This won't be something for humanity to celebrate. If and when the day comes, then we'll have to answer the question of what happens when numbers increase but resources decrease? And the answer will be in what kind of life is possible in that world. It won't be as good as the one you have now, I assure you.
Aging may well be slowed or even stopped. This, however, does not mean that people will no longer wish to inherit something from their rich uncle Billy.
The redistribution of wealth will simply find new channels. Or re-discover some old ones.
Now, now. However tiny scars may get, fakes are still fairly easy to spot. The bigger they are, the easier it is to spot them.
Talk about Captian Obvious.
Add "Mi povas chesighi kiam mi volas.", though I know I'll get yelled at for speaking Esperanto.
Damn straight. Geeks speak lojban.
Re:Misuse of words
on
Evolving Rocks
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I no longer recall whether I read this in one of Dawkins' books or somewhere else, but it seems that organic mollecules evolved (at least in part) as a by-product of "mineral life", i.e. replicating crystals in the soil.
My terminology may be off as it is not my immediate area of expertise and I've read it a while back, but I think that this is one of the reasons Dawkins was so ready to suggest memes as another form of life.
In order to receive an ad, I have to actually request the ad (part of how HTTP works). Sure, my browser's default behavior is to request all images/flash/etc, but I can easily instruct it not to.
Out of the mouths of ACs... this is the most insightful and informative thing I've read in any discussion pertaining to ad-blocking.
Just because I sometimes want a less-intrusive browsing experience does not make me a leech.
Actually it does. Just like in torrenting, if you seed one torrent forever but refuse to seed any other torrents you use, your leeching.
In torrenting, if your ratio goes above 1.0, that is because you support leechers.
In websurfing, not downloading ads you do not intend to view helps reduce the congestion of the tubes.
Besides, if ads weren't all-pervasive, people wouldn't want to block them.
I do not, in general, block Google ads. Though I could do it in a heartbeat, I have not removed them from Gmail. They do not bother me, they are not intrusive, and sometimes they are worth a laugh. OTOH, the ads in Yahoo! Mail, which I saw when I opened it in Safari the other day, are way too intrusive and made me reach for the Adblock which wasn't there.
I have a better idea.
First we claim we own some IP in Linux and threaten to sue.
Then we wait for MS to inject several million dollars to fund our anti-Linux struggle.
Then we publish our correspondence with MS and set up a bounty fund for various features Linux is still missing.
This is not massive news as it is Late November in 2008. Meaning if IE 8 was release it would have to be released within 6 weeks. Heck it would need at least that much time in the RC levels just to make sure things are kinda going smooth.
Yeah, well, 2009 is a year that is going to be but a day shorter than this year. And the date of IE8's release is as of yet unspecified, which, if our past experiences with Microsoft are in any way significant, means that we have about a year before release. At best.
Now taking bets: which will come first - IE8 or Win7?
True, but it may be that a "cat brain" computer if it's running at 4-5x the normal human's efficiency(since we only use a few percent of our brain at any one time) might actually be as smart as a typical human.
I guess the real issue here is whether it's as capable as a cat's brain after using 100% of its capabilities, or if they are going to model a cat's brain in scale and then run that at full throttle.
We do not use a small percentage of our brains. I don't have the foggiest idea why this stupid myth perpetuates at all.
Uncertain. I don't know how Google's "permanent beta" policy would fly with Windows' "our beta is alpha, our RC is beta, and our SP1 is what we should have released".
Do you think someone could get the TSA perform random searches based on a d20 die roll? On a 1, you get searched, on a 20, you get smiled at and let through. In-between rolls just get you through, with no smile unless you also sport a nice pair of boobs.
This idea was, of course, invented by Shampoo.
I don't easily trust strangers who inexplicably trust me. I'm not easily conned. I guess I have a doubting THOMAS.
I wouldn't have fallen for it for one reason only: I would not have touched the money or the envelope with the money in it. Or the envelope I thought it had the money in it. If there is no personal information in the wallet, yet it seems loaded with money, my paranoia kicks in. If there is personal information inside, then I'd rather find the owner and hand it over.
Somehow, I'd rather earn $300 than steal $1000, though I'd give it back even without the finder's fee.
Besides, I remember American Gods and two-man cons.
You really cannot cheat an honest man. Not until you become greedy do these tricks work.
Slashdot Mirror
BeaterFS will absolutely slaughter ResiserFS. Bury it.
And BallmerFS will fucking kill GoogleFS... no, wait...
Unfortunately I tend to think of it as "Beater Eff Exx".
Now waiting for wfbtrfs, i.e. the wife-beater FS.
That's Private Perks. Private Oliver Perks.
I am Colonel Panic, halting ur systemz.
This won't be something for humanity to celebrate. If and when the day comes, then we'll have to answer the question of what happens when numbers increase but resources decrease? And the answer will be in what kind of life is possible in that world. It won't be as good as the one you have now, I assure you.
