All I can gather from the last episode was that everything that was presented, happened to the characters. It wasn't a dream, etc. They did get stranded on the island, they did get off it and they did return.
The flash sideways scenes had no specific date/time associated with them. In fact, from what I can tell, it was actually some time in the future as it was a type of purgatory where all the dead "friends" meet up to realize they are actually dead and need to move on. So in that sense, it's in the future but really time has/had no meaning there.
So, no questions were answered, except, in the end, they get to spend eternity together and I'm guessing Hugo passed the torch onto some unknown heir. The island probably lives on with more people going there to figure out who gets to protect the place.
I'm still baffled by what the deal with Walt was and what did Juliet mean by "it worked" with her last words (nuke incident)?
Agg.. I suppose if you assume the show had to end last night, I guess they did an ok job. I wasn't left saying "WTF?" but I certainly didn't feel like I was looking at a completed jigsaw puzzle either.
Maybe you were hoping for a +Funny mod, I don't know, but what you _think_ a healthy sexual relationship should consist of is entirely irrelevant.
Now, in case you also didn't bother to RTFA, here are a few choice quotes for you:
"Australian customs officers have been given new powers to search incoming travellers' laptops and mobile phones for pornography, a spokeswoman for the Australian sex industry says."
"If you and your partner have filmed or photographed yourselves making love in an exotic destination or even taking a bath, you will have to answer 'Yes' to the question or you will be breaking the law."
Customs confirmed the new reference to "pornography" on the Incoming Passenger Cards and the search powers, acknowledging that searches conducted by officers may involve the discovery of "personal or sensitive possessions".
So if you and your significant other decide to take nude photos and you say "no" to having pornography, that could mean an arrest. Not to mention answering "yes" and having to show it off to strangers, low rent strangers at that.
And I don't even want to think about what happens if you do declare "yes" to be law abiding and a particularly conservative guard/cop/agent happens to uncover a few pictures of your 3 year old son running naked through a sprinkler on a summer day.
Don't you love it when your palm taps the touchpad and you overwrite your own sentence?
"If you can't read a piece of paper that says this program is voluntary and realize you don't have to follow along, I'm not sure what you're going to learn in college."
I'm sorry, but your two points against this seem to be:
1) Students could be pressured to volunteer by their parents.
2) Students might infer that this is "required".
Both are simple ways to say students can't think for themselves and we shouldn't subject them to simple decisions. When you enter college you're usually 18. You're an adult. Part of being an adult is understanding what a voluntary program is and understanding that you do _not_ have to volunteer.
If you can't read a piece of paper that says to do follow along, I'm not sure what you're going to learn in college.
Did you notice it was voluntary? It's not a requirement. If a freshman doesn't want to do it, it appears they can just not do it. Not sure if people should be fired for offering voluntary choices to new students. I guess, however, in our coddled child society, choices might confuse and damage the young minds. If we don't spoon feed them and water everything down to the bare minimum, they might not be able to cope!
I realize this is slashdot and all, but if you read the article it states: "Once the DNA sample is sent in and tested, it will show the student’s ability to tolerate alcohol, absorb folic acid and metabolize lactose."
Not sure if they will test for other things or not, but that's the list provided thus far.
I don't see the problem as it appears voluntary. Now obviously they need to disclose what purposes it will ever be used for and exactly how the process of keeping it confidential works but assuming that's all copacetic there really don't seem to be any issues. Again, it's voluntary.
I have a colony of Blaptica Dubia Roaches in my house right now. They weren't cheap either but then again I purchased them from a reputable dealer The Roach Guy.
Now, I've got about 1200 of these guys ranging from 1/4 inch to full sized adults which are roughly 2 inches in length. I actually have them living in my living room in a 36 gallon rubbermaid bin. They even have special needs such as 95F temperatures for optimal breeding. To accomplish this I bought a human heating pad and a simple thermostat.
Why? I have a baby Bearded Dragon that absolutely _loves_ these things. They are healthier for him to eat than crickets and the roaches actually don't smell much at all and are _easy_ to care for.
However, even with them living with me, I'm still creeped out by them a bit. I don't mind the little ones at all, they can crawl up and down my hand/arm without me caring much. They remind me of those rolly polly pill bugs more than roaches at that size. But the adults are quite heavy for their size and quite agile. The part that really gets me is just how sticky their legs are (hooks really) and they are a pita to get off your hand/arm. So that bit creeps me out.
