prev <-> next
[2004-06-01 15:32:12] - a: What am i looking for here? This is a big page - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:32:06] - aaron: yeah, it looks like you're right "protected" and "package" seem to do the same thing? ~a
[2004-06-01 15:30:48] - dave: ah, yes. I misunderstood your scare quotes. my bad
- vinnie[2004-06-01 15:30:10] - dave: The laws could be applied to everyone in a certain place, if a person asserted his dominance over that place with brute force, or if other people respected his dominance over that territory for other reasons - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:29:53] - aaron: http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/second_edition/html/names.doc.html#34993 ~a
[2004-06-01 15:29:53] - Dave: Well, except you aren't guaranteed reprisal at all. All you are guaranteed is that the government might look into it. -Paul
[2004-06-01 15:29:49] - vinnie: isn't that what I said? Yeah, a deterrent because there is "guaranteed" reprisal. no? -dave
[2004-06-01 15:29:09] - aaron: well, useless as far as I can tell -dave
[2004-06-01 15:28:47] - dave: no, I don't think that's the difference. I think the only difference you get from codified laws is a deterrent - vinnie
[2004-06-01 15:28:33] - aaron: actually I'm not sure if you could have codified laws in Paul's system. Or at least the laws couldn't be applied to everyone in a certain place, which would make them essentially useless -dave
[2004-06-01 15:28:00] - "Otherwise, if the member or constructor is declared protected, then access is permitted . . . [if] Access to the member or constructor occurs from within the package containing the class in which the protected member or constructor is declared." i don't understand this, but it looks related. ~a
[2004-06-01 15:27:45] - they happen to be similar
- vinnie[2004-06-01 15:27:33] - Paul: I guess the difference to me between the Wild West and today is that if a gang went and killed everyone in a town, today you would be "guaranteed" reprisal for that. Whereas in the libertarian/heinlein model it seems like they could get away with it if they had enough guns -dave
[2004-06-01 15:27:31] - aaron: we've moved off Paul's system for a second. we're talking about Heinlein's lawless system - vinnie
[2004-06-01 15:26:32] - vinnie: Although if I'm not mistaken, you can still have codified laws in Paul's system, as long as a group of people agree to them... - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:25:03] - Pierce: You could be right. -Paul
[2004-06-01 15:24:14] - Pierce: So basically you're saying, the people just won't agree on things? -dave
[2004-06-01 15:24:09] - Dave: Well, in theory, there really isn't much of a difference in what is stopping a murderer (or unruly mob) now than what would be stopping a murderer or unruly mob in the Heinlein system. -Paul
[2004-06-01 15:23:53] - yeah, it's not efficient. too much infighting. I think that's probably how codified laws evolved and were enforced - vinnie
[2004-06-01 15:23:50] - yeah, weird. i don't think that makes any sense at all (unless one is secretly a descendent of the other) ~a
[2004-06-01 15:22:42] - Paul: But you can't just say "in a good way". It doesn't follow. My argument over the centuries has been that the near-universal acceptance of the "common" rules that's necessary in order for anarchy to succeed will never exist in a society of any significant size. - pierce
[2004-06-01 15:20:29] - Paul: I guess to me it just brings up visions of the wild west and "mob rule" -dave
[2004-06-01 15:19:55] - a: Or easier (arguably), class B has "protected static void foo()" and a method in class A invokes "B.foo()"... Yes, it seems to compile, which surprises me. - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:18:57] - Paul: mmm, yeah. I suppose that's true to a certain extent. It being like the current system -dave
[2004-06-01 15:16:48] - accessing eachothers protected methods how? method in class A is doing "B b; b.ptcted()" ? ~a
[2004-06-01 15:14:38] - Dave: I guess. I don't see how it's all that different from our current system, though. It's not necessarily about evolution as much as people taking the law into their own hands, in a good way. -Paul
[2004-06-01 15:12:31] - Paul: so the model is based off of everyone being reasonable about everything and slowly letting "evolution" weed out the unreasonable ones? -dave
