This sounds like a good idea. However, there are two issues that would hinder something like this: 1. Variability between Linuxes. There are many distros out there and they all have their own ways of doing the same things.
2. Variability within Linuxes. Different distros also change their commands between versions. Any knowledge-base specific enough to be of help would have to be extremely thorough. A person working with a 2.4.22-gentoo-r3 kernel, for example, might have a different kernel than someone with the vanilla 2.4.22.
However, if enough knowledgeable people use the system, then it will hopefully conquer these problems and be useful. But for now, see the gentoo forums for what open source documentation done by a community is capable of. (However, this is only within one distro that is relatively new so it has an easier time of things.)
How about the suicide bombers? Glue a whole bunch of grenades onto your foes' vehicles while dodging them and set it off when they go home. Yeah! Or stick em onto your teammates (with friendly fire off) and have him walk near a vehicle. HEh.
This was supposed to be modded "Funny". How can any mod think that there is a 7.1 lb combo drive? Must be some guy from the sixties. Let's hope the meta-mods get him.
The problem with humint and the US is that it is too moralistic to successfully run a HUMINT campaign. It would be easier to get information if you are allowed to torture people, or if you can threaten noncompliance with summary execution of one's family. ("You will be a spy or we will kill your family.") Secret agents would also have to be allowed to commit crimes to gain entry into the criminal society. In WWII, the Double Cross double-agent system tested German counterespionage capabilities by *intentionally runnings some double-agents haphazardly*!! Imagine doing that now. The US cannot do such things on a regular basis, because someone will reveal the truth and there will be an uproar. Thus the US relies on satellites and radio intercepts. If we get tough on terrorism, it would involve getting tough on terrorists. Until the US gets this, it will not be very successful in penetrating terrorist groups.
Elevators doors close faster once someone pushes a floor button. Not the door close button, but a floor button. Try it and find out. If you just stand in an elevator and don't press a floor, it will sit there waiting for someone to get in. This is why I always push a floor button, even if it is already pressed. It has nothing to do with psychological factors.
Well, people are prone to cognitive errors that make them evaluate risks incorrectly. This is especially true in cases where the risks are not like dismemberment, but a small risk of cancer a long time away from the present. People discount this risk improperly.
Furthermore, people may not be able to ask for the money. They need the money. Poverty and a risk of dying can lead to strange tradeoffs.
Thirdly, workers may simply naively believe that IBM would never poison them. This is a stronger factor than a lot of people expect. "IBM is a huge corporation. Surely they wouldn't use dangerous chemicals without providing us with adequate safeguards!"
Reporting probably violates NDAs. In the case of IBM v. Worker, Worker loses.
The government should step in to fix this by strengthening regulation, which is currently a joke.
I find it appalling that the industry can refuse to participate in a state-funded study on the effects of the chemicals on the workers, and then claim that there is not enough medical evidence connecting their dying workers to the work conditions. Can't the state force compliance? (I know, I know. Big government is bad, etc.)
A conservative estimate is that 30,000 Americans are killed because of medical malpractice each year. Perhaps doctors should try not killing people before ranting about lawyers. If they weren't negligent, they wouldn't be liable. Anyway, doctors are acting greedy every time they refuse to save lives because they can't make enough money. Why do we trash only the lawyers for being greedy?
http://www.acponline.org/journals/ecp/novdec00/s ho rt_essays.htm
Worker's compensation schemes guarantee a payout that slides on a scale: three weeks for losing a finger, etc. In return, the employer is strictly liable for worker's injuries on the job. It doesn't matter whether the injury was the employer's fault, he has to pay for it. However, these compensations seem normatively inadequate when it comes to long-term health illnesses such as work-related cancers and the like.
Workers can get out of the comp system and into tort law for intentional or reckless actions by the employer. If the boss shoots an employee, for example, the death is not to be paid for by the worker's comp system. They seem to be arguing recklessness here. (The article, which I read, by the way, does not say.) This means that management knew of the risk of great bodily harm to the employees and ignored the risk.
Well, actually, the military has reserved the right (and apparently has the capability) to selectively degrade GPS signals for a specific part of the world. The US government runs the GPS show, you know, and they kind of hate helping the enemy.
We are already driving rats by remote control. We can effect its pleasure centers so that the mice will feel really happy when it goes right when we want it to go right. So imagine if we can get a President to feel really happy if he votes right. This isn't really meant to be funny or an indictment of the current political system. But in the far away future, mind control of this sort may be a reality.
