I'm afraid (of losing karma because) I'm the one to point out that the emperor has no clothes. Quotes from this article as posted at this moment:
"These new provision" "institutions of higher learn" "We've previous discussed"
(At least) Three gross errors in one posted article. And to think that this is about federal funding for public colleges and universities. I humbly submit we need more.
The problem of missing socks is explained by Supersymmetric Sock theory. Actually, I think it can be explained more simply. The perceived excess of right socks is a direct result of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking. (Sorry, physics joke...) Besides, we all know Supersymmetric Sock Theory and Sock String Theory have never resulted in any experimentally verifiable predictions, right???
Yes, I am a "USian" (I think). And I understand, as someone that is generally of a conservative bent, that I won't often agree with your political opinions. But I hope I will give you the opportunity to express them. However, some lies cannot be allowed to stand:
> Also, you're one of the few countries that actively use child soldiers in combat, so please come off the high horse.
Firstly, what do you define to be the age of majority (no longer a child)? Are these child soldiers US soldiers? Or employed by the US military? In what capacity? Where do they come from? How many are there? Where are they currently fighting in the US military or serving in US military uniform? Please, inform us all. Thank you.
(And, BTW, there is one God, so that "god of yours" is _your_ God, too;-) *chuckle* Let me turn off Fox News and turn on good ol' "unbiased" Auntie Beeb right now.
The 80% comment is a form of reverse rhetoric. They are trying by themselves to build unrealistic expectations which they can then knock down to prove the failure of OSS and Linux. That's called a straw-man argument.
This is all they have to wield as a weapon against quality software that challenges the proprietary vendors and shops that pay their bills. It's official. Their efforts are now pathetic.
(Mis-paraphrasing ST5)... but why does intelligence need a compassion vehicle??? (Stealing from another post of mine, so this is probably -1, Redundant.)
This discussion centers around intelligence and empathy/compassion. The fundamental question, which may have been well tackled by solid philosophers (or even theologians) is: Are intelligence and compassion orthogonal? (I don't know.) But what if they _are_ independent? _That_ is why "the singularity" is a scary concept.
Consider human psychopaths. The current level of understanding of their mental and psychological make-up is such, IMHO, that we can reliably deduce that intelligence does _NOT_ without exception produce empathy/compassion.
Case closed. And, for us, badly, may I say, in case of singularity.
Stephen Hawking: "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?"
(BTW, Hawking may turn out to be wrong. Einstein was wrong about QM/hidden variables/Copenhagen interpretation/what would become the Bell inequality, etc.)
Parent is quite insightful, and I heff no mod points!
I don't agree with everything theolein wrote, but:
1.) The singularity is nowhere near (sorry, SkyNet fans). IMHO, our level of creating machine intelligence may soon approach that of a single ant's grey matter processes -- so maybe we can successfully simulate the operation of an ant colony in the future. But there are (how many?) orders of magnitude of complexity between that and basic mammalian mental processes. And those are far below human mental processes. Have fun stormin' the castle!
2.) A discussion in a thread(s) above centers around intelligence and empathy/compassion. The fundamental question, which may have been well tackled by solid philosophers (or even theologians) is: Are intelligence and compassion orthogonal? (I don't know.) But what if they _are_ independent? _That_ is why "the singularity" is a scary concept.
Consider human psychopaths. The current level of understanding of their mental and psychological make-up is such, IMHO, that we can reliably deduce that intelligence does _NOT_ without exception produce empathy/compassion.
That's why it's a good thing that "the singularity" is sci-fi only. For how long? Maybe forever. Maybe for centuries or a century. I think I'll be dead if/when it happens, thank God.
(In sincerity, my warmest thoughts and most heartfelt prayers are given for Mr. Fossett and his family. Steve is a true explorer-hero to many people. I, for one, admire him.)
> To be fair, most missing persons are hiding in bus terminals and seedy motels.
Oblig. Futurama -->
"Bigfoot populations require vast amounts of land to remain elusive in. They typically dwell just behind rocks but are also sometimes playful... bounding into thick fogs and out-of-focus areas."
(God bless Steve and his family, and return him home safely:)
It's _the_ classic grad. level E&M textbook. Generations of physicists have learned much from (and dreaded exams on) this text. My old copy of Jackson had no info on numerical solutions, but I'm guessing you need some theoretical background, not a canned math method/computer code.
If you didn't know _anything_ about this textbook beforehand, you may not posess the background you need to solve the problem you're working on.... Sorry to be so blunt.
See, that corrupt Bush administration is up to their _evil_ tricks again!!! I can't believe the guile of that band of crooks! How dare they... subvert the freedom of... the average American... financial services client.... Preparing the country for... a biological cri... crisis....
"Try taking a drink from the firehose on this one."
Thanks, but my firehose drinking days are over. Last time I tried it, I got plastered against a brick wall. The back of my head hit first. Not fun.;)
"You'll see that while the main link is still there, he DID include a link back to ZDnet that got edited out!"
