I prefer to be able to do so as well, but it's hardly a dealbreaker for me. Instead if I think there's any chance I'm going to be listening to mp3s on it for an entire day I just toss a charged external battery into my pocket.
That's funny, I'm a linux user with netflix as well and was all set to suggest the Roku before I saw you plug it. That little box has been surprisingly useful for the price.
I don't know if it's so much that they lack education in open source, or if it's just that they don't care. There's a whole lot of people who just want their computer to work, and don't care about the code or philosophy which got it there. With all the talk of "this is the year of linux on the desktop", that's what you get. The average person is never going to have philosophical concerns about how their computers were created. You can lead them to linux if the system does what they need it to, you can't lead them to care.
It seems in large part that your concept of someone with self esteem is a person who has a knee-jerk reaction to whatever the majority of people are doing. It's a phone with a nice mp3 player and some other little features, using or not using it says nothing about a person.
Well said! Though I will say it's getting there, little by little. I managed through a blackout a couple weeks back on solar power for a few small important devices like my cellphone. It's not all it could be, but that's more than I could have done ten years ago for the price.
It is said that scientists don't change their mind, a new theory comes out and eventually all of the old fogies holding onto the outdated theories retire or die, and are replaced with people who follow the new theories.
It might be just as easily said that there's two main reasons for this. First, that people want a legacy which shows them right. "Wow, I sure wasted my life" isn't a good epitaph. It might be quite possible that if someone didn't have the threat of a dead end always looming, they could just admit they were wrong and apply all the accumulated knowledge they have to the new theory. Second, a lot of this simply comes from the brain failing just as much as any other organ when it grows older. Just as someone with an old heart might find himself able to run again with a new, someone with rejuvenated neurons might suddenly start looking at old data in a new light.
The m-prize funds have to all be documented, the pills are pure profit. And almost nobody ever stops taking them because of lack of evidence, or even evidence that they cause harm. Look at anti-oxidants, how long have they been shown to be pretty much worthless. The average person on the street will still grab anything with that label attached though.
My memory is a bit fuzzy on it, but I think the results are that peak physical fitness increases health but decreases both average and maximum lifespan. The whole candle that burns twice as bright thing. Again, this is pretty fuzzy in my mind, but I think that in the resveratrol mouse studies the sedentary resveratrol mice outlives those that were given both resveratrol and lots of exercise.
I think the biggest is that he could make a bundle at this point by marketing a line of anti-aging, powdered, snakeoil but instead just complains about them. Though he does have book sales and media appearances, neither are really big money makers that selling capsules would be.
For the memories, I expect there's a huge amount of wiggle room. Much of what we think of as long term memories are more akin to a lossily compressed memory of having a memory rather than what was originally there when the transfer from short to long first happened. I suspect one wouldn't really notice a fairly large amount of their older memories getting a bit degraded.
The increases in human lifespan have been to the average, both the maximum lifespan and progression of various markers of aging are unchanged. The usual way to increase maximum lifespan, however, does usually alter the rate of development as well. In those cases, yes, the age of puperty is shifted upward.
In mice at least, there seems to be no problem. Those who've made it past the maximum lifespan point seem to usually have much better long and short term memory than the controls did much earlier. At least going by my own somewhat hazy memory of the subject.
Sadly, the brain ages in the same way as any other part of the body. Even if you could keep it healthy, it'd still almost certainly die off of old age pretty soon after, and probably with senile dementia as an extra gift.
But I still find it more stable than 4.0 of about two months ago. That was the time I decided to just run off 4.1 checkouts, and I haven't had anything close enough to being a showstopper to switch back.
Compassion, empathy, pride in something a lot of us do for a living. Asking that question here is like asking Hank Hill why he cares about someone not using propane.
But they offered a helpful suggestion on the site for how to run it on a mac! Remove the operating system and install windows, and it should work! That got me blinking in confusion a few times.
Seriously. I used to have a 'really' free schedule too, and while it's tempting to keep bringing it up...people don't like it. It's a bit like walking up to someone without legs, and uninvited telling them about how much you love the feel of grass between your toes as you take a walk in the park. Usually the people with jobs that take up a lot of their lives are aware that it sucks, are doing it for a reason(need to support their family), and are usually not thrilled with the situation but are trying as hard as they can to keep up with it.
It's bad. Imagine every person in your life, constantly acting conspiratorial and weird around you. Loved ones no longer being around, or people refusing to let you see them, or telling you that they've been long dead. It's a living hell for a lot of people.
I'd love to pay for my tv,music, and movies. Can you convince someone to sell them to me? I buy when I can, even if with some trepedation about supporting DRM in the process. But it's still fairly common to not have any way to get a product than by downloading. Limited release movies, in particular, are high on that list. They're often better than the mainstream, never make it past festivals, and then just fade away instead of reaching dvd release.
Slashdot Mirror
I prefer to be able to do so as well, but it's hardly a dealbreaker for me. Instead if I think there's any chance I'm going to be listening to mp3s on it for an entire day I just toss a charged external battery into my pocket.
