Since one of the most famous anti-vax nutjobs is RFK jr. (A guy who was rumored that he was being considered by Obama for the position of the head of the EPA.) Before anybody says anything, yes I know there's quite a bit of anti-vax hysteria on both sides of the political spectrum.
But then again I left my previous company a few weeks before the sh*t hit the fan because I was going back to school for a couple of years. I'm not sure if I would have had problems finding a job if I looked immediately after that fiasco.
While Galilleo was big on heliocentrism he really couldn't give a way to demonstrate it was true. (You know, a scientific way through actual evidence. He had this idea that the tides demonstrated it but his explaination would have only caused 1 tide per day which was a bit of a problem.) Actually Tycho gave a way to disprove his system by pointing out if the earth didn't move there should be no stellar parallax. He saw none so he took it as evidence the earth didn't move. (In reality there is parallax but it's smaller that Tycho could measure.) Of course if you know how big the various objects in the solar system are or had a foucault pendulum you'd pretty much know the earth moves. (Too bad Galilleo didn't know the sizes and the foucault pendulum wouldn't come around until the 1800's.)
I mean it's alot easier to point at a festering pond and get people to agree to clean it up over a gas that turns out to be colorless and odorless and at the levels we're talking about also tasteless. (Actually at very high levels CO2 has a sour taste when it disolves in the mouth for what it's worth.)
Since if you hear about some group being against either Genetically modified anything or civilian nuclear energy most people will think that group leans one way and it isn't conservative.
Here's the link
http://www.heavens-above.com/
Basically you put in where you live and it tells you the times for the next few days. Plus it even generates a map of the stars at that point in time and shows where to look for the ISS.
Here in Massachusetts they're so common and they're pretty much the first ant I ever saw in my back yard as a child in the 70's that I figured they were native.(They're all over the place. Hell, I only found out they're an invasive species last year. That's how completely settled in these little guys are.) Also unlike fire ants they don't bite but man do they breed like crazy.(I know I should get rid of them from my yard but most of the time they don't actually do anything to annoy me. When I see them it's pretty much "Who cares?" which is not my response when I see carpenter ants or yellow jackets.) They're definitely doing something right.
I mean since everyone seems to not know this mad cow disease is actually extremely rare. So rare that there are no known cases being caused by US, New Zealand, Canadian, or Australian beef the last time I checked.(Mostly because it's so cheap to feed cows here in the US corn and grass, beef producers generally don't bother feeding them that ground up animal garbage or if they do only at the very end. Outlaw that practice and you wouldn't have to worry.)
Seriously though, when I was first going to college I took placement tests for physics and calculus. They said my physics was excellent, my calc sucked. (But honestly the physics test was pretty much "Do ya get newton's first law?", anybody who saw Mr. Wizard would have done well.) Anyway the physicist who looked over my results pretty much said, "Yeah, you should take the hardest physics 101 we have, the calc shouldn't be much of an issue." Turns out silly me, that "physics" course was more of an applied calc course, guess how I did?:) (What's even more disturbing is that I actually got only one question on any test completely right. Turns out the question pretty much difficult for any of us to solve it if we tried calc yet wasn't bad if you used simple geometry.)
Oh the other hand I retook Physics years later after my calc was good. (Man does it make way more sense.)
and those same changes can generate new proteins your immune system can infact recognize those new proteins as "not self" and attack cells expressing those new proteins. (So yes, your immune system can fight cancer. Actually renal cell carcinoma is one where there is quite a bit of research using the immunological based treatments.)
Well if you want to be technical a bone morrow transplant is a form of stem cell therapy and is used to treat cancers like leukemia and renal cell carcinoma. Unfortunately it's one of the most dangerous procedures a doctor can do to you. (To give some context my dad was dying from RCC a couple years back and I saw that an experimental bone marrow transplant might cure him. Probability of cure was about 20%. Probability of it just killing him in 2 weeks was also about 20%.)Yes I realize those percentages might be a bit higher since people getting them are literally deathly ill but double digit death rates are really damn high.
