Which is more likely: Teen pregnancy or teen murder? Although, TFA is about dirty words & my post was about violence. Assuming that what folks see on TV influences their actions, I think a more appropriate comparison would be:
[Likelihood of a person engaging in violence] * [Harm done from said violence] vs. [Likelihood of a person saying a dirty word] * [Harm done from said dirty word]
I think we just jumped decidedly off-topic... Oh, well.
Sorry - I didn't mean to flamebait with GP post (I tried to keep it a little light with the "talking salad" and "YVMV" - I guess that didn't come across well and combining the words "Christian" and "Propaganda" is a recipe for disaster in any civil discussion. I sincerely apologize.) I've got no problem with the lessons taught in VeggieTales - I'm in favor of being nice, not stealing, not lying, etc. It's just that (further off-topic), in my house I try to get the same messages across without tying it to the Bible. With so many choices available to teach the same lessons (Bible, Aesop, any of a large number of TV shows, whatever), the one(s) you pick for your family are entirely a matter of opinion/taste.
Anyway, my attempt at a tongue-in-cheek comment was decidedly ill-conceived. And, although tweaking religious stories to appeal to children is often used as an early step toward indoctrination, I have no real problem with VeggieTales. It just strikes me as a little creepy and I choose to educate my kids about religions differently.
The researchers are: "graduate students Yogesh Ramadass, Naveen Verma, and Joyce Kwong, along with Professor Anantha Chandrakasan". While they may very well all be U.S. citizens, it makes me want to ask for a precise definition of "American know-how". You were expecting to see "graduate students Geronimo, Running Bear, and Pocahontas, along with Professor Hithawea"?
...use a MythTV setup with different Groups and put passwords on the groups. I use BeyondTV. The permissions/groups aren't nearly as flexible as MythTV, but it's easy to log what's been played & ditching the IR remotes makes circumventing the DVR pretty tricky. As many people that have old PCs laying around not doing anything particularly useful, I'm surprised that MythTV/BeyondTV/other alternative home-crafted DVRs aren't more common...
VeggieTales and 3-2-1 Pengiuns are in the password-less Kids group I've seen VeggieTales and I'll be damned if my kid's watching it... Christian propaganda mixed with talking salad? No thank you. I'd rather have him swearing. YVMV (Your values may vary.)
You're advocating adding obscenities, or perhaps also profanities. The problem here is nit-picking what's obscene/profane. I think that reality shows are at least as insulting as the occasional dirty word. And, I don't want my kids exposed to mind-numbing Paris Hilton garbage or Big Brother or any of that other tripe. I choose not to "color my world with such muck", so I either watch a different channel or just turn the TV off. It should not be a major hurdle to figure out which shows are likely to offend you and avoid them.
What, your TV doesn't have a v-chip? Actually it doesn't... But, I do have a superior system in place - Administrative controls. My kids are allowed to watch what I tell them they're allowed to watch. They have no televisions in their rooms and they'll have to get significantly more tech-savvy if they want to defeat the logging on my DVR. There's nothing technologically stopping from watching anything coming in, but we'd certainly have a chat about it if it was something objectionable.
Technology obviated the need for "decency timeslots" a long time ago...if only parents would use it. I'd say that an obligation to parent responsibly should have superseded the need for "decency timeslots" from square one. Just my opinion...
A couple of local DJs, in order to avoid fines over the word "shit", have taken to regularly saying "shite". Why in the H-E-double-hockey-sticks is one any more inappropriate than the other?!? This is just farking silly. If a radio station/TV station/whatever airs stuff that you find offensive or inappropriate for your kids, change the fuggin station...
FTA:
Solicitor General Paul Clement... argued that the decision "places the commission in an untenable position," powerless to stop the airing of expletives even when children are watching. Airing violent murders when children are watching? Still OK.
It's the psychological, panic-inducing effects the terrorists are really for. That's not all - I think that many people underestimate the value of a poorly constructed nuclear weapon. All you really need to do is assemble a supercritical mass. If you assemble a highly supercritical mass, boost it with a plentiful supply of neutrons, and employ some other techniques, you can get a huge yield, destroy huge amounts of property and life, and scare the hell out of the world. If you simply assemble a supercritical mass and try to contain it for as long as you can manage, you just made a helluva radioactive material dispersal device.
