The US Constitution needs a Privacy Amendment specifying that people's right to privacy in our personal data shall be protected, that no one has the right to copy any such data except as necessary to complete the immediate transaction for which it was transmitted by that person, except under explicit permission from that person.
The 4th Amendment already makes explicit the right to such privacy, but it clearly isn't enough anymore - not for a long time. But since the 4th Amendment itself was merely an emphasis of a right already implicit in the Constitution, but worth repeating explicitly to ensure government protection of it (like the rest of the Bill of Rights), it's perfectly appropriate to reiterate it in terms easily enforceable in the current era, like copyright terms.
The "administrators" are Bush & Cheney's Executive Branch that's running the whole shabby criminal enterprise. The "arrests" would have to be ordered by their Justice Department that's operating their big chunk of the whole shabby criminal enterprise.
I'd like to see Bush/Cheney boil themselves in oil on the White House lawn, but as long as that's up to Bush/Cheney, I'll have to wait for the videogame.
This story isn't about just the polling being different from the counts. It's about two methods of counting ballots coming up with different results. Including possibly a different winner.
So even if that "happens all the time", that just makes it worse. It's a bigger reason to make it stop, not to accept it.
So there's clearly evidence that the machine counts are different from the hand counts, when they should both be the same. It doesn't matter which is (more) wrong, the machine or hand counts. The discrepancy clearly shows that at least one of them is wrong. And so they should all be recounted by a method that can be relied on, without the time pressure that the mass media requires from the initial counts. Especially since these recounts could change the winner, but since the election awards proportional amounts of delegates for the final contest at the convention, the recount affects everyone. Especially if some delegates actually decide not to vote for whom they were awarded, because they are unhappy about how delegates were chosen.
That's "democracy". Everything else is just a TV show.
Downmodding should at least require the downmodder to answer an automated question about the downmodded post, like "which 5 words are missing from this sentence from the post...". It would probably discourage a lot of idiots.
Making the huge budget law searchable will revolutionize the budget process. It will no longer be advantageous to make it big just to hide screwings in a law that no one reads.
Instead, not a single person will ever read it, because Congress will develop billion-dollar software to automate the task. Eventually the budget will consist of the words "whatever, dude", though the inability of computers to analyze that will produce the same results as today: random money for arbitrary projects, as long as it's more than we've got to spend.
The non-gold metals we make our American coins from don't really corrode, and are certainly workable enough to make currency. Gold is too soft to circulate without adulteration into an alloy.
Those aren't "intrinsic value", they're excuses to fetishize gold. There is no intrinsic value in anything that can't be consumed, or directly used to create something else of greater value (like iron for shovels). Gold a great con job.
I'm really waiting for the nanotech implementation of these heat engines. The nanoscale mechanics will be higher efficiency, and embedded as materials into PV materials, will seem to be simply high-efficiency solar panels, not complex machines. Maybe more than 70% efficient. And I expect they'll be lower-energy to manufacture with chemical processes, rather than mechanical assembly, and last longer, so their overall lifetime efficiency will be several times greater than today's.
Well, the difference is that in SL, the "management" is just another bunch of people who control access of the public to their private property. In FL, the corresponding "management" is imaginary. But people in FL generally use a few representatives to create their government. The ones that last, anyhow. The other differences are instructive, because the parallel is largely close. Because the people in each scope are both just people, and people operate generally the same way with respect to the overall process for creating governments, regardless of what kind of government they create.
Governments aren't useful in upholding universal rights? Then what is?
The amount of gold against which to back currency has been nearly constant for about 100 years. The price of gold has tripled in about a year.
Neither of those two "values" - a century of zero growth, or tripling in a year - are anything like the change in value of our economy during those periods.
This "gold standard is sacred" nonsense is about a stupid as basing an economy on, say, a specific government declaration of production increase 5 years from now.
That's more like a law of government than like a law of nature.
We're seeing the exact process by which people create governments to protect our rights. Since SL already had what was equivalent to tribal and voluntary governments, we are seeing something much like the process SL'ers learned about in history.
