« first day (1689 days earlier)      last day (3162 days later) » 

12:00 AM
@Robusto $5-7k of camera gear hidden in a ratty sleeping bag, then covered with a towel, then with the shade pulled over it and the suitcase.
In the place they told me was secure.
 
Shit!
 
@tchrist That sucks.
 
Also a suitcase of stuff, camping gear, jackets, sandals, everything.
 
Why would you leave the camera gear in the car, though?
 
Cards not yet read into a computer, lost forever.
 
12:01 AM
First, try neither/nor instead of neither/or. Second, if you can identify reasons why someone could make a case for using so in that context you're smart enough to know that it's futile to try to make that case in an SAT test. Third, this question is probably going to get closed anyway. — Robusto 43 secs ago
@tchrist I figured that might be the worst part.
 
@Robusto So I had less to load to leave the next morning.
 
File a police report?
 
I was right next to a video feed, right next to the bottom of the elevator, there were guards patrolling constantly.
It was the safest possible place I could imagine parking.
But I parked next to Mercedes.
They hit us both.
And were gone in 45s according to the security camera.
 
And here I thought Mormontown was crime-free.
 
The SLC cops haven’t called me about any of the missing serial numbers.
 
12:03 AM
@tchrist Sounds like they knew what they were doing. What kind of car is yours?
 
Audi.
Of course. :(
So Audi + Mercedes = meth money
 
Yeah, two high-end cars next to each other. Smash and grab.
 
Or heroin, who knows. Or cares.
Crimes against persons are more likely from meth heads but both commit crimes against property.
In more interesting news, my cats have learned how to open the fucking cat door in the week I was just now gone.
 
Partly why I drive a Ford now. I had a Porsche back in the day but it got stolen the third week I owned it and never recovered.
 
When I was eight, I didn’t hate people. I also didn’t know people. Now I hate people.
 
12:06 AM
It was not a sensible vehicle. Kind of worked out, though, since I found out my wife was pregnant the week after I bought it. So I just took the insurance money and bought a "sensible" vehicle.
 
The cat sitter/visitor even duct-taped it. They clawed through the duct tape and then somehow twisted the plastic clips holding the particle-board door in place.
 
Sounds like they hit the jackpot with you. Did they pull the stereos out of the vehicles? Doesn't sound like they could do that in 45 seconds.
 
No, not stereos.
I had a lot of computer gear upstairs including extra equipment for work.
Like four loads.
I wanted an early departure.
I didn't get it.
Glass place said they'd have it fixed that night.
Part didn’t arrive.
Said they’d have it the next day.
So the part (back glass) arrives already broken.
I said tape it up and transfer the replacement order from SLC to Boulder and I'll drive home.
Wind shredded the tape-job of course.
And in Boulder, they again ordered the wrong part.
 
Yeah, people suck.
 
And then when they got it, one of the two shops had lost a tiny connecting piece for the wiper.
It was more than a week for a same-day job. I may have been driven over the edge locked in SLC.
 
12:10 AM
Insurance going to replace all the equipment?
 
No.
Not unless I want to get a new insurance agent after 20 years.
I filed too much from floods.
 
Why not?
 
I’m pretty unhappy.
 
I should say.
 
That doesn’t really convey it even.
I am angry and depressed and hateful and mistrustful and all those things.
You feel violated, and then betrayed.
Where you means me.
And EVERYONE is utterly incompetent. Everyone.
 
12:13 AM
The good news: you'll get over it.
 
@Robusto That’s what they said when I lost my father and my maternal grandparents who co-raised me and three friends and my cat, all in quick succession. I’m still waiting to get over that. Although this will not be as hard as that, which is probably permanent.
 
No, this will not be as hard as that.
 
I don’t care about things.
I care about people.
Where people means more than humans.
But I feel violated and betrayed, and that is something else.
 
And yet you say you hate them. I see you're pretty conflicted.
 
I see why men of a certain age finally go ballistic.
“I’m mad as hell and I’m not gonna take it anymore”, as the movie goes.
 
12:18 AM
Yeah. I have my family, which keeps me going through bad times.
And good times, I might add.
 
Yes, that would help. Would have helped. Dwindling, dwindling. I’m down to well few.
I cannot see any reason to continue once they’re gone.
It’s my job to bury them. But then all my debts are done.
And I won’t have to put up with this veil of tears any longer.
I got up at 3:58am EDT.
After 4h sleep.
I’m always like this so "late", even though I am at last home. I am going to go spend time with my kitties.
 
