> lead based paint whas removed from the market because people were experiencing health problems from being exposed to it.
The problem isn't just because it's a metal, the problem is that lead itself causes health issues mostly unrelated to how it's used. In paint, the lead is in tiny particles that are easier to be consumed accidentally (eg, paint chips on the floor where a small child is playing). I wouldn't recommend eating copper filings, mind you, but lead is more dangerous because of the toxicity that aluminum & copper simply do not have.
If you are interested (probably not, but what the heck), a few sites contradict each other as to whether lead can be absorbed through the skin (such as by playing in a sandbox with lead painted sides). Mosts sites I found say you can, but this Mayo Clinic Article (and WA State Dept. of Ecology) says that most products (except diesel gasoline) containing lead do not enter through skin. This EMSA article and this ACNEM study say otherwise.
> if I wanted to run my own publicly accessible wireless website I should be allowed to right? Such a product would stop people connecting to my machine
Then don't paint your house or move into a house that has this paint. It's not like you won't be able to find regular paint any more. You'd probably have a heck of a time finding a place that DOES sell this. Or, as another pointed out, you can always use an antenna outside. You can drill a cable hole through this paint.
> They're probably worried about it interfering with medical equipment
Yes & no, depending what you consider "medical equipment." Cell phones won't really interfere with many machines in a hospital. The real problem (at least where I work) lies in wireless devices like patient telemetry -- vitals sensors hooked up to a patient while they walk around the halls which transmits that data and is picked up by wireless antennas in the ceiling. We had to get rid of our wireless 900Mhz phones because of that (and the fact that a radio scanner can pick up the conversations -- big HIPAA issue).
> When you're in a hospital, you don't exactly need to call 911, now do you?
Unless you need to call the police over a belligerent patient. It happens.
Well, considering the alternative is to put your phone on vibrate, VERY hard. And who the fuck are you to think that you're important enough to waste an usher's time finding you? It's not their job, they aren't going to do it. The first time they forget where you are or don't bother finding you, that doctor is in a world of trouble.
How about you quit whining about things that really don't affect you? How hard is that?
> CDs are sold into the channel for around $8 and are sold to the consumer for about $12.95.
Holy crap, man, where are you buying CDs? Maybe that price includes the cost of used CDs and extra-rackspace (the $3 CDs at Drug Stores, etc) CDs, but new discs at chain music stores are rarely lower than $17.
> I cringe every time I hear about "consumer rights". It used to be that being a citizen is what mattered in this country
It's just semantics dude, settle down. So you want them to call it "citizens' rights?" What if this particular citizen doesn't buy anything? You are insulting me by assuming that I do. You also need to gain a little perspective. What do you do with the food you buy? consume it. Watching TV can be considered consuming information (the little real "information" that is actually on TV is not the point).
I agree that our rights are being taken away, but arguing about the words themselves is silly. Argue the concepts.
> He was knowingly in posession of stolen property.
Please tell me what property he was in possession of?
None; he was in possession of information that was intended for limited-time secrecy. Apple told the wrong person. They should now know to never trust that person with secrets. He was repeating what he was told. That should never be illegal, unless the person is under an NDA or something like it. He was not. He did not cause any harm to the company in any way.
Hypothetical: If I were homosexual and I told a friend, but wanted it to keep it a secret, and he told someone else: do I have the right to sue them? Just because it was a secret? Does there have to be money involved (and it is VERY arguable whether there was any money at risk AT ALL here) for it to suddenly be illegal? I would have no right to sue (unless slander/libel was involved, here it was not), and neither should Apple.
Even if it was not true; here, it certainly is.
I'm going to start a rumor that Apple is going to produce a PDA-like device with Video, called the iVidaPal. I claim I have insider info, when in reality, I just guessed -- correctly. Then, two weeks later, they announce it. Would they have a case to sue? If not, you are implying that it's OK to make shit up about products, but not to tell the truth? And what if they DON'T make the product? Can they sue me for spreading lies about them?
In none of these cases, real or imaginary, was anyone harmed. Well, except for the guy who was sued.
Does anyone else look at this picture (image from article link) and think it looks horribly fake? Like a bad PhotoChop job?
It would be nice to get some reference as to size. The site does not mention anything about that, has anyone else seen anything like that? If it's a foot across, it's no big deal. 2 meters, maybe more interesting. It looks pretty small, considering the fixed-camera angle, unless it's looking down over the edge of a crater. The article stated it was pretty much in the middle of a field.
Yes, but it is annoying when you know damned well your criticisms go unheard, because you make them in the middle of comments to an unrelated topic instead of giving them to people who can do something about it... not that they would.
There's something to be said for learning the meaning of "futility."
> Your response is a typical one that still never ceases to amaze me. If you're going to reject another viewpoint, you should at least give it the courtesy of understanding it
I do understand it pretty well. I used to be a member of a church that had members that believed such things. I also work with a few of them. That you DON'T think the majority of Creationists think that way surprises me. Maybe it's geographical... I live in a pretty small town, with some pretty uneducated people.
For me to be wrong, my misunderstanding of their beliefs would have to arise out of their OWN misunderstanding of their beliefs (which, being a belief, is impossible).
> I'm sure you've heard of Answers in Genesis
Why is it assumed that I am aware of some site that is just propaganda for your religion? It claims to smooth out the Bible so that we understand it correctly. My first test for this site is "Why are there two conflicting stories of creation in the bible." Strange, they didn't seem to feel like explaining that one. They also didn't explain the conflicting information of Noah's arc.
You want me to take that site seriously, then I read on there where they claim that there were 55 kinds of dinosaurs and that they were all on the arc as well. How do you fit 55 dinosaurs on a boat (with every other species in the world, mind you)? "They were probably teenage dinosaurs."
An Aircraft carrier would have a hard time holding two of every animal on the planet... If it did, the smaller ones wouldn't last too long. What, did God make all the animals of the world love all the other animals for just 40 days? With very little to no food? IN A CLOSED, HIGH-STRESS ENVIRONMENT? Then, after it's done, the animals go their own ways, reproduce, and decide to kill each other again?
Yes, that sounds scientifically reasonable. WTF!?!?!?
I also could not find any explanation how all land-based animal life on the planet was at one time in one small area, yet only 6000 years later they have resegregated themselves pretty darn well, back to the deserts, swamps, plains, mountains, where they all JUST HAPPEN to live so comfortably -- and they would NOT, in fact, live comfortably on a FUCKING BOAT. Or a spaceship, if you believe another article on the site... Yeah, the great flood happened on Mars. I couldn't make this shit up, it's there!
Your vast ignorance is typical of Creationists and still ceases to amaze ME. If you believe in fairy tales, fine, that is your choice. But don't try to tell me that I should believe it based on flaky-to-nonsensical "evidence," bullshitting, revisionism, and wild speculation & interpretation.
> for once someone says something funny and it doesn't get a mod +Funny
Well, it has only been an hour since I posted it:)
I'm hoping a bit of time will rectify that, although I prefer to know that someone laughed, as opposed to knowing that a field in a table in some database somewhere just incremented by one.
> Actually, there is. > If the skies opened up, and a heavenly choir of angels descended, and a load booming voice shouted "I am the Lord your God, the God of Abraham and Moses!"
While it would certainly be pretty convincing, it's still not definitive proof. Who is to say it's not giant aliens using their knowledge of our strange beliefs to conquer us. They'll destroy us all! DESTROY US ALL! DESTROY US ALL!
That wouls b
Re:There's no such thing as "scientific fact"
on
Subatomic Darwinism
·
· Score: 1
> they're "true" until they're disproved.
Not exactly... they don't exist until someone notices a corrolation somewhere (then develops a hypothesis). He makes some tests to reduce the complexity a bit, to understand what's happening & why. THEN it's a theory and presumed true until proven false.
It's not like I can just say "my head is 20 feet wide" and expect everyone to believe it until they get out the measuring tape.
> I've never seen George Washington and nor has anyone else I know. But I believe that he existed.
You CAN, however, talk to someone who talked to someone, who was someone's grandson, who... who screwed George Washington's mother. You cannot say the same for God. Well, you can, but you don't have numerous sources backing it up.
> tcopeland will be introduced in at least 10 pairings over a course of approximately 1000 total pairings
One drawback. If TP make a mistake on the first appearance of Tcopeland, it would be quite difficult for him to appear in subsequent tests... He'd be dead and TP would probably opt for a live unknown over a dead tcopeland, thus marring the end results.
I believe that the world will end on a Tuesday morning. The end result will prove I'm all-knowing. A work in progress, in other words.
The argument only makes sense if you already believe it. For those who do not, it just looks like an excuse for eternal, indefinite bullshit. IOW, you are stating that the proof will be shown by an event that will never happen...
Slashdot Mirror
> lead based paint whas removed from the market because people were experiencing health problems from being exposed to it.
The problem isn't just because it's a metal, the problem is that lead itself causes health issues mostly unrelated to how it's used. In paint, the lead is in tiny particles that are easier to be consumed accidentally (eg, paint chips on the floor where a small child is playing). I wouldn't recommend eating copper filings, mind you, but lead is more dangerous because of the toxicity that aluminum & copper simply do not have.
If you are interested (probably not, but what the heck), a few sites contradict each other as to whether lead can be absorbed through the skin (such as by playing in a sandbox with lead painted sides). Mosts sites I found say you can, but this Mayo Clinic Article (and WA State Dept. of Ecology) says that most products (except diesel gasoline) containing lead do not enter through skin. This EMSA article and this ACNEM study say otherwise.
> I can see 7 networks that broadcast their SSID from my study
You might want to find the other six, then -- could be a security problem. (key phrase is "broadcast their SSID from my study")
> if I wanted to run my own publicly accessible wireless website I should be allowed to right? Such a product would stop people connecting to my machine
Then don't paint your house or move into a house that has this paint. It's not like you won't be able to find regular paint any more. You'd probably have a heck of a time finding a place that DOES sell this. Or, as another pointed out, you can always use an antenna outside. You can drill a cable hole through this paint.
> They're probably worried about it interfering with medical equipment
Yes & no, depending what you consider "medical equipment." Cell phones won't really interfere with many machines in a hospital. The real problem (at least where I work) lies in wireless devices like patient telemetry -- vitals sensors hooked up to a patient while they walk around the halls which transmits that data and is picked up by wireless antennas in the ceiling. We had to get rid of our wireless 900Mhz phones because of that (and the fact that a radio scanner can pick up the conversations -- big HIPAA issue).
> When you're in a hospital, you don't exactly need to call 911, now do you?
Unless you need to call the police over a belligerent patient. It happens.
> Now, how hard is that?
Well, considering the alternative is to put your phone on vibrate, VERY hard. And who the fuck are you to think that you're important enough to waste an usher's time finding you? It's not their job, they aren't going to do it. The first time they forget where you are or don't bother finding you, that doctor is in a world of trouble.
How about you quit whining about things that really don't affect you? How hard is that?
> CDs are sold into the channel for around $8 and are sold to the consumer for about $12.95.
Holy crap, man, where are you buying CDs? Maybe that price includes the cost of used CDs and extra-rackspace (the $3 CDs at Drug Stores, etc) CDs, but new discs at chain music stores are rarely lower than $17.
> I cringe every time I hear about "consumer rights". It used to be that being a citizen is what mattered in this country
It's just semantics dude, settle down. So you want them to call it "citizens' rights?" What if this particular citizen doesn't buy anything? You are insulting me by assuming that I do. You also need to gain a little perspective. What do you do with the food you buy? consume it. Watching TV can be considered consuming information (the little real "information" that is actually on TV is not the point).
I agree that our rights are being taken away, but arguing about the words themselves is silly. Argue the concepts.
> He was knowingly in posession of stolen property.
Please tell me what property he was in possession of?
None; he was in possession of information that was intended for limited-time secrecy. Apple told the wrong person. They should now know to never trust that person with secrets. He was repeating what he was told. That should never be illegal, unless the person is under an NDA or something like it. He was not. He did not cause any harm to the company in any way.
Hypothetical: If I were homosexual and I told a friend, but wanted it to keep it a secret, and he told someone else: do I have the right to sue them? Just because it was a secret? Does there have to be money involved (and it is VERY arguable whether there was any money at risk AT ALL here) for it to suddenly be illegal? I would have no right to sue (unless slander/libel was involved, here it was not), and neither should Apple.
Even if it was not true; here, it certainly is.
I'm going to start a rumor that Apple is going to produce a PDA-like device with Video, called the iVidaPal. I claim I have insider info, when in reality, I just guessed -- correctly. Then, two weeks later, they announce it. Would they have a case to sue? If not, you are implying that it's OK to make shit up about products, but not to tell the truth? And what if they DON'T make the product? Can they sue me for spreading lies about them?
In none of these cases, real or imaginary, was anyone harmed. Well, except for the guy who was sued.
Does anyone else look at this picture (image from article link) and think it looks horribly fake? Like a bad PhotoChop job?
It would be nice to get some reference as to size. The site does not mention anything about that, has anyone else seen anything like that? If it's a foot across, it's no big deal. 2 meters, maybe more interesting. It looks pretty small, considering the fixed-camera angle, unless it's looking down over the edge of a crater. The article stated it was pretty much in the middle of a field.
Ah, so instead of explaining the large inconsistencies, you claim to be a victim. Nice.
> People can freely criticize all they want
Yes, but it is annoying when you know damned well your criticisms go unheard, because you make them in the middle of comments to an unrelated topic instead of giving them to people who can do something about it... not that they would.
There's something to be said for learning the meaning of "futility."
> I still don't understand why keyboard-makers actually put the SysRq-label on that button.
Or Pause/break. I haven't touched that key in years... since ctrl-break actually did something.
> Your response is a typical one that still never ceases to amaze me. If you're going to reject another viewpoint, you should at least give it the courtesy of understanding it
I do understand it pretty well. I used to be a member of a church that had members that believed such things. I also work with a few of them. That you DON'T think the majority of Creationists think that way surprises me. Maybe it's geographical... I live in a pretty small town, with some pretty uneducated people.
For me to be wrong, my misunderstanding of their beliefs would have to arise out of their OWN misunderstanding of their beliefs (which, being a belief, is impossible).
> I'm sure you've heard of Answers in Genesis
Why is it assumed that I am aware of some site that is just propaganda for your religion? It claims to smooth out the Bible so that we understand it correctly. My first test for this site is "Why are there two conflicting stories of creation in the bible." Strange, they didn't seem to feel like explaining that one. They also didn't explain the conflicting information of Noah's arc.
You want me to take that site seriously, then I read on there where they claim that there were 55 kinds of dinosaurs and that they were all on the arc as well. How do you fit 55 dinosaurs on a boat (with every other species in the world, mind you)? "They were probably teenage dinosaurs."
An Aircraft carrier would have a hard time holding two of every animal on the planet... If it did, the smaller ones wouldn't last too long. What, did God make all the animals of the world love all the other animals for just 40 days? With very little to no food? IN A CLOSED, HIGH-STRESS ENVIRONMENT? Then, after it's done, the animals go their own ways, reproduce, and decide to kill each other again?
Yes, that sounds scientifically reasonable. WTF!?!?!?
I also could not find any explanation how all land-based animal life on the planet was at one time in one small area, yet only 6000 years later they have resegregated themselves pretty darn well, back to the deserts, swamps, plains, mountains, where they all JUST HAPPEN to live so comfortably -- and they would NOT, in fact, live comfortably on a FUCKING BOAT. Or a spaceship, if you believe another article on the site... Yeah, the great flood happened on Mars. I couldn't make this shit up, it's there!
Your vast ignorance is typical of Creationists and still ceases to amaze ME. If you believe in fairy tales, fine, that is your choice. But don't try to tell me that I should believe it based on flaky-to-nonsensical "evidence," bullshitting, revisionism, and wild speculation & interpretation.
> for once someone says something funny and it doesn't get a mod +Funny
:)
Well, it has only been an hour since I posted it
I'm hoping a bit of time will rectify that, although I prefer to know that someone laughed, as opposed to knowing that a field in a table in some database somewhere just incremented by one.
> Actually, there is.
> If the skies opened up, and a heavenly choir of angels descended, and a load booming voice shouted "I am the Lord your God, the God of Abraham and Moses!"
While it would certainly be pretty convincing, it's still not definitive proof. Who is to say it's not giant aliens using their knowledge of our strange beliefs to conquer us. They'll destroy us all! DESTROY US ALL! DESTROY US ALL!
That wouls b
> they're "true" until they're disproved.
Not exactly... they don't exist until someone notices a corrolation somewhere (then develops a hypothesis). He makes some tests to reduce the complexity a bit, to understand what's happening & why. THEN it's a theory and presumed true until proven false.
It's not like I can just say "my head is 20 feet wide" and expect everyone to believe it until they get out the measuring tape.
> Love leaves proof.
Don't I know it. Next time, I'm using a condom.
> I've never seen George Washington and nor has anyone else I know. But I believe that he existed.
... who screwed George Washington's mother. You cannot say the same for God. Well, you can, but you don't have numerous sources backing it up.
You CAN, however, talk to someone who talked to someone, who was someone's grandson, who
> tcopeland will be introduced in at least 10 pairings over a course of approximately 1000 total pairings
One drawback. If TP make a mistake on the first appearance of Tcopeland, it would be quite difficult for him to appear in subsequent tests... He'd be dead and TP would probably opt for a live unknown over a dead tcopeland, thus marring the end results.
> Work in progress, in other words
I believe that the world will end on a Tuesday morning. The end result will prove I'm all-knowing. A work in progress, in other words.
The argument only makes sense if you already believe it. For those who do not, it just looks like an excuse for eternal, indefinite bullshit. IOW, you are stating that the proof will be shown by an event that will never happen...
> You cannot use the scientific method to prove that the scientific method works. Should we discard it, then?
Is the Scientific Method the only way to prove anything at all? If not, you may be able to use another method to prove the SM.
> we're all indiviuals
Aha, I'm an individual! I'm finally different!
> I don't see any American candle vigils for 160k dead Asians
Then you aren't looking.
> Such a person is BOTH an atheist and an agnostic. It's what I am, and I'm not the first person I came across with that exact stance on the issue.
Wow, I've never seen it put quite so succinctly, but you can add another notch to your list of people who think exactly that way.
> Repeated measurements will not result in the same quantity each time.
I have achieved Nirvana: my philosophically brilliant mind has deduced that your scale is broken, assuming it exists at all.