The questions you SHOULD be asking are "Have the police solved and prevented all the REAL crimes that are problematic for society, such as meth use, homicide, and bribery? Is that why they're moving on to 'protecting us from radioactive people?' Has there been a rash of people exibiting high levels of radiation and committing crimes using their radioactive superpowers I haven't heard of? Why then are the police wasting time and taxpayer money investigating radiation?"
Sounds like a story of some politicians and some manufacturer of radioactivity detectors trading favors.
Someone will figure out how they are doing there and modify the swarms so it becomes ineffective.
This much is so obvious, I have to ask: WHY is MS funding this? Once they use it, it will become ineffective after a short interval. Maybe they are going to wait to use it until windows 8 comes out or is leaked, thinking that if it prevents piracy of it for just a month, they'll save the money they put into developing this?
Because if they just have money to spend on technology that is doomed to fail, I'm developing this machine to turn lead into gold, I'm looking for some research funds to make it work...
I understand, but the only way to solve police-state behavior like that is to expose it as much as possible. If the government forces you to protest with a mask or not at all, they'll be able to shut down protests more easily with the cointelpro tactics. If you get profiled and harassed, make a stink about it. That's the only way they'll stop.
I'm not judging though. Protesting injustices with a mask on is still better than not protesting injustices at all.
This is a point that is going to be lost in the debate. The ability to wear masks doesn't really help legitimate protesting (at least not in places where you're not going to get lynched for standing up for your rights). With protests here, the ones wearing the masks are generally stupid entitled kids who just want an excuse to smash stuff and steal things, and law enforcement doing cointelpro, posing as protestors, starting violence, so that the protests can be put down with a vengeance.
That being said, if the government really wanted to stop that, they'd stop giving people a reason to protest, and would prevent their police from doing scummy things like that.
There are creationists here, and just as weird as non-creationist Californians, but they don't have a hold on the school board or local governments here like they do in other states. Still, it only takes one asshole family of creationists to throw a fit that their religious rights are being oppressed by their kids hearing the word evolution.
As a liberal, I'm wondering why you lumped creationists in with the right. Even the Christian right seems unfair.
I'd question whether coddling much of a problem in education as opposed to, say, parents having to work longer hours due to the war on the middle and poor classes.
I'm not sure how net neutrality, TPB, lobbyists, and religious nutjobs are connected.
I can see the links between pirate bay being blocked and lobbyists, but the line from either to net neutrality I'm a little blurry on. I was under the impression that was copyright law and didn't overlap much with ISPs charging content providers more for preferential treatment.
The religious nutjobs I really don't see the connection between, but given that they're just bad news in general, I'll go ahead and assume they're not doing anything positive on the issue.
Our internet is half their speed, and I'm guessing that we have, proportionally, less than half the options for internet providers that they do.
Someone remind me of the specifics of when we gave telecos a bunch of taxpayer money to speed up our internet, and they, naturally, gave it to their CEOs and investors, and are now complaining they don't have the infrastructure to not throttle and cap and can't possibly afford to upgrade?
The dutch probably didn't do that. Just a wild guess.
You're saying some people who are urging us to fight a real problem have some special interest in it. I suppose that would be a conspiracy, but the climate change skeptics I was referring to are claiming that climate change is a hoax entirely.
Furthermore, that's a scheme to make money.
You want freedoms limited? Try building a coal fire power plant. Try putting in an oil pipeline between Canada and the US. Try and drill for oil or get a lease to drill for oil on any federal land.
Now you must be the one trolling or joking. Those aren't personal freedoms.
Finally, you're presumably saying Al Gore et al are bad because they're enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else. That's what coal-fired power plants do, UNLESS you make them pay for the external costs (pollution, climate change). Which you're also arguing against.
Indeed. Every story dealing with the climate, the charge is made that climate change is a conspiracy to deprive you of your freedom. And then it's never explained who is going to be taking the freedoms and what freedoms are going to be taken.
Well, aside from comments that "they" are going to regulate your breathing. I assume those comments aren't serious though. I vaguely recall someone arguing that it was just a plan by Al Gore to get laid. Not sure how many people subscribe to that particular conspiracy theory though.
