> > predetonating munitions miles away - perhaps someday even being mounted on Humvees."> > poor humvee drivers, that would suck getting blasted from miles away.
But if they have munitions mountedon their H2, they deserve to get blown up. I await the day they are blown up even without munitions on them. Of course, they could just buy a Ford and have the same thing happen without munitions and lasers. Hey, that's an idea... Find out who the next enemy is & buy their military a brand new fleet of Fords; guaranteed to kill a few of them before the war even starts. Of course, then they have a reason to preemptively attack us...
> most physicists expectations would suffice for a random slashdot discussion.
Yes, but/. discussions and using this device to kill people are 2 very different things. While it's just a discussion, we have to (well, should) take all things into consideration, and some doofus holding up a mirror to reflect a weapons-grade laser is a far cry from reality. This is why we argue the finer points; so that none of us are that doofus. Except for the trolls... feed them plenty of mirror solutions.
> it's perfectly all right if somebody detonates the nuclear arsenal just a few miles away from Seattle, because the US put those submarines near a city
Hell no, but if it happened outside Baghdad, that's okay. Finding a reason for subs in the desert, however, may prove to be a bit more perplexing.
> much more natural medications (not synthetic drugs) which tend to have less side effects. (Atleast less drastic ones.)
While I agree with your concept totally, I don't think all drugs should be done with. Some are very helpful, and natural medications have less side effects because they are generally less effective for the intended purpose. Granted, with patience & time, they can sometimes be more effective, but this article is more about releasing any kind of drug, including those that could be extracted from plants.
Muwahaha, that's only the first step, young jedi... er something. Anyway, while that sounds fun and all (Who wouldn't want 20 days-worth of time-released LSD? Oooh, and lots of Pop Rocks too), I don't think too many people would jump on that bandwagon. I'd be first on, of course, but from the drug culture I know (admittedly, not crack) most like to do things in their own pace, like a drug ritual. Time release would be nice at first, but it would get old pretty fast.
> die a horrible death of hemorraging. This could be more harm than good to the average person
Hmm, horrible hemmoraging death vs. a fully-functioning "average" person. Yeah, I'd say that's more harm than good. The problem with your statement, however, is twofold (maybe more, this is just what I'm thinking at the moment):
1. These things are pretty small, which means there would have to be a significant amount of force in exactly the right place to cause it to break. This includes the fact that skin stretches some and most likely the "chip" would simply shift instead of break. It could cause some internal cut/damage, but that would probably happen anyway, considering the force over the small area needed to damage it.
2. Even if it were to break, it does not necessarily mean all of the drug will be dispnsed at once. I'm sure it's not just miniature capsules all stacked. Unless the thing shattered COMPLETELY (ie, into fine dust), it would still time-release the drug, although it may be 2-3x the required dose. This would probably cause adverse reactions of course, but most likely something far from hemmoraging or death, at which time, a doctor could be notified to remedy the situation.
More harm? Somehow the odds seem much better with something like this instead of relying on people with generally bad memeries to take a half-dozen pills every day.
> I don't see microchips being able to make the kind of diagnoses you impart to it -- analyzing the drug chemicals in a system generally requires a lot of reactive tests, right? Something an isolated chip couldn't do, probably.
Sure, one side of the chip just has drugs, but if the other side has an RFID or something with a drug ID code, the patient can be scanned, presto, they know the (prescribed) drugs they are on and can see that something they did (or were about to do) would interact & remedy the situation. I think the poster was just thinking outside (no, not the box) the immediate implications of the article and adding in other "buzzword Technology."
> makes me think the Americans had a point with their "Freedom Fries" nonsense.
Oh please, no. I'm an American. I'm even a right-winger, but that was some of the most childish crap I've ever seen a large number of people fall for (except when Bush won the Rep. Primary Election over McCain, that was pretty dumb too). Whenever anyone would seriously use "freedom-" anything, I'd calmly explain why they're f&%king idiots and casually boot them in the head.
> > Poll: 75% of Palestinians support Haifa restaurant attack: > Where did you get that stat?
He asked four gun-toting skimask-wearing Palestinians what they thought. The one who didn't support it was promptly shot, so the "actual statistic" is 100% now. Or maybe he pulled it out of his ass. I'd bet on the second explanation.
