Slashdot Mirror

It comes down to the definition of Life. While Hawking seems to find value and fulfillment in his life and endeavors other may define what Hawking calls Life as a 'fate worse than death'.

It also has to be vastly different to be diagnosed at 21 http://neurologicalillness.suite101.com/article.cfm/dr_stephen_hawking_and_als than at 35 - 55 as commonly occurs.

> Good, I will keep a window open with the picture of a rabbit with a pancake on its head and have my cursor on it most of the time. Let them figure out what targeted ads to show me then.

It seems that you'll get something like:

* Enjoy TLC's delicious Bunny Pancakes with Strawberry Butter
* Buy Easter Bunny Pancakes
* Make Bunny Rabbit Pancakes in your microwave!

"Well, volunteer rescuers are protected by good samaritan laws - nearly every state has them."

If only you were right "The court ruled 4-3 that only those administering medical care have legal immunity, but not those like Torti, who merely take rescue action. The justices said that the perceived danger to Van Horn in the wrecked car was not "medical." The court majority said the 1980 Emergency Medical Service Act, which Torti's lawyers cited for protection, was intended only to encourage people to learn first aid and use it in emergencies, not to give Good Samaritans blanket immunity when they act negligently."

This article has a lot more information but basically it boils down to the law protecting bystanders providing medical care but not those who attempt to rescue.

it's a real shame, someone could be screaming for help but you have to just watch them burn or risk a million dollar lawsuit.

Yes, yes I do sir.

Salt crust roasting fish

the space program

Oh yes. That immediately led to all sorts of space activities by us citizens,

Seriously? I'm just as pissed as the next grounded cowboy, we were promised rocket-ships after all. But the space program has affected us citizens directly and indirectly in profound ways. Here are just a few hits from a quick google search. Enjoy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Race#Legacy

http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/10-tech-breakthroughs-to-thank-the-space-race-for-617847

http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/apollo.htm

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/pdf/80660main_ApolloFS.pdf

http://www.marsdaily.com/reports/NASA_Derived_Technology_Captures_Unique_Inaugural_Image_999.html

http://space-exploration.suite101.com/article.cfm/nasa-space-technology-inventions-and-products

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/industry-02f.html

Moore has definitely taken a more combative approach.

In fact, in a recent speech, Moore decried copyright "radical extremists" with a "babyish" attitude toward copyright.

Notice the same phrase?

Same phrase, same PR firm's that organize all the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) sounds bites, talking points, strategies for lobbyists and bought politicians alike. All extremely well crafted to incite emotional response (in this case, Balanced Copyright Proponent == Extremist, associates with Terrorists) in the minds of listeners, against any balanced copyright point of view. Unfortunately the label loving public will most probably lap it up and believe it.

Ships are routinely tracked using AIS transponders. There are free mapping services online. See for example:

Tracking Ship Positions Possible Worldwide with Free AIS Services

Newspapers were subsidized by the Federal government until about 1840 or so, due to the founder's desire to make sure there were plenty of options for people to be well informed.
Link here.

Well, these aren't the only things being used to fight the whole concept of body scanners. Its just the another piece against their usage. In fact there are other, more better arguments against these scanners. Arguments like the images being used in 'less then professional' ways. Another problem being is they just don't work well enough.

Cute graph, but the fact that he uses the term "Democrat Party" instead of "Democratic Party" indicates a bias.

But don't be insulted. This article tells it better than I can:

The truly unfortunate result of the constant carping on this trivial distinction between “Democratic Party” and “Democrat Party” is that it serves as a distraction; therefore, instead of addressing the issues, the aggrieved Democrat retorts that the offending Republican uttering the shortened form ”insults the party,” as partisan hack Paul Begala complained about Bush’s use. Other sword-swallowing partisan Democrats such as those of the DailyKos ilk like to pounce on any and every use of that term by conservatives, even when many times that use is inadvertent, as in Bush’s case, and therefore meaningless.

None of that matters as the graph was found at FreeRepublic.com. That is a right wing site. I posted it as full disclosure and I expected people to actually look at the sources and verify the data itself. Unfortunately, you fell for the "Attack the Messenger" and "Guilt by Association" fallacies. You seem to have a problem with that. Instead of looking at the data, you look at who is bringing it to you and throw it out with no consideration of its accuracy.

Both parties do it, it simply has now gotten obnoxious enough for all to see. If you go back to Lincoln's era, the politics was just as nasty. Politicians do it when they have nothing to contribute but are afraid their opposition does.

