The article strongly advocates the idea that life can arise from materials other than carbon and water but illustrates the extreme conditions that would be required for it to happen.
The problem here is what we define as extreme. I would consider the crushing pressure in one of the gas giants extreme. Or perhaps the heat of Venus. Or a planet made primarily of elements significantly different than ours, sulfur and silicon perhaps.
but I ponder how a octopus with no skeletal structure or protective shell would have faired against a humanoid on land, no matter how potentially nimble the octopus form.
To throw this back at you, how well would a spider monkey fare against a intelligent, tool using octopus descendant in the water?
Well, considering it was modded as insightful and given other absurd views of history people here on/. have, yeah, I did think someone could really think that was how civil rights were won.
Using a company's logo without their permission is more or less the corporate equivalent of identity theft, and saying "it's just satire" is not a defense that's going to work.
That's not entirely true, satire defense can be used in trademark cases, it is just more difficult than satire defenses in regards to copyright. Check out this page.
No, that is not how civil rights were won. They were won by people of color who would ignore the signs and sit in the damned restaurant anyways. They were won by lawsuit and by federal troops forcible desegregating schools. You must have some happy-go-lucky view of history if you think people were somehow shamed by the media into giving people of color civil rights.
That list is actually wrong. Fat Wreck Chords has said again and again that they are not a part of the RIAA, and the RIAA continues to list them. I'm pretty sure there are other labels in the same situation.
You missed the point. They don't need a space elevator for their business plan to succeed, just the technologies that they are/will developing. That tech moves us closer to an SE, and it is profit generating in the short term.
I hate the damn word. It sounds like it should be a swear word. "Aaaah, blog it!"
Nothing wrong with the things, you know I had a blog before the were even called blogs.(gotta build up my internet cred.)
Back then we had to telnet in, both ways! Over dial-up if we were lucky, or else we would just make weird noises on the phone. "kshhhhhh boing, boing! Kshhhhhhhh."
Because if it were a post about a black man setting a record in space and the first post was about picking cotton no everyone would think it was hilarious.
It certainly would be without hospitals. And therefore people without appendixes, who can thereby not get appendicitis, will die at a lower rate than those with appendixes.
It's not causing people to die because we have hospitals that can give people appendectomies. I suspect if this were not the case then a lot more people would die from appendicitis.
Which is all well and good, but we are holding Afghani nationals captured in Afghanistan that were denied the protections of the conventions, a clear violation.
Perhaps that is what the Army field manual says, if so then the U.S. is abrogating the Geneva Convention IV which specifically covers civilians and to which the United States is a signatory.
Art. 4. Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.
Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.
This seems to clearly cover those who have been captured, even if they had taken up arms as you described. The conventions are meant to apply after capture.
And if you read article 3 you will find:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) taking of hostages; (c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
In fact, even GCI covers individuals who are not fighting.
But on a closer look,
Persons, such as guerrillas and partisans, who take up arms and commit hostile acts without having complied with the conditions prescribed by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents, are, when captured by the injured party, not entitled to be treated as prisoners of war and may be tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment (FM 27-10 Par. 80).
could fall within the conventions if the trial includes "judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples."(GCI art. 3)
Slashdot Mirror
Evolution is a genetic algorithm, it doesn't take well to intelligent design.
Go find some software code developed by a genetic algorithm and compare it to human written code.
The article strongly advocates the idea that life can arise from materials other than carbon and water but illustrates the extreme conditions that would be required for it to happen.
The problem here is what we define as extreme. I would consider the crushing pressure in one of the gas giants extreme. Or perhaps the heat of Venus. Or a planet made primarily of elements significantly different than ours, sulfur and silicon perhaps.
but I ponder how a octopus with no skeletal structure or protective shell would have faired against a humanoid on land, no matter how potentially nimble the octopus form.
To throw this back at you, how well would a spider monkey fare against a intelligent, tool using octopus descendant in the water?
Death? You mean prison of course. Or garnished wages. Where the hell do you live that they will kill you for not paying taxes?
Well, considering it was modded as insightful and given other absurd views of history people here on /. have, yeah, I did think someone could really think that was how civil rights were won.
Sorry, nothing personal.
Using a company's logo without their permission is more or less the corporate equivalent of identity theft, and saying "it's just satire" is not a defense that's going to work.
