Sega pulled an earlier 3D product in the mid 90s because problems were observed in kids who used the device frequently. Took me forever to find links right now -- it used to be easy to pull up the documents about this on Google, but as of today, all the keywords point at today's announcement. This is the problem with relying upon Google to remember things for me.:-)
he can literally say "this is bullshit guys, you must treat people of all sexual orientations equally"
No, he can't. He couldn't.
Clinton tried to do that -- to do exactly what Truman did on race. He announced before taking office his intent to declare that gays could serve openly. In response, Congress passed the Don't Ask Don't Tell legislation to tie the president's hands. And they told Clinton, "You will sign it or we have enough votes to put through a veto-proof version that increases instead of decreases the investigations into military personnel.
It's not the same as saying "God doesn't allow it." It could simply be "under the laws of physics, no such machine can ever be constructed successfully." The theory doesn't require any active player in the game pushing back on the LHC. The theory is just suggesting a pressure, if you'll allow the analogy, that holds back any such particle generation, and if you "compress" the probability of success enough, it pops back forcefully. What the theory is suggesting is that no amount of good design can make this work, in the same way that no amount of jumping is going to launch a person into Earth orbit -- the universe doesn't allow it.
On the other hand, you could think of it like an earthquake. To let off pressure, the plates may slip very tiny amounts, generating small tremors. But if enough pressure builds up, you get a massive quake. Suppose the universe as a certain amount of "back pressure" of the universe to prevent a hadron collider from forming -- say, repressing the development of intelligent life in the first place at the micro or nano scopic levels. But improbably, something sticks and builds up. There are continuing problems in the development of a hadron collider, but one species keeps getting lucky (and they're stupidly ignoring the hints that something is wildly improbable about their existence in the first place that perhaps they've strayed into territory they shouldn't be in). And then someone decides to build a *large* hadron collider, and now the universal pressure hits a breaking point, resulting in direct macroscopic changes, like a screw popping loose and releasing gas into the chamber.
> That's why you do these kinds of experiments away from your home world.
Doesn't help... the proposal is that producing the Higgs wipes the entire universe, not just your local corner. You might as well do it on your home soil. It would suck to travel all the way to another planet just to be annihilated.
Peer review is when you're actually putting forth hard numbers. These guys are actively speculating and trying to get enough peer feedback to flesh out their theory. But beyond that, the article does note at least one falsifiable experiment that they're proposing to run. They haven't run it yet.
There is a difference in this case. It is more than just apologizing for the wrongs against him in the past. It is also fully acknowledging him, now, today, as someone worthy of respect for his contributions to our lives today. In that sense, it is affecting the lives of those still living, to have someone gay held up as someone society respects. That's the part that makes this apology worthy of Parliment's time today, and why it isn't just hereditary guilt.
Maybe the babies are using the bandwidth and just faking the minds of these researchers into thinking its the fault of the baby monitors. Are we sure this isn't just the next generation of mutant children hogging the bandwidth with psychic chat about their post-natal experiences?
Think of the children... because they're thinking of you!
Right, which means the logarithmic distribution of digits is still true. 1 is 100% because there is only one digit. The law says that in base 3, you'd have 1 be high and 2 be lower percent. And if you went to base 4, you'd have 1 high, 2 middle and 3 low. And so on.
Being 100% in binary doesn't invalidate the law. That's just the base case.
I tend to agree with w0mprat. If you feel it is unethical, push for a change, and keep pushing until you have a new job lined up already or they fire you. If they fire you, at least you get unemployment benefits (because the best they can do is fire you for not doing your job, not for doing anything illegal... its the illegal bit that would keep you from unemployment coverage).
I don't think Bandman intended to imply shaping is unethical. He merely said if it is unethical (for example, if shaping contradicts the current TOS or something like that) then he advised a course of action.
