Removal of gun crime != removal of overall crime. It just shifts it to other categories
Are you telling me this isn't a good thing??
I mean, I understand those who believe that reducing access to guns will do nothing to reduce gun crime (ie, the laws punish the good guys while the bad guys will still get the weapons)... I may not agree, but I understand it.
But to somehow believe that "[shifting] it to other categories" is anything other than a victory? That's just flat out idiotic. Killing with guns is just so much *easier*... it can be done from a safe distance, quickly and effectively. And it can be done en masse. The same isn't true of a baseball bat or a knife.
Why? What is the negative selective pressure created by "junk DNA" that would cause it to be eliminated from the population? And don't give me BS about "energetics of the system". Unless you can describe a mechanism by which individuals with junk DNA would have a reduced likelihood of survival and reproduction, your post is nothing more than baseless opinion.
On the flip side, I can think of at least one good reason to have junk DNA: it reduces the chances of a damaging mutation occuring in an important gene sequence.
I see life, and am at awe of its complexity. I have to conclude something designed it.
Weird. If you ask me, what's truly amazing about nature is the mind boggling complexity and variation that has grown out of beautifully simple principles such as natural selection. If you ask me, that's *way* cooler and more impressive than some god-thing running the show for kicks. After all, a fractal, to the naked eye, looks unbelievably complex... and it's expressed with a simple formula. The same is true of something like Conway's Game of Life. Simple rules generating remarkably complex behaviours. To me, that seems like a far better answer to Occam's Razor...
I wonder if that qualifies as circumventing protection of copyrighted content, ala the DMCA...
without certificates signed by third party both participants trust.
Meh, then just get a proper certificate from a cert authority. Heck, this could drive business to cheaper/free authorities, who currently don't have their root certs in any of the major web browsers.
Hey, here's a neat idea. Why not stop thinking about people, places, and things in terms of "good" and "evil"? Last I checked, the world wasn't an old west novel or a space opera, despite what your media or politicians might tell you.
Actually, you have to learn three (HTML/CSS/ECMAScript). DOM/AJAX/WebKit are simply APIs, and fairly regular, well defined, well documented ones, at that. Any programmer worth his pay can pick up HTML, CSS, and ECMAScript quite rapidly.
The real bitch is the lack of a decent development environment. Even on Firefox, with tools like Venkmann, debugging JS apps is a pain in the ass, let alone on an embedded device.
Hmm... where to begin. Significantly lower bandwidth, less reliable (interference being a big problem), less room for expansion (with lambda switching, you can just add frequencies), increased security risk, requires the customer to switch receiver technologies... I'm sure I could go on.
In short, wireless is nice, but it's no replacement for solid, wired infrastructure.
I'm not sure why you included "knowledgable" in there. Who else but the workers on the ground would know about the state of Verizon's infrastructure? As for bias and accuracy, I'm as likely to believe the union as Verizon, and I suspect the real answer is somewhere in between.
No, they're modding down posts that are clearly nothing more than contentless flamebait. But you just keep on fightin' the good fight against "the man".
Well son of a bitch, I thought this was a troll, but when I read the requirements, it's spelled out pretty clearly:
"The antiboycott laws were adopted to encourage, and in specified cases, require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy."
If that isn't as interventionist as it gets, I don't know what is. That's just flat out nuts!
The problem is, if you're centrist or center-right, there's no party for you, anymore. The conservatives took a hard right after the merger with the Canadian Alliance, and these days the Liberal's are known more for corruption scandals than their political views. Meanwhile, the remaining, notable parties, specifically the NDP and the Green's, are so far to the left there's no way they'll get voted in.
IMHO, the Canadian political landscape was significantly damaged by the merger of the PC and CA parties. The only good thing to come out of that was a minority government, which, admittedly, is the best thing to happen to Canadian politics in many many years. But it leaves the center/center-right in quite a bind.
Did you even read the damn article? Apparently not. To summarize: It will be a cold day in hell when that bill passes. It pisses off far more people than it pacifies.
In Canada, I believe that Alberta (our version of Texas, if you will) also has similar legislation.
