I don't get that, why would the death rate soar? I would think that the opposite would be true; as people got more exercise, and hence healthier and slimmer, the decline in the hundreds of obsity-related health problems (but mainly e.g. Diabetes and heart disease) would lead to longer lives. Regular exercise also helps with depression (physically and psychologically confidence) so expect fewer suicides, while economically peoples productivity would increase. People would also have happier healthier sex lives as they would be more fit and more physically attractive (so maybe even expect more babies;), plus cycling is more social than driving... any increase in accidents would be short-lived as people adjust to more bicycles about, as in other countries.
I agree, and I hate tailgating too. But what you said you did, breaking suddenly and causing a crash, is extremely irresponsible, dangerous, and downright crazy. I hope you don't drive near me or anyone I love.
What I said I did? I hope you pay more attention to detail when driving than when following a/. thread and making hostile accusations at strangers. Have a second look.
Triple A advises that if someone closely tailgates you, you should slow down *very gradually* until the tailgater backs off.
Funnily enough, that IS what I virtually always do. And it virtually never helps - the tailgaters follow more closely.
The one doing the tailgating is the one endangering lives. Tailgating is not just obnoxious, it kills people. What do you propose when someone is, effectively, purposely endangering your life?
No, as Dachannien has said, the dictionary entry can't 'evidence' anything, because you don't look up laws in the dictionary at all if you're talking about a crime. Whatever the dictionary says is irrelevant to the courts. Different countries and different states have slightly differing definitions of 'rape', but none of them appear in dictionaries. The dictionary entry is just a broad generalisation for the public.
Honestly, I think even raising the question in this way (i.e. calling it rape) trivialises what actual rape is to its victims to an almost offensive extent. Probably if we had a clue what actual rape is like, we wouldn't even be having this discussion; by entertaining this "debate" as if it were a genuine debate, we're legitimising it - as if it's somehow a valid question to draw equivalence between pixels on your computer screen while you're safe in your home playing a computer game to an actual life-threatening rape/assault (all rapes are physical assaults too, except when drugs are involved) where you're physically constrained, beaten and violated. Perhaps there is something else morally wrong with this so-called "virtual rape" that is worth debating on another level, but I'd be inclined to use a different term.
I guess your insight and clear superiority to Jobs in terms of business skills must be why Apple is collapsing into the ground as a company, while you're posting to Slashdot from your successful multibillion dollar company headquarters. Honestly, I've never heard such nonsense. Revel in your +5 interesting while Steve enjoys the most profitable quarter to date in a company whose support rates amongst the industry's best. Must be something "terribly wrong" there.
Simple counter-example: Say I live in a country where people may well be murdered for having views contrary to (or critical of) the ruling regime and want to set up a protest website. In such a case (which, it so happens, is not only a genuine thing to want to do in many countries, but commonplace) you specifically need privacy, and that's a good thing. You think I should be forced to put my details on there and have it easy to find out who is behind the site?
- Southern and particularly South Africa are HOT, very hot, and it's sunny almost every day of the year. Summer is baking hot for months. Rudimentary research would've turned that up.
- The black people of South Africa are here as a result of a relatively recent massive migration of the Bantu peoples from around the Cameroon area that spread first East and then South. In South Africa they have been here probably not more than 1500 years.
- The indigenous people of South Africa that have been here for a long time (10,000+ years), e.g. the Khoesan, DO in fact have lighter complexions than the Bantu peoples that came from the equatorial regions.
- Even the 'black' people of South Africa ARE in fact lighter than their self-same relatives from up North - in fact generally speaking the closer you get to the equator, the darker the black people get. (That itself appears to be another strong argument for the Vitamin D correlation, although it's not that cut and dry because some, or perhaps much, of the lightening of the blacks in South Africa is due to generations of interbreeding with e.g. Khoesan peoples.)
> In reality I'm sure the pentagon spent tens of billions on the net
I very much doubt it comes even remotely close to this, but unless we can get actual figures then this debate will just be either of us making claims we can't back up with numbers.
You can't just look at the cost of undersea links, I'm sure that tens if not hundreds of billions have been invested by local companies and individuals etc. all over the world in terrestrial Internet infrastructure.
BTW the use of undersea fiber as an example is interesting in that the UK developed fiber optics. By your arguments, this was a "free handout" to the United States.
IIRC people usually bring up, semi-tongue-in-cheeck, that the time taken for light to travel even to the nearest planet exceeds the round-trip time of TCP/IP... assuming light is the fastest thing, which it is according to our current understanding of physics. But RTT isn't actually used for time, and I'm not sure what they've done with this in IPv6. But either way you'd probably get timeouts trying to connect to any site on another planet, it wouldn't be practical (IIRC for example the RTT of communication with with Mars would be about 10 or 20 minutes). With a modified protocol and/or software you could probably transmit non-time-sensitive stuff, but it wouldn't really be the Internet as we know it.
> Since they didn't they should be happy with what they have been given for free.
