Slashdot Mirror

Alcohol is one such example. Ever heard of alcohol POISONING?

Similarly, you can take "magic" mushrooms which are poisonous but get you high at the right dosage without dying.

The GP is obviouly very naive. There are TONS of toxins in foods/drinks people eat today. Alot of food is grown in chemical fertilizers unless it's organically grown. If you eat fish, you probably are eating a very tiny amount of mercury and various other toxins in the water. Also in the states, some farmers inject their cows with bovine growth hormones to improve milk yields. Okay, so maybe hormones aren't a toxin persay, but to me, they are evil/unwanted and at the same level as toxins as they can harm your body. Maybe you've heard about Mosanto and the Fox News cover-up where they prevented reporters from releasing a story about Mosanto's rBGH and how it causes cancer not to mention the needless pain and suffering of cows (due to swollen/infected udders, it's a condition called Mastitis).

Here in Canada, rBGH is banned, but it is still not banned in the United States. IMO, the U.S government rather maintain a dominant economy over risk loosing billions if word of U.S infected beef got out, so they will do whatever they can to prevent that from happening. But, they won't test EVERY cow for mad cow (because they claim that would be prohibitively expensive). Infact, I saw a story on CBC a few years ago about a small time beef farmer in the states that wanted to market his beef as having been 100% tested for mad cow disease. The government stepped in and prevented him from testing every cow and selling it because this would set a "precedent" where all the big time beef farmers would have to follow suit, costing them alot of money in the process. So this small time farmer was prevented from marketing his beef as 100% mad-cow tested, pretty sad really (I wish I could find the original story, it was quite amazing that the government would interfere with a small-time business like that to protect the beef industry as a whole, meanwhile putting beef consumers at a greater risk for the sake of profit).

US Continues to Violate WHO Mad Cow Guidelines
Old CBC News Story about a cover-up
More info about rBGH

According to this website, The U.S. is presently testing only 1 out of every 18,000 cows slaughtered (for Mad Cow Disease). Guess what the test rates are elsewhere?
Quoted from this website: ...In Europe, where they test 1 out of every 4 cows, and Japan, where they test 100% of all cattle bound for human consumption...

So U.S tests 0.0056% of their cows, where as Europe tests 25% and Japan tests 100%. Guess I'll stick to non-american beef from now on.

There may be hope of a reprieve from President George Bush yet!

One bit of irony here is that, because the hunter had a 'polar bear' tag, he was under threat of prosecution if the bear was determined to be a grizzly - however, now that the matter is cleared up, he can pick up the carcass while he's on another hunting trip in the same area - for a grizzly! (for which he presumably purchased a license for...)

Martell had a tag that allowed him to hunt polar bears, but conservation officers were threatening to charge him with shooting a grizzly. It could have landed him 12 months in jail. Martel wasn't very happy, having spent $50,000 on his trip. He was also worried he wouldn't be able to take the hide back home with him to Idaho. ENR will return the hide to Martell, who is already back in the territory - on a grizzly hunt. CBC recently had a write up on the issue.

That's it!

The real threat isn't coming from the tens of thousands Islamist extremist terrorists trained in Afghanistan by Al Qaeda, in Saddam's Iraq, and their associates (minus the captured ones). No!

The 9/11 attacks, the attack on the USS Cole, the Bali bombings, the Madrid bombings, the London bombings, the shoe bomb attempt, the US embassy bombings in Africa, the attacks and bombings in Saudi Arabia, the bombing in Jordan, the attacks in the Philippines, the Beslan attack, the dirty bomb plan, the plan to attack the soccer stadium in the UK, the plan to attack Heathrow, the 19 person ring just broken in Michigan, the hundreds of Hezbollah operatives in the US, including the recent Hezbollah Mexican border smuggling ring broken, and the rest all show its not the terrorists that are the problem!!

The real threat is that *cough* fantasy *cough* cabal in the White House which the "insiders" on Slashnut know are secretly planning to ignore the next election with mass destraction. (How this will actually work, nobody explains. The Constitution limits the term in office and provides for succession.) Meanwhile, outside Mom's basement (or with more meds), the rest of us see them trying to detect and stop the next terrorist attack, prefereably before they can use a salvaged anthrax or chemical weapon from Saddam's discards, or maybe even start a nuclear Jihad with a little help, or simply send a suicide bomber to a crowded mall.

