It is my understanding (and I am no biologist) that at least some of the current thinking on the matter is that the earliest lifeforms on Earth were in fact extremophiles.
I recommend using Adblock PlusandNoScript. You can also add a modified hosts file, though I find between ABP and NoScript, I no longer use the latter.
NoScript requires you to explicitly enable sites to run scripts, either per session or permanently. This turns people off, but security is never easy and it's just two clicks.
How come White people do not have much in the way of political power in non-white countries? Riddle me that!
Oh, you mean like Apartheid or the Belgian Congo or Imperial Egypt or Imperial India or.... (list goes on FORVEVER...)
Retard, Hispanics are descended from European culture, ever hear of Spain? Conquistadors? Get a clue. Won't bother responding to the rest of your diatribe because I already proved you don't know what you're talking about, and thus anything that follows out of your cowardly mouth is unreliable.
I was going to watch this movie, but when I pored over the sources, I saw things like Jim Marrs: Rule By Secrecy referenced. This is a patently ridiculous tome where he regurgitates as fact the words of discredited loons. David Icke too? Yuck. Glad to see Bill Hicks though.
Now you are mixing-and-matching my points. I said that if it was a real bomb, it would have been bigger. And here you go talking about a "wheelbarrow" full of C-4. Of course anything THAT size would be (and should be) suspicious. But not a circuit board on a tee shirt (or are you claiming her rack was 'wheelbarrow sized', and should have drawn suspicion??) No, I am not. It was a mere exaggeration, quit with the bait-and switch. The point remains valid and unchallenged: a threat being obviously, to you, in hindsight, nonthreatening, doesn't mean that people who are sworn to protect us should ignore it. A terrorist wearing some sort of device in an obvious fashion is just as deadly as a more discreet terrorist if they are treated the same way.
So, you are seriously saying that we all have to be extremely careful not to do or say ANYTHING that, if properly mis-interperated by those in charge, could be the least little bit suspicious, otherwise we deserve what we get?? I don't know what "mis-interperated" means, but my point is clear: I'm saying she deliberately baited this attention and deserves what she got. It's common sense. These people are trained to always be alert to threats, and they probably have a visceral gut reaction that is difficult to manage one the adrenaline is flowing. None of them wants to be the one who is themselves a victim or fails to save other victims frmo an attack.
I think that we have a really paranoid climate, and I don't think we're in nearly as much danger as that climate would imply. But that's the way people are. You don't wear red in a crip neighborhood, and you don't fuck around with anything that could be taken for a bomb in an airport.
The death penalty is wrong because an imperfect system shouldn't be put in control of life and death when criminals can just as easily be separated from society and possibly rehabilitated in other ways.
1) Very little "rehabilitation" takes place in prisons. a) Prove it, recidivism rates are not 100%, more like 60-70% and b) the prison system is incorrectly set up as a punitive instead of a rehabilitating system.
Regarding points 2 and 3, perhaps you should do some research before you open your mouth and "remove all doubt."
That's ludicrous. If people could be expected to react to an obvious terrorist threat with complacency, then terrorists could simply be obvious. They could count on someone saying "Oh, well, that CAN'T be a bomb, I can SEE it," while they walk in with a wheelbarrow full of C-4. Further, such a person could be providing a diversion so that another person could make it through security. Further than that, a handful of plastique could kill a few people. It doesn't have to be a fucking nuclear bomb to be concerning. The point is, we live in a world in which people can universally be expected to overreact in a predictable manner when faced with the perceived threat of terrorism, no matter how obvious it looks in hindsight. We have already seen this same city freak out over a bunch of LiteBrites. In an airport, you can;t even joke about a bomb if you expect to get on a plane. Like it or not, it's her fault for being a fucking idiot and not considering the climate of an airport after 9-11.
OJ got away with murder. The judicial system lets the guilty go free. Ergo, the judicial system probably convicts the innocent. This logic is backed up by examples. The death penalty is wrong because an imperfect system shouldn't be put in control of life and death when criminals can just as easily be separated from society and possibly rehabilitated in other ways.
Faith-based initiatives have historically been completely abused. If there is a separation of Church and state, then we can honor it in the way we assist the needy.
