Seriously! What is a "Rogue Site"? Are all websites recruited to exist on the Internet under one flag of universal compliance and then BAM! Rebellion! Do rogue sites, like rogue terrorist cells, pop up and seek to destroy the United States of the Internet?
Because that's what it sounds like. A "rogue" is a "loose cannon"-- something that can destroy a bunch of hard-earned gains if left on its own.
And why are we propagating the term "Rogue Site?" We keep doing it with "IP Theft" and "Piracy"-- why don't we stick to the real, non-marketed vocabulary...
IP-Infringers. They're sites that make available copyrighted materials for copying. That's not rogue... that's "The Internet".
I expected a better response. However, I didn't read the terms of participation which clearly states:
"To avoid the appearance of improper influence, the White House may decline to address certain procurement, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or similar matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local government in its response to a petition. "
Thus, I don't really fault them for declining to comment. It looks like another avenue will have to be taken.
Note to humanity, if your judgement is a comparison of "what is" and "the worst of all possible situations", you will allow yourself to be harmed up until the time where you ARE in the worst of all known situations... and it will be too late to act.
No, Google is not the worst of all possible situations, but they have acted sufficiently for us all too be concerned about what they do now, what they can do now, and what they are able and willing to do in the future.
From my post: "The issue is likelihood of collision."
From your post: "I am not defending this, and it actually makes me sick, but it is impossible to dismiss the advantage of size in a collision."
I state again: It's not the size of the car of the collision, it's that a collision occurred at all. Collision prevention, NOT INCREASING THE SIZE OF THE VEHICLE, should be the goal.
Vehicle size is not nor has it ever been an issue. The issue is likelihood of collision. Responsible/considerate driving and higher visibility (from within all cars) are the points on which to focus.
The automobile armor race must stop if we're going to safe money and lives (the two go hand-in-hand).
1. My university email is through Gmail. I'm logged in whenever I'm at a computer. 2. The second you sign in to a Google account, your entire browser history is recorded by Google.
I accept that Google tracks what I'm doing while logged into one of their systems and I've installed their plugin to make sure they don't track me when I'm *not*. But I was never under the impression that everything will be combined into a single identity and I don't trust that they would ONLY use such information for targeted advertising both now and in the future.
I don't want what I watch on Youtube associated with my email. I don't want documents I open in Google documents to have a history with my digital self. This is too close to a single, universal, Internet Identification program and we have stated many, many times that we do NOT want this. We have separated persona for different reasons for specific reasons. OUR reasons.
I don't want Google's "your world search" giving me biased results because I'm subscribed to a couple newsgroups or because I watched 3 back to back videos from the same band on Youtube.
Google has gone too far. When they merged GoogleAccounts with Youtube, I cancelled my Youtube account and never went back to the proper site. Last night, I started backing up everything in my Gmail account with Thunderbird and pulled everything from my Google Docs account. As of today, I'm not turning on my Asus Transformer (Android) until there's a friendly Ubuntu Tablet Edition installer.
I'm open to suggestions about where to go from here. I need online webmail that will "Do no Google."
"Oh... the government will do nothing!" "The crooks won't investigate their handlers!" "The petition will be ignored!"
Are you the **AA 'turfing or just fashionably rebellious with your doubt of the value of the US Judicial system? If you've given up already, why are you bothering to comment?
Remember when Nixon was investigated? What about when Clinton got some booty on the side? Big investigations DO happen and they have to start somewhere. If you don't like the idea of an investigation, then say so. I'd genuinely like to hear those comments. But if all you got are "Whaaa! They've done nothing in the past, they'll do nothing again!", then you're the worst kind. You remove value from the entire discussion and give nothing in return..
If you give in to your butt-hurt and so easily declare "They so rarely do what I want... why bother?", then WE can never get anything done. You are WORSE than those who do nothing because you KNOW something is bad and take the time to discourage others from acting on the injustice.
I have an ASUS Transformer with keyboard dock and I think it's great. I really do. It's my netbook as necessary and a tablet which is particularly good for tabling events.
My problem with the Transformer is that it runs Android. I would prefer Android over iOS any day, but Google continues to develop Android as a single-person data collection device (requiring me to be constantly signed into a variety of services) instead of a multi-user platform where *I* get to choose who sees what.
