Maybe I'm way off base here, but ever since I first heard mention of a.xxx TLD, I instantly thought "Wouldn't it be better to have a 'xxx.' prefix instead?"
I mean, we don't have a.www TLD for 'world wide web' sites and a.email TLD for e-mail addresses. '.xxx' for a company's adult-rated site makes exactly the same amount of sense; i.e. not very much at all.
People seem to have lost sight that the prefix on a domain name signifies the function of the server under the domain, so www.yourdomain.tld is your website and mail.yourdomain.tld is your mailserver; If you're going to run an adults only site xxx.yourdomain.tld seems like the logical choice to me.
Scrupulous DNS hosters (like ISPs) could then encourage the use of such a prefix for their customers who are running that kind of site.
An example of this usage might be, say, Google Images with safe-search turned _off_ running from xxx.images.google.com, or Heff running his online corporate newsletter from www.playboy.com and pictures of the bunnies at xxx.playboy.com.
The Total Reality Vortex doesn't take the log to base ten of the Universe like this map does; It shows you your relative size to the unadulterated, unlogarithmified everything.
IMHO, Showing someone their relative size to just the planet we live on would be enough to make most people's minds implode.
Time for me to make up something plausible sounding:
A Neutron (udd) decays into a Proton (uud) and an electron (e-) (plus one or two other things that I intend to ignore for simplicity's sake). So we could conclude that a down quark (d) is an up-quark (u) plus the attributes of an electron.
Turn that on its head and say that an electron is a down-quark (d) less the attributes of an up-quark, or plus the attributes of of an anti-up quark (u-bar).
A down-quark plus an anti-up as a meson is a positive pion (pi+).
One of the decay modes of the positive pion includes a muon (mu-), the big brother of the electron.
The equivalent decay state of the negative pion (pi-) emits an anti-muon (mu+).
There is a short lived pseudo-atom that resembles Hydrogen called Positronium that is an electron and positron co-orbiting.
If an electron and a positron can co-orbit for a short while, then there is no reason to suppose a muon and an anti-muon cannot do the same...
Maybe pions that decay into leptons (i.e. muons) can do the same sort of thing before they decay.
So the mooted structure of X3872, the 'pion-anti-pion' positronium-like (c-bar,u)-(u-bar,c) [where (c) is a 'charm' quark, the big brother of the up-quark and (x-bar,y) represents quarks in a separate pion-like particle] doesn't seem so bizarre after all.
Hmm. That seemed so much more logical in my head...
I got a '64 and a bunch of Compute!'s Gazettes and RUN magazines (hence the subject) in late '89 so I was a bit of a late starter. I used and learned the '64 with the magazines right up until '95 when I got a P75 PC.
Anyway - on to the magic: 1) Turn on your '64 2) Hit Run/Stop + Restore 3) Type: POKE781,96:SYS58251 4) Hit Return. 5) Enjoy.
If you're going to be picky, the words mixable and miscible are both derived from the Latin miscere. The different spellings have yet to to diverge in meaning, so they mean the same thing.
<dig>
The only reason 'mixable' isn't in the accepted jargon-set is that it isn't confusing to non-scientists.;-) </dig>
Evolution tends to follow similar paths in similar situations.
The article suggests that the Microraptors might have 'flown' like flying squirrels do. Since the squirrels have no problems getting around, I guess the 'raptors had no trouble.
Mammals have developed two forms of flight - the modified hand as a wing in Bats and the three flaps of skin between limbs used by some Squirrels.
It stands to reason to assume that if Birds today use the modified hand method, that there might have been some other dinosaur subspecies that used the other method.
Whenever someone gives an either-or analogy to a system, it's usually found later to be a combination of the "mutually-exclusive" options that is responsible for the behaviour of that system.
In this case, we can't be probably reading Slashdot - we're part of the same universe Slashdot occupies and therefore we're part of the same wave function.
You can't observe the result of a universal wave function collapse if you're part of it.
Controversially, I could go on to speculate that this universe only exists because some extra-universal entity (God?) is watching it, but that's the old tree-in-a-forest-making-a-noise argument.
Call me crazy, but I see a parallel here with this. - Taking an existing, known format and minimising it as far as possible. Heck - even the number returned by the code is relevant.
The biggest problem IMO is its slow rotation. A day is about 240 days.
Which is longer than the Venusian year which is 225 Earth days. Weird, huh?
Perhaps a thick enough atmosphere will transfer heat evenly to the dark side
Given that Earth's atmosphere isn't all that thick, and we're warm enough at night, I reckon a planet closer to the Sun would have reasonably (if not ridiculously) warm nights...
IMHO, Venus needs several things to be habitable:
Water
A decent rotation rate
A moon to control any seas we might have after adding water.
My solution? Grab that Quaoar object everyone's in love with at the moment and smack it into Venus. Hit it right and all three criteria will be met:)
1. Isn't the adjective pertaining to Venus 'venereal'?
Yes, but to avoid the obvious innuendo people tend to derive an alternative based on 'Martian'. i.e. 'Venusian' or 'Venutian'.
