there are many kinds of tinnitus, but the most common, the persistent ringing that i suffer from and a lot of others do , is, in fact, a form of phantom limb phenomenon
tinnitus is deafness, except just like that lost hand or that lost foot, sometimes the body maps the lack of information from that dead inner ear cell to the permanent "on" position, to tinnitus sufferer's permanent torture
so any research on phantom limbs is important to a lot more people reading this than the exotic few missing a limb
there are other body processes which neurologists are beginning to rethink as phaton limb phenomena. neuralgia, for example:
the perversity is that so many people with tinnitus or neuralgia focus on treating the area where the sensation occurs. when the source of the sensation is actually deep in the brain
so solly! please to be folgiving, i not know insclutable asian palt of mindless botnet!
"The bulk of Chinese intel is heavily distributed. The world's largest families don't need to rely on 007 agents; they can aggregate huge quantities of data by getting observant volunteers from the chinese diaspora to send bits of info back home through regular channels, like aunt Ping or even uncle James. It's so distributed it doesn't look like spying, and it isn't really, in the traditional sense."
please, educate little knee jerk foolish me. describe how this works exactly
this is what it sounds like right now: so we have chinese americans. and they are doing what exactly? they hear bits and pieces. a guy walks by them on the street and they overhear a bit of conversation? then the next chinese person, he sees parts of a file on a disk drive. and these peopple "unwittingly" do this through... family gatherings? what are they, robots? oh right, they ARE: "I think it's brilliant, even if wholly dependent on the chinese sense of family ties. A malware attack is a similar approach: it doesn't look like the work of spies, at first, and it's broadly distributed."
so chinese americans, you know, they go the laundromat or the chinese restaurant, as they all do, right? and there they consort and whisper all their gems of intel, and through "aunt ping", pass the info back to the mothership, i mean, er, the chinese communist party, since all asian people are obedient ant-like slaves to the old country, right? do i understand your genius grasp on the secret truth of the world i deny out of my liberal bleeding heart yet?
please! tell me where i am wrong in that description, i await my enlightenment
i especially like the reference to the cuban mariel boatlift at the end there. emphasis: CUBAN. china's going to send 60 million refugees to the usa? really? on what? airplanes? rafts? pffffffffft
all the indignation about "buy american" and chinese labor conditions is exactly that: empty indignation. when it comes down to actually buying the crap you need, you go to walmart, and buy the cheapest stuff. end of story
oh sure, there's people with enough disposable income and reams of time to actually go out of their way to buy harder to find, more expensive stuff. i salute all 10 of you. as for the other 300 million of you who will give lipservice to a "cause" while you go on buying you crap at walmart, i see only one thing: reality
and you talk about tariffs. even more retarded efforts on your part. lets make lots of stuff more expensive for vague geopolitical goals of doubtful impact. yeah, you have a lot of support from the average joe who now has to spend much more of his scant income in order to do that. protectionism just makes us poorer, and the chinese poorer. and speaking of tits and weaning, the chinese atuocracy was weaned on the tit of poverty and suffering. so by making eveyrone poorer, you've just tightened the autocrats grasp in china, and also moved US closer to autocracy. you're a fucking genius
china makes the cheapest stuff. therefore we will buy it. therefore, we need ANOTHER WAY TO CHANGE CHINA. understand? you're feeble graps of pulling the strings on international trade is not the way
the big problem here is not that i don't share the noble goals of those who wish to defeat chinese autocracy, chinese autocracy is evil and needs to be defeated. my problem is with the cottonheaded idotic ways people think you go about doing this. buying more expensive stuff IS NOT THE WAY
so, how do you defeat the autocrats? you continue buying their cheap stuff, they get rich, then they clamor for change in their own country. how does chinese autocracy end? with a rich china. furthermore, with a rich china, guess what? the price differential for making stuff in the usa versus china simply disappears, putting american manufacturing back into competitiveness, especially since you don't have to put it on a supertanker to get it here
the whole philosopphical schizm between you and i is that you think you change someone else by denying them something. meanwhile, i change them by giving them something. my way is superior, your way gets nowhere
fixed quick because it wasn't that big of an impact
now imagine a larger impact. not enough transformer stock to fix the problem
now we're talking 9 weeks without power
"The article cites Quebec in 1989 as an example, yet today Quebec doesn't seem to be the desolate Fallout style wasteland where everyone is fending for themselves and millions die that the article infers might happen."