From my understanding of cancer is if they find it metastasized in one organ it's almost certainly metastasized in other organs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastized#Treatments_for_metastatic_cancer
If that's the case it sounds like Jobs' options are pretty much treating it as a chronic condition and curing it is probably not likely.
Well if I understood Wickard v. Filburn if you produce a large amount of wheat for use by your own farm that's interstate commerce and can be regulated even if there's no commerce and nothing going between states. Supposedly the reason is that it meant he didn't have to buy wheat which might be interstate commerce. (By that train of though if you grow your own tomatoes in a garden because the California ones in the supermarket suck well you're doing interstate commerce by not doing interstate commerce.)
See, that's a good way to expand on throws. (Give the player options) Of course SF2 is pretty old so it's not much of a surprise it didn't have counters but really the solution the average gamer came up (throws are illegal) was a stupid idea.(Because it wrecks the game.)
I mean look at Street Fighter 2. One of the main complains were throws existed at all and quite a few gamers tried to unofficially ban all throwing. Doing that pretty much wrecks the game since once they were gone it became next to impossible to really hurt a player who went completely defensive. (If they got any sort of a lead they'd just do defense the rest of the round and win by a timeout.) Of course to make things more insane alot of these people weren't against strikes that turned out to be unblockable attacks. (Which functionally is the same thing as a throw.)
Especially if the reviewer can force changes in other people's code as the result of it. I mean I had one where I had some logic that looked absolutely insane. This happened because I was using functions from another programmer and he had nonsensical return values which pretty much forced my hand. (I pointed this out to him but he refused to change it, claiming it was intentional.) The code reviewer asked why is it that way, I told him and he pretty much pulled rank and told the idiot to fix his code. (Unfortunately the idiot then had it in for me for the rest of the project and would go and whine and cry about every last little thing which didn't make things very good.)
Even if you don't count how blantantly unfair it is. (I mean I was under the impression once you're an adult your life is your life to make your own decisions.) However even not considering that and even spotting you that you meant to say only people who vote for it have to have their kids go. I know, you were too busy with one of your liberal mental masturbations to actually think this one through but you have to look at the other side, you're basically affecting what people will run for office. Of course if someone doesn't have any kids this is a non issue so figure quite a few of the childless will run. Unfortunately what are they going to think about issues involving children. Gee, that will be great for education issues.(I'm sure they give a shit about your kids' high school.)
But of course that wasn't your point, it was about people who do have kids. Now it's not just a decision about his life, he's definitely going to think about his kids.(And possibly screwing his kids over) At this point you're probably wacking off or something, completely sweaty figuring nobody will vote for a war since his kids will pay and that gets you all hot or something. However I actually see this playing out one of 2 ways. The first group will just say fuck it and not even run or anything. Even if they agree with a war they don't know if their kids do and their kids are adults with lives of their own, why screw them over. It's just easier to not run in the first place and never have to risk it. Even if you ran and got in now you have to weight how badly your kids get screwed over.(And then make a decision that may or may not have more to do with what your kid is doing now.) You might vote no even on what might be a reasonable war and then get creamed in the next election when you get figuratively raped by your opponent.
However there is a group that could make this decision fairly easily and you're giving them a huge advantage by holding this over everybody's heads. That would be people who have a family tradition of military service to begin with. Think about it, if I'm in a family where everybody joins up anyway then this is nothing. Hell, in that case my kids can join up early, I could pull a few strings and get them a commission or something and all of a sudden that being on the front line isn't the hard slog you want it to be.(When the war isn't on they'd have a better pay grade, better quarters, possibly be in the reserves, etc.) The kids would get any advantage they could and since they'd have generations of service they'd get the best the military has to offer.(Especially since daddy's an important politician.) Then if they wanted to they could use that advantage to run for office since now they have a history in the military and a family that does politics. Even when a war was on I could use my military and political connections to make sure the "front" they're at isn't the super dangerous one you were hoping for. (The front can cover quite a bit of area and wouldn't you know it, maybe my kids division is going to be in a defensive position and not storm anything.) That reminds me, who exactly makes the determination of what the most dangerous thing is? Gee, maybe it'd be somebody in the military or politics. If I'm a politician with a military back ground can you say "pull a few fucking strings" to get something ranked as "dangerous" that might not be the most dangerous thing around.(You really haven't thought this one through have you?)
