No, a successful economy is one with optimal use of resources and utilizing the best goods/service exchange patterns available.
Please, people, can you stop the fashionable 'anti-economics' whining, and instead of reading feel-good leftist "I hate big companies" and "free market is evil" articles read some real economics textbook? It's not that hard, it's quite interesting and practically no advanced math is required.
I have to agree with this AC. The problem here is that the previous posters are conflating "successful economy" with "successful society", or even perhaps "a society I would want to live in". They are not the same thing. They may (or not) be related; they may (or not) be interdependent, but they aren't the same thing.
No centralized, planned economy has ever outperformed a free market, capitalist one. Ever.
You are correct. Karl Marx predicted and directly addressed this about 150 years ago.
He said that capitalist societies will always be able to have greater productivity than communist ones. He also said that productivity was not the best measure of a society. He also pointed out that slave economies are very good at making some people very rich, but that does not make it OK. He drew a parallel between chattel slavery in the Americas and factory workers' wage slavery. (keep in mind this was 1800's)
At what cost do we seek productivity? What tradeoffs should society make between the productivity of unencumbered capitalist societies and basic human treatment of the working classes? What is the tradeoff in freedom for the wealthy and freedom for working classes? That is, people at the bottom who work hand to mouth aren't really free, especially if they cannot grow their own food or emigrate Well, again, Marx's experience was mid-19th century British factory system, and with how The Enclosure made otherwise free people into virtual slaves. I think his observations of that time were true, but we don't do things that way anymore, or not so much.
For most people, workers in unfettered 19th century capitalism have lives much like workers in the 20th century "communist" countries. OK, well there was never anything like 19th century child labor in the Soviet states, but otherwise it's close in most ways.
In Marx's time, it was common practice that workers who showed up late were beaten, thugs were sent to bring in workers who didn't show, and they would be locked in the factory until the days expected production was done. Also, in many places you had to have a permit to work or live in an area, so leaving wasn't much of an option either.
So in the modern world, we have a middle road. Private ownership of production as in capitalism, but socialist in that the government makes rules for worker protection, environmental protection, and a social safety net.
So, back to the original post. The planned economy advocated by the article in order to be stable would have to lay down a combination of 19th century "do what we say or starve" with the Soviet's "we only produce what we think you need". Only now it would be MBA's and the kind of people that wrote SAP that would be guiding the future.
Marx also said at one time that the only country that he thought would be able to have true communism was the United States. So much for his ability to make predictions.
Maybe something like that. The paper says the falloff in these diseases began in the 1960's, so we're talking about people born late 1800's to early 1900's. It would not be due to asbestos use/disuse. Asbestos was a fairly new product - peak usage was around the 1960's and the symptoms take many years to decades to show, so if there were a relationship between the major diseases and asbestos, it would suggest that asbestos is good for you. (Note: I'm saying this means there is no relationship; I am not claiming that asbestos is good for you)
Same for food additives - the first generation to experience the falloff in diseases weren't raised on the wide rage of additives we have today, but rather just salt and nitrites for preservation. The drop-off in use of nitrites may explain some of the dropoff in colon cancer rates, but that is controversial.
The generation that would be dying in the 1960's and after would be the last generation that grew up dependent upon wood fires for heating and cooking . Burning wood produces a witch's brew of chemicals including aromatic hydrocarbons. And also there's the drop-off in cigarette smoking in recent generations.
Another thing that's different is recent generations are the first in which most people did not have the panoply of childhood diseases that used to be so common. Measles, mumps, the chicken pox, etc have many serious side effects.
Maybe YOU should RTFA....this is all about counterfeit products.
Nonsense. TFA doesn't refer to a single case of "counterfeiting". p>
It kind of looks like you're just being argumentative. That's fun, I know, but at some point you should give the rest of us a break. This article is not just about the bed-tightener. To save other people (and you) the trouble of RTFA, I'll pull out the quotes that address the gist of the matter.
From the article:
In May, CNBC.com reported on a Facebook group, now consisting of over 600 people, whose members have seen their designs for t-shirts, coffee mugs and iPhone cases show up on Amazon at a fraction of the price of the originals. The designers described it as a game of whack-a-mole, where fakes pop up more quickly than they're taken down.
Birkenstock has seen dozens of stores at a time hawking its Arizona Sandal for $79.99, a full $20 below the retail price. The names of the online storefronts change all the time, one day including the monikers Silver Peak Wine Cellar and Ryan Hollifield and the next Keila*Knightley and Bking sewneg.
