I'd be far more apt to believe that any sort of stunted development in a child was due to malnutrition, especially in one that was admittedly suffering from 'extreme neglect'. This 'study', as it stands, should be binned.
Explain this to unemployed American manufacturing workers who perceive a need for income. Not everyone has the ability or means to change careers, especially when there aren't many jobs to be found in other sectors these days. With the way the economy is, why would we not welcome any and all domestic employment opportunities?
That's an interesting way to rationalize this. "The old one was flawed too, so this is now the new normal. Get over it". My Samsung phone doesn't have this problem, even when taking pictures directly of the sun. My old Blackberry didn't have this problem.. so what's Apple's excuse?
We're still going to eat beef. We're still going to slaughter the cows. If we create synthetic leather, do they suggest we just throw the real stuff away? I doubt cattle are killed strictly for their skin and all the meat is discarded, so synthetic parts don't really save them from getting the axe anyway.
If portability isn't a concern, you can easily stripe 3 standard HDD's and get near the same performance as an SSD for the same cost but with higher capacity.
And 3x the potential for data loss. Have fun listening to the whine of 3 platter motors and the clatter of 3 heads seeking at once, as well; SSDs have the added benefit of being completely silent.
Many in the deaf community are against technologies that restore hearing.... Deafness is not generally considered a condition that needs to be fixed.
Well bully for them. What about the 'few' that would like their hearing back? Tell them to quit being babies and live with it? Nobody is going to force this on those who don't want it, so at least make it an option for those who do.
Exactly this. I drive the speed I'm going to drive regardless of what the little white sign says. It may be 80, or it may be 50, depending on conditions. These arbitrary numbers do nothing to control the actual flow of traffic. Good luck getting the powers-that-be to raise the limit in your local jurisdiction, though. When you set it so low that practically everyone is breaking the law, it makes it rather easy to boost income through citations; fish in a barrel. I got pulled over for going 75 on the freeway a few weeks ago, when that was the average speed of traffic at the time. It would have been far more dangerous to have been going 65 (the legal limit), as I'd be a moving obstacle for the rest of the drivers to have to avoid, in the dark, while many of them are intoxicated.
Biggest problem I have with government is it spends whatever it likes, regardless how much I pay in taxes.
This. Why should we feel morally compelled to offer up MORE of our hard earned money to a group of people who are completely unable to responsibly handle what we already give them? Even if we turned over our entire yearly incomes and lived off the land, they'd still find a way to utterly piss it all away and we'd be in the same boat. Blaming *us* for the state's financial woes is blaming the victim. The state needs to get its own shit straight before they go pointing the finger at anybody else.
I would love to step aside, but people keep trying to forcibly involve my money in such projects.
When you pay taxes, it becomes 'our' money. You have no say in where it goes, so why do you assume 'your' money only goes to fund things you don't like? It's people like you that loudly protest something like this, but then happily and quietly reap the rewards that result from it. Do you have any idea the amazing things that were discovered via the space program over the last 50+ years? How about the incredible advances in technology that WWII brought us? Neither of those things were cheap or easy, but society has greatly benefited from their discoveries. Plus, spending resources on science and adventure is a hell of a lot more palatable than blowing it on corporate bailouts and foreign conflicts, yes?
I bet this is what people said 100 years ago about putting a man on the moon. Think of all the incredible things that have been done or discovered in the last century. Or, would you rather we not put the time and resources into an idea this grand and incredible, and say to hell with all the amazing things we may discover along the way, regardless of its outcome? My country's successes weren't accomplished by the naysayers; step aside, sir.
I am kinda caught between 'shouldn't being a patent holder be considered a conflict of interests and caused the defense to disqualify the person?' and 'wait, a jury member with actual knowledge of a field? that is almost like a peer!'.
I wouldn't really consider patent holding a 'field', but unlike most other professions these days, there usually isn't such a thick line between 'sides'. Patent holders, whether they like it or not, have been segregated by the media into the class of victim as of late. Putting a patent holder on this jury is just suspect from the get go. Of course his interests are detached from the specific case, and there's nothing stopping him from giving an impartial verdict, but it just raises too many questions for comfort. It's not as if the majority of the people in the pool are patent holders and it's just an unavoidable reality that one has to be picked...
Did NASA ever have a rocket explode and kill 48 of the Engineers?
No, but we did lose 3 astronauts on the ground and 14 in the air in three separate events. We were not without our colossal failures either.
You need insurance because the risks while driving is high, and you need a licence so that you can actually prove you know how to drive.
