Not all black holes are surrounded by a large cloud of material falling in, some black holes can be "naked" and give off very little radiation. Of course if it isn't giving off radiation then obviously they are hard to detect because there is nothing to see. Gravitational lensing is one possible way to detect a black hole in that case.
The target market of the iPhone is not to kill the blackberry - yet. It is to go after the market that the Razr has. The Razr allows you to install your own apps on it.
No I think you are missing the point. The problem is that zip codes alone are too big. Someone one one side of a zip code may have access to DSL while someone on the other side may not have any broadband access. They are currently assuming that if anyone in a zip code has broadband access everyone does. I imagine the number of entire areas without any broadband is far far less than the number of zip code areas that just have spotty coverage.
Also this is just as problematic when gaging competition. Just because the people on the west side of a region have one ISP and the people on the east side have another ISP doesn't mean there is competition.
The smaller zip codes would certainly take care of both these problems since these zip+4's in rural areas that only consist of a house or two will be much more likely to actually reflect whether or not these people have broadband.
Very well said except for:
I think one of the problems with the current administration is that they do only think in terms of years. That works fine in business where you can always bail before the stock tanks - the new investors take the loss instead of you - but it's disastrous for a government. Going by what you said shortsightedness only works well in business if you only care about your own success and not the success of the business as a whole or the other people with an interest in the company. If that's the case I don't see the difference between that and government.
Do you think anyone in the Bush administration will be put out no the street because of their reckless governing? Will any of their children be stuck fighting in Iraq? Of course not. Barring criminal prosecutions they'll all get away from the mess they made scot-free just like a CEO, Golden Parachute safely deployed.
What is the difference between the desires you describe and "traditional" desires? I don't see any difference except that one is explained algorithmically and the traditional desires are the result of mysterious workings deep in our brain.
Why do you say he's been conned? It seems pretty obvious that you can't take away someone's freedom to commit crime without being caught without also taking away someone's freedom to do things that are legal without also being watched. Would you consider yourself free without any privacy? I wouldn't.
Look at airport security for example. How do you propose that it could be made more secure without making us less free at the airport? It seems that any reasonable amount of freedom will give someone determined to do harm the ability to do it.
Re:Try Some Reading Comprehension
on
AMD's New DRM
·
· Score: 1
Freedom of relgion is freedom from religion if you choose not to follow a faith.
Regarding Fire Departments, I'm aware they are mostly all run by volunteers but they still have a lot of expenses. As you say, the trucks and all other expenses are substantially payed for with government funds.
Also the original poster didn't specifically say anything about income tax and neither did I. He said he doesn't want to give the government any taxes. To me that sounds like it would include sales tax, tariffs, and all the other sundry way the government goes about getting its share.
By the way, I'm no fan of the income tax system either, though probably for different reasons. Our current system is designed in a way so that the poorest people get screwed since they can't afford the advisers and the loopholes that the rich use to shelter their money.
However, as much as I dislike the income tax, the libertarian arguments against any sort of income tax aren't very convincing. They say they don't owe the government anything for the money they make but they ignore all the little things the government does to make their lifestyle possible. Do we have any reason to believe that anything like our interstate highway system would have been created by a private entity if the government did not do it? Maybe. I don't really know, but that sounds more like a libertarian fantasy then like something that would ever actually happen. A lot of railways are privately owned, but I don't think that's really an analogous situation.
I do agree that more of our money should be coming in from trade. Maybe if that was the case maybe something would be done about our embarrassing trade deficits.
But maybe not, because from what I've heard, some types of tours are so inherently expensive to pull off that they basically don't make significant money - they publicize album sales. Sure, you can't pull off a huge spectacle with lights and pyros and dancers maybe, but then again if your music is any good you don't need any of that stuff to entertain people anyway. Good musician's will find a way to make their music no matter what. They always have.
Yes, things sounds much better in your happy world of no taxes where every road is a toll road and where you have to give your credit card to the Fire Department before they'll put out your house.
I believe DNA is the preferred programming language. But be warned the amoeba specs are more complicated than C++, they have the largest known genome of any creature.