If/when Ubuntu gets prepped for tablet distribution and I can install it on my Transformer, I will do it the very night it's available. Google has just over-stepped its bounds for me to give it the benefit of the doubt with my data any more.
As someone who works in Transportation Demand Management, I would happily welcome higher gas taxes... especially if they are used to directly pay for the Federal and State highways. About 50% of roads and highways are paid for by non-user fees (income taxes, sales tax, etc.) because gas taxes are notoriously difficult to raise without severe political ramifications.
But if gas prices stay low (they're at about $3.60 where I am in Southern California), people will not have sufficient incentive to make their next vehicle more fuel efficient nor, which would be preferable, switch to more sustainable forms of commuting and city travel (bus, train, carpool, vanpool, bike, and walk).
Federal/State monies that would otherwise go to building/expanding roads and freeways would go towards mass transit thus increasing the availability of transit. Increased convenience of transit triggers increased utilization and thus greater expense recovery by fare being transit more solvent.
People will save money in their transit travel, pollution falls, reliance on oil falls (especially with hybrid buses and electric trains), and with fewer people living building-to-building, people will have to walk a bit more and be a bit healthier.... But it all starts with the cost of traveling by personal automobile.
That may be a hidden problem because the huge "in your face" problem is that universities have never been "workforce creators". A university is a place of creating better people (for a better society), life-long learners, and academic specialists. In many circumstances, the people that do well in that kind of environment can translate whatever they do at university to a well-paying career regardless of major.
However, with higher education now seen as a right of citizenship (in the US, since the 1970s), standards have been reduced and the universities are expected to adjust their mission from "answering the questions of life, the universe, and everything", to "make people that know how to put cog A on rod B". Where previously, education was good for what it could do for the world, it is being relied upon, from kindergarten to PhD, to balance out the economy which was screwed by people gambling with mortgages and pensions.
Neither the university, nor the whole of public education, has ever existed as a prop for the national economy. But it is being relied upon as such now.
What the nation wants is TRADE SCHOOLS, but the idea of being educated *to work* and not getting really, really rich without much effort is beyond the limit or scope of expectations of the modern American. That's why we fantasize about people getting rich quick and idolize multimillionaires who "made it" by creating one simple product or getting "discovered" in one small movie. The people say that the economy needs skilled *workers*, that means we need "trade schools*, but few are willing to be "limited" by going to such a school.
If there is no potential of making millions, the people don't want it. They're addicted to that "potential". That's why they vote Republican while poor.
This is not exactly a school of the masses, now is it? They have 60 students in their entire school, charge $17,000 per year in tuition, and tuition only makes up 75% of their revenue.
By contrast, the State of California, in 2009/2010, spent $8,452 per student for its entire educational bureaucracy. That's less than 40% of what that school charges.
Now consider any application process to get into the school... and the parents submitting those applications... and all the additional resources to which the students will be privy.
You are 100% right... because this was supposed to reply to a post about distance learning not be a post on its own./shame
However, in regards to the article itself, the guy is doing nothing new. He's having a discussion session in which he makes sure students learn fewer things in class to a higher degree of success instead of more things learned very lightly. This is why most universities have lecture and discussion sessions for the majority of their courses. The only thing that's even remotely novel is that he uses remote polling so that the scared and shy can respond without fear of being wrong in public (a genuine issue) and thus is able to collect better data.
And the success of the endeavor at all is dependent on seating arrangements and a good mix of extro- to introverts.
Look-- the vast majority of students learn because they have no choice. Slashdoters that say "public education only held me back as a child" and "I learned more outside of the classroom" are not the norm. The normal person "accidentally" gets caught up with friends, watching movies, and trolling Facebook instead of watching these lecture videos. Those normal people then fail (or worse, cheat).
Too bad for them? No... because if they end up being useless, YOU will feel the consequences. Be it in skilled labor shortages, increase poverty/crime rates, dumbed down video classes to make up for the poor previous education of your cohort, or the removal of funding due to the low passing scores, YOU WILL FEEL THEIR FAILURE.
Real education isn't a plug-and-play option. It's work. Teachers need to work in the classroom and do their best to make sure the students learn as much as possible. It's adaptive, changing, and sometimes will digress to related, but more entertaining, topics to keep long-term interest. These things cannot be done by video.
