This is some damn good thinking. Too good to work in the real world though; a lot of people would shriek themselves spitless about their 'God-given right to have children' or some such nonsense.
Personally I don't feel humans have any such 'right'. Individually, humans can embody all the qualities we hold dear - there are plenty of examples of people who are amazing and inspiring. Collectively however we are little more than greedy parasites, squirming into and befouling every aspect of this planet and its ecosystem.
It may be, but it was incredibly bad. McMillan (Lynch?) over killed him with the degenerate angle, and his baron was a sharp as a hammer. Ian McNeice was a far sharper and cunning baron in my opinion, which is much closer to the books. Lynch's baron with the preoccupation with all his little festering wounds and and disgusting nonsense was just odd to me.
You have a point there, McNeice's portrayal was much more faithful to the book. Lynch obviously took a whole lot of artistic licence but I loved it, loved it! What a towering character, a great villain to really get behind and played brilliantly IMHO.
You're quite right though, there's no escaping the fact that he wasn't really Herbert's baron.
We still have a lot to learn. We'll blow ourselves up long before we learn it, but still, there's a lot we don't know.
+5 Sad But True.
Nuclear weapons have arguably kept Humanity from going to war on a global scale again since the end of WWII. However, for the rest of us the story didn't end there. The A-Bomb Club may have started out pretty exclusive but there are a whole lot more members as of 2013 and more hopefuls are hammering at the clubhouse door wanting in.
It's well known that the push now is for smaller and smaller-yield tacnukes, ultimately serving to blur the lines between nuclear and conventional weapons. This may lead to lower resistance to the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield, which could allow a minor conflict to rapidly escalate.
Recent research posted to Slashdot made it clear that we need not experience a full-on nuclear war to suffer much of its environmental consequences. Global nuclear war may be unlikely today, but a limited exchange between (say) India and Pakistan is a potential disaster for all of us that exists well within the realms of possibility.
The most embarrassing thing about this (for me anyway) is that New Zealand is also complicit in this arrangement. As I understand it our Waihopai facility near Blenheim (attacked by activists in 2008, they were acquitted in 2010) is an important part of the surveillance programme. I expect to see a similar article about us in due course.
I jeered at the trio when I saw the original news item. At the time I called them Luddites, trespassers and vandals, unaware of the larger issue they were taking on. For shame! When the NSA scandal broke I suddenly understood what they were about and realised they were actually everyday garden-variety heroes standing up for something they believed in.
The great whites get the shit out of there when Orcas are around. Doesn't qualify as apex.
That has nothing to do with predation; the great white and the orca are both apex predators and will naturally compete (sometimes directly, as you point out) for prey.
A large part of the definition for the term 'Apex Predator' is about no other creature considering an apex predator its prey.
Oh, use your brain before rolling out the sarcasm will you? Are you seriously suggesting that Google's engineers never considered the idea of an unexpected situation arising?
These machines effectively 'see' the world in slow-motion and have a small eternity to observe, process and act. A mechanical failure (or a dropped brick) is much the same sort of problem as having to contend with a Human in another car doing something stupid.
Data-sharing will almost certainly be a feature of autonomous vehicles when they become commercially available. There's no reason to believe a Human driver would handle the brick or mechanical failure situation any better, especially if the machine gets advance warning of a problem.
Good for you, this is exactly the right way to go: vote with your feet.
My business policy is "No US travel until TSA (as we know it today) goes". I don't for one second imagine The Powers That Be give a toss but it is about the only way I can protest this outright descent into thuggery. The only alternatives such as legal inquiries, sit-ins, violent protests, guns and freedom-fighter antics all just play straight into their hands.
Sorry, "used to be a big fan" implied to me that you were opposed to it's continuance.
Fair enough. I guess I've grown disillusioned both with the lack of political will to keep this thing funded and the sheer difficulties of toroidal containment.
It's obvious to most that real-world fusion power is the beginning of the end of scarcity for Humanity and it pisses me off to no end that when push comes to shove the powers that be would rather spend our finances and effort on less helpful endeavours that maintain the status quo.
..size of Rhode Island monstrosity that runs off unicorn horns and yeti farts.
That sounds like it would be worth doing on its own merit.:-)
Fusion research has made painfully slow progress and no amount of techno-masturbation, wish fullfillment, Iron Man fantasy makes it otherwise.