Synaptic strength in this context means something different from nervous system degradation. When neurons are fired, they tend to reinforce that connection. Hence, practicing a free throw, which is simply just a certain pattern of firing a group of neurons, can make you better at shooting because the neural pathways involved are stronger. They are saying that they observed a similar phenomenon with a neuron on the chip.
Nerve wasting illnesses attack the nerve itself. MS in particular causes the myelin sheathing on the nerve cell to disintegrate. This cannot be reversed or prevented by the strengthening mentioned in this article.
The strength of this technology is that it ranks your friend as well. If he sends out a lot of e-mail and is rebuked, then he is considered a spammer. If you are the only person that he e-mails that was not in his link, then he will not be considered to be a spammer. This is quite a remarkably simple and effective idea.
Spamming is wrong from an economic point of view because there are externalities that destroy one of the tenets of free market systems. Externalities are costs or benefits that are put onto others without being compensated for. For example, pollution from a factory is an externality because it is imposing costs on its neighbors that isn't being accounted for. There will be an overuse of the externality and the government must correct this.
IBM wants to make a version of Microsoft Office that runs on Linux. This does not necessarily mean that IBM is going to redistribute a modified version of Microsoft Office. IBM probably will create an emulation layer for Office. IBM's access to the MS Office codebase will just make the job easier. Virtual PC, for example, does just this and the copy of Windows 98 has to be sold separately and intactly.
Modern economics is based to a surprising degree on human psychology and our innate behavior. (Apologies to any voles reading this post.) There is enough food to feed everyone; yet not everyone is fed. We can clothes the world; yet some still freeze. This is not a political post. The point is that there is just something innately greedy about humanity in general that makes economics in large part a study of psychology. There is a tendency for us to value the rare to bizarre lengths.
Why are diamonds so sought after? Because they are rare. Why do I have crushes on tall girls with red hair and green eyes? Because they are rare. (And hot.) So, yeah, love and economics share common principles.
Slashdot Mirror
This sounds like a good idea. However, there are two issues that would hinder something like this:
1. Variability between Linuxes. There are many distros out there and they all have their own ways of doing the same things.
2. Variability within Linuxes. Different distros also change their commands between versions. Any knowledge-base specific enough to be of help would have to be extremely thorough. A person working with a 2.4.22-gentoo-r3 kernel, for example, might have a different kernel than someone with the vanilla 2.4.22.
However, if enough knowledgeable people use the system, then it will hopefully conquer these problems and be useful. But for now, see the gentoo forums for what open source documentation done by a community is capable of. (However, this is only within one distro that is relatively new so it has an easier time of things.)
2.
How about the suicide bombers? Glue a whole bunch of grenades onto your foes' vehicles while dodging them and set it off when they go home. Yeah! Or stick em onto your teammates (with friendly fire off) and have him walk near a vehicle. HEh.
The Apollo spacecraft made the trip there in three days. Six days is a round trip.
"Well that is just great. Now how am I supposed to find my favorite teen shemales fisting watersports sites?"
That's easy.
1. Change your Slashdot level to -1
2. Look for the trolls.
3. Click on goatse.cx link
4. ????
5. Profit?
This was supposed to be modded "Funny". How can any mod think that there is a 7.1 lb combo drive? Must be some guy from the sixties. Let's hope the meta-mods get him.
The problem with humint and the US is that it is too moralistic to successfully run a HUMINT campaign. It would be easier to get information if you are allowed to torture people, or if you can threaten noncompliance with summary execution of one's family. ("You will be a spy or we will kill your family.") Secret agents would also have to be allowed to commit crimes to gain entry into the criminal society. In WWII, the Double Cross double-agent system tested German counterespionage capabilities by *intentionally runnings some double-agents haphazardly*!! Imagine doing that now. The US cannot do such things on a regular basis, because someone will reveal the truth and there will be an uproar. Thus the US relies on satellites and radio intercepts. If we get tough on terrorism, it would involve getting tough on terrorists. Until the US gets this, it will not be very successful in penetrating terrorist groups.
Elevators doors close faster once someone pushes a floor button. Not the door close button, but a floor button. Try it and find out. If you just stand in an elevator and don't press a floor, it will sit there waiting for someone to get in. This is why I always push a floor button, even if it is already pressed. It has nothing to do with psychological factors.
"cab drivers can occasionally be reckless due to long hours worked"?
Are you from New York? Cab drivers in this city are *always* reckless and it *isn't* because of the long hours worked.
Well, this is more akin to medical malpractice.
Now we're fucked.
Well, people are prone to cognitive errors that make them evaluate risks incorrectly. This is especially true in cases where the risks are not like dismemberment, but a small risk of cancer a long time away from the present. People discount this risk improperly.
