You're more or less correct. The 'w' sound doesn't exist before the 'i' sound in any Japanese word, so they tend to say something like "uii".
Most Japanese people are familiar with the English word "we", but since Japanese itself doesn't have personal pronouns in the same grammatical sense English does, they tend to think of "we" as meaning "everyone". For another example of this, look at the slogan for Katamari Damacy, "we love Katamari".
When a Japanese business rag states something as a fact, you can be pretty sure they have good sources on it. Japanese papers don't play fast and loose with the truth just to sell a few extra copies.
Irreducible complexity aside, there is an important challenge Behe sets before evolutionary scientists that they seem to prefer to ignore in their denunciations of Behe.
The short version is that evolution at the molecular biological level isn't even a theory yet. It's a black-box hypothesis. You can say this spot evolved into that eye, or this fin evolved into that arm, but you might as well say that crowbars evolved into hammers if you're not going to specify at the molecular level how these immensely complicated biological systems managed to change from one state to the other and which specific alterations allowed the new traits to be passed on.
Abiogenesis has it even worse.
Like it or not, a fair amount of what is accepted as gospel with regards to evolution isn't really science yet, because there are no falsifiable theories. Science is hard.
The USENET is practically the only place on earth everyone can share anonymous (if desired), unmoderated, uncensored, de-centralized discussion on any topic. You can share ideas and ask questions on USENET you can't easily ask anywhere else.
It's the only thing of its kind in all of history, and I hope it sticks around.
If that's the case, I don't recall seeing either candidate utter a statement that *wasn't* a lie, misrepresentation, or extreme exaggeration. Softer that could hunt for and identify words or phrases that *weren't* spin might be more useful, statistically speaking.
It doesn't matter how they feel. New York State can't tax a purchase made in Texas (or wherever Amazon is located) any more than they can tax a purchase made in Mongolia. Moreover, they can't impose taxes on New York citizens importing goods from other states, because the Constitution and its commerce clause forbid that.
I could be wrong, but it sounds to me that without the compressor machinery, this could enable smaller, quieter cooling units and lead to products like battery-powered thermoses or air-conditioned clothing. Do any engineers have a take on this?
If you run a business and say "no agents allowed", and then sell a ticket anyway through an agent, and then afterwards cancel the ticket without telling the purchaser, aren't you being a bit of a jerk if not downright fraudulent?
Ryanair might having some fine print somewhere regarding agents, but in the end, they're allowing their sales system to sell tickets to these people, and *then* cancelling them. They're not making the effort to actually check purchase requests beforehand.
You've already been modded as high as possible, so I might as well put in my two cents instead.:)
I agree wholeheartedly. Building a city is absolutely fascinating, and SimCity gives a taste while making more interesting layouts and experiments impossible. I'd love to have a city simulator that let me *at least* emulate a real-world city with angled and curved roads, pedestrian paths and walkways, customizable roads (with respect to number of lanes and lane use), mixed-use zoning (or even un-zoned development), better overpasses, etc.
I can imagine such a game being similar, complexity-wise, to SimCity 4 at first sight, but including tools like a Road Designer, an Intersection Designer, a Zone Designer, and so on that let you produce custom elements for the game. I'd pay a good deal of money for something like this.
Here's what I don't care about. I don't care about the tedium of laying pipes and power lines everywhere. I don't care to have special sims I follow around the city. I don't even care about natural disasters, though I suppose some people enjoy disaster scenarios. I just want a really sophisticated sandbox to play in.:)
New Slashdot now combines the worst of both Old Slashdot and Reddit â" wildly inaccurate story blurbs combined with crude and inappropriate slurs directed towards anyone with faith. I can't wait for the dupe tomorrow.
That's why Lego has adapted by designing nicer models and nicer models each year, and always including a few must-have pieces in the big sets.
In addition, the high price of secondhand Lego keeps used product from cannibalizing new sales too much. You can sell a single older set on eBay and make enough to buy 2-3 new sets of similar size, making the hobby almost self-sustaining. (Some people even make money off it by buying sets at retail or on sale, keeping what they want, and selling the rest off as individual bricks.)
