You don't seem to have fully read the very article you reference as proof of your intended point, rather it appears you cherry-picked what confirmed your bias. Did you read this paragraph?
If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do), then you still should agree that we are much better off having broken the hockey stick. Misinformation can do real harm, because it distorts predictions. Suppose, for example, that future measurements in the years 2005-2015 show a clear and distinct global cooling trend. (It could happen.) If we mistakenly took the hockey stick seriously--that is, if we believed that natural fluctuations in climate are small--then we might conclude (mistakenly) that the cooling could not be just a random fluctuation on top of a long-term warming trend, since according to the hockey stick, such fluctuations are negligible. And that might lead in turn to the mistaken conclusion that global warming predictions are a lot of hooey. If, on the other hand, we reject the hockey stick, and recognize that natural fluctuations can be large, then we will not be misled by a few years of random cooling.
Or what about the final paragraph?
A phony hockey stick is more dangerous than a broken one--if we know it is broken. It is our responsibility as scientists to look at the data in an unbiased way, and draw whatever conclusions follow. When we discover a mistake, we admit it, learn from it, and perhaps discover once again the value of caution.
The author of your "evidence" doesn't even share your conspiratorial conclusions.
Look, folks, Slashdot has its share of crazies, too!
... saddled us with all that Expanded/Extended Memory stuff as well as other sins.
Yeah, I was thinking of that specifically when I compared the two. Were it not for IBM's choice, though, one of the companies that once employed me, Quarterdeck, might never have even existed. Well, at least its first product never would have.
Was the 8088 in use elsewhere before IBM picked it up? I wonder if perhaps both of them weren't quite shipping when IBM made the decision? Got a published timeline from a mag or site article?
It was also the story of Motorola back in the early Eighties, when IBM was developing that first Personal Computer: the story I always heard was that IBM chose the Intel line over Motorola's more capable 68K series simply because Intel had secondary sourcing and could guarantee volume, but Motorola was the sole source and couldn't.
I've been saying the same thing for decades (as have others), but why would anyone heed the words of someone who's neither a celebrity nor a published expert? I could live with being ignored if the message finally got heard because of Hawking... but I doubt it will. Most humans plan no further than satiating their stomachs and gonads. Space exploration doesn't improve the majority's prospects for either, so....
I couldn't/can't even half-listen; it's so all-or-nothing it's maddening. Well, at least when I'm faced with the need to attempt it. The rest of the time I'm fine with it, even though it also guarantees I read slower than everyone else. I'm also a wicked proofreader and likely have a superior vocabulary because of it. Yin and Yang....
What if the visual pattern recognition is actually happening all or in part in the auditory processing center? We think we're "hearing" the words, but what if that isn't what's happening? Ever hear of synesthesia?
The visual dictionary idea rebuts the theory that our brain 'sounds out' words each time we see them.
No, it most certainly DOES NOT rebut that theory, for two reasons:
(1) Homo sapiens is not a homogenous species; there are mutations - including neurological ones - and divergent evolutionary paths being explored with every single new birth; and
(2) I am living fucking proof that at least some humans have brains that do in fact sound out words, and quite literally so.
In order to communicate with a written language, I am forced to subvocalize - literally hear the words in my head - every bit of text that I read as well as write. What's more, I am unable to listen to any other spoken words while I am involved in this subvocalization process. This was quite destructive especially during schooling, since I was unable to take notes in class, and even recording lectures for later transcription was impractical.
My best theory, lacking the results of an fMRI experiment to prove it, is that this subvocalization is actually re-purposing the auditory processing center for written language, and in doing so makes it temporarily unavailable for its original purpose.
So, the genius who thinks the tinkering of these neuroscientists disproves the existence of alternative language processing methods is not so bright after all. I welcome that fMRI experiment to rebut the rebuttal.
Both the CPU and chipset are not socketed. If the CPU fails, you're out the entire board, unless you have truly l33t skills and equipment handy. That makes the motherboard an even bigger single point of failure.
I've seen jars that were deliberately designed to discourage effective use of utensils to remove stubborn product remnant. Companies willing to do that are not going to care about selling novelty. Novelty is a fad, and they're in it for the long haul. Containers that guarantee a small amount of waste, multiplied by the millions, are exactly what they want.
... could be used to coat the inside of bottles and jars to help consumers get all of the food inside....
This was written by someone who clearly doesn't understand the motivations in play in the corporate world. These manufacturers don't want you to be able to fully empty a container. Why? It's simple bottom-line economics: they want you to be forced to buy more product sooner. Their cost of production for the contents of those containers that they simply don't care if it goes to waste, so long as you buy more.