Please stop spreading this ignorance, which I hear over and over. The "third world" wasn't "given" anything - every country has paid fully for its own bit of the network, its own infrastructure, and pays fully for its own international connectivity. They even pay for the IPs. (In fact, third-world countries pay hugely disproportionately more for international traffic routed through the US, but that's another issue.) The R&D costs for the underlying technologies have been miniscule compared to the actual infrastructure development and maintenance costs. China and India and every other country weren't "given" the Internet, they worked hard to make enough money via trade/enterprise to pay for and build it themselves.
You don't think there's any economic benefit to helping blind (and other disabled) people participate productively in the economy? Do you think it's cheaper for taxpayers to have them all be totally dependent and helpless? Or what do you suggest? You look and you only see costs. It's not as black and white as you suggest.
It's not a problem for open source; if you've released code as open source that means it's been published, and no patent application filed on a later date could be granted covering any supposed invention in that code.
My problem is that this places even more burden on the market to 'argue it out' as to whether or not a patent application is valid, which is a problem because in practice it means the guys with lots of money (the big corporates) will basically always get to keep the patents, because how many "Joe OpenSourceDevelopers" can afford patent litigation to challenge a patent? I know this is already a problem, but this "reform" makes the problem even worse, because it takes the whole existing "let anything be patented by the USPTO and let the market argue it out" a step further.
What kind of libertarian sites advocate drug use? Libertarians advocate the freedom of personal choice to use drugs, not the use of drugs itself. Or do you mean that it was restricted because they *thought* it advocated drug use?
It was probably the only reason we got these writings in our hand.
That doesn't make it a good thing to scrub off important science and overwrite it with religious texts nor does it redeem what happened --- it only makes it accidentally good in this particular case.
Microsoft aren't dumb, they've been dealing with this sort of problem for ages. It's not too difficult though... most new machines will come with Vista by default. Thus pretty soon companies will be running mixed environments. So all Microsoft has to do is introduce "annoying incompatibilities" between XP and Vista (e.g. things like perhaps network delays to access XP machines over the network, or odd error messages that pop up ("Unknown is not accessible" etc.)), to "encourage" (i.e. bulldoze) users to eventually just upgrade as much as possible. They've been doing this sort of thing for years, works like a bomb.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get that, why would the death rate soar? I would think that the opposite would be true; as people got more exercise, and hence healthier and slimmer, the decline in the hundreds of obsity-related health problems (but mainly e.g. Diabetes and heart disease) would lead to longer lives. Regular exercise also helps with depression (physically and psychologically confidence) so expect fewer suicides, while economically peoples productivity would increase. People would also have happier healthier sex lives as they would be more fit and more physically attractive (so maybe even expect more babies ;), plus cycling is more social than driving ... any increase in accidents would be short-lived as people adjust to more bicycles about, as in other countries.
I agree, and I hate tailgating too. But what you said you did, breaking suddenly and causing a crash, is extremely irresponsible, dangerous, and downright crazy. I hope you don't drive near me or anyone I love.
What I said I did? I hope you pay more attention to detail when driving than when following a /. thread and making hostile accusations at strangers. Have a second look.
Triple A advises that if someone closely tailgates you, you should slow down *very gradually* until the tailgater backs off.
Funnily enough, that IS what I virtually always do. And it virtually never helps - the tailgaters follow more closely.
The one doing the tailgating is the one endangering lives. Tailgating is not just obnoxious, it kills people. What do you propose when someone is, effectively, purposely endangering your life?
No, as Dachannien has said, the dictionary entry can't 'evidence' anything, because you don't look up laws in the dictionary at all if you're talking about a crime. Whatever the dictionary says is irrelevant to the courts. Different countries and different states have slightly differing definitions of 'rape', but none of them appear in dictionaries. The dictionary entry is just a broad generalisation for the public.
It is untrue if you are specifically talking about the CRIME of rape, which is the context of this entire discussion.
Honestly, I think even raising the question in this way (i.e. calling it rape) trivialises what actual rape is to its victims to an almost offensive extent. Probably if we had a clue what actual rape is like, we wouldn't even be having this discussion; by entertaining this "debate" as if it were a genuine debate, we're legitimising it - as if it's somehow a valid question to draw equivalence between pixels on your computer screen while you're safe in your home playing a computer game to an actual life-threatening rape/assault (all rapes are physical assaults too, except when drugs are involved) where you're physically constrained, beaten and violated. Perhaps there is something else morally wrong with this so-called "virtual rape" that is worth debating on another level, but I'd be inclined to use a different term.
I guess your insight and clear superiority to Jobs in terms of business skills must be why Apple is collapsing into the ground as a company, while you're posting to Slashdot from your successful multibillion dollar company headquarters. Honestly, I've never heard such nonsense. Revel in your +5 interesting while Steve enjoys the most profitable quarter to date in a company whose support rates amongst the industry's best. Must be something "terribly wrong" there.
You think anyone would sensibly register a protest site IN their own country? That's madness, and an obvious straw-man.
This isn't a hypothetical example, btw, this is a problem someone I know right now is facing.
