Drugs aren't legal because we have to take care of idiots after they fuck themselves and their lives and their children's lives up. If we could let people live with the consequences of their actions then I'd fully agree they should be legal. Eventually most of the real idiots would die but noooooooo! We have to care for them and make sure they get treatment and counseling. That's why they are illegal.
But if we could identify that certain drugs are just too damaging and addictive for people who have kids and serious responsibilities, we could get people to have themselves sterilized in exchange for the right to take whateverthehell drugs they want.
I checked the original article. It doesn't support the claims about bacon. I guess it's still safe to eat breakfast. At least, safe for my family and friends. Maybe not so safe for my heart.
Because 50 million people drive to work. Most of them have a fixed time at which they have to be at work. At some time in the year, this causes a large fraction of them to have to drive into the sun in busy traffic. This happens for maybe 3 weeks during the year -- unless you have DST. If you have DST, that 3 weeks becomes 3 weeks, then a period of relief when the sun's up far enough to make it safe to drive east, then they reset the clocks and you have to do it again because you're driving earlier in the day. Reverse the process in the fall. The end result: you are putting drivers in a dangerous situation twice as often as they would be in that situation if you didn't fuck with the clocks.
This is not a minor issue. Driving into the sun causes accidents and occasional deaths.
cause it would be totally justified to starve the people as punishment for big talk by their illustrious Leader. Does the morality of such a measure even cross your mind?
this is what is wrong with america specifically: Prosecutors. Their only job is to get a guilty verdict no matter if the accused party is innocent or not of anything even remotely criminal.
To heck with this system! Use Linux instead!
Aaron Schartz was caught in a computer closet with his laptop hooked into a network that had specifically denied him permission to connect to their system.
Think again about what you would do if you found a person who was not supposed to be there in your server room, copying files and doing who knows what else before you talk about "not remotely criminal."
The prosecutor, from what I can tell, did nothing wrong.
IE6 was a disaster from a technological point of view, but Microsoft sure got a lot of vendor lock-in from it!!!
I don't think that it was that bad, and it was still better than anything else available at the time. As much as I hated the concept of Active-X, the technology did fill a need and was used quite a lot - hence the lock-in with company's Intranets, etc.
It was a huge pain in the arse when it was disabled though, as almost every page load caused a prompt to appear to warn that Active-X was off.
That's more web developers' fault for making pages that rely on Microsoft proprietary stuff instead of writing standard html.
It's WAY more anticompetitive than anything Microsoft has done recently.
How would that be? Competitors for iPhones are for example Samsung phones. Is Samsung hurt in any way, especially in any illegal way, if Apple doesn't allow you to install different browsers on an iPhone?
Is ANYONE hurt in ANY way if Microsoft configures Internet Explorer as the default browser?
Probably when they have 90+% of the market captive. So, if this "post-pc" bullshit is actually going anywhere, things are going to change, eventually. Remember, it took close to 30 years to kind of get a handle on the Redmond scumbags. Hopefully our institutions have learned from that particular lesson though.
It's not captive. You can buy a computer that runs MacOS or Unix.
This is a real longshot. First off, rocks on Earth typically don't have a lot of bacteria in them. Second, the kind of shocks that could splash Earth stuff into space are... extremely rare. Third, most bacteria could not survive decades to centuries in space. Fourth, very little such material could end up on orbits that intersect other planets. Fifth, it would then have to survive the final crash and find itself in a hospitable environment.
Bingo. You can only buy apps THEY approve through THEIR store and effectively they won't allow third-party apps on their device at all without they get a cut.
It's WAY more anticompetitive than anything Microsoft has done recently. These days, Microsoft seems like the good guys. So what if competitor browsers don't come preconfigured? It takes a couple of minutes to download and install Firefox of Chrome or Safari or whatever other browser you want and set it up as the default browser on your system. Then you need never think about Internet Explorer again. Boo hoo.
When is Europe -- or the FTC -- going after Apple for creating a private, you-can't-work-around-it-without-modifying-your-system-software store for their devices?
"The closer your tractor ship to the asteroid, the more propellant you must use pushing in useless directions. The farther you put it, the more efficient the use of fuel but the amount of time you must pull to get the same delta P increases as the square of the distance to avoid the tractor escaping." (courtesy of Shavano, a few posts higher up)
in other words, the closer you are, the better your attraction but the more you have to angle away (wasting more and mroe fuel, exponentially). the farther you are, the more efficient your fuel use, but the weaker your attraction (exponentially)
Wading has always to me explained the move to upright walking and the reduction in body hair.
That's not enough of reason by itself. Humans aren't that aquatic and there's no evidence for their ever having been. Our bodies are better adapted than other primates for living every place except woodlands and for travelling long distances while carrying a load of stuff -- tools and food. Apes know about and use tools, but they don't carry them around. I think this is mainly because it's inconvenient for them to do so. Their body plan doesn't support it.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/plastination/idea_plastination.html
Drugs aren't legal because we have to take care of idiots after they fuck themselves and their lives and their children's lives up. If we could let people live with the consequences of their actions then I'd fully agree they should be legal. Eventually most of the real idiots would die but noooooooo! We have to care for them and make sure they get treatment and counseling. That's why they are illegal.
But if we could identify that certain drugs are just too damaging and addictive for people who have kids and serious responsibilities, we could get people to have themselves sterilized in exchange for the right to take whateverthehell drugs they want.
Hugh Hefner. 86 years old. Don't want to speculate about his cock though.
Hefner has a lifetime of experience telling him that beautiful women are really interested in his money.
