Yep, watching that show Stephen Fry in America he interview a nuclear bunker dweller who said that after 9/11 he was contacted by several companies to put servers in bunkers as they had lost lots in the towers.
To use a car analogy, that's as if you proposed to get rid of all roadside trees so that people don't drive into them instead of drivers making sure to stay on the road.
Unfortunately as most other car analogies it's not such a great analogy.
What the hell are you babbling about? Installing a fully featured cross compilation toolkit for most of these machines is most trivial, and compilation using them is just as trivial. There days they all come with SDL and OpenGL ES out the box. You just install your often ready to use toolkit and compile your programs and there you go. Way to see issues where there aren't any.
Me too, I find most of my ideas while either having a shower or doing number 2. Unfortunately I'm French so I don't shower that often, and I don't eat a lot of vegetables so I don't do number 2 often either.
This being said I also found the whole idea for my commercial program while daydreaming at a lecture in college after waking up from a nap on my table.
Introducing foreign species, even to battle other foreign species/NEVER WORKS/.
Sure, there's an unwritten law that says "if a new kind of engineering fails on the first few attempts, it will/ALWAYS FAIL/". It's unwritten because the guys who came up with it also failed to engineer a way to write words down.
Good point, I do indeed make little and pay little, but I can infer from that that your ideology derives from the fact that you're pissed to pay as much as you do, and not from principles. That doesn't change anything to the fact that the richer must pay more because I mean come on you're not going to make the poorer pay more. For one thing it'd only make them poorer and then they have less money we can tap into.
You're obviously one of the Americans who has no fucking clue what socialism means. So here's a clue, 'socialism' actually doesn't mean much, as it's quite an umbrella term, which covers anything from pure Marxism to modern Norther or Western European capitalist socialism. I'm from "socialist France", and let me tell you that socialism as it is (was) in France works just fine. Our national train company was doing absolutely great, our national telephone company was a leader, our national electricity company is doing so great it exports its excesses of nuclear produced power to neighbouring European countries, we have one of the best universal healthcare systems in the world, so much better than in the UK that the English would come to France to get a surgery or a root canal, our education system is so leaps and bounds better than the American one that American high school students are typically considered to be a couple of years behind French ones (could you imagine writing in a foreign language as flawlessly and fluently as I'm writing in English?), our literacy levels are so much better than yours it's not even funny, we have 10 times less teen pregnancies than you do, so yes, socialism very much works (well, worked, Sarkozy is fucking it up very nicely).
Just look at hospitals, in France, they're paid by taxes, and your healthcare is paid by taxes too. The result? Great free healthcare for anyone, you can treat your brain cancer or get a heart transplant without paying a dime that won't be refunded to you. In America? Poor people can't pay for an healthcare, and hospitals have to look for donations and stuff like that to keep running, resulting in god-awful hospital service in the poorer parts of the country. Libertarianism doesn't work, stop lying to yourself. You're relatively rich anyways, instead of being angry all of your life that you're slightly less rich than you could be if they were less taxes, enjoy your relative comfort and be happy to be a valuable contributor to society.
By the way, where's your libertarian utopia? The USA? The UK? Both are deep in the crapper thanks to what in Europe we call "ultra libertarianism" right now, yeah, this thing just fucking works, let's just have more of it.
I could point out everything that's wrong about the idea that you can have a country functioning based on donations, how hypocritical it is to say you don't want to pay taxes but rather what you give to, explain why in detail why in the real world you can't possibly expect it to work, then detail how you benefited in a million ways from what taxes paid for, even point out that if it wasn't for tax funded DARPA research we wouldn't be having this conversation, or I could just call you and anyone who agrees with you a moron.
You're a fucking moron. Pay your taxes and shut up, or enjoy your jail time. Optionally, learn how the economy works.
That is true yes, and they were wrong to trade security for freedom, but that does not make the anti-freedom lefties right, pardon the pun.
That makes them both wrong, which should be a hint that it whether you're right or wrong isn't determined by whether you're in the left or the right.
But of course you're a libertarian, so instead of acknowledging that and judging what people do for their merits you'd rather use it to say "See? Both democrats and republicans are wrong! That makes us by process of elimination the best!".
