Argument inspired by gaseous dinosaurs:
1) Methane is a greenhouse gas
2) Eating fibrous vegetation creates methane
3) Creation of methane increases your carbon footprint. .: If one eats less fibrous vegetation, then one produces less methane, and therefore has a reduced carbon footprint.
+ 1) Livestock eat much fibrous vegetation. .: Livestock have high carbon footprints
++ 1) Decreasing carbon footprint is good.
++ 2) Killing livestock that have high carbon footprints decrease carbon footprint.
++ 3) Waste is bad.
++ 4) Eating livestock that have been killed to decrease carbon footprint does not waste the livestock.
++ 5) Vegans do not eat or kill livestock. .: Vegans are bad, because they waste livestock and increase carbon footprint.
Conversely: Carnivores are good for the environment because they do not eat fibrous vegetation, and they do not waste livestock, which they kill, thereby reducing carbon footprints.
1) Some people are carnivores
2) Some carnivores eat vegans.
3) Vegans increase carbon footprint which is bad.
4) A person who eats people is a cannibal .: A cannibal that eats vegans and is a carnivore is improving the environment by reducing carbon footprint.
Is there a difference anymore? Do they have enforcement authority? Half of the regulators have some sort of enforcement authority that they self-authorized in the federal register. Don't cooperate, let them do whatever they're going to do, and when they don't find anything, sue for false imprisonment. There is an ambulance chaser somewhere interested in making a buck...
It took me a long time, and three colleges to finally understand that college is for the license to get a job. Education is for the skills. Education and college don't have to be mutually exclusive, if you intend to be a professor. Otherwise, get the degree to be competitive, and training to be proficient.
In the computer world, we're all taught to only install firmware updates if there is a real problem because a large percentage of firmware updates actually brick the hardware or cause other unforeseen bugs.
In the computer security world, we craft effigies of people like you and burn them for not installing the patch that causes the security failure. Lets see if I can follow the logic:
1)The patch that prevents me from dying might break my car.
2)My car is under warranty.
3)My dealer will install the patch, and therefore accept liability for breaking my car.
.: I should:
a) Not accept the patch, and risk DYING.
b) Let the dealer install the patch, understanding that he must fix the car that he breaks while doing the warranty repair work, and accept the consequences, up to and including the dealer providing a new car for breaking my car.
Can anyone help me to understand the argument against installing the update?
When you don't know what to do put a bunch of people in a aroom that might be responsible, come up with a scenario, and ask the question, "Who does what?"
There is also less likelihood of doing the deal, since the return on investment is so long range as to make it unpalatable to shareholders.
Why would a company fund a martian launch?
But, if you could, then since nature abhors you making the first post, your future self may have reached back in time to make your current self not make the first post, perhaps by distracting you at the crucial moment. Kind of like nature abhors the Cubs winning the series, or the Higgs Boson being discovered.
Q.E.D.
Very well stated definition of the end state as it prepares for destruction! I think you've hit the nail on the head. This organization will continue to grow exponentially more complex as each clueless manager continues to practice the Amway school of business management, and grow his downline with true believers.
At some point in a not so distant future, the prime sociopatch will die or retire, and the entire structure will collapse upon itself, thus assuring the lifecycle continues.
Tell me which one you're on right now. Now, tell me which PVP instance for HERO System? Now, show me the documentation to set it up so that we can get in the same instance on the same team. I can create teams across the world, but I can't get them on the same arena team. If you have information on how to do so, please share, since some of us work instead of playing MMO's all day.
My point is simply that there is no simple means that appears in any of the poorly documented game to help players get together. If we're standing right next to each other its simple. If we're not, then its hard enough that the majority of players haven't figured it out.
Sure you can join a supergroup. But first you have to get your folks on the same instance. To me it feels like they traded a convenient way to avoid server changes with a way to make it inconvenient for people to play together.
Bozeman will likely get it when no one under 50 applies for a job, and no one in IT applies for a position at all. Soon, either the hiring practice will change, or the town will begin paying ridonculous sums, since they are "not getting applicants". At which point it is palatable to use a throwaway email address, and social networking account or two, take the job, and have the HR moron terminated for surfing porn at work. Afterall, his or her passwords will be kept somewhere in writing.
IBM did that once. They gave away the ISA desktop architecture and allowed other people to build on it. Lots of competitors sprang up and took advantage of the free engineering. IBM then released microchannel desktop architecture. It was faster, it had a cool OS, and it was proprietary. Notice, it no longer exists, and IBM doesn't sell desktops anymore?
Seems really parallel.
That assumes that any corporate headquarters is not already at least a pocket dimension of hell. Come on man, read the Manual of the Planes. You can get it on PDF... DOH!
Slashdot Mirror
+1 Witty BUT PROBABLY TRUE
The Atari 800 XL beat the C64 hands down, you insensitive clod.
Argument inspired by gaseous dinosaurs:
.: If one eats less fibrous vegetation, then one produces less methane, and therefore has a reduced carbon footprint.
.: Livestock have high carbon footprints
.: Vegans are bad, because they waste livestock and increase carbon footprint.
.: A cannibal that eats vegans and is a carnivore is improving the environment by reducing carbon footprint.
