If this is the same show I saw a while ago, I found it very funny is the model they chose for demonstrating the golden rule really wasn't very attractive (certainly a dramatic face but not the norm, IMO).
My biggest issue with Howard Stern is that he is really very intelligent but still chooses to do his show they way he does. Perhaps, he is simply captializing on the the "When Animals Attack" crowd and doesn't consider his own show as entertainment. That really only requires stooping to the level of a common politician or used car salesman, if you think about it.
Sorry to talk to myself, but one other thought is that the "addiction" is a natural response to marketing and perception of social norms (whether or not they are really norms at all). Looking around, I can see all sorts of groups of people having fun around a particular game or show or website, but in no way can I participate in them all. People may seek to participate in as many as they can feeling inadequate that they are outside so many cliques. The Internet, in particular, makes a clique globally visible which, in turn, makes it seem much larger than life. How many people really go to LAN parties, are elite kernel hackers, or are accomplished at any given on-line game? Not many in reality, but it is hard for outsiders to gauge that fact.
but an entertainment addiction. I'd say we could group gaming addicts along with Internet junkies (e.g. chronic Slashdotters) and with television junkies (people who think Friends is them). While these each have different levels of interaction (TV least, gaming middle, on-line discussions most), the levels aren't so dramatic to really differentiate them. The amount of instant gratification is the same, for example. Worst are people who are addicted to all three and spend all their time watching, playing, or posting and can't pay attention to their other responsibilities.
If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off...
I disagree. In this situation I would want to put the car into neutral and turn off the ignition but still leave the steering wheel unlocked. Even without power, the steering and brakes will still work just with greater effort. There is also the manual emergency brake.
The Star Fleet engineering manuals show lots of toilets in the Enterprise. With all the diseases that affected the whole crew none seemed to involve vomiting or diarrhea, and even when Capt. Kirk got a hangover we didn't see him collapsed in the bathroom or anything. Very strange, indeed. I conclude that all future humans are really shape shifters from the Delta Quadrant. They took over our planet when humans were weakened from the eugenics conflicts and couldn't fight back! We must prepare for the invasion by destroying all buckets on earth so that the shape shifters will have no place to sleep! They will grow weary and we can strike back before it is too late! Victory is at hand!
Nerds have strong opinions about many things, even things that are political. Software Patents are a political issue, for example, as is Linux vs. Windows, to a large extent. GPL vs. BSD licensing has had its share of politically-motivated discussion. So has pretty much anything regarding Sun Microsystems or HPaq or IBM, lately.
Adding in election politics, at least until November, doesn't seem entirely out of line, given that the Presidential election is weighing more on many minds than whether Java 5 supports syntactic sugar for type casting.
Kerry's arguments seem to be that he would not have gone to war had he been President with the information available now and that he would not have taken the same approach as Bush in dealing with Saddam. It isn't quite being either pro-war or anti-war but skirting the issue in such a way to make his history in Congress consistent with his current statements. Running against Bush with the Iraq war being such a big campaign issue has put Kerry into a real tricky position. This doesn't make Kerry obviously right or wrong, but it makes Bush's simplistic and direct statements harder to rebut effectively. It doesn't matter that either Bush's or Kerry's statements are logically sound; what matters is that Bush sounds better, in the sense that Wal-Mart TV commercials sound better than those of their competitors (look at all those happy faces slashing prices!).
Face it, Bush was going to war because he wanted to go to war, period.
Future sessions of Congress will probably be more hesitant to give the President authority to declare a war. Even counting successes in Iraq, are there any indications that it _won't_ be another Vietnam? Technically, the US has been there for more than 13 years with a few more years coming, meaning it really could stretch out to be as long as the US presence in Vietnam. Considering the inspectors, the recently installed government, scheduled elections, the long history of conflict in the region, and what some call a guerilla warfare situation, the historical parallels are not few and far between.
GWB can rebut any statement by just saying the same simplistic catch phrases that cite only the successes in Iraq. For better or worse, Bush really knows his constituency. People can take "Saddam is in jail" to the polls, but not the three-paragraph (well reasoned or not) statements Kerry makes about why he thought Saddam was a threat but would have relied on inspectors using war as a last resort with a larger coalition of nations, etc.
