prev <-> next
[2008-09-18 15:34:17] - Gurkie: Because we all know that religion and science can't coexist.
-Paul[2008-09-18 15:26:05] - gurkie: did you talk about evolution in science class? or dinosaurs? or abortion? or safe sex? ~a
[2008-09-18 15:24:27] - a: and we had science class... ~gurkie
[2008-09-18 15:21:49] - a: although I continued going there after the rest of them went to boarding school in India for the education... the only public school I have ever gone to is TJ ~gurkie
[2008-09-18 15:21:17] - a: i went to non-religious private schools... Although you could argue that I started going to them to school with my neighborhood kids, who not so coincidentally were my religion friends... ~gurkie
[2008-09-18 15:19:36] - paul, me too! ~a
[2008-09-18 15:19:27] - and so they don't have their children taught science. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:18:55] - a: I'm thankful to the government for not having been waterboarded today.
-Paul[2008-09-18 15:18:06] - a: I really doubt that the only reason people go to private schools is so they can take religion classes. -Paul
[2008-09-18 15:17:50] - i'm a thankful person. it's almost november. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:17:20] - and elitism. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:17:17] - a: Sorry, I have a serious problem saying that we should be thankful to the government for not taking away our freedom of speech. If we follow that logic, we have a LOT to be thankful to the goverment for. -Paul
[2008-09-18 15:17:00] - paul: religion. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:16:25] - a: And public schools? Really? If public schools are so good then why do people pay so much money to go to private schools? -Paul
[2008-09-18 15:16:07] - we're thanking the government for not taking away free speech if only because it's something that other governments decide that the people don't need/want. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:15:16] - yes, the very small and/or few instances of limitation of free speech by the government is a good thing. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:14:33] - a: Because if we're thanking government for free speech, I would also like to thank them for my life and sunshine.
-Paul[2008-09-18 15:14:12] - vinnie: fair enough. pitted against the average advertisement, it's possible that i'd pick the microsoft one. however, pitted against the average technology advertisement . . . well hell i think i'd still pick the gateseinfeld ad. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:13:49] - a: Wait wait wait. Am I understanding you correctly? Are you saying that the government giving us free speech is a good thing? -Paul
[2008-09-18 15:08:10] - haha good penny arcade though - vinnie
[2008-09-18 15:07:17] - a: also I think more than a few people liked seinfeld's standup and his show
- vinnie[2008-09-18 15:06:15] - http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/9/15/ ~a
[2008-09-18 15:05:15] - aaron: i'll admit i only saw the shoe store one. maybe my opinion will be changed by the family one. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:05:03] - a: I found them mildly humorous. but I think they're a lot more interesting than basically 90% of commercials I see. seriously, a lot of the time I can't even remember what company a given commercial is for, like for instance most car ads - vinnie
[2008-09-18 15:04:37] - and "arguably" applies just as well to miguel's statements about the government screwing up the economy of this decade, social security, and healthcare. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:03:02] - all of these things are arguably much better because of our government. ~a
[2008-09-18 15:02:56] - paul: Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. also the roads are pretty cool. and the schools (i said that already). i like how low crime is. and the economy was pretty great in the late 90s. i like how low unemployment is. and life expectancies are pretty high. free speech is pretty neat. ~a
[2008-09-18 14:58:46] - a: yes, i thought they were pretty funny. i liked the one where they were living with the family better, the one in the shoe store was OK too though - aaron
[2008-09-18 14:53:53] - aaron: did anybody find them humorous? hell, i seem to be one of the few people that liked seinfeld's standup and sitcom and i didn't find them funny. did you? ~a
[2008-09-18 14:51:22] - a: Also, in response to what you said to Miguel before, I would be interested in hearing about some things that the government has done well.
