The problem is more that you basically have no control over this process. It is rather annoying to have to open up a separate program to perform these sorts of basic image optimisations and adjustments because Word is just incompetent at them.
You have to use the scientific method to cut away the parts of the meme that do nothing from the ones where the meat is.
Yes, but what this basically says is that there are some interesting things that ancient people knew but they also came up with a load of crap. The problem is that some people hang onto the crap like it were gold.
As a non-US citizen it does seem incredibly ironic to me that those who support Republican economic and social principles (small non-interfering government and minimal economic manipulation) cannot see how the Republican party is not Republican by these standards.
Snicker. Come join the 21st century why don't you?
How many revisions has the model of the atom gone through? Now you can't even quite draw it, you just write it as an equation.
Man you don't get it do you? The atom has never been anything other than math based on observations of its behaviour. More experiments -> more behaviour -> more math. The pretty drawings are just to make things easy for the non math folk.
There is a reason why they call it a "theory." It's because the guys smart enough to come up with the idea in the first place are smart enough to know they don't know enough to call it a "fact."
Of course! Because as every lay person knows a scientific theory pops into existence fully formed after a good deal of sitting about and thinking. It is much like having a theory about who took the last beer out of the fridge. The idea that somehow theories are actually reached after numerous fact giving experiments and peer review is just trying to throw people off the fact that scientists are no better than evangelists who just make up whatever crap they want before dissemenating it.
Science doesn't have the answer to everything.
And the ramblings of ancient civilizations do? It's the only proven productive method for answering ANYTHING. Questions that can't be answered by science are either subjective or probably can't be answered.
They like to say that they can't co-exist, but I disagree
You probably do so because you appear to have a woeful understanding the science and the scientific process behind the theories. It's just not possible to give creationist hypotheses the same credit because they have nothing of substance to them.
Because some religions indeed state that it DOES matter what people think now - for example, salvation through Jesus is contingent on accepting his existence before you die, not once you can confirm he's real.
Isn't evolution still based on a blind belief that someday in the past, life just magically began with a strike of lightning?
No, that's just a rather outdated hypothesis on abiogenesis.
Don't they still struggle to define what "life" is too?
You'll have to explain to me why that's a problem for evolutionary scientists in particular.
So although religion is a blind belief, in essence so is science?
Sure, if you believe that you get the same quality knowledge about the nature of the universe from asserting things about it as you would from observing it.
But to be honest if you aren't worried about writing in assembler you don't care if it is lean. It just seems like anything else is just giving people tools to be irresponsible in their jobs.
Yawn.
Seriously, are people still trotting out these arguments? Why do you think we have higher-level languages? It's not to be a test of a programmer's mettle.
It's far too late for that. Well at least it's highly unlikely since you'll need a huge amount of work just to get all the unit tests done for the current code.
The "new" Jabba is still smaller than the "old" Jabba and that's a problem.
Why? Because Jabba has, and will always be, exactly the same throughout the eons of time from the big bang forward? Irrespective of whether of not Lucas should have used that scene having a character change drastically is only a problem if you expect the Universe to be static.
Jabba's size has nothing to do with the CGI and everything to do with the film. The original scene was filmed with a stand in actor since Jabba was not yet created. Basically in order to include the original scene in the extended releases Jabba had to be smaller to accomodate the original actor's movements.
Is it only me who seems to realise that PCs are complicated beasts formed from a variety of hardware and that the behaviour of software from one to the next may vary? Because I'm getting pretty damn tired of reading all these installation stories of the form; "I installed P great, but Q was lousy," "Yeah, well I installed Q great but P was lousy!!!!"
Far less to do with P and Q and more to do with the one thing you generally can't change the behaviour of easily: the hardware.
When "hello world" in a modern language produces a binary that is tens or hundreds of K in size however, I can't help thinking that "optimization" has come to mean "optimized to waste memory and CPU time so that dealers can sell processor and memory upgrades."
Which modern language? A Java class file for a "hello world" program would be a few bytes. The only time I can think this would occur is when an executable is created that includes all the code for the static libraries used by the program. That's not the fault of the language per se, maybe just the compiler or the OS environment (Windows having the history it does has never done anything to really encourage programs to use standard shared libraries for these sorts of things whereas this is far more the norm on Linux systems).
I mean you can't possibly be suggesting that the actual business logic for "hello world" is being expanded to a few hundred Kb right?
I once had a screwed up problem with this very laptop I am typing on at the moment. The keys ended up mapped incorrectly so when I'd try to type in my password some keys didn't work and others would produce the wrong symbols - so you can imagine how frustraiting that was. Eventually I figured out that there was some crap under the keyboard or something screwing up the decoding of the matrix since I seemed to be able to rectify the mapping if I held down a key during boot. Sent it off to be repaired and they replaced the keyboard. No problems since. (Well not with the keyboard anyway).
I am not a married man and either you have a freak of a wife or you will find out very soon that women do not comprehend the world in the same way as men do.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is more that you basically have no control over this process. It is rather annoying to have to open up a separate program to perform these sorts of basic image optimisations and adjustments because Word is just incompetent at them.
Few people choose to use Windows. They just use Windows.
These Slashdotter has a girlfriend?!? jokes are as cliched as the overlords joke.
In Soviet Russia clichéd girlfriendless overlords welcome you.
