Re:Not really important
on
Space Blimps
·
· Score: 2
Yeah, but the all-your-eggs-in-one-basket issue is going to choke one of these days and we'll all sit by for a few weeks until they run out of air and die. Imagine the Nightlines every night for that, NASA.
Only when that happens will NASA take the middle road, pre-launching everything they'll need for an extended stay (not to mention ongoing supply updates.) THEN you may launch someone there, and don't forget a machine shop to fabricate things that will end up busted or improperly designed.
Re:Faster Prototype Time
on
Space Blimps
·
· Score: 1
Also the blimp would sink about 3/4 the way to the core before stabilizing vs. about eight hundred tons per square inch outside.
> Conclusion 1: The fetus is innately human and
> should be given protections under the law.
>
> Conclusion 2: The fetus is no more human than a
> clump of cells scraped from the inside of your
> mouth and should not be given any special
> protection under the law.
Well, this isn't a problem. It is a difference on the definition of a human, part of the premise.
Is it proper to assign a clump of cells (not yet sentient) a property called a "soul" (assumption: having a soul is a reason to not kill something; this adds a second reason beyond sentience). The "soul" however, has no scientific evidence to support it, and loads of circumstantial evidence that it is just a fantasy concept made up long ago deriving from superstitions. Is that proper to enshrine in law?
Furthermore, there is another assumption in both of those arguments: even assuming the broadest definition of a human, that it is wrong to terminate their life if they are dependent on your body (argument from implied contract to host them when you freely engaged in intercourse -- note that the number of claimed rapes would skyrocket since that was not free will).
Also, there is the even deeper issue that one's reproductive organs are one's one to control, regardless of the human status of the fetus, and that includes your own body's production of said fetus -- fetus, human or otherwise, is a product of one's body and one may abort that production at one's own will up until the moment of birth, when said fetus becomes an individual with unalienable rights.
Then there's the bizarre situation where purely 100% private organizations, newspapers, are prevented from merging because the government actually thinks freedom of speech is so important it will prevent private citizens from restricting the number of "independent" editorial boards.
Just ask yourselves, "Would the Redcoats have used that technology against us, and would the founding fathers have protected against it in the Constitution?"
Answer? Yes, high tech, see-thru-walls stuff would have been used, and would have been prevented in the Constitution.
Yes, spying on data flows over the internet would have happened, and would have been prevented in the Constitution.
Yes, outlawing streams of or storage of certain bit patterns would have happened, and the Constitution would talk about freedom of the Press, and freedom of data flows.
I still remember when it guest starred in that episode of Superfriends as the computer that controlled all aspects of daily life, allowing everybody to be waited on hand and foot by robots, ushuring in a new age of peace and productivity.
Then the Superfriends destroyed it because it was better in their minds for us to continue to "in labor shall you toil the soil," so to speak. The saviour, the Legion of Doom, being several years in the future.
> The line formatting in F77 is what always got
> me... starting each line 6(?) characters in,
> and only getting 75 characters was very
> frustrating...
We now know that and most of its other peccadillos were more an issue of sloppy, lazy programming on the part of the compiler writers than on any intrinsic punch card limitation.
Yea, verily, they were our forefathers, bumbling around like Marie Curie eating salad from radioactive bowls; without them we wouldn't be as advanced now, yet still how naive and incompetent they were as programmers.
> Even a 'IQ over 300' can't save you from the slashdot effect.
Will this turn into the next AYB/goatse.cx/Natalie Portman/Beowulf, or will it die on the vine like "I wonder what Taco Bell would have given out had THIS hit it's target in the ocean."
I'd rather see LISP as a "web" language than anything else. Why bother making structures when you can just tag items in a list and you're done? Makes for more generalized and rugged code. Unless you need serious number crunching (ironic, in a discussion of Fortran) you don't even need compiled languages anymore for desktop applications.
> You might also note the lack of focus groups
> looking over their shoulders telling
> them what it should be, bureaucrats telling them
> when it must be released and bean counters about
> how much they could spend doing it."
Yet somehow they still managed to churn out a steaming turd designed by committee.
> Today we're so advanced that we simply induce
> the climatic change to kill all the animals (and
> eventually ourseslves...erhm maybe we haven't
> advanced that much anyway)
Julian Simon would love to place a bet with you, I'm sure.
> Logic dictates that if you drive many animals
> to extinction and greatly upset the cycle of
> nature, you will eliminate your own means of
> survival. The reality is that you will die.
Actually, that is completely incorrect, logically.
Logic dictates that you plan the destruction of the ecosystem in an area and plant massive farms. This will enhance greatly your species' ability to survive.
To preserve plants and animals in a "natural" area is not logical. It leads to the death of many people, not the large farms, which feed many.
I'd rather live in a world of rapidly-advancing technology with lax environmental laws dictated by greedy corporations causing nature to run "a bit dirty" than live in a world where technology is ground to a halt by an overbearing, intrusive government that insinuates itself boldly with moral self-righteousness into every last decision, every single corner of everybody's life from sunup to sundown and all through the night.