You should learn the lowest level possible programming of the most general-purpose computers. That means C and maybe ASM.
Because for one, you need to start your career simply understanding how the computers work that you'll program for the rest of your career. They all basically work about the same, though there are important variants in parallel computing and stream processing, vs iterated procedures against a stack - but those aren't nearly as likely to be a target for your work (for the next 5-10 years, anyway).
But the most important reason is that you have to learn how to learn. Each programming language is a skill that you should be able to pick up in a week, because you will have to. But they all boil down to instructing the computer what to do, eventually in its own terms. Which is ASM. C is a reasonable substitute, because, though abstracted enough from the CPU to be (largely) portable, it's really mainly a really good macro assembler. And most other languages are mostly based on it and its descendants, as are practically all OS'es.
Picking which language to use is dependent on what you want it to do. If you want your language choice to teach you how to program computers, then C and ASM are the natural choice.
It's not the complete argument about faith. It's just a narrow explanation of faith's vulnerability to proof, which suggests that Scientology is a con, because it's talk about aliens is all testable, falsifiable. Scientology's very claims that it's not "supernatural" are precisely why it's not really a church, but just a science fiction fanclub (with tax exemptions and annoyingly cute nerds).
A more complete argument about faith points out that faith must always yield to proof. But proof has limits that leave faith the only way to know some knowledge that is not fact, but could still be very important. Scientology is a way of knowing that someone's a kook, or just willing to lie about their soul to get a tax break (and maybe spite their shrink).
You want "metaphysics" that validates Scientology? Now you're talking about Intelligent Design.
That behavior should gain immediate revocation of their registrar status by ICANN. ICANN should seize their records, find those domains stolen that way, and release them back into the pool (without announcing which they are, for maybe 6 months to a year "cooling off period"). Then auction off the other more legitimate domains (one by one, but automated and discounted of course) to the other registrars, but let their registrants choose where to take them first, or take the money from their winning registrar.
NSI has had a license to print money for over a decade. They suck anyway. But this behavior is absolutely unacceptable. If ICANN accepts it without smashing them as an appropriate response and as a lesson to those who ICANN supposedly "rules", then ICANN will once and for all be exposed as a fraud designed solely to exploit registrants and consumers.
I saw the "Powers of 10" show at the Hayden Planetarium, and it zoomed out to what's supposed to be an image of the entire Universe (as far as we know). Where can I find that picture, around 1600x1200 resolution? I want my own look at just how "way crazy" it is out there at the edges at space and time.
Osiris was believed to die and be reborn as Horus. Look it up.
Doc Ruby: The bible indeed has much in common with other myths, including various ones popular among early Christians but out of sight for the last 3/4 or more of their history, even if you're referring to just the New Testament. It's far from the only messiah myth, the only martyr myth. The Osiris cycle, well known throughout the region that first believed the Christian bible, is a blueprint for the mortal divine sacrificed to rise again and take the blessed followers along with him. The list goes on and on.
mav[LAG]: The bible incorporates no mythical elements and has no contents that could remotely be described as myth. Osiris was not sacrificed, did not rise again and did not take his blessed followers along with him. Maybe you should study more.
As for the long list of pagan copycat saviours, by all means post it so I can shred it.
That's where you claimed that the Osiris myth was a copy of the Jesus myth. Yet the Osiris myth predated the Jesus myth. Of course you'll disagree, with some semantics, or maybe just some more circular references where you cite today's bible to prove today's bible. You don't even seem to understand that in fact Lincoln's existence, while it can be readily accepted, cannot be proven the way that your existence can be proven, but could be proven in a way that god's existence cannot be proven.
You've been doing this "for decades". Yet your defense is the most trivially dismissed. You will perfectly obviously learn nothing from my further efforts in more detail of what's already made clear, and is pretty simple anyway. And I certainly cannot learn anything from more exposure to your kind of representations that pass for "scholarship", but ceased being convincing as such towards the late Middle Ages.
We're done here. Maybe we'll meet again - who knows?
