I agree with you on your example -- but I think your analogy doesn't equate.
How is this different from the searches of databases of which I'm a part to find "matches" or "hits" already (cell use, cc use, debit use for example)?
I understand and relate to the fear of abuse -- but that possible abuse already exists in the systems that can already be searched and is mitigated by law and regulations.
Aren't there already means to find people who "don't want to be found"? Such has credit card use? Debit/ATM use?
Speaking as someone who's nephew was kidnapped (we got him back after 2.5 years and the help of a few of these "OTHER" means to find people who don't want to be found), this does *NOT* sound like a bad thing.
We have a different philosophical approach. I don't believe that history for the masses needs to be so nuanced. Particularly for kids -- but adults as well.
I speak as someone who's an amateur historian (strong focus on colonial America and Constitutional history) -- but middle Europe, too.
While it might be in vogue to claim that making Columbus into a hero is racist, that's changing the nature of the argument. While he wasn't a 'hero', he also wasn't the boogie man -- just a very poor and brutal governor -- something when viewed from within his culture and time was not unheard of. So... do we judge a 15th century man by 21st century values? I believe strongly that this type of view destroys our understanding of history.
Also you claim that we might portray him as a better sailor than all those who came before him isn't really fair. All told, he died a wealthy man because of his voyages. While being a "better sailor" than everyone else may be in question, he certainly was a SUCCESSFUL sailor.
Unless someone plans on taking a few upper division history classes, or do some post grad research, claiming that Columbus discovered the "New World" is quite acceptable to me. Is it 100% accurate? Not really -- but in such a short sentence it conveys a huge amount of data that's fairly easy to digest for a non-historian.
This history of the sciences are likewise "summarized". Look at Newton. How many people know how much of a petty prat he was? Or that many of his discoveries were already known to the ancient Greeks -- or even independently discovered by one of his contemporaries.
He wasn't the first European to arrive at the Americas. There were several before him.
All of which have been virtually lost to history. Those others certainly didn't provide any real indications to the contemporaries and decedents on "what was out there" and "how to get there".
By "discovery", I think it's better to view Columbus as discoverer -- in that anyone else who came before really didn't relay the information of what they found.
It would be like some guy stumbling on gun powder, but for some reason share the discovery in any way that it could be re-created.
Seriously, other than a footnote, how important is this information?
Statement: Reagan cut taxes and increased revenue. Cutting taxes work!
Counter argument: The debt increased under Reagan! Cutting taxes DIDN'T WORK!
Point of fact: Revenue DID increase, but Government spending increased far more. Cutting taxes increases revenue -- but spending more that you bring in -- that increases debt.
Counter argument: Government DID spent more, and it was Reagan who did it.
Me: I've no idea wtf you are trying to say in terms of how to -- and what has worked in increasing revenue to our national coffers.
Could that be because the US didn't exist until the Constitution was ratified? Or perhaps the Articles of Confederation? Or at least the unified statements of the DoI made by the representatives of the various colonies?
Did Columbus discover the Americas? Yes (from a European perspective, anyway). Did he land in the United States of America? No.
The reason we observe it on July 4th is because that was the day on which the Declaration of Independence was signed and the day on which quite a few individuals more or less signed their own death warrants had the bid failed.
Actually, the DoI was "signed" on the 2nd (not really then either, but I digress) . It was at the printers on the 4th...
I could go in to the actually events and take 4 or 5 paragraphs... but it's my day off and I want to enjoy our nations "birth" with my kids.
And he'd go through all this to protect them? I doubt it. The guy who reported this originally is receiving death threats -- and while you "suggest" that hacked isn't quite the right word, I would suggest you listen to Congressman Weiner use it several times to describe the event.
"...and since he was hacked, there is no story here."
And if he says he was hacked, it's true, no? And his embarrassing attempts to deflect questions from the press don't suggest he just MIGHT be playing a little loose with the truth?
