Think of in terms of cars. The processes are roads, the CPUs are cars and the cores are the seats in the cars, only the seats can each travel on different roads independently and share resources with the other seats in the same car. If you have a 2-seater and the seats are on different roads, they can obviously only go half as fast as if they are on the same road. Now if you have 48 seats in a car, than it isn't a car anymore, it's a bus, so obviously you'd have to make fundamental changes to the OS.
When it comes to computers, you can never go wrong with a car analogy.
... for the slashdot community. As a part of the conservative slashdotter minority, I came to this thread fully expecting to see most people coming out in Obama's defense on this, or trying to excuse it somehow, but I saw nothing of the kind. Rather than pile on, I'll just say that I admire people who consistently back principles rather than personalities.
How do you cost out not having a lock on a cabinet or not having a extra shelf?
Actually in the case of the lock that would be easier to cost out for 1000 stores than for 1 - how much did you spend last year fixing problems caused by unauthorized access? If it hasn't been a problem at any of your stores, maybe you don't worry about it.
Companies can be really crazy about this kind of thing, though. A billion dollar company will get all excited about something that measurably saves a few thousand a year without noticing that it incurs an unmeasured cost far exceeding that by inconveniencing their employees and cutting into their productivity.
I'd like to ask a specific question about what you said, but I'm pretty much lost from beginning to end. What is "psuedo capitalism" and how does it lead to inflation, depletion of resources, etc.? In what fashion do you predict things will progress? How is the U.S. forcing China to buy it's debt and in what way is that "containing" China? Presumably, if I can understand all that, I'll see how it's a stroke of genius.
I hate to besmirch the name of the good Chinese researchers that I know but I wouldn't trust this.
It's interesting you say that, because the images just don't make sense to me. If I understand the article, those are 2 temperature maps of the moon's surface - one is "day", one is "night", but they both seem to show the entire surface of the moon, and in both, while the temperature seems to drop off toward the poles as you would expect, there is little variation around the circumference. Am I missing something? Can anyone explain this?
Also apparently Japanese does not have many/any swear words? It does have offensive words/phrases like any other language of course.
That's... somewhat true. I learned Japanese and there aren't exact analogues to most of the American curse words. They do, however, have "politeness levels" built into the language and I think they get the same effect by using inappropriately familiar or "downward" expressions, and there are some words that are pretty much rude in any situation. My kids like anime, and I watch some with english subs, and am amused at how many curse words they put in the subs. In the anime, they may just use a non-polite or derogatory form of the word "you" that really doesn't convey any other meaning than "you + disrespect", and the subs add in "scumbag" or "bi---" (if it's a woman). I can see their dilemma, but on the whole I think they would get the original sense across better if they didn't try to make up for the missing forms in English and just let the tone of voice and facial expression communicate that part.
To the original point, I would say that in Japanese, a language that doesn't have many "curse words" as we think of them, there are still ways to express rudeness and socially inappropriate forms of speech that you wouldn't want your kids using. Maybe more of them, as there are more expected differences in the way children speak to adults vs the way adults speak to children.
Not this ignorant shit again. You are confusing moderate Islam with extremist Islam. The two are not the same. It's not Islam that makes extremist Muslims crazy, but their extremism.
I don't even like the term "extremist", as it implies that religion is only safe in moderation. I don't know that much about Islam, but I personally know "extreme" Christians who are extremely tolerant and peace-loving. If there is anything crazy about them, it's the degree to which they can turn the other cheek, or keep their faith through trials. I would guess it's the same with Muslims. Hate is the seed of violence, and religion is only one of the things people use to justify acting on it.
I had a FaceBook account for a short while, then saw what other people were doing there (people I know), and decided not to be a part of the vacuous trumpeting that substitutes for interaction.
Fortunately, you'll find none of that in this forum!
