Re:There's a preventive vaccine already
on
HIV Vaccine
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Don't be gay. Don't use IV drugs. Don't be African. If you think you can avoid all that, your odds of getting struck by lightning are better than of getting AIDS. And it's going to stay that way in every developed country but Russia.
Running two monitors gives me a different perspective on this bug. When the stuttering occurs, HL2 loses its grip on my mouse, and the mouse is free to move into my second monitor. The game pauses until I move the mouse back over the game screen.
I didn't say it was idiotic. In my opinion it's half dozen to one, six to the other.
On average, yes, but that's not why I suggested restricting suffrage to property owners. Poverty is correlated to incompetence. I don't want the poor voting. As a mass, the poor are stupid, lazy, and when given the power to vote do not exercise it thoughtfully.
See 2.
Our government functions today because of the efforts of a number of branches of non-partisan civil services. Yes, abuse is possible, but it does not seem to be too high of a risk.
A certain degree of oligarchy is quite beneficial to a well-ordered society. Representative and responsive government is only good within tight limits. The representative and responsive branch of the U.S. government, the House of Representatives, is limited in our system by the President, the Senate, and the Judiciary.
Hmm. Well, people make their own decisions on what they find interesting I expect.
Whether my suggestion is democracy or not is another matter. All democracies restrict suffrage to some degree. The United States did not extend suffrage to women until 1920. I certainly do not see any great improvement in our elected officials dating from the time. Nor do I see decline, although single women (a larger voting block than it used to be) tend to vote Democrat.
Still, I have reconsidered my original point. Male property owners and married women. People with a stake in the polis.
I'd restrict suffrage to male property owners. I'd institute a poll tax and a reasonable test for intelligence and knowledge of history and current affairs. Seriously. We have this reflexive "everybody votes in a democracy" type thinking, but expanding suffrage to everybody just doesn't lead to better government in practice. Democracy has its place in constitutional government, but like the American founders knew, it should not reign supreme.
I probably shouldn't have added male in the first sentence. I can't really justify it. But hell, if you're going to make a suggestion like this, you may as well go all the way and be traditional about it.
Bits don't have to be lost for a hash. Usually they are, but not always. Bits are lost because hash functions are normally designed to take an any length string and return a fixed length string. This is not always the case, however. With the LM hash specifically, the maximum input is 15 characters. While I do not know the precise algorithm used with LM, there is no reason that data must be lost by it.
Over the next four years, who is going to be better for American, John Kerry or George W. Bush? Bush. While Bush has made mistakes (Iraq), there is no reason to suspect that he will repeat them. On every issue that Bush is bad for America, there is no evidence that Kerry will not be worse. Holding out hope that Kerry will keep spending down like Clinton or be a great compromiser like Clinton, is unjustified. It's possible, but there is no reason to think that it will be likely.
Who is going to be better for the Republican party and the conservative movement? Kerry. A Kerry victory will prompt a reevaluation of Bush's failings. 2004 will be looked at, but more importantly, so will 2000. Bush's poor standing in the 2000 election will be looked at again with a view to what he did wrong to squeak so closely by Gore rather than beating him with a large margin. I think that conservative principles are going to win the day if the Republican party has its night of the long knives following a Bush defeat.
What will be the worst consequences of a Kerry win? Supreme Court appointments. This is tempered by the fact that Bush seems poised to over-compromise with the Democratic Senators who have veto power on appointments. (Conservative Justices, correctly reading this, did not take the opportunity to retire while Bush was in office, despite what many forecasters predicted.) A Republican controlled Senate may well be able to get better compromises out of Kerry than what Bush would give to Democratic Senators.
What will be the worst consequence of a Bush win? Bush will continue to morph the Republican party into a media machine whose point is to win elections rather than a party of principles.
Who will I vote for on November 2? Bush, possibly. There is every chance that I'll change my mind in the ballot box.
I admit that 1) is completely valid as is something that I shouldn't have overlooked in my statement. It's an important point and one that I have made myself from time to time.
That aside, I have reservations about the rest.
2) is wrong. It is far more likely that we have simply created a Jihadist producing machine in Iraq that will soon have advanced to the point where it begins exporting them abroad. The evidence for terrorist production theory over terrorist flypaper theory? The fact that bombings have increased to an almost daily event in Iraq, while terrorist events abroad have not really changed in frequency at all. Abroad they are still rather rare.
