Slashdot Mirror

Except that the kinect is what is doing the voice recognition. It's not just being used as mic input.

So? They created a PC version of the Kinect. I don't see any reason for them to make content exclusive to a specific system. Besides, I am sure they could just process the mic input themselves instead of having the Kinect do it.

The FBI should just pick up this book: http://www.amazon.com/Influence-Psychology-Persuasion-Business-Essentials/dp/006124189X

There's a chapter that discusses North Korea's program for dealing with POWs during the Korean War. It was astonishingly effective, and, at least the parts in the book, didn't seem to involve much torture.

I started on this book about 6 years ago and haven't bought another PHP or MySQL book since. It is chock full of code examples. The explanations are usually short but concise. It's for more of the "learn by doing" type.

Amazon: How to Do Everything with PHP & MySQL

Correct. The FBI was horrified at the amateurish, brutal, and useless idiocy from the CIA. Read all about it: http://www.amazon.com/The-Black-Banners-Against-al-Qaeda/dp/0393079422/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1334337260&sr=8-1

It's funny, but I don't recall that the NKVD, KGB, SMERSH, or other secret police organs of Soviet Power in the USSR worried about blood feuds from torture, or any of that. They simply tortured and killed in staggering numbers.

The KGB prison in Vilnius at The Museum of Genocide Victims

solitary confinement cell, KGB style.

Surprise!

And the Gulags?

What Were Their Crimes? Living in the Gulag Stalin World - Lithuania

The Great Terror: A Reassessment

- - - - -

Torture is ineffective and diminishes the society that condones torture. I still think that the stories that came out last decade are a big part of why American society is so psychotic today.

Some small segments of American society did become unhinged, yes, but not anything close to all of American society.

Keep in perspective that: Only Three Have Been Waterboarded by CIA The most recent of which was about 9 years ago.

Many people are also mistaken regarding what went on at Abu Ghraib. The Army put a stop to abuse by a handful of rogue soldiers who were abusing prisoners, court martialed them, and sent them to jail. All the news media really did was report the news of the Army investigation, and what had gone on. Of course it is more profitable, poltically and financially, to spin dark conspiracy theories when the reality is closer to Jackass: The Movie.

Iraq abuse photos were `just for fun'

Private Lynndie England, the woman who has become the emblem of the US' shame over the Abu Ghraib prison scandal, on Tuesday showed little expression aside from an occasional nervous giggle at a hearing to determine whether she should face the full weight of a court martial.

When first confronted with pictures of her gloating over naked and cowering Iraqi prisoners, England had shown no alarm, telling the officer who led the investigation of the Abu Ghraib scandal in Iraq: "It was just for fun."

That lack of comprehension returned to haunt her yesterday as the prevailing view of the US military -- that England and the handful of other lowly reservists charged in the abuse were rogue soldiers -- began to emerge more fully.

"They didn't think it was that serious. They were just joking around and having some fun during the night shift," Chief Warrant Officer Paul Arthur told the court.

He added later: "From the get-go, it was jokes and frustration." . . . .

If England is convicted on all 19 charges, she could face 38 years in the brig. Some 25 witnesses are to appear including Specialist Joseph Darby, the soldier who first came forward about the abuse, and Specialist Jeremy Sivitz, who was granted relative leniency for cooperating with the investigation.
Much of the prosecution's evidence is from photographs, with more than 280 images of abuse of detainees, . . . The images first came to the attention of the authorities last January.

Arthur, a member of the military CID, was at Abu Ghraib when a soldier in England's military police

This did it for me... a while ago: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0553244183

My nine-year-old is using "Hello World! Computer Programming for Kids and Other Beginners" to learn Python. She's not really very motivated, though.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1933988495

You should check out the whole series.

"Hello, world!" is actually for ages 1 and 2. Probably why your daughter is bored.
"Why world?" is for ages 3 and 4.
"Stupid world full of smelly boys/girls" is for ages 5 to 7.
"I know everything world!" is for ages 8 to 12.
"I hate you, world!" is for teens.
"I'm free, world!" is for early 20s
"I can travel the world" is for mid 20s
"Where did these rugs rats come from, world!" is for late 20s or early 30s, as is the follow up "I need sleep, world!"
"I need a hot car, a hot girl and some black hair dye, world!" is for late 30s through mid 40s
"I'm falling apart, world!" is for late 40s through to early 50s
"Healthcare sux, world!" is for mid 50s through late 60s
"Who am I again, world!?" is for your 70s through 90s

I would recommend this book, it is specifically targeted at teaching python to younger people with no programming experience.

