Java without emulation has been promising stuff like this for a long time and hasn't arrived. How long do you thing it'll be before Java+emulation does?
Person #1: "I have a Java x86 emulator for platform A!"
Person #2: "Dang! We wrote our product on a Java x86 emulator for platforms B and C! Welp, guess we'll have to rewrite that puppy so that its java A, B and C compliant.."
Person #1: "Ah, but mine is Java x86 emulator A enhanced, enterprise edition: "JAEE". Meaning anything that works with it should work with B and C."
Person #2: "But isn't that the slowest of all Java x86 emulators? Also, The Java x86 B and C I was referring to were the Special Editions- you know, the ones that had memory leaks. We had to add a lot of code to compensate, which isn't really friendly to any form of A- even your JAEE."
Person #1: "Dang!"
You see where this is going....
Re:Read the book, get excited about what's possibl
on
Pro Java ME MMAPI
·
· Score: -1
Since Java still tends to have quirks depending on what platform you put it on, it should fit right in with the proprietary mountain that is today's cellphone.
Yes- these atmosphere generators are the reason Mars is warming up- it must be. (Pay no mind to that big fiery ball burning in the middle of the solar system... Nuthin to see here, nuthin to see...) The Mars rovers and orbiters are of course making it warm up there too.
On earth of course the global warming is man made, since the "science is settled."
>>>Global warming is natural. Without it we couldn't survive. The sun might be responsible for some of the current changes, but human activity has probably increased it even more.
Correction: the sun IS likely responsible for ALL of the changes. This is the easiest (I stand by Occam's Razor) explanation.
Might I add to this, that lazy "scientists" who want (yes, I dare say 'want') the cause to be man made doesn't make it true.
Since the other are planets warming up, we're going to hear: (predictably)
"Oh, it's the axial tilt of that planet!" "My, the red spot is kicking up dust! That must be the greenhouse effect on that planet!" "That planet has moons reflecting more sunlight on the surface." "The atmosphere of that planet is 'different', which causes warming on that planet!"
But on Earth, it must be man! After all the "science is settled."
I always get labeled a "Troll" (so be it) when I express this viewpoint, but it's true, true true.
"Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in our solar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in the sun's activity is the common thread linking all these baking events."
This article then goes on to "disprove" the obvious. IT'S THE SUN. The attempt was laughable. Milk shot through my nose when I read about the guy saying "this must be a coincidence!" Couldn't stop laughing.
I didn't quote this article because it says "the sun is the cause," I quoted it because it shows silly "scientists" trying to blame warming on all the planets on something other than the obvious source- THE SUN. They must do this to protect their pet theory.
If a bunch of planets are warming up, and they have the same sun, WHY IS THIS NOT THE MAIN FACTOR BEING CONSIDERED?
"Oh, it's the axial tilt of that planet!"
"My, the red spot is kicking up dust! That must be the greenhouse effect on that planet!"
"But on Earth, it's man!"
"Goly oh Gee, it's a coincidence!"
I never said science was a religion. Holding on to "man induced global warming" at all costs, no matter what, is.
What the media believes is rarely a good indicator of what is good/bad science. I'm firmly convinced that they are not "unbiased" and that they have agendas all their own.
I never brought up anything about atheists, or Christians or whatever- when I said "religion," I meant it in the context that there are plenty of people in the media who just want people to believe this (man induced global warming), and will herd up and quote scientists who agree with them, and then say that this is "real science". These actions are not based on "facts" but on something else.
The media may not want "man induced global warming" to really be true- all they need to do is convince people to believe that it is. Simply because it has the potential to scaremonger nations, and when scaremongering is effective people will hand over their liberties and their cash- potentially to suspect individuals who will "oversee" that entities are "global warming compliant". The possibilities of abuse of such a system are enormous.
If two planets are losing their ice caps and are heated by the same sun (the primary source of heat in the solar system I might add), this should be heavily factored in- a "fact". To not do so would be considered "stupid" as you put it.
This doesn't fit in with the media's model, they won't like it, and they will try to eliminate it. This particular bit of scientific evidence will be considered a "coincidence."
Do you think that this Mars discovery will be well received by the media? There is so much momentum by the media in the "man induced global warming" direction that the "Yeah, but's" will be endlessly streaming in.
I can hear the "Yeah, But's" coming in droves.....
The media's gonna have to come with something that sounds reeeEEEEal good in reply (don't worry, they will), because they must cover this up, if their religion of "man induced global warming" is to survive.
Ummmm.... I think your logic is flawed. I'll take that bet.
The difference is people don't get addicted to flourescent light bulbs like they do alcohol. And CFLs will only get better.
I simply can't imagine people secretly stashing flourescent bulbs with a snicker and a wink, saying, "When nobody's looking, I'm going to use all of these bulbs that I've been deprived of!!"
