|
Vlad!
|
 |
« Reply #1000 on: November 16, 2011, 12:58:48 PM » |
|
For the increasingly few of you who remember my brother, you may be interested to know that he and Ashley had their second kid yesterday. Owen Miles Baker.
I'm not sure Elias quite knows what to think about this turn of events, but everyone else seems pleased.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1001 on: November 16, 2011, 08:37:09 PM » |
|
my brain is hiccuping on the phrase "increasingly few".  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1002 on: November 23, 2011, 02:44:40 PM » |
|
Random Thanksgiving-related story.
When I was a kid, we would sing this song at church which went "Enter his gates with thanksgiving in your mouth/enter his courts with praise" (based, I believe, off of Psalm 100:4).
In my mind, I pictured that first line as being someone entering through a gate while eating a Thanksgiving dinner and chewing with his mouth open. This was such a disgusting image that I was completely incapable of appreciating the song itself. To this day, that's what I think about when I hear that song.
On that note, have a Happy Thanksgiving tomorrow! My preferred method of celebration is eating so much turkey, stuffing, and sweet potatoes that I feel physically uncomfortable and then watching football with my dad. I normally don't watch pro football, but since we're both borderline comatose at that point then it doesn't really matter either way.
(I will probably have to go to my brother's house at some point to see his new spawn, but I like hanging out with him so I'll put up with the child situation).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1003 on: November 23, 2011, 02:59:57 PM » |
|
In my mind, I pictured that first line as being someone entering through a gate while eating a Thanksgiving dinner and chewing with his mouth open.
this is the correct interpretation.  I'm familiar with similar song, but I think entry into the gates is with Thanksgiving in the heart rather than the mouth. x___X |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1004 on: November 23, 2011, 04:12:09 PM » |
|
I'm pretty sure we sang "mouth", because my mental image is quite vivid. However, Google does not back me up on this. It's also possible my younger self was, in fact, a remarkably poor listener.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1005 on: November 23, 2011, 04:35:36 PM » |
|
I wonder if it's a variation of the same song. does it have a repetitive section that goes "he has made me glad, he has made me glad, I will rejoice for he has made me gla-a-ad, he has made me glad, he has made me glad, I will rejoice for he has made me glad"? (I have always felt vaguely annoyed at this song. the open-mouth-full-of-Thanksgiving-dinner image would have provided a welcome, albeit disgusting, laugh for me.)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1006 on: November 23, 2011, 05:51:23 PM » |
|
That's it exactly.
I will enter his gates with thanksgiving in my mouth
I will enter his courts with praise
I will say this is the day that the Lord has made
I will rejoice for he has made me glad
He has made me glad, he has made me glad
I will rejoice for he has made me gla-a-ad
He has made me glad, he has made me glad
I will rejoice for he has made me glad
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1007 on: November 23, 2011, 05:55:23 PM » |
|
AHA, I think I recall now.
The song was sung with multiple verses, "He has made me glad x100" being the chorus. I think the first verse was the one you remember, and then it was "thanksgiving in my mouth", "thanksgiving in my steps", and (hopefully not) "thanksgiving in my digestive tract". I don't know if that's how the song was supposed to go or if the worship leader was trying to make it last longer without being horribly repetitive (obviously if so that was a fail).
The only one which stuck with me was "in my mouth", for reasons described above.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1008 on: November 23, 2011, 07:10:21 PM » |
|
xD oh dear. could there be a more off-putting praise-and-worship song? Thanksgiving in my arteries... (this song has made me sad, this song has made me mad, I will not rejoice for this song is really bad.)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1009 on: November 29, 2011, 12:32:14 PM » |
|
I wound up on Wikipedia today, as one does, and was reminded of my own meager contribution to the vast compendium of (mis)information. I created the Leafy Sea Dragon article in 2004, when I worked for TVA. (Compare it to the article as it exists today, rewritten pretty much in its entirety by people who presumably actually either know what they're talking about or bothered to do more than a Google search's worth of research). My parents had visited an aquarium, and they told me, and my brother as well, how cool this leafy sea dragon was. I had never heard of it before, so at work the next day I checked Wikipedia. It wasn't there, but some Google searching gave me a couple of references and enough information to plop down a bare paragraph about the subject. And this, friends, is why I will always be skeptical of Wikipedia. The article may have been written by a brilliant marine biologist working from the best sources on the subject, or it may have been written by, well, me. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: November 29, 2011, 01:57:48 PM by Vlad! »
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1010 on: November 29, 2011, 01:09:50 PM » |
|
I don't know--to me this seems to be an example of what makes wikipedia kind of awesome, really. it went from no info, to some info with references, to a bunch of info with a bunch of references. the user should know to be properly skeptical.