It sure has, but that's not entirely down to fusion is hard, we all know it hasn't received the funding it should, yadda.
What LM Skunkworks is doing does not appear to be anything revolutionary. Their designs are a completely believable evolutionary progression of the current thinking. Seriously, how hard is it to imagine one of these clever scientists having a lightbulb appear over his or her head, turning to a colleague and asking "I wonder how a cylinder might work?" Spheromaks already exist so it isn't much of a logical leap (not detracting in any way from their great work.)
Of course to the faithful, it's always just around the corner and there are an endless stream of excuses why it wasn't, when looking retrospectively. It's like talking to a doomsday evangelist. "Fusion is Near! Repent ye lost souls of carbon!"
There's no need for faith in Science, only faith in the Scientific Method. Even that is just bad poetry; there is already plenty of obvious evidence of the Scientific Method's efficacy.
Although I used to be a big fan of the work, I'm pretty sure I'll never see a commercial reactor born of the ITER project in my lifetime.
That's no reason to abandon it.
I'm not sure why my conclusion read that way to you, perhaps I should have worded it differently.
I believe we need to pursue all reasonable avenues as far as fusion research goes. ITER has already taught us much, has a great deal more to teach us yet and the money spent on the various fusion programmes is peanuts next to the cash pissed away on the War On Some Drugs and the War On Terr'sm amongst others.
It wont be a full scale operating commercial reactor.
It will still be a PULSED research reactor with no generators for electric power generation attached.
Err, sorry - I was referring to the LM experimental reactor I linked to, not ITER's tokamak.
Although I used to be a big fan of the work, I'm pretty sure I'll never see a commercial reactor born of the ITER project in my lifetime.
They claim they'll have a 100 MW reactor ready in 4 years. Fundamental research kept secret from everyone else in the field, or utter bullshit - which do you think is more likely?
Your scepticism is the product of a healthy mind. Were it anyone other than Skunkworks or one of the NASA labs I think my own bullshit-detector would be have squealed.
I do take comfort in their relatively conservative estimate that another full decade of development will be needed to achieve commercialisation following a successful proof-of-concept in 2017. At least it won't be long before we'll know if this is fact or unicorn farts.
You can't replace the $1 bills, how will we tip the strippers?
A good question. Here in NZ we've long since switched to plastic notes and $1 and $2 coins and I'd say it has been well received. Just looking at a pair of $2 coins from my wallet I can't see any real difference in wear between one minted in 2003 versus the 1990 model. The designs may be different but their lustre is much the same.
Tipping isn't a big part of Kiwi culture (yet?) but the girls are as well looked-after here as anywhere. Simply flip out a few extra notes as you pay your entry fee - or, more likely, swipe your EFTPOS card - and you'll be given a commensurate number of, ahem, "pussy dollars" to show your appreciation.
When people go to Google they often don't actually KNOW the question yet, all they have is something they want to know about. The real questions come later.
Well spotted - this is the sharp edge of Google's usefulness for me but I doubt I'd have ever put my finger on it, yet it was there all along. With that in mind I'm chuckling that one of my favourite quotes hasn't been correct for a long time now:
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. Pablo Picasso
Regular Guinness strikes me as stout for non-stout drinkers. Burnt to make it seem like more then it is. The 'Starbucks' of beers.
For my money, yours is an absolutely spot-on assessment of Guinness. I love a good dark beer but Guinness.. well, it certainly looks the part. It's as dark as pitch (how I wanted to say pitchblende) and adorned with a smooth, sweet-looking head and all, but when it comes to lips-meet-glass it's all mouth and no trousers. Christ, I've had tastier water!
Quite a shame really as the only beers that deliver on their visual promise (IMHO etc.) are the Trappists. Blessed art the monks with much time on their hands.
I appreciate your reasoned response and I apologise for my outburst, I failed to understand the thrust of your original post.
However, I still don't see how or why you consider homosexuality a deviant behaviour when it has been known as a normal part of mammalian life for some time now. That said I'd rather a biologist were here to weigh in as I'm only Wikipedia-qualified on the topic. Are you out there Samantha?
Biology is obvious, Tab-A goes into Slot-B and that makes sense to everyone. Perhaps you feel that using these components in any combination other than the aforementioned is a deviation from original purpose; if so, then we are probably just arguing semantics rather than fundamentally disagreeing. "Deviant behaviour" in our society has somewhat stronger connotation than 'deviation from the norm' does in discussions about statistics.
