We probably have to determine how intelligent they are in the first place, if it turns out they are smart and learn similar to how we do or to the extent we can that would be very interesting. If it turns out their smart but threw very different means that would be very interesting to. I mean if we can get one, find we are able to teach and eventually communicate with... Just studding that brain threw non invasive ways, alive and in thought will probably greatly excel our understanding of how and why a brains do what they do.
Morally or even just the list of consequences of doing that brings up a lot of I'm not sure we should actually be doing such a thing.
If your getting consistent measurements around 0.2 mm for say 14 years and end up having about a 2.8 mm difference compared to 14 years ago or even 1.4 mm 7 years ago, along with consistent measurements from others in different areas of the world...
Why are there doubts about our ability to measure some fairly large numbers associated with the oceans? We have physicists, biologist, chemists, and the long list of professions associated with nanotechnology working in incredibly small measurements. Seriously there are people working in nanometers that happen to be one billionth of a meter in size (1/1,000,000,000 m) yet suddenly it must be impossible for us to measure millimeters (1/1,000 m)?
This seems off topic but it's still a subject we have to come to terms with as we see reality behaving in a vastly different way then we once thought it had. I think the problem with religion is not god, but that most religions think they have the definitive answers to why we are here and discredit new information that does not conform to a certain belief system. It's not the idea of god but the thought of behaving, thinking, acting, or ignoring facts in certain ways to appease what largely is an idea. Just because a lot of people feel God behaves one way and another lot of people feel God behaves in another doesn't mean any of them are right. Not that, that proves them wrong either but as with religions of the past or even religions outside our current belief how often do we give these ideas a chance? Perhaps theres even the possibility that like what we once knew of the universe, that humanities image of god may also be way off track.
In my case it's not common nor uncommon to be mistaken as an atheist because I do not accept any religion as absolute truth. My mostly Christian family feels iv abandon God because iv abandon religion as an absolute, while I on the other hand feel I've found to be a more grand and more acceptable idea of what "God" is then I have seen anywhere else. While that doesn't make me correct in anyway, it still seems miles away from the traditional view the of what you are for not accepting a religions beliefs. Life is what you make it, and you can see that threw all the different cultures and religions in the world, it seems a lot of the religion bashing is from frustration and not realizing that what these people believe and grew up in is reality for them not just ignorance.
I think being at a point where weapons can wipe out entire portions of the population and maybe humanity all together, it would be a good time to implement some fundamental changes in how we approach and create technology, and conduct warfare... to be a bit of a pessimist I don't really see anything like that happening unless something truly devastating occurs, but it will probably be to late by then.
I think if you were actually able to see the planets magnetic field that it wouldn't actually be represented in solid lines. I'd guess it would be hues of color where the field is strongest that are perceived, then anything else. I say this because what we see as color is just wave lengths of light being interpreted by our brains and I have yet to read anything that says vision and the colors involved can only be interpreted by the brain threw certain frequencies of light or sound.
Anyways any species who has not evolved a back up plan like using the position of the sun, then some species may die out, but then again those aren't very successful if they a yet unable to cope with seemingly normal planetary changes.
Sorry I disagree, those were based on observations from that time period and as we know now they were not very good ones. I suppose you might be able to say the "science" that was known of the world and universe at time was incorporated, but we've seen beyond that. And why exactly do we need to be told what to believe? As a species we both know a great deal and are learning so much about the universe these day that religious views distract and generally point in the opposite direction. When people allow them self to get past the fear eternal damnation and take information in realistically I'm sure most are able to find a significantly better position of them self with in the universe. God may even be at the end of that tunnel, but that doesn't mean ancient texts hold any value or key to finding that.
That probably wont even be addressed till someone is taken to court for that exact reason. Laws will be passed and little will be done or noticed until someone blogs about it which the average slashdoter will know and care about, excluding the rest of the populous.
