not swearing That's the grey area of morality that I agreed that shouldn't be regulated.
like going to church every Sunday That's religion. Although I am religious, I don't claim that nonreligious people cannot be moral.
like not touching a woman -ever-... That's asceticism/celibacy. That's as "moral" as being a vegetarian, etc. It's a bit overboard.
The interest of state is just some commonly accepted, important parts of the general concept of morality. Precisely. I disagreed with the ruling because it could too easily be misconstrued as "the interest of the state is completely unrelated to morality."
'upholding the public sense of morality is not even a legitimate state interest'
Then what is? Granted, the greyer areas of morality such as this law may not be legitimate, but I thought morality encompassed such things as the rights to life, liberty and property. If I interfered with someone else's life or property, wouldn't that be immoral?
Although as far as powers-of-government the end result is appropriate, I'm afraid that calling morality not a state interest is going to have some disturbing consequences. Insider trading, for example, is hard to define as much other than immoral.
Since moral codes and government arose from the same need -- to ensure that society grows instead of collapsing thanks to the greed of a few miscreants -- it makes sense that they should act in similar ways and serve similar purposes. Then why should one disown the other completely? I'd agree with obscenity laws in particular not being in the realm of government or invalidated by freedom of speech, but not with all of morality thrown out the window.
And this shouldn't even be the reason why they ruled in favor of the defendant. The fact that the distributor had both material and a large market meant that no community standards were being violated. The fact that there is a thriving legal pornography industry (and an equally-large illegal one) is proof that the general moral codes accept this behavior. Can you really claim that this many people are immoral? Although this would be a more controversial ruling in the sense that most people wouldn't like it, it would be more legally preferable in my opinion: you're not forced to say that government does not care about morality.
"3", of course, is "e". Since "pwned" came from "owned", the most sensible pronunciation is to rhyme the two: "powned." I supposed "pooned" is acceptable, since the only two English-accepted words that use "w" as a vowel, "cwm" and "crwth", are pronounced with an "oo" vowel.
But "pwned" is obviously not a Welsh word. So "powned" may be preferable.
Sorry, no. If Apple really wanted to have a $499 computer, and components and labor cost over $400, they'd just throw in OS X free/underpriced. They're Apple. They can expect the profit on the Mac Mini to exceed any losses by not charging for OS X.
It is software, after all. Copying software has effectively zero marginal cost. The only question is whether to consider the profit as OS X profit or Mac Mini profit.
As an alternative to the completely stupid AC sibling discussion:
The funny part is that the submission called it WestSideStory (the namesake musical), not WebSideStory (the company). This is in itself humorous, but the "I feel pretty" line makes it even more so.
Explaining the joke: Effectively taking the humor out of it since 1997.
1) Aurora borealises is inconvenient because of a double "s" sound. Besides, the general rule for "cactuses" instead of "cacti" and so forth is different species of cactuses. This is the same aurora, just several of them.
2) Majors general is because major is the noun. The French plural would be majors generaux. Also, we've come to assume that "major" is the adjective and "general" is the noun, when apparently the reverse is true.
3) In most Romance languages, including Latin, you do indeed say the literal translation of "northerns lights" or "lights northerns." English is an exception. If we pluralize it according to Latin rules, we'd have to make both plural. Besides, Aurorae borealis and aurora boreales are both awkward, although I doubt that's what you mean.
4) We still say bacteria instead of bacteriums, right? I'm sure we'd still keep the French plural if we understood it was French and called it a "mah-JOR jey-ney-RAHL."
I assumed Radiation Storm was their competitor to BitTorrent or something.
Re:IRC analysis fatally flawed
on
Is IRC All Bad?
·
· Score: 1
Notice he said "steal". Steal vs. infringe debate notwithstanding, steal implies taking something without permission. Can you steal a straw from McDonalds, a mall directory, an AOL trial CD*, complimentary coffee, and so forth?
Creation is a doctrine, and belongs in a church. Evolution, on the other hand, is a scientific theory, and thereby, belongs in a science class.
Agreed. Completely.
Except for the minor fact that a lot of people don't realize this distinction. The underlying problem, which I'd prefer to see solved, is that people realize how science properly works and what its bounds are, so that nobody complains when science gets a different answer from religion.
Public state-run education and freedom of religion should not be interfering with each other.
You forgot something. Everyone's violating laws, but you're not really supposed to be arrested for it. Unless they can get political advantage by arresting you. You can't rule a nation of law-abiding citizens.
