So your complaining that Criminals and Tax Cheats can't hide their money anymore?
Everything is on a sliding scale. Some Island country isn't going to protect your data any better than Sweden when any other country with bigger guns says; "tell us what we want to know."
A larger country with ETHICS that will stand on principle -- yes. But Swedish banks never really had ethics so on that basis, why would they not fold like a dollar bill?
The criminal has a conundrum no matter where they hide their data / funds. So of course they go to the Caymans where the US protects them because they have both big guns and no scruples.
... anything sufficiently distancing itself from reality is too farfetched to make a plausible premise. I mean, he COULD say that they take DNA from citizens and then create virtual humans inside a matrix to predict human interaction to better control the population.
Then we have a virtual Snowden break lose on the web like Max Headroom and someone ends up with another case of writers block.
the Above post makes sense to people who don't subject their beliefs to rational scrutiny. Hence, people of faith will say; "Wow, you beat them soundly in that debate." And of course they think some atheists are arrogant -- just as anyone today might grin a bit at someone carrying on about Zeus. The personality clashes are independent of the value of any system of logic.
Is there any ultimate arbiter of a "winning argument?" Yes, but you've got to adhere to scientific principles and theories that can be disproved, otherwise it's just a bunch of theologians arguing doctrines based on evidence of God's opinion.
The fact that everything cannot be empirical and we have to "settle for" taking a few things on faith is not "religion" or doctrine -- it's society. Surviving within my social norms requires I trust people -- I cannot verify everything myself, so I listen to experts say that "light switches use electricity." IN fact, I've taken a science course and proven that bit -- but not everyone has. And there are a whole slew of things I take for granted until such a time that I have enough knowledge and inspiration to test it out myself.
We cannot breathe 100% oxygen -- for practical and health reasons. But the fact that we have pollution in the air doesn't give a value to the pollution.
We cannot prove every detail yet, but you sound like you are promoting the devil between the details rather than any admirable deity or way of life.
But I'll agree -- there is a lot of arrogance of empirical people -- and in my opinion, that's mostly because they don't recognize where they've taken things on faith and that they don't have all the answers. But being on shaky ground is empirically better than prancing around on nothing but thin air.;-)
We've saved a lot of money not REALLY bothering with space -- not really being serious about it anymore. Instead we've got this REALLY IMPORTANT deficit, but it doesn't exist when bailing out banks and being in really expensive wars hiring contractor mercenaries for ten times the regular soldier.
And so we've kind of become less inspired, less a beacon of hope and progress, less interesting.
Wasting money on inspiring children, on basic research and on people always pays for itself. The alternative is to horde and grow less.
I'm sure there are "bulk scanners" going on -- things we are not aware of like Teller Machines and such that are scanning the serial codes.
I'm fairly sure the have embedded some kind of RFID ribbon in the $100 bill and larger currency. It's not going to track with regular RFID gear, but likely with a specific radio frequency it will give out it's serial number (I mean, that's how I'd do it -- and whatever I COULD do, usually ends up being something that is BEING DONE).
The NSA is not limiting itself based on any laws or ethics -- it is ONLY limited by technology and imagination. There are efforts to legalize everything or couch it as something else -- and wherever there is a gap, there is just propaganda and PR.
Think; what COULD YOU DO -- and it's likely actually being done. Tires that can be scanned through devices in roads. Bills that can give out a serial number over radio frequencies. Hidden garbage packets that get sent out in off-band signals from chips on your computer that are involved in communication. Whatever they can do, they have done. We only need a Snowden to provide evidence.
I've been assuming this since 2000 and I have not been disappointed.
They can't track everyone. If you steal what you want, you don't make a purchase. If you use someone else's machine -- they track someone else -- and if you have no relationship and you bounced it through some anonymous service, there are diminishing returns on knowing you. If you know a bit more, you are spoofing MAC addresses and piggy-backing on other users. Or you do nothing electronically related to your nefarious plans.
In short; the NSA knows more about innocent people and clueless miscreants than it does about real bad guys. While collecting this massive amount of data -- they are distracted.
Now, if there goal really isn't security but SOMETHING ELSE -- well, then this should work out just fine for them. If it's security -- it's worse than if they did no tracking at all. If I were up to no good, I certainly wouldn't bother with leaving any legitimate tracks.
