Actually, I'd bet on narcissistic personality disorder as defined in DSM IV, but she has some elements of histrionic personality disorder (i.e. inappropriate seductive behaviors (voice, dress) which probably worked wonders on McCain)
Word doesn't matter. MS Office or any office doesn't matter. Software doesn't matter. . What people know and understand enough to USE matters. It's a human issue, not a technical one.
Hooey. If that were the case, the Chinese and Indians would have discovered North America before the Europeans. They had better navigation and technology. They didn't have the cultural impetus to exploration. The examples you mentions are all a cultural blip, largely localized to European aristocracy of the last few centuries. We don't need any more shows for the rubes; we need to use space to find answers to real problems, not the superficial nonsense of "getting off."
1) Long-term habitable space environments with atmosphere, power, sustainable ecology, etc.
2) Power generation on a large scale.
3) Reversible temperature control of the Earth.
These are *useful* and may just save our collective bacon. Mars isn't going anywhere. Neither is the moon. If there's anything useful there, we can get to it later. The three things I've mentioned seem far more important to humanity than exploration for exploration's sake, and not on the radar of any of the bureaucrats at any of the government sponsored space agencies.
Re:science?
on
Tetraktys
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Physicists are trying to discover unknown facts by using known facts and empirical testing. . Computer professionals have a broader scope. Some of what they do is to create known predictable systems from known facts and known rules. Occasionally, they are asked to discover previously unknown facts from these rules. Perhaps only the latter should be called "Computer Scientists" so as to differentiate them from "Computer Engineers" or "Programmer/Journeymen" or the other different positions involving computers.
Excuse me, but...
on
Tetraktys
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Wow, you've just typified exactly the kind of thinking that's gotten us into this mess. . Communism, socialism, capitalism. These aren't booleans. Most western democracies (including us) have mixed systems of capitalist and government sponsored organizations (e.g. the public library, your grandma's social security, food and drug regulatory agencies, rural electrification, the highway system, the military, the monetary system, and so on.) . Neither capitalism nor socialism are magic fairies that solve all problems. You *need* that mix. China has them different proportion, and unfortunately, less regard for individual rights than we do. I wouldn't want to live under that, but it's obviously working for a lot of them.
That's absolutely true. We sold our dominance for next quarter's numbers. We sold it to get money for private economic clubs (commonly called "shareholders"). Their desires trumped both economic and technological security. . The clubs haven't done so well lately either. Worse to come, I'm afraid.
Gangsters are dangerous, whether they belong to the crips, bloods, hell's angels, goldman sachs, the white house or a lobbying group. . Of course, in the USA, we have the right of free association and free speech. I'm honestly conflicted on this one. I favor these rights at a gut level.
But these rights are killing us too. Slowly. What to do?
Driving is expensive, risky and time-consuming. Plus I want to *scream* at bad drivers. (Today's example. a tiny women driving a gigundous SUV, badly, with a cell phone glued to her ear as she bore down on the guy in front of me while she was busy discussing where to pick up her little darlings after school). . Does anyone really need that?
I understand. The fear I have is that pressure for profits would eventually force the developers to make more robust and lower maintenance organisms, with long-lived continuous hydrocarbon production. . And wouldn't the easiest way to do that would be to start with a robust organism in the first place? Why re-invent the wheel? Find the toughest cyanobacteria you can and *then* start hacking for hydrocarbon production. That's what I would do.
Hydrocarbon producing algae escaping into the environment.... . Whole ecology destruction, anyone? Anyone? Any takers? You! With the gas guzzler? You don't give a flip about some ocean life do ya? Well, here's your algae oil/gasoline. Now go home and don't upset the government/financial speculators. We know what we're doing....
Quote from my human factors instructor of many years ago:
"Any system that depends on the user doing the right thing has already failed."
There should be no warnings. Nothing to click. You simply don't let them see the page and you tell them why. Assume they will work around it and protect them as much as you can anyway.
Most programmers at this point ask, "And should I wipe for them too?"
The correct answer is, "Yes, but ask what brand of paper they prefer and make sure there's an alternative if they forget." Sorry, but THAT'S YOUR JOB AS A PROGRAMMER.
