|
Confidently cheerful while covered in blood (8)
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
SANGUINE
Confidently
Sangue = French (and possibly Latin?) for blood
covered "in"
|
|
|
|
|
The answer is right - so you are up tomorrow - but you're over-thinking the solution!
SANGUINE means both "Confidently cheerful" and "covered in blood": Sanguine Synonyms, Sanguine Antonyms | Thesaurus.com[^]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
There is only one person who would fit in the overlap of the Venn diagram of those two meanings: Conor McGregor.
|
|
|
|
|
Not Sissy Spacek? 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Movie Quote Of The Day
Seems somehow appropriate after yesterdays events...
Blood has no nationality.
Which movie?
|
|
|
|
|
El chef de cuisine : Vladimir the Vampire
Rules for the FOSW ![ ^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
Unthinkable[^]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Belgium stays alive!
In Word you can only store 2 bytes. That is why I use Writer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dracula?
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
A River Runs Through It.
Saddly
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're mistaking this for the SoapBox. The Lounge isn't the place for this as it's going to get out of hand very quickly.
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Trolls be trolls.
veni bibi saltavi
|
|
|
|
|
I thought it was the soapbox?
If you open a new tab in IE and changes pages too soon the address of the original tab gets changed. Not the first time this has happened.
Did it get moved to SB then?
|
|
|
|
|
Refugees are flee away from attack like these looking got safety and live. Do not assume them doing it.The terrorist attacks were the work of Demons under the permissive will of God. The attacks were part of the Cycles of National Cursing to terrorize the nation
modified 23-Mar-16 9:09am.
|
|
|
|
|
Time to send in Sam and Dean Winchester then. What's a Cycle of National Cursing? Is it a government approved holiday where we all get to swear as much as we want?
This space for rent
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: we all get to swear as much as we want?
All at full pay of course.
There are two types of people in this world: those that pronounce GIF with a soft G, and those who do not deserve to speak words, ever.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: What's a Cycle of National Cursing? Is it a government approved holiday where we all get to swear as much as we want?
At cyclists, obviously. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
"Where do minds belong? : Intelligence could have been moving back and forth between biological beings and machine receptacles for aeons" : [^] by Caleb Scharf, "director of astrobiology at Columbia University in New York. He is the author of Extrasolar Planets and Astrobiology (2009), which won the Chambliss Astronomical Writing Award."
A wonderful antidote to the latest prognostications of Kurzveil, Hawking, Musk, et. al., that we are about to ravaged by our frankensteins-on-their-way-to-sentience.
I find this 3100 word essay a masterpiece of expository writing with scientific, cosmological, and philosophical content, and I think many of you would enjoy it (that means you: Marc Clifton ... unless you are in your "contrarian" quantum state
As someone who has pretensions to be a writer of fiction (not just mere lies), I find the idea of an evolved race of machines making the decision to relinquish virtual immortality and choose transient biological incarnation ... fascinating. Take that one step further, as Scharf does, and consider the possibility that we (homo saps) are the "ghosts of machines past" (if so, obviously degenerate, hell-bent on self-destruction and the destruction all other species and biota ... Scharf does not say, or imply).
Aeon.co, and Quanta (quantamagazine.org), have become two websites where I regularly read articles on science, philosophy, biology, and more. For me, they represent the zenith of excellent digital publishing. Yeah, there's TED, which is so decorated with beautiful young people with spotless minds singing hosannas to a technoid future ... but, TED just doesn't play as well in my head (age ? cynicism ? stoicism ? allergy to euphoria ?).
enjoy, Bill
«The truth is a snare: you cannot have it, without being caught. You cannot have the truth in such a way that you catch it, but only in such a way that it catches you.» Soren Kierkegaard
|
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: I find the idea of an evolved race of machines making the decision to relinquish virtual immortality and choose transient biological incarnation ... fascinating
Apart from being completely silly, you mean.
No-one wants a "downgrade"; that's not how the universe works (don't fall for all the nonsense about entropy).
Would you swap with a dog? An ant? An amoeba?
The voice of reason: "I can do everything better than you, why should I want to be you?"
Without the voice of reason, stories are no more than fairy tales.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I would be disappointed if my post did not elicit at least one snort from a carp.
However:Mark_Wallace wrote: No-one wants a "downgrade"; that's not how the universe works
It's too bad that the late Stephen Jay Gould is not still here so he could know that a major thesis of his seminal work on evolution (post Darwin), the disappearance of complex adaptations over time when they no longer promote gene transmission (a possibility as valid as that of a ... now ... not directly functional adaptation being used for some other purpose ... what Gould referred to as the process of exaptation), is invalid according to you.Mark_Wallace wrote: Without the voice of reason, stories are no more than fairy tales.
Without imagination the voice of the heart, and the child, is not heard.
How you are able to see this essay, full of a western scientific rationality grounded in hypothesis, theory, and experiment, that everyone from Marcus Aurelius to Occam to Darwin to Russell would applaud, as being irrational: that's beyond me ! Occam's Razor would suggest you did not actually read it, or simply used it as a mirror to preen your image of yourself as "rational" in.
Stephen Jay Gould:
"Included in this "almost nothing," as a kind of geological afterthought of the last few million years, is the first development of self-conscious intelligence on this planet—an odd and unpredictable invention of a little twig on the mammalian evolutionary bush. Any definition of this uniqueness, embedded as it is in our possession of language, must involve our ability to frame the world as stories and to transmit these tales to others. If our propensity to grasp nature as story has distorted our perceptions, I shall accept this limit of mentality upon knowledge, for we receive in trade both the joys of literature and the core of our being." from "Literary Bias on the Slippery Slope," in "Bully for Brontosaurus."
«The truth is a snare: you cannot have it, without being caught. You cannot have the truth in such a way that you catch it, but only in such a way that it catches you.» Soren Kierkegaard
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: what Gould referred to as the process of exaptation), is invalid according to you.
Not at all.
The very basis of natural evolution (or "shotgun evolution", or whatever you will), whether universal or genetic, is that many branches will occur, and most will fail.
And being the best at something doesn't mean being the most likely to survive -- many's the class that's died out because it adapted too well to doing too few things (efficient breeders, for example, have often been known to eat themselves to extinction, by consuming all their resources).
I doubt very much that you would find a class or species that has devolved, however. You might find that several more advanced branches died out, leaving only lesser branches, but no species goes backward down the chain.
Just look at a list of the "fittest". Earthworms and grass stand high on the list, but no-one and nothing wants to devolve into an earthworm or grass.
Viewing ourselves as the most perfect beings, which every other animal, plant, or robot aspires to becoming, is pure arrogant narcissism -- and building rationalisations in an effort to make that belief credible doesn't fall far short of maniacal religious fervour.
BillWoodruff wrote: Without imagination the voice of the heart, and the child, is not heard.
Without imagination, all you can write is cr@p stories. What's your point? That has nothing at all to do with what I said -- and the last person who called me unimaginative ended up eating their words very shamefacedly. As did the one before that. Etc.
If you wish to write children's fairy stories -- all imagination and no common dog -- go 'ed; but even children hate it when they read something that makes no sense to them.
If, however, you wish people to involve themselves in your stories, you have to make them believe in the stories, so the stories have to make sense.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
