Le 28/01/2012 02:53, Patrick Elliott nous fit lire :
> And, must like the "divine right of kings", its purpose wasn't to
> explain why bad things happened, or give some sort of hope (save in the
> entirely false sense, rather like the after life of Christianity), but
> to maintain how things already are. If you don't have a next life, or
> there isn't someone telling you, "If you do all the right things, it
> will be better next time", you will act to change things. If you think
> your deserve what you get, or will be rewarded for suffering it, then,
> the very act of apposing it is, by definition of how what those rules
> say about your caste, life, choices, failures, and even luck, evil (or
> bad karma).

Yep, you have some clues.
Human nature has a boon: consciousness of its own inescapable death.
And a malediction: high vulnerability in early years of life.

It generates so much stress on the long term that any derivative is
happily welcomed: here comes the various religions and ruling systems.
Most bad positions become acceptable (to most, not for all) if you have
the possibilities or probabilities to reach the other position in the
futur. children might become parents, young one might become old ones...
the vassal system is that kind too: serf to lord, lord to count, count
to duc, duc to king... and king need a top also to stay similar, it can
be emperor or god(s). It's also a repetition of the parental scheme of
younger time... "all is good, I have a powerful and mighty protector"

Post a reply to this message

On 28/01/2012 1:42 AM, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> On 1/26/2012 1:34 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 26/01/2012 8:24 PM, Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You're not a fan of "My name is Earl", then?
>>>>
>>> Uh, don't think I have ever heard of it. lol
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Name_Is_Earl
>>
>>
>>
> Ah.. Yeah, not something I would have watched, short of having a
> lobotomy, sort of like 'The Ghost Whisperer'. I prefer my fiction to
> actually be fiction, like 'Being Human'. lol

Not my cup of tea either but I saw a few episodes when someone else was 
watching it. I prefer my TV to be off. ;-)

-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 1/28/2012 2:25 AM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 28/01/2012 02:53, Patrick Elliott nous fit lire :
>> And, must like the "divine right of kings", its purpose wasn't to
>> explain why bad things happened, or give some sort of hope (save in the
>> entirely false sense, rather like the after life of Christianity), but
>> to maintain how things already are. If you don't have a next life, or
>> there isn't someone telling you, "If you do all the right things, it
>> will be better next time", you will act to change things. If you think
>> your deserve what you get, or will be rewarded for suffering it, then,
>> the very act of apposing it is, by definition of how what those rules
>> say about your caste, life, choices, failures, and even luck, evil (or
>> bad karma).
>
> Yep, you have some clues.
> Human nature has a boon: consciousness of its own inescapable death.
> And a malediction: high vulnerability in early years of life.
>
> It generates so much stress on the long term that any derivative is
> happily welcomed: here comes the various religions and ruling systems.
> Most bad positions become acceptable (to most, not for all) if you have
> the possibilities or probabilities to reach the other position in the
> futur. children might become parents, young one might become old ones...
> the vassal system is that kind too: serf to lord, lord to count, count
> to duc, duc to king... and king need a top also to stay similar, it can
> be emperor or god(s). It's also a repetition of the parental scheme of
> younger time... "all is good, I have a powerful and mighty protector"
>
Like I argued just today, on someone complaining about "New atheists", 
the problem with entirely false ones, like religion though is that they 
anesthetize the people in them with respect to actually trying to change 
any inequity. This doesn't address the problems, it merely presents one 
with a seemingly plausible reason why they are not *as bad*, while 
allowing the problems to perpetuate (or possibly get worse). The example 
I used was the LA riots, where a few hundred people ran wild, destroying 
their own neighborhoods. Where where the rest of the people, who 
outnumbered them by a huge margin? In churches, praying that they 
wouldn't be victim to it, and that it would all magically go away. A 
tactic which didn't address the questionable verdict that triggered the 
event, the sense of powerlessness, the rage, or anything else. It simply 
gave people an easy way out of the immediate problem. And, since it did, 
it will again, and again, and again, without ever changing anything that 
causes the problems.

That is the core thing that makes such stuff dangerous. It doesn't deal 
with reality at all, it just hands people a bottle of pain pills, and 
tells them, "I hope it goes away on its own."

Post a reply to this message

Le 28/01/2012 19:53, Patrick Elliott nous fit lire :
> That is the core thing that makes such stuff dangerous. It doesn't deal
> with reality at all, it just hands people a bottle of pain pills, and
> tells them, "I hope it goes away on its own."

to quote (badly, probably) a movie:
"You want the truth ? You can't handle the truth."

(Now in quizz mode, name that movie !)

