Actually they look like decent cables for the money.. gold plated connectors with heavy shielding, although 3' is a bit short. They probably used "digital" to attract the attention of people connecting S/PDIF components, but it doesn't look like they're trying to price gouge based on imaginary features. At least not more than the usual Sears markup. Now these guys, on the other hand...
I am talking about persons who are being killed for their organs and or cells.
Nobody suggested that such a thing be legal. Nobody even mentioned it except you. We were talking about the ability to use the remains from abortions which would have occurred anyway. And if you think that there'd be a rush of women getting pregnant just so they could terminate and donate the remains, then you don't know women very well at all. And anybody who would do something like that wouldn't be deterred by the fact that it was illegal.
But even if you only consider miscarriage and stillbirth, those are potential research opportunities being wasted. Squandered, in fact. Sure, it's not palletable to discuss, and it's depressing to think about, but it happens, and there's nothing immoral or unethical about using the remains for the greater good. I, and most people I know (even you, perhaps?) would have no dilemna donating their tissue to scientific research after they're gone, especially if it had the capability to help millions of people, and just because someone isn't old enough to make that decsion on their own doesn't make it the wrong decision.
Easy -- it already remained stable after being cooled to room temperature. Just increase room pressure to 5.7M PSI and you're all set. (Don't forget to swallow or yawn to equalize the pressure!)
And you think children have given consent for their organs to be harvested? Parents make that decision. Should we disallow organ transplants from people just because they're incapable of making an informed decision? Most people don't have living wills, and while that Organ Donor block is present on most Driver's Licenses, it holds no legal standing -- next of kin still have final say. So basically, we as a society (although perhaps not you personally) agree that the deceased has some influence over the decision, but not total control, and we entrust those decisions to next of kin -- for everyone -- but that's somehow completely different when it comes to embryos.
if you express an opinion based on observed circumstances and it goes against the norm, it will be modded out regardless of its veracity.
Well, that's probably not such a bad thing. Independant researchers are discouraged from posting on Wikipedia, since that's not the proper format for vetting new information. An encyclopedia is a collection of knowledge, and there will always be some margin of error between facts and knowledge. If everyone "knew" that the world was flat, it would make sense for an encyclopedia to reflect that. Maybe they could mention recent research which provides contradictory evidence, however it would be remiss to simply change the entire article based on one person's assertion. Once the information has been peer-evaluated and verified, then it would make more sense to add it to an encyclopedia. Of course it can be frustrating if you know something is wrong, and it may even be detrimental if that information is used for critical decisions, however that should rarely, if ever, be the case for Wikipedia. An encyclopedia is to research what the "The Cat in the Hat" is to literature -- a good place to start. They teach the basics, and where you go from there is up to you.
I think the ESRB should have the power to pull M-rated games from the shelf of a retailer who sells them to kids. That way there would be a business reason to enforce the ratings.
I think parents should have the power to tell their kids not to do things, and to punish them if they disobey.
Copyright law in the US was intended to protect our cultural heritage, not to provide profit to copyright holders in perpetuity.
There's nothing about "protecting cultural heritage" in the Constitution, and I'm pretty sure we didn't really have much of a cultural heritage when that document was written. It did say something about furthering the arts and sciences though, and there's a good argument to be made that modern IP law is hindering development more than it's protecting it.
Are you implying that such a thing is ridiculous? Many drivers start in their early teens.. we have quite a few 13 and 14-year-olds at our track, and they consistantly place in the top 5. They have no license to operate on public roads, but private property is fair game.
Anyway, driving laws are anything but rational -- based more on what "feels" right rather than anything else -- and are hardly the basis for a legitimate comparison.
saying that "people who drive on the left side of the road are driving illegally." It's true in the U.S... but not everywhere.
It's not even true in all cases in the US. One-way streets spring immediately to mind.
