Care to take on any of Sean's other points? Or are you just going to dig in with both feet and refocus the thread on WAR and KILLING.
How about taking on the serious points, about the trillions spent on the deficit interest? Remember, we went into debt because of Reaganomics and "winning" the Cold War. Now as we all know, when you owe money, you pay interest to someone. So who do you think reaps the billions of dollars in interest our government pays yearly on our debt?
'publicans love to thrash about hypothetic wars, probably because the real issues are out of the mental reach.
"They eat it up," said Matthew Rothenberg, an editor at Ziff Davis and a longtime Apple watcher. "It's like a B&D (bondage and dominance) relationship. There needs to a psychosexual analysis of the Mac community."
There's some merit to this: thinking back, just about all of the Mac using women I've dated were serious SM freaks. Of course, they happened to be artistically-inclined pierced, tatooed gothy punks, but that in itself is an odd correlation.
A joke, but typical of how religion deals with science: once science topples a divine bastion, religion is quick to come up with another one.
- First they promoted the flat earth
- Then they promoted the Terra-centric planetary system.
- Then they promoted the young earth theory.*
- Then they denied evolution.**
- Then they said only god could make life.
- Now they say only god can make dirt.
Religion will always be able to regroup and criticize, without offering anything other than mircales and mythology. Remember how the Democrats lost this mid-term, by criticizing with no real substance? So will science eventually obviate the need for all creationist religions by eventually leaving religion with so little ground to stand on, no one will take it's claims seriously!
As an athiest, and IMHO, the only "religions" science won't dismantle are the Theravada Buddhists and Confuscists, because they don't make such gross claims.
* (There's a childrens book for Christians that claims t-rex's teeth were used for cracking nuts, and that they got along with men before original sin.)
** (Of course, finches and antibiotics put this to rest. Fortunately the Roman Catholics were smart enough to reverse course up to this point, just look at rights of ordainment, revised in 1987.)
Well, since you asked for advice on raising your kids:
Move them off the screen altogether.
Nothing is going to promote the development of bad O/S interfaces more than indoctrinating young children to their quirks and bad design.
Why not encourage books and hands-on creative outlets rather than computer screens? Do you think they really need to learn about computers at age 3 and 7? Maybe the 11 year old, but I shudder to think you would try to teach your kids ANY OS at such a young age.
Let them enjoy life for awhile before they have to deal with an OS.
If I had your job, I would find it nearly impossible to resist sending back an email like, "You're right! It's all a hoax! Send help, I'm trapped in here by aliens and their about to colonize the planet!"... just to fuck with em.
i guess it works if i happen to be a fan of brittney spears, shakira, blink-182 or what other crapstar of the moment the RIAA happens to be hawking. too bad.
it sure would be nice to put together a frontline assembly mix without all those damned remixes! (damn you bill leeb, and your little sequencer too!!!)
How many people point to this rant repeatedly as justification for throwing garbage out their car windows?
Sad thing is, most people would buy Carlin's sarcasm than science, just like when Sideshow Bob debated Quimby.
Why are there so many environmentalists on the coasts as opposed to the midwest? Here's a reason: many of us have grown up only to see signs everwhere that say, "Don't eat the shelfish" in our favorite mussel marsh, or "Non potable water" signs on our favorite childhood freshwater springs.
So despite Carlin's rant, we can save the planet. We can save it by nailing the fuckers to the wall who dumped PCBs for 50 years in streams in Pensylvania so that the water burned and the fish lost their skins and bled to death. We can save it by making CEOs live in the neighborhoods they shit on. We can save it by buying less shit we don't need, and buying eco-groovy products that use less packaging. We can save it by carpooling, or buying normal fuel efficient cars (and not hybrids or electro-boxes, something like a Volkswagon GTI).
It's the slightest effort on our behalf to make a difference, the problem is people take Carlin seriously and say, "yeah, fuck it, I'll do what I want..."
Internet addressing giant VeriSign Inc., which operates the most important server from an undisclosed Northern Virginia location, reported no outages.
Does Cheney play QIII on it?;-)
Seriously, I know squat about what goes on outside the biege box, but should we be scared about this?
