If you're serious about consuming "healthy" chocolate, you'll want 85% cocoa content or better. Be warned: like black coffee, it's an acquired taste -- you might want to work your way up to it.:-) Also like coffee, once you get used to the good bitter stuff you'll find it hard to have anything that pretends to be "dark" -- and milk chocolate will taste like pure sugar. I love chocolate with 85-to-90% cocoa content, but having tried the Lindt 99% I can honestly say that 95% is my upper limit.
Interesting, I did not know that the FDIC did not cover theft from the bank (electronic or otherwise), since the main point would seem to be to instill consumer confidence in putting their money in banks in the first place. Thanks!
"Putting it that way kinda makes them sound less like romantic swashbucklers and more like people who aid people who allow other people to watch movies and listen to music for free instead of paying for it as the artists and their producers and publishers and investors intended, doesn't it?"
Nah, my original one was funnier. I especially like how it inspires people to justify obtaining movies, music and games without paying for them.:-)
According to the Magic Leap website, their Dynamic Digitized Lightfield Signal technology permits generating images indistinguishable from real objects.
...provided the real objects are themselves images. Look! That simulated JPEG looks exactly like a real JPEG!
Have I ever downloaded something that I didn't have rights to - yes, but not enough for anybody to care.
You can't claim anything about how much a hypothetical individual would or would not care.
The equivalent of a kid sneaking into a movie theater to watch a movie once or twice.
Unless you're 12 years old or under, you don't get to apply that standard to yourself. If you're an adult and you sneak into a movie theater to watch a film -- even if there were empty seats -- that's wrong. If you intentionally download something that you don't have the rights to, that's wrong too.
It's okay; we're human, we all do things from time to time that we know we're not supposed to, but let's not fool ourselves when we do. You can make all sorts of rationalizations to make yourself feel better about illegal downloading, and other people who do it will no doubt support you, but it's still wrong. If you don't understand that, I really can't say anything more to convince you, except that maybe you should discuss the matter with your parents or (if you're religious) your minister or equivalent, and hear what they have to say about it.
I care because I know people who make their entire living doing music or writing.
In order to sell what they produce, artists (meaning musicians, authors, etc.) make deals with publishers who in turn can market their work to distributors far and wide. Those publishers sign contracts based on how marketable the artist is, or how marketable think the artist will be. Marketability boils down to how much money the artist will bring to the publisher, because after all this is a business arrangement. The more sales by distributors (like amazon.com), the more the publisher makes, and the more successful the artist is. The more pirated downloads, the less the publisher makes -- which not only means that the artist makes less, but the publisher might not care to sign with the artist in the future. So the artist goes broke, and can't make their art anymore, because they need to do other things to put food on the table and pay rent.
If you like an artist, you support their work by paying for it exactly as they intended. If you think the artist should have a different way of making a living, you can suggest that to the artist.
I provide most of my writing and artwork online under Creative Commons Attributional license, and my Open Source libraries under the Artistic License, so I'm very sympathetic to the notion of sharing -- but only when the artist themselves elects to do so. That's not the case with The Pirate Bay and its users, and what they do doesn't pass the smell test with me.
There are tons of artists out there who release music and books and games and short films on public sites, with licenses that allow unlimited copying and sharing. If that's the model you believe in, then please frequent those artists, and throw a little cash their way -- some of them are friends of mine; they could use it! As for the rest of the artists and their producers and their distributors: if you don't like paying what they ask, then don't consume their product. It's really very simple.
Without the double helix, it would be to easy to have errors.
Can you please elaborate on that? It sounds cool... is there something specific to the shape of the double helix that makes storage or transcription less error-prone?
It would be more accurate to say: it all goes back to money.
Politics is the means by which certain individuals get elected, and how others get appointed by the elected officials. Which is legislation favorable to a particular industry gets passed, and how lucrative government defense contracts get awarded. In exchange for which, the political figure in question can be assured of a nice corporate consulting or board position upon retirement. At which point they become a campaign contributor, and the whole cycle starts all over again.
