Re:So let the flame wars begin!
on
The Birth of vi
·
· Score: 1
Wow... 1989! That practically back when Dinosaurs roamed the earth!
That's funny. Funny right? Humor?
It's not possible that anything that old could possibly be relevant to computing these days!
Okay, now I know you're being "Funny."
If you weren't around at the time to appreciate just how revolutionary a concept that was in computers, go study the history of your field.
What if I was? I wrote my first BASIC programs around 1980. Since I know "the history of my field" so well, what do I do now?
I know how revolutionary a concept having no command line was. I remember how everyone was talking about it at the time. Ooooh, cool. I also know how STUPID an idea it was. So does Apple; you'll note they undid that little gem almost immediately. Today not only does Apple's OS have a command-line, it's freaking UNIX.
Re:So let the flame wars begin!
on
The Birth of vi
·
· Score: 2
Oh please.
First off, you're quoting an article from 1989. Secondly, it's about the mac interface. From 1989.
You couldn't have a more mixed-up system of command keys, and a more total lack of command-line. Seriously, what are you thinking? Your post is totally irrelevant.
FOR CRYING OUT LOUD THE ARTICLE QUOTES PEOPLE FROM WORDPERFECT. *Enough said!*
That could just mean they've only been measuring for 30 years; it's more honest than saying 'in recorded history!' -- although if it is the case, they should say both to make it clear.
While you're asking good questions, add this one on: How is it that this thing is only 3000 years old? In geological timescales, that's nothing. The "blink of an eye." If it only just developed in the first place, why should we care that it's gone away again?
Thank you for pointing this out. Of course, this is why I bought the Zune. It's important for me to know that my music player is supporting the starving artists.
This is what blows my mind, too. I've been using postgresql 7.x (yeah, I'm a Debian user) for years and I have never, ever seen it crash, disconnect, dump core, or leak memory. Ever.
I've never seen MySQL do those things, either, to be fair, but I don't use it as much, and I *did* have it destroy a bunch of my data once when a machine was rebooted without being properly shut down.
The comment that Postgresql is unstable, even in the older version numbers, seems to indicate some kind of separation from reality. I didn't see anything in the article about their testing methods. I wonder, given some of the other complaints, if they tested them on *WINDOWS* despite the lousy support for Windows, and the outright recommendation that you don't try it, from the devs.
Seriously. Anyone else with me on that? Even outdated as this review is, it STILL doesn't make sense... unless you think maybe they did it on Windows. Then it makes more sense. Postgresql on Windows used to suck, and for good reason. It wasn't supported, either, and for good reason.
A Christian is anyone who believes in Christ. John 3:16, you know? "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that *whosoever believeth in Him* shall not die..."
YOU don't get to decide who is and isn't a Christian.
OpenOffice is already available for the Xbox, I imagine... but with only 64m of RAM, it's not going to be pretty.
I run Xebian on my Xbox, and run mythtv-frontend from within there to watch my mythtv. It's just barely passable, the famerate is sometimes noticable. Anyhow, it's a full Debian system; I'm sure OpenOffice is in the package management.
One other thing I like about my MythTV. It doesn't "forget" whether I've watched a show or not after a few months. If I've watched something and told it I'm done with it, it's not going to record it again without my permission. Unlike the TiVo which will happily record shows you've watched a dozen times, if it's been long enough for the TiVo to forget.
It's a pain in the ass to set up and configure. I can't argue with you there. If you've done it once successfully, though (or two or three times) it becomes much easier.
However, I take issue with "didn't work reliably" and "cost was higher than a tivo."
My own MythTV works flawlessly, using a donated PIII-750 (cost: $0) for the server, and a Hauppauge 150 (cost: $60) for the tuner/encoder. There are no monthly fees. If you can show me a TiVo with lifetime subscription for $60, I'll be amazed. And tell my friends to buy it.
My MythTV also has features that TiVo will never have -- like the ability to automatically detect and skip commercials, the ability to select programs to automatically burn to DVD, and support for enough tuners to simultaneously record everything on every channel (well, in theory... I'd love to see the hardware for that!).
I like the TiVo. It's easy to use. But I like my MythTV a lot more. And I don't have to worry about what stupid decisions TiVo corporate might make -- like encrypting my videos so only I can watch them, support for the "Broadcast" flag, and wasting my storage space with advertisements.
Oh, to have modpoints. As I was reading the gp post I was wondering what words I would use to explain his error. You've done a far better job than I would have - though I probably would I have begun along the lines of, "Listen, fool!" which usually just hurts my case. But is fun.
Okay, I'm probably past 20 seconds now. Someone with mod points, save the parent poster from obscurity, please!
