> I can walk into nearly any deathmatch in the world and win with nearly no effort at all. Like Neo. Like God!
I have a game you'd really like. The UI consists of a "play" button and a high-scorers widget. Every time you click "play" you win, and your name is added to the top of the high-scorers list, with a score one point higher than the highest score already there.
This is the most fun game I've ever played. I've never lost! My score gets better every time I play!!! I feel like God's own God when I played it!!!!!
> [(?)Gl]assman includes the following quote by professor Stephan Schneider, a bioligist from Standford.
I would very much like to read that review, if you could give a URL or print reference for it. A link to the source of Schneider's original statement would be useful as well; I can't find either with Google.
> No, I show that since they are neutral or left establishes their bias. If they were ALL neutral it would not. If they were neutral and left and right it would not.
No. Bias would be if they always came down on the center or one side of an issue when there was substantial evidence supporting the other side as well. If the evidence happens to come down on the center or one side only, then authors/rags always coming down on the center and that side only would be evidence of honesty, not of bias.
For instance, if the authors/editors always come down on the side of a "round" earth rather than a flat one, that's not bias, that's factual reporting. (Or perhaps "bias toward the truth".)
BTW, I'm not saying I know that the evidence only ever supports one side in the current argument; I'm merely pointing out that your purported evidence for bias isn't evidence at all. It would be bias if their reporting were skewed w.r.t. the good science that is done on the topic, but you haven't shown that, or even tried to show that.
> I use the terms left and right very loosely here, btw.
Yes, you started with "left/green" and now you've reduced it to simply "left". The real question isn't "left vs. right", but rather, "What are the consequences of our lifestyle?". It's too bad that the issue has become politicized, but we need to try to see through the politics to the science.
> 3) I try to recycle as much as I can reasonably do.
> The problem with #3 is that from what I have seen, the apartment complex I live in does a great job with the different containers for recycling, but when the garbage company comes along, they throw EVERYTHING in the back of the garbage truck and take off. So, all our local efforts aren't doing a damned thing. Anyone else seeing this problem?
Yep. Working geekish hours at a large institution, I have often seen the night janitorial staff come around and empty the paper recyc and the ordinary trash all into the same hopper.
There was a review of this book in Scientific American a couple of issues back, and they trashed it pretty hard.
Re:Accessibility: suddenly it's a priority...
on
GNOME 2.0 Beta
·
· Score: 1
> > > new accessibility features for disabled users
> > Having just broken both my wrists 2 weeks ago while snowboarding (right in 3 places, left in 2) this is suddenly of great interest. (took 10 minutes just to type this in:(
> There's 6 minutes between the original posting and your reply. How in earth's name did you do that in 10 minutes ?
It also has new accessibility features for psychics.
> A beowulf cluster is not limited to Linux, it could run on top of any OS. I believe NASA did the original design work to be OS agnostic.
Strictly speaking, Beowulf is a Linux-specific phenomenon, though there's no reason "Beowulf-like" clusters could not be built on other OSes. (However, you may need the OS's source code if you want a true cluster rather than a cluster emulator that runs in application space.)
ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage
> I think it's the latter. The problem, IMHO, is that he's a pretty decent actor but is mediocre in at least some of the creative, behind-the-scenes stuff that he insists on doing. Because of his level of creative control on the show, he's one of few people who gets to write his own character. I think he's shooting for a realistic (in D&D terms) 10 INT 17 WIS character in his scriptwriting, but is too close to the character to spot the flaws in what he does.
Thanks. BTW, is there any background story to explain why they would put someone with INT=10 in command of a team with such an important mission?
> Alan Cox is one of the most influential IT innovators in the world. A graduate of the University of Wales, Swansea, he has been a key developer of the Linux kernel for nearly a decade.
Yes, and if only we could get him to quit writing code like
> I've watched it a few times late at night (reruns); it didn't seem to be "the best of Sci-Fi," but it's certainly watchable and occasionally exhibits signs of intelligence among the writers.
\meetoo.
