i've been saying this for years. i suspect your post will be censored as trolling, but i think it's insightful and dead on. The Linux comnotquiteunity has spent it's development hours making many incomplete OSes. The are taking the wheel and spray painting it different colors instead of making one wheel that's actually round.
If Linux goes the way of OSX and decides to work a niche, that will be fine. But it they want to take on MS, they should pool their efforts.
i'm a world-class grammar nazi/snob/whathaveyou and i have no problem with ink/pen a deal. While i dislike most verbing, this is a tried and true expression. It's value as an expression outweighs the verbing. i don't know why anyone would have a problem with it. Furthermore, in this case ink cleverly refers to Amazon's eInk product.
If i were to "ink a Kindle" where ink would mean "buy", that would be a problem.
The roll of a die is random (enough) for gaming because most people can't control their hand and the environment with enough precision to control/predict the outcome. In reality, the outcome is completely causal. The starting orientation of the die, the bounciness of the die, the sharpness of the edges, the velocity imparted by the hand, the hardness and friction of the rolling surface determine what the roll will be. With enough control over those inputs the roll would cease to *appear* random.
Record a die roll on a high-speed camera. As the decelerates the outcome of the die will be easier and easier to predict. The 1 and the 2 will be on the top at the last 1/10th of a second, in the last 1/100th of a second it will become crystal clear that it's going to roll a 1.
The apparent randomness of weather is decreasing over time, not be because weather has changed it's behaviour, but because we have more and more information about it. We learned that this mountain diverts the wet air from the south and now we have a doppler radar with twice the resolution of the last generation.
Ages ago i came up with a probability funnel/cone drawing that shows this. Draw a square, draw a funnel/cone shape that is closed at one end and all the way open at the other. Held with the opening to the right you see the range of possibilities growing over time. This is like trying to predict the weather further and further out. Rotate the paper 180 degrees and it shows your attempts to predict todays weather over the course of last week. By Monday you have a much better idea than you did last Tuesday. Another way to think of it is: a car driving full speed on the salt flats. We know it's speed is fixed at 100 MPH. We are trying to predict where it will be in 1 minute. The car can only turn so much without tumbling to the driver's death. Therefore we can draw a cone of possibilities of X degrees per second in each direction. The car can go left and right at the drivers whim, but there is a bounded area showing where he can go in the time allowed. When crosses the line where he can start turning the possible end locations are many. But with each passing second it will become clearer where he'll be at the end. Where he ends up is random insofar as we don't know what he's going to do (straight, zig zag, hard left). He might have a plan, or he might wing it. In any case, the final location is *caused* by his turning the wheel.
Randomness of macro (not quantum) objects behavior isn't magical. It's just a reflection of our ignorance and lack of control over circumstances. Your bumping into an ex at the coffee shop is not random (or destiny). Each of you chose to go there at the same time. An outsider watching both of you would see it unfold as a series of choices. Hamlet shows a chaotic situation caused by independent agents making choices. Polonius decides to hide. Hamlet decides to stab the figure behind the curtain (but wasn't trying to stab Polonius).
So, in a way, randomness is dramatic irony. Sometimes you are the actor, bumbling about your plan colliding into other plans. Sometimes you're the audient seeing it all unfold. Without perception (an audience) there's no randomness... just events unfolding.
i was straight edge in the early 90s and never heard of people being militant about it, but people can take anything too far/be militant about anything. But then again, i didn't know the term until i had been that way for a while. i didn't do it to fit in with anyone. i came up with it on my own because of my dad's drinking.
Later i learned that i do have SOME selfcontrol and now i enjoy wine regularly.
What the hell are the dangers of being straight edge or vegan???? Oh teh noes, their going to eat tofu after an all night not drinking binge!
i would have been in trouble in THAT school.
And when the hell did straight edge have anything to do with being vegan? One can be one and not the other, or one can be both. Neither group is violent, if anything they're likely to be LESS violent than the jocks and hiphop kids. Geez.
That would be great if parents "parented". Most don't. There are so few consequences for poor parenting and 0 standards about who can become a parent. Let's start sending parents to jail for their kid's stupid behavior and see how that goes. "Drunk driving minor? You and kid lose their license for X days." In military brat communities parents are held liable for their kid's behavior. If the Sergeant's son is caught shoplifting it can hurt daddy's career. Consequently, such problems are rarer. Daddy gives a shit.