also, it should be "Mark and me", not "Mark and I". :trollface:
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1011 on: November 29, 2011, 01:58:35 PM » |
|
I didn't say it wasn't awesome, merely that I am always skeptical of it. Which seems to agree with what you say.
Also, OBJECTIVE CASE'd
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1012 on: December 01, 2011, 08:45:44 PM » |
|
some people on a podcast I listen to (Rum Doings) spoke about wikipedia in a way that I hadn't really thought of before. I felt like typing out their dialog, so here's a wall o' text if you want to read it and weigh in on what you think. (also, it's in episode 4 if you feel like listening to it and their other amusing/hilarious/informative off-topic ramblings.)
Nick: oh, that's another rule that I'm going to be making
John: the modesty rule
Nick: not just the modesty rule, it's...well, it's a sort of variation on the modesty rule. but, okay, let's go to my callback. you'll notice my hilarious joke I made about wikipedia.
John (sneering tone): oh, you can't...yeah, did you read that on wikipedia?
Nick: yes.
John: that's funny.
Nick: you'll hear at least 1.3 of them every week on...
Nick and John: The Nowww Showww!
Nick: um, where they go "X Y and Z must be true! I read it on wikipedia!"
John: aha! it's funny because it's inaccurate on wikipedia!
Nick: yes.
John: because the man on the previous episode of this program said it was!
Nick: yes. now. I would like to point out that it's nothing to do with wikipedia, in fact, um, epistemology has always been a cloud to true ontology, and therefore to try and claim that it's wikipedia that's the problem is missing the point that we all crawl through life trying to understand things and to ascertain facts, and we just need to get better at doing it. now whether it's a slightly old and inaccurate article in the Encyclopedia Britannica or whether it's in wikipedia, the onus is on us just to be good about analyzing, fault-checking, and resourcing facts, and wikipedia is actually quite good, inasmuch as if you find something that's wrong or suspicious, it's often pretty obvious--ah, obviously suspicious, and it also warns you by its very nature that you *should* be careful when you're reading it, and you *should* look at the sources and find out where the links come from and so on, whereas when you look at this lovely leather-bound Encyclopedia Britannica, of course that's true with a capital
John: that's FACTS!
Nick: with a capital F and a T.
John: TRUFAX!
Nick: so in fact, I think wikipedia is *more* accurate inasmuch as you are going to be more careful because it's more obvious that you need to be. so whereas the Soviet Encyclopedia, which look very good, was perhaps less accurate--the Great Soviet Encyclopedia--and so...yes...it's a tired old joke, and that needs to Stop Now. so that's the new rule.
John: the fact is that the wikipedia is the most extraordinarily peer-reviewed source of information in the world, and yes, you will have found the example of the mistake, but there are millions and millions of pages, and many of them are on subjects far, far more complicated than you could ever begin to understand
Nick: and I would like to toast wikipedia because it's an extraordinary achievement
John: I argue that it is one of the greatest achievements of mankind. I say this with no hyperbole
Nick: yes
John: and when you're thinking of the great achievements of humankind, you think of agriculture, you think of inventing sewage systems, you think of--I think that wikipedia
Nick: plastic surgery
John: would you argue that that was up there, would you really say that? nooooo.
Nick: no, I'm being fatuous.
John: you *are* fatuous.
Nick: mm.
