I recently replayed Duke Nukem 3d, only letting myself save the game before a part that could get me instakilled (big falls, rocket firing monsters,.... doors) and only loading a saved game after death. The game definitely becomes a lot more fun when after being brought down to 5% by an unlucky encounter you try to survive until the next health pack instead of hitting the quick-load key.
So a lot of the time, it's really in the way you play the game. And there are still some casual games that can get insanely difficult - try Zuma Deluxe, gauntlet mode.
Stephen Colbert: "This is the famous pocket constitution... did you shrink this down yourself?" Dennis Kucinich: "No, no, no. George Bush already did that."
I'm afraid that I'd have to disagree with this. At least compared with normal officers, SWAT is indeed trained to shoot first.
In the case you linked to, the officer was only trained to accidentally shoot first. Of course if it was anyone other than a cop, they'd be arrested for murder.
It's very easy to spot the difference between an accident and intention: 1 shot = accident multiple officers shooting and reloading for up to a minute or two = intentional.
If I had my identity stolen, I'd just want 10 minutes alone in a locked room with the bastard. I'm pretty sure I could give him hospital bills equaling my losses in time and money. He might've ruined my credit, but I'd ruin his ability to walk.
Are you so sure you won't turn out to be the one with the hospital bills. Might want to add a clause requiring him/her to be tied up.
Unfortunately the only way we seem to be able to look for it right now by attempting to detect radio signals. As others point out, the could mean we have a fairly small window of time to detect an alien civilization. For example, at any point in time we can only detect signals which were sent exactly N years ago from exactly N light years away. If their technology has progressed beyond radio signals 15 years ago, we will only find them if they keep sending out radio transmissions specifically to alert other civilizations (like us) of their existence. And this isn't even taking into account the power of a radio signal that we can detect.
Sorry, Slashdot's manbearpig fad ended as soon as the majority of posters started agreeing with Gore. You might still be able to use it in the context of welcoming our new Manbearpig overlords, but that's about it.
That's why you have emulators with scaling. Not sure if there's a Game Boy emulator, but at the worst you can always run a basic GB emulator for dos through DOSBox. I'd think modern CPUs should be able to handle that.
Ok, do you agree that in the way you use "traverse", it is definitely a subset of "movement"? Movement happens from a start position, to an end position. It's not movement if you are at both start and end positions simultaneously for the entire "trip". When moving between normal space points A and B, you start at A and not at B, time passes, you are now at B and not at A. With time travel, substitute time and meta-time for space and time reflectively. But if you exist at both times A and times B "simultaneously", how can you claim to jump from A to B?
we would still be (lying) across, moving to and from (just like going nowhere!), at (at least) two points "simultaneously", [just like a light ray traverses the crystal:-)],
When you "lie across" you're not moving. Movement from "A and B" to "A and B" is not movement. Even if you want to call it "going nowhere", it becomes absolutely useless because the whole point was that you are supposed to be experiencing the events at A and then choosing to instead experience the events at B. That means you are not experiencing both at the same (meta)time. If I am omnipresent in the universe, it doesn't make sense for me to move in the same place just to experience being in Chicago. I'm already there. I'm already experiencing it. There is nothing left to do.
I thought it would be more like it was mentioned before: one's history is like lined up along a line. But there is no time: one is not traversing one's life along the line, but rather somewhat erratically, based on the memory of one's life. Such line would have to overlap with other lines, that's clear enough, but the traversal would have had no trajectory: you're always here and there, you could only fix your position in life relative to other people's lives, that's about it.
Wait, if the traversal has no trajectory, then how can you call it a traversal? If you are omnipresent along a timeline, then you can't traverse it - as you said, you're just there. You're stuck experiencing all moments "simultaneously". If you only want to experience one moment at a time, that's where meta-time comes in - at any given meta-moment you'd be experiencing an ordinary moment, and jumps between non-sequential moments would take place within sequential meta-moments.
Imagine a standard space vs. time graph with space as the y-axis and time as the x-axis. Without teleportation, there'd be a line pointing to where in space you are at any given time. With teleportation, the line is disjointed. Same thing with time vs. meta-time. Time on the y-axis, meta-time on the x-axis. At any given point in meta-time, you are at a certain point in time. Maybe the slope would increase with your speed through space (relativity). When you actually time jump to a disconnected period, the line becomes disjointed.
But if everything is simultaneous, there is no traversal and no meta-time, no "fixing of position" since the position would be fixed remain fixed to the entire timeline.
Ok, that would have been one possibility. But also, having memory of this metafuture, they could have chosen not to go there but somewhere else instead.
That would be changing metahistory just as chosing to perform an action in a timeperiod that's different from the action they remember would be changing history. Maybe not cross the road so they wouldn't get run over by a car? If time is unchangeable, then it would make sense for metatime to be just as immutable. Or you'll have metametatime to deal with. ("Well, before I chose to jump to this future, but now instead I jumped to this future so the previous jump never happened in the metapast. But guess what, it did happen in the metametapast".):)
That's kind of what they are talking about, no? That there are neither concepts of time, nor of meta-time. You just "exist" simultaneously (notice that this is not anymore just a good old existence in some other time).
