This, and most similar issues, can be solved with proper legal incentives. For example, a mandatory payment when someone dies which is higher than the cost of caring for a lifetime cripple.
I repeat my question: what is the impact on humans, besides fewer fish to eat (which has already happened, by the way, due to overfishing)? And I repeat my assertion that the potential impacts of global warming are much more significant.
CO2 causes acidification of the oceans, which is a much bigger problem than the greenhouse effect
How exactly is this true? The greenhouse effect can lead to mass flooding in coastal areas, stronger hurricanes, increased tropical diseases, and reduced harvests of staple crops around the world. Ocean acidification can lead to... what, smaller fish catches at sea? Which can be made up for by increasing fish farming?
Well, the entire article is based off of verbatim quotes from "Aviad Dadon of Israeli cyber-security firm AdoreGroup", transcribed and translated from an interview on Israel Radio. It's not at all clear where Dadon gets his information. So, if you trust him, the article is reliable. If not, then no. The article may be correct, but it isn't exactly serious investigative journalism.
Absolute true, which is why the open source computer algebra project Maxima has a disastrous name. If you want to find out how to calculate something in it (which is often necessary because the documentation is bad), you can't just search for "maxima", you'll get a million unrelated things.
How do you distinguish a "terror tunnel" from the many tunnels used to smuggle food, clothing, potable water, and basic construction materials?
A smuggling tunnel connects one Palestinian area with another Palestinian area. A terror tunnel connects a Palestinian area with an Israeli civilian population center.
Did anyone actually expect to read a single interesting comment on this article? As opposed to hundreds of angry people pushing either one political view or the other?
Consequentialist logic can lead to very non-consequentialist-like conclusions in practice. For example, one might suggest that lying is unethical in most situations (due to the consequences) and ethical in a few situations. While in theory one could choose to lie or not based on the situation, it may be unrealistic for a person of average human psychology to consistently make that choice correctly. If so, then an ethical person would do well to cultivate a visceral aversion to lying, which will lead them to behave ethically most of the time while perhaps missing a few personal opportunities. Such a person would be unwilling (emotionally speaking) to lie even about a silly die roll in an experiment.
Maybe the connection goes in the opposite direction - societies where crime is more accepted turn out to be less successful, and less rich, in the long run.
You could take a bus to the grocery store and send your 12 bags home in a cargo vehicle while you take a bus back, or a 1-person car, etc.
For that matter, why go to the grocery store at all? You could order everything online and have it delivered via an unmanned vehicle. Groceries, electronics, pizzas, home repair supplies - all of these market sectors would be dramatically altered. You could buy individual items online - shipping would be much cheaper since the "last mile" is unmanned. You could set up a recurring weekly or monthly grocery order, eliminating the time spent on grocery shopping trips. And pizza deliveries would become much cheaper and somewhat faster, since the dominant cost of the deliverer would be removed. Clothing stores would probably still exist, so that people can try clothes on. And restaurants would definitely remain. But a high percentage of our retail stores could be eliminated, saving us countless time spent on errands, and opening up lots of land to redevelopment.
I don't know why Israel would try to exaggerate the success of Iron Dome. I think that the opposite is true - the less successful the system is, the more sympathy people will have for Israelis under bombardment.
that nothing can be kept secret anymore? Whatever you want not to be exposed, whether diplomatic communications or technical documents or "intellectual property", will eventually reach the internet either by whistle-blowing or human error? And once it reaches the internet, if anyone cares about it then it will be perpetuated forever?
There are advantages to such a situation, of course, but also disadvantages.
Interesting story: I once took a plug-in alarm clock to Europe. My first day there, I used it with a plug adapter. I overslept the next morning, and soon realized that the clock was running slow by several hours per day! Apparently its entire timing mechanism was based on the 60Hz of the grid, and where I was the frequency was 50Hz, so the clock ran slow by exactly that proportion.
Slashdot Mirror
I think we need a new version of Godwin's Law which refers to ISIS (or the Taliban) in addition to Hitler.
