Note that it's a patent application. I haven't looked to see if it's patentable, but you can file applications for things that aren't patentable.
The concern about ethics really depends on what control is exerted with the patent. It'd all be speculation, since this isn't even a procedure ready to be used. (For drugs, for example, intellectual property controls back the majority of the drug cost -- so there are reasonable ethical questions. Even with a zero cost due to IP, neither robotic prosthesis nor the surgery and therapy needed to use them are at all cheap.)
Illegal immigrants also aren't counted by census? They have legal immigrants in New York, too, despite what Rush tells you.
While newborns don't pay taxes, they will eventually. Or, more clearly, while children born this year aren't increasing the tax base, children born 18 years ago are.
Unless you have actual figures for the change in the New York tax base, you're just being an uninformed bigot.
I don't know who you're suggesting rejects results of an experiment without a suggested mechanism, but in science, it's simply not true. Showing experimental results with no known mechanism is not only acceptable, it has historically appeared quite frequently.
Usually experimenters will suggest reasonable mechanisms. It is a mistake of people and the media to report these suggested mechanisms as true, not a mistake of science. People apparently fail basic logic.
If I read the article correctly, what they're really doing is looking at the BitTorrent infohash, which is used when communicating with the tracker and other peers to identify the torrent. (The infohash uniquely identifies the torrent.) Having a different infohash for each peer would require significant BitTorrent reengineering, I would think.
However, it's defeated by encryption, cannot legally be used in the U.S. or Europe by ISPs, and relies on a blacklist of illicit torrents.
Problems: * They stopped putting thimerosol in vaccines because people thought it might cause autism, not because they suspected it actually did. * They don't put mercury in vaccines, they use thimerosol, a compound containing mercury. * The fact that something is a toxin (or an element in a compound is a toxin) is of no general relevance to "does it cause X problem". * If a vaccine changed your risk from 0.006% to 2%, that would be very easy to find with a reasonable sample size of unvaccinated children. (Vaccinated children are trivial to come by in large quantities.)
Who your electors go to compared to who people in your state voted for is meaningless. Their only purpose is to select the President; the only result that has significance is who is selected for President.
This is why this proposal requires that states totaling a majority of electoral votes all enact it before it goes into effect. Since all of these states will be choosing electors in an undefeatable bloc based on the popular election results, they will have effectively replaced the electoral college with the popular vote. The electors, then, are just a proxy for enforcing the popular vote, and meaningless.
In 10.5, the Safari cache is moved to/private/var/folders. User logs are stored in the user directory, but system logs aren't, and can be a data leak. (It could also be the case that neither of these are a concern. If you're protecting the contents of files you edit offline, FileVault works. If you're trying to hide that you're downloading porn and burning it to DVDs, it might not.)
Unfortunately, the encryption password is limited to your login password, which is stored as a simple salted SHA1. So, it absolutely requires a strong user password.
Depending on why you're encrypting, you might be concerned that there's a fair amount of information leak through log and cache files (including your browser cache) that are not encrypted.
I saw neither physics nor scientific papers in those.
This is typical. I say climatologists understand physics just fine, and in rebuttal you have documents that support your overall viewpoint but don't at all address the question.
Generally "applying more insulation" refers to using wall insulation with a higher R value. Unless your air usually comes through your walls and not through windows and doors, it's probably not a factor.
In most states, you don't get those tax benefits any more -- just like how you don't get tax benefits for buying hybrid cars any more. Once they're popular enough on the grounds of saving you money, the tax benefits dry up.
The big killer is transportation costs on food -- although you have to consider that there are secondary benefits of all that biking, and there are fixed costs on food for humans.
Of course, if your energy is primarily local plants, your energy is cheap.
That's an extremely general and vague argument. There are particular failure modes, costs, and methods of prevention for attacks in both conventional and electronic voting systems. (Note that even voting machines, the mechanical sort, have both bugs and security holes.) There are methods for both sorts of voting systems to influence the outcome of the vote, and methods of mitigating it. Reducing it to "electronic voting systems are bad" is nonsensical.
Of course, but that factor is present in voting systems that don't use voting machines, too.
It's fruitless to expect an electronic voting system will be perfect -- it's probably impossible to prevent all attacks. The important thing is that the electronic voting system is not worse than the already-existing alternatives.
Slashdot Mirror
Note that it's a patent application. I haven't looked to see if it's patentable, but you can file applications for things that aren't patentable.
The concern about ethics really depends on what control is exerted with the patent. It'd all be speculation, since this isn't even a procedure ready to be used. (For drugs, for example, intellectual property controls back the majority of the drug cost -- so there are reasonable ethical questions. Even with a zero cost due to IP, neither robotic prosthesis nor the surgery and therapy needed to use them are at all cheap.)
