inb4 liberals decide that trying to kill someone automatically equates to mental illness, and then making the claim you should help mentally ill people rather than jailing them or giving them the death penalty.
Reread that whole sentence and make sure you understand the ENTIRE SENTENCE in context before flaming me.
The tenets of Islam are not more incompatible than the tenets or radical christs.
This is very true. If one were to practice government the way Christ intended, we'd be sharing our goods with each other while also working hard to improve society with our own skills.
Think communism, but only practiced by people who want to practice it.
A hacker could hack the hospital doors and windows and everybody would die of starvation sooner or later!
Can you picture the carnage as people waste away as they vainly dance around and wave their arms at the little motion detector that was destroyed by the hacker, never realizing they could simply throw stuff at the glass in the sliding doors to make it break, thus freeing themselves from the hell they're in?
And then the judge will declare it legal even though the judges don't technically have the legal authority to decide what the law says.
For people who say that's the judges job, to interpret the law: No it isn't, if a law is subject to interpretation, it's simply void for vagueness and needs to be sent back to the legislators. Not only that, but when a case is determinted, legally the ruling only applies to the litigants. And, yes, I know that isn't how it works in the actual courtroom, but that's because the judges are BREAKING THE LAW THEY'VE BEEN SWORN TO UPHOLD.
The problem is that there are a lot of things some people, sometimes even many people, find not acceptable, but it is still a very bad idea to make them criminal. For example, there are lots of people that do not like atheists. Make that criminal?
And then there is the little problem that all these arguments are based on escalation (i.e. first they look at images then they rape children), while substitution also has merit (i.e. instead of raping children, they just look at pictures). Without a solid scientific basis, outlawing drawings could well result in much more harm to children. Despite what the public seems to believe, there is no "obviously" here. It might even be necessary to allow some people free access (because they substitute), while strictly denying it to others (because they escalate). Any knee-jerk reactions, like the current ones and those of the near past are likely to do more harm than good (i.e. get more children abused), if history is any indicator.
As someone who suffers from pedophilia urges, I agree with this. I committed a lot of sexual crimes before I turned 18. It's therapy plus porn access that keeps me from having a criminal record. I agree wholeheartedly that pedophilia is a horrible thing, but that doesn't change my sexual urges even a little bit.
People don't seem to realize that a lot of pedophiles( I have no idea what percentage) simply get urges and that those urges have nothing to do with a desire to harm children. When I was actively seeking children to molest, none of them were afraid of me, they loved being around me. And some actually enjoyed being molested, though I know that doesn't make it okay. The harm came when they got older and realized the gravity of what had occurred, at which time I was long gone.
Where they use an adult woman who looks and pretends to be underage? I used to be into that quite a bit when I first got into porn. Also, what do they do with Google search results that seem "suspicious?"
I don't live in the UK, and it looks like I'm lucky for that.
It's not so much a natural law as the fact that palladium especially tends to soak up hydrogen. People, including, apparently, some scientists, seem to ignore that there's a lot of chemical energy in hydrogen, and so keep falling for cold fusion. Pretty much every cold fusion experiment has eventually been shown to involve palladium's natural sponginess towards hydrogen to act as a natural chemical battery, if you will.
Ahhhh, so you're saying we'd be better off studying a palladium/hydrogen battery idea? Sounds promising if this is where all the enthusiasm is accidentally coming from.
It's possible there are as yet unknown natural laws. It's even possible that there are natural laws our species is just too dumb to discover, ever. But the chance of undiscoverable laws is lower than the more general chance of as yet undiscovered laws.
In the same way, the chance that there's an as yet undiscovered law which applies to this particular technology, and which has certain properties making it at all likely it gets inadvertently followed sometimes is possible, but is an accumulation of low probablility circumstances, and so has very low overall likelyhood. It's generally more likely that any undicovered laws will be ones where they consistently block getting the technological configuration right. For a simplified example, if there's some undiscovered property of, say, Tungsten, then it's likely to become apparent when people note that all the claims for success come from experiments where tungsten was used for a particular stage of the process in a particular way. There's much less chance that simply having a certain mass of Tungsten within a certain number of feet of the device, whether it's made into a part of the apparatus or light bulb filaments, will make the experiment very likely to succeed in either case.
