Ada Lovelace's contribution was somewhat exaggerated as well. Plus she was a bit of a nut. I'd recommend Doran Swade's "The Cogwheel Brain" - about Babbage and the Science Museums recreation of the difference engine.
As for Grace Hopper, while there's a lot of exaggeration, I'm sure she contributed a lot to computing.
Plutonium was created in the 1940's. Marie Curie died in the 1930's.
What is interesting, in a disturbiung way, is that Marie Curies workbooks that she used while discovering radium are still considered dangerously radioactive.
It's about time they opened up a museum showing the truth.
It's quite clear that there's a consipracy amongst godless scientists to cover up the clear existence of God, and to disprove the clear evidence in the bible that the animals were created, and then man was created. And after man, God created the animals. It says so in the bible, so it must be true. and if the bible is false, then how did the eye evolve? And what are all those fossils doing at the tops of mountains?
I hope they disprove other heretics such as Keplar, who believed the earth went round the sun, when a simple observation of the sun rising, and any rational interpretation of the bible will prov that the opposite is true.
Well, yes. If you go about this the wrong way, then you make the situation worse, but it is possible.
You are assuming people aren't easily manipulated. There are various techniques that you can use. People will defer to authority, and will be a lot less aggressive if you appear to be on their side. You have to have the confidence to march in there as though you own the place, and be able to convince the cops by your attitude that you have every right to tell them what to do. You also have to appear not to be a college student. More to the point, you have to oust the good ffear thing he's got going without it being apparent that that's what you're trying to do. And you also have to remember that civility and reason is subjective. Someone who appears to agree with the cop will be seen by him as a good guy who's on the same side.
He was being confrontational and belligerant. A psychologist will be ab le to explain this better, but what tends to happen when an authority figure starts to lose control of the situation is they get violent. It would be possible for someone with the right level of authority to step in and take charge of the situation. Human nature makes us deer to authority. If you can make it clear that you're on their side, they will not be hostile towards you.
Anyway - basically my point is there are ways to handle this. There are also ways not to handle this. A mass move towards the police would probably have started a riot. The right words and attitude at the right time may well have persuaded them to back down a little and prevent the scene from getting worse.
Yes. There are more subtle ways to step in. Step up to the officer (Ideally between him and the victim) and say something like "Don't you think he's had enough". Keep asking questions if they're hostile. Key points here is that you are being non-threatening, and also taking control by asking a question.
But it requires a lot of confidence to march in and take control.
Should the cops have just left? When someone is where they are not supposed to be, acting belligerent and confrontational, refusing to cooperate, should the police just leave? Maybe the police should only arrest those that are cooperative.
Why the dichotomy? Don't they teach cops basic "come-along" techniques in the US?
Put the guy in a forarm-elbow lock. It's uncomfortable but only really painful if the guy resists. So you can easily pull him outside and politely let him scream blue murder when he's out.
Using a tazer on someone as punishment for disobeying an order is not the way to do things. The tazer should only be used to incapacitate a suspect who may otherwise be dangerous.
Exactly. It's a joke that's become a part of the culture. Much like the alternative spelling of nybble. It's extemely logical to pluralise box as boxen, and to geeks, logic is more important than correctness.
but seriously, do you imagine that an atheist is going to win in Utah any time in the next fifty years? Dare to dream.
But does that really matter? Seems likely that the atheist would be a Democrat or independent. He'd never get a safe Republican seat like Utah. The important question is how much of an effect godlessness would have in the swing states. I'd like to see how the figures break down in different states.
I must say that this is a stark contrast to Britain where a candidate puttingtoo much emphasis on his religion would be viewed with a certain level of distrust.
I don't know. I do know that the card portion on its own isn't a valid licence. Your two examples, neither of you were really doing anything wrong, and it contains all the information they needed at the time. Not sure if they'd be so easy going about it if it was something more serious. Maybe it would be enough.
The abstract isn't the patent. It's just a summary of what the patent is for.
The actual patent is a specific means of implementing the invention. This means that lots of people can have a patent on different ways to achieve a similar result.
It's very unlikely that he had his driving licence with him. UK driving licences are annoying large A4 pieces of paper, and when stopped you're asked to bring it to a police station at a later date (Yes. This is absolutely stupoid and slightly annoying).
But I think it was probably some sort of escalation. An Illegal u-turn would possibly result in a talking to and a fine + points on the licence. I bet something else happened. Like there was something illegal about the car (e.g. untaxed, or the guy had no insurance), and somehow each time they found something wrong, they found evidence of another crime.
