salamangkero

Oh. So if I just up and poisoned a thousand civilians within a 2 km radius from our house and these civilians ae quite varied on all aspects like religion, race, color and philosophies, it will not count as a genocide? II have always been under the impression that genocide meant killing people. Lots of people. Ugh, this be the curse of the discombobulated mind.On a side note, I once heard this joke:A: If I'm the President of US, I'd kill all the Jews and one clown.B: Why the clown?A: See, nobody cares about the Jews!

I so agree. One of the more readily apparent uses of this is in organizing content on your page. For another demo, if it is not too much, click here. As you can see, the links are sorted by category. Using the script avoids the visual clutter typical of the merest link directories. I'd like to add, if it is not too much, that there is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. It is not too complicated, though. It's a few letters shorter although it does nothing too spectacular. function hide(obj){document.getElementById(obj).style.display="none";}function show(obj){document.getElementById(obj).style.display="block";}It is what I actually use. Be reminded, though, that although you do not present all the content in these divs unless the user desires so, the browser will still download all the stuff in those divs whether the user actually views it or not. It goes to say that this approach is not desirable if you plan to pop long texts or humongous images in and out of visual existence. Unless, of course, you are a cold hearted 3@$+@rd who does not care if the page loads too slowly for us dialup users. Otherwise, it'd probably be better to use an actual hyperlink

This... altered view on reliving one's life is, well, quite interesting. So if it were true, I could very well be on my second or billionth life but most certainly not my first, as evidenced by the mere existence of the deja vu phenomenon I've encountered. However, there is one grave flaw I have observed in this theory. If, indeed, what goes down in history is a person's first shot at life, then we shouldn't be hearing of anyone encountering deja vu. As a matter of fact, we shouldn't even come to know of such a phenomenon. If deja vu really is the result of a glimpse into an event in a former life, then everyone who had been remembered in history and, also, have encountered deja vu will: 1. Be on his/her first attempt at living a life. 2. Have had a glimpse of a previous life. Quite contradictory if you ask me. It's very interesting, though. Your ideas had my mental gears a-running.

I beg to differ. Of course we cannot readily expect a humanoid robot on the market, ready to do our bidding, with sufficient intelligence to interact with us the way we normally do (e.g. talking) There are already "smart" roaming vacuum cleaners in the market today, cleaning your house and moving 'round obstacles. Also, I'd like to point out that just because we do not readily interact with today's robots does not mean that they aren't doing anything for us. For instance, I think an average car is assembled by at least three robots. No, again, not humanoid. For all we care, they could be a mere arm that does its tasks repeatedly. Robots are also responsible for the manufacture of a lot of canned goods, carbonated drinks and even bars of chocolate. So in the defense of robots, I'd say they have been of more use to you than you claim to have been to them. No, it's nothing personal

True, true. Scientists today are growing nerve cells in limited numbers to better understand how they do parallel processing. Maybe one day, time will come when a vast network of simple processors could be fitted into a hull the size of a trashcan. Then, we'd have ourselves an R2D2

The parapsychologist, Carl Jung, once coined the term synchronocity: a phenomenon characterized by seemingly meaningful coincidences (for example, suddenly calling to mind, out of the blue, memories of a high-school classmate only to receive a call from him later on in the day); deja vu is said to be one of the manifestations of this synchronicity.I've read the wikipedia entry and I was shocked to find that there are different kinds of deja vu. I had no idea deja vu actually encompasses different phenomena and what I knew to be deja vu was but only one of them.I think subliminal stimuli, dreams and conscious thought factor into a deja vu in the making.For example, you could very well be in a classroom listening to the teacher. Your conscious thought is focused on the lecture, effectively overriding other stimuli from leaking into your conscious thoughts. However, it could very well be that you are overhearing talk of something, let's say a hotel lobby. We could very well be unconscious that descriptions of this hotel lobby is secretly being encoded into our memory. Indeed, we'd have no idea of it since our mind is pre-occupied with this lecture.Now, dream. There is a theory that dreaming is like a survival strategy machine where the mind tries out random possibilities and attempts to predict the outcome. We all know nitroglycerine is highly unstable but ever and anon, we may dream of ourselves, or someone else, shaking nitro and ending up in fine pieces. This is how the mind, through simulation, re-affirms that nitro, indeed, is dangerous.Sometimes, the dreaming mind might retrieve from our memory something we are not aware we know, like our hotel lobby, for example. From this stealthily encoded data, our mind could very well conjure us a scenario where we'd be in this lobby when the bomb goes off.Now, let's say you have finally made it to the hotel in question. Entering the lobby, we'd get that strange feeling that we have been here. In reality, we have our suspicion that we have dreamed of this. True enough, we have; what is eerie is the accuracy of that dream owing to a conversation we have unknowingly overheard.Well, that's just my n cents on deja vu concerning places. I'm not so sure how deja vu for experiences works. As a matter of fact, I have no idea how deja vu really works.Then again, it could just be the Matrix reprogramming something.