Try to describe a hypothetical law that works in such a way it is very hard to spot a pattern or regularity that will lead the researchers to really formally formulating that law, but makes a big enough difference that it determines general success or failure much more than many other variables. Try to craft such a genuinely new law for explaining anything, from apiary colony collapse disorder to zebra camoflage evolution*. I'll bet this results in a very long, convoluted law to explain all the conditions. That's what usually happens with novel approaches - sure every once in a while one pays off big time, but not every discovery is Special Relativity. If you end up with a long formulation, full of various clauses which make it fit all the observations, then what you have is a chain of things, and if any link of that chain is wrong, the whole formulation collapses. If a chain is really only as strong as its weakest link, then a very lengthy chain of logical inferences is a chain with a very low probability of being right.
* why do Zebras have stripes when one of their predators in roughly the same size range has polka-dots (Leopards)?, and another one even closer to Zebras in size is solidly colored (Lions)? Try to develop a new law relating to natural selection that rules out any possibilitys that this is simply happenstance, and yet that doesn't predict what sorts of camoflage any other species should display in case some of the facts don't fit that case.
Wow, you're what I wanted to be before I gave up on college because of schizophrenia. Unless I'm totally wrong about you going to college, what is, or was, your major?
A paper based on discredited experiments is not valid science.
There is no conspiracy in science. Facts rule. The fact is cold fusion is myth that needs to die. You cannot over come the columb barrier without sufficient energy. Fusion is an inherently thermal process.
I haven't studied cold fusion in much depth, but if I were to look into this I'd probably use more of a forensics type of approach than a scientific method type of approach.
It's entirely possible that there's a natural law that scientists are unaware of and are randomly following and not following when they try to duplicate the experiment.
I know this is a troll, but you don't need Jesus if you don't have religion in the first place. It's only when you have to ability to gain knowledge and use it that things get all weird.
It's transportation to other solar systems and the means to duplicate it. There's no Prime Directive, if you can get to the space station and get it up and running then BOOM, you're a galactic citizen with all that that entails.
If the US has an Ebola epedemic, it'll probably be because of people fighting for their "civil rights."
Not saying I'm against civil rights, I personally hate the Patriot Act and what the NSA has become, but sometimes you just have to live by the golden rule. In this case, that means turn yourself in for testing and possible isolation if you think you might have Ebola.
You're correct that "case law" is meaningless bullshit. But you're absolutely wrong about laws being objectively, logically, and deterministically. You're also absolutely wrong about laws that are vague or contradictory. Most laws are vague, contradictory, or both, and they're still in full effect.
Have you ever actually sat down and read the law? I suggest you try. In my case, it was income tax law. My conclusion was that the IRS runs on lies and subterfuge. The guy who pointed me in that direction(never actually met him, he sold audio tapes way back in '93 with the pertinent information on them) also suggested people research the speed limit laws if they had a "lead foot."
Not going to judge you if you don't do it, but you might try actually sitting down with the laws. Not the case law BS, but the laws themselves. Focus on things that affect you in a negative way and see what the laws actually say.
Also, realize that very few lawyers respect the literal laws if it contradicts what they've been taught. Living based on the actual laws can be a rather dangerous affair. If you do intend to do this sort of thing, go in 100% or not at all, and be a loudmouth about it. Evil fears the light, and talking about illegal practices is the light I'm talking about.
My boss is paid near $100k/year. The business relies on people working for free (we have had, at one point, three staff members volunteering) or next-to-nothing (the rest of us get paid the legal minimums) but even then he can't get things right - he commits wage theft to ensure he remains the CEO.
The entire city I live in is like this.
The whole region is like this, almost one quarter of the nation.
They pay us next-to-nothing then accuse us of not working hard enough and even bitch that we're not spending enough.
That's a horrible thing to occur, honestly I wasn't attacking anyone in particular. But think about it, if he could make just as much money without persecuting his workers, don't you think he'd choose that alternate method? I'm guessing he's feeling greed, and not an urge to screw with people. Screwing you guys is a means to an end.
Late at night, in the wee hours, a hand sneaks out of the gas cap and gently rubs the engine. For a short period of time, the car has the same size engine as the other cars.
Okay, now we just need a joke about black cars, and maybe Japanese cars.
My dad doesn't believe the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima was a terrorist attack. And people think I'm crazy for some of the things I say about the US of A and it's laws.
Slashdot Mirror
inb4 liberals decide that trying to kill someone automatically equates to mental illness, and then making the claim you should help mentally ill people rather than jailing them or giving them the death penalty.
Reread that whole sentence and make sure you understand the ENTIRE SENTENCE in context before flaming me.
The tenets of Islam are not more incompatible than the tenets or radical christs.
This is very true. If one were to practice government the way Christ intended, we'd be sharing our goods with each other while also working hard to improve society with our own skills.
Think communism, but only practiced by people who want to practice it.
Unless panic is warranted!
A hacker could hack the hospital doors and windows and everybody would die of starvation sooner or later!