Discrimination is not inherently bad. i have no problem with telling blind people they can be airline pilots. It may be ageist to tell kids to be home by 10pm, but that doesn't make it wrong. Or is ageism age discrimination we dislike? Few feminists are clamoring for women to be subject to the draft.
If we don't use age, we have to use something else to determine responsibility. If schools would allow kids to take classes at their own pace then we could use graduating HS to be the "age of consent". We could then allow the GED as a test. i'd say that should be a requirement for earning a full driver's license. Most of the trouble teens get into happens when they are driving themselves and each other around unsupervised.
i do think the drinking age should be 18. And i do resent that people call our military members "kids". They are all over 18, they are adults (mature or not). Just because a soldier is someone's child or is young, does not make them a child.
1) Pre is inappropriate for verbs 2) Pre means chronologically before, so pre-owned would mean before owned, NOT owned before. Which would mean that it was never owned. We have a term for a product no one has owned... NEW. 3) We have a term for something someone has used... USED.
Graduated HS and CC on the same day. They let her attend CC classes while in HS (the college credits applied to her HS requirements). Tis a good system for those who can handle it.
Individual treatment in general will improve education.
My cool story is that i was bright (but not brilliant) but hated doing repetitive nonsense (homework). i would have been a great student if graded on tests alone. Our current systems grade obedience more than intelligence or learning. In HS i had all the credits i needed to graduate my junior year (aside from senior english).
i use GMail through GAfYD. 90% of the Googleverse stuff works there. It's that last 10% that's driving me nuts. It doesn't support chat by itself (your domain host has to allow it, mine does not). It doesn't support Buzz.
So i have kept my ol' trusty GMail account just for those.
Maybe you're conflating what scientists are saying with what laymen are saying. Maybe the scientists are working on something that is COMPLICATED (or not yet fully understood). Maybe those things aren't as mutually exclusive as Glenn Beck thinks they are. i don't know (and neither do you).
Remember El Nino and La Nina and how this and that were attributed to them? Some of that might have come from scientists, some of it may have come from laymen doing a bit of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. People look for connections. People also like to follow the money.
"X company profited from 9/11, ergo they were behind it LOL!" "Company Y is researching biofuel, therefore they are lying about global warming LOL!"
Here's the big picture as i see it: It doesn't matter if it is false. The steps we would take to combat GW or CC (conservation, finding cleaner sources, reducing pollution) are good on their own merits. If cars become more fuel-efficient our supply will last longer. Clean power sources means less toxic crap in our air, food and water (which are important to me). It might also mean keeping certain species on the planet longer.
Wouldn't you just love for the US do give the finger to OPEC and all the other oil rich nations? How is that a bad thing?
Class M planets are in short supply. We've found exactly 1 in all the universe. If we were to find another we don't have the means to get to it yet. So we need to take care of the house we have.
Earth isn't a gift from our ancestors, it's a loan from our descendants.
What would it take? Evidence. Keep in mind that this evidence would have to be something more than "it's snowing, therefore the planet is getting colder LOL!". If the ice returns this year, great, but that's not what GW is about. GW would be indicated average global temperature over time (not this week or this year).
FWIW i do not believe in global warming any more than i believe in gravity or evolution. i accept it as the theory that best matches the evidence. All the same true or not conservation and finding alternative/clean sources of energy will be a benefit to humanity. i'm more concerned about humanity having a place to live than i am with how much Texaco can pay shareholders. i'd rather know that my great grand kids will have enough access to cheap energy that they can have a quality of life near or better than my own. i'd also like for them to not have to kill/be killed by other people to have energy.
Mr. Kettle, i'd like to accuse you of being black too. You seem to be reciting material from the Republican FUD factory. The right has done a very effective job since 2008 election of dominating dialogue. Specifically repeating nonsense like "he's kenyan", "OMG SOCIALISM = HITLER STALIN!" and "Global warming is a lie!1!one!". They repeat these things so often and with such coordination that even the moderates are starting to fall for it.
Risk is pooled, the insurer has only to balance the books rather than worry about cutting a check to the shareholders and executives. OR...
