They spent a significant amount of time looking for errors and checked 15,000 samples, yet in all this, no-one bothered to see if the measurements were off? Do you honestly believe them to be so incompetent as to miss the most basic validations? Hint: The dishevelled ADHD geniuses you see on tv are not representative of real life scientists.
Jokes aside, this is a very important subject. Every day, virii and bacteria are evolving to become immune to traditional treatment. This is because we as a population are drowned in BSA amongst others for "precautionary" reasons, mostly commercial. Just look at Greece. What do you think happens when your inflammations are immune to treatment? You can kiss grandma goodbye, thats for sure.
Who is more likely to invest in science and innovation? The right-wing religious extremist who bans work on stem cells or the scientist, who understands how innovation works? There's a reason
the US was top dog in innovation and research for a long time but is no longer.
I cannot help but laugh at the bitter irony of this. You are probably correct in your assumptions, and the obvious solution would be to offer incentives, policy, regulations and law of a more socialistic nature. Heck, perhaps even a socialistic tweak of the direction the nation is currently taking (mostly regarding business and company positioning in society). But that is anathema to american nationalism (the outcry during the healthcare reform was greater than what Obi-Wan heard during the destruction of Alderaan). Thus, anyone that proposes a solution that undermines capitalism (and instead favours citizens) is a communist, terrorist and quite possibly an evil space alien that molests children and eats virgins. And none of those are getting into heaven.
How about innocent until proven guilty? And yes, that would apply to anti-US terrorists as well (even though they never get a trial). Furthermore, given that Assange has trouble with the US military machine, perhaps a more careful examination process would be in order before shouting denigrations to the media. The whole case has been handled rather poorly by the swedish justice system, when it was clear from the start that a modicum of tact would be required to avoid this media shitstorm.
Out of respect or out of fear of vociferous soccer moms? They have certainly never found issues with war games in the past, even when the opposing sides were concurrent.
This has indeed happened. In Sweden, Telia lowered the priority on voIP communications. They did this because they are not only in the ISP business, but also handles landline and cell phone subscriptions en masse. They did not appreciate the competition, and I very much doubt they are the only ones who would employ such low tactics given the opportunity.
There is a tremendous problem with that analogy. The postal service does not take your class 1 mail and deliver it *instead* of a class 2 mail, they operate on two different networks. What AT&T proposes would be analogous to delivering only X amounts of mail each day, and only deliver class 1 mail until there are only class 2 mail left before delivering those. Oh, and every mailman would doink your wife while you are at work, and possibly molest your dog.
If AT&T wanted to build their own internet, using only their own funds and allowing people to use that for a high price, its fine. But if they want to charge extra for something that is not theirs, an issue arises.
The average life expectancy we have today is significantly higher than it was back then.
As such, it may well be that these Nubians never even experienced the consequences of liver damage outside a few extreme cases.
Awesome, lets blame the increase of cancer on the terrorists too. That way you need the vans to scan for hidden terrorist cancer machines. (Jokes aside, what is the real danger of getting irradiated this way a few times?)
Actually, "fuck" is intended to be vulgar. If it were not, another vulgar word would have to be invented. Consider instead "sex" and all others which refer to sex without vulgar, violent or dominating undertones.
Yes, but the general implication was that the UK is a common arbiter in US-Europe disputes, thus suing an american entity from the UK is not as far fetched as imagined.
I can only speak for the business scenario.
When two companies sign a contract, it is common that an arbiter of disagreements is decided in said contract. Many companies want a court for this purpose, but not necessarily any court.
For a european partner, an american court may well infer an automatic loss. Since the opposite action (that is, going to court in the european partner's nation) is not exactly favourable to the american partner, it is practical to settle for a third nations court. Great Britain is a good choice for settling these disputes.
Read into that what you will, but IANAL.
DRM has of recent caused a wave of discontent. Its the topic of the month, and noone seems to happy with it. Obviously, there will be some very public changes coming regarding DRM (EA has backed down a step or two with Spore already). But what about the long-term effects?
The makers of CoD4 have stated that they are no longer interested in creating PC focused games, since the amount of pirated CoD4 instances became so great.
