As to saving the republic... I'm honestly coming to the conclusion that we're going to have to follow in the footsteps of the founders and rebel.
And no, I'm not talking about some stupid militia shit. Things change. Wars aren't fought the same way they were 200 years ago... why would rebellions? I'm frankly thinking that the solution is to use systematic civic disobedience to render enforcement and regulatory systems ineffective.
Hack the system.
First, go through its assumptions. Then exploit them. Things it just assumes as givens but which are themselves merely tendencies... are fallacies. You can exploit it.
Second, all enforcement regimes have limited resources. Once disobedience crosses a certain threshold enforcement is impossible.
Third, empower alternative structures to regulate the system...either at a different level of government or something more anarchic to replace existing authority.
Think of the revolution if it happened in a William Gibson novel.
No battle lines. No muskets. War as they say is politics by other means. So the objective would be to make a point writ in tooth and claw that is not being made in the conventional media space. This is unsettling, extreme, dangerous, etc... But the system is so manifestly corrupt and entrenched in that corruption that it might be the only way. Voters have sent their politicians to Washington for generations with them promising things that they ultimately vote against when push comes to shove.
Why? Bribed, manipulated, or always liars... the net result is that the voters vote for X and get Y.
One of the things that is at the core of the American republic is a core of militancy. This notion of an "or else"... and eventually that chip is going to be called. If we don't play it, then the elites will know they can do whatever they want because the population are peasants at that point.
Alright, so I didn't consider the EM thing meaning stuff would just fly out the other side. But even then, do the distribution patterns of mass make any sense?
And considering that we're admitting the existence of space time AND theorizing an ever present STUFF that is flowing through us at all times... is this model the best model?
Sometimes when you get all these corrections I think it pays to step back and consider if we didn't make a false assumption earlier on.
Possibly there is a better model that explains all of this rather than improbable dark matter.
... who invaded who's country? Might the Ukrainians have done it? Sure... terrified, overwhelmed, outgunned, under trained... sure... they could have done it. But the Russians are to blame for that either way because they're the ones that panicked the kittens and pushed their backs against the wall. Raise your hand if you think the Ukrainians started this shit? No one thinks that. Raise your hand if you think the Ukrainians have a crack military or even a competent government? Okay.
So what the actual fuck?
Now am I saying the Ukrainians did do it? No... For all I know it was the Russians that did it or their proxies. But it really doesn't matter.
This is the IRS email thing all over again... "oh you can't have the email because I destroyed it"... *click* I will blow your fucking brains out if you don't hand it over... I am not fucking around. "Oh THAT email... why didn't you ask... it was right up my cunt... here you go."
hmmm... The lensing thing I'm going to put a pin in and skip over to what I feel is the critical issue...
The distribution. Now you're saying that because dark matter doesn't react electromagetically... it doesn't fall into gravity wells? That makes no sense. To the contrary it is electromagnetic reactions that tends to keep gas etc from falling into gravity wells. What inflates stars and keeps the mass from collapsing into a singularity?
EM radiation.
Okay... so your dark matter doesn't react with the repulsive force of EM but does react with the attractive force of gravity... and you think this will cause dark matter to NOT collapse into existing matter pockets or form its own singularities?
How does that make sense?
If DM is applying an attractive force by gravity then it is likewise being PULLED just as it pulls. And that means its going to fall into gravity wells... and since it doesn't react with EM... there is nothing to stop it from just collapsing into a dark matter blackhole.
Frankly this "it doesn't react with EM" concept poses more problems than it solves. I think you'd do better with the "dark matter is just regular matter we haven't detected". Saying it is a totally different type of matter that doesn't react with EM makes it even more improbable that it would have this distribution pattern you want.
And even if it were just regular undetected matter... the distribution pattern is still implausible.
And let me just add another problem with dark matter.
Drag. If Dark matter is basically everywhere then that means stars are PLOWING into it as they orbit the galactic center. That would have an effect on stars not unlike as satellite scrapping the top of earth's atmosphere... it would slow down the stars can cause them to fall into the galactic core.
But that's just icing on the cake. The distribution is the cake.
Bingo bango bongo. People get set in their ways. And changing databases is... treated with the same trepidation that a man goes through when offered open heart surgery. I mean... you have to NEED to go in there before you even consider touching that shit.
