The classical manner of dealing with stupid systems like that is adding a counter to your password. So if your password is "blA3r1gh4", your next password is "blA3r1gh5", then "blA3r1gh6", etc.
So, in other words, you have a complete lack of self control and are unable to motivate yourself to keep yourself healthy.
Losing weight is stupidly easy: eat less, exercise more. So you have a bad ankle, talk to your doctor to come up with an exercise routine that doesn't involve massive amounts of walking.
30 minutes a day. That's it. If you can't do that, then yes, it's a self control issue.
You're basically on the right track. Walking is a good way to keep reasonably fit.
But it isn't just as easy as eating less, it's often more effective to eat better than to eat less -- having regular meals (and not skipping meals), getting enough dietary fibers, maintaining a level blood sugar, etc.
In fact, eating too little will trigger a starvation "mode" in your metabolism, which in turn will make you add even more weight.
The Planck telescope is the smallest telescope that, according to our current understanding of nature, it is meaningful to speak about. This property sets the Planck telescope apart as the natural unit (also called Planck unit) for telescopes.
I think the technical term is telescope quantization. Telescopes can only exist as integer multiples of the Planck telescope.
Problem is that birds learn. It's easy to make them run away from something, but if nothing bad happens to them, they'll eventually stop running and ignore it.
Also, jet engines already make a pretty loud and conspicuous noise.
I don't quite agree about their speed. Most people drive cars in cities (because heh, that's where most people live). Even without the ubiquitous traffic jams, the speed limits are usually within horse speeds, since there's streets in all directions and pedestrians that leave a unsanitary carcasses if you run them over, and whatnot.
Indeed. It's all Duke Nukem Forever's fault. Because that is no longer almost to be released, the entire structure of stuff that happens after hell freezes over is unraveling.
I switch back and forth from Slackware to Gentoo. Sometimes, I get a whim and switch from Slack to Gentoo, I use it for a while, 6 months tops, and then I grow unhappy and realize that I loved Slackware and switch back again and am truly happy, until a year later when I rinse and repeat with Gentoo.
But (most) humans have this innate condition where taking another life weighs on them somewhat - even most veterans and soldiers I know get twitchy about having to shoot at another person. A robot removes this and replaces it with cold logic.
In defense of logic, it is only as cold as the person who implemented it.
I prefer to work with intuitive models. My "ritual" is as follows:
1. Ponder the problem. Not too hard. Just get a feel for how to solve it. 2. Prototype a solution in some readable language (python?). 3a. If the prototype is horribly broken, scrap it and go back to step 2. 3b. Otherwise, create final solution from lessons learned from prototyping.
A lot of people draw diagrams and flow charts and stuff. But that is stupid and too abstracted from the computer to be all that useful. By making a prototype, you're effectively making an interactive diagram/flowchart. It takes about the same time, and any problems will be immediately obvious.
1. NVIDIA graphics card drivers weren't installed because they were proprietary. Come on. Even then, dragging windows around and typing into text boxes had a minor delay that didn't feel natural.
Since when did Microsoft start shipping NVIDIA drivers with their Windows releases, anyways?
Did an analysis of the figures, mostly because there was none to be found. There's actually a pretty striking exponential relationship between speed and adoption. Here's a graph:
Problem is, it's not even given there is a correlation. The sample size isn't terribly large to begin with. By only looking at the top browsers, they're selecting away lots of outliers that may or may not have terrible performance.
And they produce no statistical analysis of how strong the correlation is.
Well, to be fair, you could use a trademarked name to launch some form of elaborate smear campaign.
(1) You write a program called "The vehemently evil project, closely associated with Hitler and Firefox;" plaster 50 ft advertisements about it in New York. (2) ??? (3) Profit!
If Firefox isn't a trademark, there is little to nothing they can do about it. If it is, they can sue the crap out of the perpetrators of the smear campaign.
My problem with web 2.0 is that while many of the web 1.0 features we used to have may be doable, precious few sites actually take the time to do it. The primary issue with web 2.0 is the lack of consistency. It feels like playing the lottery when using standard browser features, like maybe this time you've entered a page that actually supports them.
That would eliminate a whole lot of what we call "progress" in technology and culture.
Sometimes, you don't realize something is "broken" until somebody comes along and "fixes" it.
Know what? I like people who fix what isn't broken.
Though aimlessly adopting any new technology that comes along isn't progress.
I'm appending a list of browser features mutilated by web 2.0:
The back, reload and forward buttons
Navigation with the cursor keys.
Bookmarking
Searching in pages
When every webpage has it's own conventions for what happens when you press a key, you haven't moved forward, you've moved into chaos. Nowadays, what happens when you press a key or click on an element is an entirely arbitrary matter in the hands of the website designer, and completely different from site to site.
Navigating webpages used to be difficult enough when all links were immediately available. Now, adding to the pain, you have to search page elements that are only loaded if you perform some arcane voodoo ritual that the designer figured decided was how the page elements should work.
It's not that web 2.0 pages have a new interface that's different from the old, it's that every single web 2.0 page has it's own conventions.
Slashdot Mirror
N/t
The classical manner of dealing with stupid systems like that is adding a counter to your password. So if your password is "blA3r1gh4", your next password is "blA3r1gh5", then "blA3r1gh6", etc.
So, in other words, you have a complete lack of self control and are unable to motivate yourself to keep yourself healthy.
