If average global temperatures increase to 3.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century, as researchers currently project
The write-up claims, the 3.5 degrees is the current projections by some unspecified researchers. There no "ifs" about that write-up's claims — SuperKendall is correct, while your narrative falls apart.
More than 5 million cellphone users in Cuba received free internet on Tuesday
Now it is North Korea's turn.So much to live for and to hope for — unlike in the decadent lands of the West. The Communism is more and and more attractive every day!
Maybe, we can conclude, that such submitter-funded publications, while not necessarily "fake, can not be treated as evidence, the author is a "real" scientist (or writer, or poet). Because being established as such requires paying customers. So, Ms. Potter could not claim being a writer when publishing her book at her own expense on account of simply having been published — but only on the merits of the contents.
Which takes us back to TFA: if what its authors recognize — based on contents — as "real" scientific works was published in the supposedly fake journals, just what is it that makes those publications fake?..
the team analyzed over 175,000 articles published in predatory journals and found hundreds of papers from academics at leading institutions, as well as substantial amounts of research pushed by pharmaceutical corporations, tobacco companies, and others. Last year, one fake science institution run by a Turkish family was estimated to have earned over $4 million in revenue through conferences and journals.
What's the criteria used in determining a publication "fake" and/or "predatory"?
Is it the accuracy and reproducibility of the results? That's been a known problemfor years.
What else? "High" fees? Why would that be a reflection of "fakeness"? TFA cites susceptibility to fakes, but that too has been very well known problem, you can even generate your own CS "paper" online.
Seems like TFA is just a salvo in the war of some magazine-publishers against competitors... Slashdot editors have been duped into posting it...
All employers must complete and retain Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, for every person they hire for employment after Nov. 6, 1986, in the U.S. as long as the person works for pay or other type of payment.
Yes, all of those prove identity. The eligibility can be confirmed trivially from the I-9 form. If having to obtained this documentation for work is acceptable, why is it such an outrage to demand the same for voting?
It is not, of course — you only foam at the mouth, because you suspect (as I do), that your party benefits from the fraud.
No, the poor are forced to work inflexible schedules
You need to offer the same proof of identity and eligibility In order to work legally, as would be required to participate in elections. You've just debunked yourself, coward.
You just made a claim. The burden of proof is on you. All you have to do is show us your evidence.
I take it back.
I am unaware of this ever having been properly investigated. See? The rest of my argument stays, whereas yours falls apart if you rephrase it like this.
Which is why you have to cite evidence — or rephrase it... Still waiting.
"They've tried to stop it for so many years, but they can't stop it. There's always a way around."
This would never happen to elections. There is absolutely no need to burden the voters with having to prove their identity and eligibility, and anyone telling you otherwise is a hateful racist.
Yes, they are calling for open borders — because, in their feverish minds, open borders are better than Trump enforcing them.
but rather for an end to an organization that has become associated with Trump's immigration policies
There is nothing wrong — to a rational mind — with Trump's immigration policies. If a country can control, who crosses its borders, it ought to be able to capture and detain those, who cross them without the country's permission. It also ought to be able to pursue those, who've managed to avoid the capture and detention earlier.
That's all, there is nothing atrocious nor even cruel about it — and those, who insist otherwise, want just that: open borders.
But only for the US. Because they are driven not by humane compassion towards the refugees — had compassion been the motivation, the same groups who organized the "migrant caravan", for example, would've demanded Mexico give them refuge — but by the desire to weaken America. Which has, indeed, been the policy of American Communists for decades and the reason, USSR has been financing them for as long.
I didn't RTFA but I'm gonna guess it has something to do with the wall and children in cages.
The "cages" are a product of feverish imagination. We are perfectly entitled to build a wall — nothing unethical about it.
The idea that they are raging SJWs who object to all immigration control is just silly
Abolish ICE is just that — because someone told them about the imaginary "children in cages", thousands of people call for the abolition of any and all efforts by the US to protect its borders. Communists are spear-heading the movement, as one might expect, and will even sally themselves with your money (the root of all evil) over it.
Surely you don't actually believe that.