Have fun. Feel better.
 
 
2 hours later…
2:49 AM
@Robusto Saguaro?
 
 
7 hours later…
10:05 AM
That's^ an apparrot rainbow :D
 
yea :)
 
 
1 hour later…
11:21 AM
@cornbreadninja麵包忍者 If that's what you want.
 
12:09 PM
@JohanLarsson Gay parrots?
 
@JohanLarsson Cute.
 
Cute happy parrots.
 
STAAAP!
 
12:15 PM
 
You prefer buntings?
 
I prefer math.
 
Notice the similarities.
And yet, one is a parrot and the other a bunting.
Both display all the spectral colors, and then some.
The first is a rainbow lorikeet from the Antipodes; the second, a painted bunting from the south of the United States.
1 lorikeet + 1 lorikeet = ? lorikeets
 
Wasn't it you who said our perception of color is purely subjective?
 
12:20 PM
It is purely biological.
 
life is biological
 
We have three different signals arriving simultaneously, call them [x, y, z], and the mind assigns to that triple a particular color. However, how it does also depends on other factors than the values of x, y, and z.
A tristimulus colorimeter does not take those other factors into account, but the mind does.
 
Define the "mind."
 
Human perception.
The product of the wet hardware collection of bits and pieces we all the oculo-visual cortex. It is a function of the brain and its extensions.
It’s both complex and complicated.
 
In light of the fact that most of the human brain is devoted to vision, that doesn't narrow it down much ;-)
 
12:26 PM
^light
I don’t believe that it is accurate to say "most".
 
>50%
 
The colored parts plus the eye and its pathways. The eye can be reasonably thought of as a piece of the brain.
 
3 mins ago, by tchrist
It’s both complex and complicated.
I rest my case :-)
 
Pointing out which areas are involved doesn’t do anything to explain how complicated the processing is. Even once you take rods and three types of cones into account, you still haven’t considered the double-opponent cells.
Which are red–green and blue–yellow differentiators.
These seem to be involved in color constancy, amongst other things.
 
'Bye, baby Bunting' is a popular English language nursery rhyme and lullaby. Play It has a Roud Folk Song Index number of 11018. == Lyrics == The most common modern version is: Bye, baby Bunting, Daddy’s gone a-hunting, Gone to get a rabbit skin To wrap the baby Bunting in. == Origins == The term bunting is a term of endearment that may also imply 'plump'. The earliest published version was published in Gammer Gurton's Garland or The Nursery Parnassus in England in 1784. A version in Songs for the Nursery 1805 had the longer lyrics: Bye, baby Bunting, Father's gone a-hunting, Mother's gone a...
 
12:34 PM
> "The Rays to speak properly are not coloured. In them there is nothing else than a certain Power and Disposition to stir up a Sensation of this or that Colour... " —Sir Isaac Newton
> What this means is that the colors we see associated with different wavelengths are not contained in the light itself. Rather, they are created by our perceptual system in response to these wavelengths.
So it’s quite literally all in your head.
If we assume your eyes are a part of your head.
 
@tchrist All the senses can be thought of as part of the brain. What we think of as localized in the eyes, nose, ears, skin and tongue are just sensors whose data must be parsed and interpreted by the brain.
 
As well as the three visual centers in your brain and the fancy neurocabling.
It’s funny to think that we have both chromatic colors and achromatic colors.
 
Hmm, FumbleFingers considers me less supportive than he is of the "ELL/ELU division"—whatever that is.
> But whereas I think you're less supportive of the ELU/ELL division than I am, I would never dream of being so presumptuous/contentious as to say I consider you less supportive than me.
 
The latter seems an oxymoron.
He likes to prattle on.
 
Oh yes.
The second cup of coffee is the best, I find. You need to be awake to appreciate the wonders of coffee.
 
12:38 PM
Yes.
> Double-opponent cells reside in collections called blobs (i'm not making this up) in layer 4 of V1.
heh
 
It does not seem that what I want or don’t want should have much influence.
Where tenha is PT for ES tenga, so present subjunctive.
Wait, do I have to listen not read? :)
 
like the undefined terms at the beginning of a math :)
 
What is the brightest color?
More interestingly, what is the darkest color?
 
@tchrist I was watching a Spanish-language film last night that took place in Brazil. The Brasilieros (?) were speaking Portuguese (I think) but it sounded like Spanish, yet it had subtitles in Spanish that looked like the exact words being spoken. Strange.
 
