It sucked, but the worst thing was that it didn't suck uniformly. When one team gets all the crappy or borderline calls against them, it is a tainted game, no matter who you wanted to win.
Steelers got the calls because they forced the action. The push off in the end zone gave enough of an advantage to the receiver that he was able to create space and catch the ball. In other words, the good play of the defender created the incentive for the Seahawk to commit a penalty. He got caught because he was foolish enough to do it right in front of the official.
The hold called late in the game changed the outcome of the play because the Steeler linebacker had beaten the blocker and would have sacked the quarterback without the hold. That is the reason why "holding" is a penalty in the first place, to prevent such outcomes.
I would be curious to hear whether anyone has documented Steeler receivers during the SuperBowl pushing off to get open and not getting called, or a Steeler blocker holding a pass rusher who had an otherwise clear path to sacking the quarterback and not getting called.
The Rothlisberger touchdown call was just plain correct. Not just "not enough evidence to overrule", the replay clearly shows part of the ball breaking part of the plane of the endzone, the rulebook definition of a touchdown. Google around and you'll find still shots with superimposed vertical lines clearly demonstrating this.
The Hasselback no contact block was a flat out blown call (dumb rule regardless, Hasselback never contacted anyone). And Porter horsetackled Alexander. Those two were blown calls, but the first 3 were clearly correct.
Pittsburgh livin', Terrible Towl swingin', Black n' Gold wearin', Stiller fool, -jimbo
Are we seeing a rise in higher paying jobs, or low paying jobs?
From the fine article:
Citing information from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, it said that IT workers have seen steady gains in average annual wages for different fields in the sector of between about two to five percent a year.
No they are not trying to "shut down" it, they are simply saying that we should level it with a "research" that basicly says "I don't know how this work so there must be a god^W Inteligent designer".
Maybe a useful way to look at it is an attempt to come up with something akin to Goedel's incompleteness theorem. An attempt to find limits to the ability of natural laws and evolutionary arguments to design complex things. Perhaps this is a misguided quest doomed to failure, but it is a non-ad-hominem way to look at the argument.
Now, many have of course latched onto the "Intelligent Design" idea for political reasons with no actual curiousity or honesty or even actual knowledge of the issues involved. But that's not to say that the idea of Intelligent Design is inherently anti-reason.
What I.D. is really attempting to claim is that there is a level of entropy such that there cannot be the expectation of a coherent ecological system developing. What science is about is finding and testing such a value.
No.
Science can never be allowed to test such a value, because to do so would be to cross out of the domain of science. The DEFINITION of science requires that any evidence that might reveal or indicate the existence of anything outside the universe must not be considered.
So science can not in any way address the claims of "Intelligent Design". If you even want to think about such things, you immediately cease to be a scientist.
Making churches tax-free entities is tantamount to government support of religion, although in this particular case, ALL religion, not just a particular faith. I for one think this should be abolished unless the church can show detailed accounting records of the charitable work that it is doing, and that that charitable work represents at least 50% of the church's profits.
I'm pretty sure that no non-profit organizations are required to pay taxes, whether they profess belief in a supreme being or not. Basically, you are just against private charity in general, or you believe religion should be discriminated against relative to other non-profit organizations.
And you really want the government to decide what does or does not constitute legitimate "charity"? Before you answer that, please consider the makeup of your current, democratically elected government (assuming you're American).
That is phenomenal growth for a company of its type and size. unlike apple, it does not try to sell goods that are priced at an incredible premium based on name and popularity.
Exactly Dell's problem. No pricing power because they are selling the same thing as everyone else. Race to the bottom. I notice that you trumpet revenue growth and not profits.
He is completely ignoring the highly probably activity of many mac users of holding off on mac purchases in expectance of the G5 and lower prices for it.
You are utterly divorced from reality. The big switch, to Intel, is coming next year. If customers were to hold off on purchases, that time would be now, but they are showing a lot of growth and new converts.
Sure, but only if "irreducibly complex" means "the result of evolutionary processes of which I cannot conceive due to a lack of imagination or insight."
How are "the result of evolutionary processes of which I cannot conceive due to a lack of imagination or insight" any better than saying "God did it"?
In one case you're saying "I don't have any evidence for how it happened and can't imagine how it could have happened, but I know evolution did it".
In the other case you're saying "I don't have any evidence for how it happened and can't imagine how it could have happened, but I know God did it".
What qualitative difference is there between those two statements?
The effort to slip creationism/ID into the public school curriculum is a tacit admission that the churches have failed to make their case through their own channels.
You're joking, right?
Just search up and down this discussion for references to opinion polls showing that half or more of the American population believe in the creation story found in the Bible.
Call me when you see a large scale shift to open formats (i.e., when they abandon MS XML entirely, switch to XUL instead of XAML, stop working on that "PDF killer" I've heard stories about, drop Windows Media file formats and codecs for MPEG and H.264, etc.
PDF is a proprietary format. And rumor has it MSFT WILL support it in the next Office. I'm pretty sure MPEG and H.264 are proprietary, too (licensing fees, etc.). I don't know enough about XUL and XAML to say which is better, or if they really do the same things.
So I don't think the problem is MSFT creating their own formats, per se. It's MSFT not allowing their formats to work well with other technologies. If MSFT supports ODF, it's a step in the right direction.
I'm not some tree-hugger, but even I can see that it simply must be better to improve the mpg of the vehicles rather than start drilling in Alaska.
Whatever comes out of Alaska is less money going to the Middle East.
So 6 mpg improvement in fuel efficiency plus drilling in Alaska is, what? 130,000,000 gallons / day?
If it was either or, I'd take the increased fuel efficiency over drilling in Alaska. But if it can be both/and, I'll take a chance on despoiling Alaskan scenery to keep dollars out of the Middle East.
Gallons by which daily U.S. oil consumption would drop if SUVs' average fuel efficiency increased by 3 mpg: 49,000,000
Gallons per day that the proposed drilling of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is projected to yield: 42,000,000
Gallons per day fewer we would need to import if SUVs' average fuel efficiency increased by 3 mgp AND drililng was approved for Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: 91,000,000.
Which device makers have committed to supporting HD-DVD or BluRay is almost completely irrelevant.
The studios have chosen BluRay and the studios have all the important content. People aren't going to buy the player that MSFT endorses. They're going to buy the player they can buy movies for at Best Buy.
As far as occuring late in the day, like, after midnight, I'd like you to explain to me a series I saw in Japanese language club, which was clearly shown in daytime television, where a young child let's say about 3 years old took out a magazine and pointed at it looking at him mom, and said, "Hey, mom, this girl has more hair on her crotch than you."
Crayon Shinchan, I presume?
Don't know what it says about me, but I found the manga where he drew an elephant face on his crotch, with his penis as the trunk, to be utterly hilarious.
But if I'm writing a paper, I want to be able to just write the paper and go.
For me, this applies better to the latex model. I don't want to think about what font and size this should be, I just want to say "new chapter here" and let the program worry about making it look right.
Your kids at school do not control your PC buying decisions and if they did Apple would be the only brand in the USA and there'd be NO Internet as it back then DID NOT fit into Apple's (Job's) worldview.
Yeah, and everyone would be listening to music on an iPod, too!
I think at one point in the comics Bruce Banner actually had special purpose purple pants he would wear under his other clothes that wouldn't rip when he hulked out.
I suggest that you learn to live with the fact that the universe doesn't have a concept of right and wrong and try and accept the people around you because surprisingly most aren't actually out to get you. I hope that you think about what I have said. We can create a relaxed world where we get along it just takes a little understanding.
You were doing good until you got here.
You just spent several paragraphs making a moral argument, then try to claim morality does not exist. Well, if that's so, then a universe in which black people and pot smokers are arbitrarily persecuted is no more bad than a universe where everyone is relaxed and gets along with one another.
Moral relativism is a philosophy that is impossible for human beings to espouse consistently.
At which point it's time to grab the conversation by the scruff of the neck and quickly steer it in another direction because anything more isn't going to be productive.
Uh, to me it sounds like you're just being a snob.
"How do you research math?" is a perfectly legitimate question. It indicates curiousity. You go on to say that people don't really understand what math is and why it's important.
Uh, maybe part of that is because mathematicians are too snobby to take some time to explain what they do and why it's interesting?
Slashdot Mirror
And will you add that disclaimer to gravity, plate tectonics, magnetism and so on?
Right around the turn of the 20th century, that would have been a pretty good disclaimer with respect to gravity.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
They can make great products, but it seemed like a pretty paranoid and egotistical place to actually work at.
Er, and you expect us to believe that your employer is not?
Watch out for the flying chairs,
-jimbo
Ah, I am thrilled to see another member of the club! Although you should receive a few demerits for not including "Iron City Drinkin'" in your list...
Couldn't decide between that and Rolling Rock (what Mahrn drinks now).
