Alternative source: a "scapegoat" was a hobbled goat left with a flock of sheep. As the (less valuable) goat couldn't run it would be taken down by an attacking wolf, leaving the more valuable livestock to escape.
Nope, we can't have nuclear plants, they're too dangerous. Setting off over 2,000 nuclear weapons over the last 60 years, yes, that's fine, but nuclear power isn't thinking about the children...
wouldn't it be simpler to get 50% of the members of one of the houses to sign a pledge to vote against any such legislation?
Because, depressingly, politicians don't have to do anything they promise to (and frequently don't). An actual law carries a little more weight than a politician's word.
I think Gith may have been refering to the idea that if fear is gone then war is easy. We can remove the fear by using remote drones, or by using people who have accepted and welcome their own death for a greater cause. Either works, and it's a really dumb arms race.
Yup, I use a £200 Eee every day, have been for several years now, brilliant little machine if it's running linux. Ideal for email, I run about 15 websites from it, it'll even run Minecraft if everything's turned down graphics-wise. Oh yeah, and it came with Windows originally - doesn't make it bad hardware, you can replace that nonsense! And you know what? It didn't "just get slower" over the years.
Any script will do it if the remote machine allows remote database access. Commonly they don't to close an obvious attack vector, but it's perfectly possible.
Oh, they could take it away, but that would involve either hacking into your computer or breaking into your house. Both of which are illegal. (Which makes me wonder why remote-deletion isn't?)
"X offers 50% off!" would be nothing but a slashvertisment if it wasn't O'Reilly, one of the few publishers who really understand the geek market.
A lot of people certainly looked at him that way, in the same way a lot of US troops listened in to Hanoi Hannah's broadcasts for fun during the Vietnam war.
No, the magic of radio waves made it possible and the US government had no way to stop it, whether the US thought he had any "right" to do so is irrelevant. New technology usually trumps individual states from controlling what people can and can't hear or say. This is a bad thing if you presume the public in general will always believe what they hear - which, it turns out, they don't. German propaganda broadcasts to the UK during WWII were generally a source of amusement for the British public.
Thanks for a voice of sanity. You know who I find unpleasant and behind much of the problems on the planet? Right wing fundamentalist politicians - but I'm still glad they have the chance to espouse their views, that way I know who they are, what they think and can understand why they're so dangerous.
The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused. I'd have some sympathy if the college hadn't offered this option, but as it stands it's simply refusal to wear an ID badge and has nothing to do with RFID tracking...good luck to her when it comes to finding a job with any company that uses ID badges of any description.
It actually makes a lot of sense, even when you're reading the legalese, the influence of having the Pirate Party on board (and actually drafting a lot of it) shows.
calls on the Member States to prevent any changes to the International Telecommunication Regulations which would be harmful to the openness of the internet, net neutrality, the end-to-end principle, universal service obligations, and the participatory governance entrusted to multiple actors such as governments, supranational institutions, non-governmental organisations, large and small businesses, the technological community and internet users and consumers at large
But as with all things of this nature, I can't help but wonder where the catch is - sensible sounding legislation always comes back to bite us doesn't it?
You can also play the "launch all the missiles for the hell of it" card. Which is what's happening - these devices are on convergent evolutions and they're arguing over the current tiny ideas instead of the next big ones. Good reference though.
Emotions are easy to manipulate. I show you (generic you, not you personally) a bunch of pictures, along with heart-wrenching stories, of Palestinean children killed by Israeli bombs. "How can we support such murderers?", you ask. Then I show you heart-wrenching stories of Israeli children killed by Palestinean bombs. "We have to protect these people!", you cry. If your decision is based on how much you CARE, you can't make a decision. You have to step back and evaluate which side, if either, is more useful to support for reasons totally irrelevant to how many children are getting killed. You have to reduce people to numbers and statistics -- or you can't decide, and meanwhile, even more people die while you waffle.
As with the first point of your argument, this is where some sociopathic (but still logical) thinking comes in. By being detached from the nationalistic and religious arguments (I think both from both sides are laughable) it's relatively easy to make a decision. First, inform everybody that this will happen, and give the innocent a chance to clear out. Secondly, when either side attacks the other a NATO jet (air force chosen by lottery each time) will bomb a randomly selected infrastructure target on both sides. A power station, a railway bridge, whatever. Something that is useful to the country as a whole but which should minimise civilian casualties (maybe even give them a few minutes warning). Eventually we either run out of targets (leaving the country at the stage where they're using slingshots...) or the only people left in the area are those who really want to fight the others, and the international community doesn't have any real moral problems with combatants killing each other in a war.
You've just suggested that an individual company be allowed to restrict the ability of some users to post whatever they want. Cue screams involving the first amendment and a/. article phrased as a question.
They're probably just planning on upgrading to Windows 8 and trying to find the "start server" button. (I know, I know, a cheap and innacurate shot, couldn't resist, please mod away.)
It's essentially a tax on the small proportion of Windows users who inconvenience the company by using copies purchased from real shop rather than downloading pirated versions. One of Microsoft's biggest costs is distributing the physical product, so they have to claw some of it back. Can't blame them, they're in the business of market share rather than the business of DVD distribution after all.
In theory the basic mathematics of quantum theory is time-symmetric. You can write equations to describe particles x and y colliding to produce a and b, and those equations work perfectly well to describe particles a and b colliding to produce x and y. It's why Feynman diagrams are so useful, you can just flip the time dimension around and see something else described by the same maths.
