Once the very last person in the world who can still tell an original from the very best of the fakes suddenly kicks the bucket (the real thing), then what?
When a tree falls in the forest, does anyone here it?
My interpretation is that what they meant by "on tap" is what was being displayed at CES.
If you continued reading after stepping into the murky phrase "on tap", you've become so fixated on tracking prey that you've loss all sense of chivalry.
These are not the tea leaves you're looking for.
The correct response is to step back, throw your cape over the sticky filth to protect the innocence, thence to spend a calm half hour working your power squats, while chewing a grass stem and scraping the crud out of your boot treads with a small pen knife.
I'd rank myself at the top of the spectrum in what Paul Ekman / Daniel Goleman term "cognitive empathy" (also called perspective-taking).
Yet I can draw the most amazing blanks when encountering someone I haven't seen recently—for the first five minutes. Gradually it all comes back. I tend to recognize people far quicker by their physical mannerisms than by face, dress, or other static aspects of appearance. I recall ambiguities I've detected in people far better than their outward, declared identity.
My sister, by contrast, never fails to recognize someone on first glance, complete with name, recent concerns, context of last meeting, and last fragment of personal information exchanged. "Stephanie, how's it going with new job assignment? Oh, I like this necklace. Is it new? Hey, you know what? I saw Bob downtown just last week. Are you still in touch?" and so on. Meanwhile, I would still be at "you know, that walk looks familiar, and there's that ironic tilt of the head—there's something lurking behind that I haven't figured out yet—I so know this chick, whatsherfuckingname".
It's not just a profound difference in social orientation. My sister's social skills are, well... social. Whereas my social skills are cognitive. I pick up many shades of a person's internal self-image vs their external self-image and projected self-image. My sister socializes first, connects second. I connect first, socialize second. And both our memories reflect this.
A long time ago, when we were growing up, I used to grief her about watching the same TV shows. "Don't you remember? You watched this show last summer. That guy is going to do this, and this girl is going to do that. The dialogue was so bad, I could hardly concentrate on my calculus assignment from the next room." She never seemed to recall watching the same show twice.
Now, on basic personal dossier, she'd beat me 99 times out of 100. Until it gets deep.
What can you figure out from a face anyway? Whether someone is Jewish? How useless. What you can tell from microscopic hitches in eye movement or verbal delivery will tell you whether a person is pretending to be someone they're really not, or not. Fixed or flexible? Now we're getting somewhere.
I can only conclude that memory is deeply conditioned on the purposes in life we choose to regard as most important.
When I was roughly thirty, I looked at a photo of my grade two classroom, and remembered nearly every face and name (pretty much a fixed cohort through grade five, which certainly helped).
On a parallel note, I suck at basic plot analysis. Never had any gift with the conventions of genre fiction. I've sat beside people steeped in genre who seem to process fiction (whether a book or a movie) the way the Terminator itemizes conversational gambits, whereas I anticipate nothing immediate, but somewhere during the second act I'll start to growl, "this director is going to panic and fuck the ending, I just know it already" (by the time a film is edited, the director's success/failure in bringing the movie home is front and center in everyone's mind—director, editor, producer—so these early hints are not incidental). Yet again, conventions of form are slow for me, while deeper traces knock early.
In particular, movies that go for the fake suspense scene never work for me. He's dead! No, he's not really dead! LOTR pulls this stunt quite a few times (Frodo, Aragorn, Samwise; all the hobbits snug in their feathery Bree beds; meanwhile while Gandalf struts around as the meme personified). The form never hooks me enough to take me along on these silly ruses. After a certain amount of time wandering around in the labyrinths of tvtropes (a quantity of time that shall remain nameless), I now pick up much of this on an analytical level.
After chess, checkers, poker, and Arimaa fell, the significance of Go with its huge search space was whether its huge search space and geometrical intuition represented a fundamentally harder challenge for computer algorithms, or just a different challenge, one that we hadn't figured out yet.
