* Fate = Gravity, * Free-Will = Choice to move left or right
e.g.
* You are fated to die. * You have free-will to die sooner or later. i.e. You can commit suicide (and thus get placed in God's Penalty Box) or live a long life trying to do the 1 and only commandment to the best of your ability.
The choice is yours. For a limited time. (TM)
> This is the core of Atheistic Libertarianism,
Trading the ignorance of Theism for the arrogance of Atheism is still blindness.
i.e. Theism is the color-blind man proselytizing to others his faith that "colors" exist. Atheism is the blind man telling everyone else they are crazy and irrational. The mystic is the one seeing in color wondering "When will both sides will shut up and stop arguing their relative truth and realize a) the fact that everyone has faith in their beliefs, and b) experimental knowledge one lives is the only real truth."
-- Javaschit, noun, a fucked up programming language designed and implemented in only 10 days. HTML5 requires the "use strict"hack to turn on type safety! WTF?!
1. You are _assuming_ everyone is "innocent." There is no such thing. Everyone is responsible for their condition. 2. You assume God doesn't (already) know this. 3. By blaming others and not taking personal responsibility you are ignoring the fundamental question. 4. By rejecting the fundamental question "How can a person be responsible for their condition before they were born??" you are condemning yourself to be forever in ignorance about higher reality. 5. By not being aware of the ALL the potentials (i.e. future), along with the ENTIRE past, you are pre-judging one permutation (the present) as "bad" when you don't have all the facts. 6. Ergo, by not having all the facts you come to incorrect conclusions that "Life isn't fair." 7. Instead of starting with the fact that "Life is 100% fair." your glass is already full. 8. With your glass already full your ego is preventing you from knowing the truth: 9. Before you can learn, you must first unlearn. 10. Likewise, the beginning of wisdom is to first admit: "I don't know" 11. By thinking you know when you don't -- you are being dishonest with yourself. 12. By being dishonest with yourself you are believing a lie. 13. By believing a lie are in denial. 14. By being in denial you don't question. 15. By not questioning you are a (mental) zombie. 16. By being a zombie you assume your perspective is valid. 17. By assuming your perspective is valid you don't see you are in the dark. 18. By being in the dark you don't see enlightenment. 19. By not being see enlightened you reject the truth. 20. Before you can understand truth you must change your perspective. 21. In order to change you must answer a question: 22. "When will you 'Wake up and see things as they actually are instead of seeing things how you wish to view them?'"
-- Javaschit, noun a broken computer language (initially) designed ad implemented in 10 days. Math.tan( Math.PI/2 ); returns 16331239353195370 instead of Infinity! WTF?!
/sarcasm Let's keep blaming God for people mis-using their gift of Free-Will because absolving people of their responsibility makes _so_much more sense. NOT.
While I agree that the majority of the YouTube comments are indeed "noise" (such as the redundant "I'm watching this in year ####") there is still a few that are add a useful / interesting "signal". I've seen people add meta-data such as:
* the Song Name, Band, and/or Albumb, * Interesting links about the topic at hand
The biggest problem with YoutTube's comment section is that slow repetitive partial loading. Both/. and reddit allow you to link directly to a message, YouTube doesn't -- this makes finding a particular message extremely time consuming.
Another problem was that comments will sometimes fail to post when the generic "Error" without _any_ indication of _why_. Why are URLs sometimes allowed and other times dis-allowed??
If YouTube would actually think about fixing their crappy comment User Experience comments could actually be useful to the majority of people. Right now they are mostly useless with their brain dead UI.
If FecesBook does dumb shit like censorship then according to your "solution" they would never get feedback on their stupid policy since apparently everyone would stop using it. Let's pretend that you're right and that everyone left FB. All you've done is moved the goal post. With the _next_ social platform everyone eventually would have the _exact_ same problem.
The line must be drawn somewhere, eventually. Or as the colloquial Picard would say: "The line must be drawn, here!"
"If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for everything."
-- FecesBook, noun: where other people's bullshit is posted as "news"
Indeed. Censorship has been around in various forms.
1. Ultima Online Origin Systems had a list of "bad word" which included "ass". Unfortunately, they had a bug -- they checked substrings instead of only checking whole words. So if you said the word "assassin" it got translated as "*****in*"
Simple solution: use spaces or a separator such as dots. a.s.s.a.s.s.i.n.
