Why wouldn't it? From an easy-of-use standpoint, it makes a lot more sense to provide a link to the official website, which would then prompt the user to log in. Unfortunately, because they disabled the links, I wasn't able to use this very basic bullshit test.
Are you kidding? Sorry, but if an industry is obsoleted because of technology, well, tough luck. That's life. You don't see people trying to rescue the horse-and-buggy industry after it got heartlessly wiped out by that pesky "car" thingy. You don't see people getting all "scared" because the US postal service is having trouble competing with email.
Let me put it another way. If you are making money doing something, there is nothing, *nothing*, that gives you the right to continue making money doing whatever it is you're doing. And if the industry you're participating in dries up, that's your problem. You made some money for a while, and now it's time to move on.
Not at all. The grandparent was making the point that defense companies go through a detailed hiring process before allowing someone to work for them, something that no OSS developer has to undergo. And, thus, OSS is less secure.
My point was that this is a non-issue, because the government is not, theoretically, composed of idiots. If they require such a process before a company can begin a contract, they sure as hell won't import OSS software wholesale without going through some sort of code audit. ie, this "deficiency" is OSS software is known, and thus isn't a national security risk.
LOL! You're telling me that you think the government will replace "defense companies [that] have to go through a certain amount of security and background checks" with unverified open source software? Please... if security matters *that* much, the government will either 1) continue to hire secure defense companies or 2) hire a secure defense company to verify the safety of any open source they use.
You do realize that many of those companies who provide 1 year warrantees are providing said warrantee from the date of manufacture, and *not* the date of purchase, right?
The problem is simply this. You are engaging in a form of circular reasoning. "Assuming there is a selective advantage" Well, yes, obviously. But in that case, no need for a sick macaque to start the ball rolling, bipedalism would already be the norm through natural selection.
Umm, there has to be some reason for an individual to begin engaing in a novel activity. They may come across the behaviour naturally through experimentation. Alternatively, there may be some external pressure (say, an illness) which causes them to engage in the behaviour. The point is, at some point, the new behaviour must enter the population. And once it does, the question is, how is it passed down? Through genes? Or socially? For social species, it's probably a combination of both.
And if there isn't a selective advantage to bipedalism,
Then humans wouldn't be bipedal. Clearly, in some circumstances, it is an advantage.
Throughout the animal kingdom there tends to be very strong avoidance instincts when it comes to picking a potential mate who even appears to be slightly sick
Yup, you may be right. Alternatively, once the animal has recovered, it may be that bipedalism provided it some sort of advantage, in which case it's behaviour would be immitated. The point, though, is that bipedalism could just as easily been passed down *socially*, rather than genetically. So your little snipe about lamarckism was just silly and narrow minded.
Ugh, put away your high school biology text book and at least read the damned synopsis.
In social species, behaviours can be passed down through more than just genes. The idea is that the behaviour is *learned* by other community members via immitation. ie, adult monkey begins walking upright (for some reason). Young monkeys note behaviour and immitate.
The process continues (young immitating old, etc), and, assuming there is a selective advantage to bipedalism, individuals who are better adapted to this mode of transportation outcompete their quadrapedal counterparts. Given enough time, bipedalism ends up being the norm.
1) If I purchase a piece of equipment, it is my right as the owner of that equipment to do what I please with it. This includes bashing it with a baseball bat, ripping it apart for it's components, or chipping it.
2) The people who are distributing these games, and the people who are downloading them, are breaking the law. Your average homebrewer is not. Otherwise, why not outlaw the Internet for making distribution of these games possible? Or CD burners for making it possible to play these games? Hell, why not outlaw VCRs for making movie piracy possible?
3) Despite the use of baseball bats in crimes, they are not illegal. Why? Because, like the Internet, CD burners, and VCRs, they have substantial, non-infringing uses. Making "backup copies" of games is, in fact, an excellent example of non-infringing use. I can't tell you how often I've scratched a CD beyond playability. The ability to reburn that CD (whether it be a game, music, etc) is invaluable to many people. And that doesn't include all the other things a modchip can be used for.
I disagree that God controls everything that goes on in the world or the universe.
Interesting. It sounds to me like you don't believe in an omnipotent God. I find this interesting, since I've never heard of a Christian who didn't believe in an omnipotent God...
if you say to yourself you're going to shoot the dog, that's not the same as telling the dog IN A WAY THE DOG UNDERSTANDS COMPLETELY that you will shoot him if he eats it.