I think that's the same policy telcos have in Egypt and Syria, no?
I assume the new government in Egypt has not done anything to distinguish itself from Mubarak in that regard aside from maybe cross-their-heart, hope-to-die promising not shut down the Internet and cell phone service unless it's really really super-duper important?
I've heard that HYPOTHESIS before, but don't think I've heard it tested like this before. Anyway, scientific results should be replicated. And old wives tales and Indian ceremonies are poor bases for medicine.
There's another large portion of Americans who aspire to be nothing more than "gangstas". Even when involving a curriculum developed by non-whites and taught by non-whites, these people still insist on rejecting "the white man's education".
"Large" you say? Based on what standard?
But these days, we're talking about 60% or more of Americans who willfully and voluntarily reject a useful education. That's a recipe for disaster.
Citation needed. And some comparison needed as well.
Ineffectual? How so? At getting you a job? Sure, it's not a golden ticket, but not having a college degree is whatever the opposite of a golden ticket is. Plutonium anchor around your neck?
Ineffectual at teaching you stuff? I sure learned a lot. Aside from North Korean re-education camps, I'm not sure there's a system in the world that could teach half the college kids anything.
I would have thought you were a shill, until I heard this was managed by the same system that is managing google voice. Even computers should not be texting while driving.
(Disclaimer: I did not hear that. It was a lame joke.)
There's a lot of "pruning," where many brain cells die as the brain is being formed. The thinking, as far as I've heard, is that you want neurons that aren't properly connected to die off, or else you'll get chaos. A damaged neuron could also potentially be giving aberrant signals that could mess up the system as well.
Slashdot Mirror
On the plus side, this probably means you're less likely to get propositioned by a the government while you're just trying to do your buisiness...
The questions you SHOULD be asking are "Have the police solved and prevented all the REAL crimes that are problematic for society, such as meth use, homicide, and bribery? Is that why they're moving on to 'protecting us from radioactive people?' Has there been a rash of people exibiting high levels of radiation and committing crimes using their radioactive superpowers I haven't heard of? Why then are the police wasting time and taxpayer money investigating radiation?"
Sounds like a story of some politicians and some manufacturer of radioactivity detectors trading favors.
As someone who never really used text messages anyway, I'm worried what NEW crazy pricing schemes they'll come up with.
Someone will figure out how they are doing there and modify the swarms so it becomes ineffective.
This much is so obvious, I have to ask: WHY is MS funding this? Once they use it, it will become ineffective after a short interval. Maybe they are going to wait to use it until windows 8 comes out or is leaked, thinking that if it prevents piracy of it for just a month, they'll save the money they put into developing this?
Because if they just have money to spend on technology that is doomed to fail, I'm developing this machine to turn lead into gold, I'm looking for some research funds to make it work...
I understand, but the only way to solve police-state behavior like that is to expose it as much as possible. If the government forces you to protest with a mask or not at all, they'll be able to shut down protests more easily with the cointelpro tactics. If you get profiled and harassed, make a stink about it. That's the only way they'll stop.
I'm not judging though. Protesting injustices with a mask on is still better than not protesting injustices at all.
This is a point that is going to be lost in the debate. The ability to wear masks doesn't really help legitimate protesting (at least not in places where you're not going to get lynched for standing up for your rights). With protests here, the ones wearing the masks are generally stupid entitled kids who just want an excuse to smash stuff and steal things, and law enforcement doing cointelpro, posing as protestors, starting violence, so that the protests can be put down with a vengeance.
That being said, if the government really wanted to stop that, they'd stop giving people a reason to protest, and would prevent their police from doing scummy things like that.
but it likely won't survive through first reading anyways
I said that about the patriot act here in the US. So...
There are creationists here, and just as weird as non-creationist Californians, but they don't have a hold on the school board or local governments here like they do in other states. Still, it only takes one asshole family of creationists to throw a fit that their religious rights are being oppressed by their kids hearing the word evolution. As a liberal, I'm wondering why you lumped creationists in with the right. Even the Christian right seems unfair.
I'd question whether coddling much of a problem in education as opposed to, say, parents having to work longer hours due to the war on the middle and poor classes.