Greed, control, and misunderstanding of technology are leading us away from the growth and development in society we have come accustom to. There seem to be similar trends like that of the RIAA's on other technologies and sciences. The future we all envisioned as kids will never be in our life time.
Of course that's if they had their way, which they may push for one day but I'm more curious about actual laws in place now and if it is in fact illegal to do some of what I mentioned.
I just have a few questions which probably are irrelevant to all this but, what happens if you have 4 or 5 people split the cost of a few albums equally and then listen to the music between themselves on a folder available over a network connection... is this breaking the law? If that so when does it become legal? Would they have to be living with each other for example having music available to other family members over a network in the home? Or am I not even supposed to be doing that?
It's all in the eye of the beholder. I've always found that everything that has occurred in the past billions of years, the formation of the galaxy were in, our solar system all the systems, rules, equations it took for this planet to form that led to the combining of molecules forming that first resembled life and the long line of survival that made it all possible to allow me to be here right now typing this. Just may be me, but I find all of that to be a much more elegant and significant then 'god put me here and wants me to drive up his ego (worship)'. I can die happy knowing I had the intellect and cognitive ability to see a glimpse of the universe.
Those are perfectly acceptable questions, but questions we will never be able to directly see or ever determine true. As complex and amazing as the universe is we have to remember that its built apon many rules. Reason needs to taken into consideration to prevent blindly debating about spiritual purposes based on what we feel. Thats how science tends to be thrown out, we need to be able to keep on the track to finding out all the mysteries we our able to physically detect and then apply what we learn to make viable spirtual connections. But thats just my 2 cents on it.
I find it funny that it is acceptable to slightly alter how the word physically looks, while it still retains the same meaning. F@ck, Fuck. I'm not sure if it is just me but I fail to see the difference in how f@ck is somehow more acceptable while fuck isn't. We all know the word, we all thought 'fuck' when it read "f@ck" and it's the same concept with bleeping on television or radio. People are not that stupid; even if the word is bleeped we still all got the meaning behind it, and some how that's alright. They are words that are apart of our language and do have relevance in our lives; why (poorly) hide from them? I find it pointless to pretend a word doesn't exist in order too "protect" our children (or adults mind you), in fact I see that causing more harm then good.
What the hell are you talking about? For one, they are not kids for ever and are able to take as many pictures as they like once they hit 18 which would be a year or two when this whole thing started for them so yeah I guess thats a big lesson. Two, I seriously doubt they thought or even realized the laws or consequences. I'm not sure if you remember what it's like to be a teenager but many of them often don't consider laws/rules and consequence of there actions in certain situations. Lastly how could you blame the parents? I don't remember hearing of very many cases of teens getting prosecuted for taking pictures of them selfs before this, it may start to become an issue parents talk about to their children but I'm pretty sure it wasn't before.
Rarely do I find music worth even 12 dollars. I decided long ago that I will never spend money to potentially find new music that I'd enjoy listening to. Two reasons - 1. It already cost to much and 2. Is there enough of a risk that I will probably never listen to the artist again. Now there are a three or four bands that I wouldn't mind dishing out 30 bucks for a album but I believe they deserve every penny. I only found out about these bands by I suppose questionably unlawful means. Though as soon as I found a truly special/original/talented band I have purchased everything I've wanted to own of theirs. Everything else has either been deleted or has rarely/never been listened to again. The RIAA really has its or I suppose their head up there asses if they plan to implement this, and how exactly do they expect to sell really anything at all? People will rarely start purchasing music for artists they even like let alone take a risk on an artist they have never even heard. This may be a good thing with the whole down with the RIAA dealy but still the stupidity amazes me.
"It's a hoax _ and it's not funny," said Gov. Deval Patrick.
I highly doubt it was ever intended for these lights to be considered bombs the article even says that these devices have been present for "two to three weeks" in 10 separate cities. If these were thought to be potentially dangerous why is it that attention is drawn to them now?