From time to time I see one of the adults molting and damn are they interesting when they do. They just split their shell and walk out _pure white_ and soft. Silky even. So I try and pick them up at this point just to get over my fear/creeped out-ness.
The thing that confuses me is, why am I creeped out at all? Nothing happened in my childhood or past that I can recall at all. Frankly, I don't think I ever actually got a good look at a roach until I bought some to live with me. Maybe it's all the anti-roach comments in cartoons/movies? Apparently I've been programmed to hate these things. Seems silly.
Long story short, I paid good money for my colony and I hope they start breeding! My little reptile loves them and my wallet will appreciate not paying $5-10 a week on crickets for the next decade! I see the benefit in these insects and I'm working on not fearing them. Maybe other people should get a "pet" roach such as a Madagascar hissing cockroach and get over their fears as well? They are actually very interesting creatures and have their benefits. They really don't need to be feared as a whole. But then again, I think that's why it's called a phobia.
And if you don't confront authority that is out of control you get a utopia? This isn't a bully who is facing their third suspension this month, this is about a kid who had a piece of candy.
Or, perhaps the poster believes and and/or wants public education to work. Instead of using that $30,000 to better only his child, they aim to better the system for everyone?
Good, seeing how that's not what I'm suggesting. All I said was that I support the use of cameras to enforce school zone speed limits. I'm sorry this is so hard to understand.
I agree it sounds that way, but in this case it's a real and present danger. We're not talking about some obscure law or politicians whim. Speeding through a school zone during school hours is just a _stupid_ thing to do.
Shit, I worry about driving on side roads for fear of a 5 year old chasing a ball at dusk. Obviously you can't stop driving in school zones or in residential areas, but you can _stop_ being a jackass and at least realize you're driving a 2 ton chunk of metal that will snap a kid in two in an instant.
That is why picture enforcement of school zone speed limits _is_ something I would support.
And school zones. While I was going out to get some errands done I hit a school zone. Flashing yellow lights held up above the road with a bright "20" lit up. Obviously a warning that school is letting out and the zone is now 20MPH.
The road is a 4 lane (2 each way) and as you could guess where I'm going with this.. A SUV flies by me on the right and weaves through traffic doing at least 45. He/She also ran a yellow with a ton of kids waiting to cross.
Absolutely sickened me. A bad slip up, unexpected lane change of another vehicle, or a simple miscalculation on the light and it could have been on CNN.
I would happily support cameras on each end watching and timing plates. Ticketing anyone who speeds in a school zone during morning and afternoon student/bus/walker travel times.
No really! We got a ton of pictures but no one ever looked! You can't prove it!
Seriously?
How in the world can anyone believe that? Then what in the heck was the purpose of taking the pictures? The whole point of taking pictures is to look. No reasonable person would believe 58,000 pictures were taken but no one looked. Nice try though.
It matters to us, as a species and especially in the local area of the disaster. Again, saying it happens naturally so who gives a crap, let it go, the planet will right itself eventually is missing the point.
We have to _live_ here.. NOW!
Yes, the planet will eventually fix everything, but eventually is far too long if we keep this pace up. Personally I'd rather live out my "miserable life" than die. And I'd like to do that with a bit of enjoyment, natural beauty and otherwise. Maybe your outlook is different.
There is a big difference between 1-2 million birds dying in one geographic location over a short amount of time versus hundreds of millions spread relatively evenly across the globe. It also doesn't stop at birds. Crabs, clams, crawfish, fish, etc, etc.
Roughly a quarter million people die each day. That doesn't mean that wiping out the population of Buffalo NY every now and again is "ok". It would simply devastate the area (for other humans who live around there, etc.. probably good for the environment tho...).
I know this stuff happens naturally and I get that. Natural disasters have more or less hit the "reset" button on the planet a few times. But going out and causing it (intended or not) is stupid and entirely preventable. Just because an asteroid or another event pretty much wiped out life on the planet in the past doesn't mean that killing/poisoning large quantities of life now, no matter how small in comparison, is a-ok!
People _love_ to bash lawyers but the fact of the matter is that someone has to _hire_ the lawyer before they sue/defend/etc/etc. So get pissed at LG or AUO. The lawyers didn't start this fight.