What difference does it make. *I knew ahead of time the choice he would make* (since I am, in this example, "God"). So, I knew he would make that choice, despite my warnings, and knowing this, I still put him in this situation and punished him for his "decision". Tell me again, how is this the dog's fault?
Of course, if you don't believe in an omnipotent God, this argument is pointless, anyway.:)
Which brings me around to the root of this discussion... the question was one of "choice". If you don't think God is omnipotent, then clearly, people have choice. However, if God is omnipotent, then there is no true "choice" (from God's perspective), as per my previous argument.
Re:Personally, I would go one step further.
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 1
Oh bullshit. I'm sure there are many Muslim's who would take serious exception to your little assertion. Personally, I'd love to have you point out a real example of this "ridicule" that your average Christian supposedly experiences. AFAIK, they aren't hassled while trying to board a plane or cross the Canada-US border. People don't blame all of Christianity for the acts of people like Timothy McVeigh or your average abortion clinic bomber. In fact, last I checked, the first thing the US did in the wake of the Oklahoma bombing was target, you guessed it, Muslims!
So, sure, Christians get a little ribbing from time to time. They are a pretty large religious majority, here in the west. But they are *hardly* ridiculed or discriminated against.
*sigh* This shouldn't be so hard to understand. Let's assume God created the universe, and then stuck someone in it (let's call this person Adam). So, God had absolute control over every aspect of the Universe, and Adam himself.
Now, God presents Adam with a choice, knowing full well the decision Adam will make. Now, remember, the choice Adam makes is based entirely upon who he is, his experiences, where he is, etc, etc, and all these things are controlled by God. Therefore, because God created everything, and because God knew ahead of time that, by doing things a certain way, Adam would choose a specific path, it can be surmised that God engineered things such that Adam would make a specific choice. IOW, there is no possible way Adam would do anything else except what God chose. Thus, Adam did not truly have a choice... it sure *looked* like he had free will, but in reality, what he would do was a foregone conclusion. God then punished Adam for making a choice that HE ALREADY KNEW HE WOULD MAKE!
Or, to take your dog-and-steak example. I have a steak and a dog, and I say to myself "If that dog eats that steak, I'm going to shoot him". Then, I put the dog in the room with the steak, knowing before hand that that dog will eat the steak. So, if I shoot the dog, is it the dog's fault, or mine?
Umm, why not? Gtk, etc, works great on Linux, SunOS, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc, etc... oh, wait a sec, you didn't realize that there are more platforms than just Linux and Windows?
Well, if it makes you feel better, I consider that post to be one of the more disgusting things I've ever read, and demonstrates a really twisted set of priorities, IMHO...
Hey, I have an idea. Rather than being all clever and attempting to "[convince] him to hire a receptionist", why don't you just tell him what the damn problem is. I mean, honestly... do you understand what workplace communication is? Repeat after me: unless you tell your boss what your problems are, you have no right to bitch about them. And if your boss is worth his salt, he'll listen... anything that causes an increase in productivity without an increase in payroll will be taken seriously.
... capable of acting individually or as a very-long baseline interferometer.
Not possible. Given that you have to align the incoming light paths to a single wavelength accuracy, space-based interferometry at anything but radio frequencies is simply not possible. Heck, interferometry using ground-based scopes is bloody hard, and that's with a physically connected light path!
And I completely and totally disagree. Funny, eh? I'd imagine a lot of Windows users would say that Unix is a pretty miserable environment to work in, too. It's all about what you're used to.
Personally, I love the Squeak UI. The everything-is-an-object metaphor is literally built into the UI. You can inspect any part of the system and play with it as you see fit. Moreover, it has one of the most powerful development environments I've ever encountered. It's really *quite* cool, and if there were enough applications for it, I'd consider using it full time.
But, hey, you say it sucks, so you must be right! Right?
I second this. BNW is an incredible work and, IMHO, should be part of any high school curriculum. It's particularly disturbing as it was written over 70 years ago (1932, to be precise), and yet it's incredibly prescient in many ways. Similarly, 1984 should really be required reading for anyone today... it's depiction of a state permanently at war, and how that war is used to control the populace, is so prescient it's downright disturbing. Just look at Oceania's perpetual wars with Eurasia and Eastasia and compare them with the US's "War on Terror"...