"Amazon is making money hand over fist from counterfeiters, and they've done about as little as possible for as long as possible to address the issue," said Chris Johnson, an attorney at Johnson & Pham LLP, which focuses on intellectual property and brand enforcement and represents clients including Forever 21, Adobe and OtterBox. "Word is out in the counterfeit community that it's open season on Amazon."
And this, Even Alibaba says they're doing fakes.
Counterfeiting online is nothing new of course, particularly when it comes to commerce. Alibaba, the Chinese e-retail giant, has been dealing with it since launching in 1999.
Some form of the word counterfeit shows up 30 times in Alibaba's latest annual report, and founder Jack Ma said in a speech last month in Hangzhou, China, that the fakes are of "better quality, better prices than the real products, the real names."
"They respond and take down the images, but the very same images go up within a week by another new seller," said Kristi Spencer, whose e-commerce site Golly Girls sells personalized sports-themed T-shirts, backpacks and notebooks. "Counterfeiters are selling low-quality knockoffs of other people's artwork."
When I was somewhat younger, I was a so-called field engineer responsible for keeping some discrete element computers running.
Here's a picture of a module. This would be a single logic element such as a flip-flop, NAND gate, OR, etc. https://www.etsy.com/listing/2...
The CPU cabinet was a huge box full of these things. The I/O controllers were in another cabinet, and the memory was in another cabinet. The other boxes (storage, printers, card readers) had these same modules in them. I never was main support for a CPU using those modules, but had some peripherals that had those things inside.
In more modern computers, these modules were replaced by logic cards. A PCB would have the transistors/diodes, etc to make a single element such as NAND gates, flip-flops or whatever, and these cards might have as many as 4 or even 6 logic elements on a single card. woo-eee! I was lucky to be supporting such modern machines.
These old machines required hand-tuning such as manually synchronizing the clock signals between the near and far part of the cabinets.
The oldest machine I had to maintain was an 80 column card reader that used mechanical relays for all the logic elements. That was so long ago that the nightmares have stopped.
People keep saying it was gathered from publicly available databases.
What publicly available database has gun ownership? Neither the states nor the feds knows who owns guns. It's against the law (I know, lol) for them to maintain a database of gun owners.
And how about household income? Where can a person get the household income of other people from a publicly available database?
Where they store the medical data is a secondary consideration. What they are storing would be a major concern, and also for how long they are storing it. Also, I'd want to know whether the records will be destroyed after graduation.
I assume that it's not a college or university. I would ask why the school is storing any medical data on the student. I also assume that the child would be getting their medical care from a hospital or clinic and not the school. The school cannot be doing anything more than the most trivial medical care, so there's no need for school records of that.
I can imagine needing for some students to have some record of life-threatening allergies, vaccinations, or special needs such as diabetes. And I'm not sure that data even needs to be in a medical record format. Also, such data does not need to be accessed anywhere off-campus, and it has no need to exist after graduation. For example, consider dietary restrictions. Is the school cook going to be access the student's medical records to get that information? I don't think that would be a good idea.
If you have a child with problems that the school must know about for safety reasons, then you'll want to participate in whatever program they have. It may suck, but this is a case of small danger (loss of privacy) vs large danger (loss of health/life).
But if you have a healthy kid, here is what I would worry about if they're keeping medical records on the kids. It's mental health statements. I'd worry whether school "medical" personnel are making diagnoses of mental problems and putting in the schools medical record. For one thing, it's likely to be a poorly done diagnosis, and the other is that is something that could turn up later to haunt her if the records are later shared with some other institution. I suspect that HR people would be more likely to overlook a missing arm before overlooking a school psychologist's suspicion of of manic-depressive behavior or schizophrenia.
Actually, a computer science undergrad disproved the Turing test when he asked a panel of AI experts "If a computer that fools a man into thinking it's a man proves the computer is as intelligent as a man, is a computer that fools a dog into thinking it's a dog as intelligent as a dog?"
Good story, but that's not what the Turing test is about. Passing the Turing test does not imply that the computer is as intelligent as a human.
This robot no more mad a "dash for freedom" than does a car rolling down a hill because the owner forgot to set the parking break. Please let's not have Slashdot contribute to the blatant and foolish anthroporphizing of machines having zero intellect.
Perhaps the reason searches for " cri" doesn't expand to "crimes" from Google is the Google is trying to avoid violating Europe's (and others) "right to be forgotten" laws, or rather, trying to avoid lawsuits from it.
However, that's only one. I know about that one. It's a good reference because there is an actual document from that time of their actions and intentions.
