Slashdot Mirror

PopeRatzo,
 
May I humbly recommend some fisting powder for that ailment of yours?

TomR teh Pirate observed:

You must also recognize that each president that comes in sets a different agenda for NASA. NASA programs take more than a decade to launch (ha!), but their bosses last 4 or 8 years. It's a schizophrenic situation.

That's one of the political roadblocks to NASA meeting schedules and budgets for their most ambitious projects. The other one is Congress, which has consistently refused to authorize multi-year funding for the agency. As a result, NASA administrators routinely present best-case scenarios to the pols, even though they know very well that those are hopelessly over-optimistic, and that the actual, final costs will be considerably higher. They do so, because using realistic figures that take Congressional caprice into account would trigger outright, unanimous rejection of those projects by every committee whose approval their budget requires.

So NASA is forced to pretend their projects will be fully-funded in a timely manner, and Congress is forced to pretend it believes NASA's cost estimates are reliable. Neither thing is true, so we get the death of a thousand (budgetary) cuts that will eventually result in the launch of the James Webb Space Telescope - which will end up being at least five times more costly than the project Congress initially approved, and nearly a decade past its original launch target date ...

(Posting as AC only so as not to undo prior upmods in this thread.)

--

Check out my novel ...

sjbe pointed out"

Ummm, evolution is absolutely a scientific theory.

It is a theory (meaning model), not a "theory" (meaning unproven). Evolution is only a "theory" in the syntactic sense as used to describe scientific arguments. That's why I used the quotes. People who argue against it argue that it is a "theory" using a different definition of the term theory to disingenuously argue that it somehow is still an open question as to whether it is real. In reality it is about as debatable as whether gravity exists.

The problem lies in the fact that, for scientists, "theory" has a specific meaning: "a model which has proven generally useful, despite a variety of attempts to disprove it via well-controlled and demonstrably-repeatable experiments." By contrast, as employed by non-scientists, the word "theory" is synonymous with any number of words meaning "speculation". It's a case of scientific jargon vs. quotidian usage, and the anti-science crowd exploits the commonly-understood definition to cast doubt on the credibility of well-established scientific theories for reasons ranging from religious fanaticism to protecting their income stream.

The religious fanatics are easy to dismiss. The people who stand to lose extraordinary profits from - just as a "for instance" - world economies turning away from fossil fuel-based energy and transportation systems are a different and very much more pernicious matter. They know they're presenting misleading arguments, and they couldn't care less. As long as they keep making billions, logic and facts are going to remain at the bottom of their list of priorities ...

(Posting as AC only so as not to undo prior upmods in this thread.)

--

Check out my novel ...

There is a BIG alternative to the Google Play Store called the Amazon App Store. You can buy a new Android device today and never, ever log your goggle account onto it. Most of the essential apps are available on Amazon Underground.

All you do is go to that link, download the apk and install it on your android gadget.

Applehu Akbar pointed out:

Your wish is granted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Bryan Singer directing.

Oh, noes!

When an entertainment news story about a TV miniseries adaptation of what was arguably Robert A. Heinlein's greatest novel starts off by informing us that the name of the TV version has been changed to "Uprising," (despite the fact that there is already an existing and devoted audience for a reasonably-faithful adaptation of a famous book with an excellent and extremely memorable title), the signs are Not Good.

Why would someone as savvy as Bryan Singer make such a foolish decision - unless the script that's been greenlit throws out everything that made the novel compelling in favor of Hollywood's paint-by-numbers approach to scriptwriting ... ?

(Posting as AC only so as not to undo prior upmods in this thread.)

--

Check out my novel ...

Applehu Akbar pointed out:

Your wish is granted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Bryan Singer directing.

Oh, noes!

When an entertainment news story about a TV miniseries adaptation of what was arguably Robert A. Heinlein's greatest novel starts off by informing us that the name of the TV version has been changed to "Uprising," (despite the fact that there is already an existing and devoted audience for a reasonably-faithful adaptation of a famous book with an excellent and extremely memorable title), the signs are Not Good.

Why would someone as savvy as Bryan Singer make such a foolish decision - unless the script that's been greenlit throws out everything that made the novel compelling in favor of Hollywood's paint-by-numbers approach to scriptwriting ... ?

