What you describe would make a great fps/rpg/strategy game. as you said MMORPG is about static enviroments and leveling. A modern MMORPg patch ussually breaks the game in some small way, imagine having to do that 5 times a month to do a story arch. Imagine the smell of trekies who also play a MMORPG. Whole cities would be rendered to their knees by the stench.
Theoretically, you could make super-strong body armor to outfit your stormtr^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsoldiers. So, indirectly, it can be used to kill people...
Of course, even super-strong body armor pales before the power of the Force:)
The heaviest and highest tech of the current body armours work on sub machine gun and small arms fire only. A rifle will lay waste to any and all current body armour. even if you had a body armour equivilent to 10 times it's thickness in steel, some rifles will cut right through that.
You'd be better off making opticam. Rifles cannot be defeated by infantry body armour. Not yet anyways.
I'm not sure I'd really tout FF Tactics for it's storyline either. It's got a great battle system and a fiendish (if somewhat predictable) AI, but the storyline was a convoluted mess that at best didn't detract too much from the gameplay
You mean the translation was a bloody mess. the original story line came through, but with a bit of engrish confusion. It was said to be a very nainced storyline in japanese.
Still, for power generation, it's much safer than fosil fuels. You don't need to mine nearly as much of it, plus (as a consequence) it's worth more and easier to cost-justify safety equipment, etc. Just saying it's "dangerous" is disingenuous; the real question is, is it more or less dangerous than mining enough coal (for example) to produce the same amount of power.
Did we mention that the USSR and Canada have two of the largest deposits. it'd be a massive winfall for us canadians.
What do you think the chances are Canadians are going to tolerate the U.S. and the rest of the world shipping their nuclear waste to Canada for disposal. The problem with nuclear waste is the stigma is so bad no one wants it near them even if someone does figure out a safe way to store it or reprocess it.
If you throw enough money at us, We'll gladly bend over and let your drill our shield.
The last few original games I've liked had gameplay that was refined, but not really _new_ as such. Dungeon Siege, for example, was basically Diable meets Icewind Dale; it was good and well executed, but not really a new idea.
I contest the "good" part. more like "pretty but pointless". Diablo ii has a pretty thin vanier of a story. DS had a microscopic nano dusting of a story.
DS doesn't stand well against other games liek morrow wind and a lot of current console dungeon hacks. it only competes in graphics. HEll it doesn't stand well against diablo ii.
Thanks for clearing that up. Now I can be sure that all creationists I know are closed-minded, backwards heathens that are incapable of change.
Generally, this is true.
Humor aside. the sects that beleive this are rarly the educated set of society. And they generally would rather accept "the devil put it there to trick us" then "we might have to rethink some of our theories in light of this evidence". Are these generalizatiosn too much?
I am a christian. I have no issues what so ever with evolution. Those exsist. But creationism has no degrees. what degrees are there? they deny that mutation as any part to play in diversity.
1- Sure I've heard it's proof, but I've also seen proof that your evidence is highly incorrect.
Creationists (most) place the age of the earth at 6000- 8000 years old. This derived from calculating dates from the bible. (Chinese history goes back to 6000 bc so 8000 might be possible. Except most geological techniques and research into the age of earth place it at 4.6 billion years old. evidence here: age of earth
6000-8000 years doesn't give the mechanism for evolution (mutation) to work. however 4.6 billion give it ample time.
Creationism hold that while the mechanism for evolution (mutation/selection) can be observed now and they cannot deny any evidence that it happens and is observable, they claim simply that our current diversity is not the result of that and they label it micro evolution. They deny evolution happens by reclassing their argument to ignore all current proof. (i.e. if I have a population of people, and I kill everyone with 10 fingers and 10 toes at their 14 birthday, eventually only people with more or less toes and fingers will be around). This is perhaps their weakest argument. To say that X happens. and there is evidence X happens in the past. Then to say the past only extended to yesterday, and thus there is no time for x to happen and thus all evidence of X happening is fake, is a pretty dumb argument.
there's more but I'll move on to your next statement
2-Creationism makes more logical sense than does evolution
No, for the above reason, creationism takes more assumptions, and more unsupported assumptions. This logically, there is more support for evolution and thus evolution is our current theory.
