It seems many people are arguing "but that's not going to work, the airlines are already on so very thin profit margins".
Ticket prices are going to rise. A number of airlines are going to file for bankruptcy. Well bohoo. That's just the way it should be - market economy at work.
The “core” typically sits beneath the city’s center, and its stations usually form a ring shape.
Note that it doesn't say "loop" anywhere. So I gather they don't mean a central loop line like the moscow subway system. If you think of it more like a geographical grouping of the core stations in a ring shape, I'd say (squinting my eyes a bit) there's an embryo of it in Stockholm city between Slussen, Fridhemsplan and Östermalmstorg with T-centralen in the middle. Here's the map, btw...
Correct, that is pretty much how it works here too. So in practice it is for the most part an issue of availability anyway. I don't know yet how they specifically plan to go about in the cases where access actually could be expected to harm the patient (really only an issue in psychiatry settings, I imagine)
I am a doctor (although currently in a very junior position), and my employer, the local public health care provider, is planning on making patient records public in the very near future. (Link in Swedish, use google translate) For this reason, I have given this a bit of thought. From the larger perspective, I am all for empowering patients to access their records. The main argument against it, as I see it, is that there is a certain group of patients, maybe 1-2 %, where this hypothetically might become a problem. These are the patients who come from a position where they already have established a mistrust of healthcare providers, often (but not always) because of real or perceived mistreatments. There is a tendency among these patients to interpret everything said and done during their dealings with health care professionals in the worst possible way, reinforcing their distrust of health care in general. Having these people access their medical records, with all the latin, medical lingo and outright physician slang therein, could, I imagine, further fuel a feeling that something is going on behind their backs, which I believe is what is often at heart of the problem. On the other hand, you could also argue that it would have the opposite effect, reinstating a feeling of control in these patients when they realize that their doctor didn't write such horrible things in the journal about them as they might have imagined.
As for being a game changer, as some other people has suggested, I personally think this will have little impact on the whole. Really, as a doctor, believe me: we don't habitually hide things from our patients, as some people seem to believe! The kind of people who would use the info from their records to surf the web to find alternative treatments for their diseases etc., know all the meaningful facts even today from just discussing with their doctor. Knowing exactly how high their hemoglobin count was two months ago, and what exact differential diagnoses their doctor considered and decided to document last week, is hardly going to change that -- they would already have asked the right questions. Furthermore, the people who are overly respectful of white coats, have language issues and so forth, who could be considered most in need of information empowerment, is probably those who will make the least use of this service.
The headline is somewhat misleading, it should say: "Synthetic Skin Could Replace Animal Subjects IN COSMETICS TESTING, SPECIFICALLY DERMATOLOGICAL PRODUCTS". For medical applications we are very far from such a breakthrough, owing mostly to the immense complexity of large biological systems, such as a living animal or human being. For the vast majority of animal testing, this might at best result in a reduced need for small pieces of skin tissue for basic research in laboratory settings, which is hardly the problem anyway.
If there is no God, your professed belief in life certainly won't make a hoot of a difference after you are dead and gone, but if there is, perhaps it will matter to him (in particular with the Christian conception of God)
IIRC, Descartes tried to argue something similiar in the 17th century. His conclusions were more extreme, but the IMO strongest counterarguments against his thesis, still would apply to your "real world" approach. You see, the question is not so much whether it is a good idea to believe/not believe, but rather in *what* to believe. There's literally hundreds of religions out there, and there's absolutely nothing that says that you'd be better off in afterlife just beacause you confessed to christianity.
It is perhaps not much of an argument, but neither was the one you presented, IMHO.
As another citizen of an european country, I must concur.
I would also like to add that handling of SSN-equivalents etc (in my country at least) is, to say the least, relaxed. Even my local martial arts club requires it. And in our "SSN:s" the date of birth is literally embedded. To make matters worse, anybody who knows that number can, providing I do not have a "protected identity", get my tax records, address and more. Even my passport photo. Yet, identity thefts continue to be unheard of.
Ok, but I think you missed out on some vital information here. First, how did your parents treat you to make you into what you are and were?