Actually the nastiness goes back further, it goes back to the 1780s-90s at least. Some so called Christians campaigned negatively about Thomas Jefferson before he was elected President. A Reverend Jonn Mason[.doc] said Jefferson was "a profane philosopher and an infidel." "Christians!" he exclaimed, "it is thus that a man, whom you are expected to elevate to the chief magistracy, insults yourselves and your Bible!" During the campaign of 1800 TJ and John Adams, who were lifelong friends before the campaign, each camp accused the other of ugly stuff. In 1828 Andrew Jackson's wife Rachel Jackson was called a slut, adulteress, or bigamous. She ended up dying before he won, some say the scandal caused her to have a heart attack. Jackson blamed the press on her death.

Falcon

Both parties do it, it simply has now gotten obnoxious enough for all to see. If you go back to Lincoln's era, the politics was just as nasty. Politicians do it when they have nothing to contribute but are afraid their opposition does.

Actually the nastiness goes back further, it goes back to the 1780s-90s at least. Some so called Christians campaigned negatively about Thomas Jefferson before he was elected President. A Reverend Jonn Mason[.doc] said Jefferson was "a profane philosopher and an infidel." "Christians!" he exclaimed, "it is thus that a man, whom you are expected to elevate to the chief magistracy, insults yourselves and your Bible!" During the campaign of 1800 TJ and John Adams, who were lifelong friends before the campaign, each camp accused the other of ugly stuff. In 1828 Andrew Jackson's wife Rachel Jackson was called a slut, adulteress, or bigamous. She ended up dying before he won, some say the scandal caused her to have a heart attack. Jackson blamed the press on her death.

Falcon

Same for me! Right up until I realized the kid was 9....

So that means we should try him as an adult, right? *snark*

Yes,here is an example of it gone wrong.
http://canadianhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/science_of_eugenics_abused

http://americanaffairs.suite101.com/article.cfm/high_std_rates_abstinence_ed_link
http://www.newsweek.com/id/74005
http://gayteens.about.com/b/2009/11/17/rising-std-rates-linked-to-abstinence-only-education.htm
http://www.avert.org/abstinence.htm

Just a few links off the top google search results on the subject. While facts will certainly never really matter to people who feel so strongly in favor of religious indoctrination and against sex, it's certainly easy for the rest of us to see the obvious effects at work here. It's a lovely subject of discussion between fundamentalists and enlightened people, but for the sake of all adolescents who are just starting out on this whole sex thing, I'd rather see that relgious brainwashing stay out of sex education (or any form of education for that matter).

Einstein did not find out what he found out by calculatign[sic], first he understood the physics behind it after eh calculated for us the formula E=MC^2

Man, you have no idea what you're talking about. Einstein was having severe problems with General Relativity until his mathematician friend, Mercel Grossman, looked at what he was doing and pointed out, "hey, you need to describe this using these things called tensors.": look here

Before that, Hermann Minkowski, a mathematician, had looked at Einstein's Special Relativity and thought, "hey...if we describe these things in four dimensions, these equations become really elegant." Yes, Minkowski space was derived from the physics, but the math dealing with higher dimensions than just three was around long before.

Yes, of course, no one even mentions energy efficiency, which is why the Obama administration has been pushing for more energy efficient lighting, applicances, homes, automobiles, and industry. But don't tell anyone I mentioned it. It's a secret!

your missing the big view. this stuff is often produced by the rich, the powerful, the elite. the point of such laws is in large part to suppress anything embarrassing or that could be used for blackmail.

http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/021006_elitist_perversion.html
http://www.infowars.net/articles/january2007/030107UN_Sex.htm
http://news.branyvnimani.cz/?path=&article_id=9262&add_appdx=1
http://crime.suite101.com/article.cfm/modern_day_slavery
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/haveyoursay/2010/03/can_catholic_church_overcome_c.html

It seems that you are wrong. An airplane (with an all metal fuselage) is also a Faraday cage.

I don't like giving my bank details to anyone.

Why not? My bank details, involve my name, my bank account number and... That's it (BIC/SWIFT eventually for international trasactions). You do know what you can do with that information? Send ME money. That's it. At least, that's how it works in my part of Europe. If indeed, somewhere else you only need those information to withdraw money, I'd keep it close to my chest too.

Look at one of the guys who sells OpenBSD stuff in Europe: kd85.com. Scroll down to "Trivia". You'll find his address, his bank details (if you know how to read them, of course) and you surely find his full name on the website too. Do you really think he is at risk at any moment doing this? Nope... As said, the information is enough to give him money. There are many (european) sites who give you bank details like this.

Direct debit does involve that kind of data, BUT the main part of it is that you give them an authorization to withdraw money. In my country the company to which you give that authorization needs to send it to the bank to make it valid. Call the bank, annul the direct debit and the company is unable to withdraw. (Authorization method number two in the Wikipedia article. Why anyone would accept authorization number one is beyond me.)

Even Visa's database has been hacked over the years, so do you expect any old company to be able to protect your data?

VISA is not a bank account, and no, I don't expect them to protect that kind of data. However, as I said, only with my name and bank account, they're not going to get far. The authorization resides at the bank which I trust much more than the odd business.