We need to give MORE MONEY to really, really, really rich people, so they can do a few charities for AIDS and have after school programs for kids to play with code.
Then we bend over and let them import labor from people who were college educated where it was subsidized getting paid less than an American to do a job. Did they mention how we pay for our own educations now?
As for not paying anything - the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate on earth. Except for being completely wrong in the real world where most of the Fortune 500 are paying around 5% -- good points there.
Lots of companies (and people for that matter) don't mind paying taxes but hate being robbed. Can you blame them? Well I know YOU can, but could anyone reasonable?
I'm sorry, I'm too busy sending out resumes and keeping the lights on for my kids while my wife and I both work full time temp jobs without benefits to spend time on all this "being reasonable." It's kind of distracting to me and I've reverted from a person who worked 80 hours a week and studied to improve myself, to someone who uses butter and ketchup on spaghetti as a "dish" and merely entertains himself. It's completely the opposite of how I've heard Libertarians, NeoCons and Tea Party people explain how people are motivated by life sucking and stress.
The financial services company I was at got bought out by a Dutch Company. Apparently they've survived a higher tax rate and still had money -- go figure.
There are richer people making more profit and they want me to afford them the luxury of my reason? They are lucky I don't grunt like a Gorilla and pound my chest. I'm all for this compassion you speak of "in theory" -- just like these theoretically high corporate tax rates.
Yeah, I worry about the same thing. Pumping up water from that depth has to be a bit of a challenge and use energy (though there are temperature gradients they could borrow to assist). Still, you also have the problem that after you remove a lot of fresh water -- that creates a new chamber that sea water could flood and contaminate.
And what happens when you cause a landslide or underwater quake if you displace a LOT OF water? We've had sink-holes and land drop from removal of groundwater -- if the chamber is 100 times larger and the pressure 1000 times more, well, how bad does it get before the problem shows up?
I'm not paranoid of the future, but our system currently is unable to change course if a profit is involved. We as a society in the USA can no longer expect that if something were to cause massive damage -- you for instance "fracking" natural gas MIGHT poison fresh water and cause small earthquakes (and well, it does in fact do that) -- but you wouldn't have the news really report it and you wouldn't have the FDA shut them down because someone would just secure a nice consulting job for when they left government service and Congress would get some campaign donations and do nothing and the media wouldn't report that because they'd get some advertising dollars featuring Deer sipping from ponds over a pump.
Did I mention a broken system that cannot correct errors? I'm waiting for someone to pay me to blog happy things about Deer sipping from ponds over a pump -- I've seen them myself and people who don't like Frakking / Deep See fresh water are Hippie Commie tree huggers who hurt our economy!
Until after the royalty check clears for the Patent Attorney.
You may never make good money as a creative, but darn it, you made someone happy and able to put their kids through college, so there's that to lift your spirits!
switching the diet is providing treatment for the specific disorder improves their children's symptoms, but isn't actually affecting the underlying autism.
LOL. The "symptom" is being non-functional and impaired IQ. If mitigating the symptoms means the child functions at a higher level, then let's throw out 90% of the "treatments" which don't cure that we get prescribed. And forget about anti-depressants because that's just a symptom suppressant as well.
I'm going to go ahead and say that the next GREAT medical discovery will be based on transplanting healthy gut bacteria. The "modern medical community" will take all the credit wall all the alternative medicine people will still be ridiculed as morons. I agree that there is a general lack of scientific method going on, but the approach of many people in this alternative field is to look at a complex system as a ecology problem, and know there isn't one silver bullet of "add tigers" or "add rabbits" to solve the problem. It's looking at a person as a biological system rather than a series of parts.
What if some day the "Hollywood model" is proven right?
I can think if a lot of entrenched "medical certainty" that has been overturned, and it seems to just morph into everyone "at the present time" believing in the infallibility of modern medicine.
Really, "modern medicine" is just a results based commercial hodge-podge that is only slightly better than the days when "modern medicine" was giving people bloodletting and mercury.
There are a few really good things like Penicillin that make up the bulk of "modern medicine's" success, and then there is a lot of cough syrup. It's only in the past decade I think they started treating ulcers as problems of bacteria and not problems of stomach acid.
Medicine is the last damn field that can pretend to have a real understanding of what is going on. If you took away plumbing, good food handling practices and refrigeration, people would be dropping like flies just as they were BEFORE modern medicine.
