I may have to actually build one of those. An Internet.
It's for a training course. The curriculum needs internet access, but the organisation won't permit the class to hook up to the site LAN, and as those on the course are minors we can't let them connect to the public internet without going through an elaborate government-approved anti-porn filter... which they only allow on the LAN. Thus I suggested I make them an Internet - a netbook-in-a-box that provides a simulated little internet. Just a DHCP server, network interface configured to look like a router, DNS and a webserver to browse to.
There is Freenet - it's not a separate internet, but a network of caching nodes running on the internet that makes communications untraceable. Such a thing could be shut down easily enough by just shutting down the internet entirely - but really, that's still a win, as it would incite further unrest in itsself. I don't know how many Anons use it, but I know it was used to publish Scientology documents, so probably at least one.
I was raised slightly repressed. No porn. Didn't figure out what 'oral sex' meant until I was sixteen. Now? I'm a furry. How do you think I turned out?
It would have advertising. Lots and lots of advertising. In between the adverts would be cartoon shorts from various major studios. You can forget about the amateur content - it'd just be too time-consuming to classify it all by hand.
I assume it also includes a sat uplink. The tricky part must be making it discrete. Ideally it should look just like a briefcase to a casual inspection, even if opened. Electronics built under a false bottom, antenna in the side.
Palin never had the power to win new converts to his side. She did, and still does, have one powerful attribute: The ability to energise the base. Before Palin, the powerful social conservatives who make a a substantial part of the Republican voters and an even more substantial part of their grassroots campaign just didn't care. Oh, most would have gone out to vote just on the strength of party affiliation, but that was all - they'd vote for McCain just to keep a democrat out. Palin got them excited. With the excitement came the rallies, the campaign contributions, the get-out-the-vote efforts, the volunteer busses from churches and republican-leaning districts to the polling centers. She turned an apathetic base into one more excited than it had ever been. In the end though, it just wasn't enough, but he would have done even worse if he's chosen a 'safe' VP.
I'll fill you in on it. The Trig conspiracy says that Trig isn't actually Sarah Palin's son, but the son of her unmarried daughter Bristol. Sarah's greatest appeal is to the socially conservative, religious voting block - people who would consider it a very serious scandal that Palin allowed her daughter to engage in the sin of fornication. Doubly so, as Bristol is also an activist promoting abstinance-only education. Thus, so the conspiracy says, the family decided to pass Trig off as Sarah's own and thus spare the family the embarassment.
Like all good conspiracies, it does have a few facts that appear to lend credibility - Sarah, even near term, never showed much of a baby-bump. But it also has a serious flaw: It would be impossible to cover something like that up. The number of doctors and friends that would have to be convinced, bribed or threatened into silence is just implausible.
Rather amusingly, Bristol would actually go on to have exactly the predicted scandal some months later - she did indeed get knocked up by her unmarried boyfriend, but not until *after* Trig's birth. They married, divorced, reunited, engaged again, broke off the engagement, reseperated, fought a dirty custody battle in court and are now living in different states. The first breakup happened after the presidential election.
It takes a bit to piece together the timeline of the relationship, but once it's assembled there seems to be only one bit of actual conspiracy anywhere to be found. It appears that the Bristol-breakup actually happened during the presidential campaign, but they continued to act like a couple in public until the election was over in order to avoid tarnishing Sarah's reputation. A tiny little conspiracy, no worse than the everyday drama of so many other families, and nothing like what the Trig conspiracy promised. Just the complicated life of a teenage mother, nothing to do with Sarah Palin herself.
There is an alternative theory: That Palin isn't stupid, she just makes a deliberate effort to appear stupid in order to broaden her political appeal. The US population, especially those who lean Republican, have a significant dislike of the 'elite' - the well-spoken and well-educated. Scientists, intellectuals. By carefully avoiding the use of sophisticated arguments in her public appearances in favour of simplistic slogans ('Drill Baby Drill!') and adopting a manner of speech not usually associated with the more educated classes, she has been able to exploit this dislike and built a successful career by convincing the voters that she is just another everyday woman like them. The whole speaking-like-a-moron display may be nothing more than an act, disguising a skilled and intelligent political mind.
There are some problems in medicine that can be solved by throwing processing power at them. There are a lot more problems that can be solved only by throwing biologists at them. Science needs to go faster. This body is only good for a century, a little more with luck - I need a new one ready before it wears out.
Patents, like other legal things, can be inherited. If he held the patent (as an individual), then it would just become the property of his next of kin. As we know nothing about who that is, what happens from there is unpredictable. It's of minimal commercial worth, so they would probably just ignore it. Worst case, they sell it to a patent troll. He might have left it unpatented just to avoid such a scenario, or simply because he doesn't want to spend time on the paperwork of an application. There is nothing new in the use of head-controls and sip/puff tubes as an interface, they go back decades, but he could probably have gotten a patent for their use in games controllers. Not that it would matter if he tried today - he's been at it for thirty years. Longer than the patent term, which has not (yet) been through the near-infinite extension process that happened to copyright.
