"It's not Bush's fault. It's your fault. You elected him, you total and complete fuckwit."
I knew the slashdot crowd were losers, but I had not idea how far gone they really are.
You, sir, are not worth my time.
You will win the debate here in terms of mod points, I'm sure, but that's because the average slashdotter has the maturity and world knowledge of 15 years old.
Come to think of it, why *do* I waste my time here?
"Interesting, from experience the people who brag about a test score that is years or decades old are the ones who have done nothing since then that is worth bragging about. In other words their greatest accomplishment in life is a meaningless piece of paper. I recommend you stop bragging about such things."
Wrong. The reason I "bragged" about my math score on the GRE exam is that a) someone explicitly questioned my math ability in a insulting way, and b) it is an objective measure. I have published many papers since then, but they would be more or less meaningless to someone not in my field.
And if you are so smart, I recommend you grow up sometime soon.
"Otherwise it would be obvious. Had some trouble with math, too, right?"
I always love it when some yahoo attacks my intelligence. It gives me an excuse to brag about the fact that I scored in the top 1% on the GRE exam. The GRE (Graduate Records Exam) is the standard test taken by engineering graduates to get into graduate school (at least it was back in 1982). How did you do on your standard tests?
"The unrest against the goverment's tyranny is reaching a critical point."
You're deluded, dude. You must have missed the slashdot article a few days ago about the polling results that show 63% of Americans support the NSA operations.
"Expect another 'terrorist act' real soon to distract us from the issue of our eroding civil rights."
And you're paranoid too. Are you actually suggesting that the gov't is orchestrating terrorist attacks to consolidate its power?
Here's what's so ironic about the whole issue. The Bush administration has successfully kept the US free of terrorist attacks since 9/11/01. But his very success had lead to a sense of complacency, particularly among ultra-myopic Bush-haters.
In the book 1984, the government maintained a perpetual state of phoney war to distract the population. Today, the opposite is happening. We are in a real war with terrorist networks groups that swear they will kill us any way they can, yet the myopic deny reality and imagine that the war is phoney.
I wonder if a nuclear attack will wake them out of their stupor? Alas, probably not. They'll just blame it on Bush.
The point that always seems to be missed is that elements with longer half lives are actually *less* radioactive. Duh! That's *why* their half lives are longer!
Plutonium has a long half life, and it radioactivity level is very low. It's main toxicity is chemical, and that is vastly overblown. See
I think the fundamental problem is the lack of structure of most of the information on the Internet. It's mostly just one gigantic blob of amorphous text. Google may have a great search engine, but I am tired of getting results on condoms when I want information about LaTeX typesetting. XML was supposed to help solve this problem, but I'm still waiting for it to happen.
"Did you too have to remove your Linux partition or get special permission to use it to access the Internet? I have at least 4 friends who used to use Linux on their laptops to access the Internet but had to go to Windows due to such decrees."
No, it's not *that* bad. I don't think they will ever do anything like that. But I've been wrong before.
I work for the federal govt, and I recently received a notice from my organization stating that, for security reasons, only certain "standard" applications will be allowed. MS Office is one of them
I don't have the memo handy, but if I recall, it applied only to PCs and Macs. I'm not sure if "PC" means a "Windows PC" or if it also includes Linux PCs. So that may or may not leave the door open to OpenOffice (or other ODF-based suites) for Linux at least.
In any case, this mandate really burns me. Just when the world may be ready to start abandoning the MS monopoly, my organization is trying to reinforce it for "security" reasons.
The other thing that gets me is that if I protest, most of my colleagues will think I just have some sort of quirky, neurotic aversion to MS because Bill Gates is "too rich" or something. You'd be amazed how many otherwise well-informed technical people out there are truly clueless about the standards war going on.
"i will not say you are a racist, but i would say you are wrong. the typical white person no long commits open acts of hatred toward minorities. but instead we (white americans, probably in other countries too) show our racism when we do not show any ability to talk with a black woman, or a native american man, etc. when we are in line at the grocery store. it is little things like this that we each must do if we are to change the impression of the group as a whole."
I agree that more civility and friendliness will go a long way toward improving our society, but I don't think it's just a racial thing. Many people are just plain unfriendly regardless of race. I'm hardly the most friendly person myself, but at least I try once in a while.
I workout in the weight room at work a couple of times a week. I have seen some of the same people there for years, yet never once said hi to some of them. When I walk past them I sometimes try to make eye contact and at least give a little nod or something, but they just look away -- even if we're the only two people in the place. In fact, two black guys there are like that (along with some white guys too). The black guys give me the impression that they consider me hostile in some way, but I have no idea why. I'd be much more comfortable at least saying "Hi, how are ya?" once in a while rather than just pretending we can't even see each other.
