...fools in a row on the front page. Who's clever enough to post something that looks like a fool, smells like a fool, but is, in fact, the truth? These ones are too easy to spot.
but I don't believe there's any such thing as 'unbreakable' encryption but do you believe in the finite amount of time any message might be useful? Sure, any encryption is theoretically breakable, but you only have one universal lifetime, and that's probably many billions of times longer than the info in the message will be worth decrypting. I could put your milk in a safe, if it took you a month to figure out how to open it, would you still drink it?
DING DING DING... give this man a prize! If you have a significant head start having developed some method of accomplishing a task which is significantly superior to all previous methods, and you fail to implement your method as well as some johnny-come-lately, who exactly is to blame? Why should the rest of us be limited to your shoddy implementation of your great idea? If I invented the internal combustion engine, patented it, and decided to use it to power an automatic horse flogger, I'd be the biggest asshole on earth if I refused to allow the inventor of the automobile to use the principles of my engine in his car.
Yeah, I saw the OTOH, but since you said the experience with your cat 'makes' (present tense) rather than 'made' (past tense) you doubt the premise in question, I naturally took this to mean that this was your current assessment of the cats falling issue. Don't blame me for your ambiguous writing style. And I still don't understand how your cat falling out the window and surviving would lead you to doubt that cats survive high falls.
"My cat fell from the fifth floor and was hurt really bad, and was sore for over a week. So it made me doubt the stories about cat's surviving falls. "
If you'd said "it made me doubt the stories about cat's surviving falls unscathed" or words to that effect, it would make more sense...
So it kind of makes me think all that stuff about cats surviving high falls is a malenky bit baloney
So let me get this straight. You have first hand empirical proof that cats survive high falls, as well as anecdotal evidence from a trusted source, and you still don't believe it. What are you, the SuperSkeptic, a mutant hero whose bizarre power is the ability to disbelieve anything?
This is spot on. Scientology is the most ingenious pyramid scheme ever conceived . The product? Paranoia. I think their entire pitch can be boiled down to "Anyone who isn't a Scientologist is evil." It's a hard sell, but once someone takes the bait there's no limit to how far you can push them. It's the ultimate in absolutist reductionism. Of course, selling the bald premise that !Scientology=evil is damn near impossible, so they have to dress up the pitch in layers of silly "mysteries", which the acolyte is hoping to have revealed to them as the payoff for the investment of their mental space in a basically tautological premise. That's why the 'cherch' gets it's panties in a twist whenever these deep dark secrets about aliens ruling the earth get published on the web. It takes time to condition even the most gullible rube into swallowing this mess as gospel. Without the proper initiation, any right thinking person will just laugh off Scientology as a bunch of sci fi nutjobs a la Heaven's Gate.
L. Ron was certainly the man, I have to wonder if he wasn't a SubGenius at heart, laughing all the way to the exalted throne of worship (oh, and the bank, too).
Re:Am I the only one who read the press release?
on
Space Railroad
·
· Score: 1
Um, have you read any of the posts? Nobody (not at +1 anyway) is making these claims. Scratch that, nobody posting at -1 made any comments like that either, Mr. Superior. Why are you bitching about non-existing posts? Are you confused, or just an ass?
in answer to #2: use mailshell. Of course, you'll be getting ads from them periodically, and any links sent to you through their service get rewritten to run through their frames (much like hotmail's web interface). But it's nice to know where spammers are getting your address from, makes it easy to filter spam out.
heh, oops. I meant "microvision" of course. And how did you know about the RF modulator? Are you the one sending me those signals? must... fight... mind... control!</kirk>
...called the Spectrum. 24 bit svga 800*600, configurable as a stereoscopic binocular display. Sounds like quake through this thing would be incredible.
YOu've got a good point, but your examples seem like they'd be better served by having the appliances themselves do the tasks. The robot could fetch the coffee, go shopping, and evalutate the film for you (these tasks are successively more difficult).
