You can entertain yourself by putting in some cheesy data (but don't tread into material that might be offensive..). If you're working with some other testers, encourage them to do the same and your life will be a hell of a lot less boring. I.E. if you're working on a forum or something, make a post "I put on my wizard robe and hat" (just saw that a few posts ago, almost made me spill my coffee). I do a significant amount of testing at my job, and even though I'm often the only one testing, I still laugh sometimes just thinking of what someone else might think if they saw this or that
I work on some software where the acronym "cat" is sometimes used and my project manager hates cats, and especially lolcats. So naturally I uploaded a picture of keyboard cat as the profile pic for the primary test user / admin account for the application (so every time they logged in, they saw that picture). At the next conference call one of the consultants said "Hey I really like that picture of the cat!" and another one half jokingly said "Hey, maybe we can use that pic as the company logo!". The PM rolled his eyes and said "..If I could shoot you all right now over the phone, I would..". Best conference call ever!
Ray Kurzwell makes predictions on the past - he's not trying to sell or peddle some techno babble bullshit for profit. That's quite unfair of you to bundle this in with reiki, magnetic healing, alchemy or any other pseudo-science.
I don't necessarily believe all of his predictions (or the timing), but he's got some accurate predictions under his belt which gives him a lot more credibility than people trying to discuss "religious woo" or any other woo that turns out to be a bunch of crap.
Mod parent up - driving is indeed a privilege and not some inherit right (you got that backwards I think). You have no inherit right to operate your vehicle how you please. You're operating a large piece of machinery at very high speeds. The govt should be getting involved when you're significantly increasing the chances of injuring or killing other people.
When this device becomes mandatory for ALL vehicles regardless of any previous convictions, then we can talk about YRO and the govt / privacy debate that slashdot loves so much. However, this device is only for people *already convicted* of a DUI - don't go crying about liberty.
The only beef I might have with this is the 1/3 of the limit - seems like a bit overkill, but I have no pity for anyone that has to install this device
There's plenty of ways to circumvent the device, but if it's in the car it still has some purpose. I'm not sure if the device actually lists your current blood alcohol level, or just tells you whether you're over or not - but if you've been drinking and blow over on the device then you're fully aware of your blood alcohol content being over the limit. If you get someone sober to blow over (i.e. scene from 40 year old virgin) or use a dust buster, then get pulled over / accident and then breathalyzed to find you're actually over the limit and DELIBERATELY circumvented the device - well that judge is going to be a lot harder on you because you knew damn well you shouldn't have been driving. Ignorance isn't an excuse, but it's better than driving drunk when you're fully aware you shouldn't have been doing it.
I've seen a few people get into vehicles where I know they claim to have had "just a few beers" (whether that's 2 or 6 who knows) and get into their vehicle thinking they're fine to drive. Maybe they just had a red bull or coffee or something and feel more alert, or mistakenly think it actually sobers them up - but they truly believe they're sober enough to drive. That device might be enough to stop those people in those cases. It certainly won't stop people that are determined to drive drunk, but it will reduce these cases
Not sure if could list a favorite... too many to choose from. I'll always remember White Water and Medieval Madness, as they were probably the hardest games to "complete" (meaning that after 6 months or so of playing, I finally achieved the final super jackpot thingy after completing all the other mini-games).
I find the best formula for a pinball game involves:
- A good story / event actions that make you laugh (Addams Family, Medieval Madness, Fish Tales)
- A "final event" that's difficult to achieve, but not impossible (i.e. the "red line mania" final event in "High speed 2: The Getaway" wasn't that hard to get, and didn't feel that satisfied when I reached that point)
- Unique and fun video mode / mini-game (i.e. "Battle the Power" in Twilight Zone)
- WORKING FLIPPERS (nothing I hate more than hitting a ball half way up a ramp with a perfect shot and having it fall back down)
- Decent tilt setting (allows some leeway for shaking the machine a bit, but will set of the tilt if you shake it too much)
Just curious if anyone here that attended knew about the tilt settings for these games. There doesn't appear to be anything in the rules or contest information. I find that a critical part of the enjoyment and challenge of a pinball game is being allowed to wiggle the machine a bit to save that ball if necessary, at the risk of losing your turn if you shake the machine around too much. Ultra-sensitive tilt is no fun, but If the tilt detector is non-existent there's no challenge either as you could almost get infinite turns (I remember playing a couple of games where you could lift the entire machine to save your ball if it went down a side panel)
What is wrong with the university system is because we've screwed up our high school system to pretty much let -everyone- graduate, a diploma now means nothing.