3-but you do have to believe that there is a God for it to be proven
You must assume a god (or aliens or what ever) to have creationism. But evolution happens now, and stands on its own.
4-Either way, they're both theories at best.
Poor American education system victim. A scientific theory isn't just a "theory". A scientific theory is the current working model of a certain observed phenomenon. It is the current model because it is well supported. There may be competing theories and they will remain competing until one or the other is disproved. The community may favor one or the other.
A theory had passed the scrutiny of those reviewing it. And it has some substantial proof behind it. Theories that are accepted are rarely proven wholly wrong but are instead amended. Newton's theory of gravity(the equations) is not wrong, but only right in the local parameter set. that is at very large scales and very small scale it's off. but Einstein's general relativity solved a few of these problems while Hawking et al is trying to iron out the remaining anomalous behaviors at certain levels.
Creationism is not a scientific theory. it has not been peer reviewed its evidence is whole theological/rationalization. At best, creationist is a poorly supported idea from a certain group of individuals. At worst evolution is our best current working model of how life came into it's current diversity. Ammendments will be made as evidence comes to light.
PS. I am a devout Christian. My faith does not conflict with evolution.some may use evolution against faith but they two integrate nicly. Science is a outward growth of theological studies. It is studing gods work.
The thing is- when it comes to creationism and this particular argument, you have a third level:
Person A is an evolutionist- and thus has position X. Person B is a creationist- his position Y is a corruption of position X to a large extent (you can get Position X from the Bible if you try REALLY hard). Person A retorts with Position Z which is a straw man that exaggerates the flaws in Position Y. Person A utterly destroys Postion Z, therefore showing the flaws in Position Y and proving Position X.
But agreed, it's a fallacious argument- because neither Position Y or Postion Z is actually Position X. I find that in real life, however, I rarely if ever get accused of knocking down straw men- because I choose my battles with people who don't know what a straw man IS.
I find all my arguements with creationists are not liek this. It goes more liek this:
Person A is in favor of evolution (evolutionists isn't a proper label) person b is in favor of creationism person a points to supporting evidence X person b points out supporting evidence w + y + z is not true. person a says W Y X is not X. person b never addresses X points to W+Y+z.
indeed a straw man argument. Sure some glory seekers have placed fossils. But phylogenetic tree support most fossil evidence. many many many many other supporting evidence exsists for evolution.
Creationism is heavily dependant on assumptiosn and the bible.
Moutain of support vs assumptiosn and bible....
example of support: phylo genetic trees. fossils. mechanism in action (the creationist alteration of macro vs micro ecolution still depends on a lot of assumptions). Physics(carbon dating). Astronomy. Geology. ect...
So many fields all supporting evolution. So many diverse fields. Creationism just doesn't make sense. The only factions that beleievs it are the fundementalists.
Creationists and an open mind are mutually exclusive so even though your argument is true, no creationists will change. they believe in their narrow view of religion and science and base their faith on it. In my opinion it is the poorest form of faith. Faith that denies truth in favor of ignorance. The Catholic church beleives in evolution but the fundementalists don't.
Just like we could build a space elevator in 10 years - just so long as someone invents a way to make carbon nanotubes.
we can make them. just not long, or cheap, or many. so once we get those problems fixed, we can send something up. hey, screw carbon nanotubes, lets invent scrinth and just build a big tower.
I can get down. Can I stop the intarweb? For justice?
In A.D. 2004 War was Continuing. Captain: What happen ? Mechanic: Somebody set up us the internet crash. Operator: We get signal. Captain: What ! Operator: Main screen turn on. Captain: It's you !! Osama: How are you gentlemen !! Osama: All your DNS servers are belong to us. Osama: You are on the way to destruction. Captain: What you say !! Osama: You have no chance to survive make your time. Osama: Ha Ha Ha Ha.... Operator: Captain '!!'* Captain: Take off every 'browser'!! Captain: You know what you doing. Captain: Move 'browser'. Captain: For great justice.
Does ANYONE think that this will reduce spam in the near future? I'm still getting flooded, and I'll bet anything that my spam filters won't get any kind of a breather just because of a few arrests.
isn't that a great defeatist attitude. Spam is not like an inevitable problem. It can be dealt with. A email system with authentication, A tougher stance from the law, it all helps.