Many were saying that Go posed a fundamentally harder problem than chess. I took the view that Go would fall hard once it finally fell, but it was unclear when that day would arrive. I thought it was more "different" rather than "more difficult".
My view came more from game theory than intuition, because I'm not a Go player.
What we now know is that people reasoning from intuition about what kinds of closed, artificial problems computers are good/bad at are not to be trusted.
Business 101: Cash is king. And as long as Apple makes bucketloads of cash from their current iProducts, they will. When it stops, they will re-evaluate where they are in the world, but not before then.
In the weirdest coincidence of all time, this is also the course description for Guns, Germs, and Steel 101.
For a long time articles on Ars by Jon Stokes pretty much set the standard for enthusiast rehash. Plenty of real journalism could only wish to be as good as much of what Jon wrote back in the day.
Can't say, though, that I'm as impressed with his recent output.
Seconded. They don't improve my reading pleasure nearly enough to compensate for how badly they mess up cut and paste.
The Firefox input box has had a bug for years and years where if you "add to dictionary" a word with a curly quote possessive, it accomplishes nothing. If you change the curly to a straight single quote, and then go "add to dictionary" and then change it back to the original curly, only then it's no longer marked as spelling error.
That's just the tip of the curly quote iceberg.
My clipboard allows me to program scripts to rewrite clipboard entries, and my most heavily used script is "filter fancy quotes".
It's a big problem when software infers the fancy version incorrectly, then doesn't leave any trace of the symbol actually entered.
Half the time, I don't even find curly quotes attractive. But I am fussy about mdash and ndash and hyphen. And prime and double prime and times and degree. But I'd rather just burn those curly quotes.
By the way, The Elements of Typographic Style is awesome. I wouldn't self-publish without it.
A history and guide to typography, it has been praised by Hermann Zapf, who said "I wish to see this book become the Typographers' Bible."
Note that I had to use my "filter" script, because the Wikipedia lead combines both quote styles (it's the curly quotes that are not recommended).
See MOS:STRAIGHT.
Typographical, or curly, quotation marks and apostrophes might be read more efficiently, and many think they look better. However, for practical reasons the straight versions are used on the English Wikipedia.
Consistency keeps searches predictable. Search facilities have differences of which many readers (and editors) are unaware. For example, most modern browsers don't distinguish between curly and straight marks, but Internet Explorer still does (as of 2016), so that a search for Alzheimer's disease will fail to find Alzheimerâ(TM)s disease and vice versa.
Straight quotation marks are easier to type and edit reliably on most platforms.
All praise to Slashcode for making my point for me.
I guess my own solution is to not care quite so much. I'll contribute as I can, and if I run into an asshat, I'll move on.
My approach exactly.
I pretty much only edit Wikipedia articles that I'm actively reading (usually to take very quick notes). I make my changes and move on. I've touched hundreds of articles over the past year and only been reverted by an over-invested douche maybe five times. A couple of times I probably crossed the line a bit and wasn't too surprised.
One revert appeared to be politically motivated. My edit made Israel look slightly worse by intensifying, for clarity, what the article already said. I registered my complaint on the talk page of the editor in question (very active), and never heard back.
So I lost one battle (a quick edit, a quick revert, a quick comment, and done). Discretion is the better part of valour.
I think many of my edits survive because I'm usually scratching my own itch (usually for quickness of note taking). That helps to bring perspective, too.
while constantly hating Windows 10 for being a touchscreen centric cloud friendly os, which occasionally phones home, has a full blown Linux subsystem accessible through bash and has one of the best suites of development tools available
When the EULA reads "thou shalt bend over upon request", it seems misplaced to enthuse over the clover.
(1) Bad interaction between the browser and the sound device (the intermediate streaming libraries have been known to cause problems in the past).
I'm running Firefox on PC-BSD and I can pretty much confirm your observations on resident set and the weird audio bug.
