Well, if you look at the graph, he basically did come up with the same date. True, he started from an assumption, and then proved out his assumption, but isn't that the scientific method anyway? Start from a theory and then seek to prove or to disprove it?
"Pins and needles"? Nah, I don't think so. I think many people are interested in what Apple has to say, sure. I am. Probably so is much of the Slashdot crowd. Maybe some people are on "pins and needles" but these people would be on pins and needles if Apple was about to announce that future Macintoshes will be offered in 31 flavors including chocolate chip cookie dough.
Honestly, I don't think Microsoft gives Apple that much credence. Such will be their downfall.
Not every CPU intensive application can be done on a cluster. It depends on if the work can be distributed or not. Not every problem can be broken down into discrete little chunks that can be done on separate nodes in a cluster. It doesn't always work out that way.
Also, WiFi is not the GSM killer; a notion which seems popular in the US, but it's just plain wrong. Those are two very, very different technologies with very different objectives..
Yeah...it's that whole U.S. mentality of "live free or die." People envision a world of free or very, very cheap wireless hotspots.
What they don't get is that WiFi is for wireless LANs. It doesn't scale very well beyond providing wireless access for laptops and PDAs to a LAN and it's resources. And it doesn't even do that very well all the time, at least not until some of the major bugs are still being worked out of the technology.
Seattle Wireless is cool and all, but take that on a national or global scale -- it just doesn't work.
Re:What Time Zone is God in Anyway?
on
Incas Used Binary?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Well, rememeber it isn't my theory, it's Terence McKenna's. McKenna was an occultist who died in 2000. As an occultist myself, I find his work to be quite fascinating. Remember that everything you read in the occult field you have to take with a large grain of salt and then pick and choose what you believe for yourself -- even if it's nothing. That's something anyone who's studied the occult for any length of time will automatically tell you when you're just getting started.
Of course there are those that will, and they do not necessarily deserve to be mocked. Certain applications still require a lot of horsepower, and some people can use all they can get.
Of course, this is becoming rarer and rarer, but it still exists.
Actually, you have some details wrong, but you've got the gist right. Specifically, it was December 22, 2012, and it was the Mayans, not the Incas as you seemed to indicate.
From the disinformation co. (what was that I said about critical thinking again?;):
"According to occult scientist Terence McKenna, the end of the world as we know it will occur at 11:10 PM, December 22, 2012 and he's worked out a computer model based on an intuitive decoding of the I Ching to prove it mathematically. Before you scoff at McKenna's claims, bear in mind that the ancient Mayan calendar, a calendar accurate to within MINUTES for THOUSANDS of years ends at precisely the same time... But McKenna is no mere doomsday prophet and once you've been exposed to the psychedelic mindscape of the man referred to as 'the Timothy Leary of the Nineties' (by Leary himself!), your worldview may never be the same ever again...."
No. It means that the Incas invented the Internet, but I think that Al Gore invented the Incas, who in turn created the Internet. The SCO came along and they claim that they invented Al Gore. I don't get it either, don't worry.
Yup. Bottom line: people need to learn critical thinking skills. I think everyone should be required to pass at least one college-level critical thinking class.
You need a bullshit detector, and that's what critical thinking skills provide for you.
You also need a healthy dose of skepticism. Most of us Slashdotters (well, the non-posers anyway) are the people who have lived the online experience before it became commercialized. We almost inherently KNOW to look at things skeptically. Look at every article on/.. There's always more than a few people out there to cry "bullshit" when it's warranted. We don't believe everything we see on TV, and we don't believe everything we see on the Net.
But that's one of the inherent problems in American society. It was on TV, so it must be true! That's transforming into "I saw it on the Net, therefore it must be true!"
For every piece of truth you'll find on the Net, you'll find at least two pieces of complete, total utter bullshit. It's up to the reader to decide for him/herself what's truth and what's just something some idiot is spouting out off about he either doesn't understand -- or worse -- that he does understand but is trying to manipulate you into agreeing with him or even worse giving him money.
Don't buy it. Wear your bullshit detector. And if you don't have one get one. I highly recommend Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking by Browne and Keeley. It was the text I used in college, and is still used in many, many college critical thinking classes.
The purpose of the tax cuts as stated by the Bush administration was to provide a part of an economic stimulus package. Basically, its purpose was the improve the economy. It was predicted at the time of its passage that the economy would likely pick up in the second half of the year. Well, it's June, and there are signs of an economic recovery now.
