"Experimenting on" implies that he applied a treatment TO her.... which I didn't see any report of, though I admit to skimming the article.
Samples have been taken, to a degree of invasiveness that peaks at taking a blood sample ( a procedure that anyone with strange symptoms is going to be bored with). A wide variety of experiments may then be preformed on those samples, but they affect the source of the sample as much as a yeast culture (say, the one that brewed the beer beside me) is affected by an aliquot (said beer, in it's can) being poured into a pit of warm strong acid (beer ; stomach ; apply!).
Samples and testing samples are not the same as strapping the sample source onto a table and applying the shark-mounted laser to her.
I know of one case where an acquaintance got stopped because his registration was flagged for an insurance lapse. There was no other violation than that, just that the computer went "ping!" when he drove by the cop car.
... Which is exactly what the technology is designed to do.
Your point is... ?
... that people should have the freedom to avoid the various taxes that their elected representatives have decreed upon them?
... that people should have the right to impose major hazards on other people's lives and livelihoods by using dangerous machinery (i.e. vehicles) without carrying valid insurance against those risks?
I drive a car ; I pay my road tax ; I pay my insurance (and devote around 1 day/year to trying to get the best deal available, which typically returns me £300-£400 for that day's work - a fair return) ; I also pay for fuel for the vehicle. None of these things constrains my freedom to travel, any more than the cost of feeding, shoeing and stabling a horse impeded the freedom of travel of [INSERT ROMANTIC STEREOTYPE OF "FREEDOM" HERE].
For situations when you need to get the battery out of your iPhone as quickly as possibleâ"such as after dropping the device into waterâ"you will be ready.
Now, I've never picked up an iPhone (I think ; I don't tend to pay the slightest iota of attention to other people's phones unless asked to, and if I'm asked about an iAnything my answer is "I dunno, but it shouldn't need a moments thought, if you believe the puff from iPeople"), so I may have misunderstood it, but are you saying that you can't open your iPhone to remove and change the battery? What fucking crackhead thought of that one? How the hell are you going to make sure that the phone is off when you put away for the next month? How are you going to swap out the battery for a spare, charged one when you're away from a power source for a week?
I'll have to find out what a Nsane is, because that's definitely iNsane.
The mentality that is sick and twisted is likely to be the one imputing motive and perception to an inanimate insensible characteristic of nature.
Do you think that asteroid intended to wipe out the dinosaurs to make ecosystem niches available for cockroach-eating tree-rat's descendants? (Not quibbling over whether it was a comet or an asteroid, and whether it was actually what killed the dinosaurs ; both decidedly questionable points.)
Wow! I finally understand the term Entmoot. Thanks!
Given that Tolkein's day job was as a philologist and etymologist for the OED, I'm moderately surprised that you didn't know by the time you'd finished reading the chapter where the Entmoot starts. Or am I the only person here who first read the book curled up in a chair beside the bookshelves with dictionaries, encyclopedia, etc?
http://emlia.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=Waylight.Ustria I'm trying to write a hypercapitalist-but-not-dystopian society and have been told that it's in practice LESS capitalistic than a lot of IRL places
That approaches closely enough towards "interesting" for "economic fiction" to keep the link hanging around until I've time to think about following it. Which is actually a great success for a piece of "economic fiction" - I'd normally flick past a dozen pages of hypercapitalist bullshit whenever Robert Heinlein started off on one of his excursions into MacCarthyite autoeroticism.
IF by seeing this fiasco you don't realize that corporate "persons" are psychopaths, I don't know what will do.
I'm trying to work out why on earth you would expect the "personality" of a corporation to be anything other than profoundly psychopathic.
I don't claim any personal knowledge of "parenting", nor do I have any interest in such ; but from what I've heard, surely the lack of a "childhood" in which to "experiment", to "learn boundaries", to "become socialised" are very common traits of psychopaths in general. And so if you develop a corporation in an analogous way, then what you would expect is a corporate psychopath.