-Paul[2008-09-18 14:50:49] - a: I think any kind of effective regulation that would've prevented this would've required the government to be a lot more prescient than is possible. -Paul
[2008-09-18 14:49:31] - a: But even ignoring that, what kind of regulation would have prevented what is going on now? Do you want the government to prohibit banks from buying mortgages that at the time seemed to be a good idea? -Paul
[2008-09-18 14:48:22] - a: There's a lot of ways which one could say that the Fed and other government entities caused this whole crises in the first place by encouraging the housing boom (and subsequent bust). -Paul
[2008-09-18 14:47:46] - a: I think Andrew made some of my points fairly well. I'm more just wondering what you wanted the government to do here which might've prevented this from happening. -Paul
[2008-09-18 14:18:50] - a: well, if you're going to concede that humor was a possible "point" to the ads, then yeah humor was the point. if you didn't "get" the humor or didn't like the humor, that doesn't make the ads pointless. it just makes them pointless for you. - aaron
[2008-09-18 13:55:07] - a: Yeah... best to use symbolic logic for this. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 13:49:54] - ohhhhh. is this what you meant? "Certainly not complying or not being forced to comply with a regulation is a problem"??? i.e. the "NOT" apply to both sides of the "OR"? ~a
[2008-09-18 13:47:56] - a: I think you misunderstood, or I mis-typed. If there is a regulation, it needs to be complied with; and if it's not, you have a failure, which is a bad thing. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 13:46:31] - aaron: i do understand that they're trying to sell a brand, but i still would like to see some specifics or some humor or some point. also, i should mention that i don't think hating the microsoft ads has anything to do microsoft-bashing. the ads left everyone going "wtf?" and not the "wtf?" that leaves a smile on your face. ~a
[2008-09-18 13:42:06] - xpovos: why is it a problem to be forced to comply with a regulation? ~a
[2008-09-18 13:38:48] - aaron: even the Nike ads make it pretty clear that they're trying to sell you shoes. And as much as I hate those snooty Mac vs. PC ads, they at least make a sales pitch as to why you should buy a Mac. - mig
[2008-09-18 13:37:51] - aaron: the problem with the MS/Seinfeld ads is they're not really selling anything. It isn't even remotely tied into any Microsoft product whatsoever. - mig
[2008-09-18 13:37:08] - a: i don't think it was an ad for software, i think it was an ad for microsoft... if it was an ad for like, microsoft access or something, yea maybe they should say what it does. but it would also only target like .01% of tv viewers then. i think they were just trying to sell their brand - aaron
[2008-09-18 13:36:22] - a: They could both, arguably, be problems. Certainly not complying or being forced to comply with a regulation is a problem. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 13:33:40] - xpovos: "It doesn't matter what kind of regulation you insist on or pass unless they are actually met and continually complied with" i agree with that. "regulation was utterly ignored" that sounds like the problem, not the regulation itself. ~a
[2008-09-18 13:31:48] - aaron: i know tv vs. print isn't a very good analogy, but if you look at IT magazines, they all have lots of specifics about what their products can do. ~a
[2008-09-18 13:31:04] - aaron: except nike is selling a shoe. how horrible it would be that a software company would give some specifics about their product's capabilities. ~a
[2008-09-18 13:28:10] - mig: "they've fucked up public education, social security, health care, ..." actually, the dollar could be a lot worse. and the public education system has a lot to be desired, but it's not too bad. do you want me to make a list of things that they've done well? ~a
[2008-09-18 13:02:13] - I think it probably swayed my opinion of MS up a little. Apple's always swinging at them so I thought it was mature of them not to swing back. Kind of like how mudslinging TV ads typically decrease my opinion of a politician - aaron
[2008-09-18 12:56:55] - I didn't think the ads were that bad, I thought they were more entertaining than most ads. Nike's made far more non-sequitur ads but nobody hates them, I think this was just microsoft-bashing for the sake of microsoft-bashing - aaron
[2008-09-18 12:21:01] - a: So I guess the question from your perspective should be, "What can I do to ensure that regulations are complied with"? -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 12:20:14] - a: With regards to the regulation side, I think the point that Paul was making was more along the lines of: It doesn't matter what kind of regulation you insist on or pass unless they are actually met and continually complied with. In the cases of AA and FM&FM as you've labelled below, regulation was utterly ignored. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 12:18:02] - a: they've fucked up public education, social security, health care, "spreading democracy", keeping the dollar financially strong, etc, etc. what basis is there that the government wouldn't fuck this up too? - mig
