I quoted the parent of the parent of your post in which you said "the GP is correct".
You absolutely hate weapons of any kind, but you approve of a secret French mission to blow up a ship in New Zealand. Without anything like due process, in which people were executed by covert operatives.
I don't know what Greenpeace has ever said about oncogenetics with which you disagree. And outside your field, I don't know how much your judgement counts. Considering those two other points to which I just referred, I'm not so sure I trust your judgement in general.
Especially since you're dismissing all of Greenpeace as not having a clue based on your extremely limited experience with the organization. Not very scientific.
I want a phone or PC with a small display that rolls out to get bigger when I need it. Like a phone with a 5"x2" screen that pulls out to a 5"x10" screen in the upper half of the clamshell. And a 12-key pad in the bottom half that folds open again sideways into a 4" wide QWERTY keyboard. A WiFi/Bluetooth hub for other devices, like an extra "CPU server" that can sit in a bag, coat pocket, or across a network.
I want to see "convertible displays" destroy the distinction between mobile "phones" and "PCs" forever.
I'm of course not familiar with the TeBio 2001 speech you mention, so I can't judge it.
Nor am I familiar with the SA article, or the Golden Rice issue in general. However, I know that in both politics and in science learning more about an issue as it's studied more can lead to reversals of support.
I'm also not sure which Rainbow Warrior / France incident you mention, but I don't see how you can ignore the French bombing the Rainbow Warrior in Greenpeace's battle against French nuke testing. That level of struggle seems to transcend laws which have deadly consequences.
I note that you are hardly a disinterested party. So your claims that "green peace was taken over by anti-corporate people years ago. It's only purpose is to spread ignorance and fear." is "correct" are pretty suspect. Especially when the first claim, that Greenpeace has been "taken over by anti-corporate people" is nonsense, since Greenpeace started out anti-corporate, against corporations that threaten the environment and peace. While the second claim is clearly false, as Greenpeace certainly has the purpose of protecting the environment and peace, even if you make the argument that it does also spread "ignorance" (not false facts?) and fear.
So they're "eco-terrorists" to you. Sounds like you're afraid of them, because they oppose research you value. Exactly which biotechnology do you work with?
Direct genetic engineering by molecular genetics rather than by hybrid breeding purposely allows arbitrary mutations to bypass the reproductive barriers to mutation. Among the increased risks are gene escape from transgenic organisms. That ecological threat is rare in natural organisms, but happens more often in engineered ones.
The "errors" in the study feature ignoring half the rats because they died. So most likely the results drastically underestimate the health problems.
Rather than expose this flawed study to the normal peer review that would establish its results as either useless or useful, governments suppressed it. That also bears investigation.
When science can't investigate these questions, but instead politics with its vested corporate interest rules, we can't see what's going on here. Now that the science is free to be actively questioned and repeated more rigorously, we can try to see. And now that the political suppression is broken, we can already see what's going on there.
More hysterical bullshit than "Social Justice: Seeing a liberal getting slugged in the teeth"?
I submit a story about suppressed science being freed for actual scientific examination, rather than political convenience. You post a meaningless ad hominem attack. Signed with an insane hunger for violence.
Thanks for discrediting yourself immediately, HanzoSpam.
This research likely has other flaws, perhaps some that invalidate its results entirely. That's why it must be peer reviewed and retried, the absolute core technique that defines the scientific method. Now that it's been extracted from suppression, it can actually be part of science, regardless of how its results fare under legitimate scrutiny.
NTP servers can prioritize NTP packet QoS. They can offer SW for apps that use NTP data.
It's "NIST's" problem because it's the US Federal gov't's problem because if they don't help solve it the US population will suffer disproportionate damage.
The Feds should require insurance companies to limit liability coverage if the damage is suffered by policyholders which could have used industry standard SW, but didn't.
That's how market regulations ensures market operation. With the maximum efficiency by using existing infrastructure for existing problems in the same domain.
Typical Anonymous idiot Coward. Using the NTP servers to distribute the software is solely because clients consuming UTC data are most likely interested in client SW to use the UTC accurately, including setting the localtime.
With shallow people like you passing as NTP experts, no wonder it's still an unsolved problem keeping everyone's clocks in time.
The NTP server system is very reliable. Its servers should also include software upgrades that clients can fetch, with an authorization system in the clients. The US NIST should produce reference standard software that the NTP servers can offer, digitally signed by NIST, and test/certify/sign 3rd party SW. And the Congress should require the insurance industry to adopt uniform standards for liability when companies don't upgrade to the industry operations standard.
This function is too important to leave to corporations that have demonstrated they upgrade themselves in their own interest only when it's a years-long campaign that everyone talks about. So it's time to automate the process. Otherwise, Americans and others in the global economy will pay much higher costs in damage and loss later, cleaning up the mess.