Apparently a psychologist had diagnosed him as being in the bottom percentile of social intelligence.
Wow. It took a guy with a psychology degree to figure that out?
Prison is entirely populated by people who are in the bottom 5 to 10% in social intelligence.
True, and I want to point out that flying spaghetti is totally consistent with string theory and a fully stochastic (and messy) universe.
There is no overlay YET.
A pizza is split in 3 parts, and kept in 3 different banks in 3 countries. Bank robbers never get a full pizza.
But if they stole any part of the pizza, could you eat the rest?
So hundreds of thousand of dollars of peoples money (most of it virtual none the less) relying on some $50 flash drives.....No thanks. Ill pass.
You think the bank's computer systems are safer?
I checked the original article. It doesn't support the claims about bacon. I guess it's still safe to eat breakfast. At least, safe for my family and friends. Maybe not so safe for my heart.
If I were in that situation, I would move: either to within walking distance of my job or or onto a rail line or out of the state entirely.
Because 50 million people drive to work. Most of them have a fixed time at which they have to be at work. At some time in the year, this causes a large fraction of them to have to drive into the sun in busy traffic. This happens for maybe 3 weeks during the year -- unless you have DST. If you have DST, that 3 weeks becomes 3 weeks, then a period of relief when the sun's up far enough to make it safe to drive east, then they reset the clocks and you have to do it again because you're driving earlier in the day. Reverse the process in the fall. The end result: you are putting drivers in a dangerous situation twice as often as they would be in that situation if you didn't fuck with the clocks.
This is not a minor issue. Driving into the sun causes accidents and occasional deaths.
Taking a person's property without justification and under color of authority is a serious crime.
there isn't a browser market. Browsers are free.
cause it would be totally justified to starve the people as punishment for big talk by their illustrious Leader. Does the morality of such a measure even cross your mind?
Like their border with China??? Check a map.
this is what is wrong with america specifically: Prosecutors. Their only job is to get a guilty verdict no matter if the accused party is innocent or not of anything even remotely criminal.
To heck with this system! Use Linux instead!
Aaron Schartz was caught in a computer closet with his laptop hooked into a network that had specifically denied him permission to connect to their system.
Think again about what you would do if you found a person who was not supposed to be there in your server room, copying files and doing who knows what else before you talk about "not remotely criminal."
The prosecutor, from what I can tell, did nothing wrong.
IE6 was a disaster from a technological point of view, but Microsoft sure got a lot of vendor lock-in from it!!!
I don't think that it was that bad, and it was still better than anything else available at the time. As much as I hated the concept of Active-X, the technology did fill a need and was used quite a lot - hence the lock-in with company's Intranets, etc.
It was a huge pain in the arse when it was disabled though, as almost every page load caused a prompt to appear to warn that Active-X was off.
That's more web developers' fault for making pages that rely on Microsoft proprietary stuff instead of writing standard html.
It's WAY more anticompetitive than anything Microsoft has done recently.
How would that be? Competitors for iPhones are for example Samsung phones. Is Samsung hurt in any way, especially in any illegal way, if Apple doesn't allow you to install different browsers on an iPhone?
Is ANYONE hurt in ANY way if Microsoft configures Internet Explorer as the default browser?
Probably when they have 90+% of the market captive. So, if this "post-pc" bullshit is actually going anywhere, things are going to change, eventually. Remember, it took close to 30 years to kind of get a handle on the Redmond scumbags. Hopefully our institutions have learned from that particular lesson though.
It's not captive. You can buy a computer that runs MacOS or Unix.
Google owns Motorola Mobility and they make phones, but SAMSUNG makes a lot more Android phones than Google.
This is a real longshot. First off, rocks on Earth typically don't have a lot of bacteria in them. Second, the kind of shocks that could splash Earth stuff into space are... extremely rare. Third, most bacteria could not survive decades to centuries in space. Fourth, very little such material could end up on orbits that intersect other planets. Fifth, it would then have to survive the final crash and find itself in a hospitable environment.
How are Microsoft's customers harmed by browser bundling?
Bingo. You can only buy apps THEY approve through THEIR store and effectively they won't allow third-party apps on their device at all without they get a cut.
It's WAY more anticompetitive than anything Microsoft has done recently. These days, Microsoft seems like the good guys. So what if competitor browsers don't come preconfigured? It takes a couple of minutes to download and install Firefox of Chrome or Safari or whatever other browser you want and set it up as the default browser on your system. Then you need never think about Internet Explorer again. Boo hoo.
When is Europe -- or the FTC -- going after Apple for creating a private, you-can't-work-around-it-without-modifying-your-system-software store for their devices?
and the point you people often miss is:
"The closer your tractor ship to the asteroid, the more propellant you must use pushing in useless directions. The farther you put it, the more efficient the use of fuel but the amount of time you must pull to get the same delta P increases as the square of the distance to avoid the tractor escaping." (courtesy of Shavano, a few posts higher up)
in other words, the closer you are, the better your attraction but the more you have to angle away (wasting more and mroe fuel, exponentially). the farther you are, the more efficient your fuel use, but the weaker your attraction (exponentially)
No, quadratically.
Wading has always to me explained the move to upright walking and the reduction in body hair.
That's not enough of reason by itself. Humans aren't that aquatic and there's no evidence for their ever having been. Our bodies are better adapted than other primates for living every place except woodlands and for travelling long distances while carrying a load of stuff -- tools and food. Apes know about and use tools, but they don't carry them around. I think this is mainly because it's inconvenient for them to do so. Their body plan doesn't support it.