....at Wireless Ypsi, which is a successful community-based mesh network here in Ypsilanti, Michigan. It uses the Meraki network technology; here is Wireless Ypsi's page on the Meraki site.
In August, Obama decided to answer questions on the social news website Reddit, which many of the President’s senior aides did not know about. “Why did we put Barack Obama on Reddit?” an official asked rhetorically. “Because a whole bunch of our turnout targets were on Reddit.”
And then they didn't say who they were ! (BTW, Obama actually posts as PresidentObama. He's been a redditor for 2 months and has 3837 link karma and 20,968 comment karma!!! 10 posts 2 months ago to IAmA and 2 posts to politics 4 days ago.)
If you want to take a dopamine precursor, take L-tyrosine, which the brain converts into L-DOPA. L-tyrosine is available in Vitamin Shoppes and General Nutrition stores [USA]. Taking L-DOPA directly is not recommended; it's a pharmaceutical used to treat Parkinson's disease, and not very well at that, as it has unfortunate side effects, such as hyperdopaminergia.
Using alcohol instead of water might work even better.
NO. The LSA is soluble in water NOT alcohol. It's THC which is soluble in alcohol. Am I the only person who researched this before I did it? Go read Richard Schultes.
And as long as we're on the subject, eliminating the black seed coat will *considerably* settle your stomach. Grind seeds, soak in cool water for an hour, pour off top 3/4s of liquid, repeat until liquid is *golden* amber (not dark brown). You might want to send the liquid through a coffee filter at some point to eliminate any fibrous material. Don't *drink* the water -- let it soak into the mucous membrane under your tongue.
Best if you can buy a lot of packages,..
NO. NEVER take seeds directly from commercial packets -- they're treated with methyl bromide, which is poisonous to humans (it's to keep birds from eating the seeds.) Grow your own -- morning glories are fecund. You'll never lack for seeds after the first year.
Don't expect a spectacular acidic trip. LSA doesn't fit as snugly into the serotonin receptors as LSD, since it lacks the 2 ethyl groups. Enjoy it for what it is: a pleasantly organic experience.
Most people are familiar with the Left/Right (AKA Liberal/Conservative) dimension of politics. More perceptive people are aware that people also analyze politics along a values spectrum that spans from 'economic values' to 'social values'. But few people consider that there is a *3rd* dimension to politics, which we might refer to as the centralism/decentralism continuum. Viewed from this perspective, the major parties occupy the 'centralized' end, and the minor parties occupy the 'decentralized' end of the continuum. This continuum refers to the locus of political power. In a certain sense, it is an artifact of the Cold War, when you had two highly centralized powers confronting each other. In America, of course, you had the two monolithic political parties of Democrats and Republicans. Later, you saw this reflected in the Big Threes of the Sixties: the Big Three media (CBS, NBC, ABC); the Big Three automakers (GM, Ford, Chrysler), and the Iron Triangle of governmental policy-making (legislators, lobbyists, agencies). However, in our own age, the rise of the Net has slowly been undermining these centralist organizing memes. As hierarchies flatten, decision-making moves from the center to the edges. This trend bodes badly for the past-oriented (two) major political parties and well for the future-oriented (many) minor political parties. You can expect to see a backward-facing conservative movement to protect centralism from both major parties, but that movement --- like most conservative movements -- is already doomed to failure. The trend away from centralist organizations will only accelerate. Eventually we will see, here in America, a true multi-party system, which, like most multiple-body systems, will only be meta-stable at best. This increased political landscape, however, will be good for democracy in general, as the market in political ideas will sort itself out via competition among the various groups. Centralism is now the walking dead of politics. Remember, you read it here first, on Slashdot, Election day, 2012.
Well, not in the usual sense of following an invisible man in the sky. However, they do have a strong civic religion based on the manufactured myth of the Dear Leader (who, now being dead, is sort of a 'invisible man in the sky'), so FAIL1.
That's how the tea party did it. They started showing up (albeit with corporate money in their pockets) for everything from the local school board to party precinct captains to committee members, and they ended up completely taking over the entire Republican Party and bending every elected Republican to their will. Just like that.
Funny, that's exactly the way the Moral Majority took over the Republican Party in the 1980s. How come the Republicans keep getting taken over by right-wingers every 30 years, yet the Democrats don't get taken over by the lefties, and keep creeping to the right?
I call shotgun on the app! Have it say not "Yeah..." but "Mmmm...." and "Huh." You are then not "agreeing" [to anything], but just "thinking" and "considering".
Another one would be to require the phone companies to have a 'declare spam' number. After receiving a spam call, you call that number and simply say "the last caller was a scammer".
Large fines to the telephone company that passed on the robocall.
