If that's what Frankenberg wanted to accomplish he should have read the agreements more closely. What ultimately was signed did not produce that result.
And notice how many times racial slurs have (not) come up in this conversation?
Proof that there is a level of socially acceptable speech, even on Slashdot.
The other missing element is that broadcasting is not equivalent to free speech. Broadcasting is employing a licensed access to a scarce resource, the public airwaves. It is completely acceptable that the public, through our social and governmental structures, should have some conditions on how public resources are used.
After all, you can still say that you want the XYZ political party to be doomed to perdition, that they are brutal rapists and that feces inhabit their craniums. You just can't use the shortcut words.
Of course you are incorrect. Words are an expression of thoughts and intentions. Violent, shocking, demeaning words are an expression of violent, shocking, demeaning intent.
Otherwise those specific words would have no purpose and would fall into disuse.
It sounds like congress would demand a certain level of rational and civil discourse as a requirement of holding a license to broadcast over the public airwaves. I'm for that.
First of all, this is internal to the DOD, not the Whitehouse nor the RNC. Second, it makes good sense. Third, it doesn't apply to you. Fourth, this isn't the RIAA we are talking about. There is a war going on. People are getting killed every day. You may be deprived of the pleasure of reading a blog direct from the battlefield. That's your contribution to the war effort. I guess you'll have to wait for the post-action books to come out.
If you didn't sleep through history class you might recall that information control is one of the key facets of warfare, as practiced by such nefarious dictators as George Washington, Abe Lincoln, FDR, Harry Truman, etc. etc. Remember reading that cool book about Turing working on the codebreaking team in WWII...? Hello? anybody home?
Check out the www.9news.com website. They've been posting pictures of the wanna-be pedophiles who answered a sting ad posted by a law-enforcement agency... by showing up at the rendezvous hotel room.
And these guys ended up with sexual offender status.
In Bush's America... have you tried calling support?
Or maybe you can take them to small claims court. That's the way it used to work in Clinton's America.
And if you have, maybe you can tell us what the outcome was. Nah, that would be useful information. We wouldn't want the NSA to know what you are up to.
But if it's expanding faster than the speed of light than light would never "make a lap" and you end up with the same question... any initial light outruns all the matter.
If it's expanding much slower than the speed of light than that light is making a very large number of "laps" and it would be darn hard to tell which hunk of light going by has anything to do with the initial condition.
Oh well, don't waste too much time trying to teach me this stuff. If it's not intuitively obvious I'll probably never get it.
Ok, I kind of get the drift of looking at light that has come from some far away place as seeing "back in time".
The part I don't understand is: if this light and the matter which makes up the part of the universe nearby us, both were launched out at the same time from a single point, right?
If the light is traveling at the speed of light, if the matter is traveling at something slower than the speed of light, then all light from that initial point would have long ago wizzed past us and now be long gone.
So, how does this work?
I never would have made a good cosmologist.. or cosmetologist either.
Ok, I'm not an astronomer obviously.... isn't the phrase "the farther back in time you go" a synonym for "the farther away you look" or "the tiniest little dot you can find"?
The whole argument of red shift, distance == time, etc. does it not depend on having a homogeneous nature of space? Does this dark matter idea just mean that the red shift assumptions have some flaws?
The study authors or the people who funded it turn the results into a press release and fax it to media outlets. Media then turns the press release into a headline.
In most states of the US self defense is not illegal. Self defense in some cases will extend to my loved-ones and my property.
There is some controversy about having citizens armed and able to intervene in crimes. In my state to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon requires a short test on what situations are appropriate for citizen intervention.
In those areas where "law enforcement" is not available (like frontier towns and on the Internet), the job falls to the citizens to keep criminal activity under control. That is a feature of citizen-led government. If the government can't do it, the citizens can (and should).
Slashdot Mirror
The actual article says that they someday, maybe, might be able to make them for $1 per watt. That would be great.
But for now it ain't so.
If that's what Frankenberg wanted to accomplish he should have read the agreements more closely. What ultimately was signed did not produce that result.
Buy a few spools of cable.
Buy a box of staples.
Buy a ladder.
Trees make great telephone poles.
where the entire frame was out of focus for large parts of the movie.
(Instead of doing "real" pretend fighting, the actors
just stood near each other drinking coffee while the cameraman danced
all around.)
-1 off topic, yes I know.
Being a political consultant and advisor it was his job to help someone
get elected.
That part he did very well.
> Are you suggesting it's impossible for rational and civil discourse to include expressions of violent, shocking or demeaning thought?
No, I am suggesting rational and civil discourse would be improved by limiting its gratuitous
peppering with pointless juvenile expletives.
And notice how many times racial slurs have (not) come up in this conversation?
Proof that there is a level of socially acceptable speech, even on Slashdot.