My objection is that it is too much of a stretch to take the siege of Fort Pitt (1763) and extrapolate from that to say that Europeans had a policy of intentionally spreading smallpox as some form of germ warfare. Consider that involves extrapolating to 250 years before Fort Pitt, the early 1500's, when the disease first began spreading. And no one accuses the one of the first explorer, Hernando de Soto, of intentionally spreading diseases, and his expedition was one of the greatest carriers, that I know of.
If people were to say, "there's this one time some British gave items to the Indians that were known to be infected", that would be fine. But the idea that there was some genocidal plan put in place to exterminate the Indians from North America using germ warfare is a bunch of hooey and not supported by historical records.
When I try to research this, all I ever see evidence for is the Fort Pitt incident. Well, there's Churchhill and the Mandan outbreak that has been shown to be a fabrication.
The various European diseases had already been destroying the Native Americans since the early 1500's (250 years before Fort Pitt) by simple contact, and smallpox was but just one of many plagues. No one had to do anything to spread these diseases other than just show up and say hello.
The eventual spread through North America of European diseases was unavoidable. Primitive cultures and thought patterns want things to always have a cause or purpose that you can point to, someone to blame, but plagues don't have purpose. We want to blame someone, but not everything that happens is due to human agency.
Blankets with pox scabs served to spread it quite effectively when Europeans arrived in the western hemisphere
Uh, no. The infected blankets is a story that has spiraled in recent years. It is true that someone suggested giving infected blankets to Indians, but the only two cases that I have found say that the it wasn't only suggested, and not actually done.
Do you have some reference to a historical record that says otherwise? I'm not asking to be challenging, I have a genuine interest in this, thanks in advance.
Some scientists say that these residual stocks of smallpox should not be destroyed because some ruthless super-criminal or rogue government might be working on a new smallpox, even more virulent than existing strains of the virus. We may need existing stocks to produce new vaccines to counteract the new viruses
This is the one I have to wonder about. The vaccine for smallpox is not smallpox, It is vaccinia which is closely related to cowpox. If someone releases smallpox and you need to vaccinate, then you still don't need to have any smallpox.
If someone makes a new type of smallpox and releases it, then you want the new smallpox to develop a defense against and test and now you have it from the infected people. And it seems unlikely that the old smallpox (deadly) would be used to make a vaccine against any new smallpox, but I admit the possibility.
Smallpox is a member of the poxviridae family. If you need a virus like smallpox to fool around with in your lab, there are 28 genera and 69 species of pox.
On the other hand, smallpox is not the only disease we have eradicated. Rinderpest is the other. Rinderpest is closely related to measles and measles probably evolved from rinderpest. Stocks of Rinderpest remain, but rinderpest vaccine is made from a rinderpest virus variant, so it makes sense that we would keep some of that for just in case.
I didn't mislead. It was exactly my intent was to put in perspective the total amount of money spent on the ISS funding by comparing it to the total amount of other things we spend money on. I showed that the ISS cost is small compared to the total spending on higher education, science, (or as you correctly pointed out, R&D), beer, romance novels, or various trivialities.
We're a big country. It's not an either/or situation. We can do many things at once.
How does this affect me? Why is this important to anyone except Maria Schneider? I'll get modded down to -1 for asking this because Slashdot users don't like answering important questions. But this needs to be asked, and I challenge any of you to give me a real answer rather than insulting me. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone here is up to the challenge.
1) How does this affect me?
We cannot know the answer to that because we have no idea of who you are. Are you a musician? A Google/youtube employee? A lawyer? Those people would care a lot, but we have no idea who you are so we cannot answer your question. Only you would know what your interests are, and not everything that happens affects everybody. Don't ask this question again.
2) Why is this important to anyone except Maria Schneider?
She is a member of a community (published musicians) that has the share a common experience (or belief) that their works are being unfairly posted and uncompensated. This also affects employees of google/youtube and attorneys who may be interested in copyright law. Entertainment is a multi-billion dollar industry and an important part of the economy, as is google/youtube. This is explained in the articles linked to, and tells us that you are posting to an article that you have not read.
You are asking us to read the article for you and explain it. How can you not know how annoying that is?
3) I'll get modded down to -1 for asking this because Slashdot users don't like answering important questions.
We do like answering important questions. We don't enjoy discussions with people who have NOT read the articles.
You get modded down because your questions are about you and not about the posted article.
4) But this needs to be asked,
No, you are mistaken. Your questions do not need to be asked. How the article affects you, who we do not know anything about, does not need to be asked.
5) and I challenge any of you to give me a real answer rather than insulting me.