Runes are still an alphabet, so runes and roman letters aren't that different, and I don't see why one is necessarily better. Kanji each represent a whole word, which is why there are 1000s of them. A phonetic alphabet isn't necessarily better than kanji, but it's much better for keyboard entry. (I've heard some old Japanese typesetting machines actually had a huge grid of several thousand keys).
Others have observed that a phonetic alphabet might make a lot more sense for Japanese than Kanji. Japan learned writing from China. Chinese (I've heard) is a language where most words are one syllable and there isn't a lot of inflection. So one character for each word makes sense. Japanese is polysyllabic with lots of inflections. So in Japan they use a combination of Chinese meaning-based characters and phonetic characters they came up with on their own (but still loosely based on kanji).
It may sound stupid but one of the few reasons I've got for accumulating more money is being able to pay the medicine I hope will exist by the time my body starts failing in those kind of ways.
Ahh, youth. I'm not mocking, just reminiscing about that kind of optimism. However, I will point out that socialized medicine could make your investment irrelevant.
Please see the fundie alert up above.
(seriously, where do you people come from? What's your background? How were you raised? and why the hell are you here spewing your bullshit?)
I would assume AC was going for "funny". Of course, anything's possible.
But, ironically, conceptualising this great "value giver" lessens the value of ones contributions to humanity or outright to the Universe (to be most encompassing). After all, it doesn't really matter objectivelly...just as long as your deity says it matters (this also depends of course which self-confessed representative of gods you listen to...).
I'm not sure how it lessens the value of what an individual does. I'm not sure I follow your point.
BTW, there were many resurrection deities and gods in human form. Also children of gods living on Earth (or outright gods in human form). Why, out of all those who said they really were them, you would believe only one?
The choice was, of course, personal and subjective. I was raised Christian, but that almost kept me from accepting it later in life (I didn't want to believe "just because" my parents did). It was the influence of people that I met, and my own thoughts and feelings, some experiences I've had where I believe God answered prayer or otherwise acted in my life. I'm a rational person and I can't say I've seen anything that couldn't possibly have any other explanation, but at some point I just decided to believe, and looking back, I'm very glad I did.
You know one interesting thing about faith is that everyone practices it whether they admit it or not. Even if you only believe in science, you didn't do all the science yourself, you mostly trust that other scientists did it right and are keeping each other honest. That's how conspiracy theories can get traction -- because they are possible. Not likely, maybe, but possible. And even if you had done all the research yourself, in my opinion a materialist has the LEAST reason to trust human reasoning. To a materialist, reasoning is just chemistry going on - there's nothing mystical going on there that assures us we are even capable of seeing the truth. What kind of "blind spots" might we have, as a species, in the way we look at the world?
Discussion won't change the fact that, as a group, those who claim to be absolute moral authority and guidance can and do destroy lifes; which pretty much is an antithesis of some of the core things they claim to follow... It's all just unsubstantiated claims.
I don't see that "destruction" necessarily follows from unwavering belief in something. Yes, plenty of religious people do bad things. Some may be well intentioned and unintentionally do harm, and there are plenty of wolves in sheep's clothing - people who manipulate others for their personal benefit. But plenty of good is done by religious people (and I'm not saying EXCLUSIVELY by religious people). Whenever there is a disaster, look at all the church groups who go to help rebuild. Missionaries go all over the world to preach a message of peace and joy and hope to hurting people, and generally they also try to help them physically as well. I know people who do these things and they do them because they love people and want to help them. Yes there are bad religious people out there, but don't judge all of us by their actions.
I have a problem with the resolution... Calling it a map is a stretch. Calling it a 3D map is not legitimate as there is no usable 3D Information based solely on resolution.
Technically, it's a map no matter how little information is there. But aside from that, your math is off. It's one pixel for 1000km^2, not (1000km)^2. Each pixel represents a square with 32km sides.
forcefully brought into, with real detrimental effects for them; and with this thing still trying to get in their way every single day...while they just would like to be left alone.
