I want my old DOS 5.0 machine emulated. 400Mhz ARM procesor should be enough to emulate a 16Mhz 386, although I suspect emulating the memory controller would be trouble. I demand Wing Commander and Windows 3.1 on my PDA. Maybe a bit of Ultima 7.
If we stayed as healthy as 25-44yos in 1995 (190 deaths/100,000), we'd have a median lifespan of about 360 odd years. Which is still a pretty good run. I suspect we'd be more careful, and knock that rate down a bit as well. But, yeah, even extending old-age longevity to millenia we'll still run into other limits right quick.
You need to convert that to present cost. Getting 5% interest on that $4, it'd be worth $10.61 by then end of the 20 year period. Averaging that out, the last watt costs you $.18 in 2023 money.
Point being, when you're doing calculations over a long period like this, it's important to take interest and alternate investments into account. Even if that cells lasted forever, that doesn't mean the average cost per watt is 0. That 4 bucks, sitting in a CD, will produce 2kWh/year forever (ignoring inflation, but the interest rate is jsut a conservative guess anyway.)
Umm, no, economy is not a zero sum game "when you take natural resources into account."
First off, economy can drastically shift the availability and distribution of resources. If lots of people need milk, then things can shift so that more people are producing milk.
Secondly, technology can dramatically increase the resources available. Increased mining efficiency, mineral scans, biotech crops, fertilizers, better farming practices, etc. can all increase the resources available, often with a direct increase in capital.
Thirdly, even if all the resources available were a fixed input, the economy would still be a positive sum game. When I trade you a back-hoe for a years supply of food, we -both- benefit. Thus, positive sum. Any freely-entered trade with complete information is a positive sum exchange. To bother entering it otherwise would be foolish.
The first half dozen occurances of the definition you quoted also included: 2: (communication theory) a numerical measure of the uncertainty of an outcome; "the signal contained thousands of bits of information"
If it's a pet peeve of yours, perhaps you should make a study of statistical mechanics and information theory, where the concept and term are more clearly and quantitatively defined. With a slightly deeper understanding of statistical mechanics, you will find that ther term is more fundamental than you thought, and that they are mathematically identical, applied to two separate fields. With this understanding, your objection is similar to saying that length is defined by the distance between two ends of an object, and that talking about the length of a file, or a length of time, is completely wrong.
While the term originated in thermodynamics, it was given a formal definition (even within the realm of physics) by Boltzmann with the development of statistical mechanics. Statistical mechanics allow Boltzmann to formulate and discuss entropy well in advance of energy or temperature. When they do enter the picture, thermodynamic (dQ/dt) entropy is identical to the statistical definition, with temperature defined by 1/t = d(Energy)/d(entropy) where those ds are partial derivatives. It's actually a fascinating topic, and a beautiful mathematical insight.
The description and definition used by Boltzmann for statistical mechanics are exactly the same as those used in information theory: Entropy = Sum (-p(state)*ln(p(state)))
(over all possible states) Or, with all states equally likely (the equipartition principle): Entropy = ln( # of possible states)
Which is, of course, why Shannon used the term and the definition.
Sorry to contradict you, but misunderstandings and misuse of the term entropy are also pet peeves of mine, and this is not one of them.;)
Dude, if I wasn't so fucking humanistically calm and stressfree, I might take offense at your uptight slander of my people's unique cultural heritage, man.;)
Translation: You sure seem pretty mad at atheists/humanists for a Buddhist.
I don't know if you've noticed, in general, but most religion's add a lot of stress to people's lives, and to the world. They add guilt, and hatred and conflict and confusion at leat as often as the add love and serenity. I'd say a lot of the stress in the world is caused by religious conflict between Judeo-Christians and Muslims. Even if it's not exclusively religious, those situations could be defused much more readily wihout religion fanning the flames.
To the extent that it tells people to stay calm, meditate an hour a day, and treat other people as though they were yourself, I don't consider it a religion. That is how most westerners practice it, and the point of the comment you were replying to was that those attitudes have a calming effect on people.