And so businesses that don't need to change anything will often not change aspects of their core infrastructure for... decades. Again, IRS and a few banks have mainframes running software from the 70s. No really.
But new companies are going to be able to start from scratch and that means choosing what makes sense "today"... and that's not Oracle in most cases.
And for the big legacy institutions... eventually the patching and juryrigging and spaghettifying becomes unmanageable... and an upgrade becomes inevitable... and that's when the likes of Oracle have to justify themselves.
And none of that is made better by the generally shitty way they treat customers. I mean... people WANT to leave them if only out of spite. Oracle keeps copping this attitude of "make my day"... who the fuck do they think they are? Their software hasn't change remarkably in awhile and they think no one hasn't been able to copy the functionality? Come the fuck on, Oracle.
No, the good will of someone is not required for your position to be ad hominem.
The person you're arguing against could be Hitler/Darth Vader/etc and an argument against a point on the basis of the character of the person making the argument would still be ad hominem.
If Vader walks up to you with his black cape and says "There is a kitten in this box"... the fact that he's Vader does not mean there is or is not a kitten in the box.
If Vader issues a scientific study with all his data disclosed as well as repeatable methodology then you can't dismiss vader's study simply because he's a dark lord of the sith.
As to lensing near galaxies, that doesn't prove dark matter.
What that proves is a distortion in space time or something of that nature near galaxies. Now the only thing we know of that can do that IS matter. So when we see that we say "clearly matter". The problem with that is that the way the galaxies are behaving suggests there might be something else going on.
The dark matter concept is a deus ex machina solution. You don't actually know what is going on there. And if it is dark matter, you then need to explain why the dark matter is distributed differently from the regular matter. Actions have equal and opposite reactions, no? So if the dark matter is acting on the stars and bending light... then the matter there should be acting on the dark matter in turn. And that would incline the dark matter to concentrate in the core of the galaxy and then distribute itself throughout the disc in roughly the same way that the conventional matter is distributed. And if it does that... and it must under existing theory... then the acceleration curves would be the same thing we see in the solar system.
The ONLY way dark matter can do what you want it to do is if its distribution doesn't follow the same rules as regular matter. And given that both of them apparently respond to gravity... dark matter MUST respond like regular matter in regards to gravity.
Opposing theories? I have them of course but I'm not arrogant enough to think any of them have merit without evidence. My only observation here is that "dark matter" doesn't make sense because it couldn't be distributed that way if it responds to gravity.
There's no significant faction that is arguing against all flaws in nuclear power. You're trying to create a balance where it doesn't exist which would justify the behavior of the anti nuclear lobby.
There is no balance and no justification. Of course you'll find SOMEONE taking that position but no significant faction.
As to the problems with nuclear power... so far as I've seen, the biggest issue is the cost structure due to out of date fear based regulations actually makes nuclear power less safe because it becomes impractical to replace old systems with new ones or to even examine what is going on for fear that political elements will exploit that to shut the system down.
Oh... and the the issue with warehousing nuclear waste which isn't a big deal unless the radicals make it a big deal.
If there is a problem with their research then you can cite the issue when it is published and base your criticism on flaws in the research.
Who is doing the research or who is paying for it is not relevant. Dismissing research on that basis is literally ad hominem.
period.
No no. Shhhhh....
Period.
Text... fucking... Book.
You do not get to dismiss research because X did it or Y paid for it. If you can do that then you'd have to dismiss most research because the people doing most research have preconceptions. And the people paying for the research often have vested interests in the outcome of research.
If a conflict of interest is enough to invalidate any science then you'd have to throw out Darwin's work amongst others.
There is no anger. He's calling me angry as an insult. He's an AC troll. He's clearly been e-stalking me on the site and likes to make little snipe comments at me in most threads.
To be angry, I'd have to be afraid. You don't get anger without the fright/flight response getting triggered and flipping to fight.
Anger is an institutional emotion used to transition the defensive posture of fear into an aggressive offensive posture in anger. Anger is generally a response to an attack or damage or a threat.
If you're not getting harmed or threatened by something then you're not going to get angry. The little twit wishes to conflate hostility with anger. Hostility has no inherent emotional component. A shark or a wolf can be hostile without being angry. I company can do a hostile take over without being angry. A warlord can invade a neighboring tribe... slaughtering, raping, and pillaging... with no anger.
