Back in my day, we had to write complete sentences! In pen! On paper! Going uphill! Both ways! In the snow! And, we LIKED it!
Oh yeah? That's nothing! We had to write in cuneiform! On clay tablets! In a language we didn't know! And we got along just fine! Damn kids today don't know what they've got when you give it to them!
(YELLOW LIGHT. CAUTION. TAke your time with thsi next paragraph. It's full of potholes, and it's easier if you read it aloud and stay mentally loose.)
Win eye wuz uh teechur - uh ort teechur - eye rote ass-einmints 2 d stewed-ants n d class you-sink lang-which lak dis. It waz uh weigh off kip-ink uh lite-horted n luce attic-tyoud bout sear-he-us wirk. D stewed-ants thot et wuz fun-he. D Angwish tee-churs dead-knot. Dey sed eye waz may-kink stew-pid trubbull. Eye all-weighs re-furred dim 2 d holy right-ink uf d fey-moose rite-her Chames Choice, two ream-ind dim dat lang-witch s a kind off play. N Leyef s a kind of choke. Lafter n kern-ink n he-maj-he-nay-shun r ee-sin-shall 2 cree-ate-hiv-itty, witch s ee-sin-shall 2 sieve-ee-lie-za-shun. Oh, Kay? Now, ewe no y dis chapped-her hed-ink s speld rong. C? Lafter. 10 Q fairy mush 4 yur pay-shuns, n gud luk.
didja get rid of spyware trojans and viruses first? or bother to read the readme? No, you were too busy recompiling the kernel and whining about Microsoft to RTFM.
Shouldn't that be 6008? (not 7000) as A.L. would be 4000 + the current year, but that was changed from 4004 to make the math easier. (We'll use the "harder" form.)
(speculation on the actual month and day still abounds...)
I agree. Anyone who would hold back their own innovation for fear that they couldn't capitalize on it is one selfish bastard. Real artists and innovators desire to benifit humanity -- not just themselves.
How will the autonomous taxi know when some drunk in the back has puked on the seat before picking you up? -- whats to stop teenage (and other) vandals from random distruction (shit on the seat, etc.)
It's not the auto-auto that scares me -- it's the public.
Just about everything we accept as fact today about the Universe was resisted strongly (far past the point of rationality) by many in the existing scientific establishment of the day.
Seems silly to me. I don't recall relativity being strongly opposed -- just mostly ignored.
You might remember Arthur Schopenhauer who wrote: "Whatever you have done to me or will do to me in the future, whether you glorify me as a genius or put me in a mental institution, whether you adore me as your savior or hang me as a spy, sooner or later necessity will force you to comprehend that I have discovered the laws of the living"
It's a preaty famous quote, and a good number of crackpots have used this to justify their position. "Look! I'm being opposed! I must be right!" -- but that's no justification at all. Though I can see how this would have influenced your post.
Sure, there are lots of examples in history of ideas being met with opposition. But for every Galileo Galilei there are pleanty of others who've not met opposition. Not to count the numbers whos opposition was justified! (Science can't be responsible for researching every crackpots wild ideas. The burden of responsibility lies elsewhere.)
Let's use quantum mechanics as an example. Einstein himself (though undoubtably a primary contributor) was not only the primary critic of quantum mechanics -- he was the only critic! Science is very good at letting fact win over authority. (Einsteins trouble was with the philosophy, not the science: "God does not play dice!")
Pleanty of other scientists did further research including the famed Niels Bohr, Max Planck (he's a constant!), Arthur Compton, Erwin Schroedinger (famous for his cat), and Werner Heisenberg (everyone has heard of him!) Even Einstein admitted he couldn't explain black-body radiation without the new Bohr atom. So if figure the opposition was all but non-existant!
Yeah, the called Pasture a liar, and tortured Galileo -- but they appear to be the exception, not the rule.
Slashdot Mirror
Back in my day, we had to write complete sentences! In pen! On paper! Going uphill! Both ways! In the snow! And, we LIKED it!
Oh yeah? That's nothing! We had to write in cuneiform! On clay tablets! In a language we didn't know! And we got along just fine! Damn kids today don't know what they've got when you give it to them!
(YELLOW LIGHT. CAUTION. TAke your time with thsi next paragraph. It's full of potholes, and it's easier if you read it aloud and stay mentally loose.)
Win eye wuz uh teechur - uh ort teechur - eye rote ass-einmints 2 d stewed-ants n d class you-sink lang-which lak dis. It waz uh weigh off kip-ink uh lite-horted n luce attic-tyoud bout sear-he-us wirk. D stewed-ants thot et wuz fun-he. D Angwish tee-churs dead-knot. Dey sed eye waz may-kink stew-pid trubbull. Eye all-weighs re-furred dim 2 d holy right-ink uf d fey-moose rite-her Chames Choice, two ream-ind dim dat lang-witch s a kind off play. N Leyef s a kind of choke. Lafter n kern-ink n he-maj-he-nay-shun r ee-sin-shall 2 cree-ate-hiv-itty, witch s ee-sin-shall 2 sieve-ee-lie-za-shun. Oh, Kay?
