This guy didn't fail, he failed in such an epic way he should be embarrassed to show his face in public.. for the rest of his life. I don't know that there's an adjective sufficient to describe his level of failure, certainly not one I've heard in 50 years.
Actually, it has to be a direct substitution. Carbon is the backbone of the molecules in ours, and every living thing on the planets, bodies. Carbon is it.. it's the skeleton all the other stuff gets attached to carbon, and only carbon. There isn't a mixture of a few carbon based molecules here, a few silicon based molecules there, a few boron based molecules over that direction... just carbon; and there is a very specific reason for that.
My argument is a lot less like substituting a line of code into a program of a different language, and more like me saying if you hook up your mouse, monitor and hard drive to a tree stump, it's not going to work the same as if you'd hooked them up to your computer. Different computer languages are still computer languages; carbon is unique in what it does, there is nothing else that comes remotely close.
If you truly want to have your mind blown with what carbon is capable of making and how it works, take the chem majors version of organic chemistry (the pre-med version ain't got squat on it, fraking bio-majors).
Now, we can keep going through the 1950's pulp sci-fi ideas about silicon, or boron, or whatever, but the chemistry just is not there. They make a few good stories, and a few bad ones, and maybe, just maybe if the universe is infinite, someday, somewhere incredibly exotic we might stumble upon one of these 1950's ideas in real life (after all, science can't prove a negative).... but if we do, it won't be able to live up to half of the criteria we use to define life (pun probably intended).
True... but that's the point, WE have nuclear missiles and smart bombs, and WE have to plane for a decade just to get to our moon.
THEY on the other hand, mastered traveling between star systems. What kind of weapons do you suppose THEY have? I can see it now, Billy Bo Bob shoots and actually hits one of their infantry.... They withdraw from the area, then vaporize everything in 100 square miles with a single shot from some random small weapon they only recently remembered was in some closet somewhere, which is good because they don't want to destroy the entire planet after all.
I'm just saying, the technology needed for the interstellar travel is just slightly more than what it takes to produce any weapon we have, and of course, anytime we produce a weapon, we also try to produce a defense against it.
Of course, if they've figured out how to efficiently travel between stars, i'd lay money that no weapons we have are going to do a damn thing to them. These movies where the backwoods hicks with a hunting rifle take down the interplanetary killing machine is just about the biggest grasp at unbelievable as possible.
Ebola wasn't very good anyway, it kills too fast to be much of a good, old fashioned, plague starter. On the other hand, there is at least one chemical agent from the old USSR arsenal which does somewhat the same thing, only it's nice enough to liquify large parts of the soft tissue afterwards.
Unfortunately, imagination isn't the issue, chemistry is. Silicon simply doesn't do what carbon does when it forms bonds. Substituting silicon into place of carbon chains would not yield molecules that do the same thing, act the same way, or even look the same (silicon is a much larger atom).
Better yet, talk to an organic chemist. First day of organic our prof detailed why silicon based life is a non-starter. Make chains of carbon and you get such an incredible variety of things that they make up over half the compounds known; make chains of silicon and you get: more sand.
Your biggest worry should be the Military making a superplague, and being stupid enough to let someone dumb enough to use it actually get access to some of it.
However, if you've tried to use empiricism to prove the existence of God, you'd run into the small little hick up that in the past 75,000 years of so that humans have had some form of religion, not a single piece of empirical evidence has been found to bolster your argument that there is a god. Applying empiricism to god (or God, or gods) results in THE blanket result of: there isn't one, period.
Fascism is authoritative conservatism, always has been. You need to get a basic political education.
Philosophy of government that stresses the primacy and glory of the state, unquestioning obedience to its leader, subordination of the individual will to the state's authority, and harsh suppression of dissent. Martial virtues are celebrated, while liberal and democratic values are disparaged. Fascism arose during the 1920s and '30s partly out of fear of the rising power of the working classes; it differed from contemporary communism (as practiced under Joseph Stalin) by its protection of business and landowning elites and its preservation of class systems. The leaders of the fascist governments of Italy (1922 – 43), Germany (1933 – 45), and Spain (1939 – 75) — Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco — were portrayed to their publics as embodiments of the strength and resolve necessary to rescue their nations from political and economic chaos. Japanese fascists (1936 – 45) fostered belief in the uniqueness of the Japanese spirit and taught subordination to the state and personal sacrifice. See also totalitarianism; neofascism.
--- Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
The only ones that will suggest to you that fascism is somehow progressive or liberal are those that have been brainwashed by the truly ignorant/stupid talk radio crowd.
Actually i think what it's saying is: when you privatize something (the developing of the app), the government (and the taxpayer) gets screwed out of much more money than they should have because businesses are greedy, and willing to lie and deceive for extra profit.
Apparently geeks have more balls to try something difficult. The tragedy of the human species is worthless wimps that want to hold the species back get a free ride when the people with balls (aka: geeks) push the boundaries forward. No, i don't actually consider myself a geek... probably more a geek sympathizer. What i am is anti-worthless lazy anachronistic leeches populating the buttocks of humanity.
The rampant speculation about bus sized worms eating entire towns is wholesale propaganda. Please go back to your fine dining and dancing, and let this nonsense pass from your head.
Uncle Ira
Re:Only "troubled" if you're not Lockheed Martin
on
The F-35 Story
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately it's this type of archaic thinking to believe any country would want to physically invade or occupy us, that keeps us wasting vast amounts of money on useless shit for "defense." Per person, Switzerland has more weapons in the hands of it's population than we do, yet it hasn't been in a war in over 600 years. We not only need to change our entire idea of "defense," but also this "must be a macho dumbshit" mentality that our kids are skullfucked into believing.
Considering how Bush intentionally left out of the budget the cost of the both wars, as well as some other "home defense" spending, you have to check on the actual amount added to the national debt to see how much Bush really spent, which is MUCH higher than his "projected" budget deficit. I know, it's a great conservative talking point that Obama spent so much more than Bush, but anyone that tells you that is either outright lying to you, or is too ignorant/stupid to fact check the bullshit coming out of their mouth.
They pretend to care... say it like it is, they LIE about caring. They use that lie to gain the only thing they want: Power. The bigger problem is the idiots who believe them time after time.
Section 512(f) of the DMCA creates liability for knowingly making false claims in a DMCA takedown notice or counter-notice. See 17 U.S.C. 512(f). So, if you claim in a counter-notice that your content does not infringe the complaining party's copyrighted work while knowing this to be false, then the copyright owner can win damages from you, including court costs and attorneys' fees stemming from your wrongful counter-notice. Note, however, that this provision also works against a person or company sending a wrongful takedown notice. If someone claims in a takedown notice that you are infringing their copyrighted material while knowing this to be false, then you can win damages from them in a lawsuit. In recent years, the targets of wrongful takedowns have fought back and won damages and favorable settlements from individuals and companies sending bogus takedown notices. For instance, in Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc., 337 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (N.D. Cal. 2004), two students and their ISP sued voting machine manufacturer Diebold after it tried to use DMCA takedown notices to disable access to Internet postings of the company's leaked internal email archive. The court granted summary judgment to the students and ISP on their claim, finding that portions of the email archive were so clearly subject to the fair use defense that "[n]o reasonable copyright holder could have believed that [they] were protected by copyright." According to the EFF, Diebold subsequently agreed to pay $125,000 in damages and fees to settle the lawsuit. For another example, see Crook v. 10 Zen Monkeys in our legal threats database. Someone who has sent a baseless takedown notice about your content may be more inclined to back off if you remind him or her about section 512(f) of the DMCA, in addition to sending a counter-notice.
I'm thinking the whole "uncivilized barbarians" label came about less because the didn't have cities, which some did, but more for their propensity of pulling peoples livers our through their sphincter at a moments notice (or other acts of telling people to frak off that didn't meet with the aforementioned persons liking).
Tell that to China, who's currently kicking our asses. Eisenhower actually knew what socialism was as well, instead of just using the word for anything he disagreed with, unlike the current crop of fucking fascist conservatives.
If we come to the point where the environment is such that a rupture in a helium tanks makes it explode, driving will be the least of our worries. I suppose though, if we ever get around to the point where helium is being used for an energy source in cars, we can just have our Scottish engineer beam us where ever we want to go.
Slashdot Mirror
This guy didn't fail, he failed in such an epic way he should be embarrassed to show his face in public.. for the rest of his life. I don't know that there's an adjective sufficient to describe his level of failure, certainly not one I've heard in 50 years.