The reason he believes "anger" is an insult is because anger cannot exist without fear on my part. Thus by calling me angry he presumes to call me cowardly or intimidated or threatened by him. This inflates his ego and argues in favor of his superiority which is something trolls generally crave.
When he says I'm angry, he's really just sticking his troll tongue out and saying "You Mad Bro?"... and the reason trolls desire that is that in making someone angry they scared/threatened/intimidated them... sort of like spooking a deer or a cow makes you feel superior to the herd beast. This large powerful animal just bolts.
No fear. And where there is no fear... there is no anger.
Let me first make the obvious admission that I'm a layman. I've never claimed to be otherwise.
Now lets get to the issue here, so you're saying dark matter is backed up by things besides galactic rotation? Can you cite why those require dark matter? Are you saying there are transparent gravitational lenses out in the middle of the universe that bend light without giving any indication of mass big enough to do it?
Regardless, my main issue with dark matter is not the concept but what it conveniently skips over. The distribution of dark matter should match the distribution of non-dark matter. If they both respond to gravitation then dark matter should be concentrated in the core of galaxies just like the non-dark matter with the distribution of dark matter largely following the same pattern as regular matter in the disc. If it does that then the galaxies will spin faster BUT the acceleration curve would fall off the same way it does in our solar system.
The fact that it doesn't... if we assume dark matter... you're saying that the distribution of dark matter is DIFFERENT from regular matter. And that that distribution basically just HAPPENS to flatten the acceleration curve for every spiral galaxy's disc.
Think of the odds of that. that's like rolling a zillion dice and having them all land on six. I don't buy it.
My issue is not the dark matter itself. Its the distribution of dark matter that I find unsupportable. Why is dark matter distributed that way if it exists? I know of no physical law that would cause regular matter to distribute with most of the mass in the core of the galaxy and yet have dark matter distribute with a disproportionate amount of mass in the disc. Explain it.
Am I laymen? Sure. But that doesn't invalidate the question or the position unless ad hominem has suddenly become a valid rebuttal.
hmmm... not sure if we're talking about the same thing.
If we take any one galaxy as a given example and compare it to itself... we fine that the curve is very nearly flat once you leave the closest stars. That is, the disc is generally uniform. You're saying that isn't true for all spiral galaxies... can you give me an example of where it isn't true? I've never seen that.
The big problem with the dark matter hypothesis is that it is too convenient. Its a deus ex machina solution. And the observations are too weird for it to just be some extra mass especially when it is that much extra mass distributed just "so"... I mean, even if we buy into the missing mass, explain why the mass would be distributed that way? There's nothing in the known laws of physics that would explain a distribution pattern like that. The distribution of dark matter should be equivalent to the distribution of non-dark matter. And that would lead to the galaxies behaving basically as we initially believed they would... aka like the solar system writ large. The fact that they don't is not explained by the presence of dark matter because even if there is dark matter that doesn't explain why the distribution of mass is different.
I've seen nothing that explains that.
Possibly I'm crazy or ignorant or something... but the whole thing strikes me epicycles all over again.
This comes from a layman so by all means, high hat me. But know that that is just ad hominem and will be taken as such.
Again, I saw a video of them doing it with 500 dollars in equipment... so... while I concede that using the wrong equipment... such as a blender and a pineapple will not be useful. I think there is evidence that fairly cheap equipment can do it.
What Is more, I believe the people I saw doing this were using argon gas to stop the oxidization.
There are defections. Am I claiming Oracle doesn't have a good product? Of course not. That is part of what makes this so frustrating. If they had a shit product you could just dump them and move on.
That said, their competitors are getting more competitive and whether in fact they've caught up is itself debatable.
An issue with databases is that it is a massive pain in the ass to switch from A to B. So much so that a great many institutions maintain databases that have remained largely unchanged since the 1970s. I shit you not. The IRS has a few of those and most of the older banks have some monsters in the basement like that as well.
Why is that? because it is a pain in the fucking ass to change. So you just don't.
Reasons are given for why the change doesn't happen but its mostly concerns about the cost of rebuilding the entire database in a new technology. The stories of that going tits up are legend.
And frankly, I think that's mostly what is keeping the wheels on at Oracle these days. You cited MS's SQL implementation as the alternative to Oracle... there are fucking dozens of alternatives and lets be frank... neither of us have tried them all. The shitty behavior from Oracle makes customers mad. And when customers get mad they start talking to the competition and trying stuff out. And the chances of once of those venders being able to provide a package that the customer is happy with especially given the catharsis of firing Oracle is quite high.