This solution actually has scientific backing. Research has shown that third party punishment to reinforce social norms actually works. In fact, dishonesty invites costly third party punishment in the real world. The OP's solution will in fact put the onus on the telephone company to solve the problem -- at the source, where it *should* be solved -- as it will remove the incentive for *not* solving it. Hey AC, go ahead and submit this to the FCC -- it's ultimately the simplest and best solution!
Buyers can then either tweak them as they like or not, and either attempt to monetize them themselves or re-sell the apps to still another party.
I happened to catch the original showing. An entrepreneur was marketing an app he had acquired the rights to that sequestered calls from certain numbers. The original app was authored by "a policeman" who used it to get calls from informers. The new owner -- Neal Desai -- tried to get buy-in from the Sharks so he could market it as a "cheater's app". One of the Sharks said she was more interested in it as a privacy app. Neal ended up getting buy-in from two other investors for $200,000! Now there's a flip!
You don't get to patent arbitrary methods. Yes you do. Arbitrary: subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion. An 'arbitrary method physically instantiated' is commonly known as an "invention"; a time-limited monopoly on its control is called a "patent'.
Furthermore, OP is wrong, as well. An algorithm is an *arbitrary* expression of a *creative* method of solving a problem. Your choice of the *expression* of that method is what is arbitrary; it's only necessary that it be comprehensible to the patent examiner, so that he or she may then understand the originality of your method. It is the method which is original. That method *is* an invention and you *did* build it, out of singular mathematical primitives instantiated as specific constructs of physical information directives, also known as software codes. That is why algorithms should be patentable -- NOT merely copyrightable.
To make an analogy with copyright, let's put it like this: letters representing specific sounds are our common property. Arbitrary strings of those letters -- commonly known as words -- are generally considered the common property of all of us -- but not *necessarily*: thus the rise of trademarks (which *may*, like the now-common concept 'xerox' as a synonym for "copy" pass into the common language. Note/.'s notation at the bottom of this list: "Trademarks property of their respective owners."). Arbitrary conjunctions of those strings are considered copyrightable, and, since 1976 [in U.S. law, at least], are considered "instantly" copyrighted by their creator upon formation -- thus/.'s notation at the bottom of this list: "Comments owned by the poster". However, there is nothing to stop people from designating their personal "creative expression" as 'in the public domain': free for unlimited use by other humans, with neither reference nor payment to the original creator.
Now let's look at software patents: original methods which *do* things to information *utilizing* information in the form of software codes. Parent makes the salient point: Mathematics is the birthright of every human. I would state it as "mathematical operations are our common property". Operations *do* things: mapping one thing to another, or transforming one thing into another. Arbitrary strings of those operations -- commonly known as functions -- are generally considered the common property of all of us. (Example: the Newton-Raphson method to find the zeros of an arbitrary equation.) Functions *do* things, using information to operate on information. A "mathematical operation" can be represented as a single software code: say, 0x40 == "add" ; arbitrary combinations of *those* operations -- software functions -- *could be* considered the common property of all of us -- but not *necessarily*: consider the JPEG and MPEG algorithms (proprietary). [But see here for the furor surrounding patent issues about JPEG.] Arbitrary conjunctions of those functions *could* be considered eligible for software patenting, if their operations *do* "non-obvious things. (However, there is nothing to stop people from designating their personal "methodical expressions of operations" as 'in the public domain': free for unlimited use by other humans, with neither reference nor payment to the original creator (think *some forms of* 'open source software').)
The essential difference between copyrightable property and patentable property is that patents cover methods which *do* things; copyrights cover expressions which *say* things. Methods which merely attempt to cover the transformation of codes from one form to another (say, a patent which covers ASCII-to-UNICODE: too obvious) or are clearly invalidated by prior art (like JPEG eventually was) are not eligible for patent coverage. But what if someone applied for a patent which, as one of its methods, asserted the solution to an as-yet unproved mathe
The term was coined as a pun by Russian poet Nikolai Glazkov in the 1940s, who typed copies of his poems indicating Samsebyaizdat (, “Myself by Myself Publishers”) on the front page. Before glasnost, the practice was dangerous, because copy machines, printing presses, and even typewriters in offices were under control of the First Departments (KGB outposts): reference printouts for all of them were stored for identification purposes.
22. The system of claim 19, the actions of the analysis module further comprising: identifying a plurality of object names having the highest probabilities of having a visual representation within a first visual content item in the visual content repository; and revising a list of labels within metadata associated with the first visual content item, based at least in part on the identified plurality of object names.
Especially United States Patent 8250019 (System and method for interactive knowledge visualization) claim 9:
9. A method for interactive knowledge visualization, comprising: receiving, at a knowledge visualization server, a request for one or more visualizations; retrieving data associated with the one or more visualizations from one or more databases; converting the data associated with the one or more visualizations into visualization data,...