[2004-06-01 15:08:56] - ... but now I'm thinking maybe the order goes Public > Package > Protected > Private, with each scope being less restrictive than the one after it - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:08:08] - a: So i would expect - but somehow, while I was moving stuff around, two classes within the same package were accidentally accessing eachothers' protected methods, and not throwing any kind of error. I always thought "package" and "protected" scope kind of did a Van Neumann diagram thing... - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:05:55] - Dave: I believe the rationale would be that if somebody did something worthy of being killed for, it was something that most reasonable loonies (ironic) would agree should've been punished by death. -Paul
[2004-06-01 15:03:40] - aaron: i think that protected is for subclasses only. i think they have a fourth accessability type called "package" for that kind of thing, right? ~a
[2004-06-01 15:03:33] - Paul: and I was wondering if you could clarify the rationale since most of the ideas presented seemed to match those that you hold -dave
[2004-06-01 15:01:57] - Paul: it didn't really address stuff like, if one person killed another for doing something, but then some people didn't agree with the killing of that person. -dave
[2004-06-01 15:01:20] - http://www.inpassing.org/node/view/2009 short amusing yet relatable convo between barista + starbucks customer - aaron
[2004-06-01 15:00:11] - Paul: err, it ended up -dave
[2004-06-01 15:00:03] - Paul: Well, in the book in ended up working out since everyone that was left understood they had to follow these sort of "understood" laws. -dave
[2004-06-01 14:57:32] - Dave: I don't condone the killing of people, if that's what you mean. -paul
[2004-06-01 14:53:31] - javaman: If class A is in the same package as class B, does this mean they also have access to eachother's protected methods? Somehow I was always under the impression that protected methods were only accessible from a subclass.... - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:39:27] - Paul: I have a question about your ideal societal model. In TMiaHM, they killed/weeded out any belligerent or unsavory people. Sort of like if they saw someone offend a woman, they threw him out the airlock. Is that inline with your ideal model? -dave
[2004-06-01 14:32:41] - Dave: Yeah, I don't know. -Paul
[2004-06-01 14:30:26] - Paul: and it seems a little far-fetched to believe that they could keep such stuff away/secret from the media. Rape is just so juicy for the media -dave
[2004-06-01 14:30:04] - Oh, dog nuts. That was actually well formed! <a><a/></a>... eheh. - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:29:22] - Paul: So I suppose it may be best to conceal both names? Media probably wouldn't be too happy about that -dave
[2004-06-01 14:29:21] - pierce: I think there's an advantage to keeping XML a "dumb" language. The less flexible it is, the less likely it is different parsers will disagree on the exact (mis)meaning of xml exlert<b/>training course - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:24:59] - aaron: that brings up an interesting point... I wish xml could support <bold>Bold <italic>Bold Italic</bold> Italic</italic>, sometimes. I know that defeats the whole value of well-formedness and strict hierarchy, but it's more intuitive for HTML-like applications of XML languages. There could always also be a "strict" specification. - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:24:41] - Dave: True. -Paul
[2004-06-01 14:24:17] - Dave: Protect the woman and who gives a damn about the man. -Paul
[2004-06-01 14:24:11] - Paul: If you think about it though, it does seem rather inhibitive for people who accuse someone of rape to be exposed to so much media. If they were really raped, it seems a shame to heap all that trouble on them on top of being raped -dave
[2004-06-01 14:22:57] - pierce: My bad. I made a mistake! But given the symmetry of the XML language, couldn't you likewise ignore the contents of the opening tag, assuming the opening tag's contents will match that of the following closing tag? - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:22:32] - Paul: yeah, I don't think it's fair at all. Just was trying to come up with some sort of rationale for what they tried to do ^_^ -dave
[2004-06-01 14:21:47] - pierce: Or, <b>Aaron is using bold in a silly manner<i/> - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:16:05] - he's a celebrity. thrives on it
- vinnie[2004-06-01 14:15:02] - Dave: Because obviously Kobe wants to deal with all the media coverage. -Paul