The purpose of Slashdot is to offer a variety of topics for discussion. Look at the top of the Slashdot web page. There is a line that looks like this: Topics: Devices Build Entertainment Technnology Open Source Science YRO
This article is about YRO and Entertainment. People who are interested in YRO and Entertainment would be interested in this topic. others would skip over it.
NASA will send you a txt message on the days that the ISS will be passing overhead at dawn or dusk. It's way cool to actually see it going over and to think about the people up there. https://spotthestation.nasa.go...
But this is my favorite. It's downward looking webcams from the ISS.
And what would the world be like if we started killing the richest people in the world? I'm not for killing anyone ever, but what happens if you kill the.01% and keep culling until it doesn't exist anymore?
The result would be the same as if the richest people in the world lived for 80~90 years and then each died in their own time.
Besides, if you really want to improve the world by killing people, wouldn't you start by killing from the bottom level? This sort of idea has been tried already, both ways. You should already know how well it didn't work.
> Sergio Marchionne, an Italian-Canadian executive who is currently the CEO
I don't see any relevance at all to mentioning Marchionne's nationalities. Particularly when there's no mention of nationality for the second person mentioned:
> Jim McBride, technical leader in Ford's autonomous vehicles team
I often wonder why they do that. To me, it's an annoying interruption to the flow of the story.
And piling on... they didn't say which parent was the Canadian or the Italian (although the name is a clue), and whether or not it was the immediate parents for a 50-50 genetic split, or if it was just a single male great-grandparent that was Italian. If they're going to tell us he's Italian-Canadian, then why wouldn't they tell us which nationality donated the Y chromosome, and who donated the mitochondria? Without that knowledge, it's just pointless to say "Italian-Canadian".
Furthermore, there's cultural issues at stake. If the mother was Canadian and the father Italian, then who did the cooking? Is it possible that Sergio had an Italian parent and was raised on Canadian food? If so, how would that affect his outlook on life? If that happened to me, I would be angry all the time. Are we supposed to infer that as a Italian-Canadian he waves only one of his hands when he speaks?
Or it's possible that Starless is correct, and that the nationality is irrelevant.
However you should have explained that the study's co-author (Dr. Simon Albert) is saying that OTHER people are exaggerating the Solomon Islands - climate change connection.
From the Examiner article:
Dr. Simon Albert, the report's co-author told the Guardian today that numerous media outlets, like the Washington Post and NY Times and Think Progress, have misinterpreted their work by trying to link sea level rise with climate change. According to Albert, the researchers did not study climate change and how it influences shoreline erosion and submersion of certain low-lying islands.
He stands by the his paper and the conclusions they made.
What if, and I'm just saying, what if he had been writing his mathy stuff and using METRIC UNITS! This would clearly identify him as being a foreigner. And furthermore, he spoke English with an accent according to the article. Why would anyone learn to speak English with an accent unless they were, in fact, a terrorist?
Once exposed, he was no longer able to carry out his nefarious plot. I say that woman did stop his plot. Kudos to you, plot-stopping heroine.
The Windows GUI will prevent creation and removal of any 'special' foldername that looks like a device: LPT1, COM6, CON, etc.
To remove any of those "special" file/foldernames after the fact, all you need is look for the short 8.3 notation of the filename that the filesystem uses behind the scenes, and which the GUI hides from the end user.
Open a command prompt and navigate to the folder that contains the special name
dir/x will show the associated "short" filename, e.g. co~123 instead of COM4
You can directly remove/rename/etc the file from the command prompt when referring to these short names:
remove a file: del co~123
remove a folder with its contents: rd co~123/s
In addition to what xlsior said,
Regarding the so-called "specially crafted command" in the example,
(rd “\\.\%appdata%\com4.{241D7C96-F8BF-4F85-B01F-E2B043341A4B}”/S/Q),
All it is doing is using the \\.\ prefix to tell the parser to skip reserved-word checking. For example, you cannot create a folder c:\com4 using MKDIR C:\com4. but MKDIR "\\.\C:\com4" succeeds. Likewise with the RMDIR
Slashdot Mirror
No, a successful economy is one with optimal use of resources and utilizing the best goods/service exchange patterns available.
Please, people, can you stop the fashionable 'anti-economics' whining, and instead of reading feel-good leftist "I hate big companies" and "free market is evil" articles read some real economics textbook? It's not that hard, it's quite interesting and practically no advanced math is required.
I have to agree with this AC.
The problem here is that the previous posters are conflating "successful economy" with "successful society", or even perhaps "a society I would want to live in". They are not the same thing.