"I believe that you have an old-fashioned idea about law, Miss Taggart. Why speak of rigid, unbreakable laws? Our modern laws are elastic and open to interpretation according to . . . circumstances." --Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, book 2, chapter 8.
Of course not. It's just that there are a few savages in parts of Iraq, and the US is currently the peacekeeping force. What do you think would happen if the police force in major cities of the US not only stopped working, but they let it be known that nobody would be getting arrested?
There was looting after the attacks, even under the noses of the just-arrived US troops. That's human nature. There would've been looting if the same thing happened to New York, right?
If America pulls out UN Peacekeepers can move in temporarily until the Iraqis themselves assemble a security force.
I think what we're doing is replacing the UN Peacekeepers step with the Coalition troops step. Yes, I know the coalition is mostly US. But we're accomplishing the same thing, more or less.
Besides, a UN peacekeeping force would most likely be the Security Council telling the Coalition, "Hey, you're already there, why don't we give you our Official UN Blessing?" or at worst calling out NATO. I don't think UN has any troops of its own - at least not enough to maintain Iraq without its own police force.
A lot of people apparently think that there's somebody other than the US who's capable of leading sufficient military forces. Other than an alliance of a few European countries (not just one), there really isn't anyone willing and able to serve the same cause. This isn't Americocentrism, just recognizing the facts. I would prefer, for the world's sake, that America not have the hegemony it maintains, but such is the world today.
Except for the minor fact that I'm not. I can find proof, both on the web and in print, it's just that it's not worth wasting the effort on you. Why don't you Google for "National Science Olympiad 2002"?
I'm amazed at your persistence. If nothing else, I respect you for your tenacity and belief in your viewpoint.
Making you, what, 20 at the oldest?
Oh yeah, so the older guys always are right? Children are meant to be seen and not heard, of course. What're you going to do, believe Julia Child's or Strom Thurmond's statements about science?
Hey, if you want to make this a personal-attack-fest instead of a rational debate about something important, go for it. I was really hoping for the rational debate, but I can do personal attacks. And live up (down?) to my age.
"your science"?
Yeah, your science. As in the science that you were supporting. Now you're not even defending it, you're just appearing more childish than myself (if that's even possible).
You haven't said one thing about the topic at hand. May I interpret that as a statement that you have nothing left to say, and you're admitting defeat?
This isn't docummented anywhere and not without a reason.
No, it isn't documented anywhere, except the calculator manual, pretty much every calculus textbook oriented towards the TI-8x, and even the MATH menu on the calculator....
Y3=FnInt(Y2...
You sound like you've never tried this (at least not on a recent calculator). On the 83 series, it gives ERR:ILLEGAL NEST, mainly because it'd take so long.
I've been writing some cool stuff for my TI82.
Ah. No wonder. The 83 runs slightly faster, the 83+ runs faster, the 83+ Silver runs considerably faster, and the 84+es run considerably faster than those. If you're writing fractals and brute force stuff, you'd do well to invest in the latest 84+ -- or even an 89-series. Do yourself a favor and sell the 82 on Ebay or give it to a teacher.
You say yours takes 5 minutes for fnInt(sin(X)). Mine, an 83+ Silver, takes about 20 seconds. Annoying, yes, but hindering, no. And it's safer than overclocking.
Incidentally, if you're running into the limits of TI-BASIC programming, you might be interested in learning assembler for the calculator. Just Google for "TI-82 ASM tutorial" or somesuch; there's plenty of tutorials of varying quality.
Have you heard of the fields of astronomy, physics and astrophysics?
Dude, I won first place at the astronomy event in the National Science Olympiad in 2002, out of teams from state champion schools from almost every state. I know astrophysics. If there were anything in regular astrophysics that necessitated a universe before ours or a looping universe, I'd know about it. Nothing of what you mention requires any more than the Big Bang and an expanding universe.
If you continue to personally attack me and resort to name calling, I can only assume that you have no rational arguments left. I'm interested in rational debate according to the generally accepted rules of your science.
Oh, and I'd like to see your explanation behind "crowd control using fiction." Who benefits from controlling the crowd? How effectively is the crowd really controlled? If you want to control crowds, you're better off starting some cult like Scientology or ruling a country with a perverted ideology and an iron fist. Granted, Christianity has been used in both these manners, but I detest those incidents.
