If you dislike Pratchett, and thought Good Omens was okay, then perhaps you should read some more Neil Gaiman. Try to dig up a Sandman book or two sometime.
Most would put Good Omens in the top two of Pratchett's works. You could also try Dark Side Of The Sun, which is a standalone work in a completely different fictional universe and predates his Discworld stuff. Or Interesting Times, which is Discworld, but stands alone well...
But on the other hand, the number of things which can go wrong if they don't know what they're doing and they begin surfing the internet using MSIE and no firewall and no virus checker is pretty immense. Aren't they somewhat justified in this fear?
I didn't say anything about percentages. I'm talking about arbitrary points. "100" on the scale doesn't necessary mean anything. You could re-scale it so that "43" has the same meaning. A percentage scale implies a definite upper limit on how good a game can be - which is precisely what I'm against. How will they compare 145 points with 99 points? Obviously the first game is much better than the second one.
To go off-topic: There's no such number as "8.999...1". The nines go on forever, there's no end to put the one on. Also, I don't see how you can argue that 9.9999... - 0.9999... isn't equal to 9. Do the long subtraction. It works.
And x is the same thing all the way through. That's basic algebra.
Nuclear reactors are constructed with possible terrorist attacks in mind. You might, for example, want to see this video of what happens when an F4 Phantom jet hits the side of a nuclear power plant at five hundred miles per hour. Note how the concrete wall absorbs the impact, while the jet ceases to exist.
Even if this doesn't convince you, it's still a cool video.
My idea for a solution to this situation is to rate all games on a scale with no upper limit.
The best game in the world ever might get 99 arbitrary points. But when it is inevitably surpassed? Give it 130, no harm, no foul. As games get progressively better the scores get progressively higher, avoiding the clustering problem.
I suggest a less violent approach: Work out a legal system whereby more money != less likely to be guilty. If this means putting all lawyers in a pool from which you are always randomly assigned one regardless of whether you are corporation or human being, so be it. Level the legal playing field. Yes, it's extreme, but it's not as bad as BLOWING BUILDINGS UP as this individual proposes.
A simple solution to the plate theft problem is to simply superglue each one to whatever surface it is currently bolted to. This makes it impossible to ever change your license plates, but if you never plan to buy a personalised plate then you're fine.
Erm, as I understand the Halting Problem, if you can "stop the loop recognizing that it is infinite, but also differentiate it between non-infinite loops through a single function", then that's provably impossible. Self-awareness has nothing to do with this. Even smart human beings can have difficulty figuring out whether something will run forever or not.
lost only gives you a few mysteries at a time, and always wraps up a few before delivering the next batch
Excuse me? here is a list of questions which remained unanswered at the end of season 1 of Lost. How many of them have been answered so far in season 2? Two, perhaps three. And the answer to "What's inside the hatch?" is "Many additional mysteries!" Mysteries such as "What's the answer to that snowman riddle?", "Why do those numbers need typing every 108 minutes?", "Why 108 minutes?", "Who is the Dharma Initiative?", "What's under all that concrete?" and so on and so on and so on.
Lost is absolutely infuriating for anybody who is actually trying to find the answers to mysteries.
Feel free to be stupid on your own time, or to teach your children to be stupid, but realize that is what you are doing. Generally, it boils down to finding examples of complicated structures or systems in biology, and saying "see, this is complex enough that I don't think it could arise by evolution."
You have confused "intelligent design" with "proving intelligent design", which the grandparent explicitly does not endorse.
Firstly, why are the words "Good news, everyone!" nowhere in the summary?
Secondly, here are some potential future plot lines which were opened in the first four seasons and could yet stand to be resolved:
* The Fry/Leela love story arc * Fry is the single most important person in the universe and still needs to help the Nibblonians save it at least once more * Morbo's people have yet to live up to his threats and invade Earth * Scruffy - Who is this guy? Seriously? * How and when exactly did New York become New New York? * etc.
Another important point is that the characters of Futurama seem to properly age, and time does pass in the Futurama world, advancing from 1999 to 3000 to 3004 by the end. Will we return to find the characters all two or three years older? If so, will they look any different, and what will have happened to them in the meantime?
Of course, the main thing this means is: more of the best DVD commentaries ever!
I really don't know why they bothered featuring that game in the show at all. Monkey Fracas Junior was horribly inferior to the original Monkey Fracas.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we've found our Sun's binary companion already! Good going, Slashdot.
If you dislike Pratchett, and thought Good Omens was okay, then perhaps you should read some more Neil Gaiman. Try to dig up a Sandman book or two sometime.