Why is "but he wanted money" always used to discredit someone being controversial and "but they make money" also not a point to consider that companies would cover up a causal link.
I'm not endorsing or dismissing Wakefield, but it's not like there is any way to FIGHT the entrenched immunization market without making money. Why can't a person make money solving a problem they just revealed to everyone?
Pure altruism seems to always be demanded if someone is fighting the status quo -- yet the status quo must always be proven corrupt to even begin fighting it.
Right. The more corporate profit affects public discourse, the more certain we've become about CERTAIN FACTS.
The link between autism and stomach bacteria was also picked up by a lady by the name of Donna Gates who has been pushing the "Body Ecology Diet." I've been listening to her for a little over two decades and this link between stomach bacteria and a whole host of behavioral and health issues comes as no surprise.
I think that most food cravings, for instance, are not genetic, but orchestrated by bacteria in the gut and intestines. 80% of the Serotonin in your body is stored in the stomach and it only stands to reason that a few million generations of bacteria might latch on to affecting our neurotransmitters in order to improve survival. To bolster this theory, I was reading about studies with Fruit Flies which showed that it was stomach bacteria that were putting out pheromones they used to decide mates, by controlling what the flies ate, they controlled the bacteria and the bacteria inspired flies to pair up with other flies of similar gut bacteria.
Is it too controversial then, to take what we are finding out about Stomach bacteria affecting our minds and passions to maybe go a step further and think they might also have negative impacts on brain development? They've got the tools and the weapons, after all.
The CONNECTION here with Immunizations for me, is that when babies are out of the womb, their bodies are still trying to figure out "friend and foe." They eat peas for the first time -- and nothing bad happens; Friend. But when we immunize people -- the "bad chicken pox" is mixed in with what is called an adjutant. It's some stuff that makes you a "little sick" so that your body recognizes the dead virus signatures it delivers as "foe." But how does the body know the difference between genetic markers for chicken pox and the fist time a baby has had peas? I'm asking the question because I don't know how a body knows the difference and I wonder how many "Immunizations are always good" people have bothered to ask the question, or wonder if the TIMING of immunizations might not be why we have so many kids with food allergies.
So if we PERHAPS can entertain the idea that adjutants can immunize children against Chicken Pox and Peas or Peanuts at the same time -- what happens if it immunizes them against certain important proteins necessary for development? Being allergic to a specific protein that might cause Autism? The immune system can attack ANYTHING, and for the most part, it is not pre-programmed. When babies are developing, it figures out what to attack and not attack.
The reason our current statistic models can't narrow down this direct connection is that it is Russian Roulette with a million factors. A peanut allergy, hyperactivity, autism, diabetes, depression,... whatever. A million ailments, a million variables and million opportunities. Most of the time, nothing happens.
There has been a lot of cock sure speculation and certainty on both sides of the argument here. And some vaccines have great benefits -- while others are NOT PROVEN and people accept on faith that "since we dealt with Polio and Measles ALL VACCINES = PROGRESS". We need more real studies for each case, and on when they should be given. I'd push for most not given to babies (except for HPV vaccine) until after 9 months unless there is another risk factor.
My solution is not ALL VACCINES = BAD, but my point is that timing is everything and good vaccines are good.
I'd say the better analogy would be a school that doesn't allow parents on the campus -- ever, and you send your kid there and one day they come back with an education. You ask them how it went; "I don't know, OK, maybe." A typical answer for a kid that you expected, right?
Another school allows parents to come in and tour the campus, and even visit classes any day they like as long as they aren't interrupting a class. You can meet with teachers and talk to them off hours and get a phone number to call if there are issues. Can you talk to every teacher and know their background and tell if they are creepy or not? Probably not. Probably 99% of all parents don't get to know more than 2% of every nook and cranny of the school or its teachers.
Both systems require trust, but only the 2nd one has any transparency at all. In real world terms we don't and can't inspect everything, but it's the denial of oversight that invites true corruption.
Look, we are all worried over nothing; this encryption means that only one 256 bit Key will unlock your data, or a paperclip -- but it's merely coincidence that the encryption has a two locks on the door and one of them is always the same.
I'm waiting to see Clippie on an upcoming episode of "VH1; Where are they now?"
