They're not saying to exclude evolution, so you, by EXCLUDING a theory about unrecorded history are promoting ignorance. As soon as you can explain all the holes in evolution (and if you don't think they are both present and significant, you're more ignorant than we thought) I'll explain the holes in creationism.
Carbon dating (you believe in that, don't you?) blows the Biblical creation story out of the water. As such, I don't think it should be taught as science in America's schools. The theory of evolution is the leading scientific explanation of the origin of life -- following the scientific method, and not the it-was-written-by-a-prophet method.
So...they are 'ignorant', 'prejudiced' and 'gullible' because they don't think like you do?
No. They are 'ignorant', for example, because they support the teaching of creationism in schools. They are 'prejudiced', for example, because they oppose the right of gay couples to be married in the eyes of the state. They are 'gullible' because they reelected the President after he ran on a platform of national security -- the same President who allowed 9/11 to occur despite rancorous warnings beforehand, who allowed Osama bin Laden to escape because he cheaped out on troops, and who turned Iraq from a backwards but orderly dictatorship (just like dozens of others in the world) into a chaotic breeding ground for Muslim extremists.
Addressing a comment below about me being a liberal elitist: you bet your ass I consider my views superior to those of the conservative right. If I didn't think so, I would change those views. If that makes me a liberal elitist, well, fuck it -- at least I live in Boston.
I can accept that Bush won the election. What I have a hard time swallowing is that I live in a country where more than half the population is willfully ignorant, politically obstinate, religiously prejudiced, and embarrassingly gullible.
Perhaps New England and Quebec could each secede, and merge. All I know is that I want nothing -- nothing -- to do with any of the red states.
OpenBSD is secure, but so is NetBSD. I have been running NetBSD continuously on MITnet (a high-profile network with frequent hacker attacks) since 1997 and I have been hacked exactly 0 times. Not saying I would have been hacked with OpenBSD, but zero breaches in seven years is a pretty compelling record (especially when I compare to my Red Hat-using friends).
A properly-secured Windows desktop environment (and it is a huge pain to properly secure it, compared to Linux) will outperform a Linux desktop from the point of view of the clueless user, and in the server room they perform about equally (given, again, that the Windows administrator isn't a fuckup).
Sorry if that cuts into nethack- and IRC-time for admins, but Windows is simply wonderful for an office user. Linux is not.
They left the spinning to Slashdot. RTFA. The interviewee says:
It's not a switch that can be flipped. Software written by humans will always contain errors. We're fundamentally changing the way things operate, to help to make software more resistant to attacks. We're two and a half years down a much longer road; it's more of a 10-year timeline.
What me meant is that Microsoft is completely reworking the way their browser operates -- not just toughening a few system calls here and there. A total reconsideration of how a browser should be designed.
The Slashdot editors took that and spit out "AHAHA M$IE INSEKURE UNTIL 2011! LOL@GATES"
"All you motherfuckers are gonna pay, You are the ones who are the ball-lickers. We're gonna fuck your mothers while you watch and cry like little bitches. Once we get to Slashdot and find those karma-whore fucks who are talking shit, we're gonna make 'em eat our shit, then shit out our shit, then eat their shit which is made up of our shit that we made 'em eat. Then you're all fucking next."
Once you tie Word down, hold a knife to its throat and say "No. Really. I know what I'm doing -- back off," it's really quite good.
It's not an issue of bugs, it's an issue of features turned on by default. Unfortunately (as I said above), you need to call off the dogs in about 100 different places before Word becomes really good.
I am not a fan of MS' business practices, but it deserves to be said: MS Office is by far the best suite of office productivity applications available at any price.
My complaints with Office (and there are plenty) do not involve stability. Office is very stable, certainly more stable than OpenOffice or any other competitor. My complaints center around MS Office's tendency to get all up in my shit all the time: automatic spelling/syntax/formatting "correction" and the like.
The language makes it very easy for one person to work on another person's code, and it makes it quite painless to document your work as you go.
