Judging by his last "attempt", he'll get fairly high, but not that high, in his rocket before some mechanical problem causes a spectacular failure that he survives unhurt.
The problem is noise level. And it's a problem intentionally caused by as least some of the posters. Their goal is to shout so loudly that no one else can be heard. They are often successful. One of the benefits of moderation systems is that they mitigate the problem, but they cannot solve it.
If there is a solution, it's not obvious. Simple "solutions" tend to enclose everyone in an "echo chamber" where their pre-existing opinions and biases are reinforced without regard to their fit with reality.
It's actually both. It *is* a difficult problem, but the pharma companies are also reluctant to work on cures. They need to recoup the development expenses, and people keep complaining if too much is charged for a dose. So it's much better if you get them dependent, so they don't dare cause you to just withdraw from the market.
Both effects are well documented. It's not just one. Eliminating either would produce improved results.
That said, large numbers of companies have invested huge amounts of effort trying to cure or treat altzheimers. Some companies have gone broke doing it. So who pays for the failed attempts? It has to happen.
Yes, the system is broken. But simple fixes won't work. My thought is the development should be separated from vending into totally separate entities, but then how is the development paid for? And how are the directions for research chosen?
Yes, but... circumstances aren't all the same, and sometimes it *is* the fault of externalities. One needs to consider that it's been specifically designed to be as addictive as possible...and it's a refinement of prior attempts at such addictive design which have produced such things as Slashdot and FaceBook. Also that most kids really don't want to study anyway, so even a moderate distraction is normally sufficient.
FWIW, I've never even looked at Fortnite. I've presumed that it would have an EULA that I wouldn't agree to. So this is just based around observable trends. But I agree that parents *will* always find something external to blame their kids behavior on. That's what got Socrates killed. (If we can believe Plato, who was not an unbiased observer.) But that doesn't mean that such things don't happen, and externalities are not always neutral.
The real, possibly insoluble, problem is that all their friends are involved in the game. This is the Facebook problem all over again, but possibly in an even more malignant form. Network effects are difficult to deal with.
I'm sure it *is* a press release. Probably based on one posted on a web page.
I didn't follow any links, because every time I've checked swift didn't work reasonably on Linux. (IIRC, there were officially declared ways to do it, but scant documentation of them, and little explanation of what you'd actually end up with if you did them. And no reports from any Linux users who had done that and were happy with the results. Objective C had much better compatibility...of course, that one didn't start with Apple.)
FWIW, I've always regretted that Objective C didn't have a better Linux support community, one good enough that learning the language would have been worthwhile. Swift evokes only a shadow of that reaction.
The case is not supposed to even end up in front of a judge unless the prosecutor thinks it's a valid case. Either this rule was not followed (probable) or the prosecution didn't bother to investigate (also probable) or both.
So it was a gross miscarriage of justice (though not as bad as many). And the police did not do their job properly, but neither did the prosecuting attorney. Both should be severely censured...being stripped of right to the bar sounds right for the attorney, and being fired for incompetence sounds right for the police officers. They should also be sued by the victim of their actions for recompense. Probably the supervisor of the police officer should also be sued. Responsibility should rest with the individuals, but should include, to a *somewhat* lesser degree those who maintain an environment that facilitates or encourages such actions.
I doubt, however, that our current legal system would allow that to happen.
It's not fraud if they really believe it, and a lot of them do. You wouldn't believe how ignorant some preachers are. I went to a service a couple of weeks ago and the preacher was so ignorant of Bible history that he claimed that in the time of King David the Jews ruled the entire world. He can't have understood his claim, but the Bible itself contradicts that.
Well, some beliefs are less whacky than others, and yours at least has the virtual of being unusual.
FWIW, there *are* "secrets" held by some versions of FreeMasons, but most of them are actually easily accessible in various sources. (Try Carl Jung on alchemy for a starter, and then read Robert Anton Wilson's "Masks of the Illumanati". That should give you a good basis for further explanation. Crowley's "Magick in Theory and Practice" is another good starting point...but if you don't read Jung first you may misunderstand it.