I'd love to see Apple sell a notebook that's only 12"x8"x1" that flips open to reveal a fullsize keyboard and a wide screen at 1200x800 for immediate use. Then rotates the screen on its bottom right corner, then stretching out a "rollable" display across to a 16" or 24" wide by 12" high screen at 16-2400x1200.
My CS/engineering friends at Columbia built a half-adder from rubberbands, then combined them into logic, then little programs, back in the late 20th Century.
When MIT builds a quantum computer at mesoscopic size, then I'll be impressed.
There's no bandwidth shortage or any prospect of one. The scare talk about one is just propaganda from the backbone owner cartel trying to get even more government subsidy than the billions already shoveled on them in "broadband investments", fake taxes, tax immunity, and every other telco/cableco handout they've collected like gold rings over the past century.
Just ask these telco/cableco backbone masters whether they'll cut back the crapola TV channels they want to flood our homes with (without any regulation like that which controlled them in broadcast) to preserve the Internet bandwidth we all prefer. I bet suddenly they'll find all kinds of ways to ensure we keep our "Internet dialtone". When a bandwidth shortage threatens them, rather than serves them, I'm sure it will disappear instantly: like vapor.
Do these people just feel more productive, maybe because they're using a "business machine" like the Blackberry? Productivity measurements are standard metrics of US workers for at least a century. Have these Blackberry users actually increased their productivity since before they got the Blackberry? Compared to any increase gained by their coworkers who didn't get a Blackberry? Compared to coworkers with a Blackberry who don't feel any more productive?
Workers whose productivity doesn't increase even when they get expensive technology investments like a Blackberry aren't reliable people to ask whether they're more productive. Working longer hours isn't productivity: often it's a decrease, leaving more to get done in longer time, when fatigue, resentment and just arbitrary final cutoff times decrease productivity.
If they're less productive, and feel more productive, then they'll want more pay, though they produce less, and cost more in IT costs. How about a real answer to this question, instead of mumbo jumbo about how Blackberries "feel"?
Who cares why they open their source? As long as they release the source code, without restrictions that prevent the public from changing, revising, executing and redistributing it, people in the public can do whatever we want with it.
If selfserving companies (what other kind is there?) find it in their interest to open their source, then I welcome them joining the open source "movement". More source needs to be opened in the selfinterest of its originators. And more selfserving companies opening source will help convince others how its in their interest, too. Which will release more source.
What needs to die is the idea that open source is some kind of ideal. It's an engineering collaboration technique. It's like object oriented design. There are OOD ideologues, but they're harmless and lost in the roar of people using OOD to solve real problems. Some people are still arguing about the ideology of file vs project variable scoping. But practically no one lets that get in the way of writing code with well-defined interfaces for other code. Let's see open source outgrow the ideology, and just remain a stable way to produce and use software.
Every time this old crank or any of his fellow Senators wastes time with these fake "child protection" systems that screw adults instead of actually protecting children, they leave children actually exposed to the real threats. And their sneaky smokescreens using children as "human shields" from criticism of their sweeping attacks on American liberty makes it even harder to trust any plan offered to actually protect these people.
All they do is damage everyone. Delete Stevens and his technocrat cronies.
Penicillin, the panacea of the last generation of medical science, was discovered accidentally by Alexander Fleming. Now a cancer cure, our era's "holy grail", has perhaps been found in a similar accident.
It seems that the "error" part of the scientific method's "trial and error" process is even more important than the planned "trial" part.
Maybe we should have more scientific research conducted like jazz, which is sometimes described as "gracefully exploiting errors".
I guess trollMods are natural fans of a blatherer of lies like Crichton. Can't debate the facts and logic, so the trollMod anonymously attacks. Everybody's a critic.
Slashdot Mirror
I quoted the parent of the parent of your post in which you said "the GP is correct".
You absolutely hate weapons of any kind, but you approve of a secret French mission to blow up a ship in New Zealand. Without anything like due process, in which people were executed by covert operatives.
I don't know what Greenpeace has ever said about oncogenetics with which you disagree. And outside your field, I don't know how much your judgement counts. Considering those two other points to which I just referred, I'm not so sure I trust your judgement in general.
Especially since you're dismissing all of Greenpeace as not having a clue based on your extremely limited experience with the organization. Not very scientific.
Anonymous hilarious Coward hasn't even read the study now that it's freed from government suppression, and knows its merit. Doesn't care, though.
I can ad hominem you if you want, but pointing out that you're hysterical doesn't count. How about "you're a joke"?