Men of Mathematics by E. T. Bell. Published in 1937, it is biographies of most major mathematicians "from Zeno to Poincare'". Instead of focusing on their mathematical discoveries, this book focused on what their lives were like and why they were even interested in math and how math influenced the rest of their lives.
Number 9, The Search for the Sigma Code by Cecil Balmond. This book is half fiction, half not, and looks into the weird ways that the number 9 keeps cropping up in number theory. Fun read, with lots of accessible arithmetic for high school.
Flatland by Edwin Abbot. You've probably heard of this one. But then...
Spaceland by Rudy Rucker... in which a man from our world explores a higher dimensional world in which our 3D space is but one slice of theirs, and the strange interactions he has with the beings there.
Quoting the end of the article: > One problem is that it is difficult to verify the > ages and identities of children because they do > not have driverâ(TM)s licenses or insurance.
The answer is obvious! Drivers licenses should be issued in kindergarten. It may make our streets more dangerous, but the Internet will be safer, surely!
Yes, it would. A tight community of friends that no longer has any contact info for each other would certainly be disrupted. Just because the people do not know anything other than screen handles doesn't mean they haven't been talking for years, sharing stories, helping each other with problems, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
> Children under about 10-12 shouldn't be exposed to any artificial stereoscopy
Citation needed. But I'll do a bit more than just complain about your blind assertion... folks should check out web stories about Sega's experiences in the 1990s:
http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/06/26/2059205/3D-Displays-May-Be-Hazardous-To-Young-Children
http://markpesce.posterous.com/split-screen-how-safe-is-3d-tv-screen-play-di
Ah... and here's the Slashdot coverage of it from earlier this year:
http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/06/26/2059205/3D-Displays-May-Be-Hazardous-To-Young-Children
Sega pulled an earlier 3D product in the mid 90s because problems were observed in kids who used the device frequently. Took me forever to find links right now -- it used to be easy to pull up the documents about this on Google, but as of today, all the keywords point at today's announcement. This is the problem with relying upon Google to remember things for me. :-)
But I did find one article about it finally:
Search within this article for "Sega"
http://markpesce.posterous.com/split-screen-how-safe-is-3d-tv-screen-play-di
There are a number of write ups about Sega's experience, and that experience is what is spawning a lot of the concern from Sony and Nintendo.
he can literally say "this is bullshit guys, you must treat people of all sexual orientations equally"
No, he can't. He couldn't.
Clinton tried to do that -- to do exactly what Truman did on race. He announced before taking office his intent to declare that gays could serve openly. In response, Congress passed the Don't Ask Don't Tell legislation to tie the president's hands. And they told Clinton, "You will sign it or we have enough votes to put through a veto-proof version that increases instead of decreases the investigations into military personnel.
You can read the full history here: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell
All it takes is just one tribble.
> [btw, the Big Bang theory has an amazing number of failed predictions]
Citation needed.
It's not the same as saying "God doesn't allow it." It could simply be "under the laws of physics, no such machine can ever be constructed successfully." The theory doesn't require any active player in the game pushing back on the LHC. The theory is just suggesting a pressure, if you'll allow the analogy, that holds back any such particle generation, and if you "compress" the probability of success enough, it pops back forcefully. What the theory is suggesting is that no amount of good design can make this work, in the same way that no amount of jumping is going to launch a person into Earth orbit -- the universe doesn't allow it.
On the other hand, you could think of it like an earthquake. To let off pressure, the plates may slip very tiny amounts, generating small tremors. But if enough pressure builds up, you get a massive quake. Suppose the universe as a certain amount of "back pressure" of the universe to prevent a hadron collider from forming -- say, repressing the development of intelligent life in the first place at the micro or nano scopic levels. But improbably, something sticks and builds up. There are continuing problems in the development of a hadron collider, but one species keeps getting lucky (and they're stupidly ignoring the hints that something is wildly improbable about their existence in the first place that perhaps they've strayed into territory they shouldn't be in). And then someone decides to build a *large* hadron collider, and now the universal pressure hits a breaking point, resulting in direct macroscopic changes, like a screw popping loose and releasing gas into the chamber.
