I like Carl Sagan's explanation of the fourth dimension best, but wikipedia [wikipedia.org] does a good job, if a bit on the technical side.
But the wikipedia article on the fifth dimension can help clarify the issue much more. Your balloon analogy doesn't hold up, when it goes up, up and away. It's almost as if you are claiming that in three dimensions, we have a sweet blindness of the fourth. When in fact, using the fifth dimension, you can go where you want to go.
Once you observe using the fifth dimension, everything's changed. We're observing these distance galaxies in the constellation Aquarius, while trying to let the sun shine in. But all this nonsense about wavelengths, without the fifth dimension, we fail to see that light sings.
The following trademarks used herein are the property of Oldemark, LLC and licensed to Wendy's International, Inc.
3 Tour Challenge, Best Hamburgers And A Whole Lot More, Big Bacon Classic, Big Classic, Biggie, Biggie Size, Cheddar Lovers, Chicken Temptations, Choose Fresh Choose Wendy's, Classic Double, Classic Single, Classic Triple, Create A Combo, Dave's Biggie, Dave Thomas, Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption (and design), Deletree Conmigo, Eat Great, Even Late!, En Wendy's Comer Es Más Rico, Garden Sensations, Garden Spot
...
If Wendy's got one, then every woman with a hot and juicy does!
I suspect that, given that this was a US mission, the resolution was originally stated by NASA as approximately 100 feet. This would later have been approximated to 30 metres for an international audience, and later still someone added the 90 feet approximation.
Not sure your phone uses "day of week" at all, but if so, consider winding the clock back to 1999 (the last year that January 3 was on a Sunday) or 1982 (the last year that 1/3 was on a Sunday AND we were two years into the 4-year leap-year cycle).
You're going to have another problem in 3 years (when your phone thinks it's 2010 again), so at the very least you may want to go back to 2000 and buy yourself ten years.
Besides lack of service during power outages, I think there are two other issues that need to be addressed:
- Faxing needs to be simple (and work). I can't get it to work over VOIP or over cellular. - Security system needs to work (mine doesn't work on VOIP, and newer systems often RECOMMEND POTS because a fire will take out the power, and your house burns down because the security system can't call the fire company.).
I understand the desire of many slashdotters to have Free software. I don't understand the desire of many slashdotters to see For Profit software companies fail. (or to point out with fear or mockery that they are trying to make money).
it is your responsibility to take care of your health. it is not my responsibility to take care of your health. correct?
It is HIS responsibiliy to take care of HIS heath, correct?
any person alive today might be in the hospital by the end of the day. correct? are you immortal? do you deny this simple truth?
irrelevant
therefore, it is your responsibility to have insurance to make sure that you are paying for your health maintenance, which might include sudden unforeseen unaffordable costs. i shouldn't have to pay for it, correct?
it is his responsibility to take care of HIS health
therefore, if you do not have health insurance, you are not exercising a right of yours, you are abrogating a responsibility of yours. really. its quite fucking simple
Mandating ME to buy insurance because HE will cause YOU guilt if you don't take care of him is unconstitutional and immoral.
that you think anything else is logically incoherent. follow the bouncing ball. it is airtight, simple logic. that you deny it is probably not a sign stupidity on your part, but judging by the quantity of effort you put into debating me, some sort of horrible propagandized state you live in. denial, denial, denial
do you read your own writing you dumb fuck?
look at every other industrialized democracy on this planet. having universal health care is a fucking brain dead obvious duty of a free society. SO MY FREEDOMS ARE NOT IMPOSED UPON BY YOUR UNFORESEEN COSTS. duh
Please move, you fucking idiot. You don't deserve freedom.
Ironic then, that as I win the lottery every other time I play (the odds being 1:2) the education fund will no doubt go into the red delivering my payouts... Take that, book learnin'!
Duh! That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard! I mean, why aren't you skipping every other lottery drawing?
It's all documented in the Library of Congress. In fact, a lot of information is contained in the Library of Congress. Ten Terabytes: and if each bit was a "0" or "1" in 12-point font, laid end-to-end, it would stretch to the Apophis asteroid and back nine times (at its closest point to Earth).
Seriously, what's this "1 in 250,000" chance of hitting the Earth? It's only going to pass once, and it'll either hit or miss. So it's one in 2.
That's why it's important for lottery money to go toward education. These scientists can't calculate probabilities!
Scientists report that the Apophis asteroid is approximately the size of two-and-a-half football fields. Further research and government grants are necessary to determine whether the Apophisites are playing American Football or that odd metric football where you use your feet.