Umm, actually, I would claim that the burden of proof is on *you* to prove that Iraq is substantially *better* off than it was pre-war. After all, shouldn't the aggressor have to justify their actions?
Who said that? Monoculture cannot possibly be the reason *why* IE is so riddled with holes... that doesn't make sense. Code quality has nothing to do with popularity, and I've never seen anyone suggest that.
However, the IE monoculture is one of the reasons why 1) so many live exploits exist for IE (people target it because it's popular) and 2) why an exploit in IE is so damned devastating to the Internet community.
Err, more like intermediate amateur strength, and barely that. GNU Go is, supposedly, in the 8 kyu range (not quite the high kyus, but getting there) on KGS, but any decent amateur player could trounce GNU Go. Heck, Martin Mueller, our local honorary 1p, managed to beat Many Faces of Go (one of the strongest Go AIs out there) with a 29 stone handicap!
The flip side is we have one of the most sophisticated clearing systems in the world. This means things like debit, direct deposit, direct withdrawl, etc, are practically universal (here in Alberta, even little gas stations in the boonies have debit, which is incredibly convenient at times), unlike certain other countries to the south of us. Moreover, because the banks that do exist are quite large, you never have to worry about one of them running out of business. 'course, that's no excuse to crank user fees like the banks have (all in the name of profit, the greedy SOBs), but there are certain advantages to having a handful of large banks, rather than a huge population of small ones.
Incidentally, I don't see the bank market dwindling much more than it has. The government is relatively savvy regarding these issues, and they can't possibly miss the impact on competition that further consolidation would have (heck, all you have to do is look at the results of the big media mergers to the south).
Bah... that's like saying "Using English to Facilitate Monetary Transfers" when describing what a bank teller does. Or "Using Leibniz Notation for Determining the Area Beneath a Curve". XML is simply vehicle for transfering information. It's notation, nothing more. The really interesting thing is the information itself, and how it's being used.
I had the same thing happen to me. It took four friggin' weeks before the ban was lifted. 'course, I emailed Slashdot to ask about it, and after seeing that I was on a banned IP block, they promptly started ignoring my emails.
Slashdot Mirror
Why wouldn't it? From an easy-of-use standpoint, it makes a lot more sense to provide a link to the official website, which would then prompt the user to log in. Unfortunately, because they disabled the links, I wasn't able to use this very basic bullshit test.
Are you kidding? Sorry, but if an industry is obsoleted because of technology, well, tough luck. That's life. You don't see people trying to rescue the horse-and-buggy industry after it got heartlessly wiped out by that pesky "car" thingy. You don't see people getting all "scared" because the US postal service is having trouble competing with email.
Let me put it another way. If you are making money doing something, there is nothing, *nothing*, that gives you the right to continue making money doing whatever it is you're doing. And if the industry you're participating in dries up, that's your problem. You made some money for a while, and now it's time to move on.
Not at all. The grandparent was making the point that defense companies go through a detailed hiring process before allowing someone to work for them, something that no OSS developer has to undergo. And, thus, OSS is less secure.
My point was that this is a non-issue, because the government is not, theoretically, composed of idiots. If they require such a process before a company can begin a contract, they sure as hell won't import OSS software wholesale without going through some sort of code audit. ie, this "deficiency" is OSS software is known, and thus isn't a national security risk.
LOL! You're telling me that you think the government will replace "defense companies [that] have to go through a certain amount of security and background checks" with unverified open source software? Please... if security matters *that* much, the government will either 1) continue to hire secure defense companies or 2) hire a secure defense company to verify the safety of any open source they use.
*sigh* I live in AB... and what you say is true. So very, very true...
You do realize that many of those companies who provide 1 year warrantees are providing said warrantee from the date of manufacture, and *not* the date of purchase, right?
Oh please... there's no way we'd ever allow Arkansas or Texas to join Canada. We have our standards.
The problem is simply this. You are engaging in a form of circular reasoning. "Assuming there is a selective advantage" Well, yes, obviously. But in that case, no need for a sick macaque to start the ball rolling, bipedalism would already be the norm through natural selection.
Umm, there has to be some reason for an individual to begin engaing in a novel activity. They may come across the behaviour naturally through experimentation. Alternatively, there may be some external pressure (say, an illness) which causes them to engage in the behaviour. The point is, at some point, the new behaviour must enter the population. And once it does, the question is, how is it passed down? Through genes? Or socially? For social species, it's probably a combination of both.
