this isn't a semantics retort - when you shoot down a plane, you're shooting down a plane...not a person. It's actually preferable that the pilot lives (esp if injured). Kill an enemy, take out 1 opponent and harden the resolve of the rest. Wound an enemy, take out 3 opponents, and weaken the resolve of the rest.
"everyone in the military, and police forces learn how to hit people"
I guess you missed where I said I was in the military. Marines, 0311. Lemme know if you think I shot enough weapons for your tastes. When I signed up, I put 03 as my MOS of choice.
You do NOT learn to shoot people. You learn to AIM. The one way (almost all) people are able to shoot another human being is to momentarily forget that they other person is, in fact, a human being. Once someone knows how to aim, they generally can keep that up without constant practice. Further practice is then for psychological reasons, not to learn to aim (or learning to do anything). Its so that if you have to shoot a person, you can pretend you're just shooting a target - because you've done that so often. You zone. If you don't detach yourself, you break. Only an insane person could handle learning how to shoot a *person*.
But now you finally say what you mean - handguns. Yes, "handguns are made for killin, they ain't no good for nothin else" - to quote a little Skynard.
I emailed Rob the other day for the first time, and he emailed me back. I didn't look too hard to find his eddress, either.
Where can you get an official answer? The official answer is that there are alternatives. If you don't like slashdot, go to the old standby kuroshin, or any of the hundreds of new places out there. Worst case senerio, slashcode is GPL, right? Stand up your own site using their code. Approve you own stories. Make your own mods. Give yourself an unlimited # of points.
Official answers...officially what? That you don't like what they're doing with their own site? I'm sure sales is reachable at it's appropriate eddress. I've never needed to buy ad space or anything from them; I wouldn't know.
Again: "99% of gun use is against people" was the claim. I'm not going to argue statistics for a war that ended before my parents were even born...not in a discussion about what gun use "is" - a present-tense word.
Additionally - having spent quite a lot of time at ranges, I have to emphatically disagree with your assessment on target practice. One doesn't learn how to hit people, one learns how to aim. Apply that aiming practice to shooting tires, birds, deer, people - whatever you like - but I've yet to hear of a range where the targets were live humans (though I have heard about animals).
and you think posting here will get you an official answer?
Given the situation, I'm amazed slashdot has held up this long. However - when the student is ready, the master will appear... There are a lot of places out now that are good alternatives to the retro-slashdot years, back when they were "cool." The masses keep slashdot popular, but it's the popularity that makes it lose the real community feel. There's no cohesion here anymore.
On the other hand, if you go back 5 (or more, for some of us...) years, you'll find that many of the stories were just like this one - case mods, etc. It wasn't until the slashdot crowd all decided that they were biologists, physicists, chemists, economists, and lawyers that the community started going insane. Personally, I welcome the return to silly stories about things nerds would be interested in...like nerdy case mods.
maybe because of this line: "But the truth is, 99% of gun use is against people"
I'd have to venture a guess that 95% of gun use is against targets, 4.9% is against animals, and less than.1% is against people. I don't know where the hell you live, but whatever city it is - I promise the number of hunters in that area outnumber the number of people who shot a person in that same area by at least 100 to 1. Here at work with me (in NY, no less), about 1/4 of the people hunt. Not a single one of them has ever shot a person - oddly enough, having been in the military I am the one here that comes closest.
toddlers are relatively unpredictable (to us) and so Sony will learn how to deal with a range of human interaction.
And regardless whether or not you agree, it's a valid experiment in human psychology as well - which Sony stands to learn from in order to tailor it's continued efforts.
what you're saying almost sounds reasonable, except for 2 things:
DC is lost *quickly* in transmission. Why do you think your home circuit is AC, when DC has been around much longer? Lightning - DC, or AC? Static discharge - AC, or DC? All current starts out as DC, gets converted to AC for transmission, then in almost all devices gets converted back to DC (with very few exceptions...light bulbs being one of them). AC transits over much, much longer distances with less loss. PoE is DC. Doing this would cause there to be more loss, since you'd be transmitting lots of DC over long distances of wires. This would use more electricity in your standard gigantic corporate office with thousands of pc's - not less. If you put AC in PoE, you'll lose your data - as a data line, it will then be worthless. Too much noise.