Solution: Web services, SOA and SOAP/XML/UDDI as standard intercommunication methods.
These intercommunication methods have been evolving so rapidly as to cause more integration problems than they solve. The XML people can't even agree on a way of expressing the schemas last time I checked. As far as I can tell, the most stable interface for communication is HTTP PUT with simple name/value pairs, which is sufficient for many purposes.
I finally figured out "paradigm shift" a long time ago, but, now, we have "sea change." What does this mean? Does it mean that the 473 enterprise decision makers are so overweight that the tide rises when they are at the beach? Do shipping lanes need to be routed around them? Does a belly flop off of the diving board send islanders across the Atlantic fleeing in fear?
I would have to say that the sites at CSSZenGarden look quite different.
The last time I visited this site, it seemed the different designs rely too heavily on graphics. I was about to reply to the original post, but, then, I realized that good cross-platform CSS+HTML pages really do end up following the predictable header/column approach with light graphics for modem users.
Given the nature of putting content on the WWW, I really don't think this is that big of a deal. I'd take a simple header/column CSS site over Flash or JavaScript based ones any day, becuase it would generally be more reliable, it would be faster, and it doesn't rely as much on nuances of my browser preferences or plugins.
Microsoft was completely in the right to bundle a browser.
This wasn't the point to the lawsuits. They not only bundled the browser, but they did it in a way that was irremovable, forced default settings to use it, forced incompatible changes to industry standards such as HTML, and essentially extorted OEMs to not bundle alternatives. That's where the word "antitrust" comes in. IE on Windows is really nothing like Netscape/Mozilla on Linux/Solaris/HPUX/etc or Safari on Mac OS X.
I for one am happy that "things are getting better" and "the country is safer".
I see your sarcasm, but the country really is not safer. The inconveniences of flying are causing more people to drive inevitably causing more accidents. My personal radius of driving vs. flying went up a lot, even if only considering the mandatory luggage searches (completely messing up the stuff I spent time packing). Add the longer lines of people confused over whether they need to take off their shoes or take apart their laptops and flying is just not any fun anymore.
Does this exclude discussion of non-American politics?
Did Slashdot block off non-USA IP addresses to the politics section? Nope.
I'd actually like to hear more non-US input to the politics section. The USA is so large that most people growing up here never need to cross an international border, which inevitably leads to a lack of knowledge regarding other countries (even Canada and Mexico).
There are issues in the US campaigns right now that other countries have already addressed or at least debated in one form or another. An obvious one is health care, for example. If anything, providing information about whether Canada's or Great Britain's health care systems are any good or not can only help people in the US better understand the issue. It would also be very interesting to hear about what foreign media report about the US, since American media is understandably biased (American journalists reporting on American events).
Just because a position is the same as the churches does NOT mean that the position necessarily has religious roots.
Generally, most arguments that are not based on religious faith take a "shades of grey" approach to abortion. There are spontaneous abortions all the time, for example. Also, there is arguing about birthing a child into a family that doesn't want him or her or wouldn't take proper care of him or her. Adoption is a nice idea, but supply outweighs demand. It is obvious that an embryo is alive, at least in the sense that a carrot is alive (cellular respiration, etc.), and the unanswerable question, without religion, is whether discarding a simple multi-celled embryo is no worse than or worse than discarding a simple multi-celled carrot. It is more difficult to decide and usually the argument drops to emotional statements about "potential." Even that is vague. Abortion will be another one of those issues where no one clearly wins the debate.
Slashdot Mirror
It is based on the Golden Ratio...
If this is the same show I saw a while ago, I found it very funny is the model they chose for demonstrating the golden rule really wasn't very attractive (certainly a dramatic face but not the norm, IMO).
My biggest issue with Howard Stern is that he is really very intelligent but still chooses to do his show they way he does. Perhaps, he is simply captializing on the the "When Animals Attack" crowd and doesn't consider his own show as entertainment. That really only requires stooping to the level of a common politician or used car salesman, if you think about it.
