Mr Jobs had a "Whipple", an operation best described as a living autopsy.
Hysterical and/or prone to using overly emotional turns of phrase much?
A "whipple" is best described as a major surgical intervention intended to reduce the risk of mortality from cancer, because unlike "living autopsy," it's at least a little bit accurate. An autopsy is a examination to determine cause of death or extent of disease - a living autopsy would be an exploratory surgery.
It looks and acts like growl. Not that that's a bad thing - it'd be a great feature to have on Linux.
What'd be cool is if they'd support growl's network protocol (or work with them implementing a common one). It'd be nice to have servers send me small status updates this way, rather than through emails or whatever.
Most people aren't in your situation or that of your users. Most people are surfing the web on their personal computers, and so automatic updates will work just peachy for them.
You've got a rather naive view of the business world if you think security will take priority over cost savings without a company being severely burned first.
Yeah, believe me, I've done a lot of corporate consulting, and there's plenty of places with stuff that they'd have to recode to move off IE. Stuff that uses client side VBScript and extensive ActiveX controls. Sometimes it's 3rd party apps from a timesheet system vendor or whatever.
It already works. So why recode just to make the computer geeks happy?
Supposedly, making IE standards compliant is a big drive in IE8. But they still can't let go of the backwards compatibility that would allow people to keep from using their shitty intranet apps.
Seems like a waste of effort. Build new IE with something quick and easy to use, and maintain classic IE for corporate distribution.
And, yeah, it wasn't a suggestion I'd expect to be taken seriously in Redmond. Even if the programmers wanted to do it that way, it'd never fly with the executives.
Just start over. The thing's a chunk of crap that doesn't render stuff properly and must be a nightmare to maintain.
Pick another rendering engine - WebKit or Gecko - and build a browser around it. Maybe provide IE classic for those poor schmucks who are at jobs with crappily coded intranet apps full of client side VBScript, but don't make it the default.
For stuff like antibiotics, allowing random people to decide what they can take when they want has a definite negative effect on the society at large.
It's a big enough problem getting patients to comply with complete antibiotics regimens as it is. Giving everyone the ability to just pop a few for a couple days when they cut themselves or have the flu or whatever is a recipe for massive, widespread increases in resistant bacteria.
Not only that, but mercury was mostly phased out of vaccines 30 to 40 years ago.
No, that's not true at all. The FDA recommended that thiomersol be removed from children's vaccines only in 2001. It's still routinely used in multi-dose bottles of vaccines in the US.
Which isn't to say it's particularly harmful - it's a very small amount of mercury and the mercury in thiomersol is ethylmercury rather than methylmercury. The latter is what you find in industrial pollution that winds up in fish. It seems to be more biologically toxic, pooling in tissues and taking significantly longer to be eliminated from the body.
And every time the recording industry proposes something like this, they can take a nice bath in in it.
Every single one of those fuckers needs to be put to death. They're wasting oxygen, fuel, and food the valuable parts of the species could be consuming.
About your apparent need to deny, out of hand, even a remote possibility that this or any other event is linked to anthropogenic climate change.
You appear to have decided a priori how things are, and seem to go into an intellectual panic when something comes up that challenges you understanding of thing. You're just as bad as you claim the global warming "alarmists" to be, worse perhaps. You're willing to cling to what a tiny fraction of people have to say about the topic because it suits what you want to hear.
You are, so far, the only person who's responded to my post who's caught on to the crux of the question and it's place in the interview, as well as the essential characteristic of Kurzweil's definition of soul in his answer to the question.
Every human has one soul, for a given value of "soul".
Yes, well, duh - if we chose to define the term as "spacial extension" or whatever, yeah. But the term has a specific meaning in this context.
In this situation, Kurzweil is defining "soul" to be "consciousness".
Yes, he is. Which is a non-theistic, reductivist view of the term, as opposed to something like "the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal," which is more likely what the questioner has in mind when posing the question. If they were asking about consciousness, they'd have asked about consciousness and/or self-awareness.
The question makes an assumption which Kurzweil quickly deals with by choosing to redefine the term as a synonym for what's really a different concept for the questioner. Soul doesn't exactly mean consciousness in common parlance.
Yes, in the original (great-grandparent, I think) post, the question was rhetorical.
But the post I was responding to was asking (perhaps rhetorically):
Adding a question mark to any sentence makes it a question?
and I was giving an answer with applicability over a domain of sentences broader than the initial post.
Rhetorical questions are questions that are formulated as "normal" questions - in English we see common "proper" question features present in rhetorical questions (do-support, wh- raising, etc.). Those aren't simple instances of sticking a question mark at the end of a statement, as they involve (visible) syntactic changes (in English). I was treating instances where there is no surface syntax change.
As for your analysis of this kind of pragmatic structure and associated intonational patterns as belonging to the "valley girl" sociolinguistic speech community, I'd say you're mistaken, but you're probably just looking for an excuse to pick on people.
Slashdot Mirror
R is statistics oriented, where Octave and MATLAB are more general mathematical computing environments.
je bent een echte klootzak
Hysterical and/or prone to using overly emotional turns of phrase much?
A "whipple" is best described as a major surgical intervention intended to reduce the risk of mortality from cancer, because unlike "living autopsy," it's at least a little bit accurate. An autopsy is a examination to determine cause of death or extent of disease - a living autopsy would be an exploratory surgery.
