And of course, you are just assuming these craft are secret from, say, the American government. Or even that this in fact is not an American test. And why do you think they can travel the "stellar" system? I thought nuclear bunkers were at issue here.
You just make the latter seem simple to form some ill-conceived reductio ad absurdum.
Anyway I don't buy the story, period (which is why I said "if"). I was just saying that the alien angle is not part of the official story.
As a non-physicist, I am trying to wrap my head around the article. Glad it was short!
With the presupposition that verything is caused, meaning everything is an effect, does this further mean that the LHR can sub-atomically trace back the chain of causality to the prime efficient cause (taking the Big Bang to be a causa sui)?
This is no troll - I am not trying to smuggle in any cosmological proofs for God. What I want to know is whether this provisional result is possibly a trace of the big bang itself, or a recreation of the conditions. Or, perhaps, if recreating the conditions is identical to witnessing it.
I must say that I have pretty much totally switched to Chrome. FF 3 and 4 are really dragging my system down, and often fail to load sites I depend on (gmail passwords are now randomly rejected in FF, but work in any other browser).
Dude, you posted that 40 minutes after my comment. I guess time-travel should be part of my skill set?
Moreover, your revised point is the same as the article: MS is changing its tune (even if merely opportunistically), and yet you claim that the article gets its history wrong...
That's precisely wrong. Art permits you to observe acts of the will without being willful yourself. Think of it as the difference between looking at a painting about lust (say, the Rape of Lucretia) and pornography (find your own link). In Ebert's example: you can 'win' one of these things....
Like it or not, Schopenhauer's point is that art permits you to observe the will without being overwhelmed by it, which, in essence, we are when not looking at art.
There are much older definitions of art, like Schopenhauer's. He argues that artistic judgment is the disinterested contemplation of beauty or the sublime. That is a technical definition, but it basically means that art is free from your will, or desire.
If Schopenhauer is right and art is free from the will, then Ebert's idea is not so stupid, and has some intellectual pedigree. For, a game is the embodiment of the will, in that you want to triumph.
I lived there in 2004/5 - I remember surfing the Web and hitting police pages with a stern warning (in Thai) that the site I wanted was blocked, complete with a cartoon of a pissed-off looking cop.
The first time I saw it, I was a bit frightened (you never know how the Thai cops will respond to foreigners).
Some thoughts about the domain name itself. Google probably wanted to use 10e100, since that character string means 10 to the 100 power - in other words, a googol. Not sure why they settled for 1e100, because that only comes out to a measly 1.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm Canadian, you insensitive clod.
I am in favour if they are testing for spelling and grammar.
Otherwise, not so much.
The former.
And of course, you are just assuming these craft are secret from, say, the American government. Or even that this in fact is not an American test. And why do you think they can travel the "stellar" system? I thought nuclear bunkers were at issue here.
You just make the latter seem simple to form some ill-conceived reductio ad absurdum.
Anyway I don't buy the story, period (which is why I said "if"). I was just saying that the alien angle is not part of the official story.
UFO means unidentified flying object. The article makes no reference to aliens.
You'd think a slashdot summary would recognize such a distinction. This is not the National Inquirer.
If there were bogeys, they were almost certainly terrestrial.
As a non-physicist, I am trying to wrap my head around the article. Glad it was short!
With the presupposition that verything is caused, meaning everything is an effect, does this further mean that the LHR can sub-atomically trace back the chain of causality to the prime efficient cause (taking the Big Bang to be a causa sui)?
This is no troll - I am not trying to smuggle in any cosmological proofs for God. What I want to know is whether this provisional result is possibly a trace of the big bang itself, or a recreation of the conditions. Or, perhaps, if recreating the conditions is identical to witnessing it.
Hope my post is not nonsensical.
I agree, especially re: properties.
I must say that I have pretty much totally switched to Chrome. FF 3 and 4 are really dragging my system down, and often fail to load sites I depend on (gmail passwords are now randomly rejected in FF, but work in any other browser).
If someone paid to have this review written, they should demand their money back. It reads like most /. book reviews: amateurish and clumsy.
RAW is just repeating Heraclitus.
I thought so to, but since I see E. Michael Jones's name on the poster, I am sure it's not.
This is precisely his kind of topic.
In Europe, I only listen to AM - the BBC World Service to wit.
Dude, you posted that 40 minutes after my comment. I guess time-travel should be part of my skill set?
Moreover, your revised point is the same as the article: MS is changing its tune (even if merely opportunistically), and yet you claim that the article gets its history wrong ...
Basic reading comprehension skills are in order: "what is driving Microsoft to say 'we love open source' with an attempt at a straight face?"
I can't play a game for longer than 20 minutes. That's why I love my Wii.
Like it or not, Schopenhauer's point is that art permits you to observe the will without being overwhelmed by it, which, in essence, we are when not looking at art.
There are much older definitions of art, like Schopenhauer's. He argues that artistic judgment is the disinterested contemplation of beauty or the sublime. That is a technical definition, but it basically means that art is free from your will, or desire.
If Schopenhauer is right and art is free from the will, then Ebert's idea is not so stupid, and has some intellectual pedigree. For, a game is the embodiment of the will, in that you want to triumph.
I tagged this: "fitsoneamerican"
The've actually stopped me from using my own card. A minor inconvenience for peace of mind.
The first time I saw it, I was a bit frightened (you never know how the Thai cops will respond to foreigners).
I picked up that habit when I was an undergrad at the University of Waterloo, where Tr is used for Thursday (or at least was until 1991).
Most houses are empty between 9-5, MTWTrF.
my bad
1e1=1
1e10=1
1e100=1
Source
T-Mobile can be alright if you're careful (although the coverage is not seamless).
I bought an unlocked phone in Europe for EUR 49, and use T-mobile cards in the States, where I spend about 8 months a year.
I have no land-line, and yet I spend less than $50 every quarter on phone cards. Skype and Skype-to-go really help cut down costs.