"try to more precise" indeed! We need real American language here. Rife with typo's, missing words and grammatical errors! We just simply can't have any Aussie references/words/slang, it's too confusing...
So if one day cloning becomes legal and they decide to use a leftover sample of a lab test you had done years ago, you wouldn't get upset that a company now sells copies of you for whatever reason they want? I mean, you did give those samples away in the first place. What does it matter what they do with it after that?
Or, lets get a bit more grounded. Say your blood sample that you had done years ago was now tested and it's proven that you and your family are predisposed to a whole host of diseases. Now, that information is made public or at least made available to other companies, such as insurance (health, life). Or perhaps to anyone that potentially could take health risk factors into account when approving you for something such as a loan.
Are you really going to argue that hey, I gave that stuff away years ago and now they can do what they want because I have no say now?
If someone told you they were taking a sample from you for reason X, would you not be angry if they then used it for reasons Y and Z?
If it is "beneficial" (subjective) to you, maybe you would enjoy the "free" service of them utilizing your sample for reasons Y and Z, but if it was merely beneficial to the company that harvested the sample and you were to get no benefit from it?
I might enjoy learning that I have a pre-disposition to a disease and should avoid smoking/drinking/pooping in non-neon shades of toilet/etc. from a simple cholesterol blood test, but to you that might be something you didn't want to learn let alone a company.
It's not for us to decide what is and isn't acceptable to someone else. If the terms of the sample taking did not include the studies and other tests done I would argue it was an invasion of privacy.
Apparently you've never watched cows grazing out in an open field. They do move around, but only enough to get fresh grass between their lips. They don't trot from one end of the field to the other. They mow a bit, take a step, mow a bit, take a step. Sure, they do end up going a fair distance over time, but nothing like being forced to walk a treadmill.
Just an FYI, North America is _not_ only the United States nor does it only mean Canada, Mexico, etc. Whatever you think the title of the story should have been, it appears there is a threat of ash to North America and thus using any North American flag, especially the flag of the first country to potentially be disrupted, seems appropriate.
Slashdot Mirror
Go to ABC.com and watch the last 3 episodes. Pretty much entirely explained.
All I can gather from the last episode was that everything that was presented, happened to the characters. It wasn't a dream, etc. They did get stranded on the island, they did get off it and they did return.
The flash sideways scenes had no specific date/time associated with them. In fact, from what I can tell, it was actually some time in the future as it was a type of purgatory where all the dead "friends" meet up to realize they are actually dead and need to move on. So in that sense, it's in the future but really time has/had no meaning there.
So, no questions were answered, except, in the end, they get to spend eternity together and I'm guessing Hugo passed the torch onto some unknown heir. The island probably lives on with more people going there to figure out who gets to protect the place.
I'm still baffled by what the deal with Walt was and what did Juliet mean by "it worked" with her last words (nuke incident)?
Agg.. I suppose if you assume the show had to end last night, I guess they did an ok job. I wasn't left saying "WTF?" but I certainly didn't feel like I was looking at a completed jigsaw puzzle either.
Maybe you were hoping for a +Funny mod, I don't know, but what you _think_ a healthy sexual relationship should consist of is entirely irrelevant.
Now, in case you also didn't bother to RTFA, here are a few choice quotes for you:
"Australian customs officers have been given new powers to search incoming travellers' laptops and mobile phones for pornography, a spokeswoman for the Australian sex industry says."
"If you and your partner have filmed or photographed yourselves making love in an exotic destination or even taking a bath, you will have to answer 'Yes' to the question or you will be breaking the law."
Customs confirmed the new reference to "pornography" on the Incoming Passenger Cards and the search powers, acknowledging that searches conducted by officers may involve the discovery of "personal or sensitive possessions".
So if you and your significant other decide to take nude photos and you say "no" to having pornography, that could mean an arrest. Not to mention answering "yes" and having to show it off to strangers, low rent strangers at that.
And I don't even want to think about what happens if you do declare "yes" to be law abiding and a particularly conservative guard/cop/agent happens to uncover a few pictures of your 3 year old son running naked through a sprinkler on a summer day.
Don't you love it when your palm taps the touchpad and you overwrite your own sentence?
"If you can't read a piece of paper that says this program is voluntary and realize you don't have to follow along, I'm not sure what you're going to learn in college."
