Why are you biased against the impartiality of the police force? Are you perhaps basing your opinion of a group on individual instances of behavior displayed by isolated members of that group?
ISPs are to blame to the degree that they facilitate the transfer of data between individuals, which is about the same level of involvement that oxygen has in the ignition of gunpowder. In other words, blaming ISPs for file sharing is about as sensible as blaming oxygen in shooting deaths.
Probability doesn't help this issue. A number of grains is either a heap, not a heap, or undefined. Any number of grains has a 100% chance of being in either one of those three states, and if it is in one, then it is clearly not in the other two. Saying of a certain number of grains that it has an x% chance of being a heap is like saying of an orange that it has a 33% chance of being an orange seed and a 33% chance of being an orange tree.
What you can do is poll a statistically significant amount of people, showing them different amounts of grains of rice and taking down which amounts they consider heaps and which amounts they don't. You'll get a probability distribution that'll tell you things like "25% of people consider 45 grains to be a heap," but really it'll only tell you something about how the word 'heap' is used in everyday speech, it doesn't tell you anything ontologically significant about the situation.
That's because you can't read Hangul, and are therefore missing two pieces of key information: it doesn't have the letter f, so they use a p instead, and because of the way the symbols are constructed t becomes teu and p becomes peu. From the hangul, you can also see the syllables, so what you're actually reading is so-f-t-weh-uh, which is a pretty obvious phonetic rendering of software.
Only if you stipulate that chicken eggs derive their identity from the fact that they are laid by chickens. If you look at the chemical and structural composition, it is entirely possible that the not-quite-chicken lays eggs that are identical to those laid by the first chicken, which would mean that the egg came first.
This, interestingly, runs into the paradox of the heap. 10 grains of rice are not a heap. 11 grains of rice are not a heap. 12 grains of rice are not a heap... and adding grains of rice one by one is never going to end up in a case where X grains of rice are not a heap but X+1 grains of rice are. But now we have a problem, because 1000 grains of rice clearly are a heap! There must have been a switch somewhere from not-heap to heap, but it's somehow untraceable to any particular instance of rice adding.
The chicken is similar. The archaeopteryx clearly is not a chicken. Slowly, over the millennia, mutation by mutation, we eventually ended up with creatures that clearly are chickens. But when was the first time a non-chicken gave birth to a chicken? Just like in the case of the heap, we can't tell. What's more, not only can't we tell, there may not even be a fact of the matter; that is, it may be fundamentally unknowable.
That's how mutation works in Akira, but not in real life. The offspring can't be born a not-chicken and then mutate into a chicken. The only way it could work is for a not-chicken to have a mutant chicken offspring.
I would also imagine that the kind of person involved in this sort of attack is aware of the capabilities of the people investigating the attack, and that such a person would be interested in confounding that investigation by, say, pretending to be someone he's not, like a Korean language user.
Please read my example again if you think that approaches the definition of circular logic, and keep in mind that there is a difference between similar and identical. You wouldn't want to drink apple juice made with pears just because pears are "close enough".
If the submitter knew what circular logic meant, we'd have to ask ourselves why we allow submissions from people who knowingly spread untruths.
It is also in no way established that more donations is the reason spending has been increased. You can claim it's obvious all you want, but luckily reality doesn't conform to what seems obvious to its inhabitants. If it did, we'd be living on a flat disk with the burning chariot of a sun god running around it.
Circular logic is assuming the truth of the conclusion as a premise. For example, "I know that everything I know is true because, among the things that I know, one of the things I know is that everything I know is true" is circular. "We like to keep a reserve equal to one year's spending. Spending increases, therefore the reserve has to increase" is not circular.
I am sorry I am unfamiliar with the cultural paradigms governing nomadic workers in other countries. For all I know oil patches are all over the fucking place. Aren't the Labrea tar pits in the middle of LA?
Either the senator is bad at math or it would mean that he lived 8.5 hours away from his place of work. Perhaps as a European my perception of the amount of time commuting is supposed to take is somewhat skewed, but that seems excessive.
Slashdot Mirror
Why are you biased against the impartiality of the police force? Are you perhaps basing your opinion of a group on individual instances of behavior displayed by isolated members of that group?
Yes http://www.nytimes.com/interac...
Compare the #1 in 1900 to the #1 in 2012.
Maybe he should've done him a favor by being a better tennis player instead.
ISPs are to blame to the degree that they facilitate the transfer of data between individuals, which is about the same level of involvement that oxygen has in the ignition of gunpowder. In other words, blaming ISPs for file sharing is about as sensible as blaming oxygen in shooting deaths.
