No, it's just another piece of evidence that you can't prove a negative, which we already know.
The real question is not how to detect false positives, which is an exercise in futility, but where to draw the line based on a risk-benefit analysis. At what point does the benefit of allowing healthy/sane people to lead their lives free from interference outweigh the risk of freeing truly sick individuals, especially those who won't admit that they have a problem? Clearly there has to be a line, and it must be higher than simply claiming to be sane, especially when someone has demonstrated signs to the contrary.
I don't know the answer but I know that abolishing or decimating the mental health industry is a huge disservice to both the mentally ill and, both directly and by extension, society as a whole. Process improvements are a part of any healthy industry, but expecting perfection is not.
I hate wrist craps, especially when they're watery.
Anyway, the benefit of taking tests like that is that you don't *have to* debug. Syntax is usually a secondary concern (if it's a concern at all -- we were allowed to use pseudocode), and design is emphasized over implementation.. which is good, because any monkey can debug or look up syntax (and even the most skilled coders will have to), but creating an elegant design takes some amount of skill and insight.
That sounds horrible, but the false positives aren't necessarily a problem with the diagnosis process as a whole, especially since most sane people don't pretend to be insane (and those who "pretend" to be insane, absent any external motivation, are obviously not sane). Clearly if someone got "trapped" in the system, then the flaw was not with the system, but with the experimenter for failing to adequately account for and safeguard against the potential risks of their experiment. The cause was faking insanity, and the effect was being diagnosed as insane. Not exactly surprising.
It would be nice if we had empirical diagnostic tools for mental illness, but the fact that we don't doesn't justify dismissing the treatment of such people -- involuntary or otherwise -- out of hand.
...they have become adults in the biological and natural sense.
No, they have become biological adolescents, and they are treated accordingly, with more legal (and hopefully personal) responsibilities than a child, but not so many as an adult.
What's bullshit is the idea that the seductee has no control over his or her actions. Sex may be a biological imperative in general, but sex with any one particular individual is not. I'm not saying the laws shouldn't be changed with regards to the age of consent, but certainly the fact that someone was enticed to break the law is no excuse.
Note that this doesn't include people who were convincingly deceived into believing the person was of age, but I'd wager that in many cases, people who "don't know" that their partner is a minor don't want to know, and are ignoring obvious cues.
No "we" wouldn't, because "we" are still mostly white. As an obvious test of your argument, consider that most terrorists are also men, but that men aren't disproportionately targeted for increased security, nor is anyone advocating such measures. This isn't because men aren't more likely to be violent or aggressive (they are), but because we respect the rights and liberties of individuals.
Unfortunately drag is a nonlinear function with respect to velocity/wind resistance, so using anything over the minimal amount of fuel you need to move will necessarily result in decreased efficiency. I don't know the minimal velocity (and corresponding fuel consumption rates) to keep a 737 aloft, but I suspect it's well below cruising speed. In any event, the chosen cruising speed is almost certainly a balance between fuel consumption and travel time, rather than an exclusive function of the former.
Or a semiautomatic weapon, or a repeater, or a muzzle-loader, or a firearm of any kind. Also, nearly *all* felons, violent and nonviolent alike, are subject to this prohibition -- for life. (Because as we saw, the fact that their crimes were illegal worked so well in stopping them the first time.) They're usually prohibited from voting as well, and depending on the crime, in where they live, travel, etc.
Honestly, I find these restrictions to be arbitrary, capricious, and make a mockery of the idea of a "free man," who has settled his debt. I'm all for the idea of temporarily (or permanently) removing rights commensurate with the duration of a sentence, parole, or probationary period, but once that's over, the person should have all the rights and privileges of any other person. Adding further prohibitions doesn't prevent further crime; it only punishes those who decide to follow the law.
Furthermore, the recidivism rates for things like violent crimes are insanely low. We'd achieve better results by barring habitual DUI offenders from the privilege of driving for life -- which isn't even a right -- though I'm not away of anywhere that actually does this. (Note that "permanent" revocations are typically 5-10 years in duration. Also, I wouldn't necessarily advocate for or against this idea; I merely find it to be a particularly hypocritical inconsistency which illustrates the arbitrary nature of existing civil rights laws and practices.)
I pirate because: 1) I run Linux and therefore it is illegal to have a FLOSS piece that can playback some DVD's and most Bluray discs. Ripping takes too much time so...
