So you think that the fact you were able to grow fat mice from your parents contradicts the scientific evidence that there is a genetic difference between mice on that island and on the mainland?
BTW, its not just that they are bigger than normal mice, they are also more aggressive. They have been known to attack birds much larger than themselves (and have become a threat to the local bird populations).
The article wasn't arguing that King Kong was possible, in fact it clearly states that it is not. It is going into an interesting scientific topic and alluding to a new movie to make it more interesting.
You see this kind of thing happen all the time. For instance, since the Da Vinci Code came out, I have seen plenty of historic tv specials on channels like the History channel that allude to that book in order to gain popularity (think "Da Vinci and the Code He Lived By"). That doesn't change the fact that Dan Brown is an idiot who has no idea what he is talking about 99% of the time and whose books contain nothing factual at all, nor does it make those specials psuedoscience. These specials have nothing to do with the book, they are just feeding off its popularity.
Do you know the difference between the Atlantic ocean and Oceania? BTW, if you read the link, you will notice it actually blames much of that on El Nino, another natural phenomenon.
"
We already see the Atlantic current weakening and moving away from NA. The more it slows down, the more hot water will stay in the Gulf and tropics. Guess what? That's where the Hurricanes begin."
Got anything backing that up? Because in the world I live in (you know, the real one), I've heard much about how it is moving towards NA, which is why more storms made it to the coast this year. BTW, that movement can also be seen in historical records, implying it is also a natural phenomenon.
I'm not saying that global warming will not cause more hurricanes, rather it has not. Future global warming related events may affect future hurricane seasons, but they cannot have affected the current hurricane season due the nature of cause and effect relations, noteably that the cause has to happen first.
I'm sorry, I was assuming that the premise "Conclusions drawn from statistics are only valid if you have a large enough sample set" was known to be true (this is/., most people here have a decent knowledge of statistics). Then it becomes a simple Modus Ponens argument: We have too small of a sample set. If we have too small of a sample set, we cannot draw valid conclusions from this study. Thus, we cannot draw valid conclusions from this study.
Does that make everything clearer to you, or do you want to continue playing anal logic teacher for a few more posts?
"This all goes to show that not only do we need to reduce emissions, but we need to spend more money on research to figure out what's going on."
Hell I can think of a dozen or so reasons to reduce emissions that have nothing to do with global warming. Smog, shortages of oil, foreign dependence on oil... ok, thats not a dozen but you get the idea. However, that does not excuse people like the origional poster on this thread who cry wolf whenever there is any (in this case perfectly natural) change in the weather. They only serve to push people in a state of panic in which they will support anything that claims to be pro-environment even in cases where any objective study indicates it will do more harm than good (coughKyotocough).
Some year has to be the worst. The fact that this was the worst in the past 100 years (actually its less, hurricane seasons naturally have highs and lows, so to be accurate you should only count the high seasons) doesn't mean anything is out of the ordinary. It means we don't have enough data to know what it means.
This has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with natural cycles of strong and weak hurricane seasons. Yes, some models do suggest that global warming will cause more hurricanes (though others predict less). However, in those models the increases in hurricanes comes after substantial oceanic warming, not before. Stop blaming every natural variation in the weather on global warming, it is absurd, unscientific, and only hurts your cause (ever hear of the the boy who cried wolf?). You don't know what you are talking about, so please shut up.
Clinton was president at the time and faced possible impeachment for perjury. That made the "lying about blowjobs" story almost interesting. This is a low level IT guy working at the NSA who violated some executive policy. The worst that will probably happen to him is that he will be fined, or will lose his job. No one is saying he should be allowed to do this, the question is why should we even care? People break laws all the time, not every one becomes a front page story on/..
BTW, I didn't see anything in the gp's post saying or even implying that if this happened under a Democrat administration worse punishments should be involved. In fact, he implied just the opposite, that/. would ignore this kind of stuff under a different administration.
Also, the Clinton impeachment thing has been over for some time now. You are free to get over it any time now.
So whenever someone breaks a law we are making it a "Your Rights Online" story on/.? Well I saw someone run a red light this afternoon, where do I report it?
