Fuck, I can't read, or think, and even worse I just posted that on the only internet forum in the sodding universe whihc doesn't allow editing or deleting or posts. I don't deserve an internet connection.
Shrinking the sphere and keeping the mass the same will increase the rotation speed.... [it's] the reason an ice skater spins faster when they draw in their arms.
I was not aware that drawing in their arms reduces their mass.
We shouldn't have abandoned traditional painting as quickly as we did.
Since when did humanity abandon painting?
Loads of people still paint, commission portraits, run galleries full of paintings for you to go and see, or offer art classes for you to go and learn to do it yourself.
If that is news to you, and you're operating under the impression that paint and sculpture have been entirely abandonded, I really think that says more about you than society.
Yep. This is why I simply abandoned email. Sure, I have a gmail box so that I can "click on this link to activate my membership", but other than that it just slowly fills up with "newsletters" I never read. Any actual human being wanting to contact me online knows full well by now to send me a PM in some "walled garden" environment such as facebook or one of the music forum/communities I visit. Does this reversion to "walled garden" comms systems suck from a 'back in the day the internet was supposed to be all about...' techno-philosophical angle? Sure. Do I really give a shit? No. My friends can reliably message me over the internet, spam is a non issue, win win.
I know what you're going to say... what about people who aren't already my friends and don't already know I never read my email and they should hit me up on facebook or wherever? Well... yeah... what about them? I don't really feel my life suffers for all the unsolicitied but not spam email I would be getting in a parallel universe where spam doesn't exist. Anyway, the only instances of this I can envisage would be, for example, someone likes my music and wants to message me about it, in which case they'd have found it via a forum post or my myspace page, ergo they can message me via that forum or via myspace, so it's really a non issue.
I feel sympathetic for people whose circumstances are such where putting "My email address is blahblah@example.com" out in the wild is the only realistic choice they have, but personally I just thought, right, the whole email channel is saturated with shit, therefore I give up on that channel.
This post was an awesome mixture of "MIND BLOWN" and very funny indeed. Well played. One quesion/nitpick though... What is the circumference of the entire universe? I wasn't aware we had established the universe had an edge, let alone measured its length. And whilst I'm fairly illiterate with maths, isn't circumference a 2D property? If the universe were, say, egg shaped, what is the circumference?
Personally, I have never encountered an ATM in this country which charges for "access". Some charge for cash withdrawls, but I've not seen any charge for using the machine at all, e.g. checking your balance. And, personally, I could find a free ATM a hell of a lot quicker than I could find my cheque book;-)
Of course, I accept my experience is not universal, etc etc.
LaLa... watches my iTunes directory and automatically unlocks the streams in LaLa of the tracks of whatever CD I just imported on iTunes.
Interesting... isn't this almost exactly what mp3.com got sued for? "Knowing" you've bought a CD and giving you access to online audio of the same tracks?
I don't know about the Windows one, because I'm in the "iTunes on my PC over my dead body" crowd, but there's definitely a graphic EQ on the Mac one. I know this because my friend switched it on with some drastic setting to compensate for one particular tune once, forgot, and we spent a couple of hours wondering if his speakers were blown or something;)
Yes, it would be nice. I know the UK has panels deciding how much budget to allocate to particular medicines, or sectors - e.g. do we spend this million pounds on a pediatrics ward or a CAT scanner or X units of ARVs or whatever - when of course there will be many patients desperate for all of them, and liable to die if money for is not allocated. Such difficult decisions are of course inevitable. However I really rather doubt such panels sit around debating whether to spend money treating individual people and, unsubstantiated, the implication that they do really seems a bit FUDish.
The sheer scale of the inflated figures thrown around in the dotcom era still staggers me. Let's imagine that yahoo found a way of monetising broadcast.com to the tune of half a million dollars profit EVERY DAY. God alone knows how, but assuming they did - to recoup that $6bn they would still need to consistently turn in that profit for OVER THIRTY YEARS. How can anyone take such a proposition seriously? And, yeah, I know, stock not cash, but if you follow that line of argument to a logical conclusion, it means the investors knew how ludricously over-valued the stock is, so either way the whole market must have been running off undiluted stupid for such a deal to go through.
This is absolute nonsense. I know many people who are Capricorns (born in December-January) and who are over-achievers.
Yes, because of course when scientists talk about statistical trends observed within 52 million cases, the fact that you know "many" people who defy the trend of course sufficient basis to dismiss the trend as statistically nonexistent and "absolute nonsense". Congratulations of your robust grasp of the relationship between large data sets, statistical significance and confidence, and the anecdotal relevance of a couple of your mates' star signs.
I love the way you get marked troll for saying this satirically, while every other instance of people saying this dead seriously on slashdot is a shoo-in for +5 insightful. sigh
It appears to show any of the information or photos I can see about myself or my friends.