If there was no metatime, then they couldn't jump around time at all. The whole "I was just at that moment, but now I'm at this moment" business is strictly metatime. And if there was no ordinary time, there'd be no other moments to jump to. If our time was just another space-like dimension to them, then our metatime would be their time.
So it is to some extent an arbitrary choice, the choice that one would make based on the memory of the whole.
Sure, and that "choice" would still be predetermined. If they could see the "metafuture" they'd know where they would end up jumping "next" and would have no more control over it than they would over what they might do at any given ordinary time-moment.
You're absolutely right. There is an underlying assumption that right now we are moving linearly through time. However you have to consider that if we were bouncing around, it wouldn't make any difference to us. I mean, what's doing the bouncing? At each point, as you've said, we have our memories of the past and not the future. As far as I'm concerned, that is me, the memories, the remembered experiences, whatever the current state is. Past bounces and future bounces would have zero affect on the present. It's always the current bounce that would matter and nothing else.
To take it further, The memories present in each bounce could be completely unrelated to any events at any time. There might be no cause and effect at all, rendering "past" and "future" meaningless terms.
Hell, instead of bouncing around, we could be stuck within the same moment and not know the difference. That's what might happen when time is gone, and it "already" might be. Might "always" have been in fact.
The Bible (and God it's author) does not condemn killing in defence, punishment for a crime, or in wartime. What it does condemn is murder.
That's kind of vague. When is killing "in defense" - when your life is threatened, when your possessions are threatened, when your honor is threatened? For what types of crime is killing a justified punishment instead of murder - rape, murder, petty larceny, taking the Lord's name in vain? For what types of killing in wartime is it not murder - on the battlefield, in POW camps, random homes of civilians?
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, how quickly would "Nothing for you to see here. Please move along." show up on a browser at that speed?
I recently replayed Duke Nukem 3d, only letting myself save the game before a part that could get me instakilled (big falls, rocket firing monsters, .... doors) and only loading a saved game after death. The game definitely becomes a lot more fun when after being brought down to 5% by an unlucky encounter you try to survive until the next health pack instead of hitting the quick-load key.
So a lot of the time, it's really in the way you play the game. And there are still some casual games that can get insanely difficult - try Zuma Deluxe, gauntlet mode.
For $4.7M, they'd better provide me with my own personal garage lift. And Benz. And helipad. And helicopter.
I'm pretty sure Japanese doesn't have real swearwords. At least not any with more of an impact than "damn".
How hot does a slowly warming plate need to get before the toad jumps off?
Stephen Colbert: "This is the famous pocket constitution... did you shrink this down yourself?"
Dennis Kucinich: "No, no, no. George Bush already did that."
So why couldn't this one have been made up from two stars?
I'm afraid that I'd have to disagree with this. At least compared with normal officers, SWAT is indeed trained to shoot first.
In the case you linked to, the officer was only trained to accidentally shoot first. Of course if it was anyone other than a cop, they'd be arrested for murder.
It's very easy to spot the difference between an accident and intention:
1 shot = accident
multiple officers shooting and reloading for up to a minute or two = intentional.
Send an anonymous letter, possibly with a fake return address.
Isn't the point to NOT have SWAT teams show up at random addresses?
Yup, that's what immediately popped into my head when I read the headline.
FUCK YOU, SIR!
If I had my identity stolen, I'd just want 10 minutes alone in a locked room with the bastard. I'm pretty sure I could give him hospital bills equaling my losses in time and money. He might've ruined my credit, but I'd ruin his ability to walk.
Are you so sure you won't turn out to be the one with the hospital bills. Might want to add a clause requiring him/her to be tied up.
What's to stop it from holding our secrets hostage in an attempt to be given human rights?
It's called a pseudo-random number generator.
Personally, I think the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a more entertaining read.
Unfortunately the only way we seem to be able to look for it right now by attempting to detect radio signals. As others point out, the could mean we have a fairly small window of time to detect an alien civilization. For example, at any point in time we can only detect signals which were sent exactly N years ago from exactly N light years away. If their technology has progressed beyond radio signals 15 years ago, we will only find them if they keep sending out radio transmissions specifically to alert other civilizations (like us) of their existence. And this isn't even taking into account the power of a radio signal that we can detect.
Sorry, Slashdot's manbearpig fad ended as soon as the majority of posters started agreeing with Gore. You might still be able to use it in the context of welcoming our new Manbearpig overlords, but that's about it.
That's why you have emulators with scaling. Not sure if there's a Game Boy emulator, but at the worst you can always run a basic GB emulator for dos through DOSBox. I'd think modern CPUs should be able to handle that.