The origional story was the/. version of a front page story, the fact that was a hoax was burried in a Slashback summary. Doesn't that pretty much prove his point?
The goal of this program is to be able to naviage through an unpaved desert (which is not an easy task). Seperate teams have worked on cars that can navigate highways (I believe CMU has one that can run by itself 99% of the time). No, they are not perfected, but no one ever said they were. We still will have to wait a bit more for robot chauffeurs. But whining about this particular development isn't yet practical is like telling the Wright brothers that their plane isn't good enough to carry business travelers across the country.
Actually, it isn't. You can make a copy of a non-DRMed work of intellectual property for personal use, assuming of course you have the means to do so. Note that distributing it to other people over the net isn't considered 'personal use'.
"In reality, if your insurance company finds out you didn't lock your doors or take precautions against theft, they won't write you a check for your loss."
I believe the discussion here was whether or not the action was illegal, not whether or not you can get your insurance company to compensate you for it. The two are radically different.
"If I could break a rule here about analogies, if I make a juicy delicious steak and and put it out on my table and I leave my door open and my neighbors dog comes in and eats it... Who can I blame for my lost steak?
I could blame the dog, but that is what dogs do... They eat meat, just like a theif steals things. I can't teach the dog not to eat my food because it isn't my dog. I can beat it myself, or call my neighbor and have him punish it, or I can go the extreme and call the pound and have it dragged away."
Ok, you don't like your neighbor's dog, we get it. But you still havn't contributed a damn thing to the discussion of the legality of pirating a non-protected work. You are on a tangental subject that has no bearing to what is being discussed.
Many of you probably think that was a great choice for the top spot. The rest of you have actually had physical contact with a member of the opposite sex in the past year.
Of course, it is easy enough just to open a program up or do a bit of research to see what it does, but this is precisely the attitude which has made Linux so foreboding to beginners and new users.
I never said GNOME's naming convention was any better. It was a KDE app that was mentioned in the origional post, KDE is quickly becoming the dominant desktop environment, so it was KDE that I discussed in my post.
Man, I never knew KDE fans could be so insanely defensive.
I'm not entirely sure Killustrator is the best name for an image program in the first place (though it would make for a great title for an action game). Would it be too hard for the KDE guys to just name things like KDE Illustrator? Putting a 'K' in front of every word may be cute, but I don't think it helps usability all that much.
Thats the big problem with GNU naming conventions. There is too much attention in making the names cute and not enough attention in making them recognizable. Windows at least dumbs down their naming conventions to make them (relatively) easy to figure out.
Slashdot Mirror
BTW, its not just that they are bigger than normal mice, they are also more aggressive. They have been known to attack birds much larger than themselves (and have become a threat to the local bird populations).
You see this kind of thing happen all the time. For instance, since the Da Vinci Code came out, I have seen plenty of historic tv specials on channels like the History channel that allude to that book in order to gain popularity (think "Da Vinci and the Code He Lived By"). That doesn't change the fact that Dan Brown is an idiot who has no idea what he is talking about 99% of the time and whose books contain nothing factual at all, nor does it make those specials psuedoscience. These specials have nothing to do with the book, they are just feeding off its popularity.
I've got to remember that one.
But officer, I was driving the speed limit the entire trip, at varying degrees of accuracy, modified by my preferred speed.
But boss, I made it to work on time every day, at varying degrees of accuracy, modified by the time my alarm clock goes off.
But IRS agent, I paid all my taxes, at varying degrees of accuracy, modified by the amount of money I had.
Man, this is going to be a fun year (assuming of course I don't get fired or sent to jail)...
Do you know the difference between the Atlantic ocean and Oceania? BTW, if you read the link, you will notice it actually blames much of that on El Nino, another natural phenomenon.
" We already see the Atlantic current weakening and moving away from NA. The more it slows down, the more hot water will stay in the Gulf and tropics. Guess what? That's where the Hurricanes begin."
Got anything backing that up? Because in the world I live in (you know, the real one), I've heard much about how it is moving towards NA, which is why more storms made it to the coast this year. BTW, that movement can also be seen in historical records, implying it is also a natural phenomenon.
