But seriously, there are so many thick people out there (and they are so fucking frustrating) I don't really see the comedic value in pretending to be one.
I hope you gave yourself a nice chuckle. I certainly enjoyed lashing out at you. I guess we both win!
Really, dude? Are you a FORTRAN compiler? A lawyer? Or a human being?
I think it's perfectly clear to anyone who wants to understand me that I mean not one single person should have the power to manipulate the economy by fiat, and that no one except the rightful owner (under the theory that there is a right to property, firstly one's self, etc. etc.) what to do with the other things I mentioned.
Frankly, I don't walk around telling myself what to do. "Oh, perhaps I will use the knowledge in my brain to cause my hands to do useful labor!"
If I ever reuse the post I will make it "tell other" people, so as not to confuse other androids and half-wits. Or lawyers.
My point was that I see you (fairly or unfairly) as representing the mindset that if we just give the right guys the power they can regulate us into Utopia.
It was your reaction to the astute criticism of your original suggestion. Reconsider? No! If tinkering with people's lives and livelihoods causes misery surely more tinkering will ameliorate it!
I don't understand the purpose of your second paragraph, since it makes exactly the point I was making about the limits of my thesis. I mean, I guess I'm glad we agree so strongly. High five!
In any case, maybe I have you pegged all wrong. But I am convinced that life is hard, and people get hurt, and bad things happen. I am steadfastly of the opinion that concentrating power to a centralized cabal of elite and allowing them to tax and tinker and put the economy on little strings is not a solution to this sort of problem.
But what do I know? I'm no smarter than those assholes!
By the way, I take the position that corporations can't break the law. Corporations are a bunch of people who own a bunch of pieces of paper. If I were the Emperor of America I'd take the executives that broke the law, fine them to a degree commensurate with the damage they caused, and jail them for their actions. But that can't happen so long as we have a government made up of the social elite. Clearly the answer is we just need to make the right guy Emperor . . . and the right guy just happens to be me!
It's people like you, who think you're smart enough to engineer a solution to every problem, who got us into this mess.
Nobody is that smart. Nobody should have the power to manipulate the variables by fiat. Nobody should have the power to tell people what to do with their own company, their own money, their own property, their own skills, labor, or body. Nobody.
Anyone who implies that he or she is that smart is full of shit no matter what letters they have after their names. (D), (R), and PhD included.
Now, I'm not an anarchist. I think that we should band together and form governments to stop people from victimizing each other. But that's it. That's the good idea that has gone so horribly wrong all over the world.
I mean like buy 1/2 or 2/3 of the dept from the citizens affected, so they aren't evicted.
Maybe I'm just hopelessly capitalistic, but why on Earth would anyone choose to pay their whole mortgage if they had the equal option of only paying half (or a third!)? Why should I have to pay half of someone's mortgage while I choose to rent out of fear that I might not be able to meet a mortgage? Who does this benefit, other than the financially irresponsible?
And to be clear, I'm against a bailout. Don't we allow financiers to charge interest, in part, because they are taking on the risk of bad debt? Why should they be able to keep the good paper, and then sell the bad paper to the taxpayer?
It's all hopelessly absurd. I wonder who Congress thinks is going to bail them out when those bills come due. We're fucked.
your system is completely unresponsive due to every program being mostly swapped out.
Uh, report this to your vendor as a bug. No amount of swap space should cause your system's memory manager to make such lousy decisions.
And, in fact, having an "unreasonable" amount of swap can actually pay off. If your system can swap out really stale memory to disk and use the RAM to cache stuff on disk that you might actually want, you're going to see a really big performance gain.
I have never played a hand of online poker in my life.
I think you have an idea how online poker cheating is done, but the world is simply too big and too complicated a place for your preventative measures to work. (And cheating is too lucrative.)
The only news in this story is that it was the casino employees cheating (presumably) honest players. As opposed to players cheating each other.
