Your analogy doesn't really work but let's give it a try anyhow. If a teller starts giving away bank property to people who shouldn't have it then the teller should be fired. I'm with the GP - the authorities responsible allowed the picture out and they and the employees involved should be held responsible for the results no matter what.
Upon investigation it turns that I was right - although you may have been right too. After your post I went back to check my info and found that Canada uses 1900 for 3G which I'm told is not used anywhere else in the world.
You're lucky. Really. I want to get an Android to use in Canada. None of the carriers here support it. But I can buy the developer version. And I can buy a sim from one of the GSM carriers up here and plug it into the phone and it will work. Except the 3G. Because for some reason the carriers here elected to use a 3G frequency incompatible with both the US and Europe. Grrrrrr.....
And what if your nice secure Linux box is hosting a Windows VM to run that one piece of legacy code you just have to run? Can the Windows guest be rooted and then take over the Linux host?
I'd have to agree - around here the education and on the job training (apprenticing) to be a licensed electrician, just to be able to wire single family dwellings, exceeds what is required to get an EE degree and P.Eng. certification.
Seems to me I remember reading in Ted Nelson's "Computer Lib and Dream Machines" about a working prototype headband and software where a a cursor continually scanned across the alphabet (on a screen) and when the student caused the correct pattern the the letter currently over the cursor would be added to the output. The student could write a sentence this way. Now of course what this article describes is more sophisticated but of course it's also about 35 years later too...
Sometimes things do have top be taken to trade tribunals to get a ruling. I'm not sure what you are referring to about US pharmaceuticals so I can't comment. Canadians not being able to subscribe to satellite TV isn't a violation because it is Canada stopping it's citizens from buying it rather than the US saying it can't be sold to Canadians. Although I think control over the airwaves may in fact be exempted for all countries. And there are all sorts of violations that nobody cares enough to do anything about - or the people who care don't have deep enough pockets to do anything about it.
I don't see why a company should have to sell things to other countries.
Well one reason would be that they are required to by trade agreements entered into by their governments. For example the NAFTA requires that once you start selling a product to one of the member countries you have to keep selling it unless you also restrict selling to customers in the home country - i.e. no discriminating against the consumers in other countries. The US actually pushed hard for this because they didn't want Canada to be able to sell oil (and other natural resources) to Canadians at a lower price than they charged Americans - for obvious reasons.
Personally I think it is just that humans are hard-wired with a predilection for wishful thinking. You don't have to be alive very long to notice that when a person has a conflict between what they want to believe and established facts that it is usually the facts that lose.
And these guys aren't the first to turn to QM to explain human behavior - Penrose had his theories many years ago and was perhaps not the first either.
Here we are faced with a real dilemma - if we are deterministic constructs then there is no free will but so far, outside of religion, the only alternative offered up is quantum mechanical which is saying we are stochastic in nature. Nice choice - we are deterministic automatons or random systems. I think "free will" is pretty much a tautological concept and de facto relies on realms outside of science. Although I remember reading of some fascinating experiments that show that the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for concious decision making don't fire up until after a decision has been made - it appeared that the role of conciousness was that we act and then invent a "rational" reason for having performed the action.
I assumed it was understood that "eat less" meant "eat less stuff that's bad for you, including things that are high calorie" but if you need it said the long way then fine.
And of course there are exceptions to this - but that is exactly what they are, exceptions. Want to know why most overweight people are overweight? Here's two suggestions, 1) go stand by the supermarket line-up and see what overweight people are buying, and 2) talk to a psychologist/psychiatrist.
Yes eating less can slow your metabolism (and exercise will speed it up) - that still doesn't change the fact that if what goes in is less than what is burned then weight loss will follow.
I'm not trying to promote the idea that all that is ever required is to eat less but I do worry that "eat less, exercise more" is the proper advice for the majority of people and it is now being dismissed out of hand (not saying by you) by many who reflexively react with "it's more complicated than that" or "what if you have a slow metabolism" or other hand waving. The fact is that unless carrying out "eat less, exercise more", to the level necessary to lose weight, has significant negative health implications for an individual then it is the appropriate prescription - and will be in the majority of cases.
That is plain wrong. It is how much energy of the amount you consume is processed that decides whether you're obese.
So let's assume that your total raw intake, i.e. what goes into your mouth and before applying efficiency factors, is 1000 calories, i.e. the maximum energy that anyone could extract would be 1000 calories. Then you do exercise that requires energy expenditure of 1001 calories. Are you saying you won't lose weight? Because if so we'll have to call the perpetual motion people.
