Re:I'm not going to pay a lot for this muffler.
on
Babelfish Mutations
·
· Score: 1
You know, i didn't believe this when i saw it, so i went and checked. Incidentally, the first time i put it in, the script stopped at "I do not pay much for this sample cock Auger." I ran it through again, this time without the period, and it went all the way though. But then i tried it again each way and it finished each time. Weird...
Three cycles for king d'Elven under the sky, sieve for the dwaries getlteman in their corridors of the rock, nine for the man of inoperative women, the condemned, the end to die, by the dark degree getlteman in relative darkness of the thrones in the track of Mordor, where they are the colors. All a cycle governar it. A cycle for the position he, a cycle, the end to obtain all in him and the lock of the density in the track of Mordor, where they are the colors.
Either way, a surface scan would be a real chore (day? weeks?). Even a standard scan disk (scan card?) would take a long time for the whole thing, and you would still have to check each of your partitions for errors.
>>BTW. now that I'm whining about WinDos: [CTRL] - >>[ESC] is the shortcut for one of them does >>anybody know what the shortcuts for the others >>are (if any)
Well, once I figured out what you are talking about... Ctrl-Esc == Start The only other Windows key I know of is the right-click short cut, and well, you can use MouseKeys (I have no idea how standard this is, but it is on my computer [control panel->acessability options]) and hit "-" and then 5 on the num pad. This is so much harder than just using the mouse, however, that i would only use it if both my Windows keys and my mouse were fried and i desperatly needed to right click. Not very likely...
As mentioned in the article, Print Screen takes a screen shot in Windows, which is quite handy at times, I certainly don't know any other way of doing it. I also use Pause in DOS on my 386, but I have never used it on a newer computer, so I wouldn't really miss it.
I second your comment on the num pad. One of the things I hate about this laptop I use is it has none, and I use it primarily for entering numbers! ssslllooowwwwww....
Well, ok, I will admit the hyphen/dash difference, but backslashes really do exist in some URLs. The only places I remember seeing them have been in query results, so maybe that means they are not "really" part of the URL. Then again, you can type it in and it will take you to the same results page from a different computer, and that's close enough for me.
The idea that "he can't win, so i won't vote for him" is what makes third party candidates win so rarely. If everyone just voted for who they wanted, we might be much better off. Of course, it is quite understandable why people don't do this (and i won't bother elaborating on why, i'm sure you all understand already). My brilliant idea is this, on the ballot have two questions:
1) Who are you voting for? 2) Who do you want to win?
Only the first answer will be counted as a vote and will determine who wins, but the second will also be added up and made public along with the first. Then, if it turns out a third party cadidate would have won, people will know this for sure and change their real votes (question 1) in the next election. You could argue that this is just an elaborate way of taking a survey, but there is a definite difference. Here, you get a response from every voter and only the voters. Surveys usually have small sample sizes and are badly conducted (you have no idea how many of the people in the survey actually bother to go vote on election day, for example). After a while the need for the two questions would disappear and the second could be removed because people would have learned to vote for who they wanted to win and not "the lesser of two evils."
Um, you may not realize it, but Science is a real paper magazine also, and it costs money to print magazines. Even if it were only an online service, the people who maintain it have to make money somehow. If you don't pay people to keep the site up, what you will get is a crappy online magazine updated by random people in their spare time. I'd much rather have a high quality site that I have to pay for. In fact, I'd much rather just keep getting the paper version (which is much easier to read and doesn't crash) and ignore the web site.
I, of course, read the paper version this morning. Sure, it's backwards, but it doesn't have a password, and you wouldn't believe how fast the pages load.
And the NYT is much more interesting than most papers, unless your version of interesting is heavy on sports, sensationalism and/or local news.
I do believe that whoever moderated you down thought that you meant the "HAHAHAHAHA" in a nasty, flame provoking way. Also, moderators go kinda trigger happy on first posts, whether or not they are "first posts."
I realized after i submitted this that i did the calculations for spherical broadcasting while they are using a directed beam. But, naturally, i can't make a better estimate without knowing how tight their beam is. Does anyone have figures on what the angle between one side of the beam and the other is? And to further refine the numbers, what is the closest star system that could contain life (or that we cannot rule out the possibility of life)? Alpha Centauri doesn't even have planets, so it's not a good yardstick.
ok.5 watt, evenly distributed over a sphere 4 light years in radius (distance to nearest star). .5/(4*pi*[4*300,000,000*60*60*24*365.24]^2)
1.6*10^-32 watts/meter^2 or if you have a really big radio telescope: 1.6*10^-26 watts/kilometer^2 or if the entire surface of your planet is a radio telescope: 4.1*10^-18 watts/half of a earth sized planet.
No one is gonna be picking this up, i don't care how clever they are, the signal is simply to weak. Any background radiation at all will completely swamp it.
um, not that i disagree with any of your points or anything, but why would the msg have to get all the way to andromeda? seems to me there are plently of star systems in our galaxy it could reach first...
I'm not sure about your other claims, but you are definitly right that time dims memory. RF signals decrease by the inverse SQUARE not the inverse 4th power!
Slashdot Mirror
You know, i didn't believe this when i saw it, so i went and checked. Incidentally, the first time i put it in, the script stopped at "I do not pay much for this sample cock Auger." I ran it through again, this time without the period, and it went all the way though. But then i tried it again each way and it finished each time. Weird...
dunno, works fine for me...
