Then you never understood what stargate was. It was always stupid rehashes, but done with enough intelligence and wit that it made fun of the stupid rehashes. You can't run a sci-fi series for 200 episodes without doing stupid rehashes, so you'd better not take yourself too seriously and paint yourself into a corner you can't get out of. One of my favorite lines was when Sam says, "You know what their weakness turned out to be? Water. I mean, if that's true, why go to all the trouble to invade a planet that's two-thirds water?" C'mon, we were all thinking it...
At any rate, they've faired far better than the Simpsons, which didn't even have the good sense to step aside when it spawned a truely great comedy.
That is an awful lot of expensive equipment and storage. I'd be willing to accept it if they include some nice mapping software, or at least an output that I can hook into my own mapping software, but if I don't get the full functionality of a car I've paid for, I'll be mighty upset. Upset enough to buy import if it comes to it.
Yeah but the best thing would be the spreading of the aurora. No longer would those snooty self-important northlanders have a monopoly on pretty nighttime sky movies.
Some (most? all?) states have a "reasonable and prudent" law which protects you if you're going "with the flow of traffic." The downside though is that under adverse weather conditions, driving at the limit can still be illegal. Of course, it's also quite dangerous to other drivers, so it makes sense.
Regardless, how would they know from the blackbox data that the speed you were travelling was in fact, in excess of the limit without also knowing the road you were driving on?
Yes, you should definately do this if you're planning on being criminally at fault in an accident.
I understand why people might be reluctant to have such a device, but the possibility that it might be used as evidence against you in a case where you have committed a crime is silly. Privacy rights are not supposed to keep you from getting cought committing crimes.
"If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be worried" is just as bad of a justification as, "If you have something to hide, you should be able to."
I think I've been pretty clear on my position in the latter case in my various postings to slashdot, and I don't really care what the first word means. It is invariably trotted out by people who want to stir up controversy. It has become useless.
For those who like its "original" definition with respect to electronics, there is a much better word, "tinkerer" which gets across all of the meaning with none of the ambiguity. For the "black-hat" definition, I think "vandal," "evesdropper," and "spy" are appropriate drop-in replacements, and probably there are words even better suited to the task.
As for the word "hacker" itself, its meaning is generally apparant from context. If you can use a context-sensitive programming language, why not a context-sensitive actual language?
It may be a fair point to hold to traditional usage in many cases, but I'm not entirely sure this particular case is very worthy at all. It seems like a misconception to people schooled in the jargon of formalized debate, but it is quite obviously used by people who aren't familiar with such. So it could be a misconception (though you have to twist up language quite a bit for it to become so), but it could also be a case of parallel idiomatic evolution.
Why the hell does "begging the question" mean recursively using an argument or series of arguments as support for themselves anyway? That certainly doesn't make any sense at all.
Ah quite right. I was so cought up in my passion for grammatical leniency that I made a spelling mistake. I suppose it would be hypocritical to ask for spelling leniency for my condemnation of grammar naziism.
But if the plugin works, there's really no reason they must switch from MS, is there? I mean the goal is to store everything in ODF so that taxpayers can read it with that they like, not for the state to necessarily switch to open source word processors, right?
Oh, come off it. "Begging the question" is an idiom anyway, which doesn't follow the literal interpretation of the words themselves. The OPs comment uses it as an idiom which actually pretty closely matches the literal meaning of the individual words.
Evolution of language should perhaps be slowed in some cases, but this is rediculous. Correcting people for such a minor (and perhaps more popular than the original usage) infraction of idiomatic usage just makes you look like an ass.
A good example, but still flawed. It's one thing for a few eccentrics (or even a few dozen dozen eccentrics) to play with optics on their own dime. It's quite another to be involved in a massively expensive boondoggle of a concentrated space-lab whose main goal seems to be to be done jointly by several nations rather than to actually advance mankind's knowledge by any amount. All of the experiments proposed for ISS could be done far more cheaply (at least an order of magnitude) separatly on automated mostly independant launches. Eliminating the need for rendezvous would cut that much from the cost by itself.