It is true that body weight is a very complex issue an different people will face different challenges. None of that, including the fact that one person may extract more usable calories from the same food intake as another person, negates the fact that if your total intake is X calories and you burn X+1 calories then you will lose weight.
Not only that but my own string theory related theory is that 99% of the posters here bitching about string theory do not have the necessary knowledge of physics and math to actually have a truly informed opinion about string theory. And of the remaining 1% I would venture that only a small fraction have gone to the necessary effort to actually properly evaluate it. But then it's so safe to try and look intelligent by chanting with the crowd; after all everyone around you believes you.
Here's a thought - the right to an opinion isn't a requirement that you have one.
My gf's problem was slightly different. The linux that came with her Aspire 1 ran ok but whe wasn't familiar with the layout or apps (why a proprietary mail client???) so she asked me to put something else on. She was used to Ubuntu so I installed the netbook remix... slow as a dog. I don't know why and don't have the time to figure it out but for her she is faced with a disappointing choice. When the next release comes out next week I'll try that for her; if that doesn't do it then I suspect she is going to want to go to XP.
That's fascinating! So how does that work? Is there a refueling aircraft that approaches from at front, dangling a gas pump on a boom arm, and you maneuver the car to get the fill?
Yes. But that's only the German diesels. Oh, and Jack Bauer's I guess.
It boils down to whether or not you think "free trade" provides more benefits to the average person than "protected trade" does. Of course the answer to that question may differ depending on the scale at which you ask it, e.g. national, state/provincial, municipal etc. And I suppose part of that equation is just how much friendliness you want to cultivate between you and your neighbor at each level - what's the value of a good relationship with your neighbor?
Not to be harsh or anything, but having all the computing power in the world isn't going to help Indian enterprises when their staff can't be bothered to speak English well enough to deal with the project teams they're trying to sell their services to.
I wonder, is it possible that they have projects other than providing outsourcing to other nations?
Slashdot Mirror
Your analogy doesn't really work but let's give it a try anyhow. If a teller starts giving away bank property to people who shouldn't have it then the teller should be fired. I'm with the GP - the authorities responsible allowed the picture out and they and the employees involved should be held responsible for the results no matter what.
Ensign Toast
Upon investigation it turns that I was right - although you may have been right too. After your post I went back to check my info and found that Canada uses 1900 for 3G which I'm told is not used anywhere else in the world.
That's informative - thank you! What does the rest of the USA use for 3G?
10.25% sale tax? Cry me a river.
When you get to a 12%-14% base rate like it is in most of Canada, then I might start feeling sorry for you.
Of course we do get the slow trains and "free" healthcare (paid for by other taxes and user fees) but they aren't paid for from sales tax.
You're lucky. Really. I want to get an Android to use in Canada. None of the carriers here support it. But I can buy the developer version. And I can buy a sim from one of the GSM carriers up here and plug it into the phone and it will work. Except the 3G. Because for some reason the carriers here elected to use a 3G frequency incompatible with both the US and Europe. Grrrrrr.....
And what if your nice secure Linux box is hosting a Windows VM to run that one piece of legacy code you just have to run? Can the Windows guest be rooted and then take over the Linux host?
I'd have to agree - around here the education and on the job training (apprenticing) to be a licensed electrician, just to be able to wire single family dwellings, exceeds what is required to get an EE degree and P.Eng. certification.
Seems to me I remember reading in Ted Nelson's "Computer Lib and Dream Machines" about a working prototype headband and software where a a cursor continually scanned across the alphabet (on a screen) and when the student caused the correct pattern the the letter currently over the cursor would be added to the output. The student could write a sentence this way. Now of course what this article describes is more sophisticated but of course it's also about 35 years later too...
Sometimes things do have top be taken to trade tribunals to get a ruling. I'm not sure what you are referring to about US pharmaceuticals so I can't comment. Canadians not being able to subscribe to satellite TV isn't a violation because it is Canada stopping it's citizens from buying it rather than the US saying it can't be sold to Canadians. Although I think control over the airwaves may in fact be exempted for all countries. And there are all sorts of violations that nobody cares enough to do anything about - or the people who care don't have deep enough pockets to do anything about it.
I don't see why a company should have to sell things to other countries.
Well one reason would be that they are required to by trade agreements entered into by their governments. For example the NAFTA requires that once you start selling a product to one of the member countries you have to keep selling it unless you also restrict selling to customers in the home country - i.e. no discriminating against the consumers in other countries. The US actually pushed hard for this because they didn't want Canada to be able to sell oil (and other natural resources) to Canadians at a lower price than they charged Americans - for obvious reasons.