All you need is a big upgrade cycle to justify the change. And ideally that change is not just topical but goes down into the bones of the organization where the monsters dwell.
the video I saw on youtube of people doing it claimed that price point. Possibly they were full of shit or possibly they were not including certain things in that price or possibly they just have a really good deal with a supplier. I don't know.
Point is... if it turns out to be 1000... that's still nothing to an auto body shop.
... the foaming at the mouth abolitionists are the only ones that are being unreasonable. There isn't a contrary faction saying "lets have unsafe nuclear power".
You can have a welfare state Or You can have open immigration.
You cannot have both.
Personally, I'd be happier with open immigration and no welfare state. Just me. But everyone is addicted to the welfare so that means immigration has to be tightly controlled.
And here someone accuses me of not being politically correct. Politically correct is frequently idiotic. You cannot have open immigration and a welfare state. I'm not even going to explain why... its self evident. And that fact that pointing out the obvious there is politically incorrect should be a wake up call to believers in political correctness that the whole framework is useless.
They're getting pressed on all sides. Their once unique features can be obtained from other suppliers.
We had an article on here not long ago with the United Kingdom dumping Oracle for a competitor. I think I remember the Australians and the Canadians doing the same thing.
Business as usual is just going to lead to managed decline.
A big point here is that Special Relativity is increasingly looking shaky. I know that is heresy/crack-pottery.
But consider dark matter and dark energy.
The stars around galaxies spin with IDENTICAL angular velocity indifferent to distance. The stars near the core spin around with the SAME angular velocity as stars at the rim. That is... imagine if pluto was going around the Sun at the same rate as Mercury... EXACTLY as many rotations over a given unit of time. Precisely.
Now that's fucking weird. But that's how every star in the universe that we've seen is going around any spiral galaxy you'd like to mention.
Now to explain that... they introduce "dark matter"... aka they say there is EXACTLY enough missing mass that we're not seeing in every galaxy in the universe to give us precisely this effect. How likely does that sound? Its fucking impossible. It also means that something like 98 percent of all mass in the universe is dark matter... because that's basically how much the gravitational calculations are off by. If your theory is 98 percent off the mark... its fucking wrong.
That means there's something wrong with our understanding of gravitation.... space time... etc.
And dark energy is basically just an admission that we don't know why the universe is expanding or where the energy for that to happen is coming from. I'm not even going to deal with that. I'll stick with the dark matter.
Add to that, Quantum Mechanics doesn't line up with Special Relativity. We've been trying to unify the theories for decades and they don't match up.
The argument is always that Quantum mechanics is wrong or there is some missing theory between the two that we have to discover.
But consider if the problem is Special Relativity itself.
I know I sound insane to you now. Because this would mean Einstein was wrong. I would argue that is because I'm saying something audacious more than being actually crazy. But the proof is in the pudding, no?
So when we talk about the fate of the universe and how according to Special Relativity it must become one thing or another... I don't really credit that. I don't think Special Relativity has a clue what is going to happen at that scale.
We have so many patches and work arounds for errors in SR. All complex electronics have work arounds built into them that effectively correct for errors in SR as relates to their context.
All the communication's sats have corrections that according to SR they shouldn't need... but they do.
I think we need to take a good hard look at SR because I think we might have made some fundamental error. What that error was?... Not sure. But dark matter itself is such a huge fucking problem that the universe is basically just laughing at us. Think about that again... all the stars moving with the SAME angular velocity around the center of the spiral.
And just to underscore my point, most of the prominent scientists that predated Einstein had a very different notion of how the universe worked. There were quite a few opponents that said he was wrong. And internet famous fellows like Nikola Tesla didn't buy SR at all. Tesla didn't buy it because SR contradicts certain things about electrical fields that Tesla was very aware of... Again, to this day, we use special corrections with complex electrical devices that according to SR we shouldn't need. But we do.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not going to hold my breath.
As to saving the republic... I'm honestly coming to the conclusion that we're going to have to follow in the footsteps of the founders and rebel.
And no, I'm not talking about some stupid militia shit. Things change. Wars aren't fought the same way they were 200 years ago... why would rebellions? I'm frankly thinking that the solution is to use systematic civic disobedience to render enforcement and regulatory systems ineffective.
Hack the system.