Now, ewe no y dis chapped-her hed-ink s speld rong. C? Lafter.
10 Q fairy mush 4 yur pay-shuns, n gud luk.
--Robert Fulghum, Words I wish I wrote
Don't try to connect to the site, that's impossible. Only try to realize the truth: There is no server.
Correlation does not imply causation.
They welcomed our dark streaking, flashing non-terrestial overlords 2 years ago ... In Japan!
In Soviet Russia, dark streaking, flashing non-terrestial overlords welcome YOU!
In Korea, only Old People welcome dark streaking, flashing non-terrestial overlords
These aren't the dark streaking, flashing non-terrestial overlords you're looking for...
[/me waves goodbye to karma]
Korea! it's In Korea
In Korea, only old people spell it 'Corea'
Old People Not as Young as They Used to Be
In Korea, only old people aren't young...
Any idea where this "In Korea only old people die" nonsense came from? It's not in the Slashdot Subculture Wikipedia entry.
Basements have backyards?
I wonder what people in Beverly Hills use for their fake zip code...
on the web that's not porn....
Don't be so sure...
didja get rid of spyware trojans and viruses first? or bother to read the readme? No, you were too busy recompiling the kernel and whining about Microsoft to RTFM.
3 44
/ 2100-1016_3-5311280.html?tag=nl
t +in+SP2/2100-1016_3-5326707.html
Wow, you really don't have a clue, do you?
http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xhtml?story_id=26
http://news.com.com/Microsoft+lists+SP2+conflicts
http://news.com.com/Microsoft+tackles+AMD+conflic
From this article: Microsoft had advised AMD users to remove SP2 altogether.
There are pleanty of others.
And lets not forget problems with legacy applications. (Which many people need.)
Not all of us can run SP2 -- It just breaks too many things.
No, it's not.
I'm just checking to make sure the connectors mate.
Pervert.
Shouldn't that be 6008? (not 7000) as A.L. would be 4000 + the current year, but that was changed from 4004 to make the math easier. (We'll use the "harder" form.)
(speculation on the actual month and day still abounds...)
lol, as if Bill isn't smart enough to avoid outlook! He probably uses pine.
I agree. Anyone who would hold back their own innovation for fear that they couldn't capitalize on it is one selfish bastard. Real artists and innovators desire to benifit humanity -- not just themselves.
Isn't that what open-source is all about?
How will the autonomous taxi know when some drunk in the back has puked on the seat before picking you up? -- whats to stop teenage (and other) vandals from random distruction (shit on the seat, etc.)
It's not the auto-auto that scares me -- it's the public.
Nothing new under sun, if you ask me.
Or king Solomon [see: Ecclesiastes 1:9]
Obviously as the flash is faster than two speeding bullets ... oh, wait ...
I don't think I'd trust msnbot to act in an honerable fashion. Remember the days when IE would identify itself as netscape?
Hydrogen in mass public distributuion will kill people, lots of people!
So what's the problem?
Just about everything we accept as fact today about the Universe was resisted strongly (far past the point of rationality) by many in the existing scientific establishment of the day.
Seems silly to me. I don't recall relativity being strongly opposed -- just mostly ignored.
You might remember Arthur Schopenhauer who wrote: "Whatever you have done to me or will do to me in the future, whether you glorify me as a genius or put me in a mental institution, whether you adore me as your savior or hang me as a spy, sooner or later necessity will force you to comprehend that I have discovered the laws of the living"
It's a preaty famous quote, and a good number of crackpots have used this to justify their position. "Look! I'm being opposed! I must be right!" -- but that's no justification at all. Though I can see how this would have influenced your post.
Sure, there are lots of examples in history of ideas being met with opposition. But for every Galileo Galilei there are pleanty of others who've not met opposition. Not to count the numbers whos opposition was justified! (Science can't be responsible for researching every crackpots wild ideas. The burden of responsibility lies elsewhere.)
Let's use quantum mechanics as an example. Einstein himself (though undoubtably a primary contributor) was not only the primary critic of quantum mechanics -- he was the only critic! Science is very good at letting fact win over authority. (Einsteins trouble was with the philosophy, not the science: "God does not play dice!")
Pleanty of other scientists did further research including the famed Niels Bohr, Max Planck (he's a constant!), Arthur Compton, Erwin Schroedinger (famous for his cat), and Werner Heisenberg (everyone has heard of him!) Even Einstein admitted he couldn't explain black-body radiation without the new Bohr atom. So if figure the opposition was all but non-existant!
Yeah, the called Pasture a liar, and tortured Galileo -- but they appear to be the exception, not the rule.
Is this conclusive evidence that women are in fact smarter than men?
No, It's "conclusive evidence" that "the majority of men who voted chose Bush, but the majority of women who voted chose Kerry."
Nothing more, nothing less...