"Concrete Island" is the work of his that I most remember reading back then.
And the world will have the technology just as much as if the US had developed it.
Personally I think it is just that humans are hard-wired with a predilection for wishful thinking. You don't have to be alive very long to notice that when a person has a conflict between what they want to believe and established facts that it is usually the facts that lose.
And these guys aren't the first to turn to QM to explain human behavior - Penrose had his theories many years ago and was perhaps not the first either.
Here we are faced with a real dilemma - if we are deterministic constructs then there is no free will but so far, outside of religion, the only alternative offered up is quantum mechanical which is saying we are stochastic in nature. Nice choice - we are deterministic automatons or random systems. I think "free will" is pretty much a tautological concept and de facto relies on realms outside of science. Although I remember reading of some fascinating experiments that show that the parts of the brain thought to be responsible for concious decision making don't fire up until after a decision has been made - it appeared that the role of conciousness was that we act and then invent a "rational" reason for having performed the action.
I assumed it was understood that "eat less" meant "eat less stuff that's bad for you, including things that are high calorie" but if you need it said the long way then fine.
And of course there are exceptions to this - but that is exactly what they are, exceptions. Want to know why most overweight people are overweight? Here's two suggestions, 1) go stand by the supermarket line-up and see what overweight people are buying, and 2) talk to a psychologist/psychiatrist.
Yes eating less can slow your metabolism (and exercise will speed it up) - that still doesn't change the fact that if what goes in is less than what is burned then weight loss will follow.
I'm not trying to promote the idea that all that is ever required is to eat less but I do worry that "eat less, exercise more" is the proper advice for the majority of people and it is now being dismissed out of hand (not saying by you) by many who reflexively react with "it's more complicated than that" or "what if you have a slow metabolism" or other hand waving. The fact is that unless carrying out "eat less, exercise more", to the level necessary to lose weight, has significant negative health implications for an individual then it is the appropriate prescription - and will be in the majority of cases.
That is plain wrong. It is how much energy of the amount you consume is processed that decides whether you're obese.
So let's assume that your total raw intake, i.e. what goes into your mouth and before applying efficiency factors, is 1000 calories, i.e. the maximum energy that anyone could extract would be 1000 calories. Then you do exercise that requires energy expenditure of 1001 calories. Are you saying you won't lose weight? Because if so we'll have to call the perpetual motion people.
It is true that body weight is a very complex issue an different people will face different challenges. None of that, including the fact that one person may extract more usable calories from the same food intake as another person, negates the fact that if your total intake is X calories and you burn X+1 calories then you will lose weight.
Not only that but my own string theory related theory is that 99% of the posters here bitching about string theory do not have the necessary knowledge of physics and math to actually have a truly informed opinion about string theory. And of the remaining 1% I would venture that only a small fraction have gone to the necessary effort to actually properly evaluate it. But then it's so safe to try and look intelligent by chanting with the crowd; after all everyone around you believes you.
Here's a thought - the right to an opinion isn't a requirement that you have one.
I think if you say "fucking" a few more times it will make your arguments much more convincing. Maybe throw in a few more "shits" too.
Somehow I doubt that they would be the clients for supercomputer time.
My gf's problem was slightly different. The linux that came with her Aspire 1 ran ok but whe wasn't familiar with the layout or apps (why a proprietary mail client???) so she asked me to put something else on. She was used to Ubuntu so I installed the netbook remix... slow as a dog. I don't know why and don't have the time to figure it out but for her she is faced with a disappointing choice. When the next release comes out next week I'll try that for her; if that doesn't do it then I suspect she is going to want to go to XP.
That's fascinating! So how does that work? Is there a refueling aircraft that approaches from at front, dangling a gas pump on a boom arm, and you maneuver the car to get the fill?
Yes. But that's only the German diesels. Oh, and Jack Bauer's I guess.
It boils down to whether or not you think "free trade" provides more benefits to the average person than "protected trade" does. Of course the answer to that question may differ depending on the scale at which you ask it, e.g. national, state/provincial, municipal etc. And I suppose part of that equation is just how much friendliness you want to cultivate between you and your neighbor at each level - what's the value of a good relationship with your neighbor?
Not to be harsh or anything, but having all the computing power in the world isn't going to help Indian enterprises when their staff can't be bothered to speak English well enough to deal with the project teams they're trying to sell their services to.
I wonder, is it possible that they have projects other than providing outsourcing to other nations?
I agree with you on (1) and (2) though.