That said, (part of) the purpose (value?) of the secret societies is the purpose of any good technical school: They offer a programmed course of instruction into things that you wouldn't likely learn as an autodidact. And, as with any durable institution, their main purpose is to preserve themselves. But the secrets are really out in the open for anyone who really goes looking. What you find will depend on what you bring to the game. (See Jung's Collective Unconscious. He got it wrong, because he didn't understand evolution, so he made it Lamarckian, but the basic idea is correct. He also got a lot of causal relations backwards, and didn't understanding how systems of encoding act to preserve messages and prevent degradation by noise. But he was more accurate than almost anyone else who has written formally about his area. [Well, *some* of those who followed him have corrected a few of his mistakes, and not added too many new ones, but none of those are as comprehensive.])
It's been a long time since Esquire meant the squire to a knight, and most knights don't know how to hold a lance.
IIRC, even in British law trial by combat has been ruled invalid ever since a guy showed up in armor and on a horse. He won the case, but the process was quickly disallowed.
Unh... Dorsai reference? All my mental banks pull up for "alternate law" is the Chantry Guild. But I'd really like to understand why you think that relates.
The news is that they're doing it outside of approved channels. You're supposed to endow a chair or build a building or some such. And not hide behind a deceptive third party. (But the deception may be cheaper if you don't get caught.)
Sorry, but this is plausible. It would need careful calculation, but it's plausible. My reasoning is thus: Sound (in air) originates as a wave of compression, which squeezes things away from it, followed by a wave of de-compression, which allows things to return. If the sound encounters a barrier (necessary to create a phonon), then the pressurization still squeezes molecules out, but the barrier prevents easy return, so the mass of the air within the phonon will be less than the mass of the air away from the sound wave, and therefore it will be pulled less strongly towards the closest gravitational source.
So. Plausible "negative mass" within the phonon when contrasted with external to the phonon. Not an absolute negative mass, but a relative negative mass caused by a lesser average density.
That said, I'm not sure how to translate this into waves moving through an incompressible medium, but it's been a long time since I took physics, and acoustics got only minor coverage when I took it.
IIUC, the investigation into the accident has barely started. So the only reasonable decisions would be on some variant of "the precautionary principle". If the FAA is making a decision now, then one needs to wonder just who or what their use of "the precautionary principle" is protecting.
Actually, I ended up with a smart phone because I was in a hurry, and didn't have time to shop. I find it much worse as a phone than my prior phone, which was designed as a phone. The address book is useful, and the clock, i.e., appointment reminder is useful. The rest....no.
Next time I'm going to (attempt to) ensure I have time to get something that's better as a phone, and forget this idiocy of having it also be a camera and pocket computer. The screens too small for the second function, and a larger screen would make it less portable. And I *FAR* prefer a real keyboard.
FWIW, Ireland may be further North that Washington State of the US, but it's not *much* further North. Washington is one of the most northerly states in the US.
Yes, but that would better be accomplished when the sun is actually up. So schedule an appropriate recess, or PE period. And the timing of that could be adjusted for local conditions.
But the railroads are less politically powerful than they used to be, and the airlines all schedule via computer, so they can adapt with minimal problems. (Probably less that an MSWindows update.)
You're acting like those times are set in stone. If parents don't like the timing, take it up with the local school board. Washington hasn't grabbed control over THAT part of the school system.
An earlier response from someone who appeared to have read the article said the doctor wasn't in the hospital at the time he got the MRI results. He not only wasn't someone the family had never met, he, himself, may never have met the patient. He was the MRI specialist. And he didn't get those results until he got home. So....(a plausible scenario) The guy's going to die soon, definitely within the next week, but could be before morning for all I know. Should I wait until I get in to work to pass on the news? Should I go through channels? What? Well, I've got a video conference capability, so why don't I tell them as quickly as I can, and as personally as I can.
For some reason the term telefactor has never caught on. That's the correct name, if you don't want to just say computer screen, or video conference. (Did it have manipulators? Then it's a telefactor.)
I think you're wrong when you say "...or she's got a very winnable lawsuit...". Courts have been coming to a lot of very strange decisions recently. The word "corrupt" often seems just one step from being proven. Why the hell should "round cornered rectangles" be copyrightable, when the damn things were used back in the 1940's by large numbers of people, and probably date back before the typewriter, to pick just one very strange decision.
Having what *should* be an airtight case doesn't mean anything when you're going up against someone who has an in with the decision maker. So they're telling her "Do you feel lucky?", probably while readying a spare six-shooter.
I don't necessarily believe her story, but I sure don't believe all the idiots who proclaim that if she's innocent she'll sue them.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean it's not turtles?
Judging by his last "attempt", he'll get fairly high, but not that high, in his rocket before some mechanical problem causes a spectacular failure that he survives unhurt.
