hallucinating about something!
I love the thesis he's presenting, but that study is flawed in several ways. It confuses what they sense, and what they *claim* they sense. The claims are obviously bullshit, but that doesn't mean the sensory side is incapable of detecting differences. It's a psychology test, not a physiology one.
I'm a beer taster, much of my spare time is devoted to beer. I hang around with a lot of people who share the same hobby. It is absolutely impossible to pigeon-hole them all together. Some are very insightful, and I always like hearing their views, yet others are clearly full of crap who would be exposed to a double-blind test instantly. I obviously rate myself above average in this field - but that's because I *do* go out of my way to set up double-blind tests - and I'll have the beer multiple times, sometimes years apart, recording scores and descriptions each time, and my rating of a beer is very often identical. (I have a memory like a sieve, there's no way I could recall what I've written in the past.)
I'm prepared to believe there's the same level of variation in wine tasters, and that pigeon-holing them is sloppy. Which of course doesn't counter the argument that a fair proportion of people involved in the wine world are full of crap. It's probably a minority but certainly a very visible minority, as I suspect that the ones most in the public eye are the worst offenders. I'd trust the sommelier at my local big hotel's restaurant much more than I'd trust any of the wine journalists I've seen in newspapers, certainly. (Partly because it's interactive - I can probe him and see if he responds to the right stimuli.)
Not quite. The tears are condensed vapours. They have a different composition from the wine itself, as the different components have different volatilities. He specifically wanted to view the viscosity of the liquid itself, and for that, looking at the viscosity of condensed vapours would be useless.
If you open a bottle of wine and let is stand for half an hour, you will affect about the top 2mm at the surface.
I was at a dinner party where your claim was made, and an industrial chemist pounced on the claim, proceeding to scribble half a dozen formulae, and do some quick calculations. There is vastly more aeration from pouring than from even hours of standing.
Do a double-blind test to compare. Include a third sample that's been poured into a decanter, and then poured out again.
You're probably enjoying the wine more due to the anticipation.
Good example, as I know I've seen MAC in the last month or so. Painful at first, but amusing after the explanation of why he was using the wrong name went completely over his head.
"I have never come across a resistive screen that I liked using"
... not durable"
Thank you for proving my exact point. Sheesh.
"keyboard
I still use a proto that's about 30 months old as my primary device. And the keyboard's fine still. I use my device for text entry more than anything else.
"I'd love to know how you have used your N900s keyboard for "about 3 years""
No you wouldn't, as it would puncture your self-perceived cleverness. The N900, and the N9 after it, is my job. So, yes, I've also been using the N9 for about 2 years. And, yes, my preference is for the N900 with its resistive touch screen and keyboard over the N9 with its capacitive screen and no keyboard.
"Im not an audiophile"
Clearly. Then why did you go out of your way to spout crap about audio quality?
"I guess that must mean I'm not allowed any sort of opinion on anything smartphone related ever again."
Your error is that you are confusing your clearly biased opinion with facts.
it's the waves - they'll be bobbing up and down several metres for every metre they go forward.
However, as great grandparent post demonstrates, "MacOS" is also used to refer to the "Mac OS" by people who don't care about things like changes to kernels. MacOSX is just the X-th generation one, that followed the 9-th generation one. You may care about the internals, not everyone does.
In my experience, there is an inverse correlation between privacy and battery life.
Have you ever had autocomplete suggest a word that you wish was never suggested, perhaps you used it in anger once, or when drunk, or to someone who your wife wouldn't like you communicating with?
That word was suggested because there are daemons sniffing around at everything possible in the device, extracting anything that looks like a word in any program you touch. Those daemons cost battery life. And privacy - I certainly don't want to lend my phone to anyone now, as I really don't want anyone seeing those things.
I'm presuming that you prefer capacitive screens. Those who prefer capacitive screens don't like resistive ones like the n900. Those who prefer resistive screens say the opposite. (And some of us call people who like capacitive screens "swipe and droolers".)
And if you think that the iPhone 3G's *mono* speaker (open it up - there's only one speaker inside) is better than the n900's *two speakers in stereo*, then clearly you've already overdosed on the Koolade already. ("*Back to* my iPhone" is the give-away, you were clearly already predisposed against anything that was different from the almighty iPhone.)
And, having used the n900 keyboard for about 3 years, I think that, no matter what weaknesses it has, it's infinitely better than no keyboard at all.
Anyway, I'm glad to see that you enjoy your swiping. Hopefully that means there's one more 2nd hand n900 on the market for those that want a mobile computer rather than a toy for droolers.
"Nokia never toke MeeGo project seriously. Ever, never."
Totally false. Some Harmattan teams in Nokia lost many developers, good developers at that, who went to work on the MeeGo collaboration.
Just because nothing they got into a product that reached the market, and therefore you aren't aware of it, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Could you please not post bullshit pulled straight out of your ass?
Apple seem to refer to "Mac OS X" all over the place.
Are you not familiar with modern concepts such as Roman numerals?
Yup, if you've got PMO credentials, you can get fennec from https://files.maemo.org (in the 'ossw' section)
Does Fennec understand things like adblock plugins? If so, that will run on the n9. It might even be hiding in the repositories somewhere, just waiting for you to install it. Note, however, that fennec does evil things that it shouldn't do with the X system, so don't be surprised if it breaks your gui.
Root's got nothing to do with it - keep up. Linux has been like that since 1998. Just because your desktop distribution gives you all POSIX capabilities when you become root doesn't mean it and every other distribution ought to.
What's annoying about Aegis is that it doesn't give you a simple way of acquiring those capabilities (unless you're a developer, and even then I'm not so sure).
However, there's no turing test or captcha - the phone can't tell the difference between a user wanting to do something, and malware wanting to do something.