12:46 PM
Yes, the Portuguese word for Brazilians is brasileiros, while the Spanish word is brasileños.
Was this just one portion?
 
Yeah.
 
Hm.
I can almost see how that could happen.
 
There were some criminals speaking "Portuguese" after they kidnapped some Colombians (?), and the sections where they spoke had Spanish subtitles.
 
Sometimes they actually are the same words, and in the case of Brazil, their pronunciations track more closely.
 
Interesting.
I've been trying to wean myself off of subtitles. But this forced them on me.
 
12:48 PM
Or the spelling systems differ even when the words do not.
 
I'm at the "getting the gist" phase about 80% of the time. I find it's good to focus more on hearing than reading, since when I read I don't really listen too closely.
 
French action, seseo Spanish acción, and Portuguese acção are not so far off as one might think. They can in fact be homophones, and least phonemically.
 
My post-processing is still slow, though, which reminds me how quickly I post-process in English.
 
That sounds pretty normal.
 
Have you finished your Spanish program?
 
12:50 PM
Yes.
 
cool
 
In some senses.
 
I still do the exercises, though.
I still consider myself weak in future/conditional verbs and pronoun usage. Some of the pronoun usages I understand but can't grok the sense of them.
 
Did you notice they changed SO yesterday?
 
No.
 
12:52 PM
Visit the site.
 
Rainbow stack in tray now?
 
@Robusto Reflexives or datives perhaps, where we don’t do that in English?
@Robusto Yes.
Or just too-damned-many-versions of you?
 
@tchrist Yeah. I keep thinking continual exposure will eventually cause that to click, but so far it hasn't happened.
 
Go to Spain :-)
 
You eventually become used to which verbs have to be reflexive. You shave yourself the beard, not you shave your beard.
 
12:54 PM
When someone says "Le gusta" meaning "He likes you" I feel like I'm missing some parts of that engine.
 
Things occur themselves to you.
 
Reflexives are usually easier. We have an English counterpart: "I'm going to get me some bacon."
 
So there are often combos of reflexives and datives that when translated literally sound silly, like the ones I just gave.
 
@Robusto maybe, do you think so?
 
No.
 
12:55 PM
Fantastic colours.
 
@Robusto There aren’t too many of those.
 
I was just being facetious.
 
Are none of those photographs enhanced?
 
@Cerberus I think you mean fabulous. :)
 
Hey, I am neither Eddie nor Patsy!
 
12:56 PM
@Cerberus I mean no offence, but I’m afraid that that means less than you think it means.
 
All photographs are enhanced to some extent. Even straight out of the camera you're looking at lots of compromises made by the equipment.
 
Of course I mean "significantly".
 
There is no such thing as an unenhanced picture.
 
jinx
 
To the extent that the colours look better than in real life.
You know what I mean.
I know how to use Photoshop.
 
12:57 PM
Sometimes you have to notice better.
It isn’t that.
It is a lot more complicated.
 
44 secs ago, by Cerberus
To the extent that the colours look better than in real life.
 
It honestly is more complicated than that.
 
Nothing looks or sounds like real life, really. The best stereo in the world is at the mercy of the recording. I've played in orchestras and I can tell you for certain that I've never heard that kind of separation and clarity from a recording. Same is true for photography. However amazing a photograph may be, and they can be quite amazing, seeing the real thing is quite different.
Did you all see the tooltip on the stack this morning?
 
No.
 
> Marry whomever you love. Even if they're not a developer.
 
1:01 PM
Well, at least they got the declension correct.
 
I personally wouldn't have used whomever there, but that's another issue.
 
It’s formally correct to use the object case there, of course.
It is not especially common to observe that rule in casual speech.
 
Well, I'm not so sure you need to use the objective case in a noun phrase. Not always.
 
so, I wrote another ~library yesterday
 
@JohanLarsson You monster!
 
1:02 PM
@Robusto I don’t understand.
 
I don't either. I used to think I did.
 
"Give this card to whomever you wish" just sounds stilted to me now, like a hyper-correction.
 
@Robusto Give him a chance. Give me a chance. Give her a chance. Give them a chance.
Those don’t seem hypercorrective, do they?
 
No, that's not the noun phrases I'm talking about.
Whoever/whomever you wish.
 
1:04 PM
You wanted to give whom a chance again?
 
I don't have a problem with whom used like that.
 