Have a non-profit insurer where customers buy shares. Each unit of insurance you buy is a share per month. At the end of the year we take that pool, subtract operating costs, and payouts. Then divide that remainder by the shares bought, cut a check for $amount * $sharesTheyOwn. If a year goes badly, the profit share goes down. If(when) costs go up, increase the price of a share.
So, someone writes a book to make themselves feel better about turning their back on being vegetarian (because she did it wrong) and suddenly the Gulf of Mexico is clear of nitrates. Got it.
Forget the idea that there is a silver bullet for this werewolf (saw wolfman this weekend). We should aim for cars that can run on multiple sources of fuel and have multiple ways of creating that fuel. If it is electricity, use nuclear AND coal AND wind AND geo AND AND AND. If it is Bio, let's use as many sources as we can.
__ i find it odd that people think that biofuels could cause a food shortage. There's plenty of food and plenty of land to make more food. We might have to rethink how we use land though. For instance, cows ar are huge waste of land that are choking the rivers and adding to the green house effect.
What about the Fed building, owning and running fiber as a service? The states could get in it as well.
Charge a federal sales tax on all purchases made via the interweb to fund it. Or maybe just have a national system that does not aim at making a profit to compete against the companies.
How about making the damn providers compete? In the US, telcos DO NOT COMPETE in any meaningful way. Maybe lifting the laws that prevent competition would help. Prices are going up instead of down or staying flat, while service seems stagnant.
The net isn't just for porn and games, it's a major channel for business and communication (speech). i think it's wrong to trust that to executives of massive companies.
Slashdot Mirror
i thought judges issued subpoenas.
Or better yet, to think differently (and grammatically).
i've been saying this for years. i suspect your post will be censored as trolling, but i think it's insightful and dead on. The Linux comnotquiteunity has spent it's development hours making many incomplete OSes. The are taking the wheel and spray painting it different colors instead of making one wheel that's actually round.
If Linux goes the way of OSX and decides to work a niche, that will be fine. But it they want to take on MS, they should pool their efforts.
i'm a world-class grammar nazi/snob/whathaveyou and i have no problem with ink/pen a deal. While i dislike most verbing, this is a tried and true expression. It's value as an expression outweighs the verbing. i don't know why anyone would have a problem with it. Furthermore, in this case ink cleverly refers to Amazon's eInk product.
If i were to "ink a Kindle" where ink would mean "buy", that would be a problem.
Randomness is all about perception, i think.
The roll of a die is random (enough) for gaming because most people can't control their hand and the environment with enough precision to control/predict the outcome. In reality, the outcome is completely causal. The starting orientation of the die, the bounciness of the die, the sharpness of the edges, the velocity imparted by the hand, the hardness and friction of the rolling surface determine what the roll will be. With enough control over those inputs the roll would cease to *appear* random.
Record a die roll on a high-speed camera. As the decelerates the outcome of the die will be easier and easier to predict. The 1 and the 2 will be on the top at the last 1/10th of a second, in the last 1/100th of a second it will become crystal clear that it's going to roll a 1.
The apparent randomness of weather is decreasing over time, not be because weather has changed it's behaviour, but because we have more and more information about it. We learned that this mountain diverts the wet air from the south and now we have a doppler radar with twice the resolution of the last generation.
Ages ago i came up with a probability funnel/cone drawing that shows this. Draw a square, draw a funnel/cone shape that is closed at one end and all the way open at the other. Held with the opening to the right you see the range of possibilities growing over time. This is like trying to predict the weather further and further out. Rotate the paper 180 degrees and it shows your attempts to predict todays weather over the course of last week. By Monday you have a much better idea than you did last Tuesday.
Another way to think of it is: a car driving full speed on the salt flats. We know it's speed is fixed at 100 MPH. We are trying to predict where it will be in 1 minute. The car can only turn so much without tumbling to the driver's death. Therefore we can draw a cone of possibilities of X degrees per second in each direction. The car can go left and right at the drivers whim, but there is a bounded area showing where he can go in the time allowed. When crosses the line where he can start turning the possible end locations are many. But with each passing second it will become clearer where he'll be at the end. Where he ends up is random insofar as we don't know what he's going to do (straight, zig zag, hard left). He might have a plan, or he might wing it. In any case, the final location is *caused* by his turning the wheel.