Sounds like you've had some negative experience with religion personally. Do you want to talk about it?
Your signature is interesting given the content of your post. Would you care to elaborate, I am confused. Is supposed to be a threat to atheist, and rational thinkers, like the billboard of a kid holding a gun that says" If God doesn't matter to him then why you."? (or something similar)
I've had that sig ever since I started posting on slashdot. It's a quote from a teacher of mine from way back. I'd be glad to elaborate, especially since I never thought anyone would perceive it as a threat.
In a materialist's world view (i.e., only the material world exists, there is no "soul" or "spirit"), it seems to me that nothing can absolutely have value. The only value that things or people have is the value we give to them, but to other people those things or people might have no value and who's to say who is right? This is different from my world view (and don't tell me I'm wrong because that's not what some other religious people believe, I'm just telling you what *I* believe), that there is a higher authority, God, that values people whether anyone else values them or not. Christianity teaches that God loved the world enough to give them his son so that others might live. I believe that if YOU were the only person in the world, Jesus would die to save you. To me, that means I should value you, even if you don't think like me or act the way I want you to act.
I find it ironic that the "prophet" Mohammed is treated with more respect and reverence by Muslims who treat human life as superfluous than the "Messiah" Jesus is treated by his followers.
Not making threats against people who attack your beliefs doesn't make you "lukewarm" about them. I'm a Christian and I see plenty of stuff that offends me (even on slashdot, believe it or not). But I figure, why should I expect people to respect something they don't even believe in? Wouldn't it be better to turn the other cheek and treat others with respect even if they didn't show any to you? I'm not saying there's no place for complaining about this sort of thing, but some ways of complaining are more effective than others and making threats just doesn't seem justified to me even when it is effective (and in this case, I'm sure the threats will only prompt more offensive jokes).
I don't believe that such as thing as absolute morality exists. However, there is such a thing as contractual morality (it is wrong to cheat on your spouse because you have an implicit contract that you won't. If you and your spouse have an agreement that sleeping around is ok, then it is not immoral). So, if something offends your sense of right and wrong, DON'T DO IT! But you have no right to bitch about other people doing something that does not harm you. (Your moral indignity is a harm you impose on yourself.)
You don't believe in absolute morality. Fine. Then you tell someone they "have no right" to complain about something. If there is no absolute morality then what do you mean by "right", exactly? I'm sure based on his morals he has every right to complain. And his complaint doesn't harm you, does it? By your own argument you have no right to complain about his complaining.
Finally, if you're a high-bandwidth user of Verizon's smartphone data services, the company will soon hunt you down and throttle you. (The company has long had a maximum transfer limit on monthly data plans.)
So, it sounds like they haven't "already paid for it", but instead are violating the terms of their service agreement. Existing laws already protect the consumer from false advertising, etc (remember the lawsuits over "unlimited data" plans).
Here's how regulation could be bad... say there was a law that you couldn't sell a plan with a monthly transfer limit. Well then, the plans are going to be more expensive for everyone only to subsidize the needs of a few people who are constantly maxing bandwidth, when most people probably would have been fine with a lower price and a transfer limit. Let the heavy users pay more. As long as there is competition, I trust companies to figure out how to make plans that people want to buy more than I trust the government to correctly determine what people need or want.
Great job Tae Ashida, that looks like the perfect outfit for anyone whose lower legs are longer than the rest of their body.
Funny coincidence: the designer's name is "Ashida" and "ashi" means "leg" in Japanese. I say coincidence because that's not what the "ashi" part means in the name.
Slashdot Mirror
They're doing Archimedes solar ray AGAIN? Aren't we up to three already (the original myth and two revisits)?
Politicians like to have their answers written up ahead of time.
Think of in terms of cars. The processes are roads, the CPUs are cars and the cores are the seats in the cars, only the seats can each travel on different roads independently and share resources with the other seats in the same car. If you have a 2-seater and the seats are on different roads, they can obviously only go half as fast as if they are on the same road. Now if you have 48 seats in a car, than it isn't a car anymore, it's a bus, so obviously you'd have to make fundamental changes to the OS.
