Both papers specifically study the effect of pesticides on bees. Colony collapse disorder is not even necessary to mention in the summary, not sure why he does.
A single instance of success is not evidence of anything.
I suspect 2 forces are at play here. First, it's a novel idea to produce and distribute things this way, and people who want the idea to succeed may be more likely to buy copies. Second, his production costs are likely many times lower than that of a typical movie.
It's real science, but it's bad science reporting.
First, the difference reported was small. The largest decrease in risk, in women, was 25%. 3.1 vs 3.9 deaths per 1000 people. That's what 3 years of aspirin is purchasing for you (for men the difference was smaller). This is what people fail to look at whenever it comes to incidence of disease. When something is increased by x% more than y, it's really important what y is.
Second, are there any negative effects of taking aspirin daily? Maybe? This paper doesn't address this, because it doesn't look for it. So telling the public that daily aspirin is a good idea is short-sighted. It's also medical advice that a single research paper can't really provide.
Third, I searched around and could only find summaries, so I'm questioning their methodology. But so far I can't find the info I'm looking for. What I'm interested in is the subject selection. Who these people were and where they come from is important. If for example the average age of participants was 70, the advice hold less weight for people who are 20. If all the participants were from the UK, maybe there are factors specific to people from the UK that would invalidate this finding if it were preformed in China.
I guess what I'm saying is, this one paper shouldn't change anyone's behavior or be considered medical advice.
Maybe if this were the only thing they were doing wrong, but cops in the U.S. routinely get away with anything and everything, and yes, if you're intentionally falsifying data to put people in jail you should be fucking fired, possibly jailed - with the people you put there.
That's nothing. Ceramic blades don't show up at all, either on the metal detector or on the body scan. I mean, a blade big enough to be considered a sword would not show up at all.
Want to stop terrorism on planes? Stop pissing people off to the point that they want to kill a whole plane full of people.
I agree with your analysis, but would further point out that culturally, western capitalist democracies hold the idea that if everyone looks out for themselves, the greater good will be achieved. It's in the interest of your neighbor, for example, for you personally to be as greedy as possible. Now, I'm not anti-capitalism but as long as this idea is considered unarguable, we're at a stumbling block.
That's different. If you attack the officer or his car, that's already a crime, unrelated to whatever you're being arrested for. Resisting arrest is used when people argue with police or when police unlawfully shove you and you don't immediately go down into fetal position. It's also used to punish people who are being beaten by police and fight back. All of these are things you should be allowed to do.
The other problem I have with it is the license it gives cops when you're resisting. Say you're on the ground being cuffed and you aren't cooperating - not letting them pull your arm behind your back. Resisting arrest means a crime is in progress right now and they psychologically justify doing things like tasering you, when you're no danger to anyone.
First, Bluray is 1080p, not 720. Second, not all 1080p is the same. If you compress a 1080p movie into an H264 file, it will have visible compression artifacts that don't exist on the DVD.
Yes, for a lot of things, the compressed file is fine (especially for viewing on a laptop or tablet). But for a large TV, it's still not as good as the real thing, UNLESS you get a full uncompressed rip of the BluRay, which would be upwards of 5 GB per episode.
HOW different though? I am willing to bet that people tested on very good stereo equipment can't tell the difference between a 320k MP3 and redbook audio. With their ears - not with waveform equipment.
And I mean a real blind test, not just playing both and having them claim that one sounds better.
No, speed limits are set by people who are interested in fining everyone, any time, and having an excuse to pull anyone over, any time. They don't increase safety. At all. Google it if you care enough to. There are also regular instances of local councils lowering speed limits in their town below what is set by the state to further increase fines.
If you want to pick a traffic rule to defend, you couldn't have picked worse.
Walk up to a bunch of pet owners and ask them the advantage of a cat over a bear. They'll claim cats don't maul you. But we all know cats can theoretically maul you, so by your logic, I have just proven that cats and bears are equally dangerous pets.
For a large majority of Mac users, the only malware they've seen in the last 10 years is extra search bars in Firefox, and you don't even have to run AV software.
Windows still allows changes to the registry without your immediate consent if you're running in admin mode (which some apps inexplicably require).
A boycott is an organized refusal to support a business. It's hard to organize in digital space. It's easy if it's say, a store in your neighborhood. Boycotts like this are a fantasy. You can refuse to buy, and suggest others do, but actual boycotts are near impossible. There's no way to stand in front of an app and tell people about to buy it what the problem is. Even bad reviews don't achieve this level of organization.
