The sound samples I listened to on the NPR article were fingernails-on-the-chalkboard hard to listen to, the audio equivalent of the Uncanny Valley. But, as music is really nothing more than patterns, it should be entirely possible to have a machine assemble enough human-generated patterns with enough elaboration and finesse to be listenable. A sampled instrument library is basically exactly that, anyways.
I hate it when people making purely subjective, moral arguments disguise it as being factual. There is no right or wrong "side" of history one could be on.
What I am objecting to is the "Evil Matrix" assumption that underlies that first, summary paragraph. Re-read that paragraph again. The author's assumption shows up in literally every sentence.
These types of articles are a waste of time. There is nothing new to be learned.
...what is happening in America and what is happening in Britain are entwined. Brexit and Trump are entwined. The Trump administration’s links to Russia and Britain are entwined. And Cambridge Analytica is one point of focus through which we can see all these relationships in play; it also reveals the elephant in the room as we hurtle into a general election: Britain tying its future to an America that is being remade - in a radical and alarming way - by Trump.
I stopped reading right there. When you start your research with your conclusion already in hand, you're no longer researching, you're just finding additional support for your thesis.
And I no longer bother with Trump Is Teh Evil articles anymore. People have had their say, 10 times over. Enough.
I've never heard of this happening with a Chromebook. There are two ways to run Linux on these boxes, either in a chroot (Crouton) or to wipe the machine and install Linux.
For machines that just need a Linux app or two, I use Crouton. Crouton has a sweet Chrome plugin that pushes X Window frames to a browser tab. So, you can install a Linux desktop manager, and push the whole GUI desktop inside a tab. Or, you can install without a desktop manager at all, and just push the selected app inside a tab. This works remarkably well. Need Audacity on a Chromebook? No problem. Need Dropbox client? Again, no problem.
What's really great about this is you actually WANT Chrome to get all of its automatic updates, especially of the drivers and security. That really is a huge selling point for Chromebooks. Set it and forget it.
For machines that will really be a Linux desktop, such as my dev box, I did open up the laptop, replace the tiny SSD, and remove the silly little sticker that was preventing me from writing my own boot loader image. 10 mins., tops.
When being tolerant, let's be as generous as possible. When we start making exceptions and putting qualifiers on freedom, that's when things start to go belly-up.
Well, that's better than the selective form of tolerance that is practiced today. I'll take the generous form of tolerance any day, thank you. Somehow, I think that being more generous will result in more freedom.
Ooh, Le Dernier Combat, that is one strange flick! A terrific introduction to French film-making. This is the kind of film that got Luc Besson noticed back in his early days.
Another under-appreciated gem. I keep coming back to this movie time and time again, and it has yet to lose its appeal. The acting is very well done, but I would mainly credit the story arc, which follows a kind of relentless path of inevitability, but avoids being predictable. This is great story-telling, and very believable.
This is one of those rare movies based on a book where they keep the heart and soul of the book while changing just about every detail that can be changed, almost like an alternate-history version of the book. The acting is just outstanding, you won't find a better A-list cast brought to a SciFi movie. And the camera work! Truly an unforgettable movie.
An under-appreciated masterpiece of solid, taut film-making of the kind they used to routinely turn out by the dozens every year. The tech has aged, of course, but the concepts are still as fresh as the day it was made.
1. Never, EVER borrow to pay off borrowing. That's a fiscal death spiral. If you can't pay it back, better to tell them and then take the hit. Maybe they'll settle for less than you owe. 2. Never borrow to pay for a sunk cost. Only borrow for something that increases in value over time. 3. Build up a cash hedge over time so you can borrow from yourself.
I'm still very much attracted to the idea of using my phone as my primary computing device, but not so much that I want to carry the weight of Unity around with me. ChromeOS is already showing us how to seamlessly inject Android apps into the desktop space.