Three cycles for king d'Elven under the sky, sieve for the dwaries getlteman in their corridors of the rock, nine for the man of inoperative women, the condemned, the end to die, by the dark degree getlteman in relative darkness of the thrones in
the track of Mordor, where they are the colors. All a cycle governar it. A cycle for the position he, a cycle, the end to obtain all in him and the lock of the density in the track of Mordor, where they are the colors.
Either way, a surface scan would be a real chore (day? weeks?). Even a standard scan disk (scan card?) would take a long time for the whole thing, and you would still have to check each of your partitions for errors.
forgive me, but 2300GB/30GB*$300/$50 = 460 times less, not 500 or 600,000. Or am i mistaken?
Alright, there is a feedback button, i missed it, ok? It's little.
There is no feedback button, what there is is a fine print e-mail address link:
Contact Dr. Greenfield by email, [mailto:psydoc39@aol.com]
aol, huh? dont even need to comment on that...
Hey, a lot of my friends are troils...
But then you could only enter 1010101010101010...
USB may be cool and all, i really wouldn't know, but let's get one thing straight...
NUM LOCK IS USEFUL!!! PEOPLE USE IT!!!
i'm lazy, see other comments for details...
oh, c'mon, a real hacker (ah, erm... cracker...?) only needs TWO keys: 0 and 1.
>>BTW. now that I'm whining about WinDos: [CTRL] -
>>[ESC] is the shortcut for one of them does
>>anybody know what the shortcuts for the others
>>are (if any)
Well, once I figured out what you are talking about...
Ctrl-Esc == Start
The only other Windows key I know of is the right-click short cut, and well, you can use MouseKeys (I have no idea how standard this is, but it is on my computer [control panel->acessability options]) and hit "-" and then 5 on the num pad. This is so much harder than just using the mouse, however, that i would only use it if both my Windows keys and my mouse were fried and i desperatly needed to right click. Not very likely...
As mentioned in the article, Print Screen takes a screen shot in Windows, which is quite handy at times, I certainly don't know any other way of doing it. I also use Pause in DOS on my 386, but I have never used it on a newer computer, so I wouldn't really miss it.
I second your comment on the num pad. One of the things I hate about this laptop I use is it has none, and I use it primarily for entering numbers! ssslllooowwwwww....
No, see comment #14.
Well, ok, I will admit the hyphen/dash difference, but backslashes really do exist in some URLs. The only places I remember seeing them have been in query results, so maybe that means they are not "really" part of the URL. Then again, you can type it in and it will take you to the same results page from a different computer, and that's close enough for me.
umm, i dunno where you go on the internet, but i know a number of pages whose URLs include dashes and backslashes.
The idea that "he can't win, so i won't vote for him" is what makes third party candidates win so rarely. If everyone just voted for who they wanted, we might be much better off. Of course, it is quite understandable why people don't do this (and i won't bother elaborating on why, i'm sure you all understand already). My brilliant idea is this, on the ballot have two questions:
1) Who are you voting for?
2) Who do you want to win?
Only the first answer will be counted as a vote and will determine who wins, but the second will also be added up and made public along with the first. Then, if it turns out a third party cadidate would have won, people will know this for sure and change their real votes (question 1) in the next election.
You could argue that this is just an elaborate way of taking a survey, but there is a definite difference. Here, you get a response from every voter and only the voters. Surveys usually have small sample sizes and are badly conducted (you have no idea how many of the people in the survey actually bother to go vote on election day, for example).
After a while the need for the two questions would disappear and the second could be removed because people would have learned to vote for who they wanted to win and not "the lesser of two evils."
Yup, you're right, the only difference between the United States and the United Tions is the last syllable.
O well, close enough...
Um, you may not realize it, but Science is a real paper magazine also, and it costs money to print magazines. Even if it were only an online service, the people who maintain it have to make money somehow. If you don't pay people to keep the site up, what you will get is a crappy online magazine updated by random people in their spare time. I'd much rather have a high quality site that I have to pay for. In fact, I'd much rather just keep getting the paper version (which is much easier to read and doesn't crash) and ignore the web site.
I, of course, read the paper version this morning. Sure, it's backwards, but it doesn't have a password, and you wouldn't believe how fast the pages load.
And the NYT is much more interesting than most papers, unless your version of interesting is heavy on sports, sensationalism and/or local news.
I do believe that whoever moderated you down thought that you meant the "HAHAHAHAHA" in a nasty, flame provoking way. Also, moderators go kinda trigger happy on first posts, whether or not they are "first posts."
I realized after i submitted this that i did the calculations for spherical broadcasting while they are using a directed beam. But, naturally, i can't make a better estimate without knowing how tight their beam is. Does anyone have figures on what the angle between one side of the beam and the other is? And to further refine the numbers, what is the closest star system that could contain life (or that we cannot rule out the possibility of life)? Alpha Centauri doesn't even have planets, so it's not a good yardstick.
ok .5 watt, evenly distributed over a sphere 4 light years in radius (distance to nearest star).
.5/(4*pi*[4*300,000,000*60*60*24*365.24]^2)
1.6*10^-32 watts/meter^2
or if you have a really big radio telescope:
1.6*10^-26 watts/kilometer^2
or if the entire surface of your planet is a radio telescope:
4.1*10^-18 watts/half of a earth sized planet.
No one is gonna be picking this up, i don't care how clever they are, the signal is simply to weak.
Any background radiation at all will completely swamp it.
um, not that i disagree with any of your points or anything, but why would the msg have to get all the way to andromeda? seems to me there are plently of star systems in our galaxy it could reach first...
I'm not sure about your other claims, but you are definitly right that time dims memory. RF signals decrease by the inverse SQUARE not the inverse 4th power!