No, it literally does mean that nothing else can affect us.
Absolutely not. We know only what we have observed and deduced in the limited life of the human race. Other things that we have not observed or deduced yet will emerge. But until they do, we don't know that they are there.
The problem is, that as far as can be determined, what we have observed, is all that mankind will ever reasonably be able to observe on this matter.
So unlike the glass of water above, its like observing 99% of the lake and finding no lochness monster, then concluding there is no lochness monster.
What we have observed is what we can observe, and it may be all that we can ever observe. It does not mean that there is nothing else that can affect us.
A better example is of someone stuck in a little cove, observing the ocean from that viewpoint, hence seeing only a fraction of it. As far as that person is concerned there need be nothing else anywhere.
Flat does not imply "infinite". I see no reason that it is "likely" the universe is "infinite". "Infinite" in actualized physical terms is meaningless,....
'Infinite' in mathematics is not a meaningless concept, hence the possibilities of applying that maths to the physical universe remain. You probably mean that in your model of things there is no place for this concept.
I'm amazed that the USPTO is allowing patents to such ridiculously obvious notions, and that they take huge amounts of money to even challenge. What, apart from greed and lawyers, is keeping this system alive? Is it the possibility of control it gives big players over small ones?
One of the 'good actors' was the first to develop and has been the only one to ever use nuclear weapons. Despite there being no military reason for it other than to demonstrate a more efficient method of killing civilians than anything that had been developed before.
You're talking poppycock, either because you chose to be deluded in favour of one side, or because you're stupid and swallowed all the propaganda you've been fed.
Whether this story is true or not, one thing is certain, the next time there is a land battle between two technologically advanced armies, they will shoot every bird out of the sky in case it is an enemy drone. A major land war could be another significant extinction event for wildlife. Rats and cockroaches will survive of course.
So MS has a 'Digital Crimes Unit' and the US courts allow it to carry out law enforcement duties. How long before they have their own policemen, courts and prisons? It goes together with the Microsoft tax I suppose.
It's interesting that at the time I'm writing, the parent that asks 'why should they be able to patent it' is modded 0, while the grandparent that asks 'why should'nt they be able to patent it' is modded 5 insightful.
I did say 'relatively minor'. I'm thinking of an Indian language with about 50m speakers and a written history as long as English. The culture of India being as it is, everything you can find is geared to learning English. Yes, there are TV shows and all sorts of stuff on Youtube, but I was thinking about reasonably sophisticated learning material. Still, if the main market is oddities like me who are mainly interested in understanding some 300 year old poetry, I suppose we have to work for it.
Never mind English, there are lots of paths to learning it in most countries. Not so the other way. How about a scheme for those of us who want to learn some other, relatively minor language, where it is difficult to even find basic texts outside its native country?
So let me get this straight, it's perfectly OK to kill people with drones as long as they're not American citizens?
It seems so, and if the government accepts that American citizens cannot be so killed, then, well, there will be some method to remove their citizenship and then they can be killed. And then all will be as it was before; or perhaps a bit worse.
They'll target them the same way the USAF targeted the Vietcong with B52 bombers. Fire them in the general direction of the other side, and hope some hit their targets. Doesn't really matter if they hit lots of civilians instead, there's a well established formula to get away with it - have some evidence (or even just claims) that in the right conditions it might catch some combatants.
Yes. The Ordinary Man Party in Delhi just came to power and promptly tried to do what the ordinary man in a mob does. In this case try to get the police to carry out an illegal raid based on Ordinary Man prejudices (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25855490 )
That should be something to worry about. What I've read doesn't say much about fibre, but our digestive systems have developed not only to deal with directly useful food to absorb, but also to process such 'indigestibles', and to deal with all the variation we get in a normal diet. Without this work there is every likelihood that long term harm to the guts will result. We already know that this happens to factory farmed animals fed on processed food rather than their normal diet.
If they pay tax, they are documented, pretty much by definition. If they get benefits, they are also similarly documented. Seems fairly straightforward to me. Certainly there may be quite a few that don't pay tax, and some that don't get benefits, but is this really about them?
Engineers do not 'discover', that is done by scientists, in the true sense and some other groups of thinkers. Engineers are one of the classes of people who use a known technology to a predictable outcome (others are the craftsmen that you refer to, among others). Engineers design, in the way a house builder may design a brick structure. As such they should be held accountable for the ethical consequences of what they do.
Like everyone else should be. You exercise free will, you are also free to suffer the consequences. You seem to want free will without the consequences.
That will be the Great Firewall of Britain then. Based on a proven working model and it will keep more IT people employed, blocking not just 'Scunthorpe' but 'Bombay' as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Which is a remarkably underwhelming number.
Really! How many proportionately sized particles (say matchhead sized) in your own gut at any time would also be underwhelming?
Yes, it does depend on what sense it is being used in. I was thinking of Cantor's transfinite integers, rather than the undefined reciprocal of zero.
If we are affected, we can observe these effects.
Agreed.
No, it literally does mean that nothing else can affect us.
Absolutely not. We know only what we have observed and deduced in the limited life of the human race. Other things that we have not observed or deduced yet will emerge. But until they do, we don't know that they are there.
The problem is, that as far as can be determined, what we have observed, is all that mankind will ever reasonably be able to observe on this matter. So unlike the glass of water above, its like observing 99% of the lake and finding no lochness monster, then concluding there is no lochness monster.
What we have observed is what we can observe, and it may be all that we can ever observe. It does not mean that there is nothing else that can affect us. A better example is of someone stuck in a little cove, observing the ocean from that viewpoint, hence seeing only a fraction of it. As far as that person is concerned there need be nothing else anywhere.
Flat does not imply "infinite". I see no reason that it is "likely" the universe is "infinite". "Infinite" in actualized physical terms is meaningless,....
'Infinite' in mathematics is not a meaningless concept, hence the possibilities of applying that maths to the physical universe remain. You probably mean that in your model of things there is no place for this concept.
I'm amazed that the USPTO is allowing patents to such ridiculously obvious notions, and that they take huge amounts of money to even challenge. What, apart from greed and lawyers, is keeping this system alive? Is it the possibility of control it gives big players over small ones?
One of the 'good actors' was the first to develop and has been the only one to ever use nuclear weapons. Despite there being no military reason for it other than to demonstrate a more efficient method of killing civilians than anything that had been developed before. You're talking poppycock, either because you chose to be deluded in favour of one side, or because you're stupid and swallowed all the propaganda you've been fed.
This should be modded interesting at the least, not the current 'Troll'.
Whether this story is true or not, one thing is certain, the next time there is a land battle between two technologically advanced armies, they will shoot every bird out of the sky in case it is an enemy drone. A major land war could be another significant extinction event for wildlife. Rats and cockroaches will survive of course.
Are you talking about Windows?
Yes. You can read a brief account here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... . The entire budget is much more than the 25million quoted.
So what systems are these that Kate has crashed on? It has never given me any problems whatsoever on several Linux (KDE) systems.
So MS has a 'Digital Crimes Unit' and the US courts allow it to carry out law enforcement duties. How long before they have their own policemen, courts and prisons? It goes together with the Microsoft tax I suppose.
It's interesting that at the time I'm writing, the parent that asks 'why should they be able to patent it' is modded 0, while the grandparent that asks 'why should'nt they be able to patent it' is modded 5 insightful.
I have no mod points so I can comment only.
I did say 'relatively minor'. I'm thinking of an Indian language with about 50m speakers and a written history as long as English. The culture of India being as it is, everything you can find is geared to learning English. Yes, there are TV shows and all sorts of stuff on Youtube, but I was thinking about reasonably sophisticated learning material. Still, if the main market is oddities like me who are mainly interested in understanding some 300 year old poetry, I suppose we have to work for it.
Never mind English, there are lots of paths to learning it in most countries. Not so the other way. How about a scheme for those of us who want to learn some other, relatively minor language, where it is difficult to even find basic texts outside its native country?
So let me get this straight, it's perfectly OK to kill people with drones as long as they're not American citizens?
It seems so, and if the government accepts that American citizens cannot be so killed, then, well, there will be some method to remove their citizenship and then they can be killed. And then all will be as it was before; or perhaps a bit worse.
What's that in something understandable? Like how many Olympic size swimming pools or Pacific Oceans?
They'll target them the same way the USAF targeted the Vietcong with B52 bombers. Fire them in the general direction of the other side, and hope some hit their targets. Doesn't really matter if they hit lots of civilians instead, there's a well established formula to get away with it - have some evidence (or even just claims) that in the right conditions it might catch some combatants.
can you remember how bad the linux desktop was before ubuntu? it was atrocious....what about before x.org?
I'm afraid some of us think the ubuntu desktop was and is atrocious.
Yes. The Ordinary Man Party in Delhi just came to power and promptly tried to do what the ordinary man in a mob does. In this case try to get the police to carry out an illegal raid based on Ordinary Man prejudices (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25855490 )
I poop a lot less
That should be something to worry about. What I've read doesn't say much about fibre, but our digestive systems have developed not only to deal with directly useful food to absorb, but also to process such 'indigestibles', and to deal with all the variation we get in a normal diet. Without this work there is every likelihood that long term harm to the guts will result. We already know that this happens to factory farmed animals fed on processed food rather than their normal diet.
If they pay tax, they are documented, pretty much by definition. If they get benefits, they are also similarly documented. Seems fairly straightforward to me. Certainly there may be quite a few that don't pay tax, and some that don't get benefits, but is this really about them?
. He wants to judge each discovery as "good" or "bad", then reward or punish the engineers, scientists, and the craftsmen for whatever results.
Sad as it is, I prefer the world we have, in which men and woman exercise free will.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpCASVFyQoE
Engineers do not 'discover', that is done by scientists, in the true sense and some other groups of thinkers. Engineers are one of the classes of people who use a known technology to a predictable outcome (others are the craftsmen that you refer to, among others). Engineers design, in the way a house builder may design a brick structure. As such they should be held accountable for the ethical consequences of what they do. Like everyone else should be. You exercise free will, you are also free to suffer the consequences. You seem to want free will without the consequences.
That will be the Great Firewall of Britain then. Based on a proven working model and it will keep more IT people employed, blocking not just 'Scunthorpe' but 'Bombay' as well.