The funny thing is that if we saw each other somewhere else by chance we'd probably say hi just because not doing so would just seem wierd. Why is it that people think they should ignore each other for years just because they are at the "usual" place? I don't know.
"You can be sure that only white racists will be prosecuted. Islamic hate will be tolerated, and no fines will be assesed on Canadian web sites that advocate the killing of infidels."
It's the usual double standard. Similarly, a white person is far more likely to be charged with a "hate crime" against a black person even though blacks commit something like 10 times more crimes against whites than vice versa. And how much do you want to bet that I will be called (or considered) a "racist" just for mentioning that fact?
"Nuclear power could very easily become the largest source of power for fixed location consumers. Existing coal and oil plants could simply be replaced with nuclear facilities. This eventual phase-out of legacy power supplies could easily cut carbon emissions by hundreds of tons per year."
GVI, The Graphical Voter Interface, is a GUI (Graphical User Interface) for voting, suitable for use in private or public elections. Although it could be adapted for online voting, it is currently intended only for conventional "precinct" voting. For security reasons, GVI does not require that the voter have access to a keyboard. It can handle write-ins and multi-language elections, and it can automate voting along party lines. GVI can be used for Condorcet Voting and Instant Runoff Voting, which allow voters to rank the candidates in order of preference. It can also be used for Approval Voting, which allows voters to select more than one candidate.
I do not "worship" the founding fathers, and any suggestion that I or anyone else does is a red herring.
And, yes, the founding fathers *were* visionaries. Yes, some of them had slaves, but slavery existed throughout the world, and they set the wheels in motion to eliminate it. I understand that Jefferson, for example, wanted to end slavery, but the world just wasn't ready for that idea yet.
The US did not invent slavery, but it did eliminate it. Of course the founding fathers shouldn't have had slaves, but you can't put yourself in their 18th century shoes and understand the mindset of the world at that time. Please don't kid yourself into believing otherwise.
"So The founding fathers did not want Democracy for America, but the people wanted it, So the FFs had to let at least some of the people vote, but they had to create a govt that was not easily controlled by voting."
I'd say they did one hell of a lot better than Marx and Lenin, eh?
They gave us freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. Who else did that -- before they did?
As for Madison's and Jefferson's aversion to direct democracy, I agree with them.
You make many interesting points, but please don't kid yourself into believing that you would have been able to see the world through your 21st century eyes in the 18th century.
The founding fathers were visionaries to whom you and I owe the very freedom we have to engage in this discussion. Please don't ever forget it.
America is not a pure democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic with democratic elections. A pure democracy would allow majorities to trample the rights of minorities, which is not a good idea.
And, yes, the founders wanted to protect property rights. That's an important part of individual freedom. In China, the communist government does not recognize property rights. Leave it to someone at slashdot to conflate the two.
A few years ago my wife was thinking about studying to become a court reporter. The training is very demanding, and I heard the dropout rate is about 95%, but the pay is good if not great.
In any case, I warned her about the potential for voice recognition technology to render court reporters obsolete. It probably won't happen, but the mere prospect tipped her in the direction of foregoing the opportunity. Was that a mistake?
The same concern applies also to medical transcription.
Hey, you make some good points. I'm surprised, however, that you waste your time on slashdot with ideas that profound.
To illustrate the concept of consciousness, I think of the color blue (or whichever color you prefer). Science tells us that the color blue is the result of an electromagnetic wave of a particular wavelength. It enters our eyes, then stimulates nerves to make us sense blue. But the sensation we call blue is *not* the process described by science. It is something altogether different. That is what consciousness is all about.
Scientists who question or dismiss the concept of consciousness actually scare me a bit. Apparently they believe we are all really nothing but complicated machines. But do they *really* believe that? I don't think so. If they did, would they be self-conscious in front of a crowd?
Congratulations to slashdot for actually addressing the issue of safety-critical software. Folks, this is a completely different world than, say, the world of games or google searches -- where 80% of the output is *expected* to be crap. And the right language for the job is Ada.
Slashdot Mirror
"It's not Bush's fault. It's your fault. You elected him, you total and complete fuckwit."
I knew the slashdot crowd were losers, but I had not idea how far gone they really are.
You, sir, are not worth my time.
You will win the debate here in terms of mod points, I'm sure, but that's because the average slashdotter has the maturity and world knowledge of 15 years old.
Come to think of it, why *do* I waste my time here?
"Interesting, from experience the people who brag about a test score that is years or decades old are the ones who have done nothing since then that is worth bragging about. In other words their greatest accomplishment in life is a meaningless piece of paper. I recommend you stop bragging about such things."