no one says we're going to go into a mad max scenario. just that, yes, if the entire northern hemisphere had no power for 9 weeks, gee, i dunno, maybe bad things might happen? and maybe we should do something about it? liek maybe the easy quick fixes to our power system to take the transformers offline quickly if they get a warning from NOAA? is that really such a terrible order?
you can't on the edges of your imagination, think that perhaps something bad might happen with a CME and maybe perhaps we should take the small easy prudent steps to guard against it?
why do you feel the need to dispute this? why do you feel the need to attack the most emotionally histrionic interpretations of this scenario when just the prudent rational interpretation of the bad effects is enough to convince anyone calm and rational that the easy steps to guard against another carrington effect are maybe warranted?
why do you think the subject of your post is even remotely valid or useful for anyone considering this issue seriously? or do you lack the perceptive abilities to see that perhaps this issue does need to be taken seriously, and, even that, gasp, the fix isn't a big deal!
no one is thinking we're in beyond the thunderdome territory. nobody serious thinks that. do you got that? why do you think you add anything to the discussion by pointing out that since tina turner is not riding around in quebec in a chainmail bra shouting "two men enter, one man leaves!" that therefore, the carrington effect is nothing to worry about?
start there. follow the links. read. educate yourself
THEN comment
the issue here has absolutely nothing to do with static electricty, or small electronics. it has to do with electromagnetic induction across long powerlines
why is it we have to live in a world where the dumbest amongst us are usually also the loudest?
all of the naysayers seem to point out examples that mean absolutely nothing about what we are talking about here
1. "i live in a rural area, everything will be fine"
actually yes, you are right, i agree rural areas will be totally fine. now: tell us about major urban centers, with population densities intrinsically dependent upon regular power, that would experience serious problems
2. "we had a power outage, it wasn't that bad"
yeah: it lasted a few days. we're talking MONTHS here
3. "i come from a place with regular places intermittent power outages, we did ok"
yeah, and life adapts when thats the status quo. we are talking about a highly electricty dependent society, that has had regular pwoer for decades, suddenly without power FOR MONTHS
4. "you can get the transformers up quick, you can cannibalize 2 or 3 and get one working ok"
all the transformers would be destroyed in exactly the same way. there is no backup supply on hand, adequate supply and distribution and installation would take weeks, months
its not the lack of power that is the issue. the issue is the suddenness, the long time period, and the effect on high density areas that have grown accustomed to reliable electrity. so a lot of the naysayers here don't seem to attack the real issue here, and teach us nothing, not a damn thing, about what it would be like for that society which has depended upon regular power for decades, to suddenly not have it at all
and then there is the idea this is all some sort of hollywood movie driven hysterical fearmongering. what? no one is pissing in their pants. its a valid concern, and the fix is not very difficult, and people are talking about it calmly. we cant' do that without being accused of screaming "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" really?
its worth discussing rationally and doing something about it? we have to do nothing about this problem because you think this is false alarmism? well, false alarmism is a real problem in this world. so is a false sense of complacency. it depends upon the nature of the problem. here we are talking about an issue which is relatively easy to fix, a valid long term concern, compared to threats like religious extremism or an asteroid the size of a football field. so why not discuss it rationally and go fix it?