3) is a good point, though I'd change the North Korea in the statement to Libya. North Korea is far less worried about a war with us because they have nukes and the ability to kill a million South Koreans without them. More importantly, North Korea knows that our military is tied up in Iraq and will be for a while.
While the evolution of the eye has never been that much of a theoretical puzzle--there have been lots of plausible theories--this discovery moves us a little away from the realm of theory and into the realm of historical detail.
What effect will it have on the creation/evolution debate? The same effect that all the other mounds of evidence in favor of evolution have so far had on the debate.
But what if the choices are between eliminating terrorists using somewhat dirty and very forceful tactics, and between not eliminating them at all?
Not that I think the war in Iraq has done anything to make anybody safer from terrorism or WMDs. The only benefit thus far has been to the Iraqis themselves who have now gotten rid of Saddam. I'll repeat it again, as an American, I am against the Iraq war because we gained nothing from it. But the rest of the world has nothing to complain about.
If bullying means overthrowing regimes like the Taliban or the Baathists, if it means rejecting foolish feel-good treaties, then me and the rest of us non-loopies are for more bullies.
As an American, I can see being against the Iraq war. It was a waste of blood and money for no real strategic gain.
But why is the rest of the world against it? Saddam really wasn't that nice of a guy. Deposing him is just the sort of thing that human rights monkeys (which includes a substantial bit of Europe based on their usual press) normally salivate over.
Other reasons that the world hates Bush are Kyoto and the ICC. Kyoto was an exercise in lunacy, of course. And the ICC's only point is to go after the law-abiding nations. Specifically the ones who do the inevitably dirty work of wars, exporting security to the rest of the world. (Hint: The US) It will be impossible to invoke ICC provisions against Gap nations (Google Thomas Barnett) until their rulers have already been deposed in a war (Hint: By the US).
So while I don't like Bush all that much, I think that the rest of the world's hatred for him only proves their loopiness. You can't believe everything you see in a Michael Moore movie, after all. And unfortunately, the rest of the world doesn't know how to take the American press with a grain of salt like Americans do. The gullible Europeans simply swallow it hook line and sinker everytime the BBC or its equivalent repeats something from CNN or another American news outlet. I hope that the Europeans discover independent thought one of these days and stop letting themselves be culturally dominated by American media and American corporations.
Some of the best mathematics students I know are women. Asian women mostly, but that's not really the point.
For sheer ability, it's mainly the guys who win out. For preparedness and dedication, it's the women by a long shot -- and that makes quite a difference. They seem to have better memories as well, though they are more lecture learners than book learners. Still, it's the guys who seem to be better at thinking on their feet and actually applying what they know in new situations.
For all that, I think that the biggest difference is that women find mathematics less fulfilling than men do. That is the root of the major differences, I think. And I remain to be convinced that that is something that is taught or even could be taught.
I don't think that your comment is a troll like the idiot moderators, but you are still wrong in every way. As a show claiming to do serious journalism, unlike The Daily Show, Crossfire has a duty to do serious introspection from time to time. Stewart wasn't rude to ask for that instrospection.
And yes, Stewart can blow his show off as a comedy. It airs on Comedy Central. It presents fake news. He's a professional comedian. You know some kids taking it seriously. That is clearly not his fault.
1.) You have to watch the ads to see network television. You're paying for it.
2.) Is political speech on network television illegal? I hadn't heard it.
3.) You, the public, have leased your public airwaves to the networks through your duly elected representatives and their appointed officials. You forgot to include riders preventing partisan political speech when you did that, so you don't have much room to complain now.
This is an opportunity to buy the package now. All you get at the moment is CS:Source. You have to wait for HL2 to come out to get that (even though it is already sitting encrypted on your hard drive.)
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be gay. Don't use IV drugs. Don't be African. If you think you can avoid all that, your odds of getting struck by lightning are better than of getting AIDS. And it's going to stay that way in every developed country but Russia.
Running two monitors gives me a different perspective on this bug. When the stuttering occurs, HL2 loses its grip on my mouse, and the mouse is free to move into my second monitor. The game pauses until I move the mouse back over the game screen.
I caught an incredible view of the northern lights in New Mexico in 2000. Latitude 34.1 N.
It was a few hours after a huge solar flare, as you might expect.