To the extent that it tells people to believe in gods or supernatural effects, to accept dogma unquestioningly even when it disagrees with observation (ie science,) and that it's acceptable to kill people who hold opposing beliefs, I consider something a religion. Buddhism in Burma qualifie, IMNSHO.
Finally, this sort of law is a golden opporunity for a service provider to provider service that is competely unencumbered by the provisions of this "Uber DCMA". It's only valid if the "commmunications" service provider decides to enforce it.
Problem is, the friendly service provider can still be prosecuted under the law by whoever they get their T3/backbone connection from if they don't play ball. (It's still a commercial communications service, and they are connecting non-approved devices.) You'd have to have friends at the tp of the backbone to have a chance of keeping themselves safe. Or in another state, for as long as they remain free.
How can you get rid of a criminal statute if you can't find a DA willing to prosecute the case, through to the supreme court if need be?
It seems to me like it'd be pretty straightforward to find some friendly ISP in MI to say they don't want Linksys brand routers hooked up to their network. I'll show up, and tell people they can buy linksys routers at their local CompUSA.
Viola, crime ad absurdum!
The only problem is, how do we get a case like this prosecuted to the level it need to be to strike down the law? No DA is going to push that, no matter how hard both sides complain that the law is being violated.
Gah, hatred rising. Urge to move to Canada strong.
It seems to me like the basic problem with the DMCA is that we, as technologists, can readily turn speech into technologies. Thus, our speech (or speech to us) discussing the situation is, in the mind of the lawyers and legislators, technology. Since we can turn it into technology readily.
Here, the simple statement "There are serious security flaws in the Blackboard system." can (assuming it's true,) by a competent engineer, be readily turned into a device to circumvent that technology. Therefore the statement itself (without any explanation of mechanism, since we can fidn that out for ourselves with a few days/weeks/months of investigation) is technology to do so, and is in violation. The closer that statement gets to something that can be interpreted directly by an engineer ("There's a problem with the encryption." "There's a susceptability to cyclic keys." "If you encrypt one key with another, and then use that to encrypt a third, you can deduce the original key.") the fewer the steps. But we can turn any such statement into a technology, and even the simple ones ("There's a flaw") increase the circumvention technology's possibility by a few orders of magnitude.
If I came out tomorrow with a simple algorithm to find the prime factorization of any integer in a fixed (and reasonably short, say 2 hour) time, you (some of you at least) could turn that into a technology to circumvent huge swaths of security. You'd be able to turn it into technology faster than I'd be able to turn these guys observations into technology, certainly. Therefore, such a vitally important finding would be considered circumventing technology even though it is not described as such, or planned for implementation in any way.
That is, IMHO, the fundamental flaw with the DMCA, the idea that because savvy technologists can implement spech or ideas as technology, the ideas themselves become technology and are therefore verboten if the technology offends "the man." In effect, they are afraid of what engineers can do with the ideas, so our speech is less valuable.
I sure hope these guys take this thing to the top. This seems like a perfect case to get the DMCA thrown out on first amendment grounds.
Remember that you are just a developer, and it is not your job to improve morale. You may want sales to improve, but it's not your job to go poking into improving sales.
Management will notice your attempts, and if they are failing to address the morale problem, and you are trying to edge into their turf by trying to address it yourself (from their perspective, questioning their policies and pointing out their inadequacies.) You are likely to be the next one laid off if you try to push for change.
That might not be a bad thing, I don't know what your severance package is (I really liked mine.) When the company is going downhill, IMHO the only way to raise employee morale is to disconnect that morale from the company. The one constructive thing I would suggest you do is network with your fellow employees. Get to know as many of them as you can, especially those doing things unrelated to you. And once you or them are laid off, keep in touch.
