« first day (634 days earlier)      last day (4305 days later) » 

4:00 PM
@JSBձոգչ I disagree with your math. There's a whole big pile of people on top of that bell curve, ringing that big old bell with shows like "Ice Road Trucker," "Pawn Stars," "American Pickers," "Mountain Men," "Gator Something-or-Other" and even — I shit you not — "Hillbilly Hand-Fishin'" ... And these are shows on channels with educational-sounding names like The History Channel and The Discovery Channel
 
@ΜετάEd The BBC? =P
 
The rest of it is Kardashians all the way down.
 
@JSBձոգչ OK, not sure I have ever watched that, but I'll take your word that it is good...
 
wait, what exactly is the argument here?
that most cable tv is crap?
 
4:01 PM
^ Very interesting analysis of how cuts are made to make people "say" things on television that they never said at all, as used by the Discovery Channel (2/3 into the video—but the rest is very interesting as well).
 
or that unbundling would be cheaper?
 
@Vitaly Hah, I am not surprised. Anything that seems "interesting" to the average intellect they will stoop to.
@JSBձոգչ I think both.
 
@Vitaly I don't think Discovery channel has ever kept away such fluff. It is sciency, a load of horse shit, but not exactly science idiocy.
hm...I'm probably wrong...probably worse than science-idiocy.
@Robusto yeah, baby!
 
This reminds me...
Christian Science is a system of religious thought and practice derived from the writings of Mary Baker Eddy and the Bible. It is practiced by its adherents, students of Christian Science, who may be members of the mother church Church of Christ, Scientist, a branch church, or of both (or neither). Its central texts are the Bible and the Christian Science textbook, Science & Health With Key to the Scriptures by Mary Baker Eddy. In the textbook, she describes the teachings of Jesus as a complete and coherent divine science which was demonstrated and proven through his healings. Mary Baker ...
 
@Cerberus i've read some very convincing stuff that bundling is probably cheaper than the alternative, even if it seems like it shouldn't be at first glance. eg: newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/01/25/…
 
4:05 PM
@Vitaly Yeah, how's that for an oxymoron?
 
@JSBձոգչ thanks. you just trivialized every thing we've been saying? That somebody has noticed that before? That the food channel is ...
mmm ...food.
 
i love food
let's talk about that instead
 
exactly.
let's move on from nutella and ovaltine. because we don't want to tempt the gods.
 
@Vitaly The first sentence is golden: Christian Science is a system of religious thought and practice derived from the writings of Mary Baker Eddy and the Bible.
 
...with nutella and ovaltine. we'd never get it back if they got their dirty hands on it.
 
4:07 PM
I am eagerly awaiting the next occasion someone claims that they are a Christian and approve of science, just so I could point out that the Christian Science doctrine prohibits using human medicine and visiting doctors.
 
@Vitaly To connect things up, they supposedly have a very good and unbiased news service.
 
It is easier to just point at a catholic and a protestant who both claim to be Christans and show their differences of opinion.
 
@Vitaly er, what? i'm a christian and i approve of science, but that doesn't mean that i approve of Mary Baker Eddy
 
Straw man.
 
@Vitaly That'll never work.
 
4:08 PM
straw man and non sequitur
 
@ΜετάEd @Cerberus I know. But it's fun.
 
@JSBձոգչ whatever works.
troll baiting.
 
@Vitaly So you're a masochist, sort of by definition.
 
hold on..baiting -is- trolling
2
@JSBձոգչ and genetic fallacy (it took me a while to think that one up)
 
@Vitaly These people will actually let their children die because they don't believe in doctors. That is ignorance and idiocy in stupefying proportions.
 
4:16 PM
@Robusto What I wonder is, why do people inside this chatroom care about what we do so much.
If you think we are going to die, let us die.
No need to rage about it.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog you're a christian scientist?
 
@Js Christian. not interested in doctrine.
 
right, but the people under discussion are people in the Christian Science movement
(which, ironically, is not really considered a Christian group by most churches)
 
@JS ...which is about Christians.
 
sort of
 
4:18 PM
perhaps.
 
they're christian about like jehova's witnesses are christian
 
@JSBձոգչ Right, all that seems plausible. The thing is just that there is no true free market, but a few interconnected oligopolies.
 
Never heard of them, so I do not know if they are heresy.
 
certainly christian-ish, but heterodox by almost any standard
 
Only piracy can put some pressure on the kettle to vent the inflation.
@Vitaly I know.
 
4:19 PM
@JSBձոգչ Most Christian groups are not considered Christian groups by most Christian churches. So what?
 
@Vitaly i'm just saying that i don't waste a lot of time worrying about what silly things christian scientists believe
 
@Cerberus Yeah, and besides remember that Hitchens (I think) quote about playing chess with a pigeon? Finding fallacies in baiting like that is not really applicable for that reason. There is no point in even trying to play by the rules.
 