... C++ primer plus by Stephen prata is a good starting point when just beginning, at some point pretty much all programmers come into contact with C and Prata's pedagogy is sound. Teach each concept, have student master that concept, then move onto the next concept, building up as you go.

http://www.amazon.com/C-Primer-Plus-5th-Edition/dp/0672326973/

My nine-year-old is using "Hello World! Computer Programming for Kids and Other Beginners" to learn Python. She's not really very motivated, though.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1933988495

Kids and Computers. Available from Amazon.

Seth

To put that in perspective, Dr. Paul Pharoah, a cancer researcher at the University of Cambridge said in a statement the results would mean an increase in lifetime risk of intracranial meningioma in the U.K. from 15 out of every 10,000 people to 22 in 10,000 people.

I have scanned the original paper http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.26625/abstract as well, and it is not very impressive as to its use of statistics. This AC in the thread gets the statistics right with respect to the original paper: http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2777187&cid=39634199

But back to Dr. Paul Pharaoh's claim and correct use of Poisson statistics. When using Poisson statistics, the sample size is the number of positive events not the total population under study, in this case the 15 people with meningioma. One standard deviation is Sqrt[sample], so rounding to 4. This means that for any group of 10,000 people, there is a 68% chance that the number with meningioma is between 11 and 19. Similarly for that 22/10,0000 estimate, one standard deviation is Sqrt[22] ~ 4.6. For any 10,000 people in that group the odd are 68% that there will be between 17 and 26 people with meningioma. So we can see that there is overlap between the two expectations. From the 15 number to the 22 is about 1.8 sigma, and while 1.8 sigma hints at a result no self respecting physicist would publish that as a result; they would want to get at least three sigma certainty. And this report is no where near 3 sigma.
You state your claim of a 46% increase with a certainty that is not supported by the statistics. In some cohorts of 10,000 it is 46%, but in about the same number of cohorts it is 0%
A recent editorial in Nature comments on directly on sloppy use of statistics in cancer research: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483509a.html

improper use of statistics — the failure to understand the difference between technical replicates and independent experiments, for example.

It is relevant to the paper and our discussion.

For in-depth discussion on my above work I recommend my favorite statistics book, which has good coverage of the use of Poisson statistics: An Introduction to Error Analysis by John Taylor ; http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Error-Analysis-Uncertainties-Measurements/dp/093570275X - suitable even for a Frosh E&AS major.
* It is possible that clever use of Baysian statistics could push the sigma of the origial paper past 2, but I'd be surprised if they could get to 3.

The classic Dart has always my mainstay when making planes for my son and his friends.

I am also partial to the designs in this book : http://www.amazon.com/The-Ultimate-Paper-Airplane-Step/dp/0671555510
ISBN-10: 0671555510
ISBN-13: 978-0671555511

I have a variation of the general "Ultimate" designs, and the "Harrier" that resembles a Shuttle - These used to be mandatory for my then 3yro (now 6) when we watched shuttle liftoffs, and landings.

No. Conservatives are againt profligate government spending, and then seeing taxes raised rather than spending less in the first place.

And what does "tea" in "tea party" stand for? Yep, "taxed Enough Already" despite the fact that Federal taxes are lower than any time since Truman.

I didn't notice any famous scripture that mentions taking money from other people in order to be generous with it.

And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 15Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. 16And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's. 17And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

How can a Christian be for being generous to the hangman and the General, but not to the poor?

No. But liberals are certainly intolerant of conservatives, as you're demonstrating.

You have a strange definition of "intolerance". Many things offend me, including conservative hypocrites who claim to be Christian, but I tolerate them. I wish I had Aaron Chambers' Eats With Sinners in front of me so I could quote some of it. He lists people God loves, including crooked politicians, gangsters, gays, whores, pimps, etc. Hate the sin, love the sinner.

Jesus ate with sinners. "He who is well has no need of a physician," He said. Tolerate sinners, try to help them to find God.

You're confusing religious crazies with conservatives.

Then why did so many conservative state legislators pass laws outlawing homosexuality? And by the way, I'm a religious crazy. Here's another book for you (look in your local public library), Wierd: Because Normal Isn't Working.

