text:
My choir has a consistent tendency -- absent a metrenome or vigorous conducting -- to slow down for quieter dynamics (and then never regain the original pace). We have several individuals with good senses of pace; this is a collective problem. Why does this happen and how can we fix it? We don't want the director waving her arms that much on stage; we want to fix the root problem and perform with minimal conducting.
@Matthew Read gave some good suggestions, to which I'll add:
I can't speak to the psychological reasons or addressing them, but there are a couple things you can try that basically apply to all types of music.
1) Have the weaker members listen to and follow the stronger ones. Ensure they can hear them, of course; don't put them on opposite sides of the stage. The mediocre members will probably do well enough if the bad influence is removed.
2) The director doesn't need to flail in order to indicate the tempo. Small hand movements should be enough.
3) Not everyone can keep a consistent beat, but everyone can follow a beat. If choir members refuse to do the latter by following others or the director, they should be dismissed. (I'm assuming your choir is "serious". If not, it may be something you just have to deal with.)


text:
LISPOP Blog
Occasionally, I blog about issues relating to Canadian Politics here: http://www.lispop.ca/blog/, which is LISPOP's Opinion-Policy Nexus Blog.
I've started a new interview series with authors of recent scholarly books on Canadian politics. You can find it here:
I've also started a new interview series with "Mentors and Giants of (Canadian) Political Science." You can find it here:

subset: commoncrawl


text:
The 6 Greatest Acts of Trolling in the History of Science
The 1990s saw the rise of postmodern academics that insisted that "science," as we know it, was based more on prejudice than actual objective discovery. Most scientists didn't know what to make of this argument, because they were under the impression that they'd been doing math problems and pouring things into beakers, not trying to fulfill some latent patriarchal and/or racial agenda. Thus the "science wars" began, which sounds like something that should have been astounding, but wound up being fought inside universities with protracted silences and strongly worded letters, rather than spaceships and laser cannons.
Enter quantum physicist Alan Sokal.
Sven Klinge
Otherwise known as "Generico Scienceface."
By 1996, he was sick of postmodernism and decided to troll the community in hopes of exposing their bullshit (which to be honest has been the mission statement of every troll in history, albeit with varying degrees of applicability). Sokal submitted a bloated, meandering nonsense pile of an article to a postmodern academic journal, seeing if they would publish his paper simply because it supported the postmodern viewpoint of science being an ideological hammer made of sexist white supremacy (this would be similar to Fox News running a story written by some Appalachian lunatic with self-made dentures whittled from squirrel bones simply because it agreed with fiscal conservatism). And they totally published it.
In the paper, Sokal makes several inside jokes to fellow mathematicians and creates an absurd argument that quantum gravity and its formulations support liberalism. Hell, the quote he begins the paper with literally says he is playing a trick on the journal:
With an accompanying drawing.
"Transgressing disciplinary boundaries ... [is] a subversive undertaking since it is likely to violate the sanctuaries of accepted ways of perceiving. Among the most fortified boundaries have been those between the natural sciences and the humanities."
And it goes on and on like that. When the article was published, Sokal gave an interview to a different journal in which he divulged that the entire paper was a hoax, causing an immediate shit cyclone (or, since we're talking science here, a shit Coke-bottle tornado that you made in science class). The postmodernists tried to contain the damage, but the story quickly went mainstream, and they were mocked into disgrace.
And they were all demoted to "chicken weighers."
#2. Carl Siegel Throws His Colleague's Thesis into the Ocean
Carl Siegel and Erich Bessel-Hagen were the Starsky and Hutch of 19th century German mathematicians, so when Bessel-Hagen needed someone to review his thesis, he could think of no one better than his buddy Siegel. Siegel agreed, because that's what friends do, and decided to go over the thesis while he was taking a boat trip, because nothing makes the time fly quite like kicking back with some relaxing calculus of variations and function theory.
However, Siegel was busy with his own work in a completely unrelated field, so he found the thesis to be a tad boring and stupid (evidently people in the 1800s did all of their science on boats). Seeing as Bessel-Hagen was such a good friend, Siegel quietly packed the thesis away so he could just look it over another time ... is what we would have said, if that's what Siegel had done. What he actually did was toss it overboard like a cursed book of spells he'd suddenly found beneath an oar.
"Don't worry, I built a monument to how sucky your thesis actually was."
That's right: He took his best friend's thesis, the culmination of hundreds of hours of dedicated work, and chucked it into the goddamn ocean like a McDonald's wrapper. Keep in mind that this was the 19th century -- Kinko's and Copy Shops were pretty thin on the ground. This means that the thesis now decorating the bottom of the sea was the only copy in existence. We lose our minds if we accidentally delete a Skyrim save, so Bessel-Hagen was presumably ready to stab Siegel to death with his own jawbone.
To top it off, Siegel told Bessel-Hagen that he had done it for his own good, and he dutifully noted the coordinates of the place where he had disposed of his friend's work for reasons we cannot begin to imagine. A stack of paper doesn't sink like a treasure chest, and regardless, scuba diving was still many years from being a thing. Maybe he thought Bessel-Hagen would like to paddle out with a candle and a bottle of scotch for a quiet moment of reflection.
He lived the rest of his life with that look on his face.
#1. Galileo Trolls the Pope
Everyone knows the Galileo story as another instance of the Catholic church flexing its muscles and putting science in the corner. But the actual story is far more complex, and at the center of it lies a pretty spectacular troll.
You see, back in Galileo's day, there were three competing models of the universe. Two of them were your basic theology-approved geocentric theories, while the third, called the Copernican model, held that the Earth and the rest of the planets orbited the sun. Scientists of the time pretty much stuck to the "everything revolves around the Earth" school, because they didn't want to get stoned to death. Also, there were a couple of Mr.-Stay-Puft-sized holes in the Copernican theory, most notably the lack of observable stellar parallax, which is how astronomers determine the relative distance of celestial bodies (while simultaneously being a howlingly bitching name for a space rock band).
"Ladies and gen- wait, really? We wasted that name on these fucking idiots?"
Basically, all the best evidence of the day pointed to geocentrism. Galileo himself was never able to offer conclusive proof of the Copernican theory, and he got key details, like the shape of planetary orbits, completely wrong.
So, Galileo was instructed to teach the Copernican model only as one of many possible theories. After a few chats with Pope Urban VIII about the relevant science (because that was a thing people used to have to do), Galileo told His Eminence that he was going to write a book presenting the theories as objectively as possible and in layman's terms. What he did instead was spray out Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems like a hateful jet of burningly contrary diarrhea into the face of the man who could have his fingernails pulled out for coughing in church.
"You're lucky I'm busy delivering toys to all the world's children this month."
The Dialogue was standard-issue pop science, essentially an Al Gore movie without all the wistful sighing. It was written as a discussion between three characters, although Galileo makes it painfully clear which character he believes is correct and which characters he believes are nose-picking shitheads. To top it off, he used arguments the Pope had made to him in private conversation and had them spoken by the character Simplicio, who was depicted as a 17th century Pauly Shore. He might as well have called the character Idioticci and included illustrations of him in a papal hat. You may recognize this as a world-class piece of troll bait.
And as a result, the "moderators" (the Inquisition) stepped in and banned Galileo from the "forum" (public life). Yeah, trolling doesn't always work out the way you want it to.
Andrew Bensley can be found occasionally writing semi-humorous words on the Twitter, and you can troll Steve on his shoddy blog BuyDemocracy.
For experiments that seem like trolling, check out The 10 Craziest Scientific Experiments Ever Conducted and 5 Psych Experiments That Sounded Fun (Until They Started).
If you're pressed for time and just looking for a quick fix, then check out 'The Dark Knight Rises': The 30-Second Version.


