Actually, you're both wrong
on
Web 3.0
·
· Score: 1
Actually it's quite the opposite...
Web 1.0 is about allowing societies to create and share ideas. Web 2.0 is about allowing groups to create and share ideas. Web 3.0 is about allowing individuals to create and share ideas.
Web 1.0 is about allowing societies to look stupid and bore each other. Web 2.0 is about allowing groups to look stupid and bore each other. Web 2.0 is about allowing individuals to look stupid and bore each other.
Well, given that the Pent- part is from the Greek, not the Latin, the next product in the line should be Hexium. But that would probably get them in trouble with fundamentalists accusing them of witchcraft.
... it's hardly representative of most SUV vs. passenger car crashes.
OK, let's look at an accident I had earlier this year.
I was driving on a four lane city street. An SUV was coming towards me in his left lane and I was stopped in my left hand lane waiting to make a left hand turn. The SUV was in traffic and so was going at a fairly small speed (My findings - the safety arguments for SUVs have been promoted by fools who want to justify their waste of resources and the manufacturers who make better margins off these vehicles.
Processors are becoming fast enough that you can simply plug an A-D card into your system and let the software do the rest. Or are we going to outlaw A-D conversion cards, too? There would be a lot of unhappy electronics folks out there if he proposed that.
ESR has written about [RMS] having aspirations towards martyrdom...and I suspect [RMS] would consider [RMS's] assassination to be the ultimate logical extension of such.
Hell, I'd expect old ESR to pop him myself - give him a chance to go big game huntin', get his name in the paper... Maybe the CIA will offer him a contract!
I can never remember the formulae, I make stupid arithmetic errors all over the place, and I keep deriving when I should integrate (and vise versa).
So do I. That's why there's lookup tables, Maxima, Mathematica, and Matlab.
I'll also say that math becomes a lot more interesting as you get away from application and into proof. And I say that as a practicing engineer who has never had to prove a theorem as a part of my work. Will I ever use the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem? Not likely. But its application leads directly to several important system stability criteria. And understanding how the proof works reveals a beauty that is hidden if you only see the application's rules.
So it's not a big deal if you have a hard time with math right now. It won't impact your engineering career. You'll have plenty of procedures, tables and tools to help you out with the grunt work. But I'd recommend that you keep peeling away at the onion, if only for aesthetic reasons. And I'd give this advice to any prospective engineer.
In the next 3 years I'll move at least 60 people with similar lives as mine into my community -- and we'll all live high on the hog getting rid of the 38% overhead of living in a "house."
Let me know how that works out when the next tornado hits:-).
Seriously, this is a great idea. People should have multiple housing options and I salute you for giving them a choice. Not that I'll be giving up my house for about fifteen years or so (when my last kid's off to college and I hit retirement age). But when I do decide that the weather is better down south, I would probably be interested in a manufactured home...
As Edward Tufte noted, "PowerPoint Makes You Stupid." And trying to make your dumbass slide deck into a mulimedia extravaganza makes sure everyone knows it. And that goes for other presentaion software, too.
If you are an uneducated consumer even with all the reviews and moderations available, you're at fault for making bad decisions.
Yes. Because all of us having to check on the wiseness of every transaction we make, from the purchase of a cup of coffee, to a banana at a store, to a pencil at the office supply store, at every level, from economic advantage to health and safety makes these transactions so simple, efficient, and friction free.
Look - at some point, the idea of people getting together and agreeing that maybe we ought to establish a government to put controls on things a little bit so that everyone doesn't have to check everything every time starts to make sense - even economically. Otherwise, at some point, the transaction costs just become unsustainable and no one goes out to buy a cup of coffee - and really, the thought of that just makes me quake in my boots. Not for me, thank you - I don't drink coffee. But seeing my co-workers in the morning without their cup of Joe? No thanks...
That was all it showed, a line item for "Unfulfilled Contract" Cost $30,000. They could not produce a copy of the contract that we supposedly had not fulfilled. Needless to say, it did not get paid.
And so they get to write off $30,000 in unrecoverable recepits on their taxes. Schweet!
Wow! You really tend to conflate economic models and moral models. What makes you think that one has anything to do with the other? And what else is givrnment other than the moral desires of the public writ large? If you admit morality to argue on the Libertarian side, you also have to let it in to argue for the Regulatarian side. I think that everyone would be a lot happier if we all realized that economics was a morality-free zone...
Remember, You do not have a right to impose your values on 'Joe Righeous' any more than he has a right to impose his on you.
I call BS.
No "values" are being imposed. "Joe Rightous" has the same control over his cable as any consumer - i.e., take it or leave it. It's the cable and content providers that have put together this bundling - not the consumers (elitist or not). However much you'd like to use this as another example where the elitists are cramming decadent values down the throat of the poor put-upon Silent Majority of God-fearing, right-thinking citizens - you'd be wrong. Put the blame squarely where it lies - business.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, then lets round up everything on Intelligent design and send it to them.
