Well, those embryos are 9 months and a bit of luck away from being sentient, whereas you are one hammer-blow and a bit of luck away from no longer being sentient (and not necessarily dead). And yet I don't think that gives us a right to experiment on those of us who are less fortunate than others. Yes, there are issues with this line of reasoning with respect to the more intelligent animals, but necessity trumps some things, and keep in mind we still experiment on humans - just once we feel we've reduced the risks sufficiently through other tests. Someone was the first guy to get a pig valve implanted in his heart, and I'd be unsurprised if the success rate was lower at first due to the experimental nature of the treatment.
Maybe aliens are everywhere, aware of us, and simply choosing not to communicate.
Many people have speculated this about cats. Owners know it to be true. Perhaps aliens live among us, and late at night, turn into psyochotic axe-murderer chasing predators from the foots of our very own beds.
Um, how about this? 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. That's 7 days, inclusive, and given the GP's statement, the 23rd would be the first day. So you failed twice. First, 23 + 7 is 30, not 31. Second, you forgot the inclusion note. Don't worry, you're not the first person I've met who fancied himself a nerd and couldn't do date math properly.
... I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere about nerds not getting dates...now it all makes sense.
So, basically, what they did was build a big sturdy door (UAC) and put the treasure (system settings) behind it. Normally you need magic keys (certificates) to enter the door. Then, they built a button that unlocks the door from the outside. Wow!
the worst car analogy I've seen on slashdot for a while.
It's so bad a car analogy, that it doesn't even have cars.
I prefer to think of that as a chastity belt analogy. Put in that light, I think it's a great design!
This sounds familiar. Like when there are too many insects in some farmer's field so he brings in some frog from a far-away country to eat all the insects. But then the frog becomes a nuisance and has side effects of his own so they bring in some cats that eat this frog, but the cats...
Except this is more like an insect that is similar to the problem insects in a great many ways. Think honey bees vs. killer bees. So the question ultimately becomes, which is which? Now if we had bees that were more aggressive than honey bees for food consumption but had a milder sting, this could be a good thing. And that's what trials are all about.
What you call something and what you measure are two different things. For years, storage was sold in what we now KiB or MiB or GiB, and listed as KB, MB, and GB. When they changed the standard, they didn't change the wording, but the definition they used. Which is fine, if you tell consumers that's what you're doing. It would be no different than switching from the Imperial Gallon to the US Gallon and not telling you that I had. Especially if no one had used a US Gallon before this happened. As for base 10, standardization doesn't require its use. Standardization would require that the notation be in base 10, not the measurements we used for that particular item, bytes in this instance.
Um, yeah, except that just about everything is stored on powers of two. This is as absurd as if hot dogs were sold in packages of 8 (or 1024) and buns were sold in packages of 10 (or 1000). AND they used the same term to describe both, until it got to the point where they could sell significantly less than was expected while using VERY small print to notify us of this change in wording. There is absolutely NO reason to use base 10 numbering for computer memory of any kind, except that it allows manufacturers to use bigger numbers while selling less. The only mitigating factor is that now that they all do it, at least we're back to comparing apples to apples.
Yet everyone in BSG has the necessary personality traits to keep even the smallest of secrets. That's realistic?
There's a simple trick to keeping secrets, which can be summed up as: DON'T TELL ANYONE!!! It's surprising how hard this is for most people, and something my ex could never seem to figure out. Of course, there are more details involved, but they all revolve around how to achieve that core tenet that seems to elude most people who claim to want to keep secrets but never can. And the related issue is determining what's worth keeping a secret, and what's even possible to keep a secret. Kind of like spy satellites - everyone can see them going by at night. Pretending this is something you can hide from other agencies is laughable. Now, concealing the capabilities of that satellite is more reasonable.
Either completely absorbing or allowing the RADAR waves to pass by undisturbed are equally valuable for RADAR cloaking. The key issue is how little of the radio waves are reflected. I'm not sure which will be more viable in the future, but sufficiently absorptive paint and structures are the winners for now.
I remember one time, some dunderhead I knew in high school complained that her bike helmet was worthless. Why? Because when someone opened their car door in front of her, she flipped over, landed on her head, and the helmet cracked in two.
She didn't even get it when I pointed out that that could have been her head. She was just upset that her $30.00 helmet was ruined. I don't mean to be pessimistic about general intelligence, but I'd say that kind of response might be more the rule than the exception.
You should have told her about the good old days, when they had shatter-proof motorcycle helmets for a year or two. Problem was, instead of breaking, they bounced. The energy has to go somewhere. So instead of having to buy a new helmet if they got in an accident, they got to buy a new wheelchair or casket.
