Yeah, imagine a civilization that, having discovered enlightenment, actually embraced it and dedicated their industrial base to further it, instead of shuffling it off to the minor specialists who they then make beg for funding, typically by militarizing their research. Hot damn! I always thought Enlightenment was a pretty spiffy window manager but I didn't know it would allow us to explore the stars. Rock on Rasterman -- Let's get that man some funding!
I won't try and 'justify' wanting to see it - I mean, come on, it's a kid doing something really stupid. I'm just going to want to see that, especially when presented as something that might be censored.
A damn shame... I wanted to see it too. Nothing like broken windows and stupid kids to liven up a boring Wednesday night. As a consolation prize, here's another kid doing something stupid.
Whichever you like, although there's a clear regional bias. American English speakers will prefer 'color' while UK English (and likely colonial) speakers will prefer 'colour'. Mirriad isn't an accepted spelling anywhere I'm aware of, though. That'll get you booted out of spelling bees no matter which side of the pond you're on.;)
... rather than one of the mirriad of Vista versions??? Not to be a bitch, but it's myriad, not mirriad. Just a tip for the future. It's much easier to take a statement seriously when it doesn't include a flagrant spelling error.
"The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."
Please don't be confused... I don't think Joseph Stalin was a great man. I consider him a despicable and cold blooded tyrant. At the same time, I also happen to think he was a pretty sharp thinker, and a successful tyrant because he understood how political systems function. A democratic system cannot work unless there is absolute transparency in the voting process.
I'm an open source supporter but not a zealot. I don't have any problem with the existence of closed-source commercial software and I believe it has a right to exist. That being said, there's simply no place for closed-source software in our voting process. Voting is the foundation of our political system, and we can't settle for any ambiguity in its implementation. It's not as if vote counting is a technically demanding job, and there's no argument for keeping secret the process by which it's done.
This strikes me as a clear judicial mistake (not that I've read the article... too drunk and tired, frankly). In general, our judges don't seem to understand information technology well enough to make informed decisions. They don't understand that changing the results of an election is elementary for any programmer. Isn't that concept terrifying?
Our society is enamored with the labor saving possibilities made possible by the past century's technological advances, but thus far, the understanding of these technologies in government has not matched their application. This trend must not continue if we value our republic. In the strictest sense, our system is no longer a democracy if it has no educated oversight.
Our government needs an elected body of IT experts -- some kind of technically proficient oversight body that can rule on information technology as it applies to our system of government. Without any such educated oversight, our freedom and sovereignty is bit by bit diminished, and can be turned against our people. The possibility alone demands action.
Our founding fathers certainly didn't foresee the coming of mechanical information processing, but I firmly believe they would have wanted it to be open to review by the common man. What we need now are are IT patriots willing and motivated to take up the cause.
Language Log coined a term to refer to this type of (near) sound-alike -- Eggcorns. Every now and again, LL talks about new eggcorns they've discovered in the wild. Most of the time, these things are pretty entertaining in a "giggling at people's linguistic foibles" sort of way (foibles that we're all guilty of at some point, I should add). There's also a website dedicated to cataloging them locate here.
... But when I finally get mine, I think I might do a little home modding on my Wii-Motes. I've got standard-issue sweaty geek palms, so a little Grip Tape might be a good idea. Considering the fact that my elderly parents are also interested in playing (not to mention my goofy nieces), the TV will probably appreciate it.
I generally agree with your point, but I'm also reminded of a quote that makes its way around the internet periodically:
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner."
You've picked out a particular failing of a republic, and it's a valid point. The thing I never see, and I'd very much like to, is a recommendation for a better system. It's not enough to complain about the state of things. A complaint is worthless if it isn't accompanied by a superior solution.
So, how do we combat groupthink? Is there something better than consensus to evaluate the worth of a post? The current system does a reasonable job of supressing the posts that hold little or no intrinsic value, but how do we do that without also smothering otherwise intelligent posts which hold a dissenting opinion? Of course, there's always anarchy, but that has drawbacks which I think are obvious enough without specific illustration.