[2004-06-01 14:14:31] - one nice effect would be that you could delimit elements in a more understandable manner. <begin>Once upon a time... <middle/> ...and they lived happily ever after.</end> - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:13:06] - mig: yeah, since there's only one element that can be closed at any given point in the document. As far as I'm concerned, it should be optional. Basically, anything after "</" and before ">" should be ignored, even if it indicates the wrong element (though smart parsers can throw a warning if they'd like). - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:13:04] - pierce: Some XML editors will automatically complete your XML closing tags if you type "</", which can be handy. Eclipse, for instance, has a built-in XML editor which lets you hit CTRL-space to auto-complete a closing tag... it's nice sometimes! - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:12:03] - Paul: You gotta love our media ^_^ -dave
[2004-06-01 14:11:43] - Paul: I think the rationale (in this particular case) for keeping her name anonymous was so that she wouldn't have to undergo all the media coverage and exposure. Her name obviously got out tho and I think she's had to move several times to try to avoid stuff -dave
[2004-06-01 14:11:11] - pierce: yeah. i see no reason why you can't just use a </>. The way XML is parsed it should be that way. - mig
[2004-06-01 14:10:00] - Paul: hehe yeah. I was very amused when the defense attorney used the accuser's name like 5 times deliberately even when told not to. I think the judge said he would find her (the attorney) a muzzle if she didn't stop -dave
[2004-06-01 14:09:11] - I do write a fair amount of XML from scratch, and I sometimes find myself wishing that you could specify the ends of elements with "</>" (such as when I've written </needlessly-long-element-name> for the umpteenth time). - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:09:02] - I don't understand a bit of that link - vinnie
[2004-06-01 14:06:10] - aaron: no excuses! - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:05:24] - pierce: Okay. I don't write a lot of XML from scratch! - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:03:45] - http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204/#sec-pi - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:02:43] - Aaron: still wrong, it would have to be <?sarcasm?> - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:02:36] - Aaron: Yup! I got 17 tickets, that's how badly I did. The funny thing is that I did a LOT better at the 3 point shots than most of the closer ones. -Paul
[2004-06-01 14:01:52] - Aaron: Historically, it was probably done to protect the modesty of the female and because it was thought that women don't lie about such things and therefore the alleged rapist was considered guilty until proven innocent. -Paul
[2004-06-01 14:01:36] - I think that socialogically, being known as the victim of a rape confers more shame than to be falsely accused of rape. So it's more harmful to be named as the victim than to be named as the rapist, if the allegation is proven untrue (or unproven). However, I also think it should be a both-or-neither dealy. - pierce
[2004-06-01 14:01:10] - paul: Do you get to play that game for tickets? - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:00:40] - pierce: It was ambiguous sarcasm. Should it have been <?sarcasm> like the xml headers? - aaron
[2004-06-01 14:00:37] - Aaron: It's ok, I practiced my basketball shooting instead. It's a pretty crappy machine though. -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:59:25] - aaron: your sarcastic HTML is faulty on multiple levels. Shame. - pierce
[2004-06-01 13:56:46] - paul: I think historically, the female's name was kept hidden to prevent her from incurring personal harm? Would that make sense? - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:56:16] - though i agree, either both should be known to the public or both should be kept hidden. given that keeping both of them hidden is impossible i think the media should just do the former. - mig
[2004-06-01 13:55:49] - paul: That sucks! It's always a coin toss. I don't know what to say. It usually really picks up around 5 pm though - that's when a lot of the "regulars" seem to show up. Especially on saturdays - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:55:29] - Aaron: Ok -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:55:00] - paul: the problem is that any attempt to keep kobe's name hidden would be completely futile. - mig
