I was recently reading somewhere that crocodiles (and other Crocodilia) were at one time warm blooded. The evidence being that they have a 4 chamber heart like most warm blooded animals. It was theorized that they reverted to being cold blooded at some point in their evolution. Interestingly crocodilia also have a neo-cortex and diaphragm unlike all other extent reptiles. As usual Wikipedia has a bit about it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocodilia#Internal_organs
Depends on what you consider to be a right. Different countries seem to have arrived at different lists of rights. Your country includes things like owning arms, my country includes things like being able to vote if a citizen. Judaical decisions on rights vary quite a bit as well. Our countries supreme courts seem to have arrived at quite different interpretations of the basic right to be free of unreasonable searches, in my country it is a right to privacy. In your country it is the right of your home being inviolate. There's the ranking of rights as well, is freedom of expression more important then due process? Seems to vary from country to country.
When the constitution was ratified in 1791 there was no bill of rights. They were introduced in the first congress and ratified a couple of years later. That's why they're called amendments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights
Voting third party doesn't help. In my country I voted for the fourth party along with a lot of other people. Suddenly they're the second party and the first thing they did was change their platform to be much like the old party they replaced. Most of the things they removed from their platform were the reasons that I voted for them. A couple of elections ago the provincial right wing party self-destructed. Suddenly third party did well with a bunch of unknowns getting voted in. The members of the right wing party joined the former third, now second party enmasse, changed their platform to basically the same as party that self-destructed and got rid of most of the unknowns. Next election we get a new party in power that is pretty well the same as the party they replaced. Voting independent could work, it's just a shame the system is totally against them.
Actually energy is the big one. Given endless energy you can do anything (within the laws of thermodynamics). Any resource that you're short on can be created with enough energy. From distilling seawater, growing food in mines to transmuting elements, all it takes is energy.
I've thought of similar. Unluckily it falls down as most normal people can't afford to take 2+ years off of their life. Being self-employed I'd come back to close to zero clients.
and there have been plenty of competitors in the search market, including the market as a whole before Google rose to a leadership position through a superior product.
This is the key. I started using Google because it was superiour, unlike Microsoft where they stole hundreds of dollars from me before I figured out how to avoid them. This meant basically building your own computer because 15-20 years ago you couldn't avoid paying them easily and even though their product was crap it had mind share. Even a dozen years ago the Internet was becoming unusable if you didn't run Microsoft software. I can block everything to do with Google and my internet experience is pretty well the same, little well my desktop experience.
Also the reason for Saddam's downfall and now Kaddafi who wanted, along with some other African countries, to use a new gold-backed currency. America can not afford for the US$ to not be the reserve currency of the world.
And here I thought it was Nixon who removed the gold standard as a bunch of countries were demanding America to honour its promise to pay the bearer on demand in the form of gold and America was running out of gold due to inflation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_Shock
I still can't believe the cons won the last election... and broke their promises about balancing the budget 10 days later, and it got almost NO press coverage.
This is one of the biggest problems in todays western democracies. The press is pretty well owned by one or two individuals/companies (here there are 2 papers both owned by the same company and TV and radio aren't much better) which gives them way too much power. They can give lots of negative press coverage to the party they don't like and only a positive spin on the party they do like. What's happening in the UK really hi-lights this.
Actually the wolves have adapted very well. I have one living in the house here and so do many other people. We just call them dogs now but if people vanished they, at least some of them, would revert back to being wolves.
I was talking about Canada where the centre-left Liberal Party balanced the budget for about 10 years and were paying off the debt. The right wing Conservative Party (who were brought back to life by merging with the ultra right Reform Party) ran on a platform that the Liberals weren't lowering taxes enough and weren't spending enough and since they were conservative they were better at managing money. There were also Liberal scandals as they had been in power too long and the press really blew the scandals up. The Conservatives have since had their share of scandal but the press minimalizes them. Now that the Conservative Party has a majority they want to increase spending and cut taxes, especially for the rich while promising in 5 years they'll balance the budget. I'm old and liked the fact that Canada was one of the few western countries to not be running a deficit and I don't like the idea of increasing spending while lowering revenue. I also don't like the negative campaigning the Conservative Party did in the last election. Also in Canada when a party has a majority in Parliament they can do just about anything they want. The executive branch has close to zero power and the Party is all powerful and always votes along party lines. Anyways it's hard to compare Canada's taxes against American taxes without considering borrowing.