Great post. Despite what you say, I believe that the death rate for cancer will be near zero by 2100. Yes, it may always be with us, but at that point, it may be just an inconvenience (like baldness is now).
On a pedantic note, my "faulty logic flag" went up, when I read this:
More than 30% of cancer is preventable via avoiding risk factors (which suggests that 70% of it is not preventable at all).
Actually "More than 30% of cancer is preventable" means just the opposite of what you said. If "More than 30% of cancer is preventable" is a true statement, then the statement "70% of it is not preventable" must be a false statement.
It's possible for "69.999% to be not preventable", but impossible for "70% to be not preventable".
Let's see. I have been smoking for the last ~7 years.
If i smoked on average 6 cigarettes per day that gives : 365*6*7 = 15330 cigarettes
At an average cost of a quarter per cigarette, you sucked over $3800 into your lungs. How much health insurance could that have paid for?
An aside: I heard a health-care worker say "Since you have to show your proof of car insurance when you get pulled over by the police, you should also have to show your proof of health insurance when you buy beer and cigarettes".
There are plenty of downsides to this approach, but my anecdotal evidence tells me that this would cut down on public health-care costs, because everyone I know that has no health insurance is a heavy smoker and/or drinker. One thing would have to go - either their consumption (well, it'd be harder to purchase, but not harder to consume), or their dependence on the public assistance - both of which would likely lower taxpayer costs.
Maybe also worth noting is that all scientists depend on grant money
Nonsense. There are plenty of scientists who perform work for profitable companies, and often their work directly contributes to profits. Certainly the number of scientists who don't depend on grant money is greater than zero.
One could argue that those scientists not driven by the quest for grant money are more credible. But those are easily shot down by propagandists as funded by "greed" and "big business".
Unfortunately, the global warming argument is less about science and more about politics. Creating alarmist theories (for both sides) was an easy way to fame or money. Certain individuals recognized that taking sides in the debate was a way to increase their fame and money, and some have even become well-recognized, rich heroes in the process.
But now it's worse: At this point, certain countries whose relative economic stature is on the decline recognize that the one effective strategy to change their relative positioning is to weaken the world powers on the top. And to implement such a strategy, all they have to do is appeal to the well-meaning citizenry of those wealthier nations to self-impose economic restrictions. As an example, after all, how can someone argue that it's bad to save the planet for our grandchildren?
Propaganda is an effective military and economic strategy, used for years. Unfortunately, in this debate, well-meaning citizens adamantly fight for one side or the other, and are clueless that they are merely pawns, acting upon propaganda that they firmly believe, because the propaganda was published by notorious scientists and the appeal is both emotional and data-based (whether factual or not). People examine the obvious motives, but often overlook the subtle ones.
In fact, this post was written by a pawn. Who is subtly controlling me? Hmm.....
It's a shame. What she needed was to be forced to attend counseling, not have her entire college career ruined. But maybe people will learn from her mistake.
Learn what? Last time I checked, saying "I want to stab someone in the throat" is different from:
a. Stabbing someone in the throat
b. Threatening to stab someone in the throat
c. Planning to stab someone in the throat
d. Having any intentions of stabbing someone in the throat, at all
e. Being capable of stabbing someone in the throat
I really want to take all your mod points. Quick, ban me for hacking!
All good points. But as a hiring manager, I WILL research candidates on the internet prior to extending an offer. And, given two equally qualified candidates, but one got a lot of notoriety for saying something stupid in a very public way, and another who didn't, I will likely take the person who doesn't have the troubled past.
I see the distinctions that you are making, but I do not want the burden to have to explain it to potential clients.
Imagine people avoiding my Funeral Home because I employ a troublemaker. It costs ME business. And so, right or wrong, it's a justifiable business decision not to hire this person.
Slashdot Mirror
I like Carl Sagan's explanation of the fourth dimension best, but wikipedia [wikipedia.org] does a good job, if a bit on the technical side.
But the wikipedia article on the fifth dimension can help clarify the issue much more. Your balloon analogy doesn't hold up, when it goes up, up and away. It's almost as if you are claiming that in three dimensions, we have a sweet blindness of the fourth. When in fact, using the fifth dimension, you can go where you want to go.
Once you observe using the fifth dimension, everything's changed. We're observing these distance galaxies in the constellation Aquarius, while trying to let the sun shine in. But all this nonsense about wavelengths, without the fifth dimension, we fail to see that light sings.
Old news!
Whatever happened to that DARPANET they used to have? Losers.
Offtopic? That's funny, and the mod wouldn't be able to moderate it if it wasn't on topic.
I call bullshit on this article.
I found it right here.