[2008-09-18 12:16:03] - Correction, sorry. Morgan responded to the Panic of 1907, not 1893. 1893 was gold-based, (and so was 1907 to a lesser extent) though. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 12:13:34] - a lot of his own money into the system (via Europe, but that's another story) which basically served as re-greasing the gears of the economy. After that Congress decided to set up the Fed to do that in the future so that the economy wouldn't be beholden to the whims of the mega-rich. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 12:12:34] - The purpose of the Reserve Board really came into being during the gold crisis of 1893. No one would or could lend to anyone else, and so they had a major liquidity crisis. Far worse than today in size, but smaller in scope, because credit is so much more a part of our lives today. J.P. Morgan rode in on a white horse and saved the day by personally injecting
[2008-09-18 12:10:06] - bank. I personally would say that one of the biggest points to take from both the Federal Reserve situation, and FNM/FRE is that a joint private/public entity is in general a bad idea because the public and private halves are trying to serve different masters with wildly different goals. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 12:09:15] - Hmm, let me see if I can explain a bit. The Federal reserve has limited capacity to issue new credit, as in some, but not unlimited. They've about hit their limit, which is why they're asking the Treasury for access to more cash. When the Treasury gives out money, that's on the federal balance sheet. When the Federal Reserve does it, it's not, becuase it's a 'private'
[2008-09-18 11:00:55] - same thing with aig. ~a
[2008-09-18 11:00:47] - a: one of the comments in mig's article mentions that positive perception of MS went up and negative perception went down since the Seinfeld ads ran. I thought they were interesting myself, but I don't think it changes my perception of MS one way or the other - vinnie
[2008-09-18 11:00:17] - in other words, why do you call the current regulation strict? in the case of aa, it seems like they were allowed to do pretty much everything they wanted to and more without the government (or any regulatory body) preventing them from doing it. ~a
[2008-09-18 10:58:30] - well the loans underwritten by the government are managed by these private companies, right? isn't that relaxed (non-strict) compared to having the government do its own loans? ~a
[2008-09-18 10:51:41] - paul: I believe the Federal Reserve has a reserve of money (heh). I don't understand who it is being given to though. the article just says banks
- vinnie[2008-09-18 10:50:47] - a: Because as far as I can tell, we already do have some fairly strict regulation on wall street and it didn't seem to prevent all of this from going down. -Paul
[2008-09-18 10:50:17] - a: Well, my response would be to ask what kind of regulation would've prevented all of this mess from happening? -Paul
[2008-09-18 10:47:37] - paul: the ads certainly got people talking. so if that was their only goal, they succeeded at that. however, i believe that shouldn't have been their only goal since people were mostly talking about how horrible (and not merely quirky) the ads were. ~a
[2008-09-18 10:44:09] - if you think the government would have fucked it up worse, can you say why you think that? ~a
[2008-09-18 10:44:01] - paul: i have a malformed question for you: (assuming you do) can you explain why you think deregulation (and/or self-regulation) is good? specifically in the light of what happened recently with aig, fm&fm, lb, and less recently with aa? ~a
[2008-09-18 10:31:25] - mig: Honestly, I've seen far worse, and from everything I've read, it seems like the first few ads in a campaign like that are supposed to get people talking more than promoting anything. -Paul
[2008-09-18 10:30:31] - a: That's what I was thinking, but I wasn't sure. -Paul
[2008-09-18 10:28:02] - paul: well, the ads really were that bad. - mig
[2008-09-18 10:22:13] - paul: the fed? don't they just print money? ~a
[2008-09-18 10:17:51] - a: Perhaps stumble is the wrong word, more like a huge admission of a mistake. I really thought they would give the ads a little more chance considering how high profile they were. -Paul
[2008-09-18 10:16:49] - http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jC0Js_XMSCt-GDAijc3qIbjuVZIAD9395DL80 So can anybody explain what is involved in "pumping" money into the financial system? Where is this money coming from and who is it being given to? -Paul
[2008-09-18 10:14:17] - how so? how does stopping the ads count as a stumble? i think not stopping the ads would be a stumble. they were pointless and uninformative in a stark contrast to the apple ads they were trying to confront. ~a
[2008-09-18 10:11:17] - mig: Wow, if that's true, that's a huge stumble on microsoft's part. -Paul
[2008-09-18 09:55:17] - xpovos:
~a[2008-09-18 09:41:46] - http://valleywag.com/5051455/microsoft-to-announce-jerry-seinfeld-ads-cancelled-tomorrow no more seinfeld ads. - mig
[2008-09-18 09:32:22] - a: Vaguely. I think that one came a year or so later, but was much less impressive. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-18 08:19:13] - xpovos: yeah, except that it was more than just an ad campaign. . . . do you still remember the "creationism vs. evolution" debate? ~a
[2008-09-18 07:40:02] - I guess it shows how effective that ad campaign was that we all still remember it 7-8 years later... -- Xpovos
[2008-09-17 17:54:34] - "btw, how was the i agree with dave thing paul? miguel? -dave" "Don't take this the wrong way Dave, but it was kind of funny... -Paul" "don't take this the wrong dave, but it sucked dick... ~a" i crack me up
~a[2008-09-17 17:52:27] - . . . wtf from 2001 . . . was paul ever on tv for the "i agree with dave" thing? ~a
[2008-09-17 16:55:53] - vinnie: i agree with dave. ~a
[2008-09-17 16:19:59] - a:
guess again - aarsupply[2008-09-17 14:31:56] - title: i wish i could carry your face in my butt?
