WTF kind of mud language is that map written in? I can't read that thing to save my life! All I get is, "die, rot". I thought you were talking about the origin of life, not dying and rotting!
And...
If the whole Bible was translated into wikipedia, someone would break the "citation needed" machine.
Um, if you think there's a little "'citation needed' machine" inside Wikipedia's servers, it's clear you don't quite know how the internet works...
And let's not even get into your understanding of how languages work...
Hey fuckhole! In case you hadn't heard, even if there were solid platinum bars on the surface of the moon, covering the whole place, it STILL wouldn't be profitable to collect them!
Now, think about how much cheaper oil is per unit weight. Think about how much more it costs to make it to Mars.
Wtf? Where did that come from? How is a SOLDIER a SERIAL KILLER? That doesn't make any sense at all. Killing people in a war DOES NOT MAKE YOU A SERIAL KILLER. Hello? Anyone home?
I ask that you apologize for calling all soldiers criminals.
No, they did not discover the gene for making stupid racist remarks, As someone who happens to possess that gene, through no fault of my own, let me just say that I'm glad at what Bush is doing to keep those Jew-owned insurance companies from discriminating against me.
I saw the same thing. Is my computer just not showing it right? Or is it a flaw in the language itself? I mean, I can go to like, every other separate language out there (French, German, Spanish... everything) and actually READ it. I can't understand it, but I can still say it out loud because it uses NORMAL letters. "Mucho gracio, hombre, se come dise..." See? Actual WORDS!
But you try to read some languages and it doesn't even MEAN anything, you can't READ it, it's just squiggles. What the hell are they supposed to mean???
Anything that isn't willing to eat food capable of keeping it alive reliably deserves to die out, no matter how cute and cuddly it is. You're ignoring the fitness value of its cuteness/cuddliness.
Why do you think we kept cats around for so long?;-)
Whoa -- time out there, kiddo. What makes you so sure that absentee landlords DESERVE to regain access to land that they ABANDONED for such a long time? In my opinion, it's all about occupancy and use. You own what you actively possess and use on a regulated basis. Frankly, failure to adhere to this principle it what got us all the horrors of capitalism -- wage slaves just working someone ELSE's capital, no incentive to do their best. No responsibility for owners of lots of capital (i.e. board of directors fatcats that leech of the folks doing the real work in this country). It's what got us corporatized monoculture farms.
By what right does someone get to walk over land first, leave, and say, "oh, none o' y'all can step there"?
In venezuela, if you go on a long vacation, squatters CAN and DO take your home. Rich people try to get around this by having relatives stay there, but then that just abandons that relative's home. Fun, fun.
I sure don't want investigators to find my child pornography!
I guess I'll have to go with Ubuntu, although it's probably expensive, and I haven't worked out the illegality of those torrents people are posting.
Re:Started the download 20 minutes ago
on
Ubuntu 8.04 Released
·
· Score: -1, Troll
Why the hell did my post get modded "5, Funny"? It's a valid point. Downloading copyrighted works without the author's express written consent is illegal. Period. End of story. I'm not a big fan of illegal activity. Of any kind.
I checked up on this stuff, did my research and found out, yep, Ubuntu is copyrighted. (Well, in the sense that there's a copyright on it... you don't have to file for copyright anymore.) And yep, downloading stuff that ain't yours, is illegal.
I know you all think it's "5, Funny", to break the law, probably because you can get away with it, but I still can't figure you guys out.
Re:Started the download 20 minutes ago
on
Ubuntu 8.04 Released
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Uh, yeah, except that: isn't it kind of ILLEGAL to download copyrighted stuff via torrents?
Might want to watch yourself there, since the RIAA can see stuff like this...
CAPTCHAs are providing a valuable evolutionary pressure on machine vision/artificial intelligence development!
Uh HUH... I'd be more excited about that if evolution weren't just a theory at this point. (as opposed to a hard, ironclad, FACT like we expect in most disciplines...)
Assume an environment where changes are small and strength affords a huge advantage. In such a circumstance, the minor changes are just noise and the physically stronger species get their genes into next generations better, in direct contradiction of the "most adaptable" principle.
Oops.
All you can really say about spreading of genes is:
-Genetic molecules (uh, which may may not suffice to define an exact copy) pass from parent to child when conceived, by this process. -Whatever works to spead genes given the above... um... well, it works. TOTALLY.
Evolution cultists like to pretend there's some more predictable regularity than that so they can actually count Darwin's theory as being more scientific than it really is.
Look at the quote: "More adaptability means more survival. Uh... like, but not in the cases when it... doesn't. Look, it's hard to explain, show me the results, and then I'll predict it GOD DAMN I HATE THOSE SWINDLING PSYCHICS WHO CLAIM TO PREDICT WHAT THEY CANT, THE ****ING TERRORISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
WTF is with you people? Trying to draw all these hairsplitting lines between "okay" solitations and "not okay".
