There are more than just 'two sides' to any given issue, but I guess that is just your dichotomous bias coming to light. Two things for you to (hopefully) think about. First is that everything is biased. That is just a consequence of humans telling stories. Our language is full of value-laden dichotomies, so you cannot speak English without expressing a bias.
Second is that information that is 'biased' is not just something to be automatically rejected. That is totally absurd in light of the fact that everything has a bias. It is up to the reader to tease out what has been said, what has not been said, whose story is being told, what is the preferred viewpoint implicit in the telling, what language was chosen to describe the events and so on. Whatever happened to reading something and evaluating its merits by yourself? Or do you prefer to get it from an 'authoritative' source so that you can just let it slide into your wetware with minimal processing?
Hi, communism is the revolutionary theory of marxism. Marxism is a rather complicated theory involving a notion called dialectical materialism. This has fuck all to do with the GPL. The GPL is one thing, and one thing only: sharing. Nothing to do with communism or marxism. But then again, this is Slashdot, where you can equate apples with oranges and get bananas, and that is 'insightful'.
Hi, I don't want to nitpick, but cost per watt and cost per joule are different concepts altogether and parent was right (parent was talking about kilowatt hours which is a unit of energy).
The original discussion was framed in terms of kilowatt hours, or energy. Now you have changed the topic to kilowatts, or power. Power = energy/time. You can't 'wait' for power so I'm not quite sure what you're talking about.
Anyhow, if you had a strict power requirement, you simply have to set up a system that delivers that power, whether it be solar cells, batteries or hamster wheels. If one solar cell doesn't meet your power requirement, you set up n solar cells and you are ok. You don't wait for power - it is either instantaneously satisfied or it isn't.
It was a good thing that the issue of power, even if possibly mistakenly, was brought up. In our discussion, there are two relevant 'resources': energy, and power. The question now comes down to what is the cost/joule and cost/watt. When you use something such as solar power, the cost/joule is rather close to zero - closer than any other system I can think of. The cost/watt I honestly don't know, that would require some research. Conventional energy sources such as oil have both a cost/joule and cost/watt, both of which are highly variable. I'm not sure that a useful discussion can take place until we have nailed down some of those figures. But this is Slashdot, and we all just like to shoot our mouths off here without accomplishing anything, right?
The second 'law' does not hold for quantum systems. The second 'law' is not so much a law but merely a statement about statistics that says in a macroscopic system the odds are overwhelming that entropy tends to increase. In a small (quantum) system the statistics can be quite different. So really it is not too difficult to come up with situations where the second law is violated.
Even in large systems it is theoretically possible to see it violated, it would just take longer than the existence of the universe for you to ever observe such a violation.
You are totally contrary to your own point. On one hand, you say you want 'just the news', on the other hand you got wood when the anchorperson (surprisingly) said something insightful. So uh, what's your damn point?
IMO, I would rather that both facts and analysis were given with news stories, which is almost never the case. Today, what passes for journalism is simple 'he said, she said' style - publish two dissenting opinions on some topic and now you have a balanced piece! The journalist just lets the talking heads to the work for him/her.
Anyhow, I encourage you that instead of giving up, you should diversify your sources. Also diversify your analysis. There are so many different ways to analyse what's coming in. Some methods I use: the 'this is news?' method. News outlets control the discourse of the day and determine what is relevant for people to know. One interesting trait of news outlets: anything the government wants to say becomes 'news'. I wish I had that ability! What the government does is also unique in that there is usually not much room for a 'balanced' report : the reporter goes to the news conference, and records what the talking heads have to say, and plays it back to the people.
This is especially true of television news. If the issue is particularly contentious, then they get two experts: one from one side, one from the other side. This is because there are only ever two sides to an issue!!(?)
Other techniques involve trying to figure out what preferred world view is behind the 'news report'. What assumptions about the world do they bring to their report? Who are they not talking about? What sort of language is being used with respect to a problem? For example, the US likes to declare war on its problems. Why is it to the government's advantage to use the language of war, say with the 'war on drugs'? Well, to me, it is apparent that all is fair in love and war, so when the government declares 'war' on drugs, I guess any and all measures are reasonable. An alternative way could be to declare 'help' on the drug addicts. But now we are speaking the discourse of 'helping' and it generally changes what your average person would consider to be reasonable in this context. The analyses you can do are endless.
