Until someone makes a technological leap past chemical rockets, the resources of space are anything but infinite.
And I don't think repeated practice with 40 year old chemical rocket technology is going to lead to that leap.
Not until many people with diverse trade skills live in (or near) space will these leaps be made. We don't live in space full time yet, and we have only just begun adapting to it. We have less than 100 years in space. Comparing our space technology to our naval technology, we have the equivalent of wood rafts with a small hut shelter.
Not just in London, I think you will find that this is the case everywhere in the world...
Basic human behavior, and it's hardly restricted to cellphone misuse behind the wheel. You see, everyone is somehow special and better able to handle a given situation than anyone else, and is therefore immune to consequence. That is, until such time as a consequence kills them dead, or if they're very lucky just scares the shit out of them. Cigarettes, drugs, risky sex, bad driving... most people don't learn to think until after their stupidity nearly kills them. I don't have a problem with that, particularly, unless their mental malfunction gets someone else killed. That's what makes using that damn cellphone on the road a bad thing.
Wise up people, you're no better at driving and texting than anyone else, and nobody is any good at it.
I'm sure someone will google up some contradictions to what I'm about to say, but I'm going to say it anyway. I don't see any cops crashing into people because they were using their laptop while driving. I said it above, it can be dealt with training. If you honestly don't believe that, than please explain to me how humans can learn to fly planes by instruments only. That's much more difficult that driving a car while texting, yet pilots are not rare.
First of all, you cannot train folks to multitask because humans are incapable of doing it. The cops can't do it either. What you call multitasking is actually them selecting attention rapidly between their laptops and driving - if they're even doing that.
First) So I'm not multitasking by listening to the radio, talking on the phone, typing this post, thinking about what i'm listening to on the radio, thinking about what i'm talking about on the phone, thinking about what i'm typing here, thinking about my posture, thinking about when i should take my next sip of coffee, etc, etc, etc?
Two, even if it were possible to train folks how to do it, what makes you think that folks will follow their training? People are trained not to tailgate, speed, cut others off, etc...
Everything you've proposed is impossible. The ONLY solution is to ban cell phones in cars. There is absolutely no reason to talk in a car anyway - no exceptions. Got to talk? Pull over.
Two) If people couldn't do what they've been trained and licensed to do, they would fail the training, and thus be unable to pass the licensing examination. They would also drive all over the road in both directions at all times while ignoring all signs and markers. I've seen video of this in 3rd world countries, the USA is 1st world thankfully your ideas don't match reality.
D) Nothing is impossible except banning cell phone usage in cars being the only solution.
**Bonus points to anyone that can spot my Christmas movie reference:)
How is flushing the 4th amendment down the toilet not "interfering with previously held freedoms"? Why do all my fellow countrymen want to turn this country in to a totalitarian police state hell hole? WTF is going on in this country??
Exactly how is this flushing the 4th down the toilet? How else do you punish adults other than restrict their rights or outright revoke them? I am a proponent of the concept that if you fuck up badly enough as an adult you need to have a severe punishment.
Allowing the police to stop you and verify you're not drunk is a compromise yes, but an acceptable one for society as a whole. Otherwise society as a whole would vote to change it. I happen to agree with this, as it is democratic (even if it is a uncomfortable compromise).
All you have to do to avoid being tagged with "whiskey plates" is not repeatedly drive drunk and endanger the lives of your fellow Americans. Fuck you if you disagree with that.
One more thing... In the USA (I live in Minnesota), we have classes of drivers licenses. Lowest class being I think a D (my D license allows me to drive standard cars and trucks up to a certain size). There is a separate class for motorcycles, and tractor-trailers (semi-trucks, 18-wheelers, etc). This "problem" can easily be handled through education, hands-on training, and licensing.
Now I'm on a roll... We have these special license plates for vehicles whose owners like to drink alcohol and drive drunk. In my state we call them "whiskey plates" because the license number always starts with a W. These special license plates are a signifier for law enforcement that the person driving has been convicted multiple times of driving while intoxicated, and as such, may now be pulled over and checked at any time to verify they are not repeating the offense. I may be off on the rules, but that is the gist of it.