Possibly I'm being a bit hard on corporations - I know a couple (out of hundreds I've been involved with) which are quite "well adjusted". But since they've both grown out of being essentially family firms, that's actually a support for my argument.
This is government we're talking about here. It's a kickback to the paper, printer, and scanner companies who contributed so much to some campaigns during the last election cycle!
Ah, the Lumber Cartel (There Is No Lumber Cartel)!
unmarked vans inside which poorly trained "agents" with GEDs fiddle with the controls of secret portable xray scanners.
I've no idea what a GED is, nor why you would fiddle with one. "GE Deathrays"?
You really haven't thought this through, have you? Electromagnetic radiation travels in straight lines (unless you've got a magnetic, electric, or gravitational field so strong that it would rip the iron atoms out of your haemoglobin), so your putative "secret portable X-ray scanner would need to take the form of a doorway, with source on one side and a detector on the other side. Yes, you could disguise such as, say, a doorway ; or hide it in a structure which poses as scaffolding that is part of building work. But that rather mitigates against the description of "secret" and "portable".
Back-scatter X-ray... well, it's not impossible (I've done a little cathodoluminiscence work, which goes a fair way down into the UV) ; I can see that X-rays might backscatter sufficiently to provide useful surface composition data. But you'd need horribly high dose rates, and therefore a lot of batteries to power the thing (again, making it less than "portable", or "secret"). You'd do far better using millimetre to micrometre wavelength radio waves, which do scatter from organic materials quite well. But they don't significantly penetrate skin, so they're not X-rays in either a strict or a lax meaning of the term.
why would the terrorists solicit money from jewish organizations?
[SIGH] OK, in small words, with low counts of syllables (is "syllables" too long for you? or even "terrorist"?)... the terrorists are radical PRO-Israelis who want to kill, maim and terrorise non-Jews in general and Muslims in particular. They don't have the moral courage of the suicide bombers etc because the they don't have the balls to either die for their beliefs, or get caught and go to jail. (The damage caused by the X-rays would take days to weeks to show up, by which time they'd be off on their travels to "zap another brownie, who's not wearing a skull-cap". They'd be quite unlikely to get caught unless they were spectacularly [sorry, syllable count ; try "really, really"] stupid, which they clearly were.)
When caught they'd go out in a blaze of x-rays, then piss themselves and spend the next 200-to-life being raped nightly by Big Mohammed in their cell. "Pour encourager les autres."
also, doesn't the TSA have similar vans already?
[more SIGH] I'm not 100% sure of the TSA, but for certain the UK Border Force have a number of fixed and mobile x-ray units for examining lorries and shipping containers coming into the country, in pursuit of illegal immigrants. Modifying such to produce a harmful beam would probably be difficult (vacuum physics can get difficult at high power) and need a fairly un-subtle power source, but it's probably doable. You'd need dose rates thousands or tens of thousands of times higher than medical X-ray machines, and probably hundreds of times higher than (say) weld inspection X-ray machines.
Exactly. When I read this: "a merchant of death & a satanic force of evil, has a long inglorious record of spreading nothing but poverty, dependency & disbelief", for a moment I thought they were talking about their brand of $INSERT_RELIGION_OF_PARENT'S_CHOICE$.
FTFY
Some religions may be worse than others, but very few of them rise to the level of being almost acceptable as moral bases. It's the "I can blame it on $DEITY$" option that makes religions generally culpable.
Because the average driver can barely remember to indicate, let alone decipher complex instructions like "Change the oil now, dipstick".
"... and don't forget to put the dipstick back in, dipstick!"
Had a friend do it ; then we went up to the hills for a weekend, slowly losing oil by spray from the crankcase/ sump. Coming back home... runs out of oil, miles from anywhere. We hitch-hiked home ; he had about a 5 mile walk to a petrol station, then 5 miles back, as the snow started falling. Sympathy didn't ooze.
at least one [insurance companies] already offer it as a service that can lower your bill
Same in this country - at least one company does it. I'll be looking closely at that to cut my premiums on the next insurance cycle.