Bitch of a question, isn't it? If you've got an answer, I'm sure the slash-mods would love to hear it.
Is that true? My understanding was that any registered user with an account older than X period of time was eligible to moderate. It's true, with some caveats. From the documentation, the ability to moderate is based on four qualifications: 1) That the user is logged in. 2) That the user reads slashdot regularly (ie. not obsessively, and not once in a while). 3) That the user is a long-time reader (or older than the most recent X-thousand registrants). 4) That the user is willing to moderate -- and finally 5) That the user is a positive contributor, meaning that they have a non-negative karma.
The full docs for moderation can be viewed at this location.
If there really is some sort of reputation system, I'm not sure I approve of that. For example, I've been reading Slashdot for close to 10 years. Check out my account number. Presumably I have a pretty good "reputation." Yeah... there's a reputation system. I've been reading much, much longer than I've had an account, and geez, the reputation system's been around for a while. I didn't always pay attention to it, but it's been around. Also, you don't have to presume anything. Your reputation is visible on this page in the upper-right corner. Based on your karma bonus, it should say "good" or better.
I think all of us relish a good troll, or at least an "anti-groupthink" post every now and again, but they're rare. What the moderation succedes in is hiding all of the GNAA posts and similar tripe that do nothing but waste time. You could always browse at -1 if you'd like to see them. Of course, you might as well be on Digg at that point.
It was the Greek Apple, so to speak. The Grappa.
Dag nab it. I just spent too much time entering (roughly) correct greek in unicode, only to find out Slashdot won't render it. Grrrr...
Looks like I'll have to reproduce my lame joke in a lame latin approximation -- I think the original model was To Melon, and I seem to remember Stefanos Erga talking big game about how it interfaced with the Iota-Pod. Man, those were the days.
On a side-note, if I ever get around to buying an Apple computer, someone remind me to carve Kallistei into the side.
No, it's not. The terms first world and second world refers to the two sides in the cold war - first world is the west, and second world were the states aligned to the Soviet Union. Third world became a term for countries not aligned with either, and from that became associated with developing countries as most of countries not aligned with either side were poor, underdeveloped countries.
Since there is no Soviet Union anymore, and the term third world has already evolved to mean something beyond its original meaning, might it not be useful to appropriate second world to similar purposes?
Considering the layman's understanding of the terms first world and third world, and the growing need to describe developing nations that sit between them economically, I would expect the use of second world in this sense to pick up steam. I certainly wouldn't be shocked if it was already used this way by some broadcast news outlets... but I might just be picking on broadcast news.
In any case, there's no sense being a slave to language. It's here to work for us.:)
Close but no cigar. Mitochondrial DNA can only help us estimate our most recent female ancestor. That would still leave room for neanderthal men to have planted their seeds in our fields, so to speak.
However, I read the linked article and discovered that it's actually about the retrieval of nuclear (not mitochondrial) DNA from neanderthals, which is really quite an advance. The problem here is that their estimate for the most recent common ancestor is based on Y-Chromosome divergence, which poses a similar problem to basing such estimates on Mitochondrial DNA. Since Y-Chromosomes are passed exclusively from male ancestors, there's a possibility that neanderthal females might have interbred with our line more recently.
I'll be interested to see what findings come out of sequencing the entire genome.
Thanks for the interesting article. I've read reports of species that are isolated purely by choice - that is, fully capable of producing viable offspring, but which choose not to based on subtle, aesthetic differences. There are species of grasshopper that inhabit the same area, but which only mate with grasshoppers that sing the right "song". I believe there are also some species of salamander that are genetically compatible, but which will only breed with mates of the right color. This is the first I'd heard of a hybrid species isolating itself, though. Really interesting stuff.
The parallels with humans are amusing, but TBH I think we're in a slightly different boat. First off, in my experience (take that for what it's worth), "beauty" in humans is more strongly related to nurturing rather than nature. I seem to run into absolutely beautiful women in every walk of life, and which are often enough the offspring of unattractive parents. With the advent of cosmetic surgery, genes become even less of a factor.