[2004-06-01 13:54:35] - paul: Because a guy raping a girl isn't shameful for the guy. It makes him more macho. </sarcasm?> - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:52:55] - Aaron: Adrian and I were at the Springfield Mall DDR Friday afternoon and there were like 4 people there. -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:52:25] - Aaron: But if we're letting people keep their name hidden, then why not let Kobe keep his name hidden? -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:51:48] - paul: You might try before, like, 4 pm. It's rare to even see 2 people in line before then. - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:51:20] - paul: I don't know! I can't remember what it was like last summer, but I don't remember it being very busy. - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:50:41] - paul: Well, being raped is shameful in some ways. So if she was actually raped, I can understand wanting to keep her name hidden, to encourage her to come forward. - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:50:31] - Aaron: Do you know if there is any time during the Summer when the DDR machines aren't being used much? -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:49:22] - Vinnie: Personally, I think she was given a perfectly fine name at birth. Why not use that? -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:49:19] - but not specifically for the lakers or anything - vinnie
[2004-06-01 13:48:59] - mig: as for the fouls thing, I think the referees do take that into account, at least as far as technicals go. they really hesitate to hand out that second technical - vinnie
[2004-06-01 13:46:49] - unless rape is a criminal case. which it almost certainly is (ignore me) - vinnie
[2004-06-01 13:45:32] - they already have a good word for the rape accuser: "plaintiff" - vinnie
[2004-06-01 13:45:31] - smello: you commin to the ddr tournament june 20th? - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:45:05] - more fuel to the "nba wants lakers to win conspiracy": why did one of the referees inquire how many fouls shaq had late in the game(he had 5)? - mig
[2004-06-01 13:31:34] - http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5087301/ hmpfh. stupid page had the link wrong. - mig
[2004-06-01 13:30:41] - http://msbnc.msn.com/id/5087301/ our wonderful government in action. - mig
[2004-06-01 13:26:05] - Smelly defendant Kobe Bryant could not be reached for comment - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:25:49] - tee hee. [the defense attorney suggested] more neutral terms such as "complaining witness". I love how they take a completely neutral term, and add a negatively-skewed adjective to it, and say, "now it's really neutral!" - aaron
[2004-06-01 13:16:21] - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1813590 Kobe rape accuser should not be referred to as 'victim' -Paul
[2004-06-01 13:08:13] - Dave: I could use one of those. -Paul
[2004-06-01 12:56:44] - Paul: Yes, it's a small personal assistant that lets you input commands to control your Paul ^_^ -dave
[2004-06-01 12:50:41] - Dave: Wouldn't have won the series, might have won another game. -Paul
[2004-06-01 12:47:55] - I... don't... know - moveon.org
[2004-06-01 12:44:32] - Dave: Paul Pilot?
-Paul[2004-06-01 12:43:54] - opinions on whether the twolves would have won with a healthy sam cassell? -dave
[2004-06-01 12:41:22] - moveon.org: is that sarcastic? -dave
[2004-06-01 12:40:52] - I should have made my comment more specific, but for some reason it didn't occur to me at the time about handheld game consoles (tho it should have) -dave
[2004-06-01 12:40:46] - it will leave people wondering, "Could this really happen?" The answer of course, is no. No it couldn't. - moveon.org
[2004-06-01 12:39:19] - hehe, sorry, I was basically copying the title of the article. The CLIE is pretty popular as far as I know. My older sister has one. Basically it's just a PDA (e.g. Paul Pilot). My impression was that the CLIE was doing better than the Palms were. Which is why I was surprised Sony was exiting the market -dave
[2004-06-01 12:39:03] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3763887.stm "Audrey Hepburn tops beauty poll" -Paul
[2004-06-01 12:37:06] - http://www.moveon.org/news/dat.html "The Day After Tomorrow -- the movie the White House doesn't want you to see." -Paul
[2004-06-01 12:24:28] - Mig: The headline of the article is quite misleading too.
-Paul[2004-06-01 12:22:05] - dave: your description of the article is kind of misleading... - mig
[2004-06-01 12:00:57] - Aaron: If I understand what the Palm does, then yes.
-Paul[2004-06-01 11:59:32] - paul: It sounds/looks like some kind of Palm clone, right? - aaron
[2004-06-01 11:57:20] - Aaron: My mom has one, it's basically just a glorified personal organizer. -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:56:27] - I had actually never heard of the Clie - aaron
[2004-06-01 11:55:45] - Except for the playstation portables, and mobile phones... With that clarification, the headline is a lot less interesting - aaron
[2004-06-01 11:53:17] - http://www.brighthand.com/article/sayonara_clie Sony exiting handheld market. Quite surprising -dave