Actually, it has to be a direct substitution. Carbon is the backbone of the molecules in ours, and every living thing on the planets, bodies. Carbon is it.. it's the skeleton all the other stuff gets attached to carbon, and only carbon. There isn't a mixture of a few carbon based molecules here, a few silicon based molecules there, a few boron based molecules over that direction... just carbon; and there is a very specific reason for that.
My argument is a lot less like substituting a line of code into a program of a different language, and more like me saying if you hook up your mouse, monitor and hard drive to a tree stump, it's not going to work the same as if you'd hooked them up to your computer. Different computer languages are still computer languages; carbon is unique in what it does, there is nothing else that comes remotely close.
If you truly want to have your mind blown with what carbon is capable of making and how it works, take the chem majors version of organic chemistry (the pre-med version ain't got squat on it, fraking bio-majors).
Now, we can keep going through the 1950's pulp sci-fi ideas about silicon, or boron, or whatever, but the chemistry just is not there. They make a few good stories, and a few bad ones, and maybe, just maybe if the universe is infinite, someday, somewhere incredibly exotic we might stumble upon one of these 1950's ideas in real life (after all, science can't prove a negative).... but if we do, it won't be able to live up to half of the criteria we use to define life (pun probably intended).
True... but that's the point, WE have nuclear missiles and smart bombs, and WE have to plane for a decade just to get to our moon.
THEY on the other hand, mastered traveling between star systems. What kind of weapons do you suppose THEY have? I can see it now, Billy Bo Bob shoots and actually hits one of their infantry.... They withdraw from the area, then vaporize everything in 100 square miles with a single shot from some random small weapon they only recently remembered was in some closet somewhere, which is good because they don't want to destroy the entire planet after all.
I'm just saying, the technology needed for the interstellar travel is just slightly more than what it takes to produce any weapon we have, and of course, anytime we produce a weapon, we also try to produce a defense against it.
Of course, if they've figured out how to efficiently travel between stars, i'd lay money that no weapons we have are going to do a damn thing to them. These movies where the backwoods hicks with a hunting rifle take down the interplanetary killing machine is just about the biggest grasp at unbelievable as possible.
Ebola wasn't very good anyway, it kills too fast to be much of a good, old fashioned, plague starter. On the other hand, there is at least one chemical agent from the old USSR arsenal which does somewhat the same thing, only it's nice enough to liquify large parts of the soft tissue afterwards.
Unfortunately, imagination isn't the issue, chemistry is. Silicon simply doesn't do what carbon does when it forms bonds. Substituting silicon into place of carbon chains would not yield molecules that do the same thing, act the same way, or even look the same (silicon is a much larger atom).
Better yet, talk to an organic chemist. First day of organic our prof detailed why silicon based life is a non-starter. Make chains of carbon and you get such an incredible variety of things that they make up over half the compounds known; make chains of silicon and you get: more sand.
Your biggest worry should be the Military making a superplague, and being stupid enough to let someone dumb enough to use it actually get access to some of it.
I'm sure there's an MOS for that.
Egads, Lovie, a Yale-man!
However, if you've tried to use empiricism to prove the existence of God, you'd run into the small little hick up that in the past 75,000 years of so that humans have had some form of religion, not a single piece of empirical evidence has been found to bolster your argument that there is a god. Applying empiricism to god (or God, or gods) results in THE blanket result of: there isn't one, period.
Fascism is authoritative conservatism, always has been. You need to get a basic political education.
Philosophy of government that stresses the primacy and glory of the state, unquestioning obedience to its leader, subordination of the individual will to the state's authority, and harsh suppression of dissent. Martial virtues are celebrated, while liberal and democratic values are disparaged. Fascism arose during the 1920s and '30s partly out of fear of the rising power of the working classes; it differed from contemporary communism (as practiced under Joseph Stalin) by its protection of business and landowning elites and its preservation of class systems. The leaders of the fascist governments of Italy (1922 – 43), Germany (1933 – 45), and Spain (1939 – 75) — Benito Mussolini, Adolf Hitler, and Francisco Franco — were portrayed to their publics as embodiments of the strength and resolve necessary to rescue their nations from political and economic chaos. Japanese fascists (1936 – 45) fostered belief in the uniqueness of the Japanese spirit and taught subordination to the state and personal sacrifice. See also totalitarianism; neofascism.
--- Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
The only ones that will suggest to you that fascism is somehow progressive or liberal are those that have been brainwashed by the truly ignorant/stupid talk radio crowd.
Actually i think what it's saying is: when you privatize something (the developing of the app), the government (and the taxpayer) gets screwed out of much more money than they should have because businesses are greedy, and willing to lie and deceive for extra profit.
Dare you to join the Polar Bear Club there....
Apparently geeks have more balls to try something difficult. The tragedy of the human species is worthless wimps that want to hold the species back get a free ride when the people with balls (aka: geeks) push the boundaries forward. No, i don't actually consider myself a geek... probably more a geek sympathizer. What i am is anti-worthless lazy anachronistic leeches populating the buttocks of humanity.
The rampant speculation about bus sized worms eating entire towns is wholesale propaganda. Please go back to your fine dining and dancing, and let this nonsense pass from your head.
Uncle Ira
Unfortunately it's this type of archaic thinking to believe any country would want to physically invade or occupy us, that keeps us wasting vast amounts of money on useless shit for "defense." Per person, Switzerland has more weapons in the hands of it's population than we do, yet it hasn't been in a war in over 600 years. We not only need to change our entire idea of "defense," but also this "must be a macho dumbshit" mentality that our kids are skullfucked into believing.
Considering how Bush intentionally left out of the budget the cost of the both wars, as well as some other "home defense" spending, you have to check on the actual amount added to the national debt to see how much Bush really spent, which is MUCH higher than his "projected" budget deficit. I know, it's a great conservative talking point that Obama spent so much more than Bush, but anyone that tells you that is either outright lying to you, or is too ignorant/stupid to fact check the bullshit coming out of their mouth.
They pretend to care... say it like it is, they LIE about caring. They use that lie to gain the only thing they want: Power. The bigger problem is the idiots who believe them time after time.
"But generally the vacuum state is considered the lowest-energy state possible."
I'm pretty sure a couch potato playing Farmville is the lowest energy state possible.
from: http://www.citmedialaw.org/legal-guide/responding-dmca-takedown-notice-targeting-your-content,br.,br. The highlighted part:
Section 512(f) of the DMCA creates liability for knowingly making false claims in a DMCA takedown notice or counter-notice. See 17 U.S.C. 512(f). So, if you claim in a counter-notice that your content does not infringe the complaining party's copyrighted work while knowing this to be false, then the copyright owner can win damages from you, including court costs and attorneys' fees stemming from your wrongful counter-notice. Note, however, that this provision also works against a person or company sending a wrongful takedown notice. If someone claims in a takedown notice that you are infringing their copyrighted material while knowing this to be false, then you can win damages from them in a lawsuit. In recent years, the targets of wrongful takedowns have fought back and won damages and favorable settlements from individuals and companies sending bogus takedown notices. For instance, in Online Policy Group v. Diebold, Inc., 337 F. Supp. 2d 1195 (N.D. Cal. 2004), two students and their ISP sued voting machine manufacturer Diebold after it tried to use DMCA takedown notices to disable access to Internet postings of the company's leaked internal email archive. The court granted summary judgment to the students and ISP on their claim, finding that portions of the email archive were so clearly subject to the fair use defense that "[n]o reasonable copyright holder could have believed that [they] were protected by copyright." According to the EFF, Diebold subsequently agreed to pay $125,000 in damages and fees to settle the lawsuit. For another example, see Crook v. 10 Zen Monkeys in our legal threats database. Someone who has sent a baseless takedown notice about your content may be more inclined to back off if you remind him or her about section 512(f) of the DMCA, in addition to sending a counter-notice.
I'm thinking the whole "uncivilized barbarians" label came about less because the didn't have cities, which some did, but more for their propensity of pulling peoples livers our through their sphincter at a moments notice (or other acts of telling people to frak off that didn't meet with the aforementioned persons liking).
Blonde roots run deep.
Tell that to China, who's currently kicking our asses. Eisenhower actually knew what socialism was as well, instead of just using the word for anything he disagreed with, unlike the current crop of fucking fascist conservatives.
If we come to the point where the environment is such that a rupture in a helium tanks makes it explode, driving will be the least of our worries. I suppose though, if we ever get around to the point where helium is being used for an energy source in cars, we can just have our Scottish engineer beam us where ever we want to go.
Sarge, is this going to be a stand up fight, or just another bug-hunt?