Oh, please. It wasn't a bad movie. It was neither necessary for Tron to have a sequel nor was it a great or even good movie but it wasn't a bad film. It was mediocre with good visuals and decent cinematography.
if you like shiny things that go boom but are meaningless, then i guess i can't knock you for liking the "film", not the "movie", as you put it.
I kinda dig it. I'm keeping it turned on because (a) I like to see a history of where i've been, it's like a photo album of sorts, and (b) if it turns out I do get screwed on a privacy issue, it'll be a great historic lawsuit!
The fact you actually PAID to go see Tron Legacy, giving it a chance knowing full well what it was about, who starred in it, and even seeing previews, is an insult to intellect.
That's some great all-or-nothing logic that really gets in the way of working on the problem. I'm guessing you're a programmer, not an engineer. And probably just scripting languages. Am I right?
"Correlation is not causation." Congratulations, you took statistics 101 just like everyone else! Gold star!
Now, to actually apply what you learned (or didn't) rather than just fiddling with units until an answer falls out, the poster you are commenting on DID NOT DO THAT! The author set out to find evidence of correlation, not prove causation, to support a hypothesis (or null-hypothesis in his case).
See, that's the difference between mindlessly reciting something you read on a newsgroup, and actually understanding the words coming out of your mouth.
Did you not even read the post you're quoting? Author gave a perfectly good, rational, reasonable response. I'll agree that he/she got a little too personal at the end, but I can understand the outrage, especially given the utterly complete and measurable ignorance you have just demonstrated.
...aaaaand that's exactly why Linux fails at all things related to the end-user experience. you forget a few hundred thousand eggheads with liquid cooled mult-cpu neon-glowing pc's and staggering superiority complexes aren't what most people have in mind as "end users", right?
Try not flushing your toilet for a month and let me know if you have an insignificant impact on a closed system.
Why would I want to do that? It's not an intended use of the toilet. Further, it's not a closed system, being tied to both water and sewage systems. So you're telling me to use a component of a much larger system inappropriately. Again why?
Because it is an example of a key flaw in your contingency plan. I can easily expand your rebuttal to how you plan to use the earth.
I understand your near-troll pragmatism, but tell me one thing: when do you draw the line? Your claim is that there's plenty of space to run to if shit ever gets bad. So on our way there, if it happens: how much do you think we can pollute, develop, deforest, bury, produce, etc?
We can do a hell of a lot with that activity. Develop an interplanetary civilization, true AI, indefinite longevity, the "post scarcity" society, for starters. On my list, the goal of "preserving a planet resembling the one on which civilization developed" is pretty far down. Environmental activities should only be pursued if they make sense and further goals that we hold as a society.
You totally dodged my point and redirected, which means you're only one~two steps deep in your thought process about this.
I was hoping you had thought this out better because I'm still refining my attitude and you seemed pretty close to what's in my head, but dodging how to mitigate endless pollution and instead redirecting to "interplanetary civilization" and "true AI" is as idealistic woo-woo bullshit as hippies praying to sun goddess to save the earth.
My point is: a problem solving philosophy that summarizes as "I'll just run to the hills" is extremely poorly thought out and is a waste of the intellect you've put forward in some of your other statements.
The last two paragraphs about modern environmentalism creating more problems (and bogus rituals) than it is solving, I completely agree with. However, I wouldn't generalize here either: I think some of the rituals (like the endangered speciest list) are very, very important proxies to fight other more serious battles; just like how pushing a pawn can defeat the best laid strategy, the ESA allows us to assert pressure on other areas (mountaintop removal, for example).
Try not flushing your toilet for a month and let me know if you have an insignificant impact on a closed system.
I understand your near-troll pragmatism, but tell me one thing: when do you draw the line? Your claim is that there's plenty of space to run to if shit ever gets bad. So on our way there, if it happens: how much do you think we can pollute, develop, deforest, bury, produce, etc?
And keep in mind that our highly sophisticated means of production creates plastic products with life expectancies of thousands of years.