Because the fucking-based aspect is the only difference between a gay and a straight, and it is indeed deviant behavior. Personally, I feel sorry for gays.
Who died and made you God? Because whomever it was forgot to tell you that homosexuality isn't confined to Homo Sapiens Sapiens and has been going on since sex began.
Deviant behaviour, indeed. What a fucking arrogant thing to say.
Homosexuals reject procreation. That's not an intellectual position to take. People have both a civic and moral duty to procreate.
If that is your genuine feeling then please allow me to offer a hearty "fuck you". Who the fucking hell are you to tell me I have a moral and civic duty to procreate?
Given the shithole we're busily making out of our little planet Earth, I see it as my moral and civic duty to NOT procreate.
Funny thing is, the western concept of teenager may be exasperating the issue.
Kids that get to experience responsibility early rarely develop the "teenage" phase.
Your point (however valid) was lost in the howls of laughter precipitated by your most ingenuous substitution of a word that sounds vaguely similar to the one you were groping for. Thanks for the giggle!:)
I just don't understand how people have such tunnel vision. I have no problem noticing movement or light changes
Of course you don't understand - you're not a complete fucking retard.
Some will call me a troll for simply stating this impolite truth, but I don't think there are many people on this site (myself included) who could really imagine living life on the low slope of the bell curve. Seriously, the kind of people that cause problems with their texting behaviour are just thick, pig-headed or (more frequently) both.
We all make little mistakes from time to time, but you just can't help someone who can habitually lose themselves whilst at the lights by texting, fiddling with the radio, balancing a make-up dish etc, and somehow forget to keep an eye on the traffic. It's just common sense.
Slashdot Mirror
This is some damn good thinking. Too good to work in the real world though; a lot of people would shriek themselves spitless about their 'God-given right to have children' or some such nonsense.
Personally I don't feel humans have any such 'right'. Individually, humans can embody all the qualities we hold dear - there are plenty of examples of people who are amazing and inspiring. Collectively however we are little more than greedy parasites, squirming into and befouling every aspect of this planet and its ecosystem.
It may be, but it was incredibly bad. McMillan (Lynch?) over killed him with the degenerate angle, and his baron was a sharp as a hammer. Ian McNeice was a far sharper and cunning baron in my opinion, which is much closer to the books. Lynch's baron with the preoccupation with all his little festering wounds and and disgusting nonsense was just odd to me.
You have a point there, McNeice's portrayal was much more faithful to the book. Lynch obviously took a whole lot of artistic licence but I loved it, loved it! What a towering character, a great villain to really get behind and played brilliantly IMHO.
You're quite right though, there's no escaping the fact that he wasn't really Herbert's baron.
Your experience with the Dune movie was much the same as my own and you certainly captured the emotional appeal very nicely. Oh BTW this:
Oh Baron Harkonen, what a magnificent fucking pig you were!
..is a crowning moment of awesome. Kenneth McMillan's Baron is one of my most treasured memories as a child. :)
We still have a lot to learn. We'll blow ourselves up long before we learn it, but still, there's a lot we don't know.
+5 Sad But True.
Nuclear weapons have arguably kept Humanity from going to war on a global scale again since the end of WWII. However, for the rest of us the story didn't end there. The A-Bomb Club may have started out pretty exclusive but there are a whole lot more members as of 2013 and more hopefuls are hammering at the clubhouse door wanting in.
It's well known that the push now is for smaller and smaller-yield tacnukes, ultimately serving to blur the lines between nuclear and conventional weapons. This may lead to lower resistance to the use of nuclear weapons on the battlefield, which could allow a minor conflict to rapidly escalate.
Recent research posted to Slashdot made it clear that we need not experience a full-on nuclear war to suffer much of its environmental consequences. Global nuclear war may be unlikely today, but a limited exchange between (say) India and Pakistan is a potential disaster for all of us that exists well within the realms of possibility.
The most embarrassing thing about this (for me anyway) is that New Zealand is also complicit in this arrangement. As I understand it our Waihopai facility near Blenheim (attacked by activists in 2008, they were acquitted in 2010) is an important part of the surveillance programme. I expect to see a similar article about us in due course.
I jeered at the trio when I saw the original news item. At the time I called them Luddites, trespassers and vandals, unaware of the larger issue they were taking on. For shame! When the NSA scandal broke I suddenly understood what they were about and realised they were actually everyday garden-variety heroes standing up for something they believed in.
