Will now parade around with a colossal advertising campaign about how IE7 takes you to the Next Generation of the Internet, or Enables the Future of Web Interaction to Integrate You Ass Off, or whatever.
So Microsoft is getting into Internet-based weight loss? Sweet.
Today, we've found ways to remove ourselves from death as much as possible through antibiotics, modern surgical techniques and doing things like pasturizing milk. The unintended consequence of this advancement has become a society that is absolutely mortified of death. We think we can outrun, outsmart or create technology to put off the inevitable but the reality is we can't.
Loss of religion has got to have something to do with it as well. If you've got a Heaven to go to, how bad can it really be to croak it?
What if every astronaut believed that, if he died while serving the interests of NASA, he got paradise and 72 virgins to make it pleasant? That's an extreme example, but it makes the point.
Since the advent of the video game they've seen this apprehension dissipate, which undermines the argument that somehow behavior exhibited in the virtual world remains in the virtual world when the switch is flipped off.
Not to mention the original argument is a prime example of a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. It might be true, but temporal proximity doesn't prove anything. What you really need is a study of likely carjackers: sit them in front of GTA for a few hours a day and see if they do it less.
Evidently Harvard would have us believe that a butterfly that looks like a butterfly, smells like a butterfly, and flies like a butterfly, but has a different colour stipe on its wing....
They're saying that they may have found a mechanism whereby speciation occurs in the absence of geographic barriers.
It's important to note: they have NOT observed speciation itself. Both creationists and evolutionists can breathe easy - the status quo has not changed, however much uninformed evolutionists say it has.
Me, I'm not going to sit with either camp for a long while yet. I'm certainly not dumb enough to say "given our planet's rich biodiversity, 'speciation' clearly happens regularly...." That'd be begging the question.
As far as I can tell, the reason behind it is a reproductive strategy. The butterfly, and other insects, has hundreds of offspring, only a few of which will survive to adulthood and then have hundreds more offspring.
The grandparent isn't asking about its advantages, he's asking about its mechanism.
Who cares about the pay if the coworkers are like Baywatch?
I've lifeguarded before. The coworkers are nothing like Baywatch. For one thing, they're human, whereas Baywatch is a television show. For another - and I hope this doesn't come as a shock - reality is nothing like television. Even if they are "like Baywatch," they don't spend much time running and bouncing - more like sitting in a chair under an umbrella, getting POed at hormonal teenage boys who won't leave them alone because they look like a television show.
It's a hidden invitation to ask, Mr. Literal. There's no other reason for it to be there, because it's never referenced.
I lifeguarded and know that lifeguards make from minimum wage starting at a Red Cross facility to ~15/hr as head guard. Find yourself an IT manager and your mystery is solved.
Can some moderator mod the parent up? He's a Christian, telling it like it is from a Christian point of view. The grandparent poster is a disaffected Christian using a prophecy about how things will be, rather than actual proscriptions for behavior, to smear all of Christianity.
I have mod points today, and I was going to mod this up - but I think I need to make a point.
The parent post is Score:1, Informative as of now. -1 Overrated, +1 Informative were the moderations. Here's my question: who do these moderators think they are that they can try to silence people who present unpopular facts?
Isn't there a Firefox extension that lets you disable Flash ads?
I use the Flashblock extension. It substitutes any Flash object for a button you can press if you want to see it. You can also whitelist sites. I highly recommend it.
With all the sub-surface scattering and all that Weta used, Gollum's relative different to 'human standard' meant that they probably got the balance right there. After all, objects like vehicles, landscapes and stuff seem easy to be able to pull the wool over peoples eyes.
I'm pretty sure it's the physics and facial expressions, actually. If something looks real, it's got to act real. We spend our whole lives processing visual input and understanding how things about us move. We can tell other people apart because we spend our whole lives scrutinizing facial features. If something's body or face looks right but moves wrong, it seems very out-of-place.
Gollum was a special case because everything Serkis did was motion-captured for either direct translation to movement or as a hint for the animators. Vehicles are easy to fool people with because the rigid-body physics underlying their movement is very well-understood. These squishy human bodies are much more difficult.
Why, when I was your age, we had to walk ten miles to school, program in BASIC...
That's nothing. We had to walk a hundred miles to school and program in BASIC both ways. Our games were based on revolutionary unary technology. And we liked it!