I don't grasp how this is supposed to be an insecurity. It seems like the summary is "It can see whatever you can see". If it were "It can see stuff you otherwise couldn't see" then it would seem like a security concern, but as it stands it appears to be working exactly as intended and advertised. What am I missing?
I'm not sure what's behind all these complaints about slashdot lately, because I haven't seen anything untoward. But I'm still on firefox 2.0.20 here, rather than letting it auto-upgrade me to 3.x - which was frankly rather difficult (far more than it should have been). It took registry edits and all sorts to stop the upgrade, so why slashdot would make things work for browsers that next-to-nobody would use and not work for the versions everybody is on these days, is baffling.
The core purpose of the Trust that owns the paper is "To secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian in perpetuity: as a quality national newspaper without party affiliation"
Labour Party members, or supporters. I doubt very much anyone else reads the Guardian
Now you're just being ridiculous. It's a broadly leftist paper, yes, but Labour aren't the only leftists in town politically... in fact arguably they're not even leftist at all;)
So tbh I would say the contemporary stereotype of a Guardian reader would be closer to a Lib Dem or Green voter.
they are the Government's lone supportive voice
I doubt very much you read the Guardian, based on that claim. Pretty laughable considering how much criticism they have published over the years.
Disclosure/disclaimer: yes, I read the Guardian often, and of the major papers I would say it's probably the best... but please don't assume I am a simple fanboy who trusts them soley with the truth. I frequently mix and match with other papers and of course other sources from other media.
Well that link doesn't really relate because it's talking about really alternative stuff like Linux and Opera and all that;) whereas I was only talking about the relatively un-alternative Firefox on Windows. But yeah, you're right, it wasn't that many years ago - I didn't specify because I can't remember, but I think probably 4 or 5 years, certainly not as far back as 2002.
I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.
I'm not an expert and can't even be bothered to google for confirmation of my vague memories, but I'm pretty sure it can easily identify a nude. What it can't do is distinguish between, say, this and, well... you probably have your own bookmarks.
As the saying goes, obscenity is whatever gives a judge an erection.
Slashdot Mirror
Fuck, I can't read, or think, and even worse I just posted that on the only internet forum in the sodding universe whihc doesn't allow editing or deleting or posts. I don't deserve an internet connection.
Shrinking the sphere and keeping the mass the same will increase the rotation speed.... [it's] the reason an ice skater spins faster when they draw in their arms.
I was not aware that drawing in their arms reduces their mass.
We shouldn't have abandoned traditional painting as quickly as we did.
Since when did humanity abandon painting?
Loads of people still paint, commission portraits, run galleries full of paintings for you to go and see, or offer art classes for you to go and learn to do it yourself.
If that is news to you, and you're operating under the impression that paint and sculpture have been entirely abandonded, I really think that says more about you than society.
Yep. This is why I simply abandoned email. Sure, I have a gmail box so that I can "click on this link to activate my membership", but other than that it just slowly fills up with "newsletters" I never read. Any actual human being wanting to contact me online knows full well by now to send me a PM in some "walled garden" environment such as facebook or one of the music forum/communities I visit. Does this reversion to "walled garden" comms systems suck from a 'back in the day the internet was supposed to be all about...' techno-philosophical angle? Sure. Do I really give a shit? No. My friends can reliably message me over the internet, spam is a non issue, win win.
I know what you're going to say... what about people who aren't already my friends and don't already know I never read my email and they should hit me up on facebook or wherever? Well... yeah... what about them? I don't really feel my life suffers for all the unsolicitied but not spam email I would be getting in a parallel universe where spam doesn't exist. Anyway, the only instances of this I can envisage would be, for example, someone likes my music and wants to message me about it, in which case they'd have found it via a forum post or my myspace page, ergo they can message me via that forum or via myspace, so it's really a non issue.
I feel sympathetic for people whose circumstances are such where putting "My email address is blahblah@example.com" out in the wild is the only realistic choice they have, but personally I just thought, right, the whole email channel is saturated with shit, therefore I give up on that channel.
This post was an awesome mixture of "MIND BLOWN" and very funny indeed. Well played. One quesion/nitpick though... What is the circumference of the entire universe? I wasn't aware we had established the universe had an edge, let alone measured its length. And whilst I'm fairly illiterate with maths, isn't circumference a 2D property? If the universe were, say, egg shaped, what is the circumference?
Nice username you have for commenting on this story.
Personally, I have never encountered an ATM in this country which charges for "access". Some charge for cash withdrawls, but I've not seen any charge for using the machine at all, e.g. checking your balance. And, personally, I could find a free ATM a hell of a lot quicker than I could find my cheque book ;-)
Of course, I accept my experience is not universal, etc etc.