I don't see how more people graduating (or a higher percentage of high school attendees) affects the entry rate into university. Universities base your admission on your marks in your core classes (at least here in Canada). When I graduated you needed a minimum of 65% to apply at the local university - Now it's 80%. If high schools are lowering the bar for a diploma, the universities will raise their standards if the applicant to admission ratio changes significantly.
Exactly. The people at the top of any profitable industry make hundreds of times more than the employees at the lowest level. Not saying that's a good thing, but the only difference between the nascar or programmer scenario, and any other industry is there's significantly fewer other levels of management also making a cut.
I used to sell booze at big sporting arenas. I'd like to see the look on my co-workers' faces if I suggested something like 'You know what, those athletes we're working for make MILLIONS, we should go on strike and demand a higher wage!"
I've invented a device that disables any nearby car alarm, unlocks the door and automatically starts the car with no key. I'm selling it as a way to help those that accidentally lock their keys inside their cars. Within 3 months, calls to locksmiths are down 20%, and car theft is up 5000%. Should this device still be legal to purchase and own?
Of course not, it would be made illegal to own this type of thing. A handful would buy it for it's "intended" purpose, and everyone else would buy it to break into cars. When the illegal / costly usage of a device far exceeds any gains from society from legitimate use then it shouldn't be legal to operate. At some point when the percentage of users using it for nefarious purposes is high enough (50%? 90%? 99%?) then it should be illegal.
Correct me if my probability is wrong here, but If only 0.26 of black cars get stolen (about 1 out of every 400) and we assumed that pink cars get stolen just as often as black cars, then the odds that zero black cars get stolen is (0.9976 ^ 109) - 0.769. So there's basically only about a 23% chance that at least one black car would get stolen according to those numbers given a sample size of 109. Clearly this isn't a big enough sample size to assume that your car wouldn't get stolen simply because it's pink.That 23% chance goes even lower if you give the same odds as red (at 0.16 - only a 16% chance at least one red is stolen).
I still think that the odds of a pink car getting stolen would be less than 0.26 or 0.16 though - I can't remember the last time I saw a pink car, if ever. Why steal something that stands out?
The problems affecting the Dell computers stemmed from an industrywide encounter with bad capacitors produced by Asian PC component suppliers.
I still don't get why you would bother with these calculations. Why bother with a recall at all? If you've got faulty flux capacitors, just go back in time and fix the bad capacitors. Problem solved. Surely, the price of a DeLorean is cheaper than a recall?
Nope... it's still 50% The statement "I've tossed a coin twice, at least one of which was heads, what's the probability that both were heads?" is still 50%, given that one of them was heads. The false premise here is that there are 3 possibilities:
H H H T T H
when in fact there are 4 :
H h h H T h h T
The lowercase h represents the one that's guaranteed heads. The false assumption here is that equal weight is given to H / h, when in fact it represents 2 possible choices - the result being discussed where "at least one of which was heads" could have been the first toss or second toss.
If the first toss was the heads being referred to, then the 2nd toss could be either heads or tails (h H or h T). If the second toss was the heads being referred to, then the first toss could be either heads or tails (H h or T h). Either way you look at it, it's still 50%
After the wormhole plunge in the 4th movie, I was a little worried they'd be somewhere new with only their core characters if more new episodes came out. Nice to know Zapp Brannigan is still around.
That won't work. If we've learned anything recently about solutions to catastrophes / disasters, then the correct solution is to plug up this hole with golf balls and tires.
When I buy some blank CDs so that I can give friends a copy of my music (music that I created myself) - it really pisses me off having to pay a tax that goes to OTHER artists because it's assumed that I'll be using it for pirated music. That's assuming it actually goes to the other artists.
I'm certainly not receiving any of these funds as a "recording artist" (I use that term loosely, as I've never had an official recording contract, just made my own stuff & posted it online or given cds to friends & fans). Why the hell should I have to pay other artists for a freaking blank CD?!? Fuck this tax.