You have to use the scientific method to cut away the parts of the meme that do nothing from the ones where the meat is.
Yes, but what this basically says is that there are some interesting things that ancient people knew but they also came up with a load of crap. The problem is that some people hang onto the crap like it were gold.
Evolution requires a selective pressure.
That means you need to start cutting off balls.
As a non-US citizen it does seem incredibly ironic to me that those who support Republican economic and social principles (small non-interfering government and minimal economic manipulation) cannot see how the Republican party is not Republican by these standards.
All species are intermediate or becoming exstinct.
Erm, AT&T surely?
(we use Newtonian Physics now)
Snicker. Come join the 21st century why don't you?
How many revisions has the model of the atom gone through? Now you can't even quite draw it, you just write it as an equation.
Man you don't get it do you? The atom has never been anything other than math based on observations of its behaviour. More experiments -> more behaviour -> more math. The pretty drawings are just to make things easy for the non math folk.
There is a reason why they call it a "theory." It's because the guys smart enough to come up with the idea in the first place are smart enough to know they don't know enough to call it a "fact."
Of course! Because as every lay person knows a scientific theory pops into existence fully formed after a good deal of sitting about and thinking. It is much like having a theory about who took the last beer out of the fridge. The idea that somehow theories are actually reached after numerous fact giving experiments and peer review is just trying to throw people off the fact that scientists are no better than evangelists who just make up whatever crap they want before dissemenating it.
Science doesn't have the answer to everything.
And the ramblings of ancient civilizations do? It's the only proven productive method for answering ANYTHING. Questions that can't be answered by science are either subjective or probably can't be answered.
They like to say that they can't co-exist, but I disagree
You probably do so because you appear to have a woeful understanding the science and the scientific process behind the theories. It's just not possible to give creationist hypotheses the same credit because they have nothing of substance to them.
What does it matter what people think now
Because some religions indeed state that it DOES matter what people think now - for example, salvation through Jesus is contingent on accepting his existence before you die, not once you can confirm he's real.
Isn't evolution still based on a blind belief that someday in the past, life just magically began with a strike of lightning?
No, that's just a rather outdated hypothesis on abiogenesis.
Don't they still struggle to define what "life" is too?
You'll have to explain to me why that's a problem for evolutionary scientists in particular.
So although religion is a blind belief, in essence so is science?
Sure, if you believe that you get the same quality knowledge about the nature of the universe from asserting things about it as you would from observing it.
But to be honest if you aren't worried about writing in assembler you don't care if it is lean. It just seems like anything else is just giving people tools to be irresponsible in their jobs.
Yawn.
Seriously, are people still trotting out these arguments? Why do you think we have higher-level languages? It's not to be a test of a programmer's mettle.
It's far too late for that. Well at least it's highly unlikely since you'll need a huge amount of work just to get all the unit tests done for the current code.
Hey, I see Americans who seem to have managed it by age 7.
The "new" Jabba is still smaller than the "old" Jabba and that's a problem.
Why? Because Jabba has, and will always be, exactly the same throughout the eons of time from the big bang forward? Irrespective of whether of not Lucas should have used that scene having a character change drastically is only a problem if you expect the Universe to be static.
Jabba's size has nothing to do with the CGI and everything to do with the film. The original scene was filmed with a stand in actor since Jabba was not yet created. Basically in order to include the original scene in the extended releases Jabba had to be smaller to accomodate the original actor's movements.
The 5 in Babylon 5 isn't an accident...
Is it only me who seems to realise that PCs are complicated beasts formed from a variety of hardware and that the behaviour of software from one to the next may vary? Because I'm getting pretty damn tired of reading all these installation stories of the form; "I installed P great, but Q was lousy," "Yeah, well I installed Q great but P was lousy!!!!"
Far less to do with P and Q and more to do with the one thing you generally can't change the behaviour of easily: the hardware.
I had a VCR that did just this.
When "hello world" in a modern language produces a binary that is tens or hundreds of K in size however, I can't help thinking that "optimization" has come to mean "optimized to waste memory and CPU time so that dealers can sell processor and memory upgrades."
Which modern language? A Java class file for a "hello world" program would be a few bytes. The only time I can think this would occur is when an executable is created that includes all the code for the static libraries used by the program. That's not the fault of the language per se, maybe just the compiler or the OS environment (Windows having the history it does has never done anything to really encourage programs to use standard shared libraries for these sorts of things whereas this is far more the norm on Linux systems).
I mean you can't possibly be suggesting that the actual business logic for "hello world" is being expanded to a few hundred Kb right?
If I was not from a northern climate prone to cold weather at that time of year I could get upset by the implication that there'd be snowmen about.
Politically correct? It's an amateur attempt if that's so.
I would have thought Bastille day would be more of a concern for Americans - you still hate the French right?
It would evolve DRM?
I once had a screwed up problem with this very laptop I am typing on at the moment. The keys ended up mapped incorrectly so when I'd try to type in my password some keys didn't work and others would produce the wrong symbols - so you can imagine how frustraiting that was. Eventually I figured out that there was some crap under the keyboard or something screwing up the decoding of the matrix since I seemed to be able to rectify the mapping if I held down a key during boot. Sent it off to be repaired and they replaced the keyboard. No problems since. (Well not with the keyboard anyway).
I am not a married man and either you have a freak of a wife or you will find out very soon that women do not comprehend the world in the same way as men do.