Saw it on the big screen a couple of months ago. Unfortunately the sprocket holes were in bad shape and the image "jittered" vertically the whole time. It was also the first DVD I owned.
I'm generally not a fan of voiceover, or Ray Liotta, for that matter. But his deadpan over the whole movie really works for me.
oh and BTW, the windshield is necessary to allow a human driver to continue breathing at today's highway speeds. it's very hard to properly exhale at 50-60 mph.
You're crazy. Well, I'm crazy too. I used to routinely ride my bike up to 85mph with only goggles and a half-helmet. And no windshield whatsoever. For several minutes at a time. Took it up over 110 on a few occasions. Not for long enough to suffocate, but certainly long enough to notice if I couldn't breath.
It takes ones breath away in only a figurative sense.
Come to think of it, skydivers in free fall don't wear masks unless they need 'em due to altitude.
Your theory doesn't hold water, much less air pressure.
For the record, I did phone support for Dell for two years. First job out of the Army.
I think that it is highly probable that you don't interview well. An interviewer isn't going to say, "Get a haircut, and don't call me 'dude'." Or, "I'd hire you, but every time I ask you a question you correct or lecture me." He's going to say something about your qualifications. "Your skills just aren't a good fit."
The sad fact is that there are a lot of stupid, lazy, unqualified, and untalented people out there who interview very well. You're competing with them and smart, hard working, qualified, and talented people who also interview well. You need to put yourself among their ranks.
Maybe you could try some mock interviews with people you trust and will honestly criticize you. (Have them interview you for a job in their field, so you can't bullshit them.) You want to come off as smart, but not as a know-it-all. You need to come across as smart enough to subsume the geek long enough to get nicely dressed for the interview. Be yourself, but be your best self.
Finally, I don't know what the statistics are, but in my experience you are far more likely to get a job when you were referred by someone that the person making the hiring decision knows, likes, and trusts. You're also more likely to get frank feedback if you don't get an offer.
Good luck!
-Peter
PS: I didn't even interview for my current job. My previous boss told me I had the job in the first two minutes of the interview. I do have some idea what I'm talking about;-)
You can waste your vote only by voting for someone you don't want. You don't want the winner. Don't waste your vote on someone who's going to win. He doesn't need your vote; he's going to win. Keep voting for the lesser of two evils and things will just keep getting more evil.
But seriously, it seems like the part I quoted goes to your point. Maybe I don't understand the article, or your point, or both.
Anyway, the article seems to imply that there is some underlying "flying" software, and that the computer just "learns" the stunts from the expert. Said another way, it seems like the computer was programmed to fly the helicopter "the old fashioned way", and the new thing is that the computer is inferring what the stunts should look like.
Your blithe refusal to even acknowledge the article is an inspiration, sir.
It might seem that an autonomous helicopter could fly stunts by simply replaying the exact finger movements of an expert pilot using the joy sticks on the helicopter's remote controller. That approach, however, is doomed to failure because of uncontrollable variables such as gusting winds.
I disagree. I think they have two really good reasons to do this, having nothing to do with Microsoft.
First, according to the linked comic, they're trying to make a browser that is fast, stable, secure, and reliable for running their applications. This is a huge step forward for Google as a platform instead of just a jumble of web services.
Second, it is no secret that Google pays browser vendors for searches directed from a search bar. This is Firefox's life's blood. I'm sure someone at Google ran the numbers to see what sort of penetration they'd have to hit to break even on developing this thing, and found that it's attainable.
Slashdot Mirror
Almost certainly because "funny" doesn't carry karma, and the moderator thought you deserved a point.
-Peter
Oh! I love this game!
You were trying to be funny!
But seriously, there are so many thick people out there (and they are so fucking frustrating) I don't really see the comedic value in pretending to be one.
I hope you gave yourself a nice chuckle. I certainly enjoyed lashing out at you. I guess we both win!