This ruling reminds me of a segment I saw in a documentary ( the corporation - scroll down for quote). It always shocked me that something like a gene or life form could be patented simply by discovering it. You didn't invent it, why should you own the rights to it? If you create a brand new gene then you should you be able to profit for it, but for a gene that already exists? It may seem a bit off topic, but this is case is what paved the way for gene patenting - the ability to patent anything biological (save for a full human). I hope this case paves the way to new patent laws on biology.
The Chakrabarty case is one of the great judicial moments in world history. And the public was totally unaware it was actually happening as a process was being engaged. General Electric and Professor Chakrabarty went to the patent office with a little microbe that eats up oil spills. They said they had modified this microbe in the laboratory, and therefore it was an invention. The patent office and the U.S. Government took at look at this "invention"; they said, 'No way. The patent statutes don't cover living things. This is not an invention". Turned down. Then, General Electric and Doctor Chakrabarty appealed to the U.S. Customs Court of Appeal. And, to everyone's surprise, by a 3-to-2 decision, they overrode the patent office. They said, 'This microbe looks more like a detergent, or a reagent, than a horse or a honeybee". I laugh because they didn't understand basic biology; it looked like a chemical to them. Had it had an antenna, or eyes, or wings, or legs, it would never have crossed their table and been patented. Then the patent office appealed. And what the public should realize now is the patent office was very clear that you can't patent life. My organization provided the main amicus curiae brief. "If you allow the patent on this microbe," we argued, "it means that without any congressional guidance or public discussion, corporations will own the blueprints of life". When they made the decision, we lost by 5-to-4, and Chief Justice Warren Berger said, "Sure, some of these are big issues but we think this is a small decision". 7 Years later the U.S. Patent Office issued a 1 sentence decree, "You can patent anything in the world that's alive, except a full-birth human being". We've all been hearing about the announcement that we have mapped the human genome. But what the public doesn't know is now there's this great race by genomic companies and biotech companies and life science companies to find the treasure in the map. The treasure are the individual genes that make up the blueprint of the human race. Every time they capture a gene and isolate it, these biotech companies claim it as intellectual property. The breast cancer gene, the cystic fibrosis gene, it goes on and on and on. If this goes unchallenged in the world community within less than 10 years a handful of global companies will own, directly, or through license, the actual genes that make up the evolution of our species. And they're now beginning to patent the genomes of every other creature on this planet. In the age of biology the politics is going to sort out between those who believe life first has intrinsic value, and therefore we should choose technologies and commercial venues that honor the intrinsic value. And then we're going to have people who believe, "Look, life is a simple utility, it's commercial fare", and they will line up with the idea to let the marketplace be the ultimate arbiter of all of the age of biology.
Presenting multiple contrasting theories with discussion about both would seem to be beneficial.
That is why this was written. The whole concept of "alternate theory to evolution" is not science and does not belong in a science classroom. ID or FSMism is not a theory in scientific terms.
Science is the teaching of facts and accepted theories. No science class teaches the alternate theory of anything. You don't learn about alchemy in chemistry classes, you don't learn about astrology in astronomy, you don't learn about reiki, natural healing, voodoo etc in biology / med school.
Bikes are already banned from the sidewalks in many places, which makes absolutely no sense...
Ever try riding a bike downtown on a sidewalk during business hours? Constantly weaving through dozens of people each minute won't allow you to reach a very high speed, and you run a much higher risk of crashing into someone, as pedestrian movements can be a lot more random and sporadic (i.e. riding behind someone that just stops and turns around, people suddenly exiting parked cars or buildings) than cars, which generally travel in their lanes.
I'd prefer to ride on a sidewalk as much as possible, as getting run over by a pedestrian is a lot less worse for me than getting run over by a vehicle (paying extra attention to right turns and left turning vehicles when crossing intersections). Riding on the road when the sidewalk is empty seems like a needless risk too. Sidewalk-only riding simply doesn't work everywhere, and I'll need to ride on the road sometimes to get to my destination in the fastest possible time.
How many people have died thanks to terrorist incidents on aircraft in the last decade? How many people hove flown in aircraft? Divide the first number by the second to get the risk and you'll see it's a very small number indeed.