I experience terrible slowdowns after visiting various multimedia sites that take a browser restart to clear up. I've long suspected the audio, because audio has been a weird duck in other regards, as well. (I've got a current problem that any YouTube speed other than normal plays the audio at system rate limit until the audio runs out, usually within a few seconds even for a long video, and then the video freezes, too. This only started to happen sometime in the summer. Previously, it had worked fine. And this YouTube feature still does, under Chromium.)
Do you have a way to spot stuck audio using any tool up to and including dtrace? I'm curious about what's broken here.
The memory management fiasco forces me to restart FF about once per day (after a 2 or 3 GB working set, very sluggish). I'm presently at 2.6 res / 3.3 size with 17.7 hours of accumulated CPU, on a FF instance probably less than 48 hours old, which I hardly touched at all yesterday due to xmas errands.
Another "blessing" is that I have three screens (landscape, portrait, portrait) and a FF restart never puts my active windows back on the same screens (much less the same desktops, so I pretty much quit using desktops). FireTitle helps a lot by allowing me to attach name to my windows so I can quickly return them to their proper places manually.
My FF is pretty tricked out, and I still like it plenty, but the frequency of stone-age moments completely boggles the mind.
I'd like to add one final tip. Contrary to the love of all things sacred, Google Maps does not classify PC-BSD as "supported" (no matter your build) and defaults to "lite" mode, which makes the stone age seem positively neolithic. You can't even break out of the lite-mode prison by clicking away your unborn on the lite mode icon (bottom right corner of map).
But then I discovered that you can escape lite-mode prison by clicking on "your contributions" in the side-bar, which then tells me "you haven't written any reviews yet" and offers to switch me into "full maps". Cue the Blazing Saddles hallelujah chorus (no, Google employees may not leave the auditorium until the chorus concludes).
That $750M fund that's supposed to grow in five years will all be paid by the current and future subscribers, as ISPs will pass on the buck to us.
Back when we built the giant railroad, I think it worked the same way.
Mass infrastructure projects tend to have this bizarre social calculus where the hat is passed around during the daylight hours, and then the bat makes its rounds (among the free riders) after sunset, i.e. these projects are pretty much always designed to get you coming or going.
The golden goose is classified as ATU 571. Do tell us what classification number your story falls under concerning where all this money originates.
Certainly one of the oldest tech-oriented forums should as well.
"Certainly, these are not the droids you are looking for."
And it almost works, but the spell snaps.
"No—wait just a minute!—actually, the arrow of tradition usually points the other direction.
Which reminds me, I just knew there was something funny about the 107-year-old man standing at the head of the overnight line to be the first person in his retirement home to get an iPhone 7.
Someone summon the Men in Black. The old guy in the robe was probably not even human. The old guy is probably some shape-shifting Methuselah species faking decrepitude, but really he hasn't even reached adolescence yet."
Deep dive research with 100+ open tabs is not a standard use case for web browsing, it's just not.
I simply don't see why my expansive life needs to be filtered through your tiny mind. In my household, we bought the smallest pickup truck we could find, and then equipped my office desk with all the monitors that would fit (one landscape, two portrait). Priorities.
Someone down the street has an F450 with duallies, and probably a single HD monitor. Wouldn't you just love to knock on his door and tell him his beloved truck is not a standard use case. Go ahead, I dare you.
I'm running a file system on my desktop where I could easily expand the pool (modulo slightly better hardware) to a petabyte and beyond. Meanwhile, a GeForce GP106-300 packs a bandwidth of 192 GB/s at an MSRP of $199 because someone out there thinks this is definitely a standard use case. Sweet. Maybe the same guy out there who sniffs over his friend's video card with a mere 100 GT/s fill rate, gets on the internet later that day and starts writing "who the heck needs a hundred web tabs?"
Pretty rich.
I completely fail to see how 100 open tabs is anything special. Maybe I'm wrong. Let's see where else we can drawn a consensus line. Well, who the heck needs a clip with more than nine bullets? Or a woodshop with more than four electrical outlets. Or a kitchen with two ovens? Or more than four hobs? Or a house with bookshelves in more than one room? Or three bathrooms? Or a garage with more than three bicycles? Or more than two pairs of skates? Or four dogs?
