Sounds like you have an unusual definition of poor. You really think that poor people own property of any note? If so, count yourself lucky, because you have never been poor. Not really.
I think that the American revolution resulted in a democratic republic because there were separate colonies going into it. The leaders of each colony were VERY interested in maintaining control of their colony, and thus everyone was interested in limiting the power of the central government. I don't know that any of the leaders was all that good. They were really all just working for their own interests. It is only looking back that we see them as being great men.
I have a first gen iphone. I'm pretty sure that AT&T will not let me keep my current plan if I want the fourth gen iphone. They will say something along the lines of "your current plan doesn't include 3g service, so you will have to choose one of our current offered plans". So, I won't be grandfathered in.
My choices are: 1. Keep first gen iphone till it dies. 2. "upgrade" to a more limited plan, but get the new phone. 3. Buy an unlocked fourth gen iphone and get a plan with sprint, (coverage area sucks where I am)
That video seems to show a testing apparatus. IE: it repeatedly rolls up the display to see how much abuse it can take before pixels/lines begin to fail. It would be nice to know how many times it had been rolled up prior to the video. Clearly there has already been some damage.
Appears to be a testing application... based on the name, and the fact that it displays battery percentage, I'd guess that it might be a high usage battery drain test... ie: load up the processor/wifi/etc to see if the battery meets spec. (doesn't overheat, etc)
and that part he did, he ran the government like a business straight into the ground.
Which is no surprise, really, when you look at his record on running his own businesses... or should I say the businesses that were given to him by family and friends.
To be fair, they are trying to test technology that allows the robot to detect that it is striking something it didn't intend to and thus to refrain from doing damage.
I've driven the Autobahn in the 70s, and those rules would do us a lot of good. But those aren't the rules.
If you like the laws of the autobahn, why do you use them? They are pretty darn strict about lane usage. There is nothing from preventing you from taking on those laws as your own, even if they aren't official laws here.
If you are moving slower than other traffic, do your best to stay in the right lane, or at least use available opportunities to move right to allow people to pass before moving back to the left
Basically, the rule is don't do anything that causes a back up of cars behind you when there is also a wide open space in front of you. Obey this, and you won't come off as an asshole.
Let's get this clear, ok? the complaints I'm hearing are essentially that I am not accomodating the lawbreakers, and they are therefore left with the option of either endangering other drivers or submitting to the law.
You can't control other drivers. If they want to drive stupidly/aggressively, there is nothing that you can do to stop that. You might feel good about slowing them down briefly, but you are making a somewhat dangerous situation worse by giving the aggressive driver no less dangerous option.
So your options are thus:
- Be a left lane vigilante: break the law yourself and create more dangerous situation for you and those around you. (And temporarily prevent one or more people from speeding)
- Move to the right: Avoid breaking the law yourself while not creating a more dangerous situation, but allowing others to speed without impediment.
Morally, the second option is better, because you are not personally breaking the law, or increasing the danger of the situation. But you care more about making a point than actual safety.
-
Yes. I'm not a basement dweller, and I was previously excited about this game, but I refuse to buy it if it is tied to steam. If I still have the hardware to play a game ten years from now, I want to be able to play it if I choose to. There is absolutely no guarantee that steam will still be around then, and even if it is, there is no guarantee that they will still support the game, or release a patch to unlock the game from steam.
Bottom line, I refuse to buy a product that is defective by design. They lost my sale.
That's all fine and dandy, so long as EVERYONE actually obeys the limit. The point the GP was making is that given the reality that not everyone obeys the limit, it *might* be possible that it is actually safer to leave the speed limit as it is, rather than reducing it. I'm not advocating 75mph construction zones, but they have a good point.
So by pattern change, they probably mean that the bits that they are coming up with via the voting process [suddenly?] no longer match the expected pattern of the data.
Maybe that just means that the signal has become too weak for even the voting method to work.
Or... [puts sci fi hat on] maybe we are picking up an alien transmission, that without the voting process would be too weak to notice.
That's the part of relativity that makes my head hurt. I must be missing something, but how do we know the the probe has a higher velocity than the solar system? Couldn't it be that we sent it exactly backward, meaning that the probe has experienced 1.67 seconds more than the earth?
I agree with you that the FCC shouldn't knowingly attempt to make rules outside of their area of authority, but as far as I can tell in this particular situation, the system is working as it is supposed to. Ie: The FCC tried to instate a questionable rule. They were called out on it by those that they regulate. A judge ruled that the new rule is outside the FCCs realm of authority and thus void.
But like others have said, the fact that their last rule was judged to be outside the realm of their authority does not automatically mean that they cannot achieve the intent of the rule via other means that are within that authority.
In any case, I'm not sure exactly what you are worried about. No matter what the FCC attempts to do, the industry is going to fight it, so there is essentially no chance of the FCC getting away with an illegal rule/law.