(Posting as AC only so as not to undo prior upmods in this thread.)

--

Check out my novel ...

Why did she hold onto one single card for so long and keep topping it up?

Because she's an idiot, who thinks she's James Bond, who wanted to write a seemingly clever story.

To digress a bit... It's like this chick, Hephzibah Anderson, and her book Chastened about her voluntary year of chastity. Turns out she just stopped having penetration - gave up the “last base” (her words). Still went on dates, still kissed, still fondled, but she drew the line at that – kiss, kiss, no bang, bang. How she must have suffered. So she writes a book about it and gets famous? Please. What the fuck is wrong with people that this is interesting or even worthy of more than a passing thought? Why is anyone even talking to her, about this? Because she’s young? blond? pretty? English? WHAT?? And who names their daughter “Hephzibah” anyway?

Scientists are discovering that Consciousness Affects Matter. (The fact that the Placebo Effect even _exists_ at all is partial proof of this.)

But this is nothing new. You can find doctors talking about their NDEs. A NDE (Near Death Experience) is when a person has an OBE when they almost died.

Neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor's My stroke of insight is an interesting talk about her OBE.

Eben Alexander: A Neurosurgeon's Journey through the Afterlife

Dr.Eben Alexander talks about his Near Death Experience & Proof of Heaven

Before you graduate to OBEs you'll probably want to start with Lucid Dreaming. Reddit, of all places, has a good sub-reddit: /r/LucidDreaming/

Then as you learn to meditate you can work on having an OBE.

Thomas Campbell documents the experiences of his OBEs in My Big Toe -- where he was one the participants.

Once you have you OBE's you can start having them with others.

My wife and I have had shared OBE's -- we then compare and contrast "our notes" to see what is the same and different. The fact that we can describe the same experiences proves that consciousness is non-local -- something that Physicts just now are starting to understand.

Lastly, Michael Talbot's The Holographic Universe: The Revolutionary Theory of Reality discusses past experiments done by neuro-scientists that show the brain is !== mind, and non-local.

That is enough resources to get you started. Good luck on experiencing a wider reality !

Scientists are discovering that Consciousness Affects Matter. (The fact that the Placebo Effect even _exists_ at all is partial proof of this.)

But this is nothing new. You can find doctors talking about their NDEs. A NDE (Near Death Experience) is when a person has an OBE when they almost died.

Neuroanatomist Jill Bolte Taylor's My stroke of insight is an interesting talk about her OBE.

Eben Alexander: A Neurosurgeon's Journey through the Afterlife

Dr.Eben Alexander talks about his Near Death Experience & Proof of Heaven

Before you graduate to OBEs you'll probably want to start with Lucid Dreaming. Reddit, of all places, has a good sub-reddit: /r/LucidDreaming/

Then as you learn to meditate you can work on having an OBE.

Thomas Campbell documents the experiences of his OBEs in My Big Toe -- where he was one the participants.

Once you have you OBE's you can start having them with others.

My wife and I have had shared OBE's -- we then compare and contrast "our notes" to see what is the same and different. The fact that we can describe the same experiences proves that consciousness is non-local -- something that Physicts just now are starting to understand.

Lastly, Michael Talbot's The Holographic Universe: The Revolutionary Theory of Reality discusses past experiments done by neuro-scientists that show the brain is !== mind, and non-local.

That is enough resources to get you started. Good luck on experiencing a wider reality !

Here are the instructions, practice for a couple years and you will either be conversant or delusional.

At this point I am thinking that the brain stores experiences and patterns of behavior, which pretty much control what the 'soul' can do. Left without the body a 'soul' might have more capabilities, but it takes a lot of work to overcome the 'human' frame of reference

When is the last time you "bought a CD/DVD/Blu-Ray?

January 2018, The complete series' of
Mr. Bean and Due South for for $14.95 and $19.99 respectively.

When is the last time you "bought a CD/DVD/Blu-Ray?

January 2018, The complete series' of
Mr. Bean and Due South for for $14.95 and $19.99 respectively.

