Hey, I'm excited about the new movie and I don't really care about canon and all that (it's hard to as an Anime fan) but I'm pretty sure that the Enterprise was built in space... And you are correct, ships are not built in the water - but they are generally built in a dry dock that can then just be flooded, rather then being built somewhere on shore and then shipped to a dock to be launched. I thought that the atmospheric capabilities of the Voyager were a big part of what made that ship unique - I don't think the Enterprise's were designed to be able to land on a planet (and then take off again).
Re:Oy vey, the Technical flaws -. Buiilt in space?
on
New Star Trek Trailer
·
· Score: 1
You are dead on; and, I thought that this thing was built in space, right? [Star Trek Encyclopedia] "Launched in 2245 from the San Francisco Yards orbiting Earth, the Enterprise..." [/Star Trek Encyclopedia]
They obviously have their own agenda, but the Defenders of Wildlife Fund was quick to point out some of Ms Palin's actions are quite friendly to the oil companies and their interests:
"Sarah Palin, whose husband works for BP, has repeatedly put special interests first when it comes to the environment. In her scant two years as governor, she has lobbied aggressively to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, pushed for more drilling off of Alaska's coasts, and put special interests above science. Ms. Palin has made it clear through her actions that she is unwilling to do even as much as the Bush administration to address the impacts of global warming. Her most recent effort has been to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove the polar bear from the endangered species list, putting Big Oil before sound science. As unbelievable as this may sound, this actually puts her to the right of the Bush administration."
I think when they say "30 percent of the market" they are talking about the number of potential subscribers, not actual subscribers, being set by a regulatory cap. This is probably done by setting up some geographic boundaries using demographic data; but, I didn't do the research here so I'm just guessing!
Granted, we all have to die somehow - but you seem a little defensive! Allergic to bees, perhaps? Again, the math:
Your chances of getting killed by a terrorist (from here): But while keeping such potential dangers in mind, it is worth remembering that the total number of people killed since 9/11 by al Qaeda or al Qaedalike operatives outside of Afghanistan and Iraq is not much higher than the number who drown in bathtubs in the United States in a single year, and that the lifetime chance of an American being killed by international terrorism is about one in 80,000 -- about the same chance of being killed by a comet or a meteor. Even if there were a 9/11-scale attack every three months for the next five years, the likelihood that an individual American would number among the dead would be two hundredths of a percent (or one in 5,000).
From here: All figures below are for U.S. residents. Cause of Death Lifetime Odds
Heart Disease: 1-in-5 Cancer: 1-in-7 Stroke: 1-in-23 Accidental Injury: 1-in-36 Motor Vehicle Accident*: 1-in-100 Intentional Self-harm (suicide): 1-in-121 Falling Down: 1-in-246 Assault by Firearm: 1-in-325 Fire or Smoke: 1-in-1,116 Natural Forces (heat, cold, storms, quakes, etc.): 1-in-3,357 Electrocution*: 1-in-5,000 Drowning: 1-in-8,942 Air Travel Accident*: 1-in-20,000 Flood* (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-30,000 Legal Execution: 1-in-58,618 Tornado* (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-60,000 Lightning Strike (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-83,930 Snake, Bee or other Venomous Bite or Sting*: 1-in-100,000 Earthquake (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-131,890 Dog Attack: 1-in-147,717 Asteroid Impact*: 1-in-200,000** Tsunami*: 1-in-500,000 Fireworks Discharge: 1-in-615,488
heart disease Glad you can change your own genetic code! cancer Same here - care to share your cancer cures? stroke Unlikely considering the level of fear you seem to be experiencing on a regular basis... accidents So I guess you don't walk, bike, or drive. Good for you! influensa Nice bubble!
Why don't you just go learn some math and relax buddy. It will help you prevent those strokes!
I don't think your arguments hold any water - first of all, what does the left have to do with anything? Or democracy? I think you're looking to drop a little flamebait here, my friend. But as for the crux of your statement - while Saddam is a bad man, he was the head of state. He received US support against the Iranians! Additionally, the reason the death penalty is a morally bankrupt stance jumps out in your contradictory statements - "declare once and for all, and for everyone to see that killing is not allowed, which is a good thing" - by killing him, you're confirming the opposite! Your confirming that there ARE circumstances under which killing is ok, which is what Saddam thought when he was in power! The way you prove that "killing is not allowed" is by denouncing his actions, locking him up for all eternity as an example of how civilized people handle things, and preventing him from becoming a martyr for future generations. Those young insurgents-to-be can see an old, pathetic man living with the shame of his crimes - in a place where he can never hurt anyone again. Remember, that you are basically saying is that state-sponsored killing is bad, too - and I completely agree!
