Yes, most of us (excepting most Africans and Chinese) have Neanderthal genes in us.
From what I recall hearing the Chinese has just as much, if not more of those genes.
Not to start a pissing match, but the PBS show I watched about this this week said otherwise. Besides, who knows whether Neanderthal genes are a blessing or a curse? It's kind of early in the game to tell.
Uh huh. You should not say things like that in a discussion. Just because it's not going your way is no reason to denigrate the other side's position.
I have two options to get high-speed data access to your home: Lay new cable, or lease from the incumbent. (Okay, three - wireless. Hmm, wireless is already most places, and is more expensive than cable). How am I to overcome those barriers to entry using either method? Who would fund someone proposing to do either? This is the inherent issue with natural monopoly, which you seemed to ignore entirely.
Were they superstrong or supersmart? Who knows? But there's one way to find out
Well I don't know about the former, but given they are all dead I'm pretty sure about the latter.
So, you don't much care for SciFi. Superman's planet's gone. Vulcan's gone. The Asgard are gone. All super smart and powerful, long before your puny ancestors were even capable of wallowing in the mud onto dry land.
Why not have one of those Canadians mate with an Ecuadorian.
As a Canadian male, I can honestly say I'd have no problem with that.
Yes, most of us (excepting most Africans and Chinese) have Neanderthal genes in us. We inter-bred. Apparently, we gained much of our resistance to noxious germs from them. Neanderthals aren't dead. They merged with us Homo Sapiens, and apparently willingly for the most part (as far as can be told).
I was happy to hear it. The prior theory I heard was that we either/or out-evolved/genocided them. Cool.
That's wonderful, but ignores economies of scale, barriers to entry, and everything I said.
I thought it's obvious that the purpose of corporations is to capitalize on economies of scale. It's what they do best. I did not ignore barriers to entry. In fact I addressed it explicitly as an artifact of government intervention. As for the rest, did you see the bit about polar opposites? It's like we speak different languages, yet use the same words. I warned you.
Oh! Your post reminds me. I wanted to set up a transpacific shipping company. Do you happen to have the capital requirements to enter that business? Because my reality doesn't seem to include those.
Just go talk to Ferdinand and Isabella. You find a new continent full of gold and potential converts, and they take a cut of the action as interest on their loan. You may end up with whole countries named after you. Woohoo! You've never heard of venture capital? Alternatively, maybe your Congress-critter might be willing to cough up... Haaaaahahahahaha! Funny.
No? Well, maybe we can just use a cigarette boat.
You didn't like that example? It was just an example. How about Silicon Valley vs. IBM then?
I'll tell you up front, your and my viewpoints are polar opposites from each other. Where you see capitalism inevitably trending to larger and larger monolithic and fewer players, I see government meddling as the cause of that. Where government isn't interfering, smaller and more nimble outfits can run rings around the entrenched dinosaurs. Where government is allowed to interfere, those dinosaurs buy favours and protectionism and regulations from government, stifling those little innovators from interfering in the dinosaurs' turf.
I can accept that you likely need a government for things like WWII, the Manhattan Project, & etc. As for regulating food production and distribution & safety, it's idiotic. Informed consumers and competition can do that much better at a fraction of the cost.
It takes fifty miles for a supertanker to turn around. A cigarette boat can transport millions of dollars in illicit cargo far more nimbly and efficiently.
The issue is getting the public access to public information, not the perceived hypocrisy of who currently has access.
Is it? That was Swartz's issue, but I think this debacle has devolved into shining a light on the US' corrupt practice of plea bargaining, and that's a far bigger issue than access to public information. "We'll let you off on the 35 years of prison if you'll cop a guilty plea, pay a million dollar fine, and accept a criminal record. We don't much care whether you're actually guilty or not, because we don't have to care. So, which bung hole do you want to be pushed into, kid?"