Probably the reason the resolution isn't SVGA (800x600) is because during the operation, the docs would have to attach the thing to 480000 neurons.
Now 16 or 64 pixel resolution makes a lot more sense, doesn't it?
This isn't "disingenuous." It's true. What you describe about science is ideal and would be nice, but it is naive concerning what happens in formulating what is passed off as "science" these days.
For example, I know I am going to be disliked for saying it, but the theory of evolution is full of this very thing. It is a non-reproducible theory which is called "science". But to point out its flaws publicly means far le$$ grant money and ridicule.
When outside factors like this are involved, "throwing time and chance" at age problems becomes a very real and tempting thing, and it is much more easily called "science" because it fits in with the status quo. Meanwhile, anything that happens to overlap religion is instantly "not science" because, again, it's not status quo, it's an uphill battle, it will get ridiculed and it will be harder to get grant money.
This wasn't meant to pick on evolution, but you must admit that there is plenty in what is called "science" that is really a result of other factors beyond a simplistic "let the data lead us where it may".
"Why is there lightning?" "Time and chance did it." "How did mountains form?" "Time and chance did it." "Why do massive bodies attract each other?" "Time and chance did it. (And maybe magnetic fields?)" "How do cells reproduce?" "Time and chance did it." "Why is there disease?" "Time and chance did it."
I have a Motorola RAZR. Funny thing is, when I plug the phone + charger into one outlet in my bedroom, it works fine. But if I plug it into my kitchen outlet, I get a message that says "Unauthorized Charger" on my phone's screen.
Why, o why, IS THE ELECTRICITY IN MY KITCHEN NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR MOTOROLA??
Perhaps Disney can now sue SCO because the Caldera symbol looks like a Mickey Mouse ear? (I'll admit that I could never see the "C" in their symbol until a few weeks ago)
Slashdot Mirror
Java without emulation has been promising stuff like this for a long time and hasn't arrived. How long do you thing it'll be before Java+emulation does?
Not quite. Try:
Person #1: "I have a Java x86 emulator for platform A!"
Person #2: "Dang! We wrote our product on a Java x86 emulator for platforms B and C! Welp, guess we'll have to rewrite that puppy so that its java A, B and C compliant.."
Person #1: "Ah, but mine is Java x86 emulator A enhanced, enterprise edition: "JAEE". Meaning anything that works with it should work with B and C."
Person #2: "But isn't that the slowest of all Java x86 emulators? Also, The Java x86 B and C I was referring to were the Special Editions- you know, the ones that had memory leaks. We had to add a lot of code to compensate, which isn't really friendly to any form of A- even your JAEE."
Person #1: "Dang!"
You see where this is going....
Since Java still tends to have quirks depending on what platform you put it on, it should fit right in with the proprietary mountain that is today's cellphone.
Hmmm.... It's amazing how many gusts of wind can fit into T 00:00:29- which has lasted for ten minutes now.
Yes- these atmosphere generators are the reason Mars is warming up- it must be. (Pay no mind to that big fiery ball burning in the middle of the solar system... Nuthin to see here, nuthin to see...) The Mars rovers and orbiters are of course making it warm up there too.
On earth of course the global warming is man made, since the "science is settled."
>>>Global warming is natural. Without it we couldn't survive. The sun might be responsible for some of the current changes, but human activity has probably increased it even more.
Correction: the sun IS likely responsible for ALL of the changes. This is the easiest (I stand by Occam's Razor) explanation.
Might I add to this, that lazy "scientists" who want (yes, I dare say 'want') the cause to be man made doesn't make it true.
I agree patio.
Since the other are planets warming up, we're going to hear: (predictably)
"Oh, it's the axial tilt of that planet!" "My, the red spot is kicking up dust! That must be the greenhouse effect on that planet!" "That planet has moons reflecting more sunlight on the surface." "The atmosphere of that planet is 'different', which causes warming on that planet!"
But on Earth, it must be man! After all the "science is settled."
I always get labeled a "Troll" (so be it) when I express this viewpoint, but it's true, true true.
Face it people, it's the SUN, always has been.
This one:
"Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in our solar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in the sun's activity is the common thread linking all these baking events."
This article then goes on to "disprove" the obvious. IT'S THE SUN. The attempt was laughable. Milk shot through my nose when I read about the guy saying "this must be a coincidence!" Couldn't stop laughing.
I didn't quote this article because it says "the sun is the cause," I quoted it because it shows silly "scientists" trying to blame warming on all the planets on something other than the obvious source- THE SUN. They must do this to protect their pet theory.
If a bunch of planets are warming up, and they have the same sun, WHY IS THIS NOT THE MAIN FACTOR BEING CONSIDERED?
"Oh, it's the axial tilt of that planet!" "My, the red spot is kicking up dust! That must be the greenhouse effect on that planet!" "But on Earth, it's man!" "Goly oh Gee, it's a coincidence!"
