It's not too late, you're just lazy. If you really want to know how to make shotguns, go get a book on metalworking and start pricing out machining equipment.
Oh, what's that? You'd rather post on slashdot and pretend you're motivated enough to do something like that?
He's telling you how his day-to-day job works, you moron! Do you know anything about science? The "Scientific Method" is an idealized, dumbed-down version of how science works that we teach to FIRST GRADERS. Stop clinging to it; it's only a poor approximation of how things actually work.
If a pilot told you, in all seriousness, that most aircraft are actually flown by blind gophers on LSD, what the hell basis would you have to disagree with him? How often have you been in a cockpit?
Sorry, plague3106, you lost the right to be sarcastic and arrogant right around the time you proved you don't know how to respond to the right post in a slashdot thread.
Ah, but that's exactly the point - he had a huge effect on people _not_ interested in the music industry. Bands that play for people interested in music can't come close to his numbers, because he tapped into a huge audience they can't or won't appeal to. His music resonated with huge numbers of people who generally weren't interested in music.
You're right, his music was good for what it was but not great, it wasn't revolutionary or particularly influential, from what I've been able to discern.
What Michael Jackson did was bring music to people who didn't like music. He made people who don't like to dance often want to dance, and he made people who don't pay attention to their music tap their feet and want to sing along.
I don't listen to his music much, because it's not made for me. And with my listening habits, it's not as good as the music I listen to. But for a MUCH larger audience than I'm a part of, Michael Jackson's music is much better than anything I listen to.
A better way to phrase the question: If nine in ten pictures are worth deleting, but one is worth keeping, weren't all ten worth the effort to snap in the first place?
I'm no photographer, but I'd guess that the effort of snapping all ten is probably not greater than the effort of snapping one well-framed, well-focused, well-lit picture, and that the best of the ten is likely as good as the single well-though-out picture.
In this case, yes, it is. It's a homeopathic solution of several ingredients, but contains a normal (non-homeopathic, i.e. effective) dose of an actual medication, zinc gluconate.
1. Most "nerds" on this site don't know shit, and
2. anyone who honestly thinks people in Iran could possibly, in the most wild far-fetched fantasies, set up an ad-hoc network and successfully use it to communicate to some useful end, within the next few days, is a complete god damned idiot.
Not seeing the point isn't the same thing as not understanding why people do it.
Also, you seem to be suggesting that attempting to elevate one's self above others is a bad thing. Okay, so ivory towers and arrogance are bad, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't think that dumb things are dumb.
Got a link? I looked around and couldn't find anything. If you don't have one, I'll have to conclude, even more so than I already have, that you're a jackass who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Even if they did, what the fuck does it matter? Every time European exploration comes up, there's one asshole who has to bring up the Vikings as though they matter. Europeans and Americans didn't mix, interbreed extensively, or have extended contact and mutual knowledge of each other until the European expansion starting in the 15th century. The Vikings didn't matter, nobody forgot about them, and you're not as knowledgeable as you think you are for remembering that they existed.
No, not like that. There's plenty of old music that you haven't heard yet, same as everyone else. The good old music has survived because people listen to it, but not everyone has heard all of it. So in progressive rock, say, there was a lot of progressive rock around in the '70s, but nobody listens to anything but Yes and Genesis anymore. So someone who discovers progressive rock will grab a few Yes and Genesis albums, then buy the rest of them, and because nobody ever tells them about the bad prog-rockers, they get the impression that it was all or almost all good. Happens all the time.
We were sitting around having a conversation about similar topics, and I was curious how much of my physical attraction to her was her being good-looking and how much was because I like everything else about her a hell of a lot. I'm neither shallow nor insecure.
And you should stop pretending you're not human. If you truly don't care whether anyone else thinks your wife is pretty, then you didn't evolve with the rest of us. Pretending you don't share basic human traits like that shows you to be much more insecure than you think I am.
I can assure you I know exactly what I'm talking about. I have an extremely attractive girlfriend. I've asked people, and other people think she's moderately attractive, but I think she's one of the most beautiful women I've ever met. And that's exactly the way I like it.
But I wouldn't pretend to be an objective judge in a beauty contest she was competing in.
He knows attractiveness better than people with both interference from emotional attachments and good reasons to lie about their opinions.
And it's insightful because it's true - men are lucky, we can improve how women perceive our appearance by having the proper attitude. Women don't have as much leeway as men do, in my experience.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not too late, you're just lazy. If you really want to know how to make shotguns, go get a book on metalworking and start pricing out machining equipment.
Oh, what's that? You'd rather post on slashdot and pretend you're motivated enough to do something like that?
*giggle* Oh, you...
You need multitrack files for FOF. Do you have multitracks of all the Rage songs you want to play?
Yes, I'm sure a significant number of those news reports and blog posts after Obama said it were re-reporting McCain's earlier usage.