~a[2008-09-17 13:56:49] - vinnie: dr seuss! nice - aaron
[2008-09-17 13:25:40] - just name them all Dave - vinnie
[2008-09-17 12:43:32] - a: i would have such a hard time remembering 86 spouses names, let alone the 170 kids... ~gurkie
[2008-09-16 16:32:45] - no more than four wives at a time? how the heck are they supposed to live with four or fewer wives? that's fascism. ~a
[2008-09-16 16:14:37] - i wonder if i can be number 87 http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSLF22475520080916?feedType=RSS&feedName=oddlyEnoughNews&rpc=69 ~gurkie
[2008-09-16 16:12:45] - aaron: yeah, those endurance races are so much harder, aren't they?
~a[2008-09-16 16:10:36] - a: personally i thought our 12 second foot race was about 6 seconds too long, i was ready to quit about half way in - aaron
[2008-09-16 15:58:04] - yes it's a bike race. the longest race i've ever been in was only one hour long . . .
~a[2008-09-16 15:34:43] - a: i assume its a bike race? and fyi, I think you are insane... ~gurkie
[2008-09-16 14:50:15] - omg, i just signed up for a six hour race for this weekend. i'm such a glutton for punishment. ~a
[2008-09-16 14:42:04] - Xpovos: Too late, I already bought up 71 shares @ $28 this morning. I really like the dividend and I think they're getting a lot of stuff for a discount. Might be some short term pain but it's for long term gain, I hope. -Paul
[2008-09-16 14:32:37] - -- Xpovos
[2008-09-16 14:32:34] - paul: It's fun on the market today. I personally would recommend against investing anything in BAC. They're buying up bad debt left and right; and while it's for a substantial discount, it's pretty likely that discount isn't steep enough. On the plus side, they are making themselves 'too big to fail'. But that doesn't necessarily help stock investors. Look at FNM/FRE.
[2008-09-16 13:32:17] - you are the first generation to be raised without religion
[2008-09-16 12:39:23] - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7616817.stm ramsay cleared over puffin eating - aaron
[2008-09-16 12:33:25] - a: well "in the long run" implies that you play more than one time, which most of these games don't assume - aaron
[2008-09-16 12:27:59] - nash equilibrium seems like a stupid concept. it runs on the axiom that if you were to change your strategy, then the other players would not change their strategy. that's dumb. if you change to a worse strategy in the hopes that i change my strategy to something you can take advantage of in the long run, then that seems like it could be a good idea for you. ~a
[2008-09-16 12:04:26] - i'm pretty sure the nash equilibrium doesn't come into play here: it looks like that is for multiple player games. in our case, the way to play to maximize your expected (average) winnings, is to play forever. ~a
[2008-09-16 10:03:53] - a: but that's a good answer - aaron
[2008-09-16 10:03:35] - a: well i'll win more money than you by playing n=5
- aaron[2008-09-16 09:33:59] - a: "when you sentence Huey, Dewey, and Louie to death, you've unforgiven threeeeeeeee..." - james hetfield
[2008-09-15 20:20:03] - aaron: i don't think that's legal unless all the entrants are really young. is it legal for a 5th grader to marry an 11th grader? but yeah, i would stop once i reach the 50% point. (5/6)n = 50% . . . n=4. ~a
[2008-09-15 20:14:45] - vinnie: at least unforgiven ii has the "two" vs. "too" wordplay. what the fuck were they thinking with iii? ~a
[2008-09-15 18:03:24] - Vinnie: Yeah, today was a bit of a bloodbath for financial stocks. Some big guys went under and some others are getting bought out. -Paul
[2008-09-15 17:45:49] - lol I just found out Metallica's new album has a song called Unforgiven III. dunno why this cracks me up so much
- vinnie[2008-09-15 17:40:14] - paul: I don't really understand stocks at all but yikes - vinnie
[2008-09-15 16:47:43] - Xpovos: On a more serious note, I'm tempted to put some money into my scottrade account so I can buy up some BoA stock. I feel like I missed my golden opportunity back in early July and this might be the next best thing. -Paul
[2008-09-15 16:46:48] - xpovos: http://finance.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:LEH Look at the yield on this puppy.
