That would be bad: but even if the LHC guys manage to avoid it, there are other ways in which their meddling might destroy the world.
A particularly violent game of proton billiards, for instance, of the very sort the LHC's superpowered seven trillion electron-volt atomic cues are designed to play, might lead to all sorts of trouble. Quarks might get mixed up into "negatively-charged strangelets" which would turn everything else they touched into strangelets as well. The Earth, and then perhaps the entire universe, could be turned into a fearful strangelet soup; or perhaps custard.
A related worry is that overly vigorous particle-punishing tomfoolery at the LHC could produce "magnetic monopoles", which are dicey freaks of nature. Monopoles could trigger a runaway reaction not unlike the quark-strangelet scenario, in which everything gets changed into something else. This could lead to a turn-up for the books, in which the Moon remained made of moon but the Earth was abruptly converted into cheese.
As a kid, I read all the standard Hitchhiker's stuff. One series I thought was particularly fantastic, though, is the Stainless Steel Rat series by Harry Harrison. It's an excellent read, and really suave scifi. He also did a series called Bill the Galactic Hero - not as suave, but still pretty fun. They're not grand literature, or even hardcore scifi like some of his other books. Excellent summer reading - I may have to pick them up again this summer myself.
And yet, barely anyone gives a second thought to tuning their radio while driving or talking to a passenger while driving - both things that are shown to create just as much of a distraction.
I don't think there's anyone out there who never ever deals with distractions while driving. Having a sandwich, drinking something, changing tracks on a CD, driving while not having enough sleep... everyone does it on one level or another. All of it is dangerous, but the only thing that seems to get people keyed up is cell phone use. Can anyone explain to me why?
Ummm, no? Hadn't actually considered that at all. Completely apart from your "slanted" assumptions, why the hell would they bother with a minor civil libel suit? Are Mossad known for being bored and short of things to do, or do you figure this is more of a hobby thing?
Unfortunately, simply choosing not to pick up won't necessarily make a difference. I had the most ridiculous bill when I was down in the States visiting despite my not picking up any calls that came in. The reason was, the cell company billed you for the roaming call simply because they had to use other people's lines to make the phone ring - regardless of whether you picked it up or not. Good luck finding that one in the FAQ.
Thankfully, I'm finally rid of this horrible company and I'm on a nice tiny plan where I never pay more than $15 a month for exactly the same service I was paying $60-$150 a month for before.
Nightmarish. Make sure you read all the small print - usually if you dig enough you can find the full description of fees in the middle of some contract on their web site. If you've got a GSM phone, you can ask the carrier to unlock it for you and then just get a prepaid SIM in the US. It'll probably be much cheaper in the long run. Another thing to keep in mind is that if your phone is on and a call goes through to it - even if you don't answer it, you'll be charged for that call. That was a fun charge to figure out. =)
Honestly, I think if people didn't have the option of getting a free or heavily discounted phone, you'd see cell prices drop rapidly from $400 down to the $100-200 range. The discounts seem to be a lot like the "SALE!" signs you see in stores that advertise the original price as being suggested retail, when no one ever charges suggested retail.
I'd lean towards buying time. They don't have a lot of info to go on here, so they're trying to sound cautious but reassuring until they can get a better grip on it.
Honestly, given how little actual toner escapes in the printers, I'd personally be more concerned about paper dust in a high-volume printing area.
The "things should hurt" idea only works when people are to some extent functional. If someone's been damaged to the point where they are completely non-functional, it seems pretty horrible to say "sorry, there's a drug that could lessen the pain and allow you to go on living your life while still retaining your memories, but we're not going to give it to you because you should be capable of learning from this experience and moving on."
"Suck it up" just doesn't work in some cases. I would think retaining memories would be more important than erasing them - like you say, our experiences do make us what we are - but it only works if they're not crippling.
Funny, I've never seen that. Even legal Mexican field workers in Washington get treated like crap. When I worked down there, we were one of the only places that paid a decent wage and made sure the temp crews we hired were legit. Despite the fact that all the field crews are supposed to be run by state-licensed folks, they aren't. Most farmers don't give a rat's ass whether the guy who runs their crew is licensed, they just want their fields done cheap. Some of the licensed people are complete scum, and make their crews live in hellish situations and screw them over every chance they get.
I'm not going to deny that some folks are probably decent and treat their workers well, but it's not something I've seen. So, the people you know are good people. =) From my own experience, I wouldn't think they're in the majority.