At one point when the fraudsters were having trouble accessing my accounts via telephone banking, they somehow managed to find the name of my account manager and called the bank asking for her by name!

I understand that identity theft is a serious issue and I do understand laws and regulations are different in the US. (Much laxer... and the banking system is archaic.) I know, I'm going to give anecdotal evidence again, but I never met anyone at my side of the pond that was victim of identity theft. I Googled the issue, and found some interesting insights. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but point number three should give you a hint on how the fraudsters got the information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_salt#Composition
http://cookingresources.suite101.com/article.cfm/cooking_with_sea_salts

fucktard

No. First of all, animals raised in human company are pretty much permanently stuck in a juvenile state. They have not been taught to fend for themselves and the urban and suburban environments aren't the same thing as "the wild" - available resources are far more restricted. Don't think that because your cat occasional brings a bird to the stoop that it could live a healthy life without any human support.

I think we should do an experiment. Release pets into the wild and see what happens.

Nature always finds a way.

Between 1979 and 1984, the researchers recruited pregnant women living in poor areas of Cincinnati, which had a high concentration of older, lead-contaminated housing, into the Cincinnati Lead Study. They measured the women's blood lead concentrations during pregnancy as an indication of their offspring's prenatal lead exposure and the children's blood lead levels regularly until they were six and half years old. They then obtained information from the local criminal justice records on how many times each of the 250 offspring had been arrested between becoming 18 years old and the end of October 2005. The researchers found that increased blood lead levels before birth and during early childhood were associated with higher rates of arrest for any reason and for violent crimes. For example, for every 5 g/dl increase in blood lead levels at six years of age, the risk of being arrested for a violent crime as a young adult increased by almost 50% (the "relative risk" was 1.48).

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/576717_sidebar1
http://toxicology.suite101.com/article.cfm/irreversible-effects-of-toxic-lead-brain-damage

My parent said:

This has nothing to do with the autistic boy in the video

The summary said:

a YouTube video showing a boy with Downs syndrome

And the internets at http://autism.suite101.com/article.cfm/autism_and_down_syndrome said:

One set of co-morbid conditions that are experiencing an upsurge in research is the existence of an autism spectrum disorder in an individual who also has Down syndrome

If autism and Down syndrome can coexist, it seems reasonable they can also not coexist, and that they therefore are different things.

Please don't confuse the two.

> "The most common snow crystals by far are the irregular crystals. These are small, usually clumped together, and show little of the symmetry seen in stellar or columnar crystals."

If two symmetrical crystals get clumped together and hence become irregular, that nonetheless doesn't invalidate the perfect symmetry extant before the clumping. Thus the mistery persists...

> "As the crystal becomes larger, however, branches begin to sprout from the six corners of the hexagon (this is the third stage in the diagram at right). Since the atmospheric conditions (e. g. temperature and humidity) are nearly constant across the small crystal, the six budding arms all grow out at roughly the same rate."

Of course, branches growing from all corners don't have to form the same way -- under any atmospheric condition. Were this to be a sufficient explanation, a number of equal flakes would be formed -- all under the same conditions.

I'm sorry but this explanation looks illogical to me.

From the cited page:

> What synchronizes the growth of the six arms?
Nothing. The six arms of a snow crystal all grow independently, as described in the previous section. But since they grow under the same randomly changing conditions, all six end up with similar shapes.

And why don't they all turn left? Since they are under the same conditions, they would all turn left. Or right. See how pointless?

> If you think this is hard to swallow, let me assure you that the vast majority of snow crystals are not very symmetrical. Don't be fooled by the pictures -- irregular crystals (see the Guide to Snowflakes) are by far the most common type.

Even so, the photos do a superb job of showing striking symmetry. Should it exist in the first place? Does it have something to do with Saturn's hexagon? (ok, the last part admittedly just for show)

> If you don't believe me, just take a look for yourself next time it snows.

It may take a while where I live. Maybe centuries.

> Near-perfect, symmetrical snow crystals are fun to look at, but they are not common.

Looking at the the Guide to Snowflakes I have the exact opposite impression. One (maybe 2) is not symmetrical.

From http://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_symmetry_of_snowflakes

> Molecular Structure

> The growth of snowflakes and other ice crystals is determined by the molecular structure of water itself. Water is made of one oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms. The two hydrogen atoms attach chemically to the oxygen atom at angles making a V-shaped molecule. Three V's can connect together to make a molecule with six arms. Actually, the crystal growth is messier and more complex than this, but crystals have self-similarity. This means that the atomic geometry of any crystal is reflected in it's macroscopic structure.

Ok, now we have material for an hypothesis. The V-like water molecules can be influenced both by the instant weather varying conditions _and_ by other nearby molecules (they have an electrical property because of the V-shape.