if the source of the magnetic torque is 3 feet from you, extends 5 feet, and the wire in question is 1.5 feet, then it is possible to orient everything in just such a way that a dangerous current is induced
but on the scale of a geomagnetic storm, 1.5 feet isn't enough, i don't think. you'd need a wire a few miles long to pick up on a global effect, i think
again, i could be wrong, but the way my mind is thinking about it in analogy is: your pacemaker is a kid's pinwheel, and a nearby electric motor is a squirt gun. its possible to aim the squirt gun just right and cause the pinwheel to turn. but a geomagnetic storm is like taking a bathtub of water and dumping it on the pinwheel: its more likely the pinwheel won't even move, as the mass of water flows over it, since there's no pressure applied in scale to the object. now, pour that bathtub on a watermill in a river though, and it would push the thing along. the key is scale
somebody else here can probably say what i'm thinking a lot better than this;-P
the problem with a powerful moving magnetic field is induction: it forces eletron flow in wires. emphasis: wires, or any piece of metal with a large ratio of length/ width/ height to the other two dimensions. a wire is a perfect victim for a moving magnetic field because it presents a very long cross section to the magnetic field, and thats what makes the induction powerful
meanwhile, your medtronic device is small and compact, so it doesn't present a large cross section to the magnetic field as it hits the earth
acceptance of ugly truths about your world is just maturity, in my mind
but your permanent infantilization scheme does have some actual evolutionary theory behind it: part of our evolution from earlier simians had to do with the retention of childlike characteristics into adulthood: our minds remain plastic, we can learn for a long time, we are hairless, we have no more prominent brow or jutting jaw. we are in effect, mental and physical monkey babies
however, i still think you are a crackpot. but that shouldn't deter you. go ahead and prove me wrong, and good luck
to exorcise simple greed from the human mind as you would exorcising the desire to have sex
greed is greed is greed. monkeys, insects, hell even bacteria understand the notion: get it all for yourself
its an instinctual drive deeper and more rooted in the human mind than any social system you could ever possibly devise. it is not taught. it is organic. children brought up in isolation from any social influence you deem harmful would spontaneously recreate it
so you need to work with greed, because there's no getting rid of it
or choose to reject my words. that's fine. i don't really expect you to listen to me. such is your passion. there are in fact people on this planet who do not want to have sex. asexuality is a real psychological phenomenon. likewise, i believe there are psychological classes of people, such as yourself, who are fanatically altruistic organically. no greed
but the fanatical altruists, and the organically asexual: we are talking about classes of psychology that are firmly and permanently in the minority, and have no hope to influence the majority. not that that will stop you. nor should it
i don't think you should stop with your attempts at creating your visions. why? because your uptopian scheme, like the millions that have come before it and the millions that will come after, they DO serve a valid purpose in society: it keeps people like you occupied in mediocrity and obscurity, and away from real businesses that works and real society that works, where you might do real damage
never considers itself complete, always acknowledges there are holes, and looks at all anomalies as potential realignments of contemporary dogma
yes, there are plenty of closed minded scientists who scoff at challenges to established dogma. but these are human frailties, not aspects of what real science is. in the early 1980s there was an australian scientist who said stomach ulcers were caused by an infectious agent. he was laughed at. now, he has the nobel prize, and we have isolated that bacterium. in other words, science is not captive to entrenched unyielding dogma. it is flexible, it can change
now contrast that with creationism. creationism starts with an untestable hypothesis and adheres to it as unassailable truth. theres nothing to debate. theres nothing to argue about. there is an idea put forth that no one can probe with their minds or find fault with. you either accept creationism, or you reject it. but it is entirely rigid and opaque
this is not science. it has no place in science. it is alternative idea for why we and other living creatures are here. but it is not science, and it never will be science. it cannot be taught along with evolutionary theory. it simply doesn't belong. talk about it in church, pleas,e be my guest. but it has zero validity in any scientific context, including a classroom whose purpose is to teac children science
in other words, you have it backwards when you point out that there are holes in evolutionary theory and this is a weakness. on the contrary: the holes in evolutionary theory are aspects of its strength, adaptability to new discoveries, and intellectual honesty
creationism puts forth an idea. the idea cannot be tested. end of story
perhaps it would be better to release the members of the board into a remote ecosystem with limited resources, and allow them to compete, whereby the most well-adapted board member is selectively chosen not to starve, and he or she at that point decides the issue of whether or not to teach evolution
if on the other hand, angels are heard singing, a bright light shines from the sky, and a booming voice chooses one particular board member while the rest perish in a scream and a flash, destined for eternity to hell, maybe that will decide the issue instead
i am not foolish enough that i think i can convert a True Believer in a forum thread
the only thing that will teach you is to try and fail on your own terms. there are many suboptimal business structures out there. you can limp along in mediocrity for decades. but you won't achieve true business success, at least i don't think. hell, prove me wrong, go for it, i don't know everything. but i'm completely unimpressed. all you have here is a formula for mediocre marginalia in my mind
ideas on organization are always in competition. what is the yardstick we use to measure them? simple monetary success or monetary failure. if this structure you champion is based on nothing more than a desire to compete and win in a pure business environment, then it is sound, and will succeed, and beat out other organizational structures
or it won't
welcome the jubngle of ideas, competing in darwinian struggle. you're going to need more than optimistic idealism to survive out there. good luck, little pioneer
rule of thumb: if your plans for a group/ community/ company/ society relies upon people acting dependably in ways no group of humans have ever acted, in any society, in the history of the world, its gonna fail
human nature is what it is. learn its good parts, learn its ugly parts, and don't imagine you are ever going to change them
a business is not run on holier-than-thou shaming. either intellectual property laws are enforceable, or intellectual property laws are unenforceable. if they are unenforceable, which the internet and a billion poor teenagers with a broadband connection, no money, and little interest or respect for the law have shown, then there is no business in media anymore. furthermore, the internet is borderless, and other countries have no such regard for intellectual property laws, nor did they ever. who is to say your attitude toward sintellectual property is correct and their's is wrong?