Second, related question that I was kinda implying with native compilation:
Can programs running under the VM behave like native programs? That is, keep the same UI (preferably through compiler-added system calls instead of through copied bitmaps); assocate with filetypes properly; interface with other programs as if they were native applications, including exposed APIs, basic scripting (on Mac OS), possibly OLE (on Windows); run from an executable stub and behave taskbar/Dock-wise like a regular application; and so forth?
Not that I've ever heard of, but why do you want to turn something generic into something not generic?... Can you get an old US-II running a 3 year old version of solaris with exactly these 50 libraries
No, I can't, but I can recompile the same guaranteed-portable Java onto the new computer, or at worst run it under a virtual machine.
Sorry if I wasn't clear in my original inquiry. By native code I mean machine language vs. bytecode, not platform-specific C vs. portable C or Java. I want something that will, e.g., run on Windows and turn a.java file into a.EXE instead of a.class. I'd still be coding in Java.
Where's the observation and experimentation that supports a phoenix universe or time that somehow bends back on itself? I haven't done much reading in this area, so I haven't heard of any, but I'd be really interested in the observations there.
Although I disagree with any "experimentation." Besides, a theory is only something you made up and that happens to fit with observations.
Is there a good compiler (open source or otherwise, but for the major platforms) that will turn Java into native code without requiring a virtual machine?
I don't see why one shouldn't exist, but I haven't heard much about one.
How do they support an eternal universe? I'm honestly asking...I don't know if they do or don't.
All I've seen in this theory is a poor attempt to make the universe self-contained so that scientists have to neither invoke God nor violate the first law of thermodynamics. These theories make about as much scientific sense and reasonableness as assuming the presence of God.
Can't you set up two installations (configuration files) on the same server, but point them to the same database/directory? The data should be shared between the two, but you can customize the two page designs.
Slashdot Mirror
not swearing
That's the grey area of morality that I agreed that shouldn't be regulated.
like going to church every Sunday
That's religion. Although I am religious, I don't claim that nonreligious people cannot be moral.
like not touching a woman -ever-...
That's asceticism/celibacy. That's as "moral" as being a vegetarian, etc. It's a bit overboard.
The interest of state is just some commonly accepted, important parts of the general concept of morality.
Precisely. I disagreed with the ruling because it could too easily be misconstrued as "the interest of the state is completely unrelated to morality."
'upholding the public sense of morality is not even a legitimate state interest'
Then what is? Granted, the greyer areas of morality such as this law may not be legitimate, but I thought morality encompassed such things as the rights to life, liberty and property. If I interfered with someone else's life or property, wouldn't that be immoral?
Although as far as powers-of-government the end result is appropriate, I'm afraid that calling morality not a state interest is going to have some disturbing consequences. Insider trading, for example, is hard to define as much other than immoral.
Since moral codes and government arose from the same need -- to ensure that society grows instead of collapsing thanks to the greed of a few miscreants -- it makes sense that they should act in similar ways and serve similar purposes. Then why should one disown the other completely? I'd agree with obscenity laws in particular not being in the realm of government or invalidated by freedom of speech, but not with all of morality thrown out the window.
And this shouldn't even be the reason why they ruled in favor of the defendant. The fact that the distributor had both material and a large market meant that no community standards were being violated. The fact that there is a thriving legal pornography industry (and an equally-large illegal one) is proof that the general moral codes accept this behavior. Can you really claim that this many people are immoral? Although this would be a more controversial ruling in the sense that most people wouldn't like it, it would be more legally preferable in my opinion: you're not forced to say that government does not care about morality.
There are means better justifiable by the end.
(IANAL.)
How do you even pronounce 'pwn3d'?
"3", of course, is "e". Since "pwned" came from "owned", the most sensible pronunciation is to rhyme the two: "powned." I supposed "pooned" is acceptable, since the only two English-accepted words that use "w" as a vowel, "cwm" and "crwth", are pronounced with an "oo" vowel.
But "pwned" is obviously not a Welsh word. So "powned" may be preferable.
That is one of the reasons why it is so cheap.
Sorry, no. If Apple really wanted to have a $499 computer, and components and labor cost over $400, they'd just throw in OS X free/underpriced. They're Apple. They can expect the profit on the Mac Mini to exceed any losses by not charging for OS X.
It is software, after all. Copying software has effectively zero marginal cost. The only question is whether to consider the profit as OS X profit or Mac Mini profit.
As an alternative to the completely stupid AC sibling discussion:
The funny part is that the submission called it WestSideStory (the namesake musical), not WebSideStory (the company). This is in itself humorous, but the "I feel pretty" line makes it even more so.