See: http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0861883.html

> Many of the physical and chemical properties of water are due to its structure. The atoms in the water molecule are arranged with the two H-O bonds at an angle of about 105 rather than on directly opposite sides of the oxygen atom. The asymmetrical shape of the molecule arises from a tendency of the four electron pairs in the valence shell of oxygen to arrange themselves symmetrically at the vertices of a tetrahedron around the oxygen nucleus. The two pairs associated with covalent bonds (see chemical bond) holding the hydrogen atoms are drawn together slightly, resulting in the angle of 105 between these bonds. This arrangement results in a polar molecule, since there is a net negative charge toward the oxygen end (the apex) of the V-sh

See my subject-line above, & realize that this:

"In the 1700s it was perfectly acceptable to start sentences with a conjunction. And it is becoming increasingly prevalent again now" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 05, @05:13PM (#31040280)

This is not the 1700's, and the literacy rates, ESPECIALLY TODAY? Not good, see here:

Why is the literacy rate going down in the United States?

http://www.literacynews.com/2010/01/why-is-the-literacy-rate-going-down-in-the-united-states/

----

Perhaps because a foreign born person is at the wheel in academia now, like yourself, using incorrect grammar as you have?

Bottom-line here, is this: CORRECT ENGLISH SENTENCES DO NOT BEGIN WITH A CONJUNCTION LIKE THE WORD "AND"... get it?

(or doesn't the bulk of this information below tend to back me on that much??)

----

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

----

Yes, the majority of that does tend to back me, & I actually got a 770 on my SAT to get into college (which I graduated from no less, & working on yet another degree to my name now as we speak no less).

Much more seems to gravitate my direction, and it illustrates that what you wrote is NOT CORRECT ENGLISH, period.

APK

P.S.=> So, what did you do here, and here earlier also in attempting to troll me (which you admit you are off topic on to begin with here no less)? Ok:

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1505462&cid=30729986

Yes, it's obvious that you're the same "AC 'writing critique' slinging troll" who STARTED A SENTENCE WITH A CONJUCTION NO LESS there in the URL above - whom YOU said you were not HE, & that's clearly b.s. period.

Funniest part is, you did the SAME MISTAKE HE DID, right here in this very exchange as well:

"And no, I'm not the other AC that commented about your writing style in the link."

Please - don't attempt to tell others how to write, and don't try to tell us that "ebonics style english" is correct, when the bulk of the evidence I produce above states QUITE CLEARLY OTHERWISE.

Especially when you don't write well yourself, per your mistakes above in starting sentences with a conjunction, using "And" on your part!

(All that, & despite your stating you cannot read my posts? Well, you do an AWFUL GOOD JOB RESPONDING TO EACH POINT I MAKE, "isn't that odd" (sarcasm/NOT)... so who do you think you are kidding? Not I, or anyone else reading, you "AC writing critique slining troll", rotflmao)... apk

Did you even read the link you pasted me?

http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

In the 1700s it was perfectly acceptable to start sentences with a conjunction. And it is becoming increasingly prevalent again now. But why use a conjunction to start a sentence? There are many advantages:
It maintains an easy, conversational style.
It preserves a link between sentences, whilst still delivering in a short, punchy vein. (Great for on-line writing).
It reduces the need for long, wordy compound sentences.

It is not grammatically incorrect to start a sentence with 'or', 'and' or 'but', and never has been

My ability to still carefully go over your text and try to understand what you're trying to say doesn't make the text any easier to read. And like I suggested, you did actually stop using & and @ which alone makes your text a lot easier to read than in the initial post.

Others have suggested me even here on slashdot if I make an obvious grammatical mistake or misspell some word, and I've learned from it. The point here isn't about knowing all the times you should use a/an/the or if you write flawless English with no typos. It is that the general style of writing is hard to read. It applies to every language, not just English. Misspellings or minor grammatical errors don't affect that as anyone can easily go over them.

This is an old topic so I don't think many will even read this conversation, expect maybe with a small grin on their face.

"Like I said, English isn't my main language, and forgetting things like "a" is quite an easy thing to do because we do not have such in our language." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 05, @01:27PM (#31037222)

NO, you actually said you write better English than I do, right here ->

"but I still manage to write better English than you)." - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 04, @02:31PM (#31025686)

No, you clearly do not, as you begin sentences with a conjunction which is a huge mistake grammatically no less...

It is also QUITE FUNNY HOW YOU NOW ALSO SEEM TO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING I WRITE AS WELL TOO ("funny that", eh? NOT!)

