I am very far from being a specialist in this topic. The The Register article seems to imply that global warming must be true, given that there was ONE paper in 80s already anticipating it. That is not necessarily true. The prediction can be result of pure chance in a possibly erratic research study (I have no clue if that is the case or not). One could perhaps make an stronger statement in that direction if MANY papers anticipated global warming (possibly using different models).
This can happen in any system based in representation. However, for some reason, that doesn't happen (usually).
The good thing of this system is that now a group of people have the same power to propose laws as a unique MP. The rest of the process is the same and I don't see much differences of what can happen in a traditional system. First, it is not that people are voting for a law; they are voting to propose a law to be considered. Second, any crazy group of people can propose any crazy law, as any crazy MP can propose any crazy law in the current system. If the rest of the parliament is also mad fo the point of approving it, then probably the population in general is nuts in general. Third, the forms of pressure by the population are not all the same. Some are more easier than others, thus showing less (or more) eagerness of the population. The parliament will naturally take that into account, putting the population proposals into context. If it turns out that it is easy to build up 50k votes in a bill proposal, then the MPs will feel less pressured to vote for them. It certainly will not be the same as 50k people protesting and trying to invade the parliament.
I gave a look at the article, but didn't find any mention to a working prototype. Since the device requires a new model of human tissue to be right, it will be nice if they could test the model first.
Defined as someone who wishes they could be a journalist, but doesn't want to actually have to conform to any kind of standards
Sir, could you please point me the direction to those journalism standards you talk about?
Seriously, very few journalists follow standards; not the good ones at least (e.g., priority to reporting facts over writing a nice story, etc). For instance, eventually I come across articles in the newspapers reporting some stories which I have witnessed myself. Every single one of them until today have had factual errors, and some of them quite gross.
It would be easier to believe in these guys if they provide more technical details in how they pretend to achieve fission propulsion. As it is mentioned in the article, this is not a new idea. Is there any new development that could cast new light on the problem of fission propulsion?
Automotive window film is also a good solution in some occasions. It holds the window glass together when broken, making it more difficult to the robber to smash the window open.
Lets go for the list:
- I know how to use it;
- It seems to have a snapier feeling than linux;
- Games and other apps
As a matter of fact, nowadays I use both: Windows as host and Linux in a vm. Linux is easier to user when you have to employ a suite of different apps. For instance, when manipulating Latex documents.
Could you present some evidence for your analysis? You sound as if all the "ground breaking" research in CS during the early years originated out of thin air. This is ridiculous. Much of early ideas in CS are derivatives from established concepts in mathematics, physics and philosophy. Also, creating a new idea is not the same as proposing an useful idea. For example, parallel programming techniques have been around since the early years, but it took many years of small research steps to transform these initial ideas in useful, easy-to-use programming languages.
People at OPERA project are having an exemplar scientific conduct. It is amazing how they actively refused to elaborate any theories on their findings, restating their job as unbiased experimental physicists. This is pure scientific method.
Agreed. I just disagree on the Antarctica bit: in my opinion the video ends when the ISS start to "turn" into South America. The blackout region to the left, near the end of the video, seems to be the Amazon forest. As a matter of fact, the ISS is in this same path right now (2011-09-18 20:22 UTC).
The arguments for decreasing freedom in order to protect human rights are MUCH more compelling than the arguments for slashing freedom in order to protect corporate interests.
Slashdot Mirror
Arrr, yes! Eastasia and their terror-muslin-children-eating terrorists. Let's bomb them all!
I am very far from being a specialist in this topic. The The Register article seems to imply that global warming must be true, given that there was ONE paper in 80s already anticipating it. That is not necessarily true. The prediction can be result of pure chance in a possibly erratic research study (I have no clue if that is the case or not). One could perhaps make an stronger statement in that direction if MANY papers anticipated global warming (possibly using different models).
This can happen in any system based in representation. However, for some reason, that doesn't happen (usually).