When it comes to computers, you can never go wrong with a car analogy.
... for the slashdot community. As a part of the conservative slashdotter minority, I came to this thread fully expecting to see most people coming out in Obama's defense on this, or trying to excuse it somehow, but I saw nothing of the kind. Rather than pile on, I'll just say that I admire people who consistently back principles rather than personalities.
How do you cost out not having a lock on a cabinet or not having a extra shelf?
Actually in the case of the lock that would be easier to cost out for 1000 stores than for 1 - how much did you spend last year fixing problems caused by unauthorized access? If it hasn't been a problem at any of your stores, maybe you don't worry about it.
Companies can be really crazy about this kind of thing, though. A billion dollar company will get all excited about something that measurably saves a few thousand a year without noticing that it incurs an unmeasured cost far exceeding that by inconveniencing their employees and cutting into their productivity.
I'd like to ask a specific question about what you said, but I'm pretty much lost from beginning to end. What is "psuedo capitalism" and how does it lead to inflation, depletion of resources, etc.? In what fashion do you predict things will progress? How is the U.S. forcing China to buy it's debt and in what way is that "containing" China? Presumably, if I can understand all that, I'll see how it's a stroke of genius.
It's just like this picture, where it's night all over the planet. Or this one, where it's day everywhere and there are no clouds.
(facepalm) Duh! Thanks, I figured I was missing something obvious, or everyone else would have been all over it before I posted.
I hate to besmirch the name of the good Chinese researchers that I know but I wouldn't trust this.
It's interesting you say that, because the images just don't make sense to me. If I understand the article, those are 2 temperature maps of the moon's surface - one is "day", one is "night", but they both seem to show the entire surface of the moon, and in both, while the temperature seems to drop off toward the poles as you would expect, there is little variation around the circumference. Am I missing something? Can anyone explain this?
Also apparently Japanese does not have many/any swear words? It does have offensive words/phrases like any other language of course.
That's ... somewhat true. I learned Japanese and there aren't exact analogues to most of the American curse words. They do, however, have "politeness levels" built into the language and I think they get the same effect by using inappropriately familiar or "downward" expressions, and there are some words that are pretty much rude in any situation. My kids like anime, and I watch some with english subs, and am amused at how many curse words they put in the subs. In the anime, they may just use a non-polite or derogatory form of the word "you" that really doesn't convey any other meaning than "you + disrespect", and the subs add in "scumbag" or "bi---" (if it's a woman). I can see their dilemma, but on the whole I think they would get the original sense across better if they didn't try to make up for the missing forms in English and just let the tone of voice and facial expression communicate that part.
To the original point, I would say that in Japanese, a language that doesn't have many "curse words" as we think of them, there are still ways to express rudeness and socially inappropriate forms of speech that you wouldn't want your kids using. Maybe more of them, as there are more expected differences in the way children speak to adults vs the way adults speak to children.
Not this ignorant shit again. You are confusing moderate Islam with extremist Islam. The two are not the same. It's not Islam that makes extremist Muslims crazy, but their extremism.
I don't even like the term "extremist", as it implies that religion is only safe in moderation. I don't know that much about Islam, but I personally know "extreme" Christians who are extremely tolerant and peace-loving. If there is anything crazy about them, it's the degree to which they can turn the other cheek, or keep their faith through trials. I would guess it's the same with Muslims. Hate is the seed of violence, and religion is only one of the things people use to justify acting on it.
I had a FaceBook account for a short while, then saw what other people were doing there (people I know), and decided not to be a part of the vacuous trumpeting that substitutes for interaction.
Fortunately, you'll find none of that in this forum!
