"If it offends me, I want it banned for everyone." seems to be the mentality of so many.
Even worse, that's pretty much the actual codification into law of what makes something worthy of classification/censorship in Australia:
[...] that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults [...]
So many wishy-washy terms there. It's not like those actual "standards" are documented anywhere, nor is it immediately obvious to most people that there opinions may be unreasonable...
OpenOffice file formats are 100% open for years now
Riiiight. When the specification states things like "Do this the way Excel 95 did", and the Excel 95 implementation is closed source, it's one hell of a stretch to call that open.
Nine years ago the USPTO chief said "Don't whine about prior art, submit evidence of it" regarding the 1-Click patent.
Three+ years ago, such evidence was submitted.
Today: Amazon still retains the patent, while the promised re-exam has yet to occur.
So yes, if you only focus on one element of the entire summary I can understand why you might think that its someone other than you who is being a "dipshit".
Anyway, you asked for a cite, here's just one, that explains how people who have similar pathways have similar language ability.
This article doesn't seem to be making that claim at all. It states that people who have similar neurological damage suffer from similar impediments in language processing. That's like saying that computers with damaged GPUs are going to suffer from the same rendering problems; it makes no statement whatsoever about the overall structural compatibility between two computers.
From the article:
Our findings not only show hemispheric differences in connections between inferior frontal and posterior temporal regions but also critically suggest that individuals with more symmetric patterns of connection are better overall at learning words using semantic association.
So what is being discussed here is the biological process by which language processing occurs. At no point does it show that there is any neurological identicality between one person's concept of "apple" and another's.
"in tune"
I thought this was a discussion based in hard science, not pseudo-occult chicanery. Sorry, but this just strikes too close to that old mystical sawhorse of "vibrations". I've heard people claim they were "in tune" with Jesus; I'm certainly not going to make the leap to saying they're somehow neurologically quantum entangled with the godhead.
We all have certain neural pathways that operate similarly. This isn't a guess, but proven.
Citation please (and yes, I know where I'm posting...). Specifically, please provide a reference that proves that even basic concepts like "red", "stop" and "person" are translated into neural signals that are consistent across all people...
Think of it more as two people hearing the same song. They may have wildly different interpretations, but they are hearing the same music.
And therein lies the problem: "wildly different interpretations" do not make a solid foundation for communication.
I can propose a real quantum and biological mechanism for people to think along the same lines, simultaneously
Do two different brains operate in the same way, though? What data format do you use for the transmission of information? It's not like we all install the same mental OS when we're born...
I genuinely don't believe that we can "stream" thought from one brain to another in the way you seem to be suggesting. Neurological development isn't fixed, it's highly influenced by environment, culture, genetics, food... That two independent brains would interpret the same information in exactly the same way seems highly unlikely, if not impossible. Hell, I'm honestly amazed that we even manage to communicate as well as we do.
I'm also willing to admit that my viewpoint here has been highly influenced by Wittgenstein:)
Agreed, this is the approach I take as well. And given the del.icio.us extension supports keywords, its a -lot- easier for me to persist my keyword commands across systems than with Ubiquity.
It seems to be a common trend amongst some Apple fanatics to dismiss any criticism as "lies". Apparently, noone who owns an Apple product can ever find fault with it, anyone claiming to do so clearly doesn't own the product in question.
I would love to have a fully working version of Directory Opus for *nix. It's the application that made Windows usable for me and the only file manager on any OS that doesn't suck.
I sincerely hope they are willing to be generous with license agreements to competitors since Apple products suck.
I know that anecdotes != evidence, but here's mine anyway.
My only Apple purchase to date was a 3rd gen iPod which I picked up not long after its launch. I'd held off from the first two iterations expecting the product to be polished enough by then.
Unfortunately, I had two issues with it, which were annoying enough to prompt me to sign up to the Apple forums and make a polite general enquiry. Briefly: every time I turned it on it would skip the first track played, and as I listen to a -lot- of mixed music - where the transitions between songs are often as interesting as the songs themselves - I was surprised to find no gapless playback.
I was -astounded- to receive nothing but vitriol from the forums. The general consensus was that I was a dirty fucking liar who clearly didn't own an iPod otherwise I would know how baseless my "allegations" were.
However, the point at which I gave up, stopped reading and realised I would never own another Apple product again came when one of the iPod engineering team replied, stating that there (and I quote) "must be something wrong with [my] attention span" if I was so put off by a millisecond delay while listening to music. His solution for the skipping track problem was "use the previous track button".
Such a great community, filled with such genius insight...
What liberties did this play take with her original story? I don't recall the idea of man-made life being a "dream" of hers at all...quite the opposite.
They wrote a Windows wrapper around cross platform libraries.