@JSBձոգչ Does the Church consider non-catholics Christians these days?
@Vitaly I don't remember, but I probably disagree.
 
@Cerberus depends on what you mean. non-catholic baptisms are considered valid
but remember IANAC
 
I am not a Christian?
What was that about again?
 
4:21 PM
I Am Not A Catholic
 
Oh...
 
@JSBձոգչ Is that the title of your essay?
 
@Vitaly i have an essay?
 
Then I believe you might want to include “Why”.
 
@Vitaly You might want to include a bridge.
 
And a few hobbits.
 
@JSBձոգչ they're in the CHristian traditino, like Sikh, Jain, Buddhist are in the Hindu tradition
 
I can't decide.
Should I get Pyromancer of Elemental Dracomancer?
 
@Mitch right. i didn't deny that.
 
Both of them are radical
and look cool
 
4:25 PM
@Vitaly except, that they're not pigeons. they're just as rational (or lacking thereof) as non-religionists.
ok that's not entirely believable.
 
What should I get?
 
@Mitch If you walk like a pigeon...
 
Aquinas was rational as you can get.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog I only concern myself with beliefs that I consider dangerous: beliefs which endanger children, for example, concern me. A person has the right to off themselves, but I do not think that right extends to their children.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog pics?
 
4:27 PM
Why are we having a watered-down discussion-light about a subject so worn out as this?
 
@Mitch I don't disagree that most of the irreligious are just as irrational, by the way. But then I wouldn't try to play by the rules with those either.
 
@Mitch you've missed the rhetorical point. if you just declare your opponent to be non-rational ab initio, then you spare yourself the trouble of taking him seriously. and so you get the smug feeling of being superior without all that bothersome thinking and talking
 
Exactly, when the real question is...
 
@ΜετάEd So you are against abortion, or what?
 
@JSBձոգչ Agreed.
 
this, as far as i can tell, was Hitchens' main modus operandi
 
@SonicTheHedgehog This one is handsomer.
 
@Cerberus I see what you did there.
 
@JSBձոգչ if i get your multiple layers right..it's just an annoyance that most of the rational-looking opponents aren't.
 
@ΜετάEd Thanks.
 
yeah, that one.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog This one! Pick this one!
 
ooh! kitties!
 
4:29 PM
"You touch her, you die* look
 
I'm going to post this one on my Facebook.
 
@Cerb The pic?
 
@SonicTheHedgehog are you getting the posters or actual 3d figures?
 
@Mitch Its game.
 
oh.
then no clue.
I was going to say, get the poster of the dude with the wings, but for a figurine, the wings are kinda ...well, no they look great in a figurine.
 
4:31 PM
Easy to break, though.
 
yeah I was going to say that.
 
@JSBձոգչ Scientific American seemed much meatier 30 years ago than it does today. One can tell it is fluff because when they cover topics in one’s own field, one cannot help but cringe over how facilely they condense and omit technical content you feel of import. In contrast, when the Economist covers topics one is a genuine expert in, they seldom to never generate cringes of commission nor groans of omission.
 
but are they really?
 
@tchrist glad to hear that you agree
 
@Mitch No, but if they release them as 3D figurines.
 
4:32 PM
my area of expertise is linguistics, which fortunately they rarely cover.
but popular coverage of linguistics is almost universally awful
since the only things anybody seems to be interested in is pop-Chomskianism and pop-Worfianism
 
@JSBձոգչ economist rarely touches that, but they do use it.
 
(both of which are false)
 
Here is a question for you Life Science nuts.
What in the DNA keeps a house cat from growing into size of a big cat?
 
@tchrist agreed.
but the science articles (to compare apples to apples) in the Economist don't even attempt to give any details that get to the cringe-worthy-possible.
 
4:34 PM
@SonicTheHedgehog Yes.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog It's a combination of the P40-DU2 and the P39-DD genes.
@Vitaly you beat me to it.
 
(Don't get me wrong, I'm not waving the question off. It's just you are more likely to get a reasonably full answer there, unless someone present here is a geneticist.)
 
I was joking.
 
I am a biologist.
 
4:36 PM
@Kit Finally!
So tell me.
 
@JSBձոգչ Really? In my newspaper, it is generally OK, if necessarily a bit superficial. They sometimes have very long articles on linguistics that are mostly a condensed interview with a linguist talking about his research.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog That's like a 'why' question here at ELU. The real answer is 'Because that's how it is'.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog I'm not a geneticist.
 
@Cerberus perhaps your foreign newspapers are better
 
4:36 PM
the one-eyed former neuroscientist is king in the land of blind non-geneticists.
 
Language Log regularly covers some truly awful linguistics reporting, both in the US and at the BBC
 
@JSBձոգչ Or perhaps you are more critical.
 
@Mitch I thought you were saying I was Odin.
 
I only know three words of power.
 
4:37 PM
@KitFox ah... you're seeing through me.
 