Programs are for PEOPLE, not computers. Computers don't matter. At all. They exist ONLY for PEOPLE. Your job is to take care of the PEOPLE's issues like *they* matter. The computer is secondary, or tertiary.
It's a command line utility written in.net that cranks out system information into a comma delimited file on a shared directory on each machine. Have a batch file that copies the output to a single directory on my machine and merges the lot. I suppose I could tweak it to update an sql database and put together a nice front-end for others, but for my teeny 100 system kingdom, it's sufficient. Free too, since I wrote the thing.
[In a world without evidence for monsters under your bed, the rational position is to believe that no such monsters exist.]
Well, *there's* your problem right there!
In a turkey's world without evidence for personal decapitation on Thanksgiving, the rational position is to believe that personal decapitation on Thanksgiving never happens.
Black swan events do happen. Monsters like politicians, lawyers, et. al. have been known to hide under beds. Unless you look, you don't know, and you never know about next time with certainty.
What a bunch of pompous whooey! (FYI, a strong agnostic position antagonizes just about everybody on the thiest and athiest side). . Agnosticism is a stand against arrogance and self-delusion and for rationality. Not only do we not know, but the question is simply not answerable in any rational way. . If you assume omniscient, omnipotent superbeings, all bets are off. They/It can make us believe anything. You can't know that any of your beliefs are certain and/or yours. . If there are no omniscient, omnipotent superbeings, you can't absolutely prove the negative, you can only accumulate increasing amounts of evidence. . I'm aware of non-rational experiences of "the divine" and how powerful they are (had some myself, actually), but the interpretation of being enlightened/born-again/etc. is all done though the mind. If it can be induced by chemicals or a powerful magnetic field pointed at the right spot on the skull, I'd have to question it's association with omniscient superbeings.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I'd bet on narcissistic personality disorder as defined in DSM IV, but she has some elements of histrionic personality disorder (i.e. inappropriate seductive behaviors (voice, dress) which probably worked wonders on McCain)
And if so, are we allowed to shoot them right then, or should there be licenses and a season?
Mrs. Palin? We're waiting for you in the examination room.....
Word doesn't matter.
MS Office or any office doesn't matter.
Software doesn't matter.
.
What people know and understand enough to USE matters. It's a human issue, not a technical one.
Hooey. If that were the case, the Chinese and Indians would have discovered North America before the Europeans. They had better navigation and technology. They didn't have the cultural impetus to exploration. The examples you mentions are all a cultural blip, largely localized to European aristocracy of the last few centuries. We don't need any more shows for the rubes; we need to use space to find answers to real problems, not the superficial nonsense of "getting off."
OK, you first.
Space travel should have three goals right now:
1) Long-term habitable space environments with atmosphere, power, sustainable ecology, etc.
2) Power generation on a large scale.
3) Reversible temperature control of the Earth.
These are *useful* and may just save our collective bacon. Mars isn't going anywhere. Neither is the moon. If there's anything useful there, we can get to it later. The three things I've mentioned seem far more important to humanity than exploration for exploration's sake, and not on the radar of any of the bureaucrats at any of the government sponsored space agencies.
the dark spot on Uranus?
Just asking....
Physicists are trying to discover unknown facts by using known facts and empirical testing.
.
Computer professionals have a broader scope. Some of what they do is to create known predictable systems from known facts and known rules. Occasionally, they are asked to discover previously unknown facts from these rules. Perhaps only the latter should be called "Computer Scientists" so as to differentiate them from "Computer Engineers" or "Programmer/Journeymen" or the other different positions involving computers.
Isn't "cryptographic thriller" an oxymoron?
Wow, you've just typified exactly the kind of thinking that's gotten us into this mess.
.
Communism, socialism, capitalism. These aren't booleans. Most western democracies (including us) have mixed systems of capitalist and government sponsored organizations (e.g. the public library, your grandma's social security, food and drug regulatory agencies, rural electrification, the highway system, the military, the monetary system, and so on.)
.
Neither capitalism nor socialism are magic fairies that solve all problems. You *need* that mix. China has them different proportion, and unfortunately, less regard for individual rights than we do. I wouldn't want to live under that, but it's obviously working for a lot of them.
