Modern engineers have commented that even today, certain aspects of the pyramid would be hard to replicate.
The precision of the layout alone is extremely impressive.
But I think more than the engineering, the fascination over the pyramids has a lot more to do with the mystery of why they were built, for what purpose (there has never been a single King's body found in a pyramid... they were not tombs), etc..
Oh you want precise data? Like large support across muslim countries, where terrorism is supported. [clarionproject.org]
The clarion project is about as biased an organization as you can get: http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clarion_Fund http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clarion_Project#Criticism http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/03/27/clarion-funds-new-islamophobic-film-honor-diaries/
20% of muslims support the 7/7 bombings [telegraph.co.uk]
"....a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.
I'll just assume at this point that the rest of your links are equally misleading.
However, (not blaming the victims, I'm just surprised), I would think that celebrities would inherently try to be more secure than the average person. They have physical paparazzi chasing them all over town.... you think that would lead them to the conclusion that those same paparazzi (and hackers) are likely to be chasing them online as well.
So it just continually surprises me that A-List stars with tons of money don't hire IT security specialists just like they probably hire physical bodyguards.
If you don't want people stealing your money don't store money online. Don't use credit/debit cards, an online brokerage account, web access to your checking account, etc. If it's out there someone is going to steal it.
Simple, no? Blame the victim all you want, but that line of thinking pretty quickly devolves into unplugging from the Internet and trying to pay your bills with physical cash.
The only difference being, most of us are not celebrities. We have some security through obscurity. If I were an A-List celebrity, I would probably be more cautious than the average person.
That is an interesting tool. I'm not sure how 'real world' accurate it is, but some passwords I had that are comprised of just words and numbers, not even upper case, had years to crack times. While others, with odd special characters, upper/lower, and not resembling words at all, had seconds crack times.
Google is making money being an ISP (so they say), so why would they stop expanding?
Even the direct monthly ISP bills to consumers aside, it would be hugely in Google's interest to be able to 'see' more and more internet traffic. Google makes most its money by watching and tracking user behavior, and serving up ads. Being the ISP in addition to the search engine would be a powerful combination. Maybe too powerful...
All systemd logging can be forwarded to syslog for plain text format if you'd rather not learn about the new ways to read/parse/search the binary log files.
The treaty doesn't say anything about aiding or protecting Ukraine. It basically says "we all agree that Ukraine is sovereign, no one (especially you Russian) are to interfere or threaten Ukraine, if if you do threaten or attack, we are going to confer with the UN security council".
So the US did confer with the security council. And they are taking actions, like sanctions and travel bans.
The vast majority of China/Thailand, etc.. eats mainly rice. So I don't know if this 'carbs are bad' new fad is correct either. That, or rice isn't just carbs. It could be carbs+something else that makes those particular carbs less fattening?
So I suppose you would also want people out on bail, awaiting sentencing, to also have their 'out and free bail time' added to their sentence term if they are found guilty at some future point?
People are guilty and to be punished once a court makes a decision. Nadal Hasan was guilty when the court said he was, not at the time of the shooting. Retroactively applying punishment back to the time a crime was committed is not only a slippery slope, it is also just really messy. For instance, what if a crime happened years ago, and the laws have changed since then. Is the judge to apply the law from 3 years ago to the case, or the current law?
Murder, for instance, has no statute of limitations. Many states are moving away from capital punishment. If you get convicted of a murder from 20 years ago, in a state that recently banned executions, the judge can't say "well, you committed the crime when executions were the norm, so I sentence you to death". I mean, even just from a practical matter, that would make no sense. The state would have no execution infrastructure in place anymore.
Google isn't attempting to serve every home. The stated goal is to make sure that the majority of people have fast (1GB+) connections at reasonable rates (currently ~70 dollars a month) as well as free basic connections for everyone.
They call this 'changing the access cost'. Much the say same that hard drive capacity, cpu speed, etc.. has increased exponentially over time, Google wants to see that happen in the broadband world. Google will continue expanding until ISP's either have no choice but to match them, or are driven out of the market. Google is making money on it, so why would they stop?
see - http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/the-economics-of-google-fiber-and-what-it-means-for-u-s-broadband/
Also, 34 more cities are in planning stages right now.
https://fiber.google.com/newcities/ - 34 cities in planning phases.
I don't think it is "just a little experiment". What I see Google doing is continuing to expand until the pressure is great enough that other ISP's are forced to offer better solutions. Google will just keep on marching along until Comcast/Verizon etc.., have no choice but to start offering GB connections at sane prices. But even then, why would Google stop the expansion?