Get it through your heads. The education of the masses must be done in person by skilled individuals. Preferably in smaller groups.
Qualifier: Distance/video learning can help to enlighten. It can even help to educate people who genuinely want to learn (typically, this works better with adults). Just please understand that kids 4-25 are crap learners on their own. They NEED others to help them learn or else they just won't bother.
I don't want a smart phone. I don't want to come to rely on a smart phone. I love computers, but smart phones have become a distraction to the people and the world around them... and I never want the potential of becoming one of them.
I see couples at dinner (young and old alike), both of their faces down in their smart phones. I overheard one say to another, "Hey did you read that article...?" "No. Link me." "Sent." (minutes later) "Heh. Ya. That's funny."
No true conversation took place. They weren't "out together", they were mutually consuming.
And it's not just "other" people. I went out for some beers and a game with my best male friend once. Halfway through his first beer, we were talking about play and he started stuttering his words... I look over (eyes having been previously fixed on the screen), and he's updating his facebook status to "Beers and a game".
If it's not there for perpetual consumption, voyeurism, or exhibitionism, a smart phone is there to make up for laziness. Oh, you didn't get up in time to shower, dress, and get directions to your appointment? No problem! You can speed in the general direction of your appointment in your car while looking up directions on your smart phone! No problem there!
Personally, I just want a phone that is a FANTASTIC phone (reception, sound, etc.), a good mp3 player, a good photo camera, a text messager with a QWERTY keyboard, and have great battery life. Who makes this phone? This simple phone? I'll continue to pay my $50 a month for unlimited text and 400 minutes. I accept that price in my area. But who makes this phone!?
I overclocked first computers (2000-2004). I bought a budget system in parts, put it together, got online, and learned that I could make my computer even faster with a little risk and careful effort.
But then the prices of components began to fall and I stopped overclocking new rigs 2004. Why? Because a normal $30 heatsink was barely enough to keep some of the hotter processors cool without overclocking... and I was not willing to risk losing my processor for a few more FPS in Counter-Strike or whatever I was playing that month.
Fast-forward to now, I still leave my main computer on 24/7, but as a career-person, I need to save more (house, retirement, vacations to placate the lady) and spend less on utilities. I also have less time to clean the dust out of computer cases that effectively had hoovers for cooling. So where I used to go for a balance of cost, heat, and overclockability, I now look at cost, heat, and power consumption. I now take pride in being able to comfortably play modern games (though not at max settings) on a rig supported by a 260 watt power supply. I have no guilt leaving that on overnight.
Note: I never got into water-cooling. I never had the space or disposable income to mess around with the kit or the risk.
Background: I have had multiple conversations about "athletic endeavors". I have settled on the following taxonomy.
***Athletic Competitions*** --- Competitions requiring athletes to physically demonstrate their athletic and applicable mental capabilities (often to their fullest extent).
***Non-Athletic Competitions*** -- Competitions that may or may not require athleticism for general health/well-being, but do not require the fullest extent of athletic performance in competition.
Races (non-human-powered): NASCAR, Formula 1, Horse Racing, Yacht Racing, etc. Non-Athletic Competition: Sharpshooting, Competitive Drum Corp, Jazz Dance Non-Athletic Game: Board games, Gambling
Many will undoubtedly argue that "you need to be in great physical shape to be a formula 1 driver" or the "formula 1 drivers are athletes", and that may be true, but in the end, formula 1 is a competition of technology, not human capability.
Back on topic, I think that football is best without the aid of computers at the sidelines. The sport is supposed to be a competition of team power, coordination, and thinking capability. Computers on the sideline dilute the need for thinking capability. The ability to judge the probability of a defensive formation working well against an offensive play is a measure of human decision-making skills based on the ability to "feel out a game" or even do his/her own math. If computers are allowed on the sidelines, then we may as well start prepping the cyborg football league.
(1) A 12-mile radius is NOTHING compared to all the intentional disaster areas (nuclear *weapon* testing underground, on ground, and over water) or all the major landfills or holes in the ozone. Those are the damages we "accept" as part of our way of life. Fukushima's failure was not a guaranteed result of running the plant, but a RISK that only existed due genuine natural cataclysm that was fought with decades old technology (when much better is available now). Ya, I'd call that a win. By the way, how do you think an oil refinery or a coal mine would have fared in that same situation?
