Same here, except with a Thinkpad tablet. Made it much easier to find my notes later on, and the handwriting recognition was phenomenal when sharing notes with people. The fact that it could read my chicken scratch was very, very impressive.
What made it a disaster? Just because you have your opinion doesn't make it correct. I enjoyed Oblivion because of its gameplay and its story, and had played games with much better graphics before I picked it up.
Probably way too late to bother replying to this, but I've had a "properly used" and "properly stored" condom break on me. Sometimes it just happens, they're not 100% effective and are never advertised as such.
This, this, a million times this. The schools aren't going to offer cybersecurity scholarships unless they can make that money back somehow. If the DoHS wants more cybersecurity experts, they're going to have to provide those massive scholarships themselves.
Let me first clarify that I think the ruling is completely ridiculous and a person's genes should never be used by any legal system to determine a person's liability for a crime. Slippery slope, etc. Being predisposed to something doesn't make it okay, because you still made the choice to do it.
My issue here is that if you take the argument "genes did it," how do you plan to fix that? You remove the person from responsibility, removing them from their behavior. If they can't be held responsible from their behavior, how does reform help?
And it can be argued just the same that people predisposed to violence will be far more likely to do it again, "reformed" or not. What happens when they're in a situation when it's harder to control themselves (drunk, etc)? Just an example but it's appropriate here, and I know the obvious response is that they should know better, but really, if they couldn't control themselves once, would you honestly trust someone to compose themselves in the future, knowing that they're predisposed to doing it again?
What do you do about sociopaths? They're predisposed to crime and could similarly be found to be less liable for their actions too. What do you do about them? Do you give them a shorter sentence and release them because it wasn't their fault? On average, people using the insanity plea spend twice as long institutionalized. Pure sociopaths don't even get to use this plea, and the notable among them are sentenced to life or death.
Wow I suck at this (though I blame our IT department)...that was meant in response to the comments above asking why NASA's pumping money into this when we already did it in the 60s.
Yes, and unfortunately the contractors building spacecraft for NASA now are the same ones who built them in the 60s. Competition, in general, spurs innovation and makes things cheaper, and pushing the growth of new startups in the industry would, at the bare minimum, bring new ideas to the fore.
Ideally I'm sure the goal is to get private companies more involved in launching and exploration. There are very few around currently, and most of them are still only in the developmental stages. NASA wins by both creating competition, and taking workload off of their own engineers. It also gives incentive for these companies to develop tech on their own, before government budgets come into play.
Yes, and that's the basic unit of evolution. The reconfiguring of genes to create a difference, be it useful, detrimental, or neutral. The fact that wild E. coli have evolved the ability to use citrate shows that this specific mutation has evolved multiple times within the population, which is entirely reasonable given the time between each reproductive cycle of E. coli.
The problem with most creationists is that they'll keep arguing with you until you can show them an E. coli population that all spontaneously jumped out of their petri dishes and grew large enough to absorb an entire human. Until then, it's that awful made-up term "micro-evolution."
The argument you seem to either be ignoring or misunderstanding is that we have absolutely no way of knowing whether a fossil is Grandpa or Grandpa's cousin. Ardi, for example, could be the progenitor of all modern humans, or it could be a closely related cousin to the primate that gave rise to us. There is no way of knowing more than that without rewinding history and watching who gave birth to who.
That's exactly what they've been doing lately. SpaceX is in the process of becoming the primary provider of resupply missions to the ISS for when the shuttle program ends.
Slashdot Mirror
Same here, except with a Thinkpad tablet. Made it much easier to find my notes later on, and the handwriting recognition was phenomenal when sharing notes with people. The fact that it could read my chicken scratch was very, very impressive.
What made it a disaster? Just because you have your opinion doesn't make it correct. I enjoyed Oblivion because of its gameplay and its story, and had played games with much better graphics before I picked it up.
I'm gonna take a wild guess and say if a nuke went off next to my PC, the EMP would be the least of my problems.
But that's too much!
Probably way too late to bother replying to this, but I've had a "properly used" and "properly stored" condom break on me. Sometimes it just happens, they're not 100% effective and are never advertised as such.
This, this, a million times this. The schools aren't going to offer cybersecurity scholarships unless they can make that money back somehow. If the DoHS wants more cybersecurity experts, they're going to have to provide those massive scholarships themselves.
I sincerely, sincerely hope you're just trolling.
Mars's Or, more appropriately, "the Martian" Also, it's spelled "grammar"
We are.
Did this for my mother a few months ago. No complaints since. Took her all of 5 minutes to figure out how to use it.
Let me first clarify that I think the ruling is completely ridiculous and a person's genes should never be used by any legal system to determine a person's liability for a crime. Slippery slope, etc. Being predisposed to something doesn't make it okay, because you still made the choice to do it.
My issue here is that if you take the argument "genes did it," how do you plan to fix that? You remove the person from responsibility, removing them from their behavior. If they can't be held responsible from their behavior, how does reform help?
And it can be argued just the same that people predisposed to violence will be far more likely to do it again, "reformed" or not. What happens when they're in a situation when it's harder to control themselves (drunk, etc)? Just an example but it's appropriate here, and I know the obvious response is that they should know better, but really, if they couldn't control themselves once, would you honestly trust someone to compose themselves in the future, knowing that they're predisposed to doing it again? What do you do about sociopaths? They're predisposed to crime and could similarly be found to be less liable for their actions too. What do you do about them? Do you give them a shorter sentence and release them because it wasn't their fault? On average, people using the insanity plea spend twice as long institutionalized. Pure sociopaths don't even get to use this plea, and the notable among them are sentenced to life or death.
The obvious solution is to scan every fetus's genetic predispositions and abort the ones we don't want.
If someone has a genetic disposition towards violence, then reformation is impossible.
Wow I suck at this (though I blame our IT department)...that was meant in response to the comments above asking why NASA's pumping money into this when we already did it in the 60s.
Yes, and unfortunately the contractors building spacecraft for NASA now are the same ones who built them in the 60s. Competition, in general, spurs innovation and makes things cheaper, and pushing the growth of new startups in the industry would, at the bare minimum, bring new ideas to the fore. Ideally I'm sure the goal is to get private companies more involved in launching and exploration. There are very few around currently, and most of them are still only in the developmental stages. NASA wins by both creating competition, and taking workload off of their own engineers. It also gives incentive for these companies to develop tech on their own, before government budgets come into play.
Just kicking someone down a well seems like a pretty effective process to me.
Yes, and that's the basic unit of evolution. The reconfiguring of genes to create a difference, be it useful, detrimental, or neutral. The fact that wild E. coli have evolved the ability to use citrate shows that this specific mutation has evolved multiple times within the population, which is entirely reasonable given the time between each reproductive cycle of E. coli. The problem with most creationists is that they'll keep arguing with you until you can show them an E. coli population that all spontaneously jumped out of their petri dishes and grew large enough to absorb an entire human. Until then, it's that awful made-up term "micro-evolution."
The argument you seem to either be ignoring or misunderstanding is that we have absolutely no way of knowing whether a fossil is Grandpa or Grandpa's cousin. Ardi, for example, could be the progenitor of all modern humans, or it could be a closely related cousin to the primate that gave rise to us. There is no way of knowing more than that without rewinding history and watching who gave birth to who.
That's exactly what they've been doing lately. SpaceX is in the process of becoming the primary provider of resupply missions to the ISS for when the shuttle program ends.
Fuel cells.