I believe that what you meant was that China needs complete and factual information. Which is not what Google is (anymore) providing.
Only if he can find enough monkeys...
You know it's all been downhill since this classic was released!
After all, he was a geek who got laid!
Web 1.0 is about allowing societies to create and share ideas.
Web 2.0 is about allowing groups to create and share ideas.
Web 3.0 is about allowing individuals to create and share ideas.
Web 1.0 is about allowing societies to look stupid and bore each other.
Web 2.0 is about allowing groups to look stupid and bore each other.
Web 2.0 is about allowing individuals to look stupid and bore each other.
Well, given that the Pent- part is from the Greek, not the Latin, the next product in the line should be Hexium. But that would probably get them in trouble with fundamentalists accusing them of witchcraft.
OK, let's look at an accident I had earlier this year.
I was driving on a four lane city street. An SUV was coming towards me in his left lane and I was stopped in my left hand lane waiting to make a left hand turn. The SUV was in traffic and so was going at a fairly small speed (My findings - the safety arguments for SUVs have been promoted by fools who want to justify their waste of resources and the manufacturers who make better margins off these vehicles.
As a Lisp programmer, I find this artificial distinction between the OS, application, transmission medium, and content amusing.
And the sad thing is that they really don't look all that pretty.
Why? Do you not know the meaning of the phrase coup d'etat?
Anyone who knows the history of Java who hasn't spit coffee out his nose while reading this hasn't read it close enough.
Hell, anyone who knows the history of Gosling and hasn't spit coffee out his nose while reading this hasn't read it close enough.
Damn straight. People should be using Smalltalk or Lisp. At least the latter really is faster.
Processors are becoming fast enough that you can simply plug an A-D card into your system and let the software do the rest. Or are we going to outlaw A-D conversion cards, too? There would be a lot of unhappy electronics folks out there if he proposed that.
Hell, I'd expect old ESR to pop him myself - give him a chance to go big game huntin', get his name in the paper... Maybe the CIA will offer him a contract!
So do I. That's why there's lookup tables, Maxima, Mathematica, and Matlab.
I'll also say that math becomes a lot more interesting as you get away from application and into proof. And I say that as a practicing engineer who has never had to prove a theorem as a part of my work. Will I ever use the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem? Not likely. But its application leads directly to several important system stability criteria. And understanding how the proof works reveals a beauty that is hidden if you only see the application's rules.
So it's not a big deal if you have a hard time with math right now. It won't impact your engineering career. You'll have plenty of procedures, tables and tools to help you out with the grunt work. But I'd recommend that you keep peeling away at the onion, if only for aesthetic reasons. And I'd give this advice to any prospective engineer.
Let me know how that works out when the next tornado hits :-).
Seriously, this is a great idea. People should have multiple housing options and I salute you for giving them a choice. Not that I'll be giving up my house for about fifteen years or so (when my last kid's off to college and I hit retirement age). But when I do decide that the weather is better down south, I would probably be interested in a manufactured home...
... pretty soon all of the fishing zones are decimated.
That's the bug.
As Edward Tufte noted, "PowerPoint Makes You Stupid." And trying to make your dumbass slide deck into a mulimedia extravaganza makes sure everyone knows it. And that goes for other presentaion software, too.
Yeah, but was it running RSTS/E, RSX-11M, or UNIX? I know it wasn't running RT-11, 'cause then it could only be supporting one user.
And you even forgot the most important reason - David Hasselhoff!
Yes. Because all of us having to check on the wiseness of every transaction we make, from the purchase of a cup of coffee, to a banana at a store, to a pencil at the office supply store, at every level, from economic advantage to health and safety makes these transactions so simple, efficient, and friction free.
Look - at some point, the idea of people getting together and agreeing that maybe we ought to establish a government to put controls on things a little bit so that everyone doesn't have to check everything every time starts to make sense - even economically. Otherwise, at some point, the transaction costs just become unsustainable and no one goes out to buy a cup of coffee - and really, the thought of that just makes me quake in my boots. Not for me, thank you - I don't drink coffee. But seeing my co-workers in the morning without their cup of Joe? No thanks...
And so they get to write off $30,000 in unrecoverable recepits on their taxes. Schweet!
Wow! You really tend to conflate economic models and moral models. What makes you think that one has anything to do with the other? And what else is givrnment other than the moral desires of the public writ large? If you admit morality to argue on the Libertarian side, you also have to let it in to argue for the Regulatarian side. I think that everyone would be a lot happier if we all realized that economics was a morality-free zone...
I wasn't aware they did - they work much better than chopsticks for most Westerners, for instance...
I call BS.
No "values" are being imposed. "Joe Rightous" has the same control over his cable as any consumer - i.e., take it or leave it. It's the cable and content providers that have put together this bundling - not the consumers (elitist or not). However much you'd like to use this as another example where the elitists are cramming decadent values down the throat of the poor put-upon Silent Majority of God-fearing, right-thinking citizens - you'd be wrong. Put the blame squarely where it lies - business.