text:
Diversity and divisions
To carry forward the theme addressed in a couple of recent threads, I offer a translation of an essay by Fr. Yves Congar published fifty years ago--plus a change... It doesn't exactly speak to the precise way in which many people are posing the issue here, but there's a good deal of wisdom in it.UPDATE: I have corrected the error pointed out below and inserted page-numbers.
About the Author
Rev. Joseph A. Komonchak, professor emeritus of the School of Theology and Religious Studies at the Catholic University of America, is a retired priest of the Archdiocese of New York.
43 comments
- All
- Editor Featured
What a rich and relevant essay. Grazie!
My wife and I experience every Sunday what fr Congar experienced on his 1946 visit to Vienna. It keeps the center holding in our faith life. Our Franciscan parish stands on the shabby side of San Francisco's trendy hotel district. The presider asks out of town visitors to stand at the 9am Gospel singing Mass. Without fail visitors from other countries and States stand up and seem delighted by the diversity of our congregation and the warm welcome. Come on by someday. thegubioproject.org/video.
Thank you, Joseph. Beautiful.
Unless I missed something (entirely possible), shouldn;t this sentence begin "The One who sends" rather than "The Son who sends"? It's at 1. aThe Son who sends, the Son who is sent, the Spirit who is the gift of them both and who internalizes in people the single gift of truth and grace given in Jesus Christ, so that in the end the Church's principle of unity is the unity of God himself: "May they be one as we are one" (Jn 17:22).Thank you for this translation. Congar was really good, wasn't he?
Wonderful choice. Wise words then, and wise words now. Fr. K. is like the scribe "who brings from his storeroom both the new and the old." I was just re-reading Jerry Ryan's piece on Joe Cunneen as "ferryman" of ideas. Joe would have been delighted to see Congar's piece here, setting some of our discussions in a useful --and larger-- perspective.
A paragraph on the means by which communion was practiced and achieved: In the ancient Church communion had its organs and means, humble means, very human ones. There were visits and hospitality; on this occasion there was the celebration together, or the invitation from one priest to another, from one bishop to another, to celebrate in his place at the altar. There were the letters recommending a Christian or a priest to another community. There was the solidarity of considering condemned what another Church, and especially the Roman Church had condemned. There was the sending of professions of faith to other Churches when one assumed an office. There was the sending of letters, especially occasioned by an event, a trial, difficulties. Finally, there was the mutual aid, the sending of help, living witnesses of spiritual and bodily compassion.Letters, visits, travels: staying in communion was hard work. Now, with the internet, it should be so much easier. But it really isn't, is it?
"What makes us one is that each of us has a personal relation with the one living God, thanks to the Holy Spirit which has been given to us." Amen.
JAK --Many thanks for the translation. One can see why the Curia would object to his thinking, especially his objection to the imposition of unity by the enforcement of uniformity -- and his disparagement of monologues. But I think he's still somewhat limited by the Platonic/Greek notion that unity is found in *universality*. Yes, he admits authority and law as providing a kind of unit. But his continued talking of "criteria of unity" indicates to me that for him unity requires some one standard against which the many must be measured, and, ISTM, this is just another way of enthroning universality/uniformity again. He obviously does value individuals as such, but he never says that it is their *differences* that contribute to the unity, and he doesn't really find room for individuals except as parts of something measuring up to criteria. At one point he does talk as if "interiority" is the basis for the value of individuality, but he doesn't explain why that should be so. and he finds interiority dangerous. My biggest problem with him is that he doesn't come near appreciating *differences as such* among individuals.He's just too Greek in his defense of universality, though he is decidedly anti-Greek in his appreciation of spontaneity. But he never seems to see that unity can be established by *the complementary* of differences a much more modern notion -- the aesthetic idea that differences need not oppose each other but can contribute to a unity which is not homogenous. He does seem to see that differences do not necessarily cause divergences, but he doesn't really explain how differences can be unified. Not his fault, of course. He's obviously a product of the medievals, and they didn't get around to appreciating the notion of the complementarity of differences either. We need another Aquinas to work out the ramifications of that insight. (Another problem having to do with the transcendentals. Sigh.)Thanks also for posting the tape of your Marianist lecture. Wish the captioning were more accurate. Did you know that at one point the closed captioning has you talking about "the anthropology of Carl Reiner"? :)
unity can be established by *the complementary* of differences [...] the aesthetic idea that differences need not oppose each other but can contribute to a unity which is not homogenous.Ann, it almost looks as if you're talking about heterosexual marriage!
Claire --Indeed, I am talking about any sort of unity which incorporates differences as complements. What one is, the other isn't, and somehow those differences "fit". The mysterious thing is the "fitting". Fitting things somehow fulfill each other, but what does fulfillment mean? What makes things fit? And why do some differences fulfill, but others don't? (Ice cream and cake fulfill but not ice cream and oysters on the half shell.) And why do some repeated *likenesses* fulfill but others don't. (Explosions of fireworks but not repeated similar blasts of trumpets?)The philosophers really have a long way to go on this one.
P. S. I'm assuming that beyond repetition or uniformity complementarity is *the* explanation of all sorts of fulfillment and/or unity. But for all I know there might be other reasons for it. But what?
Congar does write that diversity is an enrichment "because it will mean the unfolding of a large number of virtualities, as when white light is refracted by a prism or a network of little drops unfolds the whole gamut of basic colors.", and then, about the Trinity's diversity, he writes that "each of the Three is relative to the others", and later in a footnote he also provides a citation: "An organism is the more unified the more its differentiation grows and its functions multiply". All those suggest an appreciation of "differences as such" (as you say). So that idea is at least present in his text even if it does not dominate, don't you think?
Ann: I confess I don't see how you could arrive at the assessment you offer of Congar. Nor how you can object to the idea of criteria of unity: if there aren't any, how can one speak of a social body as having a unity? It would be an amorphous mass. Some common experience, understandings, judgments, goals, decisions, etc. have to be present; otherwise you don't have any more of a social unit than the twenty or thirty people who just happen to be on the same bus. I don't think this is a peculiarly "Greek" way of thinking.I didn't know there was closed captioning on my Marianist lecture.Tom: Yes, you're right. It should be "The One who sends..."
FWIW, when I think of diversity/unity with regard to God and Church, I think 'anything goes except sin'; anything goes being the diversity but the unity being corralled into 'without sin.'And my actual experience of RCC is that it is the most radically decentralized organization around. Members can do pretty much anything they want in its name, except when the Church judges their behavior as sinful. Now there is disagreement about what constitutes sinful behavior, but the fundamental discussion is where to draw that line.
Bruce: I don't agree with your posing of the issue. It's not primarily a moral issue, but has to do with legitimate diversity (e.g., in language and other forms of expression; in theology; in spiritual traditions; etc.) within the common faith.
JAK --I don't object in the least to principles of unity. What I think is unfortunate is speaking only of unities of *like* realities. Yes, there are unities of like things, but there are also unities of unlike things whose very unlikesses, whose *differences* are united into a whole. They aren't just tolerated in a whole, so to speak, they are integral to many wholes, especailly aesthetic ones. Artists are, I think, particularly well aware that their unifications are of disparates.True, a human organization needs common principles and goals and sometimes common means between them, but these are not the only sorts of principles of unity. Far from it. Take the Mass -- each part is different from the others but they complement each other. A Mass is not a simple repetitive chant. It is not an Oooooooom experience. The problem for the artists is to choose just what is complementary and to place the disparates in proper order.I say yours is a Greek way of thinking because it measures up only to Aristotle's notion that a work of art seeks to portray a universal. Yes, some works, especially literary ones, do that to some extent, but in fact we don't value heroes who are *only* types. They have to be identifiably different, identifiably other than the others for us to find full value in them. Hamlet as the hero of "Macbeth" would probably be a mess (though who knows what Shakespeare could have done with him in that part). For the Greeks "the one and the many" was a problem because of the manyness. I say that for a Christian the many reveal what God is each in its own tinyy way, and the many are, therefore, anything but a problem. The metaphysical merit of *all* differences is that they are *various*. They simply are what other, different sorts of beings are not, and as such each in its own different way reflects what the Lord is in a way that the others don't. (We're in metaphysics big time here.) And works of art which incorporate the various are not messes, they're beautiful. Red reflects God as blue does not, and vice versa. You could say that creation itself is attempting to mirror the infinite God by combining into a whole the many limited but varied beings of this world. They can never fully reflect Him, but they're a start on the way to knowledge of God.Congar does talk about "the richness" of the beings of this world, and this could possibly be interpreted as an appreciation of differences, except that he doesn't say that is what he means, and his other statements preclude such a view. So he never gets down to the value of difference, of variety as such. Even though he says diversity is necessary, he doesn't say it's a good in itself.
"Congar does write that diversity is an enrichment because it will mean the unfolding of a large number of virtualities, as when white light is refracted by a prism or a network of little drops unfolds the whole gamut of basic colors.,Claire --Yes, he does find richness in the formation of a rainbow from "white" light, but I find that metaphor very muddy. He's using the word "white" in the sense of physics, not the sense of a color we experience. There is no "enfolding of virtualities" when white light is refracted through a prisim. There is a physical sifting of rays of different wave lengths.I think he's caught between shall we call it the "universalism" of the Greeks and the fact that different creatures mirror God somehow. As I see it, Western art theory really didn't appreciate differences until the Romantics over-valued the individuality of the artists themselves. (The great artists, of course, knew better.) This has led to the notion that something that is original (i.e., different) it is thereby good art. What nonsense. Yes, there are two unacceptable extremes -- one over-values the universal, the other over-values the different.You also say, ". . . in a footnote he also provides a citation: An organism is the more unified the more its differentiation grows and its functions multiply."Sorry, I overlooked that. Yes, that does recognize a value of diversity, but, note, he puts it in a footnote. And note too that this is limited to means to ends (functions of parts of organisms). I maintain that diversity can *in itself* be of value, not just as a means to some other goal.
Nor does Congar deny that diversity is a good thing in itself, and I should have thought that the whole point of the essay was to defend the value of diversity, so I still can't figure out how you reached your negative assessment. I think he thought--and I certainly do--that the Church is a concrete universal. The word for it is "catholicity," not "universality," and it is wonderfully described in Lumen gentium 13 and 23. The latter, in the context of affirming the variety of rites and traditions in the Church, has the fine phrase "in unum conspirans varietas": "this variety of local Churches together aspiring to unity more clearly demonstrates the catholicity of an undivided Church." Catholicity is not uniformity but diversity integrated in Christ and the Spirit.
Father,I'm not quite sure how 'anything goes except sin' does not easily encompass what you describe as legitimate diversity. To my way of thinking, it easily encompasses language, culture, etc while also allowing for different ministries: poor, elderly, children etc. Do you have an example that highlights what you believe to be the difference?
"And my actual experience of RCC is that it is the most radically decentralized organization around."Bruce --Centralization is, I think, a notion which tries (and sometimes succeeds) in balancing likeness and differences in some sort of whole. It recognizes that there is a special unity in authority (Congar saw that clearly), but it also admits that there are other, diverse yet integral parts in the whole. In other words, you can have a central authority which guards common/universal beliefs but also have parts which just aren't the same thing as common beliefs. The papacy, for instance, is a part which is responsible for unanimity of *beliefs*, but it is not (or it shouldn't be) responsible for all the *practices* in local churches. When the Vatican conflates beliefs and practices the whole Church suffers.Complexity, complexity.
Ann, I am interested in that metaphor. We're supposed to see Christ in other people. Imagine each person is a little drop and, from its own angle, serves to show one of the colors of God. If that person was not there, we'd be missing a color, and our understanding of God would be lessened. In that way diversity is not merely tolerated, like in Bruce's expression anything goes except sin, but is an enrichment, and even, in a way, is necessary for unity in God. (I've always thought that's what you meant when you told people commenting on this blog: "we need your voice".)
JAK --Yes, as I mentioned, Congar does speak of the *necessity* for diversity and actually says a lot about it. But that is not the same thing as speaking of the intrinsic goodness or varied things. Yes, diversity and unity are the main subjects of the article. What I say is lacking in his theory is recognition that differences are not just to be tolerated because they are necessary, they are goods each of which reflect the goodness of God. Only in the footnote Claire mentions does he admit some goodness in some diversity.I don't know what you mean by "concrete universal". Never did understand what Wimsatt was talking about.Yes, I see the distinction between "Catholicity", and "universality" and, yes, it's in the document. Congar might have talked about it somewhere else, but I just don't see him talking about it here.