Someone once said that building things like the supercollider have nothing to do with the defense of the nation, except to make it worth defending. This may be true, but we must not send good money after bad. The superconducting supercollider project was cancelled. If even one superconductiong supercollider project, or space telescope, or very large array of telescopes, or interplanetary space probe at the edge of the solar system is cancelled to provide funding for an excercise in political futility, well that's just sad.
You get tickets for 60 in a 55? What're you doing? Looking like a hippie while driving an expensive sportscar trailing a banner saying "Pigs are teh sux?"
Good gracious man, be polite, turn on your dome light, and don't make any threatening moves. (this is good advice for anyone who is being approached by someone who carries a gun and faces violent offenders regularly)
It's been my experience that they don't really want to give you the ticket, at least not until they meet you. Most of them just want you to drive safely. But if they can't avoid it (generally due to some stupidity on your part), or you piss them off enough they won't look for a way to avoid it, well you're going to bear the full penalty for your infraction.
Even then, though, it's not really YOU who'se been singled out for unfair punishment, but others who've been singled out for unfair leniency.
Do biologists have some kind of different definition of organic chemistry from engineers and physicists? IIRC, organic chemistry was fun one, with ethyl alcohol, benzene, nitroglycerin, picric acid, trinitrotoluene, and all the other nifty-sounding high calorie things you really shouldn't be eating.
Yes, but 1) you're using it already, so it can't be used for anything else, 2) hydropower is going to be an increasingly small percentage of the earth's energy supply due to it's own environmental problems, and 3) it takes a long time to ramp up new power capacity. On the order of 10 years per plant. Whatever replaces hydrocarbon fuels is definately going to take a longer timescale than the average slashdotter has left to become the majority energy source.
Ok, but let me simplify the equation for you a bit. For the forseeable future (as in, as long as you'll be alieve at least) the energy comes from fossil fuels. Either oil, coal, or natural gas.
Re:eWaste is ready to kill us, so it's better to m
on
Turning Garbage into Gold
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
2-10 lbs of lead?
I find that very difficult do believe. I mean that's 5-25 POUNDS of solder. What the hell are they doing in there?
The heaviest thing in a television set is the picture tube. Since it's big and filled with vacuum it must have very thick walls. Thick glass walls. I suppose they could be lead crystal glass tubes, but that would be needlessly expensive, and wouldn't leach into the water supply in any meaningful timescale anyway. The next heaviest thing is the hundreds of wrappings of thin copper wire. There is no reason to ever make thin copper wire out of lead. In fact, it's impossible.
That figure smacks of taking advantage of people's ignorance about a heavy rarely opened box in almost everyone's homes. There's gotta be some kind of term for abusing people's uncertainty about things to encourage fear to promote some kind of crazy agenda.
I hope so. Then we'll be able to completely reprogram it and add remarkeable features merely by rearranging six or seven variously colored gem cut crystals...
No, it's a term used to describe Justices who find things in the constitution that are not written, or use foreign law to support decisions (which generally involve more power resting in the hands of the national government.) For instance, using a vague "right to privacy" not ennumerated, but apparantly implied by the constitution to justify allowing the federal government to overrule state laws regarding abortion, rather than resorting to the (actually ennumerated) 10th ammendment, noticing that the states are intended to have more power than the national government, and simply refusing to hear the case. It does not matter whether it was a good moral decision or not, because it was a very bad legal precident. If the constitution means only what 9 peoples whim dictates, then it will not be a viable check on government power much longer.
It should probably also be applied to justices who failed to strike down John McCain's (R-AZ) campaign finance "reform" law, which clearly violates the first ammendment in the months leading up to an election.
In short, it describes justices who rule according to their whim and then find a way to justify their decision. That it has mostly been liberal judges (though many of those appointed by republican presidents) and liberal issues is immaterial to the general problem, except that it seems conservatives are the only group that's really aware of the problem. (so naturally, the liberal excesses will be the ones more strongly remembered.)
Slashdot Mirror
Everything you know is wrong.
World of Warcraft on the other hand is pure genius!
meh. worked for family guy, and perhaps even futurama. so what's your point really?