Furthermore, people may not be able to ask for the money. They need the money. Poverty and a risk of dying can lead to strange tradeoffs.
Thirdly, workers may simply naively believe that IBM would never poison them. This is a stronger factor than a lot of people expect. "IBM is a huge corporation. Surely they wouldn't use dangerous chemicals without providing us with adequate safeguards!"
Reporting probably violates NDAs. In the case of IBM v. Worker, Worker loses.
The government should step in to fix this by strengthening regulation, which is currently a joke.
I find it appalling that the industry can refuse to participate in a state-funded study on the effects of the chemicals on the workers, and then claim that there is not enough medical evidence connecting their dying workers to the work conditions. Can't the state force compliance? (I know, I know. Big government is bad, etc.)
A conservative estimate is that 30,000 Americans are killed because of medical malpractice each year. Perhaps doctors should try not killing people before ranting about lawyers. If they weren't negligent, they wouldn't be liable. Anyway, doctors are acting greedy every time they refuse to save lives because they can't make enough money. Why do we trash only the lawyers for being greedy?
s ho rt_essays.htm
http://www.acponline.org/journals/ecp/novdec00/
Worker's compensation schemes guarantee a payout that slides on a scale: three weeks for losing a finger, etc. In return, the employer is strictly liable for worker's injuries on the job. It doesn't matter whether the injury was the employer's fault, he has to pay for it. However, these compensations seem normatively inadequate when it comes to long-term health illnesses such as work-related cancers and the like.
Workers can get out of the comp system and into tort law for intentional or reckless actions by the employer. If the boss shoots an employee, for example, the death is not to be paid for by the worker's comp system. They seem to be arguing recklessness here. (The article, which I read, by the way, does not say.) This means that management knew of the risk of great bodily harm to the employees and ignored the risk.
So, uh, how do you remove the "rocket widget"? Actually, what is it?
Maybe that's what *you* meant.
Well, actually, the military has reserved the right (and apparently has the capability) to selectively degrade GPS signals for a specific part of the world. The US government runs the GPS show, you know, and they kind of hate helping the enemy.
We are already driving rats by remote control. We can effect its pleasure centers so that the mice will feel really happy when it goes right when we want it to go right. So imagine if we can get a President to feel really happy if he votes right. This isn't really meant to be funny or an indictment of the current political system. But in the far away future, mind control of this sort may be a reality.
Synaptic strength in this context means something different from nervous system degradation. When neurons are fired, they tend to reinforce that connection. Hence, practicing a free throw, which is simply just a certain pattern of firing a group of neurons, can make you better at shooting because the neural pathways involved are stronger. They are saying that they observed a similar phenomenon with a neuron on the chip.
Nerve wasting illnesses attack the nerve itself. MS in particular causes the myelin sheathing on the nerve cell to disintegrate. This cannot be reversed or prevented by the strengthening mentioned in this article.
The strength of this technology is that it ranks your friend as well. If he sends out a lot of e-mail and is rebuked, then he is considered a spammer. If you are the only person that he e-mails that was not in his link, then he will not be considered to be a spammer. This is quite a remarkably simple and effective idea.
How dare he mock us?! Come on, Slashdotters. RTFA for once in your life!! Wipe out his webserver!!!
Spamming is wrong from an economic point of view because there are externalities that destroy one of the tenets of free market systems. Externalities are costs or benefits that are put onto others without being compensated for. For example, pollution from a factory is an externality because it is imposing costs on its neighbors that isn't being accounted for. There will be an overuse of the externality and the government must correct this.
IBM wants to make a version of Microsoft Office that runs on Linux. This does not necessarily mean that IBM is going to redistribute a modified version of Microsoft Office. IBM probably will create an emulation layer for Office. IBM's access to the MS Office codebase will just make the job easier. Virtual PC, for example, does just this and the copy of Windows 98 has to be sold separately and intactly.
The chemistry is pretty simple. You start with some alcohol...
Modern economics is based to a surprising degree on human psychology and our innate behavior. (Apologies to any voles reading this post.) There is enough food to feed everyone; yet not everyone is fed. We can clothes the world; yet some still freeze. This is not a political post. The point is that there is just something innately greedy about humanity in general that makes economics in large part a study of psychology. There is a tendency for us to value the rare to bizarre lengths.
Why are diamonds so sought after? Because they are rare. Why do I have crushes on tall girls with red hair and green eyes? Because they are rare. (And hot.) So, yeah, love and economics share common principles.