But not 'Venison'.:)
2. If true, life must truly be ubiquitous. In the solar system alone, we've got Earth, Mars, Europa, Titan and now Venus. Of course, there's only evidence so far of life on one, but the very fact that scientists are even considering it is a testament to life's tenacity.
The evidence so far from those other places is purely hypothetical and circumstantial. But you're right - it is comforting to think that self-replicating patterns, structures and chemicals exist beyond our world. The big question is - Are those patterns found elsewhere complex enough to form sentient beings. Or am I being sentimental?
3. Can someone who knows more than I tell us all how easy it'd be for UV light to penetrate to the required depth? I wouldn't have thought it possible.
I seem to remember reading somewhere that it would be possible to see your surroundings if you were somehow able to survive a visit to Venus' surface - the light being a dark dull red glow. If ordinary light can get through then UV will definitely make it to the surface - On a cloudy day here on Earth, 80% of the UV radiation can make it through the clouds. People don't get suntans on those days simply because they spend more time indoors.
Bizarrely, the person responsible for the original submission is typing this sentence right now. Thankfully, brighter people have improved upon it somewhat since then...:)
Hope for amateur authors?
on
ChronoSpace
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Let's assume the book is truly as ill-plotted, badly written and poorly presented as the reviewer says. Then consider that the manuscript was still accepted by a publisher and further, made it into book form.
I reckon to those of us who have a half-decent plot idea but not the skill to build a storyscape around it could be in with a chance.
If it was truly that bad I'm sure some of the extremely short stories that I write then delete as rubbish from my hard disk would have made it past a publisher. In fact anything with a good plot idea and nothing else should suffice.
Now where did I leave that data recovery software?
Take a good long look at what we use our technology for these days - a great deal of it is for communication. Cellphones, pagers, IR/Radio laptops, conference calls are all used to bring collectives of people together.
Consider how this technology is getting smaller and smaller, how much of it is increasingly voice activated, and how much easier it would be not to have your communication devices where they are cumbersome and/or easy to lose - Surely a logical place to put the technology would be *in* the body rather than having to remember to pick it up whenever you {disembark transport}.
Neural activation of this subdermal technology would become commonplace when people realise they look like dorks talking to themselves trying to get their 'phone to work, but maybe I digress here.
You'll be instantly reachable by your Boss, your Cow-orkers, and better: your immediate circle of friends. Soon you'll be permanently connected to the areas of your associates' brains they'll let you have access to.
By the 24th Century we won't be Roddenberry's Federation. We'll be the Borg.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe I'm way off base here, but ever since I first heard mention of a .xxx TLD, I instantly thought "Wouldn't it be better to have a 'xxx.' prefix instead?"
.www TLD for 'world wide web' sites and a .email TLD for e-mail addresses. '.xxx' for a company's adult-rated site makes exactly the same amount of sense; i.e. not very much at all.
I mean, we don't have a
People seem to have lost sight that the prefix on a domain name signifies the function of the server under the domain, so www.yourdomain.tld is your website and mail.yourdomain.tld is your mailserver; If you're going to run an adults only site xxx.yourdomain.tld seems like the logical choice to me.
Scrupulous DNS hosters (like ISPs) could then encourage the use of such a prefix for their customers who are running that kind of site.
An example of this usage might be, say, Google Images with safe-search turned _off_ running from xxx.images.google.com, or Heff running his online corporate newsletter from www.playboy.com and pictures of the bunnies at xxx.playboy.com.
Or am I just spouting crazy talk here?
And no verb here either.
No problem.
Does it matter? "She's been as gray as a mule since she was seventeen."
There's a roster for roosters on the rota-roaster?!
Nobody ever seems to understand Mostly Harmless.
It was written entirely in the style of a form literature mentioned within the story itself.
And when you read it again, you'll see what I mean.
The Total Reality Vortex doesn't take the log to base ten of the Universe like this map does; It shows you your relative size to the unadulterated, unlogarithmified everything.
IMHO, Showing someone their relative size to just the planet we live on would be enough to make most people's minds implode.
- A Neutron (udd) decays into a Proton (uud) and an electron (e-) (plus one or two other things that I intend to ignore for simplicity's sake). So we could conclude that a down quark (d) is an up-quark (u) plus the attributes of an electron.
- Turn that on its head and say that an electron is a down-quark (d) less the attributes of an up-quark, or plus the attributes of of an anti-up quark (u-bar).
- A down-quark plus an anti-up as a meson is a positive pion (pi+).
- One of the decay modes of the positive pion includes a muon (mu-), the big brother of the electron.
- The equivalent decay state of the negative pion (pi-) emits an anti-muon (mu+).
- There is a short lived pseudo-atom that resembles Hydrogen called Positronium that is an electron and positron co-orbiting.
- If an electron and a positron can co-orbit for a short while, then there is no reason to suppose a muon and an anti-muon cannot do the same...
- Maybe pions that decay into leptons (i.e. muons) can do the same sort of thing before they decay.
- So the mooted structure of X3872, the 'pion-anti-pion' positronium-like (c-bar,u)-(u-bar,c) [where (c) is a 'charm' quark, the big brother of the up-quark and (x-bar,y) represents quarks in a separate pion-like particle] doesn't seem so bizarre after all.
Hmm. That seemed so much more logical in my head...I got a '64 and a bunch of Compute!'s Gazettes and RUN magazines (hence the subject) in late '89 so I was a bit of a late starter. I used and learned the '64 with the magazines right up until '95 when I got a P75 PC.
Anyway - on to the magic:
1) Turn on your '64
2) Hit Run/Stop + Restore
3) Type: POKE781,96:SYS58251
4) Hit Return.
5) Enjoy.
If you're going to be picky, the words mixable and miscible are both derived from the Latin miscere. The different spellings have yet to to diverge in meaning, so they mean the same thing.
;-) </dig>
<dig> The only reason 'mixable' isn't in the accepted jargon-set is that it isn't confusing to non-scientists.
Evolution tends to follow similar paths in similar situations.
The article suggests that the Microraptors might have 'flown' like flying squirrels do. Since the squirrels have no problems getting around, I guess the 'raptors had no trouble.
Mammals have developed two forms of flight - the modified hand as a wing in Bats and the three flaps of skin between limbs used by some Squirrels.
It stands to reason to assume that if Birds today use the modified hand method, that there might have been some other dinosaur subspecies that used the other method.
Whenever someone gives an either-or analogy to a system, it's usually found later to be a combination of the "mutually-exclusive" options that is responsible for the behaviour of that system.
In this case, we can't be probably reading Slashdot - we're part of the same universe Slashdot occupies and therefore we're part of the same wave function.
You can't observe the result of a universal wave function collapse if you're part of it.
Controversially, I could go on to speculate that this universe only exists because some extra-universal entity (God?) is watching it, but that's the old tree-in-a-forest-making-a-noise argument.
This springs to mind: Lets agree to disagree. What's on TV?
Call me crazy, but I see a parallel here with this. - Taking an existing, known format and minimising it as far as possible. Heck - even the number returned by the code is relevant.
The biggest problem IMO is its slow rotation. A day is about 240 days.
Which is longer than the Venusian year which is 225 Earth days. Weird, huh?
Perhaps a thick enough atmosphere will transfer heat evenly to the dark side
Given that Earth's atmosphere isn't all that thick, and we're warm enough at night, I reckon a planet closer to the Sun would have reasonably (if not ridiculously) warm nights...
IMHO, Venus needs several things to be habitable:
My solution? Grab that Quaoar object everyone's in love with at the moment and smack it into Venus. Hit it right and all three criteria will be met :)
Yes, but to avoid the obvious innuendo people tend to derive an alternative based on 'Martian'. i.e. 'Venusian' or 'Venutian'.
But not 'Venison'.:)
The evidence so far from those other places is purely hypothetical and circumstantial. But you're right - it is comforting to think that self-replicating patterns, structures and chemicals exist beyond our world. The big question is - Are those patterns found elsewhere complex enough to form sentient beings. Or am I being sentimental?
I seem to remember reading somewhere that it would be possible to see your surroundings if you were somehow able to survive a visit to Venus' surface - the light being a dark dull red glow. If ordinary light can get through then UV will definitely make it to the surface - On a cloudy day here on Earth, 80% of the UV radiation can make it through the clouds. People don't get suntans on those days simply because they spend more time indoors.There's a simple and to-the-point description of Antihydrogen at the Wikipedia.
Bizarrely, the person responsible for the original submission is typing this sentence right now. Thankfully, brighter people have improved upon it somewhat since then... :)
Let's assume the book is truly as ill-plotted, badly written and poorly presented as the reviewer says. Then consider that the manuscript was still accepted by a publisher and further, made it into book form.
I reckon to those of us who have a half-decent plot idea but not the skill to build a storyscape around it could be in with a chance.
If it was truly that bad I'm sure some of the extremely short stories that I write then delete as rubbish from my hard disk would have made it past a publisher. In fact anything with a good plot idea and nothing else should suffice.
Now where did I leave that data recovery software?
The HTML code for a web page should be as simple as possible, but no simpler.
I wouldn't win any prizes for my HTML coding, but I know that when the code looks convoluted and evil I'm probably not doing the job right.
Take a good long look at what we use our technology for these days - a great deal of it is for communication. Cellphones, pagers, IR/Radio laptops, conference calls are all used to bring collectives of people together.
Consider how this technology is getting smaller and smaller, how much of it is increasingly voice activated, and how much easier it would be not to have your communication devices where they are cumbersome and/or easy to lose - Surely a logical place to put the technology would be *in* the body rather than having to remember to pick it up whenever you {disembark transport}.
Neural activation of this subdermal technology would become commonplace when people realise they look like dorks talking to themselves trying to get their 'phone to work, but maybe I digress here.
You'll be instantly reachable by your Boss, your Cow-orkers, and better: your immediate circle of friends. Soon you'll be permanently connected to the areas of your associates' brains they'll let you have access to.
By the 24th Century we won't be Roddenberry's Federation. We'll be the Borg.
Now, if you'd said lunix you might have been right. It's a nice little Un*x clone specifically written for the 8-bit Commodores.