Anyway this should worry you for a couple of reasons. First off last I checked military people tend to vote Republican. (I'm probably not far off thinking you're not one.) However the part that should really worry you is you're basically setting up an old boys network of military politicians. I would expect that they probably arn't as opposed to using military force as you would want them to be. Furthermore that old "chicken-hawk" canard won't be so effective when you throw it at someone who's got generations of military experience. I mean hell, you're basically crea
The technical term is somatic cell nuclear transfer. (Don't worry, it has nothing to do with plutonium.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCNT
The idea is that you'd make a new embryo but use the DNA from whomever the patient was. (Assuming their genetics were ok to do this.) You'd hopefully get embryonic stem cells that wouldn't get rejected. Unfortuantely one down side is that talking point about "We're just using embryos we'd throw away." would basically be a whole lot of nonsense. (Since you'd actually have to create new embryos to do it.) Of course the pro people would have to come up with a new talking point they could use endlessly while the anti-abortion people would flip out over murdering babies. (Of course I'm too old so I think both sides are full of excrement.)
Slashdot Mirror
Since one of the most famous anti-vax nutjobs is RFK jr. (A guy who was rumored that he was being considered by Obama for the position of the head of the EPA.) Before anybody says anything, yes I know there's quite a bit of anti-vax hysteria on both sides of the political spectrum.
But then again I left my previous company a few weeks before the sh*t hit the fan because I was going back to school for a couple of years. I'm not sure if I would have had problems finding a job if I looked immediately after that fiasco.
While Galilleo was big on heliocentrism he really couldn't give a way to demonstrate it was true. (You know, a scientific way through actual evidence. He had this idea that the tides demonstrated it but his explaination would have only caused 1 tide per day which was a bit of a problem.) Actually Tycho gave a way to disprove his system by pointing out if the earth didn't move there should be no stellar parallax. He saw none so he took it as evidence the earth didn't move. (In reality there is parallax but it's smaller that Tycho could measure.) Of course if you know how big the various objects in the solar system are or had a foucault pendulum you'd pretty much know the earth moves. (Too bad Galilleo didn't know the sizes and the foucault pendulum wouldn't come around until the 1800's.)
I mean it's alot easier to point at a festering pond and get people to agree to clean it up over a gas that turns out to be colorless and odorless and at the levels we're talking about also tasteless. (Actually at very high levels CO2 has a sour taste when it disolves in the mouth for what it's worth.)
Since if you hear about some group being against either Genetically modified anything or civilian nuclear energy most people will think that group leans one way and it isn't conservative.
Here's the link http://www.heavens-above.com/ Basically you put in where you live and it tells you the times for the next few days. Plus it even generates a map of the stars at that point in time and shows where to look for the ISS.
Anybody? Believe it or not plutonium is less toxic than acetaminophen http://www.chemistrydaily.com/chemistry/Plutonium
Here in Massachusetts they're so common and they're pretty much the first ant I ever saw in my back yard as a child in the 70's that I figured they were native.(They're all over the place. Hell, I only found out they're an invasive species last year. That's how completely settled in these little guys are.) Also unlike fire ants they don't bite but man do they breed like crazy.(I know I should get rid of them from my yard but most of the time they don't actually do anything to annoy me. When I see them it's pretty much "Who cares?" which is not my response when I see carpenter ants or yellow jackets.) They're definitely doing something right.