Then I agree with the AC who replied to you, saying, "my compliments to kdawson for showing the way and doing some actual editing." Roland isn't very reformed, but the/. editor(s) are. I, for one, welcome our new Roland-blog-post-editing/. editors....
Well, I guess if you're dogmatic about a subject, you should expect to blow your whole leg off someday....
This is the first story of Roland's that, in my opinion: 1.) Isn't blog whoring (no link back to ZDnet blog, although his home page _is_ pri - midi); and 2.) Is a story of real scientific interest; and 3.) Isn't terribly mis-represented in his summary. So even _I_ won't tag this story.... Isn't that ironic? Don't 'cha think?
It surprises me how a scientific blogger could get the minor, or sometimes major, technical details of the story he posts about wrong, but at times Roland will. But not this time:^) Good story, Roland!
Seriously, WheelDweller is on the right track. See his post here for a good thought.
I contend that a relatively _HUGE_ friggin' moon is required to stimulate the evolution of "life as we know it," due to the effect of tidal forces in "stirring up" the oceans, where life "as we know it" inevitably must begin. And we know that a moon as large as ours is, to say the least, unusual. And that's only one factor. Are there (many) more?
When I was a child, I thought like a child, etc. And I thought there _MUST_ be other intelligent life in the universe. But now I'm a man (who's putting away childish things), and I think I better understand the real truth. Part of that truth is that Fermi may have been horrifyingly correct. We may be alone in the universe. As I said, horrifying -- and humbling.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm afraid (of losing karma because) I'm the one to point out that the emperor has no clothes. Quotes from this article as posted at this moment:
"These new provision"
"institutions of higher learn"
"We've previous discussed"
(At least) Three gross errors in one posted article. And to think that this is about federal funding for public colleges and universities. I humbly submit we need more.
Excelsior! (chuckle)
Recommended tags:
;)
gentooisdyingnetcraftconfirmsit
robbinstannedrestedandready
Please reply, adding more (hilarity) as needed
I knew I had seen something like this in an article I read... THIRTY YEARS AGO...
http://amasci.com/amateur/sciamdx.html
Search for "Chemical reactions, oscillating".
Sorry, kiddies. Been there, done that. Still interesting, though.
"... a better Internet traffic algorithms."
Huh?
FWIW, I tagged this article "perl6forever"
Great minds think alike, eh? (That way at least the two of us can feel superior....):
... was the name of an exhibit at the 1939 New York World's Fair? Whaaaa....???
Oh, you mean "Futurama...."
1. Witten's Dog (I think it was the neutrino that tasted like grape, right?)
2. (Hermes) Look it up, ya lazy bum!: http://www.peelified.com/cgi-bin/Futurama/3-000058-1/ (read down a bit; further info at http://www.mathsci.appstate.edu/~sjg/futurama/cubes.html )
3. Aleph naught
I've no mod points. Parent links to reasonably informative article. Thx.
Fry: Well, so what if I love a robot? It's not hurting anybody.
Hermes: My God! He never took middle school hygiene. He never saw the propaganda film!
And I have no mod points. Damn you, /. moderation distribution!
Funniest post I've read in a good while. Extra style points for the '*' -- reminds me of:
Zapp Branigan: People of Earth.... Shhhhhh!
> with Super Slut Cum Fest #9 sandwiched between Howard the Duck and Sleepless in Seattle
;-P
Oh my God, man, have you no shame?!?!?!....
You rented "Howard the Duck?????"
Please mod parent up ;-)
Yes, I am a "USian" (I think). And I understand, as someone that is generally of a conservative bent, that I won't often agree with your political opinions. But I hope I will give you the opportunity to express them. However, some lies cannot be allowed to stand:
;-) *chuckle* Let me turn off Fox News and turn on good ol' "unbiased" Auntie Beeb right now.
> Also, you're one of the few countries that actively use child soldiers in combat, so please come off the high horse.
Firstly, what do you define to be the age of majority (no longer a child)? Are these child soldiers US soldiers? Or employed by the US military? In what capacity? Where do they come from? How many are there? Where are they currently fighting in the US military or serving in US military uniform? Please, inform us all. Thank you.
(And, BTW, there is one God, so that "god of yours" is _your_ God, too
The 80% comment is a form of reverse rhetoric. They are trying by themselves to build unrealistic expectations which they can then knock down to prove the failure of OSS and Linux. That's called a straw-man argument.
This is all they have to wield as a weapon against quality software that challenges the proprietary vendors and shops that pay their bills. It's official. Their efforts are now pathetic.
(Mis-paraphrasing ST5) ... but why does intelligence need a compassion vehicle??? (Stealing from another post of mine, so this is probably -1, Redundant.)
This discussion centers around intelligence and empathy/compassion. The fundamental question, which may have been well tackled by solid philosophers (or even theologians) is: Are intelligence and compassion orthogonal? (I don't know.) But what if they _are_ independent? _That_ is why "the singularity" is a scary concept.
Consider human psychopaths. The current level of understanding of their mental and psychological make-up is such, IMHO, that we can reliably deduce that intelligence does _NOT_ without exception produce empathy/compassion.
Case closed. And, for us, badly, may I say, in case of singularity.
Stephen Hawking: "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?"
(BTW, Hawking may turn out to be wrong. Einstein was wrong about QM/hidden variables/Copenhagen interpretation/what would become the Bell inequality, etc.)
(Did I say that with enough conviction?)
Parent is quite insightful, and I heff no mod points!
I don't agree with everything theolein wrote, but:
1.) The singularity is nowhere near (sorry, SkyNet fans). IMHO, our level of creating machine intelligence may soon approach that of a single ant's grey matter processes -- so maybe we can successfully simulate the operation of an ant colony in the future. But there are (how many?) orders of magnitude of complexity between that and basic mammalian mental processes. And those are far below human mental processes. Have fun stormin' the castle!
2.) A discussion in a thread(s) above centers around intelligence and empathy/compassion. The fundamental question, which may have been well tackled by solid philosophers (or even theologians) is: Are intelligence and compassion orthogonal? (I don't know.) But what if they _are_ independent? _That_ is why "the singularity" is a scary concept.
Consider human psychopaths. The current level of understanding of their mental and psychological make-up is such, IMHO, that we can reliably deduce that intelligence does _NOT_ without exception produce empathy/compassion.
That's why it's a good thing that "the singularity" is sci-fi only. For how long? Maybe forever. Maybe for centuries or a century. I think I'll be dead if/when it happens, thank God.
(In sincerity, my warmest thoughts and most heartfelt prayers are given for Mr. Fossett and his family. Steve is a true explorer-hero to many people. I, for one, admire him.)
:)
> To be fair, most missing persons are hiding in bus terminals and seedy motels.
Oblig. Futurama -->
"Bigfoot populations require vast amounts of land to remain elusive in. They typically dwell just behind rocks but are also sometimes playful... bounding into thick fogs and out-of-focus areas."
(God bless Steve and his family, and return him home safely
For any questions about E&M wave equation solutions -- standing, boundary conditions, free propogation, etc., -- get a copy of this text:
h ird-David-Jackson/dp/047130932X
http://www.amazon.com/Classical-Electrodynamics-T
It's _the_ classic grad. level E&M textbook. Generations of physicists have learned much from (and dreaded exams on) this text. My old copy of Jackson had no info on numerical solutions, but I'm guessing you need some theoretical background, not a canned math method/computer code.
If you didn't know _anything_ about this textbook beforehand, you may not posess the background you need to solve the problem you're working on.... Sorry to be so blunt.
See, that corrupt Bush administration is up to their _evil_ tricks again!!! I can't believe the guile of that band of crooks! How dare they... subvert the freedom of... the average American... financial services client.... Preparing the country for... a biological cri... crisis....
Sorry, habit, never mind.
"Try taking a drink from the firehose on this one."
;)
/. editor(s) are. I, for one, welcome our new Roland-blog-post-editing /. editors....
Thanks, but my firehose drinking days are over. Last time I tried it, I got plastered against a brick wall. The back of my head hit first. Not fun.
"You'll see that while the main link is still there, he DID include a link back to ZDnet that got edited out!"
Then I agree with the AC who replied to you, saying, "my compliments to kdawson for showing the way and doing some actual editing." Roland isn't very reformed, but the
Well, I guess if you're dogmatic about a subject, you should expect to blow your whole leg off someday....
:^) Good story, Roland!
This is the first story of Roland's that, in my opinion: 1.) Isn't blog whoring (no link back to ZDnet blog, although his home page _is_ pri - midi); and 2.) Is a story of real scientific interest; and 3.) Isn't terribly mis-represented in his summary. So even _I_ won't tag this story.... Isn't that ironic? Don't 'cha think?
It surprises me how a scientific blogger could get the minor, or sometimes major, technical details of the story he posts about wrong, but at times Roland will. But not this time
Thanks, Tom ;)
Seriously, WheelDweller is on the right track. See his post here for a good thought.
I contend that a relatively _HUGE_ friggin' moon is required to stimulate the evolution of "life as we know it," due to the effect of tidal forces in "stirring up" the oceans, where life "as we know it" inevitably must begin. And we know that a moon as large as ours is, to say the least, unusual. And that's only one factor. Are there (many) more?
When I was a child, I thought like a child, etc. And I thought there _MUST_ be other intelligent life in the universe. But now I'm a man (who's putting away childish things), and I think I better understand the real truth. Part of that truth is that Fermi may have been horrifyingly correct. We may be alone in the universe. As I said, horrifying -- and humbling.