(2) The maximum *allowed* radiation dose for an American nuclear worker is nothing to sneeze at when compared to a school bus driver, but then again, it's not deadly or else it wouldn't be allowed. People wouldn't work at nuclear power plants if they had good reason to believe that they would develop various cancers as a direct result. It's a heightened risk (one cannot deny that, mathematically), but it's by no means a death sentence nor does it guarantee a lesser quality of life.
(3) 30% less electricity for any metropolitan area can be spell doom. But it didn't in Japan. For the Japanese, it's an opportunity to innovate. To remodel. To rethink ways. I wouldn't be surprised if more low-power-consumption tech comes out of Japan due to this disaster and the world as a whole benefits.
Summary: *ALL* non-region-specific (solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric) power systems can fail due to cataclysm. Some fail before the stations even get the fuel (oil spills, coal mine collapses). None but nuclear have so many safe guards, even at the 1960s tech level, that can respond to such a major disaster with so little loss of life.
Such is insurance. The first part of their job is to convince you that you may need a large sum of money in the future to recover from an otherwise unforeseen cataclysm.
The second part of their job is to convince you that you are a massive risk and must pay larger fees because, let's face it, you're going to be using their services more than others.
The last part of their job is to resist paying out in the case of a cataclysm because they have proof that you were a much higher risk that you originally stated and that lack of disclosure invalidates your relationship with the insurance company. Of course, they will have known all the risks ahead of time, but if you don't state them, they'll hold it against you.
Social media sites are means for insurance companies to find these unstated risks and use them against you later. It does or will happen. Accept it. Now, change your social media habits accordingly.
Here's the problem, though. You CAN'T call the man a quack without the research otherwise you're being just as non-scientific. Instead, check out the post further down by the Anonymous Coward. He links to clinicaltrials.gov and I'll link to a deeper source: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=burzynski&show_down=Y#down
Also note that you and I, through our taxes, pay for many, MANY experiments most of which provide no benefit aside from the "all results are good in science" aspect.
Sometimes you gotta get all James Randi with this stuff. Throw down the money for the challenge that way the people get destroyed and start harming other people. Ya, I'm willing to throw in for that.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously! What is a "Rogue Site"? Are all websites recruited to exist on the Internet under one flag of universal compliance and then BAM! Rebellion! Do rogue sites, like rogue terrorist cells, pop up and seek to destroy the United States of the Internet?
Because that's what it sounds like. A "rogue" is a "loose cannon"-- something that can destroy a bunch of hard-earned gains if left on its own.
And why are we propagating the term "Rogue Site?" We keep doing it with "IP Theft" and "Piracy"-- why don't we stick to the real, non-marketed vocabulary...
IP-Infringers. They're sites that make available copyrighted materials for copying. That's not rogue... that's "The Internet".
Very well said! It's too bad I can't "favorite" a post in Slashdot, because this would be in there simply for the use as a reference.
I expected a better response. However, I didn't read the terms of participation which clearly states:
"To avoid the appearance of improper influence, the White House may decline to address certain procurement, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or similar matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local government in its response to a petition. "
Thus, I don't really fault them for declining to comment. It looks like another avenue will have to be taken.
Note to humanity, if your judgement is a comparison of "what is" and "the worst of all possible situations", you will allow yourself to be harmed up until the time where you ARE in the worst of all known situations... and it will be too late to act.
No, Google is not the worst of all possible situations, but they have acted sufficiently for us all too be concerned about what they do now, what they can do now, and what they are able and willing to do in the future.
From my post: "The issue is likelihood of collision."
From your post: "I am not defending this, and it actually makes me sick, but it is impossible to dismiss the advantage of size in a collision."
I state again: It's not the size of the car of the collision, it's that a collision occurred at all. Collision prevention, NOT INCREASING THE SIZE OF THE VEHICLE, should be the goal.
Vehicle size is not nor has it ever been an issue. The issue is likelihood of collision. Responsible/considerate driving and higher visibility (from within all cars) are the points on which to focus.
The automobile armor race must stop if we're going to safe money and lives (the two go hand-in-hand).
I'm willing to do that. Do you have any suggestions?