Are you crazy? I don't think there has been significant testing time devoted to 3.5" floppies. I'm sticking with 5.25" until the dust settles.
Your all nuts, I'll stick to my 500 bit punch cards, and use clay tablets for back - up. That way I can do error correction by myself if I have a drive error.
That's the spirit. Way to think of the next generations.
As long as you're doing something with your life, go ahead and keep advocating for burning 10 times more carbon than would be possible if we didn't keep going after Saudi Arabia's last drop.
Do you think that the 3 trillion barrels will help us avoid a climate crisis, maybe in our own lifetimes, by being put to use running BIG FUC*ING AIRCONDITIONERS? Which would have to shed the heat they collect to, I don't know, like, THE MOON or someplace?
lol. Talk about a alarmist. What it means is, we have around 60-100 years to find alternate fuels. Something like Biodiesel or clean fusion. Even then, we'll need the oil to derive other hydro carbons(ie plastic) which will be an essential part of any alternate fuel strategy. One thign we coudl do is slap a tax on SUV's and make them less desirable by rating their fuel economy accuratly. for instance, the honda pruis has an insane MPG rating. however it may be off by as much as 30% because the rating board uses non-relaistic tests. But, SUV's also consume more then listed. By as much as 30%. showing the true numbers would deter some. Taxes woudl deter others. And a co-ordinated change in attitudes towards those monstrous wastes woudl help. But beign an alarmist doesn't help.
Hate to break it to you, but you're the biggest combating country out there.
We should have invaded you while you were out invading the Middle East;)
And what woudl we get for our trouble? 250 million malcontents who all lean right(some righter then others). A large country of mostly underinformed, mostly apathetic, mostly under educated, service industry workers. Do your really want rush limbaugh? Or Howard Stern? Common theres nothing there worth taking over. Now sweden, and those swedish girls.... theres a reason for invasion.
That's great! Pity we'll probably be running out of oil to power these things by then.
Considering Canada has ~3.0 Trillion barrels of oil, with a pretty minimial exploitation of most fo that. I'm certain we'll be okay for at least the rest of my natural life. Saudi arabia only has ~300 billion barrels. After your don'e raping the middle east. Head up and exploit your neighbors to the north. Be nice or we'll burn your white house down again.
I see. So we should just keep throwing money at defense technology? We spend more on defense per capita than the next top three nations combined- do you realize that includes North Korea, widely considered to be a "military state"?
thats essentially been your economic policy for the last 60 years. In a reccession, you spend like crazy to get out. But you spend liek crazy on military industrial expenditures. Even Nasa is a psuedo military complex, since many innovatiosn from Nasa aid the military.
In other coutnries, they have other strategies. Canada will sink money into it's health/wellness complex. Japan does civil engineering projects. It certainly beneifits yoru populace less then Japans or Canada's strategy but it means you'll have nice shiny, highly advanced weapons to use.
Well, we _can_ but the interactions of 9 planets, a hundred moons, thousands of asteroids, etc., becomes so complex that our ability to accurately model it for (cosmically) significant periods of time is limited by computational power, thus we have to simplify the equations, and get accuracy to a more limited extent. Essentially, it's Hard(tm).
Since your posting that on slashdot, the problem isn't if it's hard or not. IT's whether it's NP hard? Is it hard 1114444*N, thus we just require a larger beowolf cluster of 486's. or is it 1111*n^n hard and thus for any problem greater then 2, we're borked?
Myth: You will make so much money babes will be hanging off of you. Reality: Chicks don't dig geeks, no matter how much money you make, besides, they know you'll spend it all on computers and techy toys instead of them.
The girl I'm seeing likes geeks. She's a little viet hottie.
Second, I dont know if I believe in evolution quite myself.. Basis is there's not enough information available to make AN INFORMED decision. We can find dino bones almost everywhere.. Just dig where fossils are common. We have fossils dating back to the precambrian era.. Why not to the era that links current humans to the apes?
I beleive in evolution. I have ample information thank you. It's sorta like saying "I don't beleive in immergent properties of complex systems, I don't think they do." Thats a pretty ignorant opinion. There is not contrversy except the contriversy fundementalists make up. It passes the scrutiny of over a centry of science. It's as good a theory as we have. Any changes will be refinement not revision. It's not just fossils, there is also genetic phylogenetic tree which support them. A century of observed supporting data. Your resoning is both ignorant and silly.