Lets reach over into one of the Evolution v. Creation debates and grab Occam's Razor. Which way do you think it cuts here?

I think I understand the impulse behind William F. Buckley's statement that he would rather be governed by the first 2000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. It seems to require a certain degree of sophistication to engage in certain forms of idiocy.

It's actually called a grizzlar

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/wildlife/
David Paetkau would like to call the odd-looking bear discovered in the N.W.T. in the spring of 2006 a "pizzly," but the geneticist who confirmed the creature was a hybrid grizzly/polar bear, lost out in the office pool to "grizzlar."

---
This anonymous post was brought to you by the image-protected password: "brashly"

Actually it is happening here. The Chinese have flooded Western countries with industrial spies, informants, and worse. They use the hordes of legitimate Chinese immigrants and visitors as a smoke screen. They do more than steal secrets, they also intimidate groups/people they consider subversives who might otherwise get the idea they are out of reach. Paranoid fantasies? Even the incredibly pussified Canadian Government is getting concerned:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew s/20060414/china_espionage_060414/20060414/

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew s/20060420/china_espionage_060420/20060420/

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/06/15 /spies050615.html

Mind you, even under the intense pressure that you westernian exercise on them as the final customer of cheap products, they all prefer working in factories than in the fields in the country.
I advise you seeing the 'Getting Rich' segment of the 'China Rises' documentary from the CBC.
It might recall you what rural exodus was in Europe and America some decades ago. It's the same.

This was discussed in an episode of the CBC radio program "Quirks and Quarks" a week or two ago.

You make an excellent point. Advertisers obviously belive that currently they are recieving value for dollars spent. But are they acctually receiving that value. How are result measured? The artical that you linked to was regarding an industry event so there would be an obvious bias. What I would love to see would be consumer surveys asking how often people click on those banners and text ads and how often they acctually buy from said sites. Then a determination could be made if these ads drive sales, increase market awareness or do not much of anything at all. If you work in advertising this data should be trivial to gather. If it isn't then I would have to come to the conclusion that someone, somewhere hasn't done their homework.

There is an obvious answer here, and it has been there all the time. Media IS the new net. Bittorrent makes distrubution of very large files to thousands of users practical, not requiring a massive expenditure just in bandwidth that would drive up the cost of running such a site unreasonably (Anyone remember Heavy.com?). Advertisers have (finally) realized that internet users, esspecially heavy net users are a market niche all unto them selves and form a unique demographic that can be marketed to. So release video.. TV shows, movies on the net with ads targeted to the internet demographic. People WATCH commercials. Some people really LIKE commercials. I know I would be more than happy to watch a commercial or two at the beginning of a TV show if it ment that I could download it legally. At the very least then the cops will only have to go after those who distribute the show sans commercials, instead of just about every bittorrent user in the world, like the situation now. Watching ads IS a method of payment. If you place ads in something people want and in a way that means they will watch them (IE at the beginning or end of a TV show. See http://www.cbc.ca/clips/national/thenational.ram for a good example) Then, ads could be for new shows, things people WANT. Television adds are still THE most effective method of advertising. It has amazed me that the ad industry is still stuck in the era of print advertising in newspapers in the online world.

Just my two cents.

Toyota seems to agree with me. If that means anything to you.

What you're describing does exist. It's called the CBC.

The coverage is of a very high quality, and unbiased for the most part. Being publically funded (note that that does not mean government-run), it does not have the obvious corporate concerns of the American news media.

Watch an hour of news on FOX or CBS, and then watch an hour of CBS News. The difference is a matter of night and day. Soon enough you see how twisted most of the American news media truly is.

I'm thinking more in terms of how more and more jobs are leaving the country because the worker base in other countries is smarter and the companies have to spend less on education. Ref this artivle: http://www.cbc.ca/cp/business/050630/b0630102.html

It talks about how Toyota turned down offers from several American states and instead built a plant in Ontario because "Ontario workers are well-trained."

From the article, "The level of the workforce in general is so high that the training program you need for people, even for people who have not worked in a Toyota plant before, is minimal compared to what you have to go through in the southeastern United States," said Gerry Fedchun, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, whose members will see increased business with the new plant.