(in rot13 for you: N Srj Tbbq Zna "Lbh Pna'g Unaqyr gur Gehgu" )

I'd like to beware also about the Allegory of the Cave (Plato).

The one which know the full truth in a company must be fired.

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 21:27:31 +0100, Le_Forgeron wrote:

> to quote (badly, probably) a movie:
> "You want the truth ? You can't handle the truth."
> 
> (Now in quizz mode, name that movie !)

A Few Good Men.  One of my favourites.  Nicholson was extremely well in 
the role of Col. Jessup.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 1/27/2012 4:36 AM, Invisible wrote:
> On 27/01/2012 04:17 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> On 1/23/2012 2:42, Invisible wrote:
>>> On 23/01/2012 10:29 AM, John VanSickle wrote:
>>>> Wait, isn't Pipa some gal who's in the tabloids a lot?
>>>
>>> I wouldn't know; I don't read comic books.
>>
>> "I'm not into Pokeman."
>
> Is it bad that I realise it's actually spelt Pokémon?

Not really, they have been mainstream so long that even non-virgins know 
this.

Regards,
John

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:43:38 +0000, Invisible wrote:

>> It's easier to find jobs to apply to when you have a broader awareness
>> of the world than just what's relevant to you right now.
> 
> I doubt you're going to get that by reading some text on a screen. To
> understand what a new capability means, you often need to experience it
> for yourself.

Hmmm, so let me see if I understand this correctly....You're asserting 
that one of the methods that I actually use to keep up on technology 
doesn't work?  Interesting that you'd have insight into what works for me 
on such a deep level. 

>>> I got the impression that Slashdot was more a forum for idle gossip
>>> and bored people starting flamewars. I wasn't aware any useful
>>> information existed there.
>>
>> It is, but the articles are good pointers to what's important.  I
>> rarely read the comments (unless I'm bored).  But I have an RSS feed
>> set up from the stories page so I can see what's 'hot', read the story,
>> and follow the link to the source story so I can learn more.
> 
> OK, I have to ask: What the hell is this "RSS" everybody keeps
> mentioning?

Google it.  If that doesn't work, try "Really Simple Syndication".  It's 
only all over the web.

>> It has elements of satire, but it actually reports on real stuff.  They
>> do hardware reviews and talk about software and technology companies in
>> a real and non-satirical way.
> 
> I usually visit Tom's Hardware when I want to see what's happening in
> the hardware world.

I doubt you're going to get that by reading some text on a screen.  
(Sorry, I couldn't resist - but I hope that makes the point intended)

> Unfortunately, while there seem to be plenty of sites that track the
> latest up-to-the-minute developments, if you stop paying attention for a
> while, it seems very hard to get back up to speed. Every article assumes
> you've been following the story so far... There don't seem to be any
> high-level summaries around on the Internet. (Except for ones that are
> 10 years old.)

That's why I skim a fair bit of things.

>>> I still don't comprehend what "streaming" actually means in this
>>> context...
>>
>> 2 seconds with Google yielded this:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_media
> 
> I know what streaming *is*. (Indeed, I knew what it was 15 years ago.)
> I'm failing to comprehend how it applies in this situation.

I'm not sure I understand how this is so difficult to comprehend.  Netflix 
has servers in their data centres that stream data to clients running the 
NetFlix software on them.  You pick a movie you want to watch, and you 
instantly start watching it.

And before you say it, yes, it actually works.  We've only subscribed to 
Netflix since before they got into the streaming business.

Or are you going to again claim that something that I use on a regular 
basis doesn't exist or is impossible or couldn't *possibly* work?  I'm 
sure my son would love to know that we didn't actually spend over 3 hours 
streaming Battlestar Galactica today and have watched almost all of the 
first three series that way.  I'm sure it was just a blu-ray disc and we 
didn't realise we'd put it in the PS3 to watch it.  Yeah, that's it.  ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>>> It's easier to find jobs to apply to when you have a broader awareness
>>> of the world than just what's relevant to you right now.
>>
>> I doubt you're going to get that by reading some text on a screen. To
>> understand what a new capability means, you often need to experience it
>> for yourself.
>
> Hmmm, so let me see if I understand this correctly....You're asserting
> that one of the methods that I actually use to keep up on technology
> doesn't work?  Interesting that you'd have insight into what works for me
> on such a deep level.

I'm saying that if (for example) I read somewhere that a lot of 
companies use Citrix to host their applications, that doesn't really 
qualify me for a job managing Citrix. If I had actually /used/ Citrix, 
or something vaguely like it, then yes. But having read about how it 
exists and people use it? Not so much, no.

