...send the next payload up "out of phase" with the oscillation caused by the first one? (its good that space elevators can swing back'n'forth btw... thats how the one on Mars is gonna avoid getting hit by Phobos).
If a post is simultaneously receiving loads of troll and insightful mods, the community is probably split along some axis. (left/right, mac/linux, sick-sense-of-humor/think-of-the-children, etc, etc). Groupthink is enforced when, for example, a well thought out conservative post is labelled "troll" because 6 liberal moderators have outvoted 4 conservative ones.
If however you could identify the prejudices of the moderators, you could build a system which didn't enforce groupthink like this. Instead, a well thought out conservative post could be labelled (say) +5 insightful/+5 conservative. A good, balanced comment would get votes from both sides (+5 insightful/neutral), out-and-out troll still gets canned, etc.
It could let you see *good* posts by people you disagree with. Or, if you're sure your mind is closed on some matter, it could let you NOT see them.
Lots of problems, of course. eg... identifying the axes, identifying the prejudices of the moderators (does the system let them tick a "conservative" box, or does the system work out for itself where the moderators are, or even what the axes are?)
Much-maligned Pluto doesn't make the grade under the new rules for a planet: "a celestial body that is in orbit around the sun, has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a... nearly round shape, and has cleared the neighborhood around its orbit."
Pluto is automatically disqualified because its oblong orbit overlaps with Neptune's.
So how does Neptune qualify? Seems to me it too has failed to clear its orbit... of Pluto!
For example people with higher testosterone levels tend to have more square faces.
Maybe you could hack womens testosterone detection algorithms simply by drawing a big square on your face - a far stronger signal than a 'real' square face could ever be.
They sent Clarkson round Laguna Seca in an NSX on Gran Turisimo 4 then sent him off to see if he could get the same time in the same car on the actual track.
Its modelled as feedback, not forcing, because it has a relatively short residency in the atmosphere ie about 10 days (vs decades or centuries for perturbations in C02 levels)
...who seemed to be at it in all the bad timelines:
PICARD: "Computer, locate Leutenant Worf"
COMPUTER: "Leutenant Worf is in the bath with Leutenant Troi"
PICARD: "Red Alert! And run a full sweep for chronoton particles..."
The original comic was partly influenced by "The Abominable Dr Phibes". I'm just hoping some of that influence comes full circle back to this movie. If Evey and V in the shadow gallery echoes Vulnavia and Phibes in Phibes' lair, just a bit, then that'll do it for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure we do. And one of those choices is: Get pissed off. Loudly. Complain. Say... Fix this shit or we're leaving.
...send the next payload up "out of phase" with the oscillation caused by the first one? (its good that space elevators can swing back'n'forth btw... thats how the one on Mars is gonna avoid getting hit by Phobos).
Just to prove to him its not his lucky day.
> Given that "Al Qaeda" is Arabic for "The Base"
Yeah, "Base" or "Foundation", hence (so i heard) Asimov's "Foundation" novel was translated into Arabic with the title "Al Qaeda"
If a post is simultaneously receiving loads of troll and insightful mods, the community is probably split along some axis. (left/right, mac/linux, sick-sense-of-humor/think-of-the-children, etc, etc). Groupthink is enforced when, for example, a well thought out conservative post is labelled "troll" because 6 liberal moderators have outvoted 4 conservative ones.
If however you could identify the prejudices of the moderators, you could build a system which didn't enforce groupthink like this. Instead, a well thought out conservative post could be labelled (say) +5 insightful/+5 conservative. A good, balanced comment would get votes from both sides (+5 insightful/neutral), out-and-out troll still gets canned, etc.
It could let you see *good* posts by people you disagree with. Or, if you're sure your mind is closed on some matter, it could let you NOT see them.
Lots of problems, of course. eg... identifying the axes, identifying the prejudices of the moderators (does the system let them tick a "conservative" box, or does the system work out for itself where the moderators are, or even what the axes are?)
OH yeah? So what about GGGGGGGGMILFs?
for "resigning" from AOL
Worth a try?
...then eventually the spam sites will actually contain the information you were looking for.
...then why doesn't he settle the argument by building one?
They sent Clarkson round Laguna Seca in an NSX on Gran Turisimo 4 then sent him off to see if he could get the same time in the same car on the actual track.
He couldn't... its too scary in real life.
One could be sent to collect a downed pilot.
Its modelled as feedback, not forcing, because it has a relatively short residency in the atmosphere ie about 10 days (vs decades or centuries for perturbations in C02 levels)
More here: http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=142
...who seemed to be at it in all the bad timelines:
PICARD: "Computer, locate Leutenant Worf"
COMPUTER: "Leutenant Worf is in the bath with Leutenant Troi"
PICARD: "Red Alert! And run a full sweep for chronoton particles..."
the market leader will be the one that is not technologically superior (*cough* Mac v. Windows, Betamax v. VHS, etc. *cough*)
Each companies is convinced that it has the inferior product.
The original comic was partly influenced by "The Abominable Dr Phibes". I'm just hoping some of that influence comes full circle back to this movie. If Evey and V in the shadow gallery echoes Vulnavia and Phibes in Phibes' lair, just a bit, then that'll do it for me.
It has shown us that special effects ought to be well done instead of looking like a 2nd grade art contest.
The daleks aren't 2nd grade art. They are a genuine 1960's design classic.