Unless you get picked up as a terrorist by the US, then the US works just like China. Does China kidnap people from foreign soil in order to lock them in a military prison without trial? Probably (especially if you count Taiwan as foreign) I guess.
But yes, you'd have to be truly deluded to think the US was worse than China in terms of Freedom and Rule of Law.
The submitter/editor/whomever decided to run two paragraphs together for no apparent reason.
In context it's just saying that it is the first time such a service has been available anywhere in the nation without being restricted to a particular insurance plan. Since the same thing is already running in some states tied to insurance.
It is sloppy writing to start with made even worse summary.
Since the first world of the summary it Oklahama it isn't ambiguous. Sure someone might think the wrong place from the headline, but the headline also can't be ten pages long...
That was not considered as "insignificant", the correlation with cell phones was.
The entire conclusion was that yes their was an increase in cancer cancers over time, but the increase started before cell phones existed and didn't change once they became popular. Hence that increase is not correlated to cell phone usage (let alone caused by). Well OK it did see a spike in the 90s, but amongst 60+ year old women, not exactly the demographic you'd pick for if the cause was cell phone use.
Seems the simple standard explanation of why disease X is increasing in occurrence:
1. Better X detection methods resulting in more cases found. 2. Better treatments of other things that previously killed you before you got X.
NIH should put OSU on a blacklist and not fund anything involving them until OSU provides a valid (as judged by NIH) explanation for why they wasted the time (and money) of NIH.
OSU is of course free to not do so and rely on non-NIH funding. Or there might be a perfectly valid reason that they don't want to disclose publicly that they can provide to NIH.
Do you have any idea how much energy would be required to capture it?
You'd be better off putting some sort of automatic mining robot on it and having it launch just the extracted material on the next pass by earth (though I have no idea how close it comes on future orbits). Well aside from us not having the tech for that yet.
Actually I'm pretty sure that's a standard sci-fi technique. Send the big mining robot to the asteroid. It then starts processing the asteroid and ejects the waste material in order to produce thrust to head towards Earth (aiming for an orbit rather than a collision:).
Please don't buy a single thing made by a corporation/containing a part made by a corporation/made using something produced by a corporation ever again.
So because I can't get a FL driving license because I live in NJ, the US is not a nation of free people?
Citizens of the United States are not a free people because Microsoft won't let me hold my Voodoo goat sacrifice ceremony in their reception?
It isn't censorship, they can put the content on a domain name they meet the requirements for having. Sure the US has looser restrictions (well no restrictions) on their domain names.
Of course Australia is being heavy handed on the censorship, but this is a private entity following their own published rules.
I doubt the TOS includes anything favourable to the user, but then it's the user's fault for uploading any data they didn't want facebook to do anything they felt like doing with (like making it public).
Default settings should be whatever the hell facebook wants them to be. Again users don't have to use the stupid site.
Facebook doesn't have any information that the users haven't entered of their own free will.
Yes changing privacy behind the user's back is a bad move and one would hope would be against the terms of service - if it isn't then sure it's not nice but that's what the user agreed to. If it is against the TOS then the users can chase up facebook about it themselves.
So it's much better than the government tells you? And doesn't just tell you forces you to follow their opinions on the risk/reward by not allowing a restaurant to serve things they deem unsafe.
As opposed to say being able to get a report from any of many competing restaurant rating providers who just tell you their opinion on the risk/reward, leaving you free to do what you want.
You generally don't launch ICBMs in order to spy on people, you know where the mission is to see and not be seen.
Letting the enemy watch the video and hence determine what you have and have no seen and where you are currently looking seems mighty foolish.
They don't need to shoot the thing down, they just don't deploy the IED when they can see that they are on the video feed. Or take the escape route that isn't being watched.
They've had over 14 years to fix it since they noticed it. Note, they've designed and built and put into service the next model which has the same problem since then. So clearly they just don't care.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you get picked up as a terrorist by the US, then the US works just like China. Does China kidnap people from foreign soil in order to lock them in a military prison without trial? Probably (especially if you count Taiwan as foreign) I guess.
But yes, you'd have to be truly deluded to think the US was worse than China in terms of Freedom and Rule of Law.
And it's boring.
It is unlikely for an open source project to tackle it and keep up to date.
The submitter/editor/whomever decided to run two paragraphs together for no apparent reason.
In context it's just saying that it is the first time such a service has been available anywhere in the nation without being restricted to a particular insurance plan. Since the same thing is already running in some states tied to insurance.
It is sloppy writing to start with made even worse summary.
But NIH funding is earmarked and all that.
Can't furnish the President's office with it.