That's like saying you kill people violently because it's illegal to tie them up in your basement for life and it takes too long to poison them. Performing one illegal act to avoid another is just stupid -- all the more so when the act you're avoiding in the first place (installing a free DVD/BluRay player) is completely benign by any standard.
2) A series is not out on DVD yet in my country. So how about releasing games and vids simultaniously everwhere?!
How about eBay? Not that I disagree at all with the concept of a worldwide release, but there are legal workarounds.
3) DRM. You want me to not enjoy my games if I buy them, while you could easily for less money make me not have to activate it and you won't have to run expensive servers for it?
This, like points 1, 2, and 5, is a reason to boycott.. but it's not a valid (for moral, legal, or rational values of 'valid') reason to pirate.
4) Sometimes I just want to watch a video on demand and only once... And I do not want to get my ass all the way to the mall the next day so I can enjoy the video as early as the next day.
You have to go to the mall to watch VoD? Either you don't know what VoD means, or you're doing it wrong.
5) Sometimes games/vids are too expensive.
Agreed, but see point 3. Alternatively, you could wait for the price to drop.
Face it, these are not moral, ethical, or legal justifications for pirating. All of your "reasons" are rationalizations designed to make you feel better about your decision. If you're going to pirate, at least have the balls to call it like it is.
Oops, I believe they were actually elevated levels of enzymes. Regardless, they were abnormal when symptoms were present, and returned to normal after discontinuing Yaz.
I'll start. My wife had intense abdominal pains which her GP diagnosed as an intestinal blockage, and prescribed liquids, laxatives, and rest.
When she didn't get better, she "Googled" her symptoms, and found that the birth control Yaz had been linked to gallbladder issues, which fit the symptoms. She told her GP -- who had never heard of these side effects -- and had her liver enzymes checked. Sure enough, they were below average. My wife was scheduled for a ($20k) liver function test, and simultaneously taken off Yaz. The symptoms subsequently disappeared, enzyme levels returned to normal, and she opted not to get the test.
Now this may well be a coincidence, as I myself have pointed out, but if it wasn't, it's a clear case where Google-itis saved us 20 grand, since she never would have had the idea to stop taking Yaz if she hadn't found similar cases online.
"Kryder's Law" states that areal density doubles every year (yes, 12 months), which hasn't held true since 2005. As far as the capacity of drives themselves (which is not strictly platter density), it took 28 months to go from 750GB to 1.5TB (April 2006 to August 2008), and looks to be another 28 months between 1.5TB and 3TB. Which is quite disappointing, IMO, particularly since I've been holding off upgrading until 3TB drives hit the market.
The question is whether this slowdown is due to a lack of consumer demand, technological limitations, or a combination of the two.
1) Profit on selling the device itself (either unlocked to consumer or to AT&T)
Making a profit on a sale -- of a tangible good no less -- is now fleecing?
2) A nice MONTHLY cut of around $18 from AT&T from the subscribers min. of $70/month. (This is the real reason iPhone is exclusive to AT&T inspite of shitty service all around, notice how this isn't mentioned much here on/.?).
Unverified and irrelevant. The service charges are not higher for the iPhone versus any other phone with the same plan. You also get visual voicemail AT&T might be a ripoff, but that's on AT&T.
3) A FORCED 30% cut of all third party software sales for the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.
You say tomato, I say 70% royalties while maintaining ownership of published material. That's a far cry from what the old school publishing/distribution channels would provide, where royalties are exclusively for established authors and certainly never approach 70% of gross sales. And let's not forget that the Android Market takes exactly the same cut.
No, theseare puny nukes. As the original poster said, ~kiloton is on the low end (though estimates of the yield actually range from 800 tons to 12 kilotons), but it's still quite a large blast when compared to *any* conventional explosives, nor was it the smallest nuke by a long shot.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's just another piece of evidence that you can't prove a negative, which we already know.
The real question is not how to detect false positives, which is an exercise in futility, but where to draw the line based on a risk-benefit analysis. At what point does the benefit of allowing healthy/sane people to lead their lives free from interference outweigh the risk of freeing truly sick individuals, especially those who won't admit that they have a problem? Clearly there has to be a line, and it must be higher than simply claiming to be sane, especially when someone has demonstrated signs to the contrary.