No, it was religious people - and mostly women

You might want to read a history book that was required reading in an undergrad general studies history class I took in the late '70s, historian Frederick Lewis Allen's Only Yesterday (full text here). The book was about the roaring twenties, written in the early thirties. Allen's book contradicts what you believe. Please educate yourself, you've been fed incorrect data. Oh, you were correct about the "mostly women" part, though.

My grandparents were young adults in the twenties, and what they told me about that decade meshed with what the historian wrote.

They are against forcing you to spend part of each day working for the poor.

Stingy bastards.

Liberals are the least charitable with their own money.

Matthew 6:1 -

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 3But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 4That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

Nobody knows how much or how little I give, because I try to follow Christ's teachings. I'm not always sucessful, but I try. I won't even deduct my alms from taxes, and I expect my fellow Christians to do teh same. The conservatives you speak of are exactly the people Jesus spoke against in the above passage.

No. Conservatives are againt profligate government spending, and then seeing taxes raised rather than spending less in the first place.

And what does "tea" in "tea party" stand for? Yep, "taxed Enough Already" despite the fact that Federal taxes are lower than any time since Truman.

I didn't notice any famous scripture that mentions taking money from other people in order to be generous with it.

And when they were come, they say unto him, Master, we know that thou art true, and carest for no man: for thou regardest not the person of men, but teachest the way of God in truth: Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 15Shall we give, or shall we not give? But he, knowing their hypocrisy, said unto them, Why tempt ye me? bring me a penny, that I may see it. 16And they brought it. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? And they said unto him, Caesar's. 17And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.

How can a Christian be for being generous to the hangman and the General, but not to the poor?

No. But liberals are certainly intolerant of conservatives, as you're demonstrating.

You have a strange definition of "intolerance". Many things offend me, including conservative hypocrites who claim to be Christian, but I tolerate them. I wish I had Aaron Chambers' Eats With Sinners in front of me so I could quote some of it. He lists people God loves, including crooked politicians, gangsters, gays, whores, pimps, etc. Hate the sin, love the sinner.

Jesus ate with sinners. "He who is well has no need of a physician," He said. Tolerate sinners, try to help them to find God.

You're confusing religious crazies with conservatives.

Then why did so many conservative state legislators pass laws outlawing homosexuality? And by the way, I'm a religious crazy. Here's another book for you (look in your local public library), Wierd: Because Normal Isn't Working.

No, it was religious people - and mostly women

You might want to read a history book that was required reading in an undergrad general studies history class I took in the late '70s, historian Frederick Lewis Allen's Only Yesterday (full text here). The book was about the roaring twenties, written in the early thirties. Allen's book contradicts what you believe. Please educate yourself, you've been fed incorrect data. Oh, you were correct about the "mostly women" part, though.

My grandparents were young adults in the twenties, and what they told me about that decade meshed with what the historian wrote.

They are against forcing you to spend part of each day working for the poor.

Stingy bastards.

Liberals are the least charitable with their own money.

Matthew 6:1 -

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. 3But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: 4That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

Nobody knows how much or how little I give, because I try to follow Christ's teachings. I'm not always sucessful, but I try. I won't even deduct my alms from taxes, and I expect my fellow Christians to do teh same. The conservatives you speak of are exactly the people Jesus spoke against in the above passage.

Good lord, I see we have a Lost Cause adherent here. Try reading the records from the seccession conventions of any of the Southern states. How about Alexander Stevens' Cornerstone Speech? State's rights was a myth made up by ex-Confederates AFTER the war was over. Men like Jubal Early, P.G.T. Beauregard, Alexander Stevens and Jefferson Davis made it their duty after the war to totally obscure slavery's role what the confederacy stood for. Literally, hundreds of historians have destroyed the foolish notion of the war for state's rights. http://www.amazon.com/What-This-Cruel-War-Over/dp/0307277321/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149324&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Race-Reunion-Civil-American-Memory/dp/0674008197/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149363&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Causes-Won-Lost-Forgotten-Hollywood/dp/0807832065/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149385&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Lost-Cause-Civil-History/dp/0253222664/ref=pd_sim_b_1 Any of these books will enlighten you.

