"The U.S. Air Force Cyber Command has blocked access to any Web site with the word "blog." The new Internet filters for the Air Force also block access to content that gets a negative review from supervisors and any unapproved news sources. The Cyber Command's policy for Air Force personnel is to block information first, then review."
So not only is it not the Army that's doing it, it's this General's command that's doing it. In all likelihood, the order to block all blogs came from this individual, or someone on his staff. Seems like a pretty good question to pose to General Lord, since he's taking interview questions from a blog, himself.
It amazes me that, after all these years, Slashdot editors still apparently do not do any research before they post the stories. That has reduced the value of Slashdot as an advertising medium enormously. Pullitzer and Hearst disagree with you.
overwhelming scientific consensus I'm more interesting in overwhelming scientific evidence, myself. Come back when find some of that.
Consensus belongs in politics, not science. Darwin was right about evolution during the time when the consensus was that God created the earth and all the animals in it roughly 6000 years before the present.
How about you simply have a fee that provides exclusive rights to the property for one year, and you renew those rights every year. The fee starts out relatively low, say $100, and increases every year to a maximum of $1 million after about 50 years. The fee goes to the government, there's no tedious accounting of "value" the owner of the property just decides for themselves if it's worth enough to pay the associated fee to renew the copyright. If not, it goes into the public domain.
From the second line of the article:
Previously it was known that fish could tell big shoals from small ones, but researchers have now found that they have a limited ability to count how many other fish are nearby. So, yeah, they've already tested for size differences, this was set up to test something else entirely.
IANAL, but I believe judges can only set aside guilty verdicts, not innocent verdicts. So if the jury finds the defendant innocent because the law is guilty, the judge can't change it. But if the jury finds the defendant guilty, even though the facts don't support it, the judge can step in and nullify the verdict.
I think there were about 3 of us in the room who were NOT visibly carrying a firearm that night. Me? Because I can't - the other 2, who knows. You can't throw out a statement like that and not give up more information about it.
No, he's suggesting that God created Americans, but Canadians are nothing more than evolved monkeys. So obviously, we have every right, nay, a duty, to rule over the talking monkeys of the world. Because God made us.
Guy sounds like a racist to me, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.
the prosecutor will be looking for those who can think and come to a reasonable decision based on the available evidence. Bullshit, the prosecutor is looking for people who find the defendant guilty. So yeah, they're much more concerned with finding a group of twelve people they think they can impress, manipulate, and control, just like the defense is, than with any high flying concepts of Truth, Justice, and The American Way.
Jeez, it's like you've never watched an episode of Law & Order before.
You're forgetting that the chances of rolling two 4s in a row are not 1 in 6, they are 1 in 36. Just so, the odds against someone removing their floorboards AND having a missing/murdered wife (still no body, so technically she's missing and assume murdered) are considerably greater than either one of those incidents by themselves.
I didn't haul bodies in it, but could have packed in maybe five or six with no problem. You should've invested in a chainsaw, or at least a miter saw. You could've doubled that number and made a real go of it.
This whole situation reminds me of Duty Call formations when I was in the Marines. Ever notice how, at least some of the time, when you showed up at one of those spots, the officers from the ship had already beaten you to it? I had one JO (Junior Officer for you non-Navy types) that I worked for tell me flat out that he and his roommate put the name of their favorite bar in Hong Kong on the list, because they didn't want to end up drinking with the same guys they'd been working with for the previous four months at sea. Can't say I could blame 'em, and at least they were good sports about it and bought a round for the four of us who crashed their little party.
I do wonder if they're just in there because of somebody's dislike of that particular content. Strictly speaking, even if the site does contain child porn, it's still on the list because of someone's dislike for that content. Whether that dislike is well founded or not, and whether it serves a greater good to society to block it or not, are different questions entirely.
How the hell did this drivel get scored Insightful?
First off, there was no new economic system created by the New Deal, nor by the Great Society. They both functioned as government programs within a capitalistic economic system. If there was any new economic system in the last 100 years, it was the creation of the Federal Reserve, which predates the New Deal. Social Security is most certainly NOT an economic system.
Secondly, to insist that Bretton Woods was "undermined" by Republicans is pure partisan drivel. Its collapse had as much to do with poor monetary policy in every administration starting with Truman and ending with LBJ, neither of whom were Republicans (though they probably both would be today, along with the other Democrat during that period, JFK). Nixon can be credited with trying to save the system, or at least inject new life into it, when he abolished the gold standard. But it was an inherently flawed system in the first place that ignore the effects of markets on trading of currency. The modern FOREX system is considerably more advanced and effective because it embraces markets.
Lastly, no one says the market is "magical" or "mysterious". The under pinnings of the Free Market system are well understood by economists and theorists, and it is studied quite well as the science that it is. Saying it isn't is such a twisting of how things really are that I suspect you are not merely misinformed, but are outright lying. Though I'll take General Napoleon's advice on this matter and grant you the benefit of the doubt.