Unfortunately, this is just the kind of data that airport and security officials will use to justify the excessive searching. "The number of people that have died as a result of terrorist incidents has significantly dropped since 2001, we'd like to think it's because of the increased security in the airports".
Read another article here on it, and it's supposed to have a windows XP interface (if you couldn't tell from the video). I can (sort of) understand why the apple fans want their iPad instead of a notebook / laptop - mostly because of the simple interface / simplicity.
Why anyone would buy this instead of a desktop / laptop is beyond me. What's their advertising campaign going to be? "For $450, you can get a device with a 16-64 gig hard drive, 1 gig of ram, and no built in keyboard! It's also slightly cheaper than an iPad, so you may be able to fool your friends into thinking you have an iPad because it kind of looks like same!"
Maybe if some other countries had a serious plan to establish a moon base, the US would be more inclined to go back. If China or Japan landed a man on the moon in 5 years, I'd bet the US would invest a lot more money to establish some sort of base there. The cold war fueled most of the accomplishments in the space race - they weren't just done in the name of science.
One anonymous official said: 'We certainly don't need to go back to the moon.'" Well, they don't need to go into back into space either. They certainly COULD go back if they wanted to, it's been almost 40 years since the last landing and technology / cost / success rate would have to be significantly better than what it was in 1972. . Maybe they don't "need" to because no one else is planning to land on the moon.
From the header : "Newsday's web site redesign and relaunch reportedly cost about $4 million"
"Still publisher Terry Jimenez is unapologetic. 'That's 35 more than I would have thought it would have been"
Really? So you were expecting zero subscribers? What was the point in redesigning the sight then..?
I guess if you set your expectations really low, you can't get disappointed!
"horizontal gene transfer - in which organisms acquire genetic material "horizontally" from other organisms around them, rather than vertically from their parents or ancestors."
Genetically modified foods are like the "artificial selection" equivalent of nature / natural selection - if the transfer of genes can happen from one set of species to another, then GM crops are kinds of an accelerated / selective version of this. If I were Monsanto or another big GM food company, I'd be looking to twist this into "Genetic material gets transferred to other species in nature, what's wrong with us doing it?"
From TFA :
Suppose that a process he never wrote about, and never even imagined, has been controlling the evolution of life throughout most of the Earth's history
Slashdot Mirror
You can entertain yourself by putting in some cheesy data (but don't tread into material that might be offensive..). If you're working with some other testers, encourage them to do the same and your life will be a hell of a lot less boring. I.E. if you're working on a forum or something, make a post "I put on my wizard robe and hat" (just saw that a few posts ago, almost made me spill my coffee). I do a significant amount of testing at my job, and even though I'm often the only one testing, I still laugh sometimes just thinking of what someone else might think if they saw this or that
I work on some software where the acronym "cat" is sometimes used and my project manager hates cats, and especially lolcats. So naturally I uploaded a picture of keyboard cat as the profile pic for the primary test user / admin account for the application (so every time they logged in, they saw that picture). At the next conference call one of the consultants said "Hey I really like that picture of the cat!" and another one half jokingly said "Hey, maybe we can use that pic as the company logo!". The PM rolled his eyes and said "..If I could shoot you all right now over the phone, I would..". Best conference call ever!
Ray Kurzwell makes predictions on the past - he's not trying to sell or peddle some techno babble bullshit for profit. That's quite unfair of you to bundle this in with reiki, magnetic healing, alchemy or any other pseudo-science.
I don't necessarily believe all of his predictions (or the timing), but he's got some accurate predictions under his belt which gives him a lot more credibility than people trying to discuss "religious woo" or any other woo that turns out to be a bunch of crap.
WHERE WILL YOU PUT THIS ON AN iPHONE??
I'm sure they can make an internal antenna for the next iPhone. You'll just need to hold it right to get reception :D
Mod parent up - driving is indeed a privilege and not some inherit right (you got that backwards I think). You have no inherit right to operate your vehicle how you please. You're operating a large piece of machinery at very high speeds. The govt should be getting involved when you're significantly increasing the chances of injuring or killing other people. When this device becomes mandatory for ALL vehicles regardless of any previous convictions, then we can talk about YRO and the govt / privacy debate that slashdot loves so much. However, this device is only for people *already convicted* of a DUI - don't go crying about liberty.