1) Methane is a greenhouse gas
2) Eating fibrous vegetation creates methane
3) Creation of methane increases your carbon footprint.
+ 1) Livestock eat much fibrous vegetation.
++ 1) Decreasing carbon footprint is good.
++ 2) Killing livestock that have high carbon footprints decrease carbon footprint.
++ 3) Waste is bad.
++ 4) Eating livestock that have been killed to decrease carbon footprint does not waste the livestock.
++ 5) Vegans do not eat or kill livestock.
Conversely: Carnivores are good for the environment because they do not eat fibrous vegetation, and they do not waste livestock, which they kill, thereby reducing carbon footprints.
1) Some people are carnivores
2) Some carnivores eat vegans.
3) Vegans increase carbon footprint which is bad.
4) A person who eats people is a cannibal
Every other war? Where was Hitler's body?
Is there a difference anymore? Do they have enforcement authority? Half of the regulators have some sort of enforcement authority that they self-authorized in the federal register. Don't cooperate, let them do whatever they're going to do, and when they don't find anything, sue for false imprisonment. There is an ambulance chaser somewhere interested in making a buck...
I for one bow to our new Nipponese Ninja Assassin Overlords... Can't be any worse than bowing to agents of our own bureaucracy.
It took me a long time, and three colleges to finally understand that college is for the license to get a job. Education is for the skills. Education and college don't have to be mutually exclusive, if you intend to be a professor. Otherwise, get the degree to be competitive, and training to be proficient.
There is no significant difference between the job they described, and a law enforcement innocent images related job.
With the exception that the law enforcement job you at least get to hope you can catch the A-hole who took the horrible image to begin with.
In the computer security world, we craft effigies of people like you and burn them for not installing the patch that causes the security failure. Lets see if I can follow the logic:
.: I should:
1)The patch that prevents me from dying might break my car.
2)My car is under warranty.
3)My dealer will install the patch, and therefore accept liability for breaking my car.
a) Not accept the patch, and risk DYING.
b) Let the dealer install the patch, understanding that he must fix the car that he breaks while doing the warranty repair work, and accept the consequences, up to and including the dealer providing a new car for breaking my car.
Can anyone help me to understand the argument against installing the update?
When you don't know what to do put a bunch of people in a aroom that might be responsible, come up with a scenario, and ask the question, "Who does what?"
There is also less likelihood of doing the deal, since the return on investment is so long range as to make it unpalatable to shareholders. Why would a company fund a martian launch?
Anyone else notice the irony of playing a video game to have sex "with real people?"
Humans, Skinnies and Bugs... I get it... Why didn't the 40 k people get it?
expanded using convict labor. By then adding super computers, and a big slongshot we can end world hunger...
Whoever gets there first, say hello to Manual Garcia O'Kelly for me.
The above will only make sense to those who have read the Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert A. Heinlein.
When they say Red Planet, i guess they really mean, RED planet...
Everyone repeat after me:
Correlation Does NOT Imply Causation.
Unless of course causation is established after correlation is recognized...
But, if you could, then since nature abhors you making the first post, your future self may have reached back in time to make your current self not make the first post, perhaps by distracting you at the crucial moment. Kind of like nature abhors the Cubs winning the series, or the Higgs Boson being discovered. Q.E.D.
Very well stated definition of the end state as it prepares for destruction! I think you've hit the nail on the head. This organization will continue to grow exponentially more complex as each clueless manager continues to practice the Amway school of business management, and grow his downline with true believers.
At some point in a not so distant future, the prime sociopatch will die or retire, and the entire structure will collapse upon itself, thus assuring the lifecycle continues.
Tell me which one you're on right now. Now, tell me which PVP instance for HERO System? Now, show me the documentation to set it up so that we can get in the same instance on the same team. I can create teams across the world, but I can't get them on the same arena team. If you have information on how to do so, please share, since some of us work instead of playing MMO's all day.
My point is simply that there is no simple means that appears in any of the poorly documented game to help players get together. If we're standing right next to each other its simple. If we're not, then its hard enough that the majority of players haven't figured it out.
It is nothing like the HERO System Champions game.
Sure you can join a supergroup. But first you have to get your folks on the same instance. To me it feels like they traded a convenient way to avoid server changes with a way to make it inconvenient for people to play together.
Bozeman will likely get it when no one under 50 applies for a job, and no one in IT applies for a position at all. Soon, either the hiring practice will change, or the town will begin paying ridonculous sums, since they are "not getting applicants". At which point it is palatable to use a throwaway email address, and social networking account or two, take the job, and have the HR moron terminated for surfing porn at work. Afterall, his or her passwords will be kept somewhere in writing.
You mean like road runner does by default here in SC?
IBM did that once. They gave away the ISA desktop architecture and allowed other people to build on it. Lots of competitors sprang up and took advantage of the free engineering. IBM then released microchannel desktop architecture. It was faster, it had a cool OS, and it was proprietary. Notice, it no longer exists, and IBM doesn't sell desktops anymore? Seems really parallel.
That assumes that any corporate headquarters is not already at least a pocket dimension of hell. Come on man, read the Manual of the Planes. You can get it on PDF... DOH!