I remember the days when corps constantly worked at lowering their prices and increasing efficiency, all in order to compete for customers. Now, NorthAm telecoms is Balkanized into a few monolithic corps who don't need to care about competing; in many markets they have no competition to speak of. In Canada we have Bell, Telus, Shaw, Rogers, and they only tokenly try to appear to compete in each other's market area (territory). USA has AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, and I've read lots of stories from people saying that in their area they have only one of them to pick from. Whole cities have tried to roll out their own municipal networks to fill the gap, and they end up in lawsuits attempting to prevent them from doing it. The Google GBit rollout has proved how possible it is. That's not the game the telecom monoliths want to play. They want to milk us for every penny they can get, not maximize fair service for a fair price in competition.
Compare Euro telecoms access and rates to NorthAm's, and it's pretty easy to say it's a rigged game. Our regulators have been helping them do it, not forcing them to compete on level playing fields.
You'd think making Hubble take an accurate bead on the thing on Dec. 31 and Jul. 1, then comparing the two readings to triangulate would be all that's needed (basic geometry); nuh uh. How about Type 1a supernovae which ought to all be the same luminosity, or Cepheid Variables, ditto.
From each according to ability, to each according to need. That doesn't sound all that passive toward the former.
What's so bad about everyone and their fellow man doing what they can for their fellow man and everyone?
I'm in favour of that, if it's of their own choosing. I'm all in favour of charity and goodwill toward all. However, I'm also in favour of teaching them to fish, not giving them a fish. Most of us (myself included) are basically lazy, and would happily live off the charity of others if we could. What happens if nobody we know has any fish? Will we starve? Instead of learning how to fish? How selfish.
Probably by reading it? Anyone reading a CERT post is very likely to understand the difference between the two.
You jest! I defy you to point to one member of your immediate family, or even close personal friends, who've actually read a CERT Advisory. Mortals have no idea what that acronym means (nor do they care).
Cool! Damn, some of you people have sweet toys to play with. Here I'm struggling to get people to allow me to turn off automatic night lights so I can see some stars at night, and they're wondering WTF I'd want to do that?!? $deity! Grumble, mumble,... peons! Meanwhile, you get to hang out on a mountaintop above most of the atmosphere and the clouds...
Enjoy the ride! You'll miss it horribly when it ends.
Doesn't Orion look beautiful at this time of year?:-)
Yes. Look into the history of Michaelangelo's early tribulations wrt the Sistine Chapel. He was inventing it as he went along. Some of the early stuff he tried failed horribly (media! Ptheh!). He was geeky enough to pull it off brilliantly though.
Leonardo worked on Mona Lisa throughout his lifetime. That's serious attention to detail. That's a pretty long phase of maintenance of something you care about.
Galileo! His art (yes, I think science is art) was so important to him that he had to defy a Pope (which at the time was tantamount to blasphemy). Marie Curie's was so important to her that she was willing to die to get its secrets.
Steven Hawking, you're such a wuss. [Just kidding.:-)]
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, most of us (excepting most Africans and Chinese) have Neanderthal genes in us.
From what I recall hearing the Chinese has just as much, if not more of those genes.
Not to start a pissing match, but the PBS show I watched about this this week said otherwise. Besides, who knows whether Neanderthal genes are a blessing or a curse? It's kind of early in the game to tell.
Let's stick on topic here.
Uh huh. You should not say things like that in a discussion. Just because it's not going your way is no reason to denigrate the other side's position.
I have two options to get high-speed data access to your home: Lay new cable, or lease from the incumbent. (Okay, three - wireless. Hmm, wireless is already most places, and is more expensive than cable). How am I to overcome those barriers to entry using either method? Who would fund someone proposing to do either? This is the inherent issue with natural monopoly, which you seemed to ignore entirely.
Uh ... what?
You've got a way higher regard for this "natural monopoly" crap than I do. Perhaps you ought to start there? As in, "invalid concept"?
So, you don't much care for SciFi. Superman's planet's gone. Vulcan's gone.
"I'll take Fiction Peddled As Fact for $400, Alex."
So, I can put you down in the "No Imagination" column, okay?
What with all the parallel universes, temporal anomalies and other quirks going on I need to both agree and disagree with you.
You forgot to mention the vampires, mythical monsters, and zombies inhabiting Space Channel these days. Sucks to be us.