Runes are still an alphabet, so runes and roman letters aren't that different, and I don't see why one is necessarily better. Kanji each represent a whole word, which is why there are 1000s of them. A phonetic alphabet isn't necessarily better than kanji, but it's much better for keyboard entry. (I've heard some old Japanese typesetting machines actually had a huge grid of several thousand keys).
Others have observed that a phonetic alphabet might make a lot more sense for Japanese than Kanji. Japan learned writing from China. Chinese (I've heard) is a language where most words are one syllable and there isn't a lot of inflection. So one character for each word makes sense. Japanese is polysyllabic with lots of inflections. So in Japan they use a combination of Chinese meaning-based characters and phonetic characters they came up with on their own (but still loosely based on kanji).
No, that's not standard usage in the US or anywhere else that I'm aware of.
Maybe that's the common way of presenting it in China and Korea
Danger is *TO* the eye of the beholder.
FTFY
I'd imagine he knew that saying some of this stuff one hundred years ago would be career ending or life threatening
I wonder why he'd want to wait until 100 years after his death to publish it, then? Wouldn't his death immediately make those issues moot?
It may sound stupid but one of the few reasons I've got for accumulating more money is being able to pay the medicine I hope will exist by the time my body starts failing in those kind of ways.
Ahh, youth. I'm not mocking, just reminiscing about that kind of optimism. However, I will point out that socialized medicine could make your investment irrelevant.
Please see the fundie alert up above. (seriously, where do you people come from? What's your background? How were you raised? and why the hell are you here spewing your bullshit?)
I would assume AC was going for "funny". Of course, anything's possible.
But, ironically, conceptualising this great "value giver" lessens the value of ones contributions to humanity or outright to the Universe (to be most encompassing). After all, it doesn't really matter objectivelly...just as long as your deity says it matters (this also depends of course which self-confessed representative of gods you listen to...).
I'm not sure how it lessens the value of what an individual does. I'm not sure I follow your point.
BTW, there were many resurrection deities and gods in human form. Also children of gods living on Earth (or outright gods in human form). Why, out of all those who said they really were them, you would believe only one?
The choice was, of course, personal and subjective. I was raised Christian, but that almost kept me from accepting it later in life (I didn't want to believe "just because" my parents did). It was the influence of people that I met, and my own thoughts and feelings, some experiences I've had where I believe God answered prayer or otherwise acted in my life. I'm a rational person and I can't say I've seen anything that couldn't possibly have any other explanation, but at some point I just decided to believe, and looking back, I'm very glad I did.
You know one interesting thing about faith is that everyone practices it whether they admit it or not. Even if you only believe in science, you didn't do all the science yourself, you mostly trust that other scientists did it right and are keeping each other honest. That's how conspiracy theories can get traction -- because they are possible. Not likely, maybe, but possible. And even if you had done all the research yourself, in my opinion a materialist has the LEAST reason to trust human reasoning. To a materialist, reasoning is just chemistry going on - there's nothing mystical going on there that assures us we are even capable of seeing the truth. What kind of "blind spots" might we have, as a species, in the way we look at the world?
Discussion won't change the fact that, as a group, those who claim to be absolute moral authority and guidance can and do destroy lifes; which pretty much is an antithesis of some of the core things they claim to follow... It's all just unsubstantiated claims.
I don't see that "destruction" necessarily follows from unwavering belief in something. Yes, plenty of religious people do bad things. Some may be well intentioned and unintentionally do harm, and there are plenty of wolves in sheep's clothing - people who manipulate others for their personal benefit. But plenty of good is done by religious people (and I'm not saying EXCLUSIVELY by religious people). Whenever there is a disaster, look at all the church groups who go to help rebuild. Missionaries go all over the world to preach a message of peace and joy and hope to hurting people, and generally they also try to help them physically as well. I know people who do these things and they do them because they love people and want to help them. Yes there are bad religious people out there, but don't judge all of us by their actions.
I have a problem with the resolution ... Calling it a map is a stretch. Calling it a 3D map is not legitimate as there is no usable 3D Information based solely on resolution.