you can make all the withering shaming speeches you want. you can't run on a business on that. can you enforce the law? or not? beginning and end of issue
intellectual property law, which is a gentleman's agreement amongst a few publishers, is not morality. please stop thinking you can defend a business practice with nothing more than attitude
intellectual property was created as a sort of gentleman's agreement, when there were only a handful of real publishers in the world. now every teenager with a broadband connection is a publisher. such that the gentleman's agreement is unenforceable nowadays
i'm not defending piracy, i am simply asking you to consider the notion that your attitude is simply unsustainable on the internet
that is, if your entire defense of creators consists of whining, creators really don't have any rights any more. you need to actually defend creator's rights. effectively. i just don't see that being possible anymore. that it doesn't matter what the law is, because the de facto status on the web is poor teenagers with a broadband, zero interest in or knowledge of the law, and a hungry need for software
when publishing consisted of a guy with a vinyl press or a cassette duplicator, piracy was small, slow, and easily trackable. now its everywhere, sparse, and done in countries without the sort of intellectual property laws you apparently rely on as some sort of moral code
maybe the attitude towards intellectual property in other countries is the proper attitude and your attitude is wrong? maybe you should get off your high horse and adjust your attitude to the reality? maybe creators need to find some other way of sustaining income other than exorbitant fees for a distribution medium which is completely porous?
or ignore, dismiss me as an immoral pirate, and continue whining about a notion which is completely ignored and unenforced. reality: you need to look at it. your current attitude seems to be built in defiance of the reality you find yourself in
"This statement is meaningless and definitely explains a lot of your other posts on the subject"
i don't know what you are referring to, but if you are referring to something like music file trading, then i have to wonder at your definition of "meaningless"
copyright and intellectual proerty are laws that are in effect, gentleman's agreements. from a distant past before the internet when the only people who published anything were a small handful. and when mr. cassette tape duplicator set up shop in a warehouse, he was easy to find, easy to shut down, and small in scale and scope
now, every teenager with a teenager has the same power of bertelsmannin in 1980, if not more, in global reach
now, i am the meaningless one: you tell me, how do you enforce quaint gentleman's agreements from the age of vinyl when the country club is being sacked by 100 million teenagers with broadband connections?
i don't know, the ability to enforce a law doesn't seem meaningless to me
if you can't enforce, the law is de facto null and void
that concept does mean something to you right?
the government can pass all the laws they want. if there is no effective way to enforce such laws, what exactly do you think the value of that law is?
does it use the same protocol/ standards/ customs as gmail to communicate with the server?
well then you're screwed. google has a good mode of attack there
but surely you don't think the legal standards are so opaque that you couldn't shove the code out of that narrow cone of similarity necessary for legal enforcement
who needs a fucking license?
look at the damn js file, understand it, reverse engineer it, make it your own in such a blendered way that it is obvious you started with gmail but you are safely out of the legal line of fire
its a question of gradual easy degrees. its trivial to mess around with the code to enough of a degree that you are safely out of the legal line of fire with confidence. and this effort would most certainly be quicker and easier than starting from scratch
any obfuscating process you can describe to me is equally and easily reversible
for crying out loud, they have been teasing high level code out of compiled programs for decades. now that's hard
meanwhile, deobfuscating a bunch of ascii text is not exactly an NSA level effort here. it has to retain coherence for the browser in order to be interpretted, speedily. therefore, it is easy to deobfuscate
Slashdot Mirror
a lot of people suffer from it
there are many kinds of tinnitus, but the most common, the persistent ringing that i suffer from and a lot of others do , is, in fact, a form of phantom limb phenomenon
tinnitus is deafness, except just like that lost hand or that lost foot, sometimes the body maps the lack of information from that dead inner ear cell to the permanent "on" position, to tinnitus sufferer's permanent torture
so any research on phantom limbs is important to a lot more people reading this than the exotic few missing a limb
there are other body processes which neurologists are beginning to rethink as phaton limb phenomena. neuralgia, for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuralgia
the perversity is that so many people with tinnitus or neuralgia focus on treating the area where the sensation occurs. when the source of the sensation is actually deep in the brain
please to be folgiving, i not know insclutable asian palt of mindless botnet!
your post is racist nonsense, regardless of your intent
so solly! please to be folgiving, i not know insclutable asian palt of mindless botnet!