First, go through its assumptions. Then exploit them. Things it just assumes as givens but which are themselves merely tendencies... are fallacies. You can exploit it.
Second, all enforcement regimes have limited resources. Once disobedience crosses a certain threshold enforcement is impossible.
Third, empower alternative structures to regulate the system...either at a different level of government or something more anarchic to replace existing authority.
Think of the revolution if it happened in a William Gibson novel.
No battle lines. No muskets. War as they say is politics by other means. So the objective would be to make a point writ in tooth and claw that is not being made in the conventional media space. This is unsettling, extreme, dangerous, etc... But the system is so manifestly corrupt and entrenched in that corruption that it might be the only way. Voters have sent their politicians to Washington for generations with them promising things that they ultimately vote against when push comes to shove.
Why? Bribed, manipulated, or always liars... the net result is that the voters vote for X and get Y.
One of the things that is at the core of the American republic is a core of militancy. This notion of an "or else"... and eventually that chip is going to be called. If we don't play it, then the elites will know they can do whatever they want because the population are peasants at that point.
I am not a peasant.
Alright, so I didn't consider the EM thing meaning stuff would just fly out the other side. But even then, do the distribution patterns of mass make any sense?
And considering that we're admitting the existence of space time AND theorizing an ever present STUFF that is flowing through us at all times... is this model the best model?
Sometimes when you get all these corrections I think it pays to step back and consider if we didn't make a false assumption earlier on.
Possibly there is a better model that explains all of this rather than improbable dark matter.
If she seriously still hasn't handed over the original drive then I want her sent off to the Prisoner's island.
Give her a number and "be seeing you."
https://youtu.be/tra3Zi5ZWa0?t...
... who invaded who's country? Might the Ukrainians have done it? Sure... terrified, overwhelmed, outgunned, under trained... sure... they could have done it. But the Russians are to blame for that either way because they're the ones that panicked the kittens and pushed their backs against the wall. Raise your hand if you think the Ukrainians started this shit? No one thinks that. Raise your hand if you think the Ukrainians have a crack military or even a competent government? Okay.
So what the actual fuck?
Now am I saying the Ukrainians did do it? No... For all I know it was the Russians that did it or their proxies. But it really doesn't matter.
This is the IRS email thing all over again... "oh you can't have the email because I destroyed it"... *click* I will blow your fucking brains out if you don't hand it over... I am not fucking around. "Oh THAT email... why didn't you ask... it was right up my cunt... here you go."
Seriously... liar liar pants suit on fire.
hmmm... The lensing thing I'm going to put a pin in and skip over to what I feel is the critical issue...
The distribution. Now you're saying that because dark matter doesn't react electromagetically... it doesn't fall into gravity wells? That makes no sense. To the contrary it is electromagnetic reactions that tends to keep gas etc from falling into gravity wells. What inflates stars and keeps the mass from collapsing into a singularity?
EM radiation.
Okay... so your dark matter doesn't react with the repulsive force of EM but does react with the attractive force of gravity... and you think this will cause dark matter to NOT collapse into existing matter pockets or form its own singularities?
How does that make sense?
If DM is applying an attractive force by gravity then it is likewise being PULLED just as it pulls. And that means its going to fall into gravity wells... and since it doesn't react with EM... there is nothing to stop it from just collapsing into a dark matter blackhole.
Frankly this "it doesn't react with EM" concept poses more problems than it solves. I think you'd do better with the "dark matter is just regular matter we haven't detected". Saying it is a totally different type of matter that doesn't react with EM makes it even more improbable that it would have this distribution pattern you want.
And even if it were just regular undetected matter... the distribution pattern is still implausible.
And let me just add another problem with dark matter.
Drag. If Dark matter is basically everywhere then that means stars are PLOWING into it as they orbit the galactic center. That would have an effect on stars not unlike as satellite scrapping the top of earth's atmosphere... it would slow down the stars can cause them to fall into the galactic core.
But that's just icing on the cake. The distribution is the cake.
Bingo bango bongo. People get set in their ways. And changing databases is... treated with the same trepidation that a man goes through when offered open heart surgery. I mean... you have to NEED to go in there before you even consider touching that shit.
And so businesses that don't need to change anything will often not change aspects of their core infrastructure for... decades. Again, IRS and a few banks have mainframes running software from the 70s. No really.
But new companies are going to be able to start from scratch and that means choosing what makes sense "today"... and that's not Oracle in most cases.