And, you said you were NOT the "AC writing critique slinging troll" who bothered me before here on the EXACT SAME THING (telling me "what good writing style is" etc. et al) here -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1505462&cid=30729986

He's the same one who STARTED A SENTENCE WITH A CONJUCTION NO LESS - whom YOU said you were not HE. Funniest part is, you did the SAME MISTAKE HE DID, right here in this very exchange as well:

"And no, I'm not the other AC that commented about your writing style in the link." - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 04, @02:31PM (#31025686)

CORRECT ENGLISH SENTENCES DO NOT BEGIN WITH A CONJUNCTION LIKE THE WORD "AND"... get it?

----

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

----

Do you think I believe you at this point? Do you think ANYONE READING HERE BELIEVES YOU OR ANYTHING YOU SAY BY THIS POINT??

(Once more: Who do you think you are fooling, other than yourself???)

All in all, I must actually THANK you... why? For proving that your admittedly OFF TOPIC TROLLING has gotten the better of you, in your attempting to tell me "how t write" you only show how poorly your write this language yourself, and that's you're nobody to take seriously in your 'writing critiques' you sling here is all.

APK

P.S.=>

"However the point here is that your text is really hard to read. I do not need to hold any English master to say it." - - by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 05, @01:27PM (#31037222)

Again - it's rather "odd" (not) how you can read everything I write and respond to it well enough (grammatical mistakes & all on your part nonetheless), isn't it? Not. So... Here's a piece of advice, for you:

LEARN TO READ THIS LANGUAGE THEN, AND BEFORE TELLING ANYONE HOW TO WRITE WELL IN IT - you don't do a good job of it anyhow, on writing it yourself, per the examples thereof above, and TRY TO STAY "ON TOPIC", please. I say that, because as you can see?? Your off topic trolling only ended up making you w

"I do not hold PHD in English" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 04, @02:31PM (#31025686)

Dearest "AC writing critique slinging troll":

The correct phrase above would be "I do not hold a PHD in English" (note the "a")?

LMAO!

APK

P.S.=> You sure you want to keep telling ME how to write correctly, troll? You did a horrible job of that here too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1505462&cid=30729986 where you tried to tell me "how to write" and "what good writing style is" (inclusive of stating you were a professional writer no less too, lol (NOT)), and what did you do there?

YOU DID THE SAME THING HERE, LOL, as you did there, only once more here, again:

"And no, I'm not the other AC that commented about your writing style in the link." - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 04, @02:31PM (#31025686)

CORRECT ENGLISH SENTENCES DO NOT BEGIN WITH A CONJUNCTION LIKE THE WORD "AND"... get it?

----

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

----

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward",

ROTFLMAO! Ah... you're just "too, Too, TOO EASY" to get the better of in debate intellectually, and moreso based on your blatant lack of a mastery of proper written english (and, yet you have the NERVE to try to tell others like myself, college graduates (770 on my SAT in English by the by), how to write? Please, you're making my stomach hurt I am laughing so hard by this point)... apk

But it is not clear whether the internet causes depression or whether depressed people are drawn to it.

Exactly. And an earlier study showed a correlation between television watching and depression. Worth repeating: correlation is not always causation.

In this case, I could easily see the correlation as: depressed people are too depressed to do anything requiring activity, so they tend to sit around and watch television or surf the web.

While what you say is true to a point, it neglects what this trade *is*, and the fact that China is just barely below trade with Canada at this point, and will over take it real soon now.

Canada exports to the US (and to a greater level daily to China) mostly raw materials, not much different except in scale from some third world colonized nation. There are exceptions of course, they do manufacture cars and parts, etc, and some modern networking ear, etc, but by the numbers, petroleum exports top the list.

http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/canadas_top_exports_imports

  Whereas on the other hand, China exports to the US almost completely value-added manufactured items, i.e. economic multipliers, things that build their internal economy to a greater degree than just raw resource exporting. Raw resources for export don't make the top ten list for them, and I doubt they want to do much of that, they would rather use the stuff they got themselves..along with everyone else's stuff they can get their hands on:

http://www.uschina.org/statistics/tradetable.html

Raw resource exports are a short range economic windfall,"fat city" type thing.. long range, sorry, an exploited colony is an exploited colony...

You know the old saying, which is true, as well as witty; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee.

- can you please enlighten us, what part of that statement is true as you said? That a horse was designed? That a camel was designed? That a camel is 'worse' than a horse? Is camel worse than a horse for the environment it lives in?

So that old saying, is it truly true?

It's an Alan Sherman quote (despite what some people claim) from "Peter and the Commissar" (with Arthur Fiedler and the Boston Pops). [dig] You are obviously too young and lacking in culture [/dig] (despite your low /. ID) to have heard it. So, to you, I give a quote you must certainly have heard: "Whoosh!"

Per my subject-line above? Yet another screwup, as BOOBY (bobintetley (643462)) has FINALLY given himself away as the "dude troll" who stalks me around here.