Just a theory...
> That's why you do these kinds of experiments away from your home world.
Doesn't help... the proposal is that producing the Higgs wipes the entire universe, not just your local corner. You might as well do it on your home soil. It would suck to travel all the way to another planet just to be annihilated.
Peer review is when you're actually putting forth hard numbers. These guys are actively speculating and trying to get enough peer feedback to flesh out their theory. But beyond that, the article does note at least one falsifiable experiment that they're proposing to run. They haven't run it yet.
There is a difference in this case. It is more than just apologizing for the wrongs against him in the past. It is also fully acknowledging him, now, today, as someone worthy of respect for his contributions to our lives today. In that sense, it is affecting the lives of those still living, to have someone gay held up as someone society respects. That's the part that makes this apology worthy of Parliment's time today, and why it isn't just hereditary guilt.
Who is Jay Leno? :-)
Maybe the babies are using the bandwidth and just faking the minds of these researchers into thinking its the fault of the baby monitors. Are we sure this isn't just the next generation of mutant children hogging the bandwidth with psychic chat about their post-natal experiences?
Think of the children... because they're thinking of you!
Right, which means the logarithmic distribution of digits is still true. 1 is 100% because there is only one digit. The law says that in base 3, you'd have 1 be high and 2 be lower percent. And if you went to base 4, you'd have 1 high, 2 middle and 3 low. And so on.
Being 100% in binary doesn't invalidate the law. That's just the base case.
I tend to agree with w0mprat. If you feel it is unethical, push for a change, and keep pushing until you have a new job lined up already or they fire you. If they fire you, at least you get unemployment benefits (because the best they can do is fire you for not doing your job, not for doing anything illegal... its the illegal bit that would keep you from unemployment coverage).
I don't think Bandman intended to imply shaping is unethical. He merely said if it is unethical (for example, if shaping contradicts the current TOS or something like that) then he advised a course of action.
Somebody mod this up!
It just means that ALL media, not just Wikipedia, need to be using "citation needed".
Men of Mathematics by E. T. Bell. Published in 1937, it is biographies of most major mathematicians "from Zeno to Poincare'". Instead of focusing on their mathematical discoveries, this book focused on what their lives were like and why they were even interested in math and how math influenced the rest of their lives.
Number 9, The Search for the Sigma Code by Cecil Balmond. This book is half fiction, half not, and looks into the weird ways that the number 9 keeps cropping up in number theory. Fun read, with lots of accessible arithmetic for high school.
Flatland by Edwin Abbot. You've probably heard of this one. But then...
Spaceland by Rudy Rucker... in which a man from our world explores a higher dimensional world in which our 3D space is but one slice of theirs, and the strange interactions he has with the beings there.
A shoe is the *furthest* insult you can throw. But we're looking for *highest* for this particular trivia question.
Quoting the end of the article:
> One problem is that it is difficult to verify the
> ages and identities of children because they do
> not have driverâ(TM)s licenses or insurance.
The answer is obvious! Drivers licenses should be issued in kindergarten. It may make our streets more dangerous, but the Internet will be safer, surely!
Not that you'd see this analogy -- you'd have a fork in your eye.
Yes, it would. A tight community of friends that no longer has any contact info for each other would certainly be disrupted. Just because the people do not know anything other than screen handles doesn't mean they haven't been talking for years, sharing stories, helping each other with problems, etc.
Doesn't matter your opinion of that court. The parent post's citation is still valid.
> It's only any good if the other party co-operates.
Not a problem. After they walk away from your desk, just send them an e-mail thanking them.
"I appreciate you stopping by my desk today to approve the project. Just so we are both on the same page, here's what I heard you want me to do..."
You may quickly get a "that's not what I said" e-mail in response. Then just ask them to clarify, logging every reply.