"It proves the niggers have a smaller brain then the white man"
If anyone cares about this, they can easily measure the current ratio. I'm sure it's been done. The genetic archaeology is not going to have any impact on this question, whatever your prejudices.
ctd... Analogous to nuclear power. Why doesn't anyone believe Iran just wants to build peaceful nuclear reactors? Because even if that's all they did, the infrastructure and knowhow give them a big start on building nuclear weapons.
probably more about kick-starting the Asian airliner industry
Rocketry has more immediate applications. India's neighbours Pakistan and China are both nuclear and India has been in shooting wars with both of them not long ago. A civilian space program can give you a cover to develop lots of technology useful for the military.
I don't get this "lesser of two evils" thing. I don't want to choose the lesser of two evils.
In life you have to choose the lesser of two evils all the time.
If it all seems pointless, remember that elections are periodic. If all those who feel disgusted by the choices opt out, those who are happy with choosing "evil" will do so. And they may well choose the greater evil. And to appeal to them, since you won't be voting, the next time around, it's all shifted to be more evil. (Substitute "right" or "left" for "evil" if that makes it more real.) And thus you also encourage negative campaigning, if you can't make voters choose you, you can make them not like your opponent, the "lesser evil", who they would vote for if forced to make a choice, but instead decide to stay home.
I'm Australian, and we have a law to make voting compulsory. If you fail to vote, you are fined -- a small amount, $10 or so last I recall, so if you philosophically object to voting and don't just want to cast a blank ballot you can do so at small cost. But well over 90% do vote; it makes for a healthier system and is a much better guarantee of democracy than otherwise, in my opinion.
Let me explain. I do not "expect" privacy. I do not "expect" all ISPs to spend millions of Euros on logging mechanisms based on each user records. The impact of this is huge. Currently all user activities are normally written to a single log file. The files are normally rotated based on time.
This case is about deleting a particular user's records. If you don't keep them, you don't have to do anything. You seem to say you'll need to create an all-encompassing tracking system so you can selctively delete the records. Just delete them all as soon as you've abstracted any information you need for billing or debugging.
Has anyone asked what the plaintiff has to hide? hope he gets cyber-stalked by a hate group
In TFA: "The court ruling is the result of a case that was initiated by Holger Voss, a 33 year old man from Münster. Voss was sued for making a sarcastic comment in an Internet forum back in 2002."
Sarcasm? Yeah, he totally deserves to be stalked and vilified by a hate group. That'll learn him not to mouth off.
the data to this point justifies the panic that seems to be sweeping the planet.
Now you're talking about the media, it either ignores or sensationalises. But conservative models show us losing crops, arable land and people at an accelerating rate, it's not an abstract thing you can worry about later. As for oil running out, without a big push that will just be substituted wiht coal, to teh same or worse environmental effects.
to use fear and intimidation to silence dissent
Climate scientists use fear and intimidation? When, outside a Michael Crichton novel, has that ever happened?
And thus, demonstrate the error in Hansen's predictions, just as the author said.
Others have defended Hansen's papers here. However, I find it intersting that TFA, and posters here, concentrate on Hansen; his paper was 1988; it's of mainly historic interest now. In the almost 20 years since there has been a huge amount of new research on this, supported by massive increases in computer power. As every scientific organisation from the Royal Society down has endorsed the conclusion that climate change is happening. The political conservatives try to paint this as a bunch of greenies pushing hippie anti-industrialism. The actual scientists are mostly staid, stick-in-the-muds who take years to make conclusions. But after taking those years, thay have reached the current consensus and you can't blow it off by disputing one paper, however seminal.
But they're not required to keep a record linking that to your IP at any given time. The bill requires that record be made and kept for three years. Also, by implication,it would make using a proxy or other methods of anonymising illegal.
Destruction is subjective. Every act of creation destroys something, the only question is whether the product is more valuable than the ingredients. If someone came and painted a mural on the wall of your house, would that be vandalism?
If that's meant as an analogy, the flaw is that everyone is explicitly invited to write in Wikipedia. Whereas my house is my personal property and aside from anything else it would be trespass. When people start using "like your house" you're talking about invading personal space, and that's not at all what this is about. Also, silly wiki pages aren't in your face like the front of a house unless you look for them.