At any rate, you're right to criticize the reporting; in fact the article would be grounds for both a civil lawsuit and a motion to dismiss the case. By omitting the term "alleged," the paper has criminalized the defendant and tainted potential jurors. Of course, they're not based in Sweden, so it may be difficult to argue damages, and more trouble than it's worth, but such reporting is reckless and violates the principle of objective journalism. It's impossible to remove all bias, of course, but wanton disregard for basic principles of journalism is a plague on the industry today.
He's just saying, dollar for dollar, deutschmark for deutschmark, pound for pound, or dinar for dinar, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The most effective use of money would be to spend it on new, less polluting technologies rather than retrofitting the old stuff, which will eventually be replaced anyway as it becomes obsolete and the maintenance costs get higher. The US may be the highest polluter, but only because we were leading in industry and technology.. we got here first. Our CO2 output no longer increases at a geometrical rate, however as other countries become more developed, theirs WILL.
Power plants and cars don't have infinite lifetimes. The old will be replaced by the new eventually, and doing it RIGHT NOW instead of phased over 10 years won't change anything significantly, especially when there's no reason to believe that cutting CO2 output will have any positive effect.
Moreover, nobody can even define what a positive effect IS. What's bad for people in coastal regions could turn deserts into productive farmland. The only thing we know for sure is that things will change, and everybody's afraid of change.
Obviously I misread your post and thought you were saying something else entirely.
I agree with your point completely -- the atomic option was absolutely the lesser evil -- but his joke is still funny. After all, if we can't laugh at ourselves.. something something.
The only problem I see with Microsoft's solution is that Vista supposedly will not run non-certified drivers. Not giving a driver their blessing is one thing, but revoking the status of a driver -- which many people may not have an issue with -- leaves them with useless hardware, at least until a fix is provided. Perhaps there will be some sort of grace period, but nonetheless, it could potentially affect people's ability to use their own hardware.
That said, I do think this system is a good idea. If anything, it simply highlights why "Trusted Computing" is a bad idea.
You can thank MADD for that. I hate Ann Coulter, but there's some substance to her argument that victims are next to Godliness in this country. No matter that many European countries allow people to drink at an earlier age than they're allowed to drive, and have far lower rates of DUIs -- the solution is whatever victims say it is.
Yeah.. that's why the treatment for extreme dehydration is an IV of saline. The downside is that it's hard to find a bag of saline and an IV rig in most convenience stores.. fortunately Gatorade is a really close approximation, and slow consumption (not chugging) should do the trick when the cause is not from illness or disease.
You obviously didn't look at the 3D samples. When viewed from an angle it became clear that the irregular surface of the building was nothing more than a texture. Additionally, all the angles were wrong, making the object appear to be wildly out of proportion. Oh wait, you said Lindsay Lohan.. not a problem then.
Yeah... too bad things like "money" and "power" are more important. We can't seem to do anything without money being involved and no one is willing to give up all they have in order to change the way things are done.
I'm not sure that's necessarily true. We do seem to be in a depression with regards to philanthropy, however there are many figures throughout the 20th century who have used their wealth for altruistic purposes. While the Gates Foundation is focused on AIDS research, there's no telling what another individual (or their spouse) may choose to do. Richard Branson is pursuing space for profit, and that might lead somewhere, or maybe a Google CEO will decide to do something.
Unfortunately, unless you're one of those billionaires, you're at the mercy of their idea of priorities. Of course, just being a billionaire is some evidence of effective prioritization skills, so that might not be a wholly bad thing. However, there are alternatives to waiting for someone else to do something; namely doing it yourself. You don't have to be a billionaire to start a nonprofit organization and collect donations, or form a group of concerned citizens to pressure Congress to spend more on the space program, if that's what's important to you.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually they look like decent cables for the money.. gold plated connectors with heavy shielding, although 3' is a bit short. They probably used "digital" to attract the attention of people connecting S/PDIF components, but it doesn't look like they're trying to price gouge based on imaginary features. At least not more than the usual Sears markup. Now these guys, on the other hand...
I am talking about persons who are being killed for their organs and or cells.
