Another problem: Archaeologist finds microfiche printed in the 2000s. Archaeologist looks at the artifact under a microscope. But archaeologist is not familiar with the English language. Now what?
Rosettafiche?
More seriously, the *concept* of microfilm/microfiche may very well lead us to a newer/better technology that doesn't degrade as quickly as microfilm (It lasts a long time, but no where close to 2000 years) Given that, I don't see any reason why a "digital hardcopy" (perhaps a bar code type system) couldn't also be distributed with the preserved micro-documents for purposes of accurate and cosistent reproduction.
Oh, you can read microfiche reasonably well with a cheap magnifying glass. There wouldn't be any need for a microscope.
Wealth has little to do with it -- In the US, at least in my area, most carriers charge ten cents per text!
I pay $55 a month for my cell phone. I don't pay per minute (e.g. I can talk all day long, all month long) and I don't pay for long distance (I can talk to someone clear across the country all day long)
For those not in the know, the Old Testament is written in Hebrew -- not English. The verse in question can be found in Exodus chapter 20, verse 13
The KJV translates the sixth commandment as: Ex. 20:13 Thou shall not kill
Let's find out why! (Hebrew transliterations in brackets)
"Not" is from the Hebrew [lo] being a simple or abstract negation
"Kill" is from the Hebrew [ratsach] a primitive root, properly meaning to dash in pieces or more specificly to kill a human being (the accepted intended meaning in this case.)
The whole "thou shall" part comes from (get this) a single letter preceding [ratsach] specificly [tav]. One of the Hebrew words for you (f.sng.)[tav][aleph]
Lets look at the whole thing as found in the majority of Hebrew texts: [cheth][tsadi][resh][tav][aleph][lamedh]
The verse then, in a painfully literal translation, becomes:
Not You Kill
or, if you prefer:
Not You Murder
This isn't exactly one of those verses that is especially difficult to translate. I don't know why you prefer "murder" to "kill" exactly, but calling it a mistranslation is as absurd as claiming "murder" is the only correct english translation of [ratsach].
It would be great to see a poll on how many Christians actually know that, though.
I failed to attribute the quote! It's from the forward to Logic for the millions by A.E. Mander
Thinking is skiled work. It is not true that we are naturally endowed with teh ability to think clearly and logically -- without learning how, or without practising.It is rediculous to suppose that nay less skill is required for thinking than for carpentering, or for playing tennis, golf, or bridge, or for playing some musical instrument. People wiht untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learnt and never practised can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge-players, or pianists. Yet our world is full of people who apparently do suppose that thinking is enirely unskilled work; that thinking clearly and accurately is so easy and so "natural" that nobody need trouble to learn how to do it; that "anybody can think"; and that any one person's thinking is quite as reliable as any other person's. This accounts for the fact that, as a people, we are so much less efficient in this respect than we are in our sports. For nobody assumes that any game is so easy that we are all first-class players "naturally," without having to learn how to play or without practice.
Those who are in the earnest in wishing to think more clearly, more accurately, and more rationally should face their task in the spirit in which they would set themselves to learn the rules, to learn the technique, and to practise some new game. They should be prepared to devote as much time and attention to this as they would to learning golf, bridge, or music.
People do not expect to be 'good' at a particular sport or game without hard-work and practice.
People do expect to be good at thinking without hard-work or practice. After all, as far as they can tell, they've been thinking their whole lives!
A favorite quote of mine sums it up best:
"Thinking is skilled work. It is not true that we are naturally endowed with the ability to think clearly and logically -- without learning how, or without practicing. People with untrained minds should no more expect to think clearly and logically than people who have never learned and never practiced can expect to find themselves good carpenters, golfers, bridge players, or pianists"
No, no. Blood plasma saves lives -- which is cool. People do it (donate plasma) because plasma donation centers pay cash for blood plasma. $10 and $25 in Pittsburgh ($35/week). Poor college students and poor PGH residents don't care what happens with their plasma:)
I hear you can selectivly deactivate these "windows" with the optional blind(tm) and curtain(tm) add-on modules. Though I think the option to disable should come pre-installed. How's the casual home user supposed to know about, let alone install, these extra features?
we should be moving to fast loading pages and RSS feeds.
Hear, Hear! I couldn't agree more. The promises that the web and HTML made have not been kept. How many sites are viewable on more than one kind of device? How many sites have giant images that take forever to load over a slow connection? How often do you visit a site only to discover there is *still* no new content? or content you don't find interesting? RSS is fantastic -- and an excellent example of XML used properly.
I say we take things a step further -- new standards for content -- separate the data and navigation from the interface! Separate web applications, dynamic documents, forms, static documents, and interactive documents from one another inside the same standard or (very) small set of standards! What do we get? The promises that HTML and the web failed to deliver to us. Imagine accessing content or interacting with an application regardless of the physical device -- It's a beautiful thing -- imagine how instantly *accessable* data and applications would be for *all* users regardless of their physical handicap? (by giving us truly device independent formats) We could have a Smaller-Faster- Better web! a web like we were promised!
