You should just be glad many universities don't have any English Comprehension courses as requirements...

What makes this kook any more kooky than the kook who wrote that trash?

Power consumption, among other things.

No wonder all these kids out of "good colleges" are such lazy ass slackers.

That's stupid. As an EE, a buddy of mine and I made a spiffy wireless sensor system which we presented at a conference. We did the project all on our own without any direction from any professors and received a $5000 grant from an independent organization interested in publishing our work. And we did it all for 6 credits worth of independent undergraduate research classes, too. Just because you get college credit for a project doesn't mean it isn't a real project.

Isn't it a staple of freshman English courses at university to ask what this difference is, to discover it's only in the cultural perception, or connotation, and there is no fundamental distinction? Or did we just do that because I didn't go to school in Texas?

They should calculate pi*e. Knowing that number to such detail would be... delicious.

Ya, it's much more efficient to just have all your ram sitting around doing nothing all the time.

I seem to be having trouble conveying this very simple idea (not something major or important at all). Let's start with the concept that money only has utility in the context of a society, for the exchange of goods or services. Other materials can have utility to an individual separated from society, which money cannot. These types of utility are different. Do you see that now?

How about this: money only has utility in the context of society, for the exchange of goods or services. Other materials can have utility to an individual separated from society, which money cannot. These types of utility are different. Do you see that now?

No, it has the value we attribute it with. As a concept, it has intrinsic utility, but that's not the same as value. Food has intrinsic value because you can eat it. Wood has intrinsic value because you can build a house out of it. Money only has value if other people also believe it has value. No one has to believe food is edible, or that wood is a good building material. Do you see how these things are different?

Unless you're saying I'm wrong because money has intrinsic value as a piece of cloth, then you're totally missing my point. If that is what you're saying, though, then you're clearly a jackass.

I'm not arguing that money can't be used to buy things or that it isn't essential in the modern world, I'm just supporting the argument that it has no intrinsic value, which it doesn't.

The real planet-consuming aliens in Independence Day were... us!

Money has no intrinsic value. It only stands for what you want to imagine it stands for. If ildon chooses to ignore that artificial construct, arguing that your construct is "real" doesn't make little green pieces of cloth any more valuable to him.