Re:hmmm what? Re:Picture of bills with US bill
on
The Euro
·
· Score: 2
Not really. The problem is you wanted 'cause' to replace 'symptom', but it could equally well replace 'serious problem'. No fallacies involved, just ordinary English ambiguity.
You'll notice that no section of the Zeitgeist actually describes which things were searched for the most overall - only the top gaining and declining, and the top in each section. That's probably why.
Um... Hitler was a fascist, not a communist. They're practically at opposite ends of the political spectrum.
And this does sound kinda like fascism. It would have been nice if you had bothered to finish the analogy, though. "DMCA is bad! It's like Hitler!" doesn't exactly contribute anything useful to the discussion.
There's a joke which involves that. A link to it on one of those lame joke sites: here
"...Because of the complexity of the password selection rules, there is actually only one password which passes all the tests. To make the selection of this password simpler for the user, it will be distributed to all supervisors. All users are instructed to obtain this password from his or her supervisor and begin using it immediately."
The way I understand it, the pictures which are not the correct one are randomly generated each time. So seeing a picture from one of your old passwords would be astronomically unlikely. You might be tricked by one that looks kinda like it, though.
People keep talking about CMYK like it's the one thing which stops GIMP from being Photoshop. Wouldn't it be more effective (and have less patent problems) to actually get GIMP up to par with Photoshop 5 in terms of other features?
The replies will inevitably say that GIMP can do everything Photoshop can do. This is technically true. Editing individual pixels in a hex editor can also do everything Photoshop can do, but that doesn't mean it's the nicest way. Incidentally, I use both Photoshop and GIMP a lot.
Is it possible that you could someday write a post which is a contribution to the discussion instead of endlessly hawking your damn AI project? It's getting very very old.
Determining the number of Chinese characters is just like determining the number of English words in that regard.
ENABLE, a public-domain word list for English (which I have installed over/usr/dict/words because the latter is so uselessly incomplete), says that there are 173528 words in the English language. However, let me pick a few at random:
A couple of these are absolutely familiar (smarter, staff). A couple have meanings which could be figured out fairly easily but which aren't especially familiar (upwaft, superintend). As for the rest, does anybody know what a euglenoid is?
You know, it's pretty impressive that the Chinese can adapt to all that, while here in the English-speaking world we're still stuck using QWERTY keyboards.
Esperanto's vocabulary was founded on the assumption that European languages were the only ones that mattered. The fact that the vocabulary is familiar to Europeans is the main thing which sets Esperanto apart from other constructed languages. Do you think that Esperanto would appeal much to Chinese speakers?
Here in the US they usually call him "Osama Bin Laden" as well - but they abbreviate his name UBL. I speculate that the problem is that "Usama" begins with "USA".
RPN only makes no sense if you've never used it. Look at it this way:
When you're doing a math or physics or whatever problem, you generally have a bunch of numbers, and you need to figure out what to do with them.
In RPN, you put in the bunch of numbers. Then you decide what to do with them. When you hit the * key, for example, the bottom two numbers get multiplied together, and that result is now in your bunch of numbers in their place.
In algebraic notation, you have to concentrate on the formula, because of keeping track of where the parentheses go and all that. You also have to either do everything in one step, or use something like the [Ans] key to keep using a number that you got as a result. In RPN notation, the numbers you get as results are immediately ready for you to use. Once you learn it, it really feels like you're working with the numbers.
The one drawback to RPN is that you can't directly put in a formula you see on paper - but this does not slow you down if you understand what the formula does.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, all virii (I'm pretty sure that's the correct plural of "virus")
You certainly won't find it in a dictionary.
That's nice. Maybe when you learn to read, you can get an account and contribute something useful.
Or, for something more amusing, this.
.
http://www.milk.com/wall-o-shame/two_dollars.html
Not really. The problem is you wanted 'cause' to replace 'symptom', but it could equally well replace 'serious problem'. No fallacies involved, just ordinary English ambiguity.
You'll notice that no section of the Zeitgeist actually describes which things were searched for the most overall - only the top gaining and declining, and the top in each section. That's probably why.
Um... Hitler was a fascist, not a communist. They're practically at opposite ends of the political spectrum.
