Has anybody else noticed that the avian framerate is a little... er, off?
I mean everytime they move their heads there's like no interstitial animation whatsoever. Same goes for insects. Freaky. Plus my email has been acting up - yeah, I think the Gnostics had it right all along...
A gang of geeks obsessed with their favorite TV show put out a broadcast-ready promo in order to keep it on the air.
WTF. We can't do the same for the politicians we support or in opposition to those bills we know will create a totalitarian state in the U.S.
A.?
WTF again. Where are our FUCKING PRIORITIES? Farscape is just a little bit less important than preserving civil liberties of American citizens, and for that matter, the peace of the rest of the world. If for no other reason than to preserve the freedom of our (possible) children, we should be exerting these efforts in favor of STOPPING NIXON-ERA FORIEGN POLICY TACTICS and electing officials who will make this planet habitable for the next two centuries at the very least.
Tetris is a game in which seemingly random no-win situations are introduced as part of the game. Certain pieces (e.g. the infamous S) simply are not compatible with what the player needs to 'score'. (+5 funny, thankyouverymuch)
In Tetris, the player and opponent are on completely unequal grounds. All the 'opponent' has to do is throw enough shitty pieces at you to prevent you from reaching the next level, or scoring enough points. No intelligence can triumph against a random number generator given such a disadvantage.
All I really have to offer to these researchers is a well-enunciated 'DUHH'.
Doesn't this illustrate a backwards compatibility problem with secure systems everywhere? As such, buffer overflows that affected any previous system could conceivably affect any & all backwards-compatible systems made after the fact, should such software be afforded the necessary privileges (esp. remote management tools).
(I'm not posting this in an attempt to prove I know anything, I just think a clearly worded reply might benefit a few folks, e.g. me)
So you get one or the other: the 2nd amendment, or the 4th. Or you can accept a fatalistic worldview, take both, and be content with natural scheme of things: He who shoots first, wins (in the short term).
I honestly don't understand why so many people are attempting to defeat the above system. Fsck a bunch of kids with semiautomatics. It amounts to numbers and cojones, a la Scarface.
Does anybody at this point (six billion plus) really consider any individual human existence that sacred? Ridiculous. Several poor guys in India can program just as well as you.
Give your imaginary divinity up and taste the blood.
According to this, [the register US] the idea is to start manufacturing in Q3 so that there's inventory available for a launch around New Year's. Which implies no speed bumps in store for the internals (800 Mhz, the current top speed, is going to sound pretty pokey by then) and very little chance of a significant price drop beforehand.
This may be extrapolating a bit much from one little tidbit, but whatever. I think Apple is setting themselves up to completely miss the price point for the market, after they came so, so close with the OG iMac.
I don't believe we've even invented the mathematic systems necessary to describe a GUT, assuming one does exist. Four lines of Mathematica in about 500 years, maybe. Too much of physics in the past century has been about finding new, undiscovered layers and aspects to our understanding of the basics and adding caveats to previously accepted structures.
Human math and theory at this point does not allow for expansive-yet-accurate enough descriptions of phenomena. But the again, IAMAM/P.
A factor that I don't feel has recieved due consideration in similar cases is the readership/target audience of websites under scrutiny. For example, certain websites such as this one might occasionally feature posts by those who have us all commit DDoS attacks on, say, PanIP's servers. This is not on its face a great deal different if one subtracts the qualitative difference of murder vs. 'Information Warfare' (One could also argue that such an operation is much more easily 'immediately executed' since the tools for DoS'ing someone are often one and the same as for reading said post, whereas a murder has yet to be performed via packet-switched network).
Hopefully it could be shown in court that the vast majority of/. readers are not likely to perform such an act, regardless of how inflammatory the statement maybe. In the case of bloody-minded anti-abortionists, however, this is obviously not the case.
