You mean the guy whose only verification is a bunch of people that know him and "totally believe that dude is like... 145 years old"?
Lots of places have anecdotal reports of really long lifetimes, always dating from before accurate records. Hiking in Yorkshire a couple of years ago, I came across a town whose major point of pride is a claim that one man lived to be 169. But that was way before printed records.
Instead of the usual "How do you live with yourself," I want to know more about the environment and culture on your world.
How do you deal with the incredible heat, the pure hydrogen sulfide atmosphere and the constant pitchfork jabs from the native capriform humanoids? Is it true that the Internet provider is Comcast, and what's the broadband speed like? When you visit our world, do they make you fly Spirit?
"There is nothing fucking cool about Giant Corp. "offering" you around 1.000 eBooks in order to vendor-lock you in. "
I buy all my books in Kindle form now (readability everywhere, zero weight, being able to have all the reading I want available at all times) anyway, so this is a pure win for me. And what exactly is "vendor locked in" about having free access to all the Project Gutenberg content, as well as everything new and almost everything in between? And besides, because I run the Kindle app on an iPad, I also have available all the iBook content and all the open-source Epub content, just by running different apps.
All commercial aircraft should have a strengthened, heat-sinked, airtight metal pouch that can be used to snuff out burning mobile devices when lithium batteries go rogue.
I keep hearing the argument that environments elsewhere in the solar system are so much less survivable than even the harshest terrestrial environment that we might as well give up before we get started.
But I think of man and his machines to be one system, not some false duality. We have already established that space is a lot more machine-friendly than we once thought it to be, with our most distant probes nudging into the heliopause. As the "gold mines" and "railroads" of the outer solar system are developed, robots will work in place of Leland Stanford's army of Chinese laborers, serving humans who will come along only when habitable places have been made ready for them.
"We need to find a way off this rock, if only for reasons of hope that we have some way of existing once (not if) we completely fuck up this planet."
To me the primary reason for Getting Off This Rock is not because I believe in any apocalyptic bunk about the Earth being doomed, but to see what science and technology can accomplish once its practitioners can get away from people who believe the Earth is doomed.
Let the Greens inherit the Earth. The rest of us have bigger plans.
I was looking for this. Boeing, Lockheed, others exist for the soul purpose of "creating jobs".
One way of creating jobs would be to fix autocorrect by bringing in enough AI to give it an understanding of semantic context. It would be a logical extension of digital assistant tech.
"Meanwhile the permanently unemployed poor stay on the surface and rot."
In a socially mobile country anyone can be made poor by temporary circumstances. But those permanently unemployed poor of yours are the people who lack the vision it takes to improve themselves. Perhaps it's being dedicated to an obsolete industry, perhaps it's BLM-style racial hatred, or perhaps it's falling into the black hole of addiction.
Given any problem, Greens only support solutions that don't exist yet. As soon as we started building the windfields and solar farms they told us they wanted, objections began to appear.
Example: Currently, we hear Green support for vat-grown meat as a resource-efficient and cruelty-free substitute for range cattle. You know and I know that the moment vat meat goes on the market, it will be condemned as "nutritional plastic."
Assange will announce his first hardware product, the JulianFone. It will be designed to hack into all WiFi nodes within range, suck data from them and display a continuous scroll of surrounding secrets for your viewing pleasure.
I didn't want to waste bandwidth by repeating my original proposal on FDA reform, but if you insist: the FDA would lose all powers to keep compounds and devices off the market. In return, every product submitted for FDA would bear a label indicating FDA Approved, FDA Rejected, or FDA In Testing. Each label would bear a QR code leading to online detail about the status of the product, including detail about rejection or the current in-test status. It would continue to be an offense to misrepresent the status of a product, and absence of a label would indicate a product not submitted to the FDA at all.
I would expect that malpractice liability being what it is, most MDs and insurance carriers would insist on prescribing of FDA Approved products in ordinary cases. But if prescriptions can be written for compounds approved by the perfectly good testing authorities in Europe and Asia - if you really are in the business you must be aware of my wife's hometown, Basel, being the center of the world in advanced pharma development - then we will see a lot less gratuitous foot-dragging by the FDA.
Were my reform would really prove its worth would be in situations of obvious corruption like the Epi-Pen trainwreck, the Colcrys debacle and the Daraprim dumpster fire. In cases like this allowing doctors to prescribe from the world market is not theoretical libertarian posturing, but a moral imperative.
