What's the difference?
What's the difference?
This guy/gal gets it.
"Unsolicited advice of almost any kind has always been a socially inept move."
Do we really live in a society where that isn't obvious??? Telling some coworker they need to lose weight is NOT being helpful - it's being a dick.
I think it just turns out that most guys are just assholes. Look at the Slashdot community as an example. You're about to get a *ton* of knee-jerk insults from the gaggle of dicks who frequent this site. If you were a woman the insults would likely be worse. "You can't tell me I'm not perfect" is the standard ideology around these parts.
Perhaps it's Gabe's Greater Internet Fuckwad theory at work? Maybe we need to teach proper philosophy in school? I dunno. But humanity in general is a major let-down.
How do you know that science produces something that is true? How do you know what you are doing *is* science?
That is where philosophy of science lives. It guides the scientific method. Just because science has made wonderful advances doesn't mean that it has out-lived the need to discuss what science is and how to apply it or approve it.
Science and philosophy still haven't solved the "demarcation problem" for example. And "science" can't. It's a philosophical question.
The two don't compete - they work together. Though for some reason modern scientists seem to think they can do without the philosophy...
The earlier the system crashes, the more damage can be avoided. Possibly a civil war in Europe. Not to mention the loss of our European genetic and cultural heritage.
What about our precious bodily fluids?
Like I tell my kids - it doesn't matter what other people are doing if what you are doing is wrong.
Most voice-mails are of *terrible* quality (listen to them sometime - people mumble, etc.). But even still GV does a pretty good job. And it does a very good job with numbers. So it's great for that person who left you a long rambling voice-mail with their phone-number half-way through. Oh - and the phone number will be "clickable" in GV to boot.
I always thought
What are you talking about and do you have a source for what you're talking about?
Raw data is available and has been used. For example the Berkley Earth project re-analyzed the data starting with raw data and addressing concerns about heat islands, bad sources, etc.
The rest are mostly just crap, only of value to the people that shot them. Not really worth sharing to the public.
You mean like most vacation photos ever taken?
Ah, and *now* I find this paragraph:
"Kalia himself indicates the study refers to popular music and not specific genres or time periods with the title of his analysis: “Music was better back then: When do we stop keeping up with popular music?” It’s not that you stop listening to new artists or even discovering new styles as you age, just that you won’t care as much who is taking home platinum records and leading the iTunes downloads race."
That's a long way from calcifying...
I'm in my late 30's (*sigh*) and my music tastes have only expanded. Thing is - they expanded into areas that still aren't the current "popular music." It's difficult to tell how that would be represented in this report.
Granted I'm likely an outlier of sorts but it's not clear that the methodology would consider me such.
Thanks! Now can you define "colloquial" for us all too?
What this country needs is a dime that will buy a good five-cent bagel.