2: the wifi concern is not limited to home and small business networks. I work at a small DoD contractor (tiny outfit named Lockheed Martin. 5k at this plant) and we're going to wifi. Everyone is doing the move. It drops all sorts of costs. Darn telco rooms are always just a mess of crap.
"But once we get to photorealism, what is going to sustain growth?"
3 things: the standard "storytelling" bit that has been going on for thousands of years...new backgrounds, universes, characters, plots, whatever.
#2 things other than visual. Sounds can still be improved...and how about smells? Tactile responses?
#3 (and more appropriate for the question): AI. Photorealism might be right around the corner, but a perfect AI is *not*. We're still a LONG way away from an AI with the intellect of a mouse. Once games are VR is actually realistic, we'll still be left with a lack of realistic AI. That's an area we can get progress from for a long time. And once AI gets good, new types of games that are currently impossible (due to lack of AI) can be made.
I had a recent post set to "redundant" a *week* after the post was made...and my comment was one of the first posts. Ah well...I seem to be getting a few superfluous mods lately. I think I'll live.
1. Why would i want to improve my rankings at an "unknown", "unworthy", "bug-ridden", "slow" search engine?
They're not suggesting you should. They're saying the rankings in MSN search are affected. And guess what - millions of people use MSN search. Therefore, it will have a significant economic impact.
2. Why would i want to install IIS, when i have a better alternative Mac OS X?
Because you're a business that wants to maximize your profit-making potential. Most places with web sites care about income flow. If you don't have such pages, then don't worry about it.
"what is a rock? Is it a spray painted piece of glass, is it an electrical stimulus into your mind, what you may call a rock may be a tree if that's what people other than you think of as a treem then is a tree no less a rock?"
Again - look up a bit of epistiemology. If it is not a rock, and is instead a painted piece of glass...then it is not a rock. Fairly simple. If it is a rock, then any stupid claim that the two of us don't agree on what "rock" means is moot; what it is, it is regardless what I percieve it to be. It's a rather simple concept - everything is exactly what it is.
Middle ground? Epistemology doesn't try to answer any questions. You're confusing it with something else, which is understandable given your situation.
In fact, calling it "the trashcan in the corner" grants it the permanence that it deserves without my self-absorbed desire to make myself a GOD capable of creating and destroying universes at my mere whim, my mere perceptions.
"but while something is universally true for me, might not be universally true for some(thing/one) else"
Something might be true in your situation, and not in someone else's, but what isn't true is that you should be using the words "universal" and "true" in your statement.
did he? I doubt it. Just because he doesn't accept the BS "philosophy" that is taught in modern US classrooms (Dewey loved screwing with the education system...damn him) doesn't mean that he missed the point.
and I recommend epistemology. "the truth is..." is the subject line, correct?
Again - a rock is a rock regardless of my perception of it. Science strives to find out what the truth is. That's why things (generally) have to be retested and tested again, and then many others have to be able to reproduce the results, before it is taken as truth....and even then, sometimes not.
uh, no...the rock continues to be a rock without you being there to verify it. When you leave a room full of people, the trashcan in the corner is still there, regardless whether or not you can see it. Dewey was one self-centered individual, and it's quite sad how big an impact he had on modern thinking.
Slashdot Mirror
this isn't a semantics retort - when you shoot down a plane, you're shooting down a plane...not a person. It's actually preferable that the pilot lives (esp if injured). Kill an enemy, take out 1 opponent and harden the resolve of the rest. Wound an enemy, take out 3 opponents, and weaken the resolve of the rest.
"everyone in the military, and police forces learn how to hit people"
I guess you missed where I said I was in the military. Marines, 0311. Lemme know if you think I shot enough weapons for your tastes. When I signed up, I put 03 as my MOS of choice.