So, maybe we can create another class of license plates as well as license. You text and cause accidents or speed too much, and you have to go to court and tell a judge. Then your car gets "texty plates" and everyone around now knows you like to text and drive and cause problems, and the cops can pull you over and check your cellphone to ensure you haven't been repeating the offense.
I dunno. These ideas seem more American to me than making government bigger, and interfering with previously held freedoms.
It's the enforcement. We have really, really high fines here for all sorts of traffic violations, but enforcement is so lacking that it almost seems random. Your chances of getting caught are miniscule, so people learn to ignore the law. If they do get caught, the fines are staggering - but the one in ten thousand chance of getting caught is not a deterrent.
Actually it's not the fines or enforcement. It's training. Every police vehicle I've seen has a laptop mounted on the center console. Every time I see a cop driving around they have one hand on the keyboard and constantly glance back and forth between the road and the computer.
Cell phones and cars aren't going away anytime soon. Instead of punishing the citizens for doing something police are trained to do, train the citizens too. There is no reason that drivers ed. classes shouldn't discuss this and deal with it.
I think the best way to "think of the children" is to teach the children. If you don't want little Lisa to text and drive into a horrible wreck, teach her how to text and drive responsibly. Otherwise take your blanket statements and have every computer removed from police vehicles because otherwise we have an effective working double standard which provides revenue to the police force. Fuck that shit.
We are in fact doing terrible compared to South East Asia specifically, where DOCSIS 3.0 is pretty much fully deployed. Just spend the damn money to keep us competitive with technology invented here.
Having the government specify broadband as anything over 768k is a great way to stagnate our domestic internet network while the rest of Earth does the exact opposite... rolls out new technology and steadily increases the throughput while decreasing latency. You have the same mentality that prevents the USA from building it's own Autobahn because "65mph is high speed enough". That's pretty bullshit, and there are plenty of citizens of the US that would love to have a modern highspeed highway as well as modern highspeed internet.
Government sucks, stop making up reasons for it to do fake work.
>>>If the US Interstate Highway, and telephone networks can reach all the "hillbillies"
They don't. I personally live 100 miles from the nearest interstate, as do many people. Interstates don't reach to every home. Neither do telephones. In my parents' house the phones only reached to the state highway - they had to pay the extra cost to have it extended five more miles down a back road.
So, which is it? The phones don't reach to the house, or they do because they paid to have it reach the house? Make up your mind.
Also, I'm sure there is a 100mi road that reaches your house from the highway. Perhaps I was too specific when I said interstate highway, as every single person that uses them should be under the correct assumption that there is a highly advanced network of interconnected roadways by which to travel to and from said interstate highways.
Of course, I could be complete wrong and you actually park your car and walk 100mi to your house. I am, however, skeptical of that.
I did not say it was a good thing, I was merely siting it as a factor in why we have more trees.
I believe the longer we go not cutting down trees, and clearing underbrush and just letting forests grow and grow doing everything we can to keep from letting them burn. We should be able to log and remove old dead growth. We are just making sure that eventually we will have a forest fire so big we won't be able to stop it.
People in the timber industry want to cut down trees now (and remove the old dead ones) AND make sure there are healthy forests later so they can continue to cut down trees. It is not the timber industry that is for NOT removing that deadwood. It is the environmentalists.
I agree and I think it is rather sad that those environmentalists actually believe they know how to grow a healthy forest better than nature itself. Natural fires being a part of that healthiness. In fact I know of at least 1 tree (the Jack pine) that needs a forest fire to procreate.
Saying Japan and Korea having REAL broadband is like saying your LAN has REAL broadband.
I agree that it's bullshit that we pay so much and get so little, but the simple fact that the US is fucking huge is the main barrier. Even if the corporations were pure and good we wouldn't have comparable broadband options.