Dammit, that looks just as unrealistic as everything else I see pictured on this flat monitor I use. YouTube videos of HD-TV demos can't fool me either...
Has anyone playtested these curved monitors to see whether they work that much better than flat screens? For games? How about for movies - is the "experience feeling" any easier to forget you're looking at a simulation, a picture on a monitor?
And are these curved monitors going to trap us in "sweet spots" that are more "hifi" than flat screens, but require a single viewer to occupy a very specific viewing position at their focus, like stereo speakers do? If you're not in the sweet spot, does it look any better at all than a big, hirez flat screen? Any worse?
No, you're just bound up in your book in the typically circular reasoning of people of "faith" who aren't so good as people of "proof", even in recognizing the limits of proof.
You have no more ability to prove that Osiris did not rise from the dead than you can prove that Jesus did. Unless you call "proof" the words written in records that survive today as hearsay. There's larger amounts of evidence for longer times supporting Osiris' claims than Jesus'. But the point is that Osiris' story predates Jesus', as do so many others prefiguring bible stories. If anyone was a copycat, it was whoever retold Osiris' story with Jesus' name edited in. You're not going to convince me you're an expert in ancient evidence when you evidently believe that Jesus' life predated the Osiris myth that was still popular in the Egypt that Jesus' parents reportedly lived in, though it was already old by then.
Just because your documents talk about faith in a way that doesn't benefit from, say, logical positivism's universally accurate distinctions between science and metaphysics, doesn't mean that they're talking about experience in a way that contradicts me. See, this is how actual arguments about reality, not about authority, work. I'm not talking about whether your documents describe faith differently. If you can show me how the existence of an omnipotent god is disprovable, therefore not a matter of "faith" as I described it, then you've got something. If all you've got is impressing me that a traditional story on paper, you don't have anything speaking about facts. You've got a story that could be a matter of belief, because its claims could be disproven if you were there in person. But until you talk about the actual subject I'm talking about, knowing that which cannot be disproven (however unreliable the knowledge), you're playing word games by calling something else faith that is so only in an archaism, a semantic trick.
Amazingly, the only way you know that there was anyone there at the time to actually have the direct experience that constitutes actual proof is that you read it in a book. A book produced by 2000 years of political power based on the book. Millennia of more or less absolute power by an emperor on Earth representing the heaven he needed the book to say he represented. So unless you've got a god's honest "miracle" like a 2000 year old apostle who can replace reduce faith (merely accepting something unprovable) with some belief (that they can't prove they experienced it 2000 years ago, but at least I'd be accepting it from someone who might have an actual experienced fact), then fact has nothing to do with what you can offer at this time.
Using your definition of factual knowledge and proof, I'd like you to prove to me that Abraham Lincoln was a real person. I accept that he was, because our ways of knowing facts require quite a great deal of acceptance of facts that could possibly be proven with enough technology (eg. I could have an extremely powerful telescope, and point it at a very shiny object 75 light years away, and actually see a tall US politician signing his name and making speeches, or never see him appear where Lincoln appeared, such as at the White House or Ford's Theatre), which makes his existence a matter of fact (however true or false), But even if I trained the scope on Jerusalem's reflection in a 1000 light year distant object, I still couldn't disprove an omnipotent god, because everything that allegedly happened could be produced by a trick I could expose, or some high (though ultimately limited) tech. Or even appear to happen "naturally", but still without possibly disproving an omnipotent god, who could be just powerful enough to arrange "natural" explanations of everything that allegedly happened.
All of which, as I said, misses the point of faith. The faith that I'm talking about. If your belief in god, along with the reported miracles, is defined by the purely mundane, non-supernatural nature of that entity and its physical manifestations, then y
NH (and most of the rest of New England) doesn't seem to mind about its own digital voting being in unaccountable private hands, as it wields its totally disproportionate influence on the voting of the entire country.
USB 16GB Flash drives cost $66.25. 852GB would mean 54 of them, for $3577.50, not even enough to buy a new car, let alone a house.
