We let it happen all over the country with all sorts of issues. If it is important to the parents or the politicians then it will get in, at least briefly. The question is: Are the parents informed enough to challenge it?
"Makes me wonder if there'll ever be a Star Trek-esque Utopia..." Monsanto will own all the patents for replicator recipes for food. Feeding your family will require a monthly licensing fee.
There is to this day a great fear over having a nuclear plant nearby for some. They constantly seek to block new plants and close existing ones. Except this points out, just because you close the plant doesn't mean it is gone and you could tank your local economy.
Here is a thought: a lot of the things that make science interesting (application) are left off or left to the end because a "normal" program or course needs to make sure they get in the core prep work. MOOCs reduce the cost of introducing topics in a compelling way because time isn't at such a premium. It wouldn't hurt to have a Math 001: Cool things you can do in math that introduces the user to different applications before digging into the meat. Hey if you want to know more about the computer graphics stuff you've seen here maybe you should check out our linear algebra course. In a traditonal college this doesn't work because it isn't proper preparation material and you have to waste an instructor's time semester after semester on essentially a sales pitch.
I bought a vehicle with traction control a couple of years ago. My first indication for tire slippage in ice is the traction control indicator coming on. I can start taking action a fraction of a second quicker than I used to. I find it interesting my pretty basic truck knows that information before I do as an experienced driver.
Well they don't have a good sense of their own sanity, but typically every one of us has a number of mild psychological problems. We need treatment when those problems are severe enough to become a hinderance on our own normal operation or the safety of others. At least that is how psychology was taught to us. If it has changed then I sure would like to know.
Sure, all you have to do is come up with a sufficiently justifiable definition of life or perhaps innocent life. At that point you are free to discount anyone else's definition of life even the one you are ending. It is done on both sides of the issue with gun rights/control. It is done with abortion. It is done with capital punishment. It is done with military actions. All of those have religious and irreligious people on both sides of the issue.
In the week that we lost power following the Alabama Tornado outbreak there were people driving around offering their food to strangers. The only acts of desparation were driving long distances to unaffected areas to purchase ice or generators. I'd say it would take a bit longer than a week for society to collapse in places that aren't already impoverished.
I could have voted for the guy who supported it or the guy who probably would support it or the other two that probably would support it. Then any of them would get in the office and vote with whoever helped them get in office the most.
I'm not so sure I want to be on that boat for this one. That means I'm partially responsible. Of course that would also mean that I had meaningful choices.
I hope to leave my children an education so they can succeed in life, some good memories, and maybe a handful of things that remind them of the kind of person I was and how I want them to live. My parents have loads of sacred family relics that aren't to be touched or bothered. I'll take a few when they pass but like most of my generation I can't afford to run a family history museum.
No, you miss my point. I get those models. But what about this study, what does we influenced the weather mean? Is it more frequent, larger, more powerful and more importantly by how much? How does this study fit with the climate models we are using?
I'm not on the denier side, but risk is likelihood and severity. They showed likelihood but neither the summary nor the article spoke to severity. What is this statistical significance or practical significance?
I don't believe it is clear he was looking for trouble. Putting himself in a situation where there could be trouble isn't necessarily provocation either. I could probably pull off a self defense argument going to a ill-reputable bar and wait for a brawl to break out.
Provoked or concerned? Choose one. As distorted as the school systems have made provocation, provocation is a person intentionally drawing you into confrontation. I can "feel provoked" but that doesn't make the action a provocation if it was unintentional. The reason is if I intend to provoke you into a confrontation then I relinquish some or all of my right to self-defense. I could say The Dodgers suck unknowingly standing next to the biggest fan in the history of the club. He might feel provoked, but I shouldn't lose the right to put hands on him if he takes a swing at me. Now if I'm standing there knowing that he is the biggest fan and I'm harrassing him, that is an entirely different matter.
Zimmerman didn't follow him night after night. Zimmerman followed him once. If Zimmerman had followed him night after night it would have been provocation and probably would have ended up with a much different result. Setting the precedent that anything potentially provocative negates my right to defend myself is incredibly dangerous. I've had two friends assaulted in road rage incidents (where in your definition of provoke) provoked the violence by not giving a safe distance before merging in front of another vehicle. That makes a self-defense argument almost completely worthless.
Following someone is reasonable provocation of physical assault? If not, then we have no precedent. If it is, well maybe I need swing by Gander Mountain after work because who knows what other reasonably innocuous activities are "provocation."
My electricity is provided by a government corporation because the private sector failed to reliably do so. Just because the private sector can, doesn't mean they will.
Slashdot Mirror
Every toddler should be able to do something useful with their letters like use vi.
We let it happen all over the country with all sorts of issues. If it is important to the parents or the politicians then it will get in, at least briefly. The question is: Are the parents informed enough to challenge it?
