Hey bro, Tassie got foxes around 2002. Some mongo decided it would be a good idea to smuggle two pregnant female foxes onto the island and let them loose.
Only nuts say they've seen one. I think last reported 'sighting' was c. 1970s. Various expeditions have turned up nothing.
Southwest Tasmania though is home to one of the largest protected wilderness sites on Earth and it's possible that a small population has survived. Highly doubtful though.
If we brought some back there would theoretically be an ecosystem for them. However that ecosystem has evolved 80 years without them. Reintroduction could be very harmful.
A nice oddity in a large zoo enclosure and a triumph for marsupial DNA manipulation. That's about all you'd get from this.
Yes, exactly. If this girl had reacted differently, say by taking a knife to school and stabbing her former friend, would we be debating the nature of the MySpace abuse in the same way? I doubt it.
That's also true of the Abrahamic religions. Consider the fable of Noah's Ark and the flood which stems from Sumerian mythology.
I'm not trying to justify Buddhism, merely point out that any religion that is widely dispersed contains a large amount of local superstitions. The whole religious panoply is merely superstition as far as I'm concerned.
Buddhist societies in east and southeast Asia have a much better record on tolerance of homosexuality than any in the Judeo-Christian-Islam spectrum. Einstein didn't follow any religion but I think he was getting at the Buddhist / Daoist penchant for introspective thought and attempted harmony with one's surroundings. I think he's envisioning a 'religion' free from dogma, theocracy, theism etc. No modern religion does that yet but I personally have much fewer problems with those favouring Daoism, Buddhism, Shinto, Zen than with dogmatic deity based religions. Yes Buddhism and Daoism have deities but they're not the omniscient, omnipresent, benevolent creator of Judeo-Christian-Islam. Not having any religion is best but rather maybe a peaceful and altruistic view of the universe and everything in it might help a more enlightened future human population concentrate on the importance of science!
In China the state has to compensate you as well. Usually on the city or provincial government level.
Where this really causes problems beyond the scope of compensated fair value is where city development encroaches on agricultural lands and the people 'compensated' for their land often have no other means of livelihood. One of the biggest problems facing China at the moment is modernising its agriculture and keeping the huge amount of farmers and their families from moving into the wealthy cities which only creates urban sub classes. You can't seriously expect a family that's been growing cabbages forever to use their compensation to form a start up company in a city. There was a famous case widely reoprted on BBC et al. about the government forcibly relocating one particular family from a small suburban residential block. The city excavated deep foundations all around the building leaving a couple inside being ferried water and food from friends. However the state had twice upped their offer of compensation for the couple who were still holding out for more money. And more money here was not like holding out for 10 bags of rice instead of 5, more like snubbing US$100,000 for US$250,000. Those figures are made up as I can't be bothered finding the story but if you want to search you'll see that that was the essence of it. Eminent domain is the same thing. If your province in your country is building an international airport and some pissy landholder refuses to sell to make way for the development, they'd be forcibly removed and compensated. No government pisses on its people for fun. In Myanmar they do it because they're scared of losing power. In China they do it to speed up development. If you waited for the free market to take care of national infrastructure you could be waiting a long time...
Consider Microsoft's take down order on Slashdot comments posting NT leaked source back in the day. Or the CoS attempts to do the same with OT II or whatever filth it was.
'Freedom of information' and 'freedom to violate copyright' meet in the grey area in between the two. And that is precisely what the IP debate has been about for the past decade.
At home I can access the BBC news service but downloading the full Adobe suite goes pretty close to being illegal.
In China I can buy almost any software for a pittance but may have trouble accessing the BBC if they happen to be reporting on Tibet at the time.
Given that copyrighted code and entertainment files are at the heart of the IP debate in the West at the moment as we search for new models of content delivery and where the Open Source software ethic vies for a foothold in capitalism I think it only fair to allow the same level of debate on the online content that the CCP makes available for it's citizens.
And my point really was that a Chinese person is not free to view whatever information they want with a computer but neither are you nor I. If you can't decompile a binary to learn from its code and a Chinese political science student can't access revolutionary anarchist texts then censorship and IP laws are having the same effect are they not?
I personally would obviously rather see much freer access to the web in China. However despite being an advocate of free speech I supported the Thai government's decision to ban YouTube last year. It really was in the best interests of the people, despite the streisand effect.