Yeah, because someone being in favor of better identification of easy terror targets like airlines, and being in favor of better money tracing, automatically means they are in favor of no privacy in society at all.
Yes, right, despite thinking you're being sarcastic. Because collecting huge amounts of information about legitimate travellers does nothing to stop terrorists. Just look at the No Fly List, that catches every terrorist who books a ticket under his own name (i.e., none) while inconveniencing thousands with similar names. Idiotic security theatre. And how many times must it be pointed out that the 9/11 terrorists mostly had legit IDs and clean records; they would have walked though today's security just as easily, after surrendering their shampoo bottles. Money tracing? Similar profiling goes on here, inconveniencing every poor schmuck trying to send money home to his family, if his name happens to be Mohammed, while the actual terrorists duck the whole system.
All the information needed to predict, and prevent, 911, was already in the US government's hands before the event. They need better, smarter analysis, more people on the ground, not more noise. But that's what bureaucrats know how to do, and that's their solution to every problem.
Long ago I realised most "Ask Slashdot" posts were just hypotheticals; or fantasies along the line of "Letters to Penthouse". Basically concocted by submitters, or perhaps editors, to excite noisy discussion and lots of ad impressions. So don't worry about why anyone would be stupid enough to ask Slashdot if they were really in that situation, because the situation, and the person, are most likely imaginary.
Piracy is a BIG problem in Brazil. Almost everything is pirated.
But I'd assume, like Asia, that most piracy is via optical disc. Why spend a week downloading when you can buy 5GB discs of music, software, whatever at $1/disc more or less? Online piracy maybe for MP3 tunes and such smallish files.
This is not about anonymous posting, but anonymous access.
If your access is not anonymous; i.e. Your IP --> Your identity, you can't post anonymously, you can't read a blog anoymously, you can't do ANYTHING anonymously.
More like it gets approved for the express purpose of pissing the US off, and after the US vetoes it
Funny, I was under the impression that the US was strong-arming ther rest of the world to give up their privacy, because otherwise THE TERRORISTS WIN. Just look at information airlines and banks have been demanded to hand over to the US govt. Look at the secret, illegal wiretaps Bush has authorised. And you want me to believe the US would block this? The current administration is leading the charge to wipe out privacy.
I freely admit that I'm economically naive, but I wasn't taking about economics, I was talking about turning every able-bodied person to the service of this one, great work.
This kind of thing was tried, by for instance, Chairman Mao: The Great Leap Forward. Villagers set up iron foundries to fulfill his dream of overnight industrialisation. Ultimately tens of millions died, starved to death due to IGNORING BASIC ECONOMICS. Economics is not a game, it's away of understanding how we work together as a society. A space program can only exist with the support of an extremely sophisticated economy and society. It's not building the Great Wall where you get 10 meillion peasants carrying rocks. You may be able to get people working selflessly and unrewarded for a few weeks, or even a few years. Not the entire world for decades as this would require. You'd destroy the world while trying to save it.
"Vandalism" is the destruction of something. Nothing was destroyed by this silly article. Was it the submitter or editor who decided to sex up this tedious story by headlining it as if it was wholesale deletion or falsification of Wikipedia? Why are there three similar stories on Slashdot denigrating Wikipedia today?
It's as much news as "Troll gets FP on Slashdot!" Big deal. Slashdot trolls are modded down, Wiki trolls are fixed or deleted.
Yet here, and in the Siegenthaler Affair, is a case of a problem article that persisted for months.
Both articles about uninteresting subjects, rarely accessed by anyone except the original authors. Instead of "minutes" vs "months", probably a better metric would be number of times a dubious page is read before it's noticed and fixed. Perhaps a few dozen in each case I'd guess.
the basic problem with Wikipedia is also its strength: it's mutable. There's no static text you can refer to. The whole article can change from when you cite it to when someone reads it.
"The citation should normally include the full date and time of the article revision you are using... the URL include[s] a unique identifier such that you can tie your reference back to the exact version of the article you are referencing."
i know of at least 2 colleges (or it might be the english language teachers) who refuse to use wikipedia as a reference.... in short, the wikipedia is a failed experiment
It's not a "failed experiment". It's just not suitable as an authoritative academic reference. No one ever claimed that it was or could be.