I disagree slightly and say that the US being fucking huge is the main excuse. Otherwise rural communities would not have telephone, or modern roadways. The reality is that the US Government has not dedicated the money to building out this particular network like they did for telephony and vehicular transportation.
Demolished or demonstrated? Maybe some Googelian combination of the two?
fwarren: I believe fighting natural forest fires has proven to be policy error. For a citation please see the burning of Custer State Park. There are no more Smokey the Bear commercials because forest fires are actually necessary to prevent catastrophic fires. From what I remember reading, the 40+ years of Smokey the Bear campaigning, and fire fighting left MILLIONS of tons of fuel in the form of old dead timber.
I guess I'm just trying to point out that while some of Oregon's other forestry programs might be a benefit, fighting forest fires for decades can and has lead to a catastrophe.
If the US Interstate Highway, and telephone networks can reach all the "hillbillies" as you call them, then why can't any other sophisticated network? Oh that's right, because they spent the money lobbying and advertising instead.
Also, I notice you conveniently neglected to include Japan, Korea, etc. which have real broadband.
Am I the only person that believes we have certifiable retards running our country? Like, seriously I think you have to be retarded if you actually think you can remove data from the internet.
Just... Wow. What's wrong with having the government define broadband as anything over 768Kbps down and 200Kbps up? I'll tell you. The rest of Earth will laugh at us. That's what's wrong with that. I realize the size of the US puts a different burden on network deployment here, but please stop pretending like we don't know that pretty much all of South-East Asia is now on DOCSIS 3.0 and/or fiber-to-the-door.
I offer to/. again my anecdote about Comcast changing my plan from unlimited to hard capped at 250GB per month. I'm now paying for ~10x less theoretical data now at the SAME EXACT rates when I had for unlimited. The kicker is that no one on residential service from Comcast was ever going to reach the ~2.5TB theoretical max because Comcast's technology shares bandwidth.
I would have to guess that since Comcast is really the US Government, that this is not what we call a healthy business model. Rather than spend their money marketing and lobbying, they should have spent it on their network. I think it's absolute horseshit, and I feel cheated every time I pay the bill.
Oh and for all the jackasses out there that wish to make a snide comment pertaining to that list bit, please remember that Comcast is a monopoly in my area and I have no other ISP to offer my patronage to.
They just opened a pit to be exposed to outside air in the winter which will create a frozen ballast. They are expecting to not have to turn on the coolers for a month on each side of winter. Which means all winter long, 1 month of fall and 1 month of spring, they do don't need to run their coolers.
Inigo Montoya yourself.
theory:
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
This issue was revisited with the latest Transformer film; a couple of the robots were seen to be racist caricatures and allusions were made to the Jar Jar controversy. Googling "jar-jar racist" will give you more background if you're interested. You obviously strongly disgree -- as do many people -- but this does not discount the fact that there was a raging controversy at the time.
"What's next? Because Yoda doesn't speak with correct grammar he's somehow racist too?"
I'll take this question at face value. There was no similar discussion of Yoda's accent that I recall. This is because Jar-Jar's accent was seen by many to be patterned after racist caricatures; Yoda's had no such similarities.
Someone has a great signature that says something like: There is no dislike mod, and no, troll, flamebait, overrated are not substitutes.
Please mod parent and myself up as I was not trolling.
Really? Can I have your facebook username and password? Oh I can't? Would that be a chain link fence or a door with a lock on it?
My Facebook username is the same as my Slashdot username. Have fun.
Of course I won't be giving you my password, as that will do more than grant you access to my private information. It would allow you to log into my account and post information. In essence, it allows you to assume my identity.
And while I'm not terribly worried about you seeing the "private" information I have on Facebook... I'd rather you didn't log in as me and post stories about the affair I'm having with the hot secretary at work.
I'm sorry your answer was confusing to me. Door or fence?
A theory remains a theory forever. "Facts" are just theories with no credible counter theories.
I kinda like the way you put that.
3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
I guess the transitions would be:
Theory -> scrutiny -> fact, or:
Theory -> scrutiny -> theory.