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
Worst of all, if the computer is limiting the human because we assume puny human. That wasn't the original deal and I will never accept it. Turns out some use cases are not standard, because they are better than standard. Because every human of note better than "standard" at some thing.
I was just saying I would prefer it to what we have now.
I don't agree. A single 149-year-old with a $500 billion war chest (by age 135, soon to become known as liver spot menopause, entering into a really high stakes poker game starts to seem like a pon farr caliber idea, in some gilded back-room of the Boao Forum)—such a person who then goes seriously ape shit could end human life on this planet.
To refer to this as an "unintended" consequence would be too kind by half.
Bright line. Flash point. So different, and yet so similar.
Basically, Wikipedia has become the US college system.
Ah yes, the world according to the Lumper King—kneel before my great Rod of Lumpership, and despair. (Midas kneels, and despairs, but in truth, he was pretty unhappy already.)
Nonsense aside, I do dearly wish there was a way to eliminate all the not-notable endowed chairs from a certain online encyclopedia.
I really don't need it shoved in my face that some academic is presently the Angela Anais Juana Antolina Rosa Edelmira Nin y Culmell chair of Behaviour Psychology in the Department of Quarterly Expectations Surpassed, Lothlorien Memorial Campus, Big Smoke U, Paris, Texas.
How I quaver! Shall I kneel and kiss your ring, or merely sit here enraptured and stroke your ermine robe? Decisions, decisions.
I desperately wish some enterprising soul would create an article with the title "List of notable named chairs". (Unfortunately, I can't create this myself, because I would list only one, and my "list" would immediately be deleted as a knee high to a discarded lipstick stain.) If anyone out there can think of two other noteworthy named chairs, this is obvious, low-hanging fruit.
That concludes today's second installment of "One of These Things Is Not Like the Other", with Wikipedia and the college system mentioned in the same breath.
Hate to disappoint you, but the carbon-dioxide externality cartel is no better at showing their workings. Sometimes I doubt they even have any, unless it resembles a menu at a fancy, five-star French restaurant.
Likewise, I have nothing against smokers, though it sure would be great if they never exhaled.
Slashdot Mirror
s/here/hear
Caffeine apparently lost in flight somewhere over the Pacific.
Once the very last person in the world who can still tell an original from the very best of the fakes suddenly kicks the bucket (the real thing), then what?
When a tree falls in the forest, does anyone here it?
You quoted the whole damn thing, and now it's open to question which side you're actually playing for.
This one is ripe for moderation into the sin bin. For included content alone.
Yes, but do all these people want to be touched?
My trusty calculator with a dedicated [000] key says the legal settlement could end up costing an exillion dollars.
If you continued reading after stepping into the murky phrase "on tap", you've become so fixated on tracking prey that you've loss all sense of chivalry.
These are not the tea leaves you're looking for.
The correct response is to step back, throw your cape over the sticky filth to protect the innocence, thence to spend a calm half hour working your power squats, while chewing a grass stem and scraping the crud out of your boot treads with a small pen knife.
Between this and Pebble, it does kind of look like Fitbit "draining the swamp" of customer-controlled alternative platforms.
In three years, $25,000,000. In ten years, $25,000,000,000.
Memory is complex.
I'd rank myself at the top of the spectrum in what Paul Ekman / Daniel Goleman term "cognitive empathy" (also called perspective-taking).
Yet I can draw the most amazing blanks when encountering someone I haven't seen recently—for the first five minutes. Gradually it all comes back. I tend to recognize people far quicker by their physical mannerisms than by face, dress, or other static aspects of appearance. I recall ambiguities I've detected in people far better than their outward, declared identity.
My sister, by contrast, never fails to recognize someone on first glance, complete with name, recent concerns, context of last meeting, and last fragment of personal information exchanged. "Stephanie, how's it going with new job assignment? Oh, I like this necklace. Is it new? Hey, you know what? I saw Bob downtown just last week. Are you still in touch?" and so on. Meanwhile, I would still be at "you know, that walk looks familiar, and there's that ironic tilt of the head—there's something lurking behind that I haven't figured out yet—I so know this chick, whatsherfuckingname".
