That really only removes currency from US markets temporarily. If they send USD, those float around and help keep the dollar stable and valued worldwide, or they are used to buy things from the US. If they trade them for their local currency, the bank or moneylender now has more USD, which they'll use for those same purposes as well. The more USD their (presumably less-developed) country has, the more trade can occur, which helps them (raising their standard of living) and us (currency goes back to US markets, keeps circulating).
You have correct, wrong, and not even wrong statements in your comment, which is sort of rare - congrats!
First, yes, antibiotic resistance was around before humans used modern antibiotics. However, it was much less common and much less strong.
Second, artificial selection is still evolution. Eliminating a less fit portion of the population is Evolution 101, regardless of whether it's artificial or natural selection.
Lastly, new antibiotic resistance genes are showing up; sometimes they're heavily modified versions of the ones that already existed, but in other cases they seem not to be. However, more effective resistance genes are selected for, which definitely qualifies as new genetic information.
There are two problems I can see with this. First, if a cyclist is moving in the opposite direction of car traffic, any collision will involve a higher change in momentum, and thus potentially a more severe accident. Flipping onto the hood might mitigate this somewhat, I'm not sure. Second, making cyclists go against car traffic would effectively block them from going down narrow one-way streets, which are going to be more common in many areas where you'd want to ride a bike as a daily commute.
It's still mostly immune cells, but often immune cells that don't circulate in the bloodstream very much. Macrophages in the brain are a particularly hardy reservoir, along with follicular helper cells, which can be in lymph nodes and a couple other places.
I'm sure there are lots of conspiracy theorists out there who do think that, but the sad fact of the matter is that it gets a lot of places and it's just hard to get rid of. We'll probably get there eventually, but it'll take time.
Yeah, sorry, you lost this one. Plenty of those definitions include "before puberty", which excludes someone who is 14. But hey, in case you wanted another one: how about this? Note the first one, "an unborn or recently born person".
While I agree placing a 14 year old on this sort of list is stupid - teenagers aren't that responsible, and they shouldn't get hit with the horrors of the judicial system for sending nudes - they aren't children "by every definition". And you're being kind of an ass about it, which really doesn't help your cause.
Sorry, that's a common myth. Most people who get caught using heroin are addicted to it, but there are actually a fair number of people who have been regularly but infrequently using it for quite some time.
Well, that's not true at all. Light to moderate consumption of heroin isn't as bad as people think, but if you used it as often as a moderate beer drinker, that would certainly be worse.
Actually, modern SAMs (especially the man-portable ones) are too good at killing A-10s. The A-10 used to be amazing at dealing with missile hits; unfortunately, not so much any more.
I'm wondering if they could add some of the new stuff they're working on to protect Humvees and tanks from RPG fire to the A-10. That would probably help quite a bit.
Oh, definitely. $1M will do a lot, and there are definitely tons of labs that could use it. Or even start an endowment at a few universities so they can have more PIs.
As far as I'm aware, ERs across the country (in every state) have to stabilize people. They don't have to make sure they'll be stable for long, or treat any underlying conditions, but they can't kick someone out who is actively bleeding to death, for instance.
And in Europe, you're starting to see some of the reasons America hasn't gone with that plan; the more people coming in as immigrants or requesting asylum who either can't or won't work, or if they do, pay very little in taxes, the less well those systems work.
They'd have no basis to sue you. I doubt you'd even need to get a lawyer - any competent judge would tell them to fuck off when they tried to file the suit. Yeah, some people would squander the gift and then ask for more money, but you don't have to give it to them. They already got a bigger break than most people do. Furthermore, there's no problem with giving it anonymously - that's still a good thing.
Sure, you create envy and resentment. That doesn't change the fact that you did a good thing. Yes, people will be upset at you for not doing something for them, but that's because humans are kind of assholes that way. It would still help people. Do it anonymously if you really want to.
You'll still be set apart, but I think if you are really sincere about it, people will know. If nothing else, hiring people who can help you find projects to do will combat isolation - just think of "giving money away responsibly" as a job. Find other people to do that with.
I agree, not working drives a lot of people crazy. That doesn't mean he can't work though; he could donate time to various things instead. Hell, doing research on what you want to give money away to could take up a substantial amount of time, depending on how diligent you want to be.
Well, that depends on how you define "hot". The longer the half-life, the less radiation it puts out per unit time. So, while some uranium isotopes are radioactive for a long time, they aren't very radioactive. Fukushima will, as far as I know, not be that radioactive for that long because the type of meltdown was different and the reactor design was better.
Yeah, I was going to say "put aside enough money to live relatively comfortably for the rest of your life, then give most of it away". That way you probably won't have to work if you don't want to, and you aren't isolated.
Or just do random acts of kindness - pay off a whole neighborhood's mortgages, or something. Help some disadvantaged kids get better teachers, provide clean water or infrastructure in developing countries, donate money to interesting research projects. Help unemployed people learn new trades. There's plenty to do, and it might help with his social isolation as well.
Slashdot Mirror
That really only removes currency from US markets temporarily. If they send USD, those float around and help keep the dollar stable and valued worldwide, or they are used to buy things from the US. If they trade them for their local currency, the bank or moneylender now has more USD, which they'll use for those same purposes as well. The more USD their (presumably less-developed) country has, the more trade can occur, which helps them (raising their standard of living) and us (currency goes back to US markets, keeps circulating).