I'd rather see debate like this on/. rather than the usual China bashing that gets done around here for no obvious reason that I can discern.
China's playing a huge game of catch up and people will tolerate such things while they do. I genuinely think that given time , increased wealth and a greater place in world China will slowly ease on such controls.
I'm actually Australian but unfortunately for me that doesn't negate your 'queen' rebuttal.
I'm just referring to countries like Sweden having a more permissive digital file and information sharing environment than the US with its DMCA and the threat of litigation from MPAA type thugs. In China you can copy anything you like so in that respect it's more open than the US or Australia (though recognising IP laws was a demand leveled by leading economies and ostensibly met by China in order for it to accede to the WTO some years ago). However the Chinese government does block access to many websites and does monitor citizens blogs and personal correspondence. I'm just relaying that old mantra that no-one ever has perfect freedom of speech or right to information and between the US, EU and China models, I'd rather stick with the EU one.
Ironically enough the UK seems to have worse restrictions than most of Europe but what do you expect from 'One Nation Under CCTV?' as Banksy illustrated.
Somehow I still don't think those over 65 would know what the internet without government control would be like... I mean I know they had paper and gunpowder before Europe but TCP/IP protocol in immediate post world war two China? They're so entrepreneurial.
And like it or not the government exercises control over the internet in OECD countries as well. It just happens that most EU states are more progressive than the Chinese or the US and thus users there enjoy greater freedoms.
If you asked most people living in the OECD whether their society should tolerate kiddy porn on the 'net then I reckon at least 85% would say that the government should have some control to step in.
Well if we're being language Nazis, shouldn't that be 'uses that phrase wrongly'? I'm pretty sure that American English hasn't *quite* killed off the adverb yet. 'Incorrectly' is much nicer adverb I have to say.
jandersen is correct and succinct.
However you don't think Yasser was just trying to save his own arse? I remember watching Yasser making those statements and thinking 'he's shitscared the US will go after Palestine in retaliation.' Bet he was glad when they chose the Taliban instead.
Now is not the time to be discussing the various human rights records of major powers. A discussion of that might involve a debate between China and the US' accusations on each other's human rights abuses as is detailed before the UN General Assembly each year. China's on the US as a direct rebuttal on the US' yearly publishing of claims of human rights abuses in over 190 countries while doing nothing to address its own.
I think the point here is the speed at which so much information was distributed about this 'quake from people close to the source. The only analogy I would make with Myanmar is that we saw similar amounts of video and first hand accounts surface after the Junta's militant crackdown on the peaceful Buddhist monks protest last year (before they severed the internet connections of course). It's becoming increasingly hard for nation states to control what information the international community has access to. It's becoming increasingly easy for individuals to video, write and distribute first hand accounts of disasters such as this which takes a lot of burden off the state bureaucracy and immediately involves more people in the international community.
Consider that some posters are complaining that this is old news whereas twenty years ago we'd all be grateful to have a newspaper report the following day that came down from a state news agency to an international media carrier and finally onto our local rag. The fact that an hour after this thing happened anyone with a half way decent internet connection could see what was happening and start planning, learning, commenting or espousing political rhetoric is why there is a discussion about this on Slashdot.
The Quake logo is still the best part of this thread though.
Avian Flu Vaccine For H5N1 Mutation Human to Human
on
Earthquake In China
·
· Score: 1
Good luck on producing a vaccine to combat a hypothetical mutation which hasn't eventuated yet...
I realise this wasn't the point of your post but I think it needed to be said.
From a real dictionary (oed):
'The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology
perk(s) sl. abbr. of PERQUISITE(S)). XIX.'
Where sl. means slang. Sure a slang word can be used in this context and I even pointed out that it was an widely used spelling. I stand by the assertion that 'perq' is the correct abbreviation.
From your own link:
Main Entry:
3perk
Function:
noun
Date:
1824
: perquisite --usually used in plural
Welcome to the world, where the American is not always correct simply because it is the most popular.
/obligatory spelling daemon/
'Perk' here is a mis-spelling used commonly enough to be accurately understood, yet incorrect nonetheless.
'Perq' is short for 'perquisite' roughly 'for the person' from Latin to mean that which benefits someone, usually used to refer to employee benefits. Shortening it to a 'k' makes absolutely no sense unless you assume that most people only ever hear the shortened version and then write it phonetically.