I see a problem with your argument. It ca be found in just four words: "In a fair world." The world is not fair. The world sucks. The world is a place where you are perpetually just One Bad Day from death, crippling injury or financial ruin. A place where the very best of people could get hit by a drunk driver through no fault of their own, and the driver go on to win the lottery. The world does not care for our petty imaginings of fairness or what is right.
Option one: A bloody big lump of randomly-arranged mass-energy appeared, apparently spontainously, through processes we don't understand.
Option two: A fully formed sentient entity posessing omnipotent powers and intelliect beyond description ready-loaded with all the knowledge that could ever be known appeared, apparently spontainously.
Hmm... I admit, option one does sound unlikely. But it's still a lot more plausible than option two.
Supercomputers are expensive. They get loaned between fields all the time. When you've a machine worth so much - and one that you can't just turn off and on with ease - you don't want it sitting idle.
But those were 28 Days zombies: They have no established rules, so they can do anything the writers want. The classic zombie is much better established: A reanimated corpse, slow and uncoordinated in movement but of immense durability. Individually they may be simply walked away from, but with their ability to quickly spread the zombification they will easily form a horde of tens of thousands. The threat is in their numbers.
Heroin is very much more addictive. I think you might be confusing it with THC, the main psychoactive component of cannabis, which is more more similar. Possibly even less addictive, depending which research you believe.
Zombies don't travel much. If you're in a city, you'll be surrounded by millions of them. If you're in the country, you'll just have to deal with a few wanderers and the neighbours. Zombies just don't have the forward-planning ability to set off for a distant food source, and even if they did they don't have the coordination to drive so they'll be traveling very slowly.
Slashdot Mirror
Us English are still taunting them about Agincourt. They outnumbered us five-to-one, and they still lost dismally.
Hah, at the Battle of the Herrings we managed to beat them using a defensive structure made from fish wagons.
I said 'espicially to those who lean Republican.' I did not say exclusively.
Unlikely. What would actually happen is simpler: No-one would use it.
I may have to actually build one of those. An Internet.
It's for a training course. The curriculum needs internet access, but the organisation won't permit the class to hook up to the site LAN, and as those on the course are minors we can't let them connect to the public internet without going through an elaborate government-approved anti-porn filter... which they only allow on the LAN. Thus I suggested I make them an Internet - a netbook-in-a-box that provides a simulated little internet. Just a DHCP server, network interface configured to look like a router, DNS and a webserver to browse to.
There is Freenet - it's not a separate internet, but a network of caching nodes running on the internet that makes communications untraceable. Such a thing could be shut down easily enough by just shutting down the internet entirely - but really, that's still a win, as it would incite further unrest in itsself. I don't know how many Anons use it, but I know it was used to publish Scientology documents, so probably at least one.
I was raised slightly repressed. No porn. Didn't figure out what 'oral sex' meant until I was sixteen.
Now? I'm a furry. How do you think I turned out?
I can't give you outright pornography, but searching on 'party cake' with safesearch moderate finds me these on the first page:
http://www.caketodays.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/party-cake5.jpg
http://www.thecakeboxwales.co.uk/store/images/uploads/A%20Hen%20Party%20Cake.jpg
It would have advertising. Lots and lots of advertising. In between the adverts would be cartoon shorts from various major studios. You can forget about the amateur content - it'd just be too time-consuming to classify it all by hand.
They are customers by proxy. They tell their parents what to buy.
I assume it also includes a sat uplink. The tricky part must be making it discrete. Ideally it should look just like a briefcase to a casual inspection, even if opened. Electronics built under a false bottom, antenna in the side.
Palin never had the power to win new converts to his side. She did, and still does, have one powerful attribute: The ability to energise the base. Before Palin, the powerful social conservatives who make a a substantial part of the Republican voters and an even more substantial part of their grassroots campaign just didn't care. Oh, most would have gone out to vote just on the strength of party affiliation, but that was all - they'd vote for McCain just to keep a democrat out. Palin got them excited. With the excitement came the rallies, the campaign contributions, the get-out-the-vote efforts, the volunteer busses from churches and republican-leaning districts to the polling centers. She turned an apathetic base into one more excited than it had ever been. In the end though, it just wasn't enough, but he would have done even worse if he's chosen a 'safe' VP.
I'll fill you in on it. The Trig conspiracy says that Trig isn't actually Sarah Palin's son, but the son of her unmarried daughter Bristol. Sarah's greatest appeal is to the socially conservative, religious voting block - people who would consider it a very serious scandal that Palin allowed her daughter to engage in the sin of fornication. Doubly so, as Bristol is also an activist promoting abstinance-only education. Thus, so the conspiracy says, the family decided to pass Trig off as Sarah's own and thus spare the family the embarassment.