You say you "learned" from your family to wait with sex. Perhaps it is just a misinterpretation of mine (I am not a native english speaker), but that does not seem to be the word of choice had your upbringing been signified by parental belt swinging excercises or the verbal equivalent.
Personally, I am extremely dutiful, to the extent where it almost becomes a problem for me. I am regarded as polite, I receive exellent marks at school, I play the violin with quite some skill etc. etc. Yet what is interesting here is that my parents never *forced* me to do anything, while rules were clear, they were however not abundant. My parents trusted me; and I made sure they could continue to do so. Sure, minor breakings of rules occured, but it was rare. As drinking concerns, my parents never had any rules at all; they advised me not to drink too early, and warned me of the consequenses. I drink rarely and with extreme moderation, and that's the way it's been since I started to drink (the drinking culture in this country is otherwise... heavy). I of course do not smoke.
Of those people I know that are similarily "well brought-up", none has notably restrictive parents; however of those I know who have overly restrictive parents, most, if not all, started drinking early, started smoking, etc.
Upbringing is important. While rules might be necessary, without a proper communication -- based on trust! -- even the simplest rule will be unenforceable.
P.S. Nope. In a relationship right now, and I'm waiting. One of the things I learned from my family was to let love grow rather than just make it. A word from the wise: don't make her wait too long...:-)
I think the original poster was referring to things like networking capabilities, actually. Those who need it, well they need it. I don't, and neither does, what, 80-90% of the X users out there?
I've spent the last five or so years wondering why someone hadn't invented something like this. It was always so frustrating that I could buy a freaking Piper Jet if I bought it cash, but I couldn't even buy stamps online without the consent and cooperation of my folks. And then, two weeks after I finally am old enough to own a Visa, someone does. I bet lots of people at slashdot had the competence to do such a thing; so my question to you are simple. How come noone implemented this awfully simple idea *years* ago?
Tariffs are a short-sighted answer. They delay the inevitable while artificially maintaining high prices and inefficient businesses.
Yeah, and don't forget that such tariffs on basic elements meant for further refining also hampers the international competitivity of domestic industry that utilises these products in its production. In the case of steel products this is very much the case. I've read somewhere (or rather everywhere) that the jobs saved by the tariffs in the steel industry are far fewer than those lost in the steel-dependant industry.
"We know how people act individually, and yet we can't extrapolate the behavior of entire societies from this."
There just happens to be an entire discipline dedicated to exploring the behavior of entire societies. It's called sociology.
... and the problem with sociology is that, in fact, we don't know how people act individiually. Sure, we can quite accurately predict the behaviour of a single human being in a given enviroment, but that is mostly based on previous experience. In an arbitrary setting, it gets worse. IMO, the big problem lies with the fact that there is very little reliable research on the separation of properties acquired through enviroment vs. those acquired through heritage (and other natural factors, such as sex and even race). This opens up to heavy speculations, and leads to the possibility of constructing most elaborate theories claiming just about anything. Examples are amongst others "queer" theory and radical feminist theory (Ok, this is gonna get me flamed, but what the heck (disclaimer: I am neither a sexist or a homophobe, in fact I have a good friend who is openly gay, and as a liberal I support large parts of the feminist struggle)), both relying IMO on very little actual empirical science when it comes to the (therein) claimed properties of the individual and thus the value of these theories could be debated.
Sociology is full of these things. There is simply no one view of how we humans work by design, not to mention to which extent we are affected by external circumstances. One of the most significant splits lie in the idea of the "natural" behaviour of man. There is still a great many people, mainly in social sciences, who believe in the ideas mainly formulated by Rousseau, that all the moral faults of man, all vice and egoism, can be blamed on society itself (an idea that I believe helped form the ideologies of the anarchist movements). Experiments (and quite heartless experiments by todays standards btw) conducted as early as during the 1700s, failed ingraciously to support this idea. (Example: A young native child was taken from his mother in a colony (I believe it must have been the island St. Bartholomy, the only real colony ever held by the Swedish crown) and taken to Stockholm to be brought up at the court without any moral guidance or rules of any kind. The idea was that if the ideas of Rousseau were correct, he would grow up something of a saint with an unquelchable thirst for knowledge, moral enlightnement etc. As the common sense of most people would dictate, the kid grew up a total pest, pulling evil little pranks on everybody in his surroundings and eventually had to be sent home).