So they're not considering climate changes that may have made it easier for ancient Man to get to Australia, or climate changes that may have bulged ancient Man's brainpower a bit more, allowing them to spread to Australia at about the same time?
Climate changes --> dying animals + smarter humans who figure a way to get to Australia
or
Climate changes --> dying animals + changed trade winds blowing humans floating on logs to Australia
And since when did levelling land and killing off animals do something other than raise the level of living for people in the area? For every "bad" situation, there are a thousand and one good situations where that occurred.
Charging by the minute is very undesirable to the consumer. In a capitalist (i.e. free, specifically, free from government-guaranteed monopolies) country, no one can stop other greedy capitalists from competing for flat-rate access.
Normal modem access is virtually free now, high-speed access is almost free (ca. $50/mo worst case, where available), cell phones are a dime a minute for any calls whatsoever, long distance or otherwise; meanwhile a socialist monopoly telco will whine to the government about costs, impracticality, costs, blah blah blah and politicians bend their ear and pass more idiotic laws to protect this fragile, obese flower of an organization/pseudo corporation that sits like a lardass bon-bon eater on a sofa whining "I should have been born a queen!"
Anyway, how do I submit a bug report? I put parens around another word inside the double quote in the first line above, yet they disappear. Clearly "Plain Old Text" isn't plain old text.
The guy is arguably a visionary. In the future, when genetics, nanotechnology, whatever, allows complete, massive, and safe body modification, I've no doubt hyperenlargement of genetalia and associated orafices will be very popular.
Besides, smaller kids LIVE in a world of "poop". "He pooped a big poop out of his butt!" "Hush, now. We're eating in a restaraunt." They'd probably laugh their asses off at this.
Anyone see that TV news "article" last night showing parents putting hidden cameras in their teenage boys' rooms?
No mention of the hellish embarrassment or murderous rage such a manboy would go into getting caught polishing the bayonette.
Something tells me being spied on during private activities would do far, far, far more damage to a person's psyche than a million hours of watching Nina Hartley take it up her ample ass.
Tony stepped back, lifting his eye from the lens of the Big K cheapie he had purchased not an hour before. He tossed the Kleenex into the corner with all the others. Dreams of the back seat of a Caddy might never happen, but this afternoon, Ruthie was forever his.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but the all-your-eggs-in-one-basket issue is going to choke one of these days and we'll all sit by for a few weeks until they run out of air and die. Imagine the Nightlines every night for that, NASA.
Only when that happens will NASA take the middle road, pre-launching everything they'll need for an extended stay (not to mention ongoing supply updates.) THEN you may launch someone there, and don't forget a machine shop to fabricate things that will end up busted or improperly designed.
Also the blimp would sink about 3/4 the way to the core before stabilizing vs. about eight hundred tons per square inch outside.
And let's not forget there are those who would make linking to something the legal equivalent of publishing for the purpose of jailing you.
> Conclusion 1: The fetus is innately human and
> should be given protections under the law.
>
> Conclusion 2: The fetus is no more human than a
> clump of cells scraped from the inside of your
> mouth and should not be given any special
> protection under the law.
Well, this isn't a problem. It is a difference on the definition of a human, part of the premise.
Is it proper to assign a clump of cells (not yet sentient) a property called a "soul" (assumption: having a soul is a reason to not kill something; this adds a second reason beyond sentience). The "soul" however, has no scientific evidence to support it, and loads of circumstantial evidence that it is just a fantasy concept made up long ago deriving from superstitions. Is that proper to enshrine in law?
Furthermore, there is another assumption in both of those arguments: even assuming the broadest definition of a human, that it is wrong to terminate their life if they are dependent on your body (argument from implied contract to host them when you freely engaged in intercourse -- note that the number of claimed rapes would skyrocket since that was not free will).
Also, there is the even deeper issue that one's reproductive organs are one's one to control, regardless of the human status of the fetus, and that includes your own body's production of said fetus -- fetus, human or otherwise, is a product of one's body and one may abort that production at one's own will up until the moment of birth, when said fetus becomes an individual with unalienable rights.
Then there's the bizarre situation where purely 100% private organizations, newspapers, are prevented from merging because the government actually thinks freedom of speech is so important it will prevent private citizens from restricting the number of "independent" editorial boards.
Just ask yourselves, "Would the Redcoats have used that technology against us, and would the founding fathers have protected against it in the Constitution?"
Answer? Yes, high tech, see-thru-walls stuff would have been used, and would have been prevented in the Constitution.
Yes, spying on data flows over the internet would have happened, and would have been prevented in the Constitution.
Yes, outlawing streams of or storage of certain bit patterns would have happened, and the Constitution would talk about freedom of the Press, and freedom of data flows.
I still remember when it guest starred in that episode of Superfriends as the computer that controlled all aspects of daily life, allowing everybody to be waited on hand and foot by robots, ushuring in a new age of peace and productivity.
Then the Superfriends destroyed it because it was better in their minds for us to continue to "in labor shall you toil the soil," so to speak. The saviour, the Legion of Doom, being several years in the future.
> The line formatting in F77 is what always got
> me... starting each line 6(?) characters in,
> and only getting 75 characters was very
> frustrating...