FIRST PERTINENT EVIDENCE THEREOF (his constant use of the slang phrase "dude" as he uses here in his first reply to me here -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1505462&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=30721040 :

"Dude, the regular perl script has fewer funky symbols than your post. You may or may not have a good point, it's hard to tell with all that noise in your posts. Hint: Stop using & all the time, there is a regular word you can use instead. 'and'. See? Wasn't that hard to type." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @04:26AM (#30721040)

LOL, now comes the FUNNY part, where he lies about being some PROFESSIONAL WRITER, & got his ass shot down first in his not having a PHD in English, but after his statements of being a "pro writer", lol... HE MADE A GRADE SCHOOLER'S LEVEL ERROR IN ENGLISH GRAMMAR (by starting a sentence with a conjunction, in the word "AND"):

====

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1505462&cid=30729986

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer...)

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... apk

====

Keep stalking me you twisted little freak "Booby"?

Well, then I will just keep shooting you down with your OWN BLATANT SCREWUPS, & lies exposed easily!

APK

P.S.=> Again - "too, Too, TOO EASY"++... apk

I assume you're proposing your idea of slander and damages, not trying to recite your current understanding of the law in this area.

IANAL, but a quick google turned up this interesting page about defamation and harm. Quoting (emphasis mine):

The Libel or Slander must Harm or Damage the Plaintiff

Where libel is concerned, damages are presumed and the plaintiff need not prove special harm. Special harm is harm to one's reputation that results in monetary losses. If the libelous matter requires proof of additional, or extrinsic, facts for one to understand its defamatory meaning or its reference to the plaintiff, it is called libel per quod, which does require proof of special harm.

Slander generally requires proof of special harm. If the defamatory statement amounts to slander per se, however, the plaintiff is not required to prove special harm; damage is presumed. Slander per se includes statements that the plaintiff engaged in criminal behavior or sexual misconduct or that the plaintiff has a communicable disease. Statements that adversely affect the plaintiff's trade or profession are also slander per se.

Read more at Suite101: The Law of Defamation: Libel or Slander and Causing Harm to Reputation http://law.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_law_of_defamation#ixzz0dNf06jQq

So, in your precise scenario, spreading lies (verbally or published) that damage my business reputation are automatically presumed to cause damage. According to this Wikipedia page, all states of the United States except Arizona, Arkansas, Missouri, and Tennessee consider "allegations or imputations injurious to another in their trade, business, or profession" to be defamatory per se.

They even armed at least one space station with a 23mm automatic cannon and to this day have a firearm aboard the International Space Station

Heh, it's even better than I expected. I was trying for a pun there, but they really did put some significant firepower up there.

http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1505462&cid=30726518

Straight from that URL above, lol, is where this "allegedly professional writer" troll was critiquing me on 'writing style' & what did that outright screwup troll do? LOL: He got "taken down", right on his ballcourt (supposedly, but after what's below, we all know it was a line of b.s., including his running when I asked he his real name &/or books he supposedly wrote etc. et al):

----

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html [english-test.net]

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html [english-test.net]

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html [cliffsnotes.com]

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but [suite101.com]

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer...)

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... apk

----

Now, the REAL beauty of his f-up here? Well, the next time (and there will be one, these nothing to lose (because they haven't done anything notable whatsoever) trolls always come back for more) this 'professional writer (not) troll' tries to "critique my writing" again?

LMAO, I'll just toss this one RIGHT INTO THAT SAME ANONYMOUS TROLL'S FACE... and trust me, it WILL be a pleasure!

APK

P.S.=> Me? I LOVE IT... lol! Thanks troll, for being the PERFECT SCREWUP you always are... more ammo for me, provided by you! apk

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer... but you certainly ARE an OFF TOPIC TROLL, & most likely a liar about your alleged "professional writer" status, because when I asked your name or books of note you have written? YOU RAN, lmao... Utterly hilarious!)

Heh, I "took you out" on YOUR alleged ballcourt too, WITH EASE... too easy.

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... & of course? My usual "too, Too, TOO EASY!"... lol! apk

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer... but you certainly ARE an OFF TOPIC TROLL, & most likely a liar about your alleged "professional writer" status, because when I asked your name or books of note you have written? YOU RAN, lmao... Utterly hilarious!)

Heh, I "took you out" on YOUR alleged ballcourt too, WITH EASE...

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... & of course? My usual "too, Too, TOO EASY!"... lol! apk

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer... but you certainly ARE an OFF TOPIC TROLL, & most likely a liar about your alleged "professional writer" status, because when I asked your name or books of note you have written? YOU RAN, lmao...)

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... & of course? My usual "too, Too, TOO EASY!"... lol! apk

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html [english-test.net]

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html [english-test.net]

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html [cliffsnotes.com]

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but [suite101.com]

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer...)

