Applying the birthday problem to this only makes sense if you are considering the chances of space junk hitting anything else, including other space junk. We don't care if space junk hits space junk, we only care if space junk hits astronauts. (in other words, we only care if the space junk has the same birthday as the astronauts, not if space junk and space junk share the same birthday.)
Previously I would have suspected that absurd bloat like that would have been the result of bureaucratic NHTSA regulations, but obviously that's not the case...
Show me a single anti-nuclear environmentalist of note who's not equally also anti-coal.
Well that is exactly the problem isn't it? They see both nuclear and coal as 'Great Devils' even though nuclear is clearly far superiour in every way. Logic completely escapes these people.
You cannot mandate morality. It is something that must be voluntary. This blogger could do the right thing and take down the video, but making him take down the video is not the right thing.
I don't care much about whether he keeps the video up or not, what I care about is other people trying to make him take it down.
That however doesn't mean that it is any less random. I can make a random sequence using nothing more than 1's and 0's. Including the digit 2 would not make it any more random, it would just increase the randomness per character.
Apparently you've never seen any Mike and Ikes, they look about as much like prescription medications as hotwheel cars look like real cars.
Also, apparently you don't know what it was like being a kid in the 2000's. If you think kids these days are not doing as hard or harder drugs than kids in the 60s and 70s then you are sorely mistaken. Half of the crap in public schools didn't even exist back then.
The news just keeps on getting better and better. The more absurd this story gets, the more it will stand out as an example of why this sort of behaviour is unacceptable.
Unfortunetly, Ageism is generally only considered to be "descrimination against people for being too old", not the other way around. This is definetly something that should be changed in my opinion.
And I was using a 244MHZ PII box well into 2007. My computer of course was not typical of computers those days, and makers of modern software did not take my machine into consideration. Saying that ActiveX was a more viable technology then native applications in 1996 because your personal computer happened to be quite old doesn't really make much sense to me.
The subject line of my post was "oblig "gimp vs photoshop"/"iphone vs n900"", I feel that should have made it obvious I was only poking fun. My appologies for not being blunt enough for you.
To be fair, the N900 runs a straight up linux distro with X and everything. Having an article about the N900 running the gimp would be like having an article about opensuse or ubuntu running gimp. No fancy porting or whatnot is involved.
I should have guessed that sentence constructs more complex than "See spot run." would be beyond you. I suppose this is one of those "ignorance is bliss" moments, I'll leave you to wallow in it.
Sigh, and once again you fail to properly express your point. It would have more properly be done as:
You wouldn't know Orwellian if it smacked you in the face.
That's an interesting thing to say to a guy that isn't comparing a tamper sticker to gov't surveillance.
You see, in the first sentence I was questioning your reading ability. The second sentence is where I asserted that you didn't even know what Orwellian means. When you say "That's an interesting thing to say to a guy that isn't comparing a tamper sticker to gov't surveillance.", you are not indicating that I am unable to read, you are indicating that I don't know what Orwellian means. Therefore the proper sentence to quote is the second one.
I imagine distinctions this 'subtle' are lost on you though, you are quite possibly the stupidest person on the internet I've encountered today.
Slashdot Mirror
What I want to know is how much junk can we orbit before we have to start calling it a dyson sphere?
Applying the birthday problem to this only makes sense if you are considering the chances of space junk hitting anything else, including other space junk. We don't care if space junk hits space junk, we only care if space junk hits astronauts. (in other words, we only care if the space junk has the same birthday as the astronauts, not if space junk and space junk share the same birthday.)
And once upon a time SCO was a respectable Unix vendor.
Previously I would have suspected that absurd bloat like that would have been the result of bureaucratic NHTSA regulations, but obviously that's not the case...
Well that is exactly the problem isn't it? They see both nuclear and coal as 'Great Devils' even though nuclear is clearly far superiour in every way. Logic completely escapes these people.
That's right citizen, bend over and take it.
I am not making an argument about the morality of the blogger, only the ramifications of abusing the law to stop him.
You cannot mandate morality. It is something that must be voluntary. This blogger could do the right thing and take down the video, but making him take down the video is not the right thing.
I don't care much about whether he keeps the video up or not, what I care about is other people trying to make him take it down.
If we started making exceptions to freedom of speech/press every time somebody got offended, then we would be left with nothing.
Take a guess.
That however doesn't mean that it is any less random. I can make a random sequence using nothing more than 1's and 0's. Including the digit 2 would not make it any more random, it would just increase the randomness per character.
Apparently you've never seen any Mike and Ikes, they look about as much like prescription medications as hotwheel cars look like real cars.
Also, apparently you don't know what it was like being a kid in the 2000's. If you think kids these days are not doing as hard or harder drugs than kids in the 60s and 70s then you are sorely mistaken. Half of the crap in public schools didn't even exist back then.
The news just keeps on getting better and better. The more absurd this story gets, the more it will stand out as an example of why this sort of behaviour is unacceptable.
Unfortunetly, Ageism is generally only considered to be "descrimination against people for being too old", not the other way around. This is definetly something that should be changed in my opinion.
So if they get a staticly assigned IP address that is other than what is used on campus, that's fine then?
Let me guess... next you want me to hit you as hard as I can?
And I was using a 244MHZ PII box well into 2007. My computer of course was not typical of computers those days, and makers of modern software did not take my machine into consideration. Saying that ActiveX was a more viable technology then native applications in 1996 because your personal computer happened to be quite old doesn't really make much sense to me.
Honestly, it is not very hard to be smarter than the engineers at Adobe. Have you ever read the blog Adobe's single flash linux developer has?
The subject line of my post was "oblig "gimp vs photoshop"/"iphone vs n900"", I feel that should have made it obvious I was only poking fun. My appologies for not being blunt enough for you.
To be fair, the N900 runs a straight up linux distro with X and everything. Having an article about the N900 running the gimp would be like having an article about opensuse or ubuntu running gimp. No fancy porting or whatnot is involved.
I'm aware, I just saw this as a rare opportunity to bring up two old tired slashdot arguments at once ;)
I should have guessed that sentence constructs more complex than "See spot run." would be beyond you. I suppose this is one of those "ignorance is bliss" moments, I'll leave you to wallow in it.
And my N900 can run the latest and greatest version of the Gimp. Big whoop.
Sigh, and once again you fail to properly express your point. It would have more properly be done as:
You see, in the first sentence I was questioning your reading ability. The second sentence is where I asserted that you didn't even know what Orwellian means. When you say "That's an interesting thing to say to a guy that isn't comparing a tamper sticker to gov't surveillance.", you are not indicating that I am unable to read, you are indicating that I don't know what Orwellian means. Therefore the proper sentence to quote is the second one.
I imagine distinctions this 'subtle' are lost on you though, you are quite possibly the stupidest person on the internet I've encountered today.
With your clear issues with reading comprehension I doubt you've ever even read 1984. You wouldn't know Orwellian if it smacked you in the face.
Now grow up and go learn to read and understand the english language.