Poor people can't afford to live in cities. The people you're thinking of are homeless, and based on your post, I suspect you haven't spent a lot of time talking to them.
The problem is that Joseph Smith made a number of claims that are provably false. Only an idiot would believe in something they know to be false.
I understand that many claims made by "Christians" are also provably false, but these are claims made by preachers peddling doctrines, not claims made in scripture. For example, it is not clear whether depictions of miracles in scripture are meant to be taken literally or metaphorically. At the time, there was a tradition among Jews to make points using legends. The canonical version if the Bible offers differing accounts of Jesus' life (but does not make conflicting claims about what he said) almost as if to say that the details of his life are added to make points about spirituality rather than to document actual historical events. Another problem is the claim that scripture is inerrant. That claim is, ironically, not found in scripture, and it's obviously used by con-artists to peddle false doctrines based on narrow readings of particular scriptures ("Jesus hates fags" and stuff like that). I don't really have time to go into all differences between sound teaching as it's depicted in the Bible and what is taught in Church, but there are a lot of them.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is you shouldn't judge Christian values based on the actions and words of people who are only claiming to be Christians for worldly gain. It's good to stay open minded about things. And if you ever read the Bible, you would be shocked by all the differences between it and what is said about it in Church. And you'd be shocked by how bad Christians are at doing what it says, but then it's not surprising since they don't really know.
It is kind of strange that they would get mad a US corporation for helping out someone they've been helping out for decades. I'm sure they would have approved of the sale at the time. I guess they just look at it as a nice excuse to drive more companies out of the states.
The large cultural differences you see mean that cultures do not evolve to be more or less the same. The differences could be genetic, or geographic, but there's little reason to believe that is the case. And culture can influence either of these (genetics through sexual selection, geography because people chose where they live). If you subscribe to the theory that it is a chaotic system, then it is indeed possible that something as simple as a story can have far-reaching effects. But if you believe culture is more pre-determined, then the present world doesn't really make sense. It would be, like you say, more homogeneous.
I think the idea is that they can use this, along with information tracking, to see political events such as the riots that are now taking place in the middle east before they happen, and so that they can understand how to prevent them. And so that they can understand and engineer stories that will be effective in influencing people across cultural divides. They want to be able to do this with AI, so they need a formal scientific approach.
There are large gaps, culturally, between the western world (Europe and the Americas) that is influenced by the Bible, and the Eastern world (China, India, etc.) that are not.
Their goal is to formalize the study of stories so that they can develop quantitative methods of tracking understanding stories. Whenever a new plant is "discovered" there are a bunch of people like you who say "well, the natives already knew of it". Yes, everyone knows about stories. But there is not a formal scientific approach to dealing with them, so they have a lot of untapped potential from a social engineering perspective. It's like building a bridge without a quantitative approach to design. Yes, people did it for thousands of years, but once they figured out the science behind it they got a lot better at it. DARPA is hoping they can achieve the same thing for stories.
Their intent is to use this for military applications, but it's better than bombs, right? I'd rather fight wars through stories, honesty.
Or the crime shows where the police follow the evidence to the criminal, rather than just interviewing everyone involved, picking someone they think is guilty, and then building a case against them.
When will I be able to get the final version? I'm not normally a Microsoft fan, but I use IE a lot at work and I am legitimately excited about the prospect of a new version. I wish they would release a Mac version.
Why not? it works for a little while. They'll be long gone by the time the chickens come home to roost. Allowing future generations to pay for your excesses is the American way.
Guns in a modern fighter is a complete waste of money.
That's been said before, and proven wrong every time. Sometimes, you need a gun. You wouldn't say that since most ground combat happens out of knife range, soldiers do not need to be equipped and trained with knives, but that's basically what you've said here. You want to be equipped for as many situations as is reasonably possible. Needing a gun on a fighter is a real possibility, so you want to be able to equip your planes with them.