In fact, 8 7-port USb hubs for $240 would make the while contraption work for $3817.50. Plugged 2-deep into 4 PC USB ports could give 4x40MBps when fully parallelized.
If this drive costs more than $4000, and more than about 40-60MBps is overkill, then there really isn't any point.
Slashdot Mirror
The US Constitution needs a Privacy Amendment specifying that people's right to privacy in our personal data shall be protected, that no one has the right to copy any such data except as necessary to complete the immediate transaction for which it was transmitted by that person, except under explicit permission from that person.
The 4th Amendment already makes explicit the right to such privacy, but it clearly isn't enough anymore - not for a long time. But since the 4th Amendment itself was merely an emphasis of a right already implicit in the Constitution, but worth repeating explicitly to ensure government protection of it (like the rest of the Bill of Rights), it's perfectly appropriate to reiterate it in terms easily enforceable in the current era, like copyright terms.
The "administrators" are Bush & Cheney's Executive Branch that's running the whole shabby criminal enterprise. The "arrests" would have to be ordered by their Justice Department that's operating their big chunk of the whole shabby criminal enterprise.
I'd like to see Bush/Cheney boil themselves in oil on the White House lawn, but as long as that's up to Bush/Cheney, I'll have to wait for the videogame.
This story isn't about just the polling being different from the counts. It's about two methods of counting ballots coming up with different results. Including possibly a different winner.
So even if that "happens all the time", that just makes it worse. It's a bigger reason to make it stop, not to accept it.
So there's clearly evidence that the machine counts are different from the hand counts, when they should both be the same. It doesn't matter which is (more) wrong, the machine or hand counts. The discrepancy clearly shows that at least one of them is wrong. And so they should all be recounted by a method that can be relied on, without the time pressure that the mass media requires from the initial counts. Especially since these recounts could change the winner, but since the election awards proportional amounts of delegates for the final contest at the convention, the recount affects everyone. Especially if some delegates actually decide not to vote for whom they were awarded, because they are unhappy about how delegates were chosen.
That's "democracy". Everything else is just a TV show.
Downmodding should at least require the downmodder to answer an automated question about the downmodded post, like "which 5 words are missing from this sentence from the post...". It would probably discourage a lot of idiots.
Making the huge budget law searchable will revolutionize the budget process. It will no longer be advantageous to make it big just to hide screwings in a law that no one reads.
Instead, not a single person will ever read it, because Congress will develop billion-dollar software to automate the task. Eventually the budget will consist of the words "whatever, dude", though the inability of computers to analyze that will produce the same results as today: random money for arbitrary projects, as long as it's more than we've got to spend.
Moderation -1
100% Troll
TrollMods can't face the collapse of America's gluttonous car industry.
The non-gold metals we make our American coins from don't really corrode, and are certainly workable enough to make currency. Gold is too soft to circulate without adulteration into an alloy.
Those aren't "intrinsic value", they're excuses to fetishize gold. There is no intrinsic value in anything that can't be consumed, or directly used to create something else of greater value (like iron for shovels). Gold a great con job.
I'm really waiting for the nanotech implementation of these heat engines. The nanoscale mechanics will be higher efficiency, and embedded as materials into PV materials, will seem to be simply high-efficiency solar panels, not complex machines. Maybe more than 70% efficient. And I expect they'll be lower-energy to manufacture with chemical processes, rather than mechanical assembly, and last longer, so their overall lifetime efficiency will be several times greater than today's.
Well, the difference is that in SL, the "management" is just another bunch of people who control access of the public to their private property. In FL, the corresponding "management" is imaginary. But people in FL generally use a few representatives to create their government. The ones that last, anyhow. The other differences are instructive, because the parallel is largely close. Because the people in each scope are both just people, and people operate generally the same way with respect to the overall process for creating governments, regardless of what kind of government they create.
Governments aren't useful in upholding universal rights? Then what is?
The amount of gold against which to back currency has been nearly constant for about 100 years. The price of gold has tripled in about a year.
Neither of those two "values" - a century of zero growth, or tripling in a year - are anything like the change in value of our economy during those periods.