Nobody suggested that such a thing be legal. Nobody even mentioned it except you. We were talking about the ability to use the remains from abortions which would have occurred anyway. And if you think that there'd be a rush of women getting pregnant just so they could terminate and donate the remains, then you don't know women very well at all. And anybody who would do something like that wouldn't be deterred by the fact that it was illegal.
But even if you only consider miscarriage and stillbirth, those are potential research opportunities being wasted. Squandered, in fact. Sure, it's not palletable to discuss, and it's depressing to think about, but it happens, and there's nothing immoral or unethical about using the remains for the greater good. I, and most people I know (even you, perhaps?) would have no dilemna donating their tissue to scientific research after they're gone, especially if it had the capability to help millions of people, and just because someone isn't old enough to make that decsion on their own doesn't make it the wrong decision.
Easy -- it already remained stable after being cooled to room temperature. Just increase room pressure to 5.7M PSI and you're all set. (Don't forget to swallow or yawn to equalize the pressure!)
And you think children have given consent for their organs to be harvested? Parents make that decision. Should we disallow organ transplants from people just because they're incapable of making an informed decision? Most people don't have living wills, and while that Organ Donor block is present on most Driver's Licenses, it holds no legal standing -- next of kin still have final say. So basically, we as a society (although perhaps not you personally) agree that the deceased has some influence over the decision, but not total control, and we entrust those decisions to next of kin -- for everyone -- but that's somehow completely different when it comes to embryos.
Makes sense to me.
if you express an opinion based on observed circumstances and it goes against the norm, it will be modded out regardless of its veracity.
Well, that's probably not such a bad thing. Independant researchers are discouraged from posting on Wikipedia, since that's not the proper format for vetting new information. An encyclopedia is a collection of knowledge, and there will always be some margin of error between facts and knowledge. If everyone "knew" that the world was flat, it would make sense for an encyclopedia to reflect that. Maybe they could mention recent research which provides contradictory evidence, however it would be remiss to simply change the entire article based on one person's assertion. Once the information has been peer-evaluated and verified, then it would make more sense to add it to an encyclopedia. Of course it can be frustrating if you know something is wrong, and it may even be detrimental if that information is used for critical decisions, however that should rarely, if ever, be the case for Wikipedia. An encyclopedia is to research what the "The Cat in the Hat" is to literature -- a good place to start. They teach the basics, and where you go from there is up to you.
I think the ESRB should have the power to pull M-rated games from the shelf of a retailer who sells them to kids. That way there would be a business reason to enforce the ratings.
I think parents should have the power to tell their kids not to do things, and to punish them if they disobey.
Oh wait...
What would you think if an airport employed terrorists as security personnel because they know better what to look for?
I'd think "I wish I thought of that first..."
Where is your Unites States? I would like to visit there some day.
--
Learn to love Alaska [romancingalaska.com]
About 1000 miles south/southeast.
Copyright law in the US was intended to protect our cultural heritage, not to provide profit to copyright holders in perpetuity.
There's nothing about "protecting cultural heritage" in the Constitution, and I'm pretty sure we didn't really have much of a cultural heritage when that document was written. It did say something about furthering the arts and sciences though, and there's a good argument to be made that modern IP law is hindering development more than it's protecting it.
Are you implying that such a thing is ridiculous? Many drivers start in their early teens.. we have quite a few 13 and 14-year-olds at our track, and they consistantly place in the top 5. They have no license to operate on public roads, but private property is fair game.
Anyway, driving laws are anything but rational -- based more on what "feels" right rather than anything else -- and are hardly the basis for a legitimate comparison.
saying that "people who drive on the left side of the road are driving illegally." It's true in the U.S... but not everywhere.
It's not even true in all cases in the US. One-way streets spring immediately to mind.