Then you never understood what stargate was. It was always stupid rehashes, but done with enough intelligence and wit that it made fun of the stupid rehashes. You can't run a sci-fi series for 200 episodes without doing stupid rehashes, so you'd better not take yourself too seriously and paint yourself into a corner you can't get out of. One of my favorite lines was when Sam says, "You know what their weakness turned out to be? Water. I mean, if that's true, why go to all the trouble to invade a planet that's two-thirds water?" C'mon, we were all thinking it...
At any rate, they've faired far better than the Simpsons, which didn't even have the good sense to step aside when it spawned a truely great comedy.
That is an awful lot of expensive equipment and storage. I'd be willing to accept it if they include some nice mapping software, or at least an output that I can hook into my own mapping software, but if I don't get the full functionality of a car I've paid for, I'll be mighty upset. Upset enough to buy import if it comes to it.
Ask and you shall recieve.
Yeah but the best thing would be the spreading of the aurora. No longer would those snooty self-important northlanders have a monopoly on pretty nighttime sky movies.
Some (most? all?) states have a "reasonable and prudent" law which protects you if you're going "with the flow of traffic." The downside though is that under adverse weather conditions, driving at the limit can still be illegal. Of course, it's also quite dangerous to other drivers, so it makes sense.
Regardless, how would they know from the blackbox data that the speed you were travelling was in fact, in excess of the limit without also knowing the road you were driving on?
Yes, you should definately do this if you're planning on being criminally at fault in an accident.
I understand why people might be reluctant to have such a device, but the possibility that it might be used as evidence against you in a case where you have committed a crime is silly. Privacy rights are not supposed to keep you from getting cought committing crimes.
"If you have nothing to hide, you shouldn't be worried" is just as bad of a justification as, "If you have something to hide, you should be able to."
I think I've been pretty clear on my position in the latter case in my various postings to slashdot, and I don't really care what the first word means. It is invariably trotted out by people who want to stir up controversy. It has become useless.
For those who like its "original" definition with respect to electronics, there is a much better word, "tinkerer" which gets across all of the meaning with none of the ambiguity. For the "black-hat" definition, I think "vandal," "evesdropper," and "spy" are appropriate drop-in replacements, and probably there are words even better suited to the task.
As for the word "hacker" itself, its meaning is generally apparant from context. If you can use a context-sensitive programming language, why not a context-sensitive actual language?
It may be a fair point to hold to traditional usage in many cases, but I'm not entirely sure this particular case is very worthy at all. It seems like a misconception to people schooled in the jargon of formalized debate, but it is quite obviously used by people who aren't familiar with such. So it could be a misconception (though you have to twist up language quite a bit for it to become so), but it could also be a case of parallel idiomatic evolution.
Why the hell does "begging the question" mean recursively using an argument or series of arguments as support for themselves anyway? That certainly doesn't make any sense at all.
Ah quite right. I was so cought up in my passion for grammatical leniency that I made a spelling mistake. I suppose it would be hypocritical to ask for spelling leniency for my condemnation of grammar naziism.
But if the plugin works, there's really no reason they must switch from MS, is there? I mean the goal is to store everything in ODF so that taxpayers can read it with that they like, not for the state to necessarily switch to open source word processors, right?
Oh, come off it. "Begging the question" is an idiom anyway, which doesn't follow the literal interpretation of the words themselves. The OPs comment uses it as an idiom which actually pretty closely matches the literal meaning of the individual words.
Evolution of language should perhaps be slowed in some cases, but this is rediculous. Correcting people for such a minor (and perhaps more popular than the original usage) infraction of idiomatic usage just makes you look like an ass.
A good example, but still flawed. It's one thing for a few eccentrics (or even a few dozen dozen eccentrics) to play with optics on their own dime. It's quite another to be involved in a massively expensive boondoggle of a concentrated space-lab whose main goal seems to be to be done jointly by several nations rather than to actually advance mankind's knowledge by any amount. All of the experiments proposed for ISS could be done far more cheaply (at least an order of magnitude) separatly on automated mostly independant launches. Eliminating the need for rendezvous would cut that much from the cost by itself.