Fallout 1 and 2 were truly two of the best single-player RPGs to be released. Loved them.
But I'd think these are games that would be simple to play no matter how arthritic you are. Their combat systems are turn-based. They only require the equivalent of a mouse and one or two buttons. Nothing like an action game which often require four axis or more, and upwards of six buttons, plus insanely strict timings.
My point being -- they're great, but they aren't the kind of game he's probably worried about missing out on.
I've recently been "Studying" evolution in my spare time.
This is a cool experiment, but it's nothing "new" -- there's no new knowledge here. At all.
AND there's NOTHING AT ALL about "behavior may be inherited!" Where did THAT come from -- anyone?(*) All these lizards were already prone to running up trees. The ones with shorter legs did it better, and within just a few generations the average legs length of the population was shorter.
That's *basic* evolution, people. Go read a damn book!!! The submitter of this article makes me angry because I realize now the fight for education about Evolution isn't just for stupid fundamentalists. A lot of smart people don't get it either.
I highly recommend getting yourself a copy of "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. Read all the chapter notes, too -- get the recent version, don't gt an original copy because it makes you cool. Dawkins commentary on what he wrote in the newer printings is invaluable. It's an excellent book, and it's FUN to read... seriously!
(* I mean, in this context. It's well-known that behavior is inherited -- but not learned behavior.)
You're not ignorant of ice cores now and that's a good start. I can't see how you can deny having been ignorant of them when you suggest they "take measurements from where people are" -- hardly the case. Don't try to pretend you were making some esoteric point about the people collecting the ice cores; you weren't.
You are sort of correct in that we use the term abiogenesis to refer to "life from non life" but it's also true to say drawing the line where abiogenesis stopped and evolution started is not going to be very easy for you. I would contend this is because no such line exists.
If we take the current understanding of how life developed, we see it begin with self-replicating molecules. These cannot be called "life" by any stretch -- they are much closer to (and in many cases are) crystals. Consider a supersaturated solution into which you drop a single seed crystal. It will immediately begin to grow, often breaking off flakes and seeding new crystals -- order from chaos! If one layer of the crystal has a defect, this "change" in the crystalline structure will continue to be refelected in successive "generations" as the crystal grows. More complex molecules are capable of more impressive feats of replication, and we know that even in this early period of development, struggles were occurring which contain all of the necessary ingredients for evolution -- here we have reproduction, here we have errors in copying that are transmitted to the next generation, and here we have selection, some molecules surviving, while others fail to "make the cut". These factors become more obvious as the molecules become more complex, but all along the necessary ingredients of "Evolution" are present. It seems to me that an illustration of this is that all life on this planet shares in common the "chirality" of certain molecules, that is to say in layman's terms that at some point in the very, very distant past, "left-handed" molecules won out over their equivalent "right-handed" bretheren. I mention "Chirality" by name not to sound smart, which I'm not, but so you can look it up and learn further on the topic.
Let me be clear -- I'm not disagreeing with you that the two may be separated... I'm just suggesting that in my own, largely ignorant worldview, they're quite the same. Mostly I'm replying in hopes of educating the person you responded to, though -- to believe in God on basis of lack of knowledge of abiogenesis is truly ignorant in this age. And I hope he will forgive me if I read too much into his post.
A larger argument on the topic of God is always welcome, but in this case, as in so many others, you must either admit God took a totally "hands-off" approach, or be ignorant of the known facts. You can, at best, be some kind of pantheist that says, "Well, God set into place the laws that allowed this to happen." Fine. But to see the hand of God actively working to create life is wishful, ignorant thinking.
Worse than wishful ignorant thinking is the automatic assumption that if science hasn't told you the answer (or if you haven't bothered to go out and find it) "god did it" is an acceptable alternative to "I don't know." It just plain isn't -- a statement which this post is already too long for me to add support to.
Again, let me apologize if the "goddidit" that I think I saw in the GP post doesn't actually exist.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow... 1989! That practically back when Dinosaurs roamed the earth!
That's funny. Funny right? Humor?
It's not possible that anything that old could possibly be relevant to computing these days!
Okay, now I know you're being "Funny."
If you weren't around at the time to appreciate just how revolutionary a concept that was in computers, go study the history of your field.
What if I was? I wrote my first BASIC programs around 1980. Since I know "the history of my field" so well, what do I do now?
I know how revolutionary a concept having no command line was. I remember how everyone was talking about it at the time. Ooooh, cool. I also know how STUPID an idea it was. So does Apple; you'll note they undid that little gem almost immediately. Today not only does Apple's OS have a command-line, it's freaking UNIX.
