Invisible wrote:
>>> Why do some people like the X-Files?
>>
>> Because it's cool.  The whole UFO "I want to believe" mantra as well 
>> as the "Trust no one" conspiracionist theories were all around in the 
>> 90s...
> 
> I just don't see the point.
> 
> Each episode, something happens which makes absolutely no sense. It's 
> not that it's "mysterious", it's just nonsensical. Molder and Scully 
> investigate. A series of utterly incomprehensible events occur. It turns 
> out that the conspiracy was actually a conspiracy to create a conspiracy 
> that would make people think the conspiracy was actually a conspiracy 
> about a conspiracy to create a conspiracy. But then that turns out to be 
> wrong too. And after about an hour of abject failure to make any kind of 
> weakly comprehendable sense, the show ends.

I never liked the X-Files until I read an interview with Chris Carter 
(the guy who created the show) back in the 90s about how he was affected 
by the Watergate scandal.  The growing public sense of outrage over the 
fact that the administration had been lying and deceiving them for 
years... before then, there was a great deal more public trust in our 
elected officials, but Watergate officially marked the beginning of the 
modern age of cynicism in politics.

All of that really shows in the X-Files, as the show isn't really about 
aliens, but about a conspiracy.  From that point of view, the show is 
quite enjoyable and interesting.  As sci fi, it's really not very good.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Sep 2009 10:27:43 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> 
>> Some tiny minority of the population, perhaps. But that wouldn't explain
>> it being so popular.
> 
> If it was popular, then by definition it was understood by most of those 
> who watched it.

You're assuming that you have to understand something to enjoy it.  As 
exhibit A that this is not the case, may I present "2001"? :)

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Ah, the days of plain ASCII, before anybody spoke of Unicode. Hey, wait 
> a sec - C is *still* back in the days of plain ASCII...

Only if you assume 'char' to be a text character, rather than an 8 bit 
byte (which is what it really is, just as 'int' isn't really a true 
integer, but rather a register-sized word on whatever machine you're 
compiling for).

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Did mushrooms evolve to be poisonous because that's advantageous 
> somehow? Or do they just happen to be poisonous to animals because of 
> their unusual chemistry?

Or did animals eat all the non-poisonous mushrooms, leaving only the 
poisonous ones to reproduce?

One of the biggest misunderstandings about evolution is the nature of 
"natural selection."  The word "selection" implies an active force 
(which most people assume it is), while really it's an effect of the 
system rather than a force for change.

It's the difference between cause and effect.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>>   AFAIK the bright colors work as a warning signal. Predators learn to
>> distinguish the poisonous prey by their color.
> 
> This clearly works poorly if the prey is so poisonous they kill the 
> predator with one meal.

You're assuming that for this to be an effective evolutionary strategy 
(there's that entanglement with 'cause', again), it has to be effective 
for individuals.

An evolutionary strategy can be effective for groups, while failing 
horribly for individuals.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> There are insulators between the cables and pylons so there is no path for the
> electricity to flow there. The conductors are spaced far enough apart so that
> the electricity cannot jump between them. This is called engineering. ;)

I always assumed the cables themselves were insulated.

Seriously, are we running uninsulated wires above our roadways?!?!? :o

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Jim Henderson wrote:
> Not any more we don't.  We're burning China's money. :P

I thought they were burning ours at this point? :o

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>>   AFAIK the bright colors work as a warning signal. Predators learn to
>>> distinguish the poisonous prey by their color.
>>
>> This clearly works poorly if the prey is so poisonous they kill the 
>> predator with one meal.
> 
> You're assuming that for this to be an effective evolutionary strategy 
> (there's that entanglement with 'cause', again), it has to be effective 
> for individuals.
> 
> An evolutionary strategy can be effective for groups, while failing 
> horribly for individuals.

Well, I'm talking about color plus poison. I'm assuming the two are 
independent, since so many species have both.

Of course, it could be that the mutation to be more visible came first and 
only the distasteful individual survived that.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> It's the difference between cause and effect.

I remember once commenting something about poison ivy, and someone 
responding that poison ivy is that way because it is the first plant to grow 
back after a major fire. I asked "Why would being poisonous make you grow 
back first." They pointed out I had cause/effect reverse. D'oh!

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

Chambers wrote:
> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> Not any more we don't.  We're burning China's money. :P
> 
> I thought they were burning ours at this point? :o

Only if our money was real.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message