2. Steam censors the word "retarded" and replaces them with hearts. WTF. Again simple work-around: Steam censorship is r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d.
I would replace the word stole with the more accurate term bought:
* DriveSpace aka DoubleSpace: Licensed from Vertisoft and then out-right copied Stac Electronics. * Internet Explorer: Licensed Spyglass Mosaic and renamed it. * Windows: Copied Apple who copied Xerox. * Direct3D: Bought Rendermorphics, Ltd and renamed their shitty API RealityLab to Direct3D
Looks like David Wheeler (of readable S Lisp Expressions fame) agrees with us:
/cynical Oh hush you with your logic -- don't you know it is easier to to be in denial that one needs more faith in someone's pet theory full of holes then to admit that everyone has faith.:-)
-- Dark Matter / Energy is the Aether of the new millennium.
IMO modern sci-fi has been "dumbed" down to just action flicks. Originally, "classic" Sci-Fi dealt with the _social_ issues and problems that technology created. We got some amazing stories.
Everything by:
* Isaac Asimov -- especially Foundation series. * Robert A. Heinlein * Arthur C. Clarke
Is A+.
There are also plenty of Feynman videos on YouTube. Fascinating just to listen to him. He's the true skeptic -- an open mind and willing to _explore_ issues.
Buy why limit this to just novels though?? For modern decent sci-fi TV would include:
* Continuum * Firefly * Fringe * Lost * Star Trek: The Next Generation * X-Files
Isn't that the whole point of good Sci-Fi -- to light our imagination with possibilities?
Not the "Time Travel' Deus Ex Machina so much modern sci-fi crap resorts to.
> Just curious, what do you have trouble getting due to artificial scarcity?
I'll bite.
Old DOS games that are no longer sold aka abandonware.
Obviously piracy is one solution but that is no longer an option for me -- which means scouring Ebay for old copies.
There should be a law that if software is no longer being sold for 20 years then it automatically falls into the public domain since obviously it has lost its monetary value.
> I wonder if this means SQ3's graphics are, theoretically at least, resolution-free?
Yes, for the most part. It would be trivial to "normalize" the coordinates and then up-sample without general loss of precision. As long as the final resolution isn't too large (*) the errors wouldn't be (too) noticeable.
(*) I'm not sure at what resolution the precision errors would start becoming noticeable. I would surmise that a scale factor of < 200 would be OK.
> Why on earth did they store it like that I wonder?
It was optimized for space.
Remember Sierra started back on the Apple ][ where disk space was limited: 140 KB. When they switched to the IMB PC/jr storing a full 320x200 = 64,000 pixels is a _minimum_ of 8K compared to few hundred bytes to store the same scene.
> I would have assumed that RLE was been more efficient in space and render speed!
While RLE is extremely fast to decode it is still bloated compared to a poly-lines and/or polygon fill.
Slashdot Mirror
/sarcasm Because the justification of "I was just following orders!" excuses one of any wrong-doing !
Yeaaah, how did that work out at the Nuremberg trials again?
Everyone always has a choice and a part to play in their destiny. Only the immature try to pass the buck and "blame" someone else.
You are making numerous assumptions.
You're like the person who commits suicide and then blames God for not saving them.
I've explained the fallacies of your thinking in this same thread in another post
Your fallacy, like all institutionalized Churches, is assuming Free Will and Fate are mutually exclusive.
They are both true.
One truth does not negate another truth. This is the very definition of a paradox.
Here is an example to illustrate. Take a Quincunx (or Galton Board) and flip it vertically:
Picture
Flash Animation
In this analogy:
* Fate = Gravity,
* Free-Will = Choice to move left or right
e.g.
* You are fated to die.
* You have free-will to die sooner or later. i.e. You can commit suicide (and thus get placed in God's Penalty Box) or live a long life trying to do the 1 and only commandment to the best of your ability.
The choice is yours.
For a limited time. (TM)
> This is the core of Atheistic Libertarianism,
Trading the ignorance of Theism for the arrogance of Atheism is still blindness.
i.e.
Theism is the color-blind man proselytizing to others his faith that "colors" exist.
Atheism is the blind man telling everyone else they are crazy and irrational.