Re:What happened to interchangable parts?
on
Inside the Lego Factory
·
· Score: 2, Informative
A number of years ago, this "juniorization" process was becoming apparent as Lego attempted to make its toys accessible to younger ages while reducing the cost of nice-looking models. At the time, the company was in financial trouble and this misguided strategy ended up only making things worse.
Things seem to have reversed since then, however. Sure, there are still *some* rather specific pieces (like boat hulls) that it would be costly or difficult for Lego to sell brick-wise, but most new pieces that get introduced now are quite adaptable for custom models.
At the same time, Lego has increased their sales and income by designing better and more playable models, targeting adult fans as well as children, and improving the efficiency of their manufacturing operations.
But what seems obvious, exactly? That they're similar? That StudiVZ is inspired by Facebook? That's hardly a crime. Every function and layout concept found on either site can be found on hundreds of other social networking sites around the Internet. And of the millions of websites in the world, you'll have trouble finding even one that doesn't borrow nearly every element of design and functionality sites that came before.
Reuters doesn't even mention any specific legal complaint by Facebook, just that it's a "knockoff" and Facebook wants daddy to make the big bad German site stop. It seems to me, though, that if the German site is popular, it's because it's reaching a user-base that Facebook was either unable or too slow to reach.
Facebook hasn't lost anything. They're still growing in popularity and users worldwide. What's there to complain about? The world owes them even more than the wild success they've already achieved?
The point of copyright (nowadays) is to control what information people are allowed to think and share, for the benefit of the few. Including data and facts is the natural next logical step, unfortunately.
Yes, but that involves a perilous trip through the cavernous sub-basement to some rarely touched master reboot switch, and while the system is restarting all the perimeter fences will be de-electrified and the motion sensors inactive. In movies, this situation inevitably leads to lots of screaming and mayhem.
Japan has something similar to this, albeit with parking lots rather than metered curb spaces, which don't exist to my knowledge. When you enter a dense commercial district, overhead LED signs show a map of the neighbourhood with parking areas colour-coded according to whether there are vacancies or not.
I agree 100%. I suspect a more useful data mining system would use book *reviews*, mined from Amazon and all the other sites that post them. In addition to providing an overall barometer for quality, it could identify reviewers whose tastes run similar to your own, and use that as a starting point for recommendations.
And democracy, strictly defined, is a pretty bad idea. Ask anyone who lives in a country where a hostile ethnic majority gets to vote on what happens to minorities it doesn't like.
A spike in prices during a shortage also means great incentive to produce or import more at costs that are normally prohibitive, and to keep people from consuming more than is absolutely necessary. In other words, a serious food shortage results in more food production and less eating per person, which is pretty much the most efficient response you could hope for.
Nothing can immediately *cure* a shortage as you put it, but the invisible hand of economics is the quickest way to fix it. Any time a shortage of something critical is sustained, it's almost always due to artificial suppression of these market forces.
To extend that even further, nickel-iron meteors and asteroids are a pretty good source of gallium and other rare metals. If demand and prices went high enough, it would be extra incentive for space companies to come up with asteroid-mining schemes.
(I have no idea what the price has to be to make this feasible, but I'm sure somebody could do the math.)
The premise of this article, and your post as well, are both rooted in a fundamental economic misunderstanding.
It is almost impossible for a resource to suddenly go extinct. What happens is that as available stocks shrink, and the cost of mining more increases, the cost of that resource also goes up. This provides a natural economic incentive both to find alternatives, and to recycle, at the point where it is economically feasible.
Gallium and zinc will never be used up. They will simply go up in cost and end up used for more important applications while enterprising individuals and companies discover and develop alternatives, and consumers shift their buying habits to products that use less of them.
I read a real story some time back about someone who would save all his junk mail (even unrelated stuff) and return it in pre-paid envelopes.
And there was another guy who'd literally glue those pre-paid envelopes onto bricks and drop them in the mailbox. Supposedly that can actually work, and the recipient pays for the cost of mailing a brick.