And for the big legacy institutions... eventually the patching and juryrigging and spaghettifying becomes unmanageable... and an upgrade becomes inevitable... and that's when the likes of Oracle have to justify themselves.
And none of that is made better by the generally shitty way they treat customers. I mean... people WANT to leave them if only out of spite. Oracle keeps copping this attitude of "make my day"... who the fuck do they think they are? Their software hasn't change remarkably in awhile and they think no one hasn't been able to copy the functionality? Come the fuck on, Oracle.
I'd sooner walk around in a hockey mask while giggling.
No, the good will of someone is not required for your position to be ad hominem.
The person you're arguing against could be Hitler/Darth Vader/etc and an argument against a point on the basis of the character of the person making the argument would still be ad hominem.
If Vader walks up to you with his black cape and says "There is a kitten in this box"... the fact that he's Vader does not mean there is or is not a kitten in the box.
If Vader issues a scientific study with all his data disclosed as well as repeatable methodology then you can't dismiss vader's study simply because he's a dark lord of the sith.
So no.
Ad hominem is ad hominem.
As to lensing near galaxies, that doesn't prove dark matter.
What that proves is a distortion in space time or something of that nature near galaxies. Now the only thing we know of that can do that IS matter. So when we see that we say "clearly matter". The problem with that is that the way the galaxies are behaving suggests there might be something else going on.
The dark matter concept is a deus ex machina solution. You don't actually know what is going on there. And if it is dark matter, you then need to explain why the dark matter is distributed differently from the regular matter. Actions have equal and opposite reactions, no? So if the dark matter is acting on the stars and bending light... then the matter there should be acting on the dark matter in turn. And that would incline the dark matter to concentrate in the core of the galaxy and then distribute itself throughout the disc in roughly the same way that the conventional matter is distributed. And if it does that... and it must under existing theory... then the acceleration curves would be the same thing we see in the solar system.
The ONLY way dark matter can do what you want it to do is if its distribution doesn't follow the same rules as regular matter. And given that both of them apparently respond to gravity... dark matter MUST respond like regular matter in regards to gravity.
Opposing theories? I have them of course but I'm not arrogant enough to think any of them have merit without evidence. My only observation here is that "dark matter" doesn't make sense because it couldn't be distributed that way if it responds to gravity.
There's no significant faction that is arguing against all flaws in nuclear power. You're trying to create a balance where it doesn't exist which would justify the behavior of the anti nuclear lobby.
There is no balance and no justification. Of course you'll find SOMEONE taking that position but no significant faction.
As to the problems with nuclear power... so far as I've seen, the biggest issue is the cost structure due to out of date fear based regulations actually makes nuclear power less safe because it becomes impractical to replace old systems with new ones or to even examine what is going on for fear that political elements will exploit that to shut the system down.
Oh... and the the issue with warehousing nuclear waste which isn't a big deal unless the radicals make it a big deal.
If there is a problem with their research then you can cite the issue when it is published and base your criticism on flaws in the research.
Who is doing the research or who is paying for it is not relevant. Dismissing research on that basis is literally ad hominem.
period.
No no. Shhhhh....
Period.
Text... fucking... Book.
You do not get to dismiss research because X did it or Y paid for it. If you can do that then you'd have to dismiss most research because the people doing most research have preconceptions. And the people paying for the research often have vested interests in the outcome of research.
If a conflict of interest is enough to invalidate any science then you'd have to throw out Darwin's work amongst others.
No.
That's ad hominem. No.
There is no anger. He's calling me angry as an insult. He's an AC troll. He's clearly been e-stalking me on the site and likes to make little snipe comments at me in most threads.
To be angry, I'd have to be afraid. You don't get anger without the fright/flight response getting triggered and flipping to fight.
Anger is an institutional emotion used to transition the defensive posture of fear into an aggressive offensive posture in anger. Anger is generally a response to an attack or damage or a threat.
If you're not getting harmed or threatened by something then you're not going to get angry. The little twit wishes to conflate hostility with anger. Hostility has no inherent emotional component. A shark or a wolf can be hostile without being angry. I company can do a hostile take over without being angry. A warlord can invade a neighboring tribe... slaughtering, raping, and pillaging... with no anger.