Since the first world of the summary it Oklahama it isn't ambiguous. Sure someone might think the wrong place from the headline, but the headline also can't be ten pages long...
I suggest making the warning read:
"WARNING(666): Life may or may not be hazardous to your health"
That way we can assign other numbers to other numbers for shorthand reference (and possibly to laugh at the christian fundamentalist reaction).
That was not considered as "insignificant", the correlation with cell phones was.
The entire conclusion was that yes their was an increase in cancer cancers over time, but the increase started before cell phones existed and didn't change once they became popular. Hence that increase is not correlated to cell phone usage (let alone caused by). Well OK it did see a spike in the 90s, but amongst 60+ year old women, not exactly the demographic you'd pick for if the cause was cell phone use.
Seems the simple standard explanation of why disease X is increasing in occurrence:
1. Better X detection methods resulting in more cases found.
2. Better treatments of other things that previously killed you before you got X.
NIH should put OSU on a blacklist and not fund anything involving them until OSU provides a valid (as judged by NIH) explanation for why they wasted the time (and money) of NIH.
OSU is of course free to not do so and rely on non-NIH funding. Or there might be a perfectly valid reason that they don't want to disclose publicly that they can provide to NIH.
I read a slightly different sub-genre of sci-fi than you :)
Do you have any idea how much energy would be required to capture it?
You'd be better off putting some sort of automatic mining robot on it and having it launch just the extracted material on the next pass by earth (though I have no idea how close it comes on future orbits). Well aside from us not having the tech for that yet.
Actually I'm pretty sure that's a standard sci-fi technique. Send the big mining robot to the asteroid. It then starts processing the asteroid and ejects the waste material in order to produce thrust to head towards Earth (aiming for an orbit rather than a collision :).
Please don't buy a single thing made by a corporation/containing a part made by a corporation/made using something produced by a corporation ever again.
So because I can't get a FL driving license because I live in NJ, the US is not a nation of free people?
Citizens of the United States are not a free people because Microsoft won't let me hold my Voodoo goat sacrifice ceremony in their reception?
It isn't censorship, they can put the content on a domain name they meet the requirements for having. Sure the US has looser restrictions (well no restrictions) on their domain names.
Of course Australia is being heavy handed on the censorship, but this is a private entity following their own published rules.
the name is a registered business/company name or trademark or statutory authority or association.
They can fast track it because it is fucking obvious it isn't in this case.
Sure, if you ignore the simple fact that TARP just put a band-aid on. So in the next couple of years we'll get to pay for the real collapse as well.
$2,333 per person to delay and compound something for a few years doesn't seem so wonderful to me.
Yeah right serving a page out of cache in PHP takes ten times as long as C++.
I doubt the TOS includes anything favourable to the user, but then it's the user's fault for uploading any data they didn't want facebook to do anything they felt like doing with (like making it public).
Default settings should be whatever the hell facebook wants them to be. Again users don't have to use the stupid site.
Facebook doesn't have any information that the users haven't entered of their own free will.
Yes changing privacy behind the user's back is a bad move and one would hope would be against the terms of service - if it isn't then sure it's not nice but that's what the user agreed to. If it is against the TOS then the users can chase up facebook about it themselves.
So it's much better than the government tells you? And doesn't just tell you forces you to follow their opinions on the risk/reward by not allowing a restaurant to serve things they deem unsafe.
As opposed to say being able to get a report from any of many competing restaurant rating providers who just tell you their opinion on the risk/reward, leaving you free to do what you want.
Obviously.
I think carbon monoxide by non-human processes is more likely than human waste.
Water isn't an organic molecule.
I would think carbon monoxide would be more likely a find than human waste...
You generally don't launch ICBMs in order to spy on people, you know where the mission is to see and not be seen.
Letting the enemy watch the video and hence determine what you have and have no seen and where you are currently looking seems mighty foolish.
They don't need to shoot the thing down, they just don't deploy the IED when they can see that they are on the video feed. Or take the escape route that isn't being watched.
They've had over 14 years to fix it since they noticed it. Note, they've designed and built and put into service the next model which has the same problem since then. So clearly they just don't care.
If the mission is to see without being seen and gather intelligence then intercepting the video feed would seem to be defeating the drone.
The article mentions that they didn't bother with encryption because it would cost money and just assumed no one would notice.
And of course the new $10 million a pop model have the same problem, even though they new about it before work on that one was even started.
Wanting to do something does not mean you are going to do it.
She isn't 2 years old.
I want to call my boss a fucking idiot sometimes, but I never will (which is good because he really isn't).
Seriously???
Finding some of the classes in your chosen career therapuetic is concerning?
You would prefer:
"I hate embalming class, fucking Mondays"???