That's absolutely true. We sold our dominance for next quarter's numbers. We sold it to get money for private economic clubs (commonly called "shareholders"). Their desires trumped both economic and technological security.
.
The clubs haven't done so well lately either. Worse to come, I'm afraid.
Gangsters are dangerous, whether they belong to the crips, bloods, hell's angels, goldman sachs, the white house or a lobbying group.
.
Of course, in the USA, we have the right of free association and free speech. I'm honestly conflicted on this one. I favor these rights at a gut level.
But these rights are killing us too. Slowly. What to do?
Driving is expensive, risky and time-consuming. Plus I want to *scream* at bad drivers. (Today's example. a tiny women driving a gigundous SUV, badly, with a cell phone glued to her ear as she bore down on the guy in front of me while she was busy discussing where to pick up her little darlings after school).
.
Does anyone really need that?
I understand. The fear I have is that pressure for profits would eventually force the developers to make more robust and lower maintenance organisms, with long-lived continuous hydrocarbon production.
.
And wouldn't the easiest way to do that would be to start with a robust organism in the first place? Why re-invent the wheel? Find the toughest cyanobacteria you can and *then* start hacking for hydrocarbon production. That's what I would do.
Hydrocarbon producing algae escaping into the environment....
.
Whole ecology destruction, anyone? Anyone? Any takers? You! With the gas guzzler? You don't give a flip about some ocean life do ya? Well, here's your algae oil/gasoline. Now go home and don't upset the government/financial speculators. We know what we're doing....
Quote from my human factors instructor of many years ago:
"Any system that depends on the user doing the right thing has already failed."
There should be no warnings. Nothing to click. You simply don't let them see the page and you tell them why. Assume they will work around it and protect them as much as you can anyway.
Most programmers at this point ask, "And should I wipe for them too?"
The correct answer is, "Yes, but ask what brand of paper they prefer and make sure there's an alternative if they forget." Sorry, but THAT'S YOUR JOB AS A PROGRAMMER.
Programs are for PEOPLE, not computers. Computers don't matter. At all. They exist ONLY for PEOPLE. Your job is to take care of the PEOPLE's issues like *they* matter. The computer is secondary, or tertiary.
Nobody I know of course...
Tsera's lawyers are just a wee bit *touchy* on this topic...
In America, Microsoft tests you.
Glad they're behind the eight ball on this one.
Energy efficient, yet stinky... I *like* it!
It's a command line utility written in .net that cranks out system information into a comma delimited file on a shared directory on each machine. Have a batch file that copies the output to a single directory on my machine and merges the lot. I suppose I could tweak it to update an sql database and put together a nice front-end for others, but for my teeny 100 system kingdom, it's sufficient. Free too, since I wrote the thing.
Well then, I'd like it *back* please. I wasn't done using it yet. You can have it after I'm finished.
[In a world without evidence for monsters under your bed, the rational position is to believe that no such monsters exist.]
Well, *there's* your problem right there!
In a turkey's world without evidence for personal decapitation on Thanksgiving, the rational position is to believe that personal decapitation on Thanksgiving never happens.
Black swan events do happen. Monsters like politicians, lawyers, et. al. have been known to hide under beds. Unless you look, you don't know, and you never know about next time with certainty.
What a bunch of pompous whooey! (FYI, a strong agnostic position antagonizes just about everybody on the thiest and athiest side).
.
Agnosticism is a stand against arrogance and self-delusion and for rationality. Not only do we not know, but the question is simply not answerable in any rational way.
.
If you assume omniscient, omnipotent superbeings, all bets are off. They/It can make us believe anything. You can't know that any of your beliefs are certain and/or yours.
.
If there are no omniscient, omnipotent superbeings, you can't absolutely prove the negative, you can only accumulate increasing amounts of evidence.
.
I'm aware of non-rational experiences of "the divine" and how powerful they are (had some myself, actually), but the interpretation of being enlightened/born-again/etc. is all done though the mind. If it can be induced by chemicals or a powerful magnetic field pointed at the right spot on the skull, I'd have to question it's association with omniscient superbeings.