Why do Atheists proclaim their atheism like it's a badge of honor? Since it's impossible to know for sure can't you guys and the Christians keep off each other's tits and just enjoy life? Seriously, nothing ruins my day quite like having to listen to an Atheist bitch and moan about how stupid and illogical I am for believing in something. Just so you know, I'm not a Christian.
Of course, I'd like to point out that I'm making the assumption you're an Atheist. This may not be so, yet your diction would seem to imply it.
Actually, you've managed to generalize my statement from being against the exploitation of children to being against freedom of speech when it's something I don't like. If a particular piece of speech is shown scientifically to harm others, like shouting fire in a crowded theatre, I'm all for censorship. The problem I have with Freenet as an alternative to censorship is that it doesn't give me control over what goes on on my computer.
With Freenet I'd essentially be trading one person's idea of what's acceptable speech for another person's. Neither of them are my own. Freenet's idea of acceptable speech is too broad to be acceptable for me.
Which is great until Freenet decides to host someone's kiddie porn collection on your computer. Then you get to smile at the nice FBI agents as they escort you to your court date. It's great that someone's thought of encrypting and decentralizing what gets published to the internet, but it's not practical until I can have control over what gets put on my node. Their FAQ handwaves the hell out of this essentially by suggesting that true freedom means I have to host something I find personally disgusting or that will get me in trouble. In other words, I would be substituting one owner for another. Currently I find my government's views on what is acceptable to be a better compromise than Freenet's views on what is acceptable.
The best thing the federal government could possibly ever do for the public schools is actually put some funding behind the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and No Child Left Behind. They make a fuckton of demands on the public schools, but then they don't back it up with funding. It's been like that since the 70's. Frankly if you're going to place strict requirements on the schools that they educate *everyone* even at significant expense, you should put your money where your mouth is.
Would you be upset if your boss told you "Okay bub, do this, this, and this. But I'm not gonna pay you for it since you're doing such a good job already."
And as for our schools being shitboxes I've got a questionnaire I'd like to ask you:
1.) Can you read? 2.) Can you write coherently? 3.) Can you do mathematics? 4.) Do you have a job that is not simply menial in nature? 5.) Do you have a decent understanding that there is a world outside your state? 6.) Were your parents able to work while you were growing up?
If you answered yes to any of the questions above, you may have benefited from a free public education.
Remember Comrades, with every thrust and sigh remember that you're doing her for Big Brother! Down with Emmanuel Goldstein! Ingsoc Up! BB! BB! BB! BB! BB!...and I'm spent.
And furthermore we shouldn't require that one have a solution in order to be allowed to complain. Should I stop complaining about the world's energy crisis since I don't have a solution to the problem? What about poverty, or global warming, or world war, or anything else that people would/are complain(ing) about?
You should never use the lack of an immediate solution be the reason you don't point out a problem./OT
Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of calling it the $100 laptop in the first place? It's supposed to be ultra-affordable but then you jack up the price.
Great, let me know how that grass-clipping and epoxy house works out for you. Also, be sure to tell me how long it took you to assemble all those deck parts and how you plan to do that with a desktop-sized 3d printer.
Howabout a series of electronic devices connected in such a manner as to facilitate the sharing of data.
It includes cell phones, and doesn't mention any specifics. Any definition that mentions the physical medium across which the data is carried does not define the internet, since it doesn't include the venerable IP over Carrier Pidgeon spec, or the IP over Smoke Signal, or Sneakernet, or any of the other ways that data can be exchanged between computers that doesn't involve electrical wiring. Yes, the Internet is currently constructed with wiring but that definition becomes archaic when we switch to fiber optics or wireless.
Nowhere on the front page or anywhere in the terms of service or user agreement does it say that all users will present a fair and objective argument for their thoughts. Furthermore, this is an internet discussion forum. It's not like anyone takes anything we have to say seriously in the first place. If you do, maybe you need to get outside more. This is essentially the nerd analogue to a bunch of construction workers sitting around talking about chicks and eating lunch. Lots of bullshitting here.
