Yes I agree with that. The thing is, ever time I made things more accurate I later realise I've made it too involved.
However, it *is* visually convincing and it does explain it, and so I thought it would make quite a good introduction.
Do feel free to get in contact with me about any ideas though. I know it isn't perfect, or anywhere near, and there is always a good reason to improve it.
Now I thought this for ages, but my new DVD player does not have an 'eject' button, and it is so annoying! I always forget and stare at the remote for a while, before deciding that it doesn't have an eject button (it only has about 8 buttons anyway). It's silly but I seem to always do it.
It is actually quite useful because on some machines the tray comes out quite slowly.
"If you leave some kids alone on an island and let them fend for themselves without teaching them any known human language, it has been demonstrated that they will generate their own complete language from the ground up in precisely 2 generations. This has been demonstrated many times. There is no real need for English language education for native speakers."
Really? Do you have a reference or can you remember the name for one of these experiments? It sounds interesting.
A sword would of been better, you can run or defend yourself with something a lot better. People could of attacked him or whatever. Guns cowards can use, too.
I was actually being serious. I just meant that if Microsoft say "This feature is gonna have this...", that is more of an intention instead of a promise.
On the other hand, I kinda like the of being a sarcastic lawyer and so I choose that option. If you ever get into legal trouble, I will happily defend you in court with the use of sarcastic comments. (But that is not a promise =P)
"He details Microsoft's broken promises over the years"
I may have missed it somewhere, but did Microsoft ever promise these things? I mean, they may have said "Windows Vista will have feature X", but that is hardly a promise.
It is just it is a very bad thing to break promises, of course. But if you did not make a promise explicitly then I do not feel there is too much problem in saying "Oh actually that cannot happen".
I just don't like language like this that really gives a negative spin on things, when really language in this sort of thing should be neutral, I think.
You've just spoilt it. I always looked up to Sweden as an example of what a country can be.
Still, I don't think it is quite as bad as you make out perhaps, at least compared to the rest of the world. I have no problem with The Pirate Bay being closed down either, in fact I think it should (although I have used it a few times, I do not pretend it is not immorial. I used it to download BBC documentaries though which makes me feel not so terrible.)
Yes I agree with what you are saying, and it is worrying. The scary thingy is, until the Labour party changes back into what it was around 1997, there isn't too much we can do about this =( It's all very worrying.
It is the to be tortured part which made it incorrect. I suppose that means it is "nearly true", since it is true if you exclude those few words.
I suppose it also depends on how you read it. I read it as they want them exported so they can be tortured (i.e. their aim is for them to be tortured). I say I do not think that is true.
If you mean they are exported to places where they might be tortured... well, I think deals have been made to say this will not be the case. (Although many people feel such deals would not be carried out.) In this latter case you do have a point, but I think you should be more careful how you word it.
1. Some gun crime still occurs, but less than if there were no control. It is interesting that nearly every shooting gets on the news, isn't it?
2. That would've occurred even without CCTV. That is a human problem, not a technology one.
3. Companies already know a lot about us. So do political parties even when they are not in power. There is already lots of data which can be abused. The page you link to via Google is out of context - see replies in this same story. Insiders are worrying, but it is not a new problem.
4. (Nothing to add)
5. It is very easy to take the opinion that "Labour are all spin!" when it is what the comedians, the newspapers and the cartoonist all say. There is some truth in it, but it is perhaps better to be reasoned.
6. I didn't say anything about those problems! Consumer debt is particularly worrying actually. Very worrying. And add on to all of that the world problems, like global warming (if you believe it) and peak oil (again, if you believe it. Although this is perhaps more questionable) that we must worry about.
(This has nothing to do with this thread in particular, but some people have said that the MPs are stupid. They certainly are not, there are a lot of intelligent ones there)
Why are you so against these cards? They're not actually that bad. It is just one of those issues where it is very easy and natural to take the "NO THEY ARE BAD!" view, but in fact it is not so terrible. The worst it will be is a waste of money.
I do not see why you have these objections. "they want to take my DNA if I'm arrested for a crime I haven't committed"... why is that a problem? It isn't. It helps catch criminals, and it actually does.