Note definition 3, and the fact that it was being spoken from an American context. In Canada, U.S, and according to Wikipedia, Australia, when people say corn, they're only talking about one type of grain. And when they say 'corn-fed beef', they are again only talking about one type of grain. Oh, and when Americans talk about flats, it means something different than when the British do. Feel free to make up a complete list - I'm not interested.
the fact still remains that that land must be used to grow grain to feed the cattle.
Look buddy, I don't know what country you live in, but in MY AMERICA, we feed our livestock nothing but CORN. You don't get massive government subsidies for growing grain, you get that for growing corn.
IIRC, older TV's actually did damage your eyes if you were too close to them. Ah, here's an article that mentions the risks with older TV's. And as for old wives' tales, you'd be surprised how many have been proven. For the longest time, researchers were saying that being out in the cold wouldn't increase your risk of catching cold, because the reduced temperature would reduce the amount of the virus present. Within the last year or so, the latest research indicated that the cold temperature also suppressed your immune system, enough to give the cold virus an edge compared to if you kept properly warm. A surprising number of superstitions are based on fact, too. For instance, of course it's bad luck to walk under a ladder - it increases the chance of things falling on your head!
The fact is that any reasonable person would expect a firmware update to only fix bugs and security flaws. It would not be normal to expect entirely new features to be installed
Well, depending on how you define update (not an increase of the major version number?), how else would you add new features to what is essentially a small computer? I'm personally happy when new features are added to my router, although they haven't been spam - yet. They generally add capabilities that weren't present or were lacking in their implementation.
...and it is certainly abnormal for the new "feature" to actually include nagware that prompts you to pay for some new service.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, those embryos are 9 months and a bit of luck away from being sentient, whereas you are one hammer-blow and a bit of luck away from no longer being sentient (and not necessarily dead). And yet I don't think that gives us a right to experiment on those of us who are less fortunate than others.
Yes, there are issues with this line of reasoning with respect to the more intelligent animals, but necessity trumps some things, and keep in mind we still experiment on humans - just once we feel we've reduced the risks sufficiently through other tests. Someone was the first guy to get a pig valve implanted in his heart, and I'd be unsurprised if the success rate was lower at first due to the experimental nature of the treatment.
I wanted to mod you as meme-killing, but the closest option was funny...
Maybe aliens are everywhere, aware of us, and simply choosing not to communicate.
Many people have speculated this about cats. Owners know it to be true. Perhaps aliens live among us, and late at night, turn into psyochotic axe-murderer chasing predators from the foots of our very own beds.
Nah, they leave the axe-murderers alone, but they do a good job of keeping down the population of tiny trolls.
Um, how about this? 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. That's 7 days, inclusive, and given the GP's statement, the 23rd would be the first day. So you failed twice. First, 23 + 7 is 30, not 31. Second, you forgot the inclusion note.
Don't worry, you're not the first person I've met who fancied himself a nerd and couldn't do date math properly.
...
I'm sure there's a joke in there somewhere about nerds not getting dates...now it all makes sense.
(from GGP)
So, basically, what they did was build a big sturdy door (UAC) and put the treasure (system settings) behind it. Normally you need magic keys (certificates) to enter the door. Then, they built a button that unlocks the door from the outside. Wow!
the worst car analogy I've seen on slashdot for a while.
It's so bad a car analogy, that it doesn't even have cars.
I prefer to think of that as a chastity belt analogy. Put in that light, I think it's a great design!
This sounds familiar. Like when there are too many insects in some farmer's field so he brings in some frog from a far-away country to eat all the insects. But then the frog becomes a nuisance and has side effects of his own so they bring in some cats that eat this frog, but the cats...
Except this is more like an insect that is similar to the problem insects in a great many ways. Think honey bees vs. killer bees. So the question ultimately becomes, which is which? Now if we had bees that were more aggressive than honey bees for food consumption but had a milder sting, this could be a good thing.
And that's what trials are all about.
What you call something and what you measure are two different things. For years, storage was sold in what we now KiB or MiB or GiB, and listed as KB, MB, and GB. When they changed the standard, they didn't change the wording, but the definition they used. Which is fine, if you tell consumers that's what you're doing. It would be no different than switching from the Imperial Gallon to the US Gallon and not telling you that I had. Especially if no one had used a US Gallon before this happened.
As for base 10, standardization doesn't require its use. Standardization would require that the notation be in base 10, not the measurements we used for that particular item, bytes in this instance.
Um, yeah, except that just about everything is stored on powers of two. This is as absurd as if hot dogs were sold in packages of 8 (or 1024) and buns were sold in packages of 10 (or 1000). AND they used the same term to describe both, until it got to the point where they could sell significantly less than was expected while using VERY small print to notify us of this change in wording.