And if there isn't a selective advantage to bipedalism,
Then humans wouldn't be bipedal. Clearly, in some circumstances, it is an advantage.
Throughout the animal kingdom there tends to be very strong avoidance instincts when it comes to picking a potential mate who even appears to be slightly sick
Yup, you may be right. Alternatively, once the animal has recovered, it may be that bipedalism provided it some sort of advantage, in which case it's behaviour would be immitated. The point, though, is that bipedalism could just as easily been passed down *socially*, rather than genetically. So your little snipe about lamarckism was just silly and narrow minded.
Ugh, put away your high school biology text book and at least read the damned synopsis.
In social species, behaviours can be passed down through more than just genes. The idea is that the behaviour is *learned* by other community members via immitation. ie, adult monkey begins walking upright (for some reason). Young monkeys note behaviour and immitate.
The process continues (young immitating old, etc), and, assuming there is a selective advantage to bipedalism, individuals who are better adapted to this mode of transportation outcompete their quadrapedal counterparts. Given enough time, bipedalism ends up being the norm.
Okay...
1) If I purchase a piece of equipment, it is my right as the owner of that equipment to do what I please with it. This includes bashing it with a baseball bat, ripping it apart for it's components, or chipping it.
2) The people who are distributing these games, and the people who are downloading them, are breaking the law. Your average homebrewer is not. Otherwise, why not outlaw the Internet for making distribution of these games possible? Or CD burners for making it possible to play these games? Hell, why not outlaw VCRs for making movie piracy possible?
3) Despite the use of baseball bats in crimes, they are not illegal. Why? Because, like the Internet, CD burners, and VCRs, they have substantial, non-infringing uses. Making "backup copies" of games is, in fact, an excellent example of non-infringing use. I can't tell you how often I've scratched a CD beyond playability. The ability to reburn that CD (whether it be a game, music, etc) is invaluable to many people. And that doesn't include all the other things a modchip can be used for.
I disagree that God controls everything that goes on in the world or the universe.
:)
Interesting. It sounds to me like you don't believe in an omnipotent God. I find this interesting, since I've never heard of a Christian who didn't believe in an omnipotent God...
if you say to yourself you're going to shoot the dog, that's not the same as telling the dog IN A WAY THE DOG UNDERSTANDS COMPLETELY that you will shoot him if he eats it.
What difference does it make. *I knew ahead of time the choice he would make* (since I am, in this example, "God"). So, I knew he would make that choice, despite my warnings, and knowing this, I still put him in this situation and punished him for his "decision". Tell me again, how is this the dog's fault?
Of course, if you don't believe in an omnipotent God, this argument is pointless, anyway.
Which brings me around to the root of this discussion... the question was one of "choice". If you don't think God is omnipotent, then clearly, people have choice. However, if God is omnipotent, then there is no true "choice" (from God's perspective), as per my previous argument.
Oh bullshit. I'm sure there are many Muslim's who would take serious exception to your little assertion. Personally, I'd love to have you point out a real example of this "ridicule" that your average Christian supposedly experiences. AFAIK, they aren't hassled while trying to board a plane or cross the Canada-US border. People don't blame all of Christianity for the acts of people like Timothy McVeigh or your average abortion clinic bomber. In fact, last I checked, the first thing the US did in the wake of the Oklahoma bombing was target, you guessed it, Muslims!
So, sure, Christians get a little ribbing from time to time. They are a pretty large religious majority, here in the west. But they are *hardly* ridiculed or discriminated against.
*sigh* This shouldn't be so hard to understand. Let's assume God created the universe, and then stuck someone in it (let's call this person Adam). So, God had absolute control over every aspect of the Universe, and Adam himself.
Now, God presents Adam with a choice, knowing full well the decision Adam will make. Now, remember, the choice Adam makes is based entirely upon who he is, his experiences, where he is, etc, etc, and all these things are controlled by God. Therefore, because God created everything, and because God knew ahead of time that, by doing things a certain way, Adam would choose a specific path, it can be surmised that God engineered things such that Adam would make a specific choice. IOW, there is no possible way Adam would do anything else except what God chose. Thus, Adam did not truly have a choice... it sure *looked* like he had free will, but in reality, what he would do was a foregone conclusion. God then punished Adam for making a choice that HE ALREADY KNEW HE WOULD MAKE!