I don't know - a nipple slip might up his popularity! Seriously though, as an American I believe two things will have to happen - more election reform and a fuckload less ignorance on the part of middle America. Basically, our masses fell victim to a FUD campaign - and, in the last two presidential elections in a row, massive voting 'irregularities' and widespread disenfranchisement (including the very un-American voting right loss following a felony conviction) - in shit ass poorly run States like mine, Florida, also run by - yes, you guessed it!
I'm seeing this written in various ways in the comments here, but let me summarize - this is pure FUD, and is one of the stupidest - and most offensive - postings I have seen on Slashdot in some time. At least we seem to realize it... Why don't we Americans simply give away one of the best new industries we've ever created? CS enrollees dropping in number, 'not enough good engineers' when plenty of good engineers are un- or under-employed; crap, pure and simple. The management doesn't like our ability to demand more. Sorry about the rant - I just feel like we're flushing our futures down the toilet in pursuit of a (temporary) accumulation of $$$s.
This discussion from earlier cited some new research that suggests that some nano-particles can migrate directly into the brian via the olfactories... can anybody think of a good source of nano-sized "zinc and copper compounds that concentrate in the brains of Alzheimer's sufferers" - industrial, natural, or otherwise?
In Greg Bear's Slant, the military used a variety of robots - built from 'local' materials and nanotech (on demand)... pretty similar idea. Hopefully these robots won't need to eat you in order to complete their circuitry!
The current models, the HL-1440 and HL-1470N (built in ethernet) are great, use them at home and at the office (for low-volume stuff). The price is right, about $199 at any office store - $162 from newegg.
He's obviously making fun of America and our SUV addiction, not ripping the Europeans, ya'll... if it was done with a bit more wit, I'd say mod it up as funny!
Good point, I did forget the 'Zeroth' - the law created by robots to help deal with their ever-advancing sense of conscience. I've been looking around for some confirmation, but didn't Giskard develop the zeroth and then transfer it to Daneel (along with the ~other~ cool gift he gave him) thus beginning the Giskardian movement?
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Re:"Clear Skies" Initiative
on
Global Dimming
·
· Score: 1
I'm pretty sure you're joking, and I like the tone of your sarcasm! I think that the environment is pretty damn important, and that backing out of the Kyoto treaty pissed off the rest of the world, but as it says here (from the article):
Tiny particles of soot or chemical compounds like sulphates reflect sunlight and they also promote the formation of bigger, longer lasting clouds.
And that soot was one of the biggest issues the US had with the treaty! I STILL think that we should be in there working with the world on treaties like Kyoto, but pushing for reduced CO2 output from the big guys without putting some checks on the increasing soot and particulate output of industrializing nations is a hard sell over here.
And I do agree that the so-called "Clear Skies" initiative is complete crap, and that it would increase our output of soot and particulates as well, and that is a BIG step backwards.
You're forgetting: the duty to produce a list of voters who should NOT be allowed to vote because of their ex-felon status was delegated to a private firm. This firm produced a list and gave it to Harris saying 'hey, this list is over populated and needs to be rechecked by your officials - who should know who really IS an ex-felon in your state.' KH said 'No problem, just make it as "comprehensive" as you can, we'll sort it out!' So, the overloaded list was handed to KH... what did she do? She turned around and distributed it to the counties and their polling places, as is, and claimed that it was carefully reviewed before being put in to use. End result? Hundreds, if not thousands, of eligible voters were turned away at the polls. No negligence? Ok...
By the way, most modern industrialized (and even some not so industrialized) nations have realized that blocking ex-felons from voting is just another way of disenfranchising a class of voter - akin to poll taxes and the like. Reconstructionist bullshit, to put it nicely. We'll see changes in how this is handled within the next 10-20 years.
A sci-fi novel I really enjoyed, 'A Deepness in the Sky' (by Vernor Vinge), has a lot of fun with these types of networks. Great to see some development in this area...
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not even sure what else to say here... so much for the Three Laws ;-)
In the year 1,502,000....
War was beginning
What happen?
Hey, I'm excited about the new movie and I don't really care about canon and all that (it's hard to as an Anime fan) but I'm pretty sure that the Enterprise was built in space...
