The main reason Im not engaging is that when someone endorses homeopathy, AND opposes vaccines, AND theyre selling dietery supplements, the changes that there will be a consensus on what constitutes "science" or "evidence" or "reason" is very small. I could try to use facts to debate each one point by point, but its not like I would be breaking bold new ground; a 5 minute google spree could tell you what the realistic risks and proven benefits are to vaccines, or the actual (limited) effectiveness of homeopathy. Someone willing to discount those bodies of evidence is unlikely to pay any mind to any of the arguments I could bring to bear. Why should I even waste the time?
Joseph M. Mercola (born 1954) is an alternative medicine proponent, osteopathic physician, and web entrepreneur, who markets a variety of controversial dietary supplements
Raising alert status to yellow...
Mercola and colleagues advocate a number of unproven alternative health notions including homeopathy,
Going to code orange...
Mercola criticizes many aspects of standard medical practice, such as vaccination
CODE RED CODE RED!
Sorry, if it looks like a quack and sounds like a quack, he probably is a quack.
Im pretty sure the whole point of classifying a document after the fact is to indicate that it is not, from that point on, suitable for viewing by non-cleared / non-need-to-know parties.
It is irrelevant whether it was classified at the beginning, its classified now, and its classified for a reason.
How is it a kludge? You have the option in NTFS of having that everyone:traverse permission propogating through the directory heirarchy, but it isnt required. It sounds like Netware just assumes that traversal rights are implicit, where there may be scenarios where it is not desired.
I love corporations thrown in there as if it is relevant.
In the last 200 years of history, one has been far, far, far more likely to be killed by one's own government than by an external actor. That being the case, I wonder very much at the argument that we should therefore lay down arms and fully entrust ourselves to the loving kindness of those in power.
As noted in this thread, anything can be a lethal weapon. That includes sharpened sticks.
If we then apply your logic to sharpened sticks, we should probably ban them too because they are far more likely to be used than guns.
If we continue applying your logic consistently, we should also ban spoons: They can be used as weaponry, but are quite unlikely to be lethal and (as you argued) are therefore used extremely often.
Translation: "Linux is free" often does not factor in real-world retraining and retooling costs.
Want to push OpenOffice / Linux as cheaper alternatives? Wonderful. Just dont pretend that theyre actually free when it comes to use in a business, especially with folks used to a different system.
It blows my mind that someone would be able to read that paragraph without an ominous chill going down their spine. What hes really saying is, "some people have disgusting philosophies that are at the same time difficult to unseat. Therefore we should have the right to deem them outside the law so that such dangerous ideas do not proliferate."
The very notion that there are "dangerous ideas" that cannot be allowed is chilling, moreso because some apparently believe it.
In the old days everyone and their mother complained about the massive memory leaks in firefox, not to mention in all of the extensions you needed to come anywhere close to parity with what we have now. Tab improvement extensions particularly-- remember needing tab mix plus to get undo tab close?
In what way is it significantly bloated compared to 1,0?
I remember the days where to be usable you needed about 10-20 extensions, and THAT made it a bloated, leaky, hoggish mess; when javascript took the browser to a crawl; and when simple updates (like 1.0 - 1.5, which as I recall primarilly were visual updates and adding a new tab button) took something like a year to come to release. Trust me if you werent there, this is better.
If this were true, then you could stimulate the economy by giving everyone a $10 tax break on the condition that they give that money to someone else.
The only way it works, is if rather than giving the money, they use it to purchase some good or service-- that is, value added to the economy. Simply moving money around doesnt cut it, there has to be something that you're exchanging the money for.
Otherwise, we would have our ditch diggers use spoons, and have workmen build highrises without the assistance of cranes. Sure, it would take them forever to put a building up, but think of the employment opportunities! Except that the actual goods produced by our economy would drastically fall if we approached industry in this way and we would cease to be economically competitive with other countries.
The problem is that you are assuming that you can have an economy just by shuffling money around, whereas I had always understood it revolved around the creation (not destruction!) of value.
Seems like we should start paying kids to break store windows so that more glaziers can be employed, and more repairmen, and so on through the economy.