Applying that to the whole AGW debate, their facts have been falsified through corrupt databases and programming manipulation. I read a report from Berkley that when they [Berkley] went to check data on the instruments that 80% of the the instrumentation was placed in areas that violated the guidelines for collecting accurate data. If 80% of their instrumentation data was inaccurate, their starting data isn't factual, therefore their entire theory is flawed.
Why do people in their house with the blinds closed and the doors lock expect privacy? Because the previous controls to limit your exposure were synonymous with window shades and door locks.
I open the shades so I can see out, and with that I accept the risk that someone can see in. At least before these changes I had the ability to do just that. Now? Not so much.
Except that you're posting on Facebook, not sitting in your house.
Facebook is a social networking site on the Internet. There were never any walls, or blinds, or doors to lock... At best there were some chainlink fences and a "private property" sign.
Really? Can I have your facebook username and password? Oh I can't? Would that be a chain link fence or a door with a lock on it?
More specifically, I meant to link to the small section named Scientific Laws at the bottom of the page.
Silly me!
Forgive me, as I have apparently been under the misconception that "scientific law" must be proven, eg. pass through the skeptics crucible and come out the other end unscathed. Now I'm wondering if these laws can be vetoed with executive powers, and how long it takes to ratify new laws... Care to enlighten me on that?
A couple of miles of limestone are as effective as a lesser quantity of lead... that is to say after a certain distance, 100% effective.
Ok well then is it N+2, can it sustain human life for 3mo after the nukes go off, does it have multiple fiber connects, microwave, and satellite networking? Does it filter the air to.3 microns? You're not doing a good job of convincing me that an old mineshaft is better than a purpose built, to military spec, nuclear fallout command center.
Slashdot Mirror
Until someone makes a technological leap past chemical rockets, the resources of space are anything but infinite.
And I don't think repeated practice with 40 year old chemical rocket technology is going to lead to that leap.
Not until many people with diverse trade skills live in (or near) space will these leaps be made. We don't live in space full time yet, and we have only just begun adapting to it. We have less than 100 years in space. Comparing our space technology to our naval technology, we have the equivalent of wood rafts with a small hut shelter.
Wake me up when they make a static electricity battery that I can charge instantly after I walk across the room and touch it.
Not just in London, I think you will find that this is the case everywhere in the world...
Basic human behavior, and it's hardly restricted to cellphone misuse behind the wheel. You see, everyone is somehow special and better able to handle a given situation than anyone else, and is therefore immune to consequence. That is, until such time as a consequence kills them dead, or if they're very lucky just scares the shit out of them. Cigarettes, drugs, risky sex, bad driving ... most people don't learn to think until after their stupidity nearly kills them. I don't have a problem with that, particularly, unless their mental malfunction gets someone else killed. That's what makes using that damn cellphone on the road a bad thing.
Wise up people, you're no better at driving and texting than anyone else, and nobody is any good at it.
I'm sure someone will google up some contradictions to what I'm about to say, but I'm going to say it anyway. I don't see any cops crashing into people because they were using their laptop while driving. I said it above, it can be dealt with training. If you honestly don't believe that, than please explain to me how humans can learn to fly planes by instruments only. That's much more difficult that driving a car while texting, yet pilots are not rare.
First of all, you cannot train folks to multitask because humans are incapable of doing it. The cops can't do it either. What you call multitasking is actually them selecting attention rapidly between their laptops and driving - if they're even doing that.
First) So I'm not multitasking by listening to the radio, talking on the phone, typing this post, thinking about what i'm listening to on the radio, thinking about what i'm talking about on the phone, thinking about what i'm typing here, thinking about my posture, thinking about when i should take my next sip of coffee, etc, etc, etc?
Two, even if it were possible to train folks how to do it, what makes you think that folks will follow their training? People are trained not to tailgate, speed, cut others off, etc...
Everything you've proposed is impossible. The ONLY solution is to ban cell phones in cars. There is absolutely no reason to talk in a car anyway - no exceptions. Got to talk? Pull over.
Two) If people couldn't do what they've been trained and licensed to do, they would fail the training, and thus be unable to pass the licensing examination. They would also drive all over the road in both directions at all times while ignoring all signs and markers. I've seen video of this in 3rd world countries, the USA is 1st world thankfully your ideas don't match reality.
D) Nothing is impossible except banning cell phone usage in cars being the only solution.
**Bonus points to anyone that can spot my Christmas movie reference :)
How is flushing the 4th amendment down the toilet not "interfering with previously held freedoms"? Why do all my fellow countrymen want to turn this country in to a totalitarian police state hell hole? WTF is going on in this country??
Exactly how is this flushing the 4th down the toilet? How else do you punish adults other than restrict their rights or outright revoke them? I am a proponent of the concept that if you fuck up badly enough as an adult you need to have a severe punishment.
Allowing the police to stop you and verify you're not drunk is a compromise yes, but an acceptable one for society as a whole. Otherwise society as a whole would vote to change it. I happen to agree with this, as it is democratic (even if it is a uncomfortable compromise).
All you have to do to avoid being tagged with "whiskey plates" is not repeatedly drive drunk and endanger the lives of your fellow Americans. Fuck you if you disagree with that.
One more thing... In the USA (I live in Minnesota), we have classes of drivers licenses. Lowest class being I think a D (my D license allows me to drive standard cars and trucks up to a certain size). There is a separate class for motorcycles, and tractor-trailers (semi-trucks, 18-wheelers, etc). This "problem" can easily be handled through education, hands-on training, and licensing.
Now I'm on a roll... We have these special license plates for vehicles whose owners like to drink alcohol and drive drunk. In my state we call them "whiskey plates" because the license number always starts with a W. These special license plates are a signifier for law enforcement that the person driving has been convicted multiple times of driving while intoxicated, and as such, may now be pulled over and checked at any time to verify they are not repeating the offense. I may be off on the rules, but that is the gist of it.
So, maybe we can create another class of license plates as well as license. You text and cause accidents or speed too much, and you have to go to court and tell a judge. Then your car gets "texty plates" and everyone around now knows you like to text and drive and cause problems, and the cops can pull you over and check your cellphone to ensure you haven't been repeating the offense.
I dunno. These ideas seem more American to me than making government bigger, and interfering with previously held freedoms.
It's the enforcement. We have really, really high fines here for all sorts of traffic violations, but enforcement is so lacking that it almost seems random. Your chances of getting caught are miniscule, so people learn to ignore the law. If they do get caught, the fines are staggering - but the one in ten thousand chance of getting caught is not a deterrent.
Actually it's not the fines or enforcement. It's training. Every police vehicle I've seen has a laptop mounted on the center console. Every time I see a cop driving around they have one hand on the keyboard and constantly glance back and forth between the road and the computer.
Cell phones and cars aren't going away anytime soon. Instead of punishing the citizens for doing something police are trained to do, train the citizens too. There is no reason that drivers ed. classes shouldn't discuss this and deal with it.
I think the best way to "think of the children" is to teach the children. If you don't want little Lisa to text and drive into a horrible wreck, teach her how to text and drive responsibly. Otherwise take your blanket statements and have every computer removed from police vehicles because otherwise we have an effective working double standard which provides revenue to the police force. Fuck that shit.
We are in fact doing terrible compared to South East Asia specifically, where DOCSIS 3.0 is pretty much fully deployed. Just spend the damn money to keep us competitive with technology invented here.
Having the government specify broadband as anything over 768k is a great way to stagnate our domestic internet network while the rest of Earth does the exact opposite... rolls out new technology and steadily increases the throughput while decreasing latency. You have the same mentality that prevents the USA from building it's own Autobahn because "65mph is high speed enough". That's pretty bullshit, and there are plenty of citizens of the US that would love to have a modern highspeed highway as well as modern highspeed internet.
Government sucks, stop making up reasons for it to do fake work.
