"I want you to understand something: we are not subject to city, state or federal regulation. We are omnEEpotent... OmnEEpotent. That's 'potent' with an 'omnee' in front of it. Now, then, Mr. VEEdal, when may we expect payment?"
i before e except after c
Einstein got it wrong twice!
My friend went to college, I went to work. He could design a CPU from scratch, knew how to do visual recognition. Nothing any employer I ever came across found useful.
I could design a CPU from scratch and my employer _did_ find that useful. I, however, had an engineering degree, not computer science.
"Computer Science is not about computers, any more than astronomy is about telescopes". -- Dijkstra
...there would still be NO MANUFACTURING JOBS IN THE USA.
Do you realize that almost $2 TRILLION of goods were manufactured in the US, last year?
Do you think that was all done by robots?
Hajduk says. 'I don't believe we'll be doing anything wrong.'
Then, why does he call himself "Hajduk"?
No train in New South Wales may move.
No train may enter New South Wales.
No rail building in the area.
What you are saying is that you have no legal standing, but you have moral outrage, so you have appointed yourself as a copyright vigilante. The law (OCILLA) doesn't permit that, so you are going to be, at the very least, frustrated in your efforts.
Why were you trying to use the takedown process if you are not the copyright holder?
He (or she) who dies with the most descendants, wins.
Strangely enough, I'm reading Schoenberg's Theory of Harmony right now. I recommend the opening chapter to everyone interested in this topic, because it's one of the most well-written rants in all of music theory.
What Schoenberg opposed was the idea, which he claimed to be prevalent among music theorists in the late 19th and early 20th century, that we could discover "laws of beauty" which could be applied to make beautiful art.
Well, yes and no. Schoenberg certainly admits that certain intervals are more pleasing than others, and that perception was based on how closely they conform to the harmonic series. (Which, to stay on-topic, happens to be exactly what the researchers in this study contend). Schoenberg's argument was that "consonant" and "dissonant" tones are not opposites, as the words imply, but differ only by a matter of degree--how far out the series you go.
We can't imagine what was in the minds of the people who rioted at the premiere of The Rite of Spring.
Most reports, other than Stravinsky's self-aggrandizing story, point to the choreography, not the music, being the target of derision. For most of the performance, the audience couldn't even hear the music!
...we now understand that music theory, and the "rules" therein, are descriptive, not prescriptive. They are a language for understanding and talking about music in the tradition of the European common practice era.
I think no one understood that better (at the time) than Schoenberg, who wrote the Theory of Harmony from his own observation and not as a compilation of rules that he had been taught.
In that sense, it's like category theory in mathematics or design patterns in software engineering. they're not recipes on how to write programs or do maths, they are a vocabulary for understanding, reasoning about and talking about programs or mathematical structure.
And that is why we still read Theory of Harmony, today. It is important to note that Schoenberg did not turn against modal tonality until later.
in the Theory of Harmony by (guess who)... Arnold Schoenberg, before he started experimenting with atonal composition.
I don't think it was a particularly new idea, even then.
Students must turn in the full image. Much simpler than watermarking.
The two-party system only exists because nobody has come along to shake it up. It's not legally or constitutionally mandated.
Plurality, Winner-Take-All voting for electors is mandated by state laws (in 48 states).
That system inevitably leads to two dominant parties.
...seems to be the one kind of bigotry that is not only tolerated but considered fashionable.