The only beef I might have with this is the 1/3 of the limit - seems like a bit overkill, but I have no pity for anyone that has to install this device
There's plenty of ways to circumvent the device, but if it's in the car it still has some purpose. I'm not sure if the device actually lists your current blood alcohol level, or just tells you whether you're over or not - but if you've been drinking and blow over on the device then you're fully aware of your blood alcohol content being over the limit. If you get someone sober to blow over (i.e. scene from 40 year old virgin) or use a dust buster, then get pulled over / accident and then breathalyzed to find you're actually over the limit and DELIBERATELY circumvented the device - well that judge is going to be a lot harder on you because you knew damn well you shouldn't have been driving. Ignorance isn't an excuse, but it's better than driving drunk when you're fully aware you shouldn't have been doing it.
I've seen a few people get into vehicles where I know they claim to have had "just a few beers" (whether that's 2 or 6 who knows) and get into their vehicle thinking they're fine to drive. Maybe they just had a red bull or coffee or something and feel more alert, or mistakenly think it actually sobers them up - but they truly believe they're sober enough to drive. That device might be enough to stop those people in those cases. It certainly won't stop people that are determined to drive drunk, but it will reduce these cases
Not sure if could list a favorite... too many to choose from. I'll always remember White Water and Medieval Madness, as they were probably the hardest games to "complete" (meaning that after 6 months or so of playing, I finally achieved the final super jackpot thingy after completing all the other mini-games).
:
I find the best formula for a pinball game involves
- A good story / event actions that make you laugh (Addams Family, Medieval Madness, Fish Tales)
- A "final event" that's difficult to achieve, but not impossible (i.e. the "red line mania" final event in "High speed 2: The Getaway" wasn't that hard to get, and didn't feel that satisfied when I reached that point)
- Unique and fun video mode / mini-game (i.e. "Battle the Power" in Twilight Zone)
- WORKING FLIPPERS (nothing I hate more than hitting a ball half way up a ramp with a perfect shot and having it fall back down)
- Decent tilt setting (allows some leeway for shaking the machine a bit, but will set of the tilt if you shake it too much)
Just curious if anyone here that attended knew about the tilt settings for these games. There doesn't appear to be anything in the rules or contest information. I find that a critical part of the enjoyment and challenge of a pinball game is being allowed to wiggle the machine a bit to save that ball if necessary, at the risk of losing your turn if you shake the machine around too much. Ultra-sensitive tilt is no fun, but If the tilt detector is non-existent there's no challenge either as you could almost get infinite turns (I remember playing a couple of games where you could lift the entire machine to save your ball if it went down a side panel)
What is wrong with the university system is because we've screwed up our high school system to pretty much let -everyone- graduate, a diploma now means nothing.
I don't see how more people graduating (or a higher percentage of high school attendees) affects the entry rate into university. Universities base your admission on your marks in your core classes (at least here in Canada). When I graduated you needed a minimum of 65% to apply at the local university - Now it's 80%. If high schools are lowering the bar for a diploma, the universities will raise their standards if the applicant to admission ratio changes significantly.
Exactly. The people at the top of any profitable industry make hundreds of times more than the employees at the lowest level. Not saying that's a good thing, but the only difference between the nascar or programmer scenario, and any other industry is there's significantly fewer other levels of management also making a cut.
I used to sell booze at big sporting arenas. I'd like to see the look on my co-workers' faces if I suggested something like 'You know what, those athletes we're working for make MILLIONS, we should go on strike and demand a higher wage!"
Sure it matters what it's being used for.
I've invented a device that disables any nearby car alarm, unlocks the door and automatically starts the car with no key. I'm selling it as a way to help those that accidentally lock their keys inside their cars. Within 3 months, calls to locksmiths are down 20%, and car theft is up 5000%. Should this device still be legal to purchase and own?
Of course not, it would be made illegal to own this type of thing. A handful would buy it for it's "intended" purpose, and everyone else would buy it to break into cars. When the illegal / costly usage of a device far exceeds any gains from society from legitimate use then it shouldn't be legal to operate. At some point when the percentage of users using it for nefarious purposes is high enough (50%? 90%? 99%?) then it should be illegal.