Good lord, I see we have a Lost Cause adherent here. Try reading the records from the seccession conventions of any of the Southern states. How about Alexander Stevens' Cornerstone Speech? State's rights was a myth made up by ex-Confederates AFTER the war was over. Men like Jubal Early, P.G.T. Beauregard, Alexander Stevens and Jefferson Davis made it their duty after the war to totally obscure slavery's role what the confederacy stood for. Literally, hundreds of historians have destroyed the foolish notion of the war for state's rights. http://www.amazon.com/What-This-Cruel-War-Over/dp/0307277321/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149324&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Race-Reunion-Civil-American-Memory/dp/0674008197/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149363&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Causes-Won-Lost-Forgotten-Hollywood/dp/0807832065/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149385&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Lost-Cause-Civil-History/dp/0253222664/ref=pd_sim_b_1 Any of these books will enlighten you.

Good lord, I see we have a Lost Cause adherent here. Try reading the records from the seccession conventions of any of the Southern states. How about Alexander Stevens' Cornerstone Speech? State's rights was a myth made up by ex-Confederates AFTER the war was over. Men like Jubal Early, P.G.T. Beauregard, Alexander Stevens and Jefferson Davis made it their duty after the war to totally obscure slavery's role what the confederacy stood for. Literally, hundreds of historians have destroyed the foolish notion of the war for state's rights. http://www.amazon.com/What-This-Cruel-War-Over/dp/0307277321/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149324&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Race-Reunion-Civil-American-Memory/dp/0674008197/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149363&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Causes-Won-Lost-Forgotten-Hollywood/dp/0807832065/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149385&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Lost-Cause-Civil-History/dp/0253222664/ref=pd_sim_b_1 Any of these books will enlighten you.

Good lord, I see we have a Lost Cause adherent here. Try reading the records from the seccession conventions of any of the Southern states. How about Alexander Stevens' Cornerstone Speech? State's rights was a myth made up by ex-Confederates AFTER the war was over. Men like Jubal Early, P.G.T. Beauregard, Alexander Stevens and Jefferson Davis made it their duty after the war to totally obscure slavery's role what the confederacy stood for. Literally, hundreds of historians have destroyed the foolish notion of the war for state's rights. http://www.amazon.com/What-This-Cruel-War-Over/dp/0307277321/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149324&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Race-Reunion-Civil-American-Memory/dp/0674008197/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149363&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Causes-Won-Lost-Forgotten-Hollywood/dp/0807832065/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334149385&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Lost-Cause-Civil-History/dp/0253222664/ref=pd_sim_b_1 Any of these books will enlighten you.

I prefer "The Great International Paper Airplane Book", by Mander/Dippel/Gossage (from 1968!):

http://www.amazon.com/Great-International-Paper-Airplane-Book/dp/1578660289/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1334112956&sr=1-1

Probably the first serious book on the subject, and a must-read if you're into paper airplanes.

Amazon

Alibaba

As you can see, these things are a real goldmine on the retailer's slotwall peg.

The Great International Paper Airplane Book by Scientific America : http://www.amazon.com/Great-International-Paper-Airplane-Book/dp/0671211293
had, at least at the time, the "best performing" for time aloft, distance, etc. The designs were very solid.

I had that book as a kid!

The "Pocket Rocket" (while not a paper airplane) was seriously the most fun a 10 year old could have with a pack of matches, some tin foil and a paper clip. From there I graduated to some seriously large and quite dangerous solid fuel and liquid fuel rockets. None of that Estes rocket stuff, these were home brews, including a full LED indicated launch control board that was capable of 4 separate launches with fail safe and low power ignition check to the filament "fuses."

Times have changed, I'm sure some of my "creations" would be heavily regulated today.

I *love* this book.

http://www.amazon.com/Worlds-Greatest-Paper-Airplane-Book/dp/0830628460/ref=sr_1_1

There are at least 3 in there I like out of the 15 or so. One of them with a slight modification I got to go at least 200 ft (I and my friend were quite surprised at the result).

The Great International Paper Airplane Book by Scientific America : http://www.amazon.com/Great-International-Paper-Airplane-Book/dp/0671211293
had, at least at the time, the "best performing" for time aloft, distance, etc. The designs were very solid.

Judging from the high return rate of WP7 phones and their abysmal sales, im not at all alone in thinking it sucks.

No, you are not alone believing in myths of immanently high return rate of WP7 phones or their poor sales.