You do NOT learn to shoot people. You learn to AIM. The one way (almost all) people are able to shoot another human being is to momentarily forget that they other person is, in fact, a human being. Once someone knows how to aim, they generally can keep that up without constant practice. Further practice is then for psychological reasons, not to learn to aim (or learning to do anything). Its so that if you have to shoot a person, you can pretend you're just shooting a target - because you've done that so often. You zone. If you don't detach yourself, you break. Only an insane person could handle learning how to shoot a *person*.
But now you finally say what you mean - handguns. Yes, "handguns are made for killin, they ain't no good for nothin else" - to quote a little Skynard.
wrong. Thousands are dieing in wars, but hundreds of thousands of animals are getting shot.
And both, combined, are blips compared to target practice.
I emailed Rob the other day for the first time, and he emailed me back. I didn't look too hard to find his eddress, either.
Where can you get an official answer? The official answer is that there are alternatives. If you don't like slashdot, go to the old standby kuroshin, or any of the hundreds of new places out there. Worst case senerio, slashcode is GPL, right? Stand up your own site using their code. Approve you own stories. Make your own mods. Give yourself an unlimited # of points.
Official answers...officially what? That you don't like what they're doing with their own site? I'm sure sales is reachable at it's appropriate eddress. I've never needed to buy ad space or anything from them; I wouldn't know.
Again: "99% of gun use is against people" was the claim. I'm not going to argue statistics for a war that ended before my parents were even born...not in a discussion about what gun use "is" - a present-tense word.
Additionally - having spent quite a lot of time at ranges, I have to emphatically disagree with your assessment on target practice. One doesn't learn how to hit people, one learns how to aim. Apply that aiming practice to shooting tires, birds, deer, people - whatever you like - but I've yet to hear of a range where the targets were live humans (though I have heard about animals).
Perhaps I don't talk good.
Please tell me that was an attempt at humour?
you ARE kidding, right?
I mean...geeze...Natalie has grown up to be quite the hottie. The "competition" was only mildly cute in one scene, imo
and you think posting here will get you an official answer?
Given the situation, I'm amazed slashdot has held up this long. However - when the student is ready, the master will appear... There are a lot of places out now that are good alternatives to the retro-slashdot years, back when they were "cool." The masses keep slashdot popular, but it's the popularity that makes it lose the real community feel. There's no cohesion here anymore.
On the other hand, if you go back 5 (or more, for some of us...) years, you'll find that many of the stories were just like this one - case mods, etc. It wasn't until the slashdot crowd all decided that they were biologists, physicists, chemists, economists, and lawyers that the community started going insane. Personally, I welcome the return to silly stories about things nerds would be interested in...like nerdy case mods.
unless that city is Bagdad....not many animals around there, and lots of people shooting each other.
maybe because of this line: "But the truth is, 99% of gun use is against people"
.1% is against people. I don't know where the hell you live, but whatever city it is - I promise the number of hunters in that area outnumber the number of people who shot a person in that same area by at least 100 to 1. Here at work with me (in NY, no less), about 1/4 of the people hunt. Not a single one of them has ever shot a person - oddly enough, having been in the military I am the one here that comes closest.
I'd have to venture a guess that 95% of gun use is against targets, 4.9% is against animals, and less than
toddlers are relatively unpredictable (to us) and so Sony will learn how to deal with a range of human interaction.
And regardless whether or not you agree, it's a valid experiment in human psychology as well - which Sony stands to learn from in order to tailor it's continued efforts.
(golf clap)
what you're saying almost sounds reasonable, except for 2 things:
DC is lost *quickly* in transmission. Why do you think your home circuit is AC, when DC has been around much longer? Lightning - DC, or AC? Static discharge - AC, or DC? All current starts out as DC, gets converted to AC for transmission, then in almost all devices gets converted back to DC (with very few exceptions...light bulbs being one of them). AC transits over much, much longer distances with less loss. PoE is DC. Doing this would cause there to be more loss, since you'd be transmitting lots of DC over long distances of wires. This would use more electricity in your standard gigantic corporate office with thousands of pc's - not less. If you put AC in PoE, you'll lose your data - as a data line, it will then be worthless. Too much noise.