The other missing element is that broadcasting is not equivalent to free speech.
Broadcasting is employing a licensed access to a scarce resource, the public airwaves.
It is completely acceptable that the public, through our social and governmental
structures, should have some conditions on how public resources are used.
After all, you can still say that you want the XYZ political party to be doomed to perdition, that they are brutal rapists and that feces inhabit their craniums. You just can't use the shortcut words.
Of course you are incorrect. Words are an expression of thoughts and intentions.
Violent, shocking, demeaning words are an expression of violent, shocking, demeaning intent.
Otherwise those specific words would have no purpose and would fall into disuse.
It sounds like congress would demand a certain level of rational and civil discourse as a requirement of holding a license to broadcast over the public airwaves. I'm for that.
hey there big dead nostril John 13:35
but you may be right about the other thing
The parent poster is very confused.
First of all, this is internal to the DOD, not the Whitehouse nor the RNC.
Second, it makes good sense.
Third, it doesn't apply to you.
Fourth, this isn't the RIAA we are talking about.
There is a war going on. People are getting killed every day.
You may be deprived of the pleasure of reading a blog direct
from the battlefield. That's your contribution to the war effort.
I guess you'll have to wait for the post-action books to come out.
If you didn't sleep through history class you might recall that information
control is one of the key facets of warfare, as practiced by such nefarious
dictators as George Washington, Abe Lincoln, FDR, Harry Truman, etc. etc.
Remember reading that cool book about Turing working on the codebreaking team
in WWII...? Hello? anybody home?
I for one welcome or new supernova overlords...
this place is due for a bit of cleanup.
A lot of the displays in any natural history museum are fake.
That doesn't seem to cause anybody any problems.
What color was a T-Rex?
who hates the direction that email has taken.
Attachments, MIME, signature blocks written
by lawyers, blah blah blah.
The world would be a better place if all email
were plain text.
Linus uses Pine. And he's right.
Check out the www.9news.com website. They've been posting
pictures of the wanna-be pedophiles who answered a sting ad
posted by a law-enforcement agency... by showing up at the
rendezvous hotel room.
And these guys ended up with sexual offender status.
In Bush's America... have you tried calling support?
Or maybe you can take them to small claims court. That's the
way it used to work in Clinton's America.
And if you have, maybe you can tell us what the outcome was.
Nah, that would be useful information. We wouldn't want
the NSA to know what you are up to.
Don't worry about it. Most people don't really believe in evolution anyway
(so says recent article on the subject in the Atlantic).
According to the Wikpedia article on Big Bang,
if anything ever shot down Hubble's redshift theory
the whole thing would go boom.
so to speak
That's cool.
But if it's expanding faster than the speed of light than
light would never "make a lap" and you end up with the
same question... any initial light outruns all the matter.
If it's expanding much slower than the speed of light
than that light is making a very large number of "laps" and it
would be darn hard to tell which hunk of light going by
has anything to do with the initial condition.
Oh well, don't waste too much time trying to teach me
this stuff. If it's not intuitively obvious I'll probably
never get it.
... or a fish jumped
All you can say is that you think one cause
was more or less likely than another.
But, it's a nice pastoral scene to contemplate on a
friday afternoon. I wish I was fishing now.
Ok, I kind of get the drift of looking at light that
has come from some far away place as seeing "back in time".
The part I don't understand is: if this light and the matter
which makes up the part of the universe nearby us, both
were launched out at the same time from a single point, right?
If the light is traveling at the speed of light, if the matter is
traveling at something slower than the speed of light, then all
light from that initial point would have long ago wizzed past us
and now be long gone.
So, how does this work?
I never would have made a good cosmologist.. or cosmetologist either.
Kaypro-4
Z80 at 2 Mhz? 64K memory, two floppy drives and CP/M
No hard drive.
Ok, I'm not an astronomer obviously.... isn't the
phrase "the farther back in time you go" a synonym for "the farther
away you look" or "the tiniest little dot you can find"?
The whole argument of red shift, distance == time, etc.
does it not depend on having a homogeneous nature of space? Does
this dark matter idea just mean that the red shift assumptions
have some flaws?
Just wondering.
correction:
Colorado has an overabundance of elk (wapiti).
Buy a license and shoot one. Please.
4) hype
The study authors or the people who funded it turn the results into a press release and fax it to media outlets. Media then turns the press release into a headline.
In most states of the US self defense is not illegal. Self defense in some cases will extend to my loved-ones and my property.
There is some controversy about having citizens armed and able to intervene in crimes. In my state to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon requires a short test on what situations are appropriate for citizen intervention.
In those areas where "law enforcement" is not available (like frontier towns and on the Internet), the job falls to the citizens to keep criminal activity under control. That is a feature of citizen-led government. If the government can't do it, the citizens can (and should).