Claire --If that's the way you interpret the metaphor, then fine, I'd agree that it's significant. But I don't think that's what Congar is talking about -- he's talking about prisms "unfolding" "virtualities" which seems to be stretching the metaphor beyond where it can take him. There's no unfolding, much less any virtualities in shifting some photons around in space. But I'm not really sure what his psychology of the perception of light was, so maybe I shouldn't talk about it.
Right. I don't know what "unfolding virtualities" means. As far as I'm concerned they're just filler words.
Claire --Yes, that's what I mean about needing everyone's voice. I think the notion is particularly important these days. A young friend sent me the address of a site which offers "inspiration" daily. So very often the sayings are for people who obviously need to increase their self esteem, and the comments there bear this out. That is so very sad. In Christian theology every individual is important, every individual has great value in himself or herself. This is a lesson that perhaps should be preached more often at Mass. So many young people seem to lack the self-respect due to a child of God!
From Congar's essay:"At its own level, the Church imitates the Trinity. It is a multitude of persons communicating in the same life. But this unity of life is not uniformity; it is rich with an abundant diversity by reason of the individual and collective persons who receive and differently live its richness. It is the catholicity of the Church, one, holy, and apostolic. Unity and multiplicity are only opposed to one another at the level of the poor creatures at the lowest level of the scale of living things. They are united to one another in superior creatures whose principle of existence is rich. The Church is fullness, it is at once unity and diversity. In it the fullness of Christ in some way stretches itself into a humanity which seeks to receive and to live it, but whose members receive and live it each in its own way and in accord with what it is. On the other hand, each of them and all of them together thus contribute to fulfilling Christ, as St. Paul says (Eph 1:23), or to give him his fullness as the perfect Man (Eph 4:13). You know the classic images of this catholicity developed by the Fathers and taken up again in the documents of the popes: the Church is the queen circumdata varietate [surrounded by variety; Ps 44, Vulgate]; she speaks all the languages, with the Apostles on Pentecost; she is the cloth seen by Peter at Jaffa, full of all the animals, pure and impure, etc."
JAK --Yes, Congar again says here that the Church is both unified and diverse, and this comes closer to appreciating diversity as such, but even this doesn't quite incorporate it. Consider:** "But this unity of life is not uniformity; it is rich with an abundant diversity by reason of the individual and collective persons who receive and differently live its richness." Here the diversity is *received* from outside, Diversity intrinsic to things is not being applauded here.** "Unity and multiplicity are only opposed to one another at the level of the poor creatures at the lowest level of the scale of living things. They are united to one another in superior creatures whose principle of existence is rich. " Here multiplicity could be interpreted either as multiplicity (manyness) of things of one kind or as manyness of the many kinds. He doesn't say which. He does say that *the* principle of existence is "rich", but what is that principle? Is is many in any way? No. It's only one. And what is "the one principle of existence"?? The existence of the Church itself? Sounds like he's talking about a "subsistent" unity which is somehow other than the existences of the beings and their relationships that make the beings part of the Church. (I find this segment particularly muddy.)** "On the other hand, each of them and all of them together thus contribute to fulfilling Christ, as St. Paul says (Eph 1:23), or to give him his fullness as the perfect Man (Eph 4:13)."What is he talking about here? I read the Ephesians, and I don't see how he gets this out of it. Even if he means that we somehow contribute to the being of Christ ontologically (which would be totally weird -- I was taught it's the other way around -- Christ's life completes ours on a supernatural level) he doesn't say how our *diversity* completes Him. ** " the Church is the queen circumdata varietate [surrounded by variety; Ps 44, Vulgate];"Here the Church is (metaphorically) only *surrounded* by variety, it is not said to be *constituted by variety.
"individual and collective persons who receive and differently live its richness.Here the diversity is *received* from outsideI think that "its" refers to the unity of life here. The persons receive life.
Ann: You seem to be complaining because Congar didn't write an entire philosophical and theological essay on diversity!As St. Paul said, "what have you that you have not received?" Individuals and social bodies all receive the diverse riches of life? "They are united to one another in superior creatures whose principle of existence is rich." He means that higher creatures (human beings and angels) have a principle of life that integrates unity and multiplicity. And, no, he didn't say which kind of multiplicity he was talking about, but he probably didn't expect to be brought before so exigent a bar.I find it in Ephesians, and your problem may be with its author, not with Congar.The Latin phrase refers to the many-colored dress of the queen in the Psalm, which many of the Fathers took to be a type of the Church, the variety of whose members adorn her. Once again you're criticizing a metaphor because it doesn't say everything that must be said. But isn't that the nature of images: that they only describe or illustrate one dimension of a complex reality, and that's why you need many of them? Think of these other images of the Church: a building; a fishnet; a field of wheat and weeds; a boat; a body; etc. etc. etc.
True, I'm complaining about what he hasn't said, but I'm also complaining about what he does say. I find that his essentially Greek metaphysics is inadequate to his task, and it leads him to say some things that are muddy when they aren't outright wrong. Specifically, he keeps trying to find some one thing or principle (e.g., "the principle of existence") which will account for the oneness which result from relationships among many -- but in such a union there isn't just one uniting factor there are many. But, Platonist that he is, he keeps trying to find a simple (just one) principle/factor which unifies when there are in fact many which "add up to" the one thing he's trying to describe. (Look at it this way -- you cannot account for "the" unity of a chain by any one linkage between two of the chain's segments. It doesn't "have" a unity distinct from its parts, It is a complex unit, which sounds paradoxical until you look carefully at it.)It's because the Greek metaphysics is not all that good about the transcendentals, and it shows in Congar's attempt to describe the unity of the Church. It's yet another reason why we need another Aquinas to develop a better, more adequate theory of the transcendentals.
Ann: It's ridiculous to describe Yves Congar as a Platonist. I think you have some idee fixe in your mind that prevents you from even trying to give him an even break. As for your sentence: "(Look at it this way you cannot account for the unity of a chain by any one linkage between two of the chains segments. It doesnt have a unity distinct from its parts, It is a complex unit, which sounds paradoxical until you look carefully at it.)"-- you could be describing Congar's argument in this essay. The Church is a complex unit, both complex, then, and a unity.
" But this unity of life is not uniformity; it is rich with an abundant diversity by reason of the individual and collective persons who receive and differently live its richness." Claire --It seems to me that "unity" is the antecedent of "its" in the second sentence. But either way I don't think the thought here is coherent. Congar even asserts an identity of individuals and "collective persons", a metaphysical impossibility. Yes, he's trying to express the unity of many persons found in the one Church, and maybe English grammar is fighting him here (I wonder what the French was) -- he has to talk about a collective as it it were an ordinary unit, and has to use the singular verb "is" to do it, a form which doesn't help express the manyness involved. (I think we need another form of the verb to be clear about it.) At any rate, I don't think his metaphysics is up to it. That metaphysics has yet to be written.
Ann, sorry, I'm out of my depth. But my default assumption is that Congar is always right (unless proven wrong, of course).
"...this unity of life is not uniformity; it is rich with an abundant diversity by reason of the individual and collective persons who receive and differently live its richness."JAK --Yes, the Church is a unity and is complex. But we already knew that. How to describe its particular sort of unity and complexity is another matter.I say Congar is a Platonist because like Plato he wants to have one principle of unity present in all the relata (that one unity which is "received in all things"), but that inevitably leads to contradictions and identifications of what is/are not identical. Plato himself was never satisfied with that part of his metaphysics having to do with one-many relationships or unions.Claire --I think everyone is out of her/his depth with this problem. That is why I say we need a new Aquinas. But that is no reason not to criticize the positions already taken, including those taken by the big guys. That is the only way philosophy even begins to make progress.
Claire --It's an old notion in philosophy that the grammatical structure of language somehow mirrors the metaphysical structure of beings. For Aquinas, for instance, the sujbect of a sentence signifies the matter of the subject (i.e., the principle which makes a physical thing an individual), predicates signify form/what specifices the material thing as being of a certain kind, and the copula represents the existence of the thing. But we sometimes get into real problems, I think, when trying to disentangle *relations* out of an ordinary English sentence. For instance. "Mary is Jack's mother" has two relations expressed, but not by independent relational words. Other sentences are more explicit, e.g., in "The cat is on the mat", "on" clearly has the function of expressing a relation). Very often one word will have more than one logical sort of meaning. Symbolic logic slices lenguage up into metaphysical parts. For instance, S, P, R, E (backwards), a, b, c,..., represent metaphysical realities involved as factors in things. But try to express the sort of complex unity found in the meaning of "the Church" using symbolic logic. I'm not at all sure the logic is up to the metaphysics of it.
Ann: You wrote: "Congar even asserts an identity of individuals and collective persons, a metaphysical impossibility." Could you indicate where he asserts this?
JAK --". . . it {"this unity of life?] is rich with an abundant diversity by reason of the individual and collective persons who receive and differently live its richness."The notion of "collective persons" implies that such a "collective" is made up of individual persons. Thus we're presented with "a" person which is both one and many person(s). (VERY weird.) Like Plato he has trouble expressing one-many relationships.
Oops -= should have been "this unity of life".
A collective person is an entity such as a corporation in civil life or a religious order in the Church; but there are many other examples. Collective persons obviously are composed of individuals, but they also have legal and canonical rights not enjoyed by individuals qua individuals. Congar was aware of this, and that is why he spoke of both individual persons and of collective persons, and found a richness of life in both. He does not identify the two.
"A collective person" at best is a metaphor, and it limps badly. Its use in law has permitted some gross injustices that are weakening this country -- I mean especially the recent Citizens decision that allows "collective persons" known as PACS to contribute all the money they want to politicla campaigns allowing the super-rich a hugely disproportionate advantage in the political process. Not to mention the use of the term with reference to corporations. Sort of the way the Curia, another collective person, accumulates power and uses it as its members see fit.
Abusus non tollit usum. How would you describe a religious order, the Jesuits, say? It's not just the individual Jesuits. If you wanted to endow a chair at a university, to whom would you be making the contribution? Just to the Jesuits alive at the time of your donation? Or to the university-corporation that has an existence apart from the individuals who happen to constitute it at any particular time? The idea of a persona ficta has a long history in legal theory, beginning with canon law in the thirteenth century. You may not like it, but these fictive persons exist in law and it was to them that Congar was alluding when he spoke of "collective persons." He wasn't the metaphysical idiot you're making him out to be.
No, the Jesuit order is not *just* the individual members. It is its members with their relations to each other, their esse ad's, pros ti, towards each other. Thee relations-plus-relata constitute the unit, with, I would say, the system of relations constituting its unity. Each SJ is related singly to all the other individuals, and they (sometimes) simultaneously intend certain realizable goals, such as educating people, etc. The unity of such groups is found mainly in the intentionalities of various sorts the relata bear to one another and to other things outside the organization. (Yes, relations are all intentionalities.) If I gave money to the order it would be actually only to the present one. You can't give a dime to a possibility, though it is convenient to talk as if we do. (Leading sometimes to our"bewitchment" by the language, as Wittgenstein put it.)It makes no difference how old the persona ficta is/was/will be. You might be interested in the work of Gareth Evans, or some of his work anyway. He died young, but his death was considered a major loss to philosophy. Evans did foundational work on referents in 'The Varieties of Referents". (This question of the ontological status of "the Church" is, I think, a question of the referent of that phrase.) If I'm not mistaken his followers are still arguing about the ontological status of fictional things. He went against the tide in appreciating metaphysics -- was a student of Strawson's and Dummett's, and we can also be grateful to him for helping to make metaphysics acceptable again in academe. I'm far from saying that Congar was a metaphysical idiot. I am saying that like all the rest of these major thinkers he leaves a lot to be done yet, and some of what he says and implies is contradictory. But saying that a major thinker is not perfect is far, far from saying that his work is trash.
I don't think that what he said or implied was contradictory.