Gee. That was a long post. But this kind of topic really gets me going.
Such designs have been around for ages. I remember trying one during the mountainbike world cup in Åre, back in 1999. Yes, it was rather rudimentary, but the speed was adjusted after how fast you were pedaling and pedaling up slopes was heavier than going downwards. And I can't see how adding more advanced features, like steering sensors could be that much harder work.
uhuh. Well, I wonder what kind of cable you have. 'round here they typically are 512/128 kbit, and from what I've understood that's the case in the rest of the world too.
FYI, T1 is according to Tiscali 1,544 mbit/s, so the T1 comparison appears to be valid.
Sounds more like virtual destruction to me. Whilst there are certainly a lot of things the World Bank and IMF have done that on afterthought seems stupid and contraproductive in terms of reducing poverty, you have to keep in mind that the idea that this is because these organisations are per definition "evil" is an *opinion*. You can say it out loud to anyone you want, write it on banners, cry it on the streets. But for god's sake, what we're dealing with here is essentially a DDOS attack on their servers, intended to disrupt their communications and whatnot. Whatever the cause, how tiny damage it ever causes, it is still a lot closer to terrorism (yes, I know the word has gotten a wee bit too strong lately, but try to get my real meaning here) than demonstration.
Just because no single person is to blame, it doesnt mean that it's right. The problem, if you are of a political alignment that makes you define it as such, is political and should be dealt with in a political way. Convince the rest of us - and there will be no "enemy" .
If you go back 3 or 4 articles in slashdot history you'll find the latest article mentioning the theory of evolution, as always accompanied by the ever-present debate between creationists and evolutionists.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but:
If the event described in the article really occured, which seems likely, this would if I'm not entirely mistaken be another observation of evolution in action, and IMHO a rather solid piece of evidence against a static, creationistic view of the world.
Nowhere does it say to disregard forces other than time that may change the measuring device.
If these forces weren't readily detectable, that would mean that they were present everywhere, affected all our clocks, mechanical or electronic, in exactly the same way, which would mean that their effect could not be readily separated from the actual forces that directly affect time, and such a separation would also be pointless according to Occam's razor.
An arc welder on the other hand creates a visible distortion making one clock run very different from others, and is therefore an easily identified source of error easily to be taken into account when performing an experiment.
Slashdot Mirror
It seems many people are arguing "but that's not going to work, the airlines are already on so very thin profit margins".
Ticket prices are going to rise. A number of airlines are going to file for bankruptcy. Well bohoo. That's just the way it should be - market economy at work.
The article says:
The “core” typically sits beneath the city’s center, and its stations usually form a ring shape.
Note that it doesn't say "loop" anywhere. So I gather they don't mean a central loop line like the moscow subway system. If you think of it more like a geographical grouping of the core stations in a ring shape, I'd say (squinting my eyes a bit) there's an embryo of it in Stockholm city between Slussen, Fridhemsplan and Östermalmstorg with T-centralen in the middle. Here's the map, btw...
Correct, that is pretty much how it works here too. So in practice it is for the most part an issue of availability anyway. I don't know yet how they specifically plan to go about in the cases where access actually could be expected to harm the patient (really only an issue in psychiatry settings, I imagine)
I am a doctor (although currently in a very junior position), and my employer, the local public health care provider, is planning on making patient records public in the very near future. (Link in Swedish, use google translate) For this reason, I have given this a bit of thought. From the larger perspective, I am all for empowering patients to access their records. The main argument against it, as I see it, is that there is a certain group of patients, maybe 1-2 %, where this hypothetically might become a problem. These are the patients who come from a position where they already have established a mistrust of healthcare providers, often (but not always) because of real or perceived mistreatments. There is a tendency among these patients to interpret everything said and done during their dealings with health care professionals in the worst possible way, reinforcing their distrust of health care in general. Having these people access their medical records, with all the latin, medical lingo and outright physician slang therein, could, I imagine, further fuel a feeling that something is going on behind their backs, which I believe is what is often at heart of the problem. On the other hand, you could also argue that it would have the opposite effect, reinstating a feeling of control in these patients when they realize that their doctor didn't write such horrible things in the journal about them as they might have imagined.