I mean since everyone seems to not know this mad cow disease is actually extremely rare. So rare that there are no known cases being caused by US, New Zealand, Canadian, or Australian beef the last time I checked.(Mostly because it's so cheap to feed cows here in the US corn and grass, beef producers generally don't bother feeding them that ground up animal garbage or if they do only at the very end. Outlaw that practice and you wouldn't have to worry.)
Seriously though, when I was first going to college I took placement tests for physics and calculus. They said my physics was excellent, my calc sucked. (But honestly the physics test was pretty much "Do ya get newton's first law?", anybody who saw Mr. Wizard would have done well.) Anyway the physicist who looked over my results pretty much said, "Yeah, you should take the hardest physics 101 we have, the calc shouldn't be much of an issue." Turns out silly me, that "physics" course was more of an applied calc course, guess how I did? :) (What's even more disturbing is that I actually got only one question on any test completely right. Turns out the question pretty much difficult for any of us to solve it if we tried calc yet wasn't bad if you used simple geometry.)
Oh the other hand I retook Physics years later after my calc was good. (Man does it make way more sense.)
On that girl a while back that had 6 months to live because she was dying of cancer.
You mean it isn't what happens if you masturbate too much with both hands?
and those same changes can generate new proteins your immune system can infact recognize those new proteins as "not self" and attack cells expressing those new proteins. (So yes, your immune system can fight cancer. Actually renal cell carcinoma is one where there is quite a bit of research using the immunological based treatments.)
Well if you want to be technical a bone morrow transplant is a form of stem cell therapy and is used to treat cancers like leukemia and renal cell carcinoma. Unfortunately it's one of the most dangerous procedures a doctor can do to you. (To give some context my dad was dying from RCC a couple years back and I saw that an experimental bone marrow transplant might cure him. Probability of cure was about 20%. Probability of it just killing him in 2 weeks was also about 20%.)Yes I realize those percentages might be a bit higher since people getting them are literally deathly ill but double digit death rates are really damn high.
From my understanding of cancer is if they find it metastasized in one organ it's almost certainly metastasized in other organs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metastized#Treatments_for_metastatic_cancer If that's the case it sounds like Jobs' options are pretty much treating it as a chronic condition and curing it is probably not likely.
Well if I understood Wickard v. Filburn if you produce a large amount of wheat for use by your own farm that's interstate commerce and can be regulated even if there's no commerce and nothing going between states. Supposedly the reason is that it meant he didn't have to buy wheat which might be interstate commerce. (By that train of though if you grow your own tomatoes in a garden because the California ones in the supermarket suck well you're doing interstate commerce by not doing interstate commerce.)
And it's even in an effective dosage, at least that's what I got from this blog post http://cmpalmer.blogspot.com/2005/04/zicam-homeopathic-cold-remedies.html That is weird though, it's a fake "fake drug".
See, that's a good way to expand on throws. (Give the player options) Of course SF2 is pretty old so it's not much of a surprise it didn't have counters but really the solution the average gamer came up (throws are illegal) was a stupid idea.(Because it wrecks the game.)
I mean look at Street Fighter 2. One of the main complains were throws existed at all and quite a few gamers tried to unofficially ban all throwing. Doing that pretty much wrecks the game since once they were gone it became next to impossible to really hurt a player who went completely defensive. (If they got any sort of a lead they'd just do defense the rest of the round and win by a timeout.) Of course to make things more insane alot of these people weren't against strikes that turned out to be unblockable attacks. (Which functionally is the same thing as a throw.)
Especially if the reviewer can force changes in other people's code as the result of it. I mean I had one where I had some logic that looked absolutely insane. This happened because I was using functions from another programmer and he had nonsensical return values which pretty much forced my hand. (I pointed this out to him but he refused to change it, claiming it was intentional.) The code reviewer asked why is it that way, I told him and he pretty much pulled rank and told the idiot to fix his code. (Unfortunately the idiot then had it in for me for the rest of the project and would go and whine and cry about every last little thing which didn't make things very good.)