Here, see what Google has to say about their goals: http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/the-economics-of-google-fiber-and-what-it-means-for-u-s-broadband/
“There’s no sense selling a product at a loss,” said Google CFO Patrick Pichette (just look at Google’s Nexus 7 tablet). “But it’s not only about profits, it’s about changing the access costs.” His goal and Google’s goal is to bring the same efficiencies that have helped create cheaper, smaller and more powerful computers and create a cost and improvement curve for broadband access that resembles the curves for compute storage, as the chart below illustrates.
It has camera's and lasers that actually build an accurate image of the road and surroundings, and then image recognition type software determines what everything is, and it makes choices. A big tree limb in the road will be easily seen. The car will find another route based on map data. Ditto with washed out/blocked roads.
I haven't seen any demonstrations of google's car self-parking, but Audi has one already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEE76Eudz_M
Your last sentence seems to be the easiest problem to solve out of all of them. Camera on car views intersections, if no lights (no red, no green, no yellow) detected, car assumes the road has become a 4 way stop. Or if it is a more complicated 4 way by 4 way stop with turn lanes, I'm sure they can program a 'take turns' style algorithm that mimics whatever humans actually do in that situation.
Good video that shows the inputs that the car receives and can make decisions about: http://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewarzel/new-footage-shows-how-googles-self-driving-cars-handle-real#4byba7s
i think your sample set and conclusions might be seriously biased. i'm no expert on rape-statistics, but it's my understanding that a very significant amount of non-drug-assisted rapes go unreported by the victims for a variety of reasons.
it seems to me that under the circumstances where a woman 'comes to' and can't even remember what happened (not to mention probably still feeling mentally/emotionally impaired from the chemical hangover) there would be an even higher incidence of the rapes going unreported.
it may still be possible that drug-facilitated rape occurs with less frequency than feared, but i see no ability to reach that conclusion logically from your estimation.
I see no ability to reach the opposite conclusion either: that date rape drugs are used enough for anyone to fear them. We just don't have any data either way.
I'd rather start an education campaign centered around telling people to watch out for their friends, rather than 'watch your drink!'. I guess both are valuable, but since most rapes seem to happen with just alcohol alone involved, a more effective message to party goers would be 'watch out for each other!', 'don't let drunk friends wander off with strangers!'.
is a form of archaeological theory that had its genesis in 1958 with the work of Gordon Willey and Philip Phillips, Method and Theory in American Archeology
(the idea that all aspects of culture are accessible through the material record), the use of quantitative data, and the hypothetico-deductive model (scientific method of observation and hypothesis testing).
1. Justice - for the victim(s) 2. Deterrent - for possible future criminals 3. Punishment - for the criminal 4. Prevention - protection from repeat crimes. 5. Rehabilitation - for the criminal
The extent to which each of those 5 are accomplished by jail time, and the extent to which each of those is valuable to the public, the victim, and the criminal, are often debated.
To better understand just how depraved the people are who made it.
The sentence "with no trial, they beheaded a reporter with a knife" should make it crystal clear what type of people we are dealing with. Watching someone die won't add anything to that understanding.
I didn't care to watch it, but now that the UK wants to declare that it's a crime to watch it, I am now downloading it (thanks tpb!)
Will I enjoy it? Probably not, but if the governement(s) don't want me to see it, then I probably should see it.
I watched one a long time ago out of curiosity (early 2000's I think). I assumed naively that years of horror movies and american style explosion/killing movies would have conditioned me. It did not. I shut it off the second the knife started in... horrible. Completely different than some action/horror movie. Maybe it was my mind yelling at me that this was real, or something about the actual sounds involved (I still cringe), but it was not something anyone should watch without having a real purpose in mind.
If you want to, go for it. But it won't be something you like, you'll regret it, and it will be something you will never forget. To what end?
Read the history of this whole 'hiatus' thing above. In a nutshell, there is no hiatus. There is a slow down in the growth of temperature. But it was still going up on average. Some scientists made statements like, "we are not sure why the rate of temperature increase has slowed down", and some bad science reporters wrote headlines like, "The planet is no longer warming, and scientists are baffled!!!!".
With that out of the way, the fact that some scientists are saying that there is no actual "Hiatus"
Yeah, some scientists, after the bad headlines from bad science reporters came out, said "No, no, no, the reporting is wrong. We never said the planet stopped warming, we said the rate of warming slowed."
Slashdot Mirror
Modern engineers have commented that even today, certain aspects of the pyramid would be hard to replicate.
The precision of the layout alone is extremely impressive.
But I think more than the engineering, the fascination over the pyramids has a lot more to do with the mystery of why they were built, for what purpose (there has never been a single King's body found in a pyramid... they were not tombs), etc..