It's not just a profound difference in social orientation. My sister's social skills are, well ... social. Whereas my social skills are cognitive. I pick up many shades of a person's internal self-image vs their external self-image and projected self-image. My sister socializes first, connects second. I connect first, socialize second. And both our memories reflect this.
A long time ago, when we were growing up, I used to grief her about watching the same TV shows. "Don't you remember? You watched this show last summer. That guy is going to do this, and this girl is going to do that. The dialogue was so bad, I could hardly concentrate on my calculus assignment from the next room." She never seemed to recall watching the same show twice.
Now, on basic personal dossier, she'd beat me 99 times out of 100. Until it gets deep.
What can you figure out from a face anyway? Whether someone is Jewish? How useless. What you can tell from microscopic hitches in eye movement or verbal delivery will tell you whether a person is pretending to be someone they're really not, or not. Fixed or flexible? Now we're getting somewhere.
I can only conclude that memory is deeply conditioned on the purposes in life we choose to regard as most important.
When I was roughly thirty, I looked at a photo of my grade two classroom, and remembered nearly every face and name (pretty much a fixed cohort through grade five, which certainly helped).
On a parallel note, I suck at basic plot analysis. Never had any gift with the conventions of genre fiction. I've sat beside people steeped in genre who seem to process fiction (whether a book or a movie) the way the Terminator itemizes conversational gambits, whereas I anticipate nothing immediate, but somewhere during the second act I'll start to growl, "this director is going to panic and fuck the ending, I just know it already" (by the time a film is edited, the director's success/failure in bringing the movie home is front and center in everyone's mind—director, editor, producer—so these early hints are not incidental). Yet again, conventions of form are slow for me, while deeper traces knock early.
In particular, movies that go for the fake suspense scene never work for me. He's dead! No, he's not really dead! LOTR pulls this stunt quite a few times (Frodo, Aragorn, Samwise; all the hobbits snug in their feathery Bree beds; meanwhile while Gandalf struts around as the meme personified). The form never hooks me enough to take me along on these silly ruses. After a certain amount of time wandering around in the labyrinths of tvtropes (a quantity of time that shall remain nameless), I now pick up much of this on an analytical level.
After chess, checkers, poker, and Arimaa fell, the significance of Go with its huge search space was whether its huge search space and geometrical intuition represented a fundamentally harder challenge for computer algorithms, or just a different challenge, one that we hadn't figured out yet.
Many were saying that Go posed a fundamentally harder problem than chess. I took the view that Go would fall hard once it finally fell, but it was unclear when that day would arrive. I thought it was more "different" rather than "more difficult".
My view came more from game theory than intuition, because I'm not a Go player.
What we now know is that people reasoning from intuition about what kinds of closed, artificial problems computers are good/bad at are not to be trusted.
Brute force comes in many flavours.
In the weirdest coincidence of all time, this is also the course description for Guns, Germs, and Steel 101.
For a long time articles on Ars by Jon Stokes pretty much set the standard for enthusiast rehash. Plenty of real journalism could only wish to be as good as much of what Jon wrote back in the day.
Can't say, though, that I'm as impressed with his recent output.
Why I "Need" an AR-15
But I'm even less impressed with this:
The AR-15 has to go: Sorry, Jon Stokes, but your toy isn't more important than people's lives
Seconded. They don't improve my reading pleasure nearly enough to compensate for how badly they mess up cut and paste.
The Firefox input box has had a bug for years and years where if you "add to dictionary" a word with a curly quote possessive, it accomplishes nothing. If you change the curly to a straight single quote, and then go "add to dictionary" and then change it back to the original curly, only then it's no longer marked as spelling error.
That's just the tip of the curly quote iceberg.
My clipboard allows me to program scripts to rewrite clipboard entries, and my most heavily used script is "filter fancy quotes".
