While this was meant as a joke, many other forms of electronic entertainment(particularly video games) would have massive benefit from being able to stimulate nerves of various kinds in particular places in the body without physical contact.
While I agree with the principle of what you're stating, it's not like arsenic is being created in mesurable quantities. An element is an element and stays the same one as long as no nuclear reactions are involved. So unless it's being introduced into water supplies where before it was buried safely somewhere, it's just a natural contaminant.
As long as it was a random sample, that still is perfectly valid with a sufficient margin of error and certainty interval. Bigger samples are necessary when you want to prove a relationship, not for demonstrating that there might be one.
The idea that we're all going to die is an idea planted by pundits and shills. It's an "idea sabatoge" tactic that functions a lot like a straw man argument. I'm not denying that there will be severe human impact to it, but it's likely to harmful more than deadly.
It had shrunk, up until this time, I was under the (obviously mistaken) impression that it had stayed shrunk.
I'm not a big jumping to conclusions kind of person, but there are signifigant environmental impacts on the creation of new upper atmospheric ozone as well. I think, although I could be wrong, that most atmospheric ozone is created by lightning causing chemical reactions.
There could be some relationship there that's gone unaddressed. Regardless, this is hardly good news to hear.
I started to agree with you. Then I realized that these are games we're talking about. They should be fun. Well constructed controllers are great, but if it feels or seems wrong, then, in terms of what a game system needs, it is wrong. A feature for feature comparison will never tell you that.
back when Xbox live was new I had the same perspective on how the xbox harddrive would work. Since everyone would have a hard drive for certain, game developers would always be able to save games to the harddrive. No maybes, always. Attachments or other nonsense that you must purchase, will never have more than 2-5 games supporting it(and probably only 1 good one).
Blogs aren't the real power here. The real capacity is comments like the one you just made. People, in most cases anyone, can call someone out on a point, and asside from things like moderation systems, there's nothing ot keep people from reading them comment themselves.
Letters to the editor won't appear until the next day, but what I'm saying right now, will crop up in a couple of seconds(once slashcode's done with it)
It's the rate of buildup. The primary advantage of chatting is that replies are fast enough that they can in turn be replied to quickly, therefor allowing a dialog to made quickly. It's ideal for the "well, what about this" kinds of conversations.
Message boards have their primary advantage in thoroughness. When you answer, you try and create complete answers that are useful to everyone reading it and aren't as specific.
You do bring up an interesting point though, and it makes me think that it'd be neat to see a wiki that had chat built in. A permenant documentation with quickness in discussion.
1. That joke is tired (and not in the soviet russia, "I'll pretend to laugh and mod funny anyways" kinda way)
2. It's not really all that appropriate here, except that like the article's subject, it's related to a bug.
3. Copy and paste just isn't funny. You may as well say "First post"
Near as I can tell, the old version of the unreal engine liscenced for $500,000. The unreal 3 engine is probably not going to be much higher than that, since a high price will drive away buyers.
Let me apologize for being blunt, but you're an idiot. You throw around scientific terms like a creationist does. A hypothesis is an a simple assumption, and a conclusion derived from that assumption.
Example:
If I leave this fries out for 3 weeks, they will have mold on them.
Non-example:
Mold grows on everything.
The rightness and wrongness of neither of these is important for whether they are hypothes, it is the structure of them, and the ability to theoretically create an expirment that could disprove them.
Secondly, that's abusing the idea of scientific theory. Theories in science, are a collection of principles, hypotheses, and deductions centered around one main idea.
Also, I like how you skipped the #1 item on your list of definitions and went for something lower down because it didn't completely contradict your point.
I love that you immediaty blame liberals for butchering the purpose of the ammendment.
There are 3 points by conservatives(we're only calling them conservatives because that's what they call themselves) that really killed it.
1: the anti "well regulated militia" crowd. There's a huge group of NRA fanatics who don't even want to consider this half of the amendment "you'll get MY gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands". These people are obsessed with personal ownership of guns (you'll get no objections from me on this point), not with maintaining groups who can oppose a corrupt government.
2: the "it's for hunting" cadre. They honestly beleive that guns are for them to hunt with, and nothing else. Don't tell me they don't exist, because one of my high school history teachers was one of them.
3: the self defence people. They don't care about fighting against the government, they just want the capacity to kill other citizens.
I honestly wish the NRA had never been infested by these types, because then it'd be a group I'd support as much as I do the ACLU.
And to all the people who think there's no longer any party for you, There's no party at at all for people like me. No one wants to say "let's raise taxes and completely eliminate the national debt". A nation as rich as the United States should not be in a position where we owe money to anyone.
Most liberals I know understand the purpose of the second ammendment.
I'm going to have to say that actually doesn't matter, since most power stations charge based on the kilowatt-hour, which is a measurement of energy. Energy is something we can deal with equally on both sides of the system(generation and usage) pretty close to equivelantly. The voltage/wattage/resistance really doesn't matter, as we have a multitude of devices for changing between those various values.
