I don't know if I'm a nerd like us any more. I mean, I have an obsessive knowledge of trilobite fossils, and given a random sentence from any of the Harry Potter books I can tell what book and chapter it is from, but I don't feel like I belong with these kinds of people. What's left for me? What am I? How did pop-culture steal my identity?
Isn't sudoku extraordinarily easy for a computer? I think it would be more interesting to investigate human problem solving strategies in opposite scenarios, games that humans are really good at but that are nearly intractable for computers.
Who is the best arguer? Who is the best detective? Who is the best doctor? Who is the best programmer? The very nature of being a knowledge worker is that if you are the best you can get your way in spite of reality.
which got me thinking, I guess Darth is a title but Vader isn't, so it would be analogous to say, "the King James", which makes sense only in reference to the King James Version of the bible. Does this mean there is a Darth Vader version of badly translated Sith teachings? If so, why am I reading this shittily written article summary instead of that?
relevant part: "Humans cannot perceive UV light directly since the lens of the eye blocks most light in the wavelength range of 300-400 nm; shorter wavelengths are blocked by the cornea.[18] Nevertheless, the photoreceptors of the retina are sensitive to near UV light and people lacking a lens (a condition known as aphakia) perceive near UV light as whitish blue or whitish-violet, probably because all three types of cones are roughly equally sensitive to UV light, but blue cones a bit more.[19]"
A new colour, and all you have to do to be able to see it is have no lens.
Will it be like seeing a whole new colour, or will the infrared spectrum still need to be translated into the already visible spectrum? Judging by the article it seems to be the second, but the first would be much cooler.
"But when you consider it more carefully, we're culturally aligned with a focus on innovating and hiring the best and brightest; we believe communication drives new platforms; we want to contribute to a more open, connected world;... It opens doors to new opportunities and partnerships, reduces risk on the manufacturing and work capital side, allows us to publish more made-for-VR content, and lets us focus on what we do best: solving hard engineering challenges and delivering the future of VR."
If you find yourself saying things like this or speaking in this style you should probably just kill yourself because there's no hope left for you as a human being. God damn what an abuse of language.
Re:Klingon Beer Haiku
on
Klingon Beer
·
· Score: 2
And much like revenge Klingon beer is best served cold even by humans
Beowulf and other anglo-saxon poetry (the Eddas) inspired Middle-earth, and in that sense Tolkien's academic work is relevant to his fiction. However, his fiction is not relevant to his academic work in the areas where his academic work does not pertain to his fiction (I don't know if Tolkien himself ever contributed to the field of "Tolkien Studies" in a capacity other than as a provider of primary sources). This translation is an example of Tolkien's academic work unrelated to the Middle-earth legendarium (in the sense of 'from middle-earth to beowulf', rather than 'from beowulf to middle-earth') and so the fact that it is something Tolkien produced is completely irrelevant (unless you happen to have an extensive knowledge of the philology of Beowulf translation).
early 20th century. If Tolkien hadn't written Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit and The Silmarillion less than a hundred people currently alive would know who he was. Tolkien is remembered for Middle-earth, not for his scholarship. This is a work of scholarship, not Middle-earth, so the fact that it is something Tolkien produced is completely irrelevant.
The issue is that laws mandating censorship run counter to the purposes of freedom and democracy. This minister is trying to shift the focus from the second to the first, and it nearly worked on me too because my first thought was "why should youtube care about Turkish law?" but that's completely irrelevant.
Believing that something is not possible is not good enough grounds to warrant inclusion in anything. There are reasons why some things are not discussed on shows about science, and that is because they are either irrelevant to the subject at hand or proven to be untrue. I don't know where this idea of every point of view being equal has arisen from, but it's fucking terrible in its ignorance. The whole reason every moron and his puppet made of hair and excrement wants their claims discussed as an equal to scientific claims is because of science's epistemic integrity. If their ideas had epistemic integrity of their own, they wouldn't care about science as an authority.
I think before you continue your tour of righteous internet justice you should learn to read, and also to understand how an argument works. AC is not blaming real victims, AC is not exonerating bigots, and being an Internet Contrarian and Thinking are not tasks that are either harder or easier than the other.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if I'm a nerd like us any more. I mean, I have an obsessive knowledge of trilobite fossils, and given a random sentence from any of the Harry Potter books I can tell what book and chapter it is from, but I don't feel like I belong with these kinds of people. What's left for me? What am I? How did pop-culture steal my identity?