"Deep Space Industries is planning to build a number of dense spacecrafts called FireFlies, and they plan on sending the satellites on one way missions to gather information about the density, shape, composition and size of an asteroid. They also have plans to build a spacecraft called Dragonfly, which has the purpose of catching asteroids.
Obviously the spacecraft should have been called Serenity.
1. As the comet approaches the sun, is it likely that the angle of or proximity to the sun will provide enough light to make a difference?
2. I assume we've measured whether Rosetta is rotating, even slightly. Is there a chance that this will help (or hurt) Philae's chances at coming back on line?
3. As the comet gets closer to the sun, I imagine that it will start melting/vaporizing (this being what makes a comet look like a comet in the first place). Since Philae is not firmly anchored (and that might not make a difference in any case), what do we expect to happen, and when?
He's saying he's "proud" rather than "ashamed" -- because unfortunately, many people still think that being gay is something to be ashamed of. They believe that being gay is somehow a sign of moral failing as opposed to what it is: a normal human characteristic.
"Gay Pride" parades are about that very idea, and have been for decades. When you see someone wearing a shirt on St. Patrick's Day that says, "Proud to be Irish", do you assume they're claiming superiority to you in some way? Of course not. It's the same thing.
Whatever, see if I care.
Clearly you do care, or you wouldn't have bothered to post. Unfortunately, all you did with your post is attempt to frame his use of the word "proud" in an incorrect and unflattering light. I'm not sure why that was so important to you.
To me, it's still amazing that a person can declare their *hatred* for certain religions or ethnicities and many people will feel that it's socially acceptable, but declaring your *love* for another adult can still have serious social and financial repercussions. So in my book he's doing something brave, and that's something to be proud of too.
Slashdot Mirror
It is fairly easy to find high-end chocolate bars made by Lindt, Godiva, Green&Black, etc. where the cocoa content is shown prominently on the label:
http://www.lindtusa.com/shop/c...
http://www.thefind.com/food/in...
If you're serious about consuming "healthy" chocolate, you'll want 85% cocoa content or better. Be warned: like black coffee, it's an acquired taste -- you might want to work your way up to it. :-) Also like coffee, once you get used to the good bitter stuff you'll find it hard to have anything that pretends to be "dark" -- and milk chocolate will taste like pure sugar. I love chocolate with 85-to-90% cocoa content, but having tried the Lindt 99% I can honestly say that 95% is my upper limit.
Interesting, I did not know that the FDIC did not cover theft from the bank (electronic or otherwise), since the main point would seem to be to instill consumer confidence in putting their money in banks in the first place. Thanks!
If the cash stolen is in an FDIC account, then yes, it does.
Ah, there we go.
I see your point; let's try that again:
"Putting it that way kinda makes them sound less like romantic swashbucklers and more like people who aid people who allow other people to watch movies and listen to music for free instead of paying for it as the artists and their producers and publishers and investors intended, doesn't it?"
Nah, my original one was funnier. I especially like how it inspires people to justify obtaining movies, music and games without paying for them. :-)
I was actually going for the +1 Funny. How the heck did I get modded Insightful? :-(
According to the Magic Leap website, their Dynamic Digitized Lightfield Signal technology permits generating images indistinguishable from real objects.
You can't claim anything about how much a hypothetical individual would or would not care.
Unless you're 12 years old or under, you don't get to apply that standard to yourself. If you're an adult and you sneak into a movie theater to watch a film -- even if there were empty seats -- that's wrong. If you intentionally download something that you don't have the rights to, that's wrong too.
It's okay; we're human, we all do things from time to time that we know we're not supposed to, but let's not fool ourselves when we do. You can make all sorts of rationalizations to make yourself feel better about illegal downloading, and other people who do it will no doubt support you, but it's still wrong. If you don't understand that, I really can't say anything more to convince you, except that maybe you should discuss the matter with your parents or (if you're religious) your minister or equivalent, and hear what they have to say about it.
I care because I know people who make their entire living doing music or writing.