Yes, because everything you do is broken into baby steps. If you look at Java code and you can't figure out what it is doing, you have no business programming.
Personally I don't like holding a program's hand as I write it. That is the #1 reason I think Java is uncool.
Ha ha, that's a good one
on
IT Myths
·
· Score: 5, Funny
IT does scale
I got a big fat 503 Service Error that says you're wrong about this one!
Networked clusters are useful only when the task is parallelizable, and each subtask is computable on a single node. Cloud physics is not like that. Cracking RC5, for instance, is.
Dude, the makers of "big supercomputers" invented clustering. I don't think they're afraid of it.
There are tasks that a cluster of Linux shitboxen will do well, and tasks where the cluster will not hold up so well against a real supercomputer. Google is an example of a perfect application for networked Linux servers. If you're simulating cloud physics one molecule at a time, though, you are a lot better off using the right tool for the job instead of 1,024 wrong ones.
I think what this guy is looking for is a CS student who will write it for him. This is how academia works.
Re:Nice, but still shortsighted
on
RGB to become RGBCMY
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It's not prohibitively expensive at all. There's nothing particularly special about IR or UV photodetectors. And the system would be backward-compatible with old cameras anyway -- the IR and UV channels just need to be zeroed.
A truly revolutionary idea would be to include and project IR and UV in addition to RGB/CMY. Even though our eyes can't exactly 'see' IR and UV, they still form an important part of our realistic image perception. It's not unlike sounds above 20-25kHz in pitch; we don't 'hear' them, but our brain perceives them nonetheless and they are used for stereo imaging of a space.
Slashdot Mirror
They're not saying to exclude evolution, so you, by EXCLUDING a theory about unrecorded history are promoting ignorance. As soon as you can explain all the holes in evolution (and if you don't think they are both present and significant, you're more ignorant than we thought) I'll explain the holes in creationism.
Carbon dating (you believe in that, don't you?) blows the Biblical creation story out of the water. As such, I don't think it should be taught as science in America's schools. The theory of evolution is the leading scientific explanation of the origin of life -- following the scientific method, and not the it-was-written-by-a-prophet method.
So...they are 'ignorant', 'prejudiced' and 'gullible' because they don't think like you do?
No. They are 'ignorant', for example, because they support the teaching of creationism in schools. They are 'prejudiced', for example, because they oppose the right of gay couples to be married in the eyes of the state. They are 'gullible' because they reelected the President after he ran on a platform of national security -- the same President who allowed 9/11 to occur despite rancorous warnings beforehand, who allowed Osama bin Laden to escape because he cheaped out on troops, and who turned Iraq from a backwards but orderly dictatorship (just like dozens of others in the world) into a chaotic breeding ground for Muslim extremists.
Addressing a comment below about me being a liberal elitist: you bet your ass I consider my views superior to those of the conservative right. If I didn't think so, I would change those views. If that makes me a liberal elitist, well, fuck it -- at least I live in Boston.
I can accept that Bush won the election. What I have a hard time swallowing is that I live in a country where more than half the population is willfully ignorant, politically obstinate, religiously prejudiced, and embarrassingly gullible.
Perhaps New England and Quebec could each secede, and merge. All I know is that I want nothing -- nothing -- to do with any of the red states.
There are few posts as on-topic as this one. Maybe a condition for mod points should be that the user has overflowed a 32-bit score variable.
Eat kobold pie, lamers! EIT IN 2004!
--eit_krog
If you want to launch from America, you deal with the American Government.
I'm sure plenty of companies will base themselves elsewhere for precisely this reason.
a wet blanket is thrown onto a gathering fire.
I wonder how Congress will misregulate this industry (at least until it becomes rich enough to hire lobbyists).
...put this story under bsd.slashdot.org?
OpenBSD is secure, but so is NetBSD. I have been running NetBSD continuously on MITnet (a high-profile network with frequent hacker attacks) since 1997 and I have been hacked exactly 0 times. Not saying I would have been hacked with OpenBSD, but zero breaches in seven years is a pretty compelling record (especially when I compare to my Red Hat-using friends).
until I find /usr/bin/msword in my $PATH, that's a reasonable thing to do.