I was going to mod you up, but then I decided I really had to reply. US First showed me how my nerditcal instincts could outstrip any jock's athletic crap. A thousand chances to have fun planning, thinking and building in one year alone. It was the best possible introduction to robotics anyone of high school age could really have. If any of you are highschoolers with no robotics team, find a science/math teacher and get them to help you start one at your school.
It's instantly obvious that you've got no knowledge of Middle Earth history. Gandalf is possibly hundreds of years old. A few dozen extra wouldn't have changed him a bit. Gollem is also 900ish, so he wouldn't be too different either. Only bilbo, and a dwarf who only had a cameo should really change.
The modability was great, but the lack of colorfulness, uniqueness, and individualized characters(asside from deekin, of course) as well as empty dialog compared to the earlier offerings made it less than steller.
One must wonder what kind of motivation a government would have to shut down something so useful. Is people not being lost all the time somehow beneficial to those in power? This makes no sense at all.
This can mean only one thing... Baharain has a democratic form of government!
1.I'll bite. No, CO2 isn't the worst offender. Water vapor is; water vapor, however, creates clouds, which have this magical property climatologists call albedo. They're white and reflect a good 90% of energy from the sun back into space. After water is methane, produced primarily through industrial agriculture(cows, pigs). Methane isn't going to be an easy problem to tackle, but the best solution is probably going to come from more fruits and vegtables or lower population. Then comes CO2. Most CO2 is produced by Hyrdocarbon burning. Biological mechanisms are just very efficient compared to burning. Next is ozone. Ozone is fairly small in concentration, and keeps ultraviolet light from getting to the surface for an unknown(to me) affect on temperatures.
2. 93% of free oxygen production happens in the ocean.
3. There are alternative means of producing and storing electricity that we already know about. These are generally more expensive, although nuclear might be cheaper, the reactors currently in place only get about 20% of energy converted to electrical current and the rest is wasted. To me, it's not clear whether this is caused by old designs(which haven't been improved due to poor PR) or inherent flaws of fissile energy.
Regardless of any of that, the 2nd derivative of global temperature is like postive, with an already (definetly) massive 1st derivative. That's what's scary about the situation.
Slashdot Mirror
While this was meant as a joke, many other forms of electronic entertainment(particularly video games) would have massive benefit from being able to stimulate nerves of various kinds in particular places in the body without physical contact.
I may be mistaken, but software doesn't actually generate any waste. The packaging already has ways to be recycled. What am I missing?
While I agree with the principle of what you're stating, it's not like arsenic is being created in mesurable quantities. An element is an element and stays the same one as long as no nuclear reactions are involved. So unless it's being introduced into water supplies where before it was buried safely somewhere, it's just a natural contaminant.
a quick search on site:slashdot.org found an article about nanotrucks over a year ago.
As long as it was a random sample, that still is perfectly valid with a sufficient margin of error and certainty interval. Bigger samples are necessary when you want to prove a relationship, not for demonstrating that there might be one.
let me guess, you refresh slashdot at relativistic speeds.
Please.
The idea that we're all going to die is an idea planted by pundits and shills. It's an "idea sabatoge" tactic that functions a lot like a straw man argument. I'm not denying that there will be severe human impact to it, but it's likely to harmful more than deadly.
It had shrunk, up until this time, I was under the (obviously mistaken) impression that it had stayed shrunk.
I'm not a big jumping to conclusions kind of person, but there are signifigant environmental impacts on the creation of new upper atmospheric ozone as well. I think, although I could be wrong, that most atmospheric ozone is created by lightning causing chemical reactions. There could be some relationship there that's gone unaddressed. Regardless, this is hardly good news to hear.
I started to agree with you. Then I realized that these are games we're talking about. They should be fun. Well constructed controllers are great, but if it feels or seems wrong, then, in terms of what a game system needs, it is wrong. A feature for feature comparison will never tell you that.
That's E3 losing half their "fan"-base. I predict that in a few years, we'll see some other expo put E3 out. Just you watch.
back when Xbox live was new I had the same perspective on how the xbox harddrive would work. Since everyone would have a hard drive for certain, game developers would always be able to save games to the harddrive. No maybes, always. Attachments or other nonsense that you must purchase, will never have more than 2-5 games supporting it(and probably only 1 good one).
Microprose(or whoever owns them this year) really needs to make a sequel to that game. really.
Blogs aren't the real power here. The real capacity is comments like the one you just made. People, in most cases anyone, can call someone out on a point, and asside from things like moderation systems, there's nothing ot keep people from reading them comment themselves.
Letters to the editor won't appear until the next day, but what I'm saying right now, will crop up in a couple of seconds(once slashcode's done with it)
It's the rate of buildup. The primary advantage of chatting is that replies are fast enough that they can in turn be replied to quickly, therefor allowing a dialog to made quickly. It's ideal for the "well, what about this" kinds of conversations. Message boards have their primary advantage in thoroughness. When you answer, you try and create complete answers that are useful to everyone reading it and aren't as specific. You do bring up an interesting point though, and it makes me think that it'd be neat to see a wiki that had chat built in. A permenant documentation with quickness in discussion.