No, you've inverted it, they wrote a "cross platform layer" that currently only has a Windows libraries based implementation:
Chrome uses abstraction libraries to draw the GUI on other non-Windows platforms, but for now, what sits underneath part of ChromeViews is good ol' WTL.
This indicates that Google did have multiplatform support in mind from the beginning. If they hadn't used native Windows libs for the GUI, I'm pretty certain we'd be hearing just as much bitching about how cross platform libs never perform as solidly as native ones.
Then they had the nerve to deny it, even when anybody who looked at the source code immediately after initial release could see the truth of the matter.
I pointed out the same section earlier this week in another Chrome article and was promptly told that I was wrong to believe this, as it was a design document by a naive bunch of designers and that Google management would never let it pass. It's amazing to see how many people on/. value their own baseless paranoid conjecture (and keep getting voted up 'insightful' for it) over factual, documented statements by active project participants.
Thankfully this time it got voted up to Informative.
Don't create accounts for all these social sites in the first place.
But that's not the issue here. The problem is that other people will continue to create social network accounts and can put information in there that violates my privacy.
There's no point in protecting my identity strongly online if all it takes is one person to attribute one of my email addresses to my real name in their Facebook contacts.
Despite the fact Israel has shown great restraint in dealing with the Palestinians (if it was me, Id bulldoze the entire Gaza strip into the sea and turn it into a resort), they are still labeled as evil and a terrorist state for finally retaliating after multiple rocket attacks and suicide bombers.
Slashdot Mirror
They need a VERY low cost PS3 developer boot camp to teach the tricks of the console and to encourage developers to write more games.
Then who is currently teaching all these small company developers who are churning out fun and awesome-looking games for the Playstation Store?
Or did they just do the necessary reading/experimenting while the other devs where busy whining?
"If it offends me, I want it banned for everyone." seems to be the mentality of so many.
Even worse, that's pretty much the actual codification into law of what makes something worthy of classification/censorship in Australia:
[...] that they offend against the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults [...]
So many wishy-washy terms there. It's not like those actual "standards" are documented anywhere, nor is it immediately obvious to most people that there opinions may be unreasonable...
Are you suggesting that I have to pay different royalties to the author based on my intent to create said unicorn?
According to some of the pro-writer posts here, if the writer is currently making money from paper mache unicorn versions of their book, then yes.
I wish I could wrangle a way to be compensated for 100+ years for the work I do today...
Is there a version of Linux available for Apple Macintoshes? How about Commodore Amigas? (just curious)
The answer to both of those questions is the same: http://www.linux-m68k.org/
(I was tempted to do this through letmegooglethatforyou.com but I've used up my asshole points for today...)
OpenOffice file formats are 100% open for years now
Riiiight. When the specification states things like "Do this the way Excel 95 did", and the Excel 95 implementation is closed source, it's one hell of a stretch to call that open.
Really, why all the anti-shell hostility around here?
Ignorance, basically.
So yes, if you only focus on one element of the entire summary I can understand why you might think that its someone other than you who is being a "dipshit".
Anyway, you asked for a cite, here's just one, that explains how people who have similar pathways have similar language ability.
This article doesn't seem to be making that claim at all. It states that people who have similar neurological damage suffer from similar impediments in language processing. That's like saying that computers with damaged GPUs are going to suffer from the same rendering problems; it makes no statement whatsoever about the overall structural compatibility between two computers.
From the article:
Our findings not only show hemispheric differences in connections between inferior frontal and posterior temporal regions but also critically suggest that individuals with more symmetric patterns of connection are better overall at learning words using semantic association.
So what is being discussed here is the biological process by which language processing occurs. At no point does it show that there is any neurological identicality between one person's concept of "apple" and another's.
"in tune"
I thought this was a discussion based in hard science, not pseudo-occult chicanery. Sorry, but this just strikes too close to that old mystical sawhorse of "vibrations". I've heard people claim they were "in tune" with Jesus; I'm certainly not going to make the leap to saying they're somehow neurologically quantum entangled with the godhead.
We all have certain neural pathways that operate similarly. This isn't a guess, but proven.
Citation please (and yes, I know where I'm posting...). Specifically, please provide a reference that proves that even basic concepts like "red", "stop" and "person" are translated into neural signals that are consistent across all people...
Think of it more as two people hearing the same song. They may have wildly different interpretations, but they are hearing the same music.
And therein lies the problem: "wildly different interpretations" do not make a solid foundation for communication.
I can propose a real quantum and biological mechanism for people to think along the same lines, simultaneously
Do two different brains operate in the same way, though? What data format do you use for the transmission of information? It's not like we all install the same mental OS when we're born...