Technically, it's a map no matter how little information is there. But aside from that, your math is off. It's one pixel for 1000km^2, not (1000km)^2. Each pixel represents a square with 32km sides.
forcefully brought into, with real detrimental effects for them; and with this thing still trying to get in their way every single day...while they just would like to be left alone.
Sounds like you've had some negative experience with religion personally. Do you want to talk about it?
Your signature is interesting given the content of your post. Would you care to elaborate, I am confused. Is supposed to be a threat to atheist, and rational thinkers, like the billboard of a kid holding a gun that says" If God doesn't matter to him then why you."? (or something similar)
I've had that sig ever since I started posting on slashdot. It's a quote from a teacher of mine from way back. I'd be glad to elaborate, especially since I never thought anyone would perceive it as a threat.
In a materialist's world view (i.e., only the material world exists, there is no "soul" or "spirit"), it seems to me that nothing can absolutely have value. The only value that things or people have is the value we give to them, but to other people those things or people might have no value and who's to say who is right? This is different from my world view (and don't tell me I'm wrong because that's not what some other religious people believe, I'm just telling you what *I* believe), that there is a higher authority, God, that values people whether anyone else values them or not. Christianity teaches that God loved the world enough to give them his son so that others might live. I believe that if YOU were the only person in the world, Jesus would die to save you. To me, that means I should value you, even if you don't think like me or act the way I want you to act.
I find it ironic that the "prophet" Mohammed is treated with more respect and reverence by Muslims who treat human life as superfluous than the "Messiah" Jesus is treated by his followers.
Not making threats against people who attack your beliefs doesn't make you "lukewarm" about them. I'm a Christian and I see plenty of stuff that offends me (even on slashdot, believe it or not). But I figure, why should I expect people to respect something they don't even believe in? Wouldn't it be better to turn the other cheek and treat others with respect even if they didn't show any to you? I'm not saying there's no place for complaining about this sort of thing, but some ways of complaining are more effective than others and making threats just doesn't seem justified to me even when it is effective (and in this case, I'm sure the threats will only prompt more offensive jokes).
I don't believe that such as thing as absolute morality exists. However, there is such a thing as contractual morality (it is wrong to cheat on your spouse because you have an implicit contract that you won't. If you and your spouse have an agreement that sleeping around is ok, then it is not immoral). So, if something offends your sense of right and wrong, DON'T DO IT! But you have no right to bitch about other people doing something that does not harm you. (Your moral indignity is a harm you impose on yourself.)
You don't believe in absolute morality. Fine. Then you tell someone they "have no right" to complain about something. If there is no absolute morality then what do you mean by "right", exactly? I'm sure based on his morals he has every right to complain. And his complaint doesn't harm you, does it? By your own argument you have no right to complain about his complaining.
FTA:
Finally, if you're a high-bandwidth user of Verizon's smartphone data services, the company will soon hunt you down and throttle you. (The company has long had a maximum transfer limit on monthly data plans.)
So, it sounds like they haven't "already paid for it", but instead are violating the terms of their service agreement. Existing laws already protect the consumer from false advertising, etc (remember the lawsuits over "unlimited data" plans).
Here's how regulation could be bad ... say there was a law that you couldn't sell a plan with a monthly transfer limit. Well then, the plans are going to be more expensive for everyone only to subsidize the needs of a few people who are constantly maxing bandwidth, when most people probably would have been fine with a lower price and a transfer limit. Let the heavy users pay more. As long as there is competition, I trust companies to figure out how to make plans that people want to buy more than I trust the government to correctly determine what people need or want.
Great job Tae Ashida, that looks like the perfect outfit for anyone whose lower legs are longer than the rest of their body.
Funny coincidence: the designer's name is "Ashida" and "ashi" means "leg" in Japanese. I say coincidence because that's not what the "ashi" part means in the name.