Slashdot Mirror
You're more or less correct. The 'w' sound doesn't exist before the 'i' sound in any Japanese word, so they tend to say something like "uii".
Most Japanese people are familiar with the English word "we", but since Japanese itself doesn't have personal pronouns in the same grammatical sense English does, they tend to think of "we" as meaning "everyone". For another example of this, look at the slogan for Katamari Damacy, "we love Katamari".
When a Japanese business rag states something as a fact, you can be pretty sure they have good sources on it. Japanese papers don't play fast and loose with the truth just to sell a few extra copies.
Irreducible complexity aside, there is an important challenge Behe sets before evolutionary scientists that they seem to prefer to ignore in their denunciations of Behe.
The short version is that evolution at the molecular biological level isn't even a theory yet. It's a black-box hypothesis. You can say this spot evolved into that eye, or this fin evolved into that arm, but you might as well say that crowbars evolved into hammers if you're not going to specify at the molecular level how these immensely complicated biological systems managed to change from one state to the other and which specific alterations allowed the new traits to be passed on.
Abiogenesis has it even worse.
Like it or not, a fair amount of what is accepted as gospel with regards to evolution isn't really science yet, because there are no falsifiable theories. Science is hard.
The USENET is practically the only place on earth everyone can share anonymous (if desired), unmoderated, uncensored, de-centralized discussion on any topic. You can share ideas and ask questions on USENET you can't easily ask anywhere else.
It's the only thing of its kind in all of history, and I hope it sticks around.
Hate to break it to you, but Obama voted *for* telecom immunity.
Sericol sounds like some kind of drug.
"Sericol -- ask your doctor about it today."
I'm not sure you understand what "uncanny" means.
If that's the case, I don't recall seeing either candidate utter a statement that *wasn't* a lie, misrepresentation, or extreme exaggeration. Softer that could hunt for and identify words or phrases that *weren't* spin might be more useful, statistically speaking.
It doesn't matter how they feel. New York State can't tax a purchase made in Texas (or wherever Amazon is located) any more than they can tax a purchase made in Mongolia. Moreover, they can't impose taxes on New York citizens importing goods from other states, because the Constitution and its commerce clause forbid that.
I could be wrong, but it sounds to me that without the compressor machinery, this could enable smaller, quieter cooling units and lead to products like battery-powered thermoses or air-conditioned clothing. Do any engineers have a take on this?
If you run a business and say "no agents allowed", and then sell a ticket anyway through an agent, and then afterwards cancel the ticket without telling the purchaser, aren't you being a bit of a jerk if not downright fraudulent?
Ryanair might having some fine print somewhere regarding agents, but in the end, they're allowing their sales system to sell tickets to these people, and *then* cancelling them. They're not making the effort to actually check purchase requests beforehand.
You've already been modded as high as possible, so I might as well put in my two cents instead. :)
I agree wholeheartedly. Building a city is absolutely fascinating, and SimCity gives a taste while making more interesting layouts and experiments impossible. I'd love to have a city simulator that let me *at least* emulate a real-world city with angled and curved roads, pedestrian paths and walkways, customizable roads (with respect to number of lanes and lane use), mixed-use zoning (or even un-zoned development), better overpasses, etc.
I can imagine such a game being similar, complexity-wise, to SimCity 4 at first sight, but including tools like a Road Designer, an Intersection Designer, a Zone Designer, and so on that let you produce custom elements for the game. I'd pay a good deal of money for something like this.
Here's what I don't care about. I don't care about the tedium of laying pipes and power lines everywhere. I don't care to have special sims I follow around the city. I don't even care about natural disasters, though I suppose some people enjoy disaster scenarios. I just want a really sophisticated sandbox to play in. :)
New Slashdot now combines the worst of both Old Slashdot and Reddit â" wildly inaccurate story blurbs combined with crude and inappropriate slurs directed towards anyone with faith. I can't wait for the dupe tomorrow.
That's why Lego has adapted by designing nicer models and nicer models each year, and always including a few must-have pieces in the big sets.