And you are correct, ships are not built in the water - but they are generally built in a dry dock that can then just be flooded, rather then being built somewhere on shore and then shipped to a dock to be launched. I thought that the atmospheric capabilities of the Voyager were a big part of what made that ship unique - I don't think the Enterprise's were designed to be able to land on a planet (and then take off again).
You are dead on; and, I thought that this thing was built in space, right?
[Star Trek Encyclopedia]
"Launched in 2245 from the San Francisco Yards orbiting Earth, the Enterprise..."
[/Star Trek Encyclopedia]
They obviously have their own agenda, but the Defenders of Wildlife Fund was quick to point out some of Ms Palin's actions are quite friendly to the oil companies and their interests:
"Sarah Palin, whose husband works for BP, has repeatedly put special interests first when it comes to the environment. In her scant two years as governor, she has lobbied aggressively to open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, pushed for more drilling off of Alaska's coasts, and put special interests above science. Ms. Palin has made it clear through her actions that she is unwilling to do even as much as the Bush administration to address the impacts of global warming. Her most recent effort has been to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove the polar bear from the endangered species list, putting Big Oil before sound science. As unbelievable as this may sound, this actually puts her to the right of the Bush administration."
I for one would like to welcome our thinking machine overlords...
Singularity here we come!
I think when they say "30 percent of the market" they are talking about the number of potential subscribers, not actual subscribers, being set by a regulatory cap. This is probably done by setting up some geographic boundaries using demographic data; but, I didn't do the research here so I'm just guessing!
Granted, we all have to die somehow - but you seem a little defensive! Allergic to bees, perhaps? Again, the math:
Your chances of getting killed by a terrorist (from here):
But while keeping such potential dangers in mind, it is worth remembering that the total number of people killed since 9/11 by al Qaeda or al Qaedalike operatives outside of Afghanistan and Iraq is not much higher than the number who drown in bathtubs in the United States in a single year, and that the lifetime chance of an American being killed by international terrorism is about one in 80,000 -- about the same chance of being killed by a comet or a meteor. Even if there were a 9/11-scale attack every three months for the next five years, the likelihood that an individual American would number among the dead would be two hundredths of a percent (or one in 5,000).
From here:
All figures below are for U.S. residents.
Cause of Death Lifetime Odds
Heart Disease: 1-in-5
Cancer: 1-in-7
Stroke: 1-in-23
Accidental Injury: 1-in-36
Motor Vehicle Accident*: 1-in-100
Intentional Self-harm (suicide): 1-in-121
Falling Down: 1-in-246
Assault by Firearm: 1-in-325
Fire or Smoke: 1-in-1,116
Natural Forces (heat, cold, storms, quakes, etc.): 1-in-3,357
Electrocution*: 1-in-5,000
Drowning: 1-in-8,942
Air Travel Accident*: 1-in-20,000
Flood* (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-30,000
Legal Execution: 1-in-58,618
Tornado* (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-60,000
Lightning Strike (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-83,930
Snake, Bee or other Venomous Bite or Sting*: 1-in-100,000
Earthquake (included also in Natural Forces above): 1-in-131,890
Dog Attack: 1-in-147,717
Asteroid Impact*: 1-in-200,000**
Tsunami*: 1-in-500,000
Fireworks Discharge: 1-in-615,488
You're one of those, huh? Let's see...
I have personal control over:
heart disease
Glad you can change your own genetic code!
cancer
Same here - care to share your cancer cures?
stroke
Unlikely considering the level of fear you seem to be experiencing on a regular basis...
accidents
So I guess you don't walk, bike, or drive. Good for you!
influensa
Nice bubble!
Why don't you just go learn some math and relax buddy. It will help you prevent those strokes!
I don't think your arguments hold any water - first of all, what does the left have to do with anything? Or democracy? I think you're looking to drop a little flamebait here, my friend.
But as for the crux of your statement - while Saddam is a bad man, he was the head of state. He received US support against the Iranians! Additionally, the reason the death penalty is a morally bankrupt stance jumps out in your contradictory statements - "declare once and for all, and for everyone to see that killing is not allowed, which is a good thing" - by killing him, you're confirming the opposite! Your confirming that there ARE circumstances under which killing is ok, which is what Saddam thought when he was in power! The way you prove that "killing is not allowed" is by denouncing his actions, locking him up for all eternity as an example of how civilized people handle things, and preventing him from becoming a martyr for future generations. Those young insurgents-to-be can see an old, pathetic man living with the shame of his crimes - in a place where he can never hurt anyone again. Remember, that you are basically saying is that state-sponsored killing is bad, too - and I completely agree!