Randomness of macro (not quantum) objects behavior isn't magical. It's just a reflection of our ignorance and lack of control over circumstances. Your bumping into an ex at the coffee shop is not random (or destiny). Each of you chose to go there at the same time. An outsider watching both of you would see it unfold as a series of choices. Hamlet shows a chaotic situation caused by independent agents making choices. Polonius decides to hide. Hamlet decides to stab the figure behind the curtain (but wasn't trying to stab Polonius).
So, in a way, randomness is dramatic irony. Sometimes you are the actor, bumbling about your plan colliding into other plans. Sometimes you're the audient seeing it all unfold. Without perception (an audience) there's no randomness... just events unfolding.
Fear has a way of derailing logic trains.
i was straight edge in the early 90s and never heard of people being militant about it, but people can take anything too far/be militant about anything. But then again, i didn't know the term until i had been that way for a while. i didn't do it to fit in with anyone. i came up with it on my own because of my dad's drinking.
Later i learned that i do have SOME selfcontrol and now i enjoy wine regularly.
What the hell are the dangers of being straight edge or vegan???? Oh teh noes, their going to eat tofu after an all night not drinking binge!
i would have been in trouble in THAT school.
And when the hell did straight edge have anything to do with being vegan? One can be one and not the other, or one can be both. Neither group is violent, if anything they're likely to be LESS violent than the jocks and hiphop kids. Geez.
That would be great if parents "parented". Most don't. There are so few consequences for poor parenting and 0 standards about who can become a parent. Let's start sending parents to jail for their kid's stupid behavior and see how that goes. "Drunk driving minor? You and kid lose their license for X days." In military brat communities parents are held liable for their kid's behavior. If the Sergeant's son is caught shoplifting it can hurt daddy's career. Consequently, such problems are rarer. Daddy gives a shit.
Discrimination is not inherently bad. i have no problem with telling blind people they can be airline pilots. It may be ageist to tell kids to be home by 10pm, but that doesn't make it wrong. Or is ageism age discrimination we dislike? Few feminists are clamoring for women to be subject to the draft.
If we don't use age, we have to use something else to determine responsibility. If schools would allow kids to take classes at their own pace then we could use graduating HS to be the "age of consent". We could then allow the GED as a test. i'd say that should be a requirement for earning a full driver's license. Most of the trouble teens get into happens when they are driving themselves and each other around unsupervised.
i do think the drinking age should be 18. And i do resent that people call our military members "kids". They are all over 18, they are adults (mature or not). Just because a soldier is someone's child or is young, does not make them a child.
1) Pre is inappropriate for verbs
2) Pre means chronologically before, so pre-owned would mean before owned, NOT owned before. Which would mean that it was never owned. We have a term for a product no one has owned... NEW.
3) We have a term for something someone has used... USED.
Yup, it's awfully rare. 1 in 6 would be horribly rare. *Terribly* rare is 1 in 7.
Negative rarity scale:
4 - Icky
5 - Awful
6 - Horrible
7 - Terrible
8 - Disgusting
Chuck Norris isn't a BotNet, it's just that he's so deadly that his AIM status message leaves devastation in its wake.
Graduated HS and CC on the same day. They let her attend CC classes while in HS (the college credits applied to her HS requirements). Tis a good system for those who can handle it.
Individual treatment in general will improve education.
My cool story is that i was bright (but not brilliant) but hated doing repetitive nonsense (homework). i would have been a great student if graded on tests alone. Our current systems grade obedience more than intelligence or learning. In HS i had all the credits i needed to graduate my junior year (aside from senior english).
i use GMail through GAfYD. 90% of the Googleverse stuff works there. It's that last 10% that's driving me nuts. It doesn't support chat by itself (your domain host has to allow it, mine does not). It doesn't support Buzz.
So i have kept my ol' trusty GMail account just for those.
Shit, i just ran out of mod points.
Great SNL reference!
1) Buy a Delorean
2) Install flux capacitor
3) Drive 88 MPH
4) Go back to the coax era
5) Don't come back
or
Get rid of the early 90's tech.
TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!