I would highly recommend these "starter" books:

Topic: Math & Logic
Logicomix: An epic search for truth
https://www.amazon.com/Logicom...

Topic: Super heroes
Watchmen
https://www.amazon.com/Watchme...

Topic: DnD
The Bag Wars Saga
https://www.amazon.com/Knights...

I would highly recommend these "starter" books:

Topic: Math & Logic
Logicomix: An epic search for truth
https://www.amazon.com/Logicom...

Topic: Super heroes
Watchmen
https://www.amazon.com/Watchme...

Topic: DnD
The Bag Wars Saga
https://www.amazon.com/Knights...

I would highly recommend these "starter" books:

Topic: Math & Logic
Logicomix: An epic search for truth
https://www.amazon.com/Logicom...

Topic: Super heroes
Watchmen
https://www.amazon.com/Watchme...

Topic: DnD
The Bag Wars Saga
https://www.amazon.com/Knights...

for example (and sorry for the long link): https://www.amazon.com/Invinci...

I think it was this one that my friend lent me, and it had something like 4 separate story arcs between the covers.

The part I never understood about the Flint water crisis is why the State did not supply countertop filters and a few replacement cartridges to each household. It would have offered immediate protection until the protective coating had a chance to rebuild, at maybe 20% of the price of the first emergency aid payment.

100 micron is pretty big (about the size of table salt crystals). It might be hard to see, but it is trivial to filter.

I filter every drop of water entering my house with a 30 micron sediment filter.

I additionally filter my drinking water with an inexpensive 5 micron carbon filter followed by a more expensive 0.001 micron reverse osmosis filter.

Heck, I even filter the air circulating in my house with a 3 micron furnace filter.

100 micron is pretty big (about the size of table salt crystals). It might be hard to see, but it is trivial to filter.

I filter every drop of water entering my house with a 30 micron sediment filter.

I additionally filter my drinking water with an inexpensive 5 micron carbon filter followed by a more expensive 0.001 micron reverse osmosis filter.

Heck, I even filter the air circulating in my house with a 3 micron furnace filter.

100 micron is pretty big (about the size of table salt crystals). It might be hard to see, but it is trivial to filter.

I filter every drop of water entering my house with a 30 micron sediment filter.

I additionally filter my drinking water with an inexpensive 5 micron carbon filter followed by a more expensive 0.001 micron reverse osmosis filter.

Heck, I even filter the air circulating in my house with a 3 micron furnace filter.

100 micron is pretty big (about the size of table salt crystals). It might be hard to see, but it is trivial to filter.

I filter every drop of water entering my house with a 30 micron sediment filter.

I additionally filter my drinking water with an inexpensive 5 micron carbon filter followed by a more expensive 0.001 micron reverse osmosis filter.

Heck, I even filter the air circulating in my house with a 3 micron furnace filter.

A lot of new smart TVs support miracast out of the box and if you want a dongle just search for miracast on amazon... there is a bunch of them that can be plugged into the usb port on your TV for power.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=n...

I think he is looking for something like this...

https://www.amazon.com/Microso...?

https://www.microsoft.com/acce...

but cables are what you're trying to get away from with wireless video

The reason Chromecast and Firestick use wireless is because people generally don't have ethernet outlets adjacent to their TV. But everyone in the world has a power outlet adjacent to their TV, so few people have objections to using that.

If I understand right, your objection is that although you'll tolerate seeing the power cable go from our outlet to your TV set, you're reluctant to see a second wall-wart and cable alongside it. Your proposal (power over USB-C) is one solution to the problem, but there are several other more straightforward solutions...

1. Replace an outlet with one that has a USB socket and a power socket e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Leviton... to eliminate the wall-wart. Or you could go for a recessed outlet to hide it further e.g. https://www.amazon.com/PowerBr...

2. Use a "cable tidy wrap" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-... so the two cables look visually like a single cable.

3. Use a "wall-mounted cable concealer" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... so you don't even see the cables at all; you just see the thing on the wall. (Note: when I moved house and took down the cable concealers, they were so firmly attached that they took some paint with them, and I had to re-spackle and paint).

but cables are what you're trying to get away from with wireless video

The reason Chromecast and Firestick use wireless is because people generally don't have ethernet outlets adjacent to their TV. But everyone in the world has a power outlet adjacent to their TV, so few people have objections to using that.