They may (or not) be related; they may (or not) be interdependent, but they aren't the same thing.
No centralized, planned economy has ever outperformed a free market, capitalist one. Ever.
You are correct.
Karl Marx predicted and directly addressed this about 150 years ago.
He said that capitalist societies will always be able to have greater productivity than communist ones.
He also said that productivity was not the best measure of a society.
He also pointed out that slave economies are very good at making some people very rich, but that does not make it OK.
He drew a parallel between chattel slavery in the Americas and factory workers' wage slavery. (keep in mind this was 1800's)
At what cost do we seek productivity? What tradeoffs should society make between the productivity of unencumbered capitalist societies and basic human treatment of the working classes? What is the tradeoff in freedom for the wealthy and freedom for working classes? That is, people at the bottom who work hand to mouth aren't really free, especially if they cannot grow their own food or emigrate
Well, again, Marx's experience was mid-19th century British factory system, and with how The Enclosure made otherwise free people into virtual slaves. I think his observations of that time were true, but we don't do things that way anymore, or not so much.
For most people, workers in unfettered 19th century capitalism have lives much like workers in the 20th century "communist" countries.
OK, well there was never anything like 19th century child labor in the Soviet states, but otherwise it's close in most ways.
In Marx's time, it was common practice that workers who showed up late were beaten, thugs were sent to bring in workers who didn't show, and they would be locked in the factory until the days expected production was done. Also, in many places you had to have a permit to work or live in an area, so leaving wasn't much of an option either.
So in the modern world, we have a middle road.
Private ownership of production as in capitalism, but socialist in that the government makes rules for worker protection, environmental protection, and a social safety net.
So, back to the original post.
The planned economy advocated by the article in order to be stable would have to lay down a combination of 19th century "do what we say or starve" with the Soviet's "we only produce what we think you need".
Only now it would be MBA's and the kind of people that wrote SAP that would be guiding the future.
Marx also said at one time that the only country that he thought would be able to have true communism was the United States. So much for his ability to make predictions.
Economies are just a collection of processes that convert raw materials and labour into useful goods and services
You can prove anything if you start with a bad enough premise.
Maybe something like that.
The paper says the falloff in these diseases began in the 1960's, so we're talking about people born late 1800's to early 1900's.
It would not be due to asbestos use/disuse. Asbestos was a fairly new product - peak usage was around the 1960's and the symptoms take many years to decades to show, so if there were a relationship between the major diseases and asbestos, it would suggest that asbestos is good for you. (Note: I'm saying this means there is no relationship; I am not claiming that asbestos is good for you)
Same for food additives - the first generation to experience the falloff in diseases weren't raised on the wide rage of additives we have today, but rather just salt and nitrites for preservation. The drop-off in use of nitrites may explain some of the dropoff in colon cancer rates, but that is controversial.
The generation that would be dying in the 1960's and after would be the last generation that grew up dependent upon wood fires for heating and cooking .
Burning wood produces a witch's brew of chemicals including aromatic hydrocarbons.
And also there's the drop-off in cigarette smoking in recent generations.
Another thing that's different is recent generations are the first in which most people did not have the panoply of childhood diseases that used to be so common.
Measles, mumps, the chicken pox, etc have many serious side effects.
Maybe YOU should RTFA....this is all about counterfeit products.
Nonsense. TFA doesn't refer to a single case of "counterfeiting". p>
It kind of looks like you're just being argumentative. That's fun, I know, but at some point you should give the rest of us a break.
This article is not just about the bed-tightener.
To save other people (and you) the trouble of RTFA, I'll pull out the quotes that address the gist of the matter.
From the article:
In May, CNBC.com reported on a Facebook group, now consisting of over 600 people, whose members have seen their designs for t-shirts, coffee mugs and iPhone cases show up on Amazon at a fraction of the price of the originals. The designers described it as a game of whack-a-mole, where fakes pop up more quickly than they're taken down.
Birkenstock has seen dozens of stores at a time hawking its Arizona Sandal for $79.99, a full $20 below the retail price. The names of the online storefronts change all the time, one day including the monikers Silver Peak Wine Cellar and Ryan Hollifield and the next Keila*Knightley and Bking sewneg.
"Amazon is making money hand over fist from counterfeiters, and they've done about as little as possible for as long as possible to address the issue," said Chris Johnson, an attorney at Johnson & Pham LLP, which focuses on intellectual property and brand enforcement and represents clients including Forever 21, Adobe and OtterBox. "Word is out in the counterfeit community that it's open season on Amazon."
And this, Even Alibaba says they're doing fakes.
