...), so the only thing here that is illegal (aside from the private who initially leaked the cables - but he's in jail) is the US State Department trying to intimidate American businesses into not interacting with Wikileaks. THAT is illegal. The response from Anonymous is probably also (technically) illegal, but when the government misbehaves, law goes out the window.
And so the response should have nothing to do with Amazon, rather the government. Amazon is the teller told to hand over the cash, and Anonymous is attacking the wrong entity
So the deniers are always wrong? Even when the proponents change their models to reveal that they were right?
First, changing your model to meet the continued and feverish gathering of data and testing of hypotheses is called science. Surely you've hear of it. It differs from other forms of endeavors in that the whole idea is to get to the truth of how things work. So change is good. It means you can trust the people a hell of a lot more as they are willing to change their mind when new information comes to light.
Second, it hardly proves climate change skeptics correct. One need go no further than the painfully obvious change in the arctic to see we are experience an epic change. One with possibly frightening consequences.
Third, when the vast majority of scientist, especially those who are expert in the relevant fields are telling us that we're headed for major trouble, and a powerful and influential set of individuals dismiss this with generally mindless and often retorical thinking, taking any fuckup, or change of course inherent in good science as proof it was all a hoax, I don't call that wrong,...I call that an truly unprecedented act of betrayal. Betrayal to the entire human species and to the rest of the creatures, an unprecedented number of whom are choking out by the way. Because it appears to be pretty much based on their own self interest in one way or the other.
I would actually guess that the goal is to cement the indoctrination of the young, which is where the evangelical movement is sorely hurting as I understand it. Much the same thing that Phillip Morris did with Joe Camel actually.
So far absolutely no negative effects have yet been shown except as embarrassments to those engaging in dubious practices and policies.
First, negative effects certainly do not require being "shown" (what ever that means) to be obvious to a hedgehog. Do you really think that all players will communicate and treat with the US in as open and honest a manor going forward?...To clarify my position, this is far too complex an event to simply call it "good" or "bad", so I am not taking a position on the uber situations, but to claim there are "absolutely no negative effects" is rather...odd...in my opinion.
Certainly governments of all nations are far more concerned with the elites if nothing else as they know who butters their bread, but there is a great deal of business done in all our interests, and is best done out of sight of a sensationalist media and other players if nothing else. I have experience with negotiations and am related to a high level professional negotiator. One fundamental tool is meeting privately with each stakeholder so as to do many things, not the least of which is to give them an opportunity to express their true interests "safely" so the negotiator can better lead the process toward success for all without each side showing all their cards (for whatever reason, some more valid than others of course) and without the negotiator constantly guessing at all the various interests. Sometimes you have to just guess, but it's a lot better for everyone when someone knows where the Win-Win place is for everybody, believe me. There are MANY other examples where confidentiality can grease the wheels.
Any reasonable evaluation must see this as a trade-off at the vary least as I see it. A true open society demands the open, ugly and honest true at times, and this is a very good thing in many ways as well. God knows the pentagon papers were critical to the process in our evolution to name just one event.
The worthinesses of the payoff vs the serious damage done to open communications is one that isn't easily answered and probably should not be attempted without a good deal of time. Personally I'm not happy aobut the damage, but I'd rather live in a society where "too much" true is told, rather than the reverse.
Instant-runoff or Ranked-choice voting is viable. it would change things a lot in my opinion. Think of the way you vote for movies at netflix.I'd say it's the single most important change we could make.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
/3. You have to get at the root of the problem of why they refuse to believe those numbers are equal before you can get anywhere.
And that is the difficulty in contemplating infinity. Running decimal places out to infinity doesn't always compute...the average person rather thinks of a very large number of places. Some think of this large number getting larger. But it's not a natural mental concept to contemplate infinity.
Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
Support of Chinese Communism?? You say that like the point of Googles foray into the Chinese search market was all about a political goal. It had nothing what-so-ever to do with supporting communism or the Chinese government and to make that statement is blatantly off the mark. Say what you will about the 'deal with the devil' inherent in that bit of business, and there are certainly two sides to be made, but manipulation of political ideology as the motive for the whole thing is a totally unsupportable claim. Or do you have some info there that needs to come out?
Frankly if I were in that god-awful fray I would WELCOME the game with the supposedly offending feature. I'd be appreciative of a tool that allowed me to understand the enemy more completely. And nothing teaches you about an opponent better than climbing around in their pelt for a few hours.