The argument hinges on the fact that even with slower than light travel, a technological species could theoretically colonize the entire galaxy in something like 5 million years. That figure is based on the model of a planet sending out two colony ships, with each new colony growing for 500 years on each new planet before sending out two colony ships of their own.
What the above means, is that if there exists a space faring expansionist (aggressive/violent/etc.) alien civilization, then they must not be a whole lot older than 5 million years, because they would likely already be here if that was the case.
Chances are that a second head would be more than a typical body could support. Note that about 30% of our energy is expended to power our brain. That means that the heart (and other organs) would have to work 30% harder in order to maintain life. I suspect that would mean heart failure, and premature death in many cases. So the options would be: We keep both heads (and both minds/people) then both die early, or sever/kill one and the other gets to live a full life. Either way you go it is not an easy decision. Is the value of two short lives higher than one long one? Is the opposite true? Neither? I think it would have to be left for the individual/pair to decide.
I think it would be a lot easier to transplant a head, than a brain. That would still be a major feat, and there are the issues of paralysis, (including the fact that the brain stem is not attached to the spinal cord... ie, nothing tells your new heart to beat, lungs to breathe, etc). So until the spinal cord is mended, you would need to be on a heart/lung machine.
Yet, we share a surprisingly large number of genes with those planarians, so this research may have much more benefit than is evident at first glance.
Re:Grow parts of fingers?
on
How To Grow a Head
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Saw a documentary once where a guy who had lost a good half inch off the end of his finger and managed to regrow it, complete with fingerprints, by keeping it moist, and coating it with powdered "scaffold" protein every day. Apparently the presence of the scaffold protein triggered the stem cells that were present to start regrowing the lost tissue. The guy got the treatment idea from a friend who was studying tissue regeneration in amphibians.
The term "redneck" came from a group of coal mine workers that were trying to organize/unionize back in the 20s. From wikipedia: (yeah yeah, not a real source, blah, blah, blah, but I've seen the same same facts referenced elsewhere. Wikipedia is just the easiest to find.)
The term "redneck" was also used in The West Virginia Coal Miners March (1921) or the Battle of Blair Mountain when the coal miners wore red bandannas around their necks to identify themselves as seeking the opportunity to unionize. There was no derogatory implication.
Waa waa waa... You had originally asked about how much research was funded by industry vs. government. That excerpt directly answers the question, so it's hardly shitty. Get over yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds like you have an unusual definition of poor. You really think that poor people own property of any note? If so, count yourself lucky, because you have never been poor. Not really.
I think that the American revolution resulted in a democratic republic because there were separate colonies going into it. The leaders of each colony were VERY interested in maintaining control of their colony, and thus everyone was interested in limiting the power of the central government. I don't know that any of the leaders was all that good. They were really all just working for their own interests. It is only looking back that we see them as being great men.
I have a first gen iphone. I'm pretty sure that AT&T will not let me keep my current plan if I want the fourth gen iphone. They will say something along the lines of "your current plan doesn't include 3g service, so you will have to choose one of our current offered plans". So, I won't be grandfathered in.
My choices are:
1. Keep first gen iphone till it dies.
2. "upgrade" to a more limited plan, but get the new phone.
3. Buy an unlocked fourth gen iphone and get a plan with sprint, (coverage area sucks where I am)
That video seems to show a testing apparatus. IE: it repeatedly rolls up the display to see how much abuse it can take before pixels/lines begin to fail. It would be nice to know how many times it had been rolled up prior to the video. Clearly there has already been some damage.
Appears to be a testing application... based on the name, and the fact that it displays battery percentage, I'd guess that it might be a high usage battery drain test... ie: load up the processor/wifi/etc to see if the battery meets spec. (doesn't overheat, etc)
and that part he did, he ran the government like a business straight into the ground.
Which is no surprise, really, when you look at his record on running his own businesses... or should I say the businesses that were given to him by family and friends.
To be fair, they are trying to test technology that allows the robot to detect that it is striking something it didn't intend to and thus to refrain from doing damage.
sorry, typo. Meant to say "why don't you use them?"
I've driven the Autobahn in the 70s, and those rules would do us a lot of good. But those aren't the rules.
If you like the laws of the autobahn, why do you use them? They are pretty darn strict about lane usage. There is nothing from preventing you from taking on those laws as your own, even if they aren't official laws here.
If you are moving slower than other traffic, do your best to stay in the right lane, or at least use available opportunities to move right to allow people to pass before moving back to the left
Basically, the rule is don't do anything that causes a back up of cars behind you when there is also a wide open space in front of you. Obey this, and you won't come off as an asshole.
Let's get this clear, ok? the complaints I'm hearing are essentially that I am not accomodating the lawbreakers, and they are therefore left with the option of either endangering other drivers or submitting to the law.