text:
has there be an effort to categorify first order logic? More particularly, structures in the sense of logic.
If so, then every structure of a first order theory is a category. so in particular, the universe of categories must be a (meta)-category itself. So I have another question: is there a development of a model theory of categorified logic?
The idea is like this. In modern set-theoretic based model theory, must of the interesting stuff comes by looking at different cardinalities. First order theory like Lowenheim-Skolem Theorem makes it easy to move up and down cardinalities, and after all the category SET is equivalent to CARDINALS. Very much this equivalence dictates the model theory.
So the universe of categories CAT, and whatever is a skeletal equivalent of it, will dictate the model theory of categorified logic.
Anyone aware of categorified logic?


text:
|Line 21:
|Line 21:
A fairly simple, slightly unsafe and highly voltage limited arduino project that is fairly clever is located [http://sourceforge.net/p/openbrainstim/wiki/Hardware/ here].
A fairly simple, slightly unsafe and highly voltage limited arduino project that is fairly clever is located [http://sourceforge.net/p/openbrainstim/wiki/Hardware/ here].
==Other Resources==
==Other Resources==
Revision as of 01:50, 11 May 2012
This is a page skeleton for some new projects we're going to document here! Feel free to fill shit in. --Hurtstotouchfire 21:16, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
What it is, what it is. It is this.
Academic publications
The best collection of academic study abstracts is here. (note that we should snatch this and put a copy somewhere, since we have no clue who this dropbox account belongs to or how long access will stay stable. The file has credit within, so I don't think it's evil. I will try to remember to email the creator and make sure he has no issues with same)
There are quite a few other abstracts from more recent work that aren't included here, including the stuff from the most recent big neuro yearly powwow in DC. (Kelly, do you still have the links to those papers from the military guys at Wright-Patterson?)
- link to reddit thread here.
The basic circuit for TDCS is ridiculously simple. We are creating a 2ma DC current and running it through 2 inch square or round electrodes that are then connected to the human body. There are various configurations that can be used to place the pads, but the most common is placing the active electrode over the area of the skull corresponding to the brain region to be effected and the other electrode, called the return electrode, is placed on the opposite shoulder. Using the anode, or positive electrode, over the brain will stimulate the target region. The cathode, or negative electrode, will retard the brain region. A standard simulation time in most research is 20 minute sessions. The effect, depending on the type of stimulation and region seems to last up to an hour after the stimulation is removed. Again, depending on the type and location of the stimulation, repeated exposure daily for up to 9 sessions can cause the effects to persist for 30 days or longer in depression studies.
The simplest working circuit for this is a pair of 9v batteries in series, an LM334 current limiter and a fixed resistor across the LM334 reference and output to set the 2ma limit. A better circuit involves replacing the fixed resistor with a 200 ohm pot and adding an ammeter anywhere in series. One of the better designs of this nature is located here. Although the fuse in the circuit is of unlikely utility in reality.
A fairly simple, slightly unsafe and highly voltage limited arduino project that is fairly clever is located here.
(need to add a long discussion about electrodes here, since there is more complexity in the electrodes than the circuit itself)
Other Resources
- link to that great website with the videos.
- anyone else have spec online?


