Damn you and your deceptive sig! While I think the dolphin bubble ring video is cool, this is not the first time that you have fooled me into looking at it when I just wanted to see more comments.
I agree. Recently I heard a neighboring town was extending their water and sewer coverage and residents were protesting the fact that their wells would be capped.
In fact, what is selected for is whether the results work-- whether the individual has genes than can survive and reproduce.
But evolution only cares whether the results work well enough to reproduce, ie that you are healthy into early adulthood, and what a surprise, most of us are.
The problem is that we would like to be healthy later in life as well, but evolution doesn't care. The only way it would improve health late in life (other than by accident) is if we somehow delayed reproduction until late in life.
The US was founded on the principle that all men (humans in general) have inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Given that these folks are human, (i know some wackos would probably argue otherwise) and that we have not charged them with any crime, then we are certainly infringing on their inalienable rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
We need to release them because it is the right thing to do. Because it is what we stand for and because we would hope that the same would be done for us if we were unfortunate enough to be in a similar situation.
You've gotta love the mindset of "We didn't validate our hypothesis, our tests must be flawed."
Or, "We found unusual and unexpected data, thus we must determine whether our assumptions, or our method was flawed, or perhaps both".
In the case of the mars mission, our assumption was that some detectable organics must exist on mars. We have detected organics in asteroids and comets, and we know that many asteroids and comets must have impacted mars, thus there should be detectable amounts of long lived organics on Mars. This is already generally accepted. Not to find ANY at all when executing the experiment strongly suggests that the experiment itself is flawed.
Additionally, the probe detected perchlorates, which were not anticipated to exist in the soil. When we added perchlorates to a sample that was known to include organics and ran the experiment, no organics were detected.
Thus, we know that the experiment was flawed and that we must devise a new experiment that can detect organics in the presence of perchlorates if we want a reliable answer.
It was always meant to heat the soil to a temperature that would likely kill anything in it, but the idea was that the heating would cause the organics to vaporize so that they could be sniffed by an instrument that can determine what types of molecules are present. We weren't trying to culture martian bacteria.
I'm sure that they DID test it, but given that they didn't know that perchlorates existed in the Martian soil, they probably didn't add any to their tests. Were they supposed to test soil with every compound known to exist and in every possible mixture? There is only so much you can do, and besides, the experiment still taught us something about mars.
We didn't know that perchlorates existed in martian soil until the probe did its tests. We then realized that given the existence of perchlorates in the soil, our test would not give correct results. This is unfortunate in that our experiment "failed" to test what we expected it to, and yet we still learned something about martian soil. Given that new information, we can now send a new experiment that would be better able to test for organics in the presence of perchlorates. Thus the experiment didn't so much fail as it showed us the next step we need to take.
You should have given it a better chance. The whole idea is that they are in a region of worlds that went through a war and lost. Most of the planets are rather backward due to being on the loosing side, thus probably don't have the resources/infrastructure to manufacture the fancy stuff, but regular ole handguns are pretty simple and the ammo is probably easily available on these backward worlds, so it makes sense.
- In one accident, she did not follow the "yield sign" and merged into me.
While this is not your fault, you should have anticipated the possibility that she would not see you and should have given her room to merge.
- In another accident, the work truck in front of me swerved out of my lane to reveal a stalled vehicle on the open road. (He should have pushed his car to the side and started it there)
Following too closely.
- In another accident, I was driving down the load and a car was attempting to make a left onto the road I was on. This required crossing my lane. A truck was in front of me turning into where the car was. The car did not see me behind the truck and pulled out into traffic.
Following too closely.
While speed itself doesn't cause an accident, ALL of the collisions you mention could have been avoided if you had given yourself more room to maneuver. Clearly YOU were going too fast for the distances you were leaving between yourself and other cars.
I agree that getting rear-ended because you stopped for a red light is really lame, and it has happened to me as well. But the truth of the matter is that if you want to avoid a collision you need to be doing what other people expect you will do. If most people in your area tend to run the first second or so of a red light, then honestly if you want to avoid future rear-endings you probably should do the same.
It feels totally wrong, i know, but probably safer since nobody will be surprised by you slowing down on a yellow.
I pretty sure that the GP was not implying that said racing driver was on a ill maintained side street. Clearly they would understand that high speeds would not be suitable to that scenario.
No kidding! I live in the Twin Cities, and there are a fair share of crazy drivers here, but when I visited Boston it was nuts. Maybe there really is something to the "Minnesota nice" phrase.
This would catch the people who have truly forgotten how to drive properly, but would do nothing for those that know the laws and how to drive safely, but choose to drive like assholes instead.
However, as much as I hate assholes, they probably would handle an unexpected situation better than the people that don't have a clue what they are doing.
That is an example of a brand name becoming the generic term for a product. For example, many people would ask for a "Kleenex" rather than asking for a tissue when the need to blow their nose.
While I find the coke vs. soda thing rather annoying myself, it really is no different than the Kleenex example.
Hell I have actually seen a guy put Diesel gasoline in his unleaded pickup truck, because he didn't look closely at the pump, but had no problem pumping 20+ gallons of it and then have to pay for it
Oh the irony....
FYI: "Diesel gasoline" makes no sense. You meant to say "Diesel fuel".
Slashdot Mirror
Damn you and your deceptive sig! While I think the dolphin bubble ring video is cool, this is not the first time that you have fooled me into looking at it when I just wanted to see more comments.
I agree. Recently I heard a neighboring town was extending their water and sewer coverage and residents were protesting the fact that their wells would be capped.
WOW... the projector can actually suck the light off of a wall to make it black too! (when the wall is white, and well-lit by ambient lighting)
http://www.benq.us/page/?pageId=309&click=showcases|scid|391
In fact, what is selected for is whether the results work-- whether the individual has genes than can survive and reproduce.