If we keep on giving the FDA veto power over what products can come to market, then your brand of socialized price control is inevitable. How will patients feel about the rationing that always goes with such schemes? I would rather go in the opposite direction instead, stripping the FDA of its power to keep products off the market so that fully informed doctors and patients can decide for themselves how much risk to take.
Sanofi's Auvi-Q injector was pulled because of 26 specific instances of dosage error out of all the patients that used the device. Since no injector can deliver more epinephrine than it contains, might you be willing to assume a small degree of dosage uniformity risk as the cost of a competitive market?
A specialist MD develops an instinct for gleaning needed information from test data summarized as it has to be for the kind of testing the FDA organizes. On occasion he might make use of a side effect that might be useful for some small subset of patients, which may in time mature into an "off-label usage" that becomes generally known in medicine.
Ability to prescribe any tested product, whether or not approved, would help push innovation in the long run. Some states already have "right to try" legislation allowing terminal patients to be prescribed any compound which has passed Phase I toxicity testing. Bootlickers hate Right To Try, but all I'm proposing is an extension of the increasingly popular concept to any informed patient.
So long as FDA testing proves to be a good assurance of quality product, its reputation as a gold standard will retain value, so that products labeled "FDA Approved" will be worth, on the average, more than products that doctors grab from the middle of the testing process under my scheme. If they do not, then our testing protocols need a lot more work.
How does the energy input and thrust produced compare to NASA's current operational ion engine, which has been in use on the Dawn mission for the last ten years?
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing too. Can you imagine how bad tempered and cantankerous they'd be if they lived to be 200 years old.
What would the Early Bird Senior Special be like with such people?
You mean the guy whose only verification is a bunch of people that know him and "totally believe that dude is like... 145 years old"?
Lots of places have anecdotal reports of really long lifetimes, always dating from before accurate records. Hiking in Yorkshire a couple of years ago, I came across a town whose major point of pride is a claim that one man lived to be 169. But that was way before printed records.
"Correlation is not causation. "
But the correlation between ignoring cancer as it riddles your body and an early death certainly is.
But on the other hand, would SJ have let the Mac Pro languish for so many years in a row?
"...then the traditional taxi services."
Only when Google comes up with a version that speaks Urdu finds the special long way to get to each destination.
Instead of the usual "How do you live with yourself," I want to know more about the environment and culture on your world.
How do you deal with the incredible heat, the pure hydrogen sulfide atmosphere and the constant pitchfork jabs from the native capriform humanoids? Is it true that the Internet provider is Comcast, and what's the broadband speed like? When you visit our world, do they make you fly Spirit?
"There is nothing fucking cool about Giant Corp. "offering" you around 1.000 eBooks in order to vendor-lock you in. "
I buy all my books in Kindle form now (readability everywhere, zero weight, being able to have all the reading I want available at all times) anyway, so this is a pure win for me. And what exactly is "vendor locked in" about having free access to all the Project Gutenberg content, as well as everything new and almost everything in between? And besides, because I run the Kindle app on an iPad, I also have available all the iBook content and all the open-source Epub content, just by running different apps.
THIS is what I call news for nerds.
All commercial aircraft should have a strengthened, heat-sinked, airtight metal pouch that can be used to snuff out burning mobile devices when lithium batteries go rogue.
I keep hearing the argument that environments elsewhere in the solar system are so much less survivable than even the harshest terrestrial environment that we might as well give up before we get started.
But I think of man and his machines to be one system, not some false duality. We have already established that space is a lot more machine-friendly than we once thought it to be, with our most distant probes nudging into the heliopause. As the "gold mines" and "railroads" of the outer solar system are developed, robots will work in place of Leland Stanford's army of Chinese laborers, serving humans who will come along only when habitable places have been made ready for them.
"The poster 11010101011 seems to be strangely absent from this thread."
Probably just posting AC again. Why do certain people have such a fear of having an observable posting history?
"We need to find a way off this rock, if only for reasons of hope that we have some way of existing once (not if) we completely fuck up this planet."
To me the primary reason for Getting Off This Rock is not because I believe in any apocalyptic bunk about the Earth being doomed, but to see what science and technology can accomplish once its practitioners can get away from people who believe the Earth is doomed.
Let the Greens inherit the Earth. The rest of us have bigger plans.