It's not legislation (in fact, I'm not aware of any legislation passed to this effect). It's reality. There are a number of wind farms in southern Alberta, including Cowley Ridge, which has been running since the early 90s, The McBride Lake Wind Farm, which has been running since 2003, The Summerview Wind Farm , which opened in 2005, and many others I'm sure I've missed, with more being planned.
Bullshit. The reality, for those curious, is that captive markets + deregulation and consumers hate each other. The energy debacle in Cali had one single root cause: deregulation. It's just that simple. Good like finding a republican who will admit *that*, though...
There is *no way in hell* they would ever release something like a Sopranos Collector's Edition exclusively on BlueRay. *None*. The market for BlueRay is plain and simply dwarfed by DVD, right now, and the minor losses to piracy aren't enough to justify throwing that market away. It just ain't gonna happen.
Companies like Experian and Axiom (sp?) have been collecting information via credit card purchases, club cards, and so forth, for *years*. They literally have detailed profiles of individuals across hundreds of metrics. Honestly, looking at the list of features they offer (I've seen the brochure), it is frankly *stunning* what they know (or, at least, think they know) about people. And for years they been selling this information to marketing firms and so forth for a tidy profit (their bread and butter being direct mail). They must be *loving* this whole "google is evil" thing. Now, instead of privacy groups targeting these guys, who have been invading people's privacy since the credit card was invented, they're going after Google instead, presumably because they're the next big boogeyman on the block, even though Google has not nor has ever indicated they will sell the data the have to third parties, something Experian, etc, do as a matter of course.
Perhaps we should refine our language, here. My understanding is that most christians (well, deists in general) believe that God is a) omnipotent (having absolute control over our reality) and b) omniscient (possessed of absolute, perfect knowledge of our reality). Further, the belief is that God exists outside of time, and so this omniscience extends to the past and the future as well.
Of course, you may disagree with this, but, again AFAIK, this would put you in the minority.
Sorry, that makes no sense. If God knows everything, and that's a requirement of omnipotence, then when he put the tree in Eden and told Adam and Eve not to eat from it, he knew *full well* that they were going to do it. He had to. God's omnipotent, remember? Exists outside time and all that BS. Further, back when he originally created them, he knew full well what was going to happen... again, he had to.
Well, that's easy to deal with. Just create a new account dedicated for use on websites. When registering, use the spam account, but attach a tracking suffix. Then forward the mail from the honeypot to your primary, and filter accordingly. At least then you catch the most common case, while dealing with the more intelligent spammers who might strip the suffix.
Of course, if you're really paranoid, you can always create new accounts for each website, and forward as usual.
If an account goes bad and spammy, and I don't want the service I forward to:blackhole:
You can do the same with gmail. Just create a mail filter on the To: line and instruct it to delete the emails. Easy peasy. And works for those who don't maintain their own email infrastructure.
Exactly. Even better, If you have your own domain name where all email gets delivered to one "catch all" makes it even easier.
Actually, anyone can do this if they have a gmail account. Any address of the form "myaddress+suffix@gmail.com" will be sent to "myaddress@gmail.com". So if you want to see who's sending you spam, just create a new address of that form for each site you register to.
Build plant for cost Y. Charge cost X to 'sell' the plant for teardown and an award of carbon credits, where X is higher than Y.
Umm... you aren't "awarded" carbon credits. You either have them, because your emissions are less than the carbon cap, or you don't. Full stop. What part of "they're a function of absolute emissions versus the current cap" don't you understand?
Thus, building a plant and then tearing it down results in a zero net carbon emissions change (actually, net positive, since the process of building and tearing down the plant results in energy consumption resulting in increased carbon emissions), and taking the cap into account, a net *decrease* in total carbon credits available the following year.
Honestly, is this really that tough to comprehend?
Slashdot Mirror
Removal of gun crime != removal of overall crime. It just shifts it to other categories
Are you telling me this isn't a good thing??
I mean, I understand those who believe that reducing access to guns will do nothing to reduce gun crime (ie, the laws punish the good guys while the bad guys will still get the weapons)... I may not agree, but I understand it.