Aging may well be slowed or even stopped. This, however, does not mean that people will no longer wish to inherit something from their rich uncle Billy.
The redistribution of wealth will simply find new channels. Or re-discover some old ones.
Murders, for one, will still... occur.
Now, now. However tiny scars may get, fakes are still fairly easy to spot. The bigger they are, the easier it is to spot them.
Talk about Captian Obvious.
In Israel?
Add "Mi povas chesighi kiam mi volas.", though I know I'll get yelled at for speaking Esperanto.
Damn straight. Geeks speak lojban.
I no longer recall whether I read this in one of Dawkins' books or somewhere else, but it seems that organic mollecules evolved (at least in part) as a by-product of "mineral life", i.e. replicating crystals in the soil.
My terminology may be off as it is not my immediate area of expertise and I've read it a while back, but I think that this is one of the reasons Dawkins was so ready to suggest memes as another form of life.
In order to receive an ad, I have to actually request the ad (part of how HTTP works). Sure, my browser's default behavior is to request all images/flash/etc, but I can easily instruct it not to.
Out of the mouths of ACs... this is the most insightful and informative thing I've read in any discussion pertaining to ad-blocking.
Just because I sometimes want a less-intrusive browsing experience does not make me a leech.
Actually it does. Just like in torrenting, if you seed one torrent forever but refuse to seed any other torrents you use, your leeching.
In torrenting, if your ratio goes above 1.0, that is because you support leechers.
In websurfing, not downloading ads you do not intend to view helps reduce the congestion of the tubes.
Besides, if ads weren't all-pervasive, people wouldn't want to block them.
I do not, in general, block Google ads. Though I could do it in a heartbeat, I have not removed them from Gmail. They do not bother me, they are not intrusive, and sometimes they are worth a laugh. OTOH, the ads in Yahoo! Mail, which I saw when I opened it in Safari the other day, are way too intrusive and made me reach for the Adblock which wasn't there.
Damn, I wish i still had mod points.
On another note... The shampoo meme should just go away.
This idea was invented by Shampoo.
I have a better idea.
First we claim we own some IP in Linux and threaten to sue.
Then we wait for MS to inject several million dollars to fund our anti-Linux struggle.
Then we publish our correspondence with MS and set up a bounty fund for various features Linux is still missing.
Yeah. People are all about jam tomorrow.
Yeah, how long will it take before Google gets it right?
Dunno. How long before Gmail gets out of beta?
This is not massive news as it is Late November in 2008. Meaning if IE 8 was release it would have to be released within 6 weeks. Heck it would need at least that much time in the RC levels just to make sure things are kinda going smooth.
Yeah, well, 2009 is a year that is going to be but a day shorter than this year. And the date of IE8's release is as of yet unspecified, which, if our past experiences with Microsoft are in any way significant, means that we have about a year before release. At best.
Now taking bets: which will come first - IE8 or Win7?
True, but it may be that a "cat brain" computer if it's running at 4-5x the normal human's efficiency(since we only use a few percent of our brain at any one time) might actually be as smart as a typical human.
I guess the real issue here is whether it's as capable as a cat's brain after using 100% of its capabilities, or if they are going to model a cat's brain in scale and then run that at full throttle.
We do not use a small percentage of our brains. I don't have the foggiest idea why this stupid myth perpetuates at all.
Unfortunately, ActiveX is extremely common in corporate intranets, making it the one and only mandated browser for corporate use in a lot of places.
There is one task at my workplace that requires to be done through IE. So I have to switch computers just for that one task.
Simply marvellous.
Then again, the application was designed way back when Windows was much more of a monoculture, and Firefox was not even a gleam in the milkman's eye.
But will they still call it beta?
Uncertain. I don't know how Google's "permanent beta" policy would fly with Windows' "our beta is alpha, our RC is beta, and our SP1 is what we should have released".
Do you think someone could get the TSA perform random searches based on a d20 die roll? On a 1, you get searched, on a 20, you get smiled at and let through. In-between rolls just get you through, with no smile unless you also sport a nice pair of boobs.
This idea was, of course, invented by Shampoo.
I don't easily trust strangers who inexplicably trust me. I'm not easily conned. I guess I have a doubting THOMAS.
I wouldn't have fallen for it for one reason only: I would not have touched the money or the envelope with the money in it. Or the envelope I thought it had the money in it. If there is no personal information in the wallet, yet it seems loaded with money, my paranoia kicks in. If there is personal information inside, then I'd rather find the owner and hand it over.
Somehow, I'd rather earn $300 than steal $1000, though I'd give it back even without the finder's fee.
Besides, I remember American Gods and two-man cons.
You really cannot cheat an honest man. Not until you become greedy do these tricks work.
I'm sorry, but this idea was invented by Shampoo.
While you are indeed correct, anal retentiveness has no place in humour...
I guess it's true if all you know are fart jokes.
Are you saying that Windows 9 will be the last?
I'll drink to that.