Sorry to talk to myself, but one other thought is that the "addiction" is a natural response to marketing and perception of social norms (whether or not they are really norms at all). Looking around, I can see all sorts of groups of people having fun around a particular game or show or website, but in no way can I participate in them all. People may seek to participate in as many as they can feeling inadequate that they are outside so many cliques. The Internet, in particular, makes a clique globally visible which, in turn, makes it seem much larger than life. How many people really go to LAN parties, are elite kernel hackers, or are accomplished at any given on-line game? Not many in reality, but it is hard for outsiders to gauge that fact.
but an entertainment addiction. I'd say we could group gaming addicts along with Internet junkies (e.g. chronic Slashdotters) and with television junkies (people who think Friends is them). While these each have different levels of interaction (TV least, gaming middle, on-line discussions most), the levels aren't so dramatic to really differentiate them. The amount of instant gratification is the same, for example. Worst are people who are addicted to all three and spend all their time watching, playing, or posting and can't pay attention to their other responsibilities.
If this ever happens to you do not ever attempt to turn the ignition all the way off...
I disagree. In this situation I would want to put the car into neutral and turn off the ignition but still leave the steering wheel unlocked. Even without power, the steering and brakes will still work just with greater effort. There is also the manual emergency brake.
It works for *all* the rest of nature.
Yes, and the lifestyle of a chipmunk getting rained out of its home only to be eaten by a cat is quite appealing, I must admit.
The Star Fleet engineering manuals show lots of toilets in the Enterprise. With all the diseases that affected the whole crew none seemed to involve vomiting or diarrhea, and even when Capt. Kirk got a hangover we didn't see him collapsed in the bathroom or anything. Very strange, indeed. I conclude that all future humans are really shape shifters from the Delta Quadrant. They took over our planet when humans were weakened from the eugenics conflicts and couldn't fight back! We must prepare for the invasion by destroying all buckets on earth so that the shape shifters will have no place to sleep! They will grow weary and we can strike back before it is too late! Victory is at hand!
I'd recommend washing up afterwards, though. The thought of ingesting plutonium isn't very appealing.
How is this news for nerds?
Nerds have strong opinions about many things, even things that are political. Software Patents are a political issue, for example, as is Linux vs. Windows, to a large extent. GPL vs. BSD licensing has had its share of politically-motivated discussion. So has pretty much anything regarding Sun Microsystems or HPaq or IBM, lately.
Adding in election politics, at least until November, doesn't seem entirely out of line, given that the Presidential election is weighing more on many minds than whether Java 5 supports syntactic sugar for type casting.
Kerry's arguments seem to be that he would not have gone to war had he been President with the information available now and that he would not have taken the same approach as Bush in dealing with Saddam. It isn't quite being either pro-war or anti-war but skirting the issue in such a way to make his history in Congress consistent with his current statements. Running against Bush with the Iraq war being such a big campaign issue has put Kerry into a real tricky position. This doesn't make Kerry obviously right or wrong, but it makes Bush's simplistic and direct statements harder to rebut effectively. It doesn't matter that either Bush's or Kerry's statements are logically sound; what matters is that Bush sounds better, in the sense that Wal-Mart TV commercials sound better than those of their competitors (look at all those happy faces slashing prices!).
Face it, Bush was going to war because he wanted to go to war, period.
Future sessions of Congress will probably be more hesitant to give the President authority to declare a war. Even counting successes in Iraq, are there any indications that it _won't_ be another Vietnam? Technically, the US has been there for more than 13 years with a few more years coming, meaning it really could stretch out to be as long as the US presence in Vietnam. Considering the inspectors, the recently installed government, scheduled elections, the long history of conflict in the region, and what some call a guerilla warfare situation, the historical parallels are not few and far between.
GWB can rebut any statement by just saying the same simplistic catch phrases that cite only the successes in Iraq. For better or worse, Bush really knows his constituency. People can take "Saddam is in jail" to the polls, but not the three-paragraph (well reasoned or not) statements Kerry makes about why he thought Saddam was a threat but would have relied on inspectors using war as a last resort with a larger coalition of nations, etc.