I teach adult computer literacy classes. Oddly enought the concept of a computer program is often beyond the students initial understanding. That is to say, they typically don't come to class with that prerequisite knowledge, dispite all the opportunity they've had to acquire that knowledge. To us, a computer is a device that executes programs. To them, the computer is simply a device. If a computer contains different programs (WP vs. Word) then, in their eyes, the computers are different devices. Program types are difficult for them to understand as well -- as they lack a solid understanding of the concept of 'program'. They don't use a word processor -- they use word. They don't use an email client -- the use email -- outlook takes them to email.
There is also a difference in how we consider computer programs that might affect their ability to understand their nature. We think of a computer program as a tool. They think of computer programs spatially, as a location. e.g. I use AbiWord to type documents. They go to Word Perfect to type their documents. You can understand how a tool works, but locations have a natural function, not a logical function.
The idea that a file can also be a program is difficult for the reasons stated above. (Not to mention they have diffuculty understanding the purpose and concept of files. "No, no. My 'files' are all saved in Word." and they don't mean 'Word format') If a program is a list of instructions the computer uses to perform some function, then it's only natural that a program be stored in a file. However, the poor user never encounters this concept when they interact with the computer -- you can explain how it works, and they can parrot that back to you, but it's still just some abstract concept outside their experience with the computer. In the old dos days, things were different. Files and directories were all the user encountered. The files ending with.exe and.com were programs. The use typed the name of the program and the computer would 'run' that program. When they wanted to view the contents of a file, they needed a program that would display that information. They run the program, then open the file they saw earlier. It was all very simple. Now they 'click on a picture and the computer shows that picture' to you. The idea that a program was needed to display the picture is lost. That's just the way the computer works. The GUI may have made our computers easier to use -- I can't argue against that -- but it has made our computers more difficult for the new user to understand.
I've found that my students respond very well to simple 'this is how you do it' type lessons while they respond poorly to 'this is how it works' lessons. Unfortunately for me, when I use the 'top down' approach, my students learn much less, but feel like they've learned more. When I use the 'bottom up' approach, my students learn more, but feel like they've learned less. I've had to strike a balance between the two to create lessons that engage the student in 'how to do it' while trying to get them to understand 'how it works'. It's not as easy as it sounds. I think the parent understood this.
Special thanks goes to Microsoft for hiding the file system from the user with it's default 'hide exentions of known types' and mutilation of the Path when using windows explorer. Thanks again for providing a 'back button' in the same while moving the 'up' button farther right into no-click land. Extra thanks go to the info area to the right of explorer windows with no visible separation from the rest of the window.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, really? http://www.fixedearth.com/
(Yes, this nutcase is serious. I have a copy of his book, though I don't know why.)
Humanity is still in Beta? This proves my theory that Google must have been the Great Creator!
Rosettafiche?
More seriously, the *concept* of microfilm/microfiche may very well lead us to a newer/better technology that doesn't degrade as quickly as microfilm (It lasts a long time, but no where close to 2000 years) Given that, I don't see any reason why a "digital hardcopy" (perhaps a bar code type system) couldn't also be distributed with the preserved micro-documents for purposes of accurate and cosistent reproduction.
Oh, you can read microfiche reasonably well with a cheap magnifying glass. There wouldn't be any need for a microscope.
ACK! The like the parent provided is PORN
DON'T CLICK THAT LINK!
What about roll-on? You insensitive clod!
Wealth has little to do with it -- In the US, at least in my area, most carriers charge ten cents per text!
I pay $55 a month for my cell phone. I don't pay per minute (e.g. I can talk all day long, all month long) and I don't pay for long distance (I can talk to someone clear across the country all day long)
Texting would COST ME MORE MONEY. No thanks.
For those not in the know, the Old Testament is written in Hebrew -- not English. The verse in question can be found in Exodus chapter 20, verse 13
The KJV translates the sixth commandment as:
Ex. 20:13 Thou shall not kill
Let's find out why!
(Hebrew transliterations in brackets)
"Not" is from the Hebrew [lo] being a simple or abstract negation
"Kill" is from the Hebrew [ratsach] a primitive root, properly meaning to dash in pieces or more specificly to kill a human being (the accepted intended meaning in this case.)
The whole "thou shall" part comes from (get this) a single letter preceding [ratsach] specificly [tav]. One of the Hebrew words for you (f.sng.)[tav][aleph]
Lets look at the whole thing as found in the majority of Hebrew texts:
[cheth][tsadi][resh][tav][aleph][lamedh]
The verse then, in a painfully literal translation, becomes:
Not You Kill
or, if you prefer:
Not You Murder
This isn't exactly one of those verses that is especially difficult to translate. I don't know why you prefer "murder" to "kill" exactly, but calling it a mistranslation is as absurd as claiming "murder" is the only correct english translation of [ratsach].
It would be great to see a poll on how many Christians actually know that, though.
I only have one father...He never made slashdot... Should I be sad?
Close enough...
e mory.asp?param=2
http://www.sony.com.my/about/cretech_presentwithm
You do know that Lincoln founded the Republican Party don't you?