233 = 11101001
241 = 11110001
It is one of the oldest known paradoxes. Your proposed resolution is #2.1 in the wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... and it has a number of counter-arguments which you can read up on there or here http://plato.stanford.edu/entr...
Probability doesn't help this issue. A number of grains is either a heap, not a heap, or undefined. Any number of grains has a 100% chance of being in either one of those three states, and if it is in one, then it is clearly not in the other two. Saying of a certain number of grains that it has an x% chance of being a heap is like saying of an orange that it has a 33% chance of being an orange seed and a 33% chance of being an orange tree.
What you can do is poll a statistically significant amount of people, showing them different amounts of grains of rice and taking down which amounts they consider heaps and which amounts they don't. You'll get a probability distribution that'll tell you things like "25% of people consider 45 grains to be a heap," but really it'll only tell you something about how the word 'heap' is used in everyday speech, it doesn't tell you anything ontologically significant about the situation.
That's because you can't read Hangul, and are therefore missing two pieces of key information: it doesn't have the letter f, so they use a p instead, and because of the way the symbols are constructed t becomes teu and p becomes peu. From the hangul, you can also see the syllables, so what you're actually reading is so-f-t-weh-uh, which is a pretty obvious phonetic rendering of software.
Only if you stipulate that chicken eggs derive their identity from the fact that they are laid by chickens. If you look at the chemical and structural composition, it is entirely possible that the not-quite-chicken lays eggs that are identical to those laid by the first chicken, which would mean that the egg came first.
Compared to egg laying, vivipary is a relatively recent development. Eggs existed long before the first animals that gave live births.
Compare and contrast, moron
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
It takes like a half hour to learn to read Hangul, and then you can instantly pick out the loan words. Sopeuteuweuh for software, etc.
This, interestingly, runs into the paradox of the heap. 10 grains of rice are not a heap. 11 grains of rice are not a heap. 12 grains of rice are not a heap... and adding grains of rice one by one is never going to end up in a case where X grains of rice are not a heap but X+1 grains of rice are. But now we have a problem, because 1000 grains of rice clearly are a heap! There must have been a switch somewhere from not-heap to heap, but it's somehow untraceable to any particular instance of rice adding.
The chicken is similar. The archaeopteryx clearly is not a chicken. Slowly, over the millennia, mutation by mutation, we eventually ended up with creatures that clearly are chickens. But when was the first time a non-chicken gave birth to a chicken? Just like in the case of the heap, we can't tell. What's more, not only can't we tell, there may not even be a fact of the matter; that is, it may be fundamentally unknowable.
That's how mutation works in Akira, but not in real life. The offspring can't be born a not-chicken and then mutate into a chicken. The only way it could work is for a not-chicken to have a mutant chicken offspring.
I would also imagine that the kind of person involved in this sort of attack is aware of the capabilities of the people investigating the attack, and that such a person would be interested in confounding that investigation by, say, pretending to be someone he's not, like a Korean language user.
The egg. Eggs had existed for millions of years before the first dinosaurs, let alone before the first birds, let alone before the first chickens.
Please read my example again if you think that approaches the definition of circular logic, and keep in mind that there is a difference between similar and identical. You wouldn't want to drink apple juice made with pears just because pears are "close enough".
That's still not circular logic, that's a feedback loop, a virtuous/vicious circle.
If the submitter knew what circular logic meant, we'd have to ask ourselves why we allow submissions from people who knowingly spread untruths.
It is also in no way established that more donations is the reason spending has been increased. You can claim it's obvious all you want, but luckily reality doesn't conform to what seems obvious to its inhabitants. If it did, we'd be living on a flat disk with the burning chariot of a sun god running around it.
Circular logic is assuming the truth of the conclusion as a premise. For example, "I know that everything I know is true because, among the things that I know, one of the things I know is that everything I know is true" is circular. "We like to keep a reserve equal to one year's spending. Spending increases, therefore the reserve has to increase" is not circular.
Some of us are just more equal than others.
I am sorry I am unfamiliar with the cultural paradigms governing nomadic workers in other countries. For all I know oil patches are all over the fucking place. Aren't the Labrea tar pits in the middle of LA?
Either the senator is bad at math or it would mean that he lived 8.5 hours away from his place of work. Perhaps as a European my perception of the amount of time commuting is supposed to take is somewhat skewed, but that seems excessive.
lol is also a dutch word, meaning 'fun'. "We hebben lol gehad" = "We had fun"
You do. "Cut" is the Dutch word for cunt, though it's spelled "kut". Similarly, lull is homophonous with lul, meaning dick.