IBM.. those are the guys that used to know how to make computers, chips and operating systems, and now they don't know how to do anything. If you really wanted to get some tech knowledge, why would you ask a bunch of washed up losers?
consumers fail to act in a responsible fashion at points a government has to step in
If you argue that consumers should be dictated to by the government, aren't you really arguing in favor of a sort of totalitarianism. Who gave you or any other Fed the right to say what is responsible and what is not. That is not among the enumerated powers we have granted to the Congress in our Constitution.
I think if that were to happen you'd very suddenly realise that a lot of the services you use aren't hosted in your own country and you'd be off to get yourself an IPv6 connection.... Frankly, I can't see that ever happening though.
Either that or I'd google using the datacenter in my own country and find another service such that I wouldn't have to switch. There's millions of people that are stubbornly on IE6 and just shift their traffic about.
Come on... the moment IBM makes a computer with a billion cores, both Microsoft and Linux will be salivating at the change to get -something- to run on them. I mean, what's a GB sized array just to keep track of the CPUs. Pure insanity. Any real geek would love to tackle that.
What's going to happen is that the internet is going to be broken up by country, so that each country will have its own set of IP addresses for IPv4. So, the people that want genuinely global internet coverage will get IPv6, but those of us who just want to be in one country can use the smaller, simpler and more efficient IPv4
All this really is is welfare for all the tech cronies that supported the Obama campaign. Yahoo, Google, all were big Obama supporters, so much that even some righties wonder if right wing content is page ranked lower on Google. Now they get their share of the taxpayer trough.
So you want all experiments to show something contra to the hypothesis, which suggests some new hypothesis? That's what it sounds like
Oh, don't be so sith-like. The situation at hand is that physics has been in confirmation mode for a good long time and it would be fun to see things shaken up a bit.
As your friendly conservative I must insist everyone stop picking on France!
France has always had a huge tradition of strong copyright law that in their mind, protects the artist. They foisted the Bern convention on the world and would probably make it so that the artist and his family would have copyrights for all eternity if they could. It's entirely different set of values that drives this. Even though the piece of it may not seem logical, we need to be culturally aware. We as American (and the British obviously) are based on anglo-saxon legal values, but France is not.
Gravitational waves are a consequence of general relativity, so IF gravitational waves don't exist then GR is at least partly wrong. That's a bit stronger than believing in Santa Claus I'd think
Well, if GR was wrong on that score, don't you think physics would suddenly get a lot more interesting? I mean, seriously, its the prospect of Santa Claus popping up and gravity waves not being there that really, fundamentally, the human force that drives science. People want to be surprised by the experiments that they do.
Why is it that people opposed to socialized healthcare always have the most absurd economic ideas, like protectionism?
Because free trade is a good sounding utopian idea that has failed in practice, just like socialism is another good sounding utopian idea that has failed in practice.
Socialism fails because instead of everybody working hard to contribute for the good of the people as a whole, everyone slacks off and nothing gets done. Free trade fails because people all game the system so that they don't have to import. The largest exporters in the world all run mercantile economies, hoarding currency to manipulate its prices, and so on.
Free trade doesn't work. It's just reality, that's all.
He'll stick to his scientifically ignorant position, and you will fail to educate him.
Oh look at you, the same old lying liberal pig as ever. All you talk about is learning with one hand while on the other you ban owning chemistry sets, get rid of electricity experiments in schools, forbid kids from flying rockets in fields, or planes, or working with any sort of mechanical thing in the name of safety.
You can talk about how much you love science and point your crooked and greedy finger at religion as the supposed enemy of man, but the fact is, science is even more the enemy of you communists, because you sick and subhuman traitors are not interested in humanity advancing as much as you are in every human being the exact same thing. You ban altering the earth in every conceivable way, all the while laughing at people caught up in your lies of environmentalism and safety.
Yet, the truth is really simple, you evil bastard. You can't learn about biology unless you cut the animal open first. You can't learn about the earth unless you dig inside it. You can't learn about the sky unless you fly in it. You can't learn about chemicals until you mix them. The more you block people from doing it, the more you spread ignorance throughout humanity.
And the thing is, your side is doing it deliberately, because at the end of the day, you want to hoard knowledge, not share it.
Eintein's theory of General Relativity (GR) predicts that gravity waves exist, and GR has already made several other verified predictions. It's a bit like a boat in the water. What we've verified with GR...