Counterfeiting online is nothing new of course, particularly when it comes to commerce. Alibaba, the Chinese e-retail giant, has been dealing with it since launching in 1999.
Some form of the word counterfeit shows up 30 times in Alibaba's latest annual report, and founder Jack Ma said in a speech last month in Hangzhou, China, that the fakes are of "better quality, better prices than the real products, the real names."
From a sub-link:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/25...
"They respond and take down the images, but the very same images go up within a week by another new seller," said Kristi Spencer, whose e-commerce site Golly Girls sells personalized sports-themed T-shirts, backpacks and notebooks. "Counterfeiters are selling low-quality knockoffs of other people's artwork."
When I was somewhat younger, I was a so-called field engineer responsible for keeping some discrete element computers running.
Here's a picture of a module. This would be a single logic element such as a flip-flop, NAND gate, OR, etc.
https://www.etsy.com/listing/2...
The CPU cabinet was a huge box full of these things. The I/O controllers were in another cabinet, and the memory was in another cabinet.
The other boxes (storage, printers, card readers) had these same modules in them.
I never was main support for a CPU using those modules, but had some peripherals that had those things inside.
In more modern computers, these modules were replaced by logic cards. A PCB would have the transistors/diodes, etc to make a single element such as NAND gates, flip-flops or whatever, and these cards might have as many as 4 or even 6 logic elements on a single card. woo-eee!
I was lucky to be supporting such modern machines.
These old machines required hand-tuning such as manually synchronizing the clock signals between the near and far part of the cabinets.
The oldest machine I had to maintain was an 80 column card reader that used mechanical relays for all the logic elements. That was so long ago that the nightmares have stopped.
People keep saying it was gathered from publicly available databases.
What publicly available database has gun ownership? Neither the states nor the feds knows who owns guns. It's against the law (I know, lol) for them to maintain a database of gun owners.
And how about household income? Where can a person get the household income of other people from a publicly available database?
Where they store the medical data is a secondary consideration.
What they are storing would be a major concern, and also for how long they are storing it.
Also, I'd want to know whether the records will be destroyed after graduation.
I assume that it's not a college or university.
I would ask why the school is storing any medical data on the student. I also assume that the child would be getting their medical care from a hospital or clinic and not the school. The school cannot be doing anything more than the most trivial medical care, so there's no need for school records of that.
I can imagine needing for some students to have some record of life-threatening allergies, vaccinations, or special needs such as diabetes.
And I'm not sure that data even needs to be in a medical record format.
Also, such data does not need to be accessed anywhere off-campus, and it has no need to exist after graduation.
For example, consider dietary restrictions. Is the school cook going to be access the student's medical records to get that information? I don't think that would be a good idea.
If you have a child with problems that the school must know about for safety reasons, then you'll want to participate in whatever program they have. It may suck, but this is a case of small danger (loss of privacy) vs large danger (loss of health/life).
But if you have a healthy kid, here is what I would worry about if they're keeping medical records on the kids. It's mental health statements.
I'd worry whether school "medical" personnel are making diagnoses of mental problems and putting in the schools medical record. For one thing, it's likely to be a poorly done diagnosis, and the other is that is something that could turn up later to haunt her if the records are later shared with some other institution.
I suspect that HR people would be more likely to overlook a missing arm before overlooking a school psychologist's suspicion of of manic-depressive behavior or schizophrenia.
Actually, a computer science undergrad disproved the Turing test when he asked a panel of AI experts "If a computer that fools a man into thinking it's a man proves the computer is as intelligent as a man, is a computer that fools a dog into thinking it's a dog as intelligent as a dog?"
Good story, but that's not what the Turing test is about. Passing the Turing test does not imply that the computer is as intelligent as a human.
This robot no more mad a "dash for freedom" than does a car rolling down a hill because the owner forgot to set the parking break. Please let's not have Slashdot contribute to the blatant and foolish anthroporphizing of machines having zero intellect.
AC, you've failed the Turing test, again.
Perhaps the reason searches for " cri" doesn't expand to "crimes" from Google is the Google is trying to avoid violating Europe's (and others) "right to be forgotten" laws, or rather, trying to avoid lawsuits from it.
I hear it has something to do with pants.
Yes, I believe Dockers is the pants for pouring hot grits down.
What I find is the hardest part about changing passwords is getting my kids and dog to accept their new names.
One Case where it was specifically the mode used,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
However, that's only one.
I know about that one. It's a good reference because there is an actual document from that time of their actions and intentions.