Ok, do you agree that in the way you use "traverse", it is definitely a subset of "movement"? Movement happens from a start position, to an end position. It's not movement if you are at both start and end positions simultaneously for the entire "trip". When moving between normal space points A and B, you start at A and not at B, time passes, you are now at B and not at A. With time travel, substitute time and meta-time for space and time reflectively. But if you exist at both times A and times B "simultaneously", how can you claim to jump from A to B?
:-)],
we would still be (lying) across, moving to and from (just like going nowhere!), at (at least) two points "simultaneously", [just like a light ray traverses the crystal
When you "lie across" you're not moving. Movement from "A and B" to "A and B" is not movement. Even if you want to call it "going nowhere", it becomes absolutely useless because the whole point was that you are supposed to be experiencing the events at A and then choosing to instead experience the events at B. That means you are not experiencing both at the same (meta)time. If I am omnipresent in the universe, it doesn't make sense for me to move in the same place just to experience being in Chicago. I'm already there. I'm already experiencing it. There is nothing left to do.
I thought it would be more like it was mentioned before: one's history is like lined up along a line. But there is no time: one is not traversing one's life along the line, but rather somewhat erratically, based on the memory of one's life. Such line would have to overlap with other lines, that's clear enough, but the traversal would have had no trajectory: you're always here and there, you could only fix your position in life relative to other people's lives, that's about it.
Wait, if the traversal has no trajectory, then how can you call it a traversal? If you are omnipresent along a timeline, then you can't traverse it - as you said, you're just there. You're stuck experiencing all moments "simultaneously". If you only want to experience one moment at a time, that's where meta-time comes in - at any given meta-moment you'd be experiencing an ordinary moment, and jumps between non-sequential moments would take place within sequential meta-moments.
Imagine a standard space vs. time graph with space as the y-axis and time as the x-axis. Without teleportation, there'd be a line pointing to where in space you are at any given time. With teleportation, the line is disjointed. Same thing with time vs. meta-time. Time on the y-axis, meta-time on the x-axis. At any given point in meta-time, you are at a certain point in time. Maybe the slope would increase with your speed through space (relativity). When you actually time jump to a disconnected period, the line becomes disjointed.
But if everything is simultaneous, there is no traversal and no meta-time, no "fixing of position" since the position would be fixed remain fixed to the entire timeline.
Ok, that would have been one possibility. But also, having memory of this metafuture, they could have chosen not to go there but somewhere else instead.
:)
That would be changing metahistory just as chosing to perform an action in a timeperiod that's different from the action they remember would be changing history. Maybe not cross the road so they wouldn't get run over by a car? If time is unchangeable, then it would make sense for metatime to be just as immutable. Or you'll have metametatime to deal with. ("Well, before I chose to jump to this future, but now instead I jumped to this future so the previous jump never happened in the metapast. But guess what, it did happen in the metametapast".)
Someone should spoof that juror's screenname/IP and download a couple thousand songs with Kazaa.
That's kind of what they are talking about, no? That there are neither concepts of time, nor of meta-time. You just "exist" simultaneously (notice that this is not anymore just a good old existence in some other time).
If there was no metatime, then they couldn't jump around time at all. The whole "I was just at that moment, but now I'm at this moment" business is strictly metatime. And if there was no ordinary time, there'd be no other moments to jump to. If our time was just another space-like dimension to them, then our metatime would be their time.
So it is to some extent an arbitrary choice, the choice that one would make based on the memory of the whole.
Sure, and that "choice" would still be predetermined. If they could see the "metafuture" they'd know where they would end up jumping "next" and would have no more control over it than they would over what they might do at any given ordinary time-moment.
You're absolutely right. There is an underlying assumption that right now we are moving linearly through time. However you have to consider that if we were bouncing around, it wouldn't make any difference to us. I mean, what's doing the bouncing? At each point, as you've said, we have our memories of the past and not the future. As far as I'm concerned, that is me, the memories, the remembered experiences, whatever the current state is. Past bounces and future bounces would have zero affect on the present. It's always the current bounce that would matter and nothing else.
To take it further, The memories present in each bounce could be completely unrelated to any events at any time. There might be no cause and effect at all, rendering "past" and "future" meaningless terms.
Hell, instead of bouncing around, we could be stuck within the same moment and not know the difference. That's what might happen when time is gone, and it "already" might be. Might "always" have been in fact.
The Bible (and God it's author) does not condemn killing in defence, punishment for a crime, or in wartime. What it does condemn is murder.
That's kind of vague. When is killing "in defense" - when your life is threatened, when your possessions are threatened, when your honor is threatened? For what types of crime is killing a justified punishment instead of murder - rape, murder, petty larceny, taking the Lord's name in vain? For what types of killing in wartime is it not murder - on the battlefield, in POW camps, random homes of civilians?
How do you know the Covenant's prophet is "false"?