Finally, I will admit that I can only watch a news source for so long when I consider its information to be suspect, or the bias is too strong, or when there is an interaction between those two (which is what I think you mean when you say something is 'too biased'). If the information is suspect, there is only so much analysis you can do until it feels like a waste of time (like say, analysing a soap opera). If the bias is too strong, then they are probably not even reporting the news stories you are interested in (which is the easiest way to be a biased news source: biased by omission). The interactions between the two can be things like purposely omitting relevant information to play on your sensitivities and have you assume some preferred opinion on the matter.
If you are really interested in getting to bottom of the stories you are hearing, maybe you should take a course or two on postmodern analysis. It's definitely an eye opener, and at least for me it formalised and put on a firm footing what my instincts had taught me over the years.
P.S. From what I said above, it should be apparent now that your statement that you want know 'exactly what happened, without commentary, and without opinion' is really the least of your worries. At least commentary and opinion are separated from the object they refer to, but things like the discourse that is taking place already provides a preferred viewpoint simultaneously as information is being provided. For example, when a palestinian blows up an isreali checkpoint, is he a terrorist, or a freedom fighter? You can read reports of the event that more or less contain the same facts but are couched in different language. So what I am saying, is that additional information is tied to the language we use to describe events, and it's inescapable. Information can never be free... even binary information. In a C program 0 is false and 1 is true, in a BASH program 0 is true and 1 is false. AHH! (head asplodes)
Does it really scale up well? Magnetic fields decrease in power proportional to the distance squared, and we have limits to how intense we can make them at any given point.
That just plain isn't true. I assume that you were talking about field strength and not power, which doesn't make much sense in this context. It all depends on the geometry. Typically though, with quasi-static currents, you are looking at the field strength falling off as 1/r. That is not bad.
So, what's the big deal? Taiwan is a province of China. Mao Zedong won the civil war in China, and just because the loyalists retreated there doesn't mean that Taiwan all of a sudden becomes a new country. Get a grip.
It's not surprising that the theft of this game is considered news on Slashdot, considering the demographics. This puerile offering will probably be the most 'action' that Slashdotters will get in their lives. And yet you wonder why there aren't women in tech, as you sit around in your jammies playing out your sexist fantasies on your gaming console??
What is pretty obvious, Mr. "Ergo Ipso Facto", is that you didn't RTFA, and that you are talking out of your ass. The JibJab video takes every value that the original "This Land is My Land" enshrines and corrupts them to mean the opposite. Whether or not vector by which this is done is through political commentary is irrelevant, because ultimately the JibJab video makes a sham of "This Land is My Land", and is thus a parody.
The mods must be hitting the $2 crack today. The only reason this was modded up was because the author said "Ergo Ipso Facto". Where in the moderation guidelines does it say to award +1 for each latin word used?
Why is it that nobody in this damned forum knows how to spell cheque correctly? 'Check' is for 'checkmark' or 'checkpoint', or 'let me check that,' but it is specifically not the little piece of paper used to transfer funds between people. Get it fucking straight already.
So do you think that congress should move to anonymous voting, or would you rather be able to hold your congressmen accountable for their opinions.
You know that's a bullshit argument, but you put it out there anyway. Yes, I do think they should be accountable - why? Because the congressman is voting in a sense on my behalf. Of course I want to be represented correctly.
However, we're not talking about people expressing an opinion for you, we're talking about you expressing your opinion. As far as judging an opinion from its source goes, that is called the ad hominem fallacy, and it is symptomatic of a lazy or ignorant individual, which in your persistence of the above, you have proven yourself to be.
Jackass.
Re:So did you void her warranty ?
on
Baked Apple
·
· Score: 4, Funny
That depends on how the warranty deals with 'hot' merchandise.
I'm convinced that diet soft drinks make people fat.
Dear Sir,
In regards to your sig. Your suspicion is correct - they do make people fat, and here is how. When a person consumes something sweet this is normally followed by sugar entering the bloodstream. What happens is that the classical conditioning takes place; the brain believes that sweet things are a reliable predictor of sugar entering the bloodstream.