Can you picture the carnage as people waste away as they vainly dance around and wave their arms at the little motion detector that was destroyed by the hacker, never realizing they could simply throw stuff at the glass in the sliding doors to make it break, thus freeing themselves from the hell they're in?
Your day is kinda long, but make it a bit longer and we won't need leap days.
Does it have to be a knife injury? What about falling off or onto stuff? Do those injuries somehow make it harder to do this?
And then the judge will declare it legal even though the judges don't technically have the legal authority to decide what the law says.
For people who say that's the judges job, to interpret the law: No it isn't, if a law is subject to interpretation, it's simply void for vagueness and needs to be sent back to the legislators. Not only that, but when a case is determinted, legally the ruling only applies to the litigants. And, yes, I know that isn't how it works in the actual courtroom, but that's because the judges are BREAKING THE LAW THEY'VE BEEN SWORN TO UPHOLD.
We'll have a Moore's Law type thing for tractor beams soon? :)
The problem is that there are a lot of things some people, sometimes even many people, find not acceptable, but it is still a very bad idea to make them criminal. For example, there are lots of people that do not like atheists. Make that criminal?
And then there is the little problem that all these arguments are based on escalation (i.e. first they look at images then they rape children), while substitution also has merit (i.e. instead of raping children, they just look at pictures). Without a solid scientific basis, outlawing drawings could well result in much more harm to children. Despite what the public seems to believe, there is no "obviously" here. It might even be necessary to allow some people free access (because they substitute), while strictly denying it to others (because they escalate). Any knee-jerk reactions, like the current ones and those of the near past are likely to do more harm than good (i.e. get more children abused), if history is any indicator.
As someone who suffers from pedophilia urges, I agree with this. I committed a lot of sexual crimes before I turned 18. It's therapy plus porn access that keeps me from having a criminal record. I agree wholeheartedly that pedophilia is a horrible thing, but that doesn't change my sexual urges even a little bit.
People don't seem to realize that a lot of pedophiles( I have no idea what percentage) simply get urges and that those urges have nothing to do with a desire to harm children. When I was actively seeking children to molest, none of them were afraid of me, they loved being around me. And some actually enjoyed being molested, though I know that doesn't make it okay. The harm came when they got older and realized the gravity of what had occurred, at which time I was long gone.
Where they use an adult woman who looks and pretends to be underage? I used to be into that quite a bit when I first got into porn. Also, what do they do with Google search results that seem "suspicious?"
I don't live in the UK, and it looks like I'm lucky for that.
And who are backing them? Maybe they should suffer some very unintended consequences?
You bring the lighter, I'll bring the paper bag filled with dog poo.
It's not so much a natural law as the fact that palladium especially tends to soak up hydrogen. People, including, apparently, some scientists, seem to ignore that there's a lot of chemical energy in hydrogen, and so keep falling for cold fusion. Pretty much every cold fusion experiment has eventually been shown to involve palladium's natural sponginess towards hydrogen to act as a natural chemical battery, if you will.
Ahhhh, so you're saying we'd be better off studying a palladium/hydrogen battery idea? Sounds promising if this is where all the enthusiasm is accidentally coming from.
It's possible there are as yet unknown natural laws. It's even possible that there are natural laws our species is just too dumb to discover, ever. But the chance of undiscoverable laws is lower than the more general chance of as yet undiscovered laws.
In the same way, the chance that there's an as yet undiscovered law which applies to this particular technology, and which has certain properties making it at all likely it gets inadvertently followed sometimes is possible, but is an accumulation of low probablility circumstances, and so has very low overall likelyhood. It's generally more likely that any undicovered laws will be ones where they consistently block getting the technological configuration right. For a simplified example, if there's some undiscovered property of, say, Tungsten, then it's likely to become apparent when people note that all the claims for success come from experiments where tungsten was used for a particular stage of the process in a particular way. There's much less chance that simply having a certain mass of Tungsten within a certain number of feet of the device, whether it's made into a part of the apparatus or light bulb filaments, will make the experiment very likely to succeed in either case.
Try to describe a hypothetical law that works in such a way it is very hard to spot a pattern or regularity that will lead the researchers to really formally formulating that law, but makes a big enough difference that it determines general success or failure much more than many other variables. Try to craft such a genuinely new law for explaining anything, from apiary colony collapse disorder to zebra camoflage evolution*. I'll bet this results in a very long, convoluted law to explain all the conditions. That's what usually happens with novel approaches - sure every once in a while one pays off big time, but not every discovery is Special Relativity. If you end up with a long formulation, full of various clauses which make it fit all the observations, then what you have is a chain of things, and if any link of that chain is wrong, the whole formulation collapses. If a chain is really only as strong as its weakest link, then a very lengthy chain of logical inferences is a chain with a very low probability of being right.