Oh, and we slept in a wet paper bag in the middle of the freeway, and every night our dad would come home and beat us to sleep. Yada yada yada...
Whatever happened to scientific restraint? Whatever happened to waiting for the right evidence?
It's really hard to get excited about waiting. If you want a good amount of science to happen, you have to let them get excited about something, even if it's a wild guess. It's fine as long as they'll admit they were wrong.
Wow! How on Earth did you get your browser to grab that dialog text, paste it into the comment box, capitalize it, and press the "Submit" button for you?
Am I the only person who finds these "NO CARRIER" jokes particularly unfunny? Does it have to do with the fact that I know HTTP is an essentially stateless protocol, and if your line dies your browser doesn't magically hit the "Submit" button for you?
Or maybe the formula is getting tired. Anyway, I can't be the only one.
(Hint: If Linux took eight mouse clicks to turn on its firewall, the Windows trolls would be bitching about how hard Linux is to use and how "Grandma" will never be able to run it.)
SuSE 9.2: Three clicks, type root password, press ENTER, two more clicks, and I'm configuring the firewall. Not much better. Come on, Windows trolls - where are you?
Of course, the firewall is enabled out-of-the-box and is quite paranoid by default.
Slashdot Mirror
Will now parade around with a colossal advertising campaign about how IE7 takes you to the Next Generation of the Internet, or Enables the Future of Web Interaction to Integrate You Ass Off, or whatever.
So Microsoft is getting into Internet-based weight loss? Sweet.
Today, we've found ways to remove ourselves from death as much as possible through antibiotics, modern surgical techniques and doing things like pasturizing milk. The unintended consequence of this advancement has become a society that is absolutely mortified of death. We think we can outrun, outsmart or create technology to put off the inevitable but the reality is we can't.
Loss of religion has got to have something to do with it as well. If you've got a Heaven to go to, how bad can it really be to croak it?
What if every astronaut believed that, if he died while serving the interests of NASA, he got paradise and 72 virgins to make it pleasant? That's an extreme example, but it makes the point.
Since the advent of the video game they've seen this apprehension dissipate, which undermines the argument that somehow behavior exhibited in the virtual world remains in the virtual world when the switch is flipped off.
Not to mention the original argument is a prime example of a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. It might be true, but temporal proximity doesn't prove anything. What you really need is a study of likely carjackers: sit them in front of GTA for a few hours a day and see if they do it less.
Evidently Harvard would have us believe that a butterfly that looks like a butterfly, smells like a butterfly, and flies like a butterfly, but has a different colour stipe on its wing....
They're saying that they may have found a mechanism whereby speciation occurs in the absence of geographic barriers.
It's important to note: they have NOT observed speciation itself. Both creationists and evolutionists can breathe easy - the status quo has not changed, however much uninformed evolutionists say it has.
Me, I'm not going to sit with either camp for a long while yet. I'm certainly not dumb enough to say "given our planet's rich biodiversity, 'speciation' clearly happens regularly...." That'd be begging the question.
As far as I can tell, the reason behind it is a reproductive strategy. The butterfly, and other insects, has hundreds of offspring, only a few of which will survive to adulthood and then have hundreds more offspring.
The grandparent isn't asking about its advantages, he's asking about its mechanism.
As have I, but I retained my sense of humor!
...getting POed at hormonal teenage boys who won't leave them alone because they look like a television show.
Er...
Maybe my sense of humor was too dry? Too weird?
At any rate, you will NOT accuse me of not having a sense of humor! I do! I can feel it, inside my eyes, all the time, waiting to burst out!
(Someone hand me a shovel.)
Who cares about the pay if the coworkers are like Baywatch?
I've lifeguarded before. The coworkers are nothing like Baywatch. For one thing, they're human, whereas Baywatch is a television show. For another - and I hope this doesn't come as a shock - reality is nothing like television. Even if they are "like Baywatch," they don't spend much time running and bouncing - more like sitting in a chair under an umbrella, getting POed at hormonal teenage boys who won't leave them alone because they look like a television show.
What part of "don't ask" is beyond you?
It's a hidden invitation to ask, Mr. Literal. There's no other reason for it to be there, because it's never referenced.
I lifeguarded and know that lifeguards make from minimum wage starting at a Red Cross facility to ~15/hr as head guard. Find yourself an IT manager and your mystery is solved.
Mod parent down, offtopic.
Who peed in your Corn Flakes this morning?
Did you do it yourself?