-paul[2008-09-15 16:10:24] - These articles talk about "nash equilibrium", the way that you should play to maximize your winnings, but I don't understand what the nash equilibrium is in this kind of game - aaron
[2008-09-15 16:08:41] - a: right, but assume that unlike Millionaire, the questions stay easy (who wants to marry a 5th grader style) and unlike any game show, your potential winnings are limitless... then would you ever stop? - aaron
[2008-09-15 15:53:31] - a: yeah I think you should aim for a threshold and stop once you get there. with Millionaire it's much worse, because it's not random. the questions get progressively harder (counting how many people would know the answer) but you could still always know the answer - vinnie
[2008-09-15 15:52:04] - your expected winnings from playing n times is (10/6)n. this value only goes up the longer you play. the only problem is that your chances of winning vs. your chances of losing get further and further away from each-other the longer you play (see variance?) . ~a
[2008-09-15 15:40:45] - logically you do want to stop trying to double your money. you just proved it by contradiction. i do wonder what the best strategy is. my gut tells me you should play for a while then stop, but i can't figure that one out using logic. ~a
[2008-09-15 15:14:59] - There's all these game shows based on the principal that logically, you never want to stop trying to double your money, so they never have to give anybody anything
- aaron[2008-09-15 15:14:35] - vinnie: that page got me reading up on the other game theory articles on Wikipedia... is there a succinct phrase for the "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" game? Like say there's a game where you roll a dice. If it comes up 1 you lose all your money. If it comes up anything else you double your money. - aaron
[2008-09-15 13:10:30] - a: yeah that's what I thought too for a while. I read the whole article and they had a really lengthy explanation I didn't understand, and then a shorter one that I did - vinnie
[2008-09-15 12:25:12] - vinnie: hmmm. if you remove the word "surprise", then i think the judge cannot execute the prisoner. ~a
[2008-09-15 12:21:45] - regardless, this is a classic case of unusual punishment.
~a[2008-09-15 12:12:22] - a: yeah the article goes into detail that it's hard to make any formal logic of this puzzle because of the word "surprise". they suggest using "the date won't be deducible" - vinnie
[2008-09-15 11:54:29] - B) the judge was only able to execute the prisoner because he was able to use the same illogical reasoning the prisoner used. ~a
[2008-09-15 11:54:16] - vinnie: i haven't read any of the interpretations in that article. i have only read the problem statement. by reading the problem statement, i deduce two things: A) the prisoner was acting highly illogical. if he thinks it won't be a surprise to be executed on friday, then it'll be a surprise to be executed on friday. stupid. ~a
[2008-09-15 11:38:40] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unexpected_hanging_paradox this is confusing me - vinnie
[2008-09-15 08:39:59] - mig: Me too, I thought Leprechaun 2 was on there for a while. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-12 16:29:59] - My count is zero as well. - pierce
[2008-09-12 15:08:55] - i'm amazed none of the Leprechaun movies made it to the list. - mig
[2008-09-12 14:57:16] - pierce: request completed: go here to read more on uploading videos to the message board. once the video is uploaded, a link will automatically appear here. ~a
[2008-09-12 14:56:21] - a: Never add video! Also, I've seen Manos: the Hands of Fate and Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie. 2% of the worst 100 movies. More than I'd ever want. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-12 14:26:12] - a: feature request... video support on the msgboard plz. thx! - pierce
[2008-09-12 14:18:23] - a: I've seen From Justin to Kelly (pretty bad, but not terrible) and half of the MST3k-version of Manos before deciding even THAT was too boring - vinnie
[2008-09-12 14:17:42] - paul: be like me and wear work inappropriate clothing. i wore a "whiskey" shirt yesterday (jameson). today . . . well let's just say it's good the message board doesn't do video. ~a
[2008-09-12 14:17:03] - a: I'll be writing a lot of SQL queries and creating reports, it sounds like. Not sure if UoP is a competitor or not. I think they target slightly different audiences but I could be wrong. -Paul
[2008-09-12 14:16:26] - vinnie: and i thought that gurkie was saying that uop was at least 3 of learning tree international's competitors. if not more? ~a
[2008-09-12 14:16:04] - Aaron: I might still wear them to work occasionally since I don't really have much other work appropriate clothing. -Paul
[2008-09-12 14:15:35] - pieba: Thanks! -Paul
[2008-09-12 14:11:58] - aba/pierce: I don't see the big deal in congratulating Paul just because he hasn't seen any awful movies...
- vinnie[2008-09-12 14:02:01] - a: at least 3
if not more ~gurkie[2008-09-12 14:01:43] - paul: what are you going to be doing there? is uop one of your competitors . . . or is the target audience too different? ~a
[2008-09-12 13:59:43] - paul: what are you going to do with all your suits! - aaron
[2008-09-12 13:50:25] - paul: congrats! - pierce
[2008-09-12 13:39:52] - paul: congrats! - aba
[2008-09-12 13:30:01] - a: I don't think I have seen any of those, actually. -Paul
[2008-09-12 12:33:02] - how many of these movies have you seen? ~a
[2008-09-12 12:22:41] - pretty pictures of the lhc ~a
[2008-09-12 12:12:12] - according to a wikipedia article that references this image, "the office" was the only show on the list that wasn't paid for its product placement. ~a
[2008-09-12 12:11:12] - an image from 2007 regarding product placement in television. i didn't care enough to find out how the "index" column was defined, but it's interesting to me how many reality tv shows (compared to non-reality tv-shows) benefit from product placement. ~a
[2008-09-12 09:42:46] - Vinnie: Yeah, I was going to write an email to you and Katie (people I gave my resume to) in order to let them know. -Paul
[2008-09-12 09:21:07] - paul: wow, you finally did it...
