Are the courts really sympathetic over there or something? Because in the US, starting a relationship with someone else - even if you're legally separated - is just asking for trouble in the form of a divorce decree that, although it's a no-fault divorce, feels a lot like an at-fault divorce in terms of alimony and child support. ESPECIALLY if you're male.
A couple of incidents made the news, a few stations publicized it, and a bunch of people jumped on the bandwagon thinking they'd get big bucks in a settlement.
Presumably there will be enormous selection pressure for any mutation that escapes this vaccine to proliferate. I was merely hoping that such changes might inherently make influenza non-infectious in humans, in the same way that penicillin resistance in syphilis somehow makes it non-infectious to humans.
This will be great if the changes necessary to get around it make it unable to infect humans. After all, influenza does infect pigs and birds.
FWIW, there's a bit of precedent here: no infectious form of syphilis has ever developed penicillin resistance. As I understand it, there have been some strains developed in laboratories that are penicillin-resistant, but none of them are capable of infecting human cells. IOW, there is a possibility that in mutating so that the proteins are no longer recognized by cells sensitized by this vaccine, the influenza virus will become incapable of infecting humans.
And let this be a lesson to you, young Slashdotters: if you find you must divorce a woman, do so. But until said divorce is final, with the judge's signature upon it and its decree formally entered into the legal record, DO NOT TALK TO OTHER WOMEN. DO NOT TOUCH OTHER WOMEN. DO NOT TOUCH YOURSELF AND THINK OF OTHER WOMEN. Be a monk, and stay the ever-loving hell away from other women, because all you can cause yourself is pain.
How does evolution explain a four chambered heart? Take away one chamber and the whole thing doesn't work.
Yes it does. It just doesn't work in organisms that have adapted themselves to having four chambers, because our pulmonary circulatory system can't handle high pressure flows. A Fontan procedure can mechanically produce a very functional three-chambered system in humans.
And, FWIW, the bacterial flagellum is just ATP synthase in reverse.
The academic career isn't worth it. Take the money and move on. You'll be able to afford all those things you've been looking at for years and wishing you could have, like a girlfriend and a life.
I'm going out on a limb here based on one remark you made:
~ 1 million people, not culturally Southern
Would that perhaps be a reference to the Research Triangle? Because if so, you've got the whole point right there. Kids who are the children of successful college professors, researchers, and engineers have opportunities that are orders of magnitude better than those available to average high school students.
The father of the girl who won the science fair every year at my high school was the chairman of ophthalmology at the local medical school. He was born and raised in Taiwan, and still had numerous contacts there. As a result, she was able to produce longitudinal studies of the progression of various eye diseases in Taiwanese and American populations. Now, don't get me wrong - she was very, very smart. But that's a project that just doesn't exist for the average student. The average intelligent high school student has exactly zero chance of coming up with new group theory results or traffic pattern simulations, because they don't have the contacts to learn that these are even possibilities, and even if they somehow acquire them they don't have the personal connection that makes the potential mentor want to spend time on them (in the way that, say, a parent would).
As a broader point, people grossly underestimate how difficult the acquisition of human capital is. Even if someone has the intelligence to benefit from further education (which is not a given), opportunities are only available if you know they're there. And if your world encompasses nobody who is a scientist, or an engineer, or a banker, or a successful entrepreneur, only the truly extraordinary will become those things. Just learning what the possibilities are is a huge leap.
A friend of mine from high school was a sociology major at Tulane. However, he did work in the computer labs as his work-study job. Senior year rolls around, and the Super Bowl comes to New Orleans. The NFL asked the Tulane computer labs for a few student assistants who they could hire to help out. He ends up impressing the guys enough that they offer him a job doing some basic IT work for them - at NFL headquarters in Manhattan.
He ended up parlaying that into a job with the WHO, and then moved to Geneva, where he's been ever since. Probably the most successful sociology grad they've had in a long time.
What is somewhat odd is that they continue to assume that you're technically illiterate even when you've proved you're not... I had a Comcast tech (who was at least level 2 if not level 3 support) repeatedly ask me what the computer's timed-out message was... even when it was the same message over and over again... and after we had had a fairly extensive discussion about how I used DD-WRT generally but had plugged the computer directly into the cable modem to rule that out as a possible source of the failure before I had called.
I live in flat land where it doesn't snow every year, so other than for-the-fun-of-it there's no real reason to own a manual. It explains a great deal. Thanks.
I know people love to say this, but what does a manual transmission legitimately get you, other than a sore left leg and a very small increase in mileage? I mean, if you're counting on your car not shifting in order for it to remain stable through a turn (or whatever), aren't you really driving too fast for conditions? And even if you're a professional F1 driver, shouldn't you slow the hell down on public roads?