I want a phone or PC with a small display that rolls out to get bigger when I need it. Like a phone with a 5"x2" screen that pulls out to a 5"x10" screen in the upper half of the clamshell. And a 12-key pad in the bottom half that folds open again sideways into a 4" wide QWERTY keyboard. A WiFi/Bluetooth hub for other devices, like an extra "CPU server" that can sit in a bag, coat pocket, or across a network.
I want to see "convertible displays" destroy the distinction between mobile "phones" and "PCs" forever.
Anonymous hysterical Coward wants politicians to suppress scientific reports rather than let scientists decide its merit.
Hysterical bullshit indeed.
I'm of course not familiar with the TeBio 2001 speech you mention, so I can't judge it.
Nor am I familiar with the SA article, or the Golden Rice issue in general. However, I know that in both politics and in science learning more about an issue as it's studied more can lead to reversals of support.
I'm also not sure which Rainbow Warrior / France incident you mention, but I don't see how you can ignore the French bombing the Rainbow Warrior in Greenpeace's battle against French nuke testing. That level of struggle seems to transcend laws which have deadly consequences.
I note that you are hardly a disinterested party. So your claims that "green peace was taken over by anti-corporate people years ago. It's only purpose is to spread ignorance and fear." is "correct" are pretty suspect. Especially when the first claim, that Greenpeace has been "taken over by anti-corporate people" is nonsense, since Greenpeace started out anti-corporate, against corporations that threaten the environment and peace. While the second claim is clearly false, as Greenpeace certainly has the purpose of protecting the environment and peace, even if you make the argument that it does also spread "ignorance" (not false facts?) and fear.
So they're "eco-terrorists" to you. Sounds like you're afraid of them, because they oppose research you value. Exactly which biotechnology do you work with?
There are plenty of anti-GM posts in this thread that are not Anonymous.
There are plenty of Anonymous posts that are not anti-GM.
Why are you so wack that you will lie about something so obviously false?
Direct genetic engineering by molecular genetics rather than by hybrid breeding purposely allows arbitrary mutations to bypass the reproductive barriers to mutation. Among the increased risks are gene escape from transgenic organisms. That ecological threat is rare in natural organisms, but happens more often in engineered ones.
The "errors" in the study feature ignoring half the rats because they died. So most likely the results drastically underestimate the health problems.
Rather than expose this flawed study to the normal peer review that would establish its results as either useless or useful, governments suppressed it. That also bears investigation.
When science can't investigate these questions, but instead politics with its vested corporate interest rules, we can't see what's going on here. Now that the science is free to be actively questioned and repeated more rigorously, we can try to see. And now that the political suppression is broken, we can already see what's going on there.
Greenpeace has always opposed corporations, specifically corporations that destroy the environment, since its beginning.
The only purpose of your comment is to spread uncertainty, ignorance and fear: FUD.
But doesn't that "balance" the corporate criminals who don't let logic, safety or righteousness get in the way of money?
More hysterical bullshit than "Social Justice: Seeing a liberal getting slugged in the teeth"?
I submit a story about suppressed science being freed for actual scientific examination, rather than political convenience. You post a meaningless ad hominem attack. Signed with an insane hunger for violence.
Thanks for discrediting yourself immediately, HanzoSpam.
The biggest flaw in the Russian research is that "Half of the rats in the trial died, and results were taken from those that survived".
This research likely has other flaws, perhaps some that invalidate its results entirely. That's why it must be peer reviewed and retried, the absolute core technique that defines the scientific method. Now that it's been extracted from suppression, it can actually be part of science, regardless of how its results fare under legitimate scrutiny.
NTP servers can prioritize NTP packet QoS. They can offer SW for apps that use NTP data.
It's "NIST's" problem because it's the US Federal gov't's problem because if they don't help solve it the US population will suffer disproportionate damage.
The Feds should require insurance companies to limit liability coverage if the damage is suffered by policyholders which could have used industry standard SW, but didn't.
That's how market regulations ensures market operation. With the maximum efficiency by using existing infrastructure for existing problems in the same domain.
Typical Anonymous idiot Coward. Using the NTP servers to distribute the software is solely because clients consuming UTC data are most likely interested in client SW to use the UTC accurately, including setting the localtime.
With shallow people like you passing as NTP experts, no wonder it's still an unsolved problem keeping everyone's clocks in time.
The NTP server system is very reliable. Its servers should also include software upgrades that clients can fetch, with an authorization system in the clients. The US NIST should produce reference standard software that the NTP servers can offer, digitally signed by NIST, and test/certify/sign 3rd party SW. And the Congress should require the insurance industry to adopt uniform standards for liability when companies don't upgrade to the industry operations standard.