- vinnie[2008-09-12 09:09:50] - a: Learning Tree International. -Paul
[2008-09-11 17:39:27] - oh wow wow wow! where is paul working now? ~a
[2008-09-11 17:14:49] - paul: congrats on ur resignation! ~gurkie
[2008-09-11 16:03:56] - pierce: as far as i know, it will work invisibly. i.e. https will still remain in the url as before. ~a
[2008-09-11 16:02:20] - ddr.people: don't count on me. my friend at work had his car broken into. there's a 25% chance i'll be there. ~a
[2008-09-11 14:55:40] - aaron: yeah I'll be there - vinnie
[2008-09-11 14:54:43] - ddr_people: sfm? - aaron
[2008-09-11 13:33:42] - a: obviously sni doesn't work, but I mean "is it something besides https". - pierce
[2008-09-11 13:19:33] - - pierce
[2008-09-11 13:19:27] - a: neat, and interesting. does it work invisibly over https, or would I have to go to sni://aporter.org/msg?
[2008-09-11 10:21:43] - pierce: regarding your https request: sni is a "new" protocol extension (added onto https) that allows multiple host names (virtual hosting) on one ip with ssl. the bad news is that it's only five or six years old, so firefox2+ or msie7+ (on vista) are required. ~a
[2008-09-10 23:01:02] - aaron: HAHAHA ~dee
[2008-09-10 17:08:28] - http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2387/2198259774_baed018f2b.jpg - aaron
[2008-09-10 15:03:02] - kaleb: http://www.ddrfreak.com/locations/locations.php?action=displayState&stateID=49 DDR locations in Virginia; it's out of date (still lists Planet Play @ SF mall and ITG2 @ NVCC) but it looks like there may be a DDR Extreme machine at GMU, which is kind of close to us. Maybe we can check it out some time - aaron
[2008-09-10 13:48:49] - http://reason.com/blog/#128719 Further muddying the waters in terms of deciding who I should vote for. -Paul
[2008-09-10 13:30:03] - aaron: is it a coincidence that you used exactly the same number? aaaaaaaaa! ~a
[2008-09-10 13:29:56] - lol.
[2008-09-10 13:29:34] - I didn't see they had a We Ate The Machine I'll have to pick it up. - aaron
[2008-09-10 13:28:13] - vinnie: aaron seems interested. ~a
[2008-09-10 13:23:11] - vinnie: aaaaaaaaa!!!!! - aaron
[2008-09-10 13:22:22] - aaron: polysics at the black cat on 10/30 - vinnie
[2008-09-10 13:02:56] - virginia looking to create an open source physics textbook. zomg, we could help teach the future contemporary physicists of the world! i hope they give us credit when they make the next superbomb. ~a
[2008-09-10 12:47:54] - 100 hits? yay! everybody is bored but they have nothing to say. ~a
[2008-09-09 16:13:40] - okay, I think that's the meanest thing I've ever said about paul here. I'm deeply sorry. I take it back. - pierce
[2008-09-09 16:02:11] - a: probably coding up an activex component. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:58:12] - pierce: the problem here is that we agree. where the hell is paul?