To start with the bottom line: the very computers that make the new NSA facilities possible mean that the NSA's formal purpose is essentially soon to be at an end. Nothing you or I say here will reverse that trend. The only issue is how soon the NSA as a whole recognizes that fact, and then how people there choose to deal with that reality.

Overall, you make some great points about social dynamics and changing the system vs. changing your place in the system. That is all very insightful. It is also true that young men tend to focus more on competition (making it in the system) and older men on cooperation (making the system keep working) - and our youth-oriented US culture tends to celebrate the competition side publicly more. I'd have to agree that, in general, someone overall much above average in abilities that are currently in demand is individually usually better off investing their personal efforts in changing their place in the system in the short term (rather than trying to change the system) as far as access to resources that they can then use for personal ends (like to have a prosperous family) -- especially when they are young (part of this is also female preference and standing out). In the short term, narrow selfishness often pays off (and even sometimes in the long term, too).

That is pretty undeniable -- although there are a few caveats even then. Not all women want the same thing in a man (contrast with the Haudenosaunee culture and the women's choice of Tadodaho, like someone more compassionate and philosophical like Leon Shenandoah). There is also the issue of what values are you teaching you kids who will care for you in your old age. There is the issue of what friends you keep and how likely they may be to stab you in the back if they are also extreme social climbers. Too many "pleasure trap" rich foods (or drugs) are bad for the health. There also seems to be a law of diminishing returns to more stuff, beyond which doing good deeds and giving gifts and so on is probably going to bring you more overall happiness; see:
http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/09/07/1519221/Researchers-Say-Happiness-Costs-75k

Probably there is even a law of diminishing or even negative returns to more "social power", although we could debate that.

There is also a sense in which many people who engage in a certain kind of economic race are statistically being "chumps" according to this:
http://conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/47/
"And maybe - just maybe - the people who have "made it" wrote those rules to keep the wannabes chasing a dream that's a mirage."

Trying to change the system (at least as an individual) can for most people be a guarantee of heartbreak, loneliness, poverty, having few kids, and so on. Not that nature probably really cares about the suffering if one person succeeds though. A salmon may lay a thousand eggs to see just one survive to adulthood.

Ultimately, we may well see a newer type of economy simply because the old one is just looking so ugly these days and dysfunctional these days, although some say that has been true for a century:
http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Rest-Us-Debunking-Science/dp/1595581014

And in general, some people are seeing the value of increased cooperation, even in the USA:
"No contest: the case against competition"
http://www.share-international.org/archives/cooperation/co_nocontest.htm
"Alfie Kohn, author of No contest: the case against competition, disagrees completely. He argues that competition is essentially detrimental to every important aspect of human experience; our relationships, self-esteem, enjoyment of leisure, and even productivity would all be improved if we were to break out of

This was changed last year. AWS doesn't charge for inbound traffic. Amazon Web Services Pricing Changes Effective July 1, 2011

Is this the same John Derbyshire that wrote Prime Obsession? I really liked that book (it's about the Riemann Hypothesis). It would be a shame if the author turns out to be a moron.

You're assuming that "racist" is a subclass of "moron" rather than a subclass of "asshole."

Yes, this book details Jack purposefully not paying suppliers, nice to hear it repeated from someone first-hand. According to the book they made a point of not paying suppliers, especially if they were interested in acquiring the company. When the company was cash-strapped and desperate, Commodore would buy them out.

It made more money on the short-term, but was bad for the long-run because it burned bridges in the industry. This made it hard for Jack to get now-wary suppliers and dealers to help him grow his business when he saw an opportunity for a new market/device.

I have to agree. Having learned my craft during those early years, I recall the times well. Jack was hated by Commodore dealers, hated by users... and I don't doubt hated by his own employees. The way I see it, he basically sucked all the money he could out of a successful company and reinvested very little to keep the success rolling. They were never able to move past their 6502-based designs (the Amiga design was purchased).

I have to recommend this is an outstanding read: http://www.amazon.com/On-Edge-Spectacular-Rise-Commodore/dp/0973864907

Is this the same John Derbyshire that wrote Prime Obsession? I really liked that book (it's about the Riemann Hypothesis). It would be a shame if the author turns out to be a moron.