- I didn't say it was idiotic. In my opinion it's half dozen to one, six to the other.
- On average, yes, but that's not why I suggested restricting suffrage to property owners. Poverty is correlated to incompetence. I don't want the poor voting. As a mass, the poor are stupid, lazy, and when given the power to vote do not exercise it thoughtfully.
- See 2.
- Our government functions today because of the efforts of a number of branches of non-partisan civil services. Yes, abuse is possible, but it does not seem to be too high of a risk.
A certain degree of oligarchy is quite beneficial to a well-ordered society. Representative and responsive government is only good within tight limits. The representative and responsive branch of the U.S. government, the House of Representatives, is limited in our system by the President, the Senate, and the Judiciary.Hmm. Well, people make their own decisions on what they find interesting I expect.
Whether my suggestion is democracy or not is another matter. All democracies restrict suffrage to some degree. The United States did not extend suffrage to women until 1920. I certainly do not see any great improvement in our elected officials dating from the time. Nor do I see decline, although single women (a larger voting block than it used to be) tend to vote Democrat.
Still, I have reconsidered my original point. Male property owners and married women. People with a stake in the polis.
I'd restrict suffrage to male property owners. I'd institute a poll tax and a reasonable test for intelligence and knowledge of history and current affairs. Seriously. We have this reflexive "everybody votes in a democracy" type thinking, but expanding suffrage to everybody just doesn't lead to better government in practice. Democracy has its place in constitutional government, but like the American founders knew, it should not reign supreme.
I probably shouldn't have added male in the first sentence. I can't really justify it. But hell, if you're going to make a suggestion like this, you may as well go all the way and be traditional about it.
Isn't the news media in the business of influencing elections by providing information?
Bits don't have to be lost for a hash. Usually they are, but not always. Bits are lost because hash functions are normally designed to take an any length string and return a fixed length string. This is not always the case, however. With the LM hash specifically, the maximum input is 15 characters. While I do not know the precise algorithm used with LM, there is no reason that data must be lost by it.
I just posted this to my web log:
Over the next four years, who is going to be better for American, John Kerry or George W. Bush? Bush. While Bush has made mistakes (Iraq), there is no reason to suspect that he will repeat them. On every issue that Bush is bad for America, there is no evidence that Kerry will not be worse. Holding out hope that Kerry will keep spending down like Clinton or be a great compromiser like Clinton, is unjustified. It's possible, but there is no reason to think that it will be likely. Who is going to be better for the Republican party and the conservative movement? Kerry. A Kerry victory will prompt a reevaluation of Bush's failings. 2004 will be looked at, but more importantly, so will 2000. Bush's poor standing in the 2000 election will be looked at again with a view to what he did wrong to squeak so closely by Gore rather than beating him with a large margin. I think that conservative principles are going to win the day if the Republican party has its night of the long knives following a Bush defeat. What will be the worst consequences of a Kerry win? Supreme Court appointments. This is tempered by the fact that Bush seems poised to over-compromise with the Democratic Senators who have veto power on appointments. (Conservative Justices, correctly reading this, did not take the opportunity to retire while Bush was in office, despite what many forecasters predicted.) A Republican controlled Senate may well be able to get better compromises out of Kerry than what Bush would give to Democratic Senators. What will be the worst consequence of a Bush win? Bush will continue to morph the Republican party into a media machine whose point is to win elections rather than a party of principles. Who will I vote for on November 2? Bush, possibly. There is every chance that I'll change my mind in the ballot box.
I admit that 1) is completely valid as is something that I shouldn't have overlooked in my statement. It's an important point and one that I have made myself from time to time.
That aside, I have reservations about the rest.
2) is wrong. It is far more likely that we have simply created a Jihadist producing machine in Iraq that will soon have advanced to the point where it begins exporting them abroad. The evidence for terrorist production theory over terrorist flypaper theory? The fact that bombings have increased to an almost daily event in Iraq, while terrorist events abroad have not really changed in frequency at all. Abroad they are still rather rare.
3) is a good point, though I'd change the North Korea in the statement to Libya. North Korea is far less worried about a war with us because they have nukes and the ability to kill a million South Koreans without them. More importantly, North Korea knows that our military is tied up in Iraq and will be for a while.
I agree with everything you say. I wish that you hadn't posted it as AC. You probably have some interesting stuff around the web in places.