You can't control other drivers. If they want to drive stupidly/aggressively, there is nothing that you can do to stop that. You might feel good about slowing them down briefly, but you are making a somewhat dangerous situation worse by giving the aggressive driver no less dangerous option.
So your options are thus:
- Be a left lane vigilante: break the law yourself and create more dangerous situation for you and those around you. (And temporarily prevent one or more people from speeding) - Move to the right: Avoid breaking the law yourself while not creating a more dangerous situation, but allowing others to speed without impediment.
Morally, the second option is better, because you are not personally breaking the law, or increasing the danger of the situation. But you care more about making a point than actual safety. -
Yes. I'm not a basement dweller, and I was previously excited about this game, but I refuse to buy it if it is tied to steam. If I still have the hardware to play a game ten years from now, I want to be able to play it if I choose to. There is absolutely no guarantee that steam will still be around then, and even if it is, there is no guarantee that they will still support the game, or release a patch to unlock the game from steam.
Bottom line, I refuse to buy a product that is defective by design. They lost my sale.
That's all fine and dandy, so long as EVERYONE actually obeys the limit. The point the GP was making is that given the reality that not everyone obeys the limit, it *might* be possible that it is actually safer to leave the speed limit as it is, rather than reducing it. I'm not advocating 75mph construction zones, but they have a good point.
Never mind... I just RTFA... apparently only the science data is affected by the change. Other data is still being received normally.
So by pattern change, they probably mean that the bits that they are coming up with via the voting process [suddenly?] no longer match the expected pattern of the data.
Maybe that just means that the signal has become too weak for even the voting method to work.
Or... [puts sci fi hat on] maybe we are picking up an alien transmission, that without the voting process would be too weak to notice.
That's the part of relativity that makes my head hurt. I must be missing something, but how do we know the the probe has a higher velocity than the solar system? Couldn't it be that we sent it exactly backward, meaning that the probe has experienced 1.67 seconds more than the earth?
If we discover that it has switched to broadcasting a series of prime numbers, then I would promptly crap my pants.
I agree with you that the FCC shouldn't knowingly attempt to make rules outside of their area of authority, but as far as I can tell in this particular situation, the system is working as it is supposed to. Ie: The FCC tried to instate a questionable rule. They were called out on it by those that they regulate. A judge ruled that the new rule is outside the FCCs realm of authority and thus void.
But like others have said, the fact that their last rule was judged to be outside the realm of their authority does not automatically mean that they cannot achieve the intent of the rule via other means that are within that authority.
In any case, I'm not sure exactly what you are worried about. No matter what the FCC attempts to do, the industry is going to fight it, so there is essentially no chance of the FCC getting away with an illegal rule/law.
The argument hinges on the fact that even with slower than light travel, a technological species could theoretically colonize the entire galaxy in something like 5 million years. That figure is based on the model of a planet sending out two colony ships, with each new colony growing for 500 years on each new planet before sending out two colony ships of their own.
What the above means, is that if there exists a space faring expansionist (aggressive/violent/etc.) alien civilization, then they must not be a whole lot older than 5 million years, because they would likely already be here if that was the case.
Chances are that a second head would be more than a typical body could support. Note that about 30% of our energy is expended to power our brain. That means that the heart (and other organs) would have to work 30% harder in order to maintain life. I suspect that would mean heart failure, and premature death in many cases. So the options would be: We keep both heads (and both minds/people) then both die early, or sever/kill one and the other gets to live a full life. Either way you go it is not an easy decision. Is the value of two short lives higher than one long one? Is the opposite true? Neither? I think it would have to be left for the individual/pair to decide.
I think it would be a lot easier to transplant a head, than a brain. That would still be a major feat, and there are the issues of paralysis, (including the fact that the brain stem is not attached to the spinal cord... ie, nothing tells your new heart to beat, lungs to breathe, etc). So until the spinal cord is mended, you would need to be on a heart/lung machine.
Yet, we share a surprisingly large number of genes with those planarians, so this research may have much more benefit than is evident at first glance.
Saw a documentary once where a guy who had lost a good half inch off the end of his finger and managed to regrow it, complete with fingerprints, by keeping it moist, and coating it with powdered "scaffold" protein every day. Apparently the presence of the scaffold protein triggered the stem cells that were present to start regrowing the lost tissue. The guy got the treatment idea from a friend who was studying tissue regeneration in amphibians.
The term "redneck" was also used in The West Virginia Coal Miners March (1921) or the Battle of Blair Mountain when the coal miners wore red bandannas around their necks to identify themselves as seeking the opportunity to unionize. There was no derogatory implication.
Waa waa waa... You had originally asked about how much research was funded by industry vs. government. That excerpt directly answers the question, so it's hardly shitty. Get over yourself.