It's more like: if you get angry, you're gonna win, but the price in karma won't be worth it.
And that bit about "luminous beings, not this crude matter" etc, that's a few steps more sophistiticated than the philosophy of many modern day religions.
Well that sounds perfectly dreadful
on
Broken Links No More?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Some algorithm cruising through my website, rearranging files as it sees fit?
Sounds like a recipe for utter disaster in the worst case, and a source of mildly embarassing incidents at best.
How about this algorithm just report dead links to a human instead of trying too hard to be clever?
This sounds like someone had to come up with a final project, and settled on this one.
Yes he has the right to do this. I've also got the rights to do alot of things I shouldn't.
You should be outraged because it's a very disturbing outcome of the digital age, that classics of the past will change gradually and people will eventually forget the way things were.
It dilutes our cultural history and we should be outraged, *especially* if he's not going to release the originals.
"But the most noticeable change -- and perhaps one some "Star Wars" diehards will have a tough time stomaching -- is Hayden Christensen (who plays young Anakin in the prequel trilogy) now appearing in the scene where the "force ghosts" of Anakin, Obi Wan, and Yoda smile at Luke."
he stoles it from us, my precious Filthy filthy changeses!!
I think part of what made the LOTR movies so great is that the actors were often working in sets that really seemed like the real thing, especially the great hall of Edoras.
Actors are not machines, though they may try, but it's easier for anyone, even Johhny Depp (whom I consider one of the current greatest actors alive), to pretend to be someone when the physical set matches the scene in their mind. It's a fundamental aspect of our minds that we are influenced by context. Acting school can only diminish, not eliminate that tendency.
This whole blue/green screen thing is a flash in the pan. Eventually Hollywood will figure out that actors aren't at their best unless they are in the real scene.
We should be using our technology to enhance the immersion of actors while they are shooting, not to digitally compensate for the lack of immersion after the fact. Peter Jackson's knowledge of this one simple fact is a large part of what has made him, IMO, one of the greatest directors of our generation.
"You're not gonna feel this too bad, but you're children will. Their lives are gonna suck."
And someone else's children are going to be able to eat.
Globalism is not just about how it negatively affects you. These other countries have cheap labor because they need the money.
And in the long run, these inequalities will even out and we should be better off than we are now, especially if you consider the plight of the other 90% of the world and not just your own.
Globalism is one of those very rare cases in which the priveleged are wise enough to make a short term sacrifice for a longer term gain for the whole of humanity. It doesn't happen enough, at least be glad for this one.
That was a test firing, so it wasn't part of the actual process in bringing men to and from the moon. Safety checks and processes were circumvented (plus pressurized pure oxygen in the capsule!!), because people didn't consider a test firing on the pad dangerous.
Similarly I wouldn't consider the astronauts killed in airplane crashes against them.
But every time the chips were down and men left the launchpad, they got back alive.
Even without considering the technology difference between now and 1960's, this is a relative cakewalk to the miracles they performed in getting Men to and from the moon several times without a single fatality.
And when you consider the difference in materials and instrumentation, it's an even worse comparison.
NASA maybe be underfunded, but they are still screwing up on the things they are doing. We are beyond the point at which bringing an unmanned satellite down from orbit should be troublesome.
As I understand it, Gravity is not inherently more long range than the other forces, rather it doesn't balance itself out locally the way electrostatic forces do.
I'm guessing that if you crammed an earth sized lump of protons together somehow and kept electrons out, the positive field it produced would far exceed the its gravity.
Lacking our silly and irrational hangups about nuclear power, that place is going to be a 1+ billion person industrial powerhouse that'll put the US to shame.
What if it turns to be, dead simple, delicate and horribly inefficient? Why we like to see our own habilities as something so special? Is not specially rational.
I see these abilities as special because I've spent 10+ years studying them, and brain function is unfathomably complex to a single person, not because they are "mine". It is arrogant of us cognitive science researchers to assume we are capable of understanding these processes, not that they are "special".
It will be efficient because we've evolved writing over thousands of years to match our own capabilities.
The idea that we'd develop a particular system of communication for which our brain function is specifically inefficient is the irrational argument.
Slashdot Mirror
How do you spell your last name?
How old are you?
What is your favorite color?
So why are these people mucking about with their miniaturization technology?
Seems a perfectly scalable device already exists.
Some kind of reverse Peltier gizmo can't be used to create a solid-state nuclear battery?
Or does it just not work this way?
If it's for education, I'm sure Bush will find some reason to have it knocked out of orbit.
Thing is, that's not really the philosophy.
It's more like: if you get angry, you're gonna win, but the price in karma won't be worth it.
And that bit about "luminous beings, not this crude matter" etc, that's a few steps more sophistiticated than the philosophy of many modern day religions.
Some algorithm cruising through my website, rearranging files as it sees fit?
Sounds like a recipe for utter disaster in the worst case, and a source of mildly embarassing incidents at best.
How about this algorithm just report dead links to a human instead of trying too hard to be clever?
This sounds like someone had to come up with a final project, and settled on this one.
The one named VOIP?
It's sailed.