-Peter
Really, dude? Are you a FORTRAN compiler? A lawyer? Or a human being?
I think it's perfectly clear to anyone who wants to understand me that I mean not one single person should have the power to manipulate the economy by fiat, and that no one except the rightful owner (under the theory that there is a right to property, firstly one's self, etc. etc.) what to do with the other things I mentioned.
Frankly, I don't walk around telling myself what to do. "Oh, perhaps I will use the knowledge in my brain to cause my hands to do useful labor!"
If I ever reuse the post I will make it "tell other" people, so as not to confuse other androids and half-wits. Or lawyers.
-Peter
My point was that I see you (fairly or unfairly) as representing the mindset that if we just give the right guys the power they can regulate us into Utopia.
It was your reaction to the astute criticism of your original suggestion. Reconsider? No! If tinkering with people's lives and livelihoods causes misery surely more tinkering will ameliorate it!
I don't understand the purpose of your second paragraph, since it makes exactly the point I was making about the limits of my thesis. I mean, I guess I'm glad we agree so strongly. High five!
In any case, maybe I have you pegged all wrong. But I am convinced that life is hard, and people get hurt, and bad things happen. I am steadfastly of the opinion that concentrating power to a centralized cabal of elite and allowing them to tax and tinker and put the economy on little strings is not a solution to this sort of problem.
But what do I know? I'm no smarter than those assholes!
By the way, I take the position that corporations can't break the law. Corporations are a bunch of people who own a bunch of pieces of paper. If I were the Emperor of America I'd take the executives that broke the law, fine them to a degree commensurate with the damage they caused, and jail them for their actions. But that can't happen so long as we have a government made up of the social elite. Clearly the answer is we just need to make the right guy Emperor . . . and the right guy just happens to be me!
-Peter
It's people like you, who think you're smart enough to engineer a solution to every problem, who got us into this mess.
Nobody is that smart. Nobody should have the power to manipulate the variables by fiat. Nobody should have the power to tell people what to do with their own company, their own money, their own property, their own skills, labor, or body. Nobody .
Anyone who implies that he or she is that smart is full of shit no matter what letters they have after their names. (D), (R), and PhD included.
Now, I'm not an anarchist. I think that we should band together and form governments to stop people from victimizing each other. But that's it. That's the good idea that has gone so horribly wrong all over the world.
-Peter
Maybe I'm just hopelessly capitalistic, but why on Earth would anyone choose to pay their whole mortgage if they had the equal option of only paying half (or a third!)? Why should I have to pay half of someone's mortgage while I choose to rent out of fear that I might not be able to meet a mortgage? Who does this benefit, other than the financially irresponsible?
And to be clear, I'm against a bailout. Don't we allow financiers to charge interest, in part, because they are taking on the risk of bad debt? Why should they be able to keep the good paper, and then sell the bad paper to the taxpayer?
It's all hopelessly absurd. I wonder who Congress thinks is going to bail them out when those bills come due. We're fucked.
-Peter
Yes, Brad. It's something we ourselves have been working on for quite some time.
Hey, wait a minute, get your own joke!
-Peter
It's an ultrasonic wallet-opener.
-Peter
Uh, report this to your vendor as a bug. No amount of swap space should cause your system's memory manager to make such lousy decisions.
And, in fact, having an "unreasonable" amount of swap can actually pay off. If your system can swap out really stale memory to disk and use the RAM to cache stuff on disk that you might actually want, you're going to see a really big performance gain.
-Peter
Am I to understand that you just admitted to engaging in Federal wire fraud in a public forum? That's quite a gamble, sir!
-Peter
I have never played a hand of online poker in my life.
I think you have an idea how online poker cheating is done, but the world is simply too big and too complicated a place for your preventative measures to work. (And cheating is too lucrative.)
The only news in this story is that it was the casino employees cheating (presumably) honest players. As opposed to players cheating each other.
-Peter
Cool!