Christ Almighty, you sound like me when I was 16. But your UID shows you to be much older than me. When are you going to grow up and join the world?
It's a duty we take on because we care about the other people. It's still a duty.
He's telling you how his day-to-day job works, you moron! Do you know anything about science? The "Scientific Method" is an idealized, dumbed-down version of how science works that we teach to FIRST GRADERS. Stop clinging to it; it's only a poor approximation of how things actually work.
If a pilot told you, in all seriousness, that most aircraft are actually flown by blind gophers on LSD, what the hell basis would you have to disagree with him? How often have you been in a cockpit?
What the hell kind of worldview do you have where a scientist tells you how the practice of science actually works, and you tell him he's wrong!?!?
Sorry, plague3106, you lost the right to be sarcastic and arrogant right around the time you proved you don't know how to respond to the right post in a slashdot thread.
You're looking for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superbit .
Ah, but that's exactly the point - he had a huge effect on people _not_ interested in the music industry. Bands that play for people interested in music can't come close to his numbers, because he tapped into a huge audience they can't or won't appeal to. His music resonated with huge numbers of people who generally weren't interested in music.
You're right, his music was good for what it was but not great, it wasn't revolutionary or particularly influential, from what I've been able to discern.
What Michael Jackson did was bring music to people who didn't like music. He made people who don't like to dance often want to dance, and he made people who don't pay attention to their music tap their feet and want to sing along.
I don't listen to his music much, because it's not made for me. And with my listening habits, it's not as good as the music I listen to. But for a MUCH larger audience than I'm a part of, Michael Jackson's music is much better than anything I listen to.
A better way to phrase the question: If nine in ten pictures are worth deleting, but one is worth keeping, weren't all ten worth the effort to snap in the first place?
I'm no photographer, but I'd guess that the effort of snapping all ten is probably not greater than the effort of snapping one well-framed, well-focused, well-lit picture, and that the best of the ten is likely as good as the single well-though-out picture.
In this case, yes, it is. It's a homeopathic solution of several ingredients, but contains a normal (non-homeopathic, i.e. effective) dose of an actual medication, zinc gluconate.
No, this is an opportunity to find out that:
1. Most "nerds" on this site don't know shit, and
2. anyone who honestly thinks people in Iran could possibly, in the most wild far-fetched fantasies, set up an ad-hoc network and successfully use it to communicate to some useful end, within the next few days, is a complete god damned idiot.
Have you tried Remicade and/or Pentasa? I've been under control for years with either or both of those at different times.
Not seeing the point isn't the same thing as not understanding why people do it.
Also, you seem to be suggesting that attempting to elevate one's self above others is a bad thing. Okay, so ivory towers and arrogance are bad, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't think that dumb things are dumb.
Got a link? I looked around and couldn't find anything. If you don't have one, I'll have to conclude, even more so than I already have, that you're a jackass who doesn't know what he's talking about.
Even if they did, what the fuck does it matter? Every time European exploration comes up, there's one asshole who has to bring up the Vikings as though they matter. Europeans and Americans didn't mix, interbreed extensively, or have extended contact and mutual knowledge of each other until the European expansion starting in the 15th century. The Vikings didn't matter, nobody forgot about them, and you're not as knowledgeable as you think you are for remembering that they existed.
The Vikings didn't interbreed with the natives when they came here, not that I've heard of anyway. Nice try, though.
No, not like that. There's plenty of old music that you haven't heard yet, same as everyone else. The good old music has survived because people listen to it, but not everyone has heard all of it. So in progressive rock, say, there was a lot of progressive rock around in the '70s, but nobody listens to anything but Yes and Genesis anymore. So someone who discovers progressive rock will grab a few Yes and Genesis albums, then buy the rest of them, and because nobody ever tells them about the bad prog-rockers, they get the impression that it was all or almost all good. Happens all the time.
Look at the history.
We were sitting around having a conversation about similar topics, and I was curious how much of my physical attraction to her was her being good-looking and how much was because I like everything else about her a hell of a lot. I'm neither shallow nor insecure.
And you should stop pretending you're not human. If you truly don't care whether anyone else thinks your wife is pretty, then you didn't evolve with the rest of us. Pretending you don't share basic human traits like that shows you to be much more insecure than you think I am.
I read a story in the last couple minutes which mentioned that. Do you know what story it was? IT WAS THE STORY YOU'RE COMMENTING ON.
I can assure you I know exactly what I'm talking about. I have an extremely attractive girlfriend. I've asked people, and other people think she's moderately attractive, but I think she's one of the most beautiful women I've ever met. And that's exactly the way I like it.
But I wouldn't pretend to be an objective judge in a beauty contest she was competing in.
He knows attractiveness better than people with both interference from emotional attachments and good reasons to lie about their opinions.
And it's insightful because it's true - men are lucky, we can improve how women perceive our appearance by having the proper attitude. Women don't have as much leeway as men do, in my experience.