>>>If the US Interstate Highway, and telephone networks can reach all the "hillbillies"
They don't. I personally live 100 miles from the nearest interstate, as do many people. Interstates don't reach to every home. Neither do telephones. In my parents' house the phones only reached to the state highway - they had to pay the extra cost to have it extended five more miles down a back road.
So, which is it? The phones don't reach to the house, or they do because they paid to have it reach the house? Make up your mind.
Also, I'm sure there is a 100mi road that reaches your house from the highway. Perhaps I was too specific when I said interstate highway, as every single person that uses them should be under the correct assumption that there is a highly advanced network of interconnected roadways by which to travel to and from said interstate highways.
Of course, I could be complete wrong and you actually park your car and walk 100mi to your house. I am, however, skeptical of that.
I did not say it was a good thing, I was merely siting it as a factor in why we have more trees.
I believe the longer we go not cutting down trees, and clearing underbrush and just letting forests grow and grow doing everything we can to keep from letting them burn. We should be able to log and remove old dead growth. We are just making sure that eventually we will have a forest fire so big we won't be able to stop it.
People in the timber industry want to cut down trees now (and remove the old dead ones) AND make sure there are healthy forests later so they can continue to cut down trees. It is not the timber industry that is for NOT removing that deadwood. It is the environmentalists.
I agree and I think it is rather sad that those environmentalists actually believe they know how to grow a healthy forest better than nature itself. Natural fires being a part of that healthiness. In fact I know of at least 1 tree (the Jack pine) that needs a forest fire to procreate.
Saying Japan and Korea having REAL broadband is like saying your LAN has REAL broadband.
I agree that it's bullshit that we pay so much and get so little, but the simple fact that the US is fucking huge is the main barrier. Even if the corporations were pure and good we wouldn't have comparable broadband options.
I disagree slightly and say that the US being fucking huge is the main excuse. Otherwise rural communities would not have telephone, or modern roadways. The reality is that the US Government has not dedicated the money to building out this particular network like they did for telephony and vehicular transportation.
Demolished or demonstrated? Maybe some Googelian combination of the two?
fwarren: I believe fighting natural forest fires has proven to be policy error. For a citation please see the burning of Custer State Park. There are no more Smokey the Bear commercials because forest fires are actually necessary to prevent catastrophic fires. From what I remember reading, the 40+ years of Smokey the Bear campaigning, and fire fighting left MILLIONS of tons of fuel in the form of old dead timber.
I guess I'm just trying to point out that while some of Oregon's other forestry programs might be a benefit, fighting forest fires for decades can and has lead to a catastrophe.
If the US Interstate Highway, and telephone networks can reach all the "hillbillies" as you call them, then why can't any other sophisticated network? Oh that's right, because they spent the money lobbying and advertising instead.
Also, I notice you conveniently neglected to include Japan, Korea, etc. which have real broadband.
Am I the only person that believes we have certifiable retards running our country? Like, seriously I think you have to be retarded if you actually think you can remove data from the internet.
Just... Wow. What's wrong with having the government define broadband as anything over 768Kbps down and 200Kbps up? I'll tell you. The rest of Earth will laugh at us. That's what's wrong with that. I realize the size of the US puts a different burden on network deployment here, but please stop pretending like we don't know that pretty much all of South-East Asia is now on DOCSIS 3.0 and/or fiber-to-the-door.
I offer to /. again my anecdote about Comcast changing my plan from unlimited to hard capped at 250GB per month. I'm now paying for ~10x less theoretical data now at the SAME EXACT rates when I had for unlimited. The kicker is that no one on residential service from Comcast was ever going to reach the ~2.5TB theoretical max because Comcast's technology shares bandwidth.
I would have to guess that since Comcast is really the US Government, that this is not what we call a healthy business model. Rather than spend their money marketing and lobbying, they should have spent it on their network. I think it's absolute horseshit, and I feel cheated every time I pay the bill.
Oh and for all the jackasses out there that wish to make a snide comment pertaining to that list bit, please remember that Comcast is a monopoly in my area and I have no other ISP to offer my patronage to.