Um, cfcs are produced almost exclusively by man, and are the culprit behind the ozone hole, not global warming, and comparing the amount of CO2 produced through respiration to that produced by industrial processes and automobile driving is pretty silly. Oh, wait, you're slashdolt... nm;-)
But seriously, while I personally think our activities can have an impact on the climate, what we do is nothing compared to a sizable (1000 megaton or so) volcanic eruption, which has been known to happen. Toba in indonesia probably killed most of the people on earth due to climate change when it went 75,000 years ago. I think it's kind of funny that people get all excited about tracking large asteroids on earth intercept orbits, when statistically we're all in much greater danger from a massive volcanic eruption. I've heard the Yellowstone park area is a good candidate for this.
Hate to say it, but most new technologies don't seem to get very far until the pentagon decides they're useful. Hopefully this will prime the pump of a nanotech industrial revolution.
Australia is fortunate in having enormous amounts of (mostly uninhabitable) land to plonk windmills down on.
We have that here in the USA, too. Well, the land is habitable, but not too many people live there. There's a huge wind corridoor running from Utah through Kansas, on land which is mainly either farmed, ranched, or state-owned. There are ranchers negotiating wind-rights deal with energy producers all over the place. They get piad to lease their wind rights, we get the energy, and they can still ranch (cattle don't seem to mind windmills). And CAs windfarms are showing their age, coming close to 30 years old now. Wind generation tech has come a long way since then. Then there is the intriguing possiblity of photoelectric plastics which could be cheaply made and used nearly everywhere. What if the vinyl siding on your house produced energy from the sun? Could happen soon...
Re:Paradox: Publishing a googlewhack destroys it
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, I did some experimenting, and it looks like google doesn't index it's own search results, which is probably a good thing:~) too bad, though, the recursive googlewhack woulda been cool...
Re:Paradox: Publishing a googlewhack destroys it
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 1
But thisis a link. Perhaps google's crawler disregards links that point back to google, but then how do you explain this?
Re:Paradox: Publishing a googlewhack destroys it
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, what about a recursive googlewhack? Does google index itself? If a page containing a unique phrase pair linked to a google search on that phrase pair, got indexed, then had the phrase pair removed in time for the next (or some other subsequent)indexing, would you have a strange loop in the google index?
Re:Paradox: Publishing a googlewhack destroys it
on
Google Juice
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Slashdot Mirror
organic means it contains Carbon, methinks? As in Benzene is an organic chemical...
...fools in a row on the front page. Who's clever enough to post something that looks like a fool, smells like a fool, but is, in fact, the truth? These ones are too easy to spot.
but I don't believe there's any such thing as 'unbreakable' encryption
but do you believe in the finite amount of time any message might be useful? Sure, any encryption is theoretically breakable, but you only have one universal lifetime, and that's probably many billions of times longer than the info in the message will be worth decrypting. I could put your milk in a safe, if it took you a month to figure out how to open it, would you still drink it?
DING DING DING... give this man a prize! If you have a significant head start having developed some method of accomplishing a task which is significantly superior to all previous methods, and you fail to implement your method as well as some johnny-come-lately, who exactly is to blame? Why should the rest of us be limited to your shoddy implementation of your great idea? If I invented the internal combustion engine, patented it, and decided to use it to power an automatic horse flogger, I'd be the biggest asshole on earth if I refused to allow the inventor of the automobile to use the principles of my engine in his car.
Unlikely, since it's being worked on here already.
...minesweeper instead :)
If you'd said "it made me doubt the stories about cat's surviving falls unscathed" or words to that effect, it would make more sense...
So it kind of makes me think all that stuff about cats surviving high falls is a malenky bit baloney
So let me get this straight. You have first hand empirical proof that cats survive high falls, as well as anecdotal evidence from a trusted source, and you still don't believe it. What are you, the SuperSkeptic, a mutant hero whose bizarre power is the ability to disbelieve anything?
Rocket fuel, baby...