"conventional chemical rockets being far too expensive"
Hilarious that cost should be an issue when it comes to saving the world.
According to TFA:
The total mass of all the fliers making up the space sunshade structure would be 20 million tons. At $10,000 a pound, conventional chemical rocket launch is prohibitively expensive. Angel proposes using a cheaper way developed by Sandia National Laboratories for electromagnetic space launchers, which could bring cost down to as little as $20 a pound.
Even if you're saving the world, a cost factor of 500 is significant, if only because if you did try to do it with chemical rockets you'd spend more than the world GDP, i.e., it's impossible; and create a gigantic pollution problem.
When you see how much time it took them to build the ISS, you know this kind of project has absolutely no chance of happening (and you wonder why some people waste time thinking about this kind of stuff).
The ISS is a useless status symbol. This actually has a purpose, and the need is becoming more apparent every year. On the upside, an enormous project like this would have many spinoffs. Maybe the launchers could also send up units to convert solar energy to microwaves and beam them back.
Slashdot Mirror
"Bud" isn't in TFA. It's TFS who made the Malapropism.
If anyone cares about this, they can easily measure the current ratio. I'm sure it's been done. The genetic archaeology is not going to have any impact on this question, whatever your prejudices.
ctd... Analogous to nuclear power. Why doesn't anyone believe Iran just wants to build peaceful nuclear reactors? Because even if that's all they did, the infrastructure and knowhow give them a big start on building nuclear weapons.
Sure. But the boosters, guidance, etc are dual use. And satellites are vital to military intelligence.
Rocketry has more immediate applications. India's neighbours Pakistan and China are both nuclear and India has been in shooting wars with both of them not long ago. A civilian space program can give you a cover to develop lots of technology useful for the military.
In life you have to choose the lesser of two evils all the time.
If it all seems pointless, remember that elections are periodic. If all those who feel disgusted by the choices opt out, those who are happy with choosing "evil" will do so. And they may well choose the greater evil. And to appeal to them, since you won't be voting, the next time around, it's all shifted to be more evil. (Substitute "right" or "left" for "evil" if that makes it more real.) And thus you also encourage negative campaigning, if you can't make voters choose you, you can make them not like your opponent, the "lesser evil", who they would vote for if forced to make a choice, but instead decide to stay home.
I'm Australian, and we have a law to make voting compulsory. If you fail to vote, you are fined -- a small amount, $10 or so last I recall, so if you philosophically object to voting and don't just want to cast a blank ballot you can do so at small cost. But well over 90% do vote; it makes for a healthier system and is a much better guarantee of democracy than otherwise, in my opinion.
How ironic that some Anonymous Coward wrote this crap.
This case is about deleting a particular user's records. If you don't keep them, you don't have to do anything. You seem to say you'll need to create an all-encompassing tracking system so you can selctively delete the records. Just delete them all as soon as you've abstracted any information you need for billing or debugging.
Has anyone asked what the plaintiff has to hide? hope he gets cyber-stalked by a hate group
In TFA: "The court ruling is the result of a case that was initiated by Holger Voss, a 33 year old man from Münster. Voss was sued for making a sarcastic comment in an Internet forum back in 2002."
Sarcasm? Yeah, he totally deserves to be stalked and vilified by a hate group. That'll learn him not to mouth off.
Now you're talking about the media, it either ignores or sensationalises. But conservative models show us losing crops, arable land and people at an accelerating rate, it's not an abstract thing you can worry about later. As for oil running out, without a big push that will just be substituted wiht coal, to teh same or worse environmental effects.
to use fear and intimidation to silence dissent
Climate scientists use fear and intimidation? When, outside a Michael Crichton novel, has that ever happened?
Well, since you ask, NO.
Others have defended Hansen's papers here. However, I find it intersting that TFA, and posters here, concentrate on Hansen; his paper was 1988; it's of mainly historic interest now. In the almost 20 years since there has been a huge amount of new research on this, supported by massive increases in computer power. As every scientific organisation from the Royal Society down has endorsed the conclusion that climate change is happening. The political conservatives try to paint this as a bunch of greenies pushing hippie anti-industrialism. The actual scientists are mostly staid, stick-in-the-muds who take years to make conclusions. But after taking those years, thay have reached the current consensus and you can't blow it off by disputing one paper, however seminal.