Slashdot Mirror
Which appears to be exactly what happened.
....Puerto Rico, and Democratic Presidents as far as the eye can see. We won't even have to change the flag.
...to hunger. Therefore, the old saw "fat, dumb and happy" should probably be: "happy, fat -- and dumb".
....at Wireless Ypsi, which is a successful community-based mesh network here in Ypsilanti, Michigan. It uses the Meraki network technology; here is Wireless Ypsi's page on the Meraki site.
And then they didn't say who they were ! (BTW, Obama actually posts as PresidentObama. He's been a redditor for 2 months and has 3837 link karma and 20,968 comment karma!!! 10 posts 2 months ago to IAmA and 2 posts to politics 4 days ago.)
If you want to take a dopamine precursor, take L-tyrosine, which the brain converts into L-DOPA. L-tyrosine is available in Vitamin Shoppes and General Nutrition stores [USA]. Taking L-DOPA directly is not recommended; it's a pharmaceutical used to treat Parkinson's disease, and not very well at that, as it has unfortunate side effects, such as hyperdopaminergia.
NO. The LSA is soluble in water NOT alcohol. It's THC which is soluble in alcohol. Am I the only person who researched this before I did it? Go read Richard Schultes.
And as long as we're on the subject, eliminating the black seed coat will *considerably* settle your stomach. Grind seeds, soak in cool water for an hour, pour off top 3/4s of liquid, repeat until liquid is *golden* amber (not dark brown). You might want to send the liquid through a coffee filter at some point to eliminate any fibrous material. Don't *drink* the water -- let it soak into the mucous membrane under your tongue.
Best if you can buy a lot of packages,..
NO. NEVER take seeds directly from commercial packets -- they're treated with methyl bromide, which is poisonous to humans (it's to keep birds from eating the seeds.) Grow your own -- morning glories are fecund. You'll never lack for seeds after the first year.
Don't expect a spectacular acidic trip. LSA doesn't fit as snugly into the serotonin receptors as LSD, since it lacks the 2 ethyl groups. Enjoy it for what it is: a pleasantly organic experience.
Most people are familiar with the Left/Right (AKA Liberal/Conservative) dimension of politics. More perceptive people are aware that people also analyze politics along a values spectrum that spans from 'economic values' to 'social values'. But few people consider that there is a *3rd* dimension to politics, which we might refer to as the centralism/decentralism continuum. Viewed from this perspective, the major parties occupy the 'centralized' end, and the minor parties occupy the 'decentralized' end of the continuum. This continuum refers to the locus of political power. In a certain sense, it is an artifact of the Cold War, when you had two highly centralized powers confronting each other. In America, of course, you had the two monolithic political parties of Democrats and Republicans. Later, you saw this reflected in the Big Threes of the Sixties: the Big Three media (CBS, NBC, ABC); the Big Three automakers (GM, Ford, Chrysler), and the Iron Triangle of governmental policy-making (legislators, lobbyists, agencies). However, in our own age, the rise of the Net has slowly been undermining these centralist organizing memes. As hierarchies flatten, decision-making moves from the center to the edges. This trend bodes badly for the past-oriented (two) major political parties and well for the future-oriented (many) minor political parties. You can expect to see a backward-facing conservative movement to protect centralism from both major parties, but that movement --- like most conservative movements -- is already doomed to failure. The trend away from centralist organizations will only accelerate. Eventually we will see, here in America, a true multi-party system, which, like most multiple-body systems, will only be meta-stable at best. This increased political landscape, however, will be good for democracy in general, as the market in political ideas will sort itself out via competition among the various groups. Centralism is now the walking dead of politics. Remember, you read it here first, on Slashdot, Election day, 2012.
Well, not in the usual sense of following an invisible man in the sky. However, they do have a strong civic religion based on the manufactured myth of the Dear Leader (who, now being dead, is sort of a 'invisible man in the sky'), so FAIL1.
and doesn't support terrorist organizations.
Considering its endless hysterical posturing toward South Korea which has been ongoing for 50 years, along with various strange little attacks over the past 5 decades, I'd say that North Korea *is* a terrorist organization (albeit a rather pitiful and impotent one), so FAIL2.
Any other half-ass propaganda you'd care to pass along, Mr. Anonymous Coward?
The usefulness of AOL with the paywalling of WSJ. Gee ... thanks.
Funny, that's exactly the way the Moral Majority took over the Republican Party in the 1980s. How come the Republicans keep getting taken over by right-wingers every 30 years, yet the Democrats don't get taken over by the lefties, and keep creeping to the right?
I call shotgun on the app! Have it say not "Yeah..." but "Mmmm...." and "Huh." You are then not "agreeing" [to anything], but just "thinking" and "considering".