You have to be motivated and non-lazy to get educated, thus my point.

CBC Radio's Quirks and Quarks did a feature on DBS back in January. See http://www.cbc.ca/quirks/archives/05-06/jan21.html #1

This has been featured in an episode of Quirks and Quarks (a radio show/podcast) last January. Click on the link for details.

before the Chinese government gets its hands on this technology anyway.

Make way for zhoogle!

> Canada actually consumes more energy per person than the US and also produces more CO2 per person.

The first claim is true, but the second---the one pertinent to this discussion---is false, even using the most recent data available (2004).

Canada uses more energy per capita than the US, but has lower CO2 emissions per capita (link1, link2, link3).

You think so? Never materialized? Huh?

The floods in central Europe broke records lasting hundreds of years. Repeatedly in 1998,1999, 2002 and now 2006. Just try searching for floods in Central Europe. Or prehaps for heavy snowfall this year. Or perhaps about the wild-fires in recent years. No. Never happened. In your basement.

(Argh, preview for teh win) I am truly no fan of Walmart,particularly with their union-busting tactics, but I think the censorship alegations of the article are over-done. Consider that Walmart stocks F.E.A.R. This is a thoroughly violent game with lots of swearing, splattering blood and flying body parts. If Walmart is willing to stock this, what exactly aren't they willing to stock? Surely being unwilling to stock even more violent, more profane games than this is hardly a sign of virulent censorship, but more a case of genuinely looking out for what their customers' interests?

I am truly no fan of Walmart,particularly with their tactics, but I think the censorship alegations of the article is over-done. Consider that Walmart stocks F.E.A.R. This is a thoroughly violent game with lots of swearing, splattering blood and flying body parts. If Walmart is willing to stock this, what exactly aren't they willing to stock? Surely being unwilling to stock even more violent, more profane games than this is hardly a sign of virulent censorship, but more a case of genuinely looking out for what their customers' interests?

They're working on it... http://www.cbc.ca/story/science/national/2006/04/0 7/virus-nanowire-20060407.html
Seems to me they also covered this on Slashdot. http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/04/ 07/0635213

Cheers,
~Allen

The CBC is actively promoting opensource options.

The $%^!!*#%! Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) has archives of their shows in Real format...

Past Canadian business interests in the US:

http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/2001/06/ 11/railmergers_010611.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4374502.stm

Go NAFTA! Go belief in capitalism, free markets, etc.
Go right out the window, if dealing with... you guessed it...

"A WTO panel on Tuesday upheld U.S.-imposed anti-dumping duties on imported Canadian softwood lumber, but said the U.S. government's calculations of the duties were wrong." - CBC

"A WTO panel on Tuesday upheld U.S.-imposed anti-dumping duties on imported Canadian softwood lumber, but said the U.S. government's calculations of the duties were wrong." - CBC

The new Harper government in Ottawa has cut funding to groups studying climate change. That has to be as chilling as gagging scientists.

How many leg-length per second can the "average" human achieve?
 
A lot less than this thing once its perfected and turned into a meat-powered robot.

What the hell are thoses scientists up to? Why don't we just go ahead and program them to bat us around a bit before they eat us?
 
  Sheeesh.

I just don't get it - I prefer to listen to the music that I enjoy and focus on it, not use it as background noise in a work environment or (worse) while walking, cycling or driving.

You don't listen to the radio in your car? Are you driving a Ford Model-T?

Admittedly, in the car I listen to CBC Radio 1. But thanks to podcasting, I can listen to many R1 shows on my iPod as well.

You see, modern "music" players aren't solely for music. You can get audio books (I'm personally not a fan, but some people like to be read to). You can download podcasts, and not just amature stuff (I highly recommend CBC's Quirks and Quarks weekly science programming). So if music isn't your thing, listen to something else -- it's an audio device after all, and there are several different types of audio.

As to listening to music at work, well I suppose it depends on your work environment. Personally, I'm currently working in a computer lab where the people in my general vicinity like to work in complete silence. The ambient sounds are little but typing. Day in, day out, clickety-clack-clack-clack. It's enough to put anyone to sleep. Now personally, I'm the sort of person where ameggadon could be going on around me and I'd still be able to concentrate on the task-at-hand, but the people working in the lab with me are apparently easily distracted, and prefer no sounds, so I listen to my iPod from time to time (although not constantly, and certainly not every day). Sometimes it will be podcast material, and sometimes it will be music.