Keep it up, Cannuck! We'll make it even easier to play hockey up there, by turning the entire place into one flat plain of glass.
Countrary to popular belief, you don't have the nukes. You and Russia and China doesn't have enough nukes. Those left, will gain amazing radiation based super powers and we'll stomp you flat with our mutant war moose.
It'd be a PR nightmare (nuke or conventional) and you'd be fighting a highly trained (if sparse) guerilla army in hostile climate (like invading russia), against an army with twice your armies combined IQ (US service men are good people, but theres not denying you have one of the dumbest militaries around. Mostly because their drawn mainly from the lowest of the lower class. Thats why every US serviceman serves 1 role and 1 role only. they dont' have the aptitude to learn more.). If this flame bait. yes it is. But theres a lot of truth to all these statements.
She lived in Jakarta. And yes it's a pretty severe indication that indonesia is a hot bed of hate. She is a 5th generation immigrant, daughter of a doctor and a architect, and the government would not grant them full citizenship because they were not muslim or native Indonesian.
They forced her mother to take an extra 5 years of med school before granting her an internship. 10 years of med school, while most of her peers were done in 5. Systemic racial and religious discrimination.
Look at sadi arabia, I can recall two instances in recent memory (last 5 years) where some bizzare crime is attributed to some white collar foreign worker. A oil worker is killed, some strange story about a crime ring involving his long time filipina wife and 4 other people. A highly paid canadian worker being accused of alchohol boot legging. Hard to say how much truth is in it, but it seems to be huge amoutns of scape goating and forced confessions.
Muslims likly are not all hate mongers, but those in charge seem to be. I don't watch CNN. I get my news from BBC; a local Canadian paper; Sino Times(when I can have my father translate). I' watched Al Jezeera (translated) and read http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage. Their about as fair as msnbc (one is pro western, other is pro islam). Token pro western opinions. Token moderates. Much like CNN's token Muslim, Token pro-islamic. A overly high opinions of Muslim causes and influence. I do however respect Al Jeezera, the former BBC journalists anger a lot of local interest by even give a small voice to moderates. But isn't that an indictment of the rulers of the middle east? That a only "slightly" pro arab news network incurs the wrath of most of the leaders.
Go read what Salahuddin wrote when he was repelling the Crusaders.
While the crusades were mostly wrong, they weren't one sided affairs. A few (the first one at the very least) were initially defensive campaigns against the turks. They weren't random wars against Islam. A lot of politics and other conflicts were involved. Rights of passage, pilgrimage denial, directives from the pope ect...
You're listening in the wrong places, man. Go look up CAIR and read their dozens of condemnations of every terrorist act I've heard of in the last 2 years. I didn't even know that most of them occurred until I heard their condemnation.
Thank you for the link. I did not know about that organization.
Incidentally, our small little berg had a large group of teenage lebenese boys waving their national flag and celebrating when the twin towers were destroyed. I saw it, it was not hearsay. Dont' they seem moderate. The media reported it, then the community denied it and said it was hearsay.
Now I have to apologize. I don't think all of Islam are hateful horrible people. I may be overly emotional in my points. I beleive most of them are like my friends. Generous and helpful but a bit racist (anti-semetic, nationalistic). Even the most white washed have attitudes that resemble fundies(fundementalist christians). But not moderate. Not all that tolerant. Like many religious people (well basically all religous people), they think their religion is better. Thats their perogative, it's part and parcel with faith. But their not Moderate. They have some extreme views on jews. Which I'm sure are recipricated. There is a uniformity in this attitude that defies any nationlistic interests and crosses into a institutionalized racism. Moderate Jews don't care a spec about isreal. Don't even associate with it. Moderate Muslims are rare. If they have this racist veiw, how can they be moderate. A jew is a person of a religion. He has no more hand in Isreals oppression of palastine then my friends have in the oppression of my Ex-GF's family. Even most isreali's would rather just cede the area and have peace then fight because of their far right. And both Jews and Palastinians are guilty of not speaking up.
I want to address the fact that Islam seems to be in denial of their position
Slashdot Mirror
What you describe would make a great fps/rpg/strategy game. as you said MMORPG is about static enviroments and leveling. A modern MMORPg patch ussually breaks the game in some small way, imagine having to do that 5 times a month to do a story arch. Imagine the smell of trekies who also play a MMORPG. Whole cities would be rendered to their knees by the stench.