I don't think that a 0.08% represents a menace to society, at least as a bright line. You obviously do. I don't think there's any reason to believe that one of us will convince the other, and when you get to that point in this kind of discussion, "see you at the polls" is pretty much what it comes down to.
The presence of the device might, in the hands of a sufficiently gifted lawyer, create a responsibility on the part of the bar to monitor your BAC, and to refuse to serve you once you passed the legal limit - in many places, it is technically illegal to serve someone who is visibly intoxicated. The bar is then going to be held responsible if you go out and injure someone. And for the patron, it might create a false sense of security - the BAC can keep going up if you have a fresh drink still in your stomach.
Well, that's what would get you a 0.05%. If you'd like to make it a felony to drive with any alcohol in your system at all, go ahead and see what your electoral success is.
BTW, on a totally different note, do you know any way to go from the front-page notification (Reply to...) to a fully-expanded comment thread without having to expand each one in turn?
You couldn't ride a bike after two relatively small drinks?
I don't drive after more than two drinks, actually. But I don't think that the third would make me a sufficiently dangerous driver that I should be charged with a felony.
If you would like to eliminate everything that could make someone an imperfect driver at the level of a 0.08 BAC, you'll need to ban radios, cell phones, and all passengers other than those dedicated to serving as additional eyes for the driver. You're absolutely right that it's a detraction from someone's driving ability. The question is whether something detracts sufficiently that we should charge them with a felony for it.
Because someone with a very low BAC isn't really a danger to others. And if you'll watch the news carefully, you'll note that most of those drinks-at-a-party folks are busted at roadblocks, not on the road, because their driving isn't impaired enough to attract police attention.
The real problem with our voting system is the fact that there is only a single winner for each area
I prefer to think of that as one of its great strengths. This relentlessly pushes both political parties to the actual center of opinion in order to capture voters. In a proportional representation system (such as the one you hint at in your hypothetical city with the Greens), the Greens can force the Democrats to lean further to the left in order to clear 50%.
Slashdot Mirror
They didn't prohibit her from saying it. She wasn't censored. Retribution is an entirely different thing.
Are the courts really sympathetic over there or something? Because in the US, starting a relationship with someone else - even if you're legally separated - is just asking for trouble in the form of a divorce decree that, although it's a no-fault divorce, feels a lot like an at-fault divorce in terms of alimony and child support. ESPECIALLY if you're male.
And someone who knew how to drive a car with an automatic would have shifted it into neutral.
A couple of incidents made the news, a few stations publicized it, and a bunch of people jumped on the bandwagon thinking they'd get big bucks in a settlement.
Presumably there will be enormous selection pressure for any mutation that escapes this vaccine to proliferate. I was merely hoping that such changes might inherently make influenza non-infectious in humans, in the same way that penicillin resistance in syphilis somehow makes it non-infectious to humans.
This will be great if the changes necessary to get around it make it unable to infect humans. After all, influenza does infect pigs and birds.
FWIW, there's a bit of precedent here: no infectious form of syphilis has ever developed penicillin resistance. As I understand it, there have been some strains developed in laboratories that are penicillin-resistant, but none of them are capable of infecting human cells. IOW, there is a possibility that in mutating so that the proteins are no longer recognized by cells sensitized by this vaccine, the influenza virus will become incapable of infecting humans.
Not a priest, a monk. Monks aren't exposed to the young ones, they have to bugger each other in the crypts.
And let this be a lesson to you, young Slashdotters: if you find you must divorce a woman, do so. But until said divorce is final, with the judge's signature upon it and its decree formally entered into the legal record, DO NOT TALK TO OTHER WOMEN. DO NOT TOUCH OTHER WOMEN. DO NOT TOUCH YOURSELF AND THINK OF OTHER WOMEN. Be a monk, and stay the ever-loving hell away from other women, because all you can cause yourself is pain.
How does evolution explain a four chambered heart? Take away one chamber and the whole thing doesn't work.
Yes it does. It just doesn't work in organisms that have adapted themselves to having four chambers, because our pulmonary circulatory system can't handle high pressure flows. A Fontan procedure can mechanically produce a very functional three-chambered system in humans.
And, FWIW, the bacterial flagellum is just ATP synthase in reverse.
The academic career isn't worth it. Take the money and move on. You'll be able to afford all those things you've been looking at for years and wishing you could have, like a girlfriend and a life.
~ 1 million people, not culturally Southern
Would that perhaps be a reference to the Research Triangle? Because if so, you've got the whole point right there. Kids who are the children of successful college professors, researchers, and engineers have opportunities that are orders of magnitude better than those available to average high school students.