Slashdot Mirror
We probably have to determine how intelligent they are in the first place, if it turns out they are smart and learn similar to how we do or to the extent we can that would be very interesting. If it turns out their smart but threw very different means that would be very interesting to. I mean if we can get one, find we are able to teach and eventually communicate with... Just studding that brain threw non invasive ways, alive and in thought will probably greatly excel our understanding of how and why a brains do what they do. Morally or even just the list of consequences of doing that brings up a lot of I'm not sure we should actually be doing such a thing.
Yeah, but theres always Mars.
If your getting consistent measurements around 0.2 mm for say 14 years and end up having about a 2.8 mm difference compared to 14 years ago or even 1.4 mm 7 years ago, along with consistent measurements from others in different areas of the world... Why are there doubts about our ability to measure some fairly large numbers associated with the oceans? We have physicists, biologist, chemists, and the long list of professions associated with nanotechnology working in incredibly small measurements. Seriously there are people working in nanometers that happen to be one billionth of a meter in size (1/1,000,000,000 m) yet suddenly it must be impossible for us to measure millimeters (1/1,000 m)?
Since I cant see paying off politicians going away any time soon, is it possible for average citizens to organize and do the same?
Well how many have died?
This seems off topic but it's still a subject we have to come to terms with as we see reality behaving in a vastly different way then we once thought it had. I think the problem with religion is not god, but that most religions think they have the definitive answers to why we are here and discredit new information that does not conform to a certain belief system. It's not the idea of god but the thought of behaving, thinking, acting, or ignoring facts in certain ways to appease what largely is an idea. Just because a lot of people feel God behaves one way and another lot of people feel God behaves in another doesn't mean any of them are right. Not that, that proves them wrong either but as with religions of the past or even religions outside our current belief how often do we give these ideas a chance? Perhaps theres even the possibility that like what we once knew of the universe, that humanities image of god may also be way off track. In my case it's not common nor uncommon to be mistaken as an atheist because I do not accept any religion as absolute truth. My mostly Christian family feels iv abandon God because iv abandon religion as an absolute, while I on the other hand feel I've found to be a more grand and more acceptable idea of what "God" is then I have seen anywhere else. While that doesn't make me correct in anyway, it still seems miles away from the traditional view the of what you are for not accepting a religions beliefs. Life is what you make it, and you can see that threw all the different cultures and religions in the world, it seems a lot of the religion bashing is from frustration and not realizing that what these people believe and grew up in is reality for them not just ignorance.
I think being at a point where weapons can wipe out entire portions of the population and maybe humanity all together, it would be a good time to implement some fundamental changes in how we approach and create technology, and conduct warfare... to be a bit of a pessimist I don't really see anything like that happening unless something truly devastating occurs, but it will probably be to late by then.
I think if you were actually able to see the planets magnetic field that it wouldn't actually be represented in solid lines. I'd guess it would be hues of color where the field is strongest that are perceived, then anything else. I say this because what we see as color is just wave lengths of light being interpreted by our brains and I have yet to read anything that says vision and the colors involved can only be interpreted by the brain threw certain frequencies of light or sound. Anyways any species who has not evolved a back up plan like using the position of the sun, then some species may die out, but then again those aren't very successful if they a yet unable to cope with seemingly normal planetary changes.
Sorry I disagree, those were based on observations from that time period and as we know now they were not very good ones. I suppose you might be able to say the "science" that was known of the world and universe at time was incorporated, but we've seen beyond that. And why exactly do we need to be told what to believe? As a species we both know a great deal and are learning so much about the universe these day that religious views distract and generally point in the opposite direction. When people allow them self to get past the fear eternal damnation and take information in realistically I'm sure most are able to find a significantly better position of them self with in the universe. God may even be at the end of that tunnel, but that doesn't mean ancient texts hold any value or key to finding that.
That probably wont even be addressed till someone is taken to court for that exact reason. Laws will be passed and little will be done or noticed until someone blogs about it which the average slashdoter will know and care about, excluding the rest of the populous.