I also disagree that the slogan is meaningless. I don't want people speaking for me in any sort of collectivist fashion. It clearly crosses the Church/State boundary, and if such a boundary was meant to exist (it was) and if such a boundary should exist (it should), then it should apply to the Treasury as well as every other division of government.
So by that way of thinking, the Nazi flag has nothing to do with genocide, and everything to do with National Socialism. I'm afraid the stain of slavery cannot be removed from the Confederate flag so easily...
Makes perfect rational sense -- sorry, you're batting 0 so far. Expecting immigrants to learn the language is rational, even if it's not palatable.
Actually, it doesn't make any sense at all. The United States does not have an official language. Canada is constitutionally bilingual, English AND French. I don't think the Nuge is terribly bright. Anyone with intellect would know that that is a poor analogy.
PET/CT scanners can produce coherent datasets that can be fused by a simple overlay, and software like Mirada 7D Fusion (which we integrate with) can fully deformably fuse all sorts of datasets from differing modalities. This is usually a 2D overlay, and it looks different than what this software is doing. They are claiming that specifically fibrous tumor growth can be visualized in new ways. So perhaps the fusing isn't novel, but the method of fusing and/or visualization may be.
THAT part is true, but it's ignorant to say that Intel and AMD processors won't run x64. Speaking strictly of x86, Xeons, Opterons, and Athlons have been 64-bit for a long time--why do you think Microsoft calls the 64-bit extensions folder "AMD64" on the root of your 64-bit installation media? AMD came up with 64-bit processor compatibility FIRST--saying they don't have it is just plain dumb. All Core2-based chips support x64.
Mods, explain to me how is that insightful? YOU are missing the point of a 64-bit OS.
Xeons have been able to run 64-bit for a long time, ALL Core2-based procs will run x64, and AMD has been x64 capable for the longest of all the x86 processors.
Of course the CPU matters. It has to be 64-bit to run a 64-bit OS. If the registers aren't wide enough to store 64-bit addresses, then it won't work. Intel and AMD make chips that support 64-bit addressing and that are compatible with Windows x64. I deploy them all the time.
I'll bet the services provided to the Ajax on the iPhone will allow these applications to get your phone number and send it to, for example, Doubleclick.net. I would proceed carefully, this whole thing seems dangerous.
Good point. The mind is irrational, but the brain is not necessarily irrational. We just need a rational program to run on the hardware, which is sufficient.
To be a cult you have to be marginal. That's why Christians consider Mormons and Scientologists to be members of cults, and never would consider Christianity to be a cult. Next question.
Re:Ruby as a first language?
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
the functional support will be good for you if you ever turn to the hardcore languages, like Haskell, C++ and that ilk.
I think that's the first time I've seen Haskell and C++ lunked in an "ilk" together. I don't think that most new programmers would find much use to the functional piece of Ruby, because you can just as easily write procedural or OO code. Functional programming, at least for me, is something that you have to get used to and that I would never have gravitated towards in a self-guided exploration of programming. Unless you have an understanding of functional programming in the first place (i.e., have studied the Lambda Calculus, a Lisp dialect or Haskell) I think that most newbies programming in Lisp are going to generate (at first undisciplined) code resembling the bastard child of Smalltalk and Algol, using procedural and OO methodologies, not functional ones.
Slashdot Mirror
It is my understanding (and I am no biologist) that at least some of the current thinking on the matter is that the earliest lifeforms on Earth were in fact extremophiles.
NoScript requires you to explicitly enable sites to run scripts, either per session or permanently. This turns people off, but security is never easy and it's just two clicks.
Oh, you mean like Apartheid or the Belgian Congo or Imperial Egypt or Imperial India or.... (list goes on FORVEVER...)
Retard, Hispanics are descended from European culture, ever hear of Spain? Conquistadors? Get a clue. Won't bother responding to the rest of your diatribe because I already proved you don't know what you're talking about, and thus anything that follows out of your cowardly mouth is unreliable.
no, the real point is: I don't give a damn.
I was going to watch this movie, but when I pored over the sources, I saw things like Jim Marrs: Rule By Secrecy referenced. This is a patently ridiculous tome where he regurgitates as fact the words of discredited loons. David Icke too? Yuck. Glad to see Bill Hicks though.