I had a similar experience, although it was coupled with years of re-orgs and muddled direction. I tried to push for change, but my morale broke, and I just accepted things and hoped for severance. I'd been marked as a trouble-maker, so once things got tight enough, I was out. They had to re-hire me as a contractor, and I am 10 times happier about working, and probably 3 times more effective than when I was dragging my feet from low morale (paying me almost 3 times as much too;).)
It's my understanding that if we had held the vote, and then gone ahead with war after the vote, we would be in clear violation of a UN decision. As it is, we can claim to be enforcing the previous resolution for harsh consequences or somesuch wording.
I wish they had a more complete pointer to the study, it sounds deeply flawed, like they're just trolling for an interesting sound bite. Where's the comparison with women's sweat, dog's sweat, floor wax, nothing? I don't here any mention of a control group, etc. I bet sitting most women down in a sterile environment for 10 minutes would elevate their moods without smearing anything on there noses.
This strike me as a very weak experiment, scientifically, with more vague and ill-formed conclusions drawn from there because it deals with sex.
I hope the actual study proves me wrong, but it sound like overblown crap to me, and if it is, the "researchers" should never be given public money again.
if it weren't for old age we would all live to be about 400 years old; until we had a car accident or died of flu or something.
Hmm, looking up some statistics if we stayed as healthy as 25-44yos in 1995 (190 deaths/100,000), we'd have a median lifespan of about 360 odd years. n = log(.5)/log(1-p) Keen.
If you are actually interested in reading about heritability of intelligence, I recommend Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate (and the slew of references in the back,) although almost any good popular science book on evolutionary psychology or biological cognitive science should have a discussion and refernces to studies of heritability.
Not true. Genetically, they are the same, but they shared a whole lot of developmental environment in the womb, which is likely to have a significant impact on brain development. Ontogenetically (developmentally) they are much more closely related than two ordinary siblings.
For example, fraternal twins seem to have the same correlation of left-handedness as identical twins. I understand this is because left handedness is often caused by elevated testosterone levels in the womb (which is also why more men are left handed.)
The person you were replying to is also wrong. Intelligence is nowhere near as strongly correlated as they imply. It seems to be about 50% genetic. I don't know where he came up with almost always within 5 IQ.
Construction worker Joe: Yes sir, of course sir. Construction Boss wanders off... Construction worker Larry: Stupid pointy haired fuck, doesn't know that the dot product of two perpendicular vectors is 0. Construction worker Joe: Yeah, hell, the fucking cross product isn't even a scalar! Construction worker Larry: (in a serious tone) Now be fair, he could have meant (snicker) the zero vector. (snicker) Construction worker Joe: (laughing) I suppose if I was sliding the nail along the stud. the scene devolves into derisive snickering.
This isn't so much a solution for sequentila access as marginally conditional access.
If you're mucking around in a database, you probably need to walk a chain of record references, with record A containing a pointer to record B, containing a pointer to record C. These records can be offset enough from each other that caching doesn't do the job, or the code might not be optimized to use the cache, or it might need to be synced to disk regularly. But, being in the same file, the requests are still close enough on disk to still be accessed quickly. In these cases, you'll generate a series of requests like:
Read (Block 100) Do calculations to find record A(100)->B(120) Read (Block 120) Do calculations to find record B(120)->C(150) Read (Block 150) Do calculations to find record C(150)->D(110) Read (Block 110)...
If another thread is doing reads and write at block 100000, this form of scheduling can save you a lot of time.
The problem is that the "facts" presented aren't facts, they're pure misleading statements disguised as "it'd be to boring with actual facts."
Saying that the higher murder rate in the US can't be caused by guns, because canadians have guns 7 millions guns for 10 million families isn't presenting "facts" when you fail to mention that the US has 30 times as many guns as Canada (enough to explain the difference in # (not RATE) of murders he presented) or 3+ times as many guns per capita, or over 7 times as many handguns. It's just lying. Catholic lying, lying with statistics, it's lying. If I tell you I can't pay you back because I don't have any cash, when I've got a enough rolls of quarters to do it, that's not presenting facts, that's not being a bit biased, that's LYING.