Theoretically, you could make super-strong body armor to outfit your stormtr^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsoldiers. So, indirectly, it can be used to kill people...
:)
Of course, even super-strong body armor pales before the power of the Force
The heaviest and highest tech of the current body armours work on sub machine gun and small arms fire only. A rifle will lay waste to any and all current body armour. even if you had a body armour equivilent to 10 times it's thickness in steel, some rifles will cut right through that.
You'd be better off making opticam. Rifles cannot be defeated by infantry body armour. Not yet anyways.
I'm not sure I'd really tout FF Tactics for it's storyline either. It's got a great battle system and a fiendish (if somewhat predictable) AI, but the storyline was a convoluted mess that at best didn't detract too much from the gameplay
You mean the translation was a bloody mess. the original story line came through, but with a bit of engrish confusion. It was said to be a very nainced storyline in japanese.
Still, for power generation, it's much safer than fosil fuels. You don't need to mine nearly as much of it, plus (as a consequence) it's worth more and easier to cost-justify safety equipment, etc. Just saying it's "dangerous" is disingenuous; the real question is, is it more or less dangerous than mining enough coal (for example) to produce the same amount of power.
Did we mention that the USSR and Canada have two of the largest deposits. it'd be a massive winfall for us canadians.
What do you think the chances are Canadians are going to tolerate the U.S. and the rest of the world shipping their nuclear waste to Canada for disposal. The problem with nuclear waste is the stigma is so bad no one wants it near them even if someone does figure out a safe way to store it or reprocess it.
If you throw enough money at us, We'll gladly bend over and let your drill our shield.
The last few original games I've liked had gameplay that was refined, but not really _new_ as such. Dungeon Siege, for example, was basically Diable meets Icewind Dale; it was good and well executed, but not really a new idea.
I contest the "good" part. more like "pretty but pointless". Diablo ii has a pretty thin vanier of a story. DS had a microscopic nano dusting of a story.
DS doesn't stand well against other games liek morrow wind and a lot of current console dungeon hacks. it only competes in graphics. HEll it doesn't stand well against diablo ii.
Thanks for clearing that up. Now I can be sure that all creationists I know are closed-minded, backwards heathens that are incapable of change.
Generally, this is true.
Humor aside. the sects that beleive this are rarly the educated set of society. And they generally would rather accept "the devil put it there to trick us" then "we might have to rethink some of our theories in light of this evidence". Are these generalizatiosn too much?
I am a christian. I have no issues what so ever with evolution. Those exsist. But creationism has no degrees. what degrees are there? they deny that mutation as any part to play in diversity.
Let us break down your evidence:
1-
Sure I've heard it's proof, but I've also seen proof that your evidence is highly incorrect.
Creationists (most) place the age of the earth at 6000- 8000 years old. This derived from calculating dates from the bible. (Chinese history goes back to 6000 bc so 8000 might be possible. Except most geological techniques and research into the age of earth place it at 4.6 billion years old. evidence here: age of earth
6000-8000 years doesn't give the mechanism for evolution (mutation) to work. however 4.6 billion give it ample time.
Creationism hold that while the mechanism for evolution (mutation/selection) can be observed now and they cannot deny any evidence that it happens and is observable, they claim simply that our current diversity is not the result of that and they label it micro evolution. They deny evolution happens by reclassing their argument to ignore all current proof. (i.e. if I have a population of people, and I kill everyone with 10 fingers and 10 toes at their 14 birthday, eventually only people with more or less toes and fingers will be around). This is perhaps their weakest argument. To say that X happens. and there is evidence X happens in the past. Then to say the past only extended to yesterday, and thus there is no time for x to happen and thus all evidence of X happening is fake, is a pretty dumb argument.
there's more but I'll move on to your next statement
2-Creationism makes more logical sense than does evolution
No, for the above reason, creationism takes more assumptions, and more unsupported assumptions. This logically, there is more support for evolution and thus evolution is our current theory.
3-but you do have to believe that there is a God for it to be proven
You must assume a god (or aliens or what ever) to have creationism. But evolution happens now, and stands on its own.
4-Either way, they're both theories at best.