Wrong. The reason I "bragged" about my math score on the GRE exam is that a) someone explicitly questioned my math ability in a insulting way, and b) it is an objective measure. I have published many papers since then, but they would be more or less meaningless to someone not in my field.
And if you are so smart, I recommend you grow up sometime soon.
"I really hope your post is flamebait because if people really think like you we are all doomed."
Boy, you go me with that one! How can I reply to a content-free post?
And we must be all doomed, because my view is the majority view.
What amazes me is that such non-thinking is so common here on slashdot. Maybe it's just the 15-year-olds.
"Otherwise it would be obvious. Had some trouble with math, too, right?"
I always love it when some yahoo attacks my intelligence. It gives me an excuse to brag about the fact that I scored in the top 1% on the GRE exam. The GRE (Graduate Records Exam) is the standard test taken by engineering graduates to get into graduate school (at least it was back in 1982). How did you do on your standard tests?
"The unrest against the goverment's tyranny is reaching a critical point."
You're deluded, dude. You must have missed the slashdot article a few days ago about the polling results that show 63% of Americans support the NSA operations.
"Expect another 'terrorist act' real soon to distract us from the issue of our eroding civil rights."
And you're paranoid too. Are you actually suggesting that the gov't is orchestrating terrorist attacks to consolidate its power?
Here's what's so ironic about the whole issue. The Bush administration has successfully kept the US free of terrorist attacks since 9/11/01. But his very success had lead to a sense of complacency, particularly among ultra-myopic Bush-haters.
In the book 1984, the government maintained a perpetual state of phoney war to distract the population. Today, the opposite is happening. We are in a real war with terrorist networks groups that swear they will kill us any way they can, yet the myopic deny reality and imagine that the war is phoney.
I wonder if a nuclear attack will wake them out of their stupor? Alas, probably not. They'll just blame it on Bush.
A recent poll found that 37% of Americans are paranoid.
The point that always seems to be missed is that elements with longer half lives are actually *less* radioactive. Duh! That's *why* their half lives are longer!
Plutonium has a long half life, and it radioactivity level is very low. It's main toxicity is chemical, and that is vastly overblown. See
The Myth of Plutonium Toxicity
at http://russp.org/nucpower.htm
Thank you for that exegesis. I always knew that Lisp sucks, but now I know why!
I think the fundamental problem is the lack of structure of most of the information on the Internet. It's mostly just one gigantic blob of amorphous text. Google may have a great search engine, but I am tired of getting results on condoms when I want information about LaTeX typesetting. XML was supposed to help solve this problem, but I'm still waiting for it to happen.
"Did you too have to remove your Linux partition or get special permission to use it to access the Internet? I have at least 4 friends who used to use Linux on their laptops to access the Internet but had to go to Windows due to such decrees."
No, it's not *that* bad. I don't think they will ever do anything like that. But I've been wrong before.
I work for the federal govt, and I recently received a notice from my organization stating that, for security reasons, only certain "standard" applications will be allowed. MS Office is one of them
I don't have the memo handy, but if I recall, it applied only to PCs and Macs. I'm not sure if "PC" means a "Windows PC" or if it also includes Linux PCs. So that may or may not leave the door open to OpenOffice (or other ODF-based suites) for Linux at least.
In any case, this mandate really burns me. Just when the world may be ready to start abandoning the MS monopoly, my organization is trying to reinforce it for "security" reasons.
The other thing that gets me is that if I protest, most of my colleagues will think I just have some sort of quirky, neurotic aversion to MS because Bill Gates is "too rich" or something. You'd be amazed how many otherwise well-informed technical people out there are truly clueless about the standards war going on.
"i will not say you are a racist, but i would say you are wrong. the typical white person no long commits open acts of hatred toward minorities. but instead we (white americans, probably in other countries too) show our racism when we do not show any ability to talk with a black woman, or a native american man, etc. when we are in line at the grocery store. it is little things like this that we each must do if we are to change the impression of the group as a whole."
I agree that more civility and friendliness will go a long way toward improving our society, but I don't think it's just a racial thing. Many people are just plain unfriendly regardless of race. I'm hardly the most friendly person myself, but at least I try once in a while.
I workout in the weight room at work a couple of times a week. I have seen some of the same people there for years, yet never once said hi to some of them. When I walk past them I sometimes try to make eye contact and at least give a little nod or something, but they just look away -- even if we're the only two people in the place. In fact, two black guys there are like that (along with some white guys too). The black guys give me the impression that they consider me hostile in some way, but I have no idea why. I'd be much more comfortable at least saying "Hi, how are ya?" once in a while rather than just pretending we can't even see each other.
The funny thing is that if we saw each other somewhere else by chance we'd probably say hi just because not doing so would just seem wierd. Why is it that people think they should ignore each other for years just because they are at the "usual" place? I don't know.