The good thing of this system is that now a group of people have the same power to propose laws as a unique MP. The rest of the process is the same and I don't see much differences of what can happen in a traditional system. First, it is not that people are voting for a law; they are voting to propose a law to be considered. Second, any crazy group of people can propose any crazy law, as any crazy MP can propose any crazy law in the current system. If the rest of the parliament is also mad fo the point of approving it, then probably the population in general is nuts in general. Third, the forms of pressure by the population are not all the same. Some are more easier than others, thus showing less (or more) eagerness of the population. The parliament will naturally take that into account, putting the population proposals into context. If it turns out that it is easy to build up 50k votes in a bill proposal, then the MPs will feel less pressured to vote for them. It certainly will not be the same as 50k people protesting and trying to invade the parliament.
Now I can be all the time under a good shade during the summer.
I gave a look at the article, but didn't find any mention to a working prototype. Since the device requires a new model of human tissue to be right, it will be nice if they could test the model first.
Defined as someone who wishes they could be a journalist, but doesn't want to actually have to conform to any kind of standards
Sir, could you please point me the direction to those journalism standards you talk about?
Seriously, very few journalists follow standards; not the good ones at least (e.g., priority to reporting facts over writing a nice story, etc). For instance, eventually I come across articles in the newspapers reporting some stories which I have witnessed myself. Every single one of them until today have had factual errors, and some of them quite gross.
Why this cannot be tested in humans right now?
My employer just had a great idea.
It would be easier to believe in these guys if they provide more technical details in how they pretend to achieve fission propulsion. As it is mentioned in the article, this is not a new idea. Is there any new development that could cast new light on the problem of fission propulsion?
Automotive window film is also a good solution in some occasions. It holds the window glass together when broken, making it more difficult to the robber to smash the window open.
Lets go for the list:
- I know how to use it;
- It seems to have a snapier feeling than linux;
- Games and other apps
As a matter of fact, nowadays I use both: Windows as host and Linux in a vm. Linux is easier to user when you have to employ a suite of different apps. For instance, when manipulating Latex documents.
Could you present some evidence for your analysis? You sound as if all the "ground breaking" research in CS during the early years originated out of thin air. This is ridiculous. Much of early ideas in CS are derivatives from established concepts in mathematics, physics and philosophy. Also, creating a new idea is not the same as proposing an useful idea. For example, parallel programming techniques have been around since the early years, but it took many years of small research steps to transform these initial ideas in useful, easy-to-use programming languages.
Ant it works as in this Dilbert strip? http://www.dilbert.com/2010-12-17/
You would have to have a compatible, expansive iMouth to eat their even more expansive iFood.
People at OPERA project are having an exemplar scientific conduct. It is amazing how they actively refused to elaborate any theories on their findings, restating their job as unbiased experimental physicists. This is pure scientific method.
Agreed. I just disagree on the Antarctica bit: in my opinion the video ends when the ISS start to "turn" into South America. The blackout region to the left, near the end of the video, seems to be the Amazon forest. As a matter of fact, the ISS is in this same path right now (2011-09-18 20:22 UTC).
The arguments for decreasing freedom in order to protect human rights are MUCH more compelling than the arguments for slashing freedom in order to protect corporate interests.
How is this different from an application of video conferencing?
I would say that in the new proposal you can interact with entertaining persons only.
MUUUUAHAHHAHAHAH
. Sincerely yours,
The Lawyer
Ha! These can be found in the Sub-Etha File-o-Sharing Network already.
A photo of whom, you slack cunt?
Well, I'm not sure, to be honest with you. It is just a person frequently mentioned in Monty Python and Mock the Week stuff. Sorry, I only make joke.
However, if you stick a photo of Margareth Thatcher to your face, it will produce a beverage entirely like tea, but with poison in it.
X-Change?
Funny. I do not get offendend by counter-arguments, but I become automatically offendend when it starts with "sorry".
... I started eating Wees, which are by far more dietetic than ps's.