text:
I would like to remove blog posts from the home page if they belong to a certain category. How can I go about this in Buddypress (preferably without a plugin)?
closed as off-topic by ialocin, kaiser♦ Aug 7 '14 at 11:15
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
If you mean filtering the home page activity stream by blog post category, it's not possible using any of the buit in BuddyPress template tags, functions or queries. I struggled with this same issue for months and finally gave up. If someone can prove me wrong I would love to hear the solution.
If your not using the activity stream on your home page you can just use the WP_Query class to filter the posts.
My use case for filtering the blog posts in the activity stream was to have separate activity stream pages for each post category.
The closest thing I could find was the BuddyPress Links Plugin which creates a links post type that uses categories and is integrated into the BuddyPress activity stream but it required to much customization to get it to work how I wanted.
I also spoke with Boone at length at a WordCamp about adding custom meta or categories to any of the BuddyPress components and using the meta to filter the activity stream. He said it can be done but it would have to be completely coded from scratch and is not something nativly supported by BuddyPress. He also said the best way to accomplish this would be to create a new custom BuddyPress component.
Can you explain what your trying to achieve a little bit better. Are you wanting to filter certain categories from certain users or certain categories from all users?
EDIT: Here are some items i have found on this.
Now i have not tried to see if this works as i do not currently have a buddypress site to mess with and it takes to much to get a test one up and know what your settings are
You can use WordPress custom loop's inside a BuddyPress theme as long as it makes use of them.
You can find the WordPress loop's codex page by clicking here and the one you specifically need by click here
Here is the code you would need:
The following line


text:
Tom, Sybil, Jay Good Morning. We are in the final weeks between the 1st and 2nd terms of the Obama administration and there is much still to do before his 2nd Inauguration. But before we get into what we have to do, let's take a moment to acknowledge what many of us have done. As I stated last week, I did not see an apathetic black voter population, but a silently diligent one. And in states all over the country that stood to be true as we saw record numbers of voters turn out. In Ohio the black turnout in 2012 was actually higher than it was in 2008. Well Tom, that didn't happen by accident.
So I want to give a big thanks to the TJMS and other black radio shows that even when they were not getting big ad buys were pushing the need to turn out, educating people on voter protection and providing them with resources like 866MYVOTE1. But in places like Ohio, VA, FL, PA and other states, it was about the people on the ground. Shout out to 1911 United Super PAC, and while I try not to toot my own horn, today I will. And it's not really about me, but the organization I worked with during this cycle. Black Men Vote was the first Super Pac and one of the first initiatives of its kind to target specifically black men during an election. Shout Out to Pras of the Fugees who put up our initial $250k and more, along with the other black men from around the country who wanted to fund Black men encouraging black men to stand up for themselves. To Tim Simons who ran the campaign and most important the people on the ground.
1.Operation Step Up – Columbus – turned out over 20,000 members of the Somali community
2. Potomac Coalition – Youngstown
3. Greg Moore and the NAACP Voter Fund – Cleveland, Toledo, & Cincinnati
4. Dr. Reese (forgot the name of the organization) – Cincinnati
Tom, these folks represent the folks on the ground all over the country that didn't need a Vote or Die to know that they needed to Vote.
Now it is time to work. Our President is pushing the Republican Party to work with him on this fiscal cliff. He needs your support.
Engage your member of congress – continue to let your voices be heard to protect the working poor and the middle class. Letting the Bush Tax Cuts for the rich become a thing of the past is not the silver bullet to improving our economy, but it's a step in the right direction.
Family, use this momentum to support and challenge the President. If you have an agenda…push it. Congress and the President can only respond to what we push.
Finally, remember that in less than a year there are local elections. Let's not allow what happened in 2009 and 2010 happen in 2013 and 2014. Black community you did it. Now let's work to do it again and again and again.
Tom, I'm Jeff…and that's my truth.


text:
Current Awareness, SDI, AutoAlerts
The MUSC Library's Reference Department can provide searches on specific topics, performed on a regular monthly or weekly basis. These SDI searches, or Auto Alerts, can be done on any of the Ovid databases:
- PsycINFO
- Journals@Ovid
Search results will be e-mailed at no charge to MUSC graduate students, faculty, residents, fellows and employees. Paper copies will be provided for $5 per search. Contact Teri Lynn Herbert, Reference Librarian, at 792-1370, or by e-mail at firstname.lastname@example.com, for more information.
You can also set up your own SDI/Auto Alerts while using an OVID database. For more information, see our instruction page, "."
- searches recent updates to PubMed
- sends you e-mail alerts for the latest articles on your topic
- lets you select the search frequency—monthly, weekly, even daily
- saves your search and keeps it easily accessible
- offers citations in tagged format for EndNote, ProCite, RefMan, etc.
- links to cited journals owned by the MUSC Library
For more information about Good Citations! please contact the MUSC Library Reference Librarians at 792-2372.


text:
A beautiful blend of sophistication and style! Created in a modern gold-tone, this necklace features three cable link strands filled with various brown crystals, grey, champagne and clear glass accents and simulated cream and coco colored pearls. At the center of the necklace you'll find an eye-catching glass intaglio drop with the side profile of a woman. A unique must-have for your necklace collection.
Complete the look with the matching earrings 134-179.
Part of the Sweet Romance Collection. Made in the United States.
How are created or simulated gemstones different from natural gemstones? Natural gems are created by the forces of nature and must be discovered, usually by digging in the ground or sifting through a riverbed. When these stones are created in a laboratory, they are called created, simulated or synthetic gemstones.
The purpose of creating gemstones in a laboratory isn't necessarily to reduce the cost, but also to produce larger, more perfectly consistent stones. Created or simulated gems can be made of any material. Synthetic gems, however, share virtually all chemical, optical and physical characteristics of their natural mineral counterparts.
Austrian crystals: These are known for their excellent reflective quality and prismatic brilliance. This man-made crystal is created using natural minerals and quartz sand, which are then heated and slowly cooled using a process similar to that of creating hand-blown glass. This process creates an end product that can be fashioned into a beautiful crystal.
A special machine is used to create a highly faceted crystal. The crystals are cut in various directions, which allows for excellent light refraction, exceptional brilliance and unsurpassed color quality at an affordable price.
Today Swarovski® is one of the largest suppliers of high-end crystals. In the late 1800s, Daniel Swarovski invented a machine to cut crystal with extreme precision. He patented his technique and to this day, only select Swarovski family members and employees have unrestricted access to the production facility that creates these crystals. They are used to decorate everything from stilettos and sculptures, to chandeliers, jewelry and clothing.


text:
New Freshmen
Incoming freshmen enjoy a complete college experience at Kent State University, an institution large enough to provide resources and choices, but one that never loses its personal touch. At Kent State, you'll find the interest that will drive you and the education and knowledge to get you started in the world.
Admissions Policy
- Freshman admission at the Kent Campus is selective.
- Admissions decisions are based on the following:
- Cumulative grade point average.
- ACT and/or new SAT* scores.
- Strength of high school college preparatory curriculum.
- Grade trends.
*New SAT scores will be accepted for fall 2017 and are recommended.
Core Curriculum Requirements
- 4 units of English (emphasis of composition)
- 4 units of Mathematics (Algebra I, II, Geometry, with minimum Algebra II complete)
- 3 units of Science
- 3 units of Social Studies
- 2 units of Foreign Language
- 1 unit of Art (or additional unit of foreign language)
Kent State University endorses the minimum core curriculum above.
Fall 2015 Freshman Class Profile
- Mean high school cumulative GPA 3.36
- Mean ACT composite 23
- Mean SAT total (critical reading and math) 1050 (old SAT)
- 79 percent had a high school cumulative GPA of 3.0 or higher.
Applications are processed on a rolling basis.
Some academic programs have additional requirements.
Deferred Admission
The Admissions Office at the Kent Campus may defer the admission of students who do not meet admissions criteria but who demonstrate areas of promise for successful college study. Deferred applicants may begin their college coursework at one of seven Regional Campuses of Kent State University. The Admissions Office at the Kent Campus will forward a student's application materials to a Regional Campus upon his/her request.
Home School/Alternative Education Policy
Kent State welcomes applications from home-schooled students. Students who are home-schooled may submit an equivalent diploma through a successful General Educational Development (GED) examination and an ACT/SAT score, or submit the following information for admission consideration:
- Written verification from the appropriate school district that the student has been excused from compulsory attendance for home education.
- ACT or SAT score.
- A portfolio of the student's work reflecting all secondary coursework completed. Students should complete a program of study that covers the material in the full college preparatory program recommended by the Ohio State Board of Education. Non-Ohio students should submit appropriate supporting documents as required by their home state. Please contact the Admissions Office for further details.
To apply for admission a New Freshman must submit:
- Online application.
- Application fee of $45.
- High school transcript.
- ACT and /or new SAT* Scores.
*New SAT scores will be accepted for fall 2017 and are recommended.
Admissions Timeline
- Apply Online Now!
- Jan. 15: Deadline to submit admissions application to be considered for freshman scholarships.
- Feb. 15: Priority deadline to submit the FAFSA to the federal processor.
- March 1: Deadline to submit freshman application for upcoming fall semester


text:
Texas Longhorns vs Prairie View A&MTue, April 30, 2013 - 6:30 PMDisch-Falk Field in Austin, TX
We are sorry, the date for this event has already passed. This event took place on 4/30/2013. Click here to view upcoming events for Texas Longhorns.
Still unsure? Check out our user reviews for:
Have a question? Need help? Call us at 800.477.5285


text:
Fleet-footed Olympian lost in history's dust
It wasn't until after George Washington Orton's death in New Hampshire in 1958, when someone thought to ask who won Canada's first Olympic medal, that his feats even became the answer to a trivia question.
Post a comment
You must sign in before you can post comments. If you are experiencing issues with your account please e-mail email@example.com.