I mean, if I were a terrorist and read this, I'd immediately start salivating and try to find out as much about Verisign as possible -- everything from employee car rentals and hotel rentals to phone calls, merchandise, shopping... id do everything in my power to find the 'undisclosed location'. Is this another weakness that hasn't truly been protected yet?
Is that the same power4 that uses 1.5 kW? (Yes, that's 1500 W of power.) Hmmm... I'll believe there is competition to Intel when I actually see it in action. We're all still waiting on the Power4...
... large number of programming situations which would not benefit at all... Also, critical path code that's not multimedia based would be wise not to use SSE/MMX.... significantly longer to execute the prolog/epilog...
My point is -- What FPU code is there that isn't mission critical and couldn't benefit from conversion to SSE? And if it's not critical path, then why did the author suggest overhauling the architecture for a performance boost on legacy code?
LOL! This is what happenes when a software guy tries to wear a hardware guy's hat! As if an array of pointers is "revolutionary".
He doesn't even address his own concern -- speeding up legacy x86 code. Everyone writing performance assembly code uses SSE/MMX. Critical path code is hardly ever written in legacy x86. In fact, most compilers are smart enough to do the conversion for you (MSVC, ipp) even without intrinsics.
What does he suggest? Offer extra instructions! Hello. Does this guy actually write any code ever? It doesn't sound like it.
ok, so the article claims the cabbagey plant can absorb aresenic into its leaves, and then the plant can be disposed of. How? Isn't that how arsenic got there in the first place?
I suppose they would seal it into steel drums, or maybe bury it, but then you end up with a giant pile of supertoxic waste instead of minute amounts of it all over.
X86 is just inefficient, and that causes CPU power consumption to go up.
That statement is wrong on both counts.
CISC and VLIW can be far more power efficient than RISC because the large instruction is executed with special hardware, rather than emulated by lots of little RISC instructions.
Power in the architecture goes up when you try to get fancier and fancier with caching, prediction, and parallel execution to get the most out of any instruction set.
Crusoe get's its power gains (or losses) from slowing itself down or sleeping alot. Crusoe is also lower power because it sacrifices a lot of performance. But this point was beaten to death years ago.
Yes, at the symatic level I suppose I was being circular.
I should have said, "Evolution is the ONLY theory that explains how something like this beetle could have come into existence."
In fact, I should have added "...best fits the data that explains...", see below.
Of course, there are many theories, Creationism being one of them, along with some weird ones, like the pre-Mendelian theory that the the sperm contained a completely formed person (a homonculous), or the that strange African theory that all creation is the result of ant dung or something wacky.
But evolution fits the data best, without using miracles (which is why Creationism doesn't fly as an alternate theory).
some people bashed/. for posting this, but i think it comes at a perfect time. first, because of the recent ruling in georgia, and second, because it's always good to have a refresher of what evolution IS. lots of good posts clearing up the myth that it is just random deformed offspring superceding their parents.
i also want to point out to any highschool kids that even HS texts can get it wrong. i recall in highschool learning that man evolved from chimps, which is totally wrong! now today i know that the book MEANT to say man and chimps shared a common ancestor which was chimp-and-human-like, and we diverged 5 million years ago. just wanted to point out that even with a century old science, textbooks can still blow it! check out this page for more fun fuckups in school texts.
No, no extra fingers. We've already diverged from the space that led to digits we started with (fins). If anything, we will lose fingers -- maybe elongated middle fingers and no pinkies... or maybe the index finger serving more of a thumblike purpose.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey Mr. Freedom,
Care to take on any of Sean's other points? Or are you just going to dig in with both feet and refocus the thread on WAR and KILLING.
How about taking on the serious points, about the trillions spent on the deficit interest? Remember, we went into debt because of Reaganomics and "winning" the Cold War. Now as we all know, when you owe money, you pay interest to someone. So who do you think reaps the billions of dollars in interest our government pays yearly on our debt?
'publicans love to thrash about hypothetic wars, probably because the real issues are out of the mental reach.
