They see a technicality that can be exploited and they're exploiting it. Right or wrong, noble or unpatriotic; these concepts are not relevant at all to the lawyers.
Regardless of the outcome of this, a likely result is a legislative change to prevent future use of the exploit.
As for the article, it's a very long read but what it seems to come down to is he was convicted for pushing the button when told that pushing the button would harm people. Which is reminiscent of a psychological experiment I once read about and I'm pretty sure that most people in that would push the button.
The clause about penalising those who reveal the existence of backdoors created for use by British security service surveillance is classic upper class twat thinking... "If we don't tell anyone it exists then no-one will find it, tee hee". Problem is there is a world full of people smarter than them that will find the backdoors easily.
Well, if you consider the longest a species of life on Earth has existed (which is about 200 million years I think) against time time frames being given for cores cooling and atmospheres being stripped... "how long do *we* have?" is the wrong question.
but then why are the British and Americans so certain of evidence of a bomb declaring they detected a heat flash and cancelling flights and so forth?
Opportunism. A chance to reassure their people that they were right all along and provide the pretext for even more invasive surveillance. So much the better if no-one can prove otherwise.
Coming soon, the campaign for Brexit which is the word already being used for the campaign for the UK to exit the EU. Obviously the Daily Mail and the Daily Express will be full champions of it and have been seeding discontent with the EU among their readership for years. I'm not sure how the rest of the media are going to line up but the unfortunately the result will be decided by the high population concentration of the south-east of the UK who outnumber the rest of us and seem particularly susceptible to "it's all Johnny Foreigner's fault" thinking. And I don't think that's a sweeping generalisation.
Or... it has already been used to change history. The just, egalitarian 2015 where almost everyone led happy prosperous lives was lost to us when history was tweaked to concentrate all the wealth into the hands of a minority.
Once the NSA start impersonating people on a personal level or actively disrupting communications between their friends, you can expect that attitude to change.
I suspect their outrage will be directed at whatever their favourite media service tells them to be outraged about. Just label rejection of surveillance as "un-American". Job done.
That was what I immediately wondered, but it's no real surprise that many people dismiss reality as false and embrace fiction as reality. It's been happening for a long, long time.
There are numerous antibiotic resistant strains of other things around to provide clues on how to make a weaponized version that can't be easily treated with antibiotics.
Although that's maybe a lot of effort. They'll be looking for a lazier way to make bacteriological weapons.
I'll assume that your legal honest ethical fantasy sports betting -- I mean non-betting -- sites prohibit in some way picking a fantasy team composed of members of the same real-life team.
Well I can't comment on those USA ones but the Fantasy Football (soccer) league based on the English premier league limits you to two players per real team in your fantasy team; i.e. you can only have 2 Manchester City players no matter how many you might like.
Also the money involved is very different. There's a financial prize of something like £10,000 ($15,000) for the whole season (9 months) and you might also get a metal medal. The medals are for gold, silver and bronze but they're symbolic in that there won't actually be any gold or silver in them.
We can't build a sustainable habitat in Antarctica or in the middle of a desert
Can't or won't? I would have thought that it would be possible to create a habitat in either that would require nothing incoming. Not easy, but not impossible. It would just cost a fuck of a lot to build and would probably require a very large area (either above or below ground) to support just a few people.
Both locations, however, have the immeasurable benefit of being on a planet with a breathable atmosphere and getting the huge amount of resources required to set up this habitat to the location would not involve climbing a gravity well.
It's definitely a "won't" for anywhere on Earth and likely a "can't" for anywhere else in the solar system.
Slashdot Mirror
From the summary:
Japanese/European nuclear plants built in the UK are also expected to contribute
No, we're getting Chinese ones. I think our politicians must be among the most easily bought.
They see a technicality that can be exploited and they're exploiting it. Right or wrong, noble or unpatriotic; these concepts are not relevant at all to the lawyers.
Regardless of the outcome of this, a likely result is a legislative change to prevent future use of the exploit.
As for the article, it's a very long read but what it seems to come down to is he was convicted for pushing the button when told that pushing the button would harm people. Which is reminiscent of a psychological experiment I once read about and I'm pretty sure that most people in that would push the button.
Are they making "whiskers" (Wireless Sea Knowledge Retrieval Satellites) for a large deep sea vehicle that they will call.. I dunno... SeaQuest?
The article says:
in just a few days, they donated over $50,000
I would just complain to my ISP, over the phone obviously, and demand a compensatory cut in monthly bill... not give them *more* money.