text:
Included in "nothing new", but not reported above, is "no one cares". Wexler should concentrate more on programming and less on p.r. Give your viewers good day time programming, refocus your news division back to quality reporting (before Gousha bolted), instead of imitating TMZ with Dirty Dining and other stunts.
Time Warner considering 'me too' effect in Journal Broadcast blackout
NEW Commenting Policy
PLEASE NOTE: A Journal Sentinel subscription is now required to comment. You can read more about that transition in our FAQ. As always, our discussion guidelines and terms of use still apply to all comments and commenters. If you have any issues logging in to or using our commenting system, please let us know.
Welcome to our commenting system. Before you dive in, please note the following:
- You can log in to this system either through Facebook or using your JSOnline public profile. JSOnline public profile. Please note that your public profile login will be different than your JS Everywhere login.
- You can personalize your public profile with a photo. You can also use that profile to sign up for email newsletters and alerts.
- While we strive for a lively and vigorous debate of the issues, we do not tolerate name calling, foul language or other inappropriate behavior. Please see our discussion guidelines and terms of use for more information.
- While we do our best to moderate comments, we do not screen comments before they are posted. If you see a comment that violates our guidelines, please use the "Report Abuse" link to notify us of the issue.
- We reserve the right to close commenting on specific stories.
Sort by
If anyone doesn't want to read all the hype above here is a summation: "Nothing new".
Included in "nothing new", but not reported above, is "no one cares". Wexler should concentrate more on programming and less on p.r. Give your viewers good day time programming, refocus your news division back to quality reporting (before Gousha bolted), instead of imitating TMZ with Dirty Dining and other stunts.Hide replies
Agreed with this poster. What really got me was TMJ started doing "Mug shot of the day" on Facebook. Really? I have all but given up on TMJ4 for my local news, and I have DirecTV so I can still watch them if I choose so. I chose not to.
I for one hope Time Warner Cable stays firm. Heard an ad on the radio by WTMJ saying that TW
customers should demand a refund for not airing channel 4. Why is that their business, and
do we really think they worry about us getting a refund, after all it's only "pennies a day".
$6.00 or $7.00 a year to carry a local station starts to add up on our cable bill.Hide replies
Do I think my cable bill is too high? Yes. But that doesn't keep me from siding with TWC on this one. Wexler needs to get off the air with those ads - like we are being denied clean drinking water = not getting TMJ. If it weren't for the Packers games, I wouldn't even sniffed TMJ.
So if TWC pays JBG between 50 and 60 cents per subscriber per year, let's use 55 cents as an average, then for 26 days, TWC would theoretically owe me THREE POINT NINE CENTS. That's 55 cents divided by 365 days times the 26 day blackout. WOW, I'm going to be rich!Hide replies
"...a typical fee for a market the size of Milwaukee is 50 to 60 cents per subscriber MONTHLY." (My emphasis.)
Right. So, TWC probably should refund about 50 cents to the consumer. That's quite a windfall.
Frankly, other than the Packers, WTMJ isn't providing anything worth that 50 cents during the Summer months. Considering their ratings, they probably ought to try to get people to tune in at some point during the year for something other than football. AMC certainly understands the idea of having something worth watching throughout the year.
Yea, while I do appreciate the update, as mentioned below,
'nothing new here...move along please, there is nothing to report".
Kinda sad isn't it? And, the upswing in black outs is alarming.
So, while many here write off the CH>4 thing as irrelevant, what we
have playing out can be a litmus test for future endeavors.
Whereas, CH>4 may not having the following of many due in large part
to NBC presently not being as 'watchful' as CBS or ABC, the day may come
when a 'sit down' with say Fox stalls out, and heaven forbid
your Packers on Fox maybe compromised.
Should that day come heaven help us all.
Who still subscribes to cable? I went internet only 1 year ago. Best decision of my life.Hide replies
"of your life"?
TV is very important to you!
I do think it was kind of funny that you have a picture of a wedding that is probably yours and then indicate internet only is the best decision of your life.
If this is the best decision of your life...you need to get one
Goodbye Time Warner. The channel 4 thing doesn't bother me, but your price/value does.
The dispute with WTMJ doesn't bother me much, but I am angry that I am paying for Showtime and that has also been blacked out. Just made the switch to Directv. Have to wait about 10 more days for installation though. Bye Bye TWC!Hide replies
Irregardless of disputes, DirecTV just has better quality service. You will be happy. I made the change 3 years ago and haven't looked back. Unfortunately I still have TW for internet service because the only other option is AT&T in my area and their speed offerings in my area are lower than what TW offers for the same price as TW.
Also note - after your initial DirecTV contract expires, they'll jack your rates up to "regular pricing" just like TW does. However you can call DirecTV's customer support line and ask for discounts and they will oblige. I just called last month and was given a bunch of various discounts in various lengths which end up equating to about $40/mon savings on my bill.
I agree with your point, Creed but -1 for "irregardless."
LOL - It's a stupid habit of mine, like biting finger nails... I always type "irregardless" ... irregardless of whether I meant to or not. ;-)
And 1 for your mea culpa.
I switched to AT&T U-Verse the minute it became available in my area YEARS ago. Never is the choice to change providers more clear than when I am at someone's house who still has TWC. The service is not comparable. Not even close. U-Verse is 10 times better. Never going back to TWC.Hide replies
Really Corey - 10 times better. Please tell me how they are 10 times better.
i like U-Verse better as well.
I can't say if it's ten times better, but i like the guide, channels, better picture, multi-room dvr, amount of space on dvr, and price over TWC.
Treatment hit some of the advantages on the head - plus you can add in the wireless receivers so you don't have to string cable all over the house, the ability to change your premium channels online rather than sitting on hold for 30 minutes, and better response times if I need technical assistance - these are just a few more reasons why AT&T is better than TWC
HD picture quality is worse with AT&T. Internet is slower and capped. DVR is better. Price is the same.
Does AT&T U-verse lock you in a contract? Just asking...
Silvere63. No it is month to month. If you cancel service within the first 90 days, the installation costs, maybe passed along to you.
TMJ4 is a local yokel station,not to bright.
I appreciate Time Warner trying to keep subscriber fees from going up. I reallt don't watch tmj4 much if at all.
Prediction: TW will lose a few customers, but TMJ4 is going to suffer a major hit to advertising revenue due to 400,000 less potential viewers during this dispute, and overall apathy toward them. TMJ4 is going te be the big loser here financially.
Latest The Dudek Abides Posts
- Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.
- Rearranging on-air assignments at WTMJ-TV
- Marianne Lyles leaving WISN-TV morning show
- Video: Public schools 'suck,' says WITI reporter
- Last night's Packers score matched the game's TV ratings
- Ratings drama at Saga, Weigel stations
- Counterprogramming, WTMJ win preliminary election-night TV ratings
- Milwaukee radio ratings for October
- WZTI starts to air Christmas music the day after Halloween
- Political ads, retransmission revenue drive up Journal Communications earnings
Coming Soon to Theaters
Movie Listings: What's playing where this week
Opening Friday, July 28
- "Bad Moms"
- "Cafe Society"
- "Captain Fantastic"
- "Dishoom"
- "Jason Bourne"
- "Phantom Boy"
Opening Friday, Aug. 5
- "Nine Lives"
- "Suicide Squad"


text:
I have been told that Feynman deduced from a path integral formulation an equation that predicts the amount of time it would take for a diamond to 'jump' out of a box:
$t > \dfrac{x \Delta{x} m}{ h} $
where $x$ is the size of the box, $\Delta x$ is the distance the diamond must travel to leave the box and $m$ the mass of the diamond.
How would it be possible for a diamond to leave the box? What are the processes that happen over the stupendous time gap to allow the diamond to do this?