John: but no, I was thinking that wikipedia would be up there.
Nick: yes.
John: it's an incredible, free resource with all the information in the world, openly available for everyone in the world.
Nick: it's also a good proof of concept for people who argue that people wouldn't do this sort of thing without
John: yes, that's right, being paid.
Nick: the annoyance of copyright and patent and all that sort of stuff. it's a big "screw you" to anybody who says that.
John: it's incredible.
Nick: and so, I've had enough of Punt and Dennis and all those other wretched folk on
Nick and John: The Nowww Showww!
Nick: for saying that sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1013 on: December 01, 2011, 11:17:42 PM » |
|
So as I understand it, Wikipedia is actually more accurate because it is so obviously less accurate that you will inherently mistrust it. Brilliant! So to those well versed in the social sciences, as I am demonstrably not, there are a number of skills which are of importance when looking at a topic. Social scientists such as sociologists and historians spend a lot of time evaluating sources for veracity, possible cultural bias, etc., understanding and interpreting the cultural context, mapping differing shades of meaning, and doing lots of other science-y things I don't really understand. Wikipedia is quite adequate as a repository of facts. If I want to know when the Spanish-American War was fought or what nations fought in it. But it is remarkably spotty when it comes to actually understanding any real historical context, and because it's edited by who knows how many people then how are we to evaluate it as a source? And do I trust what it says about the cause of the war? Or the political sentiment which led to the American attitude? Or how those attitudes prompted the eventual American actions? One of the assertions in the above dialog is even untrue. Nick claimed that when you find something that's wrong, it's often obviously suspicious. I think this is not frequently the case. You will of course come across random vandalism or other mischief, but for example one of my co-workers found a bug in the description of a particular algorithm, so he corrected it. The person who originally wrote the page reverted his correction. So he corrected it again, this time giving more explanation for why his version was correct. But again it was reverted. So he just left a note on the talk page explaining why he thought it was bogus and left it at that. Some naive underclassman might very well not notice that the algorithm was flawed and not bother to click through to the talk page to find the note. I use Wikipedia quite a bit. I refer to it probably at least once a week, and I am occasionally still Wikipedia'd for minutes or hours on end. But I also know that it's made me lazy. Why bother gathering sources, reading about an issue, and forming an opinion when I have the ready-packaged end result right here in front of me? I don't have time to deeply understand every bit of everything, and that's why Wikipedia is helpful. But I use it with caution, and I try to be mindful that even when Wikipedia is the first Google result, maybe I should scan down the rest of the search page to see if there is an actual authoritative source I can read instead before clicking through. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1014 on: December 02, 2011, 04:53:00 PM » |
|
heh, yeah, the "more accurate" thing made me go "?!?!", but I guess the point I took from it was that if we are naive, it's not "lol, wikipedia", it's "lol, you". I had been curious if other listeners had commented about the wikipedia discussion but didn't find anything on the podcast post. I did find some stuff on Nick's formspring, though. I think his responses there are phrased more clearly, although perhaps just as controversially: "With works like the Britannica and the Great Soviet Encyclopedia, with their impressive leather bindings which encapsulate so beautifully the fallacy from authority, we have very little protection; however, Wikipedia is self-problematising (hence the ease with which 'The Now Show' makes 'jokes' about it). The very obviousness of its imperfections and its infrastructure are its saving. They give those with perspicacity all they need to be skilled bibliographic enquirers. And those without perspicacity? I care little for them, as they are lost in so many ways." and: "The average school pupil is born into a world where wikipedia is prominent and Britannica et al are dusty relics. Most understand to check sources and to become a wily bibliographic and epistemological detective - which is only a good thing, whether one uses wikipedia or otherwise. Wikipedia merely makes this explicit. Of course, the old fogies of "The Now Show" will continue to make their hilarious jokes, but they are irrelevant people." |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1015 on: December 02, 2011, 09:48:24 PM » |
|
All I get from that is that Nick has no conception of what the average school pupil is actually like.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
whim
Inphrequent Poster
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #1016 on: December 02, 2011, 10:37:54 PM » |
|
So basically, Wikipedia is like cookies. You could gather a long list of ingredients, take the time to learn how to properly combine them, and then - voila! - cookies! After enough practice, you'll have knowledge and skills that you didn't have before. You'll have strengthened in some way. OR you could go to the store and purchase cookie dough that has already been prepared for you. You might even enjoy it raw, no matter how many times you are told this is bad. You may experience side effects or become lazy in the end but hey, as long as you are satisfied with your cookies... That may not be the best analogy to what Vlad! was saying but I find that I understand things better if I think in terms of food. That is what came to mind as I read his post. Just thought I'd share.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
enemy anemone
|
|
« Reply #1017 on: December 02, 2011, 10:57:42 PM » |
|
C is for cookie--that's good enough for me! cookie cookie cookie starts with C!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1018 on: December 03, 2011, 08:15:02 AM » |
|
but hey, as long as you are satisfied with your cookies...