More importantly, I don't think the concept of beauty in humans is quite as uniform as the media might have us believe. I'm constantly shocked by the rift between what any two men find attractive... and for women, I think matters of physical attraction are even more variable. If we factor in women's sexual preferences, which add more weight to behavior and socio-economic factors, the speciation of "beautiful people" starts to sound really unlikely. Instead, I think we'll tend to see the average human become more "beautiful" as times goes on. Maybe that's just me.
Last, and I may be off base in this, but I think humans tend toward exogamy by nature. Most people I've talked to find "exotic" to be a beauty all its own, and that strikes me as a powerful mechanism working in the favor of species solidarity. Unlike those butterflies, most people seem to prefer a mate that's from a visibly dissimilar tribe, or at least think the idea's exciting.
Anyway, that's enough of my hobbyist-biology blabbering. Thanks again for the interesting article. Now when I seduce bonobos, I can claim that it's a scientific experiment.
The rules of evolution (from Darwin) are such that all species eventually split into seperate species.
Where'd you get that idea?
Darwin's theory was beautiful because it was simple - Those specimens most fit to live in a given environment will prevale over specimens that are less fit for that environment. That's its only claim about the future of a species. We can infer that a species will, through natural selection, become more and more fit for its environment, but that's an inferrence. Mutation is a fickle mistress, and the vast majority of her works fail to produce viable specimens, let alone ones that are more fit than their predecessors.
Splitting isn't a necessity, but it is likely when (and only when) a population is isolated. In the absence of isolation, no speciation occurs since any viable mutations are folded back into the common gene pool. That's one of the many wonders of sexual reproduction. I believe you'll agree that if anything, isolation among human populations has nearly vanished in the past hundred years, and this trend looks (quite) likely to continue as we move into the future.
I'll grant that branching of our species is possible, but for the foreseeable future I think it's unlikely, and it's certainly not a foregone conclusion. If Darwin said otherwise, I'd love to hear about it.
You want a good president, you got Clinton. Not great, but good, and better than "not bad". Probably the best since Truman, or maybe Kennedy (Democrats), who were very good or great, depending on what you value.
The hell you say? He got a blow job!!! That's against god's will. It says so in the Bible... Like, Luke 1:69 or something.
This isn't a troll... It's a Venture Bros reference, damn it!
If you don't watch the Venture Bros, you don't deserve to mod. I'm not even sure you deserve to breathe, but those namby-pamby panty-waists in government seem to think murder is "wrong" or something. Of course, half of them collect the heads of interns the way fat people collect bobble-head dolls, but it might have something to do with voodoo, or santaria, or aroma therapy - one of those occult "sciences". Hmmmmm, perhaps I should design a robot that runs for office. Now that's a prime idea. Couldn't do any worse than the robots we already have.
Brock! Did I already design a robot that runs for office?
I made a friend of mine very jealous when he was watching me Photoshop one day... One hand on the mouse, the other holding a stylus. I'd kill to actually have two separate cursors (one for each). Sounds like a fun software project, but I don't have the skills just yet.
I hadn't noticed Inkboard. I'll have to check it out. I'm reminded of similar functions in openCanvas (back when it was freeware) and Yahoo Instant Messenger (it's pretty basic, but it can be fun to doodle with friends).
Personal taste is a large factor in clicking with a UI, especially among creative professionals, I'm finding. I was never a real fan of Inkscape, and I still can't use the GIMP for anything other than the most basic tasks (I'm a Photoshop junkie). Then again, I'm really getting into Blender, while 5 versions of Max never did it for me. C'est la vie.
If you decide to give Xara another shot, check out XaraXone. They've got 10 years worth of tutorials onhand, and you can find out how to do pretty much anything, with a little searching.
I agree with the parent. Vector is by far the easiest way to produce mockups, and Inkscape is an excellent program. However, I'd also like to throw in a recommendation for Xara Xtreme which got slashdotted a couple days back. I'm quickly falling in love with it. I initially started using it because I couldn't get the newest release of Inkscape to run... Now, I don't think I'll be going back.