I don't know the answer but I know that abolishing or decimating the mental health industry is a huge disservice to both the mentally ill and, both directly and by extension, society as a whole. Process improvements are a part of any healthy industry, but expecting perfection is not.
If you think that's impressive, you should check out their proceedings. They're quite remarkable, in both length and breadth.
I hate wrist craps, especially when they're watery.
Anyway, the benefit of taking tests like that is that you don't *have to* debug. Syntax is usually a secondary concern (if it's a concern at all -- we were allowed to use pseudocode), and design is emphasized over implementation.. which is good, because any monkey can debug or look up syntax (and even the most skilled coders will have to), but creating an elegant design takes some amount of skill and insight.
Ah, so just like work then.
Exactly. There was absolutely nothing happening in the entire world that was more newsworthy than a third world country's ban on Facebook.
Sorry, that's too vague and 1 EO (Earth's Oceans) sounds small.
* Using World Bank estimate for 2008: 6,697,254,041 people
That sounds horrible, but the false positives aren't necessarily a problem with the diagnosis process as a whole, especially since most sane people don't pretend to be insane (and those who "pretend" to be insane, absent any external motivation, are obviously not sane). Clearly if someone got "trapped" in the system, then the flaw was not with the system, but with the experimenter for failing to adequately account for and safeguard against the potential risks of their experiment. The cause was faking insanity, and the effect was being diagnosed as insane. Not exactly surprising.
It would be nice if we had empirical diagnostic tools for mental illness, but the fact that we don't doesn't justify dismissing the treatment of such people -- involuntary or otherwise -- out of hand.
...they have become adults in the biological and natural sense.
No, they have become biological adolescents, and they are treated accordingly, with more legal (and hopefully personal) responsibilities than a child, but not so many as an adult.
What's bullshit is the idea that the seductee has no control over his or her actions. Sex may be a biological imperative in general, but sex with any one particular individual is not. I'm not saying the laws shouldn't be changed with regards to the age of consent, but certainly the fact that someone was enticed to break the law is no excuse.
Note that this doesn't include people who were convincingly deceived into believing the person was of age, but I'd wager that in many cases, people who "don't know" that their partner is a minor don't want to know, and are ignoring obvious cues.
You can have it in coach too; you just have to pay.
No "we" wouldn't, because "we" are still mostly white. As an obvious test of your argument, consider that most terrorists are also men, but that men aren't disproportionately targeted for increased security, nor is anyone advocating such measures. This isn't because men aren't more likely to be violent or aggressive (they are), but because we respect the rights and liberties of individuals.
Unfortunately drag is a nonlinear function with respect to velocity/wind resistance, so using anything over the minimal amount of fuel you need to move will necessarily result in decreased efficiency. I don't know the minimal velocity (and corresponding fuel consumption rates) to keep a 737 aloft, but I suspect it's well below cruising speed. In any event, the chosen cruising speed is almost certainly a balance between fuel consumption and travel time, rather than an exclusive function of the former.
Or a semiautomatic weapon, or a repeater, or a muzzle-loader, or a firearm of any kind. Also, nearly *all* felons, violent and nonviolent alike, are subject to this prohibition -- for life. (Because as we saw, the fact that their crimes were illegal worked so well in stopping them the first time.) They're usually prohibited from voting as well, and depending on the crime, in where they live, travel, etc.
Honestly, I find these restrictions to be arbitrary, capricious, and make a mockery of the idea of a "free man," who has settled his debt. I'm all for the idea of temporarily (or permanently) removing rights commensurate with the duration of a sentence, parole, or probationary period, but once that's over, the person should have all the rights and privileges of any other person. Adding further prohibitions doesn't prevent further crime; it only punishes those who decide to follow the law.
Furthermore, the recidivism rates for things like violent crimes are insanely low. We'd achieve better results by barring habitual DUI offenders from the privilege of driving for life -- which isn't even a right -- though I'm not away of anywhere that actually does this. (Note that "permanent" revocations are typically 5-10 years in duration. Also, I wouldn't necessarily advocate for or against this idea; I merely find it to be a particularly hypocritical inconsistency which illustrates the arbitrary nature of existing civil rights laws and practices.)
I pirate because:
1) I run Linux and therefore it is illegal to have a FLOSS piece that can playback some DVD's and most Bluray discs. Ripping takes too much time so...