A lot of the old people are outdated. I know some people who are absolute geniuses when it comes to assembly language, and can do some amazing stuff with bitplanes but simply haven't kept up with the state of the art.
We need people who understand C++ and 3D geometry and working as part of a team. Some of them learn this. Others end up doing contract work.
The guy making the decisions is going to have his prejudices. Typically someone in the decision chain will be someone who did a CS degree and is suspicious of anything to ospecifically targetted at games development. Modules on game development would be perfectly reasonable, and probably of interest to an employer, but so are computer graphics, AI, and anything that requires a decent understanding of how computers work.
Perhaps you wouldn't want that sort of person hiring at your games company, but it's the sort of person you're very likely to have.
I think part of the problem is that all properties have explicit values. People can't help but think that a property is "worth" say £/$/160, even though if you have 2 reds, it's worth giving up something disproportionate in value to get the other one, even if the other player will benefit from it more.
But surely they know what patents Linux infringes on, or at least the ones that it might do. Why can't they tell us? Don;t they have some responsibility to minimise their damages?
Of any comapany that asserts that another is violating its intellectual property, but refuses to say exactly what. SCO and:CueCat both tried this and were widely ridiculed.
Annoying. Most people use house rules, which makes the game last forever. While it's possible to be tactical, too many people treat it as a zero sum game, making trades a lot rarer than thy should be.
Most of the Spiel Des Jahres award winners are much better.
Scrabble
I love this game. Can cause a fight though, when there's an argument about whether sequitur, for example, is a valid word.
chess
One of the greatest games ever, but also something of an acquired taste, I'd say.
Canasta
Not played it myself, but you can have a lot of fun with a simple deck of playing cards.
I agree with you though. A friend of mine holds weekly boardgaming sessions, which are a lot of fun and much more sociable than most video games.
Sorry. That was me. I also added the module that executes arbitrary code downloaded by a network application, and the code that requires root access for trivial applications. Did I do something wrong?
Slashdot Mirror
Ada Lovelace's contribution was somewhat exaggerated as well. Plus she was a bit of a nut. I'd recommend Doran Swade's "The Cogwheel Brain" - about Babbage and the Science Museums recreation of the difference engine.
As for Grace Hopper, while there's a lot of exaggeration, I'm sure she contributed a lot to computing.
Plutonium was created in the 1940's. Marie Curie died in the 1930's.
What is interesting, in a disturbiung way, is that Marie Curies workbooks that she used while discovering radium are still considered dangerously radioactive.
It's about time they opened up a museum showing the truth.
It's quite clear that there's a consipracy amongst godless scientists to cover up the clear existence of God, and to disprove the clear evidence in the bible that the animals were created, and then man was created. And after man, God created the animals. It says so in the bible, so it must be true. and if the bible is false, then how did the eye evolve? And what are all those fossils doing at the tops of mountains?
I hope they disprove other heretics such as Keplar, who believed the earth went round the sun, when a simple observation of the sun rising, and any rational interpretation of the bible will prov that the opposite is true.
And a lot of the women looked like Raquel Welch.
It's surprising just how functional Office 95 is on a 200MHz PC with plenty of RAM.
Well, yes. If you go about this the wrong way, then you make the situation worse, but it is possible.
You are assuming people aren't easily manipulated. There are various techniques that you can use. People will defer to authority, and will be a lot less aggressive if you appear to be on their side. You have to have the confidence to march in there as though you own the place, and be able to convince the cops by your attitude that you have every right to tell them what to do. You also have to appear not to be a college student. More to the point, you have to oust the good ffear thing he's got going without it being apparent that that's what you're trying to do. And you also have to remember that civility and reason is subjective. Someone who appears to agree with the cop will be seen by him as a good guy who's on the same side.
He was being confrontational and belligerant. A psychologist will be ab le to explain this better, but what tends to happen when an authority figure starts to lose control of the situation is they get violent. It would be possible for someone with the right level of authority to step in and take charge of the situation. Human nature makes us deer to authority. If you can make it clear that you're on their side, they will not be hostile towards you.
Anyway - basically my point is there are ways to handle this. There are also ways not to handle this. A mass move towards the police would probably have started a riot. The right words and attitude at the right time may well have persuaded them to back down a little and prevent the scene from getting worse.
Yes. There are more subtle ways to step in. Step up to the officer (Ideally between him and the victim) and say something like "Don't you think he's had enough". Keep asking questions if they're hostile. Key points here is that you are being non-threatening, and also taking control by asking a question.
But it requires a lot of confidence to march in and take control.
Should the cops have just left? When someone is where they are not supposed to be, acting belligerent and confrontational, refusing to cooperate, should the police just leave? Maybe the police should only arrest those that are cooperative.
Why the dichotomy? Don't they teach cops basic "come-along" techniques in the US?
Put the guy in a forarm-elbow lock. It's uncomfortable but only really painful if the guy resists. So you can easily pull him outside and politely let him scream blue murder when he's out.
Using a tazer on someone as punishment for disobeying an order is not the way to do things. The tazer should only be used to incapacitate a suspect who may otherwise be dangerous.
Exactly. It's a joke that's become a part of the culture. Much like the alternative spelling of nybble. It's extemely logical to pluralise box as boxen, and to geeks, logic is more important than correctness.
Ninntendo fans are violent psychos who take potshots at their natural enemies - Sony customers. Sony customers are much more docile and peaceful.
Not everyone's motivation is the size of their paycheck.
Quite True. Michael Bloomberg (Mayor of NY) draws a salary of $1 per year.
but seriously, do you imagine that an atheist is going to win in Utah any time in the next fifty years? Dare to dream.
But does that really matter? Seems likely that the atheist would be a Democrat or independent. He'd never get a safe Republican seat like Utah. The important question is how much of an effect godlessness would have in the swing states. I'd like to see how the figures break down in different states.
I must say that this is a stark contrast to Britain where a candidate puttingtoo much emphasis on his religion would be viewed with a certain level of distrust.
I don't know. I do know that the card portion on its own isn't a valid licence. Your two examples, neither of you were really doing anything wrong, and it contains all the information they needed at the time. Not sure if they'd be so easy going about it if it was something more serious. Maybe it would be enough.
I would use emacs. The only thing is, it lacks a decent text editor.
The abstract isn't the patent. It's just a summary of what the patent is for.
The actual patent is a specific means of implementing the invention. This means that lots of people can have a patent on different ways to achieve a similar result.
It's very unlikely that he had his driving licence with him. UK driving licences are annoying large A4 pieces of paper, and when stopped you're asked to bring it to a police station at a later date (Yes. This is absolutely stupoid and slightly annoying).
But I think it was probably some sort of escalation. An Illegal u-turn would possibly result in a talking to and a fine + points on the licence. I bet something else happened. Like there was something illegal about the car (e.g. untaxed, or the guy had no insurance), and somehow each time they found something wrong, they found evidence of another crime.
A lot of the old people are outdated. I know some people who are absolute geniuses when it comes to assembly language, and can do some amazing stuff with bitplanes but simply haven't kept up with the state of the art.
We need people who understand C++ and 3D geometry and working as part of a team. Some of them learn this. Others end up doing contract work.
The guy making the decisions is going to have his prejudices. Typically someone in the decision chain will be someone who did a CS degree and is suspicious of anything to ospecifically targetted at games development. Modules on game development would be perfectly reasonable, and probably of interest to an employer, but so are computer graphics, AI, and anything that requires a decent understanding of how computers work.
Perhaps you wouldn't want that sort of person hiring at your games company, but it's the sort of person you're very likely to have.
Well. Sorry. It's surprisingly hard to come up with specific examples of things that Microsoft has done wrong.
I think part of the problem is that all properties have explicit values. People can't help but think that a property is "worth" say £/$/160, even though if you have 2 reds, it's worth giving up something disproportionate in value to get the other one, even if the other player will benefit from it more.
But surely they know what patents Linux infringes on, or at least the ones that it might do. Why can't they tell us? Don;t they have some responsibility to minimise their damages?
Of any comapany that asserts that another is violating its intellectual property, but refuses to say exactly what. SCO and :CueCat both tried this and were widely ridiculed.
Monopoly - very competitive...
Annoying. Most people use house rules, which makes the game last forever. While it's possible to be tactical, too many people treat it as a zero sum game, making trades a lot rarer than thy should be.
Most of the Spiel Des Jahres award winners are much better.
Scrabble
I love this game. Can cause a fight though, when there's an argument about whether sequitur, for example, is a valid word.
chess
One of the greatest games ever, but also something of an acquired taste, I'd say.
Canasta
Not played it myself, but you can have a lot of fun with a simple deck of playing cards.
I agree with you though. A friend of mine holds weekly boardgaming sessions, which are a lot of fun and much more sociable than most video games.
Sorry. That was me. I also added the module that executes arbitrary code downloaded by a network application, and the code that requires root access for trivial applications. Did I do something wrong?