You spin and cool your weapons, and make them as reflective as practical and this system won't do any damage
I've never seen anyone agree with this assessment who has professed knowledge of the subject. The issue is that lasers still dump a lot of energy, which starts to mar the mirror really incredibly fast. 2.5kW of energy is like applying a soldering iron tip to the mirror, which rapidly (1s) causes it to mar and become useless. Not only that, atmospheric pollutants, water droplets, grease-- anything-- will make that part of the mirror useless. Applying mirrors to your turrets? Good luck keeping them clean with all of the gunsmoke coming out of them.
Meanwhile the defender has the burden of carrying all of this extra weight (not really feasible with aircraft, seacraft, or missiles) and trying desperately to keep it clean in battlefield conditions, plus all of the added expense for an armor that is, at best, marginally useful.
If your enemy is having to adopt incredibly expensive, incredibly hard to maintain, and marginally effective countermeasures to your weapon, then your weapon is doing its job. It really doesnt matter whether you blow up 10 of the enemy's ships, or whether their countermeasures have meant they could build 10 fewer ships; the outcome is the same.
Because a 2.5kW laser is still sufficient to burn things, and once the mirror starts to lose reflectance it will start down a path of exponentially reducing reflectance.
I guess you're so unwilling to understand the opposing view point that you're perfectly ready to believe in a caricature of it. The person you responded to is an AC, clearly setting up a strawman, and has baited several of you into attacking it.
Congrats to the AC, you've successfully trolled several people in this thread.
Slashdot Mirror
The main reason Im not engaging is that when someone endorses homeopathy, AND opposes vaccines, AND theyre selling dietery supplements, the changes that there will be a consensus on what constitutes "science" or "evidence" or "reason" is very small. I could try to use facts to debate each one point by point, but its not like I would be breaking bold new ground; a 5 minute google spree could tell you what the realistic risks and proven benefits are to vaccines, or the actual (limited) effectiveness of homeopathy. Someone willing to discount those bodies of evidence is unlikely to pay any mind to any of the arguments I could bring to bear. Why should I even waste the time?
Im sorry could you be less vague and handwavy? What, specifically, are you implying is causing autism? And what makes you think the rates are rising?
From :
Joseph M. Mercola (born 1954) is an alternative medicine proponent, osteopathic physician, and web entrepreneur, who markets a variety of controversial dietary supplements
Raising alert status to yellow...
Mercola and colleagues advocate a number of unproven alternative health notions including homeopathy,
Going to code orange...
Mercola criticizes many aspects of standard medical practice, such as vaccination
CODE RED CODE RED!
Sorry, if it looks like a quack and sounds like a quack, he probably is a quack.
That's not his job, he has smart people hired to handle stuff like that.
But its not the smart people's responsibility to comply with laws (and common sense)-- its Hillary's.
The documents were not classified at the time.
Im pretty sure the whole point of classifying a document after the fact is to indicate that it is not, from that point on, suitable for viewing by non-cleared / non-need-to-know parties.
It is irrelevant whether it was classified at the beginning, its classified now, and its classified for a reason.
How is it a kludge? You have the option in NTFS of having that everyone:traverse permission propogating through the directory heirarchy, but it isnt required. It sounds like Netware just assumes that traversal rights are implicit, where there may be scenarios where it is not desired.
I love corporations thrown in there as if it is relevant.
In the last 200 years of history, one has been far, far, far more likely to be killed by one's own government than by an external actor. That being the case, I wonder very much at the argument that we should therefore lay down arms and fully entrust ourselves to the loving kindness of those in power.
As noted in this thread, anything can be a lethal weapon. That includes sharpened sticks.
If we then apply your logic to sharpened sticks, we should probably ban them too because they are far more likely to be used than guns.
If we continue applying your logic consistently, we should also ban spoons: They can be used as weaponry, but are quite unlikely to be lethal and (as you argued) are therefore used extremely often.
He doesnt answer :(
Translation: "Linux is free" often does not factor in real-world retraining and retooling costs.
Want to push OpenOffice / Linux as cheaper alternatives? Wonderful. Just dont pretend that theyre actually free when it comes to use in a business, especially with folks used to a different system.