This function is too important to leave to corporations that have demonstrated they upgrade themselves in their own interest only when it's a years-long campaign that everyone talks about. So it's time to automate the process. Otherwise, Americans and others in the global economy will pay much higher costs in damage and loss later, cleaning up the mess.
I'd love to see Apple sell a notebook that's only 12"x8"x1" that flips open to reveal a fullsize keyboard and a wide screen at 1200x800 for immediate use. Then rotates the screen on its bottom right corner, then stretching out a "rollable" display across to a 16" or 24" wide by 12" high screen at 16-2400x1200.
My CS/engineering friends at Columbia built a half-adder from rubberbands, then combined them into logic, then little programs, back in the late 20th Century.
When MIT builds a quantum computer at mesoscopic size, then I'll be impressed.
OK, a little editing and rethinking shows that 0.0037Hz is 68 cents above A# and 0.0044Hz is 68 cents above C#. And it's all 17 octaves below Middle C. Which is therefore 40 octaves above the Perseus Black Hole's bassline.
The hum ranges from 0.0037Hz to 0.0044Hz. Using the conventional MIDI frequency/pitch conversion formula p = 69 + (12 * log2(f/440)), the hum's pitch runs across almost exactly 3 semitones, a minor third, from just sharp of "B flat" to just sharp of "C sharp", 17 octaves above Middle C.
Four semitones is the range covered by a guitarist's fingers on a fretboard. The minor third is the most popular guitarist's composition interval.
Meanwhile, the Perseus Black Hole hums along a B flat. A bassline 57 octaves below Middle C, 74 octaves below the Earth's treble melody.
There's no bandwidth shortage or any prospect of one. The scare talk about one is just propaganda from the backbone owner cartel trying to get even more government subsidy than the billions already shoveled on them in "broadband investments", fake taxes, tax immunity, and every other telco/cableco handout they've collected like gold rings over the past century.
Just ask these telco/cableco backbone masters whether they'll cut back the crapola TV channels they want to flood our homes with (without any regulation like that which controlled them in broadcast) to preserve the Internet bandwidth we all prefer. I bet suddenly they'll find all kinds of ways to ensure we keep our "Internet dialtone". When a bandwidth shortage threatens them, rather than serves them, I'm sure it will disappear instantly: like vapor.
Do these people just feel more productive, maybe because they're using a "business machine" like the Blackberry? Productivity measurements are standard metrics of US workers for at least a century. Have these Blackberry users actually increased their productivity since before they got the Blackberry? Compared to any increase gained by their coworkers who didn't get a Blackberry? Compared to coworkers with a Blackberry who don't feel any more productive?
Workers whose productivity doesn't increase even when they get expensive technology investments like a Blackberry aren't reliable people to ask whether they're more productive. Working longer hours isn't productivity: often it's a decrease, leaving more to get done in longer time, when fatigue, resentment and just arbitrary final cutoff times decrease productivity.
If they're less productive, and feel more productive, then they'll want more pay, though they produce less, and cost more in IT costs. How about a real answer to this question, instead of mumbo jumbo about how Blackberries "feel"?
Who cares why they open their source? As long as they release the source code, without restrictions that prevent the public from changing, revising, executing and redistributing it, people in the public can do whatever we want with it.
If selfserving companies (what other kind is there?) find it in their interest to open their source, then I welcome them joining the open source "movement". More source needs to be opened in the selfinterest of its originators. And more selfserving companies opening source will help convince others how its in their interest, too. Which will release more source.
What needs to die is the idea that open source is some kind of ideal. It's an engineering collaboration technique. It's like object oriented design. There are OOD ideologues, but they're harmless and lost in the roar of people using OOD to solve real problems. Some people are still arguing about the ideology of file vs project variable scoping. But practically no one lets that get in the way of writing code with well-defined interfaces for other code. Let's see open source outgrow the ideology, and just remain a stable way to produce and use software.
Every time this old crank or any of his fellow Senators wastes time with these fake "child protection" systems that screw adults instead of actually protecting children, they leave children actually exposed to the real threats. And their sneaky smokescreens using children as "human shields" from criticism of their sweeping attacks on American liberty makes it even harder to trust any plan offered to actually protect these people.
All they do is damage everyone. Delete Stevens and his technocrat cronies.
Penicillin, the panacea of the last generation of medical science, was discovered accidentally by Alexander Fleming. Now a cancer cure, our era's "holy grail", has perhaps been found in a similar accident.
It seems that the "error" part of the scientific method's "trial and error" process is even more important than the planned "trial" part.
Maybe we should have more scientific research conducted like jazz, which is sometimes described as "gracefully exploiting errors".
Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
I guess trollMods are natural fans of a blatherer of lies like Crichton. Can't debate the facts and logic, so the trollMod anonymously attacks. Everybody's a critic.