Terrible collisions though.
Terrible collisions though.
You can only be charged with negligence if you fail to perform a legal duty. I'm not sure there is a legal duty that's broken by enabling anonymity, especially without any particular intention.
Also you're comparing geological time-scale climate change with dramatic recent climate change. Answers for your questions exist, even if you don't wish to see them.
I got here a little early. So if you come there will be at least one other person here.
Also I have shirts!
That was monzy.
You're welcome to get an early start. On the main party list you select attending next to the one you want to go to.
Happy mutants are welcome.
In the interest of full-disclosure, I mostly played Angband, but I think all rogue-likes can be friends
Hope to see you there.
So! The Daily Pint is a great little place with interesting beer and a *huge* scotch menu. I did say little though, but I'm banking on a distribution of arrival times. In any case, I checked with them and they are cool with a bunch of people showing up. They also have pool tables and some other games.
By the way, I'll plan on wearing my nethack shirt.
They used to have a dancing google logo (letters bounced every now and then) on ipv6.google.com. I was hoping they'd put that on the main page, but no.
The telescope was originally going to be called "Save Ferris", but they couldn't work out the acronym.
One of the preprogrammed demos is it acting out the scene where C3PO was telling a story to the ewoks. So there's a star wars person there somewhere.
Excellent, I'll risk providing nourishment for a troll just *once* more to show how this particular layfolk has illustrated my point. Psychologists are hardly at all related to psychiatrists, making that an ill-posed analogy. One branch of psychology is "clinical psychology". That branch deals with analysis and such and is what most people think of as "Psychology", and is indeed related to psychiatry. The rest of psychology, however, has nothing at all to do with that. So, the completion to the analogy may well be "lobsters".
For those reading who aren't trolls: If you happen to think this way, then your definition of psychology probably comes from elementary school, TV, or a college intro course (which too often amounts to about the same thing). There are many branches of psychology; the least scientific of which seem to be the most well known to layfolk. Although I do agree that some fMRI studies of the brain can be pretty close to phrenology.
In fact, the assumption that cognition is computational or mechanistic is where the mind-body problem comes from (right from the 17th century). If it's all just syntactic, then explaining semantics is now a problem, and you have problems like dualism. Non-algorithmic doesn't mean magic, by any stretch. If you don't assume algorithmic, then there is no mind-body separation about which you can have a dualist stance.
If you think that the universe in general is algorithmic, e.g. that the evolution of the sun is an algorithmic process, then we might easily only disagree about terminology. Those who do not follow computational theories of mind might say that the complexities of intelligent behavior are more like the complexities of the sun than anything you will get out of a turing machine.
There are a frightening number of different issues once we go into details, and there is a long history of people attempting to address them. I don't think a slashdot thread is capable of holding it all. And of course, the more one learns the more one realizes that the answers are far fewer than the questions.
The most difficult thing in the world is to know how to do a thing and to watch someone else doing it wrong, without commenting. -- T.H. White