The reason he believes "anger" is an insult is because anger cannot exist without fear on my part. Thus by calling me angry he presumes to call me cowardly or intimidated or threatened by him. This inflates his ego and argues in favor of his superiority which is something trolls generally crave.
For the lolz:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
When he says I'm angry, he's really just sticking his troll tongue out and saying "You Mad Bro?"... and the reason trolls desire that is that in making someone angry they scared/threatened/intimidated them... sort of like spooking a deer or a cow makes you feel superior to the herd beast. This large powerful animal just bolts.
No fear.
And where there is no fear... there is no anger.
http://slashdot.org/comments.p...
https://youtu.be/IkfBflLg8gY?t...
Let me first make the obvious admission that I'm a layman. I've never claimed to be otherwise.
Now lets get to the issue here, so you're saying dark matter is backed up by things besides galactic rotation? Can you cite why those require dark matter? Are you saying there are transparent gravitational lenses out in the middle of the universe that bend light without giving any indication of mass big enough to do it?
Regardless, my main issue with dark matter is not the concept but what it conveniently skips over. The distribution of dark matter should match the distribution of non-dark matter. If they both respond to gravitation then dark matter should be concentrated in the core of galaxies just like the non-dark matter with the distribution of dark matter largely following the same pattern as regular matter in the disc. If it does that then the galaxies will spin faster BUT the acceleration curve would fall off the same way it does in our solar system.
The fact that it doesn't... if we assume dark matter... you're saying that the distribution of dark matter is DIFFERENT from regular matter. And that that distribution basically just HAPPENS to flatten the acceleration curve for every spiral galaxy's disc.
Think of the odds of that. that's like rolling a zillion dice and having them all land on six. I don't buy it.
My issue is not the dark matter itself. Its the distribution of dark matter that I find unsupportable. Why is dark matter distributed that way if it exists? I know of no physical law that would cause regular matter to distribute with most of the mass in the core of the galaxy and yet have dark matter distribute with a disproportionate amount of mass in the disc. Explain it.
Am I laymen? Sure. But that doesn't invalidate the question or the position unless ad hominem has suddenly become a valid rebuttal.
hmmm... not sure if we're talking about the same thing.
If we take any one galaxy as a given example and compare it to itself... we fine that the curve is very nearly flat once you leave the closest stars. That is, the disc is generally uniform. You're saying that isn't true for all spiral galaxies... can you give me an example of where it isn't true? I've never seen that.
The big problem with the dark matter hypothesis is that it is too convenient. Its a deus ex machina solution. And the observations are too weird for it to just be some extra mass especially when it is that much extra mass distributed just "so"... I mean, even if we buy into the missing mass, explain why the mass would be distributed that way? There's nothing in the known laws of physics that would explain a distribution pattern like that. The distribution of dark matter should be equivalent to the distribution of non-dark matter. And that would lead to the galaxies behaving basically as we initially believed they would... aka like the solar system writ large. The fact that they don't is not explained by the presence of dark matter because even if there is dark matter that doesn't explain why the distribution of mass is different.
I've seen nothing that explains that.
Possibly I'm crazy or ignorant or something... but the whole thing strikes me epicycles all over again.
This comes from a layman so by all means, high hat me. But know that that is just ad hominem and will be taken as such.
Again, I saw a video of them doing it with 500 dollars in equipment... so... while I concede that using the wrong equipment... such as a blender and a pineapple will not be useful. I think there is evidence that fairly cheap equipment can do it.
What Is more, I believe the people I saw doing this were using argon gas to stop the oxidization.
There are defections. Am I claiming Oracle doesn't have a good product? Of course not. That is part of what makes this so frustrating. If they had a shit product you could just dump them and move on.
That said, their competitors are getting more competitive and whether in fact they've caught up is itself debatable.
An issue with databases is that it is a massive pain in the ass to switch from A to B. So much so that a great many institutions maintain databases that have remained largely unchanged since the 1970s. I shit you not. The IRS has a few of those and most of the older banks have some monsters in the basement like that as well.
Why is that? because it is a pain in the fucking ass to change. So you just don't.
Reasons are given for why the change doesn't happen but its mostly concerns about the cost of rebuilding the entire database in a new technology. The stories of that going tits up are legend.
And frankly, I think that's mostly what is keeping the wheels on at Oracle these days. You cited MS's SQL implementation as the alternative to Oracle... there are fucking dozens of alternatives and lets be frank... neither of us have tried them all. The shitty behavior from Oracle makes customers mad. And when customers get mad they start talking to the competition and trying stuff out. And the chances of once of those venders being able to provide a package that the customer is happy with especially given the catharsis of firing Oracle is quite high.