In order to sell what they produce, artists (meaning musicians, authors, etc.) make deals with publishers who in turn can market their work to distributors far and wide. Those publishers sign contracts based on how marketable the artist is, or how marketable think the artist will be. Marketability boils down to how much money the artist will bring to the publisher, because after all this is a business arrangement. The more sales by distributors (like amazon.com), the more the publisher makes, and the more successful the artist is. The more pirated downloads, the less the publisher makes -- which not only means that the artist makes less, but the publisher might not care to sign with the artist in the future. So the artist goes broke, and can't make their art anymore, because they need to do other things to put food on the table and pay rent.
If you like an artist, you support their work by paying for it exactly as they intended. If you think the artist should have a different way of making a living, you can suggest that to the artist.
I provide most of my writing and artwork online under Creative Commons Attributional license, and my Open Source libraries under the Artistic License, so I'm very sympathetic to the notion of sharing -- but only when the artist themselves elects to do so. That's not the case with The Pirate Bay and its users, and what they do doesn't pass the smell test with me.
There are tons of artists out there who release music and books and games and short films on public sites, with licenses that allow unlimited copying and sharing. If that's the model you believe in, then please frequent those artists, and throw a little cash their way -- some of them are friends of mine; they could use it! As for the rest of the artists and their producers and their distributors: if you don't like paying what they ask, then don't consume their product. It's really very simple.
Putting it that way kinda makes them sound less like romantic swashbucklers and more like thieves, doesn't it?
Without the double helix, it would be to easy to have errors.
Can you please elaborate on that? It sounds cool... is there something specific to the shape of the double helix that makes storage or transcription less error-prone?
for illegal file sharing. Because plausible.
I agree!
I read your entire post in Comic Book Guy's voice.
Citation needed.
Yep, CIPA is extremely dangerous. You have to self-monitor at all times:
CIP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
CIPA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
It would be more accurate to say: it all goes back to money.
Politics is the means by which certain individuals get elected, and how others get appointed by the elected officials. Which is legislation favorable to a particular industry gets passed, and how lucrative government defense contracts get awarded. In exchange for which, the political figure in question can be assured of a nice corporate consulting or board position upon retirement. At which point they become a campaign contributor, and the whole cycle starts all over again.
Obviously the spacecraft should have been called Serenity.
Did he not get the message four years ago??
ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA
ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE
The dude's gonna get us all monolithed. I don't wanna be monolithed.
We've been calling this comet "Rosetta" thanks to the media, but it's actual name is 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko.
Man, anyone who'd name their kid "67P" is just asking for that kid to be picked on. No wonder it prefers to go by "Rosetta".
1. As the comet approaches the sun, is it likely that the angle of or proximity to the sun will provide enough light to make a difference?
2. I assume we've measured whether Rosetta is rotating, even slightly. Is there a chance that this will help (or hurt) Philae's chances at coming back on line?
3. As the comet gets closer to the sun, I imagine that it will start melting/vaporizing (this being what makes a comet look like a comet in the first place). Since Philae is not firmly anchored (and that might not make a difference in any case), what do we expect to happen, and when?
+MAX_INT. GP and Parent have officially won the thread.
i.e., "everyone".
He's saying he's "proud" rather than "ashamed" -- because unfortunately, many people still think that being gay is something to be ashamed of. They believe that being gay is somehow a sign of moral failing as opposed to what it is: a normal human characteristic.
"Gay Pride" parades are about that very idea, and have been for decades. When you see someone wearing a shirt on St. Patrick's Day that says, "Proud to be Irish", do you assume they're claiming superiority to you in some way? Of course not. It's the same thing.
Clearly you do care, or you wouldn't have bothered to post. Unfortunately, all you did with your post is attempt to frame his use of the word "proud" in an incorrect and unflattering light. I'm not sure why that was so important to you.
To me, it's still amazing that a person can declare their *hatred* for certain religions or ethnicities and many people will feel that it's socially acceptable, but declaring your *love* for another adult can still have serious social and financial repercussions. So in my book he's doing something brave, and that's something to be proud of too.