That's like saying you kill people violently because it's illegal to tie them up in your basement for life and it takes too long to poison them. Performing one illegal act to avoid another is just stupid -- all the more so when the act you're avoiding in the first place (installing a free DVD/BluRay player) is completely benign by any standard.
2) A series is not out on DVD yet in my country. So how about releasing games and vids simultaniously everwhere?!
How about eBay? Not that I disagree at all with the concept of a worldwide release, but there are legal workarounds.
3) DRM. You want me to not enjoy my games if I buy them, while you could easily for less money make me not have to activate it and you won't have to run expensive servers for it?
This, like points 1, 2, and 5, is a reason to boycott.. but it's not a valid (for moral, legal, or rational values of 'valid') reason to pirate.
4) Sometimes I just want to watch a video on demand and only once... And I do not want to get my ass all the way to the mall the next day so I can enjoy the video as early as the next day.
You have to go to the mall to watch VoD? Either you don't know what VoD means, or you're doing it wrong.
5) Sometimes games/vids are too expensive.
Agreed, but see point 3. Alternatively, you could wait for the price to drop.
Face it, these are not moral, ethical, or legal justifications for pirating. All of your "reasons" are rationalizations designed to make you feel better about your decision. If you're going to pirate, at least have the balls to call it like it is.
Someone always takes it too far.
Oops, I believe they were actually elevated levels of enzymes. Regardless, they were abnormal when symptoms were present, and returned to normal after discontinuing Yaz.
I'll start. My wife had intense abdominal pains which her GP diagnosed as an intestinal blockage, and prescribed liquids, laxatives, and rest.
When she didn't get better, she "Googled" her symptoms, and found that the birth control Yaz had been linked to gallbladder issues, which fit the symptoms. She told her GP -- who had never heard of these side effects -- and had her liver enzymes checked. Sure enough, they were below average. My wife was scheduled for a ($20k) liver function test, and simultaneously taken off Yaz. The symptoms subsequently disappeared, enzyme levels returned to normal, and she opted not to get the test.
Now this may well be a coincidence, as I myself have pointed out, but if it wasn't, it's a clear case where Google-itis saved us 20 grand, since she never would have had the idea to stop taking Yaz if she hadn't found similar cases online.
"Kryder's Law" states that areal density doubles every year (yes, 12 months), which hasn't held true since 2005. As far as the capacity of drives themselves (which is not strictly platter density), it took 28 months to go from 750GB to 1.5TB (April 2006 to August 2008), and looks to be another 28 months between 1.5TB and 3TB. Which is quite disappointing, IMO, particularly since I've been holding off upgrading until 3TB drives hit the market.
The question is whether this slowdown is due to a lack of consumer demand, technological limitations, or a combination of the two.
Yes, yes, but the point is that the iPad does everything *worse* than similar products (for values of similar that include net/notebooks).
Except look cool. They've definitely got the market cornered on that.
So y = r cubed over 3. And if you determine the rate of change in this curve correctly, I think you'll be pleasantly surprised...
Oh hey, I didn't see you guys all the way over there.
Don't worry, it's over your head.
1) Profit on selling the device itself (either unlocked to consumer or to AT&T)
Making a profit on a sale -- of a tangible good no less -- is now fleecing?
2) A nice MONTHLY cut of around $18 from AT&T from the subscribers min. of $70/month. (This is the real reason iPhone is exclusive to AT&T inspite of shitty service all around, notice how this isn't mentioned much here on /.?).
Unverified and irrelevant. The service charges are not higher for the iPhone versus any other phone with the same plan. You also get visual voicemail AT&T might be a ripoff, but that's on AT&T.
3) A FORCED 30% cut of all third party software sales for the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad.
You say tomato, I say 70% royalties while maintaining ownership of published material. That's a far cry from what the old school publishing/distribution channels would provide, where royalties are exclusively for established authors and certainly never approach 70% of gross sales. And let's not forget that the Android Market takes exactly the same cut.
Wait, are you saying I shouldn't be putting the trackpoint in my mouth, or that I *should* be putting the trackpoint in my mouth?
Why does FF's spellchecker not like the word clit?
Because the word is actually clitoris?
That's some sexist shit right there.
Indeed.
No, these are puny nukes. As the original poster said, ~kiloton is on the low end (though estimates of the yield actually range from 800 tons to 12 kilotons), but it's still quite a large blast when compared to *any* conventional explosives, nor was it the smallest nuke by a long shot.