You are free to give whomever you care to a chance.
For some reason, the whoever/whomever/whosever thing can murk it.
 
"Give the prize to whoever shows up first/Give the prize to whomever shows up first."
 
I dont know why.
@Robusto The first one is correct.
 
I agree.
 
1:05 PM
The second is wrong, but common.
Because people don’t understand grammar.
 
is it a subject/object thing?
 
The object of the preposition is the entire clause, not the pronoun.
 
So how is that different from "Marry whomever you love"?
 
@Robusto You love whom.
 
Marry whomever shows up first.
 
1:07 PM
You can love whomever.
@Robusto No, that one is wrong.
 
They feel like the same case to me.
 
Because whomever cannot be the subject of shows up.
 
the to is the difference
 
The to actually makes no difference but to attract red herrings.
 
Tom is back
 
1:08 PM
Marry whomever you love/Marry whomever shows up first. No to in either.
 
or never left
both are correct?
 
Marry (whoever shows up first).
@JohanLarsson Nope.
 
Marry (whoever you love).
 
@tchrist derp, you are right
 
@Robusto If you can love *who.
 
1:09 PM
I don't get the distinction between "whoever you love" and "whoever shows up first."
 
The subject of you love is you.
The difference is that the pronoun has to do something in the clause, and it is doing a different something.
Find the subject of each verb.
Notice there actually is one with you.
Leaving the other pronoun to serve as its object.
 
Yeah, I know that. But the noun phrase is no longer free-standing.
 
Relative pronouns can do that.
That’s why there is no *himever.
 
I understand the grammar involved, I'm just saying that whomever always sounds awkward in such situations, even when it is grammatically correct.
 
It doesn’t bother me when it’s right.
It bothers me when it’s wrong.
 
1:13 PM
It jangles my ear most of the time. I used to care about getting that right, but I'm feeling that compulsion less and less as I get older.
 
There is a lot of asquerous hypercorrection about this out there, and it drives me loquissimo.
Most uses of whomever are actually wrong.
Which may be why it bothers you now.
 
Probably. Hypercorrection sounds worse to my ears now than hypocorrection ever did.
 
That.
Also, this explosion of hypercorrective use of whomever is comparatively recent.
 
I still bridle at "for he and I" and the like.
 
And well you should.
 
1:17 PM
I would sacrifice whom in a heartbeat if people would stop saying "for he and I."
 
> Marry whomever you love. Even if they're not a developer
 
Entre tu y yo, estoy de acuerdo contigo en ello.
 
^the reason for the discussion?
 
@JohanLarsson SCOTUS yesterday.
 
dunno what scotus is
 
1:20 PM
Supreme
Court
Of
The
United
States
 
can you squeeze in an r and an m?
scrotums
 
scrota
The nice thing about the decision is we know which justices have cojones and which ones are just dicks.
But we already knew that.
 
22 hours ago, by Robusto
In Scalia's case, you can't imagine that at 80 he's got that many more years left. But Thomas could be the doorstop of the SC cloakroom for decades to come.
 
Is evil vanquished forever?
Pot is legal. Everyone has health coverage. One can marry whomever they please.
> For the world is changing: I feel it in the water, I feel it in the earth, and I smell it in the air. I do not think we shall meet again.
 
It ain't over.
 
1:25 PM
The price of freedom being eternal vigilance?
 
Don't think the reactionary forces are forever vanquished or even muted.
 
what is a reactionary force?
example?
 
@JohanLarsson Hitler.
 
action, reaction
stimulus, response
 
Let those who have experienced buyer’s remorse over Obama remember that all these things came to pass during his watch.
 
1:28 PM
reactionary is similar to conservative then?
 
The Counterreformation.
@JohanLarsson Righter.
A reactionary is a person who holds political views that favor a return to the status quo ante, the previous political state of society, which possessed characteristics (discipline, respect for authority, etc.) that he or she thinks are absent from the contemporary status quo of society. As an adjective, the word reactionary describes points of view and policies meant to restore the status quo ante. Political reactionaries are at the right-wing of a political spectrum; yet, reactionary ideologies can be radical, in the sense of political extremism, in service to re-establishing the status quo ante...
> ‘I would have things as they were in all the days of my life,’ answered Denethor, ‘as in the days of my longfathers before me: to be the Lord of this City in peace, and leave my chair to a son after me, who would be his own master and no wizard’s pupil. But if doom denies this to me, then I will have naught: neither life diminished, nor love halved, nor honour abated.’
@Robusto It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till. What weather they shall have is not ours to rule.
pace Lord Dunsany.
 