Oookay. Allow me the audacity to give a hypothetical situation:Today's pre-school teacher has more than her handful, what with flying scissors, books and other toys on wheels that lay dangerously on the floor. Tomorrow's teacher will be driven insane, screaming, "Don't bang/hurl/throw/pee on/break/damage/kick/punch those )@mn laptops!"Today's high school teacher is more than harried with missing test tubes, lost mouse balls, "misplaced" hammers, vanishing keyboards and even pilfered sheets of paper. Perhaps tomorrow's teacher will be dreading the loss of yet another laptop?Allow me yet a simpler story:Dear Diary, My name is Angela. I am known to be a bully. Today, I punched Agnes in the gut but the second hit slipped and hit her lunch spilling orange juice on her homework. Her mom was furious 'coz I hit on her precious daughter but everyone else was indifferent 'coz Agnes is a total 3!+(# anyway. I hate Agnes :lol:Dear Diary, My name is Angela. I am known to be a bully. Today, I punched Agnes in the gut but the second hit slipped and hit her lunch spilling orange juice on her homework. Her mom was furious 'coz I hit on her precious daughter. The teacher was furious because that meant Agnes can't work until the laptop's replaced/repaired. The principal is furious because that laptop was the school's property. My mom was furious because this is gonna be the third time I damaged a laptop so it means she's gonna have to pay up. I hate Agnes

I'm not sure about this brain as mouse chip but I do know that yes, our scientists have been able to connect to our brain. No, it's not like chips we'd just slide in. It's more like the Matrix's "plug me in" socket. I saw a feature on connecting a camera to a blind man's head so that he could see and yes, they did pull it off. Again, yes, scientists can connect to the human brain, although in quite limited ways, of course

I'm from the Philippines. I'm a 20 yo student living in the capital city of Manila. I am what outspoken activists would call apathetic but no matter, I'm only numb where certain things are concerned. I do love my country, even though I prefer to use English.I too, graduated from a Catholic High School. No, I am technically an agnostic, or probably an animist. I am no sage on the Philippine culture but I do have a healthy pedestrian's viewpoint on life here.How about it? Do I qualify? If I do, message me on the Trap 17 inbox; I rarely check after my own posts

Ahh, yes. Google Moon. Hey, didja know what happens when you zoom on the moon's terrain all the way in? You'll finally see what the moon's made of :lol:If my memory serves correct, this was also part of Google's April Fool's pranks, along with Google Gulp and all other pranks

Ditto. No, I haven't gotten myself a mic yet but I'm now wondering the same thing. First, I clicked the links but I only got to pages that sell media or a free studio download, where I could create my own music video. I found nothing about searching for music by humming. I viewed the (tabby) page source, hoping to find a .swf file. I didn't find anything but I did find something about ActiveX and Javascript. I do vaguely remember seeing the term ActiveX on my old Firefox but I'm now using Firefox 2 and I have no idea what I'm doing... or saying, for that matter. I also tried viewing the page in IE and Opera. Strangely, though, it seems I can view it only in Firefox. Well, there you have it. Will anyone out there tell me how it's gonna work? If not, uhm, just tell me something nice Just kidding. Happy Holidays everyone

I am inclined to dispute it is the "correct" way but I have no doubt it is interesting. Another version: "Because people choose to continue in their evil ways," God replied. "I didn't choose that. Why am I suffering?" Needless to say, I absolutely lurve the last line I positively encourage all subsequent quotes to end with the same line, if possible

Wow. Last I've heard of such systems was about three years ago. Back then, it was still a thesis in our school and they meant to deploy it on cellphones. It's amazing to see it a reality now.I usually search for songs online by the few fragmented lyrics I manage to retain in my head but I remember a time when all I had was a tune. No words, no phrase, no lyrics, nada, but it was a very catchy tune. I did spend about 5 years searching for that song, which was Alanis Morisette's Ironic.Oh, how ironic, indeed, that this technology should surface when I needed it no more.I'm pretty sure it's gonna be useful, though. I'll be bookmarking the site just in case, heaven forbid, I catch a whiff of another unworded tune. Oh wait, $#!+, I just remembered something. A catchy tune... with words... of a foreign non-English language!Gawd! Now I need to find a microphone!

