The BBC does have a bit of a political correctness bias. You'll not often catch them saying anything that could be even remotely seen as anti-any-minority. For example, I was recently watching 'How to get a a life' episode on discrimination, and one case study was a Sikh who was unable to spectate at a cricket game because the venue had a strict policy forbidding the carrying of weapons, and as a strict Sikh he felt obliged by his religion to carry around a rather large knife. At no point in the program was it suggested that the venue might have had good reason to forbid people carrying knives at a sporting event, or was the debate raised about the right of religious freedom vs the wider public interest. It was just portrayed as a case of those ignorant british trampling upon the cultural rights of another oppress minority.
That aside though, their bias is *nothing* compared to any of the more commercial producers. The bias of the BBC pales into nothing beside them. And they do produce some excellent documentory programs, which again look even better when compared to the more commercial offerings which seem always to be dumbed-down to widen their appeal.
Then are are just using the cloud, from before someone started calling it 'the cloud.' As I said, the cloud isn't a technology: It's a business model based on not just selling virtual servers but managing them on large resource pools too.
Abstraction and provisioning. With the cloud, you don't need to worry about where the server really is physically and can alter the configuration at very short notice (It'll be a virtual machine). The 'cloud' term comes from the network diagram use of a cloud to represent internet connectivity: The server is out there on the internet, somewhere, and you don't need to care where. The cloud service operator handles that. So they can juggle workloads around for peak efficiency and thus minimum cost, or let you easily add another virtual processor and a few gig more ram if you suddenly find business booming. But in technology terms, it's really just virtualisation and some fancy management software. The cloud is a business innovation, not technological.
1. Even if true (And it was published in the Lancet, so I'm willing to give it some respect), this can be countered by counter-HIV campaigns - and there are a number of promising avenues of research being taken in the field too, so in twenty years HIV may no longer be the danger it is today.
2. They changed their stated policies in a direction you should favor... and so opponents simply declared it had to be a lie?
3. Indeed, Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenics supporter and racist. But look at the time period: Everyone was a racist! Kelloggs, the breakfast company, was founded by a public health campaigner with a strange obsession with stopping people masturbating, but that doesn't stop the company today plying children with obesity-causing sugary cereals. Companies do tend to change over the course of a century or so, and do not take the views of their founders as immutable holy writ.
4. The WHO standards for carcinogens are so lax, they also consider coffee to be one.
5. Indeed there are. There are also documented health problems caused by not having contraceptives: Specifically, pregnancy. Rather a dangerous health problem in the developing world, and their high birth rate is a major factor contributing to the rampant poverty of the region too.
6. And this is important why? Now you are just taring all your opponents with the same brush: China is oppressive in use of population control, Gates supports contraception access, therefore Gates supports oppressive dictatorships? Besides, if anything, increased access to contraception should eliminate the forced abortion: It's just much easier to prevent pregnancy before the fact.
7. So one of the supporters of the Gates foundation also supported a poorly-administered sterilisation campaign by the Indian government. That is a rather tenuous chain. Besides, if India is that desperate, that just shows how much increased access to contraception is needed.
8. And they are also associated with a lower risk of ovarian and uterine cancer. Not to mention, once again, pregnancy.
9. Wouldn't surprise me, but note the 'services' part. Planned Parenthood is if the view that abortion needs to always remain available as an option, but an option they'd rather people didn't have to choose. Why do you think they promote contraception so heavily?
10. At this stage, still mostly speculative research... and, for the third time, you appear to be neglecting the serious health risks of pregnancy. Espicially in the developing world, where access to healthcare is minimal and women are expected to start breeding almost the moment they reach fertile age.
XML has the advantage of simple parsing. For example, I made a NZB fetcher - libxml did all the hard work, and even without that I could have extracted all the information I needed with nothing but a few regexes. It's ideal for that - it needs to hold only text data, and the object it stores is itsself made up of smaller objects made of smaller objects. So XML does have it's uses, but I agree that it is overused. For that matter, so are databases in general - how many applications do you find using a database, even something light like NoSQL, when a flat file would be more suitable?
"No one who isn't there by invitation of one of the parties can hear the conversation (without a wiretap)"
But they could, if it were the phone. Obviously monitoring all calls is too expensive, but what about if they could perfect speech-recognition and natural language processing technology to the point they could monitor all conversations automatically?
Depends how radioactive the stuff is, and how long-term your planning. Not hugely so, if it needs storing so long, but if your tribe is thinking long-term conquest it would seem a perfectly good strategy to weaken your enemies by giving them a shiny gold amulet for their king in tribute which causes him to fall seriously ill and die after a few years - and he may even pass it on to his successors. Keep them uncoordinated and in an occasional state of civil war, and seriously hurt their morale when they eventually realize a century later that a 'divine curse' is coming upon every ruler.