Explaining the joke: Effectively taking the humor out of it since 1997.
1) Aurora borealises is inconvenient because of a double "s" sound. Besides, the general rule for "cactuses" instead of "cacti" and so forth is different species of cactuses. This is the same aurora, just several of them.
2) Majors general is because major is the noun. The French plural would be majors generaux. Also, we've come to assume that "major" is the adjective and "general" is the noun, when apparently the reverse is true.
3) In most Romance languages, including Latin, you do indeed say the literal translation of "northerns lights" or "lights northerns." English is an exception. If we pluralize it according to Latin rules, we'd have to make both plural. Besides, Aurorae borealis and aurora boreales are both awkward, although I doubt that's what you mean.
4) We still say bacteria instead of bacteriums, right? I'm sure we'd still keep the French plural if we understood it was French and called it a "mah-JOR jey-ney-RAHL."
I assumed Radiation Storm was their competitor to BitTorrent or something.
Notice he said "steal". Steal vs. infringe debate notwithstanding, steal implies taking something without permission. Can you steal a straw from McDonalds, a mall directory, an AOL trial CD*, complimentary coffee, and so forth?
*The physical CD-ROM as well as the ISO upon it.
Creation is a doctrine, and belongs in a church. Evolution, on the other hand, is a scientific theory, and thereby, belongs in a science class.
Agreed. Completely.
Except for the minor fact that a lot of people don't realize this distinction. The underlying problem, which I'd prefer to see solved, is that people realize how science properly works and what its bounds are, so that nobody complains when science gets a different answer from religion.
Public state-run education and freedom of religion should not be interfering with each other.
You forgot something. Everyone's violating laws, but you're not really supposed to be arrested for it. Unless they can get political advantage by arresting you. You can't rule a nation of law-abiding citizens.
"I believe that you have an old-fashioned idea about law, Miss Taggart. Why speak of rigid, unbreakable laws? Our modern laws are elastic and open to interpretation according to . . . circumstances." --Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, book 2, chapter 8.
Did Netcraft confirm that?
But Netcraft will definitely not be still alive by the time the Universe ends.
Notice that the PNG header states that it's created by Adobe ImageReady.
I don't know about you, but I tend to use Paintbrush if all I want is a screen capture....
Unless it runs on MacOS or will be available in a smaller form factor of varying stylish colors, I fail to see how this is postworthy on Slashdot.
The point is that Panix currently doesn't run on MacOS, and isn't available, whatever the form factors and colors may be.
Iraqis are not savages!
Of course not. It's just that there are a few savages in parts of Iraq, and the US is currently the peacekeeping force. What do you think would happen if the police force in major cities of the US not only stopped working, but they let it be known that nobody would be getting arrested?
There was looting after the attacks, even under the noses of the just-arrived US troops. That's human nature. There would've been looting if the same thing happened to New York, right?
If America pulls out UN Peacekeepers can move in temporarily until the Iraqis themselves assemble a security force.
I think what we're doing is replacing the UN Peacekeepers step with the Coalition troops step. Yes, I know the coalition is mostly US. But we're accomplishing the same thing, more or less.
Besides, a UN peacekeeping force would most likely be the Security Council telling the Coalition, "Hey, you're already there, why don't we give you our Official UN Blessing?" or at worst calling out NATO. I don't think UN has any troops of its own - at least not enough to maintain Iraq without its own police force.
A lot of people apparently think that there's somebody other than the US who's capable of leading sufficient military forces. Other than an alliance of a few European countries (not just one), there really isn't anyone willing and able to serve the same cause. This isn't Americocentrism, just recognizing the facts. I would prefer, for the world's sake, that America not have the hegemony it maintains, but such is the world today.
you could easily be making this up
Except for the minor fact that I'm not. I can find proof, both on the web and in print, it's just that it's not worth wasting the effort on you. Why don't you Google for "National Science Olympiad 2002"?
I'm amazed at your persistence. If nothing else, I respect you for your tenacity and belief in your viewpoint.
Making you, what, 20 at the oldest?
Oh yeah, so the older guys always are right? Children are meant to be seen and not heard, of course. What're you going to do, believe Julia Child's or Strom Thurmond's statements about science?
Hey, if you want to make this a personal-attack-fest instead of a rational debate about something important, go for it. I was really hoping for the rational debate, but I can do personal attacks. And live up (down?) to my age.