But to somehow believe that "[shifting] it to other categories" is anything other than a victory? That's just flat out idiotic. Killing with guns is just so much *easier*... it can be done from a safe distance, quickly and effectively. And it can be done en masse. The same isn't true of a baseball bat or a knife.
junk is a drag on the system
Why? What is the negative selective pressure created by "junk DNA" that would cause it to be eliminated from the population? And don't give me BS about "energetics of the system". Unless you can describe a mechanism by which individuals with junk DNA would have a reduced likelihood of survival and reproduction, your post is nothing more than baseless opinion.
On the flip side, I can think of at least one good reason to have junk DNA: it reduces the chances of a damaging mutation occuring in an important gene sequence.
I see life, and am at awe of its complexity. I have to conclude something designed it.
Weird. If you ask me, what's truly amazing about nature is the mind boggling complexity and variation that has grown out of beautifully simple principles such as natural selection. If you ask me, that's *way* cooler and more impressive than some god-thing running the show for kicks. After all, a fractal, to the naked eye, looks unbelievably complex... and it's expressed with a simple formula. The same is true of something like Conway's Game of Life. Simple rules generating remarkably complex behaviours. To me, that seems like a far better answer to Occam's Razor...
SSL can't stop a man-in-the-middle attack
I wonder if that qualifies as circumventing protection of copyrighted content, ala the DMCA...
without certificates signed by third party both participants trust.
Meh, then just get a proper certificate from a cert authority. Heck, this could drive business to cheaper/free authorities, who currently don't have their root certs in any of the major web browsers.
Hey, here's a neat idea. Why not stop thinking about people, places, and things in terms of "good" and "evil"? Last I checked, the world wasn't an old west novel or a space opera, despite what your media or politicians might tell you.
Actually, you have to learn three (HTML/CSS/ECMAScript). DOM/AJAX/WebKit are simply APIs, and fairly regular, well defined, well documented ones, at that. Any programmer worth his pay can pick up HTML, CSS, and ECMAScript quite rapidly.
The real bitch is the lack of a decent development environment. Even on Firefox, with tools like Venkmann, debugging JS apps is a pain in the ass, let alone on an embedded device.
Hmm... where to begin. Significantly lower bandwidth, less reliable (interference being a big problem), less room for expansion (with lambda switching, you can just add frequencies), increased security risk, requires the customer to switch receiver technologies... I'm sure I could go on.
In short, wireless is nice, but it's no replacement for solid, wired infrastructure.
I'm not sure why you included "knowledgable" in there. Who else but the workers on the ground would know about the state of Verizon's infrastructure? As for bias and accuracy, I'm as likely to believe the union as Verizon, and I suspect the real answer is somewhere in between.
No, they're modding down posts that are clearly nothing more than contentless flamebait. But you just keep on fightin' the good fight against "the man".
Well son of a bitch, I thought this was a troll, but when I read the requirements, it's spelled out pretty clearly:
"The antiboycott laws were adopted to encourage, and in specified cases, require U.S. firms to refuse to participate in foreign boycotts that the United States does not sanction. They have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy."
If that isn't as interventionist as it gets, I don't know what is. That's just flat out nuts!
The problem is, if you're centrist or center-right, there's no party for you, anymore. The conservatives took a hard right after the merger with the Canadian Alliance, and these days the Liberal's are known more for corruption scandals than their political views. Meanwhile, the remaining, notable parties, specifically the NDP and the Green's, are so far to the left there's no way they'll get voted in.
IMHO, the Canadian political landscape was significantly damaged by the merger of the PC and CA parties. The only good thing to come out of that was a minority government, which, admittedly, is the best thing to happen to Canadian politics in many many years. But it leaves the center/center-right in quite a bind.
Did you even read the damn article? Apparently not. To summarize: It will be a cold day in hell when that bill passes. It pisses off far more people than it pacifies.
unless you store it until the yearly "e-waste roundup" promotion happens in the spring.
Is that a problem? I mean... how much electronics waste do you produce in a year??