Losing weight is stupidly easy: eat less, exercise more. So you have a bad ankle, talk to your doctor to come up with an exercise routine that doesn't involve massive amounts of walking.
30 minutes a day. That's it. If you can't do that, then yes, it's a self control issue.
You're basically on the right track. Walking is a good way to keep reasonably fit.
But it isn't just as easy as eating less, it's often more effective to eat better than to eat less -- having regular meals (and not skipping meals), getting enough dietary fibers, maintaining a level blood sugar, etc.
In fact, eating too little will trigger a starvation "mode" in your metabolism, which in turn will make you add even more weight.
What the hell is a memristor, you ask?
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods?!
Yes, but do they run Linux?
The Planck telescope is the smallest telescope that, according to our current understanding of nature, it is meaningful to speak about. This property sets the Planck telescope apart as the natural unit (also called Planck unit) for telescopes.
I think the technical term is telescope quantization. Telescopes can only exist as integer multiples of the Planck telescope.
Politicians don't shed their genes, they shed their genitalia.
So can I get some cheap fishing line that doesn't break now?
It'll still tangle into a bucky-knot the moment it leaves your eyesight.
In base 2, it's 1111[42,643,792 more 1:s]1111.
In base 16 it's 0xffff[2,665,229 more f:s]ffff.
Problem is that birds learn. It's easy to make them run away from something, but if nothing bad happens to them, they'll eventually stop running and ignore it.
Also, jet engines already make a pretty loud and conspicuous noise.
Obligatory PHD Comics reference: If TV Science was more like REAL Science.
I don't quite agree about their speed. Most people drive cars in cities (because heh, that's where most people live). Even without the ubiquitous traffic jams, the speed limits are usually within horse speeds, since there's streets in all directions and pedestrians that leave a unsanitary carcasses if you run them over, and whatnot.
How the hell did it get all the way up there?
Indeed. It's all Duke Nukem Forever's fault. Because that is no longer almost to be released, the entire structure of stuff that happens after hell freezes over is unraveling.
I switch back and forth from Slackware to Gentoo. Sometimes, I get a whim and switch from Slack to Gentoo, I use it for a while, 6 months tops, and then I grow unhappy and realize that I loved Slackware and switch back again and am truly happy, until a year later when I rinse and repeat with Gentoo.
But (most) humans have this innate condition where taking another life weighs on them somewhat - even most veterans and soldiers I know get twitchy about having to shoot at another person. A robot removes this and replaces it with cold logic.
In defense of logic, it is only as cold as the person who implemented it.
I prefer to work with intuitive models. My "ritual" is as follows:
1. Ponder the problem. Not too hard. Just get a feel for how to solve it.
2. Prototype a solution in some readable language (python?).
3a. If the prototype is horribly broken, scrap it and go back to step 2.
3b. Otherwise, create final solution from lessons learned from prototyping.
A lot of people draw diagrams and flow charts and stuff. But that is stupid and too abstracted from the computer to be all that useful. By making a prototype, you're effectively making an interactive diagram/flowchart. It takes about the same time, and any problems will be immediately obvious.
This is my zone too. I can code earlier, but anything done before 9 PM will lack inspiration.
1. NVIDIA graphics card drivers weren't installed because they were proprietary. Come on. Even then, dragging windows around and typing into text boxes had a minor delay that didn't feel natural.
Since when did Microsoft start shipping NVIDIA drivers with their Windows releases, anyways?
Einsteinian relativity gets the blame for time.
Quantum physics has enough to worry about as it is.
Did an analysis of the figures, mostly because there was none to be found. There's actually a pretty striking exponential relationship between speed and adoption. Here's a graph:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_lhmAHZ1VwRE/Sg2k-WLthEI/AAAAAAAAACk/iub7fBGjcfQ/s1600-h/results.png
Problem is, it's not even given there is a correlation. The sample size isn't terribly large to begin with. By only looking at the top browsers, they're selecting away lots of outliers that may or may not have terrible performance.
And they produce no statistical analysis of how strong the correlation is.
Well, to be fair, you could use a trademarked name to launch some form of elaborate smear campaign.
(1) You write a program called "The vehemently evil project, closely associated with Hitler and Firefox;" plaster 50 ft advertisements about it in New York.
(2) ???
(3) Profit!
If Firefox isn't a trademark, there is little to nothing they can do about it. If it is, they can sue the crap out of the perpetrators of the smear campaign.
My problem with web 2.0 is that while many of the web 1.0 features we used to have may be doable, precious few sites actually take the time to do it. The primary issue with web 2.0 is the lack of consistency. It feels like playing the lottery when using standard browser features, like maybe this time you've entered a page that actually supports them.
That would eliminate a whole lot of what we call "progress" in technology and culture.
Sometimes, you don't realize something is "broken" until somebody comes along and "fixes" it.
Know what? I like people who fix what isn't broken.
Though aimlessly adopting any new technology that comes along isn't progress.
I'm appending a list of browser features mutilated by web 2.0:
When every webpage has it's own conventions for what happens when you press a key, you haven't moved forward, you've moved into chaos. Nowadays, what happens when you press a key or click on an element is an entirely arbitrary matter in the hands of the website designer, and completely different from site to site.
Navigating webpages used to be difficult enough when all links were immediately available. Now, adding to the pain, you have to search page elements that are only loaded if you perform some arcane voodoo ritual that the designer figured decided was how the page elements should work.
It's not that web 2.0 pages have a new interface that's different from the old, it's that every single web 2.0 page has it's own conventions.