"The bulk of Chinese intel is heavily distributed. The world's largest families don't need to rely on 007 agents; they can aggregate huge quantities of data by getting observant volunteers from the chinese diaspora to send bits of info back home through regular channels, like aunt Ping or even uncle James. It's so distributed it doesn't look like spying, and it isn't really, in the traditional sense."
please, educate little knee jerk foolish me. describe how this works exactly
this is what it sounds like right now: so we have chinese americans. and they are doing what exactly? they hear bits and pieces. a guy walks by them on the street and they overhear a bit of conversation? then the next chinese person, he sees parts of a file on a disk drive. and these peopple "unwittingly" do this through... family gatherings? what are they, robots? oh right, they ARE: "I think it's brilliant, even if wholly dependent on the chinese sense of family ties. A malware attack is a similar approach: it doesn't look like the work of spies, at first, and it's broadly distributed."
so chinese americans, you know, they go the laundromat or the chinese restaurant, as they all do, right? and there they consort and whisper all their gems of intel, and through "aunt ping", pass the info back to the mothership, i mean, er, the chinese communist party, since all asian people are obedient ant-like slaves to the old country, right? do i understand your genius grasp on the secret truth of the world i deny out of my liberal bleeding heart yet?
please! tell me where i am wrong in that description, i await my enlightenment
look! a chinese american! part of the "gossamer net" of unwitting spies!
and you got modded up?
well then we have now identified one potent weapon against the "gossamer net": the american flypaper of xenophobic retards
or maybe i'm being unfair, maybe you were modded up for your eloquent, flowery language
strangely reminescent of a qing dynasty poem!
hmmmm
i just love the way people poopoo american foreign policy and big business
as they gas up their SUVs
and go shop at walmart
the problem is not big business
the problem is not the american government
nothing but empty cruft compared to the real problem: the behavior of the american consumer
you convince them to spend $10 a gallon on gas, you convince them to buiy their crap at 2x the price. go for it
stop blaming esoteric entities when the real problem is sitting right there, in front your computer, reading this post
YOU AND YOUR OWN BEHAVIOR
i especially like the reference to the cuban mariel boatlift at the end there. emphasis: CUBAN. china's going to send 60 million refugees to the usa? really? on what? airplanes? rafts? pffffffffft
all the indignation about "buy american" and chinese labor conditions is exactly that: empty indignation. when it comes down to actually buying the crap you need, you go to walmart, and buy the cheapest stuff. end of story
oh sure, there's people with enough disposable income and reams of time to actually go out of their way to buy harder to find, more expensive stuff. i salute all 10 of you. as for the other 300 million of you who will give lipservice to a "cause" while you go on buying you crap at walmart, i see only one thing: reality
and you talk about tariffs. even more retarded efforts on your part. lets make lots of stuff more expensive for vague geopolitical goals of doubtful impact. yeah, you have a lot of support from the average joe who now has to spend much more of his scant income in order to do that. protectionism just makes us poorer, and the chinese poorer. and speaking of tits and weaning, the chinese atuocracy was weaned on the tit of poverty and suffering. so by making eveyrone poorer, you've just tightened the autocrats grasp in china, and also moved US closer to autocracy. you're a fucking genius
china makes the cheapest stuff. therefore we will buy it. therefore, we need ANOTHER WAY TO CHANGE CHINA. understand? you're feeble graps of pulling the strings on international trade is not the way
the big problem here is not that i don't share the noble goals of those who wish to defeat chinese autocracy, chinese autocracy is evil and needs to be defeated. my problem is with the cottonheaded idotic ways people think you go about doing this. buying more expensive stuff IS NOT THE WAY
so, how do you defeat the autocrats? you continue buying their cheap stuff, they get rich, then they clamor for change in their own country. how does chinese autocracy end? with a rich china. furthermore, with a rich china, guess what? the price differential for making stuff in the usa versus china simply disappears, putting american manufacturing back into competitiveness, especially since you don't have to put it on a supertanker to get it here
the whole philosopphical schizm between you and i is that you think you change someone else by denying them something. meanwhile, i change them by giving them something. my way is superior, your way gets nowhere
fixed quick because it wasn't that big of an impact
now imagine a larger impact. not enough transformer stock to fix the problem
now we're talking 9 weeks without power
"The article cites Quebec in 1989 as an example, yet today Quebec doesn't seem to be the desolate Fallout style wasteland where everyone is fending for themselves and millions die that the article infers might happen."