Poor American education system victim. A scientific theory isn't just a "theory". A scientific theory is the current working model of a certain observed phenomenon. It is the current model because it is well supported. There may be competing theories and they will remain competing until one or the other is disproved. The community may favor one or the other.
A theory had passed the scrutiny of those reviewing it. And it has some substantial proof behind it. Theories that are accepted are rarely proven wholly wrong but are instead amended. Newton's theory of gravity(the equations) is not wrong, but only right in the local parameter set. that is at very large scales and very small scale it's off. but Einstein's general relativity solved a few of these problems while Hawking et al is trying to iron out the remaining anomalous behaviors at certain levels.
Creationism is not a scientific theory. it has not been peer reviewed its evidence is whole theological/rationalization. At best, creationist is a poorly supported idea from a certain group of individuals. At worst evolution is our best current working model of how life came into it's current diversity. Ammendments will be made as evidence comes to light.
PS. I am a devout Christian. My faith does not conflict with evolution.some may use evolution against faith but they two integrate nicly. Science is a outward growth of theological studies. It is studing gods work.
The thing is- when it comes to creationism and this particular argument, you have a third level:
Person A is an evolutionist- and thus has position X.
Person B is a creationist- his position Y is a corruption of position X to a large extent (you can get Position X from the Bible if you try REALLY hard).
Person A retorts with Position Z which is a straw man that exaggerates the flaws in Position Y.
Person A utterly destroys Postion Z, therefore showing the flaws in Position Y and proving Position X.
But agreed, it's a fallacious argument- because neither Position Y or Postion Z is actually Position X. I find that in real life, however, I rarely if ever get accused of knocking down straw men- because I choose my battles with people who don't know what a straw man IS.
I find all my arguements with creationists are not liek this. It goes more liek this:
Person A is in favor of evolution (evolutionists isn't a proper label)
person b is in favor of creationism
person a points to supporting evidence X
person b points out supporting evidence w + y + z is not true.
person a says W Y X is not X.
person b never addresses X points to W+Y+z.
indeed a straw man argument. Sure some glory seekers have placed fossils. But phylogenetic tree support most fossil evidence. many many many many other supporting evidence exsists for evolution.
Creationism is heavily dependant on assumptiosn and the bible.
Moutain of support vs assumptiosn and bible....
example of support: phylo genetic trees. fossils. mechanism in action (the creationist alteration of macro vs micro ecolution still depends on a lot of assumptions). Physics(carbon dating). Astronomy. Geology. ect...
So many fields all supporting evolution. So many diverse fields. Creationism just doesn't make sense. The only factions that beleievs it are the fundementalists.
Creationists and an open mind are mutually exclusive so even though your argument is true, no creationists will change. they believe in their narrow view of religion and science and base their faith on it. In my opinion it is the poorest form of faith. Faith that denies truth in favor of ignorance. The Catholic church beleives in evolution but the fundementalists don't.
People are getting stupider.
case in point.
Sorry nothing personal. It was just ironic.
I could store this new disk in my new 12-minute wide closet.
Wow! You measure closet size in light minutes? Where do you live?
apparently, at least 107 925 284 880m from one side of his closet.
Just like we could build a space elevator in 10 years - just so long as someone invents a way to make carbon nanotubes.
we can make them. just not long, or cheap, or many. so once we get those problems fixed, we can send something up. hey, screw carbon nanotubes, lets invent scrinth and just build a big tower.
I can get down.
....
Can I stop the intarweb? For justice?
In A.D. 2004
War was Continuing.
Captain: What happen ?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the internet crash.
Operator: We get signal.
Captain: What !
Operator: Main screen turn on.
Captain: It's you !!
Osama: How are you gentlemen !!
Osama: All your DNS servers are belong to us.
Osama: You are on the way to destruction.
Captain: What you say !!
Osama: You have no chance to survive make your time.
Osama: Ha Ha Ha Ha
Operator: Captain '!!'*
Captain: Take off every 'browser'!!
Captain: You know what you doing.
Captain: Move 'browser'.
Captain: For great justice.
Does ANYONE think that this will reduce spam in the near future? I'm still getting flooded, and I'll bet anything that my spam filters won't get any kind of a breather just because of a few arrests.
isn't that a great defeatist attitude. Spam is not like an inevitable problem. It can be dealt with. A email system with authentication, A tougher stance from the law, it all helps.