As for DVRs, I want that info to go to Nielsen! I want broadcasters, and in a strange twist, advertisers, to know what I'm watching!! Why? I want to make sure my shows don't get cancelled.
Actually, yes ; that is a reasonable point of view. Particularly if you're in an advertising-funded TV model (which I'm not). But you'd also need to make it clear to the advertisers when adverts are being fast-forwarded through. I watch very, very little "live" TV - only the news really, which doesn't have adverts - precisely so that if adverts do occur, I can fast-forward over them. I also participate in for-pay surveys and focus groups (i.e. I get paid for expressing my opinions), precisely so that I can influence the availability of future products. But I'll be fucked if I am going to accidentally support the mind-benders and manipulators of the applied psychological sciences (i.e. advertising departments) by watching their shit without being paid for it.
OH NOES! I recorded a whole day of footage, even at 1080p resolution that won't hardly fill even lower end HDDs.
As I said above, "OTOH, there are very legitimate grounds for not storing what you don't want to sub-poena-ed for." ; there are two very different sides to this coin. (Maybe more.)
You want recording of the context of your crash, to prove that it was the other driver's fault. Do you also want to have the contents of your car's camera records sub-poena-ed by a passing driver to prove that someone they hit had braked suddenly to turn to his passenger-side (that's left here, but may not be in your jurisdiction), even though in such cases it is, by definition, the rear driver who is at-fault.
What you don't store, you can't be required to hand over. Regardless of your storage capacity.
Yes you record everything on a 10 minute loop, you stop the recording 30 s after an accident occurs.
... and so your recorder system misses the part where the other two drivers involved start fighting with each other (just picking an example where your privacy isn't involved, but your testimony might well be needed).
It's not so easy once you start looking at exactly what you might credibly want to store. OTOH, there are very legitimate grounds for not storing what you don't want to sub-poenae'd for.
... or he doesn't really give a shit about Star... is it Trek, or Wars?
Whichever.
Puts him in the same boat as me - saw the original movie when it was on at the movies first time around ; reasonably enjoyed it ; had grown up too much to be interested in the next... and the next... still haven't seen any of the remaining however-many. Saw one or two of the Star Trek movies too. The one with the "how quaint" mouse scene, and the silly one last year too.
Thinking that the sun shines out of George Lucas' arse is not obligatory.
Slashdot Mirror
Samples have been taken, to a degree of invasiveness that peaks at taking a blood sample ( a procedure that anyone with strange symptoms is going to be bored with). A wide variety of experiments may then be preformed on those samples, but they affect the source of the sample as much as a yeast culture (say, the one that brewed the beer beside me) is affected by an aliquot (said beer, in it's can) being poured into a pit of warm strong acid (beer ; stomach ; apply!).
Samples and testing samples are not the same as strapping the sample source onto a table and applying the shark-mounted laser to her.
... Which is exactly what the technology is designed to do.
Your point is ... ?
... that people should have the right to impose major hazards on other people's lives and livelihoods by using dangerous machinery (i.e. vehicles) without carrying valid insurance against those risks?
I drive a car ; I pay my road tax ; I pay my insurance (and devote around 1 day/year to trying to get the best deal available, which typically returns me £300-£400 for that day's work - a fair return) ; I also pay for fuel for the vehicle. None of these things constrains my freedom to travel, any more than the cost of feeding, shoeing and stabling a horse impeded the freedom of travel of [INSERT ROMANTIC STEREOTYPE OF "FREEDOM" HERE].