You have correct, wrong, and not even wrong statements in your comment, which is sort of rare - congrats!
First, yes, antibiotic resistance was around before humans used modern antibiotics. However, it was much less common and much less strong.
Second, artificial selection is still evolution. Eliminating a less fit portion of the population is Evolution 101, regardless of whether it's artificial or natural selection.
Lastly, new antibiotic resistance genes are showing up; sometimes they're heavily modified versions of the ones that already existed, but in other cases they seem not to be. However, more effective resistance genes are selected for, which definitely qualifies as new genetic information.
There are two problems I can see with this. First, if a cyclist is moving in the opposite direction of car traffic, any collision will involve a higher change in momentum, and thus potentially a more severe accident. Flipping onto the hood might mitigate this somewhat, I'm not sure. Second, making cyclists go against car traffic would effectively block them from going down narrow one-way streets, which are going to be more common in many areas where you'd want to ride a bike as a daily commute.
It's still mostly immune cells, but often immune cells that don't circulate in the bloodstream very much. Macrophages in the brain are a particularly hardy reservoir, along with follicular helper cells, which can be in lymph nodes and a couple other places.
I'm sure there are lots of conspiracy theorists out there who do think that, but the sad fact of the matter is that it gets a lot of places and it's just hard to get rid of. We'll probably get there eventually, but it'll take time.
You know, I've been trying to find the source of that statement, and I haven't been able to. My apologies, I guess I was wrong.
Yeah, sorry, you lost this one. Plenty of those definitions include "before puberty", which excludes someone who is 14. But hey, in case you wanted another one: how about this? Note the first one, "an unborn or recently born person".
While I agree placing a 14 year old on this sort of list is stupid - teenagers aren't that responsible, and they shouldn't get hit with the horrors of the judicial system for sending nudes - they aren't children "by every definition". And you're being kind of an ass about it, which really doesn't help your cause.
Class action lawsuit, maybe?
Now there's an account I'd follow!
But then they'd have to skip the private jets and cocaine! That's clearly unreasonable.
Sorry, that's a common myth. Most people who get caught using heroin are addicted to it, but there are actually a fair number of people who have been regularly but infrequently using it for quite some time.
Well, that's not true at all. Light to moderate consumption of heroin isn't as bad as people think, but if you used it as often as a moderate beer drinker, that would certainly be worse.
That was a good, informative comment. If I had mod points, you'd get some!
Actually, modern SAMs (especially the man-portable ones) are too good at killing A-10s. The A-10 used to be amazing at dealing with missile hits; unfortunately, not so much any more.
Not to disagree with your other points, but the F-35 isn't supposed to be an air superiority fighter, that's the F-22.
I'm wondering if they could add some of the new stuff they're working on to protect Humvees and tanks from RPG fire to the A-10. That would probably help quite a bit.
Oh, definitely. $1M will do a lot, and there are definitely tons of labs that could use it. Or even start an endowment at a few universities so they can have more PIs.
US laws apply outside the US if the other country signs treaties that say they'll follow those laws.
As far as I'm aware, ERs across the country (in every state) have to stabilize people. They don't have to make sure they'll be stable for long, or treat any underlying conditions, but they can't kick someone out who is actively bleeding to death, for instance.
And in Europe, you're starting to see some of the reasons America hasn't gone with that plan; the more people coming in as immigrants or requesting asylum who either can't or won't work, or if they do, pay very little in taxes, the less well those systems work.
I think you missed the point of the post; monetary compensation was pretty specifically exempted. Effort was not, which makes sense.
They'd have no basis to sue you. I doubt you'd even need to get a lawyer - any competent judge would tell them to fuck off when they tried to file the suit. Yeah, some people would squander the gift and then ask for more money, but you don't have to give it to them. They already got a bigger break than most people do. Furthermore, there's no problem with giving it anonymously - that's still a good thing.
Sure, you create envy and resentment. That doesn't change the fact that you did a good thing. Yes, people will be upset at you for not doing something for them, but that's because humans are kind of assholes that way. It would still help people. Do it anonymously if you really want to.
You'll still be set apart, but I think if you are really sincere about it, people will know. If nothing else, hiring people who can help you find projects to do will combat isolation - just think of "giving money away responsibly" as a job. Find other people to do that with.
I agree, not working drives a lot of people crazy. That doesn't mean he can't work though; he could donate time to various things instead. Hell, doing research on what you want to give money away to could take up a substantial amount of time, depending on how diligent you want to be.
Well, that depends on how you define "hot". The longer the half-life, the less radiation it puts out per unit time. So, while some uranium isotopes are radioactive for a long time, they aren't very radioactive. Fukushima will, as far as I know, not be that radioactive for that long because the type of meltdown was different and the reactor design was better.
Yeah, I was going to say "put aside enough money to live relatively comfortably for the rest of your life, then give most of it away". That way you probably won't have to work if you don't want to, and you aren't isolated.
Or just do random acts of kindness - pay off a whole neighborhood's mortgages, or something. Help some disadvantaged kids get better teachers, provide clean water or infrastructure in developing countries, donate money to interesting research projects. Help unemployed people learn new trades. There's plenty to do, and it might help with his social isolation as well.
Hell, even the Native Americans are immigrants. They came from Africa just like everyone else.