All you need is a big upgrade cycle to justify the change. And ideally that change is not just topical but goes down into the bones of the organization where the monsters dwell.
the video I saw on youtube of people doing it claimed that price point. Possibly they were full of shit or possibly they were not including certain things in that price or possibly they just have a really good deal with a supplier. I don't know.
Point is... if it turns out to be 1000... that's still nothing to an auto body shop.
The issue was that his angry rant against his boss was seen by his boss. The "error" is in venting in places where you'll get in trouble for it.
And this notion that venting makes you angrier? What? All evidence points to the contrary.
... the foaming at the mouth abolitionists are the only ones that are being unreasonable. There isn't a contrary faction saying "lets have unsafe nuclear power".
You can have a welfare state
Or
You can have open immigration.
You cannot have both.
Personally, I'd be happier with open immigration and no welfare state. Just me. But everyone is addicted to the welfare so that means immigration has to be tightly controlled.
And here someone accuses me of not being politically correct. Politically correct is frequently idiotic. You cannot have open immigration and a welfare state. I'm not even going to explain why... its self evident. And that fact that pointing out the obvious there is politically incorrect should be a wake up call to believers in political correctness that the whole framework is useless.
Wrong.
http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/...
They're getting pressed on all sides. Their once unique features can be obtained from other suppliers.
We had an article on here not long ago with the United Kingdom dumping Oracle for a competitor. I think I remember the Australians and the Canadians doing the same thing.
Business as usual is just going to lead to managed decline.
A big point here is that Special Relativity is increasingly looking shaky. I know that is heresy/crack-pottery.
But consider dark matter and dark energy.
The stars around galaxies spin with IDENTICAL angular velocity indifferent to distance. The stars near the core spin around with the SAME angular velocity as stars at the rim. That is... imagine if pluto was going around the Sun at the same rate as Mercury... EXACTLY as many rotations over a given unit of time. Precisely.
Now that's fucking weird. But that's how every star in the universe that we've seen is going around any spiral galaxy you'd like to mention.
Now to explain that... they introduce "dark matter"... aka they say there is EXACTLY enough missing mass that we're not seeing in every galaxy in the universe to give us precisely this effect. How likely does that sound? Its fucking impossible. It also means that something like 98 percent of all mass in the universe is dark matter... because that's basically how much the gravitational calculations are off by. If your theory is 98 percent off the mark... its fucking wrong.
That means there's something wrong with our understanding of gravitation.... space time... etc.
And dark energy is basically just an admission that we don't know why the universe is expanding or where the energy for that to happen is coming from. I'm not even going to deal with that. I'll stick with the dark matter.
Add to that, Quantum Mechanics doesn't line up with Special Relativity. We've been trying to unify the theories for decades and they don't match up.
The argument is always that Quantum mechanics is wrong or there is some missing theory between the two that we have to discover.
But consider if the problem is Special Relativity itself.
I know I sound insane to you now. Because this would mean Einstein was wrong. I would argue that is because I'm saying something audacious more than being actually crazy. But the proof is in the pudding, no?
So when we talk about the fate of the universe and how according to Special Relativity it must become one thing or another... I don't really credit that. I don't think Special Relativity has a clue what is going to happen at that scale.
We have so many patches and work arounds for errors in SR. All complex electronics have work arounds built into them that effectively correct for errors in SR as relates to their context.
All the communication's sats have corrections that according to SR they shouldn't need... but they do.
I think we need to take a good hard look at SR because I think we might have made some fundamental error. What that error was?... Not sure. But dark matter itself is such a huge fucking problem that the universe is basically just laughing at us. Think about that again... all the stars moving with the SAME angular velocity around the center of the spiral.
And just to underscore my point, most of the prominent scientists that predated Einstein had a very different notion of how the universe worked. There were quite a few opponents that said he was wrong. And internet famous fellows like Nikola Tesla didn't buy SR at all. Tesla didn't buy it because SR contradicts certain things about electrical fields that Tesla was very aware of... Again, to this day, we use special corrections with complex electrical devices that according to SR we shouldn't need. But we do.
Precisely. Violate the first law and your security fails. You let the enemy get the system in their greasy hands and its over.