The corporations learned a long time ago that by buying government they could make more profit for less work. AT&T grew into a monopoly with only patent law as government help (they owned patents on the telegraph, then phone, then vacuum tubes) at which point they could pay the government to declare them a 'national resource'.
Yet I often hear about how the American hospitals jack up their prices for the paying customers to cover the people who do something dangerous, get injured, and treated for free. Seems as long as you live in society, what you do affects society.
Mostly due to not borrowing so much. We had a balanced budget up till recently when the right wingers got power with their philosophy of cut taxes and increase spending. How much would your taxes be if your government taxed enough to balance their budget?
(we already have roadblocks that force you to submit to blood tests if they really want to know if you are DUI or not). you cannot refuse a roadblock test, either, btw...
How do they force you to submit to a blood test at a roadblock? Have a judge there ready to sign a search warrant and a Doctor to remove the blood? Hold you down very firmly while removing the blood and hopefully you're not hemophiliac? In Canada you can always refuse to give a breathalyzer sample and I'd presume a blood sample though I've never heard of taking a blood sample roadside. You just get charged with failure to blow with the same penalties as being DUI. IIRC the one time they can legally get a search warrant for your blood and remove it is if you're in an accident and unconscious. Then the cop can phone a judge, swear that he thinks you're impaired and get a search warrant faxed. They have to give you the warrant when you wake up. Then they need a doctor or medical technician to volunteer to remove the blood and they better remove 2 samples and put one aside for you to use to defend yourself with, eg getting it independently tested.
Second, there has only been one organisation who visited the moon, and since they do not sell those rocks (assuming the museum had the rock on loan), there is just no way he can legally possess a moon rock. That is reason enough by itself to have him handover that rock.
Ummmm, Acorn is kind of a reach. They might have come up with the basic idea of a taskbar, but Windows95 is a gigantic step up from that.
How so? The Win95 taskbar was terrible as soon as you had a few applications open and the menu had no relationship to the desktop. The Acorn, which was very popular in some markets, used icons so more could fit on the bottom of the screen. You could hover the mouse over them to get the name. Middle click to get a context menu and drag and drop. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon_bar
Microsoft's key innovation was to decisively break the Apple-Unix tradition of "a billion tiny windows shattered across the screen", giving us an alternative that worked very well on single, (relatively) low-res monitors. They established the norm of maximizing windows to fill the whole screen, and MDI as kind of a compromise that attempted to give the flexibility of dockable windows with the convenience of instant maximization/minimization. MDI obviously hasn't exactly aged well into the era of 2-3 monitor desktops, but at the time, it was a definite step forward.
When did they do that? I admit I haven't really tried Windows 7 so perhaps maximized windows are now the norm though it seems weird to come so late. Of course back in the DOS days lots of programs ran maximized with a MDI interface though I can't think of any Microsoft programs that did that in DOS excepting Windows and Windows back then seemed to encourage tiling and cascading more then running anything full screen.
Couple differences: People hating the government here are free to say so.
In China, it means the complainer and their family will "wake up in pieces" since dissidents make great organ donors. The prison factories also need labor too, so the more people incarcerated, the better, and it really doesn't take much to be jailed in China for a long time.
Hate to say it but a lot of American imports here are manufactured in the American prison system. It doesn't take much to get jailed in America for a long time either and the prison industry has good lobbyists. You are right about being allowed to bitch about the government though.
Slashdot Mirror
I was recently reading somewhere that crocodiles (and other Crocodilia) were at one time warm blooded. The evidence being that they have a 4 chamber heart like most warm blooded animals. It was theorized that they reverted to being cold blooded at some point in their evolution.
Interestingly crocodilia also have a neo-cortex and diaphragm unlike all other extent reptiles.
As usual Wikipedia has a bit about it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocodilia#Internal_organs
Both herpes are rather harmless.
Not if you get them in your eye.