~a[2008-09-09 15:57:01] - yes i understand that reality. i agree that standards aren't the end-all-be-all. if you at least start with the standards and stick to the standards that are implemented in the major browsers, you'll be 1000 times better off (and you'll be helping the community at the expense of monopolies) than if you picked browserjimbob and coded to that alone. ~a
[2008-09-09 15:56:56] - so no, it's not ideal for the health of the web, but it's neither "side's" fault or responsibility that things got so out of hand. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:55:33] - (those are different jimbobs, btw) - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:55:16] - a: and jimbob's browser has to work with bankofjimbob.com's existing code. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:51:50] - a: my explanation wasn't a dismissal of standards. I like standards. I still deal with wonky IE glitches to this day but I'll admit it's a thousand times better than it once was. The reality, however, is that standards are not comprehensive, flawless, universally implemented or consistent across implementations, and BankOfJimbob.com has to code to that reality. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:38:47] - pierce: but that's exactly why we have standardization. your explanation against coding to standards is exactly the argument we need to promote standardization. your argument taken to the logical conclusion: nobody can code anything up because they have to test their application against infinity different other applications every time they change anything. ~a
[2008-09-09 15:33:39] - a: I agree that it may have been better for the world if it had been implemented as an option in every browser, but the very valid counterpoint can be made that casual users don't want to have to know what a user agent string is, and will probably think less of their shiny new browser if they learn it has to lie about what it is just to work properly. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:31:14] - a: and of course, historically it was the new browsers being released that were the ones with no market share, so they could be easily convinced to fake it. This comment summarizes it nicely. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:28:28] - a: I can see both sides of it. As much as I'd love for every browser to be honest about who they are, doing so is a disadvantage to the browsers with less market share. Professional sites are designed with cost/benefit in mind, and they're not going to spend effort fixing them for Jimbob's You Might Be A Redneck If You Use This Browser v1.Yeehaw! for the mac. - pierce
[2008-09-09 15:15:30] - http://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/stories/2008/09/08/daily12.html I honestly thought this was an onion article. -Paul
[2008-09-09 14:24:50] - you might as well leave it blank. ~a
[2008-09-09 14:24:43] - pierce: instead, i do fault the browser makers for "faking" their user agent string. if you want to give the user the ability to fake the user agent string, that's one thing. but to use someone else's trademark as your own default user agent seems borderline-illegal. at the very least it's defeats the purpose of the user agent string altogether. ~a
[2008-09-09 14:24:01] - pierce: well, ok, i guess i don't necessarily fault them for that. webpage makers should strive for standards compliance, but i understand why they did what they did. ~a
[2008-09-09 14:15:54] - a: well in their defense, back in the day it was doing the standards-based things that would cause problems. netscape 4 had so many atrocious glitches that anything more complicated than the msgboard tended to require hacking and tweaking to look right... and doing so would break it on the better browsers unless you gave them a different page. - pierce
[2008-09-09 13:01:10] - yeah, providing differing content based on the user agent string is pretty dumb i think. if you're doing something that isn't standards based, then you probably shouldn't be doing it very often. ~a
[2008-09-09 12:06:28] - http://www.webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/ - aba
[2008-09-08 18:42:23] - Paul: If she's dead, we accomplished one of the two, at a minimum. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-08 18:34:36] - a: That's between Andrew, Travis, me, and the dead hooker. -Paul
[2008-09-08 16:58:49] - paul: which were?
~a[2008-09-08 16:39:35] - Xpovos: Damn slot machine... I enjoyed myself, although I'm still a little surprised that you did considering we didn't really do either of the two activities we expressly decided to go there for. -Paul
[2008-09-08 10:41:14] - a: At least you were up. When Paul and Travis took me there for my bachelor's party, they came home a fair bit lighter. I think we had a good enough time to warrant it, though. I guess we should ask Paul. After all, of course I'm happy with it, I went home about $50 richer. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-08 10:36:57] - no i was pretty much even: about a hundred up. i basically won the amount i spent. i know this is totally cliche, but i probably should have quit when i was way ahead. ~a
[2008-09-08 10:25:36] - a: win much? ~gurkie
[2008-09-08 10:09:25] - gurkie: grrrrrrrreat! i got to play lots of poker. i walked around town at 5am. it was pretty cool considering i was only there for like 36 hours. ~a
[2008-09-08 10:00:47] - a: how was ac? ~gurkie
[2008-09-08 09:58:02] - gurkie: she was born a zombie. ~a
[2008-09-08 09:54:33] - xpovos: I dont think brain is on any approved diet for a baby... You might want to wait til she can digest solids for that... ~gurkie
[2008-09-07 22:21:35] - a: More of a comment. It's totally unimportant, and I can't really remember it well. My daughter is eating my brain! -- Xpovos
[2008-09-07 18:40:33] - xpovos: your . . . your question? you have a question about wikipedia? ~a
[2008-09-06 10:25:44] - Fuck! She just erased that entry entirely... I give up. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-06 10:24:03] - hmm, baby on keyboard makes typing hard, -- Xpovos
[2008-09-06 10:23:36] - a: Alright, then my
[2008-09-06 10:23:21] - a: Alright,
[2008-09-06 10:23:02] - aaron: now that is an elegant design! Kudos to Zack. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-05 15:10:35] - http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1328884 my coworker Zack's solution to u-turn - aaron
[2008-09-05 14:17:54] - it's not: verbs=tionary, nouns=pedia. it is: words=tionary, encyclopedia articles=pedia. i think what you're confused by is an inconsistency (when to have a pedia entry) where consistency is not important. ~a
[2008-09-05 14:15:30] - xpovos: it's referring to [the australian slang word "root"] which taken as a whole is a noun. they'd probably mention [the normal english verb "root"] if it was notable for something to be a normal english verb. - pierce
[2008-09-05 14:07:58] - wiki folks: Help me to understand the inconcistency here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Root_(disambiguation) There is exactly one verb form on the list, the vulgar slang, however at least two other verb forms (far more common) are omitted. I'd understand if the wikipedia was all nouns and relegated verbs to the wiktionary, but why one? -- Xpovos
[2008-09-05 13:29:35] - a: add to the list: nemo, katie and devin. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-05 13:27:19] - slight correction: it was Buchanan who withdrew, not Lincoln. - mig
[2008-09-05 13:16:08] - Being an important port area, and the fact that it was deep in southern territory you can argue the Union was the aggresors by keeping a military presence there. - mig
[2008-09-05 13:14:04] - A: yeah of course. didn't know if david called u yet... i'll be driving down around midnight or earlier *crosses fingers* ~dee
[2008-09-05 13:11:30] - a: they fired first at fort sumter which was in southern territory. Originally when the south broke away Lincoln agreed to withdraw all troops from southern territory, except for Ft. Sumter. - mig
[2008-09-05 13:09:22] - gurkie: i think camping is a great idea!