The clause about penalising those who reveal the existence of backdoors created for use by British security service surveillance is classic upper class twat thinking... "If we don't tell anyone it exists then no-one will find it, tee hee". Problem is there is a world full of people smarter than them that will find the backdoors easily.
Well, UK is at 308 years (if you baseline on acts of union, which some might quibble about); thus demonstrating that statement to be erroneous.
Well, if you consider the longest a species of life on Earth has existed (which is about 200 million years I think) against time time frames being given for cores cooling and atmospheres being stripped... "how long do *we* have?" is the wrong question.
but then why are the British and Americans so certain of evidence of a bomb declaring they detected a heat flash and cancelling flights and so forth?
Opportunism. A chance to reassure their people that they were right all along and provide the pretext for even more invasive surveillance. So much the better if no-one can prove otherwise.
So a model gets discarded because it won't work. Nothing to see here.
The proposition of a new model will make a better slashdot article.
Coming soon, the campaign for Brexit which is the word already being used for the campaign for the UK to exit the EU. Obviously the Daily Mail and the Daily Express will be full champions of it and have been seeding discontent with the EU among their readership for years. I'm not sure how the rest of the media are going to line up but the unfortunately the result will be decided by the high population concentration of the south-east of the UK who outnumber the rest of us and seem particularly susceptible to "it's all Johnny Foreigner's fault" thinking. And I don't think that's a sweeping generalisation.
I'm sure I saw an article just last week where analysis of published economics papers revealed a prediction hit ratio of barely past 50%.
So it's just pseudo-science rambling.
True, although some elements of the press were never going to make a big thing of it because he's their golden boy.
However it was all over social media and still inspires a few posts that I see. To many he will now only ever be known as pig-fucker.
There's a market opportunity. I'd say patent the idea but I bet that someone already has.
Or... it has already been used to change history. The just, egalitarian 2015 where almost everyone led happy prosperous lives was lost to us when history was tweaked to concentrate all the wealth into the hands of a minority.
We'll never know.
Sometimes you just can't tell whether or not something is parody.
Nice idea from academia but it seems like it's something that current operators of CCTV wouldn't use unless they were legally forced to.
Once the NSA start impersonating people on a personal level or actively disrupting communications between their friends, you can expect that attitude to change.
I suspect their outrage will be directed at whatever their favourite media service tells them to be outraged about. Just label rejection of surveillance as "un-American". Job done.
Since online approval via "likes" or equivalent seems to be the basis of self-worth for so many, how many more crimes are going to be live streamed?
"Sure, I got eighteen months but I got 10,000 likes!"
unless that company is trying to fuck everyone and everything.
I think every company operates like that, under the guise of "delivering shareholder value".
I'm sure there are companies without shareholders that also operate like that, but never to same extreme in my experience.
That was what I immediately wondered, but it's no real surprise that many people dismiss reality as false and embrace fiction as reality. It's been happening for a long, long time.
There are numerous antibiotic resistant strains of other things around to provide clues on how to make a weaponized version that can't be easily treated with antibiotics.
Although that's maybe a lot of effort. They'll be looking for a lazier way to make bacteriological weapons.
I'll assume that your legal honest ethical fantasy sports betting -- I mean non-betting -- sites prohibit in some way picking a fantasy team composed of members of the same real-life team.
Well I can't comment on those USA ones but the Fantasy Football (soccer) league based on the English premier league limits you to two players per real team in your fantasy team; i.e. you can only have 2 Manchester City players no matter how many you might like.
Also the money involved is very different. There's a financial prize of something like £10,000 ($15,000) for the whole season (9 months) and you might also get a metal medal. The medals are for gold, silver and bronze but they're symbolic in that there won't actually be any gold or silver in them.
We can't build a sustainable habitat in Antarctica or in the middle of a desert
Can't or won't? I would have thought that it would be possible to create a habitat in either that would require nothing incoming. Not easy, but not impossible. It would just cost a fuck of a lot to build and would probably require a very large area (either above or below ground) to support just a few people.
Both locations, however, have the immeasurable benefit of being on a planet with a breathable atmosphere and getting the huge amount of resources required to set up this habitat to the location would not involve climbing a gravity well.
It's definitely a "won't" for anywhere on Earth and likely a "can't" for anywhere else in the solar system.
A similar assessment of CEOs and other board positions.
I think the suspicion is that they are detrimental to the environment but it's just being studied now.