Are you crazy? I don't think there has been significant testing time devoted to 3.5" floppies. I'm sticking with 5.25" until the dust settles.
Your all nuts, I'll stick to my 500 bit punch cards, and use clay tablets for back - up. That way I can do error correction by myself if I have a drive error.
That's the spirit. Way to think of the next generations.
As long as you're doing something with your life, go ahead and keep advocating for burning 10 times more carbon than would be possible if we didn't keep going after Saudi Arabia's last drop.
Do you think that the 3 trillion barrels will help us avoid a climate crisis, maybe in our own lifetimes, by being put to use running BIG FUC*ING AIRCONDITIONERS? Which would have to shed the heat they collect to, I don't know, like, THE MOON or someplace?
lol. Talk about a alarmist. What it means is, we have around 60-100 years to find alternate fuels. Something like Biodiesel or clean fusion. Even then, we'll need the oil to derive other hydro carbons(ie plastic) which will be an essential part of any alternate fuel strategy. One thign we coudl do is slap a tax on SUV's and make them less desirable by rating their fuel economy accuratly. for instance, the honda pruis has an insane MPG rating. however it may be off by as much as 30% because the rating board uses non-relaistic tests. But, SUV's also consume more then listed. By as much as 30%. showing the true numbers would deter some. Taxes woudl deter others. And a co-ordinated change in attitudes towards those monstrous wastes woudl help. But beign an alarmist doesn't help.
Hate to break it to you, but you're the biggest combating country out there.
;)
We should have invaded you while you were out invading the Middle East
And what woudl we get for our trouble? 250 million malcontents who all lean right(some righter then others). A large country of mostly underinformed, mostly apathetic, mostly under educated, service industry workers. Do your really want rush limbaugh? Or Howard Stern? Common theres nothing there worth taking over. Now sweden, and those swedish girls.... theres a reason for invasion.
That's great! Pity we'll probably be running out of oil to power these things by then.
Considering Canada has ~3.0 Trillion barrels of oil, with a pretty minimial exploitation of most fo that. I'm certain we'll be okay for at least the rest of my natural life. Saudi arabia only has ~300 billion barrels. After your don'e raping the middle east. Head up and exploit your neighbors to the north. Be nice or we'll burn your white house down again.
I see. So we should just keep throwing money at defense technology? We spend more on defense per capita than the next top three nations combined- do you realize that includes North Korea, widely considered to be a "military state"?
thats essentially been your economic policy for the last 60 years. In a reccession, you spend like crazy to get out. But you spend liek crazy on military industrial expenditures. Even Nasa is a psuedo military complex, since many innovatiosn from Nasa aid the military.
In other coutnries, they have other strategies. Canada will sink money into it's health/wellness complex. Japan does civil engineering projects. It certainly beneifits yoru populace less then Japans or Canada's strategy but it means you'll have nice shiny, highly advanced weapons to use.
Well, we _can_ but the interactions of 9 planets, a hundred moons, thousands of asteroids, etc., becomes so complex that our ability to accurately model it for (cosmically) significant periods of time is limited by computational power, thus we have to simplify the equations, and get accuracy to a more limited extent. Essentially, it's Hard(tm).
Since your posting that on slashdot, the problem isn't if it's hard or not. IT's whether it's NP hard? Is it hard 1114444*N, thus we just require a larger beowolf cluster of 486's. or is it 1111*n^n hard and thus for any problem greater then 2, we're borked?
Myth: You will make so much money babes will be hanging off of you.
Reality: Chicks don't dig geeks, no matter how much money you make, besides, they know you'll spend it all on computers and techy toys instead of them.
The girl I'm seeing likes geeks. She's a little viet hottie.
Second, I dont know if I believe in evolution quite myself.. Basis is there's not enough information available to make AN INFORMED decision. We can find dino bones almost everywhere.. Just dig where fossils are common. We have fossils dating back to the precambrian era.. Why not to the era that links current humans to the apes?