No, but my point is that every breakthrough in physics came through because people were ho hum and looking through some theory where they expected to find a result, and didn't. Once upon a time people thought Newtonian mechanics was all there was. We think 100 years of Einstein (wow!), is a long time, but just imagine 300 years of Newtonian physics. All these famous problems that lead to quantum physics - like where does the sun get its energy from, black body radiation, brownian motion, etc, are all really edge cases of newtonian physics.
Science isn't just about observing events and figuring out the cause. It's also about attempting to make predictions based on existing knowledge, and verifying those predictions with experiments.
But its not really useful, unless those predictions were wrong. That's my point. If they find gravity waves, and it confirms GR, that's all well and good but it doesn't really do anything useful as it doesn't change anything and in that sense its a waste of money. But, if there are no gravity waves, or, more spectacularly, there is no Higgs Bosun, then, really, our understanding or rather, physics understanding, of how gravity and mass works is completely wrong, and that would be as interesting as when Rutherford first aimed a beam at a gold foil and realized that the density of the gold is not uniform and got a rather surprising finding about how small atomic nuclei are relative to the size of the space around them.
Maybe we're just skeptical and don't believe that they exist until you can prove that they do. I thought that was called science. What you are saying is that Santa Clause exists,but you just haven't seen him yet. Let me know when he shows up.
It's kind of hard to find a real winner under this scheme.
Well, the irony is that insurance companies wind up making more money because of the regulations states impose about what they must pay for. If I get a plan that has prescription drug coverage for a lifelong illness my wife has because my insurance is supposed to pay for it, I actually wind up paying more for the insurance because they company just marks it up. If I go to Costco and pay the cash for the drugs, its a lot cheaper. But some people don't have that option, and that should be something we have to pony up and do. I'm a conservative and I don't have a problem with that. Let insurance be insurance, tis what I say.
Insurance is about risk management. It's a financial product, not a health one. I pay someone x amount of dollars to provide me the right get y amount of money back based on a risk. By demanding that insurance companies provide all of these things that have absolutely nothing to do with risk, you've screwed this country up. You've basically, like all liberals, twisted something else an excuse to go steal some money.
If you want to have money for people with chronic conditions, make them a federal problem and pay for it with tax money. I recommend taxing intellectual property and imports to come up with the dough.
But for me, all I want is a financial product that says I get coverage for if I have a sudden expensive illness. I don't need or want the federal government, or my employer, to do that.
1. Get employers out of health 2. Put chronic illnesses onto the government 3. Cut everything out of insurance that is non-risk related.
This is just another reason to abandon Microsoft. I am so happy with my Mac
So... because you don't want to update Windows from XP to Windows 7, you will instead update your entire computer to a brand new Macintosh running a brand new operating system.
I mean, if you are shopping for a new computer, isn't Microsoft's abandonment of XP kind of irrelevant? If you are not shopping for a new computer, why would anyone care?
Anti-science indeed. Bitching that God made the earth is not nearly as damaging to society as the liberal penchant to remove freedom from people to actually do science.
You know why science isn't popular? Who can actually do it? It's because liberals and all their sissy crap made it off limits and useless to kids. Between the lawyers, consumer advocates, and all the other crap, liberals have successfully gotten rid of teaching electronics, teaching chemistry, having model rockets, building model aircraft, are trying to get rid of cars and would probably get rid of boats if they could, and people are expected to learn about science? Seriously. Show me the state park where you are allowed to launch a model rocket. Show me where you can fly a model airplane. God help you if you put a remote control boat in a pond. That would be some nature area for ducks and some endangered spore. Meanwhile, spores and mold have their own land but human kids have to sit in their rooms with nothing to do but play Wii and pump each other in the ass.
Liberalism and science are fundamentally at odds, even more so than creationism and science. Liberalism says that the earth should not be altered by man to save the spores. But you can't learn about something unless you play with it...
By a Japanese style remake for the Atari ST a few years later that ruined the franchise. The original Star Raiders had a yankee dystopic feel to it, but the change in feel for the ST version was just too much. And by then Wing Commander was the most influential game of the genre "launch my little fighter from a spaceship and go fight hoards of enemies" genre.
Regardless of my own ideology, I have to recognize that any regulatory change is good for software developers, and thus, is good for me. From a "let's get money" perspective, as a developer, any sort of reform or regulation that changes the nature of the market is good. This election I watched Obama speak at victory, thinking, "well, the socialists are going to do everything, but, maybe I'll pay some bills or buy that GTO after all."