In addition, the high price of secondhand Lego keeps used product from cannibalizing new sales too much. You can sell a single older set on eBay and make enough to buy 2-3 new sets of similar size, making the hobby almost self-sustaining. (Some people even make money off it by buying sets at retail or on sale, keeping what they want, and selling the rest off as individual bricks.)
A number of years ago, this "juniorization" process was becoming apparent as Lego attempted to make its toys accessible to younger ages while reducing the cost of nice-looking models. At the time, the company was in financial trouble and this misguided strategy ended up only making things worse.
Things seem to have reversed since then, however. Sure, there are still *some* rather specific pieces (like boat hulls) that it would be costly or difficult for Lego to sell brick-wise, but most new pieces that get introduced now are quite adaptable for custom models.
At the same time, Lego has increased their sales and income by designing better and more playable models, targeting adult fans as well as children, and improving the efficiency of their manufacturing operations.
But what seems obvious, exactly? That they're similar? That StudiVZ is inspired by Facebook? That's hardly a crime. Every function and layout concept found on either site can be found on hundreds of other social networking sites around the Internet. And of the millions of websites in the world, you'll have trouble finding even one that doesn't borrow nearly every element of design and functionality sites that came before.
Reuters doesn't even mention any specific legal complaint by Facebook, just that it's a "knockoff" and Facebook wants daddy to make the big bad German site stop. It seems to me, though, that if the German site is popular, it's because it's reaching a user-base that Facebook was either unable or too slow to reach.
Facebook hasn't lost anything. They're still growing in popularity and users worldwide. What's there to complain about? The world owes them even more than the wild success they've already achieved?
The point of copyright (nowadays) is to control what information people are allowed to think and share, for the benefit of the few. Including data and facts is the natural next logical step, unfortunately.
Yes, but that involves a perilous trip through the cavernous sub-basement to some rarely touched master reboot switch, and while the system is restarting all the perimeter fences will be de-electrified and the motion sensors inactive. In movies, this situation inevitably leads to lots of screaming and mayhem.
Japan has something similar to this, albeit with parking lots rather than metered curb spaces, which don't exist to my knowledge. When you enter a dense commercial district, overhead LED signs show a map of the neighbourhood with parking areas colour-coded according to whether there are vacancies or not.
I agree 100%. I suspect a more useful data mining system would use book *reviews*, mined from Amazon and all the other sites that post them. In addition to providing an overall barometer for quality, it could identify reviewers whose tastes run similar to your own, and use that as a starting point for recommendations.
And democracy, strictly defined, is a pretty bad idea. Ask anyone who lives in a country where a hostile ethnic majority gets to vote on what happens to minorities it doesn't like.
A spike in prices during a shortage also means great incentive to produce or import more at costs that are normally prohibitive, and to keep people from consuming more than is absolutely necessary. In other words, a serious food shortage results in more food production and less eating per person, which is pretty much the most efficient response you could hope for.
Nothing can immediately *cure* a shortage as you put it, but the invisible hand of economics is the quickest way to fix it. Any time a shortage of something critical is sustained, it's almost always due to artificial suppression of these market forces.
To extend that even further, nickel-iron meteors and asteroids are a pretty good source of gallium and other rare metals. If demand and prices went high enough, it would be extra incentive for space companies to come up with asteroid-mining schemes.
(I have no idea what the price has to be to make this feasible, but I'm sure somebody could do the math.)
The premise of this article, and your post as well, are both rooted in a fundamental economic misunderstanding.
It is almost impossible for a resource to suddenly go extinct. What happens is that as available stocks shrink, and the cost of mining more increases, the cost of that resource also goes up. This provides a natural economic incentive both to find alternatives, and to recycle, at the point where it is economically feasible.
Gallium and zinc will never be used up. They will simply go up in cost and end up used for more important applications while enterprising individuals and companies discover and develop alternatives, and consumers shift their buying habits to products that use less of them.
I read a real story some time back about someone who would save all his junk mail (even unrelated stuff) and return it in pre-paid envelopes.
And there was another guy who'd literally glue those pre-paid envelopes onto bricks and drop them in the mailbox. Supposedly that can actually work, and the recipient pays for the cost of mailing a brick.