But evolution only cares whether the results work well enough to reproduce, ie that you are healthy into early adulthood, and what a surprise, most of us are.
The problem is that we would like to be healthy later in life as well, but evolution doesn't care. The only way it would improve health late in life (other than by accident) is if we somehow delayed reproduction until late in life.
Let's hope they stay away from the horror section.
TL;DR... except for the first part.
But I think you are UNDERestimating the amount that cable providers pay for popular channels.
Tyrian was sweet. I remember playing it for hours on my families old 486 back in the day. Also the destruct mini-game was a blast.
The US was founded on the principle that all men (humans in general) have inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Given that these folks are human, (i know some wackos would probably argue otherwise) and that we have not charged them with any crime, then we are certainly infringing on their inalienable rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
We need to release them because it is the right thing to do. Because it is what we stand for and because we would hope that the same would be done for us if we were unfortunate enough to be in a similar situation.
You've gotta love the mindset of "We didn't validate our hypothesis, our tests must be flawed."
Or, "We found unusual and unexpected data, thus we must determine whether our assumptions, or our method was flawed, or perhaps both".
In the case of the mars mission, our assumption was that some detectable organics must exist on mars. We have detected organics in asteroids and comets, and we know that many asteroids and comets must have impacted mars, thus there should be detectable amounts of long lived organics on Mars. This is already generally accepted. Not to find ANY at all when executing the experiment strongly suggests that the experiment itself is flawed.
Additionally, the probe detected perchlorates, which were not anticipated to exist in the soil. When we added perchlorates to a sample that was known to include organics and ran the experiment, no organics were detected.
Thus, we know that the experiment was flawed and that we must devise a new experiment that can detect organics in the presence of perchlorates if we want a reliable answer.
oxidation by definition requires oxygen.
Burning, as a generic term for a exothermic chemical reaction, does not.
It was always meant to heat the soil to a temperature that would likely kill anything in it, but the idea was that the heating would cause the organics to vaporize so that they could be sniffed by an instrument that can determine what types of molecules are present. We weren't trying to culture martian bacteria.
I'm sure that they DID test it, but given that they didn't know that perchlorates existed in the Martian soil, they probably didn't add any to their tests. Were they supposed to test soil with every compound known to exist and in every possible mixture? There is only so much you can do, and besides, the experiment still taught us something about mars.
We didn't know that perchlorates existed in martian soil until the probe did its tests. We then realized that given the existence of perchlorates in the soil, our test would not give correct results. This is unfortunate in that our experiment "failed" to test what we expected it to, and yet we still learned something about martian soil. Given that new information, we can now send a new experiment that would be better able to test for organics in the presence of perchlorates. Thus the experiment didn't so much fail as it showed us the next step we need to take.
I haven't read Ender's Game yet you insensitive clod. Next on my list though. I'll have to try to forget that bit of info.
You should have given it a better chance. The whole idea is that they are in a region of worlds that went through a war and lost. Most of the planets are rather backward due to being on the loosing side, thus probably don't have the resources/infrastructure to manufacture the fancy stuff, but regular ole handguns are pretty simple and the ammo is probably easily available on these backward worlds, so it makes sense.
I also thought the show sucked and yet I watched almost every episode. But only because my wife likes the show, and I like to hang out with her.
A good plot doesn't require you to ignore an obvious solution. To me it feels like the writers are calling the viewers morons when they do that.
- In one accident, she did not follow the "yield sign" and merged into me.
While this is not your fault, you should have anticipated the possibility that she would not see you and should have given her room to merge.
- In another accident, the work truck in front of me swerved out of my lane to reveal a stalled vehicle on the open road. (He should have pushed his car to the side and started it there)
Following too closely.
- In another accident, I was driving down the load and a car was attempting to make a left onto the road I was on. This required crossing my lane. A truck was in front of me turning into where the car was. The car did not see me behind the truck and pulled out into traffic.
Following too closely.
While speed itself doesn't cause an accident, ALL of the collisions you mention could have been avoided if you had given yourself more room to maneuver. Clearly YOU were going too fast for the distances you were leaving between yourself and other cars.
I agree that getting rear-ended because you stopped for a red light is really lame, and it has happened to me as well. But the truth of the matter is that if you want to avoid a collision you need to be doing what other people expect you will do. If most people in your area tend to run the first second or so of a red light, then honestly if you want to avoid future rear-endings you probably should do the same.
It feels totally wrong, i know, but probably safer since nobody will be surprised by you slowing down on a yellow.
I pretty sure that the GP was not implying that said racing driver was on a ill maintained side street. Clearly they would understand that high speeds would not be suitable to that scenario.
(without all those damn MASSHOLES!!) ;P
No kidding! I live in the Twin Cities, and there are a fair share of crazy drivers here, but when I visited Boston it was nuts. Maybe there really is something to the "Minnesota nice" phrase.
This would catch the people who have truly forgotten how to drive properly, but would do nothing for those that know the laws and how to drive safely, but choose to drive like assholes instead.
However, as much as I hate assholes, they probably would handle an unexpected situation better than the people that don't have a clue what they are doing.
That is an example of a brand name becoming the generic term for a product. For example, many people would ask for a "Kleenex" rather than asking for a tissue when the need to blow their nose.
While I find the coke vs. soda thing rather annoying myself, it really is no different than the Kleenex example.
Simple:
Programs = recipes.
The oven and food processor are system resources.
Hell I have actually seen a guy put Diesel gasoline in his unleaded pickup truck, because he didn't look closely at the pump, but had no problem pumping 20+ gallons of it and then have to pay for it
Oh the irony....
FYI: "Diesel gasoline" makes no sense. You meant to say "Diesel fuel".