I don't really care about gun control one wya or the other, and I thought Moore made a -few- important points in the movie. I like him before I saw it, for his work on TV nation. But when I scratch the surface (I could feel him lying in the movie when he didn't present any other figures to compare against) and saw how misleading and simply wrong his srguments and his facts were, I lost all respect for the man. Rail for your beliefs and opinions all you want. You shouldn't need to lie to convince people, and if you do lie, you're being just as despicable as the corporations/republicans/whoever you're railing against.
Are they still countersuing Walmart for damages, purgery, anything?
This is not a win unless they are hurt for their actions. They still kept FatWallet from getting the word out. They've still used the DMCA to stifle legitimate works. And it hasn't cost them a thing.
Umm, no. Those are some fairly difficult to measure constants you've got there, and almost assuredly not enough to actually use as the basis of a measuring system. They are also almost as bad as say basing temperature on the boiling points of water.
The "basic" units needed: Time Length Mass Charge
With one more point thrown in for good measure: The zero of the temperature scale.
Absolute zero is a very well defined place by the laws of statistical mechanics, and clearly should be left exactly where it is.
The unit of charge should be the charge on a down quark. (1/3 e)
The basic units of time, length, and mass should be chosen so that G,c, and hBar = 1. Those are the constant of universal gravitation, the speed of light, and Planck's constant (a constant from quantum mechanics related to wave/particle duality.)
All the other units fall out from these: unit energy = (unit mass)(unit length)^2/(unit time)^2 temperature degree = 1/(unit energy)...
Slashdot Mirror
VGA graphics + 64M of disk space. Meeemories.
I want my old DOS 5.0 machine emulated. 400Mhz ARM procesor should be enough to emulate a 16Mhz 386, although I suspect emulating the memory controller would be trouble. I demand Wing Commander and Windows 3.1 on my PDA. Maybe a bit of Ultima 7.
If we stayed as healthy as 25-44yos in 1995 (190 deaths/100,000), we'd have a median lifespan of about 360 odd years. Which is still a pretty good run. I suspect we'd be more careful, and knock that rate down a bit as well. But, yeah, even extending old-age longevity to millenia we'll still run into other limits right quick.
I'd take a measly extra 200 years, though.
Who's up for a trip to Alaska to pummel this guy's parents?
Bitch of a name.
Um, he said there weren't any meltdowns *like* Chernobyl.
Math done.
Adding 3-5 watts of power is still more power consumption.
It's not like the other option is idle the CPU and keep the disk spinning, you need the CPU either way.
Of course, the original meant that the $ cost in terms of failure was higher for running the drive.
I have two televisions in my home and neither of them are plugged in.
How do you play GTA? Or FFX? Or <shudder> DDR? Tekken? Red Faction II?
Your post frightens and confuses me.
You need to convert that to present cost. Getting 5% interest on that $4, it'd be worth $10.61 by then end of the 20 year period. Averaging that out, the last watt costs you $.18 in 2023 money.
Point being, when you're doing calculations over a long period like this, it's important to take interest and alternate investments into account. Even if that cells lasted forever, that doesn't mean the average cost per watt is 0. That 4 bucks, sitting in a CD, will produce 2kWh/year forever (ignoring inflation, but the interest rate is jsut a conservative guess anyway.)
Umm, no, economy is not a zero sum game "when you take natural resources into account."
First off, economy can drastically shift the availability and distribution of resources. If lots of people need milk, then things can shift so that more people are producing milk.
Secondly, technology can dramatically increase the resources available. Increased mining efficiency, mineral scans, biotech crops, fertilizers, better farming practices, etc. can all increase the resources available, often with a direct increase in capital.
Thirdly, even if all the resources available were a fixed input, the economy would still be a positive sum game. When I trade you a back-hoe for a years supply of food, we -both- benefit. Thus, positive sum. Any freely-entered trade with complete information is a positive sum exchange. To bother entering it otherwise would be foolish.
The first half dozen occurances of the definition you quoted also included:
;)
2: (communication theory) a numerical measure of the uncertainty of an outcome; "the signal contained thousands of bits of information"
If it's a pet peeve of yours, perhaps you should make a study of statistical mechanics and information theory, where the concept and term are more clearly and quantitatively defined. With a slightly deeper understanding of statistical mechanics, you will find that ther term is more fundamental than you thought, and that they are mathematically identical, applied to two separate fields. With this understanding, your objection is similar to saying that length is defined by the distance between two ends of an object, and that talking about the length of a file, or a length of time, is completely wrong.
While the term originated in thermodynamics, it was given a formal definition (even within the realm of physics) by Boltzmann with the development of statistical mechanics. Statistical mechanics allow Boltzmann to formulate and discuss entropy well in advance of energy or temperature. When they do enter the picture, thermodynamic (dQ/dt) entropy is identical to the statistical definition, with temperature defined by 1/t = d(Energy)/d(entropy) where those ds are partial derivatives. It's actually a fascinating topic, and a beautiful mathematical insight.
The description and definition used by Boltzmann for statistical mechanics are exactly the same as those used in information theory:
Entropy = Sum (-p(state)*ln(p(state)))
(over all possible states)
Or, with all states equally likely (the equipartition principle):
Entropy = ln( # of possible states)
Which is, of course, why Shannon used the term and the definition.
Sorry to contradict you, but misunderstandings and misuse of the term entropy are also pet peeves of mine, and this is not one of them.
Dude, if I wasn't so fucking humanistically calm and stressfree, I might take offense at your uptight slander of my people's unique cultural heritage, man. ;)
Translation: You sure seem pretty mad at atheists/humanists for a Buddhist.
I don't know if you've noticed, in general, but most religion's add a lot of stress to people's lives, and to the world. They add guilt, and hatred and conflict and confusion at leat as often as the add love and serenity. I'd say a lot of the stress in the world is caused by religious conflict between Judeo-Christians and Muslims. Even if it's not exclusively religious, those situations could be defused much more readily wihout religion fanning the flames.
To the extent that it tells people to stay calm, meditate an hour a day, and treat other people as though they were yourself, I don't consider it a religion. That is how most westerners practice it, and the point of the comment you were replying to was that those attitudes have a calming effect on people.
To the extent that it tells people to believe in gods or supernatural effects, to accept dogma unquestioningly even when it disagrees with observation (ie science,) and that it's acceptable to kill people who hold opposing beliefs, I consider something a religion. Buddhism in Burma qualifie, IMNSHO.
Finally, this sort of law is a golden opporunity for a service provider to provider service that is competely unencumbered by the provisions of this "Uber DCMA". It's only valid if the "commmunications" service provider decides to enforce it.
Problem is, the friendly service provider can still be prosecuted under the law by whoever they get their T3/backbone connection from if they don't play ball. (It's still a commercial communications service, and they are connecting non-approved devices.) You'd have to have friends at the tp of the backbone to have a chance of keeping themselves safe. Or in another state, for as long as they remain free.
How can you get rid of a criminal statute if you can't find a DA willing to prosecute the case, through to the supreme court if need be?
It seems to me like it'd be pretty straightforward to find some friendly ISP in MI to say they don't want Linksys brand routers hooked up to their network. I'll show up, and tell people they can buy linksys routers at their local CompUSA.
Viola, crime ad absurdum!
The only problem is, how do we get a case like this prosecuted to the level it need to be to strike down the law? No DA is going to push that, no matter how hard both sides complain that the law is being violated.
Gah, hatred rising. Urge to move to Canada strong.
It seems to me like the basic problem with the DMCA is that we, as technologists, can readily turn speech into technologies. Thus, our speech (or speech to us) discussing the situation is, in the mind of the lawyers and legislators, technology. Since we can turn it into technology readily.