If I understand right, your objection is that although you'll tolerate seeing the power cable go from our outlet to your TV set, you're reluctant to see a second wall-wart and cable alongside it. Your proposal (power over USB-C) is one solution to the problem, but there are several other more straightforward solutions...

1. Replace an outlet with one that has a USB socket and a power socket e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Leviton... to eliminate the wall-wart. Or you could go for a recessed outlet to hide it further e.g. https://www.amazon.com/PowerBr...

2. Use a "cable tidy wrap" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-... so the two cables look visually like a single cable.

3. Use a "wall-mounted cable concealer" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... so you don't even see the cables at all; you just see the thing on the wall. (Note: when I moved house and took down the cable concealers, they were so firmly attached that they took some paint with them, and I had to re-spackle and paint).

but cables are what you're trying to get away from with wireless video

The reason Chromecast and Firestick use wireless is because people generally don't have ethernet outlets adjacent to their TV. But everyone in the world has a power outlet adjacent to their TV, so few people have objections to using that.

If I understand right, your objection is that although you'll tolerate seeing the power cable go from our outlet to your TV set, you're reluctant to see a second wall-wart and cable alongside it. Your proposal (power over USB-C) is one solution to the problem, but there are several other more straightforward solutions...

1. Replace an outlet with one that has a USB socket and a power socket e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Leviton... to eliminate the wall-wart. Or you could go for a recessed outlet to hide it further e.g. https://www.amazon.com/PowerBr...

2. Use a "cable tidy wrap" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-... so the two cables look visually like a single cable.

3. Use a "wall-mounted cable concealer" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... so you don't even see the cables at all; you just see the thing on the wall. (Note: when I moved house and took down the cable concealers, they were so firmly attached that they took some paint with them, and I had to re-spackle and paint).

but cables are what you're trying to get away from with wireless video

The reason Chromecast and Firestick use wireless is because people generally don't have ethernet outlets adjacent to their TV. But everyone in the world has a power outlet adjacent to their TV, so few people have objections to using that.

If I understand right, your objection is that although you'll tolerate seeing the power cable go from our outlet to your TV set, you're reluctant to see a second wall-wart and cable alongside it. Your proposal (power over USB-C) is one solution to the problem, but there are several other more straightforward solutions...

1. Replace an outlet with one that has a USB socket and a power socket e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Leviton... to eliminate the wall-wart. Or you could go for a recessed outlet to hide it further e.g. https://www.amazon.com/PowerBr...

2. Use a "cable tidy wrap" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/uxcell-... so the two cables look visually like a single cable.

3. Use a "wall-mounted cable concealer" e.g. https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod... so you don't even see the cables at all; you just see the thing on the wall. (Note: when I moved house and took down the cable concealers, they were so firmly attached that they took some paint with them, and I had to re-spackle and paint).

Here. Because you (and your friend) seem like you didn't know.
These are for your dog.

If you want an insight into why Amazon is so different and so unlike any other company, you only need to look at their 1997 cover letter to their investors which has been added to every other investor letter since. A quote from the letter: "It’s All About the Long Term We believe that a fundamental measure of our success will be the shareholder value we create over the long term. This value will be a direct result of our ability to extend and solidify our current market leadership position. The stronger our market leadership, the more powerful our economic model. Market leadership can translate directly to higher revenue, higher profitability, greater capital velocity, and correspondingly stronger returns on invested capital." (Source: https://www.amazon.com/p/featu... - 1997 letter is at the end) Unlike most companies, which concentrate on shareholder value or profit or margins, Amazon is focused on one thing and one thing only. BEING THE MARKET LEADER ANY MARKET THEY ENTER. At any cost. Seriously; they care less about profit than they do about being number one in anything they do, no matter what. How do you compete with someone when their only mode is 'full out'? When the only thing they care about is beating you, even if it costs them profit to do so? There's an excellent video that explains this strategy here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

My wife and I were lucky enough to get tickets to see Dr. Stephen Hawking "speak" at the Berkeley Community Theatre. They were free, if I recall correctly, but demand for them was understandably high, since he had recently released his best-selling book A Brief History of Time, which was still on the NYT bestseller list at the time.

