I grew up in a suburb about 40 miles from Chicago and we never had AC, although I sorely wish we had. We did have 100* days in the summer, and in the midwest a 100* day means an 85* night. I remember laying spread-eagle on my bed with the windows open and window fans 'o plenty.
Such things would require a prohibitively high number of actual persons playing NPCs, and the amount of coordination between them would make this extremely buggy.
Which basically means that you WILL have players who figure out how to ruin events and storylines for other people. That's why a lot of quests are persistent, and ever un-changing.
Precisely. Since it takes much more time to create than destroy, and the MMO world is full of fuckwads, whatever "world" exists will quickly just become whatever the lowest model-able state is; ashes, protons, vandalized castles, whatever.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply I disagreed in general, only that the RIAA doesn't "have a clue".
The RIAA isn't in the pattern of suing people they *KNOW* they can beat, they sue people they think they can beat. They're simply playing the odds; 1 big case won from legal shenanigans and/or technical ignorance can overcome many that never make it that far.
Spot on. The lack of clue within the RIAA is mindnumbing.
I suspect the RIAA knows EXACTLY what the technical facts are. But if they can still sue w/o having those get in their way, so much the better! (For them)
Buy an electric car TODAY people! That petrol is causing the ocean to heat up... Wait, what? Magma? Really? Wasn't that around before we invented cars?
Hang on folks, I'll have to get back to you...
Don't worry. Al Gore will find a way to blame this on humans and CO2.
And/. will interpolate that to just the people in the US. Except people in the northern states of Canada - they're all pure and holy.
> He is a COBOL programmer and doesn't know what a database is? *That* does not compute at all. ISAM databases were the one thing that COBOL was all about.
Yeah, I'm calling "shenanigans" on the OP too. A good story is a good story, but what he reported about good ol' grandpa I'm just not buying.
*IF* you could direct the thrust precisely at the center of mass, maybe; otherwise you just spin it.
Too, I would suspect (but have no idea, really), that pretty much all heavenly bodies are already spinning. So you have to "time" the thrust to coordinate with the spin of the body (and/or, direct the thrust to counteract the natural spin until it's not spinning any more, but this seems more difficult than the problem this is solving).
And, landing the sucker and then attaching to a spinning body is probably non-trivial too.
I'm no expert, so I'm probably way off base on all this.
I've done http://simplefit.org/ for a while, and am now doing the 100 pushups (http://hundredpushups.com). Both done easily enough in the privacy of my own home office, neither take tons of time, and virtually no gear required (I did buy a $19 pullup bar at Target).
If you have a (free) alternative, would you share what it is? I have it installed for my Dad, but he has DSL also so it might not matter for him much. I'm always looking around for other, better choices however.
...And to top it off, it's so naggy it's ridiculous.
You've lost me there; I installed it probably a day or so after release and haven't seen a single "nag". What did I do different than you? (I did disable the firefox extension that did the link scanning.)
I'm not trying to argue with you here, I'm genuinely curious - wondering if I've failed to do something and am leaving my machine open!
Can't you still use those algorithms though? I mean, it's pretty trivial to check if a purported root or factorization is correct, right? So they don't really need to wait for a proof of Riemann, do they?
I was thinking the same thing; not having the proof doesn't mean there's no possible way you can show that the answers provided for a given problem aren't correct. (Or does it?)
I've generally found that better programmers write better code. The correlation is actually pretty statistically significant.
Why is all this new-age sexist/anti-sexist crap hitting the net-o-sphere lately? We don't "need" more women in computing/development/architecture/whathaveyou any more (or less) than we "need" more people with blonde hair. We NEED people who can do the damn work. Who show up on time. Who can admit they're wrong. Who can come up with good answers to hard questions. If those people happen to be women, huzzah. If not, equally fine.
As a UCF alum ('92), I... don't know what to say. Part of me rolls my eyes (the "eyes" part of me, probably), but part thinks that if someone wants to give them money, good on them.
Slashdot Mirror
If she inherits the top slot, she will be a lame duck from day one.
There's a (crude, word twisting) joke there, somehow, but I can't quite wring it out.
While not even in the same spirit as Godwin, even invoking Godwins law does not substitute for a counterargument.
> but refutations are science, too, right?
Absolutely. And it is precisely that which distinguishes it from religion.
Under what circumstances can ID be refuted?
I grew up in a suburb about 40 miles from Chicago and we never had AC, although I sorely wish we had. We did have 100* days in the summer, and in the midwest a 100* day means an 85* night. I remember laying spread-eagle on my bed with the windows open and window fans 'o plenty.
Have you SEEN him lately? He's DEFINITELY not starving!
Why not? Because you say so?
A democratic government's responsibility is to make the world a better place. A happy society is an egalitarian society.