In general I think this type of overreaction is indicative of the black and white simple minded dogmatic world-view that so many people are championing as virtuous these days. Also, the best comment I've heard so far is the one pointing out that WWII games allow for play from the German side of things.
Folks are making points about the money spent, or loaned actually, but what is saved is just as valuable.
Less $ on oil wars, oil cleanup, medical costs associated with pollution, retraining for lost jobs due to spills ruining livelihoods. And then there's the savings that are less about money but perhaps even more important. Like fewer fouled beaches, saved species, oh and that global climate change thing.
The calculations for this kind of investment really need to be more wise and less driven by simpleminded ideology if you ask me.
These plants will not use panels at all, so this seems off point. They will use mirrors to focus the radiation onto pipes of flowing molten salts that then transfer the heat to turbines or to storage. Solar panels are improving steadaly and need investment so as to continue to improve as all technology that gets the R&D improves in theis day and age,...in leaps and bounds...but they have nothing at all to do with the power plants being built. And mirrors are pretty well done technology, although the corrosion factor has been an issue I believe because of all the salt perhaps.
The argument that many transgressions have been perpetrated without the bible, seems a fallacious response to the parent. These apples are all red, therefore no apples are green. Perhaps "Proof by example"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_example
additionally there was no hatred for the bible stated. Without clarification, we do not know if the parent was making a point against to book itself or the people who interpret it.
Art is anything humans make that isn't diagrams and maps and C-SPAN, anything trying get across something besides a flat 'Here is what happened'.
I have a map of Middle Earth on my wall. Functions as art to me, and it's major function is exactly telling me where things are, fictional world or no (somewhere, someone certainly hangs a map of real territory that they display as art after all). I think limiting the definition of Art is as inherently fallible as defining Good Art. I say if it effects me emotionally, it's Art. But that's my definition. YMMV
Slashdot Mirror
...), so the only thing here that is illegal (aside from the private who initially leaked the cables - but he's in jail) is the US State Department trying to intimidate American businesses into not interacting with Wikileaks. THAT is illegal. The response from Anonymous is probably also (technically) illegal, but when the government misbehaves, law goes out the window.
And so the response should have nothing to do with Amazon, rather the government. Amazon is the teller told to hand over the cash, and Anonymous is attacking the wrong entity
Who's the terrorist? The one who did the *acts* reported in the documentation? Or the one who's letting others know they did it?
eerrrr......exactly which "acts" are you referring to that we should accept as terrorism again? Help a guy see your point of view please.
Doublethink detected!
So the deniers are always wrong? Even when the proponents change their models to reveal that they were right?
First, changing your model to meet the continued and feverish gathering of data and testing of hypotheses is called science. Surely you've hear of it. It differs from other forms of endeavors in that the whole idea is to get to the truth of how things work. So change is good. It means you can trust the people a hell of a lot more as they are willing to change their mind when new information comes to light. Second, it hardly proves climate change skeptics correct. One need go no further than the painfully obvious change in the arctic to see we are experience an epic change. One with possibly frightening consequences. Third, when the vast majority of scientist, especially those who are expert in the relevant fields are telling us that we're headed for major trouble, and a powerful and influential set of individuals dismiss this with generally mindless and often retorical thinking, taking any fuckup, or change of course inherent in good science as proof it was all a hoax, I don't call that wrong,...I call that an truly unprecedented act of betrayal. Betrayal to the entire human species and to the rest of the creatures, an unprecedented number of whom are choking out by the way. Because it appears to be pretty much based on their own self interest in one way or the other.
Seattle area, iPhone, AT&T, fully satisfied. No problems.
Same here...
and I don't even drink coffee .:shrug:. :-)
I would actually guess that the goal is to cement the indoctrination of the young, which is where the evangelical movement is sorely hurting as I understand it. Much the same thing that Phillip Morris did with Joe Camel actually.
So far absolutely no negative effects have yet been shown except as embarrassments to those engaging in dubious practices and policies.
First, negative effects certainly do not require being "shown" (what ever that means) to be obvious to a hedgehog. Do you really think that all players will communicate and treat with the US in as open and honest a manor going forward? ...To clarify my position, this is far too complex an event to simply call it "good" or "bad", so I am not taking a position on the uber situations, but to claim there are "absolutely no negative effects" is rather ...odd...in my opinion.