So-called "spam" is not the problem. The problem is that all you idiots use an outdated system that ALLOWS anyone to send information packets through it with zero traceability, zero accountability, zero credibility.
Isn't it *our* fault, collectively, for spam? For relying on such a crappy, corruptible system of communication in the first place? If we put a giant button on our homes that says "press to begin ignition process", we'd hardly be justified in claiming that button-pushers are the source of our ills.
As long as we're ordering our lives around such a corruptible system, we have precisely ZERO right to complain.
And I don't even hate "spam" like apparently the rest of you do. What you call "spam", I call "messages that give me info on the latest products, technologies, and business modesl." You want less of it? I want MORE of it. Hell, two weeks ago, I got a good deal on a prescription drug (that I won't name...) at about $50 for a year's supply. It takes a while to deliver (hasn't arrived yet), but you sure as hell can't beat the price.
And the fact is, that consumers LIKE spam. Why do you think spam is profitable? Because people buy the products advertised!
I think a study asked a bunch of questions about the internet to people to look for correlations and what they found was striking:
90% of people who think spam should be "eliminated some time in the future" have bought something on line. Does that make ANY sense whatsoever? You hate getting ads in your email, but you're all so eager to buy on line?
Why do people make spam out to be some kind of menace? Isn't it *our* fault for relying on such a crappy, corruptible system of communication in the first place? If we put a giant button on our homes that says "press to begin ignition process", we'd hardly be justified in claiming that button-pushers are the source of our ills.
As long as we're using a system that allows people to send messages without being traced, and without putting anything on the line, that system will have spam. To the extent that we do not convert to this better system, we are to blame, not spammers.
And I don't even hate spam. What you call "spam", I call "products that give me info on the latest products, technologies, and business modesl." You want less of it? I want MORE of it. And the fact is, that consumers LIKE spam. Why do you think spam is profitable? Because people buy the products advertised!
I think a study asked a bunch of questions about the internet to people to look for correlations and what they found was striking:
90% of people who think spam should be "eliminated some time in the future" have bought something on line. Does that make ANY sense whatsoever? You hate getting ads in your email, but you're all so eager to buy on line?
You really, really don't understand the intricacies involved in running a pharmacy. Really, you don't. For example, do you know how hard it is to type those labels? It's a curved surface, for heaven's sake! Do you know how much work it is to put those little bottles in a typewriter?
Second of all, counting is very difficult. Did you know that pharmacists have to recount each pill dosage up to five times? That's serious work! And it's hard to find good counters. Only people with a college degree are capable of counting, ergo the shortage of qualified people.
Finally, and most importantly, there's the issue of putting cautions on the bottles and checking for drug interactions. What I mean is, anyone can say "May cause drowsiness". But it takes a professional, licensed pharmacist to put passion into that warning. And it takes a serious education to check for drug interactions. You need four years of college to be able to type a drug name into a computer, hit enter, and read off the list of "do not mix with these drugs".
So I can see why you don't get it. But now you know:-/
Things that change shape in the body under different situations are VERY useful in medicine. Very common right now are Nitinol [wikipedia.org] devices, which can "remember" a previous geometry. Nitinol stents are saving lives today.
I understand that. What I don't understand is what light has to do with it. Alternate methods of having something deploy in the body, sure. Methods that involve light? I don't see what use they have in the body. Maybe one day they will (not likely), but aren't we supposed to FIRST find a need and THEN satisfy it, rather than coming up with a useless technology and looking for a use?
I can imagine a polymer that changed shape when exposed to light could be quite useful, as it could be inserted in a catheter and then deployed with a light emiting catheter.
Whatever is used to activate the catheter could be used, more directly, to activate a mechanical component without using light as an intermediary.
Seriously though, you're right, it seems that the "building something inside the body" has nothing whatsoever to do with matierials that change shape under light. So that dispenses with "use" number one. As for "use" number two (opening doors with light), WTF? Yeah, that sure sounds like something I've always wanted to do...
What real use does this technology have? I can't think of any scenario where this would be more cost-effective than existing technology. This seems like another case of technology for technology's sake. A sad waste of resources, since there are so many better things such intelligent people could be working on.
No, I'm pretty sure they would have responded that they don't want freelance journalists or independent newspapers to publish home addresses either... don't quite see your point there...
Slashdot Mirror
This is where humans came from: http://www.bio-pro.de/imperia/md/images/grafiken/wanderung_homo_sapiens.png
WTF kind of mud language is that map written in? I can't read that thing to save my life! All I get is, "die, rot". I thought you were talking about the origin of life, not dying and rotting!