What human activity is NOT a 'loser' from the energy standpoint, other than the very active search for new energy sources itself?
Go to this site, and do what it recommends: http://vhemt.org/
This leaves the gene pool a little cleaner for the rest of us.
I was looking for this. Boeing, Lockheed, others exist for the soul purpose of "creating jobs".
One way of creating jobs would be to fix autocorrect by bringing in enough AI to give it an understanding of semantic context. It would be a logical extension of digital assistant tech.
"Meanwhile the permanently unemployed poor stay on the surface and rot."
In a socially mobile country anyone can be made poor by temporary circumstances. But those permanently unemployed poor of yours are the people who lack the vision it takes to improve themselves. Perhaps it's being dedicated to an obsolete industry, perhaps it's BLM-style racial hatred, or perhaps it's falling into the black hole of addiction.
"Boku wa Baka"
I'm an idiot?
It's the beginning of October, not April.
And can the fine structure of spacetime even withstand Martin Shkreli and 4chan being in the same place simultaneously?
Why can't we have "progressives" who are in favor of, you know, progress? We had them in Roosevelt's day, so why not now?
Given any problem, Greens only support solutions that don't exist yet. As soon as we started building the windfields and solar farms they told us they wanted, objections began to appear.
Example: Currently, we hear Green support for vat-grown meat as a resource-efficient and cruelty-free substitute for range cattle. You know and I know that the moment vat meat goes on the market, it will be condemned as "nutritional plastic."
Assange will announce his first hardware product, the JulianFone. It will be designed to hack into all WiFi nodes within range, suck data from them and display a continuous scroll of surrounding secrets for your viewing pleasure.
It will run only one standard app, Tinder.
I didn't want to waste bandwidth by repeating my original proposal on FDA reform, but if you insist: the FDA would lose all powers to keep compounds and devices off the market. In return, every product submitted for FDA would bear a label indicating FDA Approved, FDA Rejected, or FDA In Testing. Each label would bear a QR code leading to online detail about the status of the product, including detail about rejection or the current in-test status. It would continue to be an offense to misrepresent the status of a product, and absence of a label would indicate a product not submitted to the FDA at all.
I would expect that malpractice liability being what it is, most MDs and insurance carriers would insist on prescribing of FDA Approved products in ordinary cases. But if prescriptions can be written for compounds approved by the perfectly good testing authorities in Europe and Asia - if you really are in the business you must be aware of my wife's hometown, Basel, being the center of the world in advanced pharma development - then we will see a lot less gratuitous foot-dragging by the FDA.
Were my reform would really prove its worth would be in situations of obvious corruption like the Epi-Pen trainwreck, the Colcrys debacle and the Daraprim dumpster fire. In cases like this allowing doctors to prescribe from the world market is not theoretical libertarian posturing, but a moral imperative.
If we keep on giving the FDA veto power over what products can come to market, then your brand of socialized price control is inevitable. How will patients feel about the rationing that always goes with such schemes? I would rather go in the opposite direction instead, stripping the FDA of its power to keep products off the market so that fully informed doctors and patients can decide for themselves how much risk to take.
Sanofi's Auvi-Q injector was pulled because of 26 specific instances of dosage error out of all the patients that used the device. Since no injector can deliver more epinephrine than it contains, might you be willing to assume a small degree of dosage uniformity risk as the cost of a competitive market?
A specialist MD develops an instinct for gleaning needed information from test data summarized as it has to be for the kind of testing the FDA organizes. On occasion he might make use of a side effect that might be useful for some small subset of patients, which may in time mature into an "off-label usage" that becomes generally known in medicine.
Ability to prescribe any tested product, whether or not approved, would help push innovation in the long run. Some states already have "right to try" legislation allowing terminal patients to be prescribed any compound which has passed Phase I toxicity testing. Bootlickers hate Right To Try, but all I'm proposing is an extension of the increasingly popular concept to any informed patient.
So long as FDA testing proves to be a good assurance of quality product, its reputation as a gold standard will retain value, so that products labeled "FDA Approved" will be worth, on the average, more than products that doctors grab from the middle of the testing process under my scheme. If they do not, then our testing protocols need a lot more work.
How does the energy input and thrust produced compare to NASA's current operational ion engine, which has been in use on the Dawn mission for the last ten years?
Pennsylvania will probably find itself electing Ruth From Card Services, or some guy in India who promises to repair your PC.