Once again, you are shown to be in denial about the evil of the crowd you choose to affiliate with at best, or are willingly lying at worst...
If NSA "customizes" routers meant for foreign customers, why wouldn't Chinese government seek to do something similar? Unlike NSA, they can flat-out order their own companies to do that, while doing something more subtle with the Korean and Taiwanese manufacturers...
And in the world of spying, if someone can, you can bet that they do...
I apologize. I meant to say "Latin America". The rest of my comment hints at that — clearly, I included the Mexicans (North Americans).
I've highlighted a couple key points regarding the number.
The NPR article — and you — fight a strawman. Neither Trump, nor I claim, that the illegal immigrants are especially murderous. The claim is, they have committed numerous murders and other crimes — and the article confirms that.
The article also cites a study that says that illegal immigrants in Texas were less likely to be convicted of homicide, sexual assault, or larceny than native citizens.
Whether or not they are "less likely" to do that, they have done that — more than 3000 times. And 3000 is the death toll of 9/11.
If I were a Chinese strategist, evaluating the strong and weak points of each side:
Americans sure have the technology... We are trying to steal it, but that's slow and much of what we get, we can't replicate.
What do we have? We have people, millions of people — 5 times more than America has. We can call up many more troops, if the shooting begins, and we can throw many more eyes and brains at any analytical problem.
But Americans may be able to create artificial intelligence — both to help their analysts and to create autonomous weapons...
So, let's plant — and help propagate — the idea, that using AI for military purposes is unethical! It will not affect our efforts — we can't develop such AI yet anyway, but it will impede Americans!
Will that work? It should — thanks to Soviet efforts of the past, large swaths of the American public hate their country's foreign policy and holds the very notion of "patriotism" in contempt. Our army of influence agents should be able to capitalize on that. Better yet, because the American-born will turn down any such work, the ethnic Chinese will take it — and we can count on the loyalty of at least some of them...
Anyone who thinks we have a weak border security is just naive.
Whether this is true or not, it is irrelevant. We aren't discussing, whether America's efforts are sufficient. The article is about people claiming, such efforts are unethical — and, instead of denouncing them as saboteurs, celebrates such people as heroes.
Slashdot Mirror
The write-up claims, the 3.5 degrees is the current projections by some unspecified researchers. There no "ifs" about that write-up's claims — SuperKendall is correct, while your narrative falls apart.
Remember to logout.
You replaced "fake" with "disreputable" — still without explaining, what that means... What is it, that makes a publication "disreputable"?
Now it is North Korea's turn.So much to live for and to hope for — unlike in the decadent lands of the West. The Communism is more and and more attractive every day!
Maybe, we can conclude, that such submitter-funded publications, while not necessarily "fake, can not be treated as evidence, the author is a "real" scientist (or writer, or poet). Because being established as such requires paying customers. So, Ms. Potter could not claim being a writer when publishing her book at her own expense on account of simply having been published — but only on the merits of the contents.
Which takes us back to TFA: if what its authors recognize — based on contents — as "real" scientific works was published in the supposedly fake journals, just what is it that makes those publications fake?..
The words "ask", "buy", "copies" and "copy" aren't present in TFA...
That may — or may not — qualify as "predatory", but certainly not "fake"...
What, I guess, you are trying to say, is that a publication funded by the published authors rather than readers/subscribers is "fake".
I would agree with this definition, yes, but I don't see this even claimed by TFA, much less proven there...
What's the criteria used in determining a publication "fake" and/or "predatory"?
Is it the accuracy and reproducibility of the results? That's been a known problem for years.
What else? "High" fees? Why would that be a reflection of "fakeness"? TFA cites susceptibility to fakes, but that too has been very well known problem, you can even generate your own CS "paper" online.
Seems like TFA is just a salvo in the war of some magazine-publishers against competitors... Slashdot editors have been duped into posting it...
Our new Space Force is a reaction to Chinese and Russian attempts to militarize space.
For example, Russian Air Force is but a branch of the Russian AeroSpace Forces, since 2015 — when America was still run by a Nobel Peace Prize laureate...
Am I really? Would you care to speculate, which point that might be?