*IF* (and that's a big *IF*) he is lying, he (and all public servants (elected or appointed)) who engage is such compromise behavior put themselves up for risk of blackmail should the wrong person/group find out. And as public servants, their actions on behalf of the public may be compromised/corrupted.
So, yes -- there *IS* some concern here... And since a simple call to the FBI would have reviled the source IP (and effectively ruled out the Congressman) there ARE unanswered questions. His statements saying he didn't send the pic but that he "can't say with certitude" that the pic *ISNT* him opens all kinds of questions for reasonable people.
I can't remember the name of the device but they used to be used in libraries and such to transmits little written notes from the reference desk to the stacks so the staff could retrieve books.
The Autopen -- or things like it -- have been around a LONG time. They look kind of funky and almost rube-goldbergish in design. It basically allows one to "write" once, but what one writes will appear on several copies via levers and pivots.
Several past presidents have used them, but I believe this is the first time it was ever used to sign a bill in to law -- and I haven't seen what Mr. Obama used yet. Still, I really cant find any question if it's unconstitutional to sign this way.
They flicker. But then again, I can see CRT's flicker. I have an aspie son (and aspie myself) -- trust me. They flicker.
That said, there was a school for aspie/autistic special needs kids I toured a few years ago. I walked around staring at the lights. When the director asked my why I was looking at the lights I responded "Because they aren't flickering". They were CFLs. But special CFLs. Their cycle rate is so high that even *I* couldn't notice. And they cost the school a fortune.
With many distractions already in my environment, the last thing I need is flickering lights annoying the heck out of me.
The odds are you don't understand you are being a prat.
I fully understand the current common theories concerning expansion and a cold, burnt out universe -- or "the big crunch". I also fully understand that to accept statements "without question" invites inflexibility and ignorance.
With regards to html tags -- I admit to fat fingering and not noticing in the preview. I was distracted and didn't think it important.
Now, how about you admitting to being a prat who appears to take some sort of pleasure pointing out presumed ignorance in others. I wouldn't be surprised if you walk around assuming you were superior to those around you.
"I guess alot of this would come down to one question, are humans responisble for why they are an endangered species?"
I think you're placing too high a value on the answer to that question.
Humans are a predator. Humans, like other animals, can and do push out other animals in an area.
I for one do not think it's a bad thing that many life forms have went (or are endanger of becoming) extinct due to human action. smallpox, for example. Or polio. And I'm quite happy I don't have mountain lions strolling down my street stalking my children.
I think your question should read: "I guess a lot of this would come down to one question: How would the extinction of this species in particular impact the human race".
I think that counts R&D -- as well as the cost of the Enterprise (which only flew 1 test mission but still ran about 1.2 billion to build) I was just calculating the "per mission" costs -- which I've since found can range from $400 million to $800 million (depending on cargo off setting the actual cost).
So it's not just traffic crossing their peering connection? Traffic which has seen exponential growth due to stuff like bittorrents and netflix?
I suspect you are seeing bits of the sky falling that are, in fact, just rain drops.
-- An Atheist voting Republican is like a Jew voting for Hitler.
Cute. Kind of like "A Leftist voting Democrat is like a Nazi voting for Hitler". Or even better -- let's leave the 'the other side is facist" rhetoric at the door and accept that a robust electorate can have different world views -- and that NEITHER is 'evil'.
Slashdot Mirror
1. Did you read your links?
2. Do you know what "mitigate" means?
Looks like those grievances/abuses are being addressed.
I agree with you on your example -- but I think your analogy doesn't equate.
How is this different from the searches of databases of which I'm a part to find "matches" or "hits" already (cell use, cc use, debit use for example)?
I understand and relate to the fear of abuse -- but that possible abuse already exists in the systems that can already be searched and is mitigated by law and regulations.
Aren't there already means to find people who "don't want to be found"? Such has credit card use? Debit/ATM use?