I always assumed the Pyramids, and monuments like them, were early examples of rulers staying in power by making sure unemployment stayed low.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal#Public_works
There may have been a few gold plated casing stones, but the majority were polished white limestone.
Oh you want precise data? Like large support across muslim countries, where terrorism is supported. [clarionproject.org]
The clarion project is about as biased an organization as you can get:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Clarion_Fund
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clarion_Project#Criticism
http://www.richardsilverstein.com/2014/03/27/clarion-funds-new-islamophobic-film-honor-diaries/
20% of muslims support the 7/7 bombings [telegraph.co.uk]
"....a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.
I'll just assume at this point that the rest of your links are equally misleading.
I agree with a lot of what you said.
However, (not blaming the victims, I'm just surprised), I would think that celebrities would inherently try to be more secure than the average person. They have physical paparazzi chasing them all over town.... you think that would lead them to the conclusion that those same paparazzi (and hackers) are likely to be chasing them online as well.
So it just continually surprises me that A-List stars with tons of money don't hire IT security specialists just like they probably hire physical bodyguards.
If you don't want people stealing your money don't store money online. Don't use credit/debit cards, an online brokerage account, web access to your checking account, etc. If it's out there someone is going to steal it.
Simple, no? Blame the victim all you want, but that line of thinking pretty quickly devolves into unplugging from the Internet and trying to pay your bills with physical cash.
The only difference being, most of us are not celebrities. We have some security through obscurity. If I were an A-List celebrity, I would probably be more cautious than the average person.
That is an interesting tool. I'm not sure how 'real world' accurate it is, but some passwords I had that are comprised of just words and numbers, not even upper case, had years to crack times. While others, with odd special characters, upper/lower, and not resembling words at all, had seconds crack times.
Google is making money being an ISP (so they say), so why would they stop expanding?
Even the direct monthly ISP bills to consumers aside, it would be hugely in Google's interest to be able to 'see' more and more internet traffic. Google makes most its money by watching and tracking user behavior, and serving up ads. Being the ISP in addition to the search engine would be a powerful combination. Maybe too powerful...
All systemd logging can be forwarded to syslog for plain text format if you'd rather not learn about the new ways to read/parse/search the binary log files.
They were only talking about servers as far as I can tell. The desktop is a completely different story.
The treaty doesn't say anything about aiding or protecting Ukraine. It basically says "we all agree that Ukraine is sovereign, no one (especially you Russian) are to interfere or threaten Ukraine, if if you do threaten or attack, we are going to confer with the UN security council".
So the US did confer with the security council. And they are taking actions, like sanctions and travel bans.
So in summary, you could say that the last time the US behaved the way Russia is behaving, was around 120 years ago?
The vast majority of China/Thailand, etc.. eats mainly rice. So I don't know if this 'carbs are bad' new fad is correct either. That, or rice isn't just carbs. It could be carbs+something else that makes those particular carbs less fattening?
So I suppose you would also want people out on bail, awaiting sentencing, to also have their 'out and free bail time' added to their sentence term if they are found guilty at some future point?
People are guilty and to be punished once a court makes a decision. Nadal Hasan was guilty when the court said he was, not at the time of the shooting. Retroactively applying punishment back to the time a crime was committed is not only a slippery slope, it is also just really messy. For instance, what if a crime happened years ago, and the laws have changed since then. Is the judge to apply the law from 3 years ago to the case, or the current law?
Murder, for instance, has no statute of limitations. Many states are moving away from capital punishment. If you get convicted of a murder from 20 years ago, in a state that recently banned executions, the judge can't say "well, you committed the crime when executions were the norm, so I sentence you to death". I mean, even just from a practical matter, that would make no sense. The state would have no execution infrastructure in place anymore.
Don't forget Descent 1/2
Google isn't attempting to serve every home. The stated goal is to make sure that the majority of people have fast (1GB+) connections at reasonable rates (currently ~70 dollars a month) as well as free basic connections for everyone.
They call this 'changing the access cost'. Much the say same that hard drive capacity, cpu speed, etc.. has increased exponentially over time, Google wants to see that happen in the broadband world. Google will continue expanding until ISP's either have no choice but to match them, or are driven out of the market. Google is making money on it, so why would they stop?
see - http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/the-economics-of-google-fiber-and-what-it-means-for-u-s-broadband/
Also, 34 more cities are in planning stages right now.
https://fiber.google.com/newcities/ - 34 cities in planning phases.
I don't think it is "just a little experiment". What I see Google doing is continuing to expand until the pressure is great enough that other ISP's are forced to offer better solutions. Google will just keep on marching along until Comcast/Verizon etc.., have no choice but to start offering GB connections at sane prices. But even then, why would Google stop the expansion?