I think you should stop the knee-jerk reactions and actually think about things. You may think you are thinking right now, but your not. Be calm and logical. You may come to the same conclusion, but then you will be able to come up with a better argument for it than "I feel disgusted that my government feels free to treat me like a criminal in my own country".
And voting for the torries is just a plain terrible idea. Don't do it.
(How odd. In this story I have been posting as a real Pro-ID-Cards person, when in fact I am not. It seems somewhat necessary though.)
I agree, it is irrational. All responses to your message have also been stupid. It is almost as if the slashbots against it are irrational.
This is an odd thing about Slashdot. Surely it is supposed to be the most clever of the USA, but in fact a lot of the people on here are idiots. Now there are some very clever people on here, where it is always great to hear their reasoned opinions, but on the whole it is not. A paradox!
Civil rights are not prevented in any way by gun control (that is a very good thing and we want it. Don't you dare criticise our right not to get shot). CCTV has reduced crime a lot, and we don't like crime. It doesn't affect our civil rights at all. ID cards do not affect civil rights either at all. America's problems are much worse, and in fact the UK is ahead of America in civil rights and such. We are just both behind places like Sweden.
Labour are not fascist. Conservatives are not for civil liberties either; they are just not against them.
I think Americas problems are actually much worse than the UKs, and we are certainally not doing worse things. You are just blind of the problems of America and uninformed about the problems of the UK if you think that.
Slashdot Mirror
Sadly, the Guardian sells next to nothing despite it being by far the best newspaper.
Yes I agree with that. The thing is, ever time I made things more accurate I later realise I've made it too involved.
However, it *is* visually convincing and it does explain it, and so I thought it would make quite a good introduction.
Do feel free to get in contact with me about any ideas though. I know it isn't perfect, or anywhere near, and there is always a good reason to improve it.
As for the other comment, opps I'll fix that.
Oh and also this book is great:
http://www.amazon.com/Euler-Master-Dolciani-Mathematical-Expositions/dp/0883853280
You don't need much knowledge (A-Level knowledge in the UK) but there are so many wonderful results proved in it!
I wrote this:
http://people.pwf.cam.ac.uk/jlnw3/maths/books/prime/
It was meant as an introduction to the idea of proof. Perhaps you might like it.
Real maths nerds don't use calculators because there is no need for them.
Engineering students might well need one though.
Now I thought this for ages, but my new DVD player does not have an 'eject' button, and it is so annoying! I always forget and stare at the remote for a while, before deciding that it doesn't have an eject button (it only has about 8 buttons anyway). It's silly but I seem to always do it.
It is actually quite useful because on some machines the tray comes out quite slowly.
"If you leave some kids alone on an island and let them fend for themselves without teaching them any known human language, it has been demonstrated that they will generate their own complete language from the ground up in precisely 2 generations. This has been demonstrated many times. There is no real need for English language education for native speakers."
Really? Do you have a reference or can you remember the name for one of these experiments? It sounds interesting.
We have multiple. What are you on about? Don't talk in future!
A sword would of been better, you can run or defend yourself with something a lot better. People could of attacked him or whatever. Guns cowards can use, too.
It isn't really a lack of freedom, is it?
I was actually being serious. I just meant that if Microsoft say "This feature is gonna have this...", that is more of an intention instead of a promise.
On the other hand, I kinda like the of being a sarcastic lawyer and so I choose that option. If you ever get into legal trouble, I will happily defend you in court with the use of sarcastic comments. (But that is not a promise =P)
"He details Microsoft's broken promises over the years"
I may have missed it somewhere, but did Microsoft ever promise these things? I mean, they may have said "Windows Vista will have feature X", but that is hardly a promise.
It is just it is a very bad thing to break promises, of course. But if you did not make a promise explicitly then I do not feel there is too much problem in saying "Oh actually that cannot happen".
I just don't like language like this that really gives a negative spin on things, when really language in this sort of thing should be neutral, I think.
1. Some of it is written down
2. The french have it
3. It would be legal in America.
Woah if you were in power it'd be even worse than Bush.
If people like you aren't uncommon in America, then perhaps you could be doing much worse than Bush then. Well done for electing him?
You've just spoilt it. I always looked up to Sweden as an example of what a country can be.