It's a big problem when software infers the fancy version incorrectly, then doesn't leave any trace of the symbol actually entered.
Half the time, I don't even find curly quotes attractive. But I am fussy about mdash and ndash and hyphen. And prime and double prime and times and degree. But I'd rather just burn those curly quotes.
By the way, The Elements of Typographic Style is awesome. I wouldn't self-publish without it.
Note that I had to use my "filter" script, because the Wikipedia lead combines both quote styles (it's the curly quotes that are not recommended).
See MOS:STRAIGHT.
All praise to Slashcode for making my point for me.
My approach exactly.
I pretty much only edit Wikipedia articles that I'm actively reading (usually to take very quick notes). I make my changes and move on. I've touched hundreds of articles over the past year and only been reverted by an over-invested douche maybe five times. A couple of times I probably crossed the line a bit and wasn't too surprised.
One revert appeared to be politically motivated. My edit made Israel look slightly worse by intensifying, for clarity, what the article already said. I registered my complaint on the talk page of the editor in question (very active), and never heard back.
So I lost one battle (a quick edit, a quick revert, a quick comment, and done). Discretion is the better part of valour.
I think many of my edits survive because I'm usually scratching my own itch (usually for quickness of note taking). That helps to bring perspective, too.
When the EULA reads "thou shalt bend over upon request", it seems misplaced to enthuse over the clover.
One thing worse than picking up pennies in front of a steamroller is picking up cherries under a gorilla (this includes old, tired, dissipated gorillas with weak bladders).
I'll believe this apology when I see the one-click rollback tool that never fails. (This is possible under ZFS.)
I guess that means I'll also accept their apology if and when they release Windows 7/ZFS.
I'm running Firefox on PC-BSD and I can pretty much confirm your observations on resident set and the weird audio bug.
I experience terrible slowdowns after visiting various multimedia sites that take a browser restart to clear up. I've long suspected the audio, because audio has been a weird duck in other regards, as well. (I've got a current problem that any YouTube speed other than normal plays the audio at system rate limit until the audio runs out, usually within a few seconds even for a long video, and then the video freezes, too. This only started to happen sometime in the summer. Previously, it had worked fine. And this YouTube feature still does, under Chromium.)
Do you have a way to spot stuck audio using any tool up to and including dtrace? I'm curious about what's broken here.
The memory management fiasco forces me to restart FF about once per day (after a 2 or 3 GB working set, very sluggish). I'm presently at 2.6 res / 3.3 size with 17.7 hours of accumulated CPU, on a FF instance probably less than 48 hours old, which I hardly touched at all yesterday due to xmas errands.
Another "blessing" is that I have three screens (landscape, portrait, portrait) and a FF restart never puts my active windows back on the same screens (much less the same desktops, so I pretty much quit using desktops). FireTitle helps a lot by allowing me to attach name to my windows so I can quickly return them to their proper places manually.
My FF is pretty tricked out, and I still like it plenty, but the frequency of stone-age moments completely boggles the mind.
I'd like to add one final tip. Contrary to the love of all things sacred, Google Maps does not classify PC-BSD as "supported" (no matter your build) and defaults to "lite" mode, which makes the stone age seem positively neolithic. You can't even break out of the lite-mode prison by clicking away your unborn on the lite mode icon (bottom right corner of map).
But then I discovered that you can escape lite-mode prison by clicking on "your contributions" in the side-bar, which then tells me "you haven't written any reviews yet" and offers to switch me into "full maps". Cue the Blazing Saddles hallelujah chorus (no, Google employees may not leave the auditorium until the chorus concludes).
Back when we built the giant railroad, I think it worked the same way.
Mass infrastructure projects tend to have this bizarre social calculus where the hat is passed around during the daylight hours, and then the bat makes its rounds (among the free riders) after sunset, i.e. these projects are pretty much always designed to get you coming or going.
The golden goose is classified as ATU 571. Do tell us what classification number your story falls under concerning where all this money originates.
"Certainly, these are not the droids you are looking for."
And it almost works, but the spell snaps.