"They eat it up," said Matthew Rothenberg, an editor at Ziff Davis and a longtime Apple watcher. "It's like a B&D (bondage and dominance) relationship. There needs to a psychosexual analysis of the Mac community."
There's some merit to this: thinking back, just about all of the Mac using women I've dated were serious SM freaks. Of course, they happened to be artistically-inclined pierced, tatooed gothy punks, but that in itself is an odd correlation.
Any testimonials out there?
Um, re-read my post, I say exactly what you did, and I give examples.
There were 24 CG scenes in Demi Moore's "Showgirls".
CG appears in far more movies than you would ever expect.
If anyone came close to turning it into a religious rant (or anti,in your case), it was you
Apparently I see a much different subtext than yourself. Why did you get so defensive?
(and not WINE, i'm talking something straight from MS, like OS X.x)
A joke, but typical of how religion deals with science: once science topples a divine bastion, religion is quick to come up with another one.
- First they promoted the flat earth
- Then they promoted the Terra-centric planetary system.
- Then they promoted the young earth theory.*
- Then they denied evolution.**
- Then they said only god could make life.
- Now they say only god can make dirt.
Religion will always be able to regroup and criticize, without offering anything other than mircales and mythology. Remember how the Democrats lost this mid-term, by criticizing with no real substance? So will science eventually obviate the need for all creationist religions by eventually leaving religion with so little ground to stand on, no one will take it's claims seriously!
As an athiest, and IMHO, the only "religions" science won't dismantle are the Theravada Buddhists and Confuscists, because they don't make such gross claims.
* (There's a childrens book for Christians that claims t-rex's teeth were used for cracking nuts, and that they got along with men before original sin.)
** (Of course, finches and antibiotics put this to rest. Fortunately the Roman Catholics were smart enough to reverse course up to this point, just look at rights of ordainment, revised in 1987.)
Well, since you asked for advice on raising your kids:
Move them off the screen altogether.
Nothing is going to promote the development of bad O/S interfaces more than indoctrinating young children to their quirks and bad design.
Why not encourage books and hands-on creative outlets rather than computer screens? Do you think they really need to learn about computers at age 3 and 7? Maybe the 11 year old, but I shudder to think you would try to teach your kids ANY OS at such a young age.
Let them enjoy life for awhile before they have to deal with an OS.
If I had your job, I would find it nearly impossible to resist sending back an email like, "You're right! It's all a hoax! Send help, I'm trapped in here by aliens and their about to colonize the planet!" ... just to fuck with em.
i guess it works if i happen to be a fan of brittney spears, shakira, blink-182 or what other crapstar of the moment the RIAA happens to be hawking. too bad.
it sure would be nice to put together a frontline assembly mix without all those damned remixes! (damn you bill leeb, and your little sequencer too!!!)
We're just trying to save things for us.
right right.
to continue carlin's quote, paraphrased from memory:
"...ask the people frozen in ash in Pompeii if they feel like a threat to the planet this week..."
Carlin is funny, but not right.
How many people point to this rant repeatedly as justification for throwing garbage out their car windows?
Sad thing is, most people would buy Carlin's sarcasm than science, just like when Sideshow Bob debated Quimby.
Why are there so many environmentalists on the coasts as opposed to the midwest? Here's a reason: many of us have grown up only to see signs everwhere that say, "Don't eat the shelfish" in our favorite mussel marsh, or "Non potable water" signs on our favorite childhood freshwater springs.
So despite Carlin's rant, we can save the planet. We can save it by nailing the fuckers to the wall who dumped PCBs for 50 years in streams in Pensylvania so that the water burned and the fish lost their skins and bled to death. We can save it by making CEOs live in the neighborhoods they shit on. We can save it by buying less shit we don't need, and buying eco-groovy products that use less packaging. We can save it by carpooling, or buying normal fuel efficient cars (and not hybrids or electro-boxes, something like a Volkswagon GTI).
It's the slightest effort on our behalf to make a difference, the problem is people take Carlin seriously and say, "yeah, fuck it, I'll do what I want..."
Sad.
Internet addressing giant VeriSign Inc., which operates the most important server from an undisclosed Northern Virginia location, reported no outages.