I usually enjoy it, but no so much that I plan my schedule around it. I haven't noticed the purported xfileisms, but perhaps my rerun station hasn't gotten that far along yet.
The biggest problem with the series from my POV is Richard Dean Anderson, who is either a really bad actor or else is doing a really good job on a really bad part. (I suspect the former.)
Re: Those opening paragraphs...
on
.NETly News
·
· Score: 2
> From a technological standpoint, the only thing you can really say he has helped (and I say helped because he certainly cannot claim sole credit) achieve is the positioning of computers in everyday non-geek life. Even that would have happened sooner or later has Gates not existed.
Just 3-4 years ago, if you walked into a computer store, picked up a game, and read the requirements sticker, it would say "IBM PC or 100% Compatible". The switch to "Windows" is relatively recent.
It was the IBM brand name that 'legitimized' the PC, not Microsoft, not Bill Gates. And frankly I think IBM got into the game because they could see that Apple and others were going to do it anyway, with them or without them.
Slashdot Mirror
> I can walk into nearly any deathmatch in the world and win with nearly no effort at all. Like Neo. Like God!
I have a game you'd really like. The UI consists of a "play" button and a high-scorers widget. Every time you click "play" you win, and your name is added to the top of the high-scorers list, with a score one point higher than the highest score already there.
This is the most fun game I've ever played. I've never lost! My score gets better every time I play!!! I feel like God's own God when I played it!!!!!
What the Butt Naked Brigade actually ordered was a warmer for their --
> [(?)Gl]assman includes the following quote by professor Stephan Schneider, a bioligist from Standford.
I would very much like to read that review, if you could give a URL or print reference for it. A link to the source of Schneider's original statement would be useful as well; I can't find either with Google.
Thanks.
> No, I show that since they are neutral or left establishes their bias. If they were ALL neutral it would not. If they were neutral and left and right it would not.
No. Bias would be if they always came down on the center or one side of an issue when there was substantial evidence supporting the other side as well. If the evidence happens to come down on the center or one side only, then authors/rags always coming down on the center and that side only would be evidence of honesty, not of bias.
For instance, if the authors/editors always come down on the side of a "round" earth rather than a flat one, that's not bias, that's factual reporting. (Or perhaps "bias toward the truth".)
BTW, I'm not saying I know that the evidence only ever supports one side in the current argument; I'm merely pointing out that your purported evidence for bias isn't evidence at all. It would be bias if their reporting were skewed w.r.t. the good science that is done on the topic, but you haven't shown that, or even tried to show that.
> I use the terms left and right very loosely here, btw.
Yes, you started with "left/green" and now you've reduced it to simply "left". The real question isn't "left vs. right", but rather, "What are the consequences of our lifestyle?". It's too bad that the issue has become politicized, but we need to try to see through the politics to the science.
> This is great.. and the best part is, 90% of "the market" doesn't want to buy new shit, they're quite happy with the TVs they have now.
Truly, the money would have been better spent on brighter screenwriters than on hardware.
> 3) I try to recycle as much as I can reasonably do.
> The problem with #3 is that from what I have seen, the apartment complex I live in does a great job with the different containers for recycling, but when the garbage company comes along, they throw EVERYTHING in the back of the garbage truck and take off. So, all our local efforts aren't doing a damned thing. Anyone else seeing this problem?
Yep. Working geekish hours at a large institution, I have often seen the night janitorial staff come around and empty the paper recyc and the ordinary trash all into the same hopper.
> (Aside: now that I think about it, I do get a lot more mail from the left than from the right. More religious fervour, I guess.)
Maybe just less respect for trees.
There was a review of this book in Scientific American a couple of issues back, and they trashed it pretty hard.
> > > new accessibility features for disabled users
> > Having just broken both my wrists 2 weeks ago while snowboarding (right in 3 places, left in 2) this is suddenly of great interest. (took 10 minutes just to type this in
> There's 6 minutes between the original posting and your reply. How in earth's name did you do that in 10 minutes ?
It also has new accessibility features for psychics.