As for being a game changer, as some other people has suggested, I personally think this will have little impact on the whole. Really, as a doctor, believe me: we don't habitually hide things from our patients, as some people seem to believe! The kind of people who would use the info from their records to surf the web to find alternative treatments for their diseases etc., know all the meaningful facts even today from just discussing with their doctor. Knowing exactly how high their hemoglobin count was two months ago, and what exact differential diagnoses their doctor considered and decided to document last week, is hardly going to change that -- they would already have asked the right questions. Furthermore, the people who are overly respectful of white coats, have language issues and so forth, who could be considered most in need of information empowerment, is probably those who will make the least use of this service.
The headline is somewhat misleading, it should say: "Synthetic Skin Could Replace Animal Subjects IN COSMETICS TESTING, SPECIFICALLY DERMATOLOGICAL PRODUCTS". For medical applications we are very far from such a breakthrough, owing mostly to the immense complexity of large biological systems, such as a living animal or human being. For the vast majority of animal testing, this might at best result in a reduced need for small pieces of skin tissue for basic research in laboratory settings, which is hardly the problem anyway.
IIRC, Descartes tried to argue something similiar in the 17th century. His conclusions were more extreme, but the IMO strongest counterarguments against his thesis, still would apply to your "real world" approach. You see, the question is not so much whether it is a good idea to believe/not believe, but rather in *what* to believe. There's literally hundreds of religions out there, and there's absolutely nothing that says that you'd be better off in afterlife just beacause you confessed to christianity.
It is perhaps not much of an argument, but neither was the one you presented, IMHO.
Just my philosphical $.02.
As another citizen of an european country, I must concur.
I would also like to add that handling of SSN-equivalents etc (in my country at least) is, to say the least, relaxed. Even my local martial arts club requires it. And in our "SSN:s" the date of birth is literally embedded. To make matters worse, anybody who knows that number can, providing I do not have a "protected identity", get my tax records, address and more. Even my passport photo. Yet, identity thefts continue to be unheard of.
Blame the credit companies, I say.
Ok, but I think you missed out on some vital information here. First, how did your parents treat you to make you into what you are and were?
:-)
You say you "learned" from your family to wait with sex. Perhaps it is just a misinterpretation of mine (I am not a native english speaker), but that does not seem to be the word of choice had your upbringing been signified by parental belt swinging excercises or the verbal equivalent.
Personally, I am extremely dutiful, to the extent where it almost becomes a problem for me. I am regarded as polite, I receive exellent marks at school, I play the violin with quite some skill etc. etc. Yet what is interesting here is that my parents never *forced* me to do anything, while rules were clear, they were however not abundant. My parents trusted me; and I made sure they could continue to do so. Sure, minor breakings of rules occured, but it was rare. As drinking concerns, my parents never had any rules at all; they advised me not to drink too early, and warned me of the consequenses. I drink rarely and with extreme moderation, and that's the way it's been since I started to drink (the drinking culture in this country is otherwise... heavy). I of course do not smoke.
Of those people I know that are similarily "well brought-up", none has notably restrictive parents; however of those I know who have overly restrictive parents, most, if not all, started drinking early, started smoking, etc.
Upbringing is important. While rules might be necessary, without a proper communication -- based on trust! -- even the simplest rule will be unenforceable.
P.S.
Nope. In a relationship right now, and I'm waiting. One of the things I learned from my family was to let love grow rather than just make it.
A word from the wise: don't make her wait too long...
I think the original poster was referring to things like networking capabilities, actually. Those who need it, well they need it. I don't, and neither does, what, 80-90% of the X users out there?
I've spent the last five or so years wondering why someone hadn't invented something like this. It was always so frustrating that I could buy a freaking Piper Jet if I bought it cash, but I couldn't even buy stamps online without the consent and cooperation of my folks. And then, two weeks after I finally am old enough to own a Visa, someone does. I bet lots of people at slashdot had the competence to do such a thing; so my question to you are simple. How come noone implemented this awfully simple idea *years* ago?