You need proof of financial responsibility to drive. This can be in the form of insurance, OR a deposit left with the DMV. Insurance is just the easier way for the common man to afford this. The level of insurance required to satisfy the financial responsibility requirement (at least in CA) is usually a far cry short of the actual costs incurred in an injury collision. Most people do not carry enough insurance to completely cover themselves from all financial risk, because it's become too bloody expensive to do so.
Also, a license DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROVE THAT YOU KNOW HOW TO DRIVE. It only proves you were able to pass a basic written and behind the wheel test on a single day back when you were 16ish. Spend about an hour on the freeways around Los Angeles, and tell me with a straight face that all these licensed drivers have any clue how to actually operate their vehicles in a safe manner.
At some point, a piece of rock fell from the sky and landed in what is now called Tennessee. Is there something spectacular about this particular dimple in the earth?
The Government can't force public transit on you so they'll just regulate cars to make them behave more like public transit.
I don't know where you live, but here in the outskirts of the suburbs of Los Angeles, your only real option is to drive. There is a light rail system than runs through my town, but it's absurdly expensive and takes longer to get into downtown than if you were to take your own wheels. I'd love to have a system like the Underground, or even the Metro (as long as it doesn't smell like piss!), but the government can't force us to use something that isn't there.
Reservationist: Oh, I can reserve you a flight coming back from Chicago at 5:55. Does that help?
Richard: Hi, I'm Earth. Have we met?
Reservationist: I don't think so.
Have you seen what Americans eat these days? Holy shit, that wouldn't even pass as food 100 years ago! We eat such an unhealthy assortment of food as a daily staple, I think we ought to sort out our heart disease and diabetes problems before we spend our efforts scrutinizing GMOs. GMOs may be damaging our health, but it can't be as important as addressing the obvious and immediate issues we currently face.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be far more apt to believe that any sort of stunted development in a child was due to malnutrition, especially in one that was admittedly suffering from 'extreme neglect'. This 'study', as it stands, should be binned.
Explain this to unemployed American manufacturing workers who perceive a need for income. Not everyone has the ability or means to change careers, especially when there aren't many jobs to be found in other sectors these days. With the way the economy is, why would we not welcome any and all domestic employment opportunities?
> the perceived need to bring product manufacturing back to the United States
Why would the act of bringing any sort of employment back to the states be considered a 'perceived need'?
That's an interesting way to rationalize this. "The old one was flawed too, so this is now the new normal. Get over it". My Samsung phone doesn't have this problem, even when taking pictures directly of the sun. My old Blackberry didn't have this problem.. so what's Apple's excuse?
Yes you should have the right to own a gun. No you should not own a loaded AK-47 if you live in an apartment building in a city. .
And why's that, exactly?
I seriously doubt the jihadists will be appeased merely by his temporary incarceration in an American jail.
We're still going to eat beef. We're still going to slaughter the cows. If we create synthetic leather, do they suggest we just throw the real stuff away? I doubt cattle are killed strictly for their skin and all the meat is discarded, so synthetic parts don't really save them from getting the axe anyway.
Even a little bit impossible is still entirely impossible in my book.
If portability isn't a concern, you can easily stripe 3 standard HDD's and get near the same performance as an SSD for the same cost but with higher capacity.
And 3x the potential for data loss. Have fun listening to the whine of 3 platter motors and the clatter of 3 heads seeking at once, as well; SSDs have the added benefit of being completely silent.
Many in the deaf community are against technologies that restore hearing.... Deafness is not generally considered a condition that needs to be fixed.
Well bully for them. What about the 'few' that would like their hearing back? Tell them to quit being babies and live with it? Nobody is going to force this on those who don't want it, so at least make it an option for those who do.
Exactly this. I drive the speed I'm going to drive regardless of what the little white sign says. It may be 80, or it may be 50, depending on conditions. These arbitrary numbers do nothing to control the actual flow of traffic. Good luck getting the powers-that-be to raise the limit in your local jurisdiction, though. When you set it so low that practically everyone is breaking the law, it makes it rather easy to boost income through citations; fish in a barrel. I got pulled over for going 75 on the freeway a few weeks ago, when that was the average speed of traffic at the time. It would have been far more dangerous to have been going 65 (the legal limit), as I'd be a moving obstacle for the rest of the drivers to have to avoid, in the dark, while many of them are intoxicated.
Who thinks this will stop at just helping "the FBI identify and catch criminals"? This is a bigger threat to privacy than anything in history.
Except maybe for the Stasi.. KGB... Facebook...