I'd read some interesting articles about "using polarized light to determine chirality." Basically, the building blocks of our proteins are "right handed" (I think, I could get this flipped right here), a result of a yellow sun favoring certain right-handed outcomes in carbon molecules as they constantly get destroyed and re-attached in space and with radiation. Life is left-handed amino acids based upon the right-handed building blocks being more abundant. Due to this chirality, the light coming off our planet is polarized. Non-organic life doesn't have a chiral structure (if I'm using the word right), and therefore sunlight does not get polarized.
This is just one discovery of many. The idea that we may be able to quickly "scan for life forms" from 300 light years away may be right around the corner. So it begs the question; any life forms out there a bit more advanced than us would probably be able to "scan for life. We've already seen numerous examples of patterns being reproduced and preserving information as a way to defeat entropy. WHY this happens is a matter of debate but that it happens is clear from crystals to bees.
" It's not "if" but "why" have we not been contacted by higher life forms that should be the discussion -- not "if life exists".
They should have either no VAT on any stores, or VAT all the same across the board.
1) VAT creates a "lot of little taxes" which means a lot more work (to track and get the tax) and less transactions. This is a poor replacement for import taxes (tariffs) especially on wage-slave countries and those without environmental laws. If you increase the cost of imports, it helps manufacturing in your country and balance of trade. Lowering this has only seen greater profits that don't get shared.
2) Allowing states to race each other to the bottom reduces revenues. States can compete on better services. Allowing them to compete on Tax Havens only creates bidding wars and situations where companies have factories and taxes "for free" for 5 years. It's supposed to be made up for by wages and having people work, but we keep seeing those go lower as well. So less revenue and more profits that disappear from the economy.
Slashdot Mirror
So your complaining that Criminals and Tax Cheats can't hide their money anymore?
Everything is on a sliding scale. Some Island country isn't going to protect your data any better than Sweden when any other country with bigger guns says; "tell us what we want to know."
A larger country with ETHICS that will stand on principle -- yes. But Swedish banks never really had ethics so on that basis, why would they not fold like a dollar bill?
The criminal has a conundrum no matter where they hide their data / funds. So of course they go to the Caymans where the US protects them because they have both big guns and no scruples.
Can't this country produce quality game players of it's own?
Who would have thought America would have fallen so far that our couch potatoes are getting replaced by imports.
... anything sufficiently distancing itself from reality is too farfetched to make a plausible premise. I mean, he COULD say that they take DNA from citizens and then create virtual humans inside a matrix to predict human interaction to better control the population.
Then we have a virtual Snowden break lose on the web like Max Headroom and someone ends up with another case of writers block.
TL;DNR
the Above post makes sense to people who don't subject their beliefs to rational scrutiny. Hence, people of faith will say; "Wow, you beat them soundly in that debate." And of course they think some atheists are arrogant -- just as anyone today might grin a bit at someone carrying on about Zeus. The personality clashes are independent of the value of any system of logic.
Is there any ultimate arbiter of a "winning argument?" Yes, but you've got to adhere to scientific principles and theories that can be disproved, otherwise it's just a bunch of theologians arguing doctrines based on evidence of God's opinion.
The fact that everything cannot be empirical and we have to "settle for" taking a few things on faith is not "religion" or doctrine -- it's society. Surviving within my social norms requires I trust people -- I cannot verify everything myself, so I listen to experts say that "light switches use electricity." IN fact, I've taken a science course and proven that bit -- but not everyone has. And there are a whole slew of things I take for granted until such a time that I have enough knowledge and inspiration to test it out myself.
We cannot breathe 100% oxygen -- for practical and health reasons. But the fact that we have pollution in the air doesn't give a value to the pollution.
We cannot prove every detail yet, but you sound like you are promoting the devil between the details rather than any admirable deity or way of life.
But I'll agree -- there is a lot of arrogance of empirical people -- and in my opinion, that's mostly because they don't recognize where they've taken things on faith and that they don't have all the answers. But being on shaky ground is empirically better than prancing around on nothing but thin air. ;-)
We've saved a lot of money not REALLY bothering with space -- not really being serious about it anymore. Instead we've got this REALLY IMPORTANT deficit, but it doesn't exist when bailing out banks and being in really expensive wars hiring contractor mercenaries for ten times the regular soldier.
And so we've kind of become less inspired, less a beacon of hope and progress, less interesting.
Wasting money on inspiring children, on basic research and on people always pays for itself. The alternative is to horde and grow less.