Not exactly. The allocations don't overlap, but they are close - real radio equipment isn't quite as ideal as regulators would wish, and will pick up some signal from outside of its designed range.
In both the UK and the US, they handed out free decoders during the digital switch. They know very well that were a significent portion of the population to lose television, crime rates would go up and there may be riots in the street. Panem et circenses, never fails.
It'd be of more value to preindustrials. A slow-killing, undetectable poison that can work through nothing more than proximity? That's perfect for stealth assassination. Or even mass-assassination. Cast it into a sculpture (I suggest a horse) and give it to your enemies in tribute to their gods. Let their priests spend an hour every day in worship before it.
Some cultures have not taken skulls to be a symbol of death though. In ten thousand years, maybe the primative tribes that survive consider skulls to be a symbol of the cycle of life and renewal or whatever superstious rubbish they have invented by then. They'll run into the storage facility thinking it'll make them young again.
Sampling. That's what Neilson does. They have boxes attached to TVs in a number of volunteer households, and calculate from that sample approximate national figures. Cable decoders can also report back what channels they have been tuned to at which times. You don't need every TV monitored, just enough that you can estimate with a reasonable margin of error the larger viewership. An unauthorised stream isn't viewed on a TV, so it isn't going to count on either metric, and even if the ads were viewed they can't be so targetted - there is no point in advertising a local business on an internet stream when almost all the viewers will be in other cities.
While the ads still get viewed, X no longer has the data to prove it. No marketing data means their ad-time is worth a lot less. It's also likely to cause legal complications for content (espicially sport) which X has licensed to broadcast only in a specific geographic area. In that case, the actions of Z could cause X to be unwittingly violating their contract with the producer of that content and so exposing X to liability.
If you're looking for sillyness, ask why there are so many region-specific licences still in use not only in an increasingly globalised world, but even limiting some things to specific states or local areas. Sports are the biggest culprit here by far.
You appear to be confusing contraception with abortion. While abortion is an issue still much debated, the ethics of contraception are more-or-less settled now for everyone except the Catholic church and a few other religious groups, and even they don't equate it with murder.
Slashdot Mirror
The BBC does have a bit of a political correctness bias. You'll not often catch them saying anything that could be even remotely seen as anti-any-minority. For example, I was recently watching 'How to get a a life' episode on discrimination, and one case study was a Sikh who was unable to spectate at a cricket game because the venue had a strict policy forbidding the carrying of weapons, and as a strict Sikh he felt obliged by his religion to carry around a rather large knife. At no point in the program was it suggested that the venue might have had good reason to forbid people carrying knives at a sporting event, or was the debate raised about the right of religious freedom vs the wider public interest. It was just portrayed as a case of those ignorant british trampling upon the cultural rights of another oppress minority.
That aside though, their bias is *nothing* compared to any of the more commercial producers. The bias of the BBC pales into nothing beside them. And they do produce some excellent documentory programs, which again look even better when compared to the more commercial offerings which seem always to be dumbed-down to widen their appeal.
Then are are just using the cloud, from before someone started calling it 'the cloud.' As I said, the cloud isn't a technology: It's a business model based on not just selling virtual servers but managing them on large resource pools too.
Abstraction and provisioning. With the cloud, you don't need to worry about where the server really is physically and can alter the configuration at very short notice (It'll be a virtual machine). The 'cloud' term comes from the network diagram use of a cloud to represent internet connectivity: The server is out there on the internet, somewhere, and you don't need to care where. The cloud service operator handles that. So they can juggle workloads around for peak efficiency and thus minimum cost, or let you easily add another virtual processor and a few gig more ram if you suddenly find business booming. But in technology terms, it's really just virtualisation and some fancy management software. The cloud is a business innovation, not technological.
1. Even if true (And it was published in the Lancet, so I'm willing to give it some respect), this can be countered by counter-HIV campaigns - and there are a number of promising avenues of research being taken in the field too, so in twenty years HIV may no longer be the danger it is today.
2. They changed their stated policies in a direction you should favor... and so opponents simply declared it had to be a lie?
3. Indeed, Planned Parenthood was founded by a eugenics supporter and racist. But look at the time period: Everyone was a racist! Kelloggs, the breakfast company, was founded by a public health campaigner with a strange obsession with stopping people masturbating, but that doesn't stop the company today plying children with obesity-causing sugary cereals. Companies do tend to change over the course of a century or so, and do not take the views of their founders as immutable holy writ.
4. The WHO standards for carcinogens are so lax, they also consider coffee to be one.
5. Indeed there are. There are also documented health problems caused by not having contraceptives: Specifically, pregnancy. Rather a dangerous health problem in the developing world, and their high birth rate is a major factor contributing to the rampant poverty of the region too.
6. And this is important why? Now you are just taring all your opponents with the same brush: China is oppressive in use of population control, Gates supports contraception access, therefore Gates supports oppressive dictatorships? Besides, if anything, increased access to contraception should eliminate the forced abortion: It's just much easier to prevent pregnancy before the fact.