Still, I don't think it is quite as bad as you make out perhaps, at least compared to the rest of the world. I have no problem with The Pirate Bay being closed down either, in fact I think it should (although I have used it a few times, I do not pretend it is not immorial. I used it to download BBC documentaries though which makes me feel not so terrible.)
You made me laugh in any case =P
Ah interesting point.
I will remember it. Thank you.
(Like I say, I'm not actually for it.)
Yes I agree with what you are saying, and it is worrying. The scary thingy is, until the Labour party changes back into what it was around 1997, there isn't too much we can do about this =( It's all very worrying.
It is the to be tortured part which made it incorrect. I suppose that means it is "nearly true", since it is true if you exclude those few words.
I suppose it also depends on how you read it. I read it as they want them exported so they can be tortured (i.e. their aim is for them to be tortured). I say I do not think that is true.
If you mean they are exported to places where they might be tortured... well, I think deals have been made to say this will not be the case. (Although many people feel such deals would not be carried out.) In this latter case you do have a point, but I think you should be more careful how you word it.
Nearly everyone agrees with me! You can't just say "no one agrees with you" and pretend that is the truth.
No, Gun control is not bad. We don't think it is bad. We have thought about it, and decided this. We are not being blind.
"I chuckled at the ridiculousness of your statements." -- Ah, if only I could be more like you, right? You who is so reasoned.
Hmm.
I agree with that, yes. That is the reason I am against it.
(If you look at my other posts in this thread, I seem for it, but in fact I am not. I just don't agree it takes away any of our civil rights)
1. Some gun crime still occurs, but less than if there were no control. It is interesting that nearly every shooting gets on the news, isn't it?
2. That would've occurred even without CCTV. That is a human problem, not a technology one.
3. Companies already know a lot about us. So do political parties even when they are not in power. There is already lots of data which can be abused. The page you link to via Google is out of context - see replies in this same story. Insiders are worrying, but it is not a new problem.
4. (Nothing to add)
5. It is very easy to take the opinion that "Labour are all spin!" when it is what the comedians, the newspapers and the cartoonist all say. There is some truth in it, but it is perhaps better to be reasoned.
6. I didn't say anything about those problems! Consumer debt is particularly worrying actually. Very worrying. And add on to all of that the world problems, like global warming (if you believe it) and peak oil (again, if you believe it. Although this is perhaps more questionable) that we must worry about.
(This has nothing to do with this thread in particular, but some people have said that the MPs are stupid. They certainly are not, there are a lot of intelligent ones there)
Why are you so against these cards? They're not actually that bad. It is just one of those issues where it is very easy and natural to take the "NO THEY ARE BAD!" view, but in fact it is not so terrible. The worst it will be is a waste of money.
... why is that a problem? It isn't. It helps catch criminals, and it actually does.
I do not see why you have these objections. "they want to take my DNA if I'm arrested for a crime I haven't committed"
I think you should stop the knee-jerk reactions and actually think about things. You may think you are thinking right now, but your not. Be calm and logical. You may come to the same conclusion, but then you will be able to come up with a better argument for it than "I feel disgusted that my government feels free to treat me like a criminal in my own country".
And voting for the torries is just a plain terrible idea. Don't do it.
(How odd. In this story I have been posting as a real Pro-ID-Cards person, when in fact I am not. It seems somewhat necessary though.)
I agree, it is irrational. All responses to your message have also been stupid. It is almost as if the slashbots against it are irrational.
This is an odd thing about Slashdot. Surely it is supposed to be the most clever of the USA, but in fact a lot of the people on here are idiots. Now there are some very clever people on here, where it is always great to hear their reasoned opinions, but on the whole it is not. A paradox!
Civil rights are not prevented in any way by gun control (that is a very good thing and we want it. Don't you dare criticise our right not to get shot). CCTV has reduced crime a lot, and we don't like crime. It doesn't affect our civil rights at all. ID cards do not affect civil rights either at all. America's problems are much worse, and in fact the UK is ahead of America in civil rights and such. We are just both behind places like Sweden.
Labour are not fascist. Conservatives are not for civil liberties either; they are just not against them.
I think Americas problems are actually much worse than the UKs, and we are certainally not doing worse things. You are just blind of the problems of America and uninformed about the problems of the UK if you think that.