"No—wait just a minute!—actually, the arrow of tradition usually points the other direction.
Which reminds me, I just knew there was something funny about the 107-year-old man standing at the head of the overnight line to be the first person in his retirement home to get an iPhone 7.
Someone summon the Men in Black. The old guy in the robe was probably not even human. The old guy is probably some shape-shifting Methuselah species faking decrepitude, but really he hasn't even reached adolescence yet."
I simply don't see why my expansive life needs to be filtered through your tiny mind. In my household, we bought the smallest pickup truck we could find, and then equipped my office desk with all the monitors that would fit (one landscape, two portrait). Priorities.
Someone down the street has an F450 with duallies, and probably a single HD monitor. Wouldn't you just love to knock on his door and tell him his beloved truck is not a standard use case. Go ahead, I dare you.
I'm running a file system on my desktop where I could easily expand the pool (modulo slightly better hardware) to a petabyte and beyond. Meanwhile, a GeForce GP106-300 packs a bandwidth of 192 GB/s at an MSRP of $199 because someone out there thinks this is definitely a standard use case. Sweet. Maybe the same guy out there who sniffs over his friend's video card with a mere 100 GT/s fill rate, gets on the internet later that day and starts writing "who the heck needs a hundred web tabs?"
Pretty rich.
I completely fail to see how 100 open tabs is anything special. Maybe I'm wrong. Let's see where else we can drawn a consensus line. Well, who the heck needs a clip with more than nine bullets? Or a woodshop with more than four electrical outlets. Or a kitchen with two ovens? Or more than four hobs? Or a house with bookshelves in more than one room? Or three bathrooms? Or a garage with more than three bicycles? Or more than two pairs of skates? Or four dogs?
Worst of all, if the computer is limiting the human because we assume puny human. That wasn't the original deal and I will never accept it. Turns out some use cases are not standard, because they are better than standard. Because every human of note better than "standard" at some thing.
Too bad nothing goes under or over, that would shatter this stupid story title.
"FOM FOM FOM" is how the drums of Moria would sound, underwater.
I don't agree. A single 149-year-old with a $500 billion war chest (by age 135, soon to become known as liver spot menopause, entering into a really high stakes poker game starts to seem like a pon farr caliber idea, in some gilded back-room of the Boao Forum)—such a person who then goes seriously ape shit could end human life on this planet.
To refer to this as an "unintended" consequence would be too kind by half.
Bright line. Flash point. So different, and yet so similar.
Ah yes, the world according to the Lumper King—kneel before my great Rod of Lumpership, and despair. (Midas kneels, and despairs, but in truth, he was pretty unhappy already.)
Nonsense aside, I do dearly wish there was a way to eliminate all the not-notable endowed chairs from a certain online encyclopedia.
I really don't need it shoved in my face that some academic is presently the Angela Anais Juana Antolina Rosa Edelmira Nin y Culmell chair of Behaviour Psychology in the Department of Quarterly Expectations Surpassed, Lothlorien Memorial Campus, Big Smoke U, Paris, Texas.
How I quaver! Shall I kneel and kiss your ring, or merely sit here enraptured and stroke your ermine robe? Decisions, decisions.
Notable chair: Lucasian Professor of Mathematics. All the others, not so much.
I desperately wish some enterprising soul would create an article with the title "List of notable named chairs". (Unfortunately, I can't create this myself, because I would list only one, and my "list" would immediately be deleted as a knee high to a discarded lipstick stain.) If anyone out there can think of two other noteworthy named chairs, this is obvious, low-hanging fruit.
That concludes today's second installment of "One of These Things Is Not Like the Other", with Wikipedia and the college system mentioned in the same breath.
Only with e-cash. Coming to a mineshaft gap near you.
Hate to disappoint you, but the carbon-dioxide externality cartel is no better at showing their workings. Sometimes I doubt they even have any, unless it resembles a menu at a fancy, five-star French restaurant.
Likewise, I have nothing against smokers, though it sure would be great if they never exhaled.