The Hoops are all electronic and binary; "Default state = request denied."
If (request) then {return:result};
It's not a complicated hoop, but there is at least a virtual one.
I'm sure there are "bulk scanners" going on -- things we are not aware of like Teller Machines and such that are scanning the serial codes.
I'm fairly sure the have embedded some kind of RFID ribbon in the $100 bill and larger currency. It's not going to track with regular RFID gear, but likely with a specific radio frequency it will give out it's serial number (I mean, that's how I'd do it -- and whatever I COULD do, usually ends up being something that is BEING DONE).
The NSA is not limiting itself based on any laws or ethics -- it is ONLY limited by technology and imagination. There are efforts to legalize everything or couch it as something else -- and wherever there is a gap, there is just propaganda and PR.
Think; what COULD YOU DO -- and it's likely actually being done. Tires that can be scanned through devices in roads. Bills that can give out a serial number over radio frequencies. Hidden garbage packets that get sent out in off-band signals from chips on your computer that are involved in communication. Whatever they can do, they have done. We only need a Snowden to provide evidence.
I've been assuming this since 2000 and I have not been disappointed.
They can't track everyone. If you steal what you want, you don't make a purchase. If you use someone else's machine -- they track someone else -- and if you have no relationship and you bounced it through some anonymous service, there are diminishing returns on knowing you. If you know a bit more, you are spoofing MAC addresses and piggy-backing on other users. Or you do nothing electronically related to your nefarious plans.
In short; the NSA knows more about innocent people and clueless miscreants than it does about real bad guys. While collecting this massive amount of data -- they are distracted.
Now, if there goal really isn't security but SOMETHING ELSE -- well, then this should work out just fine for them. If it's security -- it's worse than if they did no tracking at all. If I were up to no good, I certainly wouldn't bother with leaving any legitimate tracks.
Your assumption that this Bra is sexist is sexist in the extreme.
Have you no consideration that anyone in the target market, man or woman, will be able to fill out one of these bras just fine?
When you have Moobs, there are going to be a LOT OF mood alerts.
We need to give MORE MONEY to really, really, really rich people, so they can do a few charities for AIDS and have after school programs for kids to play with code.
Then we bend over and let them import labor from people who were college educated where it was subsidized getting paid less than an American to do a job. Did they mention how we pay for our own educations now?
As for not paying anything - the U.S. has the highest corporate tax rate on earth.
Except for being completely wrong in the real world where most of the Fortune 500 are paying around 5% -- good points there.
Lots of companies (and people for that matter) don't mind paying taxes but hate being robbed. Can you blame them? Well I know YOU can, but could anyone reasonable?
I'm sorry, I'm too busy sending out resumes and keeping the lights on for my kids while my wife and I both work full time temp jobs without benefits to spend time on all this "being reasonable." It's kind of distracting to me and I've reverted from a person who worked 80 hours a week and studied to improve myself, to someone who uses butter and ketchup on spaghetti as a "dish" and merely entertains himself. It's completely the opposite of how I've heard Libertarians, NeoCons and Tea Party people explain how people are motivated by life sucking and stress.
The financial services company I was at got bought out by a Dutch Company. Apparently they've survived a higher tax rate and still had money -- go figure.
There are richer people making more profit and they want me to afford them the luxury of my reason? They are lucky I don't grunt like a Gorilla and pound my chest. I'm all for this compassion you speak of "in theory" -- just like these theoretically high corporate tax rates.
Great.
I'm a native of America and I'd like this opportunity too!
All I have to do is pretend I won't complain that they pay me a third the standard, and that they can deport me at any time based on a whim.
Anyone in India willing to sell their identity to me?
Yeah, I worry about the same thing. Pumping up water from that depth has to be a bit of a challenge and use energy (though there are temperature gradients they could borrow to assist). Still, you also have the problem that after you remove a lot of fresh water -- that creates a new chamber that sea water could flood and contaminate.
And what happens when you cause a landslide or underwater quake if you displace a LOT OF water? We've had sink-holes and land drop from removal of groundwater -- if the chamber is 100 times larger and the pressure 1000 times more, well, how bad does it get before the problem shows up?