Correct me if my probability is wrong here, but If only 0.26 of black cars get stolen (about 1 out of every 400) and we assumed that pink cars get stolen just as often as black cars, then the odds that zero black cars get stolen is (0.9976 ^ 109) - 0.769. So there's basically only about a 23% chance that at least one black car would get stolen according to those numbers given a sample size of 109. Clearly this isn't a big enough sample size to assume that your car wouldn't get stolen simply because it's pink .That 23% chance goes even lower if you give the same odds as red (at 0.16 - only a 16% chance at least one red is stolen).
I still think that the odds of a pink car getting stolen would be less than 0.26 or 0.16 though - I can't remember the last time I saw a pink car, if ever. Why steal something that stands out?
The problems affecting the Dell computers stemmed from an industrywide encounter with bad capacitors produced by Asian PC component suppliers.
I still don't get why you would bother with these calculations. Why bother with a recall at all? If you've got faulty flux capacitors, just go back in time and fix the bad capacitors. Problem solved. Surely, the price of a DeLorean is cheaper than a recall?
Nope... it's still 50% The statement "I've tossed a coin twice, at least one of which was heads, what's the probability that both were heads?" is still 50%, given that one of them was heads. The false premise here is that there are 3 possibilities :
H H
H T
T H
when in fact there are 4 :
H h
h H
T h
h T
The lowercase h represents the one that's guaranteed heads. The false assumption here is that equal weight is given to H / h, when in fact it represents 2 possible choices - the result being discussed where "at least one of which was heads" could have been the first toss or second toss.
If the first toss was the heads being referred to, then the 2nd toss could be either heads or tails (h H or h T). If the second toss was the heads being referred to, then the first toss could be either heads or tails (H h or T h). Either way you look at it, it's still 50%
After the wormhole plunge in the 4th movie, I was a little worried they'd be somewhere new with only their core characters if more new episodes came out. Nice to know Zapp Brannigan is still around.
That won't work. If we've learned anything recently about solutions to catastrophes / disasters, then the correct solution is to plug up this hole with golf balls and tires.
When I buy some blank CDs so that I can give friends a copy of my music (music that I created myself) - it really pisses me off having to pay a tax that goes to OTHER artists because it's assumed that I'll be using it for pirated music. That's assuming it actually goes to the other artists.
I'm certainly not receiving any of these funds as a "recording artist" (I use that term loosely, as I've never had an official recording contract, just made my own stuff & posted it online or given cds to friends & fans). Why the hell should I have to pay other artists for a freaking blank CD?!? Fuck this tax.
The Chakrabarty case is one of the great judicial moments in world history. And the public was totally unaware it was actually happening as a process was being engaged. General Electric and Professor Chakrabarty went to the patent office with a little microbe that eats up oil spills. They said they had modified this microbe in the laboratory, and therefore it was an invention. The patent office and the U.S. Government took at look at this "invention"; they said, 'No way. The patent statutes don't cover living things. This is not an invention". Turned down. Then, General Electric and Doctor Chakrabarty appealed to the U.S. Customs Court of Appeal. And, to everyone's surprise, by a 3-to-2 decision, they overrode the patent office. They said, 'This microbe looks more like a detergent, or a reagent, than a horse or a honeybee". I laugh because they didn't understand basic biology; it looked like a chemical to them. Had it had an antenna, or eyes, or wings, or legs, it would never have crossed their table and been patented. Then the patent office appealed. And what the public should realize now is the patent office was very clear that you can't patent life. My organization provided the main amicus curiae brief. "If you allow the patent on this microbe," we argued, "it means that without any congressional guidance or public discussion, corporations will own the blueprints of life". When they made the decision, we lost by 5-to-4, and Chief Justice Warren Berger said, "Sure, some of these are big issues but we think this is a small decision". 7 Years later the U.S. Patent Office issued a 1 sentence decree, "You can patent anything in the world that's alive, except a full-birth human being". We've all been hearing about the announcement that we have mapped the human genome. But what the public doesn't know is now there's this great race by genomic companies and biotech companies and life science companies to find the treasure in the map. The treasure are the individual genes that make up the blueprint of the human race. Every time they capture a gene and isolate it, these biotech companies claim it as intellectual property. The breast cancer gene, the cystic fibrosis gene, it goes on and on and on. If this goes unchallenged in the world community within less than 10 years a handful of global companies will own, directly, or through license, the actual genes that make up the evolution of our species. And they're now beginning to patent the genomes of every other creature on this planet. In the age of biology the politics is going to sort out between those who believe life first has intrinsic value, and therefore we should choose technologies and commercial venues that honor the intrinsic value. And then we're going to have people who believe, "Look, life is a simple utility, it's commercial fare", and they will line up with the idea to let the marketplace be the ultimate arbiter of all of the age of biology.