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... apk

"And no, I don't have a PhD, but I do know spelling, grammar, and usage much better than you do, apparently." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 11, @08:42AM (#30722214)

"The rule against starting sentences with and, but or because is a hypercorrection teachers insist on in elementary school so that kids don't stay in the habit of writing fragments" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"I remember learning in grade school that this was absolutely out of the question" - http://www.english-test.net/forum/ftopic7888.html

"Novice writers should be especially careful not to begin sentence fragments with conjunctions." - http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/Section/Is-it-okay-to-begin-a-sentence-with-and-.id-305408,articleId-27216.html

"Formal alternatives to 'and', include words such as 'furthermore', 'moreover' and 'additionally" - http://languagestyle.suite101.com/article.cfm/grammar_starting_a_sentence_with_or_and_or_but

Want more, Mr. "Truly Anonymous Coward", who claimed to be a professional writer above?

(No way you are a professional writer...)

APK

P.S.=> "Judge not, lest YE be judged"... apk

Roger Sessions did a simple order-of-magnitude estimate. Order-of-magnitude estimates are common practice in science and engineering and were especially used by the great estimator Enrico Fermi, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist: http://www.education.com/activity/article/Fermi_middle/ http://physics.suite101.com/article.cfm/fermi_problems_physics_estimation If you don't like the numbers, provide your own values, justify them, and calculate your own estimate. Or work up an entirely different approach, describe it, and calculate your own estimate. Either approach would give a basis for informed dialogue.

which was the metaphor you used for the creation of the bomb shows anything about my "talent for deceit.

It wasn't about *you* personally, so don't take it personally. It was about America being Pandora - talk about high fucking maintenance - take it fucking easy dood.

If there's a huge gap in my classical knowledge that's causing me to miss a reference, I'll give you the apology due.

then pay attention to what Hermes taught Pandora.

You do realize that America has over 2 million of its people in jail, with a good proportion in there for political reasons.
Like all successful police states these people aren't busted for expressing anti-Government views. Instead laws are passed taking away fundamental rights (remember your bill of rights is not an exhaustive list and IIRC amendment #9 basically states this) then the undesirables are targeted.
The favourite rights to be removed are things like the right to grow plants and have the products in your possession.
While this is bad enough, it's your country and if the citizens like having a police state so they can feel safe that is your right.
What really pisses me off about America is the way you treat foreign political activists. If they're lucky they get extradited and spend years in the inhuman American jails perhaps being raped. If they're not lucky they get tortured and/or killed.
Also you push other countries around to remove the same rights from their citizens. See drug laws and the most recent thing being IP laws with ACTA being pushed by Americans to take away my right to play the DVD I purchased on my computer and my right to make personal copies of stuff and lend stuff to you to make personal copies.
Shit, when the leader of a political party that I voted for is being threatened with the death penalty on a trumped up charge of money laundrying (making him a king pin) and a charge of selling seeds, a law that has only been enforced against political activists, there is something wrong. One article, http://peacesecurity.suite101.com/article.cfm/marc_emery_and_the_bc3 google Marc Emery for many more.
Of course like all police states if you are a respectable citizen you don't have much to worry about. Just keep your nose clean and you won't have your life ruined by being accused of diddling children.

"Drop into the glacier"?????? Errr, no - you didn't read that anywhere, did you? You've presumed or assumed that he fell into a crevasse. From his wounds, he was hunted down by enemies. Nothing indicates that he fell - it seems that he died of an arrow wound, bleeding, and exposure. My reading suggests that he was encased by the glacier after death. If you care to look around the 'net, there are other instances of people being exposed after thousands of years, from other glaciers.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/08/25/world/body-of-ancient-man-found-in-west-canada-glacier.html

http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2009/08/melting-glaciers-reveal-bodies-from-the-ice.html?cid=6a00d83451cd3769e20120a4d01ff2970b

This one begins to explain why a body falling into a crevasse is unlikely to remain intact for thousands of years.
http://www.mummytombs.com/mummylocator/featured/glacier.htm

http://archaeological-burial-practices.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_qilakitsoq_mummies

You can dig around more if you like. I'm not especially enamored with conspiracy theories, but things that might throw a monkey wrench into the works of climate change advocates don't tend to make it into the news.

http://microbiology.suite101.com/article.cfm/alcohol_based_hand_cleansers
http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/qa.htm#e

What kills influenza virus?
Influenza virus is destroyed by heat (167-212F [75-100C]). In addition, several chemical germicides, including chlorine, hydrogen peroxide, detergents (soap), iodophors (iodine-based antiseptics), and alcohols are effective against human influenza viruses if used in proper concentration for a sufficient length of time.

Actually the US is one of the largest, if not the largest, food exporter in the world.

Not for long, if things keep going at the present rate.