But perhaps that's just the nature of the type of work I do, and my surroundings. But that's the good thing about personal audio devices like the iPod -- listen to what you want when you want, or if you prefer, don't bother buying one and listen to nothing.

Yaz.

I just don't get it - I prefer to listen to the music that I enjoy and focus on it, not use it as background noise in a work environment or (worse) while walking, cycling or driving.

You don't listen to the radio in your car? Are you driving a Ford Model-T?

Admittedly, in the car I listen to CBC Radio 1. But thanks to podcasting, I can listen to many R1 shows on my iPod as well.

You see, modern "music" players aren't solely for music. You can get audio books (I'm personally not a fan, but some people like to be read to). You can download podcasts, and not just amature stuff (I highly recommend CBC's Quirks and Quarks weekly science programming). So if music isn't your thing, listen to something else -- it's an audio device after all, and there are several different types of audio.

As to listening to music at work, well I suppose it depends on your work environment. Personally, I'm currently working in a computer lab where the people in my general vicinity like to work in complete silence. The ambient sounds are little but typing. Day in, day out, clickety-clack-clack-clack. It's enough to put anyone to sleep. Now personally, I'm the sort of person where ameggadon could be going on around me and I'd still be able to concentrate on the task-at-hand, but the people working in the lab with me are apparently easily distracted, and prefer no sounds, so I listen to my iPod from time to time (although not constantly, and certainly not every day). Sometimes it will be podcast material, and sometimes it will be music.

But perhaps that's just the nature of the type of work I do, and my surroundings. But that's the good thing about personal audio devices like the iPod -- listen to what you want when you want, or if you prefer, don't bother buying one and listen to nothing.

Yaz.

Finding good podcasts is a challenge.
Here's one! CBC Radio 3.
New music, many styles. Available in M4A, MP3, and OGG Vorbis.

Maybe this has something to do with Bush's apparent love of killing Canadians. Case in Point

Another case of selling fear to get attention.

http://www.gremcoinc.com/insight1.html
http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/doomsday.html

"Access to a waiting list is not access to health care," two of the justices wrote in their decision.

People don't vote for third parties. The republicans will say "look what happened with Perot! You'll throw away your vote and the Democrats will win!". The Democrats will say "look what happened with Nader! You'll throw away your vote and the Republicans will win!".

And so, that is why we need a sensible election system that let's people vote their conscience, and ranks the candidates so that nobody's vote is thrown away.

Additional links: http://www.avro-arrow.org/Arrow/CBC.html

From the CBC Archives: http://archives.cbc.ca/IDD-1-75-275/science_techno logy/avro_arrow/

How DARE you attack the beacon of truth, the wellspring of knowledge that is Anne Coulter.

From a CBC interview between the great Ms. Coulter and Bob McKeown:
Coulter: "Canada used to be one of our most loyal friends and vice-versa. I mean Canada sent troops to Vietnam - was Vietnam less containable and more of a threat than Saddam Hussein?"
McKeown interrupts: "Canada didn't send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter: "I don't think that's right."
McKeown: "Canada did not send troops to Vietnam."
Coulter (looking desperate): "Indochina?"
McKeown: "Uh no. Canada ...second World War of course. Korea. Yes. Vietnam No."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, took a pass on Vietnam."
Coulter: "I think you're wrong."
McKeown: "No, Australia was there, not Canada."
Coulter: "I think Canada sent troops."
McKeown: "No."
Coulter: "Well. I'll get back to you on that."

McKeown tags out in script:
"Coulter never got back to us -- but for the record, like Iraq, Canada sent no troops to Vietnam."

Hilarious video here.

Since you can't *give* the Canadians weapons

Right. And when Canada buys weapons from another country we get used pieces of crap that nobody else wants. We don't buy new - we take the mothballed junk.

I read on the CBC today that some entymologists don't think this project will work due to the size of electronics. Perhaps that is the case today, but they may just get there with more advances in microelectronics.

Westblogs

So are you saying that the Americans eat poorly and exercise less because of high health care costs? Or are you impling that diet and exercise has no impact on health care costs?