[2004-06-01 11:53:06] - Aaron: Definitely, that and the Good Earth (like Vinnie said). -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:46:40] - I don't think I would have finished reading ATOTC if I had to read it at home. I only did it because we were allotted time to read it in class. Jeez, they gave us class time to read books? Too bad that doesn't happen in college -dave
[2004-06-01 11:44:39] - To be honest I've always had a really small head for people, so when it comes to books like A Tale Of Two Cities, I always got characters confused and ended up completely missing the plot - aaron
[2004-06-01 11:42:26] - paul: Ditto, "things fall apart" comes to mind. - aaron
[2004-06-01 11:38:49] - that may have been the only one I outright skipped, though I know I skimmed through Things Fall Apart and the Good Earth. and though I realize no one's gonna guess how I did in that class since I asked rhetorically, I actually did quite well - vinnie
[2004-06-01 11:36:10] - Vinnie: There were a couple of books in Humanities that I don't remember if I read or not, even though it was "required". -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:33:25] - I didn't even get to part 3 of ATOTC. gave up after part 1. hehehe, and it was required reading - guess how I did in that class? - vinnie
[2004-06-01 11:32:44] - Ender's Game's first I found pretty easy too, IIRC - vinnie
[2004-06-01 11:32:26] - Dave: I vaguely remember A Tale of Two Cities being a lot more enjoyable near the end, still not enough to make up for the beginning though. -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:31:09] - dave: the first chapter of Snow Crash is one of the most interesting and easy-to-read
- vinnie[2004-06-01 11:30:14] - Paul: I only got to the third part because it was required reading though, if it was for fun, I would have stopped after the first coupla pages -dave
[2004-06-01 11:29:35] - Paul: Hehe, with A Tail of Two Cities, I thought the first two parts of that book were the most boring things ever, but the third part was excellent and only understood if the first two were read -dave
[2004-06-01 11:27:04] - that's a big set of books though, I think the majority of what I read
- vinnie[2004-06-01 11:26:29] - Dave: I'm definitely the odd ball. All of the supposed "great" books of our time I've pretty much thought were poorly written. I've tried reading a lot of them (Snow Crash, Satanic Verses, Ender's Game, etc) but just couldn't get past the first chapter or two in most cases. -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:20:07] - Paul: Yeah, I liked the Harry Potter books and the Peter David books. I guess you just don't like a style that I also enjoy (Ender's game etc). -dave
[2004-06-01 11:12:56] - Vinnie: Harry Turtledove also does a good job I think, considering he is often dealing with LOTS of characters and historical facts and the like. -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:12:00] - Vinnie: That's probably what it is. Nothing irritates me more than when something is added which only seems to make it more confusing. Hence my intense hatred of abstract art.
-Paul[2004-06-01 11:11:30] - ha, you beat me to it - vinnie
[2004-06-01 11:11:17] - paul: oof, give me an example of a book you thought was well-written that wasn't a children's book. no implications or judgments here, I love many children's books - vinnie
[2004-06-01 11:11:04] - Dave: Another would be most books by Peter David (I know you read Apropos of Nothing and the Woad to Wuin). He has a knack for having complex plots and storylines and yet managing ti keep it all relatively simple as well. -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:10:13] - Ender's Game was well-written and good. but I have a feeling I like more density and needless complexity than Paul
- vinnie[2004-06-01 11:10:10] - Dave: I tried reading Ender's game and didn't think that was particularly well written either. One example that I know both you and I have read are the Harry Potter books. They actually deal with an entirely new fantasy world and yet it's written in a way that even children have no trouble understanding it. -Paul
[2004-06-01 11:09:09] - good example of a book I thought was well-written but not good: Neuromancer - vinnie
[2004-06-01 11:05:55] - Paul: hmm, it just occurred to me that I'm not necessarily making a correct distinction between a "good book" and a book that is well written, since it seems like there is a distnction there. Those two examples would fall into the "good books" category -dave
[2004-06-01 11:03:17] - Paul: For me, examples would be Ender's Game and The Chosen -dave
[2004-06-01 11:02:31] - Paul: So what are examples of books that you thought were well written? -dave
[2004-06-01 11:00:45] - I guess for me I tend to equate simple with well written because for me, it's more impressive to express something deep and interesting in terms everybody can understand than to write something equally as deep and interesting and yet written in a way that is difficult for people to understand. -Paul