This is spot on. Scientology is the most ingenious pyramid scheme ever conceived . The product? Paranoia. I think their entire pitch can be boiled down to "Anyone who isn't a Scientologist is evil." It's a hard sell, but once someone takes the bait there's no limit to how far you can push them. It's the ultimate in absolutist reductionism. Of course, selling the bald premise that !Scientology=evil is damn near impossible, so they have to dress up the pitch in layers of silly "mysteries", which the acolyte is hoping to have revealed to them as the payoff for the investment of their mental space in a basically tautological premise. That's why the 'cherch' gets it's panties in a twist whenever these deep dark secrets about aliens ruling the earth get published on the web. It takes time to condition even the most gullible rube into swallowing this mess as gospel. Without the proper initiation, any right thinking person will just laugh off Scientology as a bunch of sci fi nutjobs a la Heaven's Gate.
L. Ron was certainly the man, I have to wonder if he wasn't a SubGenius at heart, laughing all the way to the exalted throne of worship (oh, and the bank, too).
Um, have you read any of the posts? Nobody (not at +1 anyway) is making these claims. Scratch that, nobody posting at -1 made any comments like that either, Mr. Superior. Why are you bitching about non-existing posts? Are you confused, or just an ass?
in answer to #2: use mailshell. Of course, you'll be getting ads from them periodically, and any links sent to you through their service get rewritten to run through their frames (much like hotmail's web interface). But it's nice to know where spammers are getting your address from, makes it easy to filter spam out.
Why didn't the statistician have a significant other?
He was satisfied with 5 significant digits.
heh, oops. I meant "microvision" of course. And how did you know about the RF modulator? Are you the one sending me those signals? must ... fight ... mind ... control!</kirk>
...called the Spectrum. 24 bit svga 800*600, configurable as a stereoscopic binocular display. Sounds like quake through this thing would be incredible.
YOu've got a good point, but your examples seem like they'd be better served by having the appliances themselves do the tasks. The robot could fetch the coffee, go shopping, and evalutate the film for you (these tasks are successively more difficult).
i luv my ibm scrollpoint
Um, cfcs are produced almost exclusively by man, and are the culprit behind the ozone hole, not global warming, and comparing the amount of CO2 produced through respiration to that produced by industrial processes and automobile driving is pretty silly. Oh, wait, you're slashdolt... nm ;-)
But seriously, while I personally think our activities can have an impact on the climate, what we do is nothing compared to a sizable (1000 megaton or so) volcanic eruption, which has been known to happen. Toba in indonesia probably killed most of the people on earth due to climate change when it went 75,000 years ago. I think it's kind of funny that people get all excited about tracking large asteroids on earth intercept orbits, when statistically we're all in much greater danger from a massive volcanic eruption. I've heard the Yellowstone park area is a good candidate for this.
Hate to say it, but most new technologies don't seem to get very far until the pentagon decides they're useful. Hopefully this will prime the pump of a nanotech industrial revolution.
No, but if you wrap your meathook around the strings, it does.
We have that here in the USA, too. Well, the land is habitable, but not too many people live there. There's a huge wind corridoor running from Utah through Kansas, on land which is mainly either farmed, ranched, or state-owned. There are ranchers negotiating wind-rights deal with energy producers all over the place. They get piad to lease their wind rights, we get the energy, and they can still ranch (cattle don't seem to mind windmills). And CAs windfarms are showing their age, coming close to 30 years old now. Wind generation tech has come a long way since then. Then there is the intriguing possiblity of photoelectric plastics which could be cheaply made and used nearly everywhere. What if the vinyl siding on your house produced energy from the sun? Could happen soon...
Yeah, I did some experimenting, and it looks like google doesn't index it's own search results, which is probably a good thing :~) too bad, though, the recursive googlewhack woulda been cool...
But this is a link. Perhaps google's crawler disregards links that point back to google, but then how do you explain this?
Hmm, what about a recursive googlewhack? Does google index itself? If a page containing a unique phrase pair linked to a google search on that phrase pair, got indexed, then had the phrase pair removed in time for the next (or some other subsequent)indexing, would you have a strange loop in the google index?
How about if you bury it in a link?