;-)
Does Cheney play QIII on it?
Seriously, I know squat about what goes on outside the biege box, but should we be scared about this?
I mean, if I were a terrorist and read this, I'd immediately start salivating and try to find out as much about Verisign as possible -- everything from employee car rentals and hotel rentals to phone calls, merchandise, shopping... id do everything in my power to find the 'undisclosed location'. Is this another weakness that hasn't truly been protected yet?
Is that the same power4 that uses 1.5 kW? (Yes, that's 1500 W of power.) Hmmm... I'll believe there is competition to Intel when I actually see it in action. We're all still waiting on the Power4...
My point is -- What FPU code is there that isn't mission critical and couldn't benefit from conversion to SSE? And if it's not critical path, then why did the author suggest overhauling the architecture for a performance boost on legacy code?
LOL! This is what happenes when a software guy tries to wear a hardware guy's hat! As if an array of pointers is "revolutionary".
He doesn't even address his own concern -- speeding up legacy x86 code. Everyone writing performance assembly code uses SSE/MMX. Critical path code is hardly ever written in legacy x86. In fact, most compilers are smart enough to do the conversion for you (MSVC, ipp) even without intrinsics.
What does he suggest? Offer extra instructions! Hello. Does this guy actually write any code ever? It doesn't sound like it.
ok, so the article claims the cabbagey plant can absorb aresenic into its leaves, and then the plant can be disposed of. How? Isn't that how arsenic got there in the first place?
I suppose they would seal it into steel drums, or maybe bury it, but then you end up with a giant pile of supertoxic waste instead of minute amounts of it all over.
i dooon't get it.
odd that the page cited in the post, and almost all of the subsequent reference pages all come from conservative news sources. hmmm...
X86 is just inefficient, and that causes CPU power consumption to go up.
That statement is wrong on both counts.
CISC and VLIW can be far more power efficient than RISC because the large instruction is executed with special hardware, rather than emulated by lots of little RISC instructions.
Power in the architecture goes up when you try to get fancier and fancier with caching, prediction, and parallel execution to get the most out of any instruction set.
Crusoe get's its power gains (or losses) from slowing itself down or sleeping alot. Crusoe is also lower power because it sacrifices a lot of performance. But this point was beaten to death years ago.
how the hell else am i supposed to stay up writing all this Darwin code without a dime of crystal?
oh
was john always that portly? looks like the nerd lifestyle has caught up (i saw him in 1995 and he was a rail). i'm so OT.
Yes, at the symatic level I suppose I was being circular.
I should have said, "Evolution is the ONLY theory that explains how something like this beetle could have come into existence."
In fact, I should have added "...best fits the data that explains...", see below.
Of course, there are many theories, Creationism being one of them, along with some weird ones, like the pre-Mendelian theory that the the sperm contained a completely formed person (a homonculous), or the that strange African theory that all creation is the result of ant dung or something wacky.
But evolution fits the data best, without using miracles (which is why Creationism doesn't fly as an alternate theory).
some people bashed /. for posting this, but i think it comes at a perfect time. first, because of the recent ruling in georgia, and second, because it's always good to have a refresher of what evolution IS. lots of good posts clearing up the myth that it is just random deformed offspring superceding their parents.
i also want to point out to any highschool kids that even HS texts can get it wrong. i recall in highschool learning that man evolved from chimps, which is totally wrong! now today i know that the book MEANT to say man and chimps shared a common ancestor which was chimp-and-human-like, and we diverged 5 million years ago. just wanted to point out that even with a century old science, textbooks can still blow it! check out this page for more fun fuckups in school texts.
Science Hobbyist Misconceptions
Exactly! Mod the parent post up.
Key point ==> is Evolution is the ONLY theory that explains how something like this beetle could have evolved.
Every other theory requires a miracle, and when you have miracles on your side, you can prove anything.
No, no extra fingers. We've already diverged from the space that led to digits we started with (fins). If anything, we will lose fingers -- maybe elongated middle fingers and no pinkies... or maybe the index finger serving more of a thumblike purpose.