How much of that is due to the tax cuts and how much of that is due to a return from uncertain times regarding war and such is uncertain. Overall, I'd have to say it's a little of both probably. The problem is that the economy in our country is mostly based on consumer spending (whether that be on goods, services, or homes or what have you), and on the commodities markets and consumers and commodities traders (stocks, bonds, or actual commodities such as gold, coffee, oil, etc) are so fickle that determining why the economy does what it does is a rather subjective and very complex process. There are so many different variables that it's difficult to give 100% credit to the Bush administration -- or any part of government, really. But, IMHO, much of the credit for the currently in-progress economic recovery can be laid on both Bush's tax cuts and on a return to less turbulent times.
Of course, this doesn't it the slightest bit alter rather negative view of the Bush administration, in light of the civil liberties that they have taken away from me, or in light of their rather poor handling of foreign policy thus far.
I don't think it was Bush's intention to keep the dot-coms down. Bush *did* contribute problems to an already hurting economy by creating uncertainty with this wars. But I don't think that his intentions were to keep dot-coms down.
As far as the outdated web servers goes, I'm sure this has more to do with budget cuts then anything else. Bush slashed spending and the last thing that's going to get updated are the Web servers. You have to put your money into your actual program (whatever that is -- be it Social Security, welfare, housing, military, infrastructure, whatever) before you can put it into niceties like a Web server. And with all the problems we have as a nation, I'd rather the money be spent on actual programs that on Web sites to that do little more than educated the public. Clearly housing the homeless or feeding the hungry are more important goals than having a Web server talking about housing the homeless or feeding the hungry. Make sense?
The picture was going to change with B2C, but the boom has collapsed saddenly, and then all investors have frozen their money waiting when Mr. President will finally all his wars he's planned. I guess once he's doneand investors are back then B2C will take it's second chance and then we'll finally see more and more infomration services about resources directly not related to internet nor to computer industry.
You're kidding, right? You don't *really* think that the dot-com crash had something to do with Bush do you?
Now, I'm no big Bush supported (well, a different kind of big bush, but that's a different story;), but I also can say with absolute certainty that the dot-com crash had little, if anything, to do with the Bush administration. It was already well on it's way to crashing before Bush took the White House.
The dot-com crash came about mostly because people were being disingenious about an Internet-based economy. Various people in these dot-com startups were going around thinking they could run a business by selling a product for less than it cost them to produce. Any 1st year business school student (heck, any 1st grader even!) could tell you that you can't make money doing that. It's ludricrous! So the venture capital dried up, the companies went bust, and *big surprise* Wall Street investors pulled all their money out of dot-com stocks.
Little, if anything, had to do with Bush and his wars. Bush and his wars *did* cause a freeze in economic markets, and *did*contribute to an *already* unstable economy (due mostly to the dot-com crash) but it didn't in any sense of the word create the dot-com crash.
Was there ever a COBOL compiler written for the Apple ][ series? I dont' ever remember seeing one. I remember lots of BASIC compilers, a Fortran compiler, a Pascal compiler (not UCSD Pascal, but another system that actually was a compiler), and unless I miss my guess, I think there was an even an educational-use RPG compiler or interpreter for the II+ or//e, but it required that you had an 80 column card. Heh. Remember PR#3?:)
But I don't remember seeing a COBOL compiler. Of course that was many, many years ago and I'm just plain old now, so I probably forgot more about the Apple II than I know now.
Of course, releasing most of their code and then reducing all the stuff they can't publish into a library makes it that much easier to reverse engineer the remaining closed source code. After all, the open source stuff has to make calls to that library, so it should be more obvious what those calls do, at least more so than with a completely closed source driver. I guess it depends on how clear the open source code is.
That being said, the Matrox G-series cards aren't anything to write home to mother about, so I don't expect very many people will be interested in doing the work.
Actually, I tend to agree with you However, in the United States there are definite taboos against older men sleeping with females who are younger especially if they are under the age of 18.
I was using the example, even if I don't necessarily agree with it, because it makes my point. Most Americans would automatically say if ((a_female->age age > 21)) then a_male.fucking(a_female) == morally_wrong.