7. So one of the supporters of the Gates foundation also supported a poorly-administered sterilisation campaign by the Indian government. That is a rather tenuous chain. Besides, if India is that desperate, that just shows how much increased access to contraception is needed.
8. And they are also associated with a lower risk of ovarian and uterine cancer. Not to mention, once again, pregnancy.
9. Wouldn't surprise me, but note the 'services' part. Planned Parenthood is if the view that abortion needs to always remain available as an option, but an option they'd rather people didn't have to choose. Why do you think they promote contraception so heavily?
10. At this stage, still mostly speculative research... and, for the third time, you appear to be neglecting the serious health risks of pregnancy. Espicially in the developing world, where access to healthcare is minimal and women are expected to start breeding almost the moment they reach fertile age.
XML has the advantage of simple parsing. For example, I made a NZB fetcher - libxml did all the hard work, and even without that I could have extracted all the information I needed with nothing but a few regexes. It's ideal for that - it needs to hold only text data, and the object it stores is itsself made up of smaller objects made of smaller objects. So XML does have it's uses, but I agree that it is overused. For that matter, so are databases in general - how many applications do you find using a database, even something light like NoSQL, when a flat file would be more suitable?
XML has many good uses.
This is not one of them.
Technically it's only a fallacy if you cannot prove that one end of the slope inevitably leads to the other.
"No one who isn't there by invitation of one of the parties can hear the conversation (without a wiretap)"
But they could, if it were the phone. Obviously monitoring all calls is too expensive, but what about if they could perfect speech-recognition and natural language processing technology to the point they could monitor all conversations automatically?
Depends how radioactive the stuff is, and how long-term your planning. Not hugely so, if it needs storing so long, but if your tribe is thinking long-term conquest it would seem a perfectly good strategy to weaken your enemies by giving them a shiny gold amulet for their king in tribute which causes him to fall seriously ill and die after a few years - and he may even pass it on to his successors. Keep them uncoordinated and in an occasional state of civil war, and seriously hurt their morale when they eventually realize a century later that a 'divine curse' is coming upon every ruler.
Not exactly. The allocations don't overlap, but they are close - real radio equipment isn't quite as ideal as regulators would wish, and will pick up some signal from outside of its designed range.
In both the UK and the US, they handed out free decoders during the digital switch. They know very well that were a significent portion of the population to lose television, crime rates would go up and there may be riots in the street. Panem et circenses, never fails.
It depends upon regional frequency allocation and distance to the transmitters.
It was just Fern Gully.
In SPAAAACE!
The law is clear: Any comparison to Hitler or the Nazis counts.
It'd be of more value to preindustrials. A slow-killing, undetectable poison that can work through nothing more than proximity? That's perfect for stealth assassination. Or even mass-assassination. Cast it into a sculpture (I suggest a horse) and give it to your enemies in tribute to their gods. Let their priests spend an hour every day in worship before it.
That only works if civilisation hasn't regressed to the point where the periodic table is in need of rediscovery.
Some cultures have not taken skulls to be a symbol of death though. In ten thousand years, maybe the primative tribes that survive consider skulls to be a symbol of the cycle of life and renewal or whatever superstious rubbish they have invented by then. They'll run into the storage facility thinking it'll make them young again.
Sampling. That's what Neilson does. They have boxes attached to TVs in a number of volunteer households, and calculate from that sample approximate national figures. Cable decoders can also report back what channels they have been tuned to at which times. You don't need every TV monitored, just enough that you can estimate with a reasonable margin of error the larger viewership. An unauthorised stream isn't viewed on a TV, so it isn't going to count on either metric, and even if the ads were viewed they can't be so targetted - there is no point in advertising a local business on an internet stream when almost all the viewers will be in other cities.
While the ads still get viewed, X no longer has the data to prove it. No marketing data means their ad-time is worth a lot less. It's also likely to cause legal complications for content (espicially sport) which X has licensed to broadcast only in a specific geographic area. In that case, the actions of Z could cause X to be unwittingly violating their contract with the producer of that content and so exposing X to liability.
If you're looking for sillyness, ask why there are so many region-specific licences still in use not only in an increasingly globalised world, but even limiting some things to specific states or local areas. Sports are the biggest culprit here by far.
Accounting for the impact of vast amounts of lobbying money? No. We're screwed.
You appear to be confusing contraception with abortion. While abortion is an issue still much debated, the ethics of contraception are more-or-less settled now for everyone except the Catholic church and a few other religious groups, and even they don't equate it with murder.
The DMCA only applies to security measures intended to restrict access to copyright-protected works. It doesn't apply to security in general.
The Pointy-Haired Boss explained the problem with this: "Credit travels upwards, blame travels downwards. That's just the way it works."
I'm still lucky if I can get a pound symbol in many places.
HP does the same.