Saw it on the big screen a couple of months ago. Unfortunately the sprocket holes were in bad shape and the image "jittered" vertically the whole time. It was also the first DVD I owned.
I'm generally not a fan of voiceover, or Ray Liotta, for that matter. But his deadpan over the whole movie really works for me.
-Peter
And when the cops assigned a whole army to stop Jimmy, what did he do?
He made them partners.
-Peter
You're crazy. Well, I'm crazy too. I used to routinely ride my bike up to 85mph with only goggles and a half-helmet. And no windshield whatsoever. For several minutes at a time. Took it up over 110 on a few occasions. Not for long enough to suffocate, but certainly long enough to notice if I couldn't breath.
It takes ones breath away in only a figurative sense.
Come to think of it, skydivers in free fall don't wear masks unless they need 'em due to altitude.
Your theory doesn't hold water, much less air pressure.
-Peter
For the record, I did phone support for Dell for two years. First job out of the Army.
I think that it is highly probable that you don't interview well. An interviewer isn't going to say, "Get a haircut, and don't call me 'dude'." Or, "I'd hire you, but every time I ask you a question you correct or lecture me." He's going to say something about your qualifications. "Your skills just aren't a good fit."
The sad fact is that there are a lot of stupid, lazy, unqualified, and untalented people out there who interview very well. You're competing with them and smart, hard working, qualified, and talented people who also interview well. You need to put yourself among their ranks.
Maybe you could try some mock interviews with people you trust and will honestly criticize you. (Have them interview you for a job in their field, so you can't bullshit them.) You want to come off as smart, but not as a know-it-all. You need to come across as smart enough to subsume the geek long enough to get nicely dressed for the interview. Be yourself, but be your best self.
Finally, I don't know what the statistics are, but in my experience you are far more likely to get a job when you were referred by someone that the person making the hiring decision knows, likes, and trusts. You're also more likely to get frank feedback if you don't get an offer.
Good luck!
-Peter
PS: I didn't even interview for my current job. My previous boss told me I had the job in the first two minutes of the interview. I do have some idea what I'm talking about ;-)
Self-regulating karaoke. If the computer can't tell what the hell you're singing it's probably best for you to stay off the stage.
-Peter
Opaque jello? Ewwww.
I'll have mine translucent. Preferably with vodka.
-Peter
I thought I was following your post until I got to that part.
-Peter
You're very clever, young man, very clever, but it's turtles all the way down!
Does your call just hop from phone to phone until it finds itself on the phone you're trying to call? Does every handset have infinite bandwidth?
I'm all for decentralized models, but I don't think you've thought your idea through very far.
-Peter
I think Penn Jillette said it very well, through the character of a sock monkey.
-Peter
Brilliantly executed, sir.
-Peter
This is exactly my argument for my anti-Godzilla policy proposals. Better safe than sorry!
-Peter
Did *you* even read your original post?
I can do this all day.
But seriously, it seems like the part I quoted goes to your point. Maybe I don't understand the article, or your point, or both.
Anyway, the article seems to imply that there is some underlying "flying" software, and that the computer just "learns" the stunts from the expert. Said another way, it seems like the computer was programmed to fly the helicopter "the old fashioned way", and the new thing is that the computer is inferring what the stunts should look like.
So, yes, I read it.
-Peter
Your blithe refusal to even acknowledge the article is an inspiration, sir.
-Peter
I disagree. I think they have two really good reasons to do this, having nothing to do with Microsoft.
First, according to the linked comic, they're trying to make a browser that is fast, stable, secure, and reliable for running their applications. This is a huge step forward for Google as a platform instead of just a jumble of web services.
Second, it is no secret that Google pays browser vendors for searches directed from a search bar. This is Firefox's life's blood. I'm sure someone at Google ran the numbers to see what sort of penetration they'd have to hit to break even on developing this thing, and found that it's attainable.
-Peter