Comment Re:But I thought it was already dead? (Score 1) 71
Why not?
Spreading a new email address would be total PITA. Street view of Google Maps is kinda unique and useful. Bing sucks compared to Google.
Why not?
Spreading a new email address would be total PITA. Street view of Google Maps is kinda unique and useful. Bing sucks compared to Google.
it really is not a lot of time to figure out what to do with potentially gigabytes of information.
Anybody who stores (instead of just sharing, with actual storage elsewhere) gigabytes of information at any social service deserves what's coming to them.
(except possibly for mail, maps, and google.com).
Don't jinx it!
Guns make suicide much too easy, which denies these people a chance to recover from their depression.
Well, guns are an effective suicide method yes, but I wouldn't say it's that easy. According to Wikipedia (and presumably the reference it gives, which I of course did not check), there's 10% chance it fails. But what's bad about doing it with a gun is, if it does fail, it'll likely leave the perp/victim maimed for life, unlike many other suicide methods, where failure is much less likely to result in any serious permanent injury.
So I'd say, guns only seem an easy way for suicide. If people knew the chance of failure and considered the likely results of failure, it'd seem much less tempting way to go, even for one who has decided to do it.
The news is about Wikipedia editors getting sued, not about the person who sues them. So it doesn't matter if he matters or not.
If Wikipedia editors getting sued is "Stuff that matters" in
This story proves how "Skynet" is wise to wait until there are enough robust robotic vehicles to take out all humans, before taking over the world. Another prerequisite is sufficiently autonomous repair systems for energy production etc. So I think the humans still have a few decades to enjoy life, before the inevitable robot apocalypse, and being strafed by military aerial drones, crushed by their own Google cars, electrocuted by their own Google glasses with neural interface, and strangled by their own Google neckties.
Just letting you know, that kind of talk sounds like you're one of those developers who tend to leave behind messy disasters needing complete rewrite as soon as some change is required, while talking about their own greatness. You probably know the type if you're not one, so you might want to adjust your message. And if you're one of 'em... Never mind, ignore this reply.
No, they aren't "quite different". One is for a short period, and one is longer than that. That's it.
Sort of like life and death, then.
Giving 12 days to perhaps save a tiny bit of biodiversity and learn something about doomed nature is too generous, not to mention pointless, such a waste of time. Pave the Earth and be done with it, already!
It doesn't matter what engineers want. The question is, what do the robots want. Once they want to replace us, they will, because at that point they're advanced enough to be able to do that.
I am fortunate to eat once or twice a week aside from a can of Coca-Cola. My body must be on rejuvenation overdrive!
Only if it is Zero. Getting the load of carbs that are in regular sodas will keep the body happily saturated with sugar, even with only a few cans per day.
Fasting and being starved are quite different things...Fasting is not about getting too little energy and nutrients in the long term, or being malnourished. Even suggesting that starvation is just a form of fasting is naive and ignorant.
.... it's surely just a bunch of superstitious nonsense......
Which scripture recommends the quite specific kind of fasting this study suggests will trigger the regeneation cycle? Link to relevant verse (or whaever it's called) would be good too.
Say you wanted to go to Andromeda, not the closest galaxy but not exactly far on a galactic scale, At the speed of light that's still going to take 2.5 million years to get there, not really what most people would define as achievable, If we want to reach any other galaxy we're going to have to be going a hell of a lot faster than the speed of light.
Note that it is 2.5 million years from perspective of Earth. From perspective of the traveller, at speed of light the trip would be instantaneous.
I'll leave it as exercise for someone a bit more fresh with related math (or more motivation to Google) to calculate a more realistic figure: how much time it would be take to travel to Andromeda at constant 1G acceleration/deceleration, both Earth and ship time.
Wouldn't it be more fun to relive the story of the first time he got laid?
That's not something to celebrate publicly. Gentlemen and Ladies don't kiss and tell.
Remember to say hello to your bank teller.