This "gold standard is sacred" nonsense is about a stupid as basing an economy on, say, a specific government declaration of production increase 5 years from now.
That's more like a law of government than like a law of nature.
We're seeing the exact process by which people create governments to protect our rights. Since SL already had what was equivalent to tribal and voluntary governments, we are seeing something much like the process SL'ers learned about in history.
What is the intrinsic value of gold?
You should learn the lowest level possible programming of the most general-purpose computers. That means C and maybe ASM.
Because for one, you need to start your career simply understanding how the computers work that you'll program for the rest of your career. They all basically work about the same, though there are important variants in parallel computing and stream processing, vs iterated procedures against a stack - but those aren't nearly as likely to be a target for your work (for the next 5-10 years, anyway).
But the most important reason is that you have to learn how to learn. Each programming language is a skill that you should be able to pick up in a week, because you will have to. But they all boil down to instructing the computer what to do, eventually in its own terms. Which is ASM. C is a reasonable substitute, because, though abstracted enough from the CPU to be (largely) portable, it's really mainly a really good macro assembler. And most other languages are mostly based on it and its descendants, as are practically all OS'es.
Picking which language to use is dependent on what you want it to do. If you want your language choice to teach you how to program computers, then C and ASM are the natural choice.
It's not the complete argument about faith. It's just a narrow explanation of faith's vulnerability to proof, which suggests that Scientology is a con, because it's talk about aliens is all testable, falsifiable. Scientology's very claims that it's not "supernatural" are precisely why it's not really a church, but just a science fiction fanclub (with tax exemptions and annoyingly cute nerds).
A more complete argument about faith points out that faith must always yield to proof. But proof has limits that leave faith the only way to know some knowledge that is not fact, but could still be very important. Scientology is a way of knowing that someone's a kook, or just willing to lie about their soul to get a tax break (and maybe spite their shrink).
You want "metaphysics" that validates Scientology? Now you're talking about Intelligent Design.
I have, but does it zoom out to "the max"?
That behavior should gain immediate revocation of their registrar status by ICANN. ICANN should seize their records, find those domains stolen that way, and release them back into the pool (without announcing which they are, for maybe 6 months to a year "cooling off period"). Then auction off the other more legitimate domains (one by one, but automated and discounted of course) to the other registrars, but let their registrants choose where to take them first, or take the money from their winning registrar.
NSI has had a license to print money for over a decade. They suck anyway. But this behavior is absolutely unacceptable. If ICANN accepts it without smashing them as an appropriate response and as a lesson to those who ICANN supposedly "rules", then ICANN will once and for all be exposed as a fraud designed solely to exploit registrants and consumers.
I predict the latter.
I saw the "Powers of 10" show at the Hayden Planetarium, and it zoomed out to what's supposed to be an image of the entire Universe (as far as we know). Where can I find that picture, around 1600x1200 resolution? I want my own look at just how "way crazy" it is out there at the edges at space and time.
Driverless cars are just the prototype. What GM is really developing is buyerless cars to save it from bankruptcy. Plan B? Carless cars.
That's where you claimed that the Osiris myth was a copy of the Jesus myth. Yet the Osiris myth predated the Jesus myth. Of course you'll disagree, with some semantics, or maybe just some more circular references where you cite today's bible to prove today's bible. You don't even seem to understand that in fact Lincoln's existence, while it can be readily accepted, cannot be proven the way that your existence can be proven, but could be proven in a way that god's existence cannot be proven.
You've been doing this "for decades". Yet your defense is the most trivially dismissed. You will perfectly obviously learn nothing from my further efforts in more detail of what's already made clear, and is pretty simple anyway. And I certainly cannot learn anything from more exposure to your kind of representations that pass for "scholarship", but ceased being convincing as such towards the late Middle Ages.
We're done here. Maybe we'll meet again - who knows?
Dammit, that looks just as unrealistic as everything else I see pictured on this flat monitor I use. YouTube videos of HD-TV demos can't fool me either...