In Canada, I believe that Alberta (our version of Texas, if you will) also has similar legislation.
It's not legislation (in fact, I'm not aware of any legislation passed to this effect). It's reality. There are a number of wind farms in southern Alberta, including Cowley Ridge, which has been running since the early 90s, The McBride Lake Wind Farm, which has been running since 2003, The Summerview Wind Farm , which opened in 2005, and many others I'm sure I've missed, with more being planned.
Bullshit. The reality, for those curious, is that captive markets + deregulation and consumers hate each other. The energy debacle in Cali had one single root cause: deregulation. It's just that simple. Good like finding a republican who will admit *that*, though...
There is *no way in hell* they would ever release something like a Sopranos Collector's Edition exclusively on BlueRay. *None*. The market for BlueRay is plain and simply dwarfed by DVD, right now, and the minor losses to piracy aren't enough to justify throwing that market away. It just ain't gonna happen.
Companies like Experian and Axiom (sp?) have been collecting information via credit card purchases, club cards, and so forth, for *years*. They literally have detailed profiles of individuals across hundreds of metrics. Honestly, looking at the list of features they offer (I've seen the brochure), it is frankly *stunning* what they know (or, at least, think they know) about people. And for years they been selling this information to marketing firms and so forth for a tidy profit (their bread and butter being direct mail). They must be *loving* this whole "google is evil" thing. Now, instead of privacy groups targeting these guys, who have been invading people's privacy since the credit card was invented, they're going after Google instead, presumably because they're the next big boogeyman on the block, even though Google has not nor has ever indicated they will sell the data the have to third parties, something Experian, etc, do as a matter of course.
Perhaps we should refine our language, here. My understanding is that most christians (well, deists in general) believe that God is a) omnipotent (having absolute control over our reality) and b) omniscient (possessed of absolute, perfect knowledge of our reality). Further, the belief is that God exists outside of time, and so this omniscience extends to the past and the future as well.
Of course, you may disagree with this, but, again AFAIK, this would put you in the minority.
Sorry, that makes no sense. If God knows everything, and that's a requirement of omnipotence, then when he put the tree in Eden and told Adam and Eve not to eat from it, he knew *full well* that they were going to do it. He had to. God's omnipotent, remember? Exists outside time and all that BS. Further, back when he originally created them, he knew full well what was going to happen... again, he had to.
So is god just a jerk?
Many studies have concluded they are harmful (and sex education would not be included in that definition of pr0n).
I call bullshit. Show me a study that "proves" this, and I'll show you a flawed study.
Well, that's easy to deal with. Just create a new account dedicated for use on websites. When registering, use the spam account, but attach a tracking suffix. Then forward the mail from the honeypot to your primary, and filter accordingly. At least then you catch the most common case, while dealing with the more intelligent spammers who might strip the suffix.
Of course, if you're really paranoid, you can always create new accounts for each website, and forward as usual.
If an account goes bad and spammy, and I don't want the service I forward to :blackhole:
You can do the same with gmail. Just create a mail filter on the To: line and instruct it to delete the emails. Easy peasy. And works for those who don't maintain their own email infrastructure.
Exactly. Even better, If you have your own domain name where all email gets delivered to one "catch all" makes it even easier.
Actually, anyone can do this if they have a gmail account. Any address of the form "myaddress+suffix@gmail.com" will be sent to "myaddress@gmail.com". So if you want to see who's sending you spam, just create a new address of that form for each site you register to.
It's funny 'cuz it's true?
Build plant for cost Y. Charge cost X to 'sell' the plant for teardown and an award of carbon credits, where X is higher than Y.
Umm... you aren't "awarded" carbon credits. You either have them, because your emissions are less than the carbon cap, or you don't. Full stop. What part of "they're a function of absolute emissions versus the current cap" don't you understand?
Thus, building a plant and then tearing it down results in a zero net carbon emissions change (actually, net positive, since the process of building and tearing down the plant results in energy consumption resulting in increased carbon emissions), and taking the cap into account, a net *decrease* in total carbon credits available the following year.
Honestly, is this really that tough to comprehend?