At any rate, you're right to criticize the reporting; in fact the article would be grounds for both a civil lawsuit and a motion to dismiss the case. By omitting the term "alleged," the paper has criminalized the defendant and tainted potential jurors. Of course, they're not based in Sweden, so it may be difficult to argue damages, and more trouble than it's worth, but such reporting is reckless and violates the principle of objective journalism. It's impossible to remove all bias, of course, but wanton disregard for basic principles of journalism is a plague on the industry today.
He's just saying, dollar for dollar, deutschmark for deutschmark, pound for pound, or dinar for dinar, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The most effective use of money would be to spend it on new, less polluting technologies rather than retrofitting the old stuff, which will eventually be replaced anyway as it becomes obsolete and the maintenance costs get higher. The US may be the highest polluter, but only because we were leading in industry and technology.. we got here first. Our CO2 output no longer increases at a geometrical rate, however as other countries become more developed, theirs WILL.
Power plants and cars don't have infinite lifetimes. The old will be replaced by the new eventually, and doing it RIGHT NOW instead of phased over 10 years won't change anything significantly, especially when there's no reason to believe that cutting CO2 output will have any positive effect.
Moreover, nobody can even define what a positive effect IS. What's bad for people in coastal regions could turn deserts into productive farmland. The only thing we know for sure is that things will change, and everybody's afraid of change.
Well as long as it's profitable, what's the problem?!?
they make cases for these things?!?
Obviously I misread your post and thought you were saying something else entirely.
I agree with your point completely -- the atomic option was absolutely the lesser evil -- but his joke is still funny. After all, if we can't laugh at ourselves.. something something.
Obviously your sarcasm meter is working perfectly.
The only problem I see with Microsoft's solution is that Vista supposedly will not run non-certified drivers. Not giving a driver their blessing is one thing, but revoking the status of a driver -- which many people may not have an issue with -- leaves them with useless hardware, at least until a fix is provided. Perhaps there will be some sort of grace period, but nonetheless, it could potentially affect people's ability to use their own hardware.
That said, I do think this system is a good idea. If anything, it simply highlights why "Trusted Computing" is a bad idea.
You can thank MADD for that. I hate Ann Coulter, but there's some substance to her argument that victims are next to Godliness in this country. No matter that many European countries allow people to drink at an earlier age than they're allowed to drive, and have far lower rates of DUIs -- the solution is whatever victims say it is.
Holy crap, Pamela Lee's +!+$ post on /.!!!
Yeah.. that's why the treatment for extreme dehydration is an IV of saline. The downside is that it's hard to find a bag of saline and an IV rig in most convenience stores.. fortunately Gatorade is a really close approximation, and slow consumption (not chugging) should do the trick when the cause is not from illness or disease.
The real future of mobile phones can be found here and here.
v 905sh/index.html
I think this one actually has more features than my HTPC... http://www.vodafone.jp/english/products/model_3G/
But we don't WANT non-geeks on our Internet!
Me too!!
You obviously didn't look at the 3D samples. When viewed from an angle it became clear that the irregular surface of the building was nothing more than a texture. Additionally, all the angles were wrong, making the object appear to be wildly out of proportion. Oh wait, you said Lindsay Lohan.. not a problem then.
NT
Yeah... too bad things like "money" and "power" are more important. We can't seem to do anything without money being involved and no one is willing to give up all they have in order to change the way things are done.
I'm not sure that's necessarily true. We do seem to be in a depression with regards to philanthropy, however there are many figures throughout the 20th century who have used their wealth for altruistic purposes. While the Gates Foundation is focused on AIDS research, there's no telling what another individual (or their spouse) may choose to do. Richard Branson is pursuing space for profit, and that might lead somewhere, or maybe a Google CEO will decide to do something.
Unfortunately, unless you're one of those billionaires, you're at the mercy of their idea of priorities. Of course, just being a billionaire is some evidence of effective prioritization skills, so that might not be a wholly bad thing. However, there are alternatives to waiting for someone else to do something; namely doing it yourself. You don't have to be a billionaire to start a nonprofit organization and collect donations, or form a group of concerned citizens to pressure Congress to spend more on the space program, if that's what's important to you.