Firefox and Apache.
A properly-secured Windows desktop environment (and it is a huge pain to properly secure it, compared to Linux) will outperform a Linux desktop from the point of view of the clueless user, and in the server room they perform about equally (given, again, that the Windows administrator isn't a fuckup).
Sorry if that cuts into nethack- and IRC-time for admins, but Windows is simply wonderful for an office user. Linux is not.
Good to see he's still in the music business. Does he still have that outrageous hair? And the acid-washed jeans?
They left the spinning to Slashdot. RTFA. The interviewee says:
It's not a switch that can be flipped. Software written by humans will always contain errors. We're fundamentally changing the way things operate, to help to make software more resistant to attacks. We're two and a half years down a much longer road; it's more of a 10-year timeline.
What me meant is that Microsoft is completely reworking the way their browser operates -- not just toughening a few system calls here and there. A total reconsideration of how a browser should be designed.
The Slashdot editors took that and spit out "AHAHA M$IE INSEKURE UNTIL 2011! LOL@GATES"
Hardly seems fair.
"All you motherfuckers are gonna pay, You are the ones who are the ball-lickers. We're gonna fuck your mothers while you watch and cry like little bitches. Once we get to Slashdot and find those karma-whore fucks who are talking shit, we're gonna make 'em eat our shit, then shit out our shit, then eat their shit which is made up of our shit that we made 'em eat. Then you're all fucking next."
Once you tie Word down, hold a knife to its throat and say "No. Really. I know what I'm doing -- back off," it's really quite good.
It's not an issue of bugs, it's an issue of features turned on by default. Unfortunately (as I said above), you need to call off the dogs in about 100 different places before Word becomes really good.
Oh, trust me, I do. There's about 100 similar features I need to turn off too. Doesn't mean it doesn't annoy me.
I am not a fan of MS' business practices, but it deserves to be said: MS Office is by far the best suite of office productivity applications available at any price.
My complaints with Office (and there are plenty) do not involve stability. Office is very stable, certainly more stable than OpenOffice or any other competitor. My complaints center around MS Office's tendency to get all up in my shit all the time: automatic spelling/syntax/formatting "correction" and the like.
Here, drive this Yugo instead.
The language makes it very easy for one person to work on another person's code, and it makes it quite painless to document your work as you go.
Yes, because everything you do is broken into baby steps. If you look at Java code and you can't figure out what it is doing, you have no business programming.
Personally I don't like holding a program's hand as I write it. That is the #1 reason I think Java is uncool.
IT does scale
I got a big fat 503 Service Error that says you're wrong about this one!
Networked clusters are useful only when the task is parallelizable, and each subtask is computable on a single node. Cloud physics is not like that. Cracking RC5, for instance, is.
Dude, the makers of "big supercomputers" invented clustering. I don't think they're afraid of it.
There are tasks that a cluster of Linux shitboxen will do well, and tasks where the cluster will not hold up so well against a real supercomputer. Google is an example of a perfect application for networked Linux servers. If you're simulating cloud physics one molecule at a time, though, you are a lot better off using the right tool for the job instead of 1,024 wrong ones.
Security experts recommend using Triple-ROT13 for increased safety.
I think what this guy is looking for is a CS student who will write it for him. This is how academia works.
It's not prohibitively expensive at all. There's nothing particularly special about IR or UV photodetectors. And the system would be backward-compatible with old cameras anyway -- the IR and UV channels just need to be zeroed.
A truly revolutionary idea would be to include and project IR and UV in addition to RGB/CMY. Even though our eyes can't exactly 'see' IR and UV, they still form an important part of our realistic image perception. It's not unlike sounds above 20-25kHz in pitch; we don't 'hear' them, but our brain perceives them nonetheless and they are used for stereo imaging of a space.