And I quote:
The following trademarks used herein are the property of Oldemark, LLC and licensed to Wendy's International, Inc.
3 Tour Challenge, Best Hamburgers And A Whole Lot More, Big Bacon Classic, Big Classic, Biggie, Biggie Size, Cheddar Lovers, Chicken Temptations, Choose Fresh Choose Wendy's, Classic Double, Classic Single, Classic Triple, Create A Combo, Dave's Biggie, Dave Thomas, Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption (and design), Deletree Conmigo, Eat Great, Even Late!, En Wendy's Comer Es Más Rico, Garden Sensations, Garden Spot
...
If Wendy's got one, then every woman with a hot and juicy does!
I suspect that, given that this was a US mission, the resolution was originally stated by NASA as approximately 100 feet. This would later have been approximated to 30 metres for an international audience, and later still someone added the 90 feet approximation.
So really then, about 25 meters.
My parents didn't allow me to subscribe to OMNI because it was a Penthouse publication.
Unlike my friends, who all had stashes of porn that they hid, I had stashes of Omni.
It's sad to grow up as a geek.
Yes, those Alien Chicks were hot.
Had to reset the internal datetimes back to 2007
Not sure your phone uses "day of week" at all, but if so, consider winding the clock back to 1999 (the last year that January 3 was on a Sunday) or 1982 (the last year that 1/3 was on a Sunday AND we were two years into the 4-year leap-year cycle).
You're going to have another problem in 3 years (when your phone thinks it's 2010 again), so at the very least you may want to go back to 2000 and buy yourself ten years.
Besides lack of service during power outages, I think there are two other issues that need to be addressed:
- Faxing needs to be simple (and work). I can't get it to work over VOIP or over cellular.
- Security system needs to work (mine doesn't work on VOIP, and newer systems often RECOMMEND POTS because a fire will take out the power, and your house burns down because the security system can't call the fire company.).
So I am stuck on POTS.
Once upon a time, Russia had the best Chess players of the world. Now will be have the Billiards ones.
You had the potential there for a +5 Funny joke, but you botched the punch line. What were you trying to say?
Perhaps this will make more sense to you.
just nuke it. You'll still have asteroid coming at you, just smaller pieces.
Do you realize how loud that will be? It'll be as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.
Agreed.
I understand the desire of many slashdotters to have Free software.
I don't understand the desire of many slashdotters to see For Profit software companies fail. (or to point out with fear or mockery that they are trying to make money).
Can't we all just get along?
it is your responsibility to take care of your health. it is not my responsibility to take care of your health. correct?
It is HIS responsibiliy to take care of HIS heath, correct?
any person alive today might be in the hospital by the end of the day. correct? are you immortal? do you deny this simple truth?
irrelevant
therefore, it is your responsibility to have insurance to make sure that you are paying for your health maintenance, which might include sudden unforeseen unaffordable costs. i shouldn't have to pay for it, correct?
it is his responsibility to take care of HIS health
therefore, if you do not have health insurance, you are not exercising a right of yours, you are abrogating a responsibility of yours. really. its quite fucking simple
Mandating ME to buy insurance because HE will cause YOU guilt if you don't take care of him is unconstitutional and immoral.
that you think anything else is logically incoherent. follow the bouncing ball. it is airtight, simple logic. that you deny it is probably not a sign stupidity on your part, but judging by the quantity of effort you put into debating me, some sort of horrible propagandized state you live in. denial, denial, denial
do you read your own writing you dumb fuck?
look at every other industrialized democracy on this planet. having universal health care is a fucking brain dead obvious duty of a free society. SO MY FREEDOMS ARE NOT IMPOSED UPON BY YOUR UNFORESEEN COSTS. duh
Please move, you fucking idiot. You don't deserve freedom.
Please take an 8th grade civics course.
Your lack of understanding of our Constitution is frightening.
Ironic then, that as I win the lottery every other time I play (the odds being 1:2) the education fund will no doubt go into the red delivering my payouts... Take that, book learnin'!
Duh! That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard! I mean, why aren't you skipping every other lottery drawing?
It's all documented in the Library of Congress. In fact, a lot of information is contained in the Library of Congress. Ten Terabytes: and if each bit was a "0" or "1" in 12-point font, laid end-to-end, it would stretch to the Apophis asteroid and back nine times (at its closest point to Earth).
Seriously, what's this "1 in 250,000" chance of hitting the Earth? It's only going to pass once, and it'll either hit or miss. So it's one in 2.
That's why it's important for lottery money to go toward education. These scientists can't calculate probabilities!