I'm curious - what is it like being a lifeguard *and* an IT manager?
I'd guess that every once in a while, he gets confused and tries to give a server mouth-to-mouth or reboot a drowned swimmer.
Can some moderator mod the parent up? He's a Christian, telling it like it is from a Christian point of view. The grandparent poster is a disaffected Christian using a prophecy about how things will be, rather than actual proscriptions for behavior, to smear all of Christianity.
Grandparent: 5, Parent: 1.
WTF????
Come on, Slashdot.
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig
Pragmatists. Sheesh.
The thing is, in the process, you might learn some valuable things about yourself, the pig, and music.
I have mod points today, and I was going to mod this up - but I think I need to make a point.
The parent post is Score:1, Informative as of now. -1 Overrated, +1 Informative were the moderations. Here's my question: who do these moderators think they are that they can try to silence people who present unpopular facts?
Come on, Slashdot. You can do better than this.
Isn't there a Firefox extension that lets you disable Flash ads?
I use the Flashblock extension. It substitutes any Flash object for a button you can press if you want to see it. You can also whitelist sites. I highly recommend it.
Don't you mean the ARM? Analog Rights Management? Harry Potter isn't going to be released as an ebook.
With all the sub-surface scattering and all that Weta used, Gollum's relative different to 'human standard' meant that they probably got the balance right there. After all, objects like vehicles, landscapes and stuff seem easy to be able to pull the wool over peoples eyes.
I'm pretty sure it's the physics and facial expressions, actually. If something looks real, it's got to act real. We spend our whole lives processing visual input and understanding how things about us move. We can tell other people apart because we spend our whole lives scrutinizing facial features. If something's body or face looks right but moves wrong, it seems very out-of-place.
Gollum was a special case because everything Serkis did was motion-captured for either direct translation to movement or as a hint for the animators. Vehicles are easy to fool people with because the rigid-body physics underlying their movement is very well-understood. These squishy human bodies are much more difficult.
Wow, I thought I spell checked that too. Sorry Spelling/grammar nazis I'll try to do better.
I darn you to heck!
Why, when I was your age, we had to walk ten miles to school, program in BASIC...
That's nothing. We had to walk a hundred miles to school and program in BASIC both ways. Our games were based on revolutionary unary technology. And we liked it!
Oh, and we slept in a wet paper bag in the middle of the freeway, and every night our dad would come home and beat us to sleep. Yada yada yada...
Come on people...you don't have to be a scientist to figure out that steam + discolored water = underwater volcano.
They're scientists. They can't be 100% sure of anything, really.
Unless it's a methane lake on Titan. Or evidence of life on Mars. Or a new planet that "weighs" x metric tons orbiting a red giant.
Well, crap. It must be Godzilla, and I'm 100% sure of it.
Great - you've just fired the one employee you know will always and forever more, triple check everything she ever does.
Can you be certain that will be true if there's no negative consequence for not doing it?
Hint: No.
Whatever happened to scientific restraint? Whatever happened to waiting for the right evidence?
It's really hard to get excited about waiting. If you want a good amount of science to happen, you have to let them get excited about something, even if it's a wild guess. It's fine as long as they'll admit they were wrong.
M$...
Hi. Are you twelve? Do you realize it makes you look like a total yutz when you do that?
You had a good point, but you lost me with the dollar signs. In writing circles, it's called a "roadblock." Try to avoid it.
Wow! How on Earth did you get your browser to grab that dialog text, paste it into the comment box, capitalize it, and press the "Submit" button for you?
I wish mine diOUT OF BUFFERS
the original can be found at: ww!@#$_
COCARRIER
Am I the only person who finds these "NO CARRIER" jokes particularly unfunny? Does it have to do with the fact that I know HTTP is an essentially stateless protocol, and if your line dies your browser doesn't magically hit the "Submit" button for you?
Or maybe the formula is getting tired. Anyway, I can't be the only one.
(Hint: If Linux took eight mouse clicks to turn on its firewall, the Windows trolls would be bitching about how hard Linux is to use and how "Grandma" will never be able to run it.)
SuSE 9.2: Three clicks, type root password, press ENTER, two more clicks, and I'm configuring the firewall. Not much better. Come on, Windows trolls - where are you?
Of course, the firewall is enabled out-of-the-box and is quite paranoid by default.
Remember when Microsoft shipped a virus?
I don't, actually. When was that?