The problem is noise level. And it's a problem intentionally caused by as least some of the posters. Their goal is to shout so loudly that no one else can be heard. They are often successful. One of the benefits of moderation systems is that they mitigate the problem, but they cannot solve it.
If there is a solution, it's not obvious. Simple "solutions" tend to enclose everyone in an "echo chamber" where their pre-existing opinions and biases are reinforced without regard to their fit with reality.
It's actually both. It *is* a difficult problem, but the pharma companies are also reluctant to work on cures. They need to recoup the development expenses, and people keep complaining if too much is charged for a dose. So it's much better if you get them dependent, so they don't dare cause you to just withdraw from the market.
Both effects are well documented. It's not just one. Eliminating either would produce improved results.
That said, large numbers of companies have invested huge amounts of effort trying to cure or treat altzheimers. Some companies have gone broke doing it. So who pays for the failed attempts? It has to happen.
Yes, the system is broken. But simple fixes won't work. My thought is the development should be separated from vending into totally separate entities, but then how is the development paid for? And how are the directions for research chosen?
Yes, but...
circumstances aren't all the same, and sometimes it *is* the fault of externalities. One needs to consider that it's been specifically designed to be as addictive as possible...and it's a refinement of prior attempts at such addictive design which have produced such things as Slashdot and FaceBook. Also that most kids really don't want to study anyway, so even a moderate distraction is normally sufficient.
FWIW, I've never even looked at Fortnite. I've presumed that it would have an EULA that I wouldn't agree to. So this is just based around observable trends. But I agree that parents *will* always find something external to blame their kids behavior on. That's what got Socrates killed. (If we can believe Plato, who was not an unbiased observer.) But that doesn't mean that such things don't happen, and externalities are not always neutral.
The real, possibly insoluble, problem is that all their friends are involved in the game. This is the Facebook problem all over again, but possibly in an even more malignant form. Network effects are difficult to deal with.
I'm sure it *is* a press release. Probably based on one posted on a web page.
I didn't follow any links, because every time I've checked swift didn't work reasonably on Linux. (IIRC, there were officially declared ways to do it, but scant documentation of them, and little explanation of what you'd actually end up with if you did them. And no reports from any Linux users who had done that and were happy with the results. Objective C had much better compatibility...of course, that one didn't start with Apple.)
FWIW, I've always regretted that Objective C didn't have a better Linux support community, one good enough that learning the language would have been worthwhile. Swift evokes only a shadow of that reaction.
The case is not supposed to even end up in front of a judge unless the prosecutor thinks it's a valid case. Either this rule was not followed (probable) or the prosecution didn't bother to investigate (also probable) or both.
So it was a gross miscarriage of justice (though not as bad as many). And the police did not do their job properly, but neither did the prosecuting attorney. Both should be severely censured...being stripped of right to the bar sounds right for the attorney, and being fired for incompetence sounds right for the police officers. They should also be sued by the victim of their actions for recompense. Probably the supervisor of the police officer should also be sued. Responsibility should rest with the individuals, but should include, to a *somewhat* lesser degree those who maintain an environment that facilitates or encourages such actions.
I doubt, however, that our current legal system would allow that to happen.
It's not fraud if they really believe it, and a lot of them do. You wouldn't believe how ignorant some preachers are. I went to a service a couple of weeks ago and the preacher was so ignorant of Bible history that he claimed that in the time of King David the Jews ruled the entire world. He can't have understood his claim, but the Bible itself contradicts that.
Well, some beliefs are less whacky than others, and yours at least has the virtual of being unusual.
FWIW, there *are* "secrets" held by some versions of FreeMasons, but most of them are actually easily accessible in various sources. (Try Carl Jung on alchemy for a starter, and then read Robert Anton Wilson's "Masks of the Illumanati". That should give you a good basis for further explanation. Crowley's "Magick in Theory and Practice" is another good starting point...but if you don't read Jung first you may misunderstand it.
That said, (part of) the purpose (value?) of the secret societies is the purpose of any good technical school: They offer a programmed course of instruction into things that you wouldn't likely learn as an autodidact. And, as with any durable institution, their main purpose is to preserve themselves. But the secrets are really out in the open for anyone who really goes looking. What you find will depend on what you bring to the game. (See Jung's Collective Unconscious. He got it wrong, because he didn't understand evolution, so he made it Lamarckian, but the basic idea is correct. He also got a lot of causal relations backwards, and didn't understanding how systems of encoding act to preserve messages and prevent degradation by noise. But he was more accurate than almost anyone else who has written formally about his area. [Well, *some* of those who followed him have corrected a few of his mistakes, and not added too many new ones, but none of those are as comprehensive.])