So to keep everthing in check, your body goes about lowering your blood sugar as soon as you taste something sweet, in anticipation of the sugar about to enter your system. Then something funny happens - no sugar. So then the person is on a sugar low, and goes hunting for some donuts or ho-hos or something else to save them from the crisis. Wash, rinse, repeat - and out pops a fat person.
Slashdot Mirror
Second is that information that is 'biased' is not just something to be automatically rejected. That is totally absurd in light of the fact that everything has a bias. It is up to the reader to tease out what has been said, what has not been said, whose story is being told, what is the preferred viewpoint implicit in the telling, what language was chosen to describe the events and so on. Whatever happened to reading something and evaluating its merits by yourself? Or do you prefer to get it from an 'authoritative' source so that you can just let it slide into your wetware with minimal processing?
Hi, communism is the revolutionary theory of marxism. Marxism is a rather complicated theory involving a notion called dialectical materialism. This has fuck all to do with the GPL. The GPL is one thing, and one thing only: sharing. Nothing to do with communism or marxism. But then again, this is Slashdot, where you can equate apples with oranges and get bananas, and that is 'insightful'.
Hi, I don't want to nitpick, but cost per watt and cost per joule are different concepts altogether and parent was right (parent was talking about kilowatt hours which is a unit of energy).
Anyhow, if you had a strict power requirement, you simply have to set up a system that delivers that power, whether it be solar cells, batteries or hamster wheels. If one solar cell doesn't meet your power requirement, you set up n solar cells and you are ok. You don't wait for power - it is either instantaneously satisfied or it isn't.
It was a good thing that the issue of power, even if possibly mistakenly, was brought up. In our discussion, there are two relevant 'resources': energy, and power. The question now comes down to what is the cost/joule and cost/watt. When you use something such as solar power, the cost/joule is rather close to zero - closer than any other system I can think of. The cost/watt I honestly don't know, that would require some research. Conventional energy sources such as oil have both a cost/joule and cost/watt, both of which are highly variable. I'm not sure that a useful discussion can take place until we have nailed down some of those figures. But this is Slashdot, and we all just like to shoot our mouths off here without accomplishing anything, right?
Even in large systems it is theoretically possible to see it violated, it would just take longer than the existence of the universe for you to ever observe such a violation.
IMO, I would rather that both facts and analysis were given with news stories, which is almost never the case. Today, what passes for journalism is simple 'he said, she said' style - publish two dissenting opinions on some topic and now you have a balanced piece! The journalist just lets the talking heads to the work for him/her.
Anyhow, I encourage you that instead of giving up, you should diversify your sources. Also diversify your analysis. There are so many different ways to analyse what's coming in. Some methods I use: the 'this is news?' method. News outlets control the discourse of the day and determine what is relevant for people to know. One interesting trait of news outlets: anything the government wants to say becomes 'news'. I wish I had that ability! What the government does is also unique in that there is usually not much room for a 'balanced' report : the reporter goes to the news conference, and records what the talking heads have to say, and plays it back to the people.
This is especially true of television news. If the issue is particularly contentious, then they get two experts: one from one side, one from the other side. This is because there are only ever two sides to an issue!!(?)
Other techniques involve trying to figure out what preferred world view is behind the 'news report'. What assumptions about the world do they bring to their report? Who are they not talking about? What sort of language is being used with respect to a problem? For example, the US likes to declare war on its problems. Why is it to the government's advantage to use the language of war, say with the 'war on drugs'? Well, to me, it is apparent that all is fair in love and war, so when the government declares 'war' on drugs, I guess any and all measures are reasonable. An alternative way could be to declare 'help' on the drug addicts. But now we are speaking the discourse of 'helping' and it generally changes what your average person would consider to be reasonable in this context. The analyses you can do are endless.
Finally, I will admit that I can only watch a news source for so long when I consider its information to be suspect, or the bias is too strong, or when there is an interaction between those two (which is what I think you mean when you say something is 'too biased'). If the information is suspect, there is only so much analysis you can do until it feels like a waste of time (like say, analysing a soap opera). If the bias is too strong, then they are probably not even reporting the news stories you are interested in (which is the easiest way to be a biased news source: biased by omission). The interactions between the two can be things like purposely omitting relevant information to play on your sensitivities and have you assume some preferred opinion on the matter.
