I'm used to thinking about the fact that objects "out there" are mind-bogglingly far away from us, such that their light takes eons to reach us. This is a reminder that they are also mind-bogglingly far away from each other.
Calling them "persons" is emotionally charged and missing the point. They are intelligent, but less so than humans. So are a lot of animal species. We recognize that relatively intelligent animals (e.g. dogs) should be treated differently – with more respect – compared to less intelligent ones (e.g. mice); it's just a matter of degree.
The obvious question is: What observable phenomena would indicate the presence of "ghosts"? He mentions heat changes, but... why? Why would ghosts radiate heat? It's just as plausible to suggest that ghosts would radiate the smell of cookies or high-energy X-rays. On the other hand, if you observe the smell of cookies (or heat or X-rays), why would that be evidence of ghosts, rather than evidence of free-floating midichlorians or of demons or of ley lines rendered unstable by global warming?
As long as you're sufficiently nearsighted (or corrected enough to focus at a few inches away), you can't beat the iPhone for screen resolution. There is no better pocketable display for reading itty bitty text.
These transcripts should reveal that the sentence "Houston we have a problem" was never actually spoken during Apollo 13. Swigert's actual words were "Houston, we've had a problem."
I'm allowed to have all sorts of medical conditions, but I have to pay extra for health insurance if I'm not actively working on the lifestyle-based conditions. It's the carrot/stick approach to motivating employees to bring down health care costs, but they're not doing it on the honor system anymore: you have to prove it.
That guy wouldn't score any better on the BMI charts that now categorize me as "obese": all they look at is height and weight. Not that I look like the former Governator, but I walk a lot and I have pretty strong legs, so I'm more fit than a simple calculation of weight/height would imply.
Dead serious. So to speak. It's either that or enroll in Weight Watchers.
I also have to submit to a blood test for nicotine, and get a note from my doctor saying I'm not suffering from depression. That last condition is a substitute for the old rule, which was based on alcohol consumption. So I guess it's OK now for me to be a drunk, as long as I'm not unhappy about it. And as long as I can stagger at least X steps per month.
My BMI is just a little higher than the value my company's insurance policy requires, so I am going to be required to carry a digital pedometer and record a minimum number of steps per month in order to get the same insurance at the same rate that someone who weighs 20 pounds less would get.
Thank you for demonstrating why reform of the US health care system has been such a difficult challenge for Congress: despite all the attention it's received, there are still countless people who don't understand even the most fundamental aspects of the problem.
Part of the problem is the medical profession's method of "training" physicians by putting them through an extended period of hazing: working around the clock, being awakened at random intervals, etc. Many of the ones who get through it develop the delusion from it that they can do the work properly under any conditions, especially sleep deprivation. It's a badge of honor for them, and they will engage in all sorts of denial and rationalization to keep at it.
Maybe a really bad "backfire" is what the system needs. Four years of President Palin could put the GOP out of commission like Millard Fillmore did for the Whigs.
You're being deliberately apologetic and dismissive if you think that the existence of marginal "competition" in the e-book market makes censorship by industry-leading behemoth Amazon non-evil and non-harmful.
"Also: who cares? If you don't like it, don't shop there."
I would think that authors would care. What's your advice for them? "If you don't like it, don't sell there"? Wait... that's exactly what Amazon apparently wants. Not much of a protest - or even a viable business move - is it?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm used to thinking about the fact that objects "out there" are mind-bogglingly far away from us, such that their light takes eons to reach us. This is a reminder that they are also mind-bogglingly far away from each other.
Calling them "persons" is emotionally charged and missing the point. They are intelligent, but less so than humans. So are a lot of animal species. We recognize that relatively intelligent animals (e.g. dogs) should be treated differently – with more respect – compared to less intelligent ones (e.g. mice); it's just a matter of degree.
Not if she doesn't call you like she promised.
The one phrase that best describes this is "patently obviously".
In Soviet Antarctica, buried lake penetrates drill hole!
Seriously. RTFA.
The obvious question is: What observable phenomena would indicate the presence of "ghosts"? He mentions heat changes, but... why? Why would ghosts radiate heat? It's just as plausible to suggest that ghosts would radiate the smell of cookies or high-energy X-rays. On the other hand, if you observe the smell of cookies (or heat or X-rays), why would that be evidence of ghosts, rather than evidence of free-floating midichlorians or of demons or of ley lines rendered unstable by global warming?
All the more reason to regulate this whole approach to "investing" out of the picture altogether.
As long as you're sufficiently nearsighted (or corrected enough to focus at a few inches away), you can't beat the iPhone for screen resolution. There is no better pocketable display for reading itty bitty text.
Bingo.
"Houston, this is so unfair!"
These transcripts should reveal that the sentence "Houston we have a problem" was never actually spoken during Apollo 13. Swigert's actual words were "Houston, we've had a problem."
I'm allowed to have all sorts of medical conditions, but I have to pay extra for health insurance if I'm not actively working on the lifestyle-based conditions. It's the carrot/stick approach to motivating employees to bring down health care costs, but they're not doing it on the honor system anymore: you have to prove it.
Gosh, why didn't I think of that?
That guy wouldn't score any better on the BMI charts that now categorize me as "obese": all they look at is height and weight. Not that I look like the former Governator, but I walk a lot and I have pretty strong legs, so I'm more fit than a simple calculation of weight/height would imply.
Dead serious. So to speak. It's either that or enroll in Weight Watchers.
I also have to submit to a blood test for nicotine, and get a note from my doctor saying I'm not suffering from depression. That last condition is a substitute for the old rule, which was based on alcohol consumption. So I guess it's OK now for me to be a drunk, as long as I'm not unhappy about it. And as long as I can stagger at least X steps per month.
My BMI is just a little higher than the value my company's insurance policy requires, so I am going to be required to carry a digital pedometer and record a minimum number of steps per month in order to get the same insurance at the same rate that someone who weighs 20 pounds less would get.
Thank you for demonstrating why reform of the US health care system has been such a difficult challenge for Congress: despite all the attention it's received, there are still countless people who don't understand even the most fundamental aspects of the problem.
Part of the problem is the medical profession's method of "training" physicians by putting them through an extended period of hazing: working around the clock, being awakened at random intervals, etc. Many of the ones who get through it develop the delusion from it that they can do the work properly under any conditions, especially sleep deprivation. It's a badge of honor for them, and they will engage in all sorts of denial and rationalization to keep at it.
Maybe a really bad "backfire" is what the system needs. Four years of President Palin could put the GOP out of commission like Millard Fillmore did for the Whigs.
You're being deliberately apologetic and dismissive if you think that the existence of marginal "competition" in the e-book market makes censorship by industry-leading behemoth Amazon non-evil and non-harmful.
Why do people cling to this archaic only-governments-can-do-it definition of "censorship"?
"Also: who cares? If you don't like it, don't shop there."
I would think that authors would care. What's your advice for them? "If you don't like it, don't sell there"? Wait... that's exactly what Amazon apparently wants. Not much of a protest - or even a viable business move - is it?
With no atomic masses included, this table is useless for cheating on my Chem tests!
It helps to have a really large population of lemmings which can be attracted by shiny new objects.
Those Europeans all looked alike too.