I have a question, then. I, for one, would probably be crucified by a lot of outspoken activists here in our country as an apathetic. I do not scream or squeal or jump around like an idiot when our boxer wins, when a billiards magician bags the bacon or when our beauty pageant contestant trips and, consequently, wins. I am much more coherent writing in English than in our own language. Political events hardly concerning me do not get the least bit of attention from me. I like watching foreign films more; it was quite rare that I actually have seen one of our own films. I haven't been to our own tourist spots because I hate traveling. Does that mean I am not patriotic? In my defense, I'd say I love my country, both the parts I have seen and the beauty that lies unseen. I don't have to go to some museum to view putrefying artifacts just to feel something stirring in my breast. I may go and work abroad but I'd be sending the money back home anyway. I do write in English a lot but I also have other poetic compositions written in our native tongue. Even some of the English works I have exalt my homeland. I would be more than honored to die for my country but I'd prefer to live on, employing stealth and deceit, if necessary, to see her triumph against what holds her down. I may kill the really, REALLY, REALLY poor people, to end their sufferings but I also wouldn't squirm at committing genocide, if that will ensure the progress of my beloved nation. I may ignore or scoff at the ignorant, pathetic masses gathering in swarms around some landmark, protesting the most recent political issue, but it's more of scorn for their gullibility and malleability than for their living conditions, or the way they dress or speak. (One of the things I hate is an activist screaming for something she has only the faintest notion of) You won't see me in rallies, barricades or picket lines. I won't even vote, given the chance. However, rest assured that I will build libraries, repair roads and assist my fellow citizens by giving employment, not money (like some politicians do) So does an apathetic like me who is hardly involved in stereotyped "patriotic" activities fail, by definition, as a patriot?

Oh dear, I don't think I can stomach this. For one, it has references to an omnipotent being in a belief I positively abhor, but let's just assume that were not the case. Believe me, I'd be speaking from experience here (which, if my memory serves correct, was supposedly the best teacher, only that he/she gives the exams before the lesson) I did once cease worrying about the immediate future and went on a que sera sera spree. Yes, I do agree that worrying is optional but it is also essential. It's pretty much optional in the same way that breathing is optional. Also, I'd think that productivity involves activity. True, productivity frees some time but it also consumes some, since the activity involved in productivity consumes the same time as well. Lastly, I'd refuse to stop analyzing life. True, all these talk about war and peace, nature, economy, politics, blackholes, warp drive, antimatter engines, eldritch lingua obscura spells, wormholes and eleven dimensions may make my head hurt as hell but at the very least, I am happy that, for the moment, my mind has been occupied with somewhat worthwhile things. As they say, an idle (non-analyzing) mind is the devil's workshop. So if God wanted us to stop analyzing, consequently idling our minds, ultimately turning them into workshops by which the devil might craft his (or her, probably her) tools, I have no other choice but to conclude that God and the devil are one and the same. I know I have been audacious enough with what I said but allow me a parting story: "God," asked man. "Why is there so much suffering in this world?" "Because your ancestors ate the forbidden fruit," God replied. "Can't you just have forgiven them?" "Haha! No."

Well, I happen to love my legs; I have no qualms about walking from place to place. However, one thing I totally hate is sitting in the same cramped space for hours. Such is the reason I abhor traveling.If, however, teleportation technology was perfected in the safest manner, I wouldn't mind traveling to all the places I haven't been to. Well, thankfully, though, I have other alternatives: get a larger vehicle or travel on my own (which would suck because then I'd have nobody at my beck and call)

Your situation sure struck me as ironic. See, if sadness is your "comfort" zone, then you find your happiness in that, even though you may or may not recognize it. When you feel "happy", on the other hand, you are thrust out of your comfort zone, hence, you become unhappy.I'm not saying it is quite paradoxical in your case; as a matter of fact, I deny it is anywhere near ambivalent. For one, you seem aware of the symptoms or indications of sadness and anger. You also have a strong idea of what constitutes a happy person, thus, you have been highly able to determine when you are happy or when you are not.Allow me to point out, however, that you have, whether you are aware of it or not, defied these social constructs. In other words, you are revel in what the majority of the world considers depressing and you have acquired an abhorrence in anything that positively agrees with almost everyone else.Well, there you have it. I have another theory at the back of my mind but I fear it is not exactly suitable for posting at the moment

If this information helps any, I know a lot of people, including me, who'd rather play games in the dead of the night. I mean, it's much quieter, you have less distractions and the atmosphere is no longer too hot (We live in the tropics) My mom said if I don't follow the natural Circadian cycle (i.e. normal hours of sleep) I'm bound to lose weight.If it also helps discombobulate people, I also know some chubby gamers, some so-so gamers and some skinny gamers. Given that, I am inclined to doubt there is any strong correlation between gaming intensity and body weight