If you are really interested in getting to bottom of the stories you are hearing, maybe you should take a course or two on postmodern analysis. It's definitely an eye opener, and at least for me it formalised and put on a firm footing what my instincts had taught me over the years.
P.S. From what I said above, it should be apparent now that your statement that you want know 'exactly what happened, without commentary, and without opinion' is really the least of your worries. At least commentary and opinion are separated from the object they refer to, but things like the discourse that is taking place already provides a preferred viewpoint simultaneously as information is being provided. For example, when a palestinian blows up an isreali checkpoint, is he a terrorist, or a freedom fighter? You can read reports of the event that more or less contain the same facts but are couched in different language. So what I am saying, is that additional information is tied to the language we use to describe events, and it's inescapable. Information can never be free... even binary information. In a C program 0 is false and 1 is true, in a BASH program 0 is true and 1 is false. AHH! (head asplodes)
I heard this one was a real bitch to get set up.
No, it doesn't. At room temperature and pressure pure water self ionizes (slightly) and gives it a non-finite resistance.
So, what's the big deal? Taiwan is a province of China. Mao Zedong won the civil war in China, and just because the loyalists retreated there doesn't mean that Taiwan all of a sudden becomes a new country. Get a grip.
Hi, I have a slashdot comment proofreading business on the side, perhaps you could use my services?
It allows you to measure: 1,3,4,5,8,9,2,7,10,11
You cannot measure six because no two distance markings differ by six.
Vote on the third?
Congratulations. Within the span of two words you have personally offended (along with the parent poster):
- people who can't speak
- donkeys
- mentally retarded people
In the future, I would kindly request that you try to be more politically correct and just say 'fuck you'.HTH. HAND.
It's not surprising that the theft of this game is considered news on Slashdot, considering the demographics. This puerile offering will probably be the most 'action' that Slashdotters will get in their lives. And yet you wonder why there aren't women in tech, as you sit around in your jammies playing out your sexist fantasies on your gaming console??
Typical pigdog qwerty centric American.
What is pretty obvious, Mr. "Ergo Ipso Facto", is that you didn't RTFA, and that you are talking out of your ass. The JibJab video takes every value that the original "This Land is My Land" enshrines and corrupts them to mean the opposite. Whether or not vector by which this is done is through political commentary is irrelevant, because ultimately the JibJab video makes a sham of "This Land is My Land", and is thus a parody.
The mods must be hitting the $2 crack today. The only reason this was modded up was because the author said "Ergo Ipso Facto". Where in the moderation guidelines does it say to award +1 for each latin word used?
The deadliest substance in the world, organic or man-made,is called botulinum toxin A and is made by botulism bacteria.
Considering the current market conditions, I think your salary should probably be about .. 1/12 of a dime.
Why is it that nobody in this damned forum knows how to spell cheque correctly? 'Check' is for 'checkmark' or 'checkpoint', or 'let me check that,' but it is specifically not the little piece of paper used to transfer funds between people. Get it fucking straight already.
Not only that, but those jobs sure as hell ain't local.
However, we're not talking about people expressing an opinion for you, we're talking about you expressing your opinion. As far as judging an opinion from its source goes, that is called the ad hominem fallacy, and it is symptomatic of a lazy or ignorant individual, which in your persistence of the above, you have proven yourself to be.
Jackass.
That depends on how the warranty deals with 'hot' merchandise.
T = N / (A * m) , or T = N / (C * m/s )
So no, that's utterly wrong. It is not even dimensionally correct.
Dear Sir,
In regards to your sig. Your suspicion is correct - they do make people fat, and here is how. When a person consumes something sweet this is normally followed by sugar entering the bloodstream. What happens is that the classical conditioning takes place; the brain believes that sweet things are a reliable predictor of sugar entering the bloodstream.
So to keep everthing in check, your body goes about lowering your blood sugar as soon as you taste something sweet, in anticipation of the sugar about to enter your system. Then something funny happens - no sugar. So then the person is on a sugar low, and goes hunting for some donuts or ho-hos or something else to save them from the crisis. Wash, rinse, repeat - and out pops a fat person.