LaLa ... watches my iTunes directory and automatically unlocks the streams in LaLa of the tracks of whatever CD I just imported on iTunes.
Interesting... isn't this almost exactly what mp3.com got sued for? "Knowing" you've bought a CD and giving you access to online audio of the same tracks?
I don't know about the Windows one, because I'm in the "iTunes on my PC over my dead body" crowd, but there's definitely a graphic EQ on the Mac one. I know this because my friend switched it on with some drastic setting to compensate for one particular tune once, forgot, and we spent a couple of hours wondering if his speakers were blown or something ;)
Awesome. I wish I had mod points for you.
Yes, it would be nice. I know the UK has panels deciding how much budget to allocate to particular medicines, or sectors - e.g. do we spend this million pounds on a pediatrics ward or a CAT scanner or X units of ARVs or whatever - when of course there will be many patients desperate for all of them, and liable to die if money for is not allocated. Such difficult decisions are of course inevitable. However I really rather doubt such panels sit around debating whether to spend money treating individual people and, unsubstantiated, the implication that they do really seems a bit FUDish.
The sheer scale of the inflated figures thrown around in the dotcom era still staggers me. Let's imagine that yahoo found a way of monetising broadcast.com to the tune of half a million dollars profit EVERY DAY. God alone knows how, but assuming they did - to recoup that $6bn they would still need to consistently turn in that profit for OVER THIRTY YEARS. How can anyone take such a proposition seriously? And, yeah, I know, stock not cash, but if you follow that line of argument to a logical conclusion, it means the investors knew how ludricously over-valued the stock is, so either way the whole market must have been running off undiluted stupid for such a deal to go through.
This is absolute nonsense. I know many people who are Capricorns (born in December-January) and who are over-achievers.
Yes, because of course when scientists talk about statistical trends observed within 52 million cases, the fact that you know "many" people who defy the trend of course sufficient basis to dismiss the trend as statistically nonexistent and "absolute nonsense". Congratulations of your robust grasp of the relationship between large data sets, statistical significance and confidence, and the anecdotal relevance of a couple of your mates' star signs.
I love the way you get marked troll for saying this satirically, while every other instance of people saying this dead seriously on slashdot is a shoo-in for +5 insightful. sigh
yes.
I see. Great explanation, thanks.
It appears to show any of the information or photos I can see about myself or my friends.
I don't grasp how this is supposed to be an insecurity. It seems like the summary is "It can see whatever you can see". If it were "It can see stuff you otherwise couldn't see" then it would seem like a security concern, but as it stands it appears to be working exactly as intended and advertised. What am I missing?
I'm not sure what's behind all these complaints about slashdot lately, because I haven't seen anything untoward. But I'm still on firefox 2.0.20 here, rather than letting it auto-upgrade me to 3.x - which was frankly rather difficult (far more than it should have been). It took registry edits and all sorts to stop the upgrade, so why slashdot would make things work for browsers that next-to-nobody would use and not work for the versions everybody is on these days, is baffling.
How many have you sold? (I know that n > 4, based upon a quantitative survey of my bookcase.)
I surrender to your superior memory!
No, the guy is just plain wrong; they do not have any party affiliation.
It is registered as supporting the Labour Party.
[Citation needed]
The core purpose of the Trust that owns the paper is "To secure the financial and editorial independence of The Guardian in perpetuity: as a quality national newspaper without party affiliation"
Labour Party members, or supporters. I doubt very much anyone else reads the Guardian
Now you're just being ridiculous. It's a broadly leftist paper, yes, but Labour aren't the only leftists in town politically... in fact arguably they're not even leftist at all ;)
So tbh I would say the contemporary stereotype of a Guardian reader would be closer to a Lib Dem or Green voter.
they are the Government's lone supportive voice
I doubt very much you read the Guardian, based on that claim. Pretty laughable considering how much criticism they have published over the years.
Disclosure/disclaimer: yes, I read the Guardian often, and of the major papers I would say it's probably the best... but please don't assume I am a simple fanboy who trusts them soley with the truth. I frequently mix and match with other papers and of course other sources from other media.
Well that link doesn't really relate because it's talking about really alternative stuff like Linux and Opera and all that ;) whereas I was only talking about the relatively un-alternative Firefox on Windows. But yeah, you're right, it wasn't that many years ago - I didn't specify because I can't remember, but I think probably 4 or 5 years, certainly not as far back as 2002.
I doubt computer vision has reached the stage when it's easy to identify a nude.
I'm not an expert and can't even be bothered to google for confirmation of my vague memories, but I'm pretty sure it can easily identify a nude. What it can't do is distinguish between, say, this and, well... you probably have your own bookmarks.
As the saying goes, obscenity is whatever gives a judge an erection.
I've used one of those exclusively with firefox since I first got online banking years ago.