From the insurance perspective, single payer is a disaster, the status quo is useless, but, the proposed changes to existing insurance are good. The ideal case, I suppose, would be a hopelessly confusing compromise piece of legislation that fuses the best ideas of both parties into some typical Washington disaster that is doomed to wreck the economy before it even starts. I remind myself that to be more receptive to using "state's rights" to argue that every state should be allowed to have its own regulation. It's all money in the bank for me.
A lot of people complaining about some of these Lego sets seem to think that you can only really build the thing on the box when you get the set. There's a ton of parts for even the tiniest Lego model and you have a lot of options. If you have more than one set, you can genuinely make some really interesting displays. You need to think differently out of the box. My four year old autistic son taught me this. I buy them for them and he puts together all sorts of stuff. At first, I put the sets together and then let him have at them, but I had gotten lazy and just handed some stuff to play with, and felt pretty bad about it, so I bought a fairly complicated set to put together with him, and found that, by the time I'd got the basics of the first page done, he'd already built something very cool. For him, the picture on the box isn't the thing to build, but is representative of a sort of world he plays in with those pieces. I think right now Princess Lea and Han Solo Lego people are wearing pirate hats and are carrying knight swords on top of a steam engine (sad end for a Bachmann set).
Still, if you must have the ultimate in "suggestionless" Lego design, you need to go to a Lego store. Lego stores have all the theme sets, for sure, but they also have a huge wall in the back where you can just fill up a big cup for $15 and get anything you want. Wheels, different shape blocks, they are all there.
. If you don't care, that's fine for you and my comment was irrelevant. I guess my thing about expanding the "local, sustainable" meat industry was my own pipe-dreaming more than anything
If you are an American and drive an American car, then I'm all on board whatever you have to offer for local and if sustainability is your sales pitch, I'm ears for it.
Slashdot Mirror
ope. It's called recognition that every government of every political persuasion needs to enact laws that promote the common good.
Sorry, nope. If you want the Federal government to do that, then pass an amendment.
So I take it you're in favor of leaded gasoline and are opposed to catalytic converters.
No, just slavery, wife beating and the holocaust.
IBM.. those are the guys that used to know how to make computers, chips and operating systems, and now they don't know how to do anything. If you really wanted to get some tech knowledge, why would you ask a bunch of washed up losers?
consumers fail to act in a responsible fashion at points a government has to step in
If you argue that consumers should be dictated to by the government, aren't you really arguing in favor of a sort of totalitarianism. Who gave you or any other Fed the right to say what is responsible and what is not. That is not among the enumerated powers we have granted to the Congress in our Constitution.
I think if that were to happen you'd very suddenly realise that a lot of the services you use aren't hosted in your own country and you'd be off to get yourself an IPv6 connection.... Frankly, I can't see that ever happening though.
Either that or I'd google using the datacenter in my own country and find another service such that I wouldn't have to switch. There's millions of people that are stubbornly on IE6 and just shift their traffic about.
Come on... the moment IBM makes a computer with a billion cores, both Microsoft and Linux will be salivating at the change to get -something- to run on them. I mean, what's a GB sized array just to keep track of the CPUs. Pure insanity. Any real geek would love to tackle that.
What's going to happen is that the internet is going to be broken up by country, so that each country will have its own set of IP addresses for IPv4. So, the people that want genuinely global internet coverage will get IPv6, but those of us who just want to be in one country can use the smaller, simpler and more efficient IPv4
Abbie Hoffman isn't going to appreciate this, me thinks.
Just need to invent a print splitter that looks like one printer on the network, but is many.
All this really is is welfare for all the tech cronies that supported the Obama campaign. Yahoo, Google, all were big Obama supporters, so much that even some righties wonder if right wing content is page ranked lower on Google. Now they get their share of the taxpayer trough.
So you want all experiments to show something contra to the hypothesis, which suggests some new hypothesis? That's what it sounds like
Oh, don't be so sith-like. The situation at hand is that physics has been in confirmation mode for a good long time and it would be fun to see things shaken up a bit.
As your friendly conservative I must insist everyone stop picking on France!
France has always had a huge tradition of strong copyright law that in their mind, protects the artist. They foisted the Bern convention on the world and would probably make it so that the artist and his family would have copyrights for all eternity if they could. It's entirely different set of values that drives this. Even though the piece of it may not seem logical, we need to be culturally aware. We as American (and the British obviously) are based on anglo-saxon legal values, but France is not.