To add to that, the public is going to stop trusting science based on published clinical trials they can't access anyway?
What's that going to look like? People going to go Amish?
Aw, you beat me to it!
you can't expect fiber optic connections in rural areas
Does that mean I CAN expect fiber optic connections to me, living in a non-rural area and still getting about the US average?
AT&T and comcast will be disappointed to hear that.
I'm not sure how net neutrality, TPB, lobbyists, and religious nutjobs are connected.
I can see the links between pirate bay being blocked and lobbyists, but the line from either to net neutrality I'm a little blurry on. I was under the impression that was copyright law and didn't overlap much with ISPs charging content providers more for preferential treatment.
The religious nutjobs I really don't see the connection between, but given that they're just bad news in general, I'll go ahead and assume they're not doing anything positive on the issue.
Our internet is half their speed, and I'm guessing that we have, proportionally, less than half the options for internet providers that they do.
Someone remind me of the specifics of when we gave telecos a bunch of taxpayer money to speed up our internet, and they, naturally, gave it to their CEOs and investors, and are now complaining they don't have the infrastructure to not throttle and cap and can't possibly afford to upgrade?
The dutch probably didn't do that. Just a wild guess.
I didn't realize that we lived in a socialist economy
I see I have indeed been trolled. Well, good job I guess? May your life measurably improve as a result of me foolishly taking you seriously.
Furthermore, that's a scheme to make money.
You want freedoms limited? Try building a coal fire power plant. Try putting in an oil pipeline between Canada and the US. Try and drill for oil or get a lease to drill for oil on any federal land.
Now you must be the one trolling or joking. Those aren't personal freedoms.
Finally, you're presumably saying Al Gore et al are bad because they're enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else. That's what coal-fired power plants do, UNLESS you make them pay for the external costs (pollution, climate change). Which you're also arguing against.
a completly lock down on personal freedom
Indeed. Every story dealing with the climate, the charge is made that climate change is a conspiracy to deprive you of your freedom. And then it's never explained who is going to be taking the freedoms and what freedoms are going to be taken.
Well, aside from comments that "they" are going to regulate your breathing. I assume those comments aren't serious though. I vaguely recall someone arguing that it was just a plan by Al Gore to get laid. Not sure how many people subscribe to that particular conspiracy theory though.
I am strongly ambivalent on this story.
Will this help prevent global climate change? To quote Futurama: "Neutral President: All I know is my gut says maybe."
I think that's the same policy telcos have in Egypt and Syria, no?
I assume the new government in Egypt has not done anything to distinguish itself from Mubarak in that regard aside from maybe cross-their-heart, hope-to-die promising not shut down the Internet and cell phone service unless it's really really super-duper important?
Yes, because the only observations that are true is what comes from a lab, right?
Please, point out where I said that.
I've heard that HYPOTHESIS before, but don't think I've heard it tested like this before. Anyway, scientific results should be replicated. And old wives tales and Indian ceremonies are poor bases for medicine.
Not sure it's fair to say they're failing because they can't compete with google. Google has a much bigger budget, and hires the best, right?
There's another large portion of Americans who aspire to be nothing more than "gangstas". Even when involving a curriculum developed by non-whites and taught by non-whites, these people still insist on rejecting "the white man's education".
"Large" you say? Based on what standard?
But these days, we're talking about 60% or more of Americans who willfully and voluntarily reject a useful education. That's a recipe for disaster.
Citation needed. And some comparison needed as well.
Ineffectual? How so? At getting you a job? Sure, it's not a golden ticket, but not having a college degree is whatever the opposite of a golden ticket is. Plutonium anchor around your neck?
Ineffectual at teaching you stuff? I sure learned a lot. Aside from North Korean re-education camps, I'm not sure there's a system in the world that could teach half the college kids anything.
I would have thought you were a shill, until I heard this was managed by the same system that is managing google voice. Even computers should not be texting while driving.
(Disclaimer: I did not hear that. It was a lame joke.)
There's a lot of "pruning," where many brain cells die as the brain is being formed. The thinking, as far as I've heard, is that you want neurons that aren't properly connected to die off, or else you'll get chaos. A damaged neuron could also potentially be giving aberrant signals that could mess up the system as well.