I think one of the keys to success is to never be satisfied with mediocrity. Some mediocrity may be inevitable (most of us are not talented enough or dedicated enough to do an excellent job at everything we do, but maybe it's possible to cut out all the stuff we're not willing to do an excellent job at, if we don't mind offending people or making enemies), but recognize it and try to mitigate it. If I am satisfied getting my opinions from other people and not thinking analytically or doing my own research, how proud can I be of my own opinion? How much confidence can I have in it? But there does come a time when you just want to eat some freaking cookies. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
leinad
|
|
« Reply #1019 on: December 03, 2011, 10:23:44 AM » |
|
In principle, I like this project's practice of beginning with "draft articles" and then eventually having them approved by (alleged) experts in the field. However, after more than four years they only have 155 approved articles. (Sorry that I couldn't think of a way to fit cookies into this.) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1020 on: December 14, 2011, 03:21:03 PM » |
|
Because I am flush with holiday cheer, I am officially lifting the moratorium on Christmas songs seven hours early.
You have been duly notified.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 14, 2011, 03:27:13 PM by Vlad! »
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1022 on: December 14, 2011, 04:13:42 PM » |
|
"I know other verses!"
"You don't even know that one!"
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1023 on: December 16, 2011, 01:24:41 PM » |
|
Last year I experienced my first white Christmas. This year, if the current temperature continues it may be my first Christmas where it's completely appropriate to wear sandals and a t-shirt.
(Not that it would my my first Christmas actually doing so, but it might be the first one my family don't tell my I'm insane)
Also, I decided I liked being in South Florida for New Year's so much that I'm doing it again. But I'm going by car instead of train this time, since the 21-hour train ride was unnecessarily long.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1024 on: December 29, 2011, 09:04:36 PM » |
|
How Engineers save money:
Me: I want something that will do X
* Checks online *
Me: A hundred dollars? For that? I could build one for ten bucks.
* I never build one *
One hundred dollars saved!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1025 on: January 04, 2012, 12:45:30 PM » |
|
At the party I went to in South Florida over New Year's, there were people there from all over the world. I spent some time in conversation with a woman from South Africa, who, as descendants of British imperialists tend to, had a quite strong British accent.
Later on, another person came up to chat, and she asked me "so where are you from?" I replied "North Carolina". She said "No, originally", so I said "Tennessee". She was like, "wow, I had overheard your conversation earlier, and I thought you were from the UK because of your accent". Apparently I had been unconsciously mimicking the first woman's accent while talking to her (or possibly she had been hearing her accent and mentally applied it to me as well).
Odd how our brains play tricks on us. I'm still not sure which of us was the victim of our brain.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
Vlad!
|
|
« Reply #1026 on: February 07, 2012, 10:09:44 PM » |
|
Whenever I buy two pairs of shoes from Zappos with the intention of returning one of them and it turns out I like the cheaper ones better, it makes me happy.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If you don’t have freedom as a principle, you can never see a reason not to make an exception. There are constantly going to be times when for one reason or another there’s some practical convenience in making an exception.
rms
|
|
|
|