1. That joke is tired (and not in the soviet russia, "I'll pretend to laugh and mod funny anyways" kinda way) 2. It's not really all that appropriate here, except that like the article's subject, it's related to a bug. 3. Copy and paste just isn't funny. You may as well say "First post"
Near as I can tell, the old version of the unreal engine liscenced for $500,000. The unreal 3 engine is probably not going to be much higher than that, since a high price will drive away buyers.
Let me apologize for being blunt, but you're an idiot. You throw around scientific terms like a creationist does. A hypothesis is an a simple assumption, and a conclusion derived from that assumption. Example: If I leave this fries out for 3 weeks, they will have mold on them. Non-example: Mold grows on everything. The rightness and wrongness of neither of these is important for whether they are hypothes, it is the structure of them, and the ability to theoretically create an expirment that could disprove them. Secondly, that's abusing the idea of scientific theory. Theories in science, are a collection of principles, hypotheses, and deductions centered around one main idea. Also, I like how you skipped the #1 item on your list of definitions and went for something lower down because it didn't completely contradict your point.
I love that you immediaty blame liberals for butchering the purpose of the ammendment. There are 3 points by conservatives(we're only calling them conservatives because that's what they call themselves) that really killed it. 1: the anti "well regulated militia" crowd. There's a huge group of NRA fanatics who don't even want to consider this half of the amendment "you'll get MY gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands". These people are obsessed with personal ownership of guns (you'll get no objections from me on this point), not with maintaining groups who can oppose a corrupt government. 2: the "it's for hunting" cadre. They honestly beleive that guns are for them to hunt with, and nothing else. Don't tell me they don't exist, because one of my high school history teachers was one of them. 3: the self defence people. They don't care about fighting against the government, they just want the capacity to kill other citizens. I honestly wish the NRA had never been infested by these types, because then it'd be a group I'd support as much as I do the ACLU. And to all the people who think there's no longer any party for you, There's no party at at all for people like me. No one wants to say "let's raise taxes and completely eliminate the national debt". A nation as rich as the United States should not be in a position where we owe money to anyone. Most liberals I know understand the purpose of the second ammendment.
I'm going to have to say that actually doesn't matter, since most power stations charge based on the kilowatt-hour, which is a measurement of energy. Energy is something we can deal with equally on both sides of the system(generation and usage) pretty close to equivelantly. The voltage/wattage/resistance really doesn't matter, as we have a multitude of devices for changing between those various values.
I was going to mod you up, but then I decided I really had to reply. US First showed me how my nerditcal instincts could outstrip any jock's athletic crap. A thousand chances to have fun planning, thinking and building in one year alone. It was the best possible introduction to robotics anyone of high school age could really have. If any of you are highschoolers with no robotics team, find a science/math teacher and get them to help you start one at your school.
It's instantly obvious that you've got no knowledge of Middle Earth history. Gandalf is possibly hundreds of years old. A few dozen extra wouldn't have changed him a bit. Gollem is also 900ish, so he wouldn't be too different either. Only bilbo, and a dwarf who only had a cameo should really change.
The modability was great, but the lack of colorfulness, uniqueness, and individualized characters(asside from deekin, of course) as well as empty dialog compared to the earlier offerings made it less than steller.
I am 100% serious when I say no more than 40% of myspace users could pass a good captcha.
One must wonder what kind of motivation a government would have to shut down something so useful. Is people not being lost all the time somehow beneficial to those in power? This makes no sense at all.
This can mean only one thing... Baharain has a democratic form of government!
1.I'll bite. No, CO2 isn't the worst offender. Water vapor is; water vapor, however, creates clouds, which have this magical property climatologists call albedo. They're white and reflect a good 90% of energy from the sun back into space. After water is methane, produced primarily through industrial agriculture(cows, pigs). Methane isn't going to be an easy problem to tackle, but the best solution is probably going to come from more fruits and vegtables or lower population. Then comes CO2. Most CO2 is produced by Hyrdocarbon burning. Biological mechanisms are just very efficient compared to burning. Next is ozone. Ozone is fairly small in concentration, and keeps ultraviolet light from getting to the surface for an unknown(to me) affect on temperatures.
2. 93% of free oxygen production happens in the ocean.
3. There are alternative means of producing and storing electricity that we already know about. These are generally more expensive, although nuclear might be cheaper, the reactors currently in place only get about 20% of energy converted to electrical current and the rest is wasted. To me, it's not clear whether this is caused by old designs(which haven't been improved due to poor PR) or inherent flaws of fissile energy.
Regardless of any of that, the 2nd derivative of global temperature is like postive, with an already (definetly) massive 1st derivative. That's what's scary about the situation.