The father of the girl who won the science fair every year at my high school was the chairman of ophthalmology at the local medical school. He was born and raised in Taiwan, and still had numerous contacts there. As a result, she was able to produce longitudinal studies of the progression of various eye diseases in Taiwanese and American populations. Now, don't get me wrong - she was very, very smart. But that's a project that just doesn't exist for the average student. The average intelligent high school student has exactly zero chance of coming up with new group theory results or traffic pattern simulations, because they don't have the contacts to learn that these are even possibilities, and even if they somehow acquire them they don't have the personal connection that makes the potential mentor want to spend time on them (in the way that, say, a parent would).
As a broader point, people grossly underestimate how difficult the acquisition of human capital is. Even if someone has the intelligence to benefit from further education (which is not a given), opportunities are only available if you know they're there. And if your world encompasses nobody who is a scientist, or an engineer, or a banker, or a successful entrepreneur, only the truly extraordinary will become those things. Just learning what the possibilities are is a huge leap.
A friend of mine from high school was a sociology major at Tulane. However, he did work in the computer labs as his work-study job. Senior year rolls around, and the Super Bowl comes to New Orleans. The NFL asked the Tulane computer labs for a few student assistants who they could hire to help out. He ends up impressing the guys enough that they offer him a job doing some basic IT work for them - at NFL headquarters in Manhattan.
He ended up parlaying that into a job with the WHO, and then moved to Geneva, where he's been ever since. Probably the most successful sociology grad they've had in a long time.
What is somewhat odd is that they continue to assume that you're technically illiterate even when you've proved you're not... I had a Comcast tech (who was at least level 2 if not level 3 support) repeatedly ask me what the computer's timed-out message was... even when it was the same message over and over again... and after we had had a fairly extensive discussion about how I used DD-WRT generally but had plugged the computer directly into the cable modem to rule that out as a possible source of the failure before I had called.
Honestly, though, doesn't that mean you should be going slower?
I live in flat land where it doesn't snow every year, so other than for-the-fun-of-it there's no real reason to own a manual. It explains a great deal. Thanks.
I know people love to say this, but what does a manual transmission legitimately get you, other than a sore left leg and a very small increase in mileage? I mean, if you're counting on your car not shifting in order for it to remain stable through a turn (or whatever), aren't you really driving too fast for conditions? And even if you're a professional F1 driver, shouldn't you slow the hell down on public roads?
I don't think that a 0.08% represents a menace to society, at least as a bright line. You obviously do. I don't think there's any reason to believe that one of us will convince the other, and when you get to that point in this kind of discussion, "see you at the polls" is pretty much what it comes down to.
The presence of the device might, in the hands of a sufficiently gifted lawyer, create a responsibility on the part of the bar to monitor your BAC, and to refuse to serve you once you passed the legal limit - in many places, it is technically illegal to serve someone who is visibly intoxicated. The bar is then going to be held responsible if you go out and injure someone. And for the patron, it might create a false sense of security - the BAC can keep going up if you have a fresh drink still in your stomach.
Well, that's what would get you a 0.05%. If you'd like to make it a felony to drive with any alcohol in your system at all, go ahead and see what your electoral success is.
BTW, on a totally different note, do you know any way to go from the front-page notification (Reply to...) to a fully-expanded comment thread without having to expand each one in turn?
You couldn't ride a bike after two relatively small drinks?
I don't drive after more than two drinks, actually. But I don't think that the third would make me a sufficiently dangerous driver that I should be charged with a felony.
If you would like to eliminate everything that could make someone an imperfect driver at the level of a 0.08 BAC, you'll need to ban radios, cell phones, and all passengers other than those dedicated to serving as additional eyes for the driver. You're absolutely right that it's a detraction from someone's driving ability. The question is whether something detracts sufficiently that we should charge them with a felony for it.
Because someone with a very low BAC isn't really a danger to others. And if you'll watch the news carefully, you'll note that most of those drinks-at-a-party folks are busted at roadblocks, not on the road, because their driving isn't impaired enough to attract police attention.
Unless you're a member of Congress, there is approximately zero chance that you agree with your representative on every issue.
And parties arose because an organized party will rapidly defeat a pool of unaffiliated legislators.
The real problem with our voting system is the fact that there is only a single winner for each area
I prefer to think of that as one of its great strengths. This relentlessly pushes both political parties to the actual center of opinion in order to capture voters. In a proportional representation system (such as the one you hint at in your hypothetical city with the Greens), the Greens can force the Democrats to lean further to the left in order to clear 50%.
In current reality, the R or D party will co-opt someone that popular.