Couple reasons:
1. My university email is through Gmail. I'm logged in whenever I'm at a computer.
2. The second you sign in to a Google account, your entire browser history is recorded by Google.
I accept that Google tracks what I'm doing while logged into one of their systems and I've installed their plugin to make sure they don't track me when I'm *not*. But I was never under the impression that everything will be combined into a single identity and I don't trust that they would ONLY use such information for targeted advertising both now and in the future.
I don't want what I watch on Youtube associated with my email. I don't want documents I open in Google documents to have a history with my digital self. This is too close to a single, universal, Internet Identification program and we have stated many, many times that we do NOT want this. We have separated persona for different reasons for specific reasons. OUR reasons.
I don't want Google's "your world search" giving me biased results because I'm subscribed to a couple newsgroups or because I watched 3 back to back videos from the same band on Youtube.
Google has gone too far. When they merged GoogleAccounts with Youtube, I cancelled my Youtube account and never went back to the proper site. Last night, I started backing up everything in my Gmail account with Thunderbird and pulled everything from my Google Docs account. As of today, I'm not turning on my Asus Transformer (Android) until there's a friendly Ubuntu Tablet Edition installer.
I'm open to suggestions about where to go from here. I need online webmail that will "Do no Google."
Who has suggestions?
"Oh... the government will do nothing!"
"The crooks won't investigate their handlers!"
"The petition will be ignored!"
Are you the **AA 'turfing or just fashionably rebellious with your doubt of the value of the US Judicial system? If you've given up already, why are you bothering to comment?
Remember when Nixon was investigated? What about when Clinton got some booty on the side? Big investigations DO happen and they have to start somewhere. If you don't like the idea of an investigation, then say so. I'd genuinely like to hear those comments. But if all you got are "Whaaa! They've done nothing in the past, they'll do nothing again!", then you're the worst kind. You remove value from the entire discussion and give nothing in return..
If you give in to your butt-hurt and so easily declare "They so rarely do what I want... why bother?", then WE can never get anything done. You are WORSE than those who do nothing because you KNOW something is bad and take the time to discourage others from acting on the injustice.
I have an ASUS Transformer with keyboard dock and I think it's great. I really do. It's my netbook as necessary and a tablet which is particularly good for tabling events.
My problem with the Transformer is that it runs Android. I would prefer Android over iOS any day, but Google continues to develop Android as a single-person data collection device (requiring me to be constantly signed into a variety of services) instead of a multi-user platform where *I* get to choose who sees what.
If/when Ubuntu gets prepped for tablet distribution and I can install it on my Transformer, I will do it the very night it's available. Google has just over-stepped its bounds for me to give it the benefit of the doubt with my data any more.
I don't want to search within "my world". I know everything here. It's MY WORLD.
When I need to find information online, I do a search of ALL OTHER KNOWN WORLDS.
Google is just racing for fail over and over lately. I don't know if they're just shooting the dark or actually think that their users want this.
As someone who works in Transportation Demand Management, I would happily welcome higher gas taxes... especially if they are used to directly pay for the Federal and State highways. About 50% of roads and highways are paid for by non-user fees (income taxes, sales tax, etc.) because gas taxes are notoriously difficult to raise without severe political ramifications.
But if gas prices stay low (they're at about $3.60 where I am in Southern California), people will not have sufficient incentive to make their next vehicle more fuel efficient nor, which would be preferable, switch to more sustainable forms of commuting and city travel (bus, train, carpool, vanpool, bike, and walk).
Federal/State monies that would otherwise go to building/expanding roads and freeways would go towards mass transit thus increasing the availability of transit. Increased convenience of transit triggers increased utilization and thus greater expense recovery by fare being transit more solvent.
People will save money in their transit travel, pollution falls, reliance on oil falls (especially with hybrid buses and electric trains), and with fewer people living building-to-building, people will have to walk a bit more and be a bit healthier. ... But it all starts with the cost of traveling by personal automobile.
That may be a hidden problem because the huge "in your face" problem is that universities have never been "workforce creators". A university is a place of creating better people (for a better society), life-long learners, and academic specialists. In many circumstances, the people that do well in that kind of environment can translate whatever they do at university to a well-paying career regardless of major.
However, with higher education now seen as a right of citizenship (in the US, since the 1970s), standards have been reduced and the universities are expected to adjust their mission from "answering the questions of life, the universe, and everything", to "make people that know how to put cog A on rod B". Where previously, education was good for what it could do for the world, it is being relied upon, from kindergarten to PhD, to balance out the economy which was screwed by people gambling with mortgages and pensions.