> A beowulf cluster is not limited to Linux, it could run on top of any OS. I believe NASA did the original design work to be OS agnostic.
Strictly speaking, Beowulf is a Linux-specific phenomenon, though there's no reason "Beowulf-like" clusters could not be built on other OSes. (However, you may need the OS's source code if you want a true cluster rather than a cluster emulator that runs in application space.)
> < turn sarcastic voice on
d00d! Close those HTML tags! Every post below yours came out sounding sarcastic, and it took me hours to figure out why.
> ALL JOBS SUCK!
Otherwise, you would be paying them instead of vice versa, and you'd call it "entertainment" instead of "my job".
> "Enhance shareholder value!"--"Yeah, I'm enhancing shareholder value by surfing for pr0n with one hand while the other is..."
Shame on you! Don't you know you shouldn't pick your nose at work?
The gods created managers to keep our species from competing with them.
> > Fifty years is plenty long enough for a corporation to reap its rewards...
> That's your opinion. Disney, who is still reaping plenty of rewards from Mickey Mouse, might think a little differently...
Can't take it with you directly, but you can still profit from your IP on the other side?
My question is, what does he spend it on over there?
Possibly of related interest, the is an article on Internet Scale Operating Systems in the newest Scientific American.
> Says Powell: "our greatest challenge in promoting broadband is deciding how best to stimulate enormous private sector investment."
I have long held that the US government is a "government of the shareholders, by the shareholders, and for the shareholders".
He seems to agree, except that he thinks that's a good thing.
> ++cyfanswm_yr_ymwelwÿr;
Yeah -- that's the kind of code he should write!
ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage
> I think it's the latter. The problem, IMHO, is that he's a pretty decent actor but is mediocre in at least some of the creative, behind-the-scenes stuff that he insists on doing. Because of his level of creative control on the show, he's one of few people who gets to write his own character. I think he's shooting for a realistic (in D&D terms) 10 INT 17 WIS character in his scriptwriting, but is too close to the character to spot the flaws in what he does.
Thanks. BTW, is there any background story to explain why they would put someone with INT=10 in command of a team with such an important mission?
> Alan Cox is one of the most influential IT innovators in the world. A graduate of the University of Wales, Swansea, he has been a key developer of the Linux kernel for nearly a decade.
Yes, and if only we could get him to quit writing code like
> There are times when I fear the raw destructive power of Slashdot readers, especially when someone says, "Look! Over there! It's Alan Cox!"
Thank Bog it wasn't Linus -- or Rob and Kathleen on their honeymoon.
> I've watched it a few times late at night (reruns); it didn't seem to be "the best of Sci-Fi," but it's certainly watchable and occasionally exhibits signs of intelligence among the writers.
\meetoo.
I usually enjoy it, but no so much that I plan my schedule around it. I haven't noticed the purported xfileisms, but perhaps my rerun station hasn't gotten that far along yet.
The biggest problem with the series from my POV is Richard Dean Anderson, who is either a really bad actor or else is doing a really good job on a really bad part. (I suspect the former.)
> From a technological standpoint, the only thing you can really say he has helped (and I say helped because he certainly cannot claim sole credit) achieve is the positioning of computers in everyday non-geek life. Even that would have happened sooner or later has Gates not existed.
Just 3-4 years ago, if you walked into a computer store, picked up a game, and read the requirements sticker, it would say "IBM PC or 100% Compatible". The switch to "Windows" is relatively recent.
It was the IBM brand name that 'legitimized' the PC, not Microsoft, not Bill Gates. And frankly I think IBM got into the game because they could see that Apple and others were going to do it anyway, with them or without them.
> "Bill Clinton blows goats."
Close, but no cigar.
> after that "Axis of evil" comment by Bush, I'm convinced the cherry is off the "war on terrorism" victory
He wanted a Big War (TM) like Daddy had, and only got a little one, so now he's shopping around for another one.
> and W. is back to halfwit status.
Surely, not too witless to notice what a war does for a president's standing in the polls?