Actually, it is a nation of immigrants. You don't get to divide immigrants up into before- and after- lines. The ones who came in before this date were "settlers", after that, but before this date they were "early immigrants" and the ones coming in now are "bad immigrants"... it doesn't work that way. An immigrant by definition is someone who leaves one country to settle in another. There's no "modern" about it, and there's no reference to fitting in to an economy. This is technically a nation of immigrants, because the immigrants far outnumber the people who were here pre-historically.
And as for the comment that many immigrants have honorable intents and are not inherently bad, well, that could be said of the entire population. Yes, some immigrants suck. Because they are _people_, not because they're immigrants. Some people suck, but then again many of them have honorable intent and are not inherently bad. I'm sure that some of the early settlers were pretty horrible, too, so lets not wax all nostalgic about heroic forbears.
My family lines came from Germany in the 1800s and Norway in the early 1900s. Relatively recent, as it goes, but still immigrants. We're all naturalized now, but that doesn't change the fact that we immigrated here.
Just be aware if you're doing this with a laserjet printer that the toner cartridges will usually start to wear out mechanically before they run out of toner. It'll depend on how much toner you use per page. If the cartridge does wear out mechanically, you can get some unpleasant toner leakage issues. Since each toner rotates on a color laser when a page goes by even if it's not putting toner on, you can actually wear out, say a cyan toner cartridge even if you never use any of the toner.
As to where to find it, the best place would be a site that reviews porn with women in mind. They'll have rating systems and categorize the films so that you can eliminate at a glance the ones that you don't like the theme or elements. Violet Blue's (nsfw) site is probably a good starting point, but plugging "women porn reviews" into Google can take you a pretty long ways.
My apologies - I mistyped. I meant to say "hardcore porn is not inherently violent". The two aren't equivalent, you're quite right there. I still think you're wrong about hardcore porn being violent - that is, while it's a common thing, it's certainly not a requirement.
That statement is so abstract as to be worthless. Let's replace 'women' in that sentence with 'snowflakes'.
You're right, that is a bit vague. The problem is that specific statements about "what women want" generalize about women so much as to be useless.
Think about things like slash and yaoi, which have been getting increasingly popular for women. They range from soft- to hard-core, and while a lot of them go for the emotional side of sex and relationships, there's no shortage of just straight sex. Ok, so "straight" is probably the wrong word. Or 'Queer as Folk' - huge female audience, and that's not because they identify with the single pair of lesbians. It's not guys writing all that Sparrow/Norrington or Aragorn/Faramir fiction out there.
Frankly, as a woman my issue with actual porn in general is the same issue I have with movies in general. They're poorly made, the good ones are few and far-between. And frankly, if you're talking about limiting the misery, hardcore films at least have sex to break up the bad acting/lighting/costuming/etc. I'd have to disagree that hardcore sex is inherently violent - it's simply graphic. Maybe you're watching the wrong ones? =) Try looking for hardcore that is marketed to women... it tends to be better, all around. Especially if what you're wanting is something your wife/girlfriend/fling will watch with you.
I suppose the point I really want to make is that women are very much like men in that they're individuals. If you think you're going to "understand" women like they are some sort of weird single organism, it's just not going to happen. Interest yourself in the individual and you're more than half there.
I saw it happen a fair bit. The local guys who were running a Quakefest "back in the day", for example, didn't know about this and didn't seem too concerned when we mentioned (working for a computer store, and all that) that they might want to not hot-swap everyone's peripherals out of the machines...
They lost quite a few motherboards that day.
Good to know it still happens, though. Well, not _good_, just good that I'm not hallucinating this or something. =)
Well, from personal experience, I don't look at the phone when I'm texting. You can type without looking at a keyboard, right? I keep it short, "running late, there in 5." Where my driving suffers in order of distraction is:
Dropping something that spills.
Having an in-depth and emotional conversation with the person next to me.
Switching CDs and finding someone's rearranged the CD book.
Trying to locate a specific spot in the book on the CD.
Eating.
Talking on the cell phone (same as the texting, I keep it short).
Texting.
Now, that's just my own observations - and I measure it by things like whether I swerve or lose eye contact with the road for long enough for something to get by me. I'm sure this is different for everyone. I also don't do things in the car that require me to, say, stare at the mirror instead of the road, like putting on makeup or doing my hair.
I really do think that dangerous/reckless driving should be used to cover any situation where the driver isn't paying attention to the road. There just isn't a need for a special cell law. Seems like a public information campaign would do the same thing for less money. "Texting=Dangerous Driving" and a list of fines, or something. It's not like police lacked the ability to pull you over for driving poorly. It's just that they couldn't pull you over if they saw a cell phone in your hand and you were driving fine.