Now, I've never picked up an iPhone (I think ; I don't tend to pay the slightest iota of attention to other people's phones unless asked to, and if I'm asked about an iAnything my answer is "I dunno, but it shouldn't need a moments thought, if you believe the puff from iPeople"), so I may have misunderstood it, but are you saying that you can't open your iPhone to remove and change the battery? What fucking crackhead thought of that one? How the hell are you going to make sure that the phone is off when you put away for the next month? How are you going to swap out the battery for a spare, charged one when you're away from a power source for a week?
I'll have to find out what a Nsane is, because that's definitely iNsane.
The mentality that is sick and twisted is likely to be the one imputing motive and perception to an inanimate insensible characteristic of nature.
Do you think that asteroid intended to wipe out the dinosaurs to make ecosystem niches available for cockroach-eating tree-rat's descendants?
(Not quibbling over whether it was a comet or an asteroid, and whether it was actually what killed the dinosaurs ; both decidedly questionable points.)
Given that Tolkein's day job was as a philologist and etymologist for the OED, I'm moderately surprised that you didn't know by the time you'd finished reading the chapter where the Entmoot starts. Or am I the only person here who first read the book curled up in a chair beside the bookshelves with dictionaries, encyclopedia, etc?
That approaches closely enough towards "interesting" for "economic fiction" to keep the link hanging around until I've time to think about following it. Which is actually a great success for a piece of "economic fiction" - I'd normally flick past a dozen pages of hypercapitalist bullshit whenever Robert Heinlein started off on one of his excursions into MacCarthyite autoeroticism.
I'm trying to work out why on earth you would expect the "personality" of a corporation to be anything other than profoundly psychopathic.
I don't claim any personal knowledge of "parenting", nor do I have any interest in such ; but from what I've heard, surely the lack of a "childhood" in which to "experiment", to "learn boundaries", to "become socialised" are very common traits of psychopaths in general. And so if you develop a corporation in an analogous way, then what you would expect is a corporate psychopath.
Possibly I'm being a bit hard on corporations - I know a couple (out of hundreds I've been involved with) which are quite "well adjusted". But since they've both grown out of being essentially family firms, that's actually a support for my argument.
So, you'll be advertising for those Mexicans and Guatemalans whose get up and go has got them to get up and go ... to Canada.
Ah, the Lumber Cartel (There Is No Lumber Cartel)!
I've no idea what a GED is, nor why you would fiddle with one. "GE Deathrays"?
You really haven't thought this through, have you? Electromagnetic radiation travels in straight lines (unless you've got a magnetic, electric, or gravitational field so strong that it would rip the iron atoms out of your haemoglobin), so your putative "secret portable X-ray scanner would need to take the form of a doorway, with source on one side and a detector on the other side. Yes, you could disguise such as, say, a doorway ; or hide it in a structure which poses as scaffolding that is part of building work. But that rather mitigates against the description of "secret" and "portable".
Back-scatter X-ray ... well, it's not impossible (I've done a little cathodoluminiscence work, which goes a fair way down into the UV) ; I can see that X-rays might backscatter sufficiently to provide useful surface composition data. But you'd need horribly high dose rates, and therefore a lot of batteries to power the thing (again, making it less than "portable", or "secret"). You'd do far better using millimetre to micrometre wavelength radio waves, which do scatter from organic materials quite well. But they don't significantly penetrate skin, so they're not X-rays in either a strict or a lax meaning of the term.
"Fee tier" or "free tier"? Whatever ; I'm pretty sure that would violate ToS on several points.
As soon as it gets known about ... you bet it would.
So, it means "carrying out war by means other than war".
Jeez, how's a mega-corp gonna make a buck off that?
[SIGH] OK, in small words, with low counts of syllables (is "syllables" too long for you? or even "terrorist"?) ... the terrorists are radical PRO-Israelis who want to kill, maim and terrorise non-Jews in general and Muslims in particular. They don't have the moral courage of the suicide bombers etc because the they don't have the balls to either die for their beliefs, or get caught and go to jail. (The damage caused by the X-rays would take days to weeks to show up, by which time they'd be off on their travels to "zap another brownie, who's not wearing a skull-cap". They'd be quite unlikely to get caught unless they were spectacularly [sorry, syllable count ; try "really, really"] stupid, which they clearly were.)
