Well, the standard should probably what it is for other subjects: the main local beliefs plus major world beliefs plus a smattering of others for variety.
Take, say, languages: You teach English plus maybe Spanish. Because China is important in today's world, many schools are teaching Chinese, too.
For religion, it would probably be the Jewish/Christian/Islamic belief all compared and contrasted to each other. Then you might want to know what the Chinese and Indians think, after the inclusion of which you basically have most of the world's population covered. For me, it would be interesting to know what other cultures at various times also thought (maybe a short paragraph on each).
I can't really comment about whether all the docs are real, but, just on the issue of the propriety of leaking documents:
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
It was great to be able to read the documents in Climategate I and II. And it's great to be able to read these, too.
Although Climategate has shown climate "scientists" to be more concerned about propaganda than science, and has thrown the whole theory of global warming (oops, I mean the theory that climate changes over time) into question, no one should be under any illusion that the think tanks that propagandize against AGW aren't oil company shills.
They may be right (by coincidence), but they're still shills.
Expecting a mod-down since I've hit both sides in this post.
Anybody remember the Atlantic story from a while ago about Pakistan transporting its nukes?
It was presented as "Oh noes, they move their nukes in ordinary trucks instead of military convoys. Maybe we should invade them and secure their arsenal."
Lo and behold, the DoE is using the same method in the US.
Hey, can we get the guy that posts the long "why your solution to spam won't work" thing in response to antispam proposals to think one up for "why SCO won't die this time"?
Meaning 99.9999991% of the people to be affected by this are NOT the poster children/excuse for this kind of tracking.
It seems all the governments of the world are in a race to be the most onerous and most oppressive. They learn from each other, and so must we (normal peeps).
This is about as useful as asking who doesn't rely on semi-slave labor practices during the industrialization phase of the UK or US (no vacations, Pinkerton detective agency, strikebreaking, pittance wages, etc.).
Look, this phase is messy, but necessary.
They can't just start out with a "services" economy all styling each others' hair.
They have to go through this phase, and it's certainly a step up from the near-starvation they had in the countryside. Then wages go up, slowly, but surely. Before you know it, Chinese will be asking about organic certification before they deign to go to work for a company.
OK, thanks, I thought he was saying his MP was hard to get a hold of, and he was just going to buttonhole him next time he goes to the hospital, as he won't be able to run away and avoid the public.
What in the world has possessed their formerly useful minds to think that people don't need multiple windows on the screen at a single time?
What possible use case is there for a single window filling the entire monitor, all the time?
If it's for a kiosk, isn't there a Puppy Linux distro for that?
For anyone else, how do you work with only one window? Whether it's drawing, writing, programming, calculating, or whatever.
Even if it's for home use: if you're copying paraphrasing from Wikipedia for a school report, you need both a browser window and an OpenOffice window, right?
Dumb question: I thought warmbloodedness was a characteristic of an entire species. You can have both warmblooded and coldblooded animals in a single species?
Similarly, no one denies that CO2 acts to warm things up in a closed glass box.
I have seen people deny exactly that.
The proverbial "on a high-school science class counter" experiment? Granted, I'm doubtful of extrapolating that experiment to the entire Earth's atmosphere, but it's strange that anyone's denying that simple experiment.
Regarding the whole climate mess generally: "hide the decline" did not help the climate scientists' case. I had at one point just accepted that humans are warming the planet up. But the whole fishy business behind Climategate served to make me (and a lot of other people) skeptical. Thing is, even if the (mainstream) climate scientists were right, it didn't behoove them to act like they did.
The entire point behind a "liberal arts" education was that free men were supposed to be educated to enough of a degree in many different subjects so they could intelligently discharge the duties of citizenship.
Ideally, that would mean -people have enough of a grounding in computer science/applications to know about encryption and privacy issues -people have enough knowledge about DNA testing to know when it useful and when it's not -people have enough knowledge about science to ask useful questions of climate and other scientists
If we're just going to leave things to a priesthood, we don't need to question prosecution attorneys, judges, the police when they ask for more powers, the government when it makes certain claims, car companies, Goldman Sachs, etc.