Au contraire, they have already invented one. Although it only teleported something infinitesimal, an electron or photon, I think, an equally infinitesimal distance, just a few nanometers.If walking is a problem, though, we could chop your legs off and install bionic limbs. I hear they're making great advances in bionic technology.If you are loathe to lose your limbs, though, we could also have an electronic wheelchair. See, there are lots of ways to get around and I doubt teleportation is actually needed for petty and trivial matters like scaling short distances

Oh, I thought it was the humuhumu nukunuku wakawaka. Oh well.I just wonder, since I've also encountered this "word" a lot, does supercalifragelisticexpliadocious count as a valid word?

I've never heard of a more ridiculously hasty generalization, but I suppose we all have the freedom of expression. First off, cars would run on a pollution free environment, only assuming that humanity will have found a non-polluting fuel alternative by then. What if, for example, we manage to synthesis an alternative to diesel or gasoline only to find out, 30 years later, that whatever it is decays into CFC's or HCFC's in a decade or two? Second, not all terrorist funding comes from countries whose economy are heavily dependent on oil. I've never heard of a more preposterous and racist statement; it is very little different from actually saying all middle-eastern countries in Asia are terrorist nations. Really, shame on thee! Third, I doubt debts will be cleared just like that. I think, more than ever, developing countries will be even more aggravated. Remember that we, third-world countries, do not readily have free access to the newest technology, including whatever alternative to oil your chemists might cook up. A running joke in our country is the way our government exaggerates the benefits of having the "new second-hand" helicopter/plane/tank graciously donated by the US. The loss of oil will virtually cripple our economy while countries like US or Japan will probably just say, "There's no more oil? Oh well, C'est la vie." (That is, of course, assuming the citizen knows, at least, some French) Gawd, that'd be a nightmare. I've heard, though, that Japan is developing fuel cell technology, that is simply speaking, a small fusion reactor. (It fuses hydrogen and oxygen to produce water and energy) I understand that the raw ingredients are readily available in seawater, but I cannot imagine a road full of cars running on fuel cell. Over here, with poor street drainage, atrocious traffic jams and numerous vehicles, that could easily mean an ankle-deep flooding... in bright sunshine. Really, it's a nightmare to live in our country when oil runs out. For your sake, guys, I do hope you'd have better luck

Ah, but that is exactly one of the things that complicates it. How do we "align" the ship in the way of the wind? If we just let it be, it will, like any object subject to wind flow, align itself to provide the least resistance to the wind and, consequently, the least thrust. If we corrected the ship's alignment with rockets, then we'd probably be doing it a lot that we might as well use them to propel the ship instead of just correcting its orientation on a, more or less, uniform flow. Also, it's not exactly like the sails in the ships, I think. The fiction book I've read has some illustrations (it was a kid's book, okay) and the ship looked pretty much like a long, thin cylinder connected to a parachute. The solar winds are caught by the "parachute". The ship itself, on the other hand, presents its narrowest side to the sun so we don't get our broadside bombarded by deadly radiation. Yes, I have watched Disney's movie, Treasure Planet. No, I didn't think of our ships that way. I did like the fabric they used for the sails, though. I digress. I will have to disagree at this point. Space is not exactly empty, although, for pedestrians, it could very well be. There still do exist particles in space, although in not the same density as it is on earth. I'm not sure of the figures but, for the sake of exaggerated illustration, let's say there is at least an atom for every square mile. I know it's not much but it's also far from nothing. The bulk of these particles come from the sun and most of them are moving away from the sun. This is what is called the solar wind. Yes, it does affect anything with mass but, more importantly, a bigger factor in harnessing this energy is the surface area. I do agree that we don't build aero-dynamic ships; au contraire, we have to create the exact opposite. We don't want ships so streamlined that solar winds hardly affect it. What we need are ships so built that we collect as much wind as possible. We could build sheet-like, conical or parabolic ships to capture the winds roght onto the hull. That will, however, expose much of the ship to the deadly rays of the sun. Such ships would also be hard to maneuver and require constant correction. In the event of a solar flare... well, those things sure fly at immense speeds I have little doubt everyone will be toasted withing a few seconds. If we use sails, however, on a cylindrical ship (quite frankly speaking, it looked no different from the rocket ships we use here on earth), we can harness the same energy using sturdy sails. We can maneuver the ship fairly swiftly by tilting the sails pretty much the same way ancient mariners did with their sails long ago. For solar flares, well, we just need hull reinforcements on the "bottom" of the ship, that is the bu++ facing the sun, not the whole ship. Yes, the sail could get damaged but we could always repair or replace it. Much better, we could retract it before the solar flare arrives; I believe we do have time for that. The only problem, though, of these pencil-shaped ships will be the space to store supplies in. I have very little doubt that those large disc or parabola-shaped ships will have more space to stash food, clothing, Internet and p0rn. In a slim cylinder ship, we'd probably only have space for food and p0rn. Bah! Who needs clothes! I agree that there are a lot of sufferings but, believe it or not, we will need to find another Earth pretty soon. We are quickly running out of resources and, even considering that we quit using fossil fuels, we're also running out of space. If a Utopian society seems too altruistic to be true, it probably is. Besides, we may be predisposed to assume that we'd never get to see the light, figuratively, in our lifetimes. The least we could do is think of our children's children's future. (I'm tempted to add something about poverty and hunger being aspects of human evolution called natural selection but it might be too much) Lastly, proponents of Ptolemy's geocentric model also told Nicolaus Copernicus that he was wasting his time and look where we are now