"You can be sure that only white racists will be prosecuted. Islamic hate will be tolerated, and no fines will be assesed on Canadian web sites that advocate the killing of infidels."
It's the usual double standard. Similarly, a white person is far more likely to be charged with a "hate crime" against a black person even though blacks commit something like 10 times more crimes against whites than vice versa. And how much do you want to bet that I will be called (or considered) a "racist" just for mentioning that fact?
"Nuclear power could very easily become the largest source of power for fixed location consumers. Existing coal and oil plants could simply be replaced with nuclear facilities. This eventual phase-out of legacy power supplies could easily cut carbon emissions by hundreds of tons per year."
Excuse me, but its hundreds of tons per *minute*.
See http://russp.us/nucfacts.html
http://russp.org/GVI.htm
GVI, The Graphical Voter Interface, is a GUI (Graphical User Interface) for voting, suitable for use in private or public elections. Although it could be adapted for online voting, it is currently intended only for conventional "precinct" voting. For security reasons, GVI does not require that the voter have access to a keyboard. It can handle write-ins and multi-language elections, and it can automate voting along party lines. GVI can be used for Condorcet Voting and Instant Runoff Voting, which allow voters to rank the candidates in order of preference. It can also be used for Approval Voting, which allows voters to select more than one candidate.
And it's FREE in every conceivable way!
I do not "worship" the founding fathers, and any suggestion that I or anyone else does is a red herring.
And, yes, the founding fathers *were* visionaries. Yes, some of them had slaves, but slavery existed throughout the world, and they set the wheels in motion to eliminate it. I understand that Jefferson, for example, wanted to end slavery, but the world just wasn't ready for that idea yet.
The US did not invent slavery, but it did eliminate it. Of course the founding fathers shouldn't have had slaves, but you can't put yourself in their 18th century shoes and understand the mindset of the world at that time. Please don't kid yourself into believing otherwise.
"So The founding fathers did not want Democracy for America, but the people wanted it, So the FFs had to let at least some of the people vote, but they had to create a govt that was not easily controlled by voting."
I'd say they did one hell of a lot better than Marx and Lenin, eh?
They gave us freedom of speech and the right to bear arms. Who else did that -- before they did?
As for Madison's and Jefferson's aversion to direct democracy, I agree with them.
You make many interesting points, but please don't kid yourself into believing that you would have been able to see the world through your 21st century eyes in the 18th century.
The founding fathers were visionaries to whom you and I owe the very freedom we have to engage in this discussion. Please don't ever forget it.
America is not a pure democracy. It is a Constitutional Republic with democratic elections. A pure democracy would allow majorities to trample the rights of minorities, which is not a good idea.
And, yes, the founders wanted to protect property rights. That's an important part of individual freedom. In China, the communist government does not recognize property rights. Leave it to someone at slashdot to conflate the two.
I say yes, select a small set of "standard" languages -- but let me select them:
-- Python for prototyping and in-house analysis
-- Ada for large, long-lasting, and/or critical systems
Yes, I'm serious.
... that the clueless morons at Slasdot are in the (small) minority.
You left out one:
He is a certified flight instructor with instrument and multiengine ratings.
I remember reading this guy's bio several years ago when he was running for some AIAA office. I was amazed.
What posesses a guy to get that many degrees and certifications? Most people would spend their entire "career" just getting that many degrees!
A few years ago my wife was thinking about studying to become a court reporter. The training is very demanding, and I heard the dropout rate is about 95%, but the pay is good if not great.
In any case, I warned her about the potential for voice recognition technology to render court reporters obsolete. It probably won't happen, but the mere prospect tipped her in the direction of foregoing the opportunity. Was that a mistake?
The same concern applies also to medical transcription.
Hey, you make some good points. I'm surprised, however, that you waste your time on slashdot with ideas that profound.
To illustrate the concept of consciousness, I think of the color blue (or whichever color you prefer). Science tells us that the color blue is the result of an electromagnetic wave of a particular wavelength. It enters our eyes, then stimulates nerves to make us sense blue. But the sensation we call blue is *not* the process described by science. It is something altogether different. That is what consciousness is all about.
Scientists who question or dismiss the concept of consciousness actually scare me a bit. Apparently they believe we are all really nothing but complicated machines. But do they *really* believe that? I don't think so. If they did, would they be self-conscious in front of a crowd?
Congratulations to slashdot for actually addressing the issue of safety-critical software. Folks, this is a completely different world than, say, the world of games or google searches -- where 80% of the output is *expected* to be crap. And the right language for the job is Ada.
is so impressed with Einstein:
http://xtxinc.com/