text:
Hot VWs February 1982 - Hot VWs Back Issues
February 1982
Don't Miss the Next Issue. Subscribe Now!Subscribe now to get the latest issue of Hot VWs Magazine.
PRO STREET TREATEric and Melanie Hurst, from Knoxville, Tennessee, wanted a show-and-go hot rod Bug, and worked with top craftsmen over four years to create their incredible '63 ragtop, complete with Kris Lauffer-built turbo-injected 2386cc engine! See all the details in the August 2016 issue of Hot VWs magazine, on-sale now!


text: Robert Pattinson: On and off set POSTED: 12:20 PM Nov 01 2012 UPDATED: 10:14 AM May 13 2015 Text Size: Small Text Medium Text Large Text Print Tweet As Robert Pattinson celebrates his birthday, join us for a look at the actor on and off the set. Comments The views expressed are not those of WCTI12.com, WCTI NewsChannel 12 or its affiliated companies. By posting your comments, you agree to accept our terms of use.


text:
Native Web Services, Part 1 - Build a WWSAPI Client
- Posted: Jul 22, 2009 at 7:11PM
- 10,885 views
Right click "Save as…"
With the Windows Web Services API (WWSAPI), you can connect your C/C++ client applications with web services. You can also create C/C++ server-side web service end-points. WWSAPI is new with Windows 7 (client) and Windows Server 2008 R2 (server). WWSAPI is also back-ported to all formally supported versions of Windows (client and server). The WWSAPI runtime library (WebServices.dll) is a native-code implementation of WS-* family of protocols for SOAP based web services.
WWSAPI enables several solution scenarios and benefits including:
1. Implement web services in native C/C++ code on both Windows client and server. C/C++ application developers have often requested this platform technology capability but were previously forced to write their own or interface their native-code solutions with managed-code wrappers.
2. Achieve interoperability with web services implemented using Windows Communication Foundation (WCF), ASP.NET XML Web Services, and even services implemented using non-Microsoft implementations of WS-* libraries.
3. Construct web services with minimal service startup time and minimal process working-set dependencies.
4. Use web services implementations in resource-constrained deployment environments.
5. Avoid native-management interop scenarios with potentially costly marshalling side-effects.
This is part 1 of a 2 episode series and focuses upon using WWSAPI from a client application. The example illustrates a client application using WWSAPI to interact with a "Sort Service".
Find sample code and additional technical details at
MSDN Code Gallery.
See part 2 of this series here.
Oops, something didn't work.
Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.


text:
5 Reasons Humanity Is Terrible at Democracy
Ask the average person what's wrong with government and you'll hear all about corrupt politicians, corporate lobbyists and shady backroom deals. But, of course, we elected those corrupt politicians, and the more you look at the situation, the more it appears that as people, we are just really bad at democracy. After all, science proves that ...
#5. Our Opinion on an Issue Is Based on How It's Worded
In the middle of the heated health care debate in 2010, the anchors at Fox News got a memo from the bosses telling them to start referring to the Democrats' plan as "government-run health insurance" rather than use the term "public option," which everyone else was using.
Why? Because CBS and NBC both ran polls showing that when you call it the "public" plan, up to 75 percent of the people are in favor -- after all, everybody likes public parks and public libraries, etc. It's a friendly word. But when polls inserted the word "government," support plummeted to 43 percent. The Exact. Same. Plan. You know, the same way that a lot more people bought canola oil after they changed the name from "rape seed oil."
"Rape was a good word before you humans fucked it up."
Likewise, only 34 percent of Americans say they strongly support "homosexuals" in the military. But a majority -- 51 percent -- strongly support "gay men and lesbians" serving in the military. That's right: You can increase the strongest support by a third by simply avoiding the "H" word. The "strongly oppose" group goes down by a third.
You can do this with virtually any issue. Try it (if you don't mind ruining your opinion of the voting public, that is). Ask us if public worker unions should be able to negotiate for their pay and people say yes. Change the wording to ask if they should be able to negotiate for higher pay, and opinion turns against them. What, did the first bunch think workers were negotiating for lower pay?
"We demand lower pay and less respect, and we won't stop working double shifts until we get it!"
Probably not. They probably thought nothing about the issue at all until the moment they were asked. We can't be educated on every issue, and the "don't know" option in a poll makes us sound like morons. So the respondent's brain probably just slapped together an opinion based on how the question made him feel at that moment. Remember that in most surveys, the most common unspoken answer is always, "Whatever it takes to get you off the phone, buddy. My burrito is getting cold."
"Yes, fine. Whatever. I support unrestricted eugenics programs for brown people. Can I get back to my vodka and soap operas now?"
But what about those of us who do follow the news? The problem there is ...
#4. Watching the News Actually Makes Us Stupider
So, you figure that the above results are simply skewed by people who are watching Cake Boss instead of the nightly news. But isn't there a smart core of people who keep the TV on CNN and thus know their shit? Not according to a study done during the 2010 election, which concluded that people who watch television news are more likely to get the facts wrong than the people who just flip past it on the way to watch wrestling.
"Star Trek re-runs make us comparatively well-informed voters!"
Whether they got their info from Fox News, MSBNC, the networks or even NPR, people who relied on those sources daily did worse when answering factual questions about election issues than people who used them only sporadically.
Why? Well, part of it is that if a politician makes a bullshit claim, the news still has to report it. So along with the hard information, you're getting spin, talking points, sound bites and other bullshit issued by people whose job it is to make you vote their way regardless of the facts. At some level, people are aware this is happening -- there are countless polls showing Americans don't have favorable views of television news. But TV also remains the country's largest source of news, which means there are a lot of people who don't trust it but then turn around and rely on it anyway.
He may be full of shit, but listening to him beats the hell out of talking to your family.
But it's not all the news media's fault. When we do hear the facts, we have countless defenses against them. Picture the facts as zombies, and your brain as the house where the survivors are holed up.
For instance, the vast majority of us think the news media are politically biased. You could simply say, "Well, duh, that means they probably are biased." But the problem is that all of us think the media are biased against us, regardless of our political affiliations. It's called the hostile media effect -- if you are passionate about your beliefs, you'll always perceive the news as being skewed against you. Researchers can show two opposing groups the same news clip, and both will come away saying that the clip was horribly skewed against their side. And even weirder, when later given a quiz about the facts presented in the clip, the two groups actually remember it differently.
"And then Glenn Beck screamed for 19 straight minutes and took a giant shit on his desk."
Then we have the curse that is confirmation bias -- the horrible brain glitch that makes countless superstitions possible. This is when the brain latches onto and remembers pieces of information that confirm what we believe but dismisses those that don't. The news media can dutifully report 10 straight studies that prove global warming, but then when the 11th casts some doubt, the skeptic can say, "See! I told you the scientists think it's bullshit!"
They've even done studies where a mixture of liberals and conservatives were presented with intentionally incorrect reports about hot-button issues (tax cuts, Iraq). When presented with authoritative corrections -- hard, inarguable evidence -- correcting the inaccuracies, the subjects continued to stick by the incorrect information if it agreed with their point of view. Nothing could change their minds. "What? Reality doesn't conform to my opinion? Shoot it in the head! Board the windows!"
"You'd best take them scientific studies back where ya' found 'em."
OK, so why can't people get their information from the experts? You know, the pundits! They have to be better than the news, right?
#3. Political Pundits Are Even Worse Than the News
On some level, you probably guessed that professional "shout political things angrily at the camera" guys like Keith Olbermann and Glenn Beck are, on some level, full of shit. But a statistical analysis on just how full of shit they are found results that were downright startling.
Punditry is all about predictions -- claiming boldly that if ___________ comes to power, the economy will be in ruins within a year, or if ___________ legislation passes, the nation will turn into a fascist nightmare (or a lawless orgy, or whatever). A 20-year study of pundits and their prognostications found that they performed significantly worse than, say, a monkey making political predictions by throwing its own feces at a chart. The hard-line partisan pundits were right a dismal 12 percent of the time.
The monkey had 19 percent accuracy -- 24 percent on the days he ate a lot of fiber.
But the really scary statistic is that the more famous a political pundit is, the worse his predictions are. There's a reason the Becks and Olbermanns of the world are the pundits everyone's familiar with: They're not giving us accurate predictions, but they are giving us predictions we like to hear, whether we care to admit it or not. Not just predictions we agree with, but bold, scary and outrageous predictions. They make for good entertainment.
The same study found that less-partisan pundits performed better (about as well as chance, aka the shit-tossing monkey). But these types also hedge their bets ("If X happens, America's economy might collapse, unless Z also happens, though I could be wrong"), which bores audiences to death. It's no surprise you don't find them at the top of the ratings.
Fair, well-reasoned political discourse doesn't show up well on a chalkboard.
No, we will only reward you for being full of shit. Are we starting to get a clearer picture of the voting public here? It's not what most people assume (aka, that everybody is just ignorant and obsessed with celebrity bullshit). There's an intentional bias toward bad information.
Why? Well ...