My objection is that it is too much of a stretch to take the siege of Fort Pitt (1763) and extrapolate from that to say that Europeans had a policy of intentionally spreading smallpox as some form of germ warfare. Consider that involves extrapolating to 250 years before Fort Pitt, the early 1500's, when the disease first began spreading. And no one accuses the one of the first explorer, Hernando de Soto, of intentionally spreading diseases, and his expedition was one of the greatest carriers, that I know of.
If people were to say, "there's this one time some British gave items to the Indians that were known to be infected", that would be fine. But the idea that there was some genocidal plan put in place to exterminate the Indians from North America using germ warfare is a bunch of hooey and not supported by historical records.
When I try to research this, all I ever see evidence for is the Fort Pitt incident.
Well, there's Churchhill and the Mandan outbreak that has been shown to be a fabrication.
The various European diseases had already been destroying the Native Americans since the early 1500's (250 years before Fort Pitt) by simple contact, and smallpox was but just one of many plagues. No one had to do anything to spread these diseases other than just show up and say hello.
The eventual spread through North America of European diseases was unavoidable.
Primitive cultures and thought patterns want things to always have a cause or purpose that you can point to, someone to blame, but plagues don't have purpose. We want to blame someone, but not everything that happens is due to human agency.
Blankets with pox scabs served to spread it quite effectively when Europeans arrived in the western hemisphere
Uh, no. The infected blankets is a story that has spiraled in recent years. It is true that someone suggested giving infected blankets to Indians, but the only two cases that I have found say that the it wasn't only suggested, and not actually done.
Do you have some reference to a historical record that says otherwise? I'm not asking to be challenging, I have a genuine interest in this, thanks in advance.
Some scientists say that these residual stocks of smallpox should not be destroyed because some ruthless super-criminal or rogue government might be working on a new smallpox, even more virulent than existing strains of the virus. We may need existing stocks to produce new vaccines to counteract the new viruses
This is the one I have to wonder about.
The vaccine for smallpox is not smallpox, It is vaccinia which is closely related to cowpox.
If someone releases smallpox and you need to vaccinate, then you still don't need to have any smallpox.
If someone makes a new type of smallpox and releases it, then you want the new smallpox to develop a defense against and test and now you have it from the infected people.
And it seems unlikely that the old smallpox (deadly) would be used to make a vaccine against any new smallpox, but I admit the possibility.
Smallpox is a member of the poxviridae family. If you need a virus like smallpox to fool around with in your lab, there are 28 genera and 69 species of pox.
On the other hand, smallpox is not the only disease we have eradicated.
Rinderpest is the other. Rinderpest is closely related to measles and measles probably evolved from rinderpest.
Stocks of Rinderpest remain, but rinderpest vaccine is made from a rinderpest virus variant, so it makes sense that we would keep some of that for just in case.
I didn't mislead.
It was exactly my intent was to put in perspective the total amount of money spent on the ISS funding by comparing it to the total amount of other things we spend money on. I showed that the ISS cost is small compared to the total spending on higher education, science, (or as you correctly pointed out, R&D), beer, romance novels, or various trivialities.
We're a big country. It's not an either/or situation. We can do many things at once.
How does this affect me? Why is this important to anyone except Maria Schneider? I'll get modded down to -1 for asking this because Slashdot users don't like answering important questions. But this needs to be asked, and I challenge any of you to give me a real answer rather than insulting me. Unfortunately, I don't think anyone here is up to the challenge.
1) How does this affect me?
We cannot know the answer to that because we have no idea of who you are. Are you a musician? A Google/youtube employee? A lawyer? Those people would care a lot, but we have no idea who you are so we cannot answer your question. Only you would know what your interests are, and not everything that happens affects everybody.
Don't ask this question again.
2) Why is this important to anyone except Maria Schneider?
She is a member of a community (published musicians) that has the share a common experience (or belief) that their works are being unfairly posted and uncompensated. This also affects employees of google/youtube and attorneys who may be interested in copyright law.
Entertainment is a multi-billion dollar industry and an important part of the economy, as is google/youtube.
This is explained in the articles linked to, and tells us that you are posting to an article that you have not read.
You are asking us to read the article for you and explain it. How can you not know how annoying that is?
3) I'll get modded down to -1 for asking this because Slashdot users don't like answering important questions.
We do like answering important questions. We don't enjoy discussions with people who have NOT read the articles.
You get modded down because your questions are about you and not about the posted article.
4) But this needs to be asked,
No, you are mistaken. Your questions do not need to be asked. How the article affects you, who we do not know anything about, does not need to be asked.
5) and I challenge any of you to give me a real answer rather than insulting me.