But you're right, freedom is a great thing indeed, if not the greatest! Hobos may be dying of cold in the streets, poor people may die from curable diseases, but hey, at least they've got freedom! Fuck the weak, only the strong shall survive!
Put in a different way : like all hippies, the greens think their propositions are so fucking important to enact that everybody should interrupt their life to to do what they think we should do until it's been done to satisfaction.
And no, it's not specific to the left, actually it's not even characteristic of the left as a whole, it's characteristic and typical of groups at the fringes of the political and ideological spectrum. Green loonies chain themselves to trees, anti-abortion loonies chain themselves to clinic beds, communist loonies put a bomb in your parliament, Islamo-fascist loonies put a bomb in your subway.
Funny you should say that "the left has always been necessarily against freedom or unwilling to sacrifice other political objectives in order to obtain it" when the most of the American right's argument after 9/11 was pretty much a freedom vs. security tradeoff.
Two things. First off, the number of twitter posts saying "just landed" isn't enormous. But secondly and more importantly, that weighting thing only works accurately if the "randomness" is unbiased. Here it's biased in favour of a specific population, that is English-speaking people who tweet. Thirdly, the method itself is flawed in that they assume that the departure point is the person's hometown.
So all things considered, it's hardly something you could rely on.
You'd get something much better simply by using flight info. We're talking mainly about international travel, the whole phone thing might work better if you visit the UK than if you visit Tanzania.
Like I said in the comment to which you replied, "by using flight information from travel companies online". Takes a bit of a guess work to figure how many people it represents but that would be orders of magnitude more accurate than that twitter thing.
According to their representation, the Pacific Ocean either is a no-fly zone, or the Earth is flat. I can't think of any other reason why American flights to Australia would fly above Africa.
Correct me if I'm wrong but all it does is probing on traffic by airplane by people who speak English and use Twitter. So it's a very vague approximation of people going from one place to another by airplane, am I right?
In other words you could have gotten something much better by using flight information from travel companies online, using a bunch of factors (like airplane type, route, time/date) to estimate how many people are in each flight. Which would still be of dubious use because we already know how much people transit between which airports.
So basically this new thing is useless in that it only gives a poor approximation of how many people go where, and it's of little relevance to virus spreading anyways, the only reason why it's on Slashdot's front page being the "cool" factor of using data mining on a service such as Twitter and using "epidemiology" as a poor excuse. Or am I missing something?
That's right, Sarkozy, despite being from the same political family as Jacques Chirac or Charles de Gaulle belongs to a new generation. Ever since Charles de Gaulle and until Jacques Chirac, the right wing was typically dominantly Gaullist, which is a fairly socialist kind of conservatism, and probably where we have our socialist reputation from.
Sarkozy however isn't a Gaullist, he's the spearhead of the new wave/generation of right-wing politicians who are die hard libertarian conservatives, hence Sarkozy's admiration for the American and British models which are seen from here as extreme libertarianism. Which is one of the many reasons French socialists (plus communists, the greens etc..) have profoundly hated his guts from the beginning, but also because he stands for pretty much the opposite of what they stand for, except on a few topics such as the European Union or foreign relations.
Well.. actually it could be familiar to you if you think about how FOX News was entangled with the Bush administration. Although actually in the case of TF1 that's much worse and more direct. Basically FOX News pals around with the GOP and actively push all the pro-republican bullshit they can.
But in France, it's more like TF1 does what the right-wing administration directly tells them to do (i.e. don't talk about this, talk more about that, fire that guy, and so on), and while watching TF1 is a much less surreal experience than watching FOX News, what goes on behind the scenes seems much darker and state propaganda-like.
How do you know? Because surely, if there were things they didn't keep records of, we wouldn't have any records to tell us there were no records?
By the sheer volume of recorded mundanities, obviously.
Wikipedia is a good start to read about something, puts claims into context, even when the topic is hotly debated, so I guess you can start with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, watching that show Stephen Fry in America he interview a nuclear bunker dweller who said that after 9/11 he was contacted by several companies to put servers in bunkers as they had lost lots in the towers.
Some services do that. But it probably costs in the tens of thousands at that point, considered what it involves.
To use a car analogy, that's as if you proposed to get rid of all roadside trees so that people don't drive into them instead of drivers making sure to stay on the road.