Oh please.
First off, you're quoting an article from 1989. Secondly, it's about the mac interface. From 1989.
You couldn't have a more mixed-up system of command keys, and a more total lack of command-line. Seriously, what are you thinking? Your post is totally irrelevant.
FOR CRYING OUT LOUD THE ARTICLE QUOTES PEOPLE FROM WORDPERFECT. *Enough said!*
That could just mean they've only been measuring for 30 years; it's more honest than saying 'in recorded history!' -- although if it is the case, they should say both to make it clear.
While you're asking good questions, add this one on: How is it that this thing is only 3000 years old? In geological timescales, that's nothing. The "blink of an eye." If it only just developed in the first place, why should we care that it's gone away again?
The Neuros OSD is small. Very small. At only 14cm wide, 14cm deep and 3.2cm high, it fits comfortably in just about any hole you'd care to stow it.
Oh my!
I'm trying SO hard not to post a link to a certain hole.
I don't know anything about law -- so this is an honest question. What about "Jury Nullification?"
Thank you for pointing this out. Of course, this is why I bought the Zune. It's important for me to know that my music player is supporting the starving artists.
This is what blows my mind, too. I've been using postgresql 7.x (yeah, I'm a Debian user) for years and I have never, ever seen it crash, disconnect, dump core, or leak memory. Ever.
I've never seen MySQL do those things, either, to be fair, but I don't use it as much, and I *did* have it destroy a bunch of my data once when a machine was rebooted without being properly shut down.
The comment that Postgresql is unstable, even in the older version numbers, seems to indicate some kind of separation from reality. I didn't see anything in the article about their testing methods. I wonder, given some of the other complaints, if they tested them on *WINDOWS* despite the lousy support for Windows, and the outright recommendation that you don't try it, from the devs.
Seriously. Anyone else with me on that? Even outdated as this review is, it STILL doesn't make sense... unless you think maybe they did it on Windows. Then it makes more sense. Postgresql on Windows used to suck, and for good reason. It wasn't supported, either, and for good reason.
I'm on 110 baud dialup, you insensitive clod!
Oh please. I've only one thing to say to that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
A Christian is anyone who believes in Christ. John 3:16, you know? "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that *whosoever believeth in Him* shall not die..."
YOU don't get to decide who is and isn't a Christian.
OpenOffice is already available for the Xbox, I imagine... but with only 64m of RAM, it's not going to be pretty.
I run Xebian on my Xbox, and run mythtv-frontend from within there to watch my mythtv. It's just barely passable, the famerate is sometimes noticable. Anyhow, it's a full Debian system; I'm sure OpenOffice is in the package management.
Imagine if they took the "Vista Sound" team and put them on fixing this bug!
We'd end up with a Word that would play a funeral dirge when you opened a compromised e-mail.
One other thing I like about my MythTV. It doesn't "forget" whether I've watched a show or not after a few months. If I've watched something and told it I'm done with it, it's not going to record it again without my permission. Unlike the TiVo which will happily record shows you've watched a dozen times, if it's been long enough for the TiVo to forget.
It's a pain in the ass to set up and configure. I can't argue with you there. If you've done it once successfully, though (or two or three times) it becomes much easier.
However, I take issue with "didn't work reliably" and "cost was higher than a tivo."
My own MythTV works flawlessly, using a donated PIII-750 (cost: $0) for the server, and a Hauppauge 150 (cost: $60) for the tuner/encoder. There are no monthly fees. If you can show me a TiVo with lifetime subscription for $60, I'll be amazed. And tell my friends to buy it.
My MythTV also has features that TiVo will never have -- like the ability to automatically detect and skip commercials, the ability to select programs to automatically burn to DVD, and support for enough tuners to simultaneously record everything on every channel (well, in theory... I'd love to see the hardware for that!).
I like the TiVo. It's easy to use. But I like my MythTV a lot more. And I don't have to worry about what stupid decisions TiVo corporate might make -- like encrypting my videos so only I can watch them, support for the "Broadcast" flag, and wasting my storage space with advertisements.
The Holy Bible --- Pedophiles in our World
Unless you're Catholic...
Oh, to have modpoints. As I was reading the gp post I was wondering what words I would use to explain his error. You've done a far better job than I would have - though I probably would I have begun along the lines of, "Listen, fool!" which usually just hurts my case. But is fun.
Okay, I'm probably past 20 seconds now. Someone with mod points, save the parent poster from obscurity, please!
Fallout 1 and 2 were truly two of the best single-player RPGs to be released. Loved them.