Could Assange be a pre-emptive plant by the higher ups to deflect attention onto sacrificial targets in various arenas? What if the list is just a subset to take the scrutiny off of the bigger criminals, and the latter goes undetected/unpunished? Maybe he's a plant so that they can ferret out anonymous sources that run to him with secrets?
I type outrageously fast, english or code. However, about 25 to 66% of my keystrokes are wrong and need to be corrected.
I think that is common, but it is important (to me, anyway) to get the idea out of my brain and on paper AS FAST AS POSSIBLE before the thought leaves me. Can always correct later, but I can't always remember a great idea.
First, you clearly don't understand the difference between gender and sex. The "genders" do deserve to be treated equally, the "sexes" are biologically not equal, and no sane person claims contrary to the latter. Second, educate yourself rather than hiding behind phoney cliches invented by impotent white conservative Christian men who are threatened by anything not like themselves.
It is unlikely you could run this CPU at 1 MHz. Some circuitry (domino logic, for example), has a minimum frequency of operation, most likely around -10% of the labeled frequency. So 1000x slower probably wouldn't work on any bleeding-edge CPU from the past 15 years.
back me up here, but i could have sworn there were a boatload of studies in the 90's claiming nicotine was more addictive than heroin. was that true or am i just high on desk cleaner?
But if I turned it back to portrait, it mysteriously worked because the bounding rectangle for the screen was now taller, not wider. That took more than a few minutes to find.
He's an app developer for mobile, but doesn't have the forethought to code for variable display sizes? rtard.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, please. It wasn't a bad movie. It was neither necessary for Tron to have a sequel nor was it a great or even good movie but it wasn't a bad film. It was mediocre with good visuals and decent cinematography.
if you like shiny things that go boom but are meaningless, then i guess i can't knock you for liking the "film", not the "movie", as you put it.
At no point did I knock chiropractic.
Slept through English class, did we? -10pts for awful reading comprehension.
only at speeds over 25mph
power and heat are the same thing
Actually, that -IS- the placebo effect. The neuromuscular release can be tied to the belief in the adjustment.
I kinda dig it. I'm keeping it turned on because (a) I like to see a history of where i've been, it's like a photo album of sorts, and (b) if it turns out I do get screwed on a privacy issue, it'll be a great historic lawsuit!
The fact you actually PAID to go see Tron Legacy, giving it a chance knowing full well what it was about, who starred in it, and even seeing previews, is an insult to intellect.
That's some great all-or-nothing logic that really gets in the way of working on the problem. I'm guessing you're a programmer, not an engineer. And probably just scripting languages. Am I right?
"Correlation is not causation." Congratulations, you took statistics 101 just like everyone else! Gold star!
Now, to actually apply what you learned (or didn't) rather than just fiddling with units until an answer falls out, the poster you are commenting on DID NOT DO THAT! The author set out to find evidence of correlation, not prove causation, to support a hypothesis (or null-hypothesis in his case).
See, that's the difference between mindlessly reciting something you read on a newsgroup, and actually understanding the words coming out of your mouth.
Did you not even read the post you're quoting? Author gave a perfectly good, rational, reasonable response. I'll agree that he/she got a little too personal at the end, but I can understand the outrage, especially given the utterly complete and measurable ignorance you have just demonstrated.
...aaaaand that's exactly why Linux fails at all things related to the end-user experience. you forget a few hundred thousand eggheads with liquid cooled mult-cpu neon-glowing pc's and staggering superiority complexes aren't what most people have in mind as "end users", right?
Try not flushing your toilet for a month and let me know if you have an insignificant impact on a closed system.
Why would I want to do that? It's not an intended use of the toilet. Further, it's not a closed system, being tied to both water and sewage systems. So you're telling me to use a component of a much larger system inappropriately. Again why?
Because it is an example of a key flaw in your contingency plan. I can easily expand your rebuttal to how you plan to use the earth.
I understand your near-troll pragmatism, but tell me one thing: when do you draw the line? Your claim is that there's plenty of space to run to if shit ever gets bad. So on our way there, if it happens: how much do you think we can pollute, develop, deforest, bury, produce, etc?