And this does sound kinda like fascism. It would have been nice if you had bothered to finish the analogy, though. "DMCA is bad! It's like Hitler!" doesn't exactly contribute anything useful to the discussion.
If one out of every thousand CD buyers did this, do you have any idea how incredibly effective it would be?
Don't take a defeatist attitude - as another poster pointed out, the "Ban the Box" movement with CDs really worked.
You mean, their ineptness in showing red, green, and blue combining to create black?
So you're saying that since we're already bad at seeing blue, they're justified in making blue even harder to see?
I think you've got some backwards logic there.
Considering that the 16 bits of color apply to the entire display, what use would alpha have? There's nothing "behind" to show through.
There's a joke which involves that. A link to it on one of those lame joke sites: here
"...Because of the complexity of the password selection rules, there is actually only one password which passes all the tests. To make the selection of this password simpler for the user, it will be distributed to all supervisors. All users are instructed to obtain this password from his or her supervisor and begin using it immediately."
The way I understand it, the pictures which are not the correct one are randomly generated each time. So seeing a picture from one of your old passwords would be astronomically unlikely. You might be tricked by one that looks kinda like it, though.
You know, on Jan 2, it will be 2002. Despite how far off that sounds.
People keep talking about CMYK like it's the one thing which stops GIMP from being Photoshop. Wouldn't it be more effective (and have less patent problems) to actually get GIMP up to par with Photoshop 5 in terms of other features?
The replies will inevitably say that GIMP can do everything Photoshop can do. This is technically true. Editing individual pixels in a hex editor can also do everything Photoshop can do, but that doesn't mean it's the nicest way. Incidentally, I use both Photoshop and GIMP a lot.
Is it possible that you could someday write a post which is a contribution to the discussion instead of endlessly hawking your damn AI project? It's getting very very old.
Normally I'd be excited that Python had a new release with lots of new features... but no longer. Ruby has stolen my heart.
Determining the number of Chinese characters is just like determining the number of English words in that regard.
/usr/dict/words because the latter is so uselessly incomplete), says that there are 173528 words in the English language. However, let me pick a few at random:
ENABLE, a public-domain word list for English (which I have installed over
inulase, euglenoids, riprap, smarter, dilatancy, hebe, staff, thrombosis, upwaft, superintend
A couple of these are absolutely familiar (smarter, staff). A couple have meanings which could be figured out fairly easily but which aren't especially familiar (upwaft, superintend). As for the rest, does anybody know what a euglenoid is?
You know, it's pretty impressive that the Chinese can adapt to all that, while here in the English-speaking world we're still stuck using QWERTY keyboards.
Esperanto's vocabulary was founded on the assumption that European languages were the only ones that mattered. The fact that the vocabulary is familiar to Europeans is the main thing which sets Esperanto apart from other constructed languages. Do you think that Esperanto would appeal much to Chinese speakers?
Orson Welles found out about this language, and found it so horrifying that he adapted it and called it "Newspeak" in 1984.
Here in the US they usually call him "Osama Bin Laden" as well - but they abbreviate his name UBL. I speculate that the problem is that "Usama" begins with "USA".
RPN only makes no sense if you've never used it. Look at it this way:
When you're doing a math or physics or whatever problem, you generally have a bunch of numbers, and you need to figure out what to do with them.
In RPN, you put in the bunch of numbers. Then you decide what to do with them. When you hit the * key, for example, the bottom two numbers get multiplied together, and that result is now in your bunch of numbers in their place.
In algebraic notation, you have to concentrate on the formula, because of keeping track of where the parentheses go and all that. You also have to either do everything in one step, or use something like the [Ans] key to keep using a number that you got as a result. In RPN notation, the numbers you get as results are immediately ready for you to use. Once you learn it, it really feels like you're working with the numbers.
The one drawback to RPN is that you can't directly put in a formula you see on paper - but this does not slow you down if you understand what the formula does.
Wow. That's one heck of an analogy.
"An e-mail virus is like a bomb. Well, not really a bomb, but a bomb that's like an e-mail virus."
No, it really is a .scr. Screensavers are executable files in Windows.
and NOT OPEN UNEXPECTED ATTACHMENTS FROM PEOPLE OUTSIDE THE COMPANY.
That's not good enough. After the first one, the rest of the unexpected attachments would be coming from people INSIDE the company.