But they're not required to keep a record linking that to your IP at any given time. The bill requires that record be made and kept for three years. Also, by implication,it would make using a proxy or other methods of anonymising illegal.
If that's meant as an analogy, the flaw is that everyone is explicitly invited to write in Wikipedia. Whereas my house is my personal property and aside from anything else it would be trespass. When people start using "like your house" you're talking about invading personal space, and that's not at all what this is about. Also, silly wiki pages aren't in your face like the front of a house unless you look for them.
Yes, right, despite thinking you're being sarcastic. Because collecting huge amounts of information about legitimate travellers does nothing to stop terrorists. Just look at the No Fly List, that catches every terrorist who books a ticket under his own name (i.e., none) while inconveniencing thousands with similar names. Idiotic security theatre. And how many times must it be pointed out that the 9/11 terrorists mostly had legit IDs and clean records; they would have walked though today's security just as easily, after surrendering their shampoo bottles. Money tracing? Similar profiling goes on here, inconveniencing every poor schmuck trying to send money home to his family, if his name happens to be Mohammed, while the actual terrorists duck the whole system.
All the information needed to predict, and prevent, 911, was already in the US government's hands before the event. They need better, smarter analysis, more people on the ground, not more noise. But that's what bureaucrats know how to do, and that's their solution to every problem.
Long ago I realised most "Ask Slashdot" posts were just hypotheticals; or fantasies along the line of "Letters to Penthouse". Basically concocted by submitters, or perhaps editors, to excite noisy discussion and lots of ad impressions. So don't worry about why anyone would be stupid enough to ask Slashdot if they were really in that situation, because the situation, and the person, are most likely imaginary.
But I'd assume, like Asia, that most piracy is via optical disc. Why spend a week downloading when you can buy 5GB discs of music, software, whatever at $1/disc more or less? Online piracy maybe for MP3 tunes and such smallish files.
If your access is not anonymous; i.e. Your IP --> Your identity, you can't post anonymously, you can't read a blog anoymously, you can't do ANYTHING anonymously.
Funny, I was under the impression that the US was strong-arming ther rest of the world to give up their privacy, because otherwise THE TERRORISTS WIN. Just look at information airlines and banks have been demanded to hand over to the US govt. Look at the secret, illegal wiretaps Bush has authorised. And you want me to believe the US would block this? The current administration is leading the charge to wipe out privacy.
This kind of thing was tried, by for instance, Chairman Mao: The Great Leap Forward. Villagers set up iron foundries to fulfill his dream of overnight industrialisation. Ultimately tens of millions died, starved to death due to IGNORING BASIC ECONOMICS. Economics is not a game, it's away of understanding how we work together as a society. A space program can only exist with the support of an extremely sophisticated economy and society. It's not building the Great Wall where you get 10 meillion peasants carrying rocks. You may be able to get people working selflessly and unrewarded for a few weeks, or even a few years. Not the entire world for decades as this would require. You'd destroy the world while trying to save it.
It's as much news as "Troll gets FP on Slashdot!" Big deal. Slashdot trolls are modded down, Wiki trolls are fixed or deleted.
Both articles about uninteresting subjects, rarely accessed by anyone except the original authors. Instead of "minutes" vs "months", probably a better metric would be number of times a dubious page is read before it's noticed and fixed. Perhaps a few dozen in each case I'd guess.
Citing_Wikipedia
"The citation should normally include the full date and time of the article revision you are using... the URL include[s] a unique identifier such that you can tie your reference back to the exact version of the article you are referencing."
It's not a "failed experiment". It's just not suitable as an authoritative academic reference. No one ever claimed that it was or could be.
According to TFA:
Even if you're saving the world, a cost factor of 500 is significant, if only because if you did try to do it with chemical rockets you'd spend more than the world GDP, i.e., it's impossible; and create a gigantic pollution problem.The ISS is a useless status symbol. This actually has a purpose, and the need is becoming more apparent every year. On the upside, an enormous project like this would have many spinoffs. Maybe the launchers could also send up units to convert solar energy to microwaves and beam them back.