random comments, random questions and thread titles made for Google

[jasong]

I thought there was already a random comments and questions thread, but I couldn't find it.

Anyhow, I'm wanting to know if I'm the only one excited about spherical worlds in video games. It seems only the last few months that there are tons and tons of games coming out that literally exist on a spherical world, rather than simply claiming they do. Unlike with games like Minecraft, you can literally walk around the world and come back to your spot without changing direction.

(oh, and Microsoft is telling me "Minecraft" is a questionable word, which is interesting in its own right, since Minecraft is owned by Microsoft)

And bendy screens. In the 3rd quarter of this year, there will be ultra-expensive(probably) bendy screen phones released as the manufacturers test the waters. So, basically, you can have a tablet that can be folded up to the size of a phone if need be.

Lastly, and I just thought of this, since there are front-facing cameras on tons of phones, I may have an idea on how to fix, or lessen the problem of, smudgy screens.

[Batalov]

Is this of a 'if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you' type of thing?
You think Google will index your thoughts and someone somewhere will pick them up... and make them happen?

I am pretty sure that they are much more interested in things that you are giving away to them without verbalizing them. Everything that 99% of the people verbalize is not worth the money spent on listening to, but their query histories, browsing histories etc (physical location, where and when of their activities...) are of significantly more value to them.

[jasong]

Originally Posted by Batalov

Is this of a 'if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you' type of thing?
You think Google will index your thoughts and someone somewhere will pick them up... and make them happen?

I am pretty sure that they are much more interested in things that you are giving away to them without verbalizing them. Everything that 99% of the people verbalize is not worth the money spent on listening to, but their query histories, browsing histories etc (physical location, where and when of their activities...) are of significantly more value to them.

I'm trying to do two things here: Trying to find some common ground to nerd out on.

And the thing about Google is sometimes it's frustratingly hard to get it to "understand" things, so I think when people ask questions they've already Googled they should phrase the thread title with the assumption that someone will use Google to try and find an answer to a similar question. So, if you have an inkling of why Google couldn't help you, it might be possible to phrase a thread title to cater to Google's peculiarities.

Speaking of Google peculiarities, has anyone tried to categorize the internet in a list-within-lists fashion? In that case, there'd be a central listing that you could use to drill down to what you want. I know Yahoo might've done something similar, and there's probably a meta-wiki on Wikipedia. (hmmmmm, I should search for that, and bookmark it if it exists)

Oh, and to repeat one of the things in the first thread: If you're excited about bendy screens(the concept, not the urge to be an early adopter, though being an early adopter would count to) maybe break the spam rules by throwing me a bone and saying,"Yay, bendy screens, a tablet that folds up into the size of a cell phone is way awesome," or something similar.

[VictordeHolland]

Originally Posted by jasong

I know Yahoo might've done something similar, and there's probably a meta-wiki on Wikipedia. (hmmmmm, I should search for that, and bookmark it if it exists)

Wikipedia calls them portals:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Contents/Portals

• Culture and the arts
• Geography and places
• Health and fitness
• History and events
• Mathematics and logic
• Natural and physical sciences
• People and self
• Philosophy and thinking
• Religion and belief systems
• Society and social sciences
• Technology and applied sciences

[science_man_88]

Originally Posted by VictordeHolland

Wikipedia calls them portals:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Contents/Portals

• Culture and the arts
• Geography and places
• Health and fitness
• History and events
• Mathematics and logic
• Natural and physical sciences
• People and self
• Philosophy and thinking
• Religion and belief systems
• Society and social sciences
• Technology and applied sciences

so similar to the dewey decimal system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ecimal_classes

maybe google the dewey decimal for the topic you want ? oh and if you need google tips and tricks:

http://www.techradar.com/news/intern...d-hacks-462143 101 tips/tricks

or

http://beebom.com/google-tricks-tips 60 tips/tricks

or others may be able to help you

[jasong]

Originally Posted by science_man_88

so similar to the dewey decimal system:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ecimal_classes

maybe google the dewey decimal for the topic you want ? oh and if you need google tips and tricks:

http://www.techradar.com/news/intern...d-hacks-462143 101 tips/tricks

or

http://beebom.com/google-tricks-tips 60 tips/tricks

or others may be able to help you

Sorry for the late response, but thanks for the Google tips and tricks, I'll check it out.

Since I live in the "town of colleges," I'm thinking I might try to do a combination of online learning plus asking for help from other people nearby. My ultimate goal is to learn enough to be able to do a useful BOINC or BOINC-like project. (and, yes, I know that could take years) Can anyone advise me on a good place to start to figure out my strengths and weaknesses, especially math and science related?

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by jasong

Can anyone advise me on a good place to start to figure out my strengths and weaknesses, especially math and science related?

To be honest and sincere... Find a driving problem which interests you, and then work it deeply.