My point is this: In previous rulings concerning this exception to the first amendment, it has been the case that the audience could be observed to be a volatile mass and thus likely to be swayed by hateful and threatening speech. Regarding websites, this issue becomes murky and threatens to turn any ruling either way into the dreaded first step down a slippery slope. I should expect my example above illustrates how this could be used to control expression in any number of forums.
I believe it was Duke Ellington who said something to the effect that all good musicians (composers) steal or borrow ideas. Imagine if someone had decided to patent the backbeat. Every drummer would be fucked. (actually, that's not a bad idea, perhaps I should try that one).
Sure, maybe it is theft from a certain perspective. But from another perspective, that's how art has been propagated for centuries, and it's not about to change. Anybody who listens to John Williams film scores and has half a clue about classical ought to realize that nearly everything he's composed is just a pastiche of other works by various dead white fellas.
Art should never be a question of whether something is legal or illegal. Laws and art should have as little to do with one another as possible. Art's value is weighed subjectively; art is about whether you like it or not, no matter where it came from, why or how.
Well, the article mentions this a bit, but I was thinking:
Aren't some sidewalks (NYC, SF) crowded and dangerous enough as it is, as far as bumping into people and such?
Imagine making those everyday collisions with fellow 'pedestrians' when one of you is moving at twelve and a half miles an hour. I foresee dislocations, damaged merchandise, and god forbid one of these cops happens to do one of those fruit stand smash-ups so popular in the film industry.
I'm all for a new, efficient means of transport, but these things need their own lanes of travel, like some cities have provided for bicyclists.
Let's see; Evolution in mammals being such a fast-moving process (dogs: no speciation in a thousand+ years of breeding) and humans being such obviously speciable (if that's a word) individuals; I think it's pretty safe to say I can bank my academic career on such an outlandish statement! In fact, if I'm a relatively schmuck-ass do-nothing in my field, I can probably get some attention by making such proclamations as this one in a public forum, and hence make myself seem more worthy of future research grants and faculty recruitment programs!
People like this guy and his comrades are why academia gets such a bad rap. Frankly he's spouting shit with very little research behind it just so he and a few other jackasses can get a little undeserved attention. The idea that evolution has come to a close re: the human race has been bandied about in bars for years, at least in any bar that's less than 50 yards from a college with an anthropology program, and doesn't need a Phud to give it credence- basically because it has none!
You don't see a lot of physics profs making premature conclusions about the behavior of quarks on a two-dimenisonal plane. So why do those in other fields feel the urge to make the same kind of far-reaching proclamations concerning the future of the human race?
Simply because the research to disprove them is extremely difficult.
All the same, it's utterly ridiculous to assume that evolution has ceased for Homo Sapiens because of medtech and transportation- We still breed according to superficial ideas of healthiness and attractiveness, and these primitive ideas of what makes a good baby-factory will continue to guide our decisions about whom to fuck for a few centuries at the very least. People for the great majority are still disgusting drool-buckets and anybody who's been turned down for a date (certainly none of the Slashdot audience, ha, right) will know this for a fact.
What the fuck is up with this planet?
Slashdot Mirror
I mean everytime they move their heads there's like no interstitial animation whatsoever. Same goes for insects. Freaky. Plus my email has been acting up - yeah, I think the Gnostics had it right all along...
WTF. We can't do the same for the politicians we support or in opposition to those bills we know will create a totalitarian state in the U.S. A.?
WTF again. Where are our FUCKING PRIORITIES? Farscape is just a little bit less important than preserving civil liberties of American citizens, and for that matter, the peace of the rest of the world. If for no other reason than to preserve the freedom of our (possible) children, we should be exerting these efforts in favor of STOPPING NIXON-ERA FORIEGN POLICY TACTICS and electing officials who will make this planet habitable for the next two centuries at the very least.
Thank you for your time, I'm going to bed.
In Tetris, the player and opponent are on completely unequal grounds. All the 'opponent' has to do is throw enough shitty pieces at you to prevent you from reaching the next level, or scoring enough points. No intelligence can triumph against a random number generator given such a disadvantage.
All I really have to offer to these researchers is a well-enunciated 'DUHH'.
(I'm not posting this in an attempt to prove I know anything, I just think a clearly worded reply might benefit a few folks, e.g. me)
I honestly don't understand why so many people are attempting to defeat the above system. Fsck a bunch of kids with semiautomatics. It amounts to numbers and cojones, a la Scarface.
Does anybody at this point (six billion plus) really consider any individual human existence that sacred? Ridiculous. Several poor guys in India can program just as well as you. Give your imaginary divinity up and taste the blood.
This may be extrapolating a bit much from one little tidbit, but whatever. I think Apple is setting themselves up to completely miss the price point for the market, after they came so, so close with the OG iMac.
Human math and theory at this point does not allow for expansive-yet-accurate enough descriptions of phenomena. But the again, IAMAM/P.
Hopefully it could be shown in court that the vast majority of /. readers are not likely to perform such an act, regardless of how inflammatory the statement maybe. In the case of bloody-minded anti-abortionists, however, this is obviously not the case.
My point is this: In previous rulings concerning this exception to the first amendment, it has been the case that the audience could be observed to be a volatile mass and thus likely to be swayed by hateful and threatening speech. Regarding websites, this issue becomes murky and threatens to turn any ruling either way into the dreaded first step down a slippery slope. I should expect my example above illustrates how this could be used to control expression in any number of forums.
Sure, maybe it is theft from a certain perspective. But from another perspective, that's how art has been propagated for centuries, and it's not about to change. Anybody who listens to John Williams film scores and has half a clue about classical ought to realize that nearly everything he's composed is just a pastiche of other works by various dead white fellas.
Art should never be a question of whether something is legal or illegal. Laws and art should have as little to do with one another as possible. Art's value is weighed subjectively; art is about whether you like it or not, no matter where it came from, why or how.
Aren't some sidewalks (NYC, SF) crowded and dangerous enough as it is, as far as bumping into people and such?
Imagine making those everyday collisions with fellow 'pedestrians' when one of you is moving at twelve and a half miles an hour. I foresee dislocations, damaged merchandise, and god forbid one of these cops happens to do one of those fruit stand smash-ups so popular in the film industry.
I'm all for a new, efficient means of transport, but these things need their own lanes of travel, like some cities have provided for bicyclists.
Let's see; Evolution in mammals being such a fast-moving process (dogs: no speciation in a thousand+ years of breeding) and humans being such obviously speciable (if that's a word) individuals; I think it's pretty safe to say I can bank my academic career on such an outlandish statement! In fact, if I'm a relatively schmuck-ass do-nothing in my field, I can probably get some attention by making such proclamations as this one in a public forum, and hence make myself seem more worthy of future research grants and faculty recruitment programs! People like this guy and his comrades are why academia gets such a bad rap. Frankly he's spouting shit with very little research behind it just so he and a few other jackasses can get a little undeserved attention. The idea that evolution has come to a close re: the human race has been bandied about in bars for years, at least in any bar that's less than 50 yards from a college with an anthropology program, and doesn't need a Phud to give it credence- basically because it has none! You don't see a lot of physics profs making premature conclusions about the behavior of quarks on a two-dimenisonal plane. So why do those in other fields feel the urge to make the same kind of far-reaching proclamations concerning the future of the human race? Simply because the research to disprove them is extremely difficult. All the same, it's utterly ridiculous to assume that evolution has ceased for Homo Sapiens because of medtech and transportation- We still breed according to superficial ideas of healthiness and attractiveness, and these primitive ideas of what makes a good baby-factory will continue to guide our decisions about whom to fuck for a few centuries at the very least. People for the great majority are still disgusting drool-buckets and anybody who's been turned down for a date (certainly none of the Slashdot audience, ha, right) will know this for a fact. What the fuck is up with this planet?