Finally! It was getting too difficult to select books due to the number on each topic and similar content. I really hope this goes through as it will save me loads of time when selecting one from the 174 books on iphone 4s

Indeed. You have asshats like the Florida guy (with his clean-shaven face and necktie, Satan's leash and symbol of wealth and power) directly contradicting Jesus' teachings by disrupting funerals with "god hates fags" signs... he's going straight to hell. God doesn't hate anyone, but he does hate things you do no matter who you are. That hypocrite that scrapes a secondary sexual characteristic off his face should look at where the bible says not to make your self look like a woman. He's worse than any gay I know (actually the gays I know are good people whose sins are no worse than mine or yours).

Jesus spoke of people like him and Newt Gingich -- "beware of wolves in sheep's clothing."

My own church just finished a series of sermons titled "save a life -- break the rules." The first one was "don't have sinners in your life" and recomended (and had new ones available for five bucks) Arron Chambers' Eats With Sinners. Everyone got an envelope with a twenty dollar bill to spend eating with a lost soul that Sunday. The Chambers book mentions the very thing you mention, "you can't be a democrat and a Christian" and answers it with "Hogwash".

The new WDTV (that came out in November 2011) has N wifi built in.

http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-Streaming-Media-Player/dp/B005KOZNBW

I LOVE that thing (although I have it wired, as it has a GigE port as well). It plays absolutely anything you throw at it.

We have seen the enemy...and it is us.

Truer than you think: how many of the 16% of the US population that is employed by the government actually understand what's going on? I would say, that number is greater than 0. So: there are enemies of those who are clinging to power, who are employed by them.

I have 4 of the ZOTAC ND01, one ASROC, and one ASUS. While I use the Zotac more than anything the ASUS and ASROC kick the crap out of it. My ASROC compiles FAR faster than the Zotac even with the Zotac overclocked, probably a HDD bottleneck. The Zotac I use are also an odd size. The ASUS, now THAT is sweet! A real wireless antenna like the box you linked and quite small. It;s a bit cheaper than the new Zotac too I think but swapping in memory is a PITA, HDD swap is through a tray in the bottom and rocks. My ASROC has a DVD drive, the rest do not and it's only ever used to boot Acronis for backups anyway. Important thing is to get ION graphics though, CPU isn't a concern.

Check out the ASUS -> http://www.amazon.com/Asus-EB1012PB0320-Eb1012p-Fcbga559-Desktop/dp/B004X1PICM/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1333841714&sr=1-3

Intel video was your first mistake. Go ION and watch video stutter free with VDPAU.

http://www.amazon.com/Asus-EB1012PB0320-Eb1012p-Fcbga559-Desktop/dp/B004X1PICM/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1333841714&sr=1-3

That's more right than you think. One author claims that the average citizen commits three felonies a day without knowing it (due to the byzantine legal code which can be interpreted any number of ways): Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. It's an interesting read if you're into that sort of thing.

Cardinal Richelieu would be so proud.

That's more right than you think. One author claims that the average citizen commits three felonies a day without knowing it (due to the byzantine legal code which can be interpreted any number of ways): Three Felonies a Day: How the Feds Target the Innocent. It's an interesting read if you're into that sort of thing.

There's a distinction to be made between:

The Mouse that Roared, a best-selling cold war satirical novel by Leonard Wibberly, and

The Mouse that Roared: Disney and the End of Innocence, a more recent book about Disney's effect on culture.

There's a distinction to be made between:

The Mouse that Roared, a best-selling cold war satirical novel by Leonard Wibberly, and

The Mouse that Roared: Disney and the End of Innocence, a more recent book about Disney's effect on culture.

So.

What can we do which is bigger than the blackout?

I don't want to believe we don't stand a chance. We have to keep fighting.

Start by signing the petitions on EFF and avaaz.org sites. Then spread the word.

Also, you may want to consider setting up a Tor bridge using Amazon free tier (if you can't afford to pay $30 a month to sponsor a more permanent one)... just in case.

$400 is way to much for this kind of box when you have things like this Asus for $180. http://www.amazon.com/Asus-EB1012PB0320-Eb1012p-Fcbga559-Desktop/dp/B004X1PICM/ref=sr_1_3?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1333841714&sr=1-3

Atom Dual core D510 /w Nvidia ION. Add your own DDR2 RAM, and a small HDD or boot off a thumb drive. Then pick up a USB IR receiver for ~$15.

