You're right. And if you are among the brilliant minds putting in the 80 hour week, and you actually make it work, you can be sure to walk away with an 8 figure bank account and/or a high position within Microsoft. You're not going to be the next Bill Gates (or Larry Page, since apparently that's what the kids want to be now), but it's still a sweet deal.
As far as the risk goes, if you know a safer way of making that kind of money, I'd like to hear it.
Heck, I'd do it myself, but it would probably mean I have to use Windows...
So the way I see it, the scientific fact, the new discovery, is, that there are light-sensitive cells in the brain. The deduction, unsupported by further evidence, is, that that means evolution is right and creationism is wrong.
I don't get it. How do you get from the one to the other? Was it disputed that light-sensitive cells can evolve? Does this result now prove it?
I always thought the whole controversy about the evolution of the eye was that the leap from a light-sensitive cell to a full human eye was a rather large one, and most of the steps in between are believed to have little survival value. In other words, the fitness to quality-of-sight curve has a huge dip between the extremes "light-sensitive-cell" and "human eye". Or am I on crack?
Re:Just because we can?
on
Flying By Brain
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
You know... if I can do something but choose not to, then it is almost guaranteed that someone else will. Even if you have moral qualms about it, it will be done. And in that case, I would rather be the one doing it, the one having control over it, than leaving it up to someone else.
I'm not surprised that Starship Troopers didn't make it to the list, as it seems to be trash-scifi of the worst kind. However, I happened to see it just days after I had seen "All Quiet on the Western Front", which shed quite a different light on it. It is probably totally unintentional by the writers and producers of the movie, but this way it seemed to exclaim that humanity will never change, no matter the technological achievements. It's imagery and way of telling the story is so incredible trite that you might think it's a parody of both war movies and real wars, real human behavior. I was watching it with a friend at the time, and we actually discussed this halfway through the movie (i.e., without knowing the ending) and were not quite sure if this was the intention of the film.
Looks like we have a contest for the most expensive bug in history... What about this one:
The Ariane 5 rocket exploded on its maiden flight in June [4], 1996 because the navigation package was inherited from the Ariane 4 without proper testing. The new rocket flew faster, resulting in larger values of some variables in the navigation software. Shortly after launch, an attempt to convert a 64-bit floating-point number into a 16-bit integer generated an overflow. The error was caught, but the code that caught it elected to shut down the subsystem. The rocket veered off course and exploded. It was unfortunate that the code that failed genereated inertial reference information useful only before lift-off; had it been turned off at the moment of launch, there would have been no trouble. (Kernighan, 1999)
This and more on this page (no, I am not affiliated;-).
Slashdot Mirror
You're right. And if you are among the brilliant minds putting in the 80 hour week, and you actually make it work, you can be sure to walk away with an 8 figure bank account and/or a high position within Microsoft. You're not going to be the next Bill Gates (or Larry Page, since apparently that's what the kids want to be now), but it's still a sweet deal.
...
As far as the risk goes, if you know a safer way of making that kind of money, I'd like to hear it.
Heck, I'd do it myself, but it would probably mean I have to use Windows
I didn't read TFA, so I don't know ... it was really written in perl?
You know, if you want to say something, just say it
So the way I see it, the scientific fact, the new discovery, is, that there are light-sensitive cells in the brain. The deduction, unsupported by further evidence, is, that that means evolution is right and creationism is wrong.
I don't get it. How do you get from the one to the other? Was it disputed that light-sensitive cells can evolve? Does this result now prove it?
I always thought the whole controversy about the evolution of the eye was that the leap from a light-sensitive cell to a full human eye was a rather large one, and most of the steps in between are believed to have little survival value. In other words, the fitness to quality-of-sight curve has a huge dip between the extremes "light-sensitive-cell" and "human eye". Or am I on crack?
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
... if I can do something but choose not to, then it is almost guaranteed that someone else will. Even if you have moral qualms about it, it will be done. And in that case, I would rather be the one doing it, the one having control over it, than leaving it up to someone else.
You know
Dare you say mars? We all say mars, all the time. That's why no one takes us serious.
They're called physicists. Contact your local university for more information.
Only on slashdot are problems like world hunger and AIDS seen set equal to the problem of attracting women ...
I'm not surprised that Starship Troopers didn't make it to the list, as it seems to be trash-scifi of the worst kind. However, I happened to see it just days after I had seen "All Quiet on the Western Front", which shed quite a different light on it. It is probably totally unintentional by the writers and producers of the movie, but this way it seemed to exclaim that humanity will never change, no matter the technological achievements. It's imagery and way of telling the story is so incredible trite that you might think it's a parody of both war movies and real wars, real human behavior.
I was watching it with a friend at the time, and we actually discussed this halfway through the movie (i.e., without knowing the ending) and were not quite sure if this was the intention of the film.
As all killer apps for new technology: Porn
This and more on this page (no, I am not affiliated
You use emacs?
The answer is simple
Cyber-Soap? ;-)
Did anyone else expect a story about hygiene products for geeks?
... you can use your old motor oil to fertilize your lawn!
Of course.
Its communicating to the goddamn commies/terrorists/ to stop shooting at us.
Dude, have you ever been to San Francisco? ;-)
you'd have to add secrecy to the list. i live less than twenty miles from that facility and have never heard about it so far...