I'm having trouble following your point. Peter does sound modern and English, but that's only because it is still used in modern English. I doubt I pronounce my name the same as the Apostle Peter pronounced his since Peter is the English version of the name, but that's a bit aside from the point. Regardless of how we pronounce his name, the Apostle Peter, is still the Apostle Peter and he was still the first Pope.
Also the legend I am referring to is the legend of Peter's death. Maybe you are confusing it with Christ's crucification, but if you look you will see that Peter's death was not recorded in the Bible. We have no hard proof how he died but, as I said, legend has it that he was crucified (upside down) by the Roman government.
My original point was simply that if the early Popes served also as Roman Emperors that would have made Peter a Roman Emperor which would make his execution by the Romans pretty highly unlikely.
BTW, I don't disagree with the point of your original post, just questioning some of the details.
Nope, You cannot prove that to any extent. That is why we are still on the hunt ofr the missing link Nope. The only people who "claim" to be looking for the mytological "missing link" are creationists. Anyone with any education knows that evolution is a gradual and continuous process. You can't discover every transitional form in a species evolution any more than you can list all the real numbers between 0 and 1.
It's just another bogus form of the old creationist "God of the gaps" argument.
What is the difference between microevolution and macroevolution other than scale? It seems pretty obvious we haven't directly witnessed speciation yet just because we haven't been making observations for long enough.
Or maybe we have witnessed it. The classification of creatures that reproduce asexually into species is fairly arbitrary, is it not?
Why is people believing in god such a big problem for some? Would you feel comfortable knowing that your government is run predominantly by people who believe that Santa Clause is real?
If not, please explain how that is different from faith in God.
History is not science. All that people can know about history is from second or third hand accounts at best, science can be observed first hand by anyone inclined to do the experiments and observations. That is why your comparison of the two is rubbish.
Well his party, The Labour Party, used to be a Socialist party. It's understandable that someone could assume Blair was also a socialist even though he is quite a bit less socialistic than many others in his party.
Still, by US standards just about every government in Europe is probably Socialist so I guess it's a relative term.
The first few popes were also the roman emperor by some coincidence. Where you getting your facts from dude? The first Pope was Peter. According to legend Peter was crucified by the Roman government. Are you claiming that his crucification was a suicide?
A master chef doesn't want to impart his recipes, because he's petty enough to consider those his own property, which only he has the right to it. Basically, he wants to 'guard' his recipes from being used by others. Are you claiming God has the same tendencies? Have you read the Old Testament? Yeah, he is quite petty and jealous actually.
I don't think he implied that the US citizens have a lot of trust in their government. I didn't take it that way at least, he was just replying to one solitary, nutjob AC.
Whoa there, there is a huge difference between having different priorities and wholesale distortion of scientific evidence which is what the Republican's are continuously being caught doing.
Can you think of any situations where a Democrat blatantly misrepresented scientific evidence in order to advance a partisan agenda? I've never heard of any. I'm sure it's happened at some point, but certainly not to the extend that this Administration is guilty of such things.
Slashdot Mirror
Not all black holes are surrounded by a large cloud of material falling in, some black holes can be "naked" and give off very little radiation. Of course if it isn't giving off radiation then obviously they are hard to detect because there is nothing to see. Gravitational lensing is one possible way to detect a black hole in that case.
No I think you are missing the point. The problem is that zip codes alone are too big. Someone one one side of a zip code may have access to DSL while someone on the other side may not have any broadband access. They are currently assuming that if anyone in a zip code has broadband access everyone does. I imagine the number of entire areas without any broadband is far far less than the number of zip code areas that just have spotty coverage.
Also this is just as problematic when gaging competition. Just because the people on the west side of a region have one ISP and the people on the east side have another ISP doesn't mean there is competition.
The smaller zip codes would certainly take care of both these problems since these zip+4's in rural areas that only consist of a house or two will be much more likely to actually reflect whether or not these people have broadband.
Comedy Central's video player does indeed suck. Try this link instead:
r /browse.jhtml
http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/media_playe
Do you think anyone in the Bush administration will be put out no the street because of their reckless governing? Will any of their children be stuck fighting in Iraq? Of course not. Barring criminal prosecutions they'll all get away from the mess they made scot-free just like a CEO, Golden Parachute safely deployed.