Great book, btw, if a tiny bit dated now. I recommend the illustrated, updated and revised edition to everyone with an interest in the work to which Hawking devoted his life.

Hawking was in town to present a series of lectures on cosmology and the physics of black holes at the University of California, and he graciously agreed to also appear at the BCT for a much more general presentation to a capacity crowd of almost 3,500.

ALS had, of course, long since claimed Hawking's ability to speak for himself - as well as almost all of his motor control - so, even then, the voice we heard was that of his voice synthesizer. Nonetheless, his personality came through in full force: by turns funny, professorial, wondering, and confiding. It was, no doubt, a canned presentation, but the man himself controlled the pace at which it unfolded - and his timing was absolutely masterful. He had the crowd hanging on his every word, and he received a standing ovation that lasted for a good five minutes or more at the end of his performance.

We'd had to park several blocks away, so, because of downtown Berkeley's proliferation of one-way streets, we found ourselves on Shattuck Avenue, headed the opposite direction from home, and looking for a chance to get turned around, when we passed the intersection of Shattuck and Allston Way. And there, on the corner, sitting all alone in his wheelchair, obviously waiting for suitably-equipped transport to arrive and whisk him away to his hotel, was Dr. Stephen Hawking, Lucasion Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, eminent physicist, bestselling author, and pop-culture superstar.

To this day, I still wish that we'd stopped, and offered to keep him company while he waited - but, sadly, we did not ...

There is something called the Backfire Effect. In short, the more factual information you give to someone pointing how/where they're wrong, the more strident in their viewpoint they become.

There is a more fundamental issue here; one that is well described in the book The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart.

As the Amazon summary says "Over the past three decades, we [Americans] have been choosing the neighborhood (and church and news show) compatible with our lifestyle and beliefs. The result is a country that has become so polarized, so ideologically inbred that people don't know and can't understand those who live a few miles away."

Living and working in communities of exclusively like-minded people tends to reinforce beliefs (and make them more extreme) over time. Confirmation bias becomes ingrained, and the willingness to even consider an alternative viewpoint diminishes.

In such an environment, rational argument is useless. Inconvenient evidence is simply ignored. Sadly, this is not just an American phenomenon. I've seen similar trends emerging in the UK in recent years.

About ten years ago I read a pop business book called Corporate Confidential , which was regularly touted by the author of the anonymous "Mini-Microsoft" blog. (So I suspect the book is widely read in Redmond as well...)

The book's author is a veteran HR executive who purports to spill the beans on what HR actually does for a corporation. She emphasizes that HR is there to protect the company from its own employees, not the other way around; and that any time you bring an issue to them, one with legal and/or financial consequences, you are potentially jeopardizing your career.

In particular, she urged women not to bring forward cases of sexual harassment (which was interesting in the light of the recent #MeToo movement - I wonder if she regrets dispensing that advice now).

But I think a lot of people follow (or used to follow) her advice, and most haven't even read her book or confided with someone who has. It's just common knowledge that bringing forth a case of discrimination or harassment is risky for all involved.

I can find the Apple adapters for $17 (or even more) on Amazon, as well. Google sells one for $9, just like Apple. Amazon also sells 2-pack for $11, one with charging capabilities for $9, and a slew of others that start out pretty cheap.

Google also lets other manufacturers make Android phones, some of which have headphone jacks built right in (what a novel idea), so I have the option of foregoing the dongle, if I don't want to deal with it. If I want a current-model phone running iOS, I don't have that option.

I'm glad I prefer Android on my phone, and I hope Apple keeps the headphone jack on the iPad.

I keep hearing that Apple did away with the headphone jack to make the phone thinner but that really doesn't hold water when the 6.1mm thick iPad has a jack and the 7.3mm thick iPhone does not.

I can find the Apple adapters for $17 (or even more) on Amazon, as well. Google sells one for $9, just like Apple. Amazon also sells 2-pack for $11, one with charging capabilities for $9, and a slew of others that start out pretty cheap.

