Ben Banana

You can compose a detailed specification for a language; but otherwise, you don't "write a computer language."

I will make fish men who can fly through air and are naturally skillful writers. Their language shall consist of popping out popcorn from their mouth at varying rates to denote words.

Oh well then! Nature appears by juanrga to have decided it was incorrect. But wait, its all an illusion! I decide whats correct, not nature. Nature is not real.

Literally, 0 is not determinedly possible. Its a mere human concept, as are all numbers. For example, "69" is impossible, at least around here. See what I did there (probably not)? That was more than a joke.

Reflexivity is so fun to think about. EDIT: By the way, your poll options could overlap so much. There could be people who would easily pick all of them.

What is your favorite color?

I have made some observations -- unusually involving a very specific aspect of social activity -- which I hope participants of this topic also try to see. On organizational efforts in particular, examine the contrast between the motives of a "foundation" or "movement" and an "institution." You might think these are just vague and unintentionally varied labels. Personally, I see things tend as though "foundations" chain you to a cropped ideology, "movements" insensibly push an ideology, yet "institutions" (hopefully) merely inform about a set of "good" and unheard ideas. Perhaps ideological distribution is one of the most prominent elements involved with the undermining of freedom.

1) Tell the inferior about my surprise I have waiting for them. 2) Contort the face of all my messengers to appear as this great inspired fellow:

Unfortunately, I'm not very sharp regarding global warming. So, they're talking about record global temperatures for the first time in millions of years? I question whether this increase has occurred continually (a very gradual rise), or has it significantly began fairly recently (within 500 years)? With that aside, I have understood the claim that it will continue, and also how this persistence is not expected to remain as "harmless" as it appears now for much longer.

Its amazing how... I can't comprehend this... you're... what kind of divine psychology needs to be imagined to describe the state of your... whatever its called? Your idiocy is undefinable. Hell yes! We've got our first subject right here!

I cannot help feeling, Phaedrus, that writing is unfortunately like painting; for the creations of the painter have the attitude of life, and yet if you ask them a question they preserve a solemn silence. And the same may be said of speeches. You would imagine that they had intelligence, but if you want to know anything and put a question to one of them, the speaker always gives one unvarying answer. And when they have been once written down they are tumbled about anywhere among those who may or may not understand them, and know not to whom they should reply, to whom not: and, if they are maltreated or abused, they have no parent to protect them; and they cannot protect or defend themselves. - Socrates The essence of expression is an import asset, and we must store assets mechanically. Computational machines are the medium.

As all of their programs, not only the first auto-codes, people "compiled" by hand into machine code.

Nice article. I found it interesting.

You're educating us? Start yet another church! You may educate your followers! This is about discussion. We don't bash religion. I have dis-welcomed your "education."

Here's just some words from "immortal" that I've picked at leisure: By the way, this is one of the worst rhetorical questions I've ever heard. immortal (nonsense)'s strongest point is: It might be false because I might be right. By the way, religious research doesn't give you anything to "might" with. Nothing. Maybe around people who believe they're being open minded, but certainly not here! Get that through your head. The only way for us to make you stop is say "oh I'll consider it ..." because after all, there's nothing else for us to combat you. So now, I'll be the first to say this: your philosophical approach is not welcomed by me. You do not belong here. Go away please. You always end every argument and sub-argument with something like: "traditions ... religious scholars ... my research contradicts!" Even if you could show me a number of posts where this is not the case; your credibility, comparatively, still means absolutely nothing.

No. It doesn't even tell the past correctly at all.

Aren't we talking about the best waffle-baking irons to buy? Are you sure this topic doesn't belong in Mathematics? What else is there to talk about?

Uh, I don't know about that. What if they have their clients drink the 2% for breakfast? Not everyone needs 1%. Personally, I'm sick of this "they're all puppets" attitude, although I'm not necessarily denying it anywhere. I hope we think more clearly. Getting frequently disgusted with people seems to require wide nostrils, a contorted face, squinted eyes and ultimately, a severely disabled focus. You can be cynical or whatever, but I feel like so many people are moaning around in circles and yet nothing meaningful happens. Again, I'm not saying "oh shut up, everything is fine," but many people seem to be in some kind of trance, though. Stomping with fascinated declarations is idiotic. From my perspective, this applies to many sorts of people, so I'm not targeting anyone in particular (e.g. any political party, any sort of movement, any sort of ideology etc). EDIT: Also, sorry that I replied to this certain statement. Really, I'm regarding much more.

Does anyone know how to make a manifold for this?

Propeller hats are better.

Well said. But, really, divine nature? Has that been manifested to anybody; Hitler? Claiming divine nature sounds pretty ignorant. Interesting enough to not be ignored. Thanks for the reply. Explicit classification, especially with religion, doesn't work well. I already understand your position to some degree. Ah... I would expect one who is neutral to have the same ideology as another who is neutral. Otherwise they take a distinguishable position. That's irrelevant, but I see why you're insisting neutrality. Ah. You've already failed. That's not purely "omniscience," anyway. Its like having a library of all knowledge. Even if you have the capacity to contain all of that knowledge at a single moment (fully accessed), it means nothing without distinction and distribution. This has relation to mortality. Mortals are unified neither by time or space. That's useful, actually. I have more to say, but I must sleep now.

What did Hitler ignore? Was someone like you pestering him? You're not neutral. "Neutral" is like agnostic (although, of course, not exactly). You've refused a religious position, although you implicitly make one. EDIT: Also known as ignorance. . . Ignorance of positions which are equally sincere. Also, please understand how ignorance is necessary, and you're a silly idealistic to call it absolute evil. Go become an enlightened master about how ignorance is fundamental, omniscience is impossible, and immortality is a terrible burden. "Enlightened master," what a silly label.

So. I see you're impressed with my new sound system! Yeah... its pretty awesome. Honestly, I just want to experience this. I really want to hear it! I don't care whether its real, or what kind of science comes with it. This ominous sound... oh, its just the coolest ever. I love hearing this stuff in soundtracks. I should try someway to artificially recreate it. I'm quite bored at the moment, and this would make a crazy fun new project. My nearest neighbors are about a mile away, but they shouldn't miss out! This should definitely cure my boredom. EDIT: Any ideas? What about bells/gongs? Shape, size, material, vibration-method, amplification techniques?