I'd kind of like to see anyone contracting something dangerous like measles from someone who chose not to vaccinate turn around and start suing the shit out of them
Those kind of cases will never be won. There is no way to prove that a single un-vaccinated person caused the illness. The infection could have come from any asymptomatic yet contagious person that had contact.
Not all vaccines should be mandatory. For example there is an anthrax vaccine. Does everyone need to have it? As Christie said;
Not every vaccine is created equal and not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others.
By the way, parents do have a choice. They can have their children get the required vaccines, they can home school or they can create their own school that does not require vaccines. I predict a non-vaccine school will last until everyone gets sick.
You could make a perfectly good argument about making a gender-blind program
That would be a good idea but not the case here. To be gender blind one would not even count the number of students in the different demographics and would not be able to see that there are any underrepresented demographics. The problem is how to encourage underrepresented demographics to participate without discouraging over represented demographics from participating.
Misandry is not the solution to misogyny; it is just a different problem.
Just a note; Google dictionary knows the spelling for misogyny but not misandry.
Just one of them is from a book on genetically modified fish
That is the only one that even comes close. Here is the quote from the book.
sterile or genetically modified fish are commonly incapable of producing viable offspring.
Genetically modified fish produce offspring but they are not viable. Since sterile fish produce no offspring the also produce no viable offspring. That is also not a formal definition.
Every reference to a formal definition equates sterility to the inability to produce offspring. How about this quote from the Concise Encyclopedia Biology;
Sterility, infertility: the partial or complete inability of an individual to produce functional gametes, and in a wider sense viable zygotes, under existing environmental conditions.
Since the mosquito offspring pass far beyond the zygote stage this definition does not apply.
If you can quote a formal definition I might believe you. Inferring from usage is not a formal definition.
Sorry but sterile means "incapable of producing offspring". It has nothing to do with whether or not the offspring reach maturity. If you have a reference that supports your definition I would love to see it.
The number of drives seems to be large. The calculations are exponential therefore as the cluster gets bugger the number of spare disks get much bigger.
Actually, the social shunning/shaming of those who advocate positions that are detrimental to society
Name calling is not shunning or shaming. It is attaching the person and not the argument and therefore has no place on civil discourse.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Today, all one needs to do is say the government wants it and many will assume it is bad. It is the flip side of the same coin.
You made some good points and I will think about them.
On a one for one basis I can see your point. The calculations get different when you can replace banks of elevators with a couple of shafts. It also reduce the floors pace on each floor taken up by shafts. A LSM elevator can cost many times the cost of a rope elevator but still come out less expensive in the long run. Then there is the issue of vary tall building that even the new rope can not handle. Neither of us have the numbers so we have no idea where the break even point is.
The main deterrent is knowing the police are in an area. Otherwise it falls into the category of being anywhere, so why not commit crime x here?
I live in a relatively small town and know how many police officers are on duty at one time. If I know where all those police offices are I also know where they are not.
Sorry but your "scenario" misses a huge piece. People do not go to jail for having beer spilled on their shirt. If the police can not prove alcohol over the limit in the person's body they do not go to jail.
You're innocent? Prove it.
It is called a breathalyzer/blood test that the police will perform.
You also completely missed the point that even if someone gets tracked an pulled over the general public was not privy to the exact location of that person.
Finally, do you realize the manpower needed to put that chain of events together? Sorry but a DWI charge is not enough to justify that amount of manpower to any police force.
Sorry but it is a pretty big leap from listening to phone calls and reading emails to "stripping an entire nation of its freedoms". There are several steps in between and none of those steps are inevitable. The closest I can get to "stripping an entire nation of its freedoms" is "strip an entire nation of some of its privacy".
worth saving a few theoretical citizens from outside attacks.
The security services infiltrate the group, which causes the group to talk to them.
How does the security service infiltrate the group when it has no ties to existing groups and can go from inception to action in a couple of weeks? The security service has to find the group before they infiltrate it.
Personally, I'd rather have a few crimes occur and not live in a surveillance state thanks.
You are looking at this form a standpoint of everyday crime. That is not what mass surveillance is about. Pre-1995 there were very few terrorist attacks in North America. Today we have ISSIS and their supporters planning attacks. Another issue is that the internet speeds communications so that planning can be done much more quickly. The police need faster methods to keep up. So you would rather have a few incidents like what happened in France?
Slashdot Mirror
I'd kind of like to see anyone contracting something dangerous like measles from someone who chose not to vaccinate turn around and start suing the shit out of them
Those kind of cases will never be won. There is no way to prove that a single un-vaccinated person caused the illness. The infection could have come from any asymptomatic yet contagious person that had contact.
Not all vaccines should be mandatory. For example there is an anthrax vaccine. Does everyone need to have it? As Christie said;
Not every vaccine is created equal and not every disease type is as great a public health threat as others.
By the way, parents do have a choice. They can have their children get the required vaccines, they can home school or they can create their own school that does not require vaccines. I predict a non-vaccine school will last until everyone gets sick.
You could make a perfectly good argument about making a gender-blind program
That would be a good idea but not the case here. To be gender blind one would not even count the number of students in the different demographics and would not be able to see that there are any underrepresented demographics. The problem is how to encourage underrepresented demographics to participate without discouraging over represented demographics from participating.
Misandry is not the solution to misogyny; it is just a different problem.
Just a note; Google dictionary knows the spelling for misogyny but not misandry.
AC I have one question for you. Do you live in India?
Just one of them is from a book on genetically modified fish
That is the only one that even comes close. Here is the quote from the book.
sterile or genetically modified fish are commonly incapable of producing viable offspring.
Genetically modified fish produce offspring but they are not viable. Since sterile fish produce no offspring the also produce no viable offspring. That is also not a formal definition.
Every reference to a formal definition equates sterility to the inability to produce offspring. How about this quote from the Concise Encyclopedia Biology;
Sterility, infertility: the partial or complete inability of an individual to produce functional gametes, and in a wider sense viable zygotes, under existing environmental conditions.
Since the mosquito offspring pass far beyond the zygote stage this definition does not apply.
If you can quote a formal definition I might believe you. Inferring from usage is not a formal definition.
I was just explaining how the supply of insects will not be significantly decreased by decimating one vector species.
Sorry but sterile means "incapable of producing offspring". It has nothing to do with whether or not the offspring reach maturity. If you have a reference that supports your definition I would love to see it.
While the outcome may be the same the way to get there is completely different than the quoted article.
Not sterile insects.
The modified males then mate with wild females whose offspring die, reducing the population.
Sterile insects do not produce offspring.
This technique does not sterilize the male. Offspring are still created but they die quickly. This is a different process.
The modified males then mate with wild females whose offspring die, reducing the population.
If the males can mate and produce offspring they are not sterile.
There are over 80 different species of mosquitos in Florida. This method only targets one of those species. There will still be plenty of mosquitos.
This is not sterilization. These mosquitos reproduce but their you die quickly.
Where is the link to the actual study?
The number of drives seems to be large. The calculations are exponential therefore as the cluster gets bugger the number of spare disks get much bigger.
Drives spares Total
5, 15, 20
10, 55, 65
30, 465, 495
That's a lot of disks. There is a point that space and power overcomes the human cost.
5s later the various systems have correlated the data and stated that you're an AA member and thus likely to be drunk - no warning should be given.
You have been watching too much Criminal Minds and CSI.
Actually, the social shunning/shaming of those who advocate positions that are detrimental to society
Name calling is not shunning or shaming. It is attaching the person and not the argument and therefore has no place on civil discourse.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.
Today, all one needs to do is say the government wants it and many will assume it is bad. It is the flip side of the same coin.
You made some good points and I will think about them.
On a one for one basis I can see your point. The calculations get different when you can replace banks of elevators with a couple of shafts. It also reduce the floors pace on each floor taken up by shafts. A LSM elevator can cost many times the cost of a rope elevator but still come out less expensive in the long run. Then there is the issue of vary tall building that even the new rope can not handle. Neither of us have the numbers so we have no idea where the break even point is.
The main deterrent is knowing the police are in an area. Otherwise it falls into the category of being anywhere, so why not commit crime x here?
I live in a relatively small town and know how many police officers are on duty at one time. If I know where all those police offices are I also know where they are not.
Sorry but your "scenario" misses a huge piece. People do not go to jail for having beer spilled on their shirt. If the police can not prove alcohol over the limit in the person's body they do not go to jail.
You're innocent? Prove it.
It is called a breathalyzer/blood test that the police will perform.
You also completely missed the point that even if someone gets tracked an pulled over the general public was not privy to the exact location of that person.
Finally, do you realize the manpower needed to put that chain of events together? Sorry but a DWI charge is not enough to justify that amount of manpower to any police force.
If sliding contacts are such an issue then how do electric trains overcome it?
Linear Synchronous Motor Elevators Become a Reality
Sorry but it is a pretty big leap from listening to phone calls and reading emails to "stripping an entire nation of its freedoms". There are several steps in between and none of those steps are inevitable. The closest I can get to "stripping an entire nation of its freedoms" is "strip an entire nation of some of its privacy".
worth saving a few theoretical citizens from outside attacks.
Tell that to the people of France.
The security services infiltrate the group, which causes the group to talk to them.
How does the security service infiltrate the group when it has no ties to existing groups and can go from inception to action in a couple of weeks? The security service has to find the group before they infiltrate it.
Berating me is doing nothing to change my mind. I do not respond well to bullies.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people don't understand the difference between saying two things are exactly alike and using analogies.
And I showed him how the differences make them not comparable.
So you've arbitrarily decided that everything in your house is magically private while everything outside of your house isn't,
And you have a similar arbitrary line between what is private and what is public. Everything you say about my line could be said about yours.
Personally, I'd rather have a few crimes occur and not live in a surveillance state thanks.
You are looking at this form a standpoint of everyday crime. That is not what mass surveillance is about. Pre-1995 there were very few terrorist attacks in North America. Today we have ISSIS and their supporters planning attacks. Another issue is that the internet speeds communications so that planning can be done much more quickly. The police need faster methods to keep up. So you would rather have a few incidents like what happened in France?