Gravitational waves are a consequence of general relativity, so IF gravitational waves don't exist then GR is at least partly wrong. That's a bit stronger than believing in Santa Claus I'd think
Well, if GR was wrong on that score, don't you think physics would suddenly get a lot more interesting? I mean, seriously, its the prospect of Santa Claus popping up and gravity waves not being there that really, fundamentally, the human force that drives science. People want to be surprised by the experiments that they do.
Why is it that people opposed to socialized healthcare always have the most absurd economic ideas, like protectionism?
Because free trade is a good sounding utopian idea that has failed in practice, just like socialism is another good sounding utopian idea that has failed in practice.
Socialism fails because instead of everybody working hard to contribute for the good of the people as a whole, everyone slacks off and nothing gets done. Free trade fails because people all game the system so that they don't have to import. The largest exporters in the world all run mercantile economies, hoarding currency to manipulate its prices, and so on.
Free trade doesn't work. It's just reality, that's all.
He'll stick to his scientifically ignorant position, and you will fail to educate him.
Oh look at you, the same old lying liberal pig as ever. All you talk about is learning with one hand while on the other you ban owning chemistry sets, get rid of electricity experiments in schools, forbid kids from flying rockets in fields, or planes, or working with any sort of mechanical thing in the name of safety.
You can talk about how much you love science and point your crooked and greedy finger at religion as the supposed enemy of man, but the fact is, science is even more the enemy of you communists, because you sick and subhuman traitors are not interested in humanity advancing as much as you are in every human being the exact same thing. You ban altering the earth in every conceivable way, all the while laughing at people caught up in your lies of environmentalism and safety.
Yet, the truth is really simple, you evil bastard. You can't learn about biology unless you cut the animal open first. You can't learn about the earth unless you dig inside it. You can't learn about the sky unless you fly in it. You can't learn about chemicals until you mix them. The more you block people from doing it, the more you spread ignorance throughout humanity.
And the thing is, your side is doing it deliberately, because at the end of the day, you want to hoard knowledge, not share it.
Eintein's theory of General Relativity (GR) predicts that gravity waves exist, and GR has already made several other verified predictions. It's a bit like a boat in the water. What we've verified with GR...
No, but my point is that every breakthrough in physics came through because people were ho hum and looking through some theory where they expected to find a result, and didn't. Once upon a time people thought Newtonian mechanics was all there was. We think 100 years of Einstein (wow!), is a long time, but just imagine 300 years of Newtonian physics. All these famous problems that lead to quantum physics - like where does the sun get its energy from, black body radiation, brownian motion, etc, are all really edge cases of newtonian physics.
Science isn't just about observing events and figuring out the cause. It's also about attempting to make predictions based on existing knowledge, and verifying those predictions with experiments.
But its not really useful, unless those predictions were wrong. That's my point. If they find gravity waves, and it confirms GR, that's all well and good but it doesn't really do anything useful as it doesn't change anything and in that sense its a waste of money. But, if there are no gravity waves, or, more spectacularly, there is no Higgs Bosun, then, really, our understanding or rather, physics understanding, of how gravity and mass works is completely wrong, and that would be as interesting as when Rutherford first aimed a beam at a gold foil and realized that the density of the gold is not uniform and got a rather surprising finding about how small atomic nuclei are relative to the size of the space around them.
Maybe we're just skeptical and don't believe that they exist until you can prove that they do. I thought that was called science. What you are saying is that Santa Clause exists,but you just haven't seen him yet. Let me know when he shows up.
It's kind of hard to find a real winner under this scheme.
Well, the irony is that insurance companies wind up making more money because of the regulations states impose about what they must pay for. If I get a plan that has prescription drug coverage for a lifelong illness my wife has because my insurance is supposed to pay for it, I actually wind up paying more for the insurance because they company just marks it up. If I go to Costco and pay the cash for the drugs, its a lot cheaper.
But some people don't have that option, and that should be something we have to pony up and do. I'm a conservative and I don't have a problem with that. Let insurance be insurance, tis what I say.
Insurance is about risk management. It's a financial product, not a health one. I pay someone x amount of dollars to provide me the right get y amount of money back based on a risk. By demanding that insurance companies provide all of these things that have absolutely nothing to do with risk, you've screwed this country up. You've basically, like all liberals, twisted something else an excuse to go steal some money.