Finally! An inter-stellar propulsion/impulsion system that does not rely on the warp drive that seems to be the shallow talk of the town nowadays. Nothing like the basics I think Solar Sails could only do so much, I guess, while we're "near" the sun, that is, within the Heliosphere. I've once read a fiction book on this back in high school and the main problem seemed to be objects eclipsing parts of the sail. It is very much the same as an uneven (and turbulent) wind blowing on a ship's sails. The part shrouded in shadow will exert a lesser "pull" on the craft, veering it laterally into that very direction. I suppose, however, that the sails, once the craft exits the heliosphere, might be retracted, to be unfurled once more in the presence of another nearby star. The main problem, though, is ensuring that the craft remains moving through interstellar space. Inertia can only do so much in a medium continuously battered by turbulent winds from different stellar sources. Even rockets can only go so far. Even assuming that we can penetrate the heliosphere of a different star, it will not be too long until we are also blown away by the same stellar winds, even assuming that we have retracted or cut off the solar sails. We could, however, approach at an angle, very much like comets, however, I have nary an idea regarding the calculation of the entry speeds and angles to launch the craft into an orbit around the star, using gravity as a catapult to reach the inner parts of the stellar system. The main problem I see, though, is actually entering another star's heliosphere. See, if the craft remains stuck or drifting in interstellar space, it will not be long before the ship eventually loses energy. As far as I know, interstellar space has temperatures that reach quite near absolute zero. True. we could travel to the edge of the solar system in pretty much the same way ancient mariners did, but for interstellar space, we need a propulsion/impulsion system far faster than solar sails.

I do like the book David Copperfield, by Charles Dickens, although I do not like it with to intense a passion. I do, in general, like classic books better than these modern-day fangirl-driven books that are too easy to digest, very much like cheese, if you'd pardon the pun.Ah, I also remembered reading a Tom Sawyer book when I was a kid but I didn't understand a single word of it back then. I did, however, find me a copy of Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn and I did enjoy it.I've just finished reading Robert Louis Stevenson's Treasure Island and I can't quite describe how I felt cheated by Disney's movie, Pirates of the Carribean, again, my apologies for the pun. I've started reading on his other works; I've borrowed an old, brown, fragile and thick copy of his works from the library. Hopefully, it will tide me over through Christmas break

It would seem so in my case: A search for the keyword "Salamangkero" shows my blog at either 1st or 2nd place while the main site itself is at a pitiful #10. I'm positive it's also about updating frequently, not just the number of inbound links. I mean, I have to compete with an imdb site by updating my blog regularly just to keep my blog at #1. About a forum reaching top Google results, it is not unheard of, I suppose. However, I guess it mostly depends on how the forum is implemented. Like mbacarra said before me, if the forum outputs pages in static html, it'd have a greater chance to reach the top of Google search results but, let's face it, this implementation pretty much sucks. Another approach is to use PHP or JSP, with a database management system like MySQL or PostGre. However, I don't think Google is able to access the content of dynamic pages, especially if a user is required to log in before viewing the page. By way of example, a search for the words "neopets jelly" will show the Neopets Jelly World page at the top. That, my friends, is due to the fact that we have a lot of pages elsewhere linking to that page as the Neopets' Jelly World. However, look at the cached text; it shows nothing remotely connected with jelly. What it does show is the Neopets login page. As a matter of fact, all Google results for Neopian pages show very similar cached texts. So it's not just simply about updating your site often or how many links point to you. We should also consider the types of pages we have on our sites, are they HTML, PHP, JSP, ASP, PHTML or whatnot?