"your science"?
Yeah, your science. As in the science that you were supporting. Now you're not even defending it, you're just appearing more childish than myself (if that's even possible).
You haven't said one thing about the topic at hand. May I interpret that as a statement that you have nothing left to say, and you're admitting defeat?
This isn't docummented anywhere and not without a reason.
No, it isn't documented anywhere, except the calculator manual, pretty much every calculus textbook oriented towards the TI-8x, and even the MATH menu on the calculator....
Y3=FnInt(Y2...
You sound like you've never tried this (at least not on a recent calculator). On the 83 series, it gives ERR:ILLEGAL NEST, mainly because it'd take so long.
I've been writing some cool stuff for my TI82.
Ah. No wonder. The 83 runs slightly faster, the 83+ runs faster, the 83+ Silver runs considerably faster, and the 84+es run considerably faster than those. If you're writing fractals and brute force stuff, you'd do well to invest in the latest 84+ -- or even an 89-series. Do yourself a favor and sell the 82 on Ebay or give it to a teacher.
You say yours takes 5 minutes for fnInt(sin(X)). Mine, an 83+ Silver, takes about 20 seconds. Annoying, yes, but hindering, no. And it's safer than overclocking.
Incidentally, if you're running into the limits of TI-BASIC programming, you might be interested in learning assembler for the calculator. Just Google for "TI-82 ASM tutorial" or somesuch; there's plenty of tutorials of varying quality.
Have you heard of the fields of astronomy, physics and astrophysics?
Dude, I won first place at the astronomy event in the National Science Olympiad in 2002, out of teams from state champion schools from almost every state. I know astrophysics. If there were anything in regular astrophysics that necessitated a universe before ours or a looping universe, I'd know about it. Nothing of what you mention requires any more than the Big Bang and an expanding universe.
If you continue to personally attack me and resort to name calling, I can only assume that you have no rational arguments left. I'm interested in rational debate according to the generally accepted rules of your science.
Oh, and I'd like to see your explanation behind "crowd control using fiction." Who benefits from controlling the crowd? How effectively is the crowd really controlled? If you want to control crowds, you're better off starting some cult like Scientology or ruling a country with a perverted ideology and an iron fist. Granted, Christianity has been used in both these manners, but I detest those incidents.
Second, related question that I was kinda implying with native compilation:
Can programs running under the VM behave like native programs? That is, keep the same UI (preferably through compiler-added system calls instead of through copied bitmaps); assocate with filetypes properly; interface with other programs as if they were native applications, including exposed APIs, basic scripting (on Mac OS), possibly OLE (on Windows); run from an executable stub and behave taskbar/Dock-wise like a regular application; and so forth?
Not that I've ever heard of, but why do you want to turn something generic into something not generic? ... Can you get an old US-II running a 3 year old version of solaris with exactly these 50 libraries
.java file into a .EXE instead of a .class. I'd still be coding in Java.
No, I can't, but I can recompile the same guaranteed-portable Java onto the new computer, or at worst run it under a virtual machine.
Sorry if I wasn't clear in my original inquiry. By native code I mean machine language vs. bytecode, not platform-specific C vs. portable C or Java. I want something that will, e.g., run on Windows and turn a
Yes, it's about equivalent to the Hydrogen Hydroxide anti-anti-DHMO page.
Where's the observation and experimentation that supports a phoenix universe or time that somehow bends back on itself? I haven't done much reading in this area, so I haven't heard of any, but I'd be really interested in the observations there.
Although I disagree with any "experimentation." Besides, a theory is only something you made up and that happens to fit with observations.
Not as a rebuttal, but as an inquiry:
Is there a good compiler (open source or otherwise, but for the major platforms) that will turn Java into native code without requiring a virtual machine?
I don't see why one shouldn't exist, but I haven't heard much about one.
How do they support an eternal universe? I'm honestly asking...I don't know if they do or don't.
All I've seen in this theory is a poor attempt to make the universe self-contained so that scientists have to neither invoke God nor violate the first law of thermodynamics. These theories make about as much scientific sense and reasonableness as assuming the presence of God.
> Should things be short?
Obviously, he's asking if he should make them short, not if they ought to be, so:
> Should I shorten?
And possibly:
> Shorten?
8 characters, almost 1/10 the size of the original, and makes about 1/10 as much sense.
Can't you set up two installations (configuration files) on the same server, but point them to the same database/directory? The data should be shared between the two, but you can customize the two page designs.