To those regions, a conservative is what the US would call a liberal Democrat.

And since when did liberal Democrats wanted to reach out to Bush? Warming relationship with the US is one of their goals.

We spend more and get less. Nice.

My wife got an MRI in less than a week so that counts for something. If Canadian healthcare is so perfect, why are private clinics poping up?

From http://www.canadian-healthcare.org/page6.html The advantage of private clinics is that they typically offer services with reduced wait times compared to the public health care system. For example, obtaining an MRI scan in a hospital could require a waiting period of months, whereas it could be obtained much faster in a private clinic. Why did they pass a law to prevent private clinics? What are they afraid of?

Under federal law, private clinics are not legally allowed to provide services covered by the Canada Health Act. Regardless of this legal issue, many do offer such services.

From http://www.mult-sclerosis.org/news/Dec2002/WomanwM SCanadianPrivateClinics.html

But at the Canada Diagnostic Centre clinic in Halifax, Viscount said public demand for private clinics in Nova Scotia -- where waiting times are weeks rather than months at hospitals -- will remain.

In her case, the MRI scans of her brain could show telltale fissures and reveal multiple sclerosis, an unpredictable neurological condition that in extreme cases causes blindness and paralysis.

With early treatment, the disease is easier to combat. That's why patients eager to relieve anxiety will keep paying for private-clinic results, said Viscount.

"I think it's another option for the public," the woman, in her 20s, said before her test.

"You have a choice of where you want to eat, where you want to drink. This is the same.

From http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/01/11 /private-care060111.html

But critics say the cost associated with such private clinics is out of reach for most families. Sharon Sholzberg-Gray, president of the Ottawa-based Canadian Healthcare Association, says a family of four could face a $10,000 bill.

"There's a certain limited client base for that. That is not the way to run a health-care system and that is not going to solve access issues for most Canadians."

She says the opening of private clinics highlights the government's need to address a shortage of family physicians.

Combined with dwindling savings and rising healthcare costs, it looks like Canada's on track to becoming a 51st state of USA. No wonder why its citizens are fed up with their government. Do you still think that the grass looks greener on the other side? Oh and bare in mind that the above article was updated January 2006.

Maybe out of work but would have a hay-day being owned by a Slashdotter on crack!

Section 319, Public incitement of hatred:

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Actually, yes.

Street Cents (a Canadian television show) has had the name "Me, Inc" for a while, here's a guide where they use it, it's basically people starting their own little business

Let's See:

1. Dec 18/2004: Dan Brown Sued
2. Aug 05/2005: Dan Brown Cleared

And February 27th, 2006: Slashdot posts it!

Evidence ...

http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national/2005/02/07 /Sports/ctv050207.html

You're absolutely full of shit. The media levy only applies to cds and 90% of the time it's ignored by vendors. You can go and buy a 50 pack of brand name cd-r disks at best buy for $25 (levy included). Let's see.. at $0.59 per disk the levy is $29.50

also see http://www.cbc.ca/story/arts/national/2005/08/08/A rts/levy050808.html

I think the slashdot article is longer then the actual article being linked.

The CBC has a good article about the case today.

If you have beachside property, I suggest you sell while it's still structurally sound.

BTW: Canada's CBC has it's own take on the melting glaciers in Greenland.

[sic]

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Also... some fun reading on -ise vs. -ize. Being Canadian, I have very little doubt that colour, favour, neighbour, centre, litre, metre, judgement, and travelling are the correct spellings, but due to our mixed French-English heritage, I accept that when it comes to -ize vs. -ise, there's probably (like perl) more than one way to do it.

For me, en français, c'est une organisation, but in English it's an organization... but -ise does look prettier, I'll give it that ;-)

"From what I understand, the government asked for web search strings alone. No identifying information at all."

This is a trial run for the DOJ. If this works out, you can guarentee that personally identifyable information will be requested next. That request will come under a Patriot Act Secret Warrant, so you'll never hear about it. The goverment will use that data to secretely and warrantlessly tap your other communications, you'll be arrested and sent to a secret prison where you'll have no access to a lawyer or the red cross. Sure you may try to starve yourself or hang yourself from your bedsheets after 4 or 5 years, but the guards will make sure to tie you down and force feed you so that your misery can continue.

Yeah, Google's the bad guy here.