As for your terminological points, I agree entirely. If the word measures a coherently defined and useful metric or constellation of metrics, then it's a useful word.
Actually, in human trials spanning hundreds of years and hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of subjects, it's been shown to be effective.
If that's not science, I don't know what is.
It's close. All it would take to turn that into science, is more rigorous record-keeping. It's true that we do have information spanning hundreds of years, but most of that was not collected according to a methodological discipline that was designed to prevent confirmation bias, placebo effects, and other 'anecdata' anomalies.
I ask them if acupuncture is "woo". One question, that's all. Brilliant and elegant. Acupuncture is both too poorly understood to have any real body of scientific knowledge, and yet too well-documented to not be real. I think the best skeptic response to acupunture is "it probably does work and I don't know how."
OK, I did go a bit far in saying 'secondary'. Authorship is still quite respected and central, and without attribution OSS is not OSS.
But attribution, the disclosure of authorship, is not the same thing as advertising or notoriety. Anyone who cares to learn the pedigree of a forked project should have no trouble finding out who contributed the code - if Ubuntu is only attributing Debian in the fine print, and not adding a "based on Debian" byline to their frontpage logo, none of Debian's rights are violated, and the authors can't claim to have expected any more than that.
Being a harpsichord player for 150 years I'm sad to see it relegated to being only identified in the mainstream as something that a dumbed-down pianoforte instrument is based on.
Is it about understanding Open Source? Or giving credit where credit is due?
I think a central part of the Open Source philosophy is that giving credit where it's due is secondary to the goal of developing better tools for users. This is why OSS licenses allow forks to be developed without the authorization of the person to whom credit is due.
BASIC is perfectly sane. There are clean, contextual rules which disambiguate between = the assignment operator and = the equality test.
Let's take a moment to remember that "x = 1" is only a legal BASIC statement in the first place because interpreters have been relaxed for programmers too lazy to use "Let".
The original James Bond film, Casino Royale, was a much sillier spoof on the 'international superspy' film genre than the less tongue-in-cheek films which came after it - and Bond's odd drink preference was contrived to make him sound a bit poncy. And yet now he and his drink are the broadly accepted standard of suave manliness.
hope that the act of matching the customer to a perfect snack
Hope is all they'll manage. Unfortunately human preferences don't work this way, and the only people who will consider the machine's guess to have been "right" are gonna be the people who didn't really have a preference in the first place, and are more swayed by the power of suggestion or confirmation bias.
Come to think of it, they're selling to the young Japanese public. They'll make a killing.
It sounds like it makes recommendations based on primitive demographic stereotypes. So try walking up to it in a dapper suit and with a sophisticated arch of the eyebrow.
Everything I thought I knew about civil law tells me that this is not a suit that you're allowed to file. Any lawyers around care to weigh in? Are you allowed to sue no one in particular?
Clippy: "Hey! It looks like you're trying to string some letters together unimaginatively. I can help you with: -picking some letters -putting them in a document in order -buying an English prose style guide online..."
Slashdot Mirror
As for your terminological points, I agree entirely. If the word measures a coherently defined and useful metric or constellation of metrics, then it's a useful word.
Actually, in human trials spanning hundreds of years and hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of subjects, it's been shown to be effective.
If that's not science, I don't know what is.
It's close. All it would take to turn that into science, is more rigorous record-keeping. It's true that we do have information spanning hundreds of years, but most of that was not collected according to a methodological discipline that was designed to prevent confirmation bias, placebo effects, and other 'anecdata' anomalies.
I ask them if acupuncture is "woo". One question, that's all.
Brilliant and elegant. Acupuncture is both too poorly understood to have any real body of scientific knowledge, and yet too well-documented to not be real. I think the best skeptic response to acupunture is "it probably does work and I don't know how."
or you believe that hard AI is woo, in which case the brain must be magic that we will never understand
You mean... woo?
OK, I did go a bit far in saying 'secondary'. Authorship is still quite respected and central, and without attribution OSS is not OSS.
But attribution, the disclosure of authorship, is not the same thing as advertising or notoriety. Anyone who cares to learn the pedigree of a forked project should have no trouble finding out who contributed the code - if Ubuntu is only attributing Debian in the fine print, and not adding a "based on Debian" byline to their frontpage logo, none of Debian's rights are violated, and the authors can't claim to have expected any more than that.
"Giving credit", i think, is a matter of degrees.
Being a harpsichord player for 150 years I'm sad to see it relegated to being only identified in the mainstream as something that a dumbed-down pianoforte instrument is based on.
Is it about understanding Open Source? Or giving credit where credit is due?
I think a central part of the Open Source philosophy is that giving credit where it's due is secondary to the goal of developing better tools for users. This is why OSS licenses allow forks to be developed without the authorization of the person to whom credit is due.
You're both wrong. It's MY favourite which is the best.
BASIC is perfectly sane. There are clean, contextual rules which disambiguate between = the assignment operator and = the equality test.
Let's take a moment to remember that "x = 1" is only a legal BASIC statement in the first place because interpreters have been relaxed for programmers too lazy to use "Let".
That's what almost no one gets!
The original James Bond film, Casino Royale, was a much sillier spoof on the 'international superspy' film genre than the less tongue-in-cheek films which came after it - and Bond's odd drink preference was contrived to make him sound a bit poncy. And yet now he and his drink are the broadly accepted standard of suave manliness.
What the hell.
hope that the act of matching the customer to a perfect snack
Hope is all they'll manage. Unfortunately human preferences don't work this way, and the only people who will consider the machine's guess to have been "right" are gonna be the people who didn't really have a preference in the first place, and are more swayed by the power of suggestion or confirmation bias.
Come to think of it, they're selling to the young Japanese public. They'll make a killing.
It sounds like it makes recommendations based on primitive demographic stereotypes. So try walking up to it in a dapper suit and with a sophisticated arch of the eyebrow.
Everything I thought I knew about civil law tells me that this is not a suit that you're allowed to file. Any lawyers around care to weigh in? Are you allowed to sue no one in particular?
Web-Based Private is an oxymoron
Actually, they have this thing, "cryptography" now.
glory, glory-hole allujiah!
What more obvious "dead man's switch" is there than knowing your password?
Uh, you know how key-length standards usually increase 'cause brute-forcing gets easier over time, right...?
No, they still live there. Got jobs as traffic wardens and never looked back.
a bus that can leverage existing roads.
Only obstacle to that that I can think of, is private traffic. Ban that, and buses'll be the fastest things around!
2mm is everything.
Clippy: "Hey! It looks like you're trying to string some letters together unimaginatively. I can help you with:
-picking some letters
-putting them in a document in order
-buying an English prose style guide online..."
http://www.free-soft.ro/pocket-wikipedia/pocket-wikipedia.html
It's not official, but it's fine.
"need"
They Terk er Jerbs!
C'mon now. 4channers are old hands in the art of Alt-# ascii entry.
when Atlantis boats malfunction they float to the surface.