This could be something as simple as gardening, or assisting in filing in a library. These things are more complex than they first appear.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by chalsall

To be honest and sincere... Find a driving problem which interests you, and then work it deeply.

This could be something as simple as gardening, or assisting in filing in a library. These things are more complex than they first appear.

Seconded.

I've amateur experience of the first and semi-professional in the latter and can vouch for your assertion.

Semi-professional because I was in charge of the FlyBase bibliographic database, so professional, but it wasn't my principal responsibility, so only semi-

[jasong]

Originally Posted by chalsall

To be honest and sincere... Find a driving problem which interests you, and then work it deeply.

This could be something as simple as gardening, or assisting in filing in a library. These things are more complex than they first appear.

Here's what I want out of life in a short list:

(1)Glorify Jesus
(2)Obtain and maintain a reasonably robust social life, and I mean reasonably robust for an "anti-social" Goatcher. The quotes are because if you want to be popular, you avoid Goatchers, but if you value integrity and truth, Goatchers are the way to go. (but I can only speak for my immediate family and close relatives in Arkansas)

(3) Is the one that drives me absolutely nuts. Prove that the IRS is a criminal organization and that it is actually illegal(and immoral, if you trust Jesus) to directly tax an American citizen. I believe I have already given a lot of evidence in the past, but people seem to think US law is decided by judges, which is wrong, because we are not, and never have been, a democracy. We've always been a constitutional republic, a nation of written law. Or, at least, that's what we're supposed to be, since the Constitution has never been officially struck down.

I live a lot on the approval of others, so when it seems like nearly everybody is against me on something, I tend to lose steam. That being said, I'm convinced that this nation(the US) could be invigorated if we'd re-assert ourselves as a nation of written law and recognize the written law as the true authority of the nation, except when a law is struck down, which, again, should also be governed by written law. I'm sick of cases being decided on "case law," totally ignoring due process.

I know a lot of people don't like the idea of being autistic, but an autistic attitude is precisely what's needed when dealing with US law. We need to treat US law the way it was intended, and iterate it like the pseudo-code it is.

Would anyone be interested in reading through my idea on why the IRS is breaking the law? I promise the only documents I'll use are the US Constitution and Title 26, which is the US Internal Revenue Code. I'm a bit rusty, but for those who like to exercise their brain, I think I can show you some stuff that will really make you think.

[wombatman]

Originally Posted by jasong

(snip)

(3) Is the one that drives me absolutely nuts. Prove that the IRS is a criminal organization and that it is actually illegal(and immoral, if you trust Jesus) to directly tax an American citizen. I believe I have already given a lot of evidence in the past, but people seem to think US law is decided by judges, which is wrong, because we are not, and never have been, a democracy. We've always been a constitutional republic, a nation of written law. Or, at least, that's what we're supposed to be, since the Constitution has never been officially struck down.(snip)

Let me save you some time. Here's a list that contains all of the arguments you're going to make (plus some you're not aware of): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_pr...onal_arguments

Here's the bit of the Constitution that authorizes at least some taxation by Congress: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxing...pending_Clause

The second link even talks about the limitations that have been imposed when interpreting a few hundred years old text.

Edit: Might also suggest that if you really desire to retread this path that you go back to the thread you started a couple of years back. At least then you can reread the things that I and others shared with you about the problems your stance has. Then you can see if you have something new to argue or are just spinning your tires some more.

[jasong]

Originally Posted by wombatman

Let me save you some time. Here's a list that contains all of the arguments you're going to make (plus some you're not aware of): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_pr...onal_arguments

That's one of the tricks the government uses, calling us tax protesters when we're actually constitutionalists. Constitutionalists believe that if you're not going to respect the will of the original writers, you need to either abolish what they wrote or gtfo. (and, no, gtfo is not legal parlance, I'm just a little pissed at how people dismiss us. No offense)

Here's the bit of the Constitution that authorizes at least some taxation by Congress: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxing...pending_Clause

The second link even talks about the limitations that have been imposed when interpreting a few hundred years old text.

Edit: Might also suggest that if you really desire to retread this path that you go back to the thread you started a couple of years back. At least then you can reread the things that I and others shared with you about the problems your stance has. Then you can see if you have something new to argue or are just spinning your tires some more.

I remember writing that thread, not sure how hard it will be to find it again. I think the reason I walked away is because people weren't arguing against what I felt to be good points, they were just repeating what they read on the internet. Quoting isn't the same as reasoning.

I'll search for the old thread. And I'll review what you gave me, but those posts tend to dodge the actual issue, which is the fact that we're intended to be a nation of written law, not a nation run by judges that disagree. Also, I object to the word interpret when it comes to US law, law isn't supposed to be interpreted, it's supposed to be read. If a law is subject to interpretation, that should be seen as a flaw, not a reason to let a judge have their say.