They say that one of the most exciting phrases to hear in science is not "eureka!" but "that's funny."

Who is the "they" who said this? It is the most ignorant thing I've heard today! It is the difference, to paraphrase Twain, between a lightning bug and a lightning bolt. "That's funny" is a significant observation; Eureka! is a celebration, a dance, to an personal intellectual achievement. One cannot sit still in such moments, one shouts, screams, runs in circles, speaks in tongues, laughs uncontrollably and like that.

"That's funny" is simply observational. There is no celebration, just collection of information which may spark curiosity. That curiosity, if acted upon, can become understanding, which, after further work, can lead to a Eureka!, but they are in no way comparable.

Perhaps not everybody has had a Eureka! moment, but most people have had a "that's funny," so they may not see the difference.

Euekas are orgasms of the mind.

Hilarious! I worked as a movie actor for some time, and, now and then, a production is doomed this way for some reason or other. I was working as an extra in a production shooting on location in Boston. During filming, the co-star suffered a heart attack and was disabled for months. During that time, a substitute was found, but rather than reshooting all the scenes with the new actor, he was shot from behind so as not to make the change obvious to viewers. The location director was the main director's brother, and he was not up to the job. Shooting went badly, and lots of time and money was wasted over stupid decisions made ad hoc.

Of course, it was impossible to edit coherently; it closed during its premiere in New York, as all the audience had walked out before the credits.

No, I will not mention the title, but it was 1969 and the brothers who wrote the story directed the film, which previously had been published in Playboy as a short story. The elder brother has since gone on to huge success in Hollywood.

Uh, no. Unix/BSD/Linux uses the F1...F10 keys for OS functionality (virtual desktops) where DOS apps typically used them, if at all, for internal functions. WordPerfect, for example, was useless on DOSemu or DOSbox for this reason as all software actions found in GUI menus were activated with these keys, which *nix clobbers,

The five senses we humans possess are those which allowed us to adapt to our environment and live in it; there is no reason for me to believe they are sufficient to explain our universe.
That is, if we are smart enough in the first place, which is very, very doubtful.

I would add to Socrates' famous quotation, "All I know is I know nothing," the phrase, "and I can't even be sure of that."

Either their target demographic was too small in gross numbers (adv. jargon, though generally understandable) or, more likely IMO, a group which is unpopular with national retail advertisers bc they/we act more nearly rationally.

I have seen the quality and number of comments go down as the nature of the content became more reddit-like. How long has it been since a website has been https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... slashdotted, anyway?

And the EXIF data is carried in all image formats, including .tiff and RAW. Has been intentionally so since digital cameras' day one.

Where have all the cool kids gone?

There's no real reason to break out the phone calls and make them orders of magnitude more expensive to prisoners than they actually are.

No, but you don't account for the real costs, which primarily are monitoring (listening in on) the call.

For real, that's the other side's argument.

Any professional salesperson knows people inherently want to please others, so they are more willing to say 'yes,' than 'no.' It is well-known that among experimental subjects, there is a strong will to please the experimenter (see milgram, etc.) so it is unsurprising that the results show an absurdist tilt.

It's like walking up to a stranger and asking, "do you like my hair this way?" Of course, most people will say, "yes."

My first permanent Linux installation (permanent in the sense that I wound up keeping and using it instead of Windows) was Caldera Open Linux 1.0. which shipped with KDE-1.0. Finding its limitations quickly, I moved to Red Hat 6.2 (KDE 1.1) and compiled each new KDE release from source until v. 3. I then switched to Knoppix and Mepis (Debian), still using KDE. I now use 4.x on Mint-14.04-3. For a short time, I tried XFCE, but returned to the integration of KDE.

KDE still looks and acts pretty much the same now as it used to, just moreso.

bc I worked in marketing and I find what they say believable (only bulk, unidentified demographic data is needed, which I opt out of just in case.) Their motives are not "questionable" to me; I have no question about allowing companies to make a profit and continue to provide a useful service. I have more questions about a company without an obvious money stream.

That would be data one gives permission to collect, IIR the installation setup correctly. Uncheck the box, and it says no information will be harvested. Are they lying?

It sure does, it then tracks the sites you visit and they sell that data.

Got a link?

wtf?

I don't use an ad blocker at all; I use a tracker blocker. If Bild doesn't have a tracker, it can feed me ads, if I go there, which I have never done, BTW.

Ghostery, the plugin i use, winds up killing most of the ads, anyway, but I have no bad conscience about blocking those who would track me even if "do not track" is enabled.

End of Story!

It was Fritz Perls IIRC who remarked, "Of what benefit is it to adapt to a psychotic culture?"

Just asking....

Aaah, I can tell you're a young one.... 'Tis the sign of another tech bubble, all of it. It's a replay of 1997-2000, but in a different mix. Now, google plays the part of Microsoft; Mozilla is alter-Netscape, trying to catch up; and Girls is Bizarro-Friends.

As Mark Twain famously said, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes."