Even worse, dealing in facts means they'd have to abandon trickle down economics. They've been running that scam for at least 30 years now. Evolution, birth control, gay rights, those aren't real issues. They're only used to whip crowds into a frenzy. But robbing from the poor and giving to the rich? That's the heart and soul of the Republican party. It's the only reason they exist.
Certainly I don't know what Tim Allen was doing. He seemed to be the head of a group of actors, and for the life of me I was trying to understand who he was imitating.
You could say the same thing about any role Tim Allen has played.
Ah, so the real problem isn't that the content of the poster was threatening. The problem is that he didn't show the proper deference to authority. Just making sure we're clear on this.
of Arduino and the "open hardware" movement. What is the big deal? Yeah, schematics and documentation are free but the circuits they are using are closed.
Well it wouldn't do much of anything if the circuit wasn't closed.
What's your thought process there? The fact that I can voice my dissent in relative safety means that our government is good and just? No, the fact that we can voice our dissent in safety is only more condemning. No one is using this vital freedom. If we had to fear for our lives if we spoke up, we'd have some sort of excuse for not doing so.
The requirements for declassification are pretty strict, and few people (relatively) can authorize it. If leaking was all that was necessary, everyone would do it just to avoid the hassle of the classified computer systems.
What? I don't think anyone here is suggesting that leaks should be legal, but once it's already leaked there's no use in pretending that it isn't out there. Information the public has should be declassified automatically. That has no bearing on whether giving information to the public should be legal or illegal.
Because large corporations are less vulnerable to patent trolls than small organizations. This creates a barrier to entry for that market, entrenching the large corporation. Since our government is wholly owned by large corporations we get the kind of law that benefits large corporations.
I've read a lot about Bell's theorem, and everything I've read indicates that that is exactly what Bell's theorem is about. If that's not what Bell's theorem means, why is it one of the most profound results in all of science?
ANAQP though. If you are, I'd love to be corrected.
Quantum physics doesn't make sense. So decay without any internal state, or external interaction is par for the course. For what it's worth, Bell's theorem proves that quantum randomness occurs without local hidden variables. Quantum events are wholy, truly, completly, utterly non-deterministic. There is nothing inside a particle that will help you predict when it will decay, it's all down to probability.
Yes it costs the same in physical resources. But it doesn't necessarily benefit both parties. The caller is the one who wants to initiate contact, so he should pay. The recipient may want the call, they may not want the call, or they may not care at all. But we know for certain the caller wants the call to go through. Since every phonecall has a caller and a recipient, every phonecall gets paid for by someone who wants that phone call.
To put this another way, if I take a shit on your lawn, it takes the same resources to clean it up whether I pay for it, or you pay for it. Is it fair for me to ask you to pay half those costs?
This is why cell phones should be pay to call. Not pay to receive. You have no control over who calls you, therefore it makes no sense to agree to pay for incoming calls. Any plan without free incoming calls is a non-starter for me.
Paying the defendents costs is nothing really. It's a very small step towards making the defendents whole. What really needs to happen is disbarment for any lawyers in this firm. Bullying people with the legal system is not legal.
But why are the constituents anti-science? They could have been properly educated, but weren't. Whose fault is that? Blaming constituents for the abuses heaped on them by politicians is a lot like blaming your grandma for giving her credit card number to the nice man on the phone.
The attacker must be a man-in-the-middle and control a website that you visit in order to have any chance of getting a cookie/password/thing-of-value that it must already be able to guess.
Why is that so implausible? With high profile sites like kernel.org, linux.com, mysql.com being compromised on what seems like a biweekly basis these days, I wouldn't put that out of the realm of plausibility.
To be specific, none of the orthodox churches nor the catholic church do find any issue with science. On the contrary.
Sure they do. The Catholic church is still pushing the completely unsupported idea that a person exists from conception. Given what we know about neurology, the neocortex is what makes us sentient. That doesn't form until the third trimester.
The only reason that science and religion doesn't seem to mix is that too many religious leaders stick to their dogmas and traditions even in face of human and scientific progress.
In other words, because science is winning.
Religions role in this world is to develop and foster spirituality, morality and selflessness so we can create a fair and just society and it can only do so if it keeps evolving and improving with new knowledge and understandings
Really? From here it looks like a way to keep the sheep passive, hoping for something better in the next life so they won't demand anything in this one. Teaching people not to think critically about authority figures (god) goes a long way to securing power.
Slashdot Mirror
Even worse, dealing in facts means they'd have to abandon trickle down economics. They've been running that scam for at least 30 years now. Evolution, birth control, gay rights, those aren't real issues. They're only used to whip crowds into a frenzy. But robbing from the poor and giving to the rich? That's the heart and soul of the Republican party. It's the only reason they exist.