Being a nerd requires a stupefying level of double-think these days.
Don't know about that. I'm a geek, not a nerd. I own no pocket protectors and I write beautiful perl.
And people wonder why I sometimes wear my pants on my head, shove pencils up my nose and go "whibble".
Yeah, about that, ... Carry on; it's none of my damned business. Have fun, and try not to hurt anybody. :-)
So resistance was futile, tqk of borg?
Know any history of China? They've been invaded by pretty much everybody, and absorbed each of them.
What's that tell you?
That saying about the sum being greater than it's parts, only applies when you know how the parts fit together.
Moron. Alfred Nobel's calling. Will you accept the charges?
Were they superstrong or supersmart? Who knows? But there's one way to find out
Well I don't know about the former, but given they are all dead I'm pretty sure about the latter.
So, you don't much care for SciFi. Superman's planet's gone. Vulcan's gone. The Asgard are gone. All super smart and powerful, long before your puny ancestors were even capable of wallowing in the mud onto dry land.
Shallow as a pane of glass, you are.
Why not have one of those Canadians mate with an Ecuadorian.
As a Canadian male, I can honestly say I'd have no problem with that.
Yes, most of us (excepting most Africans and Chinese) have Neanderthal genes in us. We inter-bred. Apparently, we gained much of our resistance to noxious germs from them. Neanderthals aren't dead. They merged with us Homo Sapiens, and apparently willingly for the most part (as far as can be told).
I was happy to hear it. The prior theory I heard was that we either/or out-evolved/genocided them. Cool.
That's wonderful, but ignores economies of scale, barriers to entry, and everything I said.
I thought it's obvious that the purpose of corporations is to capitalize on economies of scale. It's what they do best. I did not ignore barriers to entry. In fact I addressed it explicitly as an artifact of government intervention. As for the rest, did you see the bit about polar opposites? It's like we speak different languages, yet use the same words. I warned you.
Oh! Your post reminds me. I wanted to set up a transpacific shipping company. Do you happen to have the capital requirements to enter that business? Because my reality doesn't seem to include those.
Just go talk to Ferdinand and Isabella. You find a new continent full of gold and potential converts, and they take a cut of the action as interest on their loan. You may end up with whole countries named after you. Woohoo! You've never heard of venture capital? Alternatively, maybe your Congress-critter might be willing to cough up ... Haaaaahahahahaha! Funny.
No? Well, maybe we can just use a cigarette boat.
You didn't like that example? It was just an example. How about Silicon Valley vs. IBM then?
I'll tell you up front, your and my viewpoints are polar opposites from each other. Where you see capitalism inevitably trending to larger and larger monolithic and fewer players, I see government meddling as the cause of that. Where government isn't interfering, smaller and more nimble outfits can run rings around the entrenched dinosaurs. Where government is allowed to interfere, those dinosaurs buy favours and protectionism and regulations from government, stifling those little innovators from interfering in the dinosaurs' turf.
I can accept that you likely need a government for things like WWII, the Manhattan Project, & etc. As for regulating food production and distribution & safety, it's idiotic. Informed consumers and competition can do that much better at a fraction of the cost.
It takes fifty miles for a supertanker to turn around. A cigarette boat can transport millions of dollars in illicit cargo far more nimbly and efficiently.
The issue is getting the public access to public information, not the perceived hypocrisy of who currently has access.
Is it? That was Swartz's issue, but I think this debacle has devolved into shining a light on the US' corrupt practice of plea bargaining, and that's a far bigger issue than access to public information. "We'll let you off on the 35 years of prison if you'll cop a guilty plea, pay a million dollar fine, and accept a criminal record. We don't much care whether you're actually guilty or not, because we don't have to care. So, which bung hole do you want to be pushed into, kid?"
/. and the high tech they have where you can't edit posts
/. and the culture where you're expected to know how to proofread, damnit!
I suppose the system just works.
I'd allow that it functions, yes.
