This is the same argument as the open source code base, which was what I was trying to get at, somewhat. Sure you *could* theoretically audit all the code on your computer, but nobody has the time for that, and very few have the domain knowledge. I "could" read up on all the studies, but...
Do *you* understand all the nuances of the science? Really?
And stop insulting me. That isn't helping anything.
Call it Murphy's law; when the GMO company/ies inevitably cut corners while playing with living things, eventually something will get fucked up. And then when somebody finally realizes the result is unhealthy, they'll suppress the findings.
Considering that we keep finding studies that are full of shit, it's unreasonable for you to attack people who doubt studies.
While it does sound silly (and the two proposed causes have glaring logical flaws), I wonder if this isn't an urban myth that sprang from actual concerns. Kind of like leaving a pot of boiling water unattended on a stove...presumably if the fan motor was sufficiently shitty it could start a fire? And obviously the electricity is kind of going to waste as well.
You're obstructing the conversation by making the issue excessively black and white. You can experiment on crops in a controlled environment without spraying the seeds into the wind.
So if we *don't* worry about anything, that provides evolutionary advantage?
Yes. The important part is that the risk-takers don't have to be everybody, but only a sufficiently-sized subset of the population that then shares their findings.
Not to try to legitimize fiction (though they say the writers based the episodes on real stories, for what it's worth), but every time the topic of biodiversity in GMO crops come up, I remember the Leverage episode where AgriCorp tries to release a blight that only their corn is immune to, in order to make a killing when the rest of the world corn supply is destroyed and theirs survives.
Just stupid enough for somebody to actually try, I say...
So he can have the media grossly misrepresent the trial (assuming they covered it at all)? I'd rather take a foreign country's media, even if it does rag on the U.S. a bit harder than I'd like.
Just the fact that I'm seriously talking about state-influenced media in the U.S. makes me sad.
Some theorists say that our electoral setup converges on two parties by the nature of it. Bear in mind that the current Republicans and Democrats weren't always those two parties; you had the Federalists and Antifederalists, the Whigs and the Democratic-Republicans...
We need more than 2 viable parties, not a different 2.
The last time I tried Debian, I couldn't figure out how to get it installed properly. Unless they've made the installer Ubuntu-level friendly over the last year or two, they're still a bit behind in that regard.
I did try Linux Mint Debian Edition XFCE at one point, but it was somewhat painful to set up and then I made the big mistake of aborting an apt-get update and my packages got hosed.
1) The guy's wife was speaking to the kid in English so evidently this would be considered bilingualism. 2) Obviously of the 2, English was the vastly more useful one to communicate with *literally anyone.* 3) That's a horrible thing to do to your kid. Don't do experiments with extremely young children. Just don't.
If the human worker is replaced by machines and finds him/herself lacking something constructive to do, it seems natural to think that they may end up questioning the meaning of their life. Societal improvements in working conditions and ability to produce more are beside the point if the person in question doesn't have a job.
Make a high enough volume of predictions and you're guaranteed to get an equal or greater number right. Nobody said anything about success *percentage*:)
Slashdot Mirror
Or put them in management positions where they don't have enough power to harm much?
This is the same argument as the open source code base, which was what I was trying to get at, somewhat. Sure you *could* theoretically audit all the code on your computer, but nobody has the time for that, and very few have the domain knowledge. I "could" read up on all the studies, but...
Do *you* understand all the nuances of the science? Really?
And stop insulting me. That isn't helping anything.
This has absolutely nothing to do with science; this is about humans acting for human reasons (money) instead of science!
And nobody could possibly grease the USDA. Especially not a multihojillion-dollar corporation.
Call it Murphy's law; when the GMO company/ies inevitably cut corners while playing with living things, eventually something will get fucked up. And then when somebody finally realizes the result is unhealthy, they'll suppress the findings.
Considering that we keep finding studies that are full of shit, it's unreasonable for you to attack people who doubt studies.
While it does sound silly (and the two proposed causes have glaring logical flaws), I wonder if this isn't an urban myth that sprang from actual concerns. Kind of like leaving a pot of boiling water unattended on a stove...presumably if the fan motor was sufficiently shitty it could start a fire? And obviously the electricity is kind of going to waste as well.
You're obstructing the conversation by making the issue excessively black and white. You can experiment on crops in a controlled environment without spraying the seeds into the wind.
So if we *don't* worry about anything, that provides evolutionary advantage?
Yes. The important part is that the risk-takers don't have to be everybody, but only a sufficiently-sized subset of the population that then shares their findings.
Not to try to legitimize fiction (though they say the writers based the episodes on real stories, for what it's worth), but every time the topic of biodiversity in GMO crops come up, I remember the Leverage episode where AgriCorp tries to release a blight that only their corn is immune to, in order to make a killing when the rest of the world corn supply is destroyed and theirs survives.
Just stupid enough for somebody to actually try, I say...
Saying that there is a gray area between good and evil is a far cry from saying good can = evil.
So he can have the media grossly misrepresent the trial (assuming they covered it at all)? I'd rather take a foreign country's media, even if it does rag on the U.S. a bit harder than I'd like.
Just the fact that I'm seriously talking about state-influenced media in the U.S. makes me sad.
Some theorists say that our electoral setup converges on two parties by the nature of it. Bear in mind that the current Republicans and Democrats weren't always those two parties; you had the Federalists and Antifederalists, the Whigs and the Democratic-Republicans...
We need more than 2 viable parties, not a different 2.
Calling them collateral damage doesn't really affect whether the actions were moral or not.
Behavioralism or Behaviorism?
The last time I tried Debian, I couldn't figure out how to get it installed properly. Unless they've made the installer Ubuntu-level friendly over the last year or two, they're still a bit behind in that regard.
I did try Linux Mint Debian Edition XFCE at one point, but it was somewhat painful to set up and then I made the big mistake of aborting an apt-get update and my packages got hosed.
Ha! When you say it like that, I just sound idiotic now don't I...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Albert_experiment
1) The guy's wife was speaking to the kid in English so evidently this would be considered bilingualism.
2) Obviously of the 2, English was the vastly more useful one to communicate with *literally anyone.*
3) That's a horrible thing to do to your kid. Don't do experiments with extremely young children. Just don't.
Yes, exactly. I don't think anyone would argue that facebook is integrated into society; many would argue that facebook is not integral to society.
Yeah, I was kind of responding to both you and the original post. No snark inherent in it.
'Integrated' or 'integral'?
If the human worker is replaced by machines and finds him/herself lacking something constructive to do, it seems natural to think that they may end up questioning the meaning of their life. Societal improvements in working conditions and ability to produce more are beside the point if the person in question doesn't have a job.
Make a high enough volume of predictions and you're guaranteed to get an equal or greater number right. Nobody said anything about success *percentage* :)
Cite! Not site or sight, cite! Like a citation.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cite
No one speaks Klingon natively. Ergo literally any other language is more useful.