Google also lets other manufacturers make Android phones, some of which have headphone jacks built right in (what a novel idea), so I have the option of foregoing the dongle, if I don't want to deal with it. If I want a current-model phone running iOS, I don't have that option.

I'm glad I prefer Android on my phone, and I hope Apple keeps the headphone jack on the iPad.

I keep hearing that Apple did away with the headphone jack to make the phone thinner but that really doesn't hold water when the 6.1mm thick iPad has a jack and the 7.3mm thick iPhone does not.

I can find the Apple adapters for $17 (or even more) on Amazon, as well. Google sells one for $9, just like Apple. Amazon also sells 2-pack for $11, one with charging capabilities for $9, and a slew of others that start out pretty cheap.

Google also lets other manufacturers make Android phones, some of which have headphone jacks built right in (what a novel idea), so I have the option of foregoing the dongle, if I don't want to deal with it. If I want a current-model phone running iOS, I don't have that option.

I'm glad I prefer Android on my phone, and I hope Apple keeps the headphone jack on the iPad.

I keep hearing that Apple did away with the headphone jack to make the phone thinner but that really doesn't hold water when the 6.1mm thick iPad has a jack and the 7.3mm thick iPhone does not.

They make opaque labels expressly for the purpose of covering LEDs.

Ford will cheerfully sell you a socket set with their logo on it.

You'd be kind of an idiot to buy it from them, but you can if you want.

I mean, their dealers are using Snap-On tools, but hey, Ford branded ones are there for sale if you want to buy them, from a dealer or from Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Ford-FM...

These exist, but the amount of text around it makes me think they're unauthorized (it talks about maybe having to reboot the phone, etc).

https://smile.amazon.com/gp/pr...

The deep question that you should be asking is the following: is the Big Bang Theory falsifiable?

If it is not, then it is not really science. If it is falsifiable, then the scientific method demands that scientists should be constantly looking for observational evidence that could invalidate it. This is not happening nowadays within academia. It did happened some decades ago, but when this world-renowned observational astronomer discovered the falsifying evidence, instead of being congratulated, he was basically sacked from the observatory (as explained in the video documentary previously mentioned).

If you had spend the time to actually look for such thing, then you may be surprised to find that the observational evidence falsifying the Big Bang creation story is very numerous. If you just want to focus on the controversy over redshift, then there are scores of papers related to it. This is just one for example:

https://www.academia.edu/81152...

If you really want to deeply understand why the Big Bang Theory has been observationally falsified, I recommend the following four books that you may use as a reference for all the papers that are cited within them.

https://www.amazon.com/Quasars...

https://www.amazon.com/Seeing-...

https://www.amazon.com/Catalog...

https://www.amazon.com/Galileo...

In any case, the lesson of Halton Arp's story goes far beyond the data which observationally falsifies the Big Bang Theory (assuming that the theory really is falsifiable, something that doesn't seem to be the case). Arp's story is a very sad one and a lesson about everything that is wrong within academic science, and about what we need to radically change if we want to promote scientific progress and innovation.

The deep question that you should be asking is the following: is the Big Bang Theory falsifiable?

If it is not, then it is not really science. If it is falsifiable, then the scientific method demands that scientists should be constantly looking for observational evidence that could invalidate it. This is not happening nowadays within academia. It did happened some decades ago, but when this world-renowned observational astronomer discovered the falsifying evidence, instead of being congratulated, he was basically sacked from the observatory (as explained in the video documentary previously mentioned).

If you had spend the time to actually look for such thing, then you may be surprised to find that the observational evidence falsifying the Big Bang creation story is very numerous. If you just want to focus on the controversy over redshift, then there are scores of papers related to it. This is just one for example:

https://www.academia.edu/81152...

If you really want to deeply understand why the Big Bang Theory has been observationally falsified, I recommend the following four books that you may use as a reference for all the papers that are cited within them.

https://www.amazon.com/Quasars...

https://www.amazon.com/Seeing-...

https://www.amazon.com/Catalog...

https://www.amazon.com/Galileo...