I'm not saying that global warming will not cause more hurricanes, rather it has not. Future global warming related events may affect future hurricane seasons, but they cannot have affected the current hurricane season due the nature of cause and effect relations, noteably that the cause has to happen first.
Does that make everything clearer to you, or do you want to continue playing anal logic teacher for a few more posts?
Hell I can think of a dozen or so reasons to reduce emissions that have nothing to do with global warming. Smog, shortages of oil, foreign dependence on oil... ok, thats not a dozen but you get the idea. However, that does not excuse people like the origional poster on this thread who cry wolf whenever there is any (in this case perfectly natural) change in the weather. They only serve to push people in a state of panic in which they will support anything that claims to be pro-environment even in cases where any objective study indicates it will do more harm than good (coughKyotocough).
We don't have enough data to be able to compute those odds. That was the point you obviously missed.
Some year has to be the worst. The fact that this was the worst in the past 100 years (actually its less, hurricane seasons naturally have highs and lows, so to be accurate you should only count the high seasons) doesn't mean anything is out of the ordinary. It means we don't have enough data to know what it means.
This has nothing to do with global warming, it has to do with natural cycles of strong and weak hurricane seasons. Yes, some models do suggest that global warming will cause more hurricanes (though others predict less). However, in those models the increases in hurricanes comes after substantial oceanic warming, not before. Stop blaming every natural variation in the weather on global warming, it is absurd, unscientific, and only hurts your cause (ever hear of the the boy who cried wolf?). You don't know what you are talking about, so please shut up.
BTW, I didn't see anything in the gp's post saying or even implying that if this happened under a Democrat administration worse punishments should be involved. In fact, he implied just the opposite, that /. would ignore this kind of stuff under a different administration.
Also, the Clinton impeachment thing has been over for some time now. You are free to get over it any time now.
So whenever someone breaks a law we are making it a "Your Rights Online" story on /.? Well I saw someone run a red light this afternoon, where do I report it?
The origional story was the /. version of a front page story, the fact that was a hoax was burried in a Slashback summary. Doesn't that pretty much prove his point?
Well you are dividing both by zero, so actually that says infinity = infinity.
The goal of this program is to be able to naviage through an unpaved desert (which is not an easy task). Seperate teams have worked on cars that can navigate highways (I believe CMU has one that can run by itself 99% of the time). No, they are not perfected, but no one ever said they were. We still will have to wait a bit more for robot chauffeurs. But whining about this particular development isn't yet practical is like telling the Wright brothers that their plane isn't good enough to carry business travelers across the country.
Lost won in 2004, you know, the year it came out.
Actually, it isn't. You can make a copy of a non-DRMed work of intellectual property for personal use, assuming of course you have the means to do so. Note that distributing it to other people over the net isn't considered 'personal use'.
I believe the discussion here was whether or not the action was illegal, not whether or not you can get your insurance company to compensate you for it. The two are radically different.
"If I could break a rule here about analogies, if I make a juicy delicious steak and and put it out on my table and I leave my door open and my neighbors dog comes in and eats it... Who can I blame for my lost steak? I could blame the dog, but that is what dogs do... They eat meat, just like a theif steals things. I can't teach the dog not to eat my food because it isn't my dog. I can beat it myself, or call my neighbor and have him punish it, or I can go the extreme and call the pound and have it dragged away."
Ok, you don't like your neighbor's dog, we get it. But you still havn't contributed a damn thing to the discussion of the legality of pirating a non-protected work. You are on a tangental subject that has no bearing to what is being discussed.
Umm, that post was intended to be sarcastic as well...
The Office was a good choice, though.
Using analogies to compare the Internet with real life is like trying to rationalize the universe with a bag of marbles.
So you were trying to make a paradoy analogy. Ok, but I think my post was still valid as it was intended to be more sarcasm, not an analogy.
Does the existence of hate crime laws means I am free to kill other white guys?
Man, I never knew KDE fans could be so insanely defensive.
The problem isn't that this makes it harder for experienced hackers to use Linux, it is that it is harder for people new to computers to use Linux.
Thats the big problem with GNU naming conventions. There is too much attention in making the names cute and not enough attention in making them recognizable. Windows at least dumbs down their naming conventions to make them (relatively) easy to figure out.