Go Stillers! 'n'at.
-jimbo
It sucked, but the worst thing was that it didn't suck uniformly. When one team gets all the crappy or borderline calls against them, it is a tainted game, no matter who you wanted to win.
Steelers got the calls because they forced the action. The push off in the end zone gave enough of an advantage to the receiver that he was able to create space and catch the ball. In other words, the good play of the defender created the incentive for the Seahawk to commit a penalty. He got caught because he was foolish enough to do it right in front of the official.
The hold called late in the game changed the outcome of the play because the Steeler linebacker had beaten the blocker and would have sacked the quarterback without the hold. That is the reason why "holding" is a penalty in the first place, to prevent such outcomes.
I would be curious to hear whether anyone has documented Steeler receivers during the SuperBowl pushing off to get open and not getting called, or a Steeler blocker holding a pass rusher who had an otherwise clear path to sacking the quarterback and not getting called.
The Rothlisberger touchdown call was just plain correct. Not just "not enough evidence to overrule", the replay clearly shows part of the ball breaking part of the plane of the endzone, the rulebook definition of a touchdown. Google around and you'll find still shots with superimposed vertical lines clearly demonstrating this.
The Hasselback no contact block was a flat out blown call (dumb rule regardless, Hasselback never contacted anyone). And Porter horsetackled Alexander. Those two were blown calls, but the first 3 were clearly correct.
Pittsburgh livin', Terrible Towl swingin', Black n' Gold wearin', Stiller fool,
-jimbo
It's not clear from the article whether or not the wage increases adjust for inflation.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Are we seeing a rise in higher paying jobs, or low paying jobs?
From the fine article:
Citing information from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, it said that IT workers have seen steady gains in average annual wages for different fields in the sector of between about two to five percent a year.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Why do most of the Christian holidays coincide exactly with pagan holidays that are centuries older?
Because Christians are great at marketing.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
No they are not trying to "shut down" it, they are simply saying that we should level it with a "research" that basicly says "I don't know how this work so there must be a god^W Inteligent designer".
Maybe a useful way to look at it is an attempt to come up with something akin to Goedel's incompleteness theorem. An attempt to find limits to the ability of natural laws and evolutionary arguments to design complex things. Perhaps this is a misguided quest doomed to failure, but it is a non-ad-hominem way to look at the argument.
Now, many have of course latched onto the "Intelligent Design" idea for political reasons with no actual curiousity or honesty or even actual knowledge of the issues involved. But that's not to say that the idea of Intelligent Design is inherently anti-reason.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
What I.D. is really attempting to claim is that there is a level of entropy such that there cannot be the expectation of a coherent ecological system developing. What science is about is finding and testing such a value.
No.
Science can never be allowed to test such a value, because to do so would be to cross out of the domain of science. The DEFINITION of science requires that any evidence that might reveal or indicate the existence of anything outside the universe must not be considered.
So science can not in any way address the claims of "Intelligent Design". If you even want to think about such things, you immediately cease to be a scientist.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Making churches tax-free entities is tantamount to government support of religion, although in this particular case, ALL religion, not just a particular faith. I for one think this should be abolished unless the church can show detailed accounting records of the charitable work that it is doing, and that that charitable work represents at least 50% of the church's profits.
I'm pretty sure that no non-profit organizations are required to pay taxes, whether they profess belief in a supreme being or not. Basically, you are just against private charity in general, or you believe religion should be discriminated against relative to other non-profit organizations.
And you really want the government to decide what does or does not constitute legitimate "charity"? Before you answer that, please consider the makeup of your current, democratically elected government (assuming you're American).
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Maybe the most important thing is not doing what you love, but doing who you love.
Which, for guys at least, often entails first doing something that can provide you with a respectable income.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
That is phenomenal growth for a company of its type and size. unlike apple, it does not try to sell goods that are priced at an incredible premium based on name and popularity.
Exactly Dell's problem. No pricing power because they are selling the same thing as everyone else. Race to the bottom. I notice that you trumpet revenue growth and not profits.
He is completely ignoring the highly probably activity of many mac users of holding off on mac purchases in expectance of the G5 and lower prices for it.
You are utterly divorced from reality. The big switch, to Intel, is coming next year. If customers were to hold off on purchases, that time would be now, but they are showing a lot of growth and new converts.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Sure, but only if "irreducibly complex" means "the result of evolutionary processes of which I cannot conceive due to a lack of imagination or insight."
How are "the result of evolutionary processes of which I cannot conceive due to a lack of imagination or insight" any better than saying "God did it"?