That's funny, I'm a linux user with netflix as well and was all set to suggest the Roku before I saw you plug it. That little box has been surprisingly useful for the price.
The slippery slope argument is listed as a logical fallacy for a reason.
I don't know if it's so much that they lack education in open source, or if it's just that they don't care. There's a whole lot of people who just want their computer to work, and don't care about the code or philosophy which got it there. With all the talk of "this is the year of linux on the desktop", that's what you get. The average person is never going to have philosophical concerns about how their computers were created. You can lead them to linux if the system does what they need it to, you can't lead them to care.
Point is, nobody with a little bit of self-esteem
It seems in large part that your concept of someone with self esteem is a person who has a knee-jerk reaction to whatever the majority of people are doing. It's a phone with a nice mp3 player and some other little features, using or not using it says nothing about a person.
Well said! Though I will say it's getting there, little by little. I managed through a blackout a couple weeks back on solar power for a few small important devices like my cellphone. It's not all it could be, but that's more than I could have done ten years ago for the price.
It is said that scientists don't change their mind, a new theory comes out and eventually all of the old fogies holding onto the outdated theories retire or die, and are replaced with people who follow the new theories.
It might be just as easily said that there's two main reasons for this. First, that people want a legacy which shows them right. "Wow, I sure wasted my life" isn't a good epitaph. It might be quite possible that if someone didn't have the threat of a dead end always looming, they could just admit they were wrong and apply all the accumulated knowledge they have to the new theory. Second, a lot of this simply comes from the brain failing just as much as any other organ when it grows older. Just as someone with an old heart might find himself able to run again with a new, someone with rejuvenated neurons might suddenly start looking at old data in a new light.
The m-prize funds have to all be documented, the pills are pure profit. And almost nobody ever stops taking them because of lack of evidence, or even evidence that they cause harm. Look at anti-oxidants, how long have they been shown to be pretty much worthless. The average person on the street will still grab anything with that label attached though.
My memory is a bit fuzzy on it, but I think the results are that peak physical fitness increases health but decreases both average and maximum lifespan. The whole candle that burns twice as bright thing. Again, this is pretty fuzzy in my mind, but I think that in the resveratrol mouse studies the sedentary resveratrol mice outlives those that were given both resveratrol and lots of exercise.
Not sure if a martyr complex shows much respect for life. It's still glorifying death, even if it's a death you chose for yourself.
You might say the same thing about living to be 100. People, in general, seem to be very good at pretending they're immune to accidents.
I think the biggest is that he could make a bundle at this point by marketing a line of anti-aging, powdered, snakeoil but instead just complains about them. Though he does have book sales and media appearances, neither are really big money makers that selling capsules would be.
For the memories, I expect there's a huge amount of wiggle room. Much of what we think of as long term memories are more akin to a lossily compressed memory of having a memory rather than what was originally there when the transfer from short to long first happened. I suspect one wouldn't really notice a fairly large amount of their older memories getting a bit degraded.
The increases in human lifespan have been to the average, both the maximum lifespan and progression of various markers of aging are unchanged. The usual way to increase maximum lifespan, however, does usually alter the rate of development as well. In those cases, yes, the age of puperty is shifted upward.
In mice at least, there seems to be no problem. Those who've made it past the maximum lifespan point seem to usually have much better long and short term memory than the controls did much earlier. At least going by my own somewhat hazy memory of the subject.
Egg on our face for assuming innocence until guilt had been proven?
Sadly, the brain ages in the same way as any other part of the body. Even if you could keep it healthy, it'd still almost certainly die off of old age pretty soon after, and probably with senile dementia as an extra gift.
But I still find it more stable than 4.0 of about two months ago. That was the time I decided to just run off 4.1 checkouts, and I haven't had anything close enough to being a showstopper to switch back.
Compassion, empathy, pride in something a lot of us do for a living. Asking that question here is like asking Hank Hill why he cares about someone not using propane.
But they offered a helpful suggestion on the site for how to run it on a mac! Remove the operating system and install windows, and it should work! That got me blinking in confusion a few times.
It thought it was a bit odd in this day and age to not even acknowledge that linux exists.
Yep. I could buy one on a whim, but only because I have apartment living money.
Seriously. I used to have a 'really' free schedule too, and while it's tempting to keep bringing it up...people don't like it. It's a bit like walking up to someone without legs, and uninvited telling them about how much you love the feel of grass between your toes as you take a walk in the park. Usually the people with jobs that take up a lot of their lives are aware that it sucks, are doing it for a reason(need to support their family), and are usually not thrilled with the situation but are trying as hard as they can to keep up with it.
It's bad. Imagine every person in your life, constantly acting conspiratorial and weird around you. Loved ones no longer being around, or people refusing to let you see them, or telling you that they've been long dead. It's a living hell for a lot of people.
I'd love to pay for my tv,music, and movies. Can you convince someone to sell them to me? I buy when I can, even if with some trepedation about supporting DRM in the process. But it's still fairly common to not have any way to get a product than by downloading. Limited release movies, in particular, are high on that list. They're often better than the mainstream, never make it past festivals, and then just fade away instead of reaching dvd release.