I think that we have a really paranoid climate, and I don't think we're in nearly as much danger as that climate would imply. But that's the way people are. You don't wear red in a crip neighborhood, and you don't fuck around with anything that could be taken for a bomb in an airport.
1) Very little "rehabilitation" takes place in prisons.
a) Prove it, recidivism rates are not 100%, more like 60-70% and b) the prison system is incorrectly set up as a punitive instead of a rehabilitating system.
Regarding points 2 and 3, perhaps you should do some research before you open your mouth and "remove all doubt."
That's ludicrous. If people could be expected to react to an obvious terrorist threat with complacency, then terrorists could simply be obvious. They could count on someone saying "Oh, well, that CAN'T be a bomb, I can SEE it," while they walk in with a wheelbarrow full of C-4. Further, such a person could be providing a diversion so that another person could make it through security. Further than that, a handful of plastique could kill a few people. It doesn't have to be a fucking nuclear bomb to be concerning. The point is, we live in a world in which people can universally be expected to overreact in a predictable manner when faced with the perceived threat of terrorism, no matter how obvious it looks in hindsight. We have already seen this same city freak out over a bunch of LiteBrites. In an airport, you can;t even joke about a bomb if you expect to get on a plane. Like it or not, it's her fault for being a fucking idiot and not considering the climate of an airport after 9-11.
Yeah, who cares if they just blow up the baggage claim.... fucking idiot.
OJ got away with murder. The judicial system lets the guilty go free. Ergo, the judicial system probably convicts the innocent. This logic is backed up by examples. The death penalty is wrong because an imperfect system shouldn't be put in control of life and death when criminals can just as easily be separated from society and possibly rehabilitated in other ways.
OK, so if it had been a terrorist with a bomb, then they could have just said the bomb was "art" and they should have been let on a plane...
Actually, I think such a parachute could still work, it may rain feces down onto you while doing so though.
I also disagree that the slogan is meaningless. I don't want people speaking for me in any sort of collectivist fashion. It clearly crosses the Church/State boundary, and if such a boundary was meant to exist (it was) and if such a boundary should exist (it should), then it should apply to the Treasury as well as every other division of government.
So by that way of thinking, the Nazi flag has nothing to do with genocide, and everything to do with National Socialism. I'm afraid the stain of slavery cannot be removed from the Confederate flag so easily...
I prefer:
"A mind is like a parachute: if it isn't open it doesn't work."
PET/CT scanners can produce coherent datasets that can be fused by a simple overlay, and software like Mirada 7D Fusion (which we integrate with) can fully deformably fuse all sorts of datasets from differing modalities. This is usually a 2D overlay, and it looks different than what this software is doing. They are claiming that specifically fibrous tumor growth can be visualized in new ways. So perhaps the fusing isn't novel, but the method of fusing and/or visualization may be.
THAT part is true, but it's ignorant to say that Intel and AMD processors won't run x64. Speaking strictly of x86, Xeons, Opterons, and Athlons have been 64-bit for a long time--why do you think Microsoft calls the 64-bit extensions folder "AMD64" on the root of your 64-bit installation media? AMD came up with 64-bit processor compatibility FIRST--saying they don't have it is just plain dumb. All Core2-based chips support x64.
Xeons have been able to run 64-bit for a long time, ALL Core2-based procs will run x64, and AMD has been x64 capable for the longest of all the x86 processors.
Of course the CPU matters. It has to be 64-bit to run a 64-bit OS. If the registers aren't wide enough to store 64-bit addresses, then it won't work. Intel and AMD make chips that support 64-bit addressing and that are compatible with Windows x64. I deploy them all the time.
I'll bet the services provided to the Ajax on the iPhone will allow these applications to get your phone number and send it to, for example, Doubleclick.net. I would proceed carefully, this whole thing seems dangerous.
Good point. The mind is irrational, but the brain is not necessarily irrational. We just need a rational program to run on the hardware, which is sufficient.
Bill Hicks:
You ever noticed how people who believe in evolution look a little bit less evolved?
"I b'lieve Gawd created me in 6 days!"
"Yeah, it looks like he might've rushed it..."
To be a cult you have to be marginal. That's why Christians consider Mormons and Scientologists to be members of cults, and never would consider Christianity to be a cult. Next question.
$0.02