Actually, since you can only asymptotically approach the speed of light, it's meaningless to draw any inferences about what happens when you reach it based solely on Special Relativity. Also, note that Beta, your fraction of the speed of light, equals 1, and so most of the transformations for Special Relativity that depend on Gamma are being divided by zero, indicating that the law breaks down completely at the speed of light.
The Calculus result after you take the limit is physically meaningless, in my opinion. It only tells you what's happening as you get close to the speed of light, not when you hit the speed of light.
If you didn't understand what I just said, pick up a decent Modern Physics textbook and study the relations. Then argue away.
You're forgetting that we can assume the maximum possible measurement based on the scale included with the measuring device. Sig figs takes into account a wealth of information about the difficulty of reading a scale after it runs out of marks.
You're making the assumption that either we cannot measure anything to the precision guarenteed by a scale, or that we can measure past the precision guarenteed by a scale. In either case you'd be wrong. In the former case, you'd even be suggesting that measurement is useless.
Also, if you're in a laboratory setting collecting data for a scholarly work, you'd better damn well be collecting data to the maximum precision allowable by your instrument. What would be the point of the science if you didn't go as far as you could in obtaining a precise measurement?
No offense, but you forgot to tell me who Matthew Garrett is and why I should care about his livejournal. I clicked, but finding a blog with little background information I decided that he may not be an authority figure on the subject of ACPI.
That's nice, but why don't they just skip the middleman and just ask security questions anyway? What is the point of putting this extra complication in if it doesn't actually add any security beyond what is already gained when the teller asks you for personal information?
Ontopic, if my bank started using this system it would completely lock me out of my account, as I have a password long enough that I have to slow down until I get it right. There would be bonus points if I could fit the long version of it into the prompt, as that would be somewhere on the order of 50 characters. If they're expecting one speed and I type at another it would tag me as fraud?
The TOTALLY AWESOME thing about Opera that no other browser does is full page resizing with zoom, right down to the pictures. Yep, Opera takes the entire page and resizes it, preserving formatting. I was really sad about having to downgrade to Firefox in Linux because I'd lose the ability to read most of my webcomics without sitting a foot from my screen.
This is pretty much the only reason I prefer Opera to Firefox. I like being able to make text big so that I can read it from a lounging distance.
I worked construction last summer. The main reason we don't take the time to "be safe" is that often the benefits conferred by safety equipment are highly overrated. Take safety glasses for instance. Every tool I've ever worked with that had a saw blade also contained warnings advising me to wear safety glasses.
Never had a problem not wearing them. If you're actually a safe, considerate person most of those warnings can be ignored. The warnings on ladders about the top rung, especially. You can step up onto the top of a fold-out ladder provided you've got something to support yourself against so that you don't lose your balance.
It's not that construction workers are stupid as GP wants to imply, it's because 9 times out of 10 the safety labels can be disregarded because they were put there after an outlandish situation. The guy I was working for had been a roofer for 20 years, and had never seen anyone fall off a roof or a ladder except for the one time the ladder was seated against the house incorrectly.
Those desk jockeys to whom you refer probably don't realise what it takes to actually be safe. They're the ones the safety labels are written for.
I liked Brotherhood of Steel. It had a lot of the same character as the older fallout games, but the humor was a bit rougher. It was also a lot more refined in the way the graphics meshed with the gameplay. Things like not crawling under the blinking streetlight at night on the second level, or having to choose which side of a gully you're sneaking through was what gave the game its unique slant on the series. A lot of the changes that die-hard fans wailed about were what made the game so damn fun for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly, I'm suprised this isn't modded flamebait or troll.
Why do Atheists proclaim their atheism like it's a badge of honor? Since it's impossible to know for sure can't you guys and the Christians keep off each other's tits and just enjoy life? Seriously, nothing ruins my day quite like having to listen to an Atheist bitch and moan about how stupid and illogical I am for believing in something. Just so you know, I'm not a Christian.
