Pentium M vs Pentium 4 - Page 8

You want me to analyze the syntax of that sentence? Fine, here goes:

"YOU DO NOT *NEED* AN ADVANCED DEGREE TO BECOME WEALTHY, HAPPY, OR SUCCESSFULL IN LIFE."

They are one collective entity because they are all "things that you do not have need an advanced degree to achieve". It implies that all three objects can be achieved under the same condition "without the necessity of a advanced degree".

The problem with the statement is that, no corroborative statements are given to "success" and "happiness". All previous arguments adhere to wealth.

Since the statement puts "wealth" as a parallel to "success" and "happiness", it implies that wealth is not something that generates success and happiness. Rather it is a quanlity that is analogous to success and happiness.

This means that "advanced degree" is fundamentally different from wealth. Advanced degree is a cause and wealth is a result. The statement states this cause does not end in this result. But previous arguments have stated both as causes. Previously your argument was to establish that wealth and advanced degree are mutually exclusive causes. But now wealth has turned into a result.

dashby, let's not confuse literary theory with semantics. When making arguments for the sake of proving a point, obviously figurative language cannot be used.

Don't apologize...I found the interpretation of Dr, Seuss very interesting. But Frankly literature can easily be analyzed in this way. Works of philosophy, however, should do the opposite, i.e. state things as they are in the most straightforward sense.

42

No hard feelings, and yes, it's going to become *quiet* again because I have to go to some business meetings this morning.

It's been fun - not really.

Here's a thought that will blow your mind.

THERE ARE NO RULES!

I have a music degree, and one of my music composition professors always said, "It takes 20 years to learn the rules and then 20 years to forget them."

For example, there's a general *rule* that you don't play a major 7th note while phrasing over a dominant (flat) 7 chord.

However, I've heard many well respected artists intentionally break that rule and it sounds musical. It's funny when I watch musicians who know the rules, then break them, it's even more musical and entertaining, than those who don't know the rules, and are breaking them because of ignorance.

What is point of this musical analogy, you ask? There are no rules!

You seem extremely rule bound, hence my jokes and hints to go back and code - shutup already. You are *too* logical. Ever heard of that? Yes, it does exist, to the point that being so overly logical or confined within what your limited knowledge of the rules are - in the grand scheme of things (and making yourself stay within those ABSOLUTE rules) is flawed.

Free your mind! Yes, very Matrix like, but there's alot of truths like that in the Matrix.

Bye now, off to MAKE MONEY! Because Money is the only important thing in the world - HA!

PM rules!

Intel has fully split its battle into two fronts, the western front (desktop) and the eastern front (notebook). Intel has no plans to mix the processors from the two fronts. With the new 90nm chips, the separation becomes clear. The western front will consist of high frequency, long stage processors. The eastern front will have low frequency, short stage procs. Funny, the eastern front occupies the same niche as the Athlon XP's used to. This strategy makes a lot of sense, as notebooks do require lower frequencies. However, just because the current Centrino's are slower than the Northwood, doesn't mean all low freq/short stage procs will be slower than the high speed/long stage procs. This means that when comparing the Dothan and the Prescott, which occupy exactly the two extremes, the highest end of the two may have the same performance overall. Notice I said overall, b/c the two extremes perform well at some operations and not well at others.

Sorry, out of office on official business (like my abuse of the word "office"?).

I was trained to carry out arguments similar to delta's style. As I was taught clear logic can only be expressed by clear language. If anyone can second guess what you mean, then you have failed to materialize a solid idea.

With that said, I think I can defend EDR's points better (no offense buddy).

Let us establish a few things as grounds for our argument of wealthy individuals are better than highly educated individuals.

1. Wealthy is defined by economic abilities, i.e. a large bank account, high cash flow, or net worth.

2. Highly educated is defined as having at least a college degree that has a specific skill applicable to making possible discoveries, or inventions that can change humanity and/or society.