Most would put Good Omens in the top two of Pratchett's works. You could also try Dark Side Of The Sun, which is a standalone work in a completely different fictional universe and predates his Discworld stuff. Or Interesting Times, which is Discworld, but stands alone well...
...And there's no link to sex.com in the story? Good grief.
But on the other hand, the number of things which can go wrong if they don't know what they're doing and they begin surfing the internet using MSIE and no firewall and no virus checker is pretty immense. Aren't they somewhat justified in this fear?
Ironically, that sentence contained only spelling errors.
Unfortunately for you, the value of pi has decreased since you bought stock in it. Sucker!
Not all sites offer programs for download.
It's the Zeroth Law of Physics. "If it happens, it must be possible."
I didn't say anything about percentages. I'm talking about arbitrary points. "100" on the scale doesn't necessary mean anything. You could re-scale it so that "43" has the same meaning. A percentage scale implies a definite upper limit on how good a game can be - which is precisely what I'm against. How will they compare 145 points with 99 points? Obviously the first game is much better than the second one.
To go off-topic: There's no such number as "8.999...1". The nines go on forever, there's no end to put the one on. Also, I don't see how you can argue that 9.9999... - 0.9999... isn't equal to 9. Do the long subtraction. It works.
And x is the same thing all the way through. That's basic algebra.
Nuclear reactors are constructed with possible terrorist attacks in mind. You might, for example, want to see this video of what happens when an F4 Phantom jet hits the side of a nuclear power plant at five hundred miles per hour. Note how the concrete wall absorbs the impact, while the jet ceases to exist.
Even if this doesn't convince you, it's still a cool video.
My idea for a solution to this situation is to rate all games on a scale with no upper limit. The best game in the world ever might get 99 arbitrary points. But when it is inevitably surpassed? Give it 130, no harm, no foul. As games get progressively better the scores get progressively higher, avoiding the clustering problem.
There's a doll which uses RealPlayer now? Oh dear.
I think you missed the most important part of the story. The cloud of organic particles waved at us.
It's a sign, man.
I'm still waiting for the inevitable two-thousand-comment story entitled "Creationists Oppose Linux".
Garfield acknowledges that they do not have much of a grip on the file-sharing world as they would like to believe.
Well, yes, as proven by the fact that file-sharing still occurs.
What, you expected him to check?
I suggest a less violent approach: Work out a legal system whereby more money != less likely to be guilty. If this means putting all lawyers in a pool from which you are always randomly assigned one regardless of whether you are corporation or human being, so be it. Level the legal playing field. Yes, it's extreme, but it's not as bad as BLOWING BUILDINGS UP as this individual proposes.
A simple solution to the plate theft problem is to simply superglue each one to whatever surface it is currently bolted to. This makes it impossible to ever change your license plates, but if you never plan to buy a personalised plate then you're fine.
Erm, as I understand the Halting Problem, if you can "stop the loop recognizing that it is infinite, but also differentiate it between non-infinite loops through a single function", then that's provably impossible. Self-awareness has nothing to do with this. Even smart human beings can have difficulty figuring out whether something will run forever or not.
Also, both cowboys and space are independently cool. Putting them together is almost as good as robot ninjas.
Excuse me? here is a list of questions which remained unanswered at the end of season 1 of Lost. How many of them have been answered so far in season 2? Two, perhaps three. And the answer to "What's inside the hatch?" is "Many additional mysteries!" Mysteries such as "What's the answer to that snowman riddle?", "Why do those numbers need typing every 108 minutes?", "Why 108 minutes?", "Who is the Dharma Initiative?", "What's under all that concrete?" and so on and so on and so on.
Lost is absolutely infuriating for anybody who is actually trying to find the answers to mysteries.
You have confused "intelligent design" with "proving intelligent design", which the grandparent explicitly does not endorse.
Firstly, why are the words "Good news, everyone!" nowhere in the summary?
Secondly, here are some potential future plot lines which were opened in the first four seasons and could yet stand to be resolved:
* The Fry/Leela love story arc
* Fry is the single most important person in the universe and still needs to help the Nibblonians save it at least once more
* Morbo's people have yet to live up to his threats and invade Earth
* Scruffy - Who is this guy? Seriously?
* How and when exactly did New York become New New York?
* etc.
Another important point is that the characters of Futurama seem to properly age, and time does pass in the Futurama world, advancing from 1999 to 3000 to 3004 by the end. Will we return to find the characters all two or three years older? If so, will they look any different, and what will have happened to them in the meantime?
Of course, the main thing this means is: more of the best DVD commentaries ever!
I really don't know why they bothered featuring that game in the show at all. Monkey Fracas Junior was horribly inferior to the original Monkey Fracas.