Curious I wanted to see what foods China exports and found this: Chinese Food Exports to US Top US$4 Billion in 2007. At the top of that list, with more than $2 Billion in exports is fish and shellfish. That won't last long as overfishing is depleting fish stocks. The next highest is fruits and preparations including juices, at less than half that, only $816 Million. The top 10 Chinese food exports to the US come to less than $5 Billion. Yet in that same year the US exported $11.2 Billion of corn. Now those aren't really comparative because the China data is for export to the US whereas the US data is total corn exports. Darn, after several minutes looking I didn't find either US exports to China or total Chinese exports. My Google fu isn't that good.

As for California's Prop 2, packaging animals like the prop makes illegal requires a lot more antibiotics and other drugs which leads to the reduced effectiveness of the drugs. Personally as much as I can I eat organic free range food.

Falcon

Most people won't be aware that they have a parasite

Did you not bother even reading the FAQ on the site you linked to? It says the following about the Cod Worm:

Q: What would happen if a cod worm were to survive in your stomach?
A: Nothing life threatening or permanently damaging will happen, but you are likely to experience a terrible stomach ache, nausea, and vomiting.

So, no, I really doubt anyone infested with said worm wouldn't realize it.

And looking through the list on this site, it appears the Cod Worm is the only common salt water parasite that humans contract. And only an idiot would eat raw fresh water fish.

So I repeat, if parasites were a problem, sushi eaters would be the proverbial canary in the coalmine... unless there aren't that many of them, in which case it doesn't matter either way, since cooking fish renders it completely safe.

What's alarmist is the H1N1 scare.

Which only reinforces my point. If fish parasites were *really* a problem, the media would be all over it faster than you can say "manufactured hysteria".

BTW, nice try attempting to change the subject.

Yeah, sorry, that wasn't a very complete description. I think he basically proposed the system we have today, but the summary doesn't exactly make that clear. This one is more clear:

The Canadian rail system completed, Fleming took the train from Halifax to Montreal. Comparing the clocks on arrival with his watch, he found no comparison. “Between Halifax and Toronto,” commented Hugh Maclean in his 1969 book, Man of Steel, “he finds the railways employing no less than five different standards of time.” Confusion did not end in Canada. The systems around the world were not in lines and in the United States, time-keeping was even more chaotic, making train schedules almost impossible. Sanford Fleming decided to do something about it. Standard Time Zones proposal devised

Using Greenwich, England as the starting point, he divided the globe into zones, assigning times at one-hour intervals. The governments of the world were not ready and he couldn’t even get his ideas heard. With assistance from the Marquis of Lorne, Canada’s Governor General of the time and the Canadian Institute, an organization for the advancement of science that he helped to establish in 1849, Fleming’s proposal was printed and sent to nations around the world. His plan was met with approval.

The International Prime Meridian Conference was held in Washington, DC in October, 1884. After discussions and votes, Standard Time was set to begin on January 1, 1885 across the globe. Though there were some countries jealous over England being classed as the Prime Meridian, eventually all countries followed. There were some variances for local standards, as there are even yet. Ahead of the crowd, Canada had already instituted the program in 1883, a year before the conference.
complete article

The makers of the watch claim it gives peace of mind to parents

Yeah, because that's the most important thing in bringing up children, right?

It's called trust, parents. One evil detail about trust is that knowing is the opposite of trust. By replacing trust with knowledge, you're removing it. So if you don't trust your kids, you have to check on their every move. If you don't trust the people, you have to have surveilance everywhere. It really is the same mindset that's driving both of these developments of society.

And yes, this includes the kidnapping scenario. What, exactly, do you gain by a real-time alert that your kid has been kidnapped? It's not like it would prevent it.

Now the numbers. Yes, you read stuff like this:

Every 40 seconds in the United States, a child is reported missing or abducted.

(source)

Note the words "is reported missing". If you dig into the numbers a little deeper, you find that:

152,265 [of 876,213] of the persons reported missing in 2000 were categorized as either endangered or involuntary.

(source)

That's 17% of the reported cases where something serious is actually going on. But that's just the surface. Actual crime statistics show a better picture:

In 1999, only 115 children were abducted by strangers with the intent to keep, kill or hold them for ransom.

(source)

Now that's a very different figure (almost the same year, though). It does exclude sexual abuse, which accounts for a fair share and is certainly almost as frightening to a parent than a murder. However:

"Family kidnapping" accounts for nearly 50% of all child kidnappings.

(same source)

Now we're getting somewhere. Look, in the "reported missing" as well as in the "involuntary" cases above, one very common case is fully included, as if it were equal to a kidnap-rape-and-kill case: That of one parent in a divorce taking the child without the other parent's knowledge or consent. Yepp, legally that's a kidnapping.

So if you throw enough stuff together under the same label, you can get big enough numbers to frighten parents senseless with. Which you can then use to sell them stuff, pass new laws or whatever it is that was your original intend.