[2004-06-01 10:59:57] - Dave: The reason I don't think Heinlein's books are well written is because they are usually very dense and needlessly complicated and wordy. It's almost like he's trying to sound intelligent more than trying to make it easy to read. -Paul
[2004-06-01 10:54:38] - paul: I guess in some senses it's hard to pinpoint why a book is well written or not, so maybe it's just a personal decision / view. Although there have been books that I have thought were well written, but I just didn't like their style -dave
[2004-06-01 10:50:56] - Paul: ahhh, then yeah, would see how you would not like them. I guess my earlier comment on not undertsanding your taste in books is because you think books (such as this one) are poorly written whereas I think they were well written. -dave
[2004-06-01 10:26:39] - Dave: I guess that is where we disagree then. I personally don't think Heinlein's books have a very good plot at all AND I don't think they are particularly well-written. The only thing that really interests me with his books is that he usually has some interesting ideas to discuss in them. -Paul
[2004-06-01 10:18:51] - Paul: And the plot / storyline is just so well written and executed that to me it overcomes any beginning annoyances easily -dave
[2004-06-01 10:17:58] - Paul: I don't remember having that problem at all with Starship Troopers tho -dave
[2004-06-01 10:17:37] - Paul: Yeah, I guess I can see that. It annoyed me for the first 10 or so pages, then I got used to it -dave
[2004-06-01 09:41:13] - pierce: funny link
- vinnie[2004-06-01 09:19:10] - I've little use for extra made up words or new grammar rules for some special moon dialect since those things add little to the story for me and just make it harder to read. -Paul
[2004-06-01 09:18:32] - I think I pretty much like books that are well written in the sense that they are straightforward and easy to read. Heinlein seems to delight in making his books artificially hard to read just to make it seem more authentic or something. -Paul
[2004-06-01 09:14:23] - Paul: I don't understand your taste in books ^_^ -dave
[2004-06-01 08:56:58] - Dave: Yup, I've read it. Some of the political stuff is interesting but I'm still not a big fan of Heinlein in general. -Paul
[2004-06-01 08:56:18] - Paul: by Robert A. Heinlein -dave
[2004-06-01 08:55:29] - Paul: Have you read The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? I believe you would enjoy it since it is an extremely well written fictional story promoting the libertarian form of govt -dave
[2004-06-01 08:05:56] - http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_972998.html 'Make it in Scotland' shirts made in Morocco -Paul
[2004-06-01 08:04:39] - http://www.sltrib.com/2004/May/05312004/nation_w/171375.asp Michael Badnarik wins the LP nomination for president. Trust me, this was definitely a surprise. -Paul
[2004-06-01 08:03:34] - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/28/plagarist_student/ "A student who was booted off his degree course for plagiarism is to sue the university. He says tutors at the University of Kent should have spotted what he was doing and stopped him sooner." -Paul
[2004-06-01 07:31:38] - http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&ncid=528&e=2&u=/ap/20040525/ap_on_he_me/fit_video_game_diet DDR touted for weight loss -dave
[2004-05-30 23:06:19] - Heheh... this is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time. http://www.mcsweeneys.net/2004/5/26moe.html - pierce
[2004-05-30 13:15:35] - 42.20907% rounded to nearest integer = 42%! - vinnie
[2004-05-30 11:41:41] - "23.66864% - Geek" ~a
[2004-05-30 10:46:04] - I took the test and my score was 4.33925% "Poser"
- Lisa[2004-05-29 19:03:04] - apropos to this crowd (no offense), here's a geek test to waste your time: http://www.innergeek.us/geek.html . My score was 31.36095%, "Total Geek" although it sounds more like "Partial Geek" to me. - pierce
[2004-05-28 16:16:35] - gotcha. i'm outie too. see ya then - vinnie
[2004-05-28 16:15:00] - i'm spicy! ~a
[2004-05-28 16:12:02] - vinnie: I plan to leave in 15 minutes, so you can come over as early as 5:30 - aaron
[2004-05-28 16:08:50] - aaron: when are you or adrian gonna be home so I can come over? - vinnie
[2004-05-28 16:01:27] - Most of them just cheat on you - aaron
[2004-05-28 15:57:50] - I remember mike, lu, and og. kids on a desert island, no? there's a lot of things wrong with the world, not all of them bring you lasagna at work - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:45:41] - what the hell was "mike, lu, and og"? and "cow and chicken" got a show before ppg?? "courage the cowardly dog" was nominated for an oscar? what's wrong with the world? - travis