We now know that and most of its other peccadillos were more an issue of sloppy, lazy programming on the part of the compiler writers than on any intrinsic punch card limitation.
Yea, verily, they were our forefathers, bumbling around like Marie Curie eating salad from radioactive bowls; without them we wouldn't be as advanced now, yet still how naive and incompetent they were as programmers.
> Even a 'IQ over 300' can't save you from the slashdot effect.
Will this turn into the next AYB/goatse.cx/Natalie Portman/Beowulf, or will it die on the vine like "I wonder what Taco Bell would have given out had THIS hit it's target in the ocean."
I'd rather see LISP as a "web" language than anything else. Why bother making structures when you can just tag items in a list and you're done? Makes for more generalized and rugged code. Unless you need serious number crunching (ironic, in a discussion of Fortran) you don't even need compiled languages anymore for desktop applications.
> You might also note the lack of focus groups
> looking over their shoulders telling
> them what it should be, bureaucrats telling them
> when it must be released and bean counters about
> how much they could spend doing it."
Yet somehow they still managed to churn out a steaming turd designed by committee.
> In all those places, the arrival of humans
> coincided with catastrophic mass extinction of
> animals.
Nah, rats, cows, chickens, horses, sheep, pigs, ducks, geese, and so on have all blossomed.
> Today we're so advanced that we simply induce
> the climatic change to kill all the animals (and
> eventually ourseslves...erhm maybe we haven't
> advanced that much anyway)
Julian Simon would love to place a bet with you, I'm sure.
> Logic dictates that if you drive many animals
> to extinction and greatly upset the cycle of
> nature, you will eliminate your own means of
> survival. The reality is that you will die.
Actually, that is completely incorrect, logically.
Logic dictates that you plan the destruction of the ecosystem in an area and plant massive farms. This will enhance greatly your species' ability to survive.
To preserve plants and animals in a "natural" area is not logical. It leads to the death of many people, not the large farms, which feed many.
> The original was only $1 Million...
But remember back then you could get a new car for $39.97.
I'd rather live in a world of rapidly-advancing technology with lax environmental laws dictated by greedy corporations causing nature to run "a bit dirty" than live in a world where technology is ground to a halt by an overbearing, intrusive government that insinuates itself boldly with moral self-righteousness into every last decision, every single corner of everybody's life from sunup to sundown and all through the night.
So they're not considering climate changes that may have made it easier for ancient Man to get to Australia, or climate changes that may have bulged ancient Man's brainpower a bit more, allowing them to spread to Australia at about the same time?
Climate changes --> dying animals + smarter humans who figure a way to get to Australia
or
Climate changes --> dying animals + changed trade winds blowing humans floating on logs to Australia
I want a job blowing smoke out of my ass!
And since when did levelling land and killing off animals do something other than raise the level of living for people in the area? For every "bad" situation, there are a thousand and one good situations where that occurred.
Charging by the minute is very undesirable to the consumer. In a capitalist (i.e. free, specifically, free from government-guaranteed monopolies) country, no one can stop other greedy capitalists from competing for flat-rate access.
Normal modem access is virtually free now, high-speed access is almost free (ca. $50/mo worst case, where available), cell phones are a dime a minute for any calls whatsoever, long distance or otherwise; meanwhile a socialist monopoly telco will whine to the government about costs, impracticality, costs, blah blah blah and politicians bend their ear and pass more idiotic laws to protect this fragile, obese flower of an organization/pseudo corporation that sits like a lardass bon-bon eater on a sofa whining "I should have been born a queen!"
BTW, I believe this was Quakecast on Pseudo.com.
Anyway, how do I submit a bug report? I put parens around another word inside the double quote in the first line above, yet they disappear. Clearly "Plain Old Text" isn't plain old text.
Nahhhh, you're all wrong.
The best pronunciation I ever heard was on the radio, where they directed you to "dub dub dub dot "
Please use this superior version in the future. After all, if we can corrupt "period" into "dot", we can corrupt "double-u" into "dub".
The guy is arguably a visionary. In the future, when genetics, nanotechnology, whatever, allows complete, massive, and safe body modification, I've no doubt hyperenlargement of genetalia and associated orafices will be very popular.
Besides, smaller kids LIVE in a world of "poop". "He pooped a big poop out of his butt!" "Hush, now. We're eating in a restaraunt." They'd probably laugh their asses off at this.
Anyone see that TV news "article" last night showing parents putting hidden cameras in their teenage boys' rooms?
No mention of the hellish embarrassment or murderous rage such a manboy would go into getting caught polishing the bayonette.
Something tells me being spied on during private activities would do far, far, far more damage to a person's psyche than a million hours of watching Nina Hartley take it up her ample ass.
> So you'd prefer ex post facto changes to
> election law, huh. Figures.
Well, only if his guy wins, of course. A person owns the rights to their own body, anyone?
Ok, then...brace yourselves...
Tony stepped back, lifting his eye from the lens of the Big K cheapie he had purchased not an hour before. He tossed the Kleenex into the corner with all the others. Dreams of the back seat of a Caddy might never happen, but this afternoon, Ruthie was forever his.