* why do Zebras have stripes when one of their predators in roughly the same size range has polka-dots (Leopards)?, and another one even closer to Zebras in size is solidly colored (Lions)? Try to develop a new law relating to natural selection that rules out any possibilitys that this is simply happenstance, and yet that doesn't predict what sorts of camoflage any other species should display in case some of the facts don't fit that case.
Wow, you're what I wanted to be before I gave up on college because of schizophrenia. Unless I'm totally wrong about you going to college, what is, or was, your major?
A paper based on discredited experiments is not valid science.
There is no conspiracy in science. Facts rule. The fact is cold fusion is myth that needs to die. You cannot over come the columb barrier without sufficient energy. Fusion is an inherently thermal process.
I haven't studied cold fusion in much depth, but if I were to look into this I'd probably use more of a forensics type of approach than a scientific method type of approach.
It's entirely possible that there's a natural law that scientists are unaware of and are randomly following and not following when they try to duplicate the experiment.
I know this is a troll, but you don't need Jesus if you don't have religion in the first place. It's only when you have to ability to gain knowledge and use it that things get all weird.
It's transportation to other solar systems and the means to duplicate it. There's no Prime Directive, if you can get to the space station and get it up and running then BOOM, you're a galactic citizen with all that that entails.
And you even get a free ride back to Earth.
And, yes, I'm totally joking.
If the US has an Ebola epedemic, it'll probably be because of people fighting for their "civil rights."
Not saying I'm against civil rights, I personally hate the Patriot Act and what the NSA has become, but sometimes you just have to live by the golden rule. In this case, that means turn yourself in for testing and possible isolation if you think you might have Ebola.
People haven't taken the constitution seriously in years, why on earth would they start during an Ebola epedemic?
No, don't pay more, then the ISPs win. We need to force more competition.
All I do is stop most scripts from running. I don't mind ads, just so long as they don't animate without my permission.
As if this game isn't already scary enough as it is, now you can have the creepy alien kill you in 3d.
You're correct that "case law" is meaningless bullshit.
But you're absolutely wrong about laws being objectively, logically, and deterministically. You're also absolutely wrong about laws that are vague or contradictory. Most laws are vague, contradictory, or both, and they're still in full effect.
Have you ever actually sat down and read the law? I suggest you try. In my case, it was income tax law. My conclusion was that the IRS runs on lies and subterfuge. The guy who pointed me in that direction(never actually met him, he sold audio tapes way back in '93 with the pertinent information on them) also suggested people research the speed limit laws if they had a "lead foot."
Not going to judge you if you don't do it, but you might try actually sitting down with the laws. Not the case law BS, but the laws themselves. Focus on things that affect you in a negative way and see what the laws actually say.
Also, realize that very few lawyers respect the literal laws if it contradicts what they've been taught. Living based on the actual laws can be a rather dangerous affair. If you do intend to do this sort of thing, go in 100% or not at all, and be a loudmouth about it. Evil fears the light, and talking about illegal practices is the light I'm talking about.
My boss is paid near $100k/year. The business relies on people working for free (we have had, at one point, three staff members volunteering) or next-to-nothing (the rest of us get paid the legal minimums) but even then he can't get things right - he commits wage theft to ensure he remains the CEO.
The entire city I live in is like this.
The whole region is like this, almost one quarter of the nation.
They pay us next-to-nothing then accuse us of not working hard enough and even bitch that we're not spending enough.
That's a horrible thing to occur, honestly I wasn't attacking anyone in particular. But think about it, if he could make just as much money without persecuting his workers, don't you think he'd choose that alternate method? I'm guessing he's feeling greed, and not an urge to screw with people. Screwing you guys is a means to an end.
But again, sorry about your situation.
Late at night, in the wee hours, a hand sneaks out of the gas cap and gently rubs the engine. For a short period of time, the car has the same size engine as the other cars.
Okay, now we just need a joke about black cars, and maybe Japanese cars.
I am very happy with rectangular shape of the screen. It is very intuitive and practical. GUI windows are rectangular after all.
What shape would you like your screen if you had a chance to customize?
How about a screen that's shaped like a part of a sphere and can change it's concavity based on where the bridge of my nose is?
I really, REALLY, hope this is sarcastic humor.
My dad doesn't believe the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima was a terrorist attack. And people think I'm crazy for some of the things I say about the US of A and it's laws.
It makes me very sad.