That's not true because the problems that brought down those two shuttles have been fixed. There's no way to really know what the odds are now. They might be less because there are fewer issues that can cause a failure now, or they might be more because the shuttles are aging.
I think the most realistic alternative launch technique is a rail gun like the one the navy recently demonstrated. You could use it at first to launch a scramjet vehicle up to the supersonic speeds it needs to begin working. Later as the technology develops you might be able to launch payloads at orbital velocities directly from the railgun. This would reduce the weight and size of the vehicles, and hopefully their cost along with it.
You can do it, if the report has one table, and one figure, a one page executive summary, one page of actual report text, and one page of field notes, and then just three fly-sheets for the table, figure, and field notes. But 8 pages is definitely the bare minimum.
Liquid fuel rocket research did not start in NAZI Germany. It is very likely in my opinion the technology would have been used to launch payloads to orbit initially no matter the course of history. It's inventor specifically imagined using the technology for launching payloads to orbit, and it was the only technology even remotely capable of achieving that at the time. H.G. Wells imagined shooting a payload out of a giant cannon, but the Germans were working on that too. Even today, the imagined alternatives (Scramjets, space elevators among others) may prove to be impossible, infeasible, or more expensive. Irregardless, research on such alternatives is ongoing, and it disingenuous to imply that it somehow is not.
Of the 54 new planet candidates found in the habitable zone, five are near Earth- sized. The remaining 49 habitable zone candidates range from super-Earth size -- up to twice the size of Earth -- to larger than Jupiter, NASA stated.
They've found 5 earth sized planet candidates in what they believe to be the habitable zone. That's pretty exciting to me whether they're confirmed or not.
If I were the manager I would have written him an email saying his experience was not typical and that he should come back and have a free meal on the house. Suing him seems much less likely to have a favorable result, given the nature of the complaint.
Also, if the chicken was undercooked, why didn't he just ask the chef to cook it longer? He's right there.
Slashdot Mirror
Poor people can't afford to live in cities. The people you're thinking of are homeless, and based on your post, I suspect you haven't spent a lot of time talking to them.
The problem is that Joseph Smith made a number of claims that are provably false. Only an idiot would believe in something they know to be false.
I understand that many claims made by "Christians" are also provably false, but these are claims made by preachers peddling doctrines, not claims made in scripture. For example, it is not clear whether depictions of miracles in scripture are meant to be taken literally or metaphorically. At the time, there was a tradition among Jews to make points using legends. The canonical version if the Bible offers differing accounts of Jesus' life (but does not make conflicting claims about what he said) almost as if to say that the details of his life are added to make points about spirituality rather than to document actual historical events. Another problem is the claim that scripture is inerrant. That claim is, ironically, not found in scripture, and it's obviously used by con-artists to peddle false doctrines based on narrow readings of particular scriptures ("Jesus hates fags" and stuff like that). I don't really have time to go into all differences between sound teaching as it's depicted in the Bible and what is taught in Church, but there are a lot of them.
Anyway, what I'm trying to say is you shouldn't judge Christian values based on the actions and words of people who are only claiming to be Christians for worldly gain. It's good to stay open minded about things. And if you ever read the Bible, you would be shocked by all the differences between it and what is said about it in Church. And you'd be shocked by how bad Christians are at doing what it says, but then it's not surprising since they don't really know.
It is kind of strange that they would get mad a US corporation for helping out someone they've been helping out for decades. I'm sure they would have approved of the sale at the time. I guess they just look at it as a nice excuse to drive more companies out of the states.
The large cultural differences you see mean that cultures do not evolve to be more or less the same. The differences could be genetic, or geographic, but there's little reason to believe that is the case. And culture can influence either of these (genetics through sexual selection, geography because people chose where they live). If you subscribe to the theory that it is a chaotic system, then it is indeed possible that something as simple as a story can have far-reaching effects. But if you believe culture is more pre-determined, then the present world doesn't really make sense. It would be, like you say, more homogeneous.