The mystic is the one seeing in color wondering "When will both sides will shut up and stop arguing their relative truth and realize a) the fact that everyone has faith in their beliefs, and b) experimental knowledge one lives is the only real truth."
--
Javaschit, noun, a fucked up programming language designed and implemented in only 10 days. HTML5 requires the "use strict" hack to turn on type safety! WTF?!
Your thinking is incomplete.
1. You are _assuming_ everyone is "innocent." There is no such thing. Everyone is responsible for their condition.
2. You assume God doesn't (already) know this.
3. By blaming others and not taking personal responsibility you are ignoring the fundamental question.
4. By rejecting the fundamental question "How can a person be responsible for their condition before they were born??" you are condemning yourself to be forever in ignorance about higher reality.
5. By not being aware of the ALL the potentials (i.e. future), along with the ENTIRE past, you are pre-judging one permutation (the present) as "bad" when you don't have all the facts.
6. Ergo, by not having all the facts you come to incorrect conclusions that "Life isn't fair."
7. Instead of starting with the fact that "Life is 100% fair." your glass is already full.
8. With your glass already full your ego is preventing you from knowing the truth:
9. Before you can learn, you must first unlearn.
10. Likewise, the beginning of wisdom is to first admit: "I don't know"
11. By thinking you know when you don't -- you are being dishonest with yourself.
12. By being dishonest with yourself you are believing a lie.
13. By believing a lie are in denial.
14. By being in denial you don't question.
15. By not questioning you are a (mental) zombie.
16. By being a zombie you assume your perspective is valid.
17. By assuming your perspective is valid you don't see you are in the dark.
18. By being in the dark you don't see enlightenment.
19. By not being see enlightened you reject the truth.
20. Before you can understand truth you must change your perspective.
21. In order to change you must answer a question:
22. "When will you 'Wake up and see things as they actually are instead of seeing things how you wish to view them?'"
--
Javaschit, noun a broken computer language (initially) designed ad implemented in 10 days. Math.tan( Math.PI/2 ); returns 16331239353195370 instead of Infinity! WTF?!
/sarcasm Let's keep blaming God for people mis-using their gift of Free-Will because absolving people of their responsibility makes _so_much more sense. NOT.
Maybe instead of being given a Nobel Peace Prize for doing fuck all, that would actually make it worth it.
To bad he doesn't have the balls.
While I agree that the majority of the YouTube comments are indeed "noise" (such as the redundant "I'm watching this in year ####") there is still a few that are add a useful / interesting "signal". I've seen people add meta-data such as:
* the Song Name, Band, and/or Albumb,
* Interesting links about the topic at hand
The biggest problem with YoutTube's comment section is that slow repetitive partial loading. Both /. and reddit allow you to link directly to a message, YouTube doesn't -- this makes finding a particular message extremely time consuming.
Another problem was that comments will sometimes fail to post when the generic "Error" without _any_ indication of _why_. Why are URLs sometimes allowed and other times dis-allowed??
If YouTube would actually think about fixing their crappy comment User Experience comments could actually be useful to the majority of people. Right now they are mostly useless with their brain dead UI.
You're comparing apples and oranges.
One is a forward transformation.
The other is the reverse transformation.
Mapping between the two is non-trivial.
> Don't use FB... problems solved.
Ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away.
If FecesBook does dumb shit like censorship then according to your "solution" they would never get feedback on their stupid policy since apparently everyone would stop using it. Let's pretend that you're right and that everyone left FB. All you've done is moved the goal post. With the _next_ social platform everyone eventually would have the _exact_ same problem.
The line must be drawn somewhere, eventually.
Or as the colloquial Picard would say: "The line must be drawn, here!"
"If you stand for nothing, you'll fall for everything."
--
FecesBook, noun: where other people's bullshit is posted as "news"
When an industry refers to their most profitable consumer to exploit as "whales" you know there is a problem with a lack of respect:
http://kotaku.com/who-are-the-...
Ah, so there is a name for that phenomena.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
LOL -- those are awesome examples BTW !
Indeed. Censorship has been around in various forms.
1. Ultima Online
Origin Systems had a list of "bad word" which included "ass".
Unfortunately, they had a bug -- they checked substrings instead of only checking whole words.
So if you said the word "assassin" it got translated as "*****in*"
Simple solution: use spaces or a separator such as dots.
a.s.s.a.s.s.i.n.