Here, the simple statement "There are serious security flaws in the Blackboard system." can (assuming it's true,) by a competent engineer, be readily turned into a device to circumvent that technology. Therefore the statement itself (without any explanation of mechanism, since we can fidn that out for ourselves with a few days/weeks/months of investigation) is technology to do so, and is in violation. The closer that statement gets to something that can be interpreted directly by an engineer ("There's a problem with the encryption." "There's a susceptability to cyclic keys." "If you encrypt one key with another, and then use that to encrypt a third, you can deduce the original key.") the fewer the steps. But we can turn any such statement into a technology, and even the simple ones ("There's a flaw") increase the circumvention technology's possibility by a few orders of magnitude.
If I came out tomorrow with a simple algorithm to find the prime factorization of any integer in a fixed (and reasonably short, say 2 hour) time, you (some of you at least) could turn that into a technology to circumvent huge swaths of security. You'd be able to turn it into technology faster than I'd be able to turn these guys observations into technology, certainly. Therefore, such a vitally important finding would be considered circumventing technology even though it is not described as such, or planned for implementation in any way.
That is, IMHO, the fundamental flaw with the DMCA, the idea that because savvy technologists can implement spech or ideas as technology, the ideas themselves become technology and are therefore verboten if the technology offends "the man." In effect, they are afraid of what engineers can do with the ideas, so our speech is less valuable.
I sure hope these guys take this thing to the top. This seems like a perfect case to get the DMCA thrown out on first amendment grounds.
Remember that you are just a developer, and it is not your job to improve morale. You may want sales to improve, but it's not your job to go poking into improving sales.
;).)
Management will notice your attempts, and if they are failing to address the morale problem, and you are trying to edge into their turf by trying to address it yourself (from their perspective, questioning their policies and pointing out their inadequacies.) You are likely to be the next one laid off if you try to push for change.
That might not be a bad thing, I don't know what your severance package is (I really liked mine.) When the company is going downhill, IMHO the only way to raise employee morale is to disconnect that morale from the company. The one constructive thing I would suggest you do is network with your fellow employees. Get to know as many of them as you can, especially those doing things unrelated to you. And once you or them are laid off, keep in touch.
I had a similar experience, although it was coupled with years of re-orgs and muddled direction. I tried to push for change, but my morale broke, and I just accepted things and hoped for severance. I'd been marked as a trouble-maker, so once things got tight enough, I was out. They had to re-hire me as a contractor, and I am 10 times happier about working, and probably 3 times more effective than when I was dragging my feet from low morale (paying me almost 3 times as much too
It's my understanding that if we had held the vote, and then gone ahead with war after the vote, we would be in clear violation of a UN decision.
As it is, we can claim to be enforcing the previous resolution for harsh consequences or somesuch wording.
I wish they had a more complete pointer to the study, it sounds deeply flawed, like they're just trolling for an interesting sound bite.
Where's the comparison with women's sweat, dog's sweat, floor wax, nothing? I don't here any mention of a control group, etc. I bet sitting most women down in a sterile environment for 10 minutes would elevate their moods without smearing anything on there noses.
This strike me as a very weak experiment, scientifically, with more vague and ill-formed conclusions drawn from there because it deals with sex.
I hope the actual study proves me wrong, but it sound like overblown crap to me, and if it is, the "researchers" should never be given public money again.
if it weren't for old age we would all live to be about 400 years old; until we had a car accident or died of flu or something.
Hmm, looking up some statistics if we stayed as healthy as 25-44yos in 1995 (190 deaths/100,000), we'd have a median lifespan of about 360 odd years.
n = log(.5)/log(1-p)
Keen.
If you are actually interested in reading about heritability of intelligence, I recommend Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate (and the slew of references in the back,) although almost any good popular science book on evolutionary psychology or biological cognitive science should have a discussion and refernces to studies of heritability.
Not true. Genetically, they are the same, but they shared a whole lot of developmental environment in the womb, which is likely to have a significant impact on brain development. Ontogenetically (developmentally) they are much more closely related than two ordinary siblings.
