acex

an article from recode.net - really? a fox news of tech.

Someone could argue that if we had not lost the Archimedes Palimpsest we could be in a better shape scientifically.

How, and by what tools, do we recognise an improvement then?

How can someone like this call himself an intellectual or be called a leading world's intellectual. I think that an intelligent design is an insult to both, intelligence and design and I as well think that circle (more than a triangle) arise from a biochemistry and as a part of the same evolution. Dawkins in the same piece uses the same argument to claim that the evolution came late in the development of human mind. Late compared to what? Evolution? Millions of yeas compared to a few thousands years of a written word or since we invented a more persistent method to pass the knowledge than story or since a man drew some of the first inscriptions on a wall of a cave. And this is no allegory. Let us get rid of the PI formulas then. It does fit the model. Since we can only approximate it we cannot use it. The world is a better place today than it was hundreds or thousands of years ago. The idea that it can be better is the very idea of ideal and abstract types we are never to reach and should always aspire to. Essentialism, from an evolutionary standpoint, relatively is no less correct than some other approximation of what a certain species is in some period. The evolutionary traits are the same for hundreds of thousands of years for a species. Mutations take place rarely and only on extreme environmental changes. The nature (or the evolution) is perfect there. Its every 'design' has a function perfected through many centuries. This is essential (sic) problem with the certain type of scientists (those of celebrity type) is that they not count in how short is human experience on this world. We say Earth is 4.5 billions years old and that we know that and those people who claimed differently are in wrong as if we as a human race posses our own memory since primordial soup. In a shallow struggle against those 6 thousands years we tend to forget that ideas and their shapes were experience of the world. Colours are not wrong, we experience the colours the same way as thousands years before. And will experience them in the future in a broader spectre. Like we always did with everything. The very world we experience, even when we do it with our best tools is no more than an approximation of a world more perfect (or less measured and computed).

it might be the case of a developer who loves to build things more than to be pm. the 'symptoms' you describe are signs of your maturity as a person capable of leading a project.

or why is tilted from bottom-right to top-left. ;)

post and measurements like these are kindergarden posts. which speaks volumes about the fact that usually end up on the front page. scripting is a process of putting some other process in motion (e.g. some that would do millions of calculations) and for starting such a process(es) an instruction is needed every once in a while.

i couldn't read this diagonally let alone going through and around me only device that's isn't apple is xbox in the living room. bollocks.

for some reason i find this hilariously funny.

end of the article "After months of investigation, physicists have ruled that the speedy neutrinos observed were likely due to a faulty connection in an optical fiber of the Master Clock." i really do wonder why negative attitude to my "were likely goes both ways" - they have ruled (not proved) that something is likely. please. either the article is stupid or those who have ruled.

were likely goes both ways.

internet is not technology but a place and a medium to it.

walter: am i right? dude: yes walter you're right you're also an asshole.

your talent 'for computers' drove you to the computers in the first place. you speak of computer knowledge you acquired.