In any case, the lesson of Halton Arp's story goes far beyond the data which observationally falsifies the Big Bang Theory (assuming that the theory really is falsifiable, something that doesn't seem to be the case). Arp's story is a very sad one and a lesson about everything that is wrong within academic science, and about what we need to radically change if we want to promote scientific progress and innovation.

The deep question that you should be asking is the following: is the Big Bang Theory falsifiable?

If it is not, then it is not really science. If it is falsifiable, then the scientific method demands that scientists should be constantly looking for observational evidence that could invalidate it. This is not happening nowadays within academia. It did happened some decades ago, but when this world-renowned observational astronomer discovered the falsifying evidence, instead of being congratulated, he was basically sacked from the observatory (as explained in the video documentary previously mentioned).

If you had spend the time to actually look for such thing, then you may be surprised to find that the observational evidence falsifying the Big Bang creation story is very numerous. If you just want to focus on the controversy over redshift, then there are scores of papers related to it. This is just one for example:

https://www.academia.edu/81152...

If you really want to deeply understand why the Big Bang Theory has been observationally falsified, I recommend the following four books that you may use as a reference for all the papers that are cited within them.

https://www.amazon.com/Quasars...

https://www.amazon.com/Seeing-...

https://www.amazon.com/Catalog...

https://www.amazon.com/Galileo...

In any case, the lesson of Halton Arp's story goes far beyond the data which observationally falsifies the Big Bang Theory (assuming that the theory really is falsifiable, something that doesn't seem to be the case). Arp's story is a very sad one and a lesson about everything that is wrong within academic science, and about what we need to radically change if we want to promote scientific progress and innovation.

The deep question that you should be asking is the following: is the Big Bang Theory falsifiable?

If it is not, then it is not really science. If it is falsifiable, then the scientific method demands that scientists should be constantly looking for observational evidence that could invalidate it. This is not happening nowadays within academia. It did happened some decades ago, but when this world-renowned observational astronomer discovered the falsifying evidence, instead of being congratulated, he was basically sacked from the observatory (as explained in the video documentary previously mentioned).

If you had spend the time to actually look for such thing, then you may be surprised to find that the observational evidence falsifying the Big Bang creation story is very numerous. If you just want to focus on the controversy over redshift, then there are scores of papers related to it. This is just one for example:

https://www.academia.edu/81152...

If you really want to deeply understand why the Big Bang Theory has been observationally falsified, I recommend the following four books that you may use as a reference for all the papers that are cited within them.

https://www.amazon.com/Quasars...

https://www.amazon.com/Seeing-...

https://www.amazon.com/Catalog...

https://www.amazon.com/Galileo...

In any case, the lesson of Halton Arp's story goes far beyond the data which observationally falsifies the Big Bang Theory (assuming that the theory really is falsifiable, something that doesn't seem to be the case). Arp's story is a very sad one and a lesson about everything that is wrong within academic science, and about what we need to radically change if we want to promote scientific progress and innovation.

Walmart doesn't ship milk. Although the Amazon listings for Milk are mostly scammy looking. Walmart has much better prices on powdered milk and shelf stable milk products.

...how does one start now, legally.

This is how I heard it. I remember paying about a quarter of what they're asking now. I keep the mp3s I ripped on my phone; when I've been hospitalized, they keep me company. Youtube is an alternative.

Will you turn your clocks back an hour before going to bed Saturday night? Thank daylight saving time. Many place the conception of daylight saving time upon the shoulders of renowned Pennsylvania statesman Benjamin Franklin, genius inventor, journalist and man about town. He was living in Paris as the Ambassador to France at the time, going to bed late and waking up at noon — contrary to his often quoted saying "Early to bed and early to rise, makes a man healthy, wealthy and wise," according to a 1784 letter to the editors of The Journal of Paris found on www.webexibits.com.

He had an epiphany after witnessing a demonstration of a new type of oil lamp and pondered whether the oil "it consumed was not in proportion to the light it afforded." Paris could save a heck of a lot of money by using sunshine — instead of candle wax and wicks — as a source of light. If only its citizens would get out of bed before noon.

Franklin's plan was laid out in mocking detail in his letter. It included calculations of the 183 nights between March 20 and Sept. 20, multiplied by the number of hours and candles, multiplied by the number of Parisians, and so on.