2: the wifi concern is not limited to home and small business networks. I work at a small DoD contractor (tiny outfit named Lockheed Martin. 5k at this plant) and we're going to wifi. Everyone is doing the move. It drops all sorts of costs. Darn telco rooms are always just a mess of crap.
"But once we get to photorealism, what is going to sustain growth?"
3 things: the standard "storytelling" bit that has been going on for thousands of years...new backgrounds, universes, characters, plots, whatever.
#2 things other than visual. Sounds can still be improved...and how about smells? Tactile responses?
#3 (and more appropriate for the question): AI. Photorealism might be right around the corner, but a perfect AI is *not*. We're still a LONG way away from an AI with the intellect of a mouse. Once games are VR is actually realistic, we'll still be left with a lack of realistic AI. That's an area we can get progress from for a long time. And once AI gets good, new types of games that are currently impossible (due to lack of AI) can be made.
I had a recent post set to "redundant" a *week* after the post was made...and my comment was one of the first posts. Ah well...I seem to be getting a few superfluous mods lately. I think I'll live.
1. Why would i want to improve my rankings at an "unknown", "unworthy", "bug-ridden", "slow" search engine?
They're not suggesting you should. They're saying the rankings in MSN search are affected. And guess what - millions of people use MSN search. Therefore, it will have a significant economic impact.
2. Why would i want to install IIS, when i have a better alternative Mac OS X?
Because you're a business that wants to maximize your profit-making potential. Most places with web sites care about income flow. If you don't have such pages, then don't worry about it.
you've gone to school in general. Dewey was very intent in mucking about with the education system - not just philosophy classes, but all classes.
"what is a rock? Is it a spray painted piece of glass, is it an electrical stimulus into your mind, what you may call a rock may be a tree if that's what people other than you think of as a treem then is a tree no less a rock?"
Again - look up a bit of epistiemology. If it is not a rock, and is instead a painted piece of glass...then it is not a rock. Fairly simple. If it is a rock, then any stupid claim that the two of us don't agree on what "rock" means is moot; what it is, it is regardless what I percieve it to be. It's a rather simple concept - everything is exactly what it is.
Middle ground? Epistemology doesn't try to answer any questions. You're confusing it with something else, which is understandable given your situation.
well duh, who else would I be talking about...
it was either there, or it wasn't.
In fact, calling it "the trashcan in the corner" grants it the permanence that it deserves without my self-absorbed desire to make myself a GOD capable of creating and destroying universes at my mere whim, my mere perceptions.
"but while something is universally true for me, might not be universally true for some(thing/one) else"
Something might be true in your situation, and not in someone else's, but what isn't true is that you should be using the words "universal" and "true" in your statement.
did he? I doubt it. Just because he doesn't accept the BS "philosophy" that is taught in modern US classrooms (Dewey loved screwing with the education system...damn him) doesn't mean that he missed the point.
and I recommend epistemology. "the truth is..." is the subject line, correct?
Again - a rock is a rock regardless of my perception of it. Science strives to find out what the truth is. That's why things (generally) have to be retested and tested again, and then many others have to be able to reproduce the results, before it is taken as truth....and even then, sometimes not.
I'm quite familiar with Kant, btw. Thanks though.
uh, no...the rock continues to be a rock without you being there to verify it. When you leave a room full of people, the trashcan in the corner is still there, regardless whether or not you can see it. Dewey was one self-centered individual, and it's quite sad how big an impact he had on modern thinking.
don't worry, the mod trolls that dislike my participation in discussions are out; the post won't exist soon anyway ;)
Nevermind that it is perfectly on-topic...guess the mods should read the article. C'est la vie.