Even if you don't count how blantantly unfair it is. (I mean I was under the impression once you're an adult your life is your life to make your own decisions.) However even not considering that and even spotting you that you meant to say only people who vote for it have to have their kids go. I know, you were too busy with one of your liberal mental masturbations to actually think this one through but you have to look at the other side, you're basically affecting what people will run for office. Of course if someone doesn't have any kids this is a non issue so figure quite a few of the childless will run. Unfortunately what are they going to think about issues involving children. Gee, that will be great for education issues.(I'm sure they give a shit about your kids' high school.)
But of course that wasn't your point, it was about people who do have kids. Now it's not just a decision about his life, he's definitely going to think about his kids.(And possibly screwing his kids over) At this point you're probably wacking off or something, completely sweaty figuring nobody will vote for a war since his kids will pay and that gets you all hot or something. However I actually see this playing out one of 2 ways. The first group will just say fuck it and not even run or anything. Even if they agree with a war they don't know if their kids do and their kids are adults with lives of their own, why screw them over. It's just easier to not run in the first place and never have to risk it. Even if you ran and got in now you have to weight how badly your kids get screwed over.(And then make a decision that may or may not have more to do with what your kid is doing now.) You might vote no even on what might be a reasonable war and then get creamed in the next election when you get figuratively raped by your opponent.
However there is a group that could make this decision fairly easily and you're giving them a huge advantage by holding this over everybody's heads. That would be people who have a family tradition of military service to begin with. Think about it, if I'm in a family where everybody joins up anyway then this is nothing. Hell, in that case my kids can join up early, I could pull a few strings and get them a commission or something and all of a sudden that being on the front line isn't the hard slog you want it to be.(When the war isn't on they'd have a better pay grade, better quarters, possibly be in the reserves, etc.) The kids would get any advantage they could and since they'd have generations of service they'd get the best the military has to offer.(Especially since daddy's an important politician.) Then if they wanted to they could use that advantage to run for office since now they have a history in the military and a family that does politics. Even when a war was on I could use my military and political connections to make sure the "front" they're at isn't the super dangerous one you were hoping for. (The front can cover quite a bit of area and wouldn't you know it, maybe my kids division is going to be in a defensive position and not storm anything.) That reminds me, who exactly makes the determination of what the most dangerous thing is? Gee, maybe it'd be somebody in the military or politics. If I'm a politician with a military back ground can you say "pull a few fucking strings" to get something ranked as "dangerous" that might not be the most dangerous thing around.(You really haven't thought this one through have you?)
Anyway this should worry you for a couple of reasons. First off last I checked military people tend to vote Republican. (I'm probably not far off thinking you're not one.) However the part that should really worry you is you're basically setting up an old boys network of military politicians. I would expect that they probably arn't as opposed to using military force as you would want them to be. Furthermore that old "chicken-hawk" canard won't be so effective when you throw it at someone who's got generations of military experience. I mean hell, you're basically crea
The technical term is somatic cell nuclear transfer. (Don't worry, it has nothing to do with plutonium.) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCNT The idea is that you'd make a new embryo but use the DNA from whomever the patient was. (Assuming their genetics were ok to do this.) You'd hopefully get embryonic stem cells that wouldn't get rejected. Unfortuantely one down side is that talking point about "We're just using embryos we'd throw away." would basically be a whole lot of nonsense. (Since you'd actually have to create new embryos to do it.) Of course the pro people would have to come up with a new talking point they could use endlessly while the anti-abortion people would flip out over murdering babies. (Of course I'm too old so I think both sides are full of excrement.)
I mean if they don't want to use VLC. Doesn't media player classic also do DVD's?
And Damn it, it's the best 2 hours of the year.
Surely making the subject fun, interesting would be a better way of encouraging students?
Ahh, I understand that you've never taken a foreign language course in college :-)