I'm not paranoid of the future, but our system currently is unable to change course if a profit is involved. We as a society in the USA can no longer expect that if something were to cause massive damage -- you for instance "fracking" natural gas MIGHT poison fresh water and cause small earthquakes (and well, it does in fact do that) -- but you wouldn't have the news really report it and you wouldn't have the FDA shut them down because someone would just secure a nice consulting job for when they left government service and Congress would get some campaign donations and do nothing and the media wouldn't report that because they'd get some advertising dollars featuring Deer sipping from ponds over a pump.
Did I mention a broken system that cannot correct errors? I'm waiting for someone to pay me to blog happy things about Deer sipping from ponds over a pump -- I've seen them myself and people who don't like Frakking / Deep See fresh water are Hippie Commie tree huggers who hurt our economy!
Until after the royalty check clears for the Patent Attorney.
You may never make good money as a creative, but darn it, you made someone happy and able to put their kids through college, so there's that to lift your spirits!
... I can attest to this bias against me, likely the cause of mega jealousy!
Non-Creative; "What do you make of this report?"
Me; "Well I can make a hat, an airplane or a little swan..."
switching the diet is providing treatment for the specific disorder improves their children's symptoms, but isn't actually affecting the underlying autism.
LOL. The "symptom" is being non-functional and impaired IQ. If mitigating the symptoms means the child functions at a higher level, then let's throw out 90% of the "treatments" which don't cure that we get prescribed. And forget about anti-depressants because that's just a symptom suppressant as well.
I'm going to go ahead and say that the next GREAT medical discovery will be based on transplanting healthy gut bacteria. The "modern medical community" will take all the credit wall all the alternative medicine people will still be ridiculed as morons. I agree that there is a general lack of scientific method going on, but the approach of many people in this alternative field is to look at a complex system as a ecology problem, and know there isn't one silver bullet of "add tigers" or "add rabbits" to solve the problem. It's looking at a person as a biological system rather than a series of parts.
What if some day the "Hollywood model" is proven right?
I can think if a lot of entrenched "medical certainty" that has been overturned, and it seems to just morph into everyone "at the present time" believing in the infallibility of modern medicine.
Really, "modern medicine" is just a results based commercial hodge-podge that is only slightly better than the days when "modern medicine" was giving people bloodletting and mercury.
There are a few really good things like Penicillin that make up the bulk of "modern medicine's" success, and then there is a lot of cough syrup. It's only in the past decade I think they started treating ulcers as problems of bacteria and not problems of stomach acid.
Medicine is the last damn field that can pretend to have a real understanding of what is going on. If you took away plumbing, good food handling practices and refrigeration, people would be dropping like flies just as they were BEFORE modern medicine.
Why is "but he wanted money" always used to discredit someone being controversial and "but they make money" also not a point to consider that companies would cover up a causal link.
I'm not endorsing or dismissing Wakefield, but it's not like there is any way to FIGHT the entrenched immunization market without making money. Why can't a person make money solving a problem they just revealed to everyone?
Pure altruism seems to always be demanded if someone is fighting the status quo -- yet the status quo must always be proven corrupt to even begin fighting it.
"we all know Wakefield was committing fraud..."
Right. The more corporate profit affects public discourse, the more certain we've become about CERTAIN FACTS.
The link between autism and stomach bacteria was also picked up by a lady by the name of Donna Gates who has been pushing the "Body Ecology Diet." I've been listening to her for a little over two decades and this link between stomach bacteria and a whole host of behavioral and health issues comes as no surprise.
I think that most food cravings, for instance, are not genetic, but orchestrated by bacteria in the gut and intestines. 80% of the Serotonin in your body is stored in the stomach and it only stands to reason that a few million generations of bacteria might latch on to affecting our neurotransmitters in order to improve survival. To bolster this theory, I was reading about studies with Fruit Flies which showed that it was stomach bacteria that were putting out pheromones they used to decide mates, by controlling what the flies ate, they controlled the bacteria and the bacteria inspired flies to pair up with other flies of similar gut bacteria.
Is it too controversial then, to take what we are finding out about Stomach bacteria affecting our minds and passions to maybe go a step further and think they might also have negative impacts on brain development? They've got the tools and the weapons, after all.