You just reinvented the crowd-wisdom blacklist.
This solution actually has scientific backing. Research has shown that third party punishment to reinforce social norms actually works. In fact, dishonesty invites costly third party punishment in the real world. The OP's solution will in fact put the onus on the telephone company to solve the problem -- at the source, where it *should* be solved -- as it will remove the incentive for *not* solving it. Hey AC, go ahead and submit this to the FCC -- it's ultimately the simplest and best solution!
I'd rather have the picture. When I look at you I just see a narcissist.
I happened to catch the original showing. An entrepreneur was marketing an app he had acquired the rights to that sequestered calls from certain numbers. The original app was authored by "a policeman" who used it to get calls from informers. The new owner -- Neal Desai -- tried to get buy-in from the Sharks so he could market it as a "cheater's app". One of the Sharks said she was more interested in it as a privacy app. Neal ended up getting buy-in from two other investors for $200,000! Now there's a flip!
Oh yeah -- I was employed....
s/advertising/newspeakanalysis/
Does anyone else see some kind of irony here? W. T. Policy F.???
--Talking Heads, "Dream Operator", True Stories, [Sire Records 25512-2, 1986]
And what is more random than free will?
Best. Band. Name. Ever.
Furthermore, OP is wrong, as well. An algorithm is an *arbitrary* expression of a *creative* method of solving a problem. Your choice of the *expression* of that method is what is arbitrary; it's only necessary that it be comprehensible to the patent examiner, so that he or she may then understand the originality of your method. It is the method which is original. That method *is* an invention and you *did* build it, out of singular mathematical primitives instantiated as specific constructs of physical information directives, also known as software codes. That is why algorithms should be patentable -- NOT merely copyrightable.
To make an analogy with copyright, let's put it like this: letters representing specific sounds are our common property. Arbitrary strings of those letters -- commonly known as words -- are generally considered the common property of all of us -- but not *necessarily*: thus the rise of trademarks (which *may*, like the now-common concept 'xerox' as a synonym for "copy" pass into the common language. Note /.'s notation at the bottom of this list: "Trademarks property of their respective owners."). Arbitrary conjunctions of those strings are considered copyrightable, and, since 1976 [in U.S. law, at least], are considered "instantly" copyrighted by their creator upon formation -- thus /.'s notation at the bottom of this list: "Comments owned by the poster". However, there is nothing to stop people from designating their personal "creative expression" as 'in the public domain': free for unlimited use by other humans, with neither reference nor payment to the original creator.
Now let's look at software patents: original methods which *do* things to information *utilizing* information in the form of software codes. Parent makes the salient point: Mathematics is the birthright of every human. I would state it as "mathematical operations are our common property". Operations *do* things: mapping one thing to another, or transforming one thing into another. Arbitrary strings of those operations -- commonly known as functions -- are generally considered the common property of all of us. (Example: the Newton-Raphson method to find the zeros of an arbitrary equation.) Functions *do* things, using information to operate on information. A "mathematical operation" can be represented as a single software code: say, 0x40 == "add" ; arbitrary combinations of *those* operations -- software functions -- *could be* considered the common property of all of us -- but not *necessarily*: consider the JPEG and MPEG algorithms (proprietary). [But see here for the furor surrounding patent issues about JPEG.] Arbitrary conjunctions of those functions *could* be considered eligible for software patenting, if their operations *do* "non-obvious things. (However, there is nothing to stop people from designating their personal "methodical expressions of operations" as 'in the public domain': free for unlimited use by other humans, with neither reference nor payment to the original creator (think *some forms of* 'open source software').)
The essential difference between copyrightable property and patentable property is that patents cover methods which *do* things; copyrights cover expressions which *say* things. Methods which merely attempt to cover the transformation of codes from one form to another (say, a patent which covers ASCII-to-UNICODE: too obvious) or are clearly invalidated by prior art (like JPEG eventually was) are not eligible for patent coverage. But what if someone applied for a patent which, as one of its methods, asserted the solution to an as-yet unproved mathe
Perhaps here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samizdat.
The term was coined as a pun by Russian poet Nikolai Glazkov in the 1940s, who typed copies of his poems indicating Samsebyaizdat (, “Myself by Myself Publishers”) on the front page. Before glasnost, the practice was dangerous, because copy machines, printing presses, and even typewriters in offices were under control of the First Departments (KGB outposts): reference printouts for all of them were stored for identification purposes.
Especially United States Patent 8250019 (System and method for interactive knowledge visualization) claim 9:
9. A method for interactive knowledge visualization, comprising: receiving, at a knowledge visualization server, a request for one or more visualizations; retrieving data associated with the one or more visualizations from one or more databases; converting the data associated with the one or more visualizations into visualization data,...