Certainly governments of all nations are far more concerned with the elites if nothing else as they know who butters their bread, but there is a great deal of business done in all our interests, and is best done out of sight of a sensationalist media and other players if nothing else. I have experience with negotiations and am related to a high level professional negotiator. One fundamental tool is meeting privately with each stakeholder so as to do many things, not the least of which is to give them an opportunity to express their true interests "safely" so the negotiator can better lead the process toward success for all without each side showing all their cards (for whatever reason, some more valid than others of course) and without the negotiator constantly guessing at all the various interests. Sometimes you have to just guess, but it's a lot better for everyone when someone knows where the Win-Win place is for everybody, believe me. There are MANY other examples where confidentiality can grease the wheels.
Any reasonable evaluation must see this as a trade-off at the vary least as I see it. A true open society demands the open, ugly and honest true at times, and this is a very good thing in many ways as well. God knows the pentagon papers were critical to the process in our evolution to name just one event.
The worthinesses of the payoff vs the serious damage done to open communications is one that isn't easily answered and probably should not be attempted without a good deal of time. Personally I'm not happy aobut the damage, but I'd rather live in a society where "too much" true is told, rather than the reverse.
Instant-runoff or Ranked-choice voting is viable. it would change things a lot in my opinion. Think of the way you vote for movies at netflix.I'd say it's the single most important change we could make. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
/3. You have to get at the root of the problem of why they refuse to believe those numbers are equal before you can get anywhere.
And that is the difficulty in contemplating infinity. Running decimal places out to infinity doesn't always compute...the average person rather thinks of a very large number of places. Some think of this large number getting larger. But it's not a natural mental concept to contemplate infinity.
Instant runoff voting. Nuff said http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting
Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
But what really ticks them off is when that buggy, knockoff product might be used by targeting systems in military unmanned drone attacks...
....I HATE when that happens.
Support of Chinese Communism?? You say that like the point of Googles foray into the Chinese search market was all about a political goal. It had nothing what-so-ever to do with supporting communism or the Chinese government and to make that statement is blatantly off the mark. Say what you will about the 'deal with the devil' inherent in that bit of business, and there are certainly two sides to be made, but manipulation of political ideology as the motive for the whole thing is a totally unsupportable claim. Or do you have some info there that needs to come out?
such as....
they're called lobbyists
that implies that you know what it IS about. By all means, continue.
Frankly if I were in that god-awful fray I would WELCOME the game with the supposedly offending feature. I'd be appreciative of a tool that allowed me to understand the enemy more completely. And nothing teaches you about an opponent better than climbing around in their pelt for a few hours. In general I think this type of overreaction is indicative of the black and white simple minded dogmatic world-view that so many people are championing as virtuous these days. Also, the best comment I've heard so far is the one pointing out that WWII games allow for play from the German side of things.
ah...thanks for that. I was indeed speaking from knowledge of the Arizona plant, but should have specified that
Folks are making points about the money spent, or loaned actually, but what is saved is just as valuable. Less $ on oil wars, oil cleanup, medical costs associated with pollution, retraining for lost jobs due to spills ruining livelihoods. And then there's the savings that are less about money but perhaps even more important. Like fewer fouled beaches, saved species, oh and that global climate change thing. The calculations for this kind of investment really need to be more wise and less driven by simpleminded ideology if you ask me.
I neglected to login when writing the previous
These plants will not use panels at all, so this seems off point. They will use mirrors to focus the radiation onto pipes of flowing molten salts that then transfer the heat to turbines or to storage. Solar panels are improving steadaly and need investment so as to continue to improve as all technology that gets the R&D improves in theis day and age, ...in leaps and bounds...but they have nothing at all to do with the power plants being built. And mirrors are pretty well done technology, although the corrosion factor has been an issue I believe because of all the salt perhaps.
OK what the hell does the Tesla electric car have to do with a solar power plant?
The argument that many transgressions have been perpetrated without the bible, seems a fallacious response to the parent. These apples are all red, therefore no apples are green. Perhaps "Proof by example"? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_example additionally there was no hatred for the bible stated. Without clarification, we do not know if the parent was making a point against to book itself or the people who interpret it.
Art is anything humans make that isn't diagrams and maps and C-SPAN, anything trying get across something besides a flat 'Here is what happened'.
I have a map of Middle Earth on my wall. Functions as art to me, and it's major function is exactly telling me where things are, fictional world or no (somewhere, someone certainly hangs a map of real territory that they display as art after all). I think limiting the definition of Art is as inherently fallible as defining Good Art. I say if it effects me emotionally, it's Art. But that's my definition. YMMV
actually, they have the 'critical' part down,...it's that 'thinking' part that causes them to foam at the mouth and bark a lot.
Now, now...I never said the cat didn't LIKE it