Depends on what you consider to be a right. Different countries seem to have arrived at different lists of rights. Your country includes things like owning arms, my country includes things like being able to vote if a citizen.
Judaical decisions on rights vary quite a bit as well. Our countries supreme courts seem to have arrived at quite different interpretations of the basic right to be free of unreasonable searches, in my country it is a right to privacy. In your country it is the right of your home being inviolate.
There's the ranking of rights as well, is freedom of expression more important then due process? Seems to vary from country to country.
When the constitution was ratified in 1791 there was no bill of rights. They were introduced in the first congress and ratified a couple of years later. That's why they're called amendments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Bill_of_Rights
Voting third party doesn't help. In my country I voted for the fourth party along with a lot of other people. Suddenly they're the second party and the first thing they did was change their platform to be much like the old party they replaced. Most of the things they removed from their platform were the reasons that I voted for them.
A couple of elections ago the provincial right wing party self-destructed. Suddenly third party did well with a bunch of unknowns getting voted in. The members of the right wing party joined the former third, now second party enmasse, changed their platform to basically the same as party that self-destructed and got rid of most of the unknowns. Next election we get a new party in power that is pretty well the same as the party they replaced.
Voting independent could work, it's just a shame the system is totally against them.
Actually energy is the big one. Given endless energy you can do anything (within the laws of thermodynamics).
Any resource that you're short on can be created with enough energy. From distilling seawater, growing food in mines to transmuting elements, all it takes is energy.
I've thought of similar. Unluckily it falls down as most normal people can't afford to take 2+ years off of their life. Being self-employed I'd come back to close to zero clients.
I thought they made money selling rebranded mice.
and there have been plenty of competitors in the search market, including the market as a whole before Google rose to a leadership position through a superior product.
This is the key. I started using Google because it was superiour, unlike Microsoft where they stole hundreds of dollars from me before I figured out how to avoid them. This meant basically building your own computer because 15-20 years ago you couldn't avoid paying them easily and even though their product was crap it had mind share. Even a dozen years ago the Internet was becoming unusable if you didn't run Microsoft software.
I can block everything to do with Google and my internet experience is pretty well the same, little well my desktop experience.
All he had was a million dollar trust fund and multi-millionaire parents when he started out in 1970 or so.
Also the reason for Saddam's downfall and now Kaddafi who wanted, along with some other African countries, to use a new gold-backed currency.
America can not afford for the US$ to not be the reserve currency of the world.
And here I thought it was Nixon who removed the gold standard as a bunch of countries were demanding America to honour its promise to pay the bearer on demand in the form of gold and America was running out of gold due to inflation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nixon_Shock
$800 buys 1 Oz of gold in 1979
$800 buys 2.9 Oz of gold in 2000
$800 buys 1/2 Oz of gold in 2011
So prices went down by 290% from '79 to 2000 and have only doubled from '79 to '11. Sure fooled me.
So between '79 when gold was close to a $1000 an oz to 2007 (or whenever, too lazy to double-check) when gold was $350 an oz we had 200% deflation?
I still can't believe the cons won the last election ... and broke their promises about balancing the budget 10 days later, and it got almost NO press coverage.
This is one of the biggest problems in todays western democracies. The press is pretty well owned by one or two individuals/companies (here there are 2 papers both owned by the same company and TV and radio aren't much better) which gives them way too much power. They can give lots of negative press coverage to the party they don't like and only a positive spin on the party they do like.
What's happening in the UK really hi-lights this.
Actually the wolves have adapted very well. I have one living in the house here and so do many other people. We just call them dogs now but if people vanished they, at least some of them, would revert back to being wolves.
I was talking about Canada where the centre-left Liberal Party balanced the budget for about 10 years and were paying off the debt. The right wing Conservative Party (who were brought back to life by merging with the ultra right Reform Party) ran on a platform that the Liberals weren't lowering taxes enough and weren't spending enough and since they were conservative they were better at managing money. There were also Liberal scandals as they had been in power too long and the press really blew the scandals up. The Conservatives have since had their share of scandal but the press minimalizes them.
Now that the Conservative Party has a majority they want to increase spending and cut taxes, especially for the rich while promising in 5 years they'll balance the budget.