400 years ago...Galileo was arguing with the Pope about the Earth being flat Um, no, the argument was about the moons of Jupiter, and the fact that Galileo discovered that they orbit their primary planet, not their primary star (not entirely accurate, but a big step forward from the geo- and helio-centric universe models that came before). Considering that this discovery came over 100 years after Columbus reached the New World and several decades after Magellan* circumnavigated the globe, the question of whether the earth was flat or not had long since been put to bed.
*Actually, his crew did it, since he was supper in the Philippines.
If Apple went anywhere near the subject of androids, they'd make something like iBimbo. It'd be beautiful, and maybe even have a wonderful voice, but it would have extremely low intelligence. How do I get on the announcement list for this?
The "news" tend to include opinion and commentary on noteworthy events, such as a major Internet company launching a new service that's likely going to feed itself off of the hard work of millions of volunteers. So yeah, writing about this is definitely "news".
Especially when those link farms are filled with Google ads, which just feeds back into GP statement about Google results being filled up with Google pages.
Slashdot Mirror
Bzzt, wrong:
"The U.S. Air Force Cyber Command has blocked access to any Web site with the word "blog." The new Internet filters for the Air Force also block access to content that gets a negative review from supervisors and any unapproved news sources. The Cyber Command's policy for Air Force personnel is to block information first, then review."
From: http://www.sci-tech-today.com/news/Air-Force-Blocks-Access-to-Blogs/story.xhtml?story_id=13100G0EZ8OF
So not only is it not the Army that's doing it, it's this General's command that's doing it. In all likelihood, the order to block all blogs came from this individual, or someone on his staff. Seems like a pretty good question to pose to General Lord, since he's taking interview questions from a blog, himself.
They should've outsourced it to Jennings & Rall, those guys get shit done.
Wow, you knew Hillary Clinton when she was a kid?
So, you an Obama supporter now?
Consensus belongs in politics, not science. Darwin was right about evolution during the time when the consensus was that God created the earth and all the animals in it roughly 6000 years before the present.
How about you simply have a fee that provides exclusive rights to the property for one year, and you renew those rights every year. The fee starts out relatively low, say $100, and increases every year to a maximum of $1 million after about 50 years. The fee goes to the government, there's no tedious accounting of "value" the owner of the property just decides for themselves if it's worth enough to pay the associated fee to renew the copyright. If not, it goes into the public domain.
Of course fish are intelligent, that's what makes them delicious!
Mmmm, brain food....
So you hate advertising, but your sig has a link to your website? Interesting.
IANAL, but I believe judges can only set aside guilty verdicts, not innocent verdicts. So if the jury finds the defendant innocent because the law is guilty, the judge can't change it. But if the jury finds the defendant guilty, even though the facts don't support it, the judge can step in and nullify the verdict.
I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.
No, he's suggesting that God created Americans, but Canadians are nothing more than evolved monkeys. So obviously, we have every right, nay, a duty, to rule over the talking monkeys of the world. Because God made us.
Guy sounds like a racist to me, but maybe I'm reading too much into it.
Jeez, it's like you've never watched an episode of Law & Order before.
You're forgetting that the chances of rolling two 4s in a row are not 1 in 6, they are 1 in 36. Just so, the odds against someone removing their floorboards AND having a missing/murdered wife (still no body, so technically she's missing and assume murdered) are considerably greater than either one of those incidents by themselves.
Hans, shouldn't you be focused on your trial, and not looking for your next wife?
How the hell did this drivel get scored Insightful?
First off, there was no new economic system created by the New Deal, nor by the Great Society. They both functioned as government programs within a capitalistic economic system. If there was any new economic system in the last 100 years, it was the creation of the Federal Reserve, which predates the New Deal. Social Security is most certainly NOT an economic system.
Secondly, to insist that Bretton Woods was "undermined" by Republicans is pure partisan drivel. Its collapse had as much to do with poor monetary policy in every administration starting with Truman and ending with LBJ, neither of whom were Republicans (though they probably both would be today, along with the other Democrat during that period, JFK). Nixon can be credited with trying to save the system, or at least inject new life into it, when he abolished the gold standard. But it was an inherently flawed system in the first place that ignore the effects of markets on trading of currency. The modern FOREX system is considerably more advanced and effective because it embraces markets.
Lastly, no one says the market is "magical" or "mysterious". The under pinnings of the Free Market system are well understood by economists and theorists, and it is studied quite well as the science that it is. Saying it isn't is such a twisting of how things really are that I suspect you are not merely misinformed, but are outright lying. Though I'll take General Napoleon's advice on this matter and grant you the benefit of the doubt.
*Actually, his crew did it, since he was supper in the Philippines.
The "news" tend to include opinion and commentary on noteworthy events, such as a major Internet company launching a new service that's likely going to feed itself off of the hard work of millions of volunteers. So yeah, writing about this is definitely "news".
Especially when those link farms are filled with Google ads, which just feeds back into GP statement about Google results being filled up with Google pages.