no one says we're going to go into a mad max scenario. just that, yes, if the entire northern hemisphere had no power for 9 weeks, gee, i dunno, maybe bad things might happen? and maybe we should do something about it? liek maybe the easy quick fixes to our power system to take the transformers offline quickly if they get a warning from NOAA? is that really such a terrible order?
you can't on the edges of your imagination, think that perhaps something bad might happen with a CME and maybe perhaps we should take the small easy prudent steps to guard against it?
why do you feel the need to dispute this? why do you feel the need to attack the most emotionally histrionic interpretations of this scenario when just the prudent rational interpretation of the bad effects is enough to convince anyone calm and rational that the easy steps to guard against another carrington effect are maybe warranted?
why do you think the subject of your post is even remotely valid or useful for anyone considering this issue seriously? or do you lack the perceptive abilities to see that perhaps this issue does need to be taken seriously, and, even that, gasp, the fix isn't a big deal!
no one is thinking we're in beyond the thunderdome territory. nobody serious thinks that. do you got that? why do you think you add anything to the discussion by pointing out that since tina turner is not riding around in quebec in a chainmail bra shouting "two men enter, one man leaves!" that therefore, the carrington effect is nothing to worry about?
you are clearly ignorant. this is not meant as a throwaway insult, but a qualitative judgment of your words on the subject matter
here's some intellectual charity:
http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/electromag/java/faraday2/
start there. follow the links. read. educate yourself
THEN comment
the issue here has absolutely nothing to do with static electricty, or small electronics. it has to do with electromagnetic induction across long powerlines
why is it we have to live in a world where the dumbest amongst us are usually also the loudest?
hit that critter at the right time with that taser, and you could kill it AND COOK IT, all at the same time
this is helpful with squeamish city dwellers who will be killing their first wild game for food. just tell them its god's microwave oven at work
all of the naysayers seem to point out examples that mean absolutely nothing about what we are talking about here
1. "i live in a rural area, everything will be fine"
actually yes, you are right, i agree rural areas will be totally fine. now: tell us about major urban centers, with population densities intrinsically dependent upon regular power, that would experience serious problems
2. "we had a power outage, it wasn't that bad"
yeah: it lasted a few days. we're talking MONTHS here
3. "i come from a place with regular places intermittent power outages, we did ok"
yeah, and life adapts when thats the status quo. we are talking about a highly electricty dependent society, that has had regular pwoer for decades, suddenly without power FOR MONTHS
4. "you can get the transformers up quick, you can cannibalize 2 or 3 and get one working ok"
all the transformers would be destroyed in exactly the same way. there is no backup supply on hand, adequate supply and distribution and installation would take weeks, months
its not the lack of power that is the issue. the issue is the suddenness, the long time period, and the effect on high density areas that have grown accustomed to reliable electrity. so a lot of the naysayers here don't seem to attack the real issue here, and teach us nothing, not a damn thing, about what it would be like for that society which has depended upon regular power for decades, to suddenly not have it at all
and then there is the idea this is all some sort of hollywood movie driven hysterical fearmongering. what? no one is pissing in their pants. its a valid concern, and the fix is not very difficult, and people are talking about it calmly. we cant' do that without being accused of screaming "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!" really?
its worth discussing rationally and doing something about it? we have to do nothing about this problem because you think this is false alarmism? well, false alarmism is a real problem in this world. so is a false sense of complacency. it depends upon the nature of the problem. here we are talking about an issue which is relatively easy to fix, a valid long term concern, compared to threats like religious extremism or an asteroid the size of a football field. so why not discuss it rationally and go fix it?
if the source of the magnetic torque is 3 feet from you, extends 5 feet, and the wire in question is 1.5 feet, then it is possible to orient everything in just such a way that a dangerous current is induced
but on the scale of a geomagnetic storm, 1.5 feet isn't enough, i don't think. you'd need a wire a few miles long to pick up on a global effect, i think
again, i could be wrong, but the way my mind is thinking about it in analogy is: your pacemaker is a kid's pinwheel, and a nearby electric motor is a squirt gun. its possible to aim the squirt gun just right and cause the pinwheel to turn. but a geomagnetic storm is like taking a bathtub of water and dumping it on the pinwheel: its more likely the pinwheel won't even move, as the mass of water flows over it, since there's no pressure applied in scale to the object. now, pour that bathtub on a watermill in a river though, and it would push the thing along. the key is scale
somebody else here can probably say what i'm thinking a lot better than this ;-P
the problem with a powerful moving magnetic field is induction: it forces eletron flow in wires. emphasis: wires, or any piece of metal with a large ratio of length/ width/ height to the other two dimensions. a wire is a perfect victim for a moving magnetic field because it presents a very long cross section to the magnetic field, and thats what makes the induction powerful
meanwhile, your medtronic device is small and compact, so it doesn't present a large cross section to the magnetic field as it hits the earth
just make sure you make note of the fact that you are occupied in mediocrity and obscurity replying to said ass ;-)
acceptance of ugly truths about your world is just maturity, in my mind
but your permanent infantilization scheme does have some actual evolutionary theory behind it: part of our evolution from earlier simians had to do with the retention of childlike characteristics into adulthood: our minds remain plastic, we can learn for a long time, we are hairless, we have no more prominent brow or jutting jaw. we are in effect, mental and physical monkey babies
however, i still think you are a crackpot. but that shouldn't deter you. go ahead and prove me wrong, and good luck
to exorcise simple greed from the human mind as you would exorcising the desire to have sex
greed is greed is greed. monkeys, insects, hell even bacteria understand the notion: get it all for yourself
its an instinctual drive deeper and more rooted in the human mind than any social system you could ever possibly devise. it is not taught. it is organic. children brought up in isolation from any social influence you deem harmful would spontaneously recreate it
so you need to work with greed, because there's no getting rid of it
or choose to reject my words. that's fine. i don't really expect you to listen to me. such is your passion. there are in fact people on this planet who do not want to have sex. asexuality is a real psychological phenomenon. likewise, i believe there are psychological classes of people, such as yourself, who are fanatically altruistic organically. no greed
but the fanatical altruists, and the organically asexual: we are talking about classes of psychology that are firmly and permanently in the minority, and have no hope to influence the majority. not that that will stop you. nor should it
i don't think you should stop with your attempts at creating your visions. why? because your uptopian scheme, like the millions that have come before it and the millions that will come after, they DO serve a valid purpose in society: it keeps people like you occupied in mediocrity and obscurity, and away from real businesses that works and real society that works, where you might do real damage
xoxoxoxoxoxoxox
never considers itself complete, always acknowledges there are holes, and looks at all anomalies as potential realignments of contemporary dogma
yes, there are plenty of closed minded scientists who scoff at challenges to established dogma. but these are human frailties, not aspects of what real science is. in the early 1980s there was an australian scientist who said stomach ulcers were caused by an infectious agent. he was laughed at. now, he has the nobel prize, and we have isolated that bacterium. in other words, science is not captive to entrenched unyielding dogma. it is flexible, it can change
now contrast that with creationism. creationism starts with an untestable hypothesis and adheres to it as unassailable truth. theres nothing to debate. theres nothing to argue about. there is an idea put forth that no one can probe with their minds or find fault with. you either accept creationism, or you reject it. but it is entirely rigid and opaque
this is not science. it has no place in science. it is alternative idea for why we and other living creatures are here. but it is not science, and it never will be science. it cannot be taught along with evolutionary theory. it simply doesn't belong. talk about it in church, pleas,e be my guest. but it has zero validity in any scientific context, including a classroom whose purpose is to teac children science
in other words, you have it backwards when you point out that there are holes in evolutionary theory and this is a weakness. on the contrary: the holes in evolutionary theory are aspects of its strength, adaptability to new discoveries, and intellectual honesty
creationism puts forth an idea. the idea cannot be tested. end of story
perhaps it would be better to release the members of the board into a remote ecosystem with limited resources, and allow them to compete, whereby the most well-adapted board member is selectively chosen not to starve, and he or she at that point decides the issue of whether or not to teach evolution
if on the other hand, angels are heard singing, a bright light shines from the sky, and a booming voice chooses one particular board member while the rest perish in a scream and a flash, destined for eternity to hell, maybe that will decide the issue instead
i am not foolish enough that i think i can convert a True Believer in a forum thread
the only thing that will teach you is to try and fail on your own terms. there are many suboptimal business structures out there. you can limp along in mediocrity for decades. but you won't achieve true business success, at least i don't think. hell, prove me wrong, go for it, i don't know everything. but i'm completely unimpressed. all you have here is a formula for mediocre marginalia in my mind
ideas on organization are always in competition. what is the yardstick we use to measure them? simple monetary success or monetary failure. if this structure you champion is based on nothing more than a desire to compete and win in a pure business environment, then it is sound, and will succeed, and beat out other organizational structures
or it won't
welcome the jubngle of ideas, competing in darwinian struggle. you're going to need more than optimistic idealism to survive out there. good luck, little pioneer
rule of thumb: if your plans for a group/ community/ company/ society relies upon people acting dependably in ways no group of humans have ever acted, in any society, in the history of the world, its gonna fail
human nature is what it is. learn its good parts, learn its ugly parts, and don't imagine you are ever going to change them
a business is not run on holier-than-thou shaming. either intellectual property laws are enforceable, or intellectual property laws are unenforceable. if they are unenforceable, which the internet and a billion poor teenagers with a broadband connection, no money, and little interest or respect for the law have shown, then there is no business in media anymore. furthermore, the internet is borderless, and other countries have no such regard for intellectual property laws, nor did they ever. who is to say your attitude toward sintellectual property is correct and their's is wrong?