Since you're the only one who seemed to notice that point at all, I'd say my argument was pretty effective.;)
That being said, there is something to be said for taking advantage of young, naive and impressionable girls, which is morally wrong. Not every 16 year old is very naive and not every case of a 30 year old man fucking a 16-year-old female would necessarily be morally wrong, but in many situations it can be and it all depends on the situation.
Any logical person would agree with this. If a teenager downloads and burns a CD of music, why would he spend $20 on the real thing?
I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that you'll just call me a Slashbot again!
Let's ignore colleges, libraries, and more! Yes, even dialup users freely download music. In a single night, one can grab an entire album.
Most libraries don't allow the installation of peer to peer file sharing clients and in fact have software installed to prevent the saving of downloaded files to disk. Ditto on some college lab computers, although some college lab computers undoubtedly let you save stuff. But realistically they have no mass storage media to facilitate transfer to a different computer other than the LAN they sit on and floppy disk. And colleges have really been cracking down on filesharing on student-owned (and campus-owned) equipment by blocking the ports that P2P clients use.
An entire album on a 56 dialup connection in a night? This I gotta see.
Since when has the RIAA and MPAA dictated your life just by combating illegal downloading of their legally protected works? You mean you don't have control over your life unless you can break the law and steal--yes, steal--valuable music?
Go ahead couch your words with 'legal' and 'illegal'. You know what? Too many people are caught up with the terms 'legal' and 'illegal'. They should more concerned with 'right' and 'wrong.' It's totally LEGAL for me, a 30-year-old man, to sleep with a consenting 16-year-old female in the state of Michigan. Does that make it right? No.
That's the problem with our society. You can stick to doing what's legal, I'll do what's RIGHT.
And, finally, the capper to every Slashbot post involving the government, which is the claim to considering moving to another country, which will of course never pan out.
What do you know about personal motivations? Nothing.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you look at the graph, he basically did come up with the same date. True, he started from an assumption, and then proved out his assumption, but isn't that the scientific method anyway? Start from a theory and then seek to prove or to disprove it?
"Pins and needles"? Nah, I don't think so. I think many people are interested in what Apple has to say, sure. I am. Probably so is much of the Slashdot crowd. Maybe some people are on "pins and needles" but these people would be on pins and needles if Apple was about to announce that future Macintoshes will be offered in 31 flavors including chocolate chip cookie dough.
Honestly, I don't think Microsoft gives Apple that much credence. Such will be their downfall.
Not every CPU intensive application can be done on a cluster. It depends on if the work can be distributed or not. Not every problem can be broken down into discrete little chunks that can be done on separate nodes in a cluster. It doesn't always work out that way.
Also, WiFi is not the GSM killer; a notion which seems popular in the US, but it's just plain wrong. Those are two very, very different technologies with very different objectives..
Yeah...it's that whole U.S. mentality of "live free or die." People envision a world of free or very, very cheap wireless hotspots.
What they don't get is that WiFi is for wireless LANs. It doesn't scale very well beyond providing wireless access for laptops and PDAs to a LAN and it's resources. And it doesn't even do that very well all the time, at least not until some of the major bugs are still being worked out of the technology.
Seattle Wireless is cool and all, but take that on a national or global scale -- it just doesn't work.
Well, rememeber it isn't my theory, it's Terence McKenna's. McKenna was an occultist who died in 2000. As an occultist myself, I find his work to be quite fascinating. Remember that everything you read in the occult field you have to take with a large grain of salt and then pick and choose what you believe for yourself -- even if it's nothing. That's something anyone who's studied the occult for any length of time will automatically tell you when you're just getting started.
I dunno. It isn't my theory. I'd ask Terence McKenna, but unfortunately, he's rather late.
Of course there are those that will, and they do not necessarily deserve to be mocked. Certain applications still require a lot of horsepower, and some people can use all they can get.
Of course, this is becoming rarer and rarer, but it still exists.
Actually, you have some details wrong, but you've got the gist right. Specifically, it was December 22, 2012, and it was the Mayans, not the Incas as you seemed to indicate.
;) :
From the disinformation co. (what was that I said about critical thinking again?