If you want to have money for people with chronic conditions, make them a federal problem and pay for it with tax money. I recommend taxing intellectual property and imports to come up with the dough.
But for me, all I want is a financial product that says I get coverage for if I have a sudden expensive illness. I don't need or want the federal government, or my employer, to do that.
1. Get employers out of health
2. Put chronic illnesses onto the government
3. Cut everything out of insurance that is non-risk related.
Duh.
This is just another reason to abandon Microsoft. I am so happy with my Mac
So... because you don't want to update Windows from XP to Windows 7, you will instead update your entire computer to a brand new Macintosh running a brand new operating system.
I mean, if you are shopping for a new computer, isn't Microsoft's abandonment of XP kind of irrelevant? If you are not shopping for a new computer, why would anyone care?
Procurement times are so long in the military that everything is old. I understand the Seawolf is powered by 68030 processors...
Anti-science indeed. Bitching that God made the earth is not nearly as damaging to society as the liberal penchant to remove freedom from people to actually do science.
You know why science isn't popular? Who can actually do it? It's because liberals and all their sissy crap made it off limits and useless to kids. Between the lawyers, consumer advocates, and all the other crap, liberals have successfully gotten rid of teaching electronics, teaching chemistry, having model rockets, building model aircraft, are trying to get rid of cars and would probably get rid of boats if they could, and people are expected to learn about science? Seriously. Show me the state park where you are allowed to launch a model rocket. Show me where you can fly a model airplane. God help you if you put a remote control boat in a pond. That would be some nature area for ducks and some endangered spore. Meanwhile, spores and mold have their own land but human kids have to sit in their rooms with nothing to do but play Wii and pump each other in the ass.
Liberalism and science are fundamentally at odds, even more so than creationism and science. Liberalism says that the earth should not be altered by man to save the spores. But you can't learn about something unless you play with it...
By a Japanese style remake for the Atari ST a few years later that ruined the franchise. The original Star Raiders had a yankee dystopic feel to it, but the change in feel for the ST version was just too much. And by then Wing Commander was the most influential game of the genre "launch my little fighter from a spaceship and go fight hoards of enemies" genre.
Regardless of my own ideology, I have to recognize that any regulatory change is good for software developers, and thus, is good for me. From a "let's get money" perspective, as a developer, any sort of reform or regulation that changes the nature of the market is good. This election I watched Obama speak at victory, thinking, "well, the socialists are going to do everything, but, maybe I'll pay some bills or buy that GTO after all."
From the insurance perspective, single payer is a disaster, the status quo is useless, but, the proposed changes to existing insurance are good. The ideal case, I suppose, would be a hopelessly confusing compromise piece of legislation that fuses the best ideas of both parties into some typical Washington disaster that is doomed to wreck the economy before it even starts. I remind myself that to be more receptive to using "state's rights" to argue that every state should be allowed to have its own regulation. It's all money in the bank for me.
A lot of people complaining about some of these Lego sets seem to think that you can only really build the thing on the box when you get the set. There's a ton of parts for even the tiniest Lego model and you have a lot of options. If you have more than one set, you can genuinely make some really interesting displays. You need to think differently out of the box. My four year old autistic son taught me this. I buy them for them and he puts together all sorts of stuff. At first, I put the sets together and then let him have at them, but I had gotten lazy and just handed some stuff to play with, and felt pretty bad about it, so I bought a fairly complicated set to put together with him, and found that, by the time I'd got the basics of the first page done, he'd already built something very cool. For him, the picture on the box isn't the thing to build, but is representative of a sort of world he plays in with those pieces. I think right now Princess Lea and Han Solo Lego people are wearing pirate hats and are carrying knight swords on top of a steam engine (sad end for a Bachmann set).
Still, if you must have the ultimate in "suggestionless" Lego design, you need to go to a Lego store. Lego stores have all the theme sets, for sure, but they also have a huge wall in the back where you can just fill up a big cup for $15 and get anything you want. Wheels, different shape blocks, they are all there.
. If you don't care, that's fine for you and my comment was irrelevant. I guess my thing about expanding the "local, sustainable" meat industry was my own pipe-dreaming more than anything
If you are an American and drive an American car, then I'm all on board whatever you have to offer for local and if sustainability is your sales pitch, I'm ears for it.