Install the XBMCbuntu or OpenELEC and your done. The mini keyboard with your box is handy, but outside of the initial configuration, I only every interface with a remote.

Streaming over the NAS is excellent if you're OK with building the collection. For about two years I've been using an old Mac Mini running Win7 automatically booting into Windows Media Center running the Media Browser addon. Add in this remote and everyone that comes over automatically wants the same setup. I've found that by far the most difficult parts of this setup are ripping your movie collection and finding an inexpensive way to back up your movies.

Having set all that up, I'm currently looking at XBMC because it has more options for customization and better control over what database is used to identify your movies for cover art, summary, ratings etc.

"ANDROID RED 7" Mini Laptop Notebook Netbook PC WiFi TONS of Apps Games Android 2.2 Market Flash Player Built-in Camera 4gb HD 256mb Ram 1-2HR Battery Life by WOLVOL" link

by Deborah Stone explores "fairness": http://www.amazon.com/Policy-Paradox-Political-Decision-Revised/dp/0393976254

The paper itself is an great review, but as they say at the end: "In a more general setting, even with the combined tools of Mathematics, Economics and Computer Science at our disposal it would seem that further progress will be no cakewalk." So, you make good points in those regards.

For example, one thing the paper does not seem to consider in my cursory skimming of it (which Deborah Stone talks about in "Policy Paradox") is if the number of entities changes during the course of the cake cutting and distribution. And also it is possible that the availability of other cakes may change during that time, too (like with the invention of cold fusion or LENR cheap energy devices). So, if the cake is the Earth, but there are future generations, and also new inventions to be discovered, and we might someday move into space, then how do we "divide" it now? And how does an entity, whether human or animal or plant or other, be deemed to have a right to a share?

As Albert Einstein said, reflecting your points:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm
"For the scientific method can teach us nothing else beyond how facts are related to, and conditioned by, each other. The aspiration toward such objective knowledge belongs to the highest of which man is capabIe, and you will certainly not suspect me of wishing to belittle the achievements and the heroic efforts of man in this sphere. Yet it is equally clear that knowledge of what is does not open the door directly to what should be. One can have the clearest and most complete knowledge of what is, and yet not be able to deduct from that what should be the goal of our human aspirations. Objective knowledge provides us with powerful instruments for the achievements of certain ends, but the ultimate goal itself and the longing to reach it must come from another source. And it is hardly necessary to argue for the view that our existence and our activity acquire meaning only by the setting up of such a goal and of corresponding values. The knowledge of truth as such is wonderful, but it is so little capable of acting as a guide that it cannot prove even the justification and the value of the aspiration toward that very knowledge of truth. Here we face, therefore, the limits of the purely rational conception of our existence.
    But it must not be assumed that intelligent thinking can play no part in the formation of the goal and of ethical judgments. When someone realizes that for the achievement of an end certain means would be useful, the means itself becomes thereby an end. Intelligence makes clear to us the interrelation of means and ends. But mere thinking cannot give us a sense of the ultimate and fundamental ends. To make clear these fundamental ends and valuations, and to set them fast in the emotional life of the individual, seems to me precisely the most important function which religion has to perform in the social life of man. And if one asks whence derives the authority of such fundamental ends, since they cannot be stated and justified merely by reason, one can only answer: they exist in a healthy society as powerful traditions, which act upon the conduct and aspirations and judgments of the individuals; they are there, that is, as something living, without its being necessary to find justification for their existence. They come into being not through demonstration but through revelation, through the medium of powerful personalities. One must not attempt to justify them, but rather to sense their nature simply and clearly. "

Cliff Stoll is probably unsurprised. As am I. A computer is a tool to accomplish a task, and giving computers to kids who don't have any use for them is likely to be less productive than giving them all math textbooks.

I think there's some irony there, but he's not too far off. Appears there's a place for physics/engineers in the financial sector. Not sure how big the market is, but the student whose fluid dynamics code we used went to work on Wall Street. Your mileage may vary, but it also looks to me like there are more satisfying lives than the life of an academic.

Crap. Here we go...

