I read it that same way as you. It didn't seem biased toward the junk-faxers....maybe it seemed to me like it assumed the audience was intelligent and knew that junk faxers were the jerks, and just reported what both sides said.
He said "When do we get a break?" An honest way of saying it would be "when do you get a break?". Maybe not a lie per se, but I'd say the word "we" makes it pretty explicitly pretending to be there.
I've had one lucid dream (~15 years ago) --- if this thing can trigger one reliably, maybe by just reminding you to check if you are dreaming by seeing if you can fly or something, I would pay good money for it.
I know I can hear when i am dreaming, because I have often heard a song on the radio or something and worked it into the dream.
So what if Dan Rather, instead of travelling to the middle of a hurricane to report live, just used a blue screen and a wind machine, and had someone off screen throw a tree branch or two at him? Is that ok too?
First, it opens the last page visited, literally, not the current page in the browser window I am currently in. That's just wrong.
Second, it doesn't preserve the history, which defeats the purpose. I love the ability to open a new window, navigate forwards and backwards in the history while keeping my "old" history in the other window. I use it all the time, its hard to explain how useful that is.
I hear you on the tabs, but I still don't like them. I never liked microsoft's MDI (especially when in "maximized" mode where you could only look at one document at a time), and this is the same thing to me. I want to have two or more things side by side. Not all the time, but often enough that I find it maddening to have to jump through hoops when I do feel the need.
Google toolbar works in IE to get rid of popups quite nicely.
I'd use mozilla more except that I can't stand it's useless "new window" function. Being as I have muliple monitors, I don't use tabbed browsing and just open new windows when i want to explore something but still keep a browser where i am not lose my place. IE does the right thing, IMO (the new window is a clone of the current one, including having the same history). I just wish they'd make it an option.
Bondo car body filler works great for rebuilding plastic parts. You can whittle it with a knife easily before it completely hardens, and then if you have a dremel tool, clean it up easily. (otherwise just sandpaper works fine). It is about as hard as wood. If you need something harder/stronger, use fiberglass resin, also in the automotive section. Its more liquidy before it sets so it can be harder to work with though.
Segway doesn't use gyroscopes to actually balance the thing, only to sense balance. It uses the motors and wheels to keep it balanced.
A 4 wheeled variation could use the additional wheels to detect the angle the platform is at, and use the motors to balance it. It could (probably) be just as stable as the segway.
That's not to say that we'll be killing most people we send up, but rather than there is no shortage of people willing to take the risks
There may be people willing to die, but that doesn't mean that the public (and congress) will continue being willing to fund something that is causing high-profile deaths that make our technology look unreliable.
If that were really true, then if you are smart, you should be able to make a killing at the stock market.
People may artificially inflate the price of tulips or dot-coms for a while in their speculative frenzy, but eventually it will have to come back down if it truly is artificial. If you are so sure of yourself that those inflating the stocks are the stupid ones, then short the stocks and make a ton of money.
Re:The first 15 posts on this are things you cant
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
No I wasn't saying that. But it sounds like you and your sig. other might need some counseling.
Re:The first 15 posts on this are things you cant
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
He didn't say there was a difference
He said it was a double standard. That clearly implies a difference (see http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary? double+standard....note the word "differently").
Re:The first 15 posts on this are things you cant
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
No, it is not called reverse descrimination. That's a different thing, nigga.
Re:The first 15 posts on this are things you cant
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Why is it a double standard, and it's a negative hateful word.
Same reason your wife can say "I am so fat", but you get in trouble if you say "honey, you are fat". I don't see why that is so hard to understand why the difference.
It is a barrier to reproduction, in that producing all-males is a disadvantage by making the chances of getting one's genes into future generations less. This becomes more and more true the more the gene is expressed into the population. It is about statistics, its not all black and white. Just because it is possible to for an individual to reproduce (and for an individuals offspring, and their offspring...) does not mean it is as likely as for another individual.
I've said all I can. If you don't grasp that, it appears you really just don't understand how equilibriums happen in evolution (and in game theory and economics), and I guess you are never going to get it.
Ok, would it spread (i.e. be successful), or would it wipe out the species (i.e. be the extreme of unsuccessful)? Pick one, you can't have both.
Just because the strong disadvantage of producing all males has a one generation latency period before it "kicks in" does not make it significantly less likely to be natural selected away.
The whole idea of natural selection is that it avoids the exact scenario you suggest. Something that is a barrier to reproduction -- which producing all males is -- is not going to spread.
Try to imagine a population graph of how your scenario might happen and you'd realize that it just doesn't make sense. The percentage of carp carrying the gene would have to increase till it reached nearly 100%, then it the species would simply die all at once without giving the chance for the other gene to work its way back in. NOTHING happens that way in nature.
Ya gotta love how all us non-biologists here at/. think we know more about fish breeding than the scientists who developed the thing.
People knowledgeable about game theory and economics probably are more qualified that most biologists to analyze this stuff.
The point is that the more this gene spreads, the more it becomes a disadvantage to have this gene (in terms of passing along your own genes to future generations). So it wouldn't spread. Simple as that.
Slashdot Mirror
If the average number of hands is like 1.99, I'd think that would be enough to operate a standard keyboard.
sounds like he just knew he was playing to the slashdot crowd.
I read it that same way as you. It didn't seem biased toward the junk-faxers....maybe it seemed to me like it assumed the audience was intelligent and knew that junk faxers were the jerks, and just reported what both sides said.