I genuinely don't believe that we can "stream" thought from one brain to another in the way you seem to be suggesting. Neurological development isn't fixed, it's highly influenced by environment, culture, genetics, food... That two independent brains would interpret the same information in exactly the same way seems highly unlikely, if not impossible. Hell, I'm honestly amazed that we even manage to communicate as well as we do.
I'm also willing to admit that my viewpoint here has been highly influenced by Wittgenstein :)
Nobody reads snowcrash anymore?
It's like so 1992.
Nobody reads philosophical texts anymore?
It's like so 1931.
The map is NOT the territory.
Agreed, this is the approach I take as well. And given the del.icio.us extension supports keywords, its a -lot- easier for me to persist my keyword commands across systems than with Ubiquity.
It seems to be a common trend amongst some Apple fanatics to dismiss any criticism as "lies". Apparently, noone who owns an Apple product can ever find fault with it, anyone claiming to do so clearly doesn't own the product in question.
I would love to have a fully working version of Directory Opus for *nix. It's the application that made Windows usable for me and the only file manager on any OS that doesn't suck.
I sincerely hope they are willing to be generous with license agreements to competitors since Apple products suck.
I know that anecdotes != evidence, but here's mine anyway.
My only Apple purchase to date was a 3rd gen iPod which I picked up not long after its launch. I'd held off from the first two iterations expecting the product to be polished enough by then.
Unfortunately, I had two issues with it, which were annoying enough to prompt me to sign up to the Apple forums and make a polite general enquiry. Briefly: every time I turned it on it would skip the first track played, and as I listen to a -lot- of mixed music - where the transitions between songs are often as interesting as the songs themselves - I was surprised to find no gapless playback.
I was -astounded- to receive nothing but vitriol from the forums. The general consensus was that I was a dirty fucking liar who clearly didn't own an iPod otherwise I would know how baseless my "allegations" were.
However, the point at which I gave up, stopped reading and realised I would never own another Apple product again came when one of the iPod engineering team replied, stating that there (and I quote) "must be something wrong with [my] attention span" if I was so put off by a millisecond delay while listening to music. His solution for the skipping track problem was "use the previous track button".
Such a great community, filled with such genius insight...
It's nice to see DivX (the company) back Matroska, but does anyone really use DivX (the codec) anymore?
The PS3 has official DivX support.
(Cue jokes about the size of the PS3 userbase...)
What liberties did this play take with her original story? I don't recall the idea of man-made life being a "dream" of hers at all...quite the opposite.
They wrote a Windows wrapper around cross platform libraries.
No, you've inverted it, they wrote a "cross platform layer" that currently only has a Windows libraries based implementation:
Chrome uses abstraction libraries to draw the GUI on other non-Windows platforms, but for now, what sits underneath part of ChromeViews is good ol' WTL.
(from Scott Hanselman's analysis of the Chrome code)
This indicates that Google did have multiplatform support in mind from the beginning. If they hadn't used native Windows libs for the GUI, I'm pretty certain we'd be hearing just as much bitching about how cross platform libs never perform as solidly as native ones.
Then they had the nerve to deny it, even when anybody who looked at the source code immediately after initial release could see the truth of the matter.
Citation, please.
I pointed out the same section earlier this week in another Chrome article and was promptly told that I was wrong to believe this, as it was a design document by a naive bunch of designers and that Google management would never let it pass. It's amazing to see how many people on /. value their own baseless paranoid conjecture (and keep getting voted up 'insightful' for it) over factual, documented statements by active project participants.
Thankfully this time it got voted up to Informative.
I'm guessing that Chrome will never have AdBlock Plus and NoScript.
That's a common but incorrect belief, at least according to this official design doc (emphasis mine):
The following lists some types of extensions that we'd like to eventually support:
* Bookmarking/navigation tools
* Content enhancements
* Content filtering: Adblock, Flashblock, Privacy control, Parental control
* [...]
Don't create accounts for all these social sites in the first place.
But that's not the issue here. The problem is that other people will continue to create social network accounts and can put information in there that violates my privacy.
There's no point in protecting my identity strongly online if all it takes is one person to attribute one of my email addresses to my real name in their Facebook contacts.
I'm not aware of that many single-hit hammers...
Ah, war, where our dead our horrendous wrongs that must be revenged, while theirs are just another opportunity for propaganda.
You people who blame Israel [...]
At no point did I say I hold either side responsible, I was more stating that I don't find either side blameless.
I assume you are either Canadian, European, or one of leftie Americans.
I assume you're an arrogant asshole. Snap.
Despite the fact Israel has shown great restraint in dealing with the Palestinians (if it was me, Id bulldoze the entire Gaza strip into the sea and turn it into a resort), they are still labeled as evil and a terrorist state for finally retaliating after multiple rocket attacks and suicide bombers.
And up until the point I saw that the Israeli's get their children to sign and paint the missiles they retaliate with, I had some sympathy for them too.