[2004-05-28 15:45:05] - Cool. I guess Ed Edd + Eddy is (are?) not quite as old as I thought. - aaron
[2004-05-28 15:40:34] - yes! that's what I was thinking of! - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:40:25] - pretty much answers all our questions - travis
[2004-05-28 15:40:09] - not just the ones you mentioned - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:39:59] - http://fridays.toonzone.net/whatacartoon.html - travis
[2004-05-28 15:39:31] - I guess maybe they just compiled the shorts into episodes, but I remember them just having a bunch of different shorts in an hour or something - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:38:08] - the pilot didn't always have a date listed it with, but from the descriptions they sound like the original cartoon cartoon shorts (like dexter and deedee zapping each other into different animals) - travis
[2004-05-28 15:34:26] - travis: Not the pilot? Hmmm... Okay. Maybe i just blocked johnny from my memory because it was so awful - aaron
[2004-05-28 15:25:39] - tv tome first ep (not pilot) air dates: dexter: 28-Apr-1996, ppg: 25-Nov-1998, johnny: 07-Jul-1997, ee+e: 04-Jan-1999 - travis
[2004-05-28 15:19:55] - johnny got his show at the same time dexter and ppg, i'm pretty sure, and EE+E was a long time afterwards - travis
[2004-05-28 15:17:34] - I think the first big 3 original cartoon series were Dexter, PPG, and EE+E - aaron
[2004-05-28 15:17:14] - travis: Those were the first shorts, but I don't think Johnny got his own real show for a long time.... - aaron
[2004-05-28 15:15:11] - vinnie: weren't johnny, ppg, and dexter the first cartoon cartoon shorts? - travis
[2004-05-28 15:09:05] - travis: the cartoon cartoon shorts I think predated those series - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:08:22] - yeah, I guess it's not quite the same, because it's like linking to only pay sites - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:06:53] - yeah, but those channels are also marginalized, like lifetime doesn't show the most popular stuff like oprah because they can't afford it - travis
[2004-05-28 15:05:49] - cartoon networks first original series were johnny bravo, powerpuff girls, and dexter, i thought, cause they made a big deal about the premiers - travis
[2004-05-28 15:05:44] - channels like that do have a use though, kind of like link blogs. especially now that there are so many channels it helps to compartmentalize shows - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:04:57] - and lots of channels make lots of money off reruns, like tnt showing law & order (i assume their repeats, i don't watch the show), and tbs and usa show old shows all day then repeat movies at night - travis
[2004-05-28 15:03:25] - yeah, mostly reruns, if not all - vinnie
[2004-05-28 15:03:23] - yeah, i imagine if Logo does well enough it'll be able to create its own shows and create a sister network (like how CN now has boomerang) - travis
[2004-05-28 14:44:51] - travis: Although "Queer As Folk" was only on showtime, so there may be some interested people who still haven't seen it... Anyway, Cartoon Network originally only showed reruns also... Didn't they? I can barely remember how they started - aaron
[2004-05-28 14:38:51] - aaron: yeah, i read that article, it does seem kinda pointless to make a network based mostly on reruns from other channels, then again how much new stuff do channels like the golf channel actually have to show - travis
[2004-05-28 14:37:08] - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/05/28/DDGHN6S7TN1.DTL Editorial on "logo", a new MTV-backed gay network soon to air on digital cable - aaron
[2004-05-28 14:08:52] - Throw in some fake vomit and a laugh track and you're there - aaron
[2004-05-28 14:08:34] - Ha ha ha! I can't believe this is a transcript. It almost seems like an SNL parody or something. - aaron
[2004-05-28 13:57:34] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3754199.stm maybe bush is the same? - travis
[2004-05-28 13:48:36] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3757665.stm more moore controversy - travis
[2004-05-28 13:47:10] - "Virginie"? I feel sorry for that hurricane. - aaron
[2004-05-28 13:45:30] - meh. I'll believe it when my house is flying away - vinnie
[2004-05-28 13:43:45] - http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=scienceNews&storyID=5287034 we joke about weatherman not being able to predict tomorrow's weather but here they are giving a year long prediction - travis
[2004-05-28 12:09:22] - I got exactly one taxi (from the airport to the office), and I used the hotel's free shuttle to the airport today. - pierce