@KitFox can you use them? Now?
 
@SonicTheHedgehog ocelots! i love ocelots
 
@SonicTheHedgehog roflcopter.
 
4:38 PM
@Mitch I am disinclined to start Ragnarok at the moment.
 
Awww.
 
Although I do rather hate today.
 
@KitFox exasperated
Come on!
just a little ragnarok?
 
Look, you want Ragnarok, you hang upside down from the World Tree.
 
(but after lunch. really)
 
Geezis. Everybody is hounding me today.
 
You ain't nothing but a hound dog
 
@KitFox that's all it takes? I am there.
 
cryin' all the time...
 
but wouldn't that be from the roots?
 
4:40 PM
I've got better things to do. Like quit blubbering like a schoolgirl.
 
or from a branch like from a tire swing?
 
@KitFox aw, that bad?
 
Not to belittle the whole myth...I mean ..uh..story.
 
@JSBձոգչ I don't know what's gotten into me.
It can't be PMS.
 
4:41 PM
 
no blubbering in chat. kinda messy.
 
sulking is totally cool
 
@JSBձոգչ Aww, thanks.
 
4:42 PM
I just had an obnoxious meeting with the project group.
 
nobody posts pictures of really cute slugs.
 
Vitaly might.
 
s/obnoxious//
 
But "an meeting" doesn't scan.
 
and are you the only developer and the rest are just project 'owners'?
 
4:43 PM
Yep.
 
@KitFox say it faster then.
 
I put my foot down and got subsequently chastised.
 
@KitFox condolences.
 
Thanks.
 
Dude, nobody commenting on my kittens?
 
4:43 PM
everybody has opinions, but you're the only one doing things?
 
I wasn't even in the mood for taco salad.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog they are by default, excellent.
 
@Mitch Thank you.
 
@KitFox OMG are you OK?
@SonicTheHedgehog I have only heard of the kitten onslaught in the news, but this is my first experience. They realy are cute.
 
Kitten onslaught?
 
4:45 PM
The project lead can't go to an orientation that the program manager is insisting on (she's a huge bitch). He says I have to do it, which screws up my development plan hugely for one day of stupidity.
 
What kind of devilish creature kills kittens?
 
Yes, kinda like Ragnarok, but with kittens.
Sweet beautiful kittens.
 
Whats Ragnarok?
 
What do they teach children these days?
 
In Norse mythology, Ragnarök (, or ), typically spelled Ragnarǫk in the handwritten scripts, is a series of future events, including a great battle foretold to ultimately result in the death of a number of major figures (including the gods Odin, Thor, Týr, Freyr, Heimdallr, and Loki), the occurrence of various natural disasters, and the subsequent submersion of the world in water. Afterward, the world will resurface anew and fertile, the surviving and reborn gods will meet, and the world will be repopulated by two human survivors. Ragnarök is an important event in the Norse canon, and h...
 
4:46 PM
@Mitch Asgardian version of Noah's Ark?
 
huh..I thought it was the complete destruction of the world. but it looks like -something- is left.
 
So I found the whole thing upsetting because nobody even cares about my development plan.
 
@Kit I do.
 
But they naturally still expect it to be done on time.
 
About as same as I care about my game.
Which is saying something.
 
4:47 PM
@SonicTheHedgehog no. in the noah's ark story, you get 3 couples for repopulation. ragnarok is more like..um... Lot and his daughters... ick.
 
@SonicTheHedgehog Oh thanks.
 
@Kit So, whatcha developing?
 
An expansion for my website.
 
@KitFox if experience has taught me anything...
and it has only taught me how to repeat wise things to others instead of to fllow them...
 
@SonicTheHedgehog You have written a game? In what language?
 
4:48 PM
@Kit the same website you made and you sang about it and which it launched on Monday?
 
I'm just having a hard time shaking it off.
 
@vitaly I am playing it. I wish I could make a game.
 
Oh.
 
then:
1-no work or decisions are made in meetings. people are just brought together to have the decision maker tell people what the decision is (as communally as possible).
2- have a one-on-one meeting before then to tell people what -your didea is to make their decision for them.
This involves talking to people which is annoying especially to software developers.
 
Sep 22 '11 at 19:56, by Kitḫ
My site worksoh yeah, my site worksI'm gonna launch iton Monday
@Kit This one?
Is everybody reminiscing about what they did a year ago or what?
O.o
...anybody?
 
4:56 PM
um..for what occasion?
 
@Mitch nobody was commenting for straight 6 minutes.
 
stochastic availability.
or lack thereof.
 
But... everybody was talking like the usual.
 
the usual what?
 
Nevermind.
 
4:58 PM
we ran out of words?
(there's a limit)
(internal)
 
What was I doing a year ago? hmm
 
If we answer correctly..
that'd be kinda weird.
 

« first day (634 days earlier)      last day (4305 days later) »