Imagine a crappy nuclear weapon detonated on top of a high-rise in Manhattan. Is it going to scare the military? No - You're not going to take over the country that way. But, despite the likely (relative to a properly constructed nuke) low loss of life, you just made Manhattan uninhabitable for a long time. Major impact on the economy & national morale.
Yeah, and you'd think a country like Iran would have other ways to get this kind of information. Like, I dunno, stealing it from Pakistan. Yes, most of the information is public domain at this point. Although, I've never seen a sketch with specific weights in the wild before. Those you would need to "steal" from Dr. Khan.
This is incorrect. While it may be the case that nuclear bombs function with short half-life isotopes, the dangerousness of a given isotope depends both on its half-life AND on the toxicity of the particles emitted upon each fission event (i.e per atom). That seems a little pedantic, but I'll bite... Maybe I should have prefaced my post with "All else being equal...", but I thought that would be implied. Let me repair my post: X atoms of a Y-emitting isotope with a "Really long half-life = Pretty safe" regarding its radioactive emissions. X atoms of a Y-emitting isotope with a "Really short half-life = Really fuggin dangerous" regarding its radioactive emissions.
Yes, alpha/beta/gamma emitters have different risks and can't trivially be equated. If you want to get really pedantic, cyanide is really dangerous despite its extremely long half-life. Since the post I was replying to said, "...we're working with materials that have radioactive lives longer than human civilization...", I thought that you were trying to imply a positive correlation between the length of a material's radioactive life with its toxicity. Again, all else being equal, the opposite is true. It still seems like a legitimate inference to me but, if it was spurious, I apologize.
...we're working with materials that have radioactive lives longer than human civilization... This bugs me a little every time I see it. Really long half-life = Pretty safe Really short half-life = Really fuggin dangerous
...we can't just hand this shit out like cup-cakes. No doubt - I agree entirely. Maybe I inferred something from AC that wasn't there - It sounded pretty anti-nuclear to me - I dunno.
How's that mod-worthy? Off-topic, I'm actually thinking of changing my sig to address the idiots that keep making posts to the effect of "Why the hell am I being modded down?!?" and "Who TF modded me (-1 Troll)?!?" I don't mean you - You posted a legitimate and insightful reply - Thanks.
we're already losing large amounts of low-grade uranium every year So what? Low-grade uranium is available on the open market. It's openly, legally mined by a handful of shady countries and traded, more-or-less, without restriction. The bottleneck is the refinement technology and the trade in refined uranium.
It's important to note - Even refining uranium to reactor-quality is a big step from trading in raw ore.
What you wrote is like saying software code has nothing to do with malware infections, or airplanes have nothing to do with airplane crashes. So, is the solution to stop development and implementation of software and airplanes?
You must have forgotten to put on your lulz hat this morning I guess so. Today I opted for my "So obtuse that I could believe that Chinese cyber-attacks on the U.S. may be news to some people" hat. Lulz hat is in wash - May wear it tomorrow.
Espionage is hardly immoral... I think that the main reason that espionage is accepted is that it's so common. And, because it's so common, it's necessary. But, if only one country in the world was engaged in it, the rest of the world would consider it very immoral and possibly an act of war.
That's of course not the case, but I don't think the issue of morality within espionage is remotely cut-and-dry.
...we get port sweeps every day coming from china. Probably so, but I'd guess that you're also getting port sweeps from Russia, Korea, various others, and from within the US - Am I right?
Also, FTA:
Is the United States under attack again? If there any nation's government with a large on-line presence that isn't constantly under attack?
4) Household robots Depending on how picky you are about you definition of 'household robots", there are a number of them commercially available. (Note: I would have linked to irobots's web page, but it appears to be experiencing difficulty. Perhaps one of their business robots washed the server...)
Gophers are actually not that hard to hack, although most of my experience is with prairie dogs. About 250 yards out with a decent scope and 'opening a port' is not that hard. Known exploit.