And...
If the whole Bible was translated into wikipedia, someone would break the "citation needed" machine.
Um, if you think there's a little "'citation needed' machine" inside Wikipedia's servers, it's clear you don't quite know how the internet works...
And let's not even get into your understanding of how languages work...
What the hell does Dungeons and Dragons have to do with FAITH in GOD?
Hey fuckhole! In case you hadn't heard, even if there were solid platinum bars on the surface of the moon, covering the whole place, it STILL wouldn't be profitable to collect them!
Now, think about how much cheaper oil is per unit weight. Think about how much more it costs to make it to Mars.
Yeah, let's try that one again.
Well don't you think we should start classifying people as terrorists or not terrorists based on whether or not they'll blow up the plane?
What about 9/11? Weren't those guys (the Arabs that carried out the attack I mean) terrorists?
hi
Wtf? Where did that come from? How is a SOLDIER a SERIAL KILLER? That doesn't make any sense at all. Killing people in a war DOES NOT MAKE YOU A SERIAL KILLER. Hello? Anyone home?
I ask that you apologize for calling all soldiers criminals.
I saw the same thing. Is my computer just not showing it right? Or is it a flaw in the language itself? I mean, I can go to like, every other separate language out there (French, German, Spanish ... everything) and actually READ it. I can't understand it, but I can still say it out loud because it uses NORMAL letters. "Mucho gracio, hombre, se come dise..." See? Actual WORDS!
But you try to read some languages and it doesn't even MEAN anything, you can't READ it, it's just squiggles. What the hell are they supposed to mean???
Why do you think we kept cats around for so long?
Whoa -- time out there, kiddo. What makes you so sure that absentee landlords DESERVE to regain access to land that they ABANDONED for such a long time? In my opinion, it's all about occupancy and use. You own what you actively possess and use on a regulated basis. Frankly, failure to adhere to this principle it what got us all the horrors of capitalism -- wage slaves just working someone ELSE's capital, no incentive to do their best. No responsibility for owners of lots of capital (i.e. board of directors fatcats that leech of the folks doing the real work in this country). It's what got us corporatized monoculture farms.
By what right does someone get to walk over land first, leave, and say, "oh, none o' y'all can step there"?
In venezuela, if you go on a long vacation, squatters CAN and DO take your home. Rich people try to get around this by having relatives stay there, but then that just abandons that relative's home. Fun, fun.
Let's do that.
I sure don't want investigators to find my child pornography!
I guess I'll have to go with Ubuntu, although it's probably expensive, and I haven't worked out the illegality of those torrents people are posting.
Why the hell did my post get modded "5, Funny"? It's a valid point. Downloading copyrighted works without the author's express written consent is illegal. Period. End of story. I'm not a big fan of illegal activity. Of any kind.
... you don't have to file for copyright anymore.) And yep, downloading stuff that ain't yours, is illegal.
I checked up on this stuff, did my research and found out, yep, Ubuntu is copyrighted. (Well, in the sense that there's a copyright on it
I know you all think it's "5, Funny", to break the law, probably because you can get away with it, but I still can't figure you guys out.
Uh, yeah, except that: isn't it kind of ILLEGAL to download copyrighted stuff via torrents?
Might want to watch yourself there, since the RIAA can see stuff like this...
CAPTCHAs are providing a valuable evolutionary pressure on machine vision/artificial intelligence development!
Uh HUH... I'd be more excited about that if evolution weren't just a theory at this point. (as opposed to a hard, ironclad, FACT like we expect in most disciplines...)
Yep, looks like we got another evolution cultist. It still only works *if the environment turns out to change*...
Uh...
In some way that actually turns out to make the non-strong species, like, be better and stuff.
Evolutionists are ex-physics students that couldn't cut the mustard.
Actually, that's a load of crap. Pure, pure crap.
... um ... well, it works. TOTALLY.
... like, but not in the cases when it ... doesn't. Look, it's hard to explain, show me the results, and then I'll predict it GOD DAMN I HATE THOSE SWINDLING PSYCHICS WHO CLAIM TO PREDICT WHAT THEY CANT, THE ****ING TERRORISTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Assume an environment where changes are small and strength affords a huge advantage. In such a circumstance, the minor changes are just noise and the physically stronger species get their genes into next generations better, in direct contradiction of the "most adaptable" principle.
Oops.
All you can really say about spreading of genes is:
-Genetic molecules (uh, which may may not suffice to define an exact copy) pass from parent to child when conceived, by this process.
-Whatever works to spead genes given the above
Evolution cultists like to pretend there's some more predictable regularity than that so they can actually count Darwin's theory as being more scientific than it really is.