Isn't sudoku extraordinarily easy for a computer? I think it would be more interesting to investigate human problem solving strategies in opposite scenarios, games that humans are really good at but that are nearly intractable for computers.
With a spherical penis I could knock up (down) all the bowling pins in the world.
Who is the best arguer? Who is the best detective? Who is the best doctor? Who is the best programmer? The very nature of being a knowledge worker is that if you are the best you can get your way in spite of reality.
I wouldn't, I would describe it in terms of orange and yellow, or pink and black.
No, that interpretation is negated by the subsequent "himself."
But you can't understand at any speed you like. A real geek can read faster than the speed at which sped up video becomes unintelligible.
Wouldn't it be more efficient simply to memorize the script? Why would a real nerd bother with media he can't control the rate of consumption of?
which got me thinking, I guess Darth is a title but Vader isn't, so it would be analogous to say, "the King James", which makes sense only in reference to the King James Version of the bible. Does this mean there is a Darth Vader version of badly translated Sith teachings? If so, why am I reading this shittily written article summary instead of that?
How would you describe a color only you can see other than in terms of other colors?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
relevant part: "Humans cannot perceive UV light directly since the lens of the eye blocks most light in the wavelength range of 300-400 nm; shorter wavelengths are blocked by the cornea.[18] Nevertheless, the photoreceptors of the retina are sensitive to near UV light and people lacking a lens (a condition known as aphakia) perceive near UV light as whitish blue or whitish-violet, probably because all three types of cones are roughly equally sensitive to UV light, but blue cones a bit more.[19]"
A new colour, and all you have to do to be able to see it is have no lens.
I think being able to see a new color would be a reasonable trade-off for the risks of neurosurgery.
Will it be like seeing a whole new colour, or will the infrared spectrum still need to be translated into the already visible spectrum? Judging by the article it seems to be the second, but the first would be much cooler.
I thought daylight saving time was linked to my clock.
No, I think this was a case of someone suffering from mental AIDS.
Or do they mean in the "yeah but guess where that electricity comes from, a coal-burning plant" sense?
"But when you consider it more carefully, we're culturally aligned with a focus on innovating and hiring the best and brightest; we believe communication drives new platforms; we want to contribute to a more open, connected world; ... It opens doors to new opportunities and partnerships, reduces risk on the manufacturing and work capital side, allows us to publish more made-for-VR content, and lets us focus on what we do best: solving hard engineering challenges and delivering the future of VR."
If you find yourself saying things like this or speaking in this style you should probably just kill yourself because there's no hope left for you as a human being. God damn what an abuse of language.
And much like revenge
Klingon beer is best served cold
even by humans
Beowulf and other anglo-saxon poetry (the Eddas) inspired Middle-earth, and in that sense Tolkien's academic work is relevant to his fiction. However, his fiction is not relevant to his academic work in the areas where his academic work does not pertain to his fiction (I don't know if Tolkien himself ever contributed to the field of "Tolkien Studies" in a capacity other than as a provider of primary sources). This translation is an example of Tolkien's academic work unrelated to the Middle-earth legendarium (in the sense of 'from middle-earth to beowulf', rather than 'from beowulf to middle-earth') and so the fact that it is something Tolkien produced is completely irrelevant (unless you happen to have an extensive knowledge of the philology of Beowulf translation).
early 20th century. If Tolkien hadn't written Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit and The Silmarillion less than a hundred people currently alive would know who he was. Tolkien is remembered for Middle-earth, not for his scholarship. This is a work of scholarship, not Middle-earth, so the fact that it is something Tolkien produced is completely irrelevant.
The issue is that laws mandating censorship run counter to the purposes of freedom and democracy. This minister is trying to shift the focus from the second to the first, and it nearly worked on me too because my first thought was "why should youtube care about Turkish law?" but that's completely irrelevant.
Believing that something is not possible is not good enough grounds to warrant inclusion in anything. There are reasons why some things are not discussed on shows about science, and that is because they are either irrelevant to the subject at hand or proven to be untrue. I don't know where this idea of every point of view being equal has arisen from, but it's fucking terrible in its ignorance. The whole reason every moron and his puppet made of hair and excrement wants their claims discussed as an equal to scientific claims is because of science's epistemic integrity. If their ideas had epistemic integrity of their own, they wouldn't care about science as an authority.
I think before you continue your tour of righteous internet justice you should learn to read, and also to understand how an argument works. AC is not blaming real victims, AC is not exonerating bigots, and being an Internet Contrarian and Thinking are not tasks that are either harder or easier than the other.
Ageist
It would be nice if they both killed each other, Braveheart-style.