In one case you're saying "I don't have any evidence for how it happened and can't imagine how it could have happened, but I know evolution did it".
In the other case you're saying "I don't have any evidence for how it happened and can't imagine how it could have happened, but I know God did it".
What qualitative difference is there between those two statements?
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
The effort to slip creationism/ID into the public school curriculum is a tacit admission that the churches have failed to make their case through their own channels.
You're joking, right?
Just search up and down this discussion for references to opinion polls showing that half or more of the American population believe in the creation story found in the Bible.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Call me when you see a large scale shift to open formats (i.e., when they abandon MS XML entirely, switch to XUL instead of XAML, stop working on that "PDF killer" I've heard stories about, drop Windows Media file formats and codecs for MPEG and H.264, etc.
PDF is a proprietary format. And rumor has it MSFT WILL support it in the next Office. I'm pretty sure MPEG and H.264 are proprietary, too (licensing fees, etc.). I don't know enough about XUL and XAML to say which is better, or if they really do the same things.
So I don't think the problem is MSFT creating their own formats, per se. It's MSFT not allowing their formats to work well with other technologies. If MSFT supports ODF, it's a step in the right direction.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
I'm not some tree-hugger, but even I can see that it simply must be better to improve the mpg of the vehicles rather than start drilling in Alaska.
Whatever comes out of Alaska is less money going to the Middle East.
So 6 mpg improvement in fuel efficiency plus drilling in Alaska is, what? 130,000,000 gallons / day?
If it was either or, I'd take the increased fuel efficiency over drilling in Alaska. But if it can be both/and, I'll take a chance on despoiling Alaskan scenery to keep dollars out of the Middle East.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Gallons by which daily U.S. oil consumption would drop if SUVs' average fuel efficiency increased by 3 mpg: 49,000,000
Gallons per day that the proposed drilling of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is projected to yield: 42,000,000
Gallons per day fewer we would need to import if SUVs' average fuel efficiency increased by 3 mgp AND drililng was approved for Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: 91,000,000.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Which device makers have committed to supporting HD-DVD or BluRay is almost completely irrelevant.
The studios have chosen BluRay and the studios have all the important content. People aren't going to buy the player that MSFT endorses. They're going to buy the player they can buy movies for at Best Buy.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
As far as occuring late in the day, like, after midnight, I'd like you to explain to me a series I saw in Japanese language club, which was clearly shown in daytime television, where a young child let's say about 3 years old took out a magazine and pointed at it looking at him mom, and said, "Hey, mom, this girl has more hair on her crotch than you."
Crayon Shinchan, I presume?
Don't know what it says about me, but I found the manga where he drew an elephant face on his crotch, with his penis as the trunk, to be utterly hilarious.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
But if I'm writing a paper, I want to be able to just write the paper and go.
For me, this applies better to the latex model. I don't want to think about what font and size this should be, I just want to say "new chapter here" and let the program worry about making it look right.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Sometimes freedom is more important than money..
Your use of the word freedom to describe Cuba without irony makes it pretty hard to take anything else you have to say seriously.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Your kids at school do not control your PC buying decisions and if they did Apple would be the only brand in the USA and there'd be NO Internet as it back then DID NOT fit into Apple's (Job's) worldview.
Yeah, and everyone would be listening to music on an iPod, too!
Oh, wait...
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
I think at one point in the comics Bruce Banner actually had special purpose purple pants he would wear under his other clothes that wouldn't rip when he hulked out.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
I suggest that you learn to live with the fact that the universe doesn't have a concept of right and wrong and try and accept the people around you because surprisingly most aren't actually out to get you. I hope that you think about what I have said. We can create a relaxed world where we get along it just takes a little understanding.
You were doing good until you got here.
You just spent several paragraphs making a moral argument, then try to claim morality does not exist. Well, if that's so, then a universe in which black people and pot smokers are arbitrarily persecuted is no more bad than a universe where everyone is relaxed and gets along with one another.
Moral relativism is a philosophy that is impossible for human beings to espouse consistently.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Person: How do you research math?
At which point it's time to grab the conversation by the scruff of the neck and quickly steer it in another direction because anything more isn't going to be productive.
Uh, to me it sounds like you're just being a snob.
"How do you research math?" is a perfectly legitimate question. It indicates curiousity. You go on to say that people don't really understand what math is and why it's important.
Uh, maybe part of that is because mathematicians are too snobby to take some time to explain what they do and why it's interesting?
Just a thought.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo