but oh god no! I can only imagine the horrors that will be visited upon the Internet once MySpace users get a hold of this.
Why are you visiting MySpace so much if you don't like what they're doing there? Alternately, if you aren't visiting MySpace, why would you care what they do with this one way or the other?
"Someone, somewhere, is doing something I don't like. They must be stopped!":p
The basic idea of Austrian economics is that the study of economics is an a priori discipline.
Which is to say, it's an attempt to reason from assumptions instead of draw conclusions from evidence. An a priori discipline is an arcane way of saying a philosophy, mathematical system, or religion. It's the opposite of science, which is a posterioi.
Really? Engineers are the easiest people to dupe with financial numbers. Why, you ask?
Engineers come from a background where the numbers are based upon physical laws - the numbers mean something tangible in the end. Whereas in accounting and in business in general, the can be and usually are several correct answers, and in some cases, the incorrect numbers look more reasonable. Many times, the numbers are assumptions. Numbers that are assumptions are pulled from one's ass; hence assumptions.
Speaking as an engineer, I won't dispute your assertions about financial numbers, but I find your faith in the reality of our assumptions as engineers amusing... but ignore me, I wouldn't want to discourage you from taking my own assumptions and estimates more seriously.;)
Personally I think this is a terrible sign. Irrational investors should be discouraged from gambling in the markets...
So, you're saying we should abolish markets and give up on capitalism? Or are you saying there are a substantial number of investors who are not irrational? You're wrong either way, just wondering which style of craziness you subscribe to.
Personally, I think economics is a good field of study. But to be a useful study, it has to deal with reality as it is, and not spew bullshit theories based on made-up nonsense about how markets work, when they don't actually work that way.
I'm ignoring the rest of your post as it appears to be an off-topic rant on unconnected issues. I'm not sure why you believe basing economic theories on reality rather than idealized fantasy leads to command economies. In fact, I believe the opposite is true, but then, I actually do believe in capitalism. I don't think putting it under the microscope and trying to understand it better will cause us to abandon it. It's curious that you do given that you seem to favor it. It's self contradictory to assert going away from free-market capitalism is "the wrong direction", but insist that getting a more accurate understanding of how free-market capitalism actually works will lead us in that direction. If free-market capitalism really is the best thing, then a more accurate understanding of it is a good thing that will make us want more of it, no?
The market already takes irrationality into account. Irrational actors fail. Instead of robbing taxpayers in order to reward irrational investors, a just government would let them fail.
Ah, if only this were true. The fact is, it's just not that simple. Irrational actors often succeed, and rational actors often fail when they're deluded into thinking the market will act rationally.
There is another flying object in the second video at 2:16 - 2:20. I'm not saying it's a UFO, but I wonder what it is.
Damn, good catch -- I had to watch several times to see it. Based on size (incredibly small) and relative speed (quite quick, indicating it's likely much closer to the camera than the rocket, further indicating small size to appear so small while that close), I'm gonna go with "insect".
Actually, I just watched the second video, and if you watch the way the dust moves that gets kicked up when they first ignite the engine at takeoff, it's pretty obvious there's a pretty decent wind blowing.
While I realize it would never have to on the moon, I wonder how well it would deal with a slight breeze.
Watch the video again, noting how quickly the somewhat threatening clouds are moving overhead in shots where you can see the rocket itself isn't moving. Also, look at the the way the fire at the end, and the exhaust from the fire extinguishers moves. There was more than "a slight breeze" going during the attempt -- there was a pretty decent wind blowing. Nothing extreme, but more than what I'd call "a slight breeze"...
Thanks for the link to the pendulum fallacy. I suffered from it until about two minutes ago... I am now enlightened.:) Although I'm not sure I'm happier knowing that the Apollo spacecraft had several hundred kilograms of depleted uranium packed into the nose...:o
Not totally related but - why would you even make a 'gay gamer' site - do tastes in games really vary that much with sexual orientation? Seems like his whole job is built around being controversial and 'different'.
Yes and no. Mostly no, but... people do have different sensitivities. It may be both hetero guy A and gay guy B enjoy the same sort of game, but a certain event or image or something it gets taken very differently, where A won't hardly notice but B really has a problem with it, or vice versa. There's also a subculture thing here -- any discussion tends to be different if its with people in a particular community vs. with people not part of it, even if the topic of discussion really has nothing to do with the community's raison d'etre.
Another issue is that a cat can't be alive and dead, only one or the other. Just because YOU don't know which, doesn't mean that it doesn't, or that reality doesn't. [...]
Yes, that was once a common philosophical view of reality, but it's one that's flat out contradicted by observation. I'm ignoring the errors in the rest of your post since it all seems to follow from the above false statements.
If we pull a DNA strand out of a nucleus from one of your cells and put it on a plate, it is not a living thing. It remains true that if we put it back undamaged, it can then reproduce, but it's still just a DNA fragment.
If we are to say viruses are living things, it would imply that that DNA fragment is a living thing.
Also, we've been on a crusade recently to taxonomically reclassify everything based on its evolutionary history, now that our understanding of DNA enables us to determine this. Since viruses, being leftover DNA or RNA fragments from the breakup of expired bacteria for the most part, they don't have an evolutionary history per se. They don't fit into the taxonomic classes for living things anywhere. A severed or left-over part of a living being is not, in an of itself, a living being, no matter how it behaves when you reattach or reinsert it into one.
Apparently the movement in Britain to legitimate homosexuality began as a rebellion against the infusion of Judeo-Christian ideals in society and the onerous ethical requirements of the Victorian era.
That said, I argue that it is no accident that during the era it was said that the sun never sets on the British Empire, while these days other powers are in ascendancy.
Indeed. In an era when Britain would forcefully deny the rights of other nations and dominate them militarily all around the world, it also denied human sexuality and imposed an equally immoral view of "ethical requirements" on people regardless of how they felt about it. In the era when Britain stopped being so thoroughly evil to the core, it ceased both to impose empire on others and to enforce the most abhorrent of Judeo-Christian ideals upon its own citizens. Both the lack of an empire and the lack of Victorian standards are signs of an increasingly moral and ethical British society. I too agree that this is no accident, both are signs of increasing enlightenment among the British (and the world at large).
Just to add a bit of perspective on this, from Brown's statement:
But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for his contribution to humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united, democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once the theatre of mankind's darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in living memory, people could become so consumed by hate - by anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices - that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls which had marked out the European civilisation for hundreds of years. It is thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism, people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war are part of Europe's history and not Europe's present.
Considering that? I'm sorry, but his contributions to AI are utter trivia compared to his other contributions to humanity. Brown put the emphasis in the right place. Not that being the father of modern computer science is nothing, but it speaks a lot to how much we owe Turing that it is practically nothing compared to his other accomplishments.
What kind of guy says that Turing is most famous for breaking Enigma codes.
Someone knowledgeable.
Turing is famous for his contribution to AI and most importantly the Turing test and the Turing award (Computer Science's Nobel prize equivalent)...
As these are all things the average person has never even heard of, calling someone "famous" for them is invoking a limited definition of "famous", ala "famous amongst [some group]".
Another thing I've sometimes wondered: notwithstanding the official secrets act, where was Churchill when Turing could have used a solid character witness, such as "the official secrets act prohibits me from discussing the details, but in my opinion, if you do this, you'll shame the British empire for 100 years" or some distinctly British harrumph to that effect.
Interesting way to phrase that. Although not causally related, I'm sure, it is noteworthy that the "British Empire" didn't significantly outlive Turing as such.
It's a shame they didn't at least pay passing tribute to Turing's full accomplishments. Cracking Enigma and "quite brilliant mathemetician" don't do the man justice. I like Wikipedia's "often considered to be the father of modern computer science" as a starting point.
To non-computer-nerds, that's a footnote... trivia compared to "cracking Enigma".
Of course, these days a lot of people wouldn't immediately grasp the significance of "cracking Enigma", either. At least in the US. I imagine knowledge of WWII history is somewhat better over on the other side of the pond...
True, but this is for Alan Turing personally. This statement should not be diluted to be more generally applicable. Let this one be for him alone, since he was the victim in this particular instance. Rather, if another public statement is required, then work toward that.
This misunderstands the purpose of such things. They're never for the person they're "for". Heck, even funerals are for the sake of the living, not the dead.
Once the petition is signed by more than 500 signatures the government has to make a response.
Over here in the states we have in our constitution that we have the right to "petition the government for redress of grievances". Although, unfortunately, no one had the bright idea to make it a requirement that the government actually give a damn -- or even pretend to - when we do.
True, but it beats being shot for making a petition...
Okay, whoever modded the above post as "Troll" is confused. Talking about the moderation system on a thread about some other topic (e.g. Snow Leopard) isn't a "Troll", it's "Off-topic".
Slashdot Mirror
but oh god no! I can only imagine the horrors that will be visited upon the Internet once MySpace users get a hold of this.
Why are you visiting MySpace so much if you don't like what they're doing there? Alternately, if you aren't visiting MySpace, why would you care what they do with this one way or the other?
"Someone, somewhere, is doing something I don't like. They must be stopped!" :p
The basic idea of Austrian economics is that the study of economics is an a priori discipline.
Which is to say, it's an attempt to reason from assumptions instead of draw conclusions from evidence. An a priori discipline is an arcane way of saying a philosophy, mathematical system, or religion. It's the opposite of science, which is a posterioi.
So engineers/smart people pursue it.
Really? Engineers are the easiest people to dupe with financial numbers. Why, you ask?
Engineers come from a background where the numbers are based upon physical laws - the numbers mean something tangible in the end. Whereas in accounting and in business in general, the can be and usually are several correct answers, and in some cases, the incorrect numbers look more reasonable. Many times, the numbers are assumptions. Numbers that are assumptions are pulled from one's ass; hence assumptions.
Speaking as an engineer, I won't dispute your assertions about financial numbers, but I find your faith in the reality of our assumptions as engineers amusing... but ignore me, I wouldn't want to discourage you from taking my own assumptions and estimates more seriously. ;)
Personally I think this is a terrible sign. Irrational investors should be discouraged from gambling in the markets...
So, you're saying we should abolish markets and give up on capitalism? Or are you saying there are a substantial number of investors who are not irrational? You're wrong either way, just wondering which style of craziness you subscribe to.
Personally, I think economics is a good field of study. But to be a useful study, it has to deal with reality as it is, and not spew bullshit theories based on made-up nonsense about how markets work, when they don't actually work that way.
I'm ignoring the rest of your post as it appears to be an off-topic rant on unconnected issues. I'm not sure why you believe basing economic theories on reality rather than idealized fantasy leads to command economies. In fact, I believe the opposite is true, but then, I actually do believe in capitalism. I don't think putting it under the microscope and trying to understand it better will cause us to abandon it. It's curious that you do given that you seem to favor it. It's self contradictory to assert going away from free-market capitalism is "the wrong direction", but insist that getting a more accurate understanding of how free-market capitalism actually works will lead us in that direction. If free-market capitalism really is the best thing, then a more accurate understanding of it is a good thing that will make us want more of it, no?
The market already takes irrationality into account. Irrational actors fail. Instead of robbing taxpayers in order to reward irrational investors, a just government would let them fail.
Ah, if only this were true. The fact is, it's just not that simple. Irrational actors often succeed, and rational actors often fail when they're deluded into thinking the market will act rationally.
There is another flying object in the second video at 2:16 - 2:20. I'm not saying it's a UFO, but I wonder what it is.
Damn, good catch -- I had to watch several times to see it. Based on size (incredibly small) and relative speed (quite quick, indicating it's likely much closer to the camera than the rocket, further indicating small size to appear so small while that close), I'm gonna go with "insect".
I didn't know you could fit videos or pictures in 140 characters. Did they use ascii art?
It's a brand new technology called a "hyperlink".
Back away from the gopher...
How would anyone know?
From the previous movie, of course. You need to maintain continuity... unless this is supposed to be a "reboot"...
Having to put the thing out with a fire extinguisher is a bit worrying too.
You got the part about this being designed for landing on the Moon, right? Perhaps you're unaware, but there's no atmosphere there.
Actually, I just watched the second video, and if you watch the way the dust moves that gets kicked up when they first ignite the engine at takeoff, it's pretty obvious there's a pretty decent wind blowing.
While I realize it would never have to on the moon, I wonder how well it would deal with a slight breeze.
Watch the video again, noting how quickly the somewhat threatening clouds are moving overhead in shots where you can see the rocket itself isn't moving. Also, look at the the way the fire at the end, and the exhaust from the fire extinguishers moves. There was more than "a slight breeze" going during the attempt -- there was a pretty decent wind blowing. Nothing extreme, but more than what I'd call "a slight breeze"...
Thanks for the link to the pendulum fallacy. I suffered from it until about two minutes ago... I am now enlightened. :) Although I'm not sure I'm happier knowing that the Apollo spacecraft had several hundred kilograms of depleted uranium packed into the nose... :o
If that were true, the console itself would have been immensely popular, but the games would have suffered from low sales. That's not what happened...
Not totally related but - why would you even make a 'gay gamer' site - do tastes in games really vary that much with sexual orientation? Seems like his whole job is built around being controversial and 'different'.
Yes and no. Mostly no, but... people do have different sensitivities. It may be both hetero guy A and gay guy B enjoy the same sort of game, but a certain event or image or something it gets taken very differently, where A won't hardly notice but B really has a problem with it, or vice versa. There's also a subculture thing here -- any discussion tends to be different if its with people in a particular community vs. with people not part of it, even if the topic of discussion really has nothing to do with the community's raison d'etre.
Another issue is that a cat can't be alive and dead, only one or the other. Just because YOU don't know which, doesn't mean that it doesn't, or that reality doesn't. [...]
Yes, that was once a common philosophical view of reality, but it's one that's flat out contradicted by observation. I'm ignoring the errors in the rest of your post since it all seems to follow from the above false statements.
If we pull a DNA strand out of a nucleus from one of your cells and put it on a plate, it is not a living thing. It remains true that if we put it back undamaged, it can then reproduce, but it's still just a DNA fragment.
If we are to say viruses are living things, it would imply that that DNA fragment is a living thing.
Also, we've been on a crusade recently to taxonomically reclassify everything based on its evolutionary history, now that our understanding of DNA enables us to determine this. Since viruses, being leftover DNA or RNA fragments from the breakup of expired bacteria for the most part, they don't have an evolutionary history per se. They don't fit into the taxonomic classes for living things anywhere. A severed or left-over part of a living being is not, in an of itself, a living being, no matter how it behaves when you reattach or reinsert it into one.
Apparently the movement in Britain to legitimate homosexuality began as a rebellion against the infusion of Judeo-Christian ideals in society and the onerous ethical requirements of the Victorian era. That said, I argue that it is no accident that during the era it was said that the sun never sets on the British Empire, while these days other powers are in ascendancy.
Indeed. In an era when Britain would forcefully deny the rights of other nations and dominate them militarily all around the world, it also denied human sexuality and imposed an equally immoral view of "ethical requirements" on people regardless of how they felt about it. In the era when Britain stopped being so thoroughly evil to the core, it ceased both to impose empire on others and to enforce the most abhorrent of Judeo-Christian ideals upon its own citizens. Both the lack of an empire and the lack of Victorian standards are signs of an increasingly moral and ethical British society. I too agree that this is no accident, both are signs of increasing enlightenment among the British (and the world at large).
Just to add a bit of perspective on this, from Brown's statement:
But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for his contribution to humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united, democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once the theatre of mankind's darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in living memory, people could become so consumed by hate - by anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices - that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls which had marked out the European civilisation for hundreds of years. It is thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism, people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war are part of Europe's history and not Europe's present.
Considering that? I'm sorry, but his contributions to AI are utter trivia compared to his other contributions to humanity. Brown put the emphasis in the right place. Not that being the father of modern computer science is nothing, but it speaks a lot to how much we owe Turing that it is practically nothing compared to his other accomplishments.
What kind of guy says that Turing is most famous for breaking Enigma codes.
Someone knowledgeable.
Turing is famous for his contribution to AI and most importantly the Turing test and the Turing award (Computer Science's Nobel prize equivalent)...
As these are all things the average person has never even heard of, calling someone "famous" for them is invoking a limited definition of "famous", ala "famous amongst [some group]".
Another thing I've sometimes wondered: notwithstanding the official secrets act, where was Churchill when Turing could have used a solid character witness, such as "the official secrets act prohibits me from discussing the details, but in my opinion, if you do this, you'll shame the British empire for 100 years" or some distinctly British harrumph to that effect.
Interesting way to phrase that. Although not causally related, I'm sure, it is noteworthy that the "British Empire" didn't significantly outlive Turing as such.
It's a shame they didn't at least pay passing tribute to Turing's full accomplishments. Cracking Enigma and "quite brilliant mathemetician" don't do the man justice. I like Wikipedia's "often considered to be the father of modern computer science" as a starting point.
To non-computer-nerds, that's a footnote... trivia compared to "cracking Enigma".
Of course, these days a lot of people wouldn't immediately grasp the significance of "cracking Enigma", either. At least in the US. I imagine knowledge of WWII history is somewhat better over on the other side of the pond...
True, but this is for Alan Turing personally. This statement should not be diluted to be more generally applicable. Let this one be for him alone, since he was the victim in this particular instance. Rather, if another public statement is required, then work toward that.
This misunderstands the purpose of such things. They're never for the person they're "for". Heck, even funerals are for the sake of the living, not the dead.
Once the petition is signed by more than 500 signatures the government has to make a response.
Over here in the states we have in our constitution that we have the right to "petition the government for redress of grievances". Although, unfortunately, no one had the bright idea to make it a requirement that the government actually give a damn -- or even pretend to - when we do.
True, but it beats being shot for making a petition...
Okay, whoever modded the above post as "Troll" is confused. Talking about the moderation system on a thread about some other topic (e.g. Snow Leopard) isn't a "Troll", it's "Off-topic".
... that's no moon
If Kepler says it's a moon, it's a moon. I find your lack of faith disturbing...