Slashdot Mirror
I won't try and 'justify' wanting to see it - I mean, come on, it's a kid doing something really stupid. I'm just going to want to see that, especially when presented as something that might be censored.
A damn shame... I wanted to see it too. Nothing like broken windows and stupid kids to liven up a boring Wednesday night. As a consolation prize, here's another kid doing something stupid.
The fabled christmas tree jump...
Whichever you like, although there's a clear regional bias. American English speakers will prefer 'color' while UK English (and likely colonial) speakers will prefer 'colour'. Mirriad isn't an accepted spelling anywhere I'm aware of, though. That'll get you booted out of spelling bees no matter which side of the pond you're on. ;)
... rather than one of the mirriad of Vista versions??? Not to be a bitch, but it's myriad, not mirriad. Just a tip for the future. It's much easier to take a statement seriously when it doesn't include a flagrant spelling error.I'm being a bitch, I know.
"The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."
Please don't be confused... I don't think Joseph Stalin was a great man. I consider him a despicable and cold blooded tyrant. At the same time, I also happen to think he was a pretty sharp thinker, and a successful tyrant because he understood how political systems function. A democratic system cannot work unless there is absolute transparency in the voting process.
I'm an open source supporter but not a zealot. I don't have any problem with the existence of closed-source commercial software and I believe it has a right to exist. That being said, there's simply no place for closed-source software in our voting process. Voting is the foundation of our political system, and we can't settle for any ambiguity in its implementation. It's not as if vote counting is a technically demanding job, and there's no argument for keeping secret the process by which it's done.
This strikes me as a clear judicial mistake (not that I've read the article... too drunk and tired, frankly). In general, our judges don't seem to understand information technology well enough to make informed decisions. They don't understand that changing the results of an election is elementary for any programmer. Isn't that concept terrifying?
Our society is enamored with the labor saving possibilities made possible by the past century's technological advances, but thus far, the understanding of these technologies in government has not matched their application. This trend must not continue if we value our republic. In the strictest sense, our system is no longer a democracy if it has no educated oversight.
Our government needs an elected body of IT experts -- some kind of technically proficient oversight body that can rule on information technology as it applies to our system of government. Without any such educated oversight, our freedom and sovereignty is bit by bit diminished, and can be turned against our people. The possibility alone demands action.
Our founding fathers certainly didn't foresee the coming of mechanical information processing, but I firmly believe they would have wanted it to be open to review by the common man. What we need now are are IT patriots willing and motivated to take up the cause.
News for kids. Stuff that matters precious little.
**Off-topic warning**
Language Log coined a term to refer to this type of (near) sound-alike -- Eggcorns. Every now and again, LL talks about new eggcorns they've discovered in the wild. Most of the time, these things are pretty entertaining in a "giggling at people's linguistic foibles" sort of way (foibles that we're all guilty of at some point, I should add). There's also a website dedicated to cataloging them locate here.
... But when I finally get mine, I think I might do a little home modding on my Wii-Motes. I've got standard-issue sweaty geek palms, so a little Grip Tape might be a good idea. Considering the fact that my elderly parents are also interested in playing (not to mention my goofy nieces), the TV will probably appreciate it.
I generally agree with your point, but I'm also reminded of a quote that makes its way around the internet periodically:
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner."
You've picked out a particular failing of a republic, and it's a valid point. The thing I never see, and I'd very much like to, is a recommendation for a better system. It's not enough to complain about the state of things. A complaint is worthless if it isn't accompanied by a superior solution.
So, how do we combat groupthink? Is there something better than consensus to evaluate the worth of a post? The current system does a reasonable job of supressing the posts that hold little or no intrinsic value, but how do we do that without also smothering otherwise intelligent posts which hold a dissenting opinion? Of course, there's always anarchy, but that has drawbacks which I think are obvious enough without specific illustration.
Bitch of a question, isn't it? If you've got an answer, I'm sure the slash-mods would love to hear it.