No idea, but Truecrypt can have 2 passwords, one which unlocks a "fake" set of data, but still hides your real one. Due to the way data is stored while encrypted, there's no way to tell the difference between a second encrypted section and noise.
No, they don't need solid proof, only evidence. An officer saying "I saw it before the shut off the computer" is evidence. If that convinces a judge, he gets a warrant.
Of course, this does very little in the way of actually forcing you to do anything. If you don't open your door for a warrant, the police can break it down. If you "forget" your password, I have no idea what will happen.
If enough states vote for a constitutional convention, they can overturn any law or any part of the constitution without any input from the federal government.
I would argue it's better to expose a few children to sex way before they're ready for it, than it is to expose all of them to an invasive government that scrutinizes their every action "for the greater good".
Except there was no child pornography. I never heard of this subreddit before the controversy yesterday, so decided to check it out. It was pictures of fully clothed children. The threads had lewd comments (like "mmm yeah") which gives it a sexual context. But where's the line? Is discussing the sexualization of children a crime?
I'm on Reddit's side because as a web site operator, you can't afford to be in the gray area opening yourself up to costly legal battles over issues you might not even care strongly about. I just don't think the content was as objectionable as actual child pornography would be.
But you're NOT willing to accept that $2 price increase, because you have no relationship to it. You and others go online and compare prices between components, and pick based on price (not solely on price, but still). If Foxconn cleans up their act and has to raise prices in the process, people buy from somewhere else instead. They don't say "oh, well okay I'll pay more because it's helping people". It would be nice if they did, but they won't.
I'm not saying you don't have good intentions, just that your good intentions CAN ONLY mess things up.
Slashdot Mirror
Both papers specifically study the effect of pesticides on bees. Colony collapse disorder is not even necessary to mention in the summary, not sure why he does.
Why wouldn't "science" allow it? Science allows for outrageous hypotheses, even if they eventually can't be proven, or are proven false.
A single instance of success is not evidence of anything.
I suspect 2 forces are at play here. First, it's a novel idea to produce and distribute things this way, and people who want the idea to succeed may be more likely to buy copies. Second, his production costs are likely many times lower than that of a typical movie.
It's real science, but it's bad science reporting.
First, the difference reported was small. The largest decrease in risk, in women, was 25%. 3.1 vs 3.9 deaths per 1000 people. That's what 3 years of aspirin is purchasing for you (for men the difference was smaller). This is what people fail to look at whenever it comes to incidence of disease. When something is increased by x% more than y, it's really important what y is.
Second, are there any negative effects of taking aspirin daily? Maybe? This paper doesn't address this, because it doesn't look for it. So telling the public that daily aspirin is a good idea is short-sighted. It's also medical advice that a single research paper can't really provide.
Third, I searched around and could only find summaries, so I'm questioning their methodology. But so far I can't find the info I'm looking for. What I'm interested in is the subject selection. Who these people were and where they come from is important. If for example the average age of participants was 70, the advice hold less weight for people who are 20. If all the participants were from the UK, maybe there are factors specific to people from the UK that would invalidate this finding if it were preformed in China.
I guess what I'm saying is, this one paper shouldn't change anyone's behavior or be considered medical advice.
Whistleblowers and muckrakers shouldn't be a part of the government.
Neither should liars and assholes. But guess what?
Maybe if this were the only thing they were doing wrong, but cops in the U.S. routinely get away with anything and everything, and yes, if you're intentionally falsifying data to put people in jail you should be fucking fired, possibly jailed - with the people you put there.
That's nothing. Ceramic blades don't show up at all, either on the metal detector or on the body scan. I mean, a blade big enough to be considered a sword would not show up at all. Want to stop terrorism on planes? Stop pissing people off to the point that they want to kill a whole plane full of people.
How are companies making money from mining data? It seems like anyone who might actually want that data could very easily just mine it themselves.
I agree with your analysis, but would further point out that culturally, western capitalist democracies hold the idea that if everyone looks out for themselves, the greater good will be achieved. It's in the interest of your neighbor, for example, for you personally to be as greedy as possible. Now, I'm not anti-capitalism but as long as this idea is considered unarguable, we're at a stumbling block.
That's different. If you attack the officer or his car, that's already a crime, unrelated to whatever you're being arrested for. Resisting arrest is used when people argue with police or when police unlawfully shove you and you don't immediately go down into fetal position. It's also used to punish people who are being beaten by police and fight back. All of these are things you should be allowed to do.
The other problem I have with it is the license it gives cops when you're resisting. Say you're on the ground being cuffed and you aren't cooperating - not letting them pull your arm behind your back. Resisting arrest means a crime is in progress right now and they psychologically justify doing things like tasering you, when you're no danger to anyone.
Get rid of resisting arrest. It is only used to arrest people who haven't done anything wrong. It's everyone's duty to resist arrest.
First, Bluray is 1080p, not 720. Second, not all 1080p is the same. If you compress a 1080p movie into an H264 file, it will have visible compression artifacts that don't exist on the DVD.
Yes, for a lot of things, the compressed file is fine (especially for viewing on a laptop or tablet). But for a large TV, it's still not as good as the real thing, UNLESS you get a full uncompressed rip of the BluRay, which would be upwards of 5 GB per episode.
HOW different though? I am willing to bet that people tested on very good stereo equipment can't tell the difference between a 320k MP3 and redbook audio. With their ears - not with waveform equipment.
And I mean a real blind test, not just playing both and having them claim that one sounds better.
No, speed limits are set by people who are interested in fining everyone, any time, and having an excuse to pull anyone over, any time. They don't increase safety. At all. Google it if you care enough to. There are also regular instances of local councils lowering speed limits in their town below what is set by the state to further increase fines.
If you want to pick a traffic rule to defend, you couldn't have picked worse.
Walk up to a bunch of pet owners and ask them the advantage of a cat over a bear. They'll claim cats don't maul you. But we all know cats can theoretically maul you, so by your logic, I have just proven that cats and bears are equally dangerous pets.
For a large majority of Mac users, the only malware they've seen in the last 10 years is extra search bars in Firefox, and you don't even have to run AV software.
Windows still allows changes to the registry without your immediate consent if you're running in admin mode (which some apps inexplicably require).
A boycott is an organized refusal to support a business. It's hard to organize in digital space. It's easy if it's say, a store in your neighborhood. Boycotts like this are a fantasy. You can refuse to buy, and suggest others do, but actual boycotts are near impossible. There's no way to stand in front of an app and tell people about to buy it what the problem is. Even bad reviews don't achieve this level of organization.
No idea, but Truecrypt can have 2 passwords, one which unlocks a "fake" set of data, but still hides your real one. Due to the way data is stored while encrypted, there's no way to tell the difference between a second encrypted section and noise.
No, they don't need solid proof, only evidence. An officer saying "I saw it before the shut off the computer" is evidence. If that convinces a judge, he gets a warrant.
Of course, this does very little in the way of actually forcing you to do anything. If you don't open your door for a warrant, the police can break it down. If you "forget" your password, I have no idea what will happen.
If enough states vote for a constitutional convention, they can overturn any law or any part of the constitution without any input from the federal government.
At any given store, DVDs are about $15 for new stuff, while BluRay is about $25 for the same movie.
I have a 1080p TV, and I can barely see the difference between a BluRay and a DVD. It's just not worth the $10.
I would argue it's better to expose a few children to sex way before they're ready for it, than it is to expose all of them to an invasive government that scrutinizes their every action "for the greater good".
Except there was no child pornography. I never heard of this subreddit before the controversy yesterday, so decided to check it out. It was pictures of fully clothed children. The threads had lewd comments (like "mmm yeah") which gives it a sexual context. But where's the line? Is discussing the sexualization of children a crime?
I'm on Reddit's side because as a web site operator, you can't afford to be in the gray area opening yourself up to costly legal battles over issues you might not even care strongly about. I just don't think the content was as objectionable as actual child pornography would be.
I'm calling bullshit on your police stats, if you even care to provide them. The complete removal of speed limits has no effect on accident rates.
Who modded this trash up? Seriously. I don't think this guy has ever met another live human.
But you're NOT willing to accept that $2 price increase, because you have no relationship to it. You and others go online and compare prices between components, and pick based on price (not solely on price, but still). If Foxconn cleans up their act and has to raise prices in the process, people buy from somewhere else instead. They don't say "oh, well okay I'll pay more because it's helping people". It would be nice if they did, but they won't.
I'm not saying you don't have good intentions, just that your good intentions CAN ONLY mess things up.