It's been a long time since Esquire meant the squire to a knight, and most knights don't know how to hold a lance.
IIRC, even in British law trial by combat has been ruled invalid ever since a guy showed up in armor and on a horse. He won the case, but the process was quickly disallowed.
Thank you. Someone please mod parent up as informative.
Unh... Dorsai reference? All my mental banks pull up for "alternate law" is the Chantry Guild. But I'd really like to understand why you think that relates.
And do you also write "N.A.S.A."?
The news is that they're doing it outside of approved channels. You're supposed to endow a chair or build a building or some such. And not hide behind a deceptive third party. (But the deception may be cheaper if you don't get caught.)
Sorry, but this is plausible. It would need careful calculation, but it's plausible. My reasoning is thus:
Sound (in air) originates as a wave of compression, which squeezes things away from it, followed by a wave of de-compression, which allows things to return. If the sound encounters a barrier (necessary to create a phonon), then the pressurization still squeezes molecules out, but the barrier prevents easy return, so the mass of the air within the phonon will be less than the mass of the air away from the sound wave, and therefore it will be pulled less strongly towards the closest gravitational source.
So. Plausible "negative mass" within the phonon when contrasted with external to the phonon. Not an absolute negative mass, but a relative negative mass caused by a lesser average density.
That said, I'm not sure how to translate this into waves moving through an incompressible medium, but it's been a long time since I took physics, and acoustics got only minor coverage when I took it.
IIUC, the investigation into the accident has barely started. So the only reasonable decisions would be on some variant of "the precautionary principle". If the FAA is making a decision now, then one needs to wonder just who or what their use of "the precautionary principle" is protecting.
Perhaps not. Red Hat effectively controls a lot of FOSS software, as proven by the prevalence of Gnome3 and systemD against widespread disgust.
Actually, I ended up with a smart phone because I was in a hurry, and didn't have time to shop. I find it much worse as a phone than my prior phone, which was designed as a phone. The address book is useful, and the clock, i.e., appointment reminder is useful. The rest....no.
Next time I'm going to (attempt to) ensure I have time to get something that's better as a phone, and forget this idiocy of having it also be a camera and pocket computer. The screens too small for the second function, and a larger screen would make it less portable. And I *FAR* prefer a real keyboard.
FWIW, Ireland may be further North that Washington State of the US, but it's not *much* further North. Washington is one of the most northerly states in the US.
Yes, but that would better be accomplished when the sun is actually up. So schedule an appropriate recess, or PE period. And the timing of that could be adjusted for local conditions.
But the railroads are less politically powerful than they used to be, and the airlines all schedule via computer, so they can adapt with minimal problems. (Probably less that an MSWindows update.)
You're acting like those times are set in stone. If parents don't like the timing, take it up with the local school board. Washington hasn't grabbed control over THAT part of the school system.
An earlier response from someone who appeared to have read the article said the doctor wasn't in the hospital at the time he got the MRI results. He not only wasn't someone the family had never met, he, himself, may never have met the patient. He was the MRI specialist. And he didn't get those results until he got home.
So....(a plausible scenario)
The guy's going to die soon, definitely within the next week, but could be before morning for all I know. Should I wait until I get in to work to pass on the news? Should I go through channels? What? Well, I've got a video conference capability, so why don't I tell them as quickly as I can, and as personally as I can.
For some reason the term telefactor has never caught on. That's the correct name, if you don't want to just say computer screen, or video conference. (Did it have manipulators? Then it's a telefactor.)
I think you're wrong when you say "...or she's got a very winnable lawsuit...". Courts have been coming to a lot of very strange decisions recently. The word "corrupt" often seems just one step from being proven. Why the hell should "round cornered rectangles" be copyrightable, when the damn things were used back in the 1940's by large numbers of people, and probably date back before the typewriter, to pick just one very strange decision.
Having what *should* be an airtight case doesn't mean anything when you're going up against someone who has an in with the decision maker. So they're telling her "Do you feel lucky?", probably while readying a spare six-shooter.
I don't necessarily believe her story, but I sure don't believe all the idiots who proclaim that if she's innocent she'll sue them.