> What is the point of the cost of electronic machines?
Speed. Reading paper ballots takes a long time, but if the computer tallies the results, it's millions of times faster. Then the paper ones are only necessary for backup, recounts, etc.
> All we need to show is having a higher IQ correlates to making more money, and we've got something.
Unfortunately, a quick survey of management will prove otherwise. Furtunately, I'm lucky enough that where I work, the management-types are smart, really nice, and actually think about my suggestions instead of nodding & just tossing them out.
I think your theory is flawed that later children eat better. First-time parents are paranoid as hell about doing everything right, so they feed them right. They don't care with the second, because they don't want the headaches and whining again, so they say "shut up and eat the damned Pop-Tart, see if I care." I know all about it, I'm asecond child, and the first is the "perfect" son. I'm... well, not.
There's an idea... maybe the original carvings are each slightly different from each other so you could stand in the middle, spin around real fast and watch the "animation..." uh.. of an axe turning into a mushroom or something like that.
> American trying to make the Arab people look bad
Okay, the poster's an idiot, but he didn't say a damned thing about Arabs, so why did you make that jump? Hell, you don't even know if he's an American.
Slashdot Mirror
> > predetonating munitions miles away - perhaps someday even being mounted on Humvees.">
> poor humvee drivers, that would suck getting blasted from miles away.
But if they have munitions mountedon their H2, they deserve to get blown up. I await the day they are blown up even without munitions on them. Of course, they could just buy a Ford and have the same thing happen without munitions and lasers. Hey, that's an idea... Find out who the next enemy is & buy their military a brand new fleet of Fords; guaranteed to kill a few of them before the war even starts. Of course, then they have a reason to preemptively attack us...
> most physicists expectations would suffice for a random slashdot discussion.
/. discussions and using this device to kill people are 2 very different things. While it's just a discussion, we have to (well, should) take all things into consideration, and some doofus holding up a mirror to reflect a weapons-grade laser is a far cry from reality. This is why we argue the finer points; so that none of us are that doofus. Except for the trolls... feed them plenty of mirror solutions.
Yes, but
> it's perfectly all right if somebody detonates the nuclear arsenal just a few miles away from Seattle, because the US put those submarines near a city
Hell no, but if it happened outside Baghdad, that's okay. Finding a reason for subs in the desert, however, may prove to be a bit more perplexing.
> Geeks' enthusiasm for machines which are designed to kill and destroy is disgusting.
Trolls' enthusiasm for mock naievete which is designed to enrage those with a brain is disgusting.
> > under pressure and let it out
> Light-up condoms, anyone?
I don't you want anything to be let out of the condom. Kinda' defeats the purpose, dan't you think?
> much more natural medications (not synthetic drugs) which tend to have less side effects. (Atleast less drastic ones.)
While I agree with your concept totally, I don't think all drugs should be done with. Some are very helpful, and natural medications have less side effects because they are generally less effective for the intended purpose. Granted, with patience & time, they can sometimes be more effective, but this article is more about releasing any kind of drug, including those that could be extracted from plants.
> If God intended man to smoke, he would have set him on fire
If God intended man to eat, he would have made him a jelly donut. W. T. F.
> I think I'm developing a very sick mind.
Muwahaha, that's only the first step, young jedi... er something. Anyway, while that sounds fun and all (Who wouldn't want 20 days-worth of time-released LSD? Oooh, and lots of Pop Rocks too), I don't think too many people would jump on that bandwagon. I'd be first on, of course, but from the drug culture I know (admittedly, not crack) most like to do things in their own pace, like a drug ritual. Time release would be nice at first, but it would get old pretty fast.
> die a horrible death of hemorraging. This could be more harm than good to the average person
Hmm, horrible hemmoraging death vs. a fully-functioning "average" person. Yeah, I'd say that's more harm than good. The problem with your statement, however, is twofold (maybe more, this is just what I'm thinking at the moment):
1. These things are pretty small, which means there would have to be a significant amount of force in exactly the right place to cause it to break. This includes the fact that skin stretches some and most likely the "chip" would simply shift instead of break. It could cause some internal cut/damage, but that would probably happen anyway, considering the force over the small area needed to damage it.