"guilty by association?" ... How about Guilty through Direct Action?
Ever wonder who was doing the actual SELLING of the slaves?
Yeah, that's right. Who do you think is more at fault; the Buyer or the Seller?
(A good analogy here would be drug dealers and drug users.)
Stop trying to blame slavery on WHITE Americans. It's obviously RACIST and demonstrably false.
A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
Ah, the miracle of birth... I hope your 'baby meme' grows up big and strong.
May I post its first abuse?
Chuck Norris IS the only meme killer
Which beats the wikipedia version, which taught us B-O-L-O-G-N-A-A...
People do expect to be good at thinking without hard-work or practice. After all, as far as they can tell, they've been thinking their whole lives!
A favorite quote of mine sums it up best:
You might be interested in The right to read by RMS
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
No, no. Blood plasma saves lives -- which is cool. People do it (donate plasma) because plasma donation centers pay cash for blood plasma. $10 and $25 in Pittsburgh ($35/week). Poor college students and poor PGH residents don't care what happens with their plasma
I hear you can selectivly deactivate these "windows" with the optional blind(tm) and curtain(tm) add-on modules. Though I think the option to disable should come pre-installed. How's the casual home user supposed to know about, let alone install, these extra features?
Cellular One has an unlimited data plan ($15/m) and an unlimited minutes plan ($50/m).
Hear, Hear! I couldn't agree more. The promises that the web and HTML made have not been kept. How many sites are viewable on more than one kind of device? How many sites have giant images that take forever to load over a slow connection? How often do you visit a site only to discover there is *still* no new content? or content you don't find interesting? RSS is fantastic -- and an excellent example of XML used properly.
I say we take things a step further -- new standards for content -- separate the data and navigation from the interface! Separate web applications, dynamic documents, forms, static documents, and interactive documents from one another inside the same standard or (very) small set of standards! What do we get? The promises that HTML and the web failed to deliver to us. Imagine accessing content or interacting with an application regardless of the physical device -- It's a beautiful thing -- imagine how instantly *accessable* data and applications would be for *all* users regardless of their physical handicap? (by giving us truly device independent formats) We could have a Smaller-Faster- Better web! a web like we were promised!
A 900mhz cordless phone won't interfere with wifi (802.11b/g) -- however a 2.4ghz phone will.
I once thought like you until I started to...
.exe and .com were programs. The use typed the name of the program and the computer would 'run' that program. When they wanted to view the contents of a file, they needed a program that would display that information. They run the program, then open the file they saw earlier. It was all very simple. Now they 'click on a picture and the computer shows that picture' to you. The idea that a program was needed to display the picture is lost. That's just the way the computer works. The GUI may have made our computers easier to use -- I can't argue against that -- but it has made our computers more difficult for the new user to understand.
I teach adult computer literacy classes. Oddly enought the concept of a computer program is often beyond the students initial understanding. That is to say, they typically don't come to class with that prerequisite knowledge, dispite all the opportunity they've had to acquire that knowledge. To us, a computer is a device that executes programs. To them, the computer is simply a device. If a computer contains different programs (WP vs. Word) then, in their eyes, the computers are different devices. Program types are difficult for them to understand as well -- as they lack a solid understanding of the concept of 'program'. They don't use a word processor -- they use word. They don't use an email client -- the use email -- outlook takes them to email.
There is also a difference in how we consider computer programs that might affect their ability to understand their nature. We think of a computer program as a tool. They think of computer programs spatially, as a location. e.g. I use AbiWord to type documents. They go to Word Perfect to type their documents. You can understand how a tool works, but locations have a natural function, not a logical function.
The idea that a file can also be a program is difficult for the reasons stated above. (Not to mention they have diffuculty understanding the purpose and concept of files. "No, no. My 'files' are all saved in Word." and they don't mean 'Word format') If a program is a list of instructions the computer uses to perform some function, then it's only natural that a program be stored in a file. However, the poor user never encounters this concept when they interact with the computer -- you can explain how it works, and they can parrot that back to you, but it's still just some abstract concept outside their experience with the computer. In the old dos days, things were different. Files and directories were all the user encountered. The files ending with
I've found that my students respond very well to simple 'this is how you do it' type lessons while they respond poorly to 'this is how it works' lessons. Unfortunately for me, when I use the 'top down' approach, my students learn much less, but feel like they've learned more. When I use the 'bottom up' approach, my students learn more, but feel like they've learned less. I've had to strike a balance between the two to create lessons that engage the student in 'how to do it' while trying to get them to understand 'how it works'. It's not as easy as it sounds. I think the parent understood this.
Special thanks goes to Microsoft for hiding the file system from the user with it's default 'hide exentions of known types' and mutilation of the Path when using windows explorer. Thanks again for providing a 'back button' in the same while moving the 'up' button farther right into no-click land. Extra thanks go to the info area to the right of explorer windows with no visible separation from the rest of the window.
Why Natalie Portman, naked and petrified, covered in Hot Grits of course!
Learn your Slashdot Subculture and all about Slashdot Trolling Phenomena