text:
Meet and Communicate with Fun Singles Near You on BBW Personals Plus
Register now to search thousands of members and post your FREE profile!
I am a single mother of two boys. They are my life. I do not work as my older boy is disabled with Autism/non-verbal. I like to watch T...
135223769 is a 30yr-old single woman in Clinton, IndianaView Profile


text:
Starting a new standard game, a player must choose between easy, normal, veteran, and elite modes. After beating the final boss, you can start New Game Plus. Are there also 4 difficulty levels for New Game Plus? If so, do you choose the difficulty again or does it carry over from your character's last game?
Upon accepting and finishing the quest that gives you NG+, you will be booted back to the initial character loading screen (where you can switch between characters etc.).
You can then choose to
You are not prompted to change the difficulty mode at any time (a pity in my eyes), so your difficulty setting is carried over.
You can ofcourse always change the difficulty setting if you want, as explained in this post.
so NG+ doesn't change that percentage but merely scales the level and items. you could, however, change your difficulty by playing LAN or Online mode.


text:
Manage Subscriptions
Log Out
Log In
Think you know it all? Even smart people can make big health mistakes.
Mistake No. 6 -- Getting too drunk
No email address was supplied by
To complete your registration on this site, please supply an address.
Please confirm or modify the email address to which you will have subscription offers sent.
For a more personalized experience, please supply the following optional information.


text:
I have a question about equation 6 in this paper.
Simplifying somewhat, the authors state the following
$$\int_0^{\infty} e^{-tL} dt = L^{-1}$$
$L$ here is a graph laplacian and therefore is a matrix. (Leave aside for the moment that $L$ is singular and thus make the above equation meaningless.)
To derive the equation, I first tried expanding $e^{-tL}$ into a series and integrating the individual terms in the hope that something clean comes out: $$\int_0^{\infty} e^{-tL} dt = \sum_{i=0}^\infty \frac{(-L)^i}{i!}\int_0^{\infty} t^i dt$$ which lead nowhere for me.
So I tried the alternative tack of just treating $L$ as if it were scalar. In that case, the first equation is obviously true.
My question is, can I treat the matrix $L$ in the exponent as if it were a scalar and just integrate it?
(Bonus question, since $L$ is a graph laplacian and therefore singular, why are the authors inverting it when they should know better?)


text:
6 Unintentionally Hilarious Songs by Fictional Characters
Once upon a time, no successful franchise was considered complete without a tie-in album or two. And no, we don't mean an official soundtrack -- we mean original songs, often sung by the cast, in character. Video game characters, wrestlers, superheroes, you name it -- they would all take time to release novelty singles as if part of some elaborate experiment to see if there's anything fans won't spend money on.
And yes, these tracks were often even more insane than you'd expect ...
#6. "Wise Guy," by Joe Pesci as Vinny Gambini
Columbia Records
We'll give you a moment to read that headline and try to puzzle through it. Trust us -- knowing the details isn't going to clear things up for you.
Joe Pesci has had a pretty interesting movie career, seamlessly switching between two types of roles: violent sociopaths (Goodfellas, Casino, etc.) and lovable losers like in My Cousin Vinny, where he plays the wise-cracking attorney Vincent LaGuardia Gambini, who has to defend his cousin from a false murder charge. Somehow, some way, through a chain of decisions that no human logic could ever follow, they had Pesci make an album where he sings as that guy.
20th Century Fox
"Joe Pesci may never play an angry New Jersey stereotype again; better monetize this while we can."
Thus into the annals of history was born the 1998 Pesci rap song "Wise Guy," from the album Vincent LaGuardia Gambini Sings Just for You.
Strangely, Pesci reinvents the character for the purpose of the song, quickly getting confused about which film he was making the album for. So he winds up talking about how his lawyer character is a violent murderer, describing him more like Tommy from Goodfellas:
If there's a witness on tape that they play,
Probably a broad that I used to lay,
The last one to talk was never ever found.
So we wind with a song about life as a gangster, rapped over a Blondie track, sung by a fictional incompetent lawyer who once showed up to a trial in an usher's suit.
20th Century Fox
"The bow tie: yes or no?"
After sitting through rap boasts straight out of a Simpsons parody, we get to what can sort of be described as the main "story" of "Wise Guy": Vinny talks about being ratted out by a girl he used to bang. In retribution, he runs over her brother, buries her father alive, and bangs her sister:
Her brother didn't like me, I hit him with a truck.
Her sister was a rip, everybody got a ride.
Her father was a rat, so I buried him alive.
And this is just one of 14 tracks! Three of which give Pesci a writing credit! And did we mention the album came out six years after the movie?
20th Century Fox
The world needed some time for "yoots" to become funny again.
#5. "Ignorance Is Bliss," by Bowser from Mario Bros.
In 1991, after years of convincing kids that reading is for losers who can't afford game consoles, Nintendo finally decided to give back to society and combat the problem of illiteracy ... with a song. That song was "Ignorance Is Bliss," an upbeat piece sung appropriately by Bowser, the Super Mario villain who's never figured out why repeated false imprisonment hasn't made Princess Peach fall in love with him yet.
Appearing on the official Nintendo album White Knuckle Scorin' (where it was performed by the band Jellyfish), "Ignorance Is Bliss" starts off innocently enough with Bowser kidnapping Peach to lure Mario and Luigi to his lair. Then, suddenly, the entire thing goes all There Will Be Blood after Bowser claims that he wants to use a magical book to turn Yoshi and his dinosaur family into oil.
With my magic book, I'll shower
Those clumsy lizards with my power
Until Dinosaur Land is nothing but fossil fuel.
But that's not really a problem because, get this: Bowser can't read.
My only problem with these spells
Is that I know not what they tell
So every hex leaves me perplexed ...
So that's why he keeps ignoring Peach's restraining orders.
More importantly, though, we also learn that the title of "Ignorance Is Bliss" might actually be referring to Peach being better off not knowing what Bowser is planning for her, what with lyrics like:
Princess Toadstool, I know you're frightened!
Mmm ... 'Cause if you knew just why you're here
Your fear would just be heightened.
By now you're probably wondering how "Ignorance Is Bliss" is supposed to fight illiteracy, seeing as here that's the only thing stopping a species-wide genocide. That's actually all covered in the official comic book included with the CD, which also provides all sorts of additional information about this story, like how Bowser needs all that oil to join OPEC:
There's a surprising crossover audience between children's games and international energy policy wonks.
... or how every time Mario defeats an enemy, he in fact gets a massive erection:
In the next panel he snorts ground-up invincibility star off Luigi's bare thigh.
It's like they immediately decided the already-bizarre world of Mario didn't provide enough material for a song by the main villain, so they go off the reservation and just start making up random shit that has never, ever been referenced in any of the games. After all, it's not like they had the option of, say, just not making the album at all.
#4. "The Man in Black," by The Undertaker
Mark "The Undertaker" Calaway needs no introduction if you're a pro wrestling fan, or even vaguely familiar with the WWE. For those who don't know, Calaway has been playing various incarnations of his magical Undertaker wrestling persona for more than 20 years, including stints as an unstoppable zombie and a mystical priest. Part of his performance includes entering the arena to gongs, church bells, organs, and other "dark" sounds, building up an ominous tone that is the polar opposite of The Undertaker's 1993 rap/spoken word single "The Man in Black."
The song, which is a part of WWF Superstars -- Wrestlemania: The Album, promisingly kicks off with nice guitar riffs and acceptably cheesy lyrics like:
The man in black has got a tombstone just for you!
But around 30 seconds in, playful keyboards and drum machines start pumping like the dead man of the WWE has suddenly been replaced by MC Hammer. Next, rapping with the same energy and dedication you'd expect from a narcoleptic math teacher (to the point that it appears to just be random lines he recorded without music), The Undertaker informs you that he's:
The most powerful entity in the World Wrestling Federation, slam jam death!
For some reason, it sounds eerily familiar.
The first part sort of makes sense, but what does "slam jam death" mean? Our best guess is that Calaway genuinely ran out of things to say and just shouted the first random thing that popped into his head. And considering that the majority of the song already consists of him repeating the phrase "the man in black" like a broken record, we're going to say that that is exactly what happened here.
We just can't figure out why ...
Actually, listen to the end of the song -- the last several seconds are the sound of his footsteps and finally a door opening, like they just kept rolling as Calaway got bored and decided to go grab some lunch.