a vanishingly small percentage of the population would even know what cd means, much less make
Then "open" will (and should) mean nothing to them. And Jobs' rant will be seen by them as a lot of flapping and not much flying, as by a chicken; a plucked chicken.
You have a right to speak as long as you keep it civil. There's no criminal law for verbal abuse (unless it's threatening), but with this much evidence the guy's would have a decent chance of winning most of these cases in a civil court in America.
And there should be an explicit right to make such recordings public.
But while there's a right to criticize the things seen in the recordings, there's no right to abuse the person who did those things. That would be citizens overstepping the bounds.
If you wanted to say that in the first place you would have. Instead, you said what you said, and it was an ignorant tautology, as you've proved by changing what you would say, now that you know you were wrong.
As for whose head is in the sand, you have worms in your teeth.
The sphere of ice is a hard-to-fuck-up design. Harder, apparently, than their design for how to do concave reflection, which, come on, isn't that easy to fuck up.
It got 2 mods for funny, 1 for insightful, and 1 for underrated.
You might want to read up on the UN, and how it gets done a fuckload more than the powers granted to it would seem to allow in the cynical, self-serving world of international relations.
Things happening in Africa are tiny compared with the entire European continent (about half the world's population at the time) being systematically brutalized by an international religious empire.
The Catholic Church essentially was the U.N. for the middle ages, and when their power was threatened even slightly they started making up reasons to torture and execute people.
The only "good" that came from that is that there are now nations that specifically outlaw the combination of church and state. Not that you can convince the people who live in some of them that it's supposed to be that way.
First, those are relatively small compared to the things I listed. And second, the UN did eventually stop them. Without the UN, nothing would have been done, and the victims would be receiving no aid. More likely there would be an imperialistic member state waiting for the region to be so destabilized it could sweep in behind and take over, to subjugate and enslave the remaining victims and victors.
You can set fire to wood with a ten-centimeter reflector. Failure to accomplish the same thing with a large number of larger reflectors is just lame-assed design and sloppy implementation.
It's TV. There are two guys on the screen covering themselves in gold paint and duct tape and gaping at ballistic water heaters. There are two dozen people behind the camera coordinating their tactics, and two hundred in scattered offices coordinating their strategies.
TV is always a conspiracy you totally underestimate, and it's always about putting your eyeballs on the filmed bits of advertising that are inserted between the filmed bits you made time in your day (or, more commonly, organized your entire diurnal schedule) to watch.
They're getting more out of Obama than he is out of them.
This made me chuckle: "the oil at a solar thermal plant".
The proliferation of solar thermal power plants is one of the worst-publicized success stories of the modern age. Not that there isn't tons of stuff googlable about it:
This is true. The only time I've ever complimented them on their science was the one about throwing a ball backwards from a moving vehicle so that it has zero velocity relative to the ground. Their presentation of the hypothesis and their efforts to eliminate the perturbative forces in their apparatus, plus their use of statistics to justify their inexact results, actually looked like what science really does.
The rest of what they do is (1) half-assed attempt at myth-based experiment they may or may not correctly understand, followed by (2) quick-and-dirty attempt to do something flashy for the mythbusters' and viewers' enjoyment.
Though they have made some things visible that I've suspected, primarily relating to high-speed anything that's hard to grasp mentally. Bullets colliding with surfaces, crashing vehicles, etc. Someone else noticed the same thing, and spawned that deadly-dull attempt to make high-speed filming a series on its own; cool visuals do not a TV show guarantee.
Of course you have to give them mad props for making an entire cement truck "go away," and putting a cylinder of compressed air through a cinderblock wall. Nobody else would have had anything like the thematic reach to do those things.
If you want to get all semanticky about things, babies can't "think", period. Their brain wiring comes out without insulation (myelin), so their heads can be smaller so they'll fit through the human birth canal which has to be small because erect posture means the gestation takes place directly over the pelvic opening which can't be so big the uterus prolapses halfway through the process. What they're doing is recognizing shapes and motions that are hardwired into the more primitive portions of the brain that cause the infant to react properly to elicit and accept the caring it needs because it doesn't have the ability to think. This all points to the idea that at some point in our evolutionary history we evolved an excess of capability to care for ourselves and could then give care to infants that were too weak to care for themselves, and that allowed us to access the advantages of an increasingly erect posture. Our erect posture, our manual dexterity, our adult brain capacity, and our nuturing nature, aren't separately evolved, they're completely evolutionarily interdependent; without any one of them we wouldn't be here.