The great whites get the shit out of there when Orcas are around. Doesn't qualify as apex.
That has nothing to do with predation; the great white and the orca are both apex predators and will naturally compete (sometimes directly, as you point out) for prey.
A large part of the definition for the term 'Apex Predator' is about no other creature considering an apex predator its prey.
Oh, use your brain before rolling out the sarcasm will you? Are you seriously suggesting that Google's engineers never considered the idea of an unexpected situation arising?
These machines effectively 'see' the world in slow-motion and have a small eternity to observe, process and act. A mechanical failure (or a dropped brick) is much the same sort of problem as having to contend with a Human in another car doing something stupid.
Data-sharing will almost certainly be a feature of autonomous vehicles when they become commercially available. There's no reason to believe a Human driver would handle the brick or mechanical failure situation any better, especially if the machine gets advance warning of a problem.
Good for you, this is exactly the right way to go: vote with your feet.
My business policy is "No US travel until TSA (as we know it today) goes". I don't for one second imagine The Powers That Be give a toss but it is about the only way I can protest this outright descent into thuggery. The only alternatives such as legal inquiries, sit-ins, violent protests, guns and freedom-fighter antics all just play straight into their hands.
Sorry, "used to be a big fan" implied to me that you were opposed to it's continuance.
Fair enough. I guess I've grown disillusioned both with the lack of political will to keep this thing funded and the sheer difficulties of toroidal containment.
It's obvious to most that real-world fusion power is the beginning of the end of scarcity for Humanity and it pisses me off to no end that when push comes to shove the powers that be would rather spend our finances and effort on less helpful endeavours that maintain the status quo.
..size of Rhode Island monstrosity that runs off unicorn horns and yeti farts.
That sounds like it would be worth doing on its own merit. :-)
Fusion research has made painfully slow progress and no amount of techno-masturbation, wish fullfillment, Iron Man fantasy makes it otherwise.
It sure has, but that's not entirely down to fusion is hard, we all know it hasn't received the funding it should, yadda.
What LM Skunkworks is doing does not appear to be anything revolutionary. Their designs are a completely believable evolutionary progression of the current thinking. Seriously, how hard is it to imagine one of these clever scientists having a lightbulb appear over his or her head, turning to a colleague and asking "I wonder how a cylinder might work?" Spheromaks already exist so it isn't much of a logical leap (not detracting in any way from their great work.)
Of course to the faithful, it's always just around the corner and there are an endless stream of excuses why it wasn't, when looking retrospectively. It's like talking to a doomsday evangelist. "Fusion is Near! Repent ye lost souls of carbon!"
There's no need for faith in Science, only faith in the Scientific Method. Even that is just bad poetry; there is already plenty of obvious evidence of the Scientific Method's efficacy.
Although I used to be a big fan of the work, I'm pretty sure I'll never see a commercial reactor born of the ITER project in my lifetime.
That's no reason to abandon it.
I'm not sure why my conclusion read that way to you, perhaps I should have worded it differently.
I believe we need to pursue all reasonable avenues as far as fusion research goes. ITER has already taught us much, has a great deal more to teach us yet and the money spent on the various fusion programmes is peanuts next to the cash pissed away on the War On Some Drugs and the War On Terr'sm amongst others.
It wont be a full scale operating commercial reactor. It will still be a PULSED research reactor with no generators for electric power generation attached.
Err, sorry - I was referring to the LM experimental reactor I linked to, not ITER's tokamak.
Although I used to be a big fan of the work, I'm pretty sure I'll never see a commercial reactor born of the ITER project in my lifetime.
They claim they'll have a 100 MW reactor ready in 4 years. Fundamental research kept secret from everyone else in the field, or utter bullshit - which do you think is more likely?
Your scepticism is the product of a healthy mind. Were it anyone other than Skunkworks or one of the NASA labs I think my own bullshit-detector would be have squealed.
I do take comfort in their relatively conservative estimate that another full decade of development will be needed to achieve commercialisation following a successful proof-of-concept in 2017. At least it won't be long before we'll know if this is fact or unicorn farts.
We should have scrapped the whole thing long ago.
Personally I'm very glad Lockheed-Martin don't share your defeatist attitude.
A fully operational commercial reactor by 2027? Sounds like progress to me.
You can't replace the $1 bills, how will we tip the strippers?