2. Even if it were to break, it does not necessarily mean all of the drug will be dispnsed at once. I'm sure it's not just miniature capsules all stacked. Unless the thing shattered COMPLETELY (ie, into fine dust), it would still time-release the drug, although it may be 2-3x the required dose. This would probably cause adverse reactions of course, but most likely something far from hemmoraging or death, at which time, a doctor could be notified to remedy the situation.
More harm? Somehow the odds seem much better with something like this instead of relying on people with generally bad memeries to take a half-dozen pills every day.
> I don't see microchips being able to make the kind of diagnoses you impart to it -- analyzing the drug chemicals in a system generally requires a lot of reactive tests, right? Something an isolated chip couldn't do, probably.
Sure, one side of the chip just has drugs, but if the other side has an RFID or something with a drug ID code, the patient can be scanned, presto, they know the (prescribed) drugs they are on and can see that something they did (or were about to do) would interact & remedy the situation. I think the poster was just thinking outside (no, not the box) the immediate implications of the article and adding in other "buzzword Technology."
I've surprised I haven't seen this quote (or a version of it, I may have mangled it a bit) so far:
"Asking whether a computer can think is like asking if a submarine can swim."
Don't know who said it, but it's someon'se sig.
> makes me think the Americans had a point with their "Freedom Fries" nonsense.
Oh please, no. I'm an American. I'm even a right-winger, but that was some of the most childish crap I've ever seen a large number of people fall for (except when Bush won the Rep. Primary Election over McCain, that was pretty dumb too). Whenever anyone would seriously use "freedom-" anything, I'd calmly explain why they're f&%king idiots and casually boot them in the head.
> why do I have so much trouble making heads or tails of any of the math in the lecture slides on this webpage?
Because you're an idiot and don't know math, now go troll somewhere else.
> > Poll: 75% of Palestinians support Haifa restaurant attack:
> Where did you get that stat?
He asked four gun-toting skimask-wearing Palestinians what they thought. The one who didn't support it was promptly shot, so the "actual statistic" is 100% now. Or maybe he pulled it out of his ass. I'd bet on the second explanation.
> What is the point of the cost of electronic machines?
Speed. Reading paper ballots takes a long time, but if the computer tallies the results, it's millions of times faster. Then the paper ones are only necessary for backup, recounts, etc.
> All we need to show is having a higher IQ correlates to making more money, and we've got something.
Unfortunately, a quick survey of management will prove otherwise. Furtunately, I'm lucky enough that where I work, the management-types are smart, really nice, and actually think about my suggestions instead of nodding & just tossing them out.
I think your theory is flawed that later children eat better. First-time parents are paranoid as hell about doing everything right, so they feed them right. They don't care with the second, because they don't want the headaches and whining again, so they say "shut up and eat the damned Pop-Tart, see if I care." I know all about it, I'm asecond child, and the first is the "perfect" son. I'm... well, not.
> men are taller than women, men get payed more than women,
Insightful, my ass. The article said the study was controlled by gender, weight, and age.
> I looked and all I sam was a bok
Wow, stellar typing today, if I say so myself.
Of course, I meant "saw was a box." Still getting used to this Dvorak thing.
> I looked and I sure can't see any
I looked and all I sam was a bok that said "www.stonehengelaserscan.org could not be found. check the name and try again."
Must be some crazy, ancient enigma.
> oh hey, animations, that'll probably be cool,
There's an idea... maybe the original carvings are each slightly different from each other so you could stand in the middle, spin around real fast and watch the "animation..." uh.. of an axe turning into a mushroom or something like that.
> > Go Western United!
> Stonehenge is in England
I know! That's what makes it so mysterious! WooOOOOoooOOOooo...
> if you want to find a more precise timeline than my fuzzy 6yo memory.
Wow, you're pretty smart for a 6 year old.
> > Where's the quality assurance ?
> Right back at ya, Linux user.
With Linux, the end-users can do QA. With MS, we have to assume (sometimes incorrectly) that the new code isn't worse than the "buggy" code.
> American trying to make the Arab people look bad
Okay, the poster's an idiot, but he didn't say a damned thing about Arabs, so why did you make that jump? Hell, you don't even know if he's an American.