This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Full screen v. Wide screen

12346

Comments

  • There are schools that grant a BA in Computer Science.
    Retard schools.
    Yale?
  • You can get a B.A. or a B.S. in almost anything. They are determined more by the general education requirements that surround your major(s)/minor(s).
  • Yale?
    A technology degree from Yale is worth about as much as a law degree from RIT.
  • You can get a B.A. or a B.S. in almost anything. They are determined more by the general education requirements that surround your major(s)/minor(s).
    "That's the beauty of college these days, Tommy! You can major in Game Boy if you know how to bullshit." - Droz, PCU
  • You can get a B.A. or a B.S. in almost anything. They are determined more by the general education requirements that surround your major(s)/minor(s).
    That's quite a lot of BS you can learn.
  • Funny, when Rym(Scott) said the FRC was split between science and artistic types, I thought they meant they fell on the artistic side of the group.
  • BAs in Computer Science or Information Technology are generally looked down upon as inferior degrees. A proper computer program will provide you with a BS.
  • All my computer programs provide me with BS. Especially Firefox. It taps a rich vein.
  • edited January 2009
    Science, when done properly, is an art. I just use agar plates as my canvas, plasmids as my brush and DNA as the color of life.

    Most of the FRC science geeks are biologist and Comp. Sci. Also, most of the people with master level degrees or higher are women.

    EDIT: Since I started this brush fire. I figured I'd throw in my final opinion is on the topic. Art movies, epic movies and the like should be viewed as they were intended on. This doesn't make every cinematic piece an artistic endeavor nor does it mean it will be good but to give it a fair shot. You should see it as it was intended. Other movies, what ever is fine. I don't feel that I've some how missed the point of a Broken Lizard flick by not seeing it in Wide Screen. I'll still enjoy Tropic Thunder even if I never fully grasp the magnitude of each individual shot. I am fine with that. I am however going to make it a point to watch The Fifth Element again to see if it changes the movie for me. I'd still like to see both options given for more movies. That is all.
    Post edited by Wyatt on
  • edited January 2009
    Science, when done properly, is an art. I just use agar plates as my canvas, plasmids as my brush and DNA as the color of life.
    That scares me a bit. I want science to be just that, science. ^_~ While there is creativity involved, it is a pursuit of fact, not an aesthetic pursuit.
    Most of the FRC science geeks are biologist and Comp. Sci. Also, most of the people with master level degrees or higher are women.
    Actually, it is an even split. As far as I am aware, Adam and Alex have their masters and Laura and Lisa have their masters. That is it for the time being. I am about to begin work on my post graduate education and that will swing it for the ladies.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • I don't think Lisa has an MS yet. She's still shooting for a Ph.D.; it'll only become an MS if she doesn't get the Ph.D. That's why they call the MS the "consolation prize" in the real sciences. :P

    So, hopefully soon, a member of the FRC will legitimately be called "Doctor."

    I've been thinking about getting an MPH, but that'll be off in the future somewhere.
  • Why do I think MS stands for "Master of Science"?
  • I think the point that Wyatt was trying to make was as a whole the FRC women are smarter then the men :-p
  • I think the point that Wyatt was trying to make was as a whole the FRC women are smarter then the men :-p
    That is a sexist remark. But I am not going to argue it. ^_~
  • Why do I think MS stands for "Master of Science"?
    Because it does?
  • Why do I think MS stands for "Master of Science"?
    Because it does?
    Also Microsoft and Multiple Sclerosis
  • Why do I think MS stands for "Master of Science"?
    Because it does?
    Also Microsoft and Multiple Sclerosis
    Also, Mississippi.

    Smartass.
  • Why do I think MS stands for "Master of Science"?
    Because it does?
    Also Microsoft and Multiple Sclerosis
    Also, Mississippi.

    Smartass.
    Morgan Stanley stock symbol. Also, miso... soup?
  • Morgan Stanley stock symbol. Also, miso... soup?
    Let's end this right now.
  • Science, when done properly, is an art. I just use agar plates as my canvas, plasmids as my brush and DNA as the color of life.
    That scares me a bit. I want science to be just that, science. ^_~ While there is creativity involved, it is a pursuit of fact, not an aesthetic pursuit.
    Most of the FRC science geeks are biologist and Comp. Sci. Also, most of the people with master level degrees or higher are women.
    Actually, it is an even split. As far as I am aware, Adam and Alex have their masters and Laura and Lisa have their masters. That is it for the time being. I am about to begin work on my post graduate education and that will swing it for the ladies.
    Why can't it be both? I prefer art that has form and functionality. Architecture being the best example I've got right now.