I'm old and liked the fact that Canada was one of the few western countries to not be running a deficit and I don't like the idea of increasing spending while lowering revenue. I also don't like the negative campaigning the Conservative Party did in the last election.
Also in Canada when a party has a majority in Parliament they can do just about anything they want. The executive branch has close to zero power and the Party is all powerful and always votes along party lines.
Anyways it's hard to compare Canada's taxes against American taxes without considering borrowing.
The corporations learned a long time ago that by buying government they could make more profit for less work.
AT&T grew into a monopoly with only patent law as government help (they owned patents on the telegraph, then phone, then vacuum tubes) at which point they could pay the government to declare them a 'national resource'.
Yet I often hear about how the American hospitals jack up their prices for the paying customers to cover the people who do something dangerous, get injured, and treated for free.
Seems as long as you live in society, what you do affects society.
Mostly due to not borrowing so much. We had a balanced budget up till recently when the right wingers got power with their philosophy of cut taxes and increase spending.
How much would your taxes be if your government taxed enough to balance their budget?
(we already have roadblocks that force you to submit to blood tests if they really want to know if you are DUI or not). you cannot refuse a roadblock test, either, btw ...
How do they force you to submit to a blood test at a roadblock? Have a judge there ready to sign a search warrant and a Doctor to remove the blood? Hold you down very firmly while removing the blood and hopefully you're not hemophiliac?
In Canada you can always refuse to give a breathalyzer sample and I'd presume a blood sample though I've never heard of taking a blood sample roadside. You just get charged with failure to blow with the same penalties as being DUI.
IIRC the one time they can legally get a search warrant for your blood and remove it is if you're in an accident and unconscious. Then the cop can phone a judge, swear that he thinks you're impaired and get a search warrant faxed. They have to give you the warrant when you wake up.
Then they need a doctor or medical technician to volunteer to remove the blood and they better remove 2 samples and put one aside for you to use to defend yourself with, eg getting it independently tested.
Second, there has only been one organisation who visited the moon, and since they do not sell those rocks (assuming the museum had the rock on loan), there is just no way he can legally possess a moon rock. That is reason enough by itself to have him handover that rock.
You do know that the Soviets acquired their own moon rocks don't you? Three different times they launched successful sample return missions so it is even slightly possible that the moon rock had nothing to do with NASA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_16 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_20 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_24
Ummmm, Acorn is kind of a reach. They might have come up with the basic idea of a taskbar, but Windows95 is a gigantic step up from that.
How so? The Win95 taskbar was terrible as soon as you had a few applications open and the menu had no relationship to the desktop. The Acorn, which was very popular in some markets, used icons so more could fit on the bottom of the screen. You could hover the mouse over them to get the name. Middle click to get a context menu and drag and drop. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icon_bar
Microsoft's key innovation was to decisively break the Apple-Unix tradition of "a billion tiny windows shattered across the screen", giving us an alternative that worked very well on single, (relatively) low-res monitors. They established the norm of maximizing windows to fill the whole screen, and MDI as kind of a compromise that attempted to give the flexibility of dockable windows with the convenience of instant maximization/minimization. MDI obviously hasn't exactly aged well into the era of 2-3 monitor desktops, but at the time, it was a definite step forward.
When did they do that? I admit I haven't really tried Windows 7 so perhaps maximized windows are now the norm though it seems weird to come so late.
Of course back in the DOS days lots of programs ran maximized with a MDI interface though I can't think of any Microsoft programs that did that in DOS excepting Windows and Windows back then seemed to encourage tiling and cascading more then running anything full screen.
The taskbar was first used in Acorn computers '87, long before Microsoft copied it for Win95. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taskbar#Acorn_Computers.
Microsoft didn't invent the scroll wheel either, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousewheel#History
Couple differences: People hating the government here are free to say so.
In China, it means the complainer and their family will "wake up in pieces" since dissidents make great organ donors. The prison factories also need labor too, so the more people incarcerated, the better, and it really doesn't take much to be jailed in China for a long time.
Hate to say it but a lot of American imports here are manufactured in the American prison system. It doesn't take much to get jailed in America for a long time either and the prison industry has good lobbyists.
You are right about being allowed to bitch about the government though.