Why? Because you say so?
Such things would require a prohibitively high number of actual persons playing NPCs, and the amount of coordination between them would make this extremely buggy.
The bigger issue is the "Internet Fuckwad Theory".
Which basically means that you WILL have players who figure out how to ruin events and storylines for other people. That's why a lot of quests are persistent, and ever un-changing.
Precisely. Since it takes much more time to create than destroy, and the MMO world is full of fuckwads, whatever "world" exists will quickly just become whatever the lowest model-able state is; ashes, protons, vandalized castles, whatever.
I'm not sure I agree, but as I don't have any facts to back me up I can't say for sure. Your argument is certainly compelling.
BTW, +1 karma for the use of "cluster fuckery" =)
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply I disagreed in general, only that the RIAA doesn't "have a clue".
The RIAA isn't in the pattern of suing people they *KNOW* they can beat, they sue people they think they can beat. They're simply playing the odds; 1 big case won from legal shenanigans and/or technical ignorance can overcome many that never make it that far.
I see. Apologies for the misread.
Spot on. The lack of clue within the RIAA is mindnumbing.
I suspect the RIAA knows EXACTLY what the technical facts are. But if they can still sue w/o having those get in their way, so much the better! (For them)
Remember this is law, not logic.
Buy an electric car TODAY people! That petrol is causing the ocean to heat up... Wait, what? Magma? Really? Wasn't that around before we invented cars?
Hang on folks, I'll have to get back to you...
Don't worry. Al Gore will find a way to blame this on humans and CO2.
And /. will interpolate that to just the people in the US. Except people in the northern states of Canada - they're all pure and holy.
> He is a COBOL programmer and doesn't know what a database is? *That* does not compute at all. ISAM databases were the one thing that COBOL was all about.
Yeah, I'm calling "shenanigans" on the OP too. A good story is a good story, but what he reported about good ol' grandpa I'm just not buying.
*IF* you could direct the thrust precisely at the center of mass, maybe; otherwise you just spin it.
Too, I would suspect (but have no idea, really), that pretty much all heavenly bodies are already spinning. So you have to "time" the thrust to coordinate with the spin of the body (and/or, direct the thrust to counteract the natural spin until it's not spinning any more, but this seems more difficult than the problem this is solving).
And, landing the sucker and then attaching to a spinning body is probably non-trivial too.
I'm no expert, so I'm probably way off base on all this.
I've done http://simplefit.org/ for a while, and am now doing the 100 pushups (http://hundredpushups.com). Both done easily enough in the privacy of my own home office, neither take tons of time, and virtually no gear required (I did buy a $19 pullup bar at Target).
While you're certainly correct about comments, a "plain text" file refers to format, not content.
According to your logic this a plain text file...
==============
foo bar baz
==============
==============
foo,bar,baz
==============
Or did I misunderstand you?
Ah, I see. Yeah, I'm on broadband.
If you have a (free) alternative, would you share what it is? I have it installed for my Dad, but he has DSL also so it might not matter for him much. I'm always looking around for other, better choices however.
Thanks!
...And to top it off, it's so naggy it's ridiculous.
You've lost me there; I installed it probably a day or so after release and haven't seen a single "nag". What did I do different than you? (I did disable the firefox extension that did the link scanning.)
I'm not trying to argue with you here, I'm genuinely curious - wondering if I've failed to do something and am leaving my machine open!
Can't you still use those algorithms though? I mean, it's pretty trivial to check if a purported root or factorization is correct, right? So they don't really need to wait for a proof of Riemann, do they?
I was thinking the same thing; not having the proof doesn't mean there's no possible way you can show that the answers provided for a given problem aren't correct. (Or does it?)
Someone's been sitting on the fact that penguins are in the southern hemisphere, for /years/?
Wow.
Yup, you're right. Microsoft slowed down computing tremendously so the "average joe" could catch up.
Good or bad, that, remains to be seen.
> To you city folks who think this is wrong, how would you like to wake up and find me in your living room?
I'm neither a city folk nor do I think it's wrong, but I'll answer your question with a question... did you have the decency to bring some beer?
I've generally found that better programmers write better code. The correlation is actually pretty statistically significant.
Why is all this new-age sexist/anti-sexist crap hitting the net-o-sphere lately? We don't "need" more women in computing/development/architecture/whathaveyou any more (or less) than we "need" more people with blonde hair. We NEED people who can do the damn work. Who show up on time. Who can admit they're wrong. Who can come up with good answers to hard questions. If those people happen to be women, huzzah. If not, equally fine.
As a UCF alum ('92), I... don't know what to say. Part of me rolls my eyes (the "eyes" part of me, probably), but part thinks that if someone wants to give them money, good on them.