The point of what these folks have done is to look very closely at one particular Feynman diagram, that of the B meson decay, and showing that it is not time symmetric in some way. So the flow of time is something extra on top of the basic quantum theory...that's fascinating.
Slashdot Mirror
Alternative source: a "scapegoat" was a hobbled goat left with a flock of sheep. As the (less valuable) goat couldn't run it would be taken down by an attacking wolf, leaving the more valuable livestock to escape.
Nope, we can't have nuclear plants, they're too dangerous. Setting off over 2,000 nuclear weapons over the last 60 years, yes, that's fine, but nuclear power isn't thinking about the children...
The refugee camp in your back garden may hit your property magnate dreams somewhat.
Because, depressingly, politicians don't have to do anything they promise to (and frequently don't). An actual law carries a little more weight than a politician's word.
I think Gith may have been refering to the idea that if fear is gone then war is easy. We can remove the fear by using remote drones, or by using people who have accepted and welcome their own death for a greater cause. Either works, and it's a really dumb arms race.
To burgle. He burgled. They will burgle. I was burgled. I suffered a burglary. etc
Yup, I use a £200 Eee every day, have been for several years now, brilliant little machine if it's running linux. Ideal for email, I run about 15 websites from it, it'll even run Minecraft if everything's turned down graphics-wise. Oh yeah, and it came with Windows originally - doesn't make it bad hardware, you can replace that nonsense! And you know what? It didn't "just get slower" over the years.
Any script will do it if the remote machine allows remote database access. Commonly they don't to close an obvious attack vector, but it's perfectly possible.
Oh, they could take it away, but that would involve either hacking into your computer or breaking into your house. Both of which are illegal. (Which makes me wonder why remote-deletion isn't?)
"X offers 50% off!" would be nothing but a slashvertisment if it wasn't O'Reilly, one of the few publishers who really understand the geek market.
A lot of people certainly looked at him that way, in the same way a lot of US troops listened in to Hanoi Hannah's broadcasts for fun during the Vietnam war.
No, the magic of radio waves made it possible and the US government had no way to stop it, whether the US thought he had any "right" to do so is irrelevant. New technology usually trumps individual states from controlling what people can and can't hear or say. This is a bad thing if you presume the public in general will always believe what they hear - which, it turns out, they don't. German propaganda broadcasts to the UK during WWII were generally a source of amusement for the British public.
America has always been not at war with $country.
Thanks for a voice of sanity. You know who I find unpleasant and behind much of the problems on the planet? Right wing fundamentalist politicians - but I'm still glad they have the chance to espouse their views, that way I know who they are, what they think and can understand why they're so dangerous.
Problem in Karachi Not In Computer?
Dunno, but I bet you could make a tonne of money by sending adverts through it.
The student was offered a security card with no battery and chip, but still refused. I'd have some sympathy if the college hadn't offered this option, but as it stands it's simply refusal to wear an ID badge and has nothing to do with RFID tracking...good luck to her when it comes to finding a job with any company that uses ID badges of any description.
But as with all things of this nature, I can't help but wonder where the catch is - sensible sounding legislation always comes back to bite us doesn't it?
You can also play the "launch all the missiles for the hell of it" card. Which is what's happening - these devices are on convergent evolutions and they're arguing over the current tiny ideas instead of the next big ones. Good reference though.
As with the first point of your argument, this is where some sociopathic (but still logical) thinking comes in. By being detached from the nationalistic and religious arguments (I think both from both sides are laughable) it's relatively easy to make a decision. First, inform everybody that this will happen, and give the innocent a chance to clear out. Secondly, when either side attacks the other a NATO jet (air force chosen by lottery each time) will bomb a randomly selected infrastructure target on both sides. A power station, a railway bridge, whatever. Something that is useful to the country as a whole but which should minimise civilian casualties (maybe even give them a few minutes warning). Eventually we either run out of targets (leaving the country at the stage where they're using slingshots...) or the only people left in the area are those who really want to fight the others, and the international community doesn't have any real moral problems with combatants killing each other in a war.
You've just suggested that an individual company be allowed to restrict the ability of some users to post whatever they want. Cue screams involving the first amendment and a /. article phrased as a question.
Out of curiosity, can you run a .NET framework on a linux server via WINE? Or can you legitimately use the Windows licence to run it virtually?
They're probably just planning on upgrading to Windows 8 and trying to find the "start server" button. (I know, I know, a cheap and innacurate shot, couldn't resist, please mod away.)
It's essentially a tax on the small proportion of Windows users who inconvenience the company by using copies purchased from real shop rather than downloading pirated versions. One of Microsoft's biggest costs is distributing the physical product, so they have to claw some of it back. Can't blame them, they're in the business of market share rather than the business of DVD distribution after all.
What I'd like: announcement of microbial life in Martian soil, probably some sort of methanogen.
What we'll probably get: Methane is being generated in the soil...probably...with no idea of the actual origin.
Here's my take on it:
In theory the basic mathematics of quantum theory is time-symmetric. You can write equations to describe particles x and y colliding to produce a and b, and those equations work perfectly well to describe particles a and b colliding to produce x and y. It's why Feynman diagrams are so useful, you can just flip the time dimension around and see something else described by the same maths.
The point of what these folks have done is to look very closely at one particular Feynman diagram, that of the B meson decay, and showing that it is not time symmetric in some way. So the flow of time is something extra on top of the basic quantum theory...that's fascinating.