I actually was pretty impressed. It's definitely more than just a note-taking app, it's focused more on collaboration. It does have a document surface to record the collaboration (you make lists of things, images, text, and so on), but the final result isn't supposed to be the pretty-print product, it's supposed to be everyone's collective ideas, comments, links, contributions, etc.
It did warm my heart to see markdown as an export format, and actually that kind of makes a lot of sense given the intent (just get 'er done, forget the fancy formatting.)
It is interesting that you are able to describe an entire movie, yet still miss it what it was about.
I say this not as a criticism, because you sound like a smart person, you were obviously paying close attention, and you write about it very well. It is just very interesting because you clearly had some expectations about what the movie would be about, and those expectations were completely unfilled.
What you may not have been expecting is to see a movie that is entirely about EMOTION. Not plot. Not dialog. Not even characters, really. The plot, such as it is, is about intertwining emotional journeys, not physical ones. Each of the time jumps follows a clear arc in that journey, almost literally step by step. You have to jump through time -- you have to! -- to understand how each character wound up where they are today, and where they are going. That's because emotional development lags outward events, sometimes by years and years. And sometimes, outward events continue on, but emotional development stops in its tracks.
This is probably not a young person's movie, and again I say that with no disrespect intended. But I think you have to have some life experience with how discontinuous emotional development and outward events truly are, if you are going to appreciate this movie.
Let me just one other thing that might help. The intentional use of the long shots, the shots from a distance, vs. the shots close up are used to reflect the inner, emotional state you are supposed to be feeling. If the director wants you to feel detached, the camera sits back to audience-at-a-play distance, and events play out flatly. If he wants you to feel like you're gaining some insight, he uses a long lens with a close up, as if you're listening inside someone's head. It's really quite brilliantly done. And notice that the only time you really feel the full, borderless, bright light is when they are in the boat. The camera then pulls way out so you can take it all in. You're supposed to feel unbounded and free, which explains why the boat is so important in the emotional story. On land, everything is sad and laden. But we can't be sad all the time, there must be some release. The sea is that.
This is a very insightful point, I would mod this up if I could. The answer to ANY question depends entirely on how you frame it. In fact, he who controls the framing controls the range of possible answers, so one of the biggest goals of any (dis)information campaign is to seize the framing first, then you can let people ask "any" question they like.
"The red ink was partially the result of an increased caseload from Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program, which was expanded under the Affordable Care Act. Medi-Cal reimbursements are so low that UCSF loses 40 cents on every dollar it spends on those patients’ treatment, he says."
Multiples of 3 are just so much more useful in everyday life than multiples of 10. I used the base 12 pica/point system in printing for many years, and always admired how trivially easy it was to calculate layout proportions. The human attention is drawn strongly to things in threes: three panels, three points in an argument, three parts to a story, and many others.
Is it just me, or is every evolution-based hypothesis -- and I do mean every single one I've ever read -- just a conclusion shopping for facts that may or may not support it, but cannot ever be proved experimentally? Shouldn't scientific hypothesis at least be testable? Let's leave metaphysics, philosophy, theology and all the other theoretical disciplines out of scientific inquiry. There's no experiment you could ever devise that would prove or disprove the hypothesis that monogamy caused the male penis bone to disappear, it's ludicrous on its face.
Science is just ONE system of thought, not "the" system of thought. Not every darn square peg has to go through the round hole. No pun intended.
Is it just me, or does every evolution-based hypothesis -- and I do mean, literally, every, single one I've ever read -- seem like nothing more than an effect in search of a satisfactorily matching cause? When did we start coming to scientific conclusions first, and then go shopping for facts that "prove" them?
These aren't even testable, now that I think of it. How could you possibly verify the truth or falsity of something like "monogamy caused the penis bone to disappear"? Shouldn't a requirement of a scientific hypothesis be that it can be experimentally demonstrated?
Let's leave metaphysics and theology to the theoretical disciplines.