Someone once said that building things like the supercollider have nothing to do with the defense of the nation, except to make it worth defending. This may be true, but we must not send good money after bad. The superconducting supercollider project was cancelled. If even one superconductiong supercollider project, or space telescope, or very large array of telescopes, or interplanetary space probe at the edge of the solar system is cancelled to provide funding for an excercise in political futility, well that's just sad.
No he doesn't, if he were a marketing rep he wouldn't have singled out Ubuntu specifically.
You get tickets for 60 in a 55? What're you doing? Looking like a hippie while driving an expensive sportscar trailing a banner saying "Pigs are teh sux?"
Good gracious man, be polite, turn on your dome light, and don't make any threatening moves. (this is good advice for anyone who is being approached by someone who carries a gun and faces violent offenders regularly)
It's been my experience that they don't really want to give you the ticket, at least not until they meet you. Most of them just want you to drive safely. But if they can't avoid it (generally due to some stupidity on your part), or you piss them off enough they won't look for a way to avoid it, well you're going to bear the full penalty for your infraction.
Even then, though, it's not really YOU who'se been singled out for unfair punishment, but others who've been singled out for unfair leniency.
Do biologists have some kind of different definition of organic chemistry from engineers and physicists? IIRC, organic chemistry was fun one, with ethyl alcohol, benzene, nitroglycerin, picric acid, trinitrotoluene, and all the other nifty-sounding high calorie things you really shouldn't be eating.
um.. stop using the reboot button on the case?
Yes, but 1) you're using it already, so it can't be used for anything else, 2) hydropower is going to be an increasingly small percentage of the earth's energy supply due to it's own environmental problems, and 3) it takes a long time to ramp up new power capacity. On the order of 10 years per plant. Whatever replaces hydrocarbon fuels is definately going to take a longer timescale than the average slashdotter has left to become the majority energy source.
Ok, but let me simplify the equation for you a bit. For the forseeable future (as in, as long as you'll be alieve at least) the energy comes from fossil fuels. Either oil, coal, or natural gas.
2-10 lbs of lead?
I find that very difficult do believe. I mean that's 5-25 POUNDS of solder. What the hell are they doing in there?
The heaviest thing in a television set is the picture tube. Since it's big and filled with vacuum it must have very thick walls. Thick glass walls. I suppose they could be lead crystal glass tubes, but that would be needlessly expensive, and wouldn't leach into the water supply in any meaningful timescale anyway. The next heaviest thing is the hundreds of wrappings of thin copper wire. There is no reason to ever make thin copper wire out of lead. In fact, it's impossible.
That figure smacks of taking advantage of people's ignorance about a heavy rarely opened box in almost everyone's homes. There's gotta be some kind of term for abusing people's uncertainty about things to encourage fear to promote some kind of crazy agenda.
I hope so. Then we'll be able to completely reprogram it and add remarkeable features merely by rearranging six or seven variously colored gem cut crystals...
It actually works pretty well through walls.
No, it's a term used to describe Justices who find things in the constitution that are not written, or use foreign law to support decisions (which generally involve more power resting in the hands of the national government.)
For instance, using a vague "right to privacy" not ennumerated, but apparantly implied by the constitution to justify allowing the federal government to overrule state laws regarding abortion, rather than resorting to the (actually ennumerated) 10th ammendment, noticing that the states are intended to have more power than the national government, and simply refusing to hear the case. It does not matter whether it was a good moral decision or not, because it was a very bad legal precident. If the constitution means only what 9 peoples whim dictates, then it will not be a viable check on government power much longer.
It should probably also be applied to justices who failed to strike down John McCain's (R-AZ) campaign finance "reform" law, which clearly violates the first ammendment in the months leading up to an election.
In short, it describes justices who rule according to their whim and then find a way to justify their decision. That it has mostly been liberal judges (though many of those appointed by republican presidents) and liberal issues is immaterial to the general problem, except that it seems conservatives are the only group that's really aware of the problem. (so naturally, the liberal excesses will be the ones more strongly remembered.)