2. Steam censors the word "retarded" and replaces them with hearts.
WTF.
Again simple work-around:
Steam censorship is r.e.t.a.r.d.e.d.
> I'd argue that they have never "innovative".
I would also agree with that assessment.
> Just stole.
I would replace the word stole with the more accurate term bought:
* DriveSpace aka DoubleSpace: Licensed from Vertisoft and then out-right copied Stac Electronics.
* Internet Explorer: Licensed Spyglass Mosaic and renamed it.
* Windows: Copied Apple who copied Xerox.
* Direct3D: Bought Rendermorphics, Ltd and renamed their shitty API RealityLab to Direct3D
Looks like David Wheeler (of readable S Lisp Expressions fame) agrees with us:
* http://www.dwheeler.com/innovation/microsoft.html
I'm asking for proof of the claim that "Science" is the only major area:
science is still the major, if not only, area of life where that introspection happens.
Because it isn't and gave a counter-example.
> Scientists are mere mortals, but science is still the major, if not only, area of life where that introspection happens.
[[Citation]]
Because you're conveniently ignoring "people growing up".
/cynical Oh hush you with your logic -- don't you know it is easier to to be in denial that one needs more faith in someone's pet theory full of holes then to admit that everyone has faith. :-)
--
Dark Matter / Energy is the Aether of the new millennium.
You're spot on about Microsoft slowly becoming irrelevant. They haven't done anything innovative in 20+ years.
Microsoft has become IBM. Still around but no one really cares anymore.
Aside from the new Battlestar Galactica (2004) or Continuum (2012) I haven't seen any _good_ Sci-Fi. Pickings have been pretty slim.
Definitely going to check out recommendations. Thanks !
These are pretty famous people too, eh?
* Celine Dion
* Dan Aykroyd
* Jim Carey
* Keanu Reeves
* Matthew Perry
* Michael J Fox
* Mike Myers
* Pamela Anderson
Just how does one calculate who is more popular anyways? Google trends?
https://www.google.com/trends/...
IMO modern sci-fi has been "dumbed" down to just action flicks. Originally, "classic" Sci-Fi dealt with the _social_ issues and problems that technology created. We got some amazing stories.
Everything by:
* Isaac Asimov -- especially Foundation series.
* Robert A. Heinlein
* Arthur C. Clarke
Is A+.
There are also plenty of Feynman videos on YouTube. Fascinating just to listen to him. He's the true skeptic -- an open mind and willing to _explore_ issues.
Buy why limit this to just novels though?? For modern decent sci-fi TV would include:
* Continuum
* Firefly
* Fringe
* Lost
* Star Trek: The Next Generation
* X-Files
Isn't that the whole point of good Sci-Fi -- to light our imagination with possibilities?
Not the "Time Travel' Deus Ex Machina so much modern sci-fi crap resorts to.
> Just curious, what do you have trouble getting due to artificial scarcity?
I'll bite.
Old DOS games that are no longer sold aka abandonware.
Obviously piracy is one solution but that is no longer an option for me -- which means scouring Ebay for old copies.
There should be a law that if software is no longer being sold for 20 years then it automatically falls into the public domain since obviously it has lost its monetary value.
Agreed. The only "winning" move is to ignore Stupid Juvenile Whiners trolling.
Of course by commenting we're becoming part of the problem. *sigh*
--
"What you resist, persists"
> I wonder if this means SQ3's graphics are, theoretically at least, resolution-free?
Yes, for the most part. It would be trivial to "normalize" the coordinates and then up-sample without general loss of precision.
As long as the final resolution isn't too large (*) the errors wouldn't be (too) noticeable.
(*) I'm not sure at what resolution the precision errors would start becoming noticeable. I would surmise that a scale factor of < 200 would be OK.
> Why on earth did they store it like that I wonder?
It was optimized for space.
Remember Sierra started back on the Apple ][ where disk space was limited: 140 KB. When they switched to the IMB PC/jr storing a full 320x200 = 64,000 pixels is a _minimum_ of 8K compared to few hundred bytes to store the same scene.
> I would have assumed that RLE was been more efficient in space and render speed!
While RLE is extremely fast to decode it is still bloated compared to a poly-lines and/or polygon fill.
You'll probably enjoy this ... it shows how SQ3 rendered a frame piece by piece
Space Quest III art timelapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...