Here, see what Google has to say about their goals:
http://gigaom.com/2012/07/26/the-economics-of-google-fiber-and-what-it-means-for-u-s-broadband/
“There’s no sense selling a product at a loss,” said Google CFO Patrick Pichette (just look at Google’s Nexus 7 tablet). “But it’s not only about profits, it’s about changing the access costs.” His goal and Google’s goal is to bring the same efficiencies that have helped create cheaper, smaller and more powerful computers and create a cost and improvement curve for broadband access that resembles the curves for compute storage, as the chart below illustrates.
Print your post out and stick it on a wall. Wait 20 years and read it again.
It has camera's and lasers that actually build an accurate image of the road and surroundings, and then image recognition type software determines what everything is, and it makes choices. A big tree limb in the road will be easily seen. The car will find another route based on map data. Ditto with washed out/blocked roads.
I haven't seen any demonstrations of google's car self-parking, but Audi has one already: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEE76Eudz_M
Your last sentence seems to be the easiest problem to solve out of all of them. Camera on car views intersections, if no lights (no red, no green, no yellow) detected, car assumes the road has become a 4 way stop. Or if it is a more complicated 4 way by 4 way stop with turn lanes, I'm sure they can program a 'take turns' style algorithm that mimics whatever humans actually do in that situation.
Good video that shows the inputs that the car receives and can make decisions about: http://www.buzzfeed.com/charliewarzel/new-footage-shows-how-googles-self-driving-cars-handle-real#4byba7s
i think your sample set and conclusions might be seriously biased. i'm no expert on rape-statistics, but it's my understanding that a very significant amount of non-drug-assisted rapes go unreported by the victims for a variety of reasons.
it seems to me that under the circumstances where a woman 'comes to' and can't even remember what happened (not to mention probably still feeling mentally/emotionally impaired from the chemical hangover) there would be an even higher incidence of the rapes going unreported.
it may still be possible that drug-facilitated rape occurs with less frequency than feared, but i see no ability to reach that conclusion logically from your estimation.
I see no ability to reach the opposite conclusion either: that date rape drugs are used enough for anyone to fear them. We just don't have any data either way.
I'd rather start an education campaign centered around telling people to watch out for their friends, rather than 'watch your drink!'. I guess both are valuable, but since most rapes seem to happen with just alcohol alone involved, a more effective message to party goers would be 'watch out for each other!', 'don't let drunk friends wander off with strangers!'.
In the beginning of the 1970s, Ben Hesper and I started to use the term “bioinformatics”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3068925/
is a form of archaeological theory that had its genesis in 1958 with the work of Gordon Willey and Philip Phillips, Method and Theory in American Archeology
(the idea that all aspects of culture are accessible through the material record), the use of quantitative data, and the hypothetico-deductive model (scientific method of observation and hypothesis testing).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Processual_archaeology
Jail time has always served multiple purposes.
1. Justice - for the victim(s)
2. Deterrent - for possible future criminals
3. Punishment - for the criminal
4. Prevention - protection from repeat crimes.
5. Rehabilitation - for the criminal
The extent to which each of those 5 are accomplished by jail time, and the extent to which each of those is valuable to the public, the victim, and the criminal, are often debated.
To better understand just how depraved the people are who made it.
The sentence "with no trial, they beheaded a reporter with a knife" should make it crystal clear what type of people we are dealing with. Watching someone die won't add anything to that understanding.
Why would anyone actually want to watch it?
I didn't care to watch it, but now that the UK wants to declare that it's a crime to watch it, I am now downloading it (thanks tpb!)
Will I enjoy it? Probably not, but if the governement(s) don't want me to see it, then I probably should see it.
I watched one a long time ago out of curiosity (early 2000's I think). I assumed naively that years of horror movies and american style explosion/killing movies would have conditioned me. It did not. I shut it off the second the knife started in... horrible. Completely different than some action/horror movie. Maybe it was my mind yelling at me that this was real, or something about the actual sounds involved (I still cringe), but it was not something anyone should watch without having a real purpose in mind.
If you want to, go for it. But it won't be something you like, you'll regret it, and it will be something you will never forget. To what end?
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/09/global-warming-pause-ipcc
Read the history of this whole 'hiatus' thing above. In a nutshell, there is no hiatus. There is a slow down in the growth of temperature. But it was still going up on average. Some scientists made statements like, "we are not sure why the rate of temperature increase has slowed down", and some bad science reporters wrote headlines like, "The planet is no longer warming, and scientists are baffled!!!!".
With that out of the way, the fact that some scientists are saying that there is no actual "Hiatus"
Yeah, some scientists, after the bad headlines from bad science reporters came out, said "No, no, no, the reporting is wrong. We never said the planet stopped warming, we said the rate of warming slowed."