A good question. Here in NZ we've long since switched to plastic notes and $1 and $2 coins and I'd say it has been well received. Just looking at a pair of $2 coins from my wallet I can't see any real difference in wear between one minted in 2003 versus the 1990 model. The designs may be different but their lustre is much the same.
Tipping isn't a big part of Kiwi culture (yet?) but the girls are as well looked-after here as anywhere. Simply flip out a few extra notes as you pay your entry fee - or, more likely, swipe your EFTPOS card - and you'll be given a commensurate number of, ahem, "pussy dollars" to show your appreciation.
When people go to Google they often don't actually KNOW the question yet, all they have is something they want to know about. The real questions come later.
Well spotted - this is the sharp edge of Google's usefulness for me but I doubt I'd have ever put my finger on it, yet it was there all along. With that in mind I'm chuckling that one of my favourite quotes hasn't been correct for a long time now:
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
Pablo Picasso
Regular Guinness strikes me as stout for non-stout drinkers. Burnt to make it seem like more then it is. The 'Starbucks' of beers.
For my money, yours is an absolutely spot-on assessment of Guinness. I love a good dark beer but Guinness.. well, it certainly looks the part. It's as dark as pitch (how I wanted to say pitchblende) and adorned with a smooth, sweet-looking head and all, but when it comes to lips-meet-glass it's all mouth and no trousers. Christ, I've had tastier water!
Quite a shame really as the only beers that deliver on their visual promise (IMHO etc.) are the Trappists. Blessed art the monks with much time on their hands.
Bock-style lager was originally designed to be a meal replacement.
Alcohol is at the top of the Healthy Food Pyramid for a reason! :)
Ahh didn't see it was 300 Mev *per meter*. Small detail, thanks!
This masterful demonstration of The Save reminds me of the way a cat lands on its feet no matter how it is thro^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfalls.
I appreciate your reasoned response and I apologise for my outburst, I failed to understand the thrust of your original post.
However, I still don't see how or why you consider homosexuality a deviant behaviour when it has been known as a normal part of mammalian life for some time now. That said I'd rather a biologist were here to weigh in as I'm only Wikipedia-qualified on the topic. Are you out there Samantha?
Biology is obvious, Tab-A goes into Slot-B and that makes sense to everyone. Perhaps you feel that using these components in any combination other than the aforementioned is a deviation from original purpose; if so, then we are probably just arguing semantics rather than fundamentally disagreeing. "Deviant behaviour" in our society has somewhat stronger connotation than 'deviation from the norm' does in discussions about statistics.
Because the fucking-based aspect is the only difference between a gay and a straight, and it is indeed deviant behavior. Personally, I feel sorry for gays.
Who died and made you God? Because whomever it was forgot to tell you that homosexuality isn't confined to Homo Sapiens Sapiens and has been going on since sex began.
Deviant behaviour, indeed. What a fucking arrogant thing to say.
Homosexuals reject procreation. That's not an intellectual position to take. People have both a civic and moral duty to procreate.
If that is your genuine feeling then please allow me to offer a hearty "fuck you". Who the fucking hell are you to tell me I have a moral and civic duty to procreate?
Given the shithole we're busily making out of our little planet Earth, I see it as my moral and civic duty to NOT procreate.
Funny thing is, the western concept of teenager may be exasperating the issue.
Kids that get to experience responsibility early rarely develop the "teenage" phase.
Your point (however valid) was lost in the howls of laughter precipitated by your most ingenuous substitution of a word that sounds vaguely similar to the one you were groping for. Thanks for the giggle! :)
I just don't understand how people have such tunnel vision. I have no problem noticing movement or light changes
Of course you don't understand - you're not a complete fucking retard.
Some will call me a troll for simply stating this impolite truth, but I don't think there are many people on this site (myself included) who could really imagine living life on the low slope of the bell curve. Seriously, the kind of people that cause problems with their texting behaviour are just thick, pig-headed or (more frequently) both.
We all make little mistakes from time to time, but you just can't help someone who can habitually lose themselves whilst at the lights by texting, fiddling with the radio, balancing a make-up dish etc, and somehow forget to keep an eye on the traffic. It's just common sense.
..outsourcing, check. Golden parachute, check. Smoldering wreckage in the rear view mirror, check. Mission completed.
Sometimes I find myself wondering why they need a golden parachute when they're so obviously failing upwards...