For example, fraternal twins seem to have the same correlation of left-handedness as identical twins. I understand this is because left handedness is often caused by elevated testosterone levels in the womb (which is also why more men are left handed.)
The person you were replying to is also wrong. Intelligence is nowhere near as strongly correlated as they imply. It seems to be about 50% genetic. I don't know where he came up with almost always within 5 IQ.
Construction worker Joe: Yes sir, of course sir.
Construction Boss wanders off...
Construction worker Larry: Stupid pointy haired fuck, doesn't know that the dot product of two perpendicular vectors is 0.
Construction worker Joe: Yeah, hell, the fucking cross product isn't even a scalar!
Construction worker Larry: (in a serious tone) Now be fair, he could have meant (snicker) the zero vector. (snicker)
Construction worker Joe: (laughing) I suppose if I was sliding the nail along the stud.
the scene devolves into derisive snickering.
This isn't so much a solution for sequentila access as marginally conditional access.
...
If you're mucking around in a database, you probably need to walk a chain of record references, with record A containing a pointer to record B, containing a pointer to record C. These records can be offset enough from each other that caching doesn't do the job, or the code might not be optimized to use the cache, or it might need to be synced to disk regularly. But, being in the same file, the requests are still close enough on disk to still be accessed quickly. In these cases, you'll generate a series of requests like:
Read (Block 100)
Do calculations to find record A(100)->B(120)
Read (Block 120)
Do calculations to find record B(120)->C(150)
Read (Block 150)
Do calculations to find record C(150)->D(110)
Read (Block 110)
If another thread is doing reads and write at block 100000, this form of scheduling can save you a lot of time.
The article is one how -quickly- planets -formed-, not how old they might be. It doesn't contradict the data you mention in any way.
It's also about gas giants rather than earhtly bodies.
The problem is that the "facts" presented aren't facts, they're pure misleading statements disguised as "it'd be to boring with actual facts."
Saying that the higher murder rate in the US can't be caused by guns, because canadians have guns 7 millions guns for 10 million families isn't presenting "facts" when you fail to mention that the US has 30 times as many guns as Canada (enough to explain the difference in # (not RATE) of murders he presented) or 3+ times as many guns per capita, or over 7 times as many handguns. It's just lying. Catholic lying, lying with statistics, it's lying. If I tell you I can't pay you back because I don't have any cash, when I've got a enough rolls of quarters to do it, that's not presenting facts, that's not being a bit biased, that's LYING.
I don't really care about gun control one wya or the other, and I thought Moore made a -few- important points in the movie. I like him before I saw it, for his work on TV nation. But when I scratch the surface (I could feel him lying in the movie when he didn't present any other figures to compare against) and saw how misleading and simply wrong his srguments and his facts were, I lost all respect for the man. Rail for your beliefs and opinions all you want. You shouldn't need to lie to convince people, and if you do lie, you're being just as despicable as the corporations/republicans/whoever you're railing against.
Are they still countersuing Walmart for damages, purgery, anything?
This is not a win unless they are hurt for their actions. They still kept FatWallet from getting the word out. They've still used the DMCA to stifle legitimate works. And it hasn't cost them a thing.
Umm, no.
...
Those are some fairly difficult to measure constants you've got there, and almost assuredly not enough to actually use as the basis of a measuring system. They are also almost as bad as say basing temperature on the boiling points of water.
The "basic" units needed:
Time
Length
Mass
Charge
With one more point thrown in for good measure:
The zero of the temperature scale.
Absolute zero is a very well defined place by the laws of statistical mechanics, and clearly should be left exactly where it is.
The unit of charge should be the charge on a down quark. (1/3 e)
The basic units of time, length, and mass should be chosen so that G,c, and hBar = 1. Those are the constant of universal gravitation, the speed of light, and Planck's constant (a constant from quantum mechanics related to wave/particle duality.)
All the other units fall out from these:
unit energy = (unit mass)(unit length)^2/(unit time)^2
temperature degree = 1/(unit energy)