But I'd think these are games that would be simple to play no matter how arthritic you are. Their combat systems are turn-based. They only require the equivalent of a mouse and one or two buttons. Nothing like an action game which often require four axis or more, and upwards of six buttons, plus insanely strict timings.
My point being -- they're great, but they aren't the kind of game he's probably worried about missing out on.
Thanks - I hope someone mods you up. I'll have to look into those myself.
I've recently been "Studying" evolution in my spare time.
This is a cool experiment, but it's nothing "new" -- there's no new knowledge here. At all.
AND there's NOTHING AT ALL about "behavior may be inherited!" Where did THAT come from -- anyone?(*) All these lizards were already prone to running up trees. The ones with shorter legs did it better, and within just a few generations the average legs length of the population was shorter.
That's *basic* evolution, people. Go read a damn book!!! The submitter of this article makes me angry because I realize now the fight for education about Evolution isn't just for stupid fundamentalists. A lot of smart people don't get it either.
I highly recommend getting yourself a copy of "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins. Read all the chapter notes, too -- get the recent version, don't gt an original copy because it makes you cool. Dawkins commentary on what he wrote in the newer printings is invaluable. It's an excellent book, and it's FUN to read... seriously!
(* I mean, in this context. It's well-known that behavior is inherited -- but not learned behavior.)
You're not ignorant of ice cores now and that's a good start. I can't see how you can deny having been ignorant of them when you suggest they "take measurements from where people are" -- hardly the case. Don't try to pretend you were making some esoteric point about the people collecting the ice cores; you weren't.
Ha-ha.
I don't personally have any strong feelings about Apple one way or the other -- I've never used an Apple product so I can't say anything about them.
But it's important for you to remember, *there is nothing wrong with having a monopoly*.
It's abusing that monopoly's power that is illegal. Having a monopoly is OK and legal.
Could it be because that temperatures were being measured where people were, rather than where people were not?
No, but you're awfully well-spoken for someone so ignorant of the topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core
This got +5? There's not an animal in the list!
That nicely answers my question. Thanks. Apparently the Vogon security sucks not to notice the same cookie being submitted from a different IP.
You are sort of correct in that we use the term abiogenesis to refer to "life from non life" but it's also true to say drawing the line where abiogenesis stopped and evolution started is not going to be very easy for you. I would contend this is because no such line exists.
If we take the current understanding of how life developed, we see it begin with self-replicating molecules. These cannot be called "life" by any stretch -- they are much closer to (and in many cases are) crystals. Consider a supersaturated solution into which you drop a single seed crystal. It will immediately begin to grow, often breaking off flakes and seeding new crystals -- order from chaos! If one layer of the crystal has a defect, this "change" in the crystalline structure will continue to be refelected in successive "generations" as the crystal grows. More complex molecules are capable of more impressive feats of replication, and we know that even in this early period of development, struggles were occurring which contain all of the necessary ingredients for evolution -- here we have reproduction, here we have errors in copying that are transmitted to the next generation, and here we have selection, some molecules surviving, while others fail to "make the cut". These factors become more obvious as the molecules become more complex, but all along the necessary ingredients of "Evolution" are present. It seems to me that an illustration of this is that all life on this planet shares in common the "chirality" of certain molecules, that is to say in layman's terms that at some point in the very, very distant past, "left-handed" molecules won out over their equivalent "right-handed" bretheren. I mention "Chirality" by name not to sound smart, which I'm not, but so you can look it up and learn further on the topic.
Let me be clear -- I'm not disagreeing with you that the two may be separated... I'm just suggesting that in my own, largely ignorant worldview, they're quite the same. Mostly I'm replying in hopes of educating the person you responded to, though -- to believe in God on basis of lack of knowledge of abiogenesis is truly ignorant in this age. And I hope he will forgive me if I read too much into his post.
A larger argument on the topic of God is always welcome, but in this case, as in so many others, you must either admit God took a totally "hands-off" approach, or be ignorant of the known facts. You can, at best, be some kind of pantheist that says, "Well, God set into place the laws that allowed this to happen." Fine. But to see the hand of God actively working to create life is wishful, ignorant thinking.
Worse than wishful ignorant thinking is the automatic assumption that if science hasn't told you the answer (or if you haven't bothered to go out and find it) "god did it" is an acceptable alternative to "I don't know." It just plain isn't -- a statement which this post is already too long for me to add support to.
Again, let me apologize if the "goddidit" that I think I saw in the GP post doesn't actually exist.
That's hardly the best argument I've heard against design. I say this as an atheist and a skeptic.
If you're interested in arguing such topics, may I recommend "The Blind Watchmaker," by Richard Dawkins?