I beleive in evolution. I have ample information thank you. It's sorta like saying "I don't beleive in immergent properties of complex systems, I don't think they do." Thats a pretty ignorant opinion. There is not contrversy except the contriversy fundementalists make up. It passes the scrutiny of over a centry of science. It's as good a theory as we have. Any changes will be refinement not revision. It's not just fossils, there is also genetic phylogenetic tree which support them. A century of observed supporting data. Your resoning is both ignorant and silly.
Keep it up, Cannuck! We'll make it even easier to play hockey up there, by turning the entire place into one flat plain of glass.
Countrary to popular belief, you don't have the nukes. You and Russia and China doesn't have enough nukes. Those left, will gain amazing radiation based super powers and we'll stomp you flat with our mutant war moose.
It'd be a PR nightmare (nuke or conventional) and you'd be fighting a highly trained (if sparse) guerilla army in hostile climate (like invading russia), against an army with twice your armies combined IQ (US service men are good people, but theres not denying you have one of the dumbest militaries around. Mostly because their drawn mainly from the lowest of the lower class. Thats why every US serviceman serves 1 role and 1 role only. they dont' have the aptitude to learn more.). If this flame bait. yes it is. But theres a lot of truth to all these statements.
She lived in Jakarta. And yes it's a pretty severe indication that indonesia is a hot bed of hate. She is a 5th generation immigrant, daughter of a doctor and a architect, and the government would not grant them full citizenship because they were not muslim or native Indonesian.
They forced her mother to take an extra 5 years of med school before granting her an internship. 10 years of med school, while most of her peers were done in 5. Systemic racial and religious discrimination.
Look at sadi arabia, I can recall two instances in recent memory (last 5 years) where some bizzare crime is attributed to some white collar foreign worker. A oil worker is killed, some strange story about a crime ring involving his long time filipina wife and 4 other people. A highly paid canadian worker being accused of alchohol boot legging. Hard to say how much truth is in it, but it seems to be huge amoutns of scape goating and forced confessions.
Muslims likly are not all hate mongers, but those in charge seem to be. I don't watch CNN. I get my news from BBC; a local Canadian paper; Sino Times(when I can have my father translate). I' watched Al Jezeera (translated) and read http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage. Their about as fair as msnbc (one is pro western, other is pro islam). Token pro western opinions. Token moderates. Much like CNN's token Muslim, Token pro-islamic. A overly high opinions of Muslim causes and influence. I do however respect Al Jeezera, the former BBC journalists anger a lot of local interest by even give a small voice to moderates. But isn't that an indictment of the rulers of the middle east? That a only "slightly" pro arab news network incurs the wrath of most of the leaders.
Go read what Salahuddin wrote when he was repelling the Crusaders.
While the crusades were mostly wrong, they weren't one sided affairs. A few (the first one at the very least) were initially defensive campaigns against the turks. They weren't random wars against Islam. A lot of politics and other conflicts were involved. Rights of passage, pilgrimage denial, directives from the pope ect...
You're listening in the wrong places, man. Go look up CAIR and read their dozens of condemnations of every terrorist act I've heard of in the last 2 years. I didn't even know that most of them occurred until I heard their condemnation.
Thank you for the link. I did not know about that organization.
Incidentally, our small little berg had a large group of teenage lebenese boys waving their national flag and celebrating when the twin towers were destroyed. I saw it, it was not hearsay. Dont' they seem moderate. The media reported it, then the community denied it and said it was hearsay.
Now I have to apologize. I don't think all of Islam are hateful horrible people. I may be overly emotional in my points. I beleive most of them are like my friends. Generous and helpful but a bit racist (anti-semetic, nationalistic). Even the most white washed have attitudes that resemble fundies(fundementalist christians). But not moderate. Not all that tolerant. Like many religious people (well basically all religous people), they think their religion is better. Thats their perogative, it's part and parcel with faith. But their not Moderate. They have some extreme views on jews. Which I'm sure are recipricated. There is a uniformity in this attitude that defies any nationlistic interests and crosses into a institutionalized racism. Moderate Jews don't care a spec about isreal. Don't even associate with it. Moderate Muslims are rare. If they have this racist veiw, how can they be moderate. A jew is a person of a religion. He has no more hand in Isreals oppression of palastine then my friends have in the oppression of my Ex-GF's family. Even most isreali's would rather just cede the area and have peace then fight because of their far right. And both Jews and Palastinians are guilty of not speaking up.
I want to address the fact that Islam seems to be in denial of their position