Spore has been pirated so much that it was hailed as the most pirated game in human history. Will this color EA's interest in publishing more PC games? How many will pirate the next popular title? How many game companies have stopped creating PC titles to instead focus on console only titles?
Overall, the popularity of pirating seems to be increasing. With that in mind, it will get harder for new game businesses to start up (barriers to entry go higher) and the market will be less enthusing to already established businesses. The end result is that the market for PC games will be less populated, and the gamers will receive fewer toys to play with. How do the gamers benefit from this?
DRM serves a function. Companies want to make money, and they see DRM as a great way to do that. Gamers want to play games without getting royally screwed. Customers want to actually get a product once they have paid the sometimes exorbitant prices. Yes, it sucks. But like the Prisoners Dilemma, the only way both teams can profit (and stay in the game indefinetly) is if they cooperate.
At the moment, both teams act like superpowers, certain in the truth that they have moral justice on their side. To draw a picture, the game publishers are the US and the gamers are USSR. Both teams know they are right, and they try to enforce this right by building more and more nuclear missiles. In the end, the teams only achieve the "Mutually Assured Destruction" formula. Game publishers no longer sell games (because very few will pay for them), and gamers no longer get to play games (because all the game companies migrated to console only). Noone gets to pass Go, noone collects $500.
This is boring, but only actual communication between the interest groups can rectify the problem. DRM is by all accounts a b0rked idea, and making it tougher and tougher will only drive away the customers. On the other hand, game creators need to eat and they have to make money creating their games.
The big companies will need to find a different way of making their games sell. But until they get there, gamers will have to show some restraint, and still BUY the games that get an overall good review. The only way those big companies will bother to find the acceptable fix is to show them the market is right there waiting for them. That means you voice some concerns, and some righteous fury if necessary, but you don't upheave the market or otherwise make it unprofitable long-term.
Slashdot Mirror
They spent a significant amount of time looking for errors and checked 15,000 samples, yet in all this, no-one bothered to see if the measurements were off? Do you honestly believe them to be so incompetent as to miss the most basic validations? Hint: The dishevelled ADHD geniuses you see on tv are not representative of real life scientists.
I smell an MMO.
Jokes aside, this is a very important subject. Every day, virii and bacteria are evolving to become immune to traditional treatment. This is because we as a population are drowned in BSA amongst others for "precautionary" reasons, mostly commercial. Just look at Greece. What do you think happens when your inflammations are immune to treatment? You can kiss grandma goodbye, thats for sure.
Who is more likely to invest in science and innovation? The right-wing religious extremist who bans work on stem cells or the scientist, who understands how innovation works? There's a reason the US was top dog in innovation and research for a long time but is no longer.
Haha, you are fantastic! Is there anything you actually do know, or does this wellspring of knowledge stem entirely from your extremist ideology?
Derr, ifn ya don't like America, den use can GET OUT!
Queue the Palin. Might be time for Apple and Google to be hunted down like Al-Qaeda. Is there any room left in the Assange bunker?
Perhaps, but the native Americans didn't have a flag. And you know the rules...
I cannot help but laugh at the bitter irony of this. You are probably correct in your assumptions, and the obvious solution would be to offer incentives, policy, regulations and law of a more socialistic nature. Heck, perhaps even a socialistic tweak of the direction the nation is currently taking (mostly regarding business and company positioning in society). But that is anathema to american nationalism (the outcry during the healthcare reform was greater than what Obi-Wan heard during the destruction of Alderaan). Thus, anyone that proposes a solution that undermines capitalism (and instead favours citizens) is a communist, terrorist and quite possibly an evil space alien that molests children and eats virgins. And none of those are getting into heaven.
How about innocent until proven guilty? And yes, that would apply to anti-US terrorists as well (even though they never get a trial). Furthermore, given that Assange has trouble with the US military machine, perhaps a more careful examination process would be in order before shouting denigrations to the media. The whole case has been handled rather poorly by the swedish justice system, when it was clear from the start that a modicum of tact would be required to avoid this media shitstorm.
Out of respect or out of fear of vociferous soccer moms? They have certainly never found issues with war games in the past, even when the opposing sides were concurrent.
This has indeed happened. In Sweden, Telia lowered the priority on voIP communications. They did this because they are not only in the ISP business, but also handles landline and cell phone subscriptions en masse. They did not appreciate the competition, and I very much doubt they are the only ones who would employ such low tactics given the opportunity.