What is the difference between the desires you describe and "traditional" desires? I don't see any difference except that one is explained algorithmically and the traditional desires are the result of mysterious workings deep in our brain.
Why do you say he's been conned? It seems pretty obvious that you can't take away someone's freedom to commit crime without being caught without also taking away someone's freedom to do things that are legal without also being watched. Would you consider yourself free without any privacy? I wouldn't.
Look at airport security for example. How do you propose that it could be made more secure without making us less free at the airport? It seems that any reasonable amount of freedom will give someone determined to do harm the ability to do it.
Freedom of relgion is freedom from religion if you choose not to follow a faith.
Regarding Fire Departments, I'm aware they are mostly all run by volunteers but they still have a lot of expenses. As you say, the trucks and all other expenses are substantially payed for with government funds.
Also the original poster didn't specifically say anything about income tax and neither did I. He said he doesn't want to give the government any taxes. To me that sounds like it would include sales tax, tariffs, and all the other sundry way the government goes about getting its share.
By the way, I'm no fan of the income tax system either, though probably for different reasons. Our current system is designed in a way so that the poorest people get screwed since they can't afford the advisers and the loopholes that the rich use to shelter their money.
However, as much as I dislike the income tax, the libertarian arguments against any sort of income tax aren't very convincing. They say they don't owe the government anything for the money they make but they ignore all the little things the government does to make their lifestyle possible. Do we have any reason to believe that anything like our interstate highway system would have been created by a private entity if the government did not do it? Maybe. I don't really know, but that sounds more like a libertarian fantasy then like something that would ever actually happen. A lot of railways are privately owned, but I don't think that's really an analogous situation.
I do agree that more of our money should be coming in from trade. Maybe if that was the case maybe something would be done about our embarrassing trade deficits.
Yes, things sounds much better in your happy world of no taxes where every road is a toll road and where you have to give your credit card to the Fire Department before they'll put out your house.
I believe DNA is the preferred programming language. But be warned the amoeba specs are more complicated than C++, they have the largest known genome of any creature.
Ahh, thanks for the clarification. What you wrote makes much more sense now!
I'm having trouble following your point. Peter does sound modern and English, but that's only because it is still used in modern English. I doubt I pronounce my name the same as the Apostle Peter pronounced his since Peter is the English version of the name, but that's a bit aside from the point. Regardless of how we pronounce his name, the Apostle Peter, is still the Apostle Peter and he was still the first Pope.
Also the legend I am referring to is the legend of Peter's death. Maybe you are confusing it with Christ's crucification, but if you look you will see that Peter's death was not recorded in the Bible. We have no hard proof how he died but, as I said, legend has it that he was crucified (upside down) by the Roman government.
My original point was simply that if the early Popes served also as Roman Emperors that would have made Peter a Roman Emperor which would make his execution by the Romans pretty highly unlikely.
BTW, I don't disagree with the point of your original post, just questioning some of the details.
It's just another bogus form of the old creationist "God of the gaps" argument.
What is the difference between microevolution and macroevolution other than scale? It seems pretty obvious we haven't directly witnessed speciation yet just because we haven't been making observations for long enough.
Or maybe we have witnessed it. The classification of creatures that reproduce asexually into species is fairly arbitrary, is it not?
If not, please explain how that is different from faith in God.
History is not science. All that people can know about history is from second or third hand accounts at best, science can be observed first hand by anyone inclined to do the experiments and observations. That is why your comparison of the two is rubbish.
Well his party, The Labour Party, used to be a Socialist party. It's understandable that someone could assume Blair was also a socialist even though he is quite a bit less socialistic than many others in his party.
Still, by US standards just about every government in Europe is probably Socialist so I guess it's a relative term.
I don't think he implied that the US citizens have a lot of trust in their government. I didn't take it that way at least, he was just replying to one solitary, nutjob AC.
Whoa there, there is a huge difference between having different priorities and wholesale distortion of scientific evidence which is what the Republican's are continuously being caught doing.
Can you think of any situations where a Democrat blatantly misrepresented scientific evidence in order to advance a partisan agenda? I've never heard of any. I'm sure it's happened at some point, but certainly not to the extend that this Administration is guilty of such things.
They prefer to call it "intelligent falling", but yeah you got the gist of it.