>> OK, I have to ask: What the hell is this "RSS" everybody keeps
>> mentioning?
>
> Google it.  If that doesn't work, try "Really Simple Syndication".  It's
> only all over the web.

Ooo, because I haven't tried *that* before. :-P

OK, so let's see... First hit from Google is

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSS

(Unless you meant Royal Statistical Society, which I'm pretty sure you 
didn't.)

As usual with Wikipedia, the page babbles about updates and feeds and 
XML and "syndication" and something about RDF, but utterly fails to 
explain WHAT IT IS.

>> I usually visit Tom's Hardware when I want to see what's happening in
>> the hardware world.
>
> I doubt you're going to get that by reading some text on a screen.

That's why I just built a new PC - to experience the Core i7 first-hand. :-P

>> I know what streaming *is*. (Indeed, I knew what it was 15 years ago.)
>> I'm failing to comprehend how it applies in this situation.
>
> I'm not sure I understand how this is so difficult to comprehend.  Netflix
> has servers in their data centres that stream data to clients running the
> NetFlix software on them.  You pick a movie you want to watch, and you
> instantly start watching it.
>
> And before you say it, yes, it actually works.

The BBC's iPlayer system "works". I mean, it's so horrifyingly blurry 
that you sometimes can't see people's faces clearly enough to recognise 
who's who, and often the end credits are unreadable. But technically 
that still counts as "works", right?

I just looked it up. The transfer rate of a DVD is 10.5 mbit/sec. The 
maximum broadband speed you can get is 8 mbit/sec. So... does that mean 
that people in America have something faster than ADSL or something?

Post a reply to this message

Le 2012-01-31 04:12, Invisible a écrit :
>
> I'm saying that if (for example) I read somewhere that a lot of
> companies use Citrix to host their applications, that doesn't really
> qualify me for a job managing Citrix. If I had actually /used/ Citrix,
> or something vaguely like it, then yes. But having read about how it
> exists and people use it? Not so much, no.
>

It would allow you to have a better understanding of how that business 
operates.  Having a general idea of how entrerpise apps like SAP, BEA 
Weblogic, or Websphere work is never a bad thing.  While no one would 
hopefully expect you to be able to manage their Citrix server farms 
based on having read something about it on CNET, it would probably be 
easier for you to understand where your job fits in the grander scheme 
of things, or helkp you move up the corporate ladder.

For example, my current job is network performance & capacity planning. 
  I gather usage statistics from Cisco devices, and make nice graphs 
with them.  However, knowing a little about the applications running on 
the servers connected to these switch ports allows me to be more helpful 
when a problem ticket comes in saying "Users say that app XYZ is slow" 
instead of having to wait for someone else to ask me to look for errors 
on port 15 of switch C.

>>> OK, I have to ask: What the hell is this "RSS" everybody keeps
>>> mentioning?
>>
>> Google it. If that doesn't work, try "Really Simple Syndication". It's
>> only all over the web.
>
> As usual with Wikipedia, the page babbles about updates and feeds and
> XML and "syndication" and something about RDF, but utterly fails to
> explain WHAT IT IS.
>

This is similar to what news organizations do with newsfeeds from 
Reuters, AP, AFP, etcept it's for the common mortal.  It's a 
standardized way to package news items (or in many cases, blog entries). 
  It allows you to view content that comes from other sources.  Some 
people use that to put "in the news..." sections on their websites, some 
others use RSS readers to gather news flashes and what nots from 
multiple sources they find interesting.

For example, If I had a website devoted to 3D graphics, I could set up 
RSS feeds from various makers of 3D software (those, that have a feed, 
of course!) and whenever they had news releases or announcements, they 
would automagically show up on my web site, without me having to hunt 
for them.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> > I'm not sure I understand how this is so difficult to comprehend.  Netflix
> > has servers in their data centres that stream data to clients running the
> > NetFlix software on them.  You pick a movie you want to watch, and you
> > instantly start watching it.
> >
> > And before you say it, yes, it actually works.
>
> The BBC's iPlayer system "works". I mean, it's so horrifyingly blurry
> that you sometimes can't see people's faces clearly enough to recognise
> who's who, and often the end credits are unreadable. But technically
> that still counts as "works", right?
>
> I just looked it up. The transfer rate of a DVD is 10.5 mbit/sec. The
> maximum broadband speed you can get is 8 mbit/sec. So... does that mean
> that people in America have something faster than ADSL or something?

no, it simply means MP4 does a way better job at compressing than DVD codecs...
they are watching non-blurry HD streams, real-time.

Post a reply to this message