Speaking as someone who's nephew was kidnapped (we got him back after 2.5 years and the help of a few of these "OTHER" means to find people who don't want to be found), this does *NOT* sound like a bad thing.
Much like "Global Warming"...
We have a different philosophical approach. I don't believe that history for the masses needs to be so nuanced. Particularly for kids -- but adults as well.
I speak as someone who's an amateur historian (strong focus on colonial America and Constitutional history) -- but middle Europe, too.
While it might be in vogue to claim that making Columbus into a hero is racist, that's changing the nature of the argument. While he wasn't a 'hero', he also wasn't the boogie man -- just a very poor and brutal governor -- something when viewed from within his culture and time was not unheard of. So... do we judge a 15th century man by 21st century values? I believe strongly that this type of view destroys our understanding of history.
Also you claim that we might portray him as a better sailor than all those who came before him isn't really fair. All told, he died a wealthy man because of his voyages. While being a "better sailor" than everyone else may be in question, he certainly was a SUCCESSFUL sailor.
Unless someone plans on taking a few upper division history classes, or do some post grad research, claiming that Columbus discovered the "New World" is quite acceptable to me. Is it 100% accurate? Not really -- but in such a short sentence it conveys a huge amount of data that's fairly easy to digest for a non-historian.
This history of the sciences are likewise "summarized". Look at Newton. How many people know how much of a petty prat he was? Or that many of his discoveries were already known to the ancient Greeks -- or even independently discovered by one of his contemporaries.
All of which have been virtually lost to history. Those others certainly didn't provide any real indications to the contemporaries and decedents on "what was out there" and "how to get there".
By "discovery", I think it's better to view Columbus as discoverer -- in that anyone else who came before really didn't relay the information of what they found.
It would be like some guy stumbling on gun powder, but for some reason share the discovery in any way that it could be re-created.
Seriously, other than a footnote, how important is this information?
Statement: Reagan cut taxes and increased revenue. Cutting taxes work!
Counter argument: The debt increased under Reagan! Cutting taxes DIDN'T WORK!
Point of fact: Revenue DID increase, but Government spending increased far more. Cutting taxes increases revenue -- but spending more that you bring in -- that increases debt.
Counter argument: Government DID spent more, and it was Reagan who did it.
Me: I've no idea wtf you are trying to say in terms of how to -- and what has worked in increasing revenue to our national coffers.
Could that be because the US didn't exist until the Constitution was ratified? Or perhaps the Articles of Confederation? Or at least the unified statements of the DoI made by the representatives of the various colonies?
Did Columbus discover the Americas? Yes (from a European perspective, anyway). Did he land in the United States of America? No.
Actually, the DoI was "signed" on the 2nd (not really then either, but I digress) . It was at the printers on the 4th...
I could go in to the actually events and take 4 or 5 paragraphs... but it's my day off and I want to enjoy our nations "birth" with my kids.
"Not really"? We didn't have a couple of decades of growth? Or are you trying to change what he said?
Did we have deficits? Yes. Was that due to tax cuts? No. More money came in as a result of the growth generated by those tax cuts.
What caused the deficits, then? Could it be.... Government over-spending? Spending far more than what was generated? Hmmm....
But that wouldn't fit in to your narrative... would it?
Neither do the dead. Oh wait...
And he'd go through all this to protect them? I doubt it. The guy who reported this originally is receiving death threats -- and while you "suggest" that hacked isn't quite the right word, I would suggest you listen to Congressman Weiner use it several times to describe the event.
And if he says he was hacked, it's true, no? And his embarrassing attempts to deflect questions from the press don't suggest he just MIGHT be playing a little loose with the truth?
*IF* (and that's a big *IF*) he is lying, he (and all public servants (elected or appointed)) who engage is such compromise behavior put themselves up for risk of blackmail should the wrong person/group find out. And as public servants, their actions on behalf of the public may be compromised/corrupted.