Yeah, and don't forget that such tariffs on basic elements meant for further refining also hampers the international competitivity of domestic industry that utilises these products in its production. In the case of steel products this is very much the case. I've read somewhere (or rather everywhere) that the jobs saved by the tariffs in the steel industry are far fewer than those lost in the steel-dependant industry.
Sociology is full of these things. There is simply no one view of how we humans work by design, not to mention to which extent we are affected by external circumstances. One of the most significant splits lie in the idea of the "natural" behaviour of man. There is still a great many people, mainly in social sciences, who believe in the ideas mainly formulated by Rousseau, that all the moral faults of man, all vice and egoism, can be blamed on society itself (an idea that I believe helped form the ideologies of the anarchist movements). Experiments (and quite heartless experiments by todays standards btw) conducted as early as during the 1700s, failed ingraciously to support this idea. (Example: A young native child was taken from his mother in a colony (I believe it must have been the island St. Bartholomy, the only real colony ever held by the Swedish crown) and taken to Stockholm to be brought up at the court without any moral guidance or rules of any kind. The idea was that if the ideas of Rousseau were correct, he would grow up something of a saint with an unquelchable thirst for knowledge, moral enlightnement etc. As the common sense of most people would dictate, the kid grew up a total pest, pulling evil little pranks on everybody in his surroundings and eventually had to be sent home).
Gee. That was a long post. But this kind of topic really gets me going.
"It sounds crazy, but it might just work"
Huh?
Such designs have been around for ages. I remember trying one during the mountainbike world cup in Åre, back in 1999. Yes, it was rather rudimentary, but the speed was adjusted after how fast you were pedaling and pedaling up slopes was heavier than going downwards. And I can't see how adding more advanced features, like steering sensors could be that much harder work.
As a curiosity, the name "Gandalf" appears as a name on one of seven dwarves in Völsung, a poem in the older Edda.
Hey, just tell 'em your constructing a nuclear weapon. I mean, wouldn't that fall under the second amendment?
uhuh. Well, I wonder what kind of cable you have. 'round here they typically are 512/128 kbit, and from what I've understood that's the case in the rest of the world too.
FYI, T1 is according to Tiscali 1,544 mbit/s, so the T1 comparison appears to be valid.
/me throws hat in the air!
"I don't know what the law is in Finland"
Me neither. But that's not really relevant, since the trial is held in Norway.
Yeah... I mean on one's wedding, shouldn't you at least try to *look* decent? geez... Americans.
This text provides a vision of a future now made rather plausible.
Virtual "demonstration"...
Sounds more like virtual destruction to me. Whilst there are certainly a lot of things the World Bank and IMF have done that on afterthought seems stupid and contraproductive in terms of reducing poverty, you have to keep in mind that the idea that this is because these organisations are per definition "evil" is an *opinion*. You can say it out loud to anyone you want, write it on banners, cry it on the streets. But for god's sake, what we're dealing with here is essentially a DDOS attack on their servers, intended to disrupt their communications and whatnot. Whatever the cause, how tiny damage it ever causes, it is still a lot closer to terrorism (yes, I know the word has gotten a wee bit too strong lately, but try to get my real meaning here) than demonstration.
Just because no single person is to blame, it doesnt mean that it's right. The problem, if you are of a political alignment that makes you define it as such, is political and should be dealt with in a political way. Convince the rest of us - and there will be no "enemy" .
Wine cellar. Right. I mean, how naive can journalists get?
If you go back 3 or 4 articles in slashdot history you'll find the latest article mentioning the theory of evolution, as always accompanied by the ever-present debate between creationists and evolutionists.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but:
If the event described in the article really occured, which seems likely, this would if I'm not entirely mistaken be another observation of evolution in action, and IMHO a rather solid piece of evidence against a static, creationistic view of the world.
Nowhere does it say to disregard forces other than time that may change the measuring device.
If these forces weren't readily detectable, that would mean that they were present everywhere, affected all our clocks, mechanical or electronic, in exactly the same way, which would mean that their effect could not be readily separated from the actual forces that directly affect time, and such a separation would also be pointless according to Occam's razor.
An arc welder on the other hand creates a visible distortion making one clock run very different from others, and is therefore an easily identified source of error easily to be taken into account when performing an experiment.