No doubt - That would have been a terrible analogy. And, I agree that since he immediately informed google of his actions, he did the right thing. But, as I tried to make clear, I didn't intend it to be an analogy - Just an answer to the question, "What twisted, warped world do you live in where it is unethical to stop a crime-in-progress?" Depending on the circumstances, illegal actions may be prosecuted even if they were undertaken in an effort to stop a crime in progress.
Still, although I can't fathom that anyone would be so blind as to charge him for what he did, logging into someone else's e-mail account, deleting all of their (albeit ill-gotten) e-mail, and changing their password may be against some law. I dunno - IANAL.
Also, your garbage analogy may raise more questions than you intended. If your neighbor's trash is waiting at the curb, going through it and retrieving mail may be perfectly legal. Grabbing the bag that the guy is stuffing mail into almost certainly is not. Again, IANAL.
What twisted, warped world do you live in where it is unethical to stop a crime-in-progress? I don't think that securing the account information was unethical. But, in response to your question, try this situation:
Pretend that a bunch of stuff was stolen from your house. Say, a bunch of valuable sports memorabilia. Now, say that you learn that it's being fenced off in a hotel room. Say in Las Vegas. Now, should you: 1) Contact the police and hope they respond quickly or 2) Pick up a couple of buddies and go down to the hotel to "stop the crime-in-progress"?
And this, children, is why you should never ever give the password to your account to someone else. Not even someone who claims to want to do something for you. This is a little bit different than the standard "give your password out" case. I give my e-mail password to Thunderbird. I give Firefox a few of my passwords. Because those applications need those passwords to authenticate with remote servers so that they can "do something for me." For folks who were using it, the same goes with G-archiver. In some applications, you just have to decide whether the service being rendered is worth you taking the risk that the application may be malevolent. (Or putting a lot of effort into being reasonably sure that it's kept in check.)
Don't you feel dirty for comparing Newtonian physics with Astrology? Absolutely - But, I wanted a model on the other end of the spectrum that was still imperfect. And it was tempting because I figure that Newtonian physics falls short of predicting my pen's trajectory by about the same amount as astrology accurately predicts what will happen on my way home today. I figured that by combining the two, I'd achieve perfection! [Damn near perfect Newtonian prediction] + [Damn near worthless astrology prediction] = Profit!
Go take a shower scary dude. You think that's bad? In anotherthread today, I was defending banner ads! Ewww...
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry if it sounded like I object to the V-chip. I most certainly do not. But, like you said, it would be a poor excuse for effective parenting.
[Likelihood of a person engaging in violence] * [Harm done from said violence]
vs.
[Likelihood of a person saying a dirty word] * [Harm done from said dirty word]
I think we just jumped decidedly off-topic... Oh, well.
Sorry - I didn't mean to flamebait with GP post (I tried to keep it a little light with the "talking salad" and "YVMV" - I guess that didn't come across well and combining the words "Christian" and "Propaganda" is a recipe for disaster in any civil discussion. I sincerely apologize.) I've got no problem with the lessons taught in VeggieTales - I'm in favor of being nice, not stealing, not lying, etc. It's just that (further off-topic), in my house I try to get the same messages across without tying it to the Bible. With so many choices available to teach the same lessons (Bible, Aesop, any of a large number of TV shows, whatever), the one(s) you pick for your family are entirely a matter of opinion/taste.
Anyway, my attempt at a tongue-in-cheek comment was decidedly ill-conceived. And, although tweaking religious stories to appeal to children is often used as an early step toward indoctrination, I have no real problem with VeggieTales. It just strikes me as a little creepy and I choose to educate my kids about religions differently.
Cheers.
...use a MythTV setup with different Groups and put passwords on the groups. I use BeyondTV. The permissions/groups aren't nearly as flexible as MythTV, but it's easy to log what's been played & ditching the IR remotes makes circumventing the DVR pretty tricky. As many people that have old PCs laying around not doing anything particularly useful, I'm surprised that MythTV/BeyondTV/other alternative home-crafted DVRs aren't more common... VeggieTales and 3-2-1 Pengiuns are in the password-less Kids group I've seen VeggieTales and I'll be damned if my kid's watching it... Christian propaganda mixed with talking salad? No thank you. I'd rather have him swearing. YVMV (Your values may vary.)A couple of local DJs, in order to avoid fines over the word "shit", have taken to regularly saying "shite". Why in the H-E-double-hockey-sticks is one any more inappropriate than the other?!? This is just farking silly. If a radio station/TV station/whatever airs stuff that you find offensive or inappropriate for your kids, change the fuggin station...