Maybe you're conflating what scientists are saying with what laymen are saying. Maybe the scientists are working on something that is COMPLICATED (or not yet fully understood). Maybe those things aren't as mutually exclusive as Glenn Beck thinks they are. i don't know (and neither do you).
Remember El Nino and La Nina and how this and that were attributed to them? Some of that might have come from scientists, some of it may have come from laymen doing a bit of post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. People look for connections. People also like to follow the money.
"X company profited from 9/11, ergo they were behind it LOL!"
"Company Y is researching biofuel, therefore they are lying about global warming LOL!"
Here's the big picture as i see it: It doesn't matter if it is false. The steps we would take to combat GW or CC (conservation, finding cleaner sources, reducing pollution) are good on their own merits. If cars become more fuel-efficient our supply will last longer. Clean power sources means less toxic crap in our air, food and water (which are important to me). It might also mean keeping certain species on the planet longer.
Wouldn't you just love for the US do give the finger to OPEC and all the other oil rich nations? How is that a bad thing?
Class M planets are in short supply. We've found exactly 1 in all the universe. If we were to find another we don't have the means to get to it yet. So we need to take care of the house we have.
Earth isn't a gift from our ancestors, it's a loan from our descendants.
What would it take? Evidence. Keep in mind that this evidence would have to be something more than "it's snowing, therefore the planet is getting colder LOL!". If the ice returns this year, great, but that's not what GW is about. GW would be indicated average global temperature over time (not this week or this year).
FWIW i do not believe in global warming any more than i believe in gravity or evolution. i accept it as the theory that best matches the evidence. All the same true or not conservation and finding alternative/clean sources of energy will be a benefit to humanity. i'm more concerned about humanity having a place to live than i am with how much Texaco can pay shareholders. i'd rather know that my great grand kids will have enough access to cheap energy that they can have a quality of life near or better than my own. i'd also like for them to not have to kill/be killed by other people to have energy.
Mr. Kettle, i'd like to accuse you of being black too. You seem to be reciting material from the Republican FUD factory. The right has done a very effective job since 2008 election of dominating dialogue. Specifically repeating nonsense like "he's kenyan", "OMG SOCIALISM = HITLER STALIN!" and "Global warming is a lie!1!one!". They repeat these things so often and with such coordination that even the moderates are starting to fall for it.
The opposite of progress would be regress.
The con means 'with' or 'together'. Not against.
Cute joke though, bro.
That's good. If it was too rosy that would be a bad thing. Just like we don't want pizza that is too hot or too cold.
Solution: Non-profit insurance.
Risk is pooled, the insurer has only to balance the books rather than worry about cutting a check to the shareholders and executives. OR...
Have a non-profit insurer where customers buy shares. Each unit of insurance you buy is a share per month. At the end of the year we take that pool, subtract operating costs, and payouts. Then divide that remainder by the shares bought, cut a check for $amount * $sharesTheyOwn. If a year goes badly, the profit share goes down. If(when) costs go up, increase the price of a share.
So, someone writes a book to make themselves feel better about turning their back on being vegetarian (because she did it wrong) and suddenly the Gulf of Mexico is clear of nitrates. Got it.
Solution:
Forget the idea that there is a silver bullet for this werewolf (saw wolfman this weekend). We should aim for cars that can run on multiple sources of fuel and have multiple ways of creating that fuel. If it is electricity, use nuclear AND coal AND wind AND geo AND AND AND. If it is Bio, let's use as many sources as we can.
__
i find it odd that people think that biofuels could cause a food shortage. There's plenty of food and plenty of land to make more food. We might have to rethink how we use land though. For instance, cows ar are huge waste of land that are choking the rivers and adding to the green house effect.
Otherwise a ship might hit one and cause the front to fall off.
What about the Fed building, owning and running fiber as a service? The states could get in it as well.
Charge a federal sales tax on all purchases made via the interweb to fund it. Or maybe just have a national system that does not aim at making a profit to compete against the companies.
How about making the damn providers compete? In the US, telcos DO NOT COMPETE in any meaningful way. Maybe lifting the laws that prevent competition would help. Prices are going up instead of down or staying flat, while service seems stagnant.
The net isn't just for porn and games, it's a major channel for business and communication (speech). i think it's wrong to trust that to executives of massive companies.
Yes. Yes we are.