That's not entirely true, satire defense can be used in trademark cases, it is just more difficult than satire defenses in regards to copyright. Check out this page.
No, that is not how civil rights were won. They were won by people of color who would ignore the signs and sit in the damned restaurant anyways. They were won by lawsuit and by federal troops forcible desegregating schools. You must have some happy-go-lucky view of history if you think people were somehow shamed by the media into giving people of color civil rights.
Insightful my ass.
That list is actually wrong. Fat Wreck Chords has said again and again that they are not a part of the RIAA, and the RIAA continues to list them. I'm pretty sure there are other labels in the same situation.
Your all lower-case style of posting shows you to be on the cutting edge of post-moderism
/. has gotten rid of all the mods?
Is that the time when
Fucking sweet!
We are finally free from the tyrannical rule of the mods! All rejoice!
You missed the point. They don't need a space elevator for their business plan to succeed, just the technologies that they are/will developing. That tech moves us closer to an SE, and it is profit generating in the short term.
Space elevators are only possible with engineered carbon nanotubes which have only recently been envisioned by scientists.
And by envisioned you mean created, because they have been. Certainly not up to spec for a space elevator yet, but they are out there already.
The word 'blog' annoys me, as does 'voip' when it's said as a word (they pronounce it voyp) and not an acronym.
If it isn't pronounced it's not properly an acronym. I.E. NATO, FUBAR and VOIP are proper acronyms where as IBM is not.
That's where my keys went. /me shakes fist at sky
Damn you global warming.
Strangely Global Warming almost never responds, and when it does it's a bunch of bullshit.
I hate the damn word. It sounds like it should be a swear word. "Aaaah, blog it!"
Nothing wrong with the things, you know I had a blog before the were even called blogs.(gotta build up my internet cred.)
Back then we had to telnet in, both ways! Over dial-up if we were lucky, or else we would just make weird noises on the phone. "kshhhhhh boing, boing! Kshhhhhhhh."
Ahh the god old days.
Is there some new rule that only a racist/sexist tells racist/sexist jokes or finds them funny?
Yeah, brand new! No one has ever mentioned before how fucked up racist and sexist humor is.
Because if it were a post about a black man setting a record in space and the first post was about picking cotton no everyone would think it was hilarious.
But people still die from appendicitis. Especially those without access to a hospital.
And appendicitis isn't fatal sometimes?
It certainly would be without hospitals. And therefore people without appendixes, who can thereby not get appendicitis, will die at a lower rate than those with appendixes.
How is this confusing?
You don't really understand how evolution works, do you?
It's not causing people to die because we have hospitals that can give people appendectomies. I suspect if this were not the case then a lot more people would die from appendicitis.
Which is all well and good, but we are holding Afghani nationals captured in Afghanistan that were denied the protections of the conventions, a clear violation.
Perhaps that is what the Army field manual says, if so then the U.S. is abrogating the Geneva Convention IV which specifically covers civilians and to which the United States is a signatory.
Article 4 from said convention
Art. 4. Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case of a conflict or occupation, in the hands of a Party to the conflict or Occupying Power of which they are not nationals.
Nationals of a State which is not bound by the Convention are not protected by it. Nationals of a neutral State who find themselves in the territory of a belligerent State, and nationals of a co-belligerent State, shall not be regarded as protected persons while the State of which they are nationals has normal diplomatic representation in the State in whose hands they are.
This seems to clearly cover those who have been captured, even if they had taken up arms as you described. The conventions are meant to apply after capture.
And if you read article 3 you will find:
(1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria.
To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:
(a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;
(b) taking of hostages;
(c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment;
(d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples.
In fact, even GCI covers individuals who are not fighting.
But on a closer look,
Persons, such as guerrillas and partisans, who take up arms and commit hostile acts without having complied with the conditions prescribed by the laws of war for recognition as belligerents, are, when captured by the injured party, not entitled to be treated as prisoners of war and may be tried and sentenced to execution or imprisonment (FM 27-10 Par. 80).
could fall within the conventions if the trial includes "judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples."(GCI art. 3)
The problems is that the U.S. is not doing so.
Well, that's rather convenient.
You realize of course that no one has ever been convicted of Logan act violations and it is likely unconstitutional.
I'm sure that won't stop you from using it as a bludgeon.
What then do you deem worthy as "real" action?
Has the abrogation of treaties been tested, in a legal sense, or is it just an assumed power?