Or, to take your dog-and-steak example. I have a steak and a dog, and I say to myself "If that dog eats that steak, I'm going to shoot him". Then, I put the dog in the room with the steak, knowing before hand that that dog will eat the steak. So, if I shoot the dog, is it the dog's fault, or mine?
Umm, why not? Gtk, etc, works great on Linux, SunOS, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, etc, etc... oh, wait a sec, you didn't realize that there are more platforms than just Linux and Windows?
Well, if it makes you feel better, I consider that post to be one of the more disgusting things I've ever read, and demonstrates a really twisted set of priorities, IMHO...
Hey, I have an idea. Rather than being all clever and attempting to "[convince] him to hire a receptionist", why don't you just tell him what the damn problem is. I mean, honestly... do you understand what workplace communication is? Repeat after me: unless you tell your boss what your problems are, you have no right to bitch about them. And if your boss is worth his salt, he'll listen... anything that causes an increase in productivity without an increase in payroll will be taken seriously.
... capable of acting individually or as a very-long baseline interferometer.
Not possible. Given that you have to align the incoming light paths to a single wavelength accuracy, space-based interferometry at anything but radio frequencies is simply not possible. Heck, interferometry using ground-based scopes is bloody hard, and that's with a physically connected light path!
And I completely and totally disagree. Funny, eh? I'd imagine a lot of Windows users would say that Unix is a pretty miserable environment to work in, too. It's all about what you're used to.
Personally, I love the Squeak UI. The everything-is-an-object metaphor is literally built into the UI. You can inspect any part of the system and play with it as you see fit. Moreover, it has one of the most powerful development environments I've ever encountered. It's really *quite* cool, and if there were enough applications for it, I'd consider using it full time.
But, hey, you say it sucks, so you must be right! Right?
I second this. BNW is an incredible work and, IMHO, should be part of any high school curriculum. It's particularly disturbing as it was written over 70 years ago (1932, to be precise), and yet it's incredibly prescient in many ways. Similarly, 1984 should really be required reading for anyone today... it's depiction of a state permanently at war, and how that war is used to control the populace, is so prescient it's downright disturbing. Just look at Oceania's perpetual wars with Eurasia and Eastasia and compare them with the US's "War on Terror"...
Umm, actually, I would claim that the burden of proof is on *you* to prove that Iraq is substantially *better* off than it was pre-war. After all, shouldn't the aggressor have to justify their actions?
Who said that? Monoculture cannot possibly be the reason *why* IE is so riddled with holes... that doesn't make sense. Code quality has nothing to do with popularity, and I've never seen anyone suggest that.
However, the IE monoculture is one of the reasons why 1) so many live exploits exist for IE (people target it because it's popular) and 2) why an exploit in IE is so damned devastating to the Internet community.
So, please, take your straw man and go home.
Err, more like intermediate amateur strength, and barely that. GNU Go is, supposedly, in the 8 kyu range (not quite the high kyus, but getting there) on KGS, but any decent amateur player could trounce GNU Go. Heck, Martin Mueller, our local honorary 1p, managed to beat Many Faces of Go (one of the strongest Go AIs out there) with a 29 stone handicap!
The flip side is we have one of the most sophisticated clearing systems in the world. This means things like debit, direct deposit, direct withdrawl, etc, are practically universal (here in Alberta, even little gas stations in the boonies have debit, which is incredibly convenient at times), unlike certain other countries to the south of us. Moreover, because the banks that do exist are quite large, you never have to worry about one of them running out of business. 'course, that's no excuse to crank user fees like the banks have (all in the name of profit, the greedy SOBs), but there are certain advantages to having a handful of large banks, rather than a huge population of small ones.
Incidentally, I don't see the bank market dwindling much more than it has. The government is relatively savvy regarding these issues, and they can't possibly miss the impact on competition that further consolidation would have (heck, all you have to do is look at the results of the big media mergers to the south).
Bah... that's like saying "Using English to Facilitate Monetary Transfers" when describing what a bank teller does. Or "Using Leibniz Notation for Determining the Area Beneath a Curve". XML is simply vehicle for transfering information. It's notation, nothing more. The really interesting thing is the information itself, and how it's being used.
I had the same thing happen to me. It took four friggin' weeks before the ban was lifted. 'course, I emailed Slashdot to ask about it, and after seeing that I was on a banned IP block, they promptly started ignoring my emails.