Of course, I'd like to point out that I'm making the assumption you're an Atheist. This may not be so, yet your diction would seem to imply it.
Actually, you've managed to generalize my statement from being against the exploitation of children to being against freedom of speech when it's something I don't like. If a particular piece of speech is shown scientifically to harm others, like shouting fire in a crowded theatre, I'm all for censorship. The problem I have with Freenet as an alternative to censorship is that it doesn't give me control over what goes on on my computer.
With Freenet I'd essentially be trading one person's idea of what's acceptable speech for another person's. Neither of them are my own. Freenet's idea of acceptable speech is too broad to be acceptable for me.
Then it's definitely something I can't get behind no matter how bad the current situation gets.
Which is great until Freenet decides to host someone's kiddie porn collection on your computer. Then you get to smile at the nice FBI agents as they escort you to your court date. It's great that someone's thought of encrypting and decentralizing what gets published to the internet, but it's not practical until I can have control over what gets put on my node. Their FAQ handwaves the hell out of this essentially by suggesting that true freedom means I have to host something I find personally disgusting or that will get me in trouble. In other words, I would be substituting one owner for another. Currently I find my government's views on what is acceptable to be a better compromise than Freenet's views on what is acceptable.
Sorry, no dice.
The best thing the federal government could possibly ever do for the public schools is actually put some funding behind the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and No Child Left Behind. They make a fuckton of demands on the public schools, but then they don't back it up with funding. It's been like that since the 70's. Frankly if you're going to place strict requirements on the schools that they educate *everyone* even at significant expense, you should put your money where your mouth is.
Would you be upset if your boss told you "Okay bub, do this, this, and this. But I'm not gonna pay you for it since you're doing such a good job already."
And as for our schools being shitboxes I've got a questionnaire I'd like to ask you:
1.) Can you read?
2.) Can you write coherently?
3.) Can you do mathematics?
4.) Do you have a job that is not simply menial in nature?
5.) Do you have a decent understanding that there is a world outside your state?
6.) Were your parents able to work while you were growing up?
If you answered yes to any of the questions above, you may have benefited from a free public education.
Remember Comrades, with every thrust and sigh remember that you're doing her for Big Brother! Down with Emmanuel Goldstein! Ingsoc Up! BB! BB! BB! BB! BB! ...and I'm spent.
And furthermore we shouldn't require that one have a solution in order to be allowed to complain. Should I stop complaining about the world's energy crisis since I don't have a solution to the problem? What about poverty, or global warming, or world war, or anything else that people would/are complain(ing) about?
/OT
You should never use the lack of an immediate solution be the reason you don't point out a problem.
Doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of calling it the $100 laptop in the first place? It's supposed to be ultra-affordable but then you jack up the price.
Great, let me know how that grass-clipping and epoxy house works out for you. Also, be sure to tell me how long it took you to assemble all those deck parts and how you plan to do that with a desktop-sized 3d printer.
Umm, the same thing that happens to a USB flash drive? Does your digital camera lose its pictures when you take the batteries out?
Howabout a series of electronic devices connected in such a manner as to facilitate the sharing of data.
It includes cell phones, and doesn't mention any specifics. Any definition that mentions the physical medium across which the data is carried does not define the internet, since it doesn't include the venerable IP over Carrier Pidgeon spec, or the IP over Smoke Signal, or Sneakernet, or any of the other ways that data can be exchanged between computers that doesn't involve electrical wiring. Yes, the Internet is currently constructed with wiring but that definition becomes archaic when we switch to fiber optics or wireless.
Nowhere on the front page or anywhere in the terms of service or user agreement does it say that all users will present a fair and objective argument for their thoughts. Furthermore, this is an internet discussion forum. It's not like anyone takes anything we have to say seriously in the first place. If you do, maybe you need to get outside more. This is essentially the nerd analogue to a bunch of construction workers sitting around talking about chicks and eating lunch. Lots of bullshitting here.
Yeah, I'd have to agree with you there.