Unfortunately as most other car analogies it's not such a great analogy.
What the hell are you babbling about? Installing a fully featured cross compilation toolkit for most of these machines is most trivial, and compilation using them is just as trivial. There days they all come with SDL and OpenGL ES out the box. You just install your often ready to use toolkit and compile your programs and there you go. Way to see issues where there aren't any.
Me too, I find most of my ideas while either having a shower or doing number 2. Unfortunately I'm French so I don't shower that often, and I don't eat a lot of vegetables so I don't do number 2 often either.
This being said I also found the whole idea for my commercial program while daydreaming at a lecture in college after waking up from a nap on my table.
Nice. NZ will become the first country without an air force to get a space program.
You mean.. besides the Royal New Zealand Airforce?
You know we don't have any planes, right?
Apparently you don't know you have any planes.
Introducing foreign species, even to battle other foreign species /NEVER WORKS/.
Sure, there's an unwritten law that says "if a new kind of engineering fails on the first few attempts, it will /ALWAYS FAIL/". It's unwritten because the guys who came up with it also failed to engineer a way to write words down.
Good point, I do indeed make little and pay little, but I can infer from that that your ideology derives from the fact that you're pissed to pay as much as you do, and not from principles. That doesn't change anything to the fact that the richer must pay more because I mean come on you're not going to make the poorer pay more. For one thing it'd only make them poorer and then they have less money we can tap into.
You're obviously one of the Americans who has no fucking clue what socialism means. So here's a clue, 'socialism' actually doesn't mean much, as it's quite an umbrella term, which covers anything from pure Marxism to modern Norther or Western European capitalist socialism. I'm from "socialist France", and let me tell you that socialism as it is (was) in France works just fine. Our national train company was doing absolutely great, our national telephone company was a leader, our national electricity company is doing so great it exports its excesses of nuclear produced power to neighbouring European countries, we have one of the best universal healthcare systems in the world, so much better than in the UK that the English would come to France to get a surgery or a root canal, our education system is so leaps and bounds better than the American one that American high school students are typically considered to be a couple of years behind French ones (could you imagine writing in a foreign language as flawlessly and fluently as I'm writing in English?), our literacy levels are so much better than yours it's not even funny, we have 10 times less teen pregnancies than you do, so yes, socialism very much works (well, worked, Sarkozy is fucking it up very nicely).
Just look at hospitals, in France, they're paid by taxes, and your healthcare is paid by taxes too. The result? Great free healthcare for anyone, you can treat your brain cancer or get a heart transplant without paying a dime that won't be refunded to you. In America? Poor people can't pay for an healthcare, and hospitals have to look for donations and stuff like that to keep running, resulting in god-awful hospital service in the poorer parts of the country. Libertarianism doesn't work, stop lying to yourself. You're relatively rich anyways, instead of being angry all of your life that you're slightly less rich than you could be if they were less taxes, enjoy your relative comfort and be happy to be a valuable contributor to society.
By the way, where's your libertarian utopia? The USA? The UK? Both are deep in the crapper thanks to what in Europe we call "ultra libertarianism" right now, yeah, this thing just fucking works, let's just have more of it.
I could point out everything that's wrong about the idea that you can have a country functioning based on donations, how hypocritical it is to say you don't want to pay taxes but rather what you give to, explain why in detail why in the real world you can't possibly expect it to work, then detail how you benefited in a million ways from what taxes paid for, even point out that if it wasn't for tax funded DARPA research we wouldn't be having this conversation, or I could just call you and anyone who agrees with you a moron.
You're a fucking moron. Pay your taxes and shut up, or enjoy your jail time. Optionally, learn how the economy works.
That is true yes, and they were wrong to trade security for freedom, but that does not make the anti-freedom lefties right, pardon the pun.
That makes them both wrong, which should be a hint that it whether you're right or wrong isn't determined by whether you're in the left or the right.
But of course you're a libertarian, so instead of acknowledging that and judging what people do for their merits you'd rather use it to say "See? Both democrats and republicans are wrong! That makes us by process of elimination the best!".
But you're right, freedom is a great thing indeed, if not the greatest! Hobos may be dying of cold in the streets, poor people may die from curable diseases, but hey, at least they've got freedom! Fuck the weak, only the strong shall survive!