I remember the days when corps constantly worked at lowering their prices and increasing efficiency, all in order to compete for customers. Now, NorthAm telecoms is Balkanized into a few monolithic corps who don't need to care about competing; in many markets they have no competition to speak of. In Canada we have Bell, Telus, Shaw, Rogers, and they only tokenly try to appear to compete in each other's market area (territory). USA has AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobile, and I've read lots of stories from people saying that in their area they have only one of them to pick from. Whole cities have tried to roll out their own municipal networks to fill the gap, and they end up in lawsuits attempting to prevent them from doing it. The Google GBit rollout has proved how possible it is. That's not the game the telecom monoliths want to play. They want to milk us for every penny they can get, not maximize fair service for a fair price in competition.
Compare Euro telecoms access and rates to NorthAm's, and it's pretty easy to say it's a rigged game. Our regulators have been helping them do it, not forcing them to compete on level playing fields.
Does this discrepancy only exist for Polaris? Do all other stars give the same results for both measurement methods?
Short read.
You'd think making Hubble take an accurate bead on the thing on Dec. 31 and Jul. 1, then comparing the two readings to triangulate would be all that's needed (basic geometry); nuh uh. How about Type 1a supernovae which ought to all be the same luminosity, or Cepheid Variables, ditto.
Nope. It's not that easy. Fun problem.
From each according to ability, to each according to need. That doesn't sound all that passive toward the former.
What's so bad about everyone and their fellow man doing what they can for their fellow man and everyone?
I'm in favour of that, if it's of their own choosing. I'm all in favour of charity and goodwill toward all. However, I'm also in favour of teaching them to fish, not giving them a fish. Most of us (myself included) are basically lazy, and would happily live off the charity of others if we could. What happens if nobody we know has any fish? Will we starve? Instead of learning how to fish? How selfish.
Next, do what the nice GP asked and provide us citations of why communism is aggressive towards you.
It depends who you are. From each according to ability, to each according to need. That doesn't sound all that passive toward the former.
communism tends to be aggressive towards you.
Citation needed. Seriously.
You have got to be kidding. Kulaks, a history of the KGB.
This is not to suggest that (so-called) Capitalism isn't every bit as aggressive, or that monarchies are any better.
Geez man, read a book!
Always assume you're vulnerable because there is somebody smarter, sneakier and greedier out there.
Words to live by.
http://pingtest.net/
Okay, that's the stupidest thing I've ever seen. Apologies to all others I've said that to (yes, there's been more than a few).
ping. Huh.
Probably by reading it? Anyone reading a CERT post is very likely to understand the difference between the two.
You jest! I defy you to point to one member of your immediate family, or even close personal friends, who've actually read a CERT Advisory. Mortals have no idea what that acronym means (nor do they care).
Put away the hard-on for Larry Ellison and calm down.
What's Ellison got to do with this? Perhaps you mean Gosling?
Just curious. What does:
mashing F5 on Slashdot
mean? In Linux running fluxbox, <ALT>-F[12] takes me to my other desktop. Is this a (gag me with a spoon) MS Win* thing?
For example, my current wallpaper ...
Cool! Damn, some of you people have sweet toys to play with. Here I'm struggling to get people to allow me to turn off automatic night lights so I can see some stars at night, and they're wondering WTF I'd want to do that?!? $deity! Grumble, mumble, ... peons! Meanwhile, you get to hang out on a mountaintop above most of the atmosphere and the clouds ...
Enjoy the ride! You'll miss it horribly when it ends.
Doesn't Orion look beautiful at this time of year? :-)
... every bit as much as it offends me that people like you exist. HAND.
I can think of many examples of who are.
Yes. Look into the history of Michaelangelo's early tribulations wrt the Sistine Chapel. He was inventing it as he went along. Some of the early stuff he tried failed horribly (media! Ptheh!). He was geeky enough to pull it off brilliantly though.
Leonardo worked on Mona Lisa throughout his lifetime. That's serious attention to detail. That's a pretty long phase of maintenance of something you care about.
Galileo! His art (yes, I think science is art) was so important to him that he had to defy a Pope (which at the time was tantamount to blasphemy). Marie Curie's was so important to her that she was willing to die to get its secrets.
Steven Hawking, you're such a wuss. [Just kidding. :-)]