Yeah, I have to admit I'm kind of nostalgic for the days when the school didn't actually have sysadmins and you could hack the system by just changing to a different directory. Oh... and when the teachers didn't have a clue what you were doing.
Then again, I guess they still don't have a clue... and the schools are suspension-happy these days.
Nice! That'd be much cheaper than the lights, too. I wonder if the US could be talked into something like that. I always get caught by surprise when I'm driving down in the States now, where they don't have the warning lights.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I was just thinking of sneaking around and turning some machines off...
Currently, we've got a few hundred computers and monitors all running (with no one to use them) for some completely unknown reason.
Plus it'd mean my co-worker would stop having weird computer issues because she only reboots like once a week.
I love The Register. My favorite part...
Man, I wish I could write like that.
As a kid, I read all the standard Hitchhiker's stuff. One series I thought was particularly fantastic, though, is the Stainless Steel Rat series by Harry Harrison. It's an excellent read, and really suave scifi. He also did a series called Bill the Galactic Hero - not as suave, but still pretty fun. They're not grand literature, or even hardcore scifi like some of his other books. Excellent summer reading - I may have to pick them up again this summer myself.
And yet, barely anyone gives a second thought to tuning their radio while driving or talking to a passenger while driving - both things that are shown to create just as much of a distraction.
I don't think there's anyone out there who never ever deals with distractions while driving. Having a sandwich, drinking something, changing tracks on a CD, driving while not having enough sleep... everyone does it on one level or another. All of it is dangerous, but the only thing that seems to get people keyed up is cell phone use. Can anyone explain to me why?
You don't really expect this guy to know about bus lanes, do you? ;)
Ummm, no? Hadn't actually considered that at all. Completely apart from your "slanted" assumptions, why the hell would they bother with a minor civil libel suit? Are Mossad known for being bored and short of things to do, or do you figure this is more of a hobby thing?
Unfortunately, simply choosing not to pick up won't necessarily make a difference. I had the most ridiculous bill when I was down in the States visiting despite my not picking up any calls that came in. The reason was, the cell company billed you for the roaming call simply because they had to use other people's lines to make the phone ring - regardless of whether you picked it up or not. Good luck finding that one in the FAQ.
Thankfully, I'm finally rid of this horrible company and I'm on a nice tiny plan where I never pay more than $15 a month for exactly the same service I was paying $60-$150 a month for before.
Funny, I would have sworn it comes up every year.
Besides, I don't think that the period of time in which the two groups of people actually working and living together is a bad thing to celebrate.
So, if you legitimately practice witchcraft, that's ok? Looks like the sort of law that would need a bit more fleshing out.
Nightmarish. Make sure you read all the small print - usually if you dig enough you can find the full description of fees in the middle of some contract on their web site. If you've got a GSM phone, you can ask the carrier to unlock it for you and then just get a prepaid SIM in the US. It'll probably be much cheaper in the long run. Another thing to keep in mind is that if your phone is on and a call goes through to it - even if you don't answer it, you'll be charged for that call. That was a fun charge to figure out. =)
Honestly, I think if people didn't have the option of getting a free or heavily discounted phone, you'd see cell prices drop rapidly from $400 down to the $100-200 range. The discounts seem to be a lot like the "SALE!" signs you see in stores that advertise the original price as being suggested retail, when no one ever charges suggested retail.
I'd lean towards buying time. They don't have a lot of info to go on here, so they're trying to sound cautious but reassuring until they can get a better grip on it.
Honestly, given how little actual toner escapes in the printers, I'd personally be more concerned about paper dust in a high-volume printing area.
The "things should hurt" idea only works when people are to some extent functional. If someone's been damaged to the point where they are completely non-functional, it seems pretty horrible to say "sorry, there's a drug that could lessen the pain and allow you to go on living your life while still retaining your memories, but we're not going to give it to you because you should be capable of learning from this experience and moving on."
"Suck it up" just doesn't work in some cases. I would think retaining memories would be more important than erasing them - like you say, our experiences do make us what we are - but it only works if they're not crippling.
Funny, I've never seen that. Even legal Mexican field workers in Washington get treated like crap. When I worked down there, we were one of the only places that paid a decent wage and made sure the temp crews we hired were legit. Despite the fact that all the field crews are supposed to be run by state-licensed folks, they aren't. Most farmers don't give a rat's ass whether the guy who runs their crew is licensed, they just want their fields done cheap. Some of the licensed people are complete scum, and make their crews live in hellish situations and screw them over every chance they get.
I'm not going to deny that some folks are probably decent and treat their workers well, but it's not something I've seen. So, the people you know are good people. =) From my own experience, I wouldn't think they're in the majority.