This, and most similar issues, can be solved with proper legal incentives. For example, a mandatory payment when someone dies which is higher than the cost of caring for a lifetime cripple.
That wouldn't work either, because you forgot to set the evil bit.
FTFY
He's probably lying, but this argument is weak due to the existence of black swan events.
Do you think the DL's wikipedia page is accessible in China?
Why not contact lenses?
Interesting. Source?
I repeat my question: what is the impact on humans, besides fewer fish to eat (which has already happened, by the way, due to overfishing)? And I repeat my assertion that the potential impacts of global warming are much more significant.
How exactly is this true? The greenhouse effect can lead to mass flooding in coastal areas, stronger hurricanes, increased tropical diseases, and reduced harvests of staple crops around the world. Ocean acidification can lead to... what, smaller fish catches at sea? Which can be made up for by increasing fish farming?
Exactly what mental help do you provide to someone whose sexual orientation is towards kids rather than adults?
I'm surprised.
Great to wear if you want to mugged by a passing thug.
Well, the entire article is based off of verbatim quotes from "Aviad Dadon of Israeli cyber-security firm AdoreGroup", transcribed and translated from an interview on Israel Radio. It's not at all clear where Dadon gets his information. So, if you trust him, the article is reliable. If not, then no. The article may be correct, but it isn't exactly serious investigative journalism.
Absolute true, which is why the open source computer algebra project Maxima has a disastrous name. If you want to find out how to calculate something in it (which is often necessary because the documentation is bad), you can't just search for "maxima", you'll get a million unrelated things.
A smuggling tunnel connects one Palestinian area with another Palestinian area. A terror tunnel connects a Palestinian area with an Israeli civilian population center.
Did anyone actually expect to read a single interesting comment on this article?
As opposed to hundreds of angry people pushing either one political view or the other?
Consequentialist logic can lead to very non-consequentialist-like conclusions in practice. For example, one might suggest that lying is unethical in most situations (due to the consequences) and ethical in a few situations. While in theory one could choose to lie or not based on the situation, it may be unrealistic for a person of average human psychology to consistently make that choice correctly. If so, then an ethical person would do well to cultivate a visceral aversion to lying, which will lead them to behave ethically most of the time while perhaps missing a few personal opportunities. Such a person would be unwilling (emotionally speaking) to lie even about a silly die roll in an experiment.
Maybe the connection goes in the opposite direction - societies where crime is more accepted turn out to be less successful, and less rich, in the long run.
That's why TV shows have laugh tracks.
Oh yeah, and slashdot comments are definitely funnier when they have been modded to +5 Funny.
For that matter, why go to the grocery store at all? You could order everything online and have it delivered via an unmanned vehicle. Groceries, electronics, pizzas, home repair supplies - all of these market sectors would be dramatically altered. You could buy individual items online - shipping would be much cheaper since the "last mile" is unmanned. You could set up a recurring weekly or monthly grocery order, eliminating the time spent on grocery shopping trips. And pizza deliveries would become much cheaper and somewhat faster, since the dominant cost of the deliverer would be removed. Clothing stores would probably still exist, so that people can try clothes on. And restaurants would definitely remain. But a high percentage of our retail stores could be eliminated, saving us countless time spent on errands, and opening up lots of land to redevelopment.
I think her soul is made out of this material.
I don't know why Israel would try to exaggerate the success of Iron Dome. I think that the opposite is true - the less successful the system is, the more sympathy people will have for Israelis under bombardment.
that nothing can be kept secret anymore? Whatever you want not to be exposed, whether diplomatic communications or technical documents or "intellectual property", will eventually reach the internet either by whistle-blowing or human error? And once it reaches the internet, if anyone cares about it then it will be perpetuated forever?
There are advantages to such a situation, of course, but also disadvantages.
Interesting story: I once took a plug-in alarm clock to Europe. My first day there, I used it with a plug adapter. I overslept the next morning, and soon realized that the clock was running slow by several hours per day! Apparently its entire timing mechanism was based on the 60Hz of the grid, and where I was the frequency was 50Hz, so the clock ran slow by exactly that proportion.