Simple counter-example: Say I live in a country where people may well be murdered for having views contrary to (or critical of) the ruling regime and want to set up a protest website. In such a case (which, it so happens, is not only a genuine thing to want to do in many countries, but commonplace) you specifically need privacy, and that's a good thing. You think I should be forced to put my details on there and have it easy to find out who is behind the site?
Google for 'Bantu migration' and you'll see why.
Several counter-points:
- Southern and particularly South Africa are HOT, very hot, and it's sunny almost every day of the year. Summer is baking hot for months. Rudimentary research would've turned that up.
- The black people of South Africa are here as a result of a relatively recent massive migration of the Bantu peoples from around the Cameroon area that spread first East and then South. In South Africa they have been here probably not more than 1500 years.
- The indigenous people of South Africa that have been here for a long time (10,000+ years), e.g. the Khoesan, DO in fact have lighter complexions than the Bantu peoples that came from the equatorial regions.
- Even the 'black' people of South Africa ARE in fact lighter than their self-same relatives from up North - in fact generally speaking the closer you get to the equator, the darker the black people get. (That itself appears to be another strong argument for the Vitamin D correlation, although it's not that cut and dry because some, or perhaps much, of the lightening of the blacks in South Africa is due to generations of interbreeding with e.g. Khoesan peoples.)
> In reality I'm sure the pentagon spent tens of billions on the net
I very much doubt it comes even remotely close to this, but unless we can get actual figures then this debate will just be either of us making claims we can't back up with numbers.
You can't just look at the cost of undersea links, I'm sure that tens if not hundreds of billions have been invested by local companies and individuals etc. all over the world in terrestrial Internet infrastructure.
BTW the use of undersea fiber as an example is interesting in that the UK developed fiber optics. By your arguments, this was a "free handout" to the United States.
IIRC people usually bring up, semi-tongue-in-cheeck, that the time taken for light to travel even to the nearest planet exceeds the round-trip time of TCP/IP ... assuming light is the fastest thing, which it is according to our current understanding of physics. But RTT isn't actually used for time, and I'm not sure what they've done with this in IPv6. But either way you'd probably get timeouts trying to connect to any site on another planet, it wouldn't be practical (IIRC for example the RTT of communication with with Mars would be about 10 or 20 minutes). With a modified protocol and/or software you could probably transmit non-time-sensitive stuff, but it wouldn't really be the Internet as we know it.
> Since they didn't they should be happy with what they have been given for free.
Please stop spreading this ignorance, which I hear over and over. The "third world" wasn't "given" anything - every country has paid fully for its own bit of the network, its own infrastructure, and pays fully for its own international connectivity. They even pay for the IPs. (In fact, third-world countries pay hugely disproportionately more for international traffic routed through the US, but that's another issue.) The R&D costs for the underlying technologies have been miniscule compared to the actual infrastructure development and maintenance costs. China and India and every other country weren't "given" the Internet, they worked hard to make enough money via trade/enterprise to pay for and build it themselves.
Which essentially boils down to nationalisation of business and government control of commerce ... doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I can't imagine having underwear full of coins is helpful when dancing
'Insert coin in slot' ... ;)
You don't think there's any economic benefit to helping blind (and other disabled) people participate productively in the economy? Do you think it's cheaper for taxpayers to have them all be totally dependent and helpless? Or what do you suggest? You look and you only see costs. It's not as black and white as you suggest.
It's not a problem for open source; if you've released code as open source that means it's been published, and no patent application filed on a later date could be granted covering any supposed invention in that code.
My problem is that this places even more burden on the market to 'argue it out' as to whether or not a patent application is valid, which is a problem because in practice it means the guys with lots of money (the big corporates) will basically always get to keep the patents, because how many "Joe OpenSourceDevelopers" can afford patent litigation to challenge a patent? I know this is already a problem, but this "reform" makes the problem even worse, because it takes the whole existing "let anything be patented by the USPTO and let the market argue it out" a step further.
This kind of thing happens every single country in the world, just in different degrees.
What kind of libertarian sites advocate drug use? Libertarians advocate the freedom of personal choice to use drugs, not the use of drugs itself. Or do you mean that it was restricted because they *thought* it advocated drug use?
Or, alternately, in the medium term, for advertising. An electronic billboard could 'adapt' itself to viewers.
Looking ahead, I think this kind of technology would have more interesting applications in robotics.
As for whether or not it's art, there is some truth to the claim that art is in the eye of the beholder.
It was probably the only reason we got these writings in our hand.
That doesn't make it a good thing to scrub off important science and overwrite it with religious texts nor does it redeem what happened --- it only makes it accidentally good in this particular case.
Microsoft aren't dumb, they've been dealing with this sort of problem for ages. It's not too difficult though ... most new machines will come with Vista by default. Thus pretty soon companies will be running mixed environments. So all Microsoft has to do is introduce "annoying incompatibilities" between XP and Vista (e.g. things like perhaps network delays to access XP machines over the network, or odd error messages that pop up ("Unknown is not accessible" etc.)), to "encourage" (i.e. bulldoze) users to eventually just upgrade as much as possible. They've been doing this sort of thing for years, works like a bomb.
otherwise my XP machines need to be rebooted once every couple months
So you don't patch?