Certainly I don't know what Tim Allen was doing. He seemed to be the head of a group of actors, and for the life of me I was trying to understand who he was imitating.
You could say the same thing about any role Tim Allen has played.
Sure. Jim's too blitzed to realize it's not 1999 anymore, and they just offered Randy a cheeseburger.
Somehow I don't think WFS is the kind of guy who spends much time regretting the past.
The best way to deal with police (EVERY time) is to be kind until you're blue in the face
Isn't this just a way of restating what I just said, except with the underlying assumption that deference to authority is in fact proper?
Ah, so the real problem isn't that the content of the poster was threatening. The problem is that he didn't show the proper deference to authority. Just making sure we're clear on this.
I find that my free time is worth much more than the time I spend at work.
Payola.
Touche!
of Arduino and the "open hardware" movement. What is the big deal? Yeah, schematics and documentation are free but the circuits they are using are closed.
Well it wouldn't do much of anything if the circuit wasn't closed.
All they need to do is borrow some spectrum and lend it out to 9 different entities, and they've created 10 times the spectrum!
What's your thought process there? The fact that I can voice my dissent in relative safety means that our government is good and just? No, the fact that we can voice our dissent in safety is only more condemning. No one is using this vital freedom. If we had to fear for our lives if we spoke up, we'd have some sort of excuse for not doing so.
The requirements for declassification are pretty strict, and few people (relatively) can authorize it. If leaking was all that was necessary, everyone would do it just to avoid the hassle of the classified computer systems.
What? I don't think anyone here is suggesting that leaks should be legal, but once it's already leaked there's no use in pretending that it isn't out there. Information the public has should be declassified automatically. That has no bearing on whether giving information to the public should be legal or illegal.
You're exactly right. The average American today has absolutely no moral superiority to the average German in 1940.
When it comes to games, "doing it right" involves polishing the gameplay, not the graphics. If you want to be wowed by CG, go to a movie.
Because large corporations are less vulnerable to patent trolls than small organizations. This creates a barrier to entry for that market, entrenching the large corporation. Since our government is wholly owned by large corporations we get the kind of law that benefits large corporations.
I've read a lot about Bell's theorem, and everything I've read indicates that that is exactly what Bell's theorem is about. If that's not what Bell's theorem means, why is it one of the most profound results in all of science?
ANAQP though. If you are, I'd love to be corrected.
Quantum physics doesn't make sense. So decay without any internal state, or external interaction is par for the course. For what it's worth, Bell's theorem proves that quantum randomness occurs without local hidden variables. Quantum events are wholy, truly, completly, utterly non-deterministic. There is nothing inside a particle that will help you predict when it will decay, it's all down to probability.
Yes it costs the same in physical resources. But it doesn't necessarily benefit both parties. The caller is the one who wants to initiate contact, so he should pay. The recipient may want the call, they may not want the call, or they may not care at all. But we know for certain the caller wants the call to go through. Since every phonecall has a caller and a recipient, every phonecall gets paid for by someone who wants that phone call.
To put this another way, if I take a shit on your lawn, it takes the same resources to clean it up whether I pay for it, or you pay for it. Is it fair for me to ask you to pay half those costs?
This is why cell phones should be pay to call. Not pay to receive. You have no control over who calls you, therefore it makes no sense to agree to pay for incoming calls. Any plan without free incoming calls is a non-starter for me.
Paying the defendents costs is nothing really. It's a very small step towards making the defendents whole. What really needs to happen is disbarment for any lawyers in this firm. Bullying people with the legal system is not legal.
But why are the constituents anti-science? They could have been properly educated, but weren't. Whose fault is that? Blaming constituents for the abuses heaped on them by politicians is a lot like blaming your grandma for giving her credit card number to the nice man on the phone.
The attacker must be a man-in-the-middle and control a website that you visit in order to have any chance of getting a cookie/password/thing-of-value that it must already be able to guess.
Why is that so implausible? With high profile sites like kernel.org, linux.com, mysql.com being compromised on what seems like a biweekly basis these days, I wouldn't put that out of the realm of plausibility.
To be specific, none of the orthodox churches nor the catholic church do find any issue with science. On the contrary.
Sure they do. The Catholic church is still pushing the completely unsupported idea that a person exists from conception. Given what we know about neurology, the neocortex is what makes us sentient. That doesn't form until the third trimester.
The only reason that science and religion doesn't seem to mix is that too many religious leaders stick to their dogmas and traditions even in face of human and scientific progress.
In other words, because science is winning.
Religions role in this world is to develop and foster spirituality, morality and selflessness so we can create a fair and just society and it can only do so if it keeps evolving and improving with new knowledge and understandings
Really? From here it looks like a way to keep the sheep passive, hoping for something better in the next life so they won't demand anything in this one. Teaching people not to think critically about authority figures (god) goes a long way to securing power.