The CONNECTION here with Immunizations for me, is that when babies are out of the womb, their bodies are still trying to figure out "friend and foe." They eat peas for the first time -- and nothing bad happens; Friend. But when we immunize people -- the "bad chicken pox" is mixed in with what is called an adjutant. It's some stuff that makes you a "little sick" so that your body recognizes the dead virus signatures it delivers as "foe." But how does the body know the difference between genetic markers for chicken pox and the fist time a baby has had peas? I'm asking the question because I don't know how a body knows the difference and I wonder how many "Immunizations are always good" people have bothered to ask the question, or wonder if the TIMING of immunizations might not be why we have so many kids with food allergies.
So if we PERHAPS can entertain the idea that adjutants can immunize children against Chicken Pox and Peas or Peanuts at the same time -- what happens if it immunizes them against certain important proteins necessary for development? Being allergic to a specific protein that might cause Autism? The immune system can attack ANYTHING, and for the most part, it is not pre-programmed. When babies are developing, it figures out what to attack and not attack.
The reason our current statistic models can't narrow down this direct connection is that it is Russian Roulette with a million factors. A peanut allergy, hyperactivity, autism, diabetes, depression,... whatever. A million ailments, a million variables and million opportunities. Most of the time, nothing happens.
There has been a lot of cock sure speculation and certainty on both sides of the argument here. And some vaccines have great benefits -- while others are NOT PROVEN and people accept on faith that "since we dealt with Polio and Measles ALL VACCINES = PROGRESS". We need more real studies for each case, and on when they should be given. I'd push for most not given to babies (except for HPV vaccine) until after 9 months unless there is another risk factor.
My solution is not ALL VACCINES = BAD, but my point is that timing is everything and good vaccines are good.
I'd say the better analogy would be a school that doesn't allow parents on the campus -- ever, and you send your kid there and one day they come back with an education. You ask them how it went; "I don't know, OK, maybe." A typical answer for a kid that you expected, right?
Another school allows parents to come in and tour the campus, and even visit classes any day they like as long as they aren't interrupting a class. You can meet with teachers and talk to them off hours and get a phone number to call if there are issues. Can you talk to every teacher and know their background and tell if they are creepy or not? Probably not. Probably 99% of all parents don't get to know more than 2% of every nook and cranny of the school or its teachers.
Both systems require trust, but only the 2nd one has any transparency at all. In real world terms we don't and can't inspect everything, but it's the denial of oversight that invites true corruption.
Look, we are all worried over nothing; this encryption means that only one 256 bit Key will unlock your data, or a paperclip -- but it's merely coincidence that the encryption has a two locks on the door and one of them is always the same.
I'm waiting to see Clippie on an upcoming episode of "VH1; Where are they now?"
I saw "Sharknado" on SyFy. That isn't just jumping the shark on SyFy the shark jumps you!
So once you are hit by a tornado with teeth, a mere hybrid Sharktopus is kind of tame in comparison.
I'd read some interesting articles about "using polarized light to determine chirality." Basically, the building blocks of our proteins are "right handed" (I think, I could get this flipped right here), a result of a yellow sun favoring certain right-handed outcomes in carbon molecules as they constantly get destroyed and re-attached in space and with radiation. Life is left-handed amino acids based upon the right-handed building blocks being more abundant. Due to this chirality, the light coming off our planet is polarized. Non-organic life doesn't have a chiral structure (if I'm using the word right), and therefore sunlight does not get polarized.
This is just one discovery of many. The idea that we may be able to quickly "scan for life forms" from 300 light years away may be right around the corner. So it begs the question; any life forms out there a bit more advanced than us would probably be able to "scan for life. We've already seen numerous examples of patterns being reproduced and preserving information as a way to defeat entropy. WHY this happens is a matter of debate but that it happens is clear from crystals to bees.
" It's not "if" but "why" have we not been contacted by higher life forms that should be the discussion -- not "if life exists".
They should have either no VAT on any stores, or VAT all the same across the board.
1) VAT creates a "lot of little taxes" which means a lot more work (to track and get the tax) and less transactions. This is a poor replacement for import taxes (tariffs) especially on wage-slave countries and those without environmental laws. If you increase the cost of imports, it helps manufacturing in your country and balance of trade. Lowering this has only seen greater profits that don't get shared.
2) Allowing states to race each other to the bottom reduces revenues. States can compete on better services. Allowing them to compete on Tax Havens only creates bidding wars and situations where companies have factories and taxes "for free" for 5 years. It's supposed to be made up for by wages and having people work, but we keep seeing those go lower as well. So less revenue and more profits that disappear from the economy.