Actually, since you can only asymptotically approach the speed of light, it's meaningless to draw any inferences about what happens when you reach it based solely on Special Relativity. Also, note that Beta, your fraction of the speed of light, equals 1, and so most of the transformations for Special Relativity that depend on Gamma are being divided by zero, indicating that the law breaks down completely at the speed of light.
The Calculus result after you take the limit is physically meaningless, in my opinion. It only tells you what's happening as you get close to the speed of light, not when you hit the speed of light.
If you didn't understand what I just said, pick up a decent Modern Physics textbook and study the relations. Then argue away.
Tell your mother she serves a mean rotten couch!
~Dave Lister, king of the cockroaches.
You're forgetting that we can assume the maximum possible measurement based on the scale included with the measuring device. Sig figs takes into account a wealth of information about the difficulty of reading a scale after it runs out of marks.
You're making the assumption that either we cannot measure anything to the precision guarenteed by a scale, or that we can measure past the precision guarenteed by a scale. In either case you'd be wrong. In the former case, you'd even be suggesting that measurement is useless.
Also, if you're in a laboratory setting collecting data for a scholarly work, you'd better damn well be collecting data to the maximum precision allowable by your instrument. What would be the point of the science if you didn't go as far as you could in obtaining a precise measurement?
Calling it a myth is pushing it.
Ahh, Jesse Owens. Clearly a fine exemplar of the Aryan race... OH SNAP!
Thanks much, I'll take a look.
No offense, but you forgot to tell me who Matthew Garrett is and why I should care about his livejournal. I clicked, but finding a blog with little background information I decided that he may not be an authority figure on the subject of ACPI.
That's nice, but why don't they just skip the middleman and just ask security questions anyway? What is the point of putting this extra complication in if it doesn't actually add any security beyond what is already gained when the teller asks you for personal information?
Huh. I didn't know bagels got hangovers.
Ontopic, if my bank started using this system it would completely lock me out of my account, as I have a password long enough that I have to slow down until I get it right. There would be bonus points if I could fit the long version of it into the prompt, as that would be somewhere on the order of 50 characters. If they're expecting one speed and I type at another it would tag me as fraud?
The TOTALLY AWESOME thing about Opera that no other browser does is full page resizing with zoom, right down to the pictures. Yep, Opera takes the entire page and resizes it, preserving formatting. I was really sad about having to downgrade to Firefox in Linux because I'd lose the ability to read most of my webcomics without sitting a foot from my screen.
This is pretty much the only reason I prefer Opera to Firefox. I like being able to make text big so that I can read it from a lounging distance.
The fact that we run a consistent trade deficit is a sign that our manufacturing and export economy is in the crapper.
I worked construction last summer. The main reason we don't take the time to "be safe" is that often the benefits conferred by safety equipment are highly overrated. Take safety glasses for instance. Every tool I've ever worked with that had a saw blade also contained warnings advising me to wear safety glasses.
Never had a problem not wearing them. If you're actually a safe, considerate person most of those warnings can be ignored. The warnings on ladders about the top rung, especially. You can step up onto the top of a fold-out ladder provided you've got something to support yourself against so that you don't lose your balance.
It's not that construction workers are stupid as GP wants to imply, it's because 9 times out of 10 the safety labels can be disregarded because they were put there after an outlandish situation. The guy I was working for had been a roofer for 20 years, and had never seen anyone fall off a roof or a ladder except for the one time the ladder was seated against the house incorrectly.
Those desk jockeys to whom you refer probably don't realise what it takes to actually be safe. They're the ones the safety labels are written for.
I liked Brotherhood of Steel. It had a lot of the same character as the older fallout games, but the humor was a bit rougher. It was also a lot more refined in the way the graphics meshed with the gameplay. Things like not crawling under the blinking streetlight at night on the second level, or having to choose which side of a gully you're sneaking through was what gave the game its unique slant on the series. A lot of the changes that die-hard fans wailed about were what made the game so damn fun for me.