Like all good conspiracies, it does have a few facts that appear to lend credibility - Sarah, even near term, never showed much of a baby-bump. But it also has a serious flaw: It would be impossible to cover something like that up. The number of doctors and friends that would have to be convinced, bribed or threatened into silence is just implausible.
Rather amusingly, Bristol would actually go on to have exactly the predicted scandal some months later - she did indeed get knocked up by her unmarried boyfriend, but not until *after* Trig's birth. They married, divorced, reunited, engaged again, broke off the engagement, reseperated, fought a dirty custody battle in court and are now living in different states. The first breakup happened after the presidential election.
It takes a bit to piece together the timeline of the relationship, but once it's assembled there seems to be only one bit of actual conspiracy anywhere to be found. It appears that the Bristol-breakup actually happened during the presidential campaign, but they continued to act like a couple in public until the election was over in order to avoid tarnishing Sarah's reputation. A tiny little conspiracy, no worse than the everyday drama of so many other families, and nothing like what the Trig conspiracy promised. Just the complicated life of a teenage mother, nothing to do with Sarah Palin herself.
There is an alternative theory: That Palin isn't stupid, she just makes a deliberate effort to appear stupid in order to broaden her political appeal. The US population, especially those who lean Republican, have a significant dislike of the 'elite' - the well-spoken and well-educated. Scientists, intellectuals. By carefully avoiding the use of sophisticated arguments in her public appearances in favour of simplistic slogans ('Drill Baby Drill!') and adopting a manner of speech not usually associated with the more educated classes, she has been able to exploit this dislike and built a successful career by convincing the voters that she is just another everyday woman like them. The whole speaking-like-a-moron display may be nothing more than an act, disguising a skilled and intelligent political mind.
There are some problems in medicine that can be solved by throwing processing power at them. There are a lot more problems that can be solved only by throwing biologists at them. Science needs to go faster. This body is only good for a century, a little more with luck - I need a new one ready before it wears out.
Patents, like other legal things, can be inherited. If he held the patent (as an individual), then it would just become the property of his next of kin. As we know nothing about who that is, what happens from there is unpredictable. It's of minimal commercial worth, so they would probably just ignore it. Worst case, they sell it to a patent troll. He might have left it unpatented just to avoid such a scenario, or simply because he doesn't want to spend time on the paperwork of an application. There is nothing new in the use of head-controls and sip/puff tubes as an interface, they go back decades, but he could probably have gotten a patent for their use in games controllers. Not that it would matter if he tried today - he's been at it for thirty years. Longer than the patent term, which has not (yet) been through the near-infinite extension process that happened to copyright.
I see a problem with your argument. It ca be found in just four words: "In a fair world." The world is not fair. The world sucks. The world is a place where you are perpetually just One Bad Day from death, crippling injury or financial ruin. A place where the very best of people could get hit by a drunk driver through no fault of their own, and the driver go on to win the lottery. The world does not care for our petty imaginings of fairness or what is right.
I've not heard the term before, but I would guess it's the same reason that the average size of condom needed is 'large.'
Fuel cells are not nuclear. Though they would require production of the hydrogen, which may well be done using electricity from nuclear.
Option one: A bloody big lump of randomly-arranged mass-energy appeared, apparently spontainously, through processes we don't understand.
Option two: A fully formed sentient entity posessing omnipotent powers and intelliect beyond description ready-loaded with all the knowledge that could ever be known appeared, apparently spontainously.
Hmm... I admit, option one does sound unlikely. But it's still a lot more plausible than option two.
Supercomputers are expensive. They get loaned between fields all the time. When you've a machine worth so much - and one that you can't just turn off and on with ease - you don't want it sitting idle.
But those were 28 Days zombies: They have no established rules, so they can do anything the writers want. The classic zombie is much better established: A reanimated corpse, slow and uncoordinated in movement but of immense durability. Individually they may be simply walked away from, but with their ability to quickly spread the zombification they will easily form a horde of tens of thousands. The threat is in their numbers.
Heroin is very much more addictive. I think you might be confusing it with THC, the main psychoactive component of cannabis, which is more more similar. Possibly even less addictive, depending which research you believe.
Zombies don't travel much. If you're in a city, you'll be surrounded by millions of them. If you're in the country, you'll just have to deal with a few wanderers and the neighbours. Zombies just don't have the forward-planning ability to set off for a distant food source, and even if they did they don't have the coordination to drive so they'll be traveling very slowly.
I would guess that it's harder to draw.
But if he had been able to use the official app store? Probably have sold ten times as many. At least.