There is a tremendous problem with that analogy. The postal service does not take your class 1 mail and deliver it *instead* of a class 2 mail, they operate on two different networks. What AT&T proposes would be analogous to delivering only X amounts of mail each day, and only deliver class 1 mail until there are only class 2 mail left before delivering those. Oh, and every mailman would doink your wife while you are at work, and possibly molest your dog. If AT&T wanted to build their own internet, using only their own funds and allowing people to use that for a high price, its fine. But if they want to charge extra for something that is not theirs, an issue arises.
The average life expectancy we have today is significantly higher than it was back then. As such, it may well be that these Nubians never even experienced the consequences of liver damage outside a few extreme cases.
"Who is your expert witness?" "Fey000, he had Score:5, Insightful!"
Curse you Glen Beck and your unearthly grasp of reverse psychology!
Awesome, lets blame the increase of cancer on the terrorists too. That way you need the vans to scan for hidden terrorist cancer machines. (Jokes aside, what is the real danger of getting irradiated this way a few times?)
Actually, "fuck" is intended to be vulgar. If it were not, another vulgar word would have to be invented. Consider instead "sex" and all others which refer to sex without vulgar, violent or dominating undertones.
Last time I checked at least. Have you guys moved?
Yes, but the general implication was that the UK is a common arbiter in US-Europe disputes, thus suing an american entity from the UK is not as far fetched as imagined.
I can only speak for the business scenario. When two companies sign a contract, it is common that an arbiter of disagreements is decided in said contract. Many companies want a court for this purpose, but not necessarily any court. For a european partner, an american court may well infer an automatic loss. Since the opposite action (that is, going to court in the european partner's nation) is not exactly favourable to the american partner, it is practical to settle for a third nations court. Great Britain is a good choice for settling these disputes. Read into that what you will, but IANAL.
Was it german? You can't fault the guy for shooting a de-server.
Great, my trash can is now smarter than I.
There is a fatal flaw in your argument. Sweden is not USA.
DRM has of recent caused a wave of discontent. Its the topic of the month, and noone seems to happy with it. Obviously, there will be some very public changes coming regarding DRM (EA has backed down a step or two with Spore already). But what about the long-term effects? The makers of CoD4 have stated that they are no longer interested in creating PC focused games, since the amount of pirated CoD4 instances became so great. Spore has been pirated so much that it was hailed as the most pirated game in human history. Will this color EA's interest in publishing more PC games? How many will pirate the next popular title? How many game companies have stopped creating PC titles to instead focus on console only titles? Overall, the popularity of pirating seems to be increasing. With that in mind, it will get harder for new game businesses to start up (barriers to entry go higher) and the market will be less enthusing to already established businesses. The end result is that the market for PC games will be less populated, and the gamers will receive fewer toys to play with. How do the gamers benefit from this? DRM serves a function. Companies want to make money, and they see DRM as a great way to do that. Gamers want to play games without getting royally screwed. Customers want to actually get a product once they have paid the sometimes exorbitant prices. Yes, it sucks. But like the Prisoners Dilemma, the only way both teams can profit (and stay in the game indefinetly) is if they cooperate. At the moment, both teams act like superpowers, certain in the truth that they have moral justice on their side. To draw a picture, the game publishers are the US and the gamers are USSR. Both teams know they are right, and they try to enforce this right by building more and more nuclear missiles. In the end, the teams only achieve the "Mutually Assured Destruction" formula. Game publishers no longer sell games (because very few will pay for them), and gamers no longer get to play games (because all the game companies migrated to console only). Noone gets to pass Go, noone collects $500. This is boring, but only actual communication between the interest groups can rectify the problem. DRM is by all accounts a b0rked idea, and making it tougher and tougher will only drive away the customers. On the other hand, game creators need to eat and they have to make money creating their games. The big companies will need to find a different way of making their games sell. But until they get there, gamers will have to show some restraint, and still BUY the games that get an overall good review. The only way those big companies will bother to find the acceptable fix is to show them the market is right there waiting for them. That means you voice some concerns, and some righteous fury if necessary, but you don't upheave the market or otherwise make it unprofitable long-term.