Put in a different way : like all hippies, the greens think their propositions are so fucking important to enact that everybody should interrupt their life to to do what they think we should do until it's been done to satisfaction.
And no, it's not specific to the left, actually it's not even characteristic of the left as a whole, it's characteristic and typical of groups at the fringes of the political and ideological spectrum. Green loonies chain themselves to trees, anti-abortion loonies chain themselves to clinic beds, communist loonies put a bomb in your parliament, Islamo-fascist loonies put a bomb in your subway.
Funny you should say that "the left has always been necessarily against freedom or unwilling to sacrifice other political objectives in order to obtain it" when the most of the American right's argument after 9/11 was pretty much a freedom vs. security tradeoff.
....
No, not for USA->Australia, you won't go over Africa. Ever. That would be like doing New York->London over the Pacific and Russia.
Two things. First off, the number of twitter posts saying "just landed" isn't enormous. But secondly and more importantly, that weighting thing only works accurately if the "randomness" is unbiased. Here it's biased in favour of a specific population, that is English-speaking people who tweet. Thirdly, the method itself is flawed in that they assume that the departure point is the person's hometown.
So all things considered, it's hardly something you could rely on.
I'm afraid you missed something about my original comment. This has strictly nothing to do with H1N1. There's no link, no where. Really.
Convincing? All their flight data is right there online...
You'd get something much better simply by using flight info. We're talking mainly about international travel, the whole phone thing might work better if you visit the UK than if you visit Tanzania.
Privacy? If someone intently shouts to the world "Hear, hear, I just landed in London!" where's the privacy issue?
Like I said in the comment to which you replied, "by using flight information from travel companies online". Takes a bit of a guess work to figure how many people it represents but that would be orders of magnitude more accurate than that twitter thing.
According to their representation, the Pacific Ocean either is a no-fly zone, or the Earth is flat. I can't think of any other reason why American flights to Australia would fly above Africa.
Correct me if I'm wrong but all it does is probing on traffic by airplane by people who speak English and use Twitter. So it's a very vague approximation of people going from one place to another by airplane, am I right?
In other words you could have gotten something much better by using flight information from travel companies online, using a bunch of factors (like airplane type, route, time/date) to estimate how many people are in each flight. Which would still be of dubious use because we already know how much people transit between which airports.
So basically this new thing is useless in that it only gives a poor approximation of how many people go where, and it's of little relevance to virus spreading anyways, the only reason why it's on Slashdot's front page being the "cool" factor of using data mining on a service such as Twitter and using "epidemiology" as a poor excuse. Or am I missing something?
android and everything google does, sucks.
i hate google, gmail, youtube, etc. fuck'em
A most compelling argument, I am convinced!!
Way to compare apples and tractor tires.
That's right, Sarkozy, despite being from the same political family as Jacques Chirac or Charles de Gaulle belongs to a new generation. Ever since Charles de Gaulle and until Jacques Chirac, the right wing was typically dominantly Gaullist, which is a fairly socialist kind of conservatism, and probably where we have our socialist reputation from.
Sarkozy however isn't a Gaullist, he's the spearhead of the new wave/generation of right-wing politicians who are die hard libertarian conservatives, hence Sarkozy's admiration for the American and British models which are seen from here as extreme libertarianism. Which is one of the many reasons French socialists (plus communists, the greens etc..) have profoundly hated his guts from the beginning, but also because he stands for pretty much the opposite of what they stand for, except on a few topics such as the European Union or foreign relations.
Well.. actually it could be familiar to you if you think about how FOX News was entangled with the Bush administration. Although actually in the case of TF1 that's much worse and more direct. Basically FOX News pals around with the GOP and actively push all the pro-republican bullshit they can.
But in France, it's more like TF1 does what the right-wing administration directly tells them to do (i.e. don't talk about this, talk more about that, fire that guy, and so on), and while watching TF1 is a much less surreal experience than watching FOX News, what goes on behind the scenes seems much darker and state propaganda-like.
How do you know? Because surely, if there were things they didn't keep records of, we wouldn't have any records to tell us there were no records?
By the sheer volume of recorded mundanities, obviously.
Wikipedia is a good start to read about something, puts claims into context, even when the topic is hotly debated, so I guess you can start with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus