That chart is unfortunate in that it mixes generalized power production( ie power production that is independent of geography) and things like Geothermal, which can't be used anywhere. When you consider that Nuclear is only marginally more expensive than fossil fuel sources and 2, even 3 times less expensive than non-constrained renewable energy production sources, calling it "among the most expensive power generation methods" is a bit naive. This isn't even considering the advantages gained on an economic front of losing dependence on fossil fuels.
IANAL, but I don't think that "aiding the enemy" in the legal world needs to be a specific group. Considering how Manning (supposedly) leaked a list of critical infrastructure sites (including but not limited to hospitals and gas pipelines), I'd say that the prosecution has a good basis for such charges.
Classification laws are not Jim Crow laws. While I'm for whistle blowing, it's naive to think that keeping certain information classified(at least for a small period of time) isn't probably the best stimulus for serious diplomacy, especially between nations who have serious concerns.
isn't there some law against suing foreign governments? At the very least, the judicial branch can't possibly imagine having the power to demand money from foreign nations.....can they?
because wikileaks isn't about journalism, it's about dumping information. It's one of the things that annoys me the most about the outfit. I'm for freedom of the press but if we just abuse our rights like this no wonder we get crazy politicians trying to remove them
it's more about being able to find people and recognizing them( the old high school friend example). I, for one, have gotten into contact with a lot of people through FB that I wouldn't've if it weren't realname-based
People know what a DVR is. TiVo came out 11 years ago now.
That being said, 1 million is a non-negligible install base. But for a $99 gadget, it could do better(especially with an Apple logo on it).
I dunno about most people, but I'll buy organic sometimes because it's usually indicative of a more sustainable farming process. I couldn't care less about the "all natural" part, but I do care about promoting intelligent usage of the (limited) resources on the planet.
Then again I'll be dead before it becomes a problem so what do I care.
You do realise that facebook didn't invent online photo publishing right? Flickr is at least as easy to use and doesn't force us into the walled garden if we don't want to.
Agreed. Denying the legitimacy of copyright would be like trying to act as if there's no such thing as the service industry.
When I buy a book, I don't buy it to support the printers. I don't buy it for the physical material from which it is made. I buy it for the author's story. Copyright protects the author's share for my purchase of their book.
Now, as to whether I feel it necessary to give them money for life+50, I'm not too sure. Though quite frankly, having it at life doesn't strike me as unfair(shakespeare is shakespeare, even if I had bought it 20 years after it was written). Now, as to how to deal with companies hoarding copyrights, that's another discussion entirely...
I think this is more about pragmatism than denying protesters their rights. If the police were saying "you can only protest here" then that would be more bothersome.
Here it's just the police saying "we don't like how this is planned" because for them it's a logistics nightmare. I think they're right to signal it ahead of time.
We live in the real world, and in the real world there are certain nuances. Just like how free speech doesn't protect hate speech, right to free assembly doesn't let you sit on someone else's property or (in this case) block all streets. At least after the proper procedures the police actually offer a way to set up a "proper" rally.
Does every cable have something damning in it? why release 250k cables when not even 100 have anything murky in it? What wikileaks does is not journalism, and Wikileaks is not a journalistic organisation. It is merely a dumping service, passing the information to be leaked through (minimal) filters, while still releasing very dangerous articles(notably a list of important infrastructure sites: nothing illegal there, just a potential terrosist target).
I think that if Wikileaks wanted to be journalists, it would've released the cables about the spying and the money laundering , with analysis and commentary, without releasing the cables about some wedding in Kyrgyzstan or the Paris Embassy's plans for working on their public image. What they're doing now pretty much boils down to being a diplomatic tabloid
And maybe you should rework on your idea of government. Governments exist to maintain social order in exchange for some of the inhabitants freedoms(like our freedom to go kill our neighbors). The government doesn't work for you, it works to maintain society.
Do you seriously believe that The US gov't is behind everything happening with Wikileaks? Obviously pissing off everyone hasn't helped Assange, but him being put(or rather forcing himself) into the public eye sure motivates Sweden to get on the ball over the (probably legitimate, or at least not politically motivated) rape charges. But the reason most of these companies are refusing to do business with wikileaks is because it's just bad press for them. Most people realise the tactlessness of the cable releases, and doubt not whether they can do this, but whether they should. Trying to say what's happening to Wikileaks is only government coersion is of an arrogance probably only equal to Assange himself.
I hope Wikileaks can fight through this, so they can be responsible about what they leak, instead of being some sort of diplomatic tabloid, and maybe have somebody who isn't a power maniac running the shop.
Your analogy doesn't really correspond well. What this website is doing is offering the service to everyone(people in US jurisdiction included), so it would be more indian casinos setting up branches in other states.
I don't think that what the DHS is doing is right, and I hopen this doesn't become a precedent. What's more worrying is that, according to interviews, rapgodfathers was cooperating to DMCA takedown notices. Seems an odd target to seize.
No matter how "legitimate" a site is, illegal activities are still illegal. Rapgodfathers, for instance(cited in the eff brief), has a very clear "downloads" section, filled with very copyrighted material.
While I don't like the heavy-handed-ness of the DHS's actions, acting as if these sites were completely clean just debases your argument.
It'd be nice if we could all just get along, or if someone in the justice department could figure out a clean way to fix copyright law to a manageable state without leaving the web to be a wild west for illegal file-sharing.
Well, what wikileaks is doing is releasing these cables. While you could say that the NYT and AP are doing the same thing, there's also (a bit of) plausible deniability.
If you've been following the leaks, you'll notice that wikileaks always releases the cables before the NYT will post a copy of it. This can put them in a position of "we got it from wikileaks." This is obviously a lot different from "we published this classified information first." Obviously the Times has experience with classified info(see the Pentagon Papers).
Interestingly enough, while the Pentagon Papers did set a precedent for publishing classified information, it isn't nearly as open as people thing. In the ruling, the Supreme court did say that, in certain situations("material damaging to 'national security' ") the government has the right to prevent publication(but not distribution). By letting wikileaks release first, the Times can argue that, legally, they are merely distributing published information.
I am not a lawyer but I'm (hoping) the legalities of these actions have been thought out.
I'm not discussing whether wikileaks has a right to do what it does, but rather whether it should. If they were looking through these cables themselves, pointing out the specific cables with sensitive information, and actually analyzing them( what the guardian, the nyt, etc have been doing), then I wouldn't be complaining as much. But instead they just release these dumps, if only to say "500000 CABLES!"
Associating wikileaks to the press is an insult to journalistic endeavors. At most they've just become a source for real journalists... one with a huge ego.
I really don't see how just throwing out a bunch of diplomatic cables "helps" the democratic process. More likely than not these companies just don't want to be associated with a group whose reason for being recently seems to be releasing all the sensitive information they can get their hands on, without any sort of analysis. In my book, that's not journalism, and these diplomatic cable releases is far from whistleblowing (99% of these cables don't reveal much of anything), just spying on the US government.
Re:Hi- I'm the Author
on
Land of Lisp
·
· Score: 1
Gotta say this is the sort of book I've always been waiting for. I learned C by following game tutorials, and I've always found it hard to learn a language without some solid complete examples that don't bore me to death. I've always found games to be the best way to show most anything, considering how complete such examples are. Even though I rarely buy these kinds of books( these books are so expensive: you're no exception) You've just gotten at least one sale.
Now to find somewhere in europe where I can get the book+ebook combo for cheap enough.
I think that the point the article is trying to make is that math couses try to push us too far. If you consider what is covered, for example, in precal courses(which is around the end of obligatory math) we're taught things that are certainly essential for extended math learning, but bring nothing essential to the table for "necessary" everyday knowledge. Comprehension of trigonometric rules is essential, knowing Cramer's rule isn't. Just like how it's important to understand basic mechanics of the sciences, math is no different. But it's pointless to push people beyond what they need to know( or what they will retain of the whole for that matter).
I don't know what you were watching. Most things I read discussed the Task Forces, high civilian casualties, and the Pakistani suspicions. But the question of the ethics of it are also important.
Slashdot Mirror
That chart is unfortunate in that it mixes generalized power production( ie power production that is independent of geography) and things like Geothermal, which can't be used anywhere. When you consider that Nuclear is only marginally more expensive than fossil fuel sources and 2, even 3 times less expensive than non-constrained renewable energy production sources, calling it "among the most expensive power generation methods" is a bit naive. This isn't even considering the advantages gained on an economic front of losing dependence on fossil fuels.
IANAL, but I don't think that "aiding the enemy" in the legal world needs to be a specific group. Considering how Manning (supposedly) leaked a list of critical infrastructure sites (including but not limited to hospitals and gas pipelines), I'd say that the prosecution has a good basis for such charges.
Classification laws are not Jim Crow laws. While I'm for whistle blowing, it's naive to think that keeping certain information classified(at least for a small period of time) isn't probably the best stimulus for serious diplomacy, especially between nations who have serious concerns.
isn't there some law against suing foreign governments? At the very least, the judicial branch can't possibly imagine having the power to demand money from foreign nations.....can they?
because wikileaks isn't about journalism, it's about dumping information. It's one of the things that annoys me the most about the outfit. I'm for freedom of the press but if we just abuse our rights like this no wonder we get crazy politicians trying to remove them
it's more about being able to find people and recognizing them( the old high school friend example). I, for one, have gotten into contact with a lot of people through FB that I wouldn't've if it weren't realname-based
0.03e is about 5 cents, but yeah, France definitely gets a good deal on electricity, especially for people living in the boonies.
People know what a DVR is. TiVo came out 11 years ago now. That being said, 1 million is a non-negligible install base. But for a $99 gadget, it could do better(especially with an Apple logo on it).
So you won't mind me staring at you through your front window this evening?
I dunno about most people, but I'll buy organic sometimes because it's usually indicative of a more sustainable farming process. I couldn't care less about the "all natural" part, but I do care about promoting intelligent usage of the (limited) resources on the planet.
Then again I'll be dead before it becomes a problem so what do I care.
You do realise that facebook didn't invent online photo publishing right? Flickr is at least as easy to use and doesn't force us into the walled garden if we don't want to.
Agreed. Denying the legitimacy of copyright would be like trying to act as if there's no such thing as the service industry.
When I buy a book, I don't buy it to support the printers. I don't buy it for the physical material from which it is made. I buy it for the author's story. Copyright protects the author's share for my purchase of their book.
Now, as to whether I feel it necessary to give them money for life+50, I'm not too sure. Though quite frankly, having it at life doesn't strike me as unfair(shakespeare is shakespeare, even if I had bought it 20 years after it was written). Now, as to how to deal with companies hoarding copyrights, that's another discussion entirely...
I think this is more about pragmatism than denying protesters their rights. If the police were saying "you can only protest here" then that would be more bothersome.
Here it's just the police saying "we don't like how this is planned" because for them it's a logistics nightmare. I think they're right to signal it ahead of time.
We live in the real world, and in the real world there are certain nuances. Just like how free speech doesn't protect hate speech, right to free assembly doesn't let you sit on someone else's property or (in this case) block all streets. At least after the proper procedures the police actually offer a way to set up a "proper" rally.
Does every cable have something damning in it? why release 250k cables when not even 100 have anything murky in it? What wikileaks does is not journalism, and Wikileaks is not a journalistic organisation. It is merely a dumping service, passing the information to be leaked through (minimal) filters, while still releasing very dangerous articles(notably a list of important infrastructure sites: nothing illegal there, just a potential terrosist target).
I think that if Wikileaks wanted to be journalists, it would've released the cables about the spying and the money laundering , with analysis and commentary, without releasing the cables about some wedding in Kyrgyzstan or the Paris Embassy's plans for working on their public image. What they're doing now pretty much boils down to being a diplomatic tabloid
And maybe you should rework on your idea of government. Governments exist to maintain social order in exchange for some of the inhabitants freedoms(like our freedom to go kill our neighbors). The government doesn't work for you, it works to maintain society.
Do you seriously believe that The US gov't is behind everything happening with Wikileaks? Obviously pissing off everyone hasn't helped Assange, but him being put(or rather forcing himself) into the public eye sure motivates Sweden to get on the ball over the (probably legitimate, or at least not politically motivated) rape charges. But the reason most of these companies are refusing to do business with wikileaks is because it's just bad press for them. Most people realise the tactlessness of the cable releases, and doubt not whether they can do this, but whether they should. Trying to say what's happening to Wikileaks is only government coersion is of an arrogance probably only equal to Assange himself.
I hope Wikileaks can fight through this, so they can be responsible about what they leak, instead of being some sort of diplomatic tabloid, and maybe have somebody who isn't a power maniac running the shop.
Your analogy doesn't really correspond well. What this website is doing is offering the service to everyone(people in US jurisdiction included), so it would be more indian casinos setting up branches in other states.
I don't think that what the DHS is doing is right, and I hopen this doesn't become a precedent. What's more worrying is that, according to interviews, rapgodfathers was cooperating to DMCA takedown notices. Seems an odd target to seize.
No matter how "legitimate" a site is, illegal activities are still illegal. Rapgodfathers, for instance(cited in the eff brief), has a very clear "downloads" section, filled with very copyrighted material.
While I don't like the heavy-handed-ness of the DHS's actions, acting as if these sites were completely clean just debases your argument.
It'd be nice if we could all just get along, or if someone in the justice department could figure out a clean way to fix copyright law to a manageable state without leaving the web to be a wild west for illegal file-sharing.
Well, what wikileaks is doing is releasing these cables. While you could say that the NYT and AP are doing the same thing, there's also (a bit of) plausible deniability.
If you've been following the leaks, you'll notice that wikileaks always releases the cables before the NYT will post a copy of it. This can put them in a position of "we got it from wikileaks." This is obviously a lot different from "we published this classified information first." Obviously the Times has experience with classified info(see the Pentagon Papers).
Interestingly enough, while the Pentagon Papers did set a precedent for publishing classified information, it isn't nearly as open as people thing. In the ruling, the Supreme court did say that, in certain situations("material damaging to 'national security' ") the government has the right to prevent publication(but not distribution). By letting wikileaks release first, the Times can argue that, legally, they are merely distributing published information.
I am not a lawyer but I'm (hoping) the legalities of these actions have been thought out.
It's not wikileaks that's actually doing the pointing. They just dump their information onto the net.
I'm not discussing whether wikileaks has a right to do what it does, but rather whether it should. If they were looking through these cables themselves, pointing out the specific cables with sensitive information, and actually analyzing them( what the guardian, the nyt, etc have been doing), then I wouldn't be complaining as much. But instead they just release these dumps, if only to say "500000 CABLES!"
Associating wikileaks to the press is an insult to journalistic endeavors. At most they've just become a source for real journalists... one with a huge ego.
I really don't see how just throwing out a bunch of diplomatic cables "helps" the democratic process. More likely than not these companies just don't want to be associated with a group whose reason for being recently seems to be releasing all the sensitive information they can get their hands on, without any sort of analysis. In my book, that's not journalism, and these diplomatic cable releases is far from whistleblowing (99% of these cables don't reveal much of anything), just spying on the US government.
Gotta say this is the sort of book I've always been waiting for. I learned C by following game tutorials, and I've always found it hard to learn a language without some solid complete examples that don't bore me to death. I've always found games to be the best way to show most anything, considering how complete such examples are. Even though I rarely buy these kinds of books( these books are so expensive: you're no exception) You've just gotten at least one sale. Now to find somewhere in europe where I can get the book+ebook combo for cheap enough.
I think that the point the article is trying to make is that math couses try to push us too far. If you consider what is covered, for example, in precal courses(which is around the end of obligatory math) we're taught things that are certainly essential for extended math learning, but bring nothing essential to the table for "necessary" everyday knowledge. Comprehension of trigonometric rules is essential, knowing Cramer's rule isn't. Just like how it's important to understand basic mechanics of the sciences, math is no different. But it's pointless to push people beyond what they need to know( or what they will retain of the whole for that matter).
I don't know what you were watching. Most things I read discussed the Task Forces, high civilian casualties, and the Pakistani suspicions. But the question of the ethics of it are also important.
You do know classified information isn't just illegal activities right? Most of the time it's just time-sensitive information