Slashdot Mirror
The sound samples I listened to on the NPR article were fingernails-on-the-chalkboard hard to listen to, the audio equivalent of the Uncanny Valley. But, as music is really nothing more than patterns, it should be entirely possible to have a machine assemble enough human-generated patterns with enough elaboration and finesse to be listenable. A sampled instrument library is basically exactly that, anyways.
how, exactly? I doubt you could install Linux on a school's enterprise laptop either.
I hate it when people making purely subjective, moral arguments disguise it as being factual. There is no right or wrong "side" of history one could be on.
it'd be a shame if something happened to it. Now, be a good boy and reauthorize the section.
What I am objecting to is the "Evil Matrix" assumption that underlies that first, summary paragraph. Re-read that paragraph again. The author's assumption shows up in literally every sentence.
These types of articles are a waste of time. There is nothing new to be learned.
FTY:
I stopped reading right there. When you start your research with your conclusion already in hand, you're no longer researching, you're just finding additional support for your thesis.
And I no longer bother with Trump Is Teh Evil articles anymore. People have had their say, 10 times over. Enough.
I've never heard of this happening with a Chromebook. There are two ways to run Linux on these boxes, either in a chroot (Crouton) or to wipe the machine and install Linux.
For machines that just need a Linux app or two, I use Crouton. Crouton has a sweet Chrome plugin that pushes X Window frames to a browser tab. So, you can install a Linux desktop manager, and push the whole GUI desktop inside a tab. Or, you can install without a desktop manager at all, and just push the selected app inside a tab. This works remarkably well. Need Audacity on a Chromebook? No problem. Need Dropbox client? Again, no problem.
What's really great about this is you actually WANT Chrome to get all of its automatic updates, especially of the drivers and security. That really is a huge selling point for Chromebooks. Set it and forget it.
For machines that will really be a Linux desktop, such as my dev box, I did open up the laptop, replace the tiny SSD, and remove the silly little sticker that was preventing me from writing my own boot loader image. 10 mins., tops.
When being tolerant, let's be as generous as possible. When we start making exceptions and putting qualifiers on freedom, that's when things start to go belly-up.
Well, that's better than the selective form of tolerance that is practiced today. I'll take the generous form of tolerance any day, thank you. Somehow, I think that being more generous will result in more freedom.
Ooh, Le Dernier Combat, that is one strange flick! A terrific introduction to French film-making. This is the kind of film that got Luc Besson noticed back in his early days.
Another under-appreciated gem. I keep coming back to this movie time and time again, and it has yet to lose its appeal. The acting is very well done, but I would mainly credit the story arc, which follows a kind of relentless path of inevitability, but avoids being predictable. This is great story-telling, and very believable.
This is one of those rare movies based on a book where they keep the heart and soul of the book while changing just about every detail that can be changed, almost like an alternate-history version of the book. The acting is just outstanding, you won't find a better A-list cast brought to a SciFi movie. And the camera work! Truly an unforgettable movie.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
An under-appreciated masterpiece of solid, taut film-making of the kind they used to routinely turn out by the dozens every year. The tech has aged, of course, but the concepts are still as fresh as the day it was made.
If you don't decide UP FRONT how much is "enough" then it just becomes a horizon line. No matter how much you have, it's never enough.
1. Never, EVER borrow to pay off borrowing. That's a fiscal death spiral. If you can't pay it back, better to tell them and then take the hit. Maybe they'll settle for less than you owe.
2. Never borrow to pay for a sunk cost. Only borrow for something that increases in value over time.
3. Build up a cash hedge over time so you can borrow from yourself.
I'm still very much attracted to the idea of using my phone as my primary computing device, but not so much that I want to carry the weight of Unity around with me. ChromeOS is already showing us how to seamlessly inject Android apps into the desktop space.
Yes, like the fact that his wife had cancer, perhaps? Just because the HR person found "a" reason to fire him, it doesn't mean it was "the" reason.
That molecule gets trapped in there, feeding crazy signals to the brain, until it just happens to fall out.