    I wasn't saying anything about intelligence. I think we all function on an even playing field each with our own areas of expertise. I just didn't know Alex had his master and as far as I knew the degree ratio was 2:1.
  • edited January 2009
    Science, when done properly, is an art. I just use agar plates as my canvas, plasmids as my brush and DNA as the color of life.
    That scares me a bit. I want science to be just that, science. ^_~ While there is creativity involved, it is a pursuit of fact, not an aesthetic pursuit.
    Most of the FRC science geeks are biologist and Comp. Sci. Also, most of the people with master level degrees or higher are women.
    Actually, it is an even split. As far as I am aware, Adam and Alex have their masters and Laura and Lisa have their masters. That is it for the time being. I am about to begin work on my post graduate education and that will swing it for the ladies.
    Why can't it be both? I prefer art that has form and functionality. Architecture being the best example I've got right now.

    I wasn't saying anything about intelligence. I think we all function on an even playing field each with our own areas of expertise. I just didn't know Alex had his master and as far as I knew the degree ratio was 2:1.
    While I think science can contribute to and inspire art, engineering and design; when scientists approach their field as an art, they create pseudoscience.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • You have apparently never worked in a Tissue culture lab before :-p
  • For some reason, I always relate art and science mixed together to a mad scientist, working hard in his basement creating works of awesome.
  • Science, when done properly, is an art. I just use agar plates as my canvas, plasmids as my brush and DNA as the color of life.
    That scares me a bit. I want science to be just that, science. ^_~ While there is creativity involved, it is a pursuit of fact, not an aesthetic pursuit.
    Most of the FRC science geeks are biologist and Comp. Sci. Also, most of the people with master level degrees or higher are women.
    Actually, it is an even split. As far as I am aware, Adam and Alex have their masters and Laura and Lisa have their masters. That is it for the time being. I am about to begin work on my post graduate education and that will swing it for the ladies.
    Why can't it be both? I prefer art that has form and functionality. Architecture being the best example I've got right now.

    I wasn't saying anything about intelligence. I think we all function on an even playing field each with our own areas of expertise. I just didn't know Alex had his master and as far as I knew the degree ratio was 2:1.
    While I think science can contribute to and inspire art, engineering and design; when scientists approach their field as an art, they create pseudoscience.
    Not really. When scientists talk about being artists, they most likely are talking about the elegance of certain solutions. For example, if you study special relativity, derive the Lorentz Transformations, and then follow the experimental proofs such as the Mount Washington experiment, you should be easily see how there is a beauty there rivalling the best that anything painting, poetry, or music can offer.

    In fact, you can sometimes appreciate this beauty by simply working through some college physics problems.

  • Though simple, it proves that art and science mix together just wonderfully.

    At least half of Instructables works as another example.
  • edited January 2009
    Elegance, beauty, and greatness might be there; however, Science is science and Art is art. Art and science may mix together well, but science is not an art. A woman may be elegant and beautiful, but is she a work of art? How about a tree or a molecule? Moreover, who is the artists? While one can wonder at the marvel at the wonder of a particular solution or function or process, science is methodical and while imagination, creative thinking and design play their parts in science and scientists may approach it with passion, it is still science, not art.
    Scientists taking artistic license are quacks and fools.
    An artist taking artistic license is may be a genius uncovering a greater truth or beauty.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • edited January 2009
    "Scientific and artistic are both properties of an object but not of each other." Any thoughts? I just kinda came up with that as a basic hypothesis.
    That is to say, while something you come across in science may have artistic properties, it's scientific nature is part of the order of the universe and separate from it's artistic properties which are part of human perception.
    I dunno, I'm just some human..
    Post edited by Omnutia on
  • Keats said beauty is truth and truth beauty, so doesn't that make science and art synonymous?
  • edited January 2009
    Keats said beauty is truth and truth beauty, so doesn't that make science and art synonymous?
    Who said Art was necessarily beautiful? It simply means that Truth (with a capital T) is beautiful. If you want to take the statement literally, most of Keats' works would be considered "ugly" as they are fiction, and not literal truth.
    Post edited by Kate Monster on
  • That's kinda wrong Jason. Something being truthful is absolute but beauty is based on your perceptions.
    But then again, I choose not to solve problems like "what is beauty?" for that would fall withing the pervue of philosophy. I solve practical problems..
Sign In or Register to comment.