Greed, control, and misunderstanding of technology are leading us away from the growth and development in society we have come accustom to. There seem to be similar trends like that of the RIAA's on other technologies and sciences. The future we all envisioned as kids will never be in our life time.
Of course that's if they had their way, which they may push for one day but I'm more curious about actual laws in place now and if it is in fact illegal to do some of what I mentioned.
I just have a few questions which probably are irrelevant to all this but, what happens if you have 4 or 5 people split the cost of a few albums equally and then listen to the music between themselves on a folder available over a network connection... is this breaking the law? If that so when does it become legal? Would they have to be living with each other for example having music available to other family members over a network in the home? Or am I not even supposed to be doing that?
Very well put.
It's all in the eye of the beholder. I've always found that everything that has occurred in the past billions of years, the formation of the galaxy were in, our solar system all the systems, rules, equations it took for this planet to form that led to the combining of molecules forming that first resembled life and the long line of survival that made it all possible to allow me to be here right now typing this. Just may be me, but I find all of that to be a much more elegant and significant then 'god put me here and wants me to drive up his ego (worship)'. I can die happy knowing I had the intellect and cognitive ability to see a glimpse of the universe.
Those are perfectly acceptable questions, but questions we will never be able to directly see or ever determine true. As complex and amazing as the universe is we have to remember that its built apon many rules. Reason needs to taken into consideration to prevent blindly debating about spiritual purposes based on what we feel. Thats how science tends to be thrown out, we need to be able to keep on the track to finding out all the mysteries we our able to physically detect and then apply what we learn to make viable spirtual connections. But thats just my 2 cents on it.
I find it funny that it is acceptable to slightly alter how the word physically looks, while it still retains the same meaning. F@ck, Fuck. I'm not sure if it is just me but I fail to see the difference in how f@ck is somehow more acceptable while fuck isn't. We all know the word, we all thought 'fuck' when it read "f@ck" and it's the same concept with bleeping on television or radio. People are not that stupid; even if the word is bleeped we still all got the meaning behind it, and some how that's alright. They are words that are apart of our language and do have relevance in our lives; why (poorly) hide from them? I find it pointless to pretend a word doesn't exist in order too "protect" our children (or adults mind you), in fact I see that causing more harm then good.
This was a joke right?...
Must be technologies way of thinning the herd.
Sweet! Now I just gotta figure out how to point with my left pump with my right.
I couldn't read for more then a few minutes... It's already that infuriating. This is truly sad... I don't know what else to say. Just horrible.
What the hell are you talking about? For one, they are not kids for ever and are able to take as many pictures as they like once they hit 18 which would be a year or two when this whole thing started for them so yeah I guess thats a big lesson. Two, I seriously doubt they thought or even realized the laws or consequences. I'm not sure if you remember what it's like to be a teenager but many of them often don't consider laws/rules and consequence of there actions in certain situations. Lastly how could you blame the parents? I don't remember hearing of very many cases of teens getting prosecuted for taking pictures of them selfs before this, it may start to become an issue parents talk about to their children but I'm pretty sure it wasn't before.
Rarely do I find music worth even 12 dollars. I decided long ago that I will never spend money to potentially find new music that I'd enjoy listening to. Two reasons - 1. It already cost to much and 2. Is there enough of a risk that I will probably never listen to the artist again. Now there are a three or four bands that I wouldn't mind dishing out 30 bucks for a album but I believe they deserve every penny. I only found out about these bands by I suppose questionably unlawful means. Though as soon as I found a truly special/original/talented band I have purchased everything I've wanted to own of theirs. Everything else has either been deleted or has rarely/never been listened to again. The RIAA really has its or I suppose their head up there asses if they plan to implement this, and how exactly do they expect to sell really anything at all? People will rarely start purchasing music for artists they even like let alone take a risk on an artist they have never even heard. This may be a good thing with the whole down with the RIAA dealy but still the stupidity amazes me.
by Terry Bisson
http://www.terrybisson.com/meat.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq_Bj-av3g0&eurl=. What else is there to say.