While the evolution of the eye has never been that much of a theoretical puzzle--there have been lots of plausible theories--this discovery moves us a little away from the realm of theory and into the realm of historical detail.
What effect will it have on the creation/evolution debate? The same effect that all the other mounds of evidence in favor of evolution have so far had on the debate.
But what if the choices are between eliminating terrorists using somewhat dirty and very forceful tactics, and between not eliminating them at all?
Not that I think the war in Iraq has done anything to make anybody safer from terrorism or WMDs. The only benefit thus far has been to the Iraqis themselves who have now gotten rid of Saddam. I'll repeat it again, as an American, I am against the Iraq war because we gained nothing from it. But the rest of the world has nothing to complain about.
If bullying means overthrowing regimes like the Taliban or the Baathists, if it means rejecting foolish feel-good treaties, then me and the rest of us non-loopies are for more bullies.
As an American, I can see being against the Iraq war. It was a waste of blood and money for no real strategic gain.
But why is the rest of the world against it? Saddam really wasn't that nice of a guy. Deposing him is just the sort of thing that human rights monkeys (which includes a substantial bit of Europe based on their usual press) normally salivate over.
Other reasons that the world hates Bush are Kyoto and the ICC. Kyoto was an exercise in lunacy, of course. And the ICC's only point is to go after the law-abiding nations. Specifically the ones who do the inevitably dirty work of wars, exporting security to the rest of the world. (Hint: The US) It will be impossible to invoke ICC provisions against Gap nations (Google Thomas Barnett) until their rulers have already been deposed in a war (Hint: By the US).
So while I don't like Bush all that much, I think that the rest of the world's hatred for him only proves their loopiness. You can't believe everything you see in a Michael Moore movie, after all. And unfortunately, the rest of the world doesn't know how to take the American press with a grain of salt like Americans do. The gullible Europeans simply swallow it hook line and sinker everytime the BBC or its equivalent repeats something from CNN or another American news outlet. I hope that the Europeans discover independent thought one of these days and stop letting themselves be culturally dominated by American media and American corporations.
Some of the best mathematics students I know are women. Asian women mostly, but that's not really the point.
For sheer ability, it's mainly the guys who win out. For preparedness and dedication, it's the women by a long shot -- and that makes quite a difference. They seem to have better memories as well, though they are more lecture learners than book learners. Still, it's the guys who seem to be better at thinking on their feet and actually applying what they know in new situations.
For all that, I think that the biggest difference is that women find mathematics less fulfilling than men do. That is the root of the major differences, I think. And I remain to be convinced that that is something that is taught or even could be taught.
Why are there fewer women in sports of all kinds? Why are there fewer women in the hard sciences? Why are there fewer women in prisions?
Maybe we're kind of different.
I don't think that your comment is a troll like the idiot moderators, but you are still wrong in every way. As a show claiming to do serious journalism, unlike The Daily Show, Crossfire has a duty to do serious introspection from time to time. Stewart wasn't rude to ask for that instrospection. And yes, Stewart can blow his show off as a comedy. It airs on Comedy Central. It presents fake news. He's a professional comedian. You know some kids taking it seriously. That is clearly not his fault.
Strict building codes can only go so far. Take a look at Kobe in Japan. A big enough earthquake could cause serious havoc.
1.) You have to watch the ads to see network television. You're paying for it.
2.) Is political speech on network television illegal? I hadn't heard it.
3.) You, the public, have leased your public airwaves to the networks through your duly elected representatives and their appointed officials. You forgot to include riders preventing partisan political speech when you did that, so you don't have much room to complain now.
"The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board. Eleven, eleven, eleven."
"Oh, I see, and mostly, the amps go up to ten?"
"Exactly."
"Does that mean it's louder? Is it any louder?"
"Well, it's one louder, isn't it?"
"One louder."
"Why don't you just make ten louder, and make ten be the top number, and make that a little louder?"
"These go to eleven."
Imagining CYA at NASA isn't exactly tin-foil league stuff.
This is an opportunity to buy the package now. All you get at the moment is CS:Source. You have to wait for HL2 to come out to get that (even though it is already sitting encrypted on your hard drive.)
I goofed. I meant "when the Boston Globe endorses Bush."
Let me know when the Boston Globe endorses Kerry.