The full docs for moderation can be viewed at this location. If there really is some sort of reputation system, I'm not sure I approve of that. For example, I've been reading Slashdot for close to 10 years. Check out my account number. Presumably I have a pretty good "reputation." Yeah... there's a reputation system. I've been reading much, much longer than I've had an account, and geez, the reputation system's been around for a while. I didn't always pay attention to it, but it's been around. Also, you don't have to presume anything. Your reputation is visible on this page in the upper-right corner. Based on your karma bonus, it should say "good" or better.
I think all of us relish a good troll, or at least an "anti-groupthink" post every now and again, but they're rare. What the moderation succedes in is hiding all of the GNAA posts and similar tripe that do nothing but waste time. You could always browse at -1 if you'd like to see them. Of course, you might as well be on Digg at that point.
It was the Greek Apple, so to speak. The Grappa.
Dag nab it. I just spent too much time entering (roughly) correct greek in unicode, only to find out Slashdot won't render it. Grrrr...
Looks like I'll have to reproduce my lame joke in a lame latin approximation -- I think the original model was To Melon, and I seem to remember Stefanos Erga talking big game about how it interfaced with the Iota-Pod. Man, those were the days.
On a side-note, if I ever get around to buying an Apple computer, someone remind me to carve Kallistei into the side.
No, it's not. The terms first world and second world refers to the two sides in the cold war - first world is the west, and second world were the states aligned to the Soviet Union. Third world became a term for countries not aligned with either, and from that became associated with developing countries as most of countries not aligned with either side were poor, underdeveloped countries.
:)
Since there is no Soviet Union anymore, and the term third world has already evolved to mean something beyond its original meaning, might it not be useful to appropriate second world to similar purposes?
Considering the layman's understanding of the terms first world and third world, and the growing need to describe developing nations that sit between them economically, I would expect the use of second world in this sense to pick up steam. I certainly wouldn't be shocked if it was already used this way by some broadcast news outlets... but I might just be picking on broadcast news.
In any case, there's no sense being a slave to language. It's here to work for us.
Close but no cigar. Mitochondrial DNA can only help us estimate our most recent female ancestor. That would still leave room for neanderthal men to have planted their seeds in our fields, so to speak.
However, I read the linked article and discovered that it's actually about the retrieval of nuclear (not mitochondrial) DNA from neanderthals, which is really quite an advance. The problem here is that their estimate for the most recent common ancestor is based on Y-Chromosome divergence, which poses a similar problem to basing such estimates on Mitochondrial DNA. Since Y-Chromosomes are passed exclusively from male ancestors, there's a possibility that neanderthal females might have interbred with our line more recently.
I'll be interested to see what findings come out of sequencing the entire genome.
I read it quickly and thought it said, "The shuttle computers were never envisioned to fly through a year-end hangover".
I couldn't figure out for the life of me why they'd let mission critical crew drink bubbly in space... or why the computer would give a damn.
Thanks for the interesting article. I've read reports of species that are isolated purely by choice - that is, fully capable of producing viable offspring, but which choose not to based on subtle, aesthetic differences. There are species of grasshopper that inhabit the same area, but which only mate with grasshoppers that sing the right "song". I believe there are also some species of salamander that are genetically compatible, but which will only breed with mates of the right color. This is the first I'd heard of a hybrid species isolating itself, though. Really interesting stuff.
The parallels with humans are amusing, but TBH I think we're in a slightly different boat. First off, in my experience (take that for what it's worth), "beauty" in humans is more strongly related to nurturing rather than nature. I seem to run into absolutely beautiful women in every walk of life, and which are often enough the offspring of unattractive parents. With the advent of cosmetic surgery, genes become even less of a factor.
More importantly, I don't think the concept of beauty in humans is quite as uniform as the media might have us believe. I'm constantly shocked by the rift between what any two men find attractive... and for women, I think matters of physical attraction are even more variable. If we factor in women's sexual preferences, which add more weight to behavior and socio-economic factors, the speciation of "beautiful people" starts to sound really unlikely. Instead, I think we'll tend to see the average human become more "beautiful" as times goes on. Maybe that's just me.