you can make all the withering shaming speeches you want. you can't run on a business on that. can you enforce the law? or not? beginning and end of issue
intellectual property law, which is a gentleman's agreement amongst a few publishers, is not morality. please stop thinking you can defend a business practice with nothing more than attitude
intellectual property was created as a sort of gentleman's agreement, when there were only a handful of real publishers in the world. now every teenager with a broadband connection is a publisher. such that the gentleman's agreement is unenforceable nowadays
i'm not defending piracy, i am simply asking you to consider the notion that your attitude is simply unsustainable on the internet
that is, if your entire defense of creators consists of whining, creators really don't have any rights any more. you need to actually defend creator's rights. effectively. i just don't see that being possible anymore. that it doesn't matter what the law is, because the de facto status on the web is poor teenagers with a broadband, zero interest in or knowledge of the law, and a hungry need for software
when publishing consisted of a guy with a vinyl press or a cassette duplicator, piracy was small, slow, and easily trackable. now its everywhere, sparse, and done in countries without the sort of intellectual property laws you apparently rely on as some sort of moral code
maybe the attitude towards intellectual property in other countries is the proper attitude and your attitude is wrong? maybe you should get off your high horse and adjust your attitude to the reality? maybe creators need to find some other way of sustaining income other than exorbitant fees for a distribution medium which is completely porous?
or ignore, dismiss me as an immoral pirate, and continue whining about a notion which is completely ignored and unenforced. reality: you need to look at it. your current attitude seems to be built in defiance of the reality you find yourself in
if it cannot be enforced
"This statement is meaningless and definitely explains a lot of your other posts on the subject"
i don't know what you are referring to, but if you are referring to something like music file trading, then i have to wonder at your definition of "meaningless"
copyright and intellectual proerty are laws that are in effect, gentleman's agreements. from a distant past before the internet when the only people who published anything were a small handful. and when mr. cassette tape duplicator set up shop in a warehouse, he was easy to find, easy to shut down, and small in scale and scope
now, every teenager with a teenager has the same power of bertelsmannin in 1980, if not more, in global reach
now, i am the meaningless one: you tell me, how do you enforce quaint gentleman's agreements from the age of vinyl when the country club is being sacked by 100 million teenagers with broadband connections?
i don't know, the ability to enforce a law doesn't seem meaningless to me
if you can't enforce, the law is de facto null and void
that concept does mean something to you right?
the government can pass all the laws they want. if there is no effective way to enforce such laws, what exactly do you think the value of that law is?
sorry if this concept is too "meaningless"
does it use the same protocol/ standards/ customs as gmail to communicate with the server?
well then you're screwed. google has a good mode of attack there
but surely you don't think the legal standards are so opaque that you couldn't shove the code out of that narrow cone of similarity necessary for legal enforcement
who needs a fucking license?
look at the damn js file, understand it, reverse engineer it, make it your own in such a blendered way that it is obvious you started with gmail but you are safely out of the legal line of fire
its a question of gradual easy degrees. its trivial to mess around with the code to enough of a degree that you are safely out of the legal line of fire with confidence. and this effort would most certainly be quicker and easier than starting from scratch
any obfuscating process you can describe to me is equally and easily reversible
for crying out loud, they have been teasing high level code out of compiled programs for decades. now that's hard
meanwhile, deobfuscating a bunch of ascii text is not exactly an NSA level effort here. it has to retain coherence for the browser in order to be interpretted, speedily. therefore, it is easy to deobfuscate
i'm still trying to figure out what the creepy japanese girl with the long hair was doing the whole time