"According to occult scientist Terence McKenna, the end of the world as we know it will occur at 11:10 PM, December 22, 2012 and he's worked out a computer model based on an intuitive decoding of the I Ching to prove it mathematically. Before you scoff at McKenna's claims, bear in mind that the ancient Mayan calendar, a calendar accurate to within MINUTES for THOUSANDS of years ends at precisely the same time... But McKenna is no mere doomsday prophet and once you've been exposed to the psychedelic mindscape of the man referred to as 'the Timothy Leary of the Nineties' (by Leary himself!), your worldview may never be the same ever again...."
No. It means that the Incas invented the Internet, but I think that Al Gore invented the Incas, who in turn created the Internet. The SCO came along and they claim that they invented Al Gore. I don't get it either, don't worry.
Yup. Bottom line: people need to learn critical thinking skills. I think everyone should be required to pass at least one college-level critical thinking class.
/.. There's always more than a few people out there to cry "bullshit" when it's warranted. We don't believe everything we see on TV, and we don't believe everything we see on the Net.
You need a bullshit detector, and that's what critical thinking skills provide for you.
You also need a healthy dose of skepticism. Most of us Slashdotters (well, the non-posers anyway) are the people who have lived the online experience before it became commercialized. We almost inherently KNOW to look at things skeptically. Look at every article on
But that's one of the inherent problems in American society. It was on TV, so it must be true! That's transforming into "I saw it on the Net, therefore it must be true!"
For every piece of truth you'll find on the Net, you'll find at least two pieces of complete, total utter bullshit. It's up to the reader to decide for him/herself what's truth and what's just something some idiot is spouting out off about he either doesn't understand -- or worse -- that he does understand but is trying to manipulate you into agreeing with him or even worse giving him money.
Don't buy it. Wear your bullshit detector. And if you don't have one get one. I highly recommend Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking by Browne and Keeley. It was the text I used in college, and is still used in many, many college critical thinking classes.
When I first read your article, I thought: hydrogen hydroxide? That's very familiar ... almost like ... WATER! Oh yeah. It's early yet. :)
Only when the moderators aren't on crack.
The purpose of the tax cuts as stated by the Bush administration was to provide a part of an economic stimulus package. Basically, its purpose was the improve the economy. It was predicted at the time of its passage that the economy would likely pick up in the second half of the year. Well, it's June, and there are signs of an economic recovery now.
How much of that is due to the tax cuts and how much of that is due to a return from uncertain times regarding war and such is uncertain. Overall, I'd have to say it's a little of both probably. The problem is that the economy in our country is mostly based on consumer spending (whether that be on goods, services, or homes or what have you), and on the commodities markets and consumers and commodities traders (stocks, bonds, or actual commodities such as gold, coffee, oil, etc) are so fickle that determining why the economy does what it does is a rather subjective and very complex process. There are so many different variables that it's difficult to give 100% credit to the Bush administration -- or any part of government, really. But, IMHO, much of the credit for the currently in-progress economic recovery can be laid on both Bush's tax cuts and on a return to less turbulent times.
Of course, this doesn't it the slightest bit alter rather negative view of the Bush administration, in light of the civil liberties that they have taken away from me, or in light of their rather poor handling of foreign policy thus far.
I don't think it was Bush's intention to keep the dot-coms down. Bush *did* contribute problems to an already hurting economy by creating uncertainty with this wars. But I don't think that his intentions were to keep dot-coms down.
As far as the outdated web servers goes, I'm sure this has more to do with budget cuts then anything else. Bush slashed spending and the last thing that's going to get updated are the Web servers. You have to put your money into your actual program (whatever that is -- be it Social Security, welfare, housing, military, infrastructure, whatever) before you can put it into niceties like a Web server. And with all the problems we have as a nation, I'd rather the money be spent on actual programs that on Web sites to that do little more than educated the public. Clearly housing the homeless or feeding the hungry are more important goals than having a Web server talking about housing the homeless or feeding the hungry. Make sense?
Right. Aliens created SARS. That's the whole problem. They're taking over by infecting our society with it. Pretty soon, we'll all be one of them.
The picture was going to change with B2C, but the boom has collapsed saddenly, and then all investors have frozen their money waiting when Mr. President will finally all his wars he's planned. I guess once he's doneand investors are back then B2C will take it's second chance and then we'll finally see more and more infomration services about resources directly not related to internet nor to computer industry.
;), but I also can say with absolute certainty that the dot-com crash had little, if anything, to do with the Bush administration. It was already well on it's way to crashing before Bush took the White House.