I'm sorry, but your two points against this seem to be:
1) Students could be pressured to volunteer by their parents.
2) Students might infer that this is "required".
Both are simple ways to say students can't think for themselves and we shouldn't subject them to simple decisions. When you enter college you're usually 18. You're an adult. Part of being an adult is understanding what a voluntary program is and understanding that you do _not_ have to volunteer.
If you can't read a piece of paper that says to do follow along, I'm not sure what you're going to learn in college.
Did you notice it was voluntary? It's not a requirement. If a freshman doesn't want to do it, it appears they can just not do it. Not sure if people should be fired for offering voluntary choices to new students. I guess, however, in our coddled child society, choices might confuse and damage the young minds. If we don't spoon feed them and water everything down to the bare minimum, they might not be able to cope!
I realize this is slashdot and all, but if you read the article it states: "Once the DNA sample is sent in and tested, it will show the student’s ability to tolerate alcohol, absorb folic acid and metabolize lactose."
Not sure if they will test for other things or not, but that's the list provided thus far.
I don't see the problem as it appears voluntary. Now obviously they need to disclose what purposes it will ever be used for and exactly how the process of keeping it confidential works but assuming that's all copacetic there really don't seem to be any issues. Again, it's voluntary.
Hate replying to myself, but I wanted to provide a video/visual. This is basically what I have in my living room, right now!
Not me and not my video, but a good representation of my setup: B.Dubia Setup
I have a colony of Blaptica Dubia Roaches in my house right now. They weren't cheap either but then again I purchased them from a reputable dealer The Roach Guy.
Now, I've got about 1200 of these guys ranging from 1/4 inch to full sized adults which are roughly 2 inches in length. I actually have them living in my living room in a 36 gallon rubbermaid bin. They even have special needs such as 95F temperatures for optimal breeding. To accomplish this I bought a human heating pad and a simple thermostat.
Why? I have a baby Bearded Dragon that absolutely _loves_ these things. They are healthier for him to eat than crickets and the roaches actually don't smell much at all and are _easy_ to care for.
However, even with them living with me, I'm still creeped out by them a bit. I don't mind the little ones at all, they can crawl up and down my hand/arm without me caring much. They remind me of those rolly polly pill bugs more than roaches at that size. But the adults are quite heavy for their size and quite agile. The part that really gets me is just how sticky their legs are (hooks really) and they are a pita to get off your hand/arm. So that bit creeps me out.
From time to time I see one of the adults molting and damn are they interesting when they do. They just split their shell and walk out _pure white_ and soft. Silky even. So I try and pick them up at this point just to get over my fear/creeped out-ness.
The thing that confuses me is, why am I creeped out at all? Nothing happened in my childhood or past that I can recall at all. Frankly, I don't think I ever actually got a good look at a roach until I bought some to live with me. Maybe it's all the anti-roach comments in cartoons/movies? Apparently I've been programmed to hate these things. Seems silly.
Long story short, I paid good money for my colony and I hope they start breeding! My little reptile loves them and my wallet will appreciate not paying $5-10 a week on crickets for the next decade! I see the benefit in these insects and I'm working on not fearing them. Maybe other people should get a "pet" roach such as a Madagascar hissing cockroach and get over their fears as well? They are actually very interesting creatures and have their benefits. They really don't need to be feared as a whole. But then again, I think that's why it's called a phobia.
And if you don't confront authority that is out of control you get a utopia? This isn't a bully who is facing their third suspension this month, this is about a kid who had a piece of candy.
Or, perhaps the poster believes and and/or wants public education to work. Instead of using that $30,000 to better only his child, they aim to better the system for everyone?
Good, seeing how that's not what I'm suggesting. All I said was that I support the use of cameras to enforce school zone speed limits. I'm sorry this is so hard to understand.
I agree it sounds that way, but in this case it's a real and present danger. We're not talking about some obscure law or politicians whim. Speeding through a school zone during school hours is just a _stupid_ thing to do.
Shit, I worry about driving on side roads for fear of a 5 year old chasing a ball at dusk. Obviously you can't stop driving in school zones or in residential areas, but you can _stop_ being a jackass and at least realize you're driving a 2 ton chunk of metal that will snap a kid in two in an instant.
That is why picture enforcement of school zone speed limits _is_ something I would support.
And school zones. While I was going out to get some errands done I hit a school zone. Flashing yellow lights held up above the road with a bright "20" lit up. Obviously a warning that school is letting out and the zone is now 20MPH.
The road is a 4 lane (2 each way) and as you could guess where I'm going with this.. A SUV flies by me on the right and weaves through traffic doing at least 45. He/She also ran a yellow with a ton of kids waiting to cross.
Absolutely sickened me. A bad slip up, unexpected lane change of another vehicle, or a simple miscalculation on the light and it could have been on CNN.
I would happily support cameras on each end watching and timing plates. Ticketing anyone who speeds in a school zone during morning and afternoon student/bus/walker travel times.
No really! We got a ton of pictures but no one ever looked! You can't prove it!
Seriously?
How in the world can anyone believe that? Then what in the heck was the purpose of taking the pictures? The whole point of taking pictures is to look. No reasonable person would believe 58,000 pictures were taken but no one looked. Nice try though.
It matters to us, as a species and especially in the local area of the disaster. Again, saying it happens naturally so who gives a crap, let it go, the planet will right itself eventually is missing the point.
We have to _live_ here.. NOW!
Yes, the planet will eventually fix everything, but eventually is far too long if we keep this pace up. Personally I'd rather live out my "miserable life" than die. And I'd like to do that with a bit of enjoyment, natural beauty and otherwise. Maybe your outlook is different.
There is a big difference between 1-2 million birds dying in one geographic location over a short amount of time versus hundreds of millions spread relatively evenly across the globe. It also doesn't stop at birds. Crabs, clams, crawfish, fish, etc, etc.
Roughly a quarter million people die each day. That doesn't mean that wiping out the population of Buffalo NY every now and again is "ok". It would simply devastate the area (for other humans who live around there, etc.. probably good for the environment tho...).
I know this stuff happens naturally and I get that. Natural disasters have more or less hit the "reset" button on the planet a few times. But going out and causing it (intended or not) is stupid and entirely preventable. Just because an asteroid or another event pretty much wiped out life on the planet in the past doesn't mean that killing/poisoning large quantities of life now, no matter how small in comparison, is a-ok!
People _love_ to bash lawyers but the fact of the matter is that someone has to _hire_ the lawyer before they sue/defend/etc/etc. So get pissed at LG or AUO. The lawyers didn't start this fight.
Hay, now thats the sprit!
"try to more precise" indeed! We need real American language here. Rife with typo's, missing words and grammatical errors! We just simply can't have any Aussie references/words/slang, it's too confusing...
So if one day cloning becomes legal and they decide to use a leftover sample of a lab test you had done years ago, you wouldn't get upset that a company now sells copies of you for whatever reason they want? I mean, you did give those samples away in the first place. What does it matter what they do with it after that?
Or, lets get a bit more grounded. Say your blood sample that you had done years ago was now tested and it's proven that you and your family are predisposed to a whole host of diseases. Now, that information is made public or at least made available to other companies, such as insurance (health, life). Or perhaps to anyone that potentially could take health risk factors into account when approving you for something such as a loan.
Are you really going to argue that hey, I gave that stuff away years ago and now they can do what they want because I have no say now?
If someone told you they were taking a sample from you for reason X, would you not be angry if they then used it for reasons Y and Z?
If it is "beneficial" (subjective) to you, maybe you would enjoy the "free" service of them utilizing your sample for reasons Y and Z, but if it was merely beneficial to the company that harvested the sample and you were to get no benefit from it?
I might enjoy learning that I have a pre-disposition to a disease and should avoid smoking/drinking/pooping in non-neon shades of toilet/etc. from a simple cholesterol blood test, but to you that might be something you didn't want to learn let alone a company.
It's not for us to decide what is and isn't acceptable to someone else. If the terms of the sample taking did not include the studies and other tests done I would argue it was an invasion of privacy.
Apparently you've never watched cows grazing out in an open field. They do move around, but only enough to get fresh grass between their lips. They don't trot from one end of the field to the other. They mow a bit, take a step, mow a bit, take a step. Sure, they do end up going a fair distance over time, but nothing like being forced to walk a treadmill.
Just an FYI, North America is _not_ only the United States nor does it only mean Canada, Mexico, etc. Whatever you think the title of the story should have been, it appears there is a threat of ash to North America and thus using any North American flag, especially the flag of the first country to potentially be disrupted, seems appropriate.