Look at the quote: "More adaptability means more survival. Uh
WTF is with you people? Trying to draw all these hairsplitting lines between "okay" solitations and "not okay".
So-called "spam" is not the problem. The problem is that all you idiots use an outdated system that ALLOWS anyone to send information packets through it with zero traceability, zero accountability, zero credibility.
Isn't it *our* fault, collectively, for spam? For relying on such a crappy, corruptible system of communication in the first place? If we put a giant button on our homes that says "press to begin ignition process", we'd hardly be justified in claiming that button-pushers are the source of our ills.
As long as we're ordering our lives around such a corruptible system, we have precisely ZERO right to complain.
And I don't even hate "spam" like apparently the rest of you do. What you call "spam", I call "messages that give me info on the latest products, technologies, and business modesl." You want less of it? I want MORE of it. Hell, two weeks ago, I got a good deal on a prescription drug (that I won't name...) at about $50 for a year's supply. It takes a while to deliver (hasn't arrived yet), but you sure as hell can't beat the price.
And the fact is, that consumers LIKE spam. Why do you think spam is profitable? Because people buy the products advertised!
I think a study asked a bunch of questions about the internet to people to look for correlations and what they found was striking:
90% of people who think spam should be "eliminated some time in the future" have bought something on line. Does that make ANY sense whatsoever? You hate getting ads in your email, but you're all so eager to buy on line?
I don't know, the only way that the Boy Scouts of America "squeezes the little guys" is by making them share tents deep in the woods with homosexuals.
Why do people make spam out to be some kind of menace? Isn't it *our* fault for relying on such a crappy, corruptible system of communication in the first place? If we put a giant button on our homes that says "press to begin ignition process", we'd hardly be justified in claiming that button-pushers are the source of our ills.
As long as we're using a system that allows people to send messages without being traced, and without putting anything on the line, that system will have spam. To the extent that we do not convert to this better system, we are to blame, not spammers.
And I don't even hate spam. What you call "spam", I call "products that give me info on the latest products, technologies, and business modesl." You want less of it? I want MORE of it. And the fact is, that consumers LIKE spam. Why do you think spam is profitable? Because people buy the products advertised!
I think a study asked a bunch of questions about the internet to people to look for correlations and what they found was striking:
90% of people who think spam should be "eliminated some time in the future" have bought something on line. Does that make ANY sense whatsoever? You hate getting ads in your email, but you're all so eager to buy on line?
Gimme a break!
I think camping the passing lane or rear-ending someone at a light is even more invasive.
You really, really don't understand the intricacies involved in running a pharmacy. Really, you don't. For example, do you know how hard it is to type those labels? It's a curved surface, for heaven's sake! Do you know how much work it is to put those little bottles in a typewriter?
:-/
Second of all, counting is very difficult. Did you know that pharmacists have to recount each pill dosage up to five times? That's serious work! And it's hard to find good counters. Only people with a college degree are capable of counting, ergo the shortage of qualified people.
Finally, and most importantly, there's the issue of putting cautions on the bottles and checking for drug interactions. What I mean is, anyone can say "May cause drowsiness". But it takes a professional, licensed pharmacist to put passion into that warning. And it takes a serious education to check for drug interactions. You need four years of college to be able to type a drug name into a computer, hit enter, and read off the list of "do not mix with these drugs".
So I can see why you don't get it. But now you know
Things that change shape in the body under different situations are VERY useful in medicine. Very common right now are Nitinol [wikipedia.org] devices, which can "remember" a previous geometry. Nitinol stents are saving lives today.
I understand that. What I don't understand is what light has to do with it. Alternate methods of having something deploy in the body, sure. Methods that involve light? I don't see what use they have in the body. Maybe one day they will (not likely), but aren't we supposed to FIRST find a need and THEN satisfy it, rather than coming up with a useless technology and looking for a use?
I can imagine a polymer that changed shape when exposed to light could be quite useful, as it could be inserted in a catheter and then deployed with a light emiting catheter.
Whatever is used to activate the catheter could be used, more directly, to activate a mechanical component without using light as an intermediary.
Seriously though, you're right, it seems that the "building something inside the body" has nothing whatsoever to do with matierials that change shape under light. So that dispenses with "use" number one. As for "use" number two (opening doors with light), WTF? Yeah, that sure sounds like something I've always wanted to do...
What real use does this technology have? I can't think of any scenario where this would be more cost-effective than existing technology. This seems like another case of technology for technology's sake. A sad waste of resources, since there are so many better things such intelligent people could be working on.
No, I'm pretty sure they would have responded that they don't want freelance journalists or independent newspapers to publish home addresses either... don't quite see your point there...