Actually, it is a nation of immigrants. You don't get to divide immigrants up into before- and after- lines. The ones who came in before this date were "settlers", after that, but before this date they were "early immigrants" and the ones coming in now are "bad immigrants"... it doesn't work that way. An immigrant by definition is someone who leaves one country to settle in another. There's no "modern" about it, and there's no reference to fitting in to an economy. This is technically a nation of immigrants, because the immigrants far outnumber the people who were here pre-historically.
And as for the comment that many immigrants have honorable intents and are not inherently bad, well, that could be said of the entire population. Yes, some immigrants suck. Because they are _people_, not because they're immigrants. Some people suck, but then again many of them have honorable intent and are not inherently bad. I'm sure that some of the early settlers were pretty horrible, too, so lets not wax all nostalgic about heroic forbears.
My family lines came from Germany in the 1800s and Norway in the early 1900s. Relatively recent, as it goes, but still immigrants. We're all naturalized now, but that doesn't change the fact that we immigrated here.
Just be aware if you're doing this with a laserjet printer that the toner cartridges will usually start to wear out mechanically before they run out of toner. It'll depend on how much toner you use per page. If the cartridge does wear out mechanically, you can get some unpleasant toner leakage issues. Since each toner rotates on a color laser when a page goes by even if it's not putting toner on, you can actually wear out, say a cyan toner cartridge even if you never use any of the toner.
My apologies - I mistyped. I meant to say "hardcore porn is not inherently violent". The two aren't equivalent, you're quite right there. I still think you're wrong about hardcore porn being violent - that is, while it's a common thing, it's certainly not a requirement.
You're right, that is a bit vague. The problem is that specific statements about "what women want" generalize about women so much as to be useless.Think about things like slash and yaoi, which have been getting increasingly popular for women. They range from soft- to hard-core, and while a lot of them go for the emotional side of sex and relationships, there's no shortage of just straight sex. Ok, so "straight" is probably the wrong word. Or 'Queer as Folk' - huge female audience, and that's not because they identify with the single pair of lesbians. It's not guys writing all that Sparrow/Norrington or Aragorn/Faramir fiction out there.
Frankly, as a woman my issue with actual porn in general is the same issue I have with movies in general. They're poorly made, the good ones are few and far-between. And frankly, if you're talking about limiting the misery, hardcore films at least have sex to break up the bad acting/lighting/costuming/etc. I'd have to disagree that hardcore sex is inherently violent - it's simply graphic. Maybe you're watching the wrong ones? =) Try looking for hardcore that is marketed to women... it tends to be better, all around. Especially if what you're wanting is something your wife/girlfriend/fling will watch with you.
I suppose the point I really want to make is that women are very much like men in that they're individuals. If you think you're going to "understand" women like they are some sort of weird single organism, it's just not going to happen. Interest yourself in the individual and you're more than half there.
I saw it happen a fair bit. The local guys who were running a Quakefest "back in the day", for example, didn't know about this and didn't seem too concerned when we mentioned (working for a computer store, and all that) that they might want to not hot-swap everyone's peripherals out of the machines...
They lost quite a few motherboards that day.
Good to know it still happens, though. Well, not _good_, just good that I'm not hallucinating this or something. =)
I told someone that yesterday, they didn't believe me. =) I'm assuming they've fixed this?
- Texting.
Now, that's just my own observations - and I measure it by things like whether I swerve or lose eye contact with the road for long enough for something to get by me. I'm sure this is different for everyone. I also don't do things in the car that require me to, say, stare at the mirror instead of the road, like putting on makeup or doing my hair.I really do think that dangerous/reckless driving should be used to cover any situation where the driver isn't paying attention to the road. There just isn't a need for a special cell law. Seems like a public information campaign would do the same thing for less money. "Texting=Dangerous Driving" and a list of fines, or something. It's not like police lacked the ability to pull you over for driving poorly. It's just that they couldn't pull you over if they saw a cell phone in your hand and you were driving fine.
Funny, I do the select-deselect thing too. It drives anyone in a quiet room with me completely insane. I've got no clue why I do it, either...
Excellent article, I just wish it was a bit more recent. The diamond industry obviously didn't fall apart in the 1980s.
Yeah, I have to admit I'm kind of nostalgic for the days when the school didn't actually have sysadmins and you could hack the system by just changing to a different directory. Oh... and when the teachers didn't have a clue what you were doing.
Then again, I guess they still don't have a clue... and the schools are suspension-happy these days.
Nice! That'd be much cheaper than the lights, too. I wonder if the US could be talked into something like that. I always get caught by surprise when I'm driving down in the States now, where they don't have the warning lights.