We can do a hell of a lot with that activity. Develop an interplanetary civilization, true AI, indefinite longevity, the "post scarcity" society, for starters. On my list, the goal of "preserving a planet resembling the one on which civilization developed" is pretty far down. Environmental activities should only be pursued if they make sense and further goals that we hold as a society.
You totally dodged my point and redirected, which means you're only one~two steps deep in your thought process about this.
I was hoping you had thought this out better because I'm still refining my attitude and you seemed pretty close to what's in my head, but dodging how to mitigate endless pollution and instead redirecting to "interplanetary civilization" and "true AI" is as idealistic woo-woo bullshit as hippies praying to sun goddess to save the earth.
My point is: a problem solving philosophy that summarizes as "I'll just run to the hills" is extremely poorly thought out and is a waste of the intellect you've put forward in some of your other statements.
The last two paragraphs about modern environmentalism creating more problems (and bogus rituals) than it is solving, I completely agree with. However, I wouldn't generalize here either: I think some of the rituals (like the endangered speciest list) are very, very important proxies to fight other more serious battles; just like how pushing a pawn can defeat the best laid strategy, the ESA allows us to assert pressure on other areas (mountaintop removal, for example).
Hey Khallow,
Try not flushing your toilet for a month and let me know if you have an insignificant impact on a closed system.
I understand your near-troll pragmatism, but tell me one thing: when do you draw the line? Your claim is that there's plenty of space to run to if shit ever gets bad. So on our way there, if it happens: how much do you think we can pollute, develop, deforest, bury, produce, etc?
And keep in mind that our highly sophisticated means of production creates plastic products with life expectancies of thousands of years.
S
Could Assange be a pre-emptive plant by the higher ups to deflect attention onto sacrificial targets in various arenas? What if the list is just a subset to take the scrutiny off of the bigger criminals, and the latter goes undetected/unpunished? Maybe he's a plant so that they can ferret out anonymous sources that run to him with secrets?
Hmmm...
I type outrageously fast, english or code. However, about 25 to 66% of my keystrokes are wrong and need to be corrected.
I think that is common, but it is important (to me, anyway) to get the idea out of my brain and on paper AS FAST AS POSSIBLE before the thought leaves me. Can always correct later, but I can't always remember a great idea.
First, you clearly don't understand the difference between gender and sex. The "genders" do deserve to be treated equally, the "sexes" are biologically not equal, and no sane person claims contrary to the latter. Second, educate yourself rather than hiding behind phoney cliches invented by impotent white conservative Christian men who are threatened by anything not like themselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_equality
Seems like you need to read the /. post from a few days ago about the link between fertility and cell phones...
It is unlikely you could run this CPU at 1 MHz. Some circuitry (domino logic, for example), has a minimum frequency of operation, most likely around -10% of the labeled frequency. So 1000x slower probably wouldn't work on any bleeding-edge CPU from the past 15 years.
ah yes: the hobbyist/enthusiast market. let me see, that makes up, oh 1% of the market?
good business strategy.
back me up here, but i could have sworn there were a boatload of studies in the 90's claiming nicotine was more addictive than heroin. was that true or am i just high on desk cleaner?
But if I turned it back to portrait, it mysteriously worked because the bounding rectangle for the screen was now taller, not wider. That took more than a few minutes to find.
He's an app developer for mobile, but doesn't have the forethought to code for variable display sizes? rtard.
wow, almost 15 years later and they still get sh*t for fdiv. of course, this joke is so stale we'll probably hear it on jay leno tonight.
"Facebook's application for a default judgment against Wallace for violating the Can-Spam Act"
Cool new app!
I crack myself up.
FTA :
"It won't work for exploiting the bug for software written with the WIN32 api, they don't accept (for good
reason) *!"
Como?
You must mean that 3d technology that doesn't exist (at mass production scale) yet?
Who is daydreaming again? LOL!
And who do you suspect is going to invest $10B+ in fabs to make this technology?
LOL!