I was just impressed that he could pronounce the word.
He had to concentrate so hard while pronouncing that word that I'm also impressed he didn't pass out.
In the debate, Bush referred to statements the Prime Minister made in defending the status of Iraq. I guess that would be circular reasoning?
HTTP PUT
Sorry, I meant HTTP POST.
Solution: Web services, SOA and SOAP/XML/UDDI as standard intercommunication methods.
These intercommunication methods have been evolving so rapidly as to cause more integration problems than they solve. The XML people can't even agree on a way of expressing the schemas last time I checked. As far as I can tell, the most stable interface for communication is HTTP PUT with simple name/value pairs, which is sufficient for many purposes.
I finally figured out "paradigm shift" a long time ago, but, now, we have "sea change." What does this mean? Does it mean that the 473 enterprise decision makers are so overweight that the tide rises when they are at the beach? Do shipping lanes need to be routed around them? Does a belly flop off of the diving board send islanders across the Atlantic fleeing in fear?
I would have to say that the sites at CSSZenGarden look quite different.
The last time I visited this site, it seemed the different designs rely too heavily on graphics. I was about to reply to the original post, but, then, I realized that good cross-platform CSS+HTML pages really do end up following the predictable header/column approach with light graphics for modem users.
Given the nature of putting content on the WWW, I really don't think this is that big of a deal. I'd take a simple header/column CSS site over Flash or JavaScript based ones any day, becuase it would generally be more reliable, it would be faster, and it doesn't rely as much on nuances of my browser preferences or plugins.
AC's a troll; don't pay the toll.
Microsoft was completely in the right to bundle a browser.
This wasn't the point to the lawsuits. They not only bundled the browser, but they did it in a way that was irremovable, forced default settings to use it, forced incompatible changes to industry standards such as HTML, and essentially extorted OEMs to not bundle alternatives. That's where the word "antitrust" comes in. IE on Windows is really nothing like Netscape/Mozilla on Linux/Solaris/HPUX/etc or Safari on Mac OS X.
In contrast, windows is significantly more expensive...
Yes, $149 is way too much for a K car, even when new.
I for one am happy that "things are getting better" and "the country is safer".
I see your sarcasm, but the country really is not safer. The inconveniences of flying are causing more people to drive inevitably causing more accidents. My personal radius of driving vs. flying went up a lot, even if only considering the mandatory luggage searches (completely messing up the stuff I spent time packing). Add the longer lines of people confused over whether they need to take off their shoes or take apart their laptops and flying is just not any fun anymore.
Also, Kerry doesn't do Elmer Fudd impressions when put on the spot.
Does this exclude discussion of non-American politics?
Did Slashdot block off non-USA IP addresses to the politics section? Nope.
I'd actually like to hear more non-US input to the politics section. The USA is so large that most people growing up here never need to cross an international border, which inevitably leads to a lack of knowledge regarding other countries (even Canada and Mexico).
There are issues in the US campaigns right now that other countries have already addressed or at least debated in one form or another. An obvious one is health care, for example. If anything, providing information about whether Canada's or Great Britain's health care systems are any good or not can only help people in the US better understand the issue. It would also be very interesting to hear about what foreign media report about the US, since American media is understandably biased (American journalists reporting on American events).
Just because a position is the same as the churches does NOT mean that the position necessarily has religious roots.
Generally, most arguments that are not based on religious faith take a "shades of grey" approach to abortion. There are spontaneous abortions all the time, for example. Also, there is arguing about birthing a child into a family that doesn't want him or her or wouldn't take proper care of him or her. Adoption is a nice idea, but supply outweighs demand. It is obvious that an embryo is alive, at least in the sense that a carrot is alive (cellular respiration, etc.), and the unanswerable question, without religion, is whether discarding a simple multi-celled embryo is no worse than or worse than discarding a simple multi-celled carrot. It is more difficult to decide and usually the argument drops to emotional statements about "potential." Even that is vague. Abortion will be another one of those issues where no one clearly wins the debate.