His proposal suggested the government tax every window with shutters to keep out the light; have the police regulate burning candles in the same manner they regulated burning wood; post guards to prevent coaches on the streets after sunset; ring the church bells and fire cannons if necessary "to wake the sluggards effectually," the letter stated.

Franklin, as brilliant as he was, could not have predicted World War I and the fuel shortages and famine his New World would face.

Most of Europe had already instituted "daylight saving time" when the U.S. instituted stringent fuel-conservation measures in January 1918. The U.S. faced a coal shortage and famine at the height of its involvement in WWI.

It was no joke on Jan. 3, 1918, when the Federal Fuel Administration ordered Gary Heat, Light and Water Co. to turn off the electricity powering street lights and signs on Broadway at night, reported the Gary Daily Tribune Jan. 4, 1918.

Transportation of goods became a big issue and the same day. The Hobart Gazette published President Wilson's announcement that he was taking over control of the railroad.

"This is a war of resources, no less than of men, perhaps even more than of men and it is necessary for the complete mobilization of our resources that the transportation system of the country should be organized under a single authority," his remarks stated in part.

The first week in January that year, Northwest Indiana was blasted by a blizzard. Gary Mayor William F. Hodges beseeched his citizens in a front page letter in the Gary Daily Tribune to step up and help shovel the snow out of the streets and off the rail lines to allow food and fuel to be delivered to the city.

Hahaha, neckbeard.

Unfortunately, I couldn't grow a beard if I wanted to. Not much of one anyway.

It always amazes me how so many on slashdot these days are anti cypherpunk. The same technology that gives you so many of the tools you take for granted today are the stepping stones for bitcoin.

Your arguments remind me of those of Cliff Stoll and Bill Gates back in the early 1990's - how the internet would never amount to much.

Exchanges like Coinbase and others are only temporary on-ramps until bitcoin has absorbed all the world's fiat. Like any good technology, it takes a long time to roll out, especially game-changing ones. If you think there haven't been amazing advances in the past 9 years (bitcoin not exist a decade ago) then you simply haven't been paying attention.

And lastly, economics. I've read an advanced copy of this book, and I highly recommend it once it's released at the end of next month: https://smile.amazon.com/Bitco...

In any event, I think you'll find yourself on the wrong side of history on this one.

And just buy something like this from a brand like Audio-Technica. It'll probably be half the price Apple charges and just as luxurious with great sound.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B...

The man who mistook his wife for a hat and other clinical tails.

People make mistakes all the time, misidentify objects, mistake cats for dogs, toast burn patterns for faces, random market movement for predictability.

And about 1-2% of humans are *not* amazing at recognizing human facial expressions. They really suck at it in fact.

Basic thing is neural networks are still fairly small. About the size of a miniscule worm's brain.

Strong A.I. will probably be composed of swarms of weak A.I. performing subtasks.

Thing I learned recently: When your move where your eyes are looking- you are momentarily blind- and you don't even realize it.

If you are thinking about lists with due dates then you're already in trouble. The best method I've found over many years is the Getting Things Done (GTD) method, though you don't need to take it to the extreme like he does in the book. If you follow that method, it'll change the way you think about to-do lists, for the better.

Now at home I do have a system to organize papers by *when* we need to deal with them (think bills, permission slips, registrations, etc.). I made a stack of 183 (=366/2) plastic sleeves held together by 3 big binder rings. I labelled each sleeve with two days (the first is Jan 1 and Jan 2, etc.). Total cost about $50, and well worth it. The top sleeve has today's date on it. When you get a new physical thing that you need to deal with at a later date, you stick it in that date's sleeve. Every 2 days you just flip the top page over. Now you only have relevant stuff on top to deal with.

For other things that just have to be done on a certain day, you just need a regular old calendar app. Google calendar is great because you can share it with your spouse. The GTD method talks about calendars too.

A good companion to GTD is still the whole "time quadrant" chapter from 7 Habits of Highly Effecive People. If your time is in demand, you can't possibly do everything people want of you. The quadrant idea help filter out the crap.

You can still get physical keyboards on many modern phones by using a keyboard case: e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Samsung...