So, yes -- there *IS* some concern here... And since a simple call to the FBI would have reviled the source IP (and effectively ruled out the Congressman) there ARE unanswered questions. His statements saying he didn't send the pic but that he "can't say with certitude" that the pic *ISNT* him opens all kinds of questions for reasonable people.
The device is called an "undergrad".
The Autopen -- or things like it -- have been around a LONG time. They look kind of funky and almost rube-goldbergish in design. It basically allows one to "write" once, but what one writes will appear on several copies via levers and pivots.
Several past presidents have used them, but I believe this is the first time it was ever used to sign a bill in to law -- and I haven't seen what Mr. Obama used yet. Still, I really cant find any question if it's unconstitutional to sign this way.
Jeez...
Count the number of republicans and the number of democrats who voted for the bill. Make your case that this was a republican boondogle. Just try.
To paraphrase you, do ideologs ever consistently hold their side to the same standards to which they hold the OTHER?
The bill passed 74 to 26 in 2005 including our current President (D). There certainly weren't 74 Republicans in the Senate in 05...
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00213
I'm getting flipping sick and tired of blaming EVERYTHING on one side or the other... This isn't a football game.
They flicker. But then again, I can see CRT's flicker. I have an aspie son (and aspie myself) -- trust me. They flicker.
That said, there was a school for aspie/autistic special needs kids I toured a few years ago. I walked around staring at the lights. When the director asked my why I was looking at the lights I responded "Because they aren't flickering". They were CFLs. But special CFLs. Their cycle rate is so high that even *I* couldn't notice. And they cost the school a fortune.
With many distractions already in my environment, the last thing I need is flickering lights annoying the heck out of me.
The odds are you don't understand you are being a prat.
I fully understand the current common theories concerning expansion and a cold, burnt out universe -- or "the big crunch". I also fully understand that to accept statements "without question" invites inflexibility and ignorance.
With regards to html tags -- I admit to fat fingering and not noticing in the preview. I was distracted and didn't think it important.
Now, how about you admitting to being a prat who appears to take some sort of pleasure pointing out presumed ignorance in others. I wouldn't be surprised if you walk around assuming you were superior to those around you.
"I guess alot of this would come down to one question, are humans responisble for why they are an endangered species?"
I think you're placing too high a value on the answer to that question.
Humans are a predator. Humans, like other animals, can and do push out other animals in an area.
I for one do not think it's a bad thing that many life forms have went (or are endanger of becoming) extinct due to human action. smallpox, for example. Or polio. And I'm quite happy I don't have mountain lions strolling down my street stalking my children.
I think your question should read: "I guess a lot of this would come down to one question: How would the extinction of this species in particular impact the human race".
I think that counts R&D -- as well as the cost of the Enterprise (which only flew 1 test mission but still ran about 1.2 billion to build) I was just calculating the "per mission" costs -- which I've since found can range from $400 million to $800 million (depending on cargo off setting the actual cost).
I recall (and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong) that it runs somewhere around $450-$550 million per shuttle mission.
On the high end with a smallish crew (6 on the last mission), thats about $91 million per seat (assuming zero-cost for cargo).
On the low-end with a larger crew (8 is on the high side), that's about $56 million per seat.
Add cargo on that and this doesn't sound so cheap -- even on the high-end (assuming my numbers are correct).
So it's not just traffic crossing their peering connection? Traffic which has seen exponential growth due to stuff like bittorrents and netflix?
I suspect you are seeing bits of the sky falling that are, in fact, just rain drops.
Cute. Kind of like "A Leftist voting Democrat is like a Nazi voting for Hitler". Or even better -- let's leave the 'the other side is facist" rhetoric at the door and accept that a robust electorate can have different world views -- and that NEITHER is 'evil'.
Or it could be their U-Verse service doesn't cross their peering connection so wouldn't be same type of bottleneck source.
Not everything is evilcorporategreed. Some of it's just plain network QoS.