There is absolutely NO reason to use base 10 numbering for computer memory of any kind, except that it allows manufacturers to use bigger numbers while selling less. The only mitigating factor is that now that they all do it, at least we're back to comparing apples to apples.
Yet everyone in BSG has the necessary personality traits to keep even the smallest of secrets. That's realistic?
There's a simple trick to keeping secrets, which can be summed up as: DON'T TELL ANYONE!!!
It's surprising how hard this is for most people, and something my ex could never seem to figure out. Of course, there are more details involved, but they all revolve around how to achieve that core tenet that seems to elude most people who claim to want to keep secrets but never can.
And the related issue is determining what's worth keeping a secret, and what's even possible to keep a secret. Kind of like spy satellites - everyone can see them going by at night. Pretending this is something you can hide from other agencies is laughable. Now, concealing the capabilities of that satellite is more reasonable.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Pedant
Ah, I see oxymorons are still okay.
Either completely absorbing or allowing the RADAR waves to pass by undisturbed are equally valuable for RADAR cloaking. The key issue is how little of the radio waves are reflected. I'm not sure which will be more viable in the future, but sufficiently absorptive paint and structures are the winners for now.
"Computer, arch"
Nope, not a hologram.
Who said you had access rights?
"Computer, end simulation."
Always wanted to be a BOFH.
Yep, looks like that problem solved itself.
Or, if you don't like finding an editor that can delete the info, just go to a record store and steal the CD.
The irony is, the penalties would be lower if you did this than if you downloaded the music.
There is not much Oprah in my world, fat or thin.
Trust me, there's more of her in your world than there was 6 months ago.
If my code's still running in 2100, our society has got way bigger problems than me not figuring leap years correctly.
I think I hear the cries of programmers in the 1960's who said something very similar...and 91 years isn't that much more than 40 years...
I remember one time, some dunderhead I knew in high school complained that her bike helmet was worthless. Why? Because when someone opened their car door in front of her, she flipped over, landed on her head, and the helmet cracked in two.
She didn't even get it when I pointed out that that could have been her head. She was just upset that her $30.00 helmet was ruined. I don't mean to be pessimistic about general intelligence, but I'd say that kind of response might be more the rule than the exception.
You should have told her about the good old days, when they had shatter-proof motorcycle helmets for a year or two. Problem was, instead of breaking, they bounced. The energy has to go somewhere. So instead of having to buy a new helmet if they got in an accident, they got to buy a new wheelchair or casket.
There was a fiction novel, Gorky Park, in which facial reconstruction was a key element of the novel. Some interesting reading on the technique.
Note definition 3, and the fact that it was being spoken from an American context. In Canada, U.S, and according to Wikipedia, Australia, when people say corn, they're only talking about one type of grain. And when they say 'corn-fed beef', they are again only talking about one type of grain.
Oh, and when Americans talk about flats, it means something different than when the British do. Feel free to make up a complete list - I'm not interested.
...the only exception is radioactive elements which cannot be broken down any further without undergoing a nuclear reaction.
That would be atomic elements. Something tells me mercury, arsenic, and lead are still going to be a problem, too.
the fact still remains that that land must be used to grow grain to feed the cattle.
Look buddy, I don't know what country you live in, but in MY AMERICA, we feed our livestock nothing but CORN. You don't get massive government subsidies for growing grain, you get that for growing corn.
Um, corn's a grain.
IIRC, older TV's actually did damage your eyes if you were too close to them. Ah, here's an article that mentions the risks with older TV's.
And as for old wives' tales, you'd be surprised how many have been proven. For the longest time, researchers were saying that being out in the cold wouldn't increase your risk of catching cold, because the reduced temperature would reduce the amount of the virus present. Within the last year or so, the latest research indicated that the cold temperature also suppressed your immune system, enough to give the cold virus an edge compared to if you kept properly warm.
A surprising number of superstitions are based on fact, too. For instance, of course it's bad luck to walk under a ladder - it increases the chance of things falling on your head!
The fact is that any reasonable person would expect a firmware update to only fix bugs and security flaws. It would not be normal to expect entirely new features to be installed
Well, depending on how you define update (not an increase of the major version number?), how else would you add new features to what is essentially a small computer? I'm personally happy when new features are added to my router, although they haven't been spam - yet. They generally add capabilities that weren't present or were lacking in their implementation.
...and it is certainly abnormal for the new "feature" to actually include nagware that prompts you to pay for some new service.
Can't argue that one.
Both are valid grammar errors, neither or which would be caught by a spell checker. How they came to be were likely different.
...generate my own electricity my peddling my home-made bicycle vigorously!
Better put a grammar-checker on your project list.