Last, and I may be off base in this, but I think humans tend toward exogamy by nature. Most people I've talked to find "exotic" to be a beauty all its own, and that strikes me as a powerful mechanism working in the favor of species solidarity. Unlike those butterflies, most people seem to prefer a mate that's from a visibly dissimilar tribe, or at least think the idea's exciting.
Anyway, that's enough of my hobbyist-biology blabbering. Thanks again for the interesting article. Now when I seduce bonobos, I can claim that it's a scientific experiment.
The rules of evolution (from Darwin) are such that all species eventually split into seperate species.
Where'd you get that idea?
Darwin's theory was beautiful because it was simple - Those specimens most fit to live in a given environment will prevale over specimens that are less fit for that environment. That's its only claim about the future of a species. We can infer that a species will, through natural selection, become more and more fit for its environment, but that's an inferrence. Mutation is a fickle mistress, and the vast majority of her works fail to produce viable specimens, let alone ones that are more fit than their predecessors.
Splitting isn't a necessity, but it is likely when (and only when) a population is isolated. In the absence of isolation, no speciation occurs since any viable mutations are folded back into the common gene pool. That's one of the many wonders of sexual reproduction. I believe you'll agree that if anything, isolation among human populations has nearly vanished in the past hundred years, and this trend looks (quite) likely to continue as we move into the future.
I'll grant that branching of our species is possible, but for the foreseeable future I think it's unlikely, and it's certainly not a foregone conclusion. If Darwin said otherwise, I'd love to hear about it.
You want a good president, you got Clinton. Not great, but good, and better than "not bad". Probably the best since Truman, or maybe Kennedy (Democrats), who were very good or great, depending on what you value.
The hell you say? He got a blow job!!! That's against god's will. It says so in the Bible... Like, Luke 1:69 or something.
Will no one think of the children?!
This isn't a troll... It's a Venture Bros reference, damn it!
If you don't watch the Venture Bros, you don't deserve to mod. I'm not even sure you deserve to breathe, but those namby-pamby panty-waists in government seem to think murder is "wrong" or something. Of course, half of them collect the heads of interns the way fat people collect bobble-head dolls, but it might have something to do with voodoo, or santaria, or aroma therapy - one of those occult "sciences". Hmmmmm, perhaps I should design a robot that runs for office. Now that's a prime idea. Couldn't do any worse than the robots we already have.
Brock! Did I already design a robot that runs for office?
The same reason that Smurfs are three apples high and blue.
Because they're french.
I once thought GNOME had mono for an entire year. It turned out the developers were just really bored.
I made a friend of mine very jealous when he was watching me Photoshop one day... One hand on the mouse, the other holding a stylus. I'd kill to actually have two separate cursors (one for each). Sounds like a fun software project, but I don't have the skills just yet.
Oh the power I would wield. The power.
I hadn't noticed Inkboard. I'll have to check it out. I'm reminded of similar functions in openCanvas (back when it was freeware) and Yahoo Instant Messenger (it's pretty basic, but it can be fun to doodle with friends).
Personal taste is a large factor in clicking with a UI, especially among creative professionals, I'm finding. I was never a real fan of Inkscape, and I still can't use the GIMP for anything other than the most basic tasks (I'm a Photoshop junkie). Then again, I'm really getting into Blender, while 5 versions of Max never did it for me. C'est la vie.
If you decide to give Xara another shot, check out XaraXone. They've got 10 years worth of tutorials onhand, and you can find out how to do pretty much anything, with a little searching.
I agree with the parent. Vector is by far the easiest way to produce mockups, and Inkscape is an excellent program. However, I'd also like to throw in a recommendation for Xara Xtreme which got slashdotted a couple days back. I'm quickly falling in love with it. I initially started using it because I couldn't get the newest release of Inkscape to run... Now, I don't think I'll be going back.
This is off-topic but... About that quote in your sig -
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
That line is widely quoted and attributed to Burke. Unfortunately, Edmund Burke never said or wrote such a thing.
An essay on the "Burke" quote.
Take care.
I was going to pick on you, but the sad fact is that your written english skills are superior to those of an average american.