Your ticket clearly said 1995.
MIT students don't need to resort to hotmail, even for their spam sandbags.
No, it's because Lucas is sanitizing these movies. Han is no longer the rough bounty hunter he used to be in IV who would shoot first.
Check out this page
/ SW _Changes_18.htm
http://perso.club-internet.fr/willow/SW_Changes
More and more sanitization, it's sickening. Might as well put an Antibacterial sticker on the box.
Yes he has the right to do this. I've also got the rights to do alot of things I shouldn't.
You should be outraged because it's a very disturbing outcome of the digital age, that classics of the past will change gradually and people will eventually forget the way things were.
It dilutes our cultural history and we should be outraged, *especially* if he's not going to release the originals.
"But the most noticeable change -- and perhaps one some "Star Wars" diehards will have a tough time stomaching -- is Hayden Christensen (who plays young Anakin in the prequel trilogy) now appearing in the scene where the "force ghosts" of Anakin, Obi Wan, and Yoda smile at Luke."
he stoles it from us, my precious
Filthy filthy changeses!!
50% of players agree or strongly agree that they play MMORPG's to roleplay.
49% of those players either lied on the survery, or are delusional.
Apart from the fact questions, these are some of the most loaded questions I could imagine asking on a survery. Seems like a waste of time.
Number 5a basically boils down to asking MMORPG players if they enjoy playing them.
What are they going to say to that? no?
cripes.
I think part of what made the LOTR movies so great is that the actors were often working in sets that really seemed like the real thing, especially the great hall of Edoras.
Actors are not machines, though they may try, but it's easier for anyone, even Johhny Depp (whom I consider one of the current greatest actors alive), to pretend to be someone when the physical set matches the scene in their mind. It's a fundamental aspect of our minds that we are influenced by context. Acting school can only diminish, not eliminate that tendency.
This whole blue/green screen thing is a flash in the pan. Eventually Hollywood will figure out that actors aren't at their best unless they are in the real scene.
We should be using our technology to enhance the immersion of actors while they are shooting, not to digitally compensate for the lack of immersion after the fact. Peter Jackson's knowledge of this one simple fact is a large part of what has made him, IMO, one of the greatest directors of our generation.
Next week we'll hear about a wrestling match between a 400 lb gorilla and a 2 year old child.
This map has apparently been added to the Harvard Map Collection. I love it when crusty old institutions fail to take themselves too seriously.
"You're not gonna feel this too bad, but you're children will. Their lives are gonna suck."
And someone else's children are going to be able to eat.
Globalism is not just about how it negatively affects you. These other countries have cheap labor because they need the money.
And in the long run, these inequalities will even out and we should be better off than we are now, especially if you consider the plight of the other 90% of the world and not just your own.
Globalism is one of those very rare cases in which the priveleged are wise enough to make a short term sacrifice for a longer term gain for the whole of humanity. It doesn't happen enough, at least be glad for this one.
So when the next hurricane/tornado comes, the only things left in the house will be my family and my servers. :)
You'd let your family into your server room?
I mean, I know it's a hurricane and all but.... some things you just don't do.
No, I'm not.
That was a test firing, so it wasn't part of the actual process in bringing men to and from the moon. Safety checks and processes were circumvented (plus pressurized pure oxygen in the capsule!!), because people didn't consider a test firing on the pad dangerous.
Similarly I wouldn't consider the astronauts killed in airplane crashes against them.
But every time the chips were down and men left the launchpad, they got back alive.
There's a good reason people are upset.
It's because of Apollo.
Even without considering the technology difference between now and 1960's, this is a relative cakewalk to the miracles they performed in getting Men to and from the moon several times without a single fatality.
And when you consider the difference in materials and instrumentation, it's an even worse comparison.
NASA maybe be underfunded, but they are still screwing up on the things they are doing. We are beyond the point at which bringing an unmanned satellite down from orbit should be troublesome.
As I understand it, Gravity is not inherently more long range than the other forces, rather it doesn't balance itself out locally the way electrostatic forces do.
I'm guessing that if you crammed an earth sized lump of protons together somehow and kept electrons out, the positive field it produced would far exceed the its gravity.
Oh Cmon.
Giving the average person access to a "compound computational device" would be about the biggest waste of resources in human history.
And yet such services are rarely available.
The Postcode system here narrows you down to a few hundred feet, and it does so with math, rather than arbitrarily drawn boundaries.
This implementation would be completely trivial here, but was probably a pain in the ass in the US.
Lacking our silly and irrational hangups about nuclear power, that place is going to be a 1+ billion person industrial powerhouse that'll put the US to shame.
What if it turns to be, dead simple, delicate and horribly inefficient? Why we like to see our own habilities as something so special? Is not specially rational.
I see these abilities as special because I've spent 10+ years studying them, and brain function is unfathomably complex to a single person, not because they are "mine". It is arrogant of us cognitive science researchers to assume we are capable of understanding these processes, not that they are "special".
It will be efficient because we've evolved writing over thousands of years to match our own capabilities.
The idea that we'd develop a particular system of communication for which our brain function is specifically inefficient is the irrational argument.