Illegal immigrants also aren't counted by census? They have legal immigrants in New York, too, despite what Rush tells you.
While newborns don't pay taxes, they will eventually. Or, more clearly, while children born this year aren't increasing the tax base, children born 18 years ago are.
Unless you have actual figures for the change in the New York tax base, you're just being an uninformed bigot.
If you'd read the study, you'd know that it does!
I don't know who you're suggesting rejects results of an experiment without a suggested mechanism, but in science, it's simply not true. Showing experimental results with no known mechanism is not only acceptable, it has historically appeared quite frequently.
Usually experimenters will suggest reasonable mechanisms. It is a mistake of people and the media to report these suggested mechanisms as true, not a mistake of science. People apparently fail basic logic.
Actually, most journals will let you skip the charges and have grey pictures in the print version and color pictures in the online version.
A few major research institutions have made a push toward cutting out the expensive journals, since some companies (Elsevier) have exorbitant charges.
Whether or not people are paying for software isn't the primary concern of the MPAA.
Example
Bonus second example
Real answer: ask a lawyer how relevant the legality of a search is.
As it's a passive tool, all you'd need to do is encrypt the communication with the tracker.
He probably read page 2 of the article,.
If I read the article correctly, what they're really doing is looking at the BitTorrent infohash, which is used when communicating with the tracker and other peers to identify the torrent. (The infohash uniquely identifies the torrent.) Having a different infohash for each peer would require significant BitTorrent reengineering, I would think.
However, it's defeated by encryption, cannot legally be used in the U.S. or Europe by ISPs, and relies on a blacklist of illicit torrents.
Problems:
* They stopped putting thimerosol in vaccines because people thought it might cause autism, not because they suspected it actually did.
* They don't put mercury in vaccines, they use thimerosol, a compound containing mercury.
* The fact that something is a toxin (or an element in a compound is a toxin) is of no general relevance to "does it cause X problem".
* If a vaccine changed your risk from 0.006% to 2%, that would be very easy to find with a reasonable sample size of unvaccinated children. (Vaccinated children are trivial to come by in large quantities.)
Who your electors go to compared to who people in your state voted for is meaningless. Their only purpose is to select the President; the only result that has significance is who is selected for President.
This is why this proposal requires that states totaling a majority of electoral votes all enact it before it goes into effect. Since all of these states will be choosing electors in an undefeatable bloc based on the popular election results, they will have effectively replaced the electoral college with the popular vote. The electors, then, are just a proxy for enforcing the popular vote, and meaningless.
Iridium-33 is the name of the satellite.
Unless, of course, they're talking about a specific component of it, like natural selection, speciation, or heredity.
I almost gave you a hard time for unnecessarily relating something to the poor economy.
Joke's on me. :-)
In 10.5, the Safari cache is moved to /private/var/folders. User logs are stored in the user directory, but system logs aren't, and can be a data leak. (It could also be the case that neither of these are a concern. If you're protecting the contents of files you edit offline, FileVault works. If you're trying to hide that you're downloading porn and burning it to DVDs, it might not.)
Unfortunately, the encryption password is limited to your login password, which is stored as a simple salted SHA1. So, it absolutely requires a strong user password.
Depending on why you're encrypting, you might be concerned that there's a fair amount of information leak through log and cache files (including your browser cache) that are not encrypted.
I saw neither physics nor scientific papers in those.
This is typical. I say climatologists understand physics just fine, and in rebuttal you have documents that support your overall viewpoint but don't at all address the question.
Generally "applying more insulation" refers to using wall insulation with a higher R value. Unless your air usually comes through your walls and not through windows and doors, it's probably not a factor.
In most states, you don't get those tax benefits any more -- just like how you don't get tax benefits for buying hybrid cars any more. Once they're popular enough on the grounds of saving you money, the tax benefits dry up.
The big killer is transportation costs on food -- although you have to consider that there are secondary benefits of all that biking, and there are fixed costs on food for humans.
Of course, if your energy is primarily local plants, your energy is cheap.
Obviously, the 3% and 17% are right.
It sounds like we're talking about what scientists say, not what the "loudest proponents" say.
If you have some information on peer-reviewed climatological science that has a terrible lack of understanding of physics, do let us know.
That's an extremely general and vague argument. There are particular failure modes, costs, and methods of prevention for attacks in both conventional and electronic voting systems. (Note that even voting machines, the mechanical sort, have both bugs and security holes.) There are methods for both sorts of voting systems to influence the outcome of the vote, and methods of mitigating it. Reducing it to "electronic voting systems are bad" is nonsensical.
Of course, but that factor is present in voting systems that don't use voting machines, too.
It's fruitless to expect an electronic voting system will be perfect -- it's probably impossible to prevent all attacks. The important thing is that the electronic voting system is not worse than the already-existing alternatives.