3. Sometimes one can be wealthy and highly educated, but not always.

4. Lets have some fun! Nothing personal here, I just like to play the devil's advocate.

A highly educated researcher can only contribute to society, if the researcher can first satisfy his basic human needs. If you refer to Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you would agree that a person cannot function, despite intention, without food, water, and shelter.

Without the wealthy investing their resources into highly educated people's ideas, their ideas aren't likely to materialize in some way. For instance, how's a researcher going to research, if he cannot afford to feed himself?

Therefore, the wealthy drives technological innovation, researches that benefit humanities etc... A lot of the medical foundations are being funded by corporations owned by very wealthy individuals who may not know a thing about biology or chemistry.

Another point is that wealthy individuals are often powerful, in terms of social, and government connections. Through their web of influence, the wealthy can often drive changes in society.

So in conclusion, I would say the wealthy is better than the highly educated. Yes, the real drive comes from those willing to devote resources in ideas that can change the world, not those highly educated grunts that perform the day to day lab tests. Without these wealthy individuals driving changes from the top, the grunts will not get anywhere. It's analogous to a general and his army.

Ok...now someone say something!

Lol, i went to sleep at like 4am and woke up around 12, and i see like 4 new pages! Lol no offense but this is entertaining! As for EDR, i am 10 and 7 month old but i am currently enrolled in my community college. As for the reason why I misspelled several vocabularies it is that i have played too many online games where people would just use "YOU STUPID, ME GOOD YOU SUCK" kind of language, so when i type in this forum i tend to use the same kind of language.

Dashby, if intel offers a p4 with longer battery life and less heat, then i'd be all over it. I must admit that PM is pretty weak as a CPU, but since its a laptop, you wanna carry it around and still be able to play a few nice games, while you save those heavy duty for your desktop. But it is a good question tho, I am currently reconsidering about buying a PM (gateway m505x) or a sager 5780 kind of desktop replacement. But the damn p4 is like 9 pounds, theres no way for my 10 years old and 7 month body to handle it.

And EDR, if you based one person's intelligence level (esp on internet) on his or her command of English language, then I assume you have to put the rest of the world under the section "YOU ARE STUPID. MR. EINSTEINE YOU ARE STUPID BECAUSE U SPEAK NO ENGLISH". So please don't say that, it offends some foreign ppl, like me (I am from China), because you remind them of their incompetence in English language but still make a good engineer.

Jeez, what are they feeding the Chinese kids?! 11 year old kid in community college?

I don't know whether I should say "wow that's bloody brilliant" or "geez American colleges must be a joke to the foreigners".

Sleep earlier Clone, it'll do your 11 year old body good You should save the heavy lifting when you turn 15.

Man, I keep trying to dig the argument out of intelligence and onto PM vs. P4, and they keep pulling me back in.

X, it seems you know that the highest level of self-satisfaction is self-actualization. Assuming both the scientist and the entrepreneur can satisfy basic human needs, be it welfare or a staff of servants, then each achieve self-actualization by two ways: the scientist is obviously satisfied with his/her work, while the entrepreneur enjoys his wealth. So the issue does not stand with self-preception, but rest with how others perceive these two jobs. According to an independent survey mentioned in PopSci, the public rank scientist as the most reverred position, well above CEOs, the president of the US, doctors, and engineers. I think that says a lot about how others perceive these positions.

I see your argument but your assumption is based on if both can satisfy the bottom of the pyramid. Without the wealthy investing resources, the scientist cannot self actualize, or think at all.

One is the giver (wealthy) and receiver (scientist) of resources. And we all know that to give is better than to get.
[sneaky aye? bwaahhahaa]

And admit it, this is fun.

Ah, we have stumbled upon the cooperative nature of society. Usually this kind of argument ends up with everyone exclaiming how all jobs are equally important and other corny statements like that...

Boo, you're no fun

Well, they do! And this has been fun...

Quick, think of something new before I get bored again!

Ummm....so the polular progressive rockers Yes have decided to do the theme song for a computer game? that sounds pretty lame. Oh wait that was 4 years ago...