~a[2008-09-05 13:00:59] - paul: didn't the south strike first? ~a
[2008-09-05 12:58:05] - i think we should sit around a campfire and sing Kumbaya... Who is with me? ~gurkie
[2008-09-05 12:55:31] - people we've scared away / people who got bored with us: dave, travis, mel, jdb, logan, wolf, cryptic, kris. ~a
[2008-09-05 12:53:23] - a: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuleaux_triangle alternative shapes for manhole covers... - aaron
[2008-09-05 12:51:56] - dee: yes. i'll be driving down tonight. is that still cool? ~a
[2008-09-05 12:50:13] - a: are you coming this weekend?? -Dee
[2008-09-05 12:48:21] - Man, I remember those heady days... Although 2001 was the year I was making a real ass of myself. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-05 12:45:01] - Pierce: Needless to say we disagree, and I know I'm not changing your mind, but I just really don't think the southern states were itching for a war with the northern states when they broke away. I think they just wanted to be left alone (admittedly with their institution of slavery) and that it was the north that wanted to force the issue. -Paul
[2008-09-05 12:15:44] - vinnie: oh oh, i thought you were referring to the inanity of the "*cries*" conversation. and yes, i took what paul said out of context. wolf had said about ann coulter: "she's another person whose death i plan on celebrating." to which paul replied "wolf: I plan on celebrating your death -Paul" ~a
[2008-09-05 11:46:00] - a: I thought 2002 was when all the huge arguments happened. wow, did paul really say that, and how did he mean it?
- vinnie[2008-09-05 10:25:37] - http://www.massively.com/2008/09/04/massively-interview-multiverse-explains-the-buffy-mmo-firefly/ also a firefly mmo. -mig
[2008-09-05 10:25:11] - http://www.massively.com/2008/09/03/virtual-worlds-conference-talk-to-unveil-buffy-the-vampire-slaye/ buffy mmo under development. - mig
[2008-09-05 08:59:15] - a: that guy Kevin who sees us at DDR now and then has good things to say about new egg - aaron
[2008-09-05 08:58:52] - a: nice! - aaron
[2008-09-05 06:22:01] - a: I seem to remember doing so, but not often, even if this isn't a false memory. However it gets very good cred from other people I know. -- Xpovos
[2008-09-05 03:16:26] - a: oh man, that image was creepy. i'm going to have nightmares now. - aba
[2008-09-04 23:37:56] - have any of you ever bought anything off of newegg? ~a
[2008-09-04 21:54:34] - aaron: down under ~a
[2008-09-04 21:34:26] - aaron: i looked at the contraption i thought didn't work (the one i mentioned) and it worked. weird. ~a
[2008-09-04 21:25:22] - http://FantasticContraption.com/?designId=1108981 hangdog (my first solution to down under... this was difficult for me!) - aaron
[2008-09-04 20:59:41] - aba: Image:Crying-adrian.jpg ~a
[2008-09-04 20:58:42] - vinnie: i think you mean 2000. 2002 was a totally different message board. 2000: "Can you dig it?
" 2002: "wolf: I plan on celebrating your death -Paul" ~a[2008-09-04 20:53:57] - a: did you mean
? - aba[2008-09-04 20:07:00] - after all, I'm making snide remarks and not contributing to the greater discussion - vinnie
[2008-09-04 19:59:59] - it's starting to feel like 2002 around here
- vinnie[2008-09-04 17:28:45] - *cries* ~a
[2008-09-04 17:20:16] - that should have been the angry face - aba
prev <-> next