Disclaimer: Not intended as flamebait or unnecessary spelling Nazism.
I think you mean 'alumnus' don't you? Assuming you're a bloke (fairly safe assumption on/.) Tell any facebook moderators you know as well, that quirk always irks me.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey bro, Tassie got foxes around 2002. Some mongo decided it would be a good idea to smuggle two pregnant female foxes onto the island and let them loose.
Yes, exactly. If this girl had reacted differently, say by taking a knife to school and stabbing her former friend, would we be debating the nature of the MySpace abuse in the same way? I doubt it.
I've known many young bilingual Buddhists do this in Thailand. I found it very amusing the first time I heard it.
I think dress codes for women in Thai Buddhist temples are pretty much on par with those in Malaysian Mosques.
Buddhist societies in east and southeast Asia have a much better record on tolerance of homosexuality than any in the Judeo-Christian-Islam spectrum. Einstein didn't follow any religion but I think he was getting at the Buddhist / Daoist penchant for introspective thought and attempted harmony with one's surroundings. I think he's envisioning a 'religion' free from dogma, theocracy, theism etc. No modern religion does that yet but I personally have much fewer problems with those favouring Daoism, Buddhism, Shinto, Zen than with dogmatic deity based religions. Yes Buddhism and Daoism have deities but they're not the omniscient, omnipresent, benevolent creator of Judeo-Christian-Islam. Not having any religion is best but rather maybe a peaceful and altruistic view of the universe and everything in it might help a more enlightened future human population concentrate on the importance of science!
In China the state has to compensate you as well. Usually on the city or provincial government level. Where this really causes problems beyond the scope of compensated fair value is where city development encroaches on agricultural lands and the people 'compensated' for their land often have no other means of livelihood. One of the biggest problems facing China at the moment is modernising its agriculture and keeping the huge amount of farmers and their families from moving into the wealthy cities which only creates urban sub classes. You can't seriously expect a family that's been growing cabbages forever to use their compensation to form a start up company in a city. There was a famous case widely reoprted on BBC et al. about the government forcibly relocating one particular family from a small suburban residential block. The city excavated deep foundations all around the building leaving a couple inside being ferried water and food from friends. However the state had twice upped their offer of compensation for the couple who were still holding out for more money. And more money here was not like holding out for 10 bags of rice instead of 5, more like snubbing US$100,000 for US$250,000. Those figures are made up as I can't be bothered finding the story but if you want to search you'll see that that was the essence of it. Eminent domain is the same thing. If your province in your country is building an international airport and some pissy landholder refuses to sell to make way for the development, they'd be forcibly removed and compensated. No government pisses on its people for fun. In Myanmar they do it because they're scared of losing power. In China they do it to speed up development. If you waited for the free market to take care of national infrastructure you could be waiting a long time...
You can't gamble online in America? Why not? Popularly approved government control? No seriously I'm not trying to take the piss now, is that true?
Well if we're being language Nazis, shouldn't that be 'uses that phrase wrongly'? I'm pretty sure that American English hasn't *quite* killed off the adverb yet. 'Incorrectly' is much nicer adverb I have to say.
From a real dictionary (oed): 'The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology perk(s) sl. abbr. of PERQUISITE(S)). XIX.' Where sl. means slang. Sure a slang word can be used in this context and I even pointed out that it was an widely used spelling. I stand by the assertion that 'perq' is the correct abbreviation. From your own link: Main Entry: 3perk Function: noun Date: 1824 : perquisite --usually used in plural Welcome to the world, where the American is not always correct simply because it is the most popular.
/obligatory spelling daemon/ 'Perk' here is a mis-spelling used commonly enough to be accurately understood, yet incorrect nonetheless. 'Perq' is short for 'perquisite' roughly 'for the person' from Latin to mean that which benefits someone, usually used to refer to employee benefits. Shortening it to a 'k' makes absolutely no sense unless you assume that most people only ever hear the shortened version and then write it phonetically. Disclaimer: Not intended as flamebait or unnecessary spelling Nazism.
I think you mean 'alumnus' don't you? Assuming you're a bloke (fairly safe assumption on /.) Tell any facebook moderators you know as well, that quirk always irks me.