Did you know, strawmen are racist?
Now, curiously, here is an actual racist statement, but that's off-topic, of course.
You are the first to use the word "picture" in this lengthy thread. Fight your strawmen of your own making yourself.
The above is a demonstrable falsehood:
https://i.imgur.com/TYcqpRZ.jp...
Yes, all of those prove identity. The eligibility can be confirmed trivially from the I-9 form. If having to obtained this documentation for work is acceptable, why is it such an outrage to demand the same for voting?
It is not, of course — you only foam at the mouth, because you suspect (as I do), that your party benefits from the fraud.
You need to offer the same proof of identity and eligibility In order to work legally, as would be required to participate in elections. You've just debunked yourself, coward.
I take it back.
I am unaware of this ever having been properly investigated. See? The rest of my argument stays, whereas yours falls apart if you rephrase it like this.
Which is why you have to cite evidence — or rephrase it... Still waiting.
No, I didn't, coward.
Yes, I know you would. That's why your ilk are laboring so vigorously against the 2nd Amendment.
You don't need "thousands". Al Franken got into Senate with (officially) 312 votes — and this allowed the passing of Obamacare.
Earlier, Bush won Florida with a similarly sub-thousand majority — also dramatically affecting the entire nation's life... A few is enough.
When checked
Yep, sure. YouTube would've liked you to believe the same thing.
Presenting identification is not difficult. Or are you going to claim, alcohol and tobacco-sellers are all racists?
Yep, "assholes". Or — just as I said — "hateful racists".
What "hoops"?
How would you know? It has never been properly investigated...
You just made a claim, that it is incredibly rare and negligible. The burden of proof is on you...
You've cited surprisingly few sources for a claim this bold...
This would never happen to elections. There is absolutely no need to burden the voters with having to prove their identity and eligibility, and anyone telling you otherwise is a hateful racist.
Yes, they are calling for open borders — because, in their feverish minds, open borders are better than Trump enforcing them.
There is nothing wrong — to a rational mind — with Trump's immigration policies. If a country can control, who crosses its borders, it ought to be able to capture and detain those, who cross them without the country's permission. It also ought to be able to pursue those, who've managed to avoid the capture and detention earlier.
That's all, there is nothing atrocious nor even cruel about it — and those, who insist otherwise, want just that: open borders.
But only for the US. Because they are driven not by humane compassion towards the refugees — had compassion been the motivation, the same groups who organized the "migrant caravan", for example, would've demanded Mexico give them refuge — but by the desire to weaken America. Which has, indeed, been the policy of American Communists for decades and the reason, USSR has been financing them for as long.
The "cages" are a product of feverish imagination. We are perfectly entitled to build a wall — nothing unethical about it.
Abolish ICE is just that — because someone told them about the imaginary "children in cages", thousands of people call for the abolition of any and all efforts by the US to protect its borders. Communists are spear-heading the movement, as one might expect, and will even sally themselves with your money (the root of all evil) over it.
Once again, you are shown to be in denial about the evil of the crowd you choose to affiliate with at best, or are willingly lying at worst...
If NSA "customizes" routers meant for foreign customers, why wouldn't Chinese government seek to do something similar? Unlike NSA, they can flat-out order their own companies to do that, while doing something more subtle with the Korean and Taiwanese manufacturers...
And in the world of spying, if someone can, you can bet that they do...
I apologize. I meant to say "Latin America". The rest of my comment hints at that — clearly, I included the Mexicans (North Americans).
The NPR article — and you — fight a strawman. Neither Trump, nor I claim, that the illegal immigrants are especially murderous. The claim is, they have committed numerous murders and other crimes — and the article confirms that.
Whether or not they are "less likely" to do that, they have done that — more than 3000 times. And 3000 is the death toll of 9/11.
If I were a Chinese strategist, evaluating the strong and weak points of each side:
Anyone who thinks we have a weak border security is just naive.
Whether this is true or not, it is irrelevant. We aren't discussing, whether America's efforts are sufficient. The article is about people claiming, such efforts are unethical — and, instead of denouncing them as saboteurs, celebrates such people as heroes.