The purpose of Slashdot is to offer a variety of topics for discussion.
Look at the top of the Slashdot web page. There is a line that looks like this:
Topics: Devices Build Entertainment Technnology Open Source Science YRO
This article is about YRO and Entertainment.
People who are interested in YRO and Entertainment would be interested in this topic. others would skip over it.
NASA will send you a txt message on the days that the ISS will be passing overhead at dawn or dusk.
It's way cool to actually see it going over and to think about the people up there.
https://spotthestation.nasa.go...
But this is my favorite. It's downward looking webcams from the ISS.
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/HDEV/
And what would the world be like if we started killing the richest people in the world? I'm not for killing anyone ever, but what happens if you kill the .01% and keep culling until it doesn't exist anymore?
The result would be the same as if the richest people in the world lived for 80~90 years and then each died in their own time.
Besides, if you really want to improve the world by killing people, wouldn't you start by killing from the bottom level?
This sort of idea has been tried already, both ways. You should already know how well it didn't work.
1900 to 1946:
Radio
Television
telephone
antibiotics
Women suffrage
domestic refrigerators
automobile
air travel
electricity distribution networks
What we got in the 1970 to 2016 period is really cool, but it's just toys compared to the changes the first half of the 20th century brought us.
> Sergio Marchionne, an Italian-Canadian executive who is currently the CEO
I don't see any relevance at all to mentioning Marchionne's nationalities.
Particularly when there's no mention of nationality for the second person mentioned:
> Jim McBride, technical leader in Ford's autonomous vehicles team
I often wonder why they do that. To me, it's an annoying interruption to the flow of the story.
And piling on ... they didn't say which parent was the Canadian or the Italian (although the name is a clue), and whether or not it was the immediate parents for a 50-50 genetic split, or if it was just a single male great-grandparent that was Italian.
If they're going to tell us he's Italian-Canadian, then why wouldn't they tell us which nationality donated the Y chromosome, and who donated the mitochondria? Without that knowledge, it's just pointless to say "Italian-Canadian".
Furthermore, there's cultural issues at stake.
If the mother was Canadian and the father Italian, then who did the cooking? Is it possible that Sergio had an Italian parent and was raised on Canadian food? If so, how would that affect his outlook on life? If that happened to me, I would be angry all the time.
Are we supposed to infer that as a Italian-Canadian he waves only one of his hands when he speaks?
Or it's possible that Starless is correct, and that the nationality is irrelevant.
This is the truth about the whole matter:
http://www.examiner.com/article/sinking-solomon-islands-and-climate-link-exaggerated-admits-study-s-author
Good link.
http://www.examiner.com/articl...
However you should have explained that the study's co-author (Dr. Simon Albert) is saying that OTHER people are exaggerating the Solomon Islands - climate change connection.
From the Examiner article:
Dr. Simon Albert, the report's co-author told the Guardian today that numerous media outlets, like the Washington Post and NY Times and Think Progress, have misinterpreted their work by trying to link sea level rise with climate change. According to Albert, the researchers did not study climate change and how it influences shoreline erosion and submersion of certain low-lying islands.
He stands by the his paper and the conclusions they made.
What if, and I'm just saying, what if he had been writing his mathy stuff and using METRIC UNITS!
This would clearly identify him as being a foreigner. And furthermore, he spoke English with an accent according to the article. Why would anyone learn to speak English with an accent unless they were, in fact, a terrorist?
Once exposed, he was no longer able to carry out his nefarious plot.
I say that woman did stop his plot. Kudos to you, plot-stopping heroine.
The Windows GUI will prevent creation and removal of any 'special' foldername that looks like a device: LPT1, COM6, CON, etc.
To remove any of those "special" file/foldernames after the fact, all you need is look for the short 8.3 notation of the filename that the filesystem uses behind the scenes, and which the GUI hides from the end user.
Open a command prompt and navigate to the folder that contains the special name
dir /x will show the associated "short" filename, e.g. co~123 instead of COM4
You can directly remove/rename/etc the file from the command prompt when referring to these short names:
remove a file: del co~123
remove a folder with its contents: rd co~123 /s
In addition to what xlsior said,
Regarding the so-called "specially crafted command" in the example, /S /Q),
(rd “\\.\%appdata%\com4.{241D7C96-F8BF-4F85-B01F-E2B043341A4B}”
All it is doing is using the \\.\ prefix to tell the parser to skip reserved-word checking.
For example, you cannot create a folder c:\com4 using MKDIR C:\com4. but MKDIR "\\.\C:\com4" succeeds.
Likewise with the RMDIR