Presenting multiple contrasting theories with discussion about both would seem to be beneficial.
That is why this was written. The whole concept of "alternate theory to evolution" is not science and does not belong in a science classroom. ID or FSMism is not a theory in scientific terms.
Science is the teaching of facts and accepted theories. No science class teaches the alternate theory of anything. You don't learn about alchemy in chemistry classes, you don't learn about astrology in astronomy, you don't learn about reiki, natural healing, voodoo etc in biology / med school.
Bikes are already banned from the sidewalks in many places, which makes absolutely no sense...
Ever try riding a bike downtown on a sidewalk during business hours? Constantly weaving through dozens of people each minute won't allow you to reach a very high speed, and you run a much higher risk of crashing into someone, as pedestrian movements can be a lot more random and sporadic (i.e. riding behind someone that just stops and turns around, people suddenly exiting parked cars or buildings) than cars, which generally travel in their lanes.
I'd prefer to ride on a sidewalk as much as possible, as getting run over by a pedestrian is a lot less worse for me than getting run over by a vehicle (paying extra attention to right turns and left turning vehicles when crossing intersections). Riding on the road when the sidewalk is empty seems like a needless risk too. Sidewalk-only riding simply doesn't work everywhere, and I'll need to ride on the road sometimes to get to my destination in the fastest possible time.
What high risk?
How many people have died thanks to terrorist incidents on aircraft in the last decade? How many people hove flown in aircraft? Divide the first number by the second to get the risk and you'll see it's a very small number indeed.
Unfortunately, this is just the kind of data that airport and security officials will use to justify the excessive searching. "The number of people that have died as a result of terrorist incidents has significantly dropped since 2001, we'd like to think it's because of the increased security in the airports".
Read another article here on it, and it's supposed to have a windows XP interface (if you couldn't tell from the video). I can (sort of) understand why the apple fans want their iPad instead of a notebook / laptop - mostly because of the simple interface / simplicity.
Why anyone would buy this instead of a desktop / laptop is beyond me. What's their advertising campaign going to be? "For $450, you can get a device with a 16-64 gig hard drive, 1 gig of ram, and no built in keyboard! It's also slightly cheaper than an iPad, so you may be able to fool your friends into thinking you have an iPad because it kind of looks like same!"
Maybe if some other countries had a serious plan to establish a moon base, the US would be more inclined to go back. If China or Japan landed a man on the moon in 5 years, I'd bet the US would invest a lot more money to establish some sort of base there. The cold war fueled most of the accomplishments in the space race - they weren't just done in the name of science.
One anonymous official said: 'We certainly don't need to go back to the moon.'" Well, they don't need to go into back into space either. They certainly COULD go back if they wanted to, it's been almost 40 years since the last landing and technology / cost / success rate would have to be significantly better than what it was in 1972. . Maybe they don't "need" to because no one else is planning to land on the moon.
From the header :
"Newsday's web site redesign and relaunch reportedly cost about $4 million"
"Still publisher Terry Jimenez is unapologetic. 'That's 35 more than I would have thought it would have been"
Really? So you were expecting zero subscribers? What was the point in redesigning the sight then..? I guess if you set your expectations really low, you can't get disappointed!
"horizontal gene transfer - in which organisms acquire genetic material "horizontally" from other organisms around them, rather than vertically from their parents or ancestors."
Genetically modified foods are like the "artificial selection" equivalent of nature / natural selection - if the transfer of genes can happen from one set of species to another, then GM crops are kinds of an accelerated / selective version of this. If I were Monsanto or another big GM food company, I'd be looking to twist this into "Genetic material gets transferred to other species in nature, what's wrong with us doing it?"
From TFA : Suppose that a process he never wrote about, and never even imagined, has been controlling the evolution of life throughout most of the Earth's history
Intelligent Design?