[2004-05-28 12:08:59] - a: no, no rental car. But there were three of us here, and we were all staying at the same hotel and going to the same offices at the same time, so there was no need for it. - pierce
[2004-05-28 11:53:39] - bahahaha! sounds right - vinnie
[2004-05-28 11:50:34] - vinnie: microsoft calculator: copyright 1981-2001 (they probably haven't updated it since 1981) ~a
[2004-05-28 11:49:32] - travis: yep. i was agreeing. (whether i was joking or not is up to the reader) ~a
[2004-05-28 11:48:33] - i was jokingly proving your claim that most calculators have 1/x but not decimal->fraction - travis
[2004-05-28 11:48:23] - hehe, windows calc is what I just used to test it out. ms is so behind though, they're not representative of anything
- vinnie[2004-05-28 11:48:07] - a: i'm confused on what you're saying - travis
[2004-05-28 11:46:46] - travis: it does have 1/x ~a
[2004-05-28 11:46:31] - http://education.ti.com/images/products/scientific/30xabig.jpg this one even has 1/x as a reserved button. ~a
[2004-05-28 11:46:28] - windows "calc" doesn't have fractions. q.e.d. - travis
[2004-05-28 11:45:39] - sure. i'd say most do. (according to this site http://education.ti.com/downloads/pdf/us/ngi4.pdf it seems like even most scientific calculators have "decimal -> fracction" these days) on a side note, most of them also have "x^y" which can be used to do "x^-1" ~a
[2004-05-28 11:39:50] - they do have 1/x? I thought most didn't - vinnie
[2004-05-28 11:37:17] - oh oops. ~a
[2004-05-28 11:37:07] - i wouldn't say that. most scientific (non-graphing) calculators have "1/x" but not "decimal -> fraction" of integers. ~a
[2004-05-28 11:26:20] - not terribly useful though, as many calculators with 1/x also have decimal -> fraction of integers - vinnie
[2004-05-28 11:25:01] - http://www.freakytrigger.co.uk/proven/2004_05_01_proven_archive.html#108561725719605375 nifty way for figuring out decimal -> fraction of integers - vinnie
[2004-05-28 11:19:15] - a: wow, I might be the only person on the mboard who gets that reference - vinnie
[2004-05-28 11:16:16] - pierce: no rental car?! ~a
[2004-05-28 11:15:32] - he thought of no cars and nowhere, nowhere to drive them, noone to drive them with, there, there was no-one, no-one. ~a
[2004-05-28 10:58:33] - pierce: roger that. over and out. - travis
[2004-05-28 10:40:51] - P.S. to those playing basketball: I'll give you a call when I land in D.C. as to whether or not I'm going to make it. - pierce
[2004-05-28 10:39:57] - I don't have a car here, but I have a car in general. - pierce
[2004-05-28 10:02:33] - I don't know. not me. I have a car - vinnie
[2004-05-28 10:00:24] - Who has no cars? - aaron
[2004-05-28 09:53:06] - here in no car, I just wish I could drive, I've got places to be, yeah it doesn't seem right. no cars. *do-do, do-do* - vinnie
[2004-05-28 09:41:04] - no cars? ~a
[2004-05-28 09:13:18] - travis: ah-hahaha. Honest mistake right?
- aaron[2004-05-28 09:12:33] - aaron: yeah, except it got muddled since the first store i visited and exchanged at didn't have black controllers (it says the color on the receipt and apparently they have different scanning numbers) - travis
[2004-05-28 07:44:18] - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/21/politics/main619019.shtml bush better beware of libertarians. - mig
[2004-05-27 19:07:25] - travis: Wow cool - so you got away with the exchange! That's awesome. - aaron
[2004-05-27 18:57:34] - yes, that sentence probably made my math look bad, but i had already bought a new controller a couple weeks ago so my total is 1 exchanged + 1 newish + 2 brand new = 4 total - travis
[2004-05-27 18:56:29] - aaron+mig: no need to worry about ever bringing gamecube controllers, i bought 2 new ones and exchanged the broken one so i have 4 new black controllers - travis
[2004-05-27 17:20:54] - Pierce:
-Paul[2004-05-27 17:20:05] - Paul: However, I'm not positive that you were being sarcastic. - pierce
[2004-05-27 17:19:43] - Paul: And I'm positive that Vinnie was being sarcastic. - pierce
[2004-05-27 17:19:10] - Vinnie: I'm positive non-drinkable drugs can affect your driving. -Paul
[2004-05-27 17:14:03] - AFAIK, non-drinkable drugs don't affect driving. who's ever heard of "snorting and driving"? - vinnie
[2004-05-27 17:13:26] - Pierce: I thought so. -Paul
[2004-05-27 17:12:15] - Paul: that would seem to follow. - pierce
[2004-05-27 17:09:52] - Vinnie: Doing drugs? -Paul
[2004-05-27 17:09:13] - a: yeah, I don't plan on drinking - vinnie
[2004-05-27 17:06:15] - Travis: Glad I'm not going to this concert.
-Paul[2004-05-27 17:05:25] - a: so there's only going to be one other man with vinnie? which of the group gets to be the man? - travis
[2004-05-27 17:04:49] - "turned on by my" curses, missing words always ruin humor - travis
prev <-> next