I actually was pretty impressed. It's definitely more than just a note-taking app, it's focused more on collaboration. It does have a document surface to record the collaboration (you make lists of things, images, text, and so on), but the final result isn't supposed to be the pretty-print product, it's supposed to be everyone's collective ideas, comments, links, contributions, etc.
It did warm my heart to see markdown as an export format, and actually that kind of makes a lot of sense given the intent (just get 'er done, forget the fancy formatting.)
I could see myself using it, sure.
It is interesting that you are able to describe an entire movie, yet still miss it what it was about.
I say this not as a criticism, because you sound like a smart person, you were obviously paying close attention, and you write about it very well. It is just very interesting because you clearly had some expectations about what the movie would be about, and those expectations were completely unfilled.
What you may not have been expecting is to see a movie that is entirely about EMOTION. Not plot. Not dialog. Not even characters, really. The plot, such as it is, is about intertwining emotional journeys, not physical ones. Each of the time jumps follows a clear arc in that journey, almost literally step by step. You have to jump through time -- you have to! -- to understand how each character wound up where they are today, and where they are going. That's because emotional development lags outward events, sometimes by years and years. And sometimes, outward events continue on, but emotional development stops in its tracks.
This is probably not a young person's movie, and again I say that with no disrespect intended. But I think you have to have some life experience with how discontinuous emotional development and outward events truly are, if you are going to appreciate this movie.
Let me just one other thing that might help. The intentional use of the long shots, the shots from a distance, vs. the shots close up are used to reflect the inner, emotional state you are supposed to be feeling. If the director wants you to feel detached, the camera sits back to audience-at-a-play distance, and events play out flatly. If he wants you to feel like you're gaining some insight, he uses a long lens with a close up, as if you're listening inside someone's head. It's really quite brilliantly done. And notice that the only time you really feel the full, borderless, bright light is when they are in the boat. The camera then pulls way out so you can take it all in. You're supposed to feel unbounded and free, which explains why the boat is so important in the emotional story. On land, everything is sad and laden. But we can't be sad all the time, there must be some release. The sea is that.
This is a very insightful point, I would mod this up if I could. The answer to ANY question depends entirely on how you frame it. In fact, he who controls the framing controls the range of possible answers, so one of the biggest goals of any (dis)information campaign is to seize the framing first, then you can let people ask "any" question they like.
"The red ink was partially the result of an increased caseload from Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program, which was expanded under the Affordable Care Act. Medi-Cal reimbursements are so low that UCSF loses 40 cents on every dollar it spends on those patients’ treatment, he says."
Multiples of 3 are just so much more useful in everyday life than multiples of 10. I used the base 12 pica/point system in printing for many years, and always admired how trivially easy it was to calculate layout proportions. The human attention is drawn strongly to things in threes: three panels, three points in an argument, three parts to a story, and many others.
Is it just me, or is every evolution-based hypothesis -- and I do mean every single one I've ever read -- just a conclusion shopping for facts that may or may not support it, but cannot ever be proved experimentally? Shouldn't scientific hypothesis at least be testable? Let's leave metaphysics, philosophy, theology and all the other theoretical disciplines out of scientific inquiry. There's no experiment you could ever devise that would prove or disprove the hypothesis that monogamy caused the male penis bone to disappear, it's ludicrous on its face. Science is just ONE system of thought, not "the" system of thought. Not every darn square peg has to go through the round hole. No pun intended.
Is it just me, or does every evolution-based hypothesis -- and I do mean, literally, every, single one I've ever read -- seem like nothing more than an effect in search of a satisfactorily matching cause? When did we start coming to scientific conclusions first, and then go shopping for facts that "prove" them? These aren't even testable, now that I think of it. How could you possibly verify the truth or falsity of something like "monogamy caused the penis bone to disappear"? Shouldn't a requirement of a scientific hypothesis be that it can be experimentally demonstrated? Let's leave metaphysics and theology to the theoretical disciplines.