So I spent the last five years in two different grad programs and will soon be leaving with... an M.S... They were decent/very good programs and I was plenty smart, but spent most of ages 22-27 almost completely miserable for it. In short, I went because I was smart, capable, and loved the material, and I payed a pretty big price for it. It's a great thing if you can find a field that piques your curiosity like that, but I'd call it a necessary rather than sufficient condition for success in grad school. I like to get lost in equations and algorithms, and it just didn't dawn on me that I'd have to make such a desperate attempt to flaunt it and establish a name for myself. I don't have a big enough ego to think that the world revolves around my research topic much less me, and as silly as it sounds, I found myself sitting through presentations much more interested in the personality of the presenter than the content. Grown men (yes, usually men) spending their whole lives analyzing a particular wave mode? Are they passionate about it because it's interesting or because they're desperately clinging to something they can get funding for? It's a mind trip if you really sit there and analyze it. And the isolation. Hell. When I was most productive, it wasn't at all unusual for me to go three or four days without speaking to anyone. Probably wouldn't be so bad if you're of the female type. In the end, I decided that although nothing would technically prevent me from being a scientist and a good person, as stressed out, overworked, and miserable as I already was, and with no end in sight, the risk was just too great.

Sorry for the pessimism. I'll cut myself off there and refer you to a few sources I've found helpful:

worstprofessorever.com/
Former classics professor, now web developer/writer. Pretty awesome person. No longer an academic. You read that correctly. Not an academic. Awesome person. They're not incompatible, despite what some professors would like you to believe.

Demetri Martin On Puzzles And 'Important Things'
Because who doesn't love Demetri Martin? He made it most of the way through law school before dropping out and doing something that made him happy. I like his explanation around 10 minutes in.

Amazon.com: Winning the Games Scientists Play
I can't recommend this book enough. It's basically a book about how to advance your scientific career in the most efficient way possible. I picked it up randomly and got through half of it standing in the library stacks before I found myself too nauseous to continue. He starts off insisting he's only the messenger, but it's really pretty sickening that someone would attempt to codify and advocate everything that makes academia such a miserable place. Thing is, it's pretty much true. I love where he says that fake scientists with outside hobbies or interests that occupy too much of their minds should be identified and exposed with great pleasure. Wow.

Richard Hamming: You and Your Research
Yes, Richard Hamming of the eponymous window function! Advice on how to be a good researcher. "I don't like to say it in front of my wife, but I did sort of neglect her sometimes; I needed to study. You have to neglect things if you intend to get what you want done. There's no question about this."

Anyway, after all this, I figure someone who's not deterred in the least might actually

Question 7: 5 points
What’s the best thing a person can do personally to cut greenhouse gas emissions?
A. Drive a hybrid car
B. Eat one less hamburger a week
C. Buy all your food from local sources

Question 8: 3 points
Which is most effective at stopping the greenhouse effect?
A. Public-awareness campaigns to discourage consumption
B. Cap-and-trade agreements on carbon emissions
C. Volcanic explosions
D. Planting lots of trees

http://www.amazon.com/Super-Freakonomics-Patriotic-Prostitutes-Insurance/dp/0060889578

Surprising and fascinating.

This has nothing to do with things like offets for favored industries. Large companies now move the various parts of their business to whatever location gives the best net tax situation. Multinationals construct structures like the Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich to place sub-companies for minimal tax. Techniques like Transfer pricing are aggressively used to move the profit to the right place to tax it minimally. Games are played with repatriation too.

If none of the options are good, they lobby for the specific incentives they need. US companies operate in Delaware because the state legislature there passes whatever the companies ask for in return for the business. Been that way since the 80's. The Cayman Islands and the Bailiwick of Jersey are popular offshore locations because they bend laws to whatever companies ask them to. Even a low rate on a lot of money is still a lot of money relative to a small country or state.

Yes, this is all legal, but it's only legal because the companies have gotten the laws they lobbied and or bullied for. The result is that we're in a race to the bottom on taxation, where business flows to whoever is running the lowest margin government--which unsurprisingly is usually with the most favorable legislative kickbacks too.

Treasure Islands: Tax Havens and the Men Who Stole The World takes 350 pages to outline just how that happened over the last hundred years, it's a great read for those interested what I'd call "financial tech". The minute you allow companies to influence lawmakers by things like lobbyists and campaign contributions, the inevitable result is making what those companies want legal. The corporate side is unsurprising given that corporations are by definition immoral. The fact that voters are ignorant to how they are being conned is really the problem here. The lawmakers who are complicit and benefitting in all of these schemes shouldn't just be voted out, they should be prosecuted as traitors for hire.