While you may have a point, you may want to read up a bit on what has actually been uncovered regarding electronic voting manipulation by the 'Right':- things-to-come-in-november.html
http://weazlsrevenge.blogspot.com/2006/10/sign-of
I think you're talking about the NHMFL - it's in Tallahassee, at the Seminary West of the Suwannee.
Ha ha, you're probably right - but, I met my wife on Match.com, and she is beautiful, intelligent, and funny. It was years ago, though (2001).
I don't know - a nipple slip might up his popularity! Seriously though, as an American I believe two things will have to happen - more election reform and a fuckload less ignorance on the part of middle America. Basically, our masses fell victim to a FUD campaign - and, in the last two presidential elections in a row, massive voting 'irregularities' and widespread disenfranchisement (including the very un-American voting right loss following a felony conviction) - in shit ass poorly run States like mine, Florida, also run by - yes, you guessed it!
I'm seeing this written in various ways in the comments here, but let me summarize - this is pure FUD, and is one of the stupidest - and most offensive - postings I have seen on Slashdot in some time. At least we seem to realize it... Why don't we Americans simply give away one of the best new industries we've ever created? CS enrollees dropping in number, 'not enough good engineers' when plenty of good engineers are un- or under-employed; crap, pure and simple. The management doesn't like our ability to demand more.
Sorry about the rant - I just feel like we're flushing our futures down the toilet in pursuit of a (temporary) accumulation of $$$s.
This discussion from earlier cited some new research that suggests that some nano-particles can migrate directly into the brian via the olfactories... can anybody think of a good source of nano-sized "zinc and copper compounds that concentrate in the brains of Alzheimer's sufferers" - industrial, natural, or otherwise?
In Greg Bear's Slant, the military used a variety of robots - built from 'local' materials and nanotech (on demand)... pretty similar idea. Hopefully these robots won't need to eat you in order to complete their circuitry!
The current models, the HL-1440 and HL-1470N (built in ethernet) are great, use them at home and at the office (for low-volume stuff). The price is right, about $199 at any office store - $162 from newegg.
Linux Support Details in case you're interested!
He's obviously making fun of America and our SUV addiction, not ripping the Europeans, ya'll... if it was done with a bit more wit, I'd say mod it up as funny!
Good point, I did forget the 'Zeroth' - the law created by robots to help deal with their ever-advancing sense of conscience. I've been looking around for some confirmation, but didn't Giskard develop the zeroth and then transfer it to Daneel (along with the ~other~ cool gift he gave him) thus beginning the Giskardian movement?
From this page:
Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics"
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
I'm pretty sure you're joking, and I like the tone of your sarcasm! I think that the environment is pretty damn important, and that backing out of the Kyoto treaty pissed off the rest of the world, but as it says here (from the article):
Tiny particles of soot or chemical compounds like sulphates reflect sunlight and they also promote the formation of bigger, longer lasting clouds.
And that soot was one of the biggest issues the US had with the treaty! I STILL think that we should be in there working with the world on treaties like Kyoto, but pushing for reduced CO2 output from the big guys without putting some checks on the increasing soot and particulate output of industrializing nations is a hard sell over here.
And I do agree that the so-called "Clear Skies" initiative is complete crap, and that it would increase our output of soot and particulates as well, and that is a BIG step backwards.
Ok, how about:
Article on Salon...
Harpers...
Bradenton Herald...
Harvard U. School of Gov't Reseach Paper...
One or these days, they're going to declare it treasonous to be so criminally ignorant. Wise up before then.
You're forgetting: the duty to produce a list of voters who should NOT be allowed to vote because of their ex-felon status was delegated to a private firm. This firm produced a list and gave it to Harris saying 'hey, this list is over populated and needs to be rechecked by your officials - who should know who really IS an ex-felon in your state.' KH said 'No problem, just make it as "comprehensive" as you can, we'll sort it out!' So, the overloaded list was handed to KH... what did she do? She turned around and distributed it to the counties and their polling places, as is, and claimed that it was carefully reviewed before being put in to use. End result? Hundreds, if not thousands, of eligible voters were turned away at the polls. No negligence? Ok...
By the way, most modern industrialized (and even some not so industrialized) nations have realized that blocking ex-felons from voting is just another way of disenfranchising a class of voter - akin to poll taxes and the like. Reconstructionist bullshit, to put it nicely. We'll see changes in how this is handled within the next 10-20 years.
A sci-fi novel I really enjoyed, 'A Deepness in the Sky' (by Vernor Vinge), has a lot of fun with these types of networks. Great to see some development in this area...