I know, but we can't ever believe the battle is over.
 
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
> It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt.
Man, they talked weird back then.
> The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes.
“The French courage proceeds from vanity — the German from phlegm — the Turkish from fanaticism & opium — the Spanish from pride — the English from coolness — the Dutch from obstinacy — the Russian from insensibility — but the Italian from anger.” —Lord Byron
How can Germans cough up courage?
 
1:52 PM
Byron was indulging his own vanity. English "coolness" indeed.
 
Quite.
“Courage (ἀνδρεία, andreia) is the first of human virtues because it makes all others possible.” —Aristotle
 
Where did he say that?
 
Book III.
 
ok, i haven't got there yet :)
 
Ethics
 
1:56 PM
yep
 
thanks for the link
 
@Robusto Did "cool" have a positive connotation at the time or was he just referring to the English emotional restraint?
 
It had a positive connotation, but not the same one it has today.
Today it means "fitting in in all the right/interesting ways" and then it meant "unflappability."
 
@Robusto That's what I thought, it is actually a characteristic of the English. It might not have been quite as self satisfied an utterance as all that.
 
2:09 PM
@terdon Well, but you have to consider how Byron characterized everyone else. Coolness was the only positive characteristic to which courage could be attributed.
 
True, true. I just read it as more disparaging than complementary as I don't consider the English "stiff upper lip" concept to be a good thing.
 
Phlegm, vanity, anger, pride, fanaticism, opium, obstinacy, insensibility . . . these are not flattering.
 
 
1 hour later…
3:31 PM
1176
A: Can Stack Overflow and Meta's logos be changed temporarily to the "#LoveOverflows" logo?

Joel SpolskyI am in favor of this. We wouldn't be doing it to promote social causes, nor would we be doing it to hitch our brand-wagon onto a popular cause. We're just doing it to celebrate how fast the world is moving towards acceptance of gay people. I'm the CEO, co-founder, and inventor of Stack Overflo...

Learn something new every day.
 
@tchrist I am glad that the future now seems bright to you.
 
No, the future does not seem bright. The future seems dark. The morning seems bright.
 
Progress is slow and haphazard, but the signs are good.
@tchrist It did seem bright to you an hour ago!
 
Evil vanquished.
 
There you go.
Evil is never vanquished, just slowly constricted.
It is an illusion to think that a sudden, severe change is usually what makes the world a better place.
 
3:42 PM
If we had had one fewer progressive justice, the last decade would have been disastrous.
If you think the answers and comments on the MSO posting are incredible, you should see the deleted ones.
The amount of hate in the world is grievous.
 
3:55 PM
What does underlie mean?

For example, X(Verb/adverb) underlie Y(verb/adverb)?
 
4:06 PM
@shingu I think you mean a different kind of sentence, because that sounds impossible.
Can you give us a real example?
@tchrist Or it would have been fixed in a different way.
Views of homosexuality have changed a lot in European and American society; the Supreme Court is just one factor.
It would probably have taken longer, but the homophobic states would have buckled to the trend (is that an expression?) eventually. Look how fast the other states changed!
One can buck the trend, but can one buckle to/in the trend?
 
@Cerberus Nope.
 
Too bad.
 
user116848
4:22 PM
Hi all
 
6:57 PM
@Cerberus Yeah, 10 or 11 years ago my state was the first one to sanction gay marriage. Now it's the rule of law nationwide.
But we still haven't legalized pot. Three years ago we legalized medical marijuana, but we only just opened the first distributor last week. WTF are they waiting for? And full legalization is on the ballot for 2016. So how long after that will enough politicians get their palms greased before we get weed in the stores?
But TPTB aren't done. The cynic in me suspects a feint toward social liberalism in order to clamp down on the other side. The people who really run this country care only about money, and they're about to rob us blind, I fear.
@Cerberus Usually one just follows a trend. It's not wrong to say one buckled to a trend, but it would be a metaphorical way of saying that one capitulated after some resistance. So make sure that's what you want to say.
 
 
2 hours later…
9:09 PM
[ SmokeDetector ] Nested quote blocks in body: Meaning of "there’s a fire burning in someone's bones" by Rwy5 on english.stackexchange.com
 
 
2 hours later…
11:34 PM
@Cerberus "Buckle under the trend" sounds better to me pal :-)
 

« first day (1689 days earlier)      last day (3162 days later) »