It blows my mind that someone would be able to read that paragraph without an ominous chill going down their spine. What hes really saying is, "some people have disgusting philosophies that are at the same time difficult to unseat. Therefore we should have the right to deem them outside the law so that such dangerous ideas do not proliferate."
The very notion that there are "dangerous ideas" that cannot be allowed is chilling, moreso because some apparently believe it.
In the old days everyone and their mother complained about the massive memory leaks in firefox, not to mention in all of the extensions you needed to come anywhere close to parity with what we have now. Tab improvement extensions particularly-- remember needing tab mix plus to get undo tab close?
In what way is it significantly bloated compared to 1,0?
I remember the days where to be usable you needed about 10-20 extensions, and THAT made it a bloated, leaky, hoggish mess; when javascript took the browser to a crawl; and when simple updates (like 1.0 - 1.5, which as I recall primarilly were visual updates and adding a new tab button) took something like a year to come to release. Trust me if you werent there, this is better.
If this were true, then you could stimulate the economy by giving everyone a $10 tax break on the condition that they give that money to someone else.
The only way it works, is if rather than giving the money, they use it to purchase some good or service-- that is, value added to the economy. Simply moving money around doesnt cut it, there has to be something that you're exchanging the money for.
Otherwise, we would have our ditch diggers use spoons, and have workmen build highrises without the assistance of cranes. Sure, it would take them forever to put a building up, but think of the employment opportunities! Except that the actual goods produced by our economy would drastically fall if we approached industry in this way and we would cease to be economically competitive with other countries.
The problem is that you are assuming that you can have an economy just by shuffling money around, whereas I had always understood it revolved around the creation (not destruction!) of value.
Seems like we should start paying kids to break store windows so that more glaziers can be employed, and more repairmen, and so on through the economy.
If Microsoft abandons Powershell, Im switching to Mac.
Users have to be logged into their Google account, and their profile names and photos are displayed alongside the URL in incoming Tone notifications.
Its right there in the article....
Note: I was wrong re soldering iron; soldering irons are generally 100watts, this is 25x more powerful.
The mirror would last fractions of a second.
You spin and cool your weapons, and make them as reflective as practical and this system won't do any damage
I've never seen anyone agree with this assessment who has professed knowledge of the subject. The issue is that lasers still dump a lot of energy, which starts to mar the mirror really incredibly fast. 2.5kW of energy is like applying a soldering iron tip to the mirror, which rapidly (1s) causes it to mar and become useless. Not only that, atmospheric pollutants, water droplets, grease-- anything-- will make that part of the mirror useless. Applying mirrors to your turrets? Good luck keeping them clean with all of the gunsmoke coming out of them.
Meanwhile the defender has the burden of carrying all of this extra weight (not really feasible with aircraft, seacraft, or missiles) and trying desperately to keep it clean in battlefield conditions, plus all of the added expense for an armor that is, at best, marginally useful.
If your enemy is having to adopt incredibly expensive, incredibly hard to maintain, and marginally effective countermeasures to your weapon, then your weapon is doing its job. It really doesnt matter whether you blow up 10 of the enemy's ships, or whether their countermeasures have meant they could build 10 fewer ships; the outcome is the same.
Its possible that its your expectations that are off, rather than the functionality.
You could always take slashcode and make your own site if you arent happy with the service your money gets you here.
Because a 2.5kW laser is still sufficient to burn things, and once the mirror starts to lose reflectance it will start down a path of exponentially reducing reflectance.
That is,
0.0s - 0.1s: 95% reflectance
0.1s - 0.2s: 90% reflectance
0.2s - 0.3s: 80% reflectance
0.3s - 0.4s: 60%
0.4s - 0.5s: 20%
Etc. Source: Numbers are made up and hypothetical.
In our system, we avoid punishment for even the worst crimes committed by our military or cops.
I would be in favor of even harsher punishments for those in authority than those not.
I guess you're so unwilling to understand the opposing view point that you're perfectly ready to believe in a caricature of it. The person you responded to is an AC, clearly setting up a strawman, and has baited several of you into attacking it.
Congrats to the AC, you've successfully trolled several people in this thread.
PSSST, hes playing the part of straw man. Dont feed the trolls.