As for the extent of the issue, as soon as you give a pet a name, you're treating it as human. Animals don't need names. They respond to nonverbal cues, attention, and tone of voice. Words actually mean nothing to them, the way barks, meows, and squeaks mean nothing to us even after decades listening to the same animal. We may understand a particular noise, but we don't ascribe wordness to it. So labeling the animal with a word and calling the animal with it is anthropomorphic. You do that almost as soon as you decide to make it your pet. And you almost certainly use more than just its name when telling it what to do, even if you know explicitly that it's not possible for it to understand. I doubt there's ever been a human who hasn't done some anthropomorphizing of animals at some time in his life.
Slashdot Mirror
In this case it's the Macher vs. the Fixer. Whatever happens, they're just figuring out how to divide the value of our efforts.
a vanishingly small percentage of the population would even know what cd means, much less make
Then "open" will (and should) mean nothing to them. And Jobs' rant will be seen by them as a lot of flapping and not much flying, as by a chicken; a plucked chicken.
Not actually.
You have a right to speak as long as you keep it civil. There's no criminal law for verbal abuse (unless it's threatening), but with this much evidence the guy's would have a decent chance of winning most of these cases in a civil court in America.
And there should be an explicit right to make such recordings public.
But while there's a right to criticize the things seen in the recordings, there's no right to abuse the person who did those things. That would be citizens overstepping the bounds.
If you wanted to say that in the first place you would have. Instead, you said what you said, and it was an ignorant tautology, as you've proved by changing what you would say, now that you know you were wrong.
As for whose head is in the sand, you have worms in your teeth.
It would be even more poetic if he never found out.
No, it's 10 seconds taken to read the thread before replying.
Bennington College.
No, it's still ignorance, because it's not the fact that was in question, which was "it displays perfectly everywhere."
So I again amend my remarks.
"for deliberately self-unaware and/or ignorant values of 'perfectly' and 'everywhere'".
No, it throws it into stark, shameful relief.
The sphere of ice is a hard-to-fuck-up design. Harder, apparently, than their design for how to do concave reflection, which, come on, isn't that easy to fuck up.
Oh, I knew exactly what it was. It's just ironic.
Although, in reality, since it is oil, if something ever stops the plant from functioning again, they can always burn it.
It got 2 mods for funny, 1 for insightful, and 1 for underrated.
You might want to read up on the UN, and how it gets done a fuckload more than the powers granted to it would seem to allow in the cynical, self-serving world of international relations.
The UN was doing its job in Iraq, which is why W and his gang rushed into a war they couldn't finish.
Things happening in Africa are tiny compared with the entire European continent (about half the world's population at the time) being systematically brutalized by an international religious empire.
The Catholic Church essentially was the U.N. for the middle ages, and when their power was threatened even slightly they started making up reasons to torture and execute people.
The only "good" that came from that is that there are now nations that specifically outlaw the combination of church and state. Not that you can convince the people who live in some of them that it's supposed to be that way.
I knew someone would bring those up.
First, those are relatively small compared to the things I listed. And second, the UN did eventually stop them. Without the UN, nothing would have been done, and the victims would be receiving no aid. More likely there would be an imperialistic member state waiting for the region to be so destabilized it could sweep in behind and take over, to subjugate and enslave the remaining victims and victors.
You can set fire to wood with a ten-centimeter reflector. Failure to accomplish the same thing with a large number of larger reflectors is just lame-assed design and sloppy implementation.
Archimedes 1
Mythbusters 0
It's TV. There are two guys on the screen covering themselves in gold paint and duct tape and gaping at ballistic water heaters. There are two dozen people behind the camera coordinating their tactics, and two hundred in scattered offices coordinating their strategies.
TV is always a conspiracy you totally underestimate, and it's always about putting your eyeballs on the filmed bits of advertising that are inserted between the filmed bits you made time in your day (or, more commonly, organized your entire diurnal schedule) to watch.