"Makes me wonder if there'll ever be a Star Trek-esque Utopia..." Monsanto will own all the patents for replicator recipes for food. Feeding your family will require a monthly licensing fee.
Law 1, article 4, section 53, subsection 12
This is probably a bigger deal for the manufacturer than you actually being able to download and print the entire car.
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20130801/CARNEWS/130809996
There is to this day a great fear over having a nuclear plant nearby for some. They constantly seek to block new plants and close existing ones. Except this points out, just because you close the plant doesn't mean it is gone and you could tank your local economy.
Here is a thought: a lot of the things that make science interesting (application) are left off or left to the end because a "normal" program or course needs to make sure they get in the core prep work. MOOCs reduce the cost of introducing topics in a compelling way because time isn't at such a premium. It wouldn't hurt to have a Math 001: Cool things you can do in math that introduces the user to different applications before digging into the meat. Hey if you want to know more about the computer graphics stuff you've seen here maybe you should check out our linear algebra course. In a traditonal college this doesn't work because it isn't proper preparation material and you have to waste an instructor's time semester after semester on essentially a sales pitch.
I bought a vehicle with traction control a couple of years ago. My first indication for tire slippage in ice is the traction control indicator coming on. I can start taking action a fraction of a second quicker than I used to. I find it interesting my pretty basic truck knows that information before I do as an experienced driver.
Yeah but the people who actually hold power are more likely to be personally "harmed" by regulation than plague or total war.
Don't forget a for-profit 24-7 news cycle has to maximize profit not truth. Some things are incredibly worse when their first motive is profit.
Death by Snu snu.
Well they don't have a good sense of their own sanity, but typically every one of us has a number of mild psychological problems. We need treatment when those problems are severe enough to become a hinderance on our own normal operation or the safety of others. At least that is how psychology was taught to us. If it has changed then I sure would like to know.
Sure, all you have to do is come up with a sufficiently justifiable definition of life or perhaps innocent life. At that point you are free to discount anyone else's definition of life even the one you are ending. It is done on both sides of the issue with gun rights/control. It is done with abortion. It is done with capital punishment. It is done with military actions. All of those have religious and irreligious people on both sides of the issue.
In the week that we lost power following the Alabama Tornado outbreak there were people driving around offering their food to strangers. The only acts of desparation were driving long distances to unaffected areas to purchase ice or generators. I'd say it would take a bit longer than a week for society to collapse in places that aren't already impoverished.
I could have voted for the guy who supported it or the guy who probably would support it or the other two that probably would support it. Then any of them would get in the office and vote with whoever helped them get in office the most.
I'm not so sure I want to be on that boat for this one. That means I'm partially responsible. Of course that would also mean that I had meaningful choices.
I hope to leave my children an education so they can succeed in life, some good memories, and maybe a handful of things that remind them of the kind of person I was and how I want them to live. My parents have loads of sacred family relics that aren't to be touched or bothered. I'll take a few when they pass but like most of my generation I can't afford to run a family history museum.
No, you miss my point. I get those models. But what about this study, what does we influenced the weather mean? Is it more frequent, larger, more powerful and more importantly by how much? How does this study fit with the climate models we are using?
I'm not on the denier side, but risk is likelihood and severity. They showed likelihood but neither the summary nor the article spoke to severity. What is this statistical significance or practical significance?
I don't believe it is clear he was looking for trouble. Putting himself in a situation where there could be trouble isn't necessarily provocation either. I could probably pull off a self defense argument going to a ill-reputable bar and wait for a brawl to break out.
Provoked or concerned? Choose one. As distorted as the school systems have made provocation, provocation is a person intentionally drawing you into confrontation. I can "feel provoked" but that doesn't make the action a provocation if it was unintentional. The reason is if I intend to provoke you into a confrontation then I relinquish some or all of my right to self-defense. I could say The Dodgers suck unknowingly standing next to the biggest fan in the history of the club. He might feel provoked, but I shouldn't lose the right to put hands on him if he takes a swing at me. Now if I'm standing there knowing that he is the biggest fan and I'm harrassing him, that is an entirely different matter.
Zimmerman didn't follow him night after night. Zimmerman followed him once. If Zimmerman had followed him night after night it would have been provocation and probably would have ended up with a much different result. Setting the precedent that anything potentially provocative negates my right to defend myself is incredibly dangerous. I've had two friends assaulted in road rage incidents (where in your definition of provoke) provoked the violence by not giving a safe distance before merging in front of another vehicle. That makes a self-defense argument almost completely worthless.
Following someone is reasonable provocation of physical assault? If not, then we have no precedent. If it is, well maybe I need swing by Gander Mountain after work because who knows what other reasonably innocuous activities are "provocation."
My electricity is provided by a government corporation because the private sector failed to reliably do so. Just because the private sector can, doesn't mean they will.