If gravity had a political program attached like a Siamese twin to it, I think you'd probably start seeing a lot of "gravity deniers".
Let's work out some analogues: 1) theory: masses attract. 2) conjecture: some asteroid might swerve into the path of the Earth 3) political program: spending billions, even trillions of dollars on asteroid-avoidance
If scientists were solemnly intoning that we have to spend trillions of dollars on X because "the science says so", you'd see a of people denying X.
Actually, though, they'd be denying the attached political program, not the underlying basic science.
Similarly, no one denies that CO2 acts to warm things up in a closed glass box. That's the real basic science. They're denying the conjectures (we'll be X degrees in Y years) and the political program.
A somewhat less cynical view is that Facebook is to your social interactions what a bank is to your money.
OK. So, analogous to how the government set up the Federal Reserve to be the lender of last resort, I guess we need a Friendship Reserve to be the "liker" of last resort, for people with no friends, right?
Slashdot Mirror
>Let me guess, you buy new clothes every year if they need replacing or not.
No, I think he buys new clothes if they need washing.
I'm with you on the pseudo-keys.
What kind of Koolaid are auto engineers drinking?
What question is this the answer to?
Yeah. This.
I'm of two minds, too.
On the one hand, we've all seen the situation as it is currently with the US on past Slashdot stories (shutting down websites, taking domains, etc.)
So you start to think, maybe the US shouldn't have control.
The problem is, the UN could be worse.
Well, the standard should probably what it is for other subjects: the main local beliefs plus major world beliefs plus a smattering of others for variety.
Take, say, languages: You teach English plus maybe Spanish. Because China is important in today's world, many schools are teaching Chinese, too.
For religion, it would probably be the Jewish/Christian/Islamic belief all compared and contrasted to each other. Then you might want to know what the Chinese and Indians think, after the inclusion of which you basically have most of the world's population covered. For me, it would be interesting to know what other cultures at various times also thought (maybe a short paragraph on each).
I can't really comment about whether all the docs are real, but, just on the issue of the propriety of leaking documents:
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
It was great to be able to read the documents in Climategate I and II. And it's great to be able to read these, too.
Although Climategate has shown climate "scientists" to be more concerned about propaganda than science, and has thrown the whole theory of global warming (oops, I mean the theory that climate changes over time) into question, no one should be under any illusion that the think tanks that propagandize against AGW aren't oil company shills.
They may be right (by coincidence), but they're still shills.
Expecting a mod-down since I've hit both sides in this post.
Does this have anything to do with Apple?
I.e., Apple's suing Samsung, and vice versa. On the other hand, Samsung provides the iPad's displays.
So, by spinning off the display division, is the purpose to get on with the suing?
have anything else to do?
Sorry, had to say it.
Anybody remember the Atlantic story from a while ago about Pakistan transporting its nukes?
It was presented as "Oh noes, they move their nukes in ordinary trucks instead of military convoys. Maybe we should invade them and secure their arsenal."
Lo and behold, the DoE is using the same method in the US.
Here's an idea: The government should own the pipes.
Literally, the pipes: the cylindrical things in which you would then pull wires.
So you'd have a 6" (?) pipe, and then ATT would pull their wire along, and Brand X theirs, and City Internet Co their own.
it was just a "voluntary" request for cooperation.
(That means they had good old Joe Lieberman call up the company and "ask" them to print teh dots.)
Can anyone comment on the infamous "bearer bonds" which Hollywood and movie bank robbers are so fond of?
Hey, can we get the guy that posts the long "why your solution to spam won't work" thing in response to antispam proposals to think one up for "why SCO won't die this time"?
If the gas is at 10k ft, and the water is at 10k-X ft, the gas and chemicals have to pass through the water, right?