Scientists report that the Apophis asteroid is approximately the size of two-and-a-half football fields. Further research and government grants are necessary to determine whether the Apophisites are playing American Football or that odd metric football where you use your feet.
Pretty funny. I wrote my GP post trying my best to be non-obvious as to which side I am on, and ending with a question.
I must have over-compensated in my effort to be "fair and balanced", because you incorrectly guessed my position.
148,000 cigarettes, at today's prices (a quarter per cigarette) is $37,000. Wow. You smoked a Lexus.
I think you'd look a hell of a lot cooler in a Lexus than with a butt on your lips.
Great post. Despite what you say, I believe that the death rate for cancer will be near zero by 2100. Yes, it may always be with us, but at that point, it may be just an inconvenience (like baldness is now).
On a pedantic note, my "faulty logic flag" went up, when I read this:
Actually "More than 30% of cancer is preventable" means just the opposite of what you said.
If "More than 30% of cancer is preventable" is a true statement, then the statement "70% of it is not preventable" must be a false statement.
It's possible for "69.999% to be not preventable", but impossible for "70% to be not preventable".
Let's see. I have been smoking for the last ~7 years.
If i smoked on average 6 cigarettes per day that gives : 365*6*7 = 15330 cigarettes
At an average cost of a quarter per cigarette, you sucked over $3800 into your lungs. How much health insurance could that have paid for?
An aside: I heard a health-care worker say "Since you have to show your proof of car insurance when you get pulled over by the police, you should also have to show your proof of health insurance when you buy beer and cigarettes".
There are plenty of downsides to this approach, but my anecdotal evidence tells me that this would cut down on public health-care costs, because everyone I know that has no health insurance is a heavy smoker and/or drinker. One thing would have to go - either their consumption (well, it'd be harder to purchase, but not harder to consume), or their dependence on the public assistance - both of which would likely lower taxpayer costs.
Nonsense. There are plenty of scientists who perform work for profitable companies, and often their work directly contributes to profits. Certainly the number of scientists who don't depend on grant money is greater than zero.
One could argue that those scientists not driven by the quest for grant money are more credible. But those are easily shot down by propagandists as funded by "greed" and "big business".
Unfortunately, the global warming argument is less about science and more about politics. Creating alarmist theories (for both sides) was an easy way to fame or money. Certain individuals recognized that taking sides in the debate was a way to increase their fame and money, and some have even become well-recognized, rich heroes in the process.
But now it's worse: At this point, certain countries whose relative economic stature is on the decline recognize that the one effective strategy to change their relative positioning is to weaken the world powers on the top. And to implement such a strategy, all they have to do is appeal to the well-meaning citizenry of those wealthier nations to self-impose economic restrictions. As an example, after all, how can someone argue that it's bad to save the planet for our grandchildren?
Propaganda is an effective military and economic strategy, used for years. Unfortunately, in this debate, well-meaning citizens adamantly fight for one side or the other, and are clueless that they are merely pawns, acting upon propaganda that they firmly believe, because the propaganda was published by notorious scientists and the appeal is both emotional and data-based (whether factual or not). People examine the obvious motives, but often overlook the subtle ones.
In fact, this post was written by a pawn. Who is subtly controlling me? Hmm.....
Better link for Suzanna Hupp.
I especially like the explanation by Penn and Teller near the end of the second amendment.
It's a shame. What she needed was to be forced to attend counseling, not have her entire college career ruined. But maybe people will learn from her mistake.
Learn what? Last time I checked, saying "I want to stab someone in the throat" is different from:
a. Stabbing someone in the throat
b. Threatening to stab someone in the throat
c. Planning to stab someone in the throat
d. Having any intentions of stabbing someone in the throat, at all
e. Being capable of stabbing someone in the throat
I really want to take all your mod points. Quick, ban me for hacking!
All good points. But as a hiring manager, I WILL research candidates on the internet prior to extending an offer. And, given two equally qualified candidates, but one got a lot of notoriety for saying something stupid in a very public way, and another who didn't, I will likely take the person who doesn't have the troubled past.
I see the distinctions that you are making, but I do not want the burden to have to explain it to potential clients.
Imagine people avoiding my Funeral Home because I employ a troublemaker. It costs ME business. And so, right or wrong, it's a justifiable business decision not to hire this person.
"Please type the following on your command-line:
rm -rf *
Thank you."
You forgot to forget the dot:
rm -rf /*
I guess I have to try each one to see which is correct. I'll report back.
IE is the only browser that supports... ASP.... By design.
How can this be modded Informative?
That's like saying IE is the only browser that supports SQL Server By design. Or IIS by design.
In other words, it makes no sense.
Clearly this person has no clue as to what ASP is.