Why do you think toothpaste has been advertised for decades showing the suggested use of what amounts to at least an order of magnitude more product than is actually required? The manufacturers want you to buy more product. Waste or inefficient use of said product will be encouraged if that helps sell more product.
There are practical reasons quite aside from Anglo-Saxon tyranny that are driving English to be the common tongue. Here's a little homework assignment for you: pick several dozen messages to be communicated, and then translate them into English, Spanish, and French. Once you've done that, then count the number of syllables that each of those languages required to express the message.
Which one consistently requires the fewest syllables? Answer: English. The worst of those three? Spanish.
Would anyone willingly choose to speak a language that requires them to work harder to communicate the same idea? Not likely? Would they willingly choose to use a language that requires less work? Yes.
I share that frustration, and for a decade or more I've been using add-ons like Shove-It and HandyThing and others to try to automate some of that "window management". You'd think a so-called window manager would be doing that, huh? It's testimony to just how pervasive the tunnel vision is in the developer camps at Apple, Microsoft, and Canonical that they completely ignore the existence of such utilities and the fact that the only reason they exist is because they're solving problems that the not-so-aptly-named window managers are not. They've had a decade at least to take notice of the problems these addons solve and incorporate that, but the best we get is "Aero snap" and the like, which is still not solution enough.
That's not really tyranny of the majority you described, it's tyranny of the few. They're BOTH a threat to egalitarian democracy. The trick is to dance the tightrope between both bonfires without getting burned. When police arrest and DAs prosecute people who record police actions in public as criminals on the basis of inapplicable wiretapping laws, that's not the work of a majority, that's the work of a minority tribe selfishly protecting its elevated class status.
Slashdot Mirror
How can you ignore this. What are you afraid of?
I'm afraid of you and your histrionic tactics and misinformation, Mister Beck.
You don't seem to have fully read the very article you reference as proof of your intended point, rather it appears you cherry-picked what confirmed your bias. Did you read this paragraph?
If you are concerned about global warming (as I am) and think that human-created carbon dioxide may contribute (as I do), then you still should agree that we are much better off having broken the hockey stick. Misinformation can do real harm, because it distorts predictions. Suppose, for example, that future measurements in the years 2005-2015 show a clear and distinct global cooling trend. (It could happen.) If we mistakenly took the hockey stick seriously--that is, if we believed that natural fluctuations in climate are small--then we might conclude (mistakenly) that the cooling could not be just a random fluctuation on top of a long-term warming trend, since according to the hockey stick, such fluctuations are negligible. And that might lead in turn to the mistaken conclusion that global warming predictions are a lot of hooey. If, on the other hand, we reject the hockey stick, and recognize that natural fluctuations can be large, then we will not be misled by a few years of random cooling.
Or what about the final paragraph?
A phony hockey stick is more dangerous than a broken one--if we know it is broken. It is our responsibility as scientists to look at the data in an unbiased way, and draw whatever conclusions follow. When we discover a mistake, we admit it, learn from it, and perhaps discover once again the value of caution.
The author of your "evidence" doesn't even share your conspiratorial conclusions.
Look, folks, Slashdot has its share of crazies, too!
No, it's just more confirmation that these guys don't know why things are but are far more concerned that the number deliver the right message.
Mister Limbaugh, could you please restate that in English?
Pretty sure not Cyrix. It didn't even exist at that time AFAIK.
... saddled us with all that Expanded/Extended Memory stuff as well as other sins.
Yeah, I was thinking of that specifically when I compared the two. Were it not for IBM's choice, though, one of the companies that once employed me, Quarterdeck, might never have even existed. Well, at least its first product never would have.
I know! We used to overclock them in some systems by swapping the clock crystals. :-)
Was the 8088 in use elsewhere before IBM picked it up? I wonder if perhaps both of them weren't quite shipping when IBM made the decision? Got a published timeline from a mag or site article?
I think there was yet another source as well, but I have no memory for detail and no time to Google the blanks.
It was also the story of Motorola back in the early Eighties, when IBM was developing that first Personal Computer: the story I always heard was that IBM chose the Intel line over Motorola's more capable 68K series simply because Intel had secondary sourcing and could guarantee volume, but Motorola was the sole source and couldn't.
I've been saying the same thing for decades (as have others), but why would anyone heed the words of someone who's neither a celebrity nor a published expert? I could live with being ignored if the message finally got heard because of Hawking... but I doubt it will. Most humans plan no further than satiating their stomachs and gonads. Space exploration doesn't improve the majority's prospects for either, so....
I use TreeWalk. Since it's an implementation of BIND, do I need to apply this patch to it, and if so how?
Minority or not, I'm evidence that the rebuttal... isn't.
I couldn't/can't even half-listen; it's so all-or-nothing it's maddening. Well, at least when I'm faced with the need to attempt it. The rest of the time I'm fine with it, even though it also guarantees I read slower than everyone else. I'm also a wicked proofreader and likely have a superior vocabulary because of it. Yin and Yang....
What if the visual pattern recognition is actually happening all or in part in the auditory processing center? We think we're "hearing" the words, but what if that isn't what's happening? Ever hear of synesthesia?
The visual dictionary idea rebuts the theory that our brain 'sounds out' words each time we see them.
No, it most certainly DOES NOT rebut that theory, for two reasons:
(1) Homo sapiens is not a homogenous species; there are mutations - including neurological ones - and divergent evolutionary paths being explored with every single new birth; and
(2) I am living fucking proof that at least some humans have brains that do in fact sound out words, and quite literally so.
In order to communicate with a written language, I am forced to subvocalize - literally hear the words in my head - every bit of text that I read as well as write. What's more, I am unable to listen to any other spoken words while I am involved in this subvocalization process. This was quite destructive especially during schooling, since I was unable to take notes in class, and even recording lectures for later transcription was impractical.
My best theory, lacking the results of an fMRI experiment to prove it, is that this subvocalization is actually re-purposing the auditory processing center for written language, and in doing so makes it temporarily unavailable for its original purpose.
So, the genius who thinks the tinkering of these neuroscientists disproves the existence of alternative language processing methods is not so bright after all. I welcome that fMRI experiment to rebut the rebuttal.
And thus we learn the true origin of the phrase "down under"....
... I think I've already babbled on about squids enough.
Nope, I don't think you have! More squid anecdotes, pls thx.
Both the CPU and chipset are not socketed. If the CPU fails, you're out the entire board, unless you have truly l33t skills and equipment handy. That makes the motherboard an even bigger single point of failure.
I've seen jars that were deliberately designed to discourage effective use of utensils to remove stubborn product remnant. Companies willing to do that are not going to care about selling novelty. Novelty is a fad, and they're in it for the long haul. Containers that guarantee a small amount of waste, multiplied by the millions, are exactly what they want.
... could be used to coat the inside of bottles and jars to help consumers get all of the food inside....
This was written by someone who clearly doesn't understand the motivations in play in the corporate world. These manufacturers don't want you to be able to fully empty a container. Why? It's simple bottom-line economics: they want you to be forced to buy more product sooner. Their cost of production for the contents of those containers that they simply don't care if it goes to waste, so long as you buy more.
Why do you think toothpaste has been advertised for decades showing the suggested use of what amounts to at least an order of magnitude more product than is actually required? The manufacturers want you to buy more product. Waste or inefficient use of said product will be encouraged if that helps sell more product.
And you'd rather learn... Chinese?
*silence*
I didn't think so!
There are practical reasons quite aside from Anglo-Saxon tyranny that are driving English to be the common tongue. Here's a little homework assignment for you: pick several dozen messages to be communicated, and then translate them into English, Spanish, and French. Once you've done that, then count the number of syllables that each of those languages required to express the message.
Which one consistently requires the fewest syllables? Answer: English. The worst of those three? Spanish.
Would anyone willingly choose to speak a language that requires them to work harder to communicate the same idea? Not likely? Would they willingly choose to use a language that requires less work? Yes.
More like "damn you lysdexia", I'd say....
...let the tyranny begin.
The American Twentieth Century called, and wants its tyranny back.
I share that frustration, and for a decade or more I've been using add-ons like Shove-It and HandyThing and others to try to automate some of that "window management". You'd think a so-called window manager would be doing that, huh? It's testimony to just how pervasive the tunnel vision is in the developer camps at Apple, Microsoft, and Canonical that they completely ignore the existence of such utilities and the fact that the only reason they exist is because they're solving problems that the not-so-aptly-named window managers are not. They've had a decade at least to take notice of the problems these addons solve and incorporate that, but the best we get is "Aero snap" and the like, which is still not solution enough.
That's not really tyranny of the majority you described, it's tyranny of the few. They're BOTH a threat to egalitarian democracy. The trick is to dance the tightrope between both bonfires without getting burned. When police arrest and DAs prosecute people who record police actions in public as criminals on the basis of inapplicable wiretapping laws, that's not the work of a majority, that's the work of a minority tribe selfishly protecting its elevated class status.