I think the idea is that they can use this, along with information tracking, to see political events such as the riots that are now taking place in the middle east before they happen, and so that they can understand how to prevent them. And so that they can understand and engineer stories that will be effective in influencing people across cultural divides. They want to be able to do this with AI, so they need a formal scientific approach.
I love this story! More people need to read it.
There are large gaps, culturally, between the western world (Europe and the Americas) that is influenced by the Bible, and the Eastern world (China, India, etc.) that are not.
Their goal is to formalize the study of stories so that they can develop quantitative methods of tracking understanding stories. Whenever a new plant is "discovered" there are a bunch of people like you who say "well, the natives already knew of it". Yes, everyone knows about stories. But there is not a formal scientific approach to dealing with them, so they have a lot of untapped potential from a social engineering perspective. It's like building a bridge without a quantitative approach to design. Yes, people did it for thousands of years, but once they figured out the science behind it they got a lot better at it. DARPA is hoping they can achieve the same thing for stories.
Their intent is to use this for military applications, but it's better than bombs, right? I'd rather fight wars through stories, honesty.
Or the crime shows where the police follow the evidence to the criminal, rather than just interviewing everyone involved, picking someone they think is guilty, and then building a case against them.
Ok, I read the fucking article, and it's supposed to be available mid-April.
So that I can work from home without feeling the wrath of an unsupported browser. I wouldn't have to use it all the time.
When will I be able to get the final version? I'm not normally a Microsoft fan, but I use IE a lot at work and I am legitimately excited about the prospect of a new version. I wish they would release a Mac version.
Why not? it works for a little while. They'll be long gone by the time the chickens come home to roost. Allowing future generations to pay for your excesses is the American way.
That's been said before, and proven wrong every time. Sometimes, you need a gun. You wouldn't say that since most ground combat happens out of knife range, soldiers do not need to be equipped and trained with knives, but that's basically what you've said here. You want to be equipped for as many situations as is reasonably possible. Needing a gun on a fighter is a real possibility, so you want to be able to equip your planes with them.
That's not true because the problems that brought down those two shuttles have been fixed. There's no way to really know what the odds are now. They might be less because there are fewer issues that can cause a failure now, or they might be more because the shuttles are aging.
I was gonna say cost. . .
I think the most realistic alternative launch technique is a rail gun like the one the navy recently demonstrated. You could use it at first to launch a scramjet vehicle up to the supersonic speeds it needs to begin working. Later as the technology develops you might be able to launch payloads at orbital velocities directly from the railgun. This would reduce the weight and size of the vehicles, and hopefully their cost along with it.
I can think of a couple reasons.
You can do it, if the report has one table, and one figure, a one page executive summary, one page of actual report text, and one page of field notes, and then just three fly-sheets for the table, figure, and field notes. But 8 pages is definitely the bare minimum.
Liquid fuel rocket research did not start in NAZI Germany. It is very likely in my opinion the technology would have been used to launch payloads to orbit initially no matter the course of history. It's inventor specifically imagined using the technology for launching payloads to orbit, and it was the only technology even remotely capable of achieving that at the time. H.G. Wells imagined shooting a payload out of a giant cannon, but the Germans were working on that too. Even today, the imagined alternatives (Scramjets, space elevators among others) may prove to be impossible, infeasible, or more expensive. Irregardless, research on such alternatives is ongoing, and it disingenuous to imply that it somehow is not.
They've found 5 earth sized planet candidates in what they believe to be the habitable zone. That's pretty exciting to me whether they're confirmed or not.
He may have been referring to the "MS" in "MSNBC".
. . . and he was never heard from again.
What you have said is true. On the other hand, this latest nomination brings the award renewed credibility.
If I were the manager I would have written him an email saying his experience was not typical and that he should come back and have a free meal on the house. Suing him seems much less likely to have a favorable result, given the nature of the complaint.
Also, if the chicken was undercooked, why didn't he just ask the chef to cook it longer? He's right there.