They're getting more out of Obama than he is out of them.
This made me chuckle: "the oil at a solar thermal plant".
The proliferation of solar thermal power plants is one of the worst-publicized success stories of the modern age. Not that there isn't tons of stuff googlable about it:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20012060-54.html
http://terrainforma.ca/2010/09/20/the-promise-of-thermal-solar-power-activist-and-educator-sheila-watt-cloutier/
http://climateprogress.org/2007/08/30/the-solar-power-you-dont-hear-about/
http://carbon-pros.com/blog1/2009/06/solar_thermal_at_utility_scale.html
http://venturebeat.com/2010/02/22/energy-dept-gives-brightsource-solar-thermal-a-1-4b-boost/
http://www.abengoasolar.es/corp/web/en/index.html
http://www.acciona-na.com/About-Us/Our-Projects/U-S-/Nevada-Solar-One.aspx
http://www.leonardo-energy.org/worlds-largest-solar-thermal-power-plant
This is true. The only time I've ever complimented them on their science was the one about throwing a ball backwards from a moving vehicle so that it has zero velocity relative to the ground. Their presentation of the hypothesis and their efforts to eliminate the perturbative forces in their apparatus, plus their use of statistics to justify their inexact results, actually looked like what science really does.
The rest of what they do is (1) half-assed attempt at myth-based experiment they may or may not correctly understand, followed by (2) quick-and-dirty attempt to do something flashy for the mythbusters' and viewers' enjoyment.
Though they have made some things visible that I've suspected, primarily relating to high-speed anything that's hard to grasp mentally. Bullets colliding with surfaces, crashing vehicles, etc. Someone else noticed the same thing, and spawned that deadly-dull attempt to make high-speed filming a series on its own; cool visuals do not a TV show guarantee.
Of course you have to give them mad props for making an entire cement truck "go away," and putting a cylinder of compressed air through a cinderblock wall. Nobody else would have had anything like the thematic reach to do those things.
If the UN existed at that time, we'd never have had the Dark Ages, the Inquisition, the rise of Colonialism, or two World Wars.
It wouldn't all have been rainbows and unicorns, but it would have been better than it was.
My mistake. I should have said, "for ignorant values of 'perfectly' and 'everywhere'."
For inexact values of "perfectly" and "everywhere".
If you want to get all semanticky about things, babies can't "think", period. Their brain wiring comes out without insulation (myelin), so their heads can be smaller so they'll fit through the human birth canal which has to be small because erect posture means the gestation takes place directly over the pelvic opening which can't be so big the uterus prolapses halfway through the process. What they're doing is recognizing shapes and motions that are hardwired into the more primitive portions of the brain that cause the infant to react properly to elicit and accept the caring it needs because it doesn't have the ability to think. This all points to the idea that at some point in our evolutionary history we evolved an excess of capability to care for ourselves and could then give care to infants that were too weak to care for themselves, and that allowed us to access the advantages of an increasingly erect posture. Our erect posture, our manual dexterity, our adult brain capacity, and our nuturing nature, aren't separately evolved, they're completely evolutionarily interdependent; without any one of them we wouldn't be here.
As for the extent of the issue, as soon as you give a pet a name, you're treating it as human. Animals don't need names. They respond to nonverbal cues, attention, and tone of voice. Words actually mean nothing to them, the way barks, meows, and squeaks mean nothing to us even after decades listening to the same animal. We may understand a particular noise, but we don't ascribe wordness to it. So labeling the animal with a word and calling the animal with it is anthropomorphic. You do that almost as soon as you decide to make it your pet. And you almost certainly use more than just its name when telling it what to do, even if you know explicitly that it's not possible for it to understand. I doubt there's ever been a human who hasn't done some anthropomorphizing of animals at some time in his life.
Protected mode involves having a separate process brokering write requests from the document viewer to the OS.
Because that's just what a bloated resource-hog like Acroread needs, is a whole layer of IPC and ACL in the most basic of places...
Why does anyone use PDF anymore anyway?
His dog?
99% chance his favorite password has "zynga" in it.