Rubbish! IT'S THE SUN!
Of course, on Earth it's "man made global warming," but it's the sun for other 7 (8 if you count Pluto) planets.
i vescience/sunblamedforwarmingofearthandotherworlds ;_ylt=ApB5JHKLzixl9LW9qHP7HRWyvtEF
Remember people, the "science is closed."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070312/sc_l
The Milky Way's central object Sagittarius A*, widely believed to be a supermassive black hole, is now suspected to be the source.
That black hole must really suck.
I never said science was a religion. Holding on to "man induced global warming" at all costs, no matter what, is.
What the media believes is rarely a good indicator of what is good/bad science. I'm firmly convinced that they are not "unbiased" and that they have agendas all their own.
I never brought up anything about atheists, or Christians or whatever- when I said "religion," I meant it in the context that there are plenty of people in the media who just want people to believe this (man induced global warming), and will herd up and quote scientists who agree with them, and then say that this is "real science". These actions are not based on "facts" but on something else.
The media may not want "man induced global warming" to really be true- all they need to do is convince people to believe that it is. Simply because it has the potential to scaremonger nations, and when scaremongering is effective people will hand over their liberties and their cash- potentially to suspect individuals who will "oversee" that entities are "global warming compliant". The possibilities of abuse of such a system are enormous.
If two planets are losing their ice caps and are heated by the same sun (the primary source of heat in the solar system I might add), this should be heavily factored in- a "fact". To not do so would be considered "stupid" as you put it.
This doesn't fit in with the media's model, they won't like it, and they will try to eliminate it. This particular bit of scientific evidence will be considered a "coincidence."
Do you think that this Mars discovery will be well received by the media? There is so much momentum by the media in the "man induced global warming" direction that the "Yeah, but's" will be endlessly streaming in.
I can hear the "Yeah, But's" coming in droves.....
The media's gonna have to come with something that sounds reeeEEEEal good in reply (don't worry, they will), because they must cover this up, if their religion of "man induced global warming" is to survive.
Ummmm.... I think your logic is flawed. I'll take that bet. The difference is people don't get addicted to flourescent light bulbs like they do alcohol. And CFLs will only get better. I simply can't imagine people secretly stashing flourescent bulbs with a snicker and a wink, saying, "When nobody's looking, I'm going to use all of these bulbs that I've been deprived of!!"
Probably the reason the resolution isn't SVGA (800x600) is because during the operation, the docs would have to attach the thing to 480000 neurons. Now 16 or 64 pixel resolution makes a lot more sense, doesn't it?
This isn't "disingenuous." It's true. What you describe about science is ideal and would be nice, but it is naive concerning what happens in formulating what is passed off as "science" these days. For example, I know I am going to be disliked for saying it, but the theory of evolution is full of this very thing. It is a non-reproducible theory which is called "science". But to point out its flaws publicly means far le$$ grant money and ridicule. When outside factors like this are involved, "throwing time and chance" at age problems becomes a very real and tempting thing, and it is much more easily called "science" because it fits in with the status quo. Meanwhile, anything that happens to overlap religion is instantly "not science" because, again, it's not status quo, it's an uphill battle, it will get ridiculed and it will be harder to get grant money. This wasn't meant to pick on evolution, but you must admit that there is plenty in what is called "science" that is really a result of other factors beyond a simplistic "let the data lead us where it may".
You can just as easily turn this on its head.
"Why is there lightning?" "Time and chance did it."
"How did mountains form?" "Time and chance did it."
"Why do massive bodies attract each other?" "Time and chance did it. (And maybe magnetic fields?)"
"How do cells reproduce?" "Time and chance did it."
"Why is there disease?" "Time and chance did it."
With the patenting of other people's ideas, Microsoft could be the "Sylar" of Tech Heroes.
All your oceans are belong to us....
Maybe we will someday find such a world- a peaceful pastoral world without war; a world without hate.
Then I can picture us attacking that world, 'cause they'd never suspect it.
My friend, who is a PhD in Astronomy, gave me the canned answer when astronomers don't really know the real answer: "It must be the magnetic field."
All your Blu Rays are belong to us...
I have a Motorola RAZR. Funny thing is, when I plug the phone + charger into one outlet in my bedroom, it works fine. But if I plug it into my kitchen outlet, I get a message that says "Unauthorized Charger" on my phone's screen.
Why, o why, IS THE ELECTRICITY IN MY KITCHEN NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR MOTOROLA??
By ID I assume you mean "Intelligent Design?"
Creating "artificial life" in a lab will only fortify ID, assuming of course that it took intelligence to create that life in the lab.
Perhaps Disney can now sue SCO because the Caldera symbol looks like a Mickey Mouse ear? (I'll admit that I could never see the "C" in their symbol until a few weeks ago)
I finally see the "C" in the Caldera symbol. All this time I thought it was a Mickey Mouse ear.