He said "When do we get a break?" An honest way of saying it would be "when do you get a break?". Maybe not a lie per se, but I'd say the word "we" makes it pretty explicitly pretending to be there.
I've had one lucid dream (~15 years ago) --- if this thing can trigger one reliably, maybe by just reminding you to check if you are dreaming by seeing if you can fly or something, I would pay good money for it.
I know I can hear when i am dreaming, because I have often heard a song on the radio or something and worked it into the dream.
So what if Dan Rather, instead of travelling to the middle of a hurricane to report live, just used a blue screen and a wind machine, and had someone off screen throw a tree branch or two at him? Is that ok too?
It is bug #18808. Doesn't look like anyone is working on it, but I cast a vote for it.
I hope it gets done for Firebird, since when I use "mozilla" normally that is what I use. Should that be filed in a completely different place?
Ok, I found it, but it doesn't do what I need.
First, it opens the last page visited, literally, not the current page in the browser window I am currently in. That's just wrong.
Second, it doesn't preserve the history, which defeats the purpose. I love the ability to open a new window, navigate forwards and backwards in the history while keeping my "old" history in the other window. I use it all the time, its hard to explain how useful that is.
I hear you on the tabs, but I still don't like them. I never liked microsoft's MDI (especially when in "maximized" mode where you could only look at one document at a time), and this is the same thing to me. I want to have two or more things side by side. Not all the time, but often enough that I find it maddening to have to jump through hoops when I do feel the need.
that's an option in "preferences". It doesn't come enabled by default, but it's there.
Where? I don't see it.
Google toolbar works in IE to get rid of popups quite nicely.
I'd use mozilla more except that I can't stand it's useless "new window" function. Being as I have muliple monitors, I don't use tabbed browsing and just open new windows when i want to explore something but still keep a browser where i am not lose my place. IE does the right thing, IMO (the new window is a clone of the current one, including having the same history). I just wish they'd make it an option.
Well, so does putting checkout lines at the grocery store, rather than relying on the honor system.
Bondo car body filler works great for rebuilding plastic parts. You can whittle it with a knife easily before it completely hardens, and then if you have a dremel tool, clean it up easily. (otherwise just sandpaper works fine). It is about as hard as wood. If you need something harder/stronger, use fiberglass resin, also in the automotive section. Its more liquidy before it sets so it can be harder to work with though.
Segway doesn't use gyroscopes to actually balance the thing, only to sense balance. It uses the motors and wheels to keep it balanced.
A 4 wheeled variation could use the additional wheels to detect the angle the platform is at, and use the motors to balance it. It could (probably) be just as stable as the segway.
They are clearly biased toward the right politically, but I don't think fact-oriented things like this they have such a bad record on.
That's not to say that we'll be killing most people we send up, but rather than there is no shortage of people willing to take the risks
There may be people willing to die, but that doesn't mean that the public (and congress) will continue being willing to fund something that is causing high-profile deaths that make our technology look unreliable.
So if you are so much smarter than the market, I assume you must be rich.
Most investors ARE stupid. They follow the herd
If that were really true, then if you are smart, you should be able to make a killing at the stock market.
People may artificially inflate the price of tulips or dot-coms for a while in their speculative frenzy, but eventually it will have to come back down if it truly is artificial. If you are so sure of yourself that those inflating the stocks are the stupid ones, then short the stocks and make a ton of money.
No I wasn't saying that. But it sounds like you and your sig. other might need some counseling.
He didn't say there was a difference
? double+standard ....note the word "differently").
He said it was a double standard. That clearly implies a difference (see http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
No, it is not called reverse descrimination. That's a different thing, nigga.
Why is it a double standard, and it's a negative hateful word.
Same reason your wife can say "I am so fat", but you get in trouble if you say "honey, you are fat". I don't see why that is so hard to understand why the difference.
Well not sure if you are still reading, but...
It is a barrier to reproduction, in that producing all-males is a disadvantage by making the chances of getting one's genes into future generations less. This becomes more and more true the more the gene is expressed into the population. It is about statistics, its not all black and white. Just because it is possible to for an individual to reproduce (and for an individuals offspring, and their offspring...) does not mean it is as likely as for another individual.
I've said all I can. If you don't grasp that, it appears you really just don't understand how equilibriums happen in evolution (and in game theory and economics), and I guess you are never going to get it.
Fresnel lens has a small scratch, and vacuum tube port is broken, but otherwise mint. Best offer.
Argghhhh....
Ok, would it spread (i.e. be successful), or would it wipe out the species (i.e. be the extreme of unsuccessful)? Pick one, you can't have both.
Just because the strong disadvantage of producing all males has a one generation latency period before it "kicks in" does not make it significantly less likely to be natural selected away.
The whole idea of natural selection is that it avoids the exact scenario you suggest. Something that is a barrier to reproduction -- which producing all males is -- is not going to spread.
Try to imagine a population graph of how your scenario might happen and you'd realize that it just doesn't make sense. The percentage of carp carrying the gene would have to increase till it reached nearly 100%, then it the species would simply die all at once without giving the chance for the other gene to work its way back in. NOTHING happens that way in nature.
Ya gotta love how all us non-biologists here at /. think we know more about fish breeding than the scientists who developed the thing.
People knowledgeable about game theory and economics probably are more qualified that most biologists to analyze this stuff.
The point is that the more this gene spreads, the more it becomes a disadvantage to have this gene (in terms of passing along your own genes to future generations). So it wouldn't spread. Simple as that.