When caught they'd go out in a blaze of x-rays, then piss themselves and spend the next 200-to-life being raped nightly by Big Mohammed in their cell. "Pour encourager les autres."
[more SIGH] I'm not 100% sure of the TSA, but for certain the UK Border Force have a number of fixed and mobile x-ray units for examining lorries and shipping containers coming into the country, in pursuit of illegal immigrants. Modifying such to produce a harmful beam would probably be difficult (vacuum physics can get difficult at high power) and need a fairly un-subtle power source, but it's probably doable. You'd need dose rates thousands or tens of thousands of times higher than medical X-ray machines, and probably hundreds of times higher than (say) weld inspection X-ray machines.
FTFY
FTFY
Some religions may be worse than others, but very few of them rise to the level of being almost acceptable as moral bases. It's the "I can blame it on $DEITY$" option that makes religions generally culpable.
Spoilsports! We'd got our new carbon-nanotube diamond double-helix anchoring ropes into production and now you pull out on us. Wimps!
Guess we'll just have to junk the cable now, unless these people wanting to build a space elevator are serious about wanting 30,000 km of the stuff.
"... and don't forget to put the dipstick back in, dipstick!"
Had a friend do it ; then we went up to the hills for a weekend, slowly losing oil by spray from the crankcase/ sump. Coming back home ... runs out of oil, miles from anywhere. We hitch-hiked home ; he had about a 5 mile walk to a petrol station, then 5 miles back, as the snow started falling. Sympathy didn't ooze.
Same in this country - at least one company does it. I'll be looking closely at that to cut my premiums on the next insurance cycle.
Actually, yes ; that is a reasonable point of view. Particularly if you're in an advertising-funded TV model (which I'm not). But you'd also need to make it clear to the advertisers when adverts are being fast-forwarded through. I watch very, very little "live" TV - only the news really, which doesn't have adverts - precisely so that if adverts do occur, I can fast-forward over them. I also participate in for-pay surveys and focus groups (i.e. I get paid for expressing my opinions), precisely so that I can influence the availability of future products. But I'll be fucked if I am going to accidentally support the mind-benders and manipulators of the applied psychological sciences (i.e. advertising departments) by watching their shit without being paid for it.
As I said above, "OTOH, there are very legitimate grounds for not storing what you don't want to sub-poena-ed for." ; there are two very different sides to this coin. (Maybe more.)
You want recording of the context of your crash, to prove that it was the other driver's fault. Do you also want to have the contents of your car's camera records sub-poena-ed by a passing driver to prove that someone they hit had braked suddenly to turn to his passenger-side (that's left here, but may not be in your jurisdiction), even though in such cases it is, by definition, the rear driver who is at-fault.
What you don't store, you can't be required to hand over. Regardless of your storage capacity.
... and so your recorder system misses the part where the other two drivers involved start fighting with each other (just picking an example where your privacy isn't involved, but your testimony might well be needed).
It's not so easy once you start looking at exactly what you might credibly want to store. OTOH, there are very legitimate grounds for not storing what you don't want to sub-poenae'd for.
Not if you want me to watch it.
Whichever.
Puts him in the same boat as me - saw the original movie when it was on at the movies first time around ; reasonably enjoyed it ; had grown up too much to be interested in the next ... and the next ... still haven't seen any of the remaining however-many. Saw one or two of the Star Trek movies too. The one with the "how quaint" mouse scene, and the silly one last year too.
Thinking that the sun shines out of George Lucas' arse is not obligatory.
I fail to see the fault in the design. Please elucidate.
OK, in appallingly bad Dog-Latin.
"If it works, don't fuck with it!"
Or you could look into the future.