You're kidding, right? You don't *really* think that the dot-com crash had something to do with Bush do you?
Now, I'm no big Bush supported (well, a different kind of big bush, but that's a different story
The dot-com crash came about mostly because people were being disingenious about an Internet-based economy. Various people in these dot-com startups were going around thinking they could run a business by selling a product for less than it cost them to produce. Any 1st year business school student (heck, any 1st grader even!) could tell you that you can't make money doing that. It's ludricrous! So the venture capital dried up, the companies went bust, and *big surprise* Wall Street investors pulled all their money out of dot-com stocks.
Little, if anything, had to do with Bush and his wars. Bush and his wars *did* cause a freeze in economic markets, and *did*contribute to an *already* unstable economy (due mostly to the dot-com crash) but it didn't in any sense of the word create the dot-com crash.
Was there ever a COBOL compiler written for the Apple ][ series? I dont' ever remember seeing one. I remember lots of BASIC compilers, a Fortran compiler, a Pascal compiler (not UCSD Pascal, but another system that actually was a compiler), and unless I miss my guess, I think there was an even an educational-use RPG compiler or interpreter for the II+ or //e, but it required that you had an 80 column card. Heh. Remember PR#3? :)
But I don't remember seeing a COBOL compiler. Of course that was many, many years ago and I'm just plain old now, so I probably forgot more about the Apple II than I know now.
Of course, releasing most of their code and then reducing all the stuff they can't publish into a library makes it that much easier to reverse engineer the remaining closed source code. After all, the open source stuff has to make calls to that library, so it should be more obvious what those calls do, at least more so than with a completely closed source driver. I guess it depends on how clear the open source code is.
That being said, the Matrox G-series cards aren't anything to write home to mother about, so I don't expect very many people will be interested in doing the work.
I'm posting this from a Linux box, SCO! Find me! Sue me! I'd love to rip you a new asshole in court! Please!
ahhhh...stupid slashdot...mangled my post.
Take the manged mess of code above to mean If the guy is older than 21 and the girl younger than 18...
Actually, I tend to agree with you However, in the United States there are definite taboos against older men sleeping with females who are younger especially if they are under the age of 18.
;)
I was using the example, even if I don't necessarily agree with it, because it makes my point. Most Americans would automatically say if ((a_female->age age > 21)) then a_male.fucking(a_female) == morally_wrong.
Since you're the only one who seemed to notice that point at all, I'd say my argument was pretty effective.
That being said, there is something to be said for taking advantage of young, naive and impressionable girls, which is morally wrong. Not every 16 year old is very naive and not every case of a 30 year old man fucking a 16-year-old female would necessarily be morally wrong, but in many situations it can be and it all depends on the situation.
Any logical person would agree with this. If a teenager downloads and burns a CD of music, why would he spend $20 on the real thing?
I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that you'll just call me a Slashbot again!
Let's ignore colleges, libraries, and more! Yes, even dialup users freely download music. In a single night, one can grab an entire album.
Most libraries don't allow the installation of peer to peer file sharing clients and in fact have software installed to prevent the saving of downloaded files to disk. Ditto on some college lab computers, although some college lab computers undoubtedly let you save stuff. But realistically they have no mass storage media to facilitate transfer to a different computer other than the LAN they sit on and floppy disk. And colleges have really been cracking down on filesharing on student-owned (and campus-owned) equipment by blocking the ports that P2P clients use.
An entire album on a 56 dialup connection in a night? This I gotta see.
Since when has the RIAA and MPAA dictated your life just by combating illegal downloading of their legally protected works? You mean you don't have control over your life unless you can break the law and steal--yes, steal--valuable music?
Go ahead couch your words with 'legal' and 'illegal'. You know what? Too many people are caught up with the terms 'legal' and 'illegal'. They should more concerned with 'right' and 'wrong.' It's totally LEGAL for me, a 30-year-old man, to sleep with a consenting 16-year-old female in the state of Michigan. Does that make it right? No.
That's the problem with our society. You can stick to doing what's legal, I'll do what's RIGHT.
And, finally, the capper to every Slashbot post involving the government, which is the claim to considering moving to another country, which will of course never pan out.
What do you know about personal motivations? Nothing.
Blame Canada! Blame Canada!
Well, you don't want him to get pulled over do you? :)
I thought this was only for content that's worth more than $5,000? Of course, I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.