Well then I guess I'll have to leave my helmet off for the ride home tonight. Wouldn't want to upset the police!
Biggest problem I have with government is it spends whatever it likes, regardless how much I pay in taxes.
This. Why should we feel morally compelled to offer up MORE of our hard earned money to a group of people who are completely unable to responsibly handle what we already give them? Even if we turned over our entire yearly incomes and lived off the land, they'd still find a way to utterly piss it all away and we'd be in the same boat. Blaming *us* for the state's financial woes is blaming the victim. The state needs to get its own shit straight before they go pointing the finger at anybody else.
I would love to step aside, but people keep trying to forcibly involve my money in such projects.
When you pay taxes, it becomes 'our' money. You have no say in where it goes, so why do you assume 'your' money only goes to fund things you don't like? It's people like you that loudly protest something like this, but then happily and quietly reap the rewards that result from it. Do you have any idea the amazing things that were discovered via the space program over the last 50+ years? How about the incredible advances in technology that WWII brought us? Neither of those things were cheap or easy, but society has greatly benefited from their discoveries. Plus, spending resources on science and adventure is a hell of a lot more palatable than blowing it on corporate bailouts and foreign conflicts, yes?
Empirical proof that homeopathy is completely useless? Less the validity of homeopathy itself, but more regarding the placebo effect.
I bet this is what people said 100 years ago about putting a man on the moon. Think of all the incredible things that have been done or discovered in the last century. Or, would you rather we not put the time and resources into an idea this grand and incredible, and say to hell with all the amazing things we may discover along the way, regardless of its outcome? My country's successes weren't accomplished by the naysayers; step aside, sir.
If your poop is coming out as a fluid, you've got bigger problems than just gravity.
I am kinda caught between 'shouldn't being a patent holder be considered a conflict of interests and caused the defense to disqualify the person?' and 'wait, a jury member with actual knowledge of a field? that is almost like a peer!'.
I wouldn't really consider patent holding a 'field', but unlike most other professions these days, there usually isn't such a thick line between 'sides'. Patent holders, whether they like it or not, have been segregated by the media into the class of victim as of late. Putting a patent holder on this jury is just suspect from the get go. Of course his interests are detached from the specific case, and there's nothing stopping him from giving an impartial verdict, but it just raises too many questions for comfort. It's not as if the majority of the people in the pool are patent holders and it's just an unavoidable reality that one has to be picked...
Did NASA ever have a rocket explode and kill 48 of the Engineers?
No, but we did lose 3 astronauts on the ground and 14 in the air in three separate events. We were not without our colossal failures either.
You need insurance because the risks while driving is high, and you need a licence so that you can actually prove you know how to drive.
You need proof of financial responsibility to drive. This can be in the form of insurance, OR a deposit left with the DMV. Insurance is just the easier way for the common man to afford this. The level of insurance required to satisfy the financial responsibility requirement (at least in CA) is usually a far cry short of the actual costs incurred in an injury collision. Most people do not carry enough insurance to completely cover themselves from all financial risk, because it's become too bloody expensive to do so.
Also, a license DOES NOT IN ANY WAY PROVE THAT YOU KNOW HOW TO DRIVE. It only proves you were able to pass a basic written and behind the wheel test on a single day back when you were 16ish. Spend about an hour on the freeways around Los Angeles, and tell me with a straight face that all these licensed drivers have any clue how to actually operate their vehicles in a safe manner.
At some point, a piece of rock fell from the sky and landed in what is now called Tennessee. Is there something spectacular about this particular dimple in the earth?
The Government can't force public transit on you so they'll just regulate cars to make them behave more like public transit.
I don't know where you live, but here in the outskirts of the suburbs of Los Angeles, your only real option is to drive. There is a light rail system than runs through my town, but it's absurdly expensive and takes longer to get into downtown than if you were to take your own wheels. I'd love to have a system like the Underground, or even the Metro (as long as it doesn't smell like piss!), but the government can't force us to use something that isn't there.
Reservationist: Oh, I can reserve you a flight coming back from Chicago at 5:55. Does that help? Richard: Hi, I'm Earth. Have we met? Reservationist: I don't think so.
What bunch of geniuses decided to hold a national convention in Florida in the middle of hurricane season? Oh, wait...
Have you seen what Americans eat these days? Holy shit, that wouldn't even pass as food 100 years ago! We eat such an unhealthy assortment of food as a daily staple, I think we ought to sort out our heart disease and diabetes problems before we spend our efforts scrutinizing GMOs. GMOs may be damaging our health, but it can't be as important as addressing the obvious and immediate issues we currently face.