It looks and acts like growl. Not that that's a bad thing - it'd be a great feature to have on Linux.
What'd be cool is if they'd support growl's network protocol (or work with them implementing a common one). It'd be nice to have servers send me small status updates this way, rather than through emails or whatever.
Most people aren't in your situation or that of your users. Most people are surfing the web on their personal computers, and so automatic updates will work just peachy for them.
You've got a rather naive view of the business world if you think security will take priority over cost savings without a company being severely burned first.
Yeah, believe me, I've done a lot of corporate consulting, and there's plenty of places with stuff that they'd have to recode to move off IE. Stuff that uses client side VBScript and extensive ActiveX controls. Sometimes it's 3rd party apps from a timesheet system vendor or whatever.
It already works. So why recode just to make the computer geeks happy?
Supposedly, making IE standards compliant is a big drive in IE8. But they still can't let go of the backwards compatibility that would allow people to keep from using their shitty intranet apps.
Seems like a waste of effort. Build new IE with something quick and easy to use, and maintain classic IE for corporate distribution.
And, yeah, it wasn't a suggestion I'd expect to be taken seriously in Redmond. Even if the programmers wanted to do it that way, it'd never fly with the executives.
Just start over. The thing's a chunk of crap that doesn't render stuff properly and must be a nightmare to maintain.
Pick another rendering engine - WebKit or Gecko - and build a browser around it. Maybe provide IE classic for those poor schmucks who are at jobs with crappily coded intranet apps full of client side VBScript, but don't make it the default.
woosh.
For stuff like antibiotics, allowing random people to decide what they can take when they want has a definite negative effect on the society at large.
It's a big enough problem getting patients to comply with complete antibiotics regimens as it is. Giving everyone the ability to just pop a few for a couple days when they cut themselves or have the flu or whatever is a recipe for massive, widespread increases in resistant bacteria.
No, that's not true at all. The FDA recommended that thiomersol be removed from children's vaccines only in 2001. It's still routinely used in multi-dose bottles of vaccines in the US.
Which isn't to say it's particularly harmful - it's a very small amount of mercury and the mercury in thiomersol is ethylmercury rather than methylmercury. The latter is what you find in industrial pollution that winds up in fish. It seems to be more biologically toxic, pooling in tissues and taking significantly longer to be eliminated from the body.
And every time the recording industry proposes something like this, they can take a nice bath in in it.
Every single one of those fuckers needs to be put to death. They're wasting oxygen, fuel, and food the valuable parts of the species could be consuming.
The hyperventilation notwithstanding, what amuses me most is the fact that the project is currently hosted at Google Code.
Try meditation or something.
Man, you're kind of a fucking tool yourself, aren't you?
Truthfully, very little of what he has to say is actually that useful or informative. Dave's kind of an intellectually dishonest ass.
About your apparent need to deny, out of hand, even a remote possibility that this or any other event is linked to anthropogenic climate change.
You appear to have decided a priori how things are, and seem to go into an intellectual panic when something comes up that challenges you understanding of thing. You're just as bad as you claim the global warming "alarmists" to be, worse perhaps. You're willing to cling to what a tiny fraction of people have to say about the topic because it suits what you want to hear.
The OS running on the iPhone vs. the OS running on a Mac is far more than "slightly scaled down."
Have a look at an architectural overview. There's some pretty significant differences between the platforms
ask your mom. I hear she does a lot of gagging on liquid meat.
Oh eat a dick. You stupid hyperventilating slashdot fucks need to fucking relax and back off of the hyperbole.
That's just a link to amazon.
A caveat would be a warning or proviso indicating terms of use, like that you have to pay them $1 million if you don't buy the video from Amazon.
Thank you.
You are, so far, the only person who's responded to my post who's caught on to the crux of the question and it's place in the interview, as well as the essential characteristic of Kurzweil's definition of soul in his answer to the question.
Sure, here you go:http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=soul
Also, speak for yourself - I'm self-conscious while sleeping, for at least part of the time - I have lucid dreams.
Yes, well, duh - if we chose to define the term as "spacial extension" or whatever, yeah. But the term has a specific meaning in this context.
Yes, he is. Which is a non-theistic, reductivist view of the term, as opposed to something like "the spiritual or immaterial part of a human being or animal, regarded as immortal," which is more likely what the questioner has in mind when posing the question. If they were asking about consciousness, they'd have asked about consciousness and/or self-awareness.
The question makes an assumption which Kurzweil quickly deals with by choosing to redefine the term as a synonym for what's really a different concept for the questioner. Soul doesn't exactly mean consciousness in common parlance.
Yes, in the original (great-grandparent, I think) post, the question was rhetorical.
But the post I was responding to was asking (perhaps rhetorically) :
and I was giving an answer with applicability over a domain of sentences broader than the initial post.
Rhetorical questions are questions that are formulated as "normal" questions - in English we see common "proper" question features present in rhetorical questions (do-support, wh- raising, etc.). Those aren't simple instances of sticking a question mark at the end of a statement, as they involve (visible) syntactic changes (in English). I was treating instances where there is no surface syntax change.
As for your analysis of this kind of pragmatic structure and associated intonational patterns as belonging to the "valley girl" sociolinguistic speech community, I'd say you're mistaken, but you're probably just looking for an excuse to pick on people.