Imagine a crappy nuclear weapon detonated on top of a high-rise in Manhattan. Is it going to scare the military? No - You're not going to take over the country that way. But, despite the likely (relative to a properly constructed nuke) low loss of life, you just made Manhattan uninhabitable for a long time. Major impact on the economy & national morale.
X atoms of a Y-emitting isotope with a "Really long half-life = Pretty safe" regarding its radioactive emissions.
X atoms of a Y-emitting isotope with a "Really short half-life = Really fuggin dangerous" regarding its radioactive emissions.
Yes, alpha/beta/gamma emitters have different risks and can't trivially be equated. If you want to get really pedantic, cyanide is really dangerous despite its extremely long half-life. Since the post I was replying to said, "...we're working with materials that have radioactive lives longer than human civilization...", I thought that you were trying to imply a positive correlation between the length of a material's radioactive life with its toxicity. Again, all else being equal, the opposite is true. It still seems like a legitimate inference to me but, if it was spurious, I apologize.
...we're working with materials that have radioactive lives longer than human civilization... This bugs me a little every time I see it.Really long half-life = Pretty safe
Really short half-life = Really fuggin dangerous
...we can't just hand this shit out like cup-cakes. No doubt - I agree entirely. Maybe I inferred something from AC that wasn't there - It sounded pretty anti-nuclear to me - I dunno. How's that mod-worthy? Off-topic, I'm actually thinking of changing my sig to address the idiots that keep making posts to the effect of "Why the hell am I being modded down?!?" and "Who TF modded me (-1 Troll)?!?"I don't mean you - You posted a legitimate and insightful reply - Thanks.
It's important to note - Even refining uranium to reactor-quality is a big step from trading in raw ore.
Cheers.
That's of course not the case, but I don't think the issue of morality within espionage is remotely cut-and-dry.
...we get port sweeps every day coming from china. Probably so, but I'd guess that you're also getting port sweeps from Russia, Korea, various others, and from within the US - Am I right?Also, FTA: Is the United States under attack again? If there any nation's government with a large on-line presence that isn't constantly under attack?
What do you suggest I do when my bit-bucket fills up?
Gophers are actually not that hard to hack, although most of my experience is with prairie dogs. About 250 yards out with a decent scope and 'opening a port' is not that hard. Known exploit.
No doubt - That would have been a terrible analogy. And, I agree that since he immediately informed google of his actions, he did the right thing. But, as I tried to make clear, I didn't intend it to be an analogy - Just an answer to the question, "What twisted, warped world do you live in where it is unethical to stop a crime-in-progress?" Depending on the circumstances, illegal actions may be prosecuted even if they were undertaken in an effort to stop a crime in progress.
Still, although I can't fathom that anyone would be so blind as to charge him for what he did, logging into someone else's e-mail account, deleting all of their (albeit ill-gotten) e-mail, and changing their password may be against some law. I dunno - IANAL.
Also, your garbage analogy may raise more questions than you intended. If your neighbor's trash is waiting at the curb, going through it and retrieving mail may be perfectly legal. Grabbing the bag that the guy is stuffing mail into almost certainly is not. Again, IANAL.
Pretend that a bunch of stuff was stolen from your house. Say, a bunch of valuable sports memorabilia. Now, say that you learn that it's being fenced off in a hotel room. Say in Las Vegas. Now, should you:
1) Contact the police and hope they respond quickly
or
2) Pick up a couple of buddies and go down to the hotel to "stop the crime-in-progress"?
[Damn near perfect Newtonian prediction] + [Damn near worthless astrology prediction] = Profit! Go take a shower scary dude. You think that's bad? In another thread today, I was defending banner ads! Ewww...