While the rock may be impermeable, geologists can't know exactly where a crevice might or might not be, can they?
For "normal" people, obviously:
There are 1,170,938,000 people in India.
The Taj attacks were carried out by 10 men.
Meaning 99.9999991% of the people to be affected by this are NOT the poster children/excuse for this kind of tracking.
It seems all the governments of the world are in a race to be the most onerous and most oppressive. They learn from each other, and so must we (normal peeps).
This is about as useful as asking who doesn't rely on semi-slave labor practices during the industrialization phase of the UK or US (no vacations, Pinkerton detective agency, strikebreaking, pittance wages, etc.).
Look, this phase is messy, but necessary.
They can't just start out with a "services" economy all styling each others' hair.
They have to go through this phase, and it's certainly a step up from the near-starvation they had in the countryside. Then wages go up, slowly, but surely. Before you know it, Chinese will be asking about organic certification before they deign to go to work for a company.
OK, thanks, I thought he was saying his MP was hard to get a hold of, and he was just going to buttonhole him next time he goes to the hospital, as he won't be able to run away and avoid the public.
You meet him at his next surgery?
Heartily agree about a smartphone. I don't think I'd like to have 2 windows showing there.
Strangely, the Gnome devs do not seem to understand different strokes for different artichokes.
What in the world has possessed their formerly useful minds to think that people don't need multiple windows on the screen at a single time?
What possible use case is there for a single window filling the entire monitor, all the time?
If it's for a kiosk, isn't there a Puppy Linux distro for that?
For anyone else, how do you work with only one window? Whether it's drawing, writing, programming, calculating, or whatever.
Even if it's for home use: if you're copying paraphrasing from Wikipedia for a school report, you need both a browser window and an OpenOffice window, right?
Lemme quit before I go nuts.
You're saying one floor of an office building is $2 billion? 15% of that is $300 mil rent per year?
Dumb question: I thought warmbloodedness was a characteristic of an entire species. You can have both warmblooded and coldblooded animals in a single species?
The proverbial "on a high-school science class counter" experiment? Granted, I'm doubtful of extrapolating that experiment to the entire Earth's atmosphere, but it's strange that anyone's denying that simple experiment.
Regarding the whole climate mess generally: "hide the decline" did not help the climate scientists' case. I had at one point just accepted that humans are warming the planet up. But the whole fishy business behind Climategate served to make me (and a lot of other people) skeptical. Thing is, even if the (mainstream) climate scientists were right, it didn't behoove them to act like they did.
The entire point behind a "liberal arts" education was that free men were supposed to be educated to enough of a degree in many different subjects so they could intelligently discharge the duties of citizenship.
Ideally, that would mean
-people have enough of a grounding in computer science/applications to know about encryption and privacy issues
-people have enough knowledge about DNA testing to know when it useful and when it's not
-people have enough knowledge about science to ask useful questions of climate and other scientists
If we're just going to leave things to a priesthood, we don't need to question prosecution attorneys, judges, the police when they ask for more powers, the government when it makes certain claims, car companies, Goldman Sachs, etc.
>"Gravity" is not a theory.
If gravity had a political program attached like a Siamese twin to it, I think you'd probably start seeing a lot of "gravity deniers".
Let's work out some analogues:
1) theory: masses attract.
2) conjecture: some asteroid might swerve into the path of the Earth
3) political program: spending billions, even trillions of dollars on asteroid-avoidance
If scientists were solemnly intoning that we have to spend trillions of dollars on X because "the science says so", you'd see a of people denying X.
Actually, though, they'd be denying the attached political program, not the underlying basic science.
Similarly, no one denies that CO2 acts to warm things up in a closed glass box. That's the real basic science. They're denying the conjectures (we'll be X degrees in Y years) and the political program.
OK. So, analogous to how the government set up the Federal Reserve to be the lender of last resort, I guess we need a Friendship Reserve to be the "liker" of last resort, for people with no friends, right?