Infobunker 4tw. Again.
They just opened a pit to be exposed to outside air in the winter which will create a frozen ballast. They are expecting to not have to turn on the coolers for a month on each side of winter. Which means all winter long, 1 month of fall and 1 month of spring, they do don't need to run their coolers.
Inigo Montoya yourself.
theory:
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
That's just like, you're opinion, man.
"I've never heard of this before. Who came up with that bullshit interpretation?"
A few people did at the time. A few are listed here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jar_Jar_Binks#Allegations_of_racial_caricature
This issue was revisited with the latest Transformer film; a couple of the robots were seen to be racist caricatures and allusions were made to the Jar Jar controversy. Googling "jar-jar racist" will give you more background if you're interested. You obviously strongly disgree -- as do many people -- but this does not discount the fact that there was a raging controversy at the time.
"What's next? Because Yoda doesn't speak with correct grammar he's somehow racist too?"
I'll take this question at face value. There was no similar discussion of Yoda's accent that I recall. This is because Jar-Jar's accent was seen by many to be patterned after racist caricatures; Yoda's had no such similarities.
Someone has a great signature that says something like: There is no dislike mod, and no, troll, flamebait, overrated are not substitutes.
Please mod parent and myself up as I was not trolling.
Really? Can I have your facebook username and password? Oh I can't? Would that be a chain link fence or a door with a lock on it?
My Facebook username is the same as my Slashdot username. Have fun.
Of course I won't be giving you my password, as that will do more than grant you access to my private information. It would allow you to log into my account and post information. In essence, it allows you to assume my identity.
And while I'm not terribly worried about you seeing the "private" information I have on Facebook... I'd rather you didn't log in as me and post stories about the affair I'm having with the hot secretary at work.
I'm sorry your answer was confusing to me. Door or fence?
A theory remains a theory forever. "Facts" are just theories with no credible counter theories.
I kinda like the way you put that.
3. a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true: Scientists gather facts about plant growth.
I guess the transitions would be:
Theory -> scrutiny -> fact, or:
Theory -> scrutiny -> theory.
Applying that to the whole AGW debate, their facts have been falsified through corrupt databases and programming manipulation. I read a report from Berkley that when they [Berkley] went to check data on the instruments that 80% of the the instrumentation was placed in areas that violated the guidelines for collecting accurate data. If 80% of their instrumentation data was inaccurate, their starting data isn't factual, therefore their entire theory is flawed.
Why do people in their house with the blinds closed and the doors lock expect privacy? Because the previous controls to limit your exposure were synonymous with window shades and door locks.
I open the shades so I can see out, and with that I accept the risk that someone can see in. At least before these changes I had the ability to do just that. Now? Not so much.
Except that you're posting on Facebook, not sitting in your house.
Facebook is a social networking site on the Internet. There were never any walls, or blinds, or doors to lock... At best there were some chainlink fences and a "private property" sign.
Really? Can I have your facebook username and password? Oh I can't? Would that be a chain link fence or a door with a lock on it?
More specifically, I meant to link to the small section named Scientific Laws at the bottom of the page.
Silly me!
Forgive me, as I have apparently been under the misconception that "scientific law" must be proven, eg. pass through the skeptics crucible and come out the other end unscathed. Now I'm wondering if these laws can be vetoed with executive powers, and how long it takes to ratify new laws... Care to enlighten me on that?
A couple of miles of limestone are as effective as a lesser quantity of lead ... that is to say after a certain distance, 100% effective.
Ok well then is it N+2, can it sustain human life for 3mo after the nukes go off, does it have multiple fiber connects, microwave, and satellite networking? Does it filter the air to .3 microns? You're not doing a good job of convincing me that an old mineshaft is better than a purpose built, to military spec, nuclear fallout command center.
I agree. Racist? How is that possibly racist?
Woosh? Gungans (particularly their Ebonics) showed George Lucas racist sentiments toward uneducated black Americans.