Has anyone playtested these curved monitors to see whether they work that much better than flat screens? For games? How about for movies - is the "experience feeling" any easier to forget you're looking at a simulation, a picture on a monitor?
And are these curved monitors going to trap us in "sweet spots" that are more "hifi" than flat screens, but require a single viewer to occupy a very specific viewing position at their focus, like stereo speakers do? If you're not in the sweet spot, does it look any better at all than a big, hirez flat screen? Any worse?
No, you're just bound up in your book in the typically circular reasoning of people of "faith" who aren't so good as people of "proof", even in recognizing the limits of proof.
You have no more ability to prove that Osiris did not rise from the dead than you can prove that Jesus did. Unless you call "proof" the words written in records that survive today as hearsay. There's larger amounts of evidence for longer times supporting Osiris' claims than Jesus'. But the point is that Osiris' story predates Jesus', as do so many others prefiguring bible stories. If anyone was a copycat, it was whoever retold Osiris' story with Jesus' name edited in. You're not going to convince me you're an expert in ancient evidence when you evidently believe that Jesus' life predated the Osiris myth that was still popular in the Egypt that Jesus' parents reportedly lived in, though it was already old by then.
Just because your documents talk about faith in a way that doesn't benefit from, say, logical positivism's universally accurate distinctions between science and metaphysics, doesn't mean that they're talking about experience in a way that contradicts me. See, this is how actual arguments about reality, not about authority, work. I'm not talking about whether your documents describe faith differently. If you can show me how the existence of an omnipotent god is disprovable, therefore not a matter of "faith" as I described it, then you've got something. If all you've got is impressing me that a traditional story on paper, you don't have anything speaking about facts. You've got a story that could be a matter of belief, because its claims could be disproven if you were there in person. But until you talk about the actual subject I'm talking about, knowing that which cannot be disproven (however unreliable the knowledge), you're playing word games by calling something else faith that is so only in an archaism, a semantic trick.
Amazingly, the only way you know that there was anyone there at the time to actually have the direct experience that constitutes actual proof is that you read it in a book. A book produced by 2000 years of political power based on the book. Millennia of more or less absolute power by an emperor on Earth representing the heaven he needed the book to say he represented. So unless you've got a god's honest "miracle" like a 2000 year old apostle who can replace reduce faith (merely accepting something unprovable) with some belief (that they can't prove they experienced it 2000 years ago, but at least I'd be accepting it from someone who might have an actual experienced fact), then fact has nothing to do with what you can offer at this time.
Using your definition of factual knowledge and proof, I'd like you to prove to me that Abraham Lincoln was a real person. I accept that he was, because our ways of knowing facts require quite a great deal of acceptance of facts that could possibly be proven with enough technology (eg. I could have an extremely powerful telescope, and point it at a very shiny object 75 light years away, and actually see a tall US politician signing his name and making speeches, or never see him appear where Lincoln appeared, such as at the White House or Ford's Theatre), which makes his existence a matter of fact (however true or false), But even if I trained the scope on Jerusalem's reflection in a 1000 light year distant object, I still couldn't disprove an omnipotent god, because everything that allegedly happened could be produced by a trick I could expose, or some high (though ultimately limited) tech. Or even appear to happen "naturally", but still without possibly disproving an omnipotent god, who could be just powerful enough to arrange "natural" explanations of everything that allegedly happened.
All of which, as I said, misses the point of faith. The faith that I'm talking about. If your belief in god, along with the reported miracles, is defined by the purely mundane, non-supernatural nature of that entity and its physical manifestations, then y
NH (and most of the rest of New England) doesn't seem to mind about its own digital voting being in unaccountable private hands, as it wields its totally disproportionate influence on the voting of the entire country.
USB 16GB Flash drives cost $66.25. 852GB would mean 54 of them, for $3577.50, not even enough to buy a new car, let alone a house.
In fact, 8 7-port USb hubs for $240 would make the while contraption work for $3817.50. Plugged 2-deep into 4 PC USB ports could give 4x40MBps when fully parallelized.
If this drive costs more than $4000, and more than about 40-60MBps is overkill, then there really isn't any point.