Neither the university, nor the whole of public education, has ever existed as a prop for the national economy. But it is being relied upon as such now.
What the nation wants is TRADE SCHOOLS, but the idea of being educated *to work* and not getting really, really rich without much effort is beyond the limit or scope of expectations of the modern American. That's why we fantasize about people getting rich quick and idolize multimillionaires who "made it" by creating one simple product or getting "discovered" in one small movie. The people say that the economy needs skilled *workers*, that means we need "trade schools*, but few are willing to be "limited" by going to such a school.
If there is no potential of making millions, the people don't want it. They're addicted to that "potential". That's why they vote Republican while poor.
This is not exactly a school of the masses, now is it? They have 60 students in their entire school, charge $17,000 per year in tuition, and tuition only makes up 75% of their revenue.
By contrast, the State of California, in 2009/2010, spent $8,452 per student for its entire educational bureaucracy. That's less than 40% of what that school charges.
Now consider any application process to get into the school... and the parents submitting those applications... and all the additional resources to which the students will be privy.
You are 100% right... because this was supposed to reply to a post about distance learning not be a post on its own. /shame
However, in regards to the article itself, the guy is doing nothing new. He's having a discussion session in which he makes sure students learn fewer things in class to a higher degree of success instead of more things learned very lightly. This is why most universities have lecture and discussion sessions for the majority of their courses. The only thing that's even remotely novel is that he uses remote polling so that the scared and shy can respond without fear of being wrong in public (a genuine issue) and thus is able to collect better data.
And the success of the endeavor at all is dependent on seating arrangements and a good mix of extro- to introverts.
Look-- the vast majority of students learn because they have no choice. Slashdoters that say "public education only held me back as a child" and "I learned more outside of the classroom" are not the norm. The normal person "accidentally" gets caught up with friends, watching movies, and trolling Facebook instead of watching these lecture videos. Those normal people then fail (or worse, cheat).
Too bad for them? No... because if they end up being useless, YOU will feel the consequences. Be it in skilled labor shortages, increase poverty/crime rates, dumbed down video classes to make up for the poor previous education of your cohort, or the removal of funding due to the low passing scores, YOU WILL FEEL THEIR FAILURE.
Real education isn't a plug-and-play option. It's work. Teachers need to work in the classroom and do their best to make sure the students learn as much as possible. It's adaptive, changing, and sometimes will digress to related, but more entertaining, topics to keep long-term interest. These things cannot be done by video.
Get it through your heads. The education of the masses must be done in person by skilled individuals. Preferably in smaller groups.
Qualifier: Distance/video learning can help to enlighten. It can even help to educate people who genuinely want to learn (typically, this works better with adults). Just please understand that kids 4-25 are crap learners on their own. They NEED others to help them learn or else they just won't bother.
I don't want a smart phone. I don't want to come to rely on a smart phone. I love computers, but smart phones have become a distraction to the people and the world around them... and I never want the potential of becoming one of them.
I see couples at dinner (young and old alike), both of their faces down in their smart phones. I overheard one say to another, "Hey did you read that article...?" "No. Link me." "Sent." (minutes later) "Heh. Ya. That's funny."
No true conversation took place. They weren't "out together", they were mutually consuming.
And it's not just "other" people. I went out for some beers and a game with my best male friend once. Halfway through his first beer, we were talking about play and he started stuttering his words... I look over (eyes having been previously fixed on the screen), and he's updating his facebook status to "Beers and a game".
If it's not there for perpetual consumption, voyeurism, or exhibitionism, a smart phone is there to make up for laziness. Oh, you didn't get up in time to shower, dress, and get directions to your appointment? No problem! You can speed in the general direction of your appointment in your car while looking up directions on your smart phone! No problem there!
Personally, I just want a phone that is a FANTASTIC phone (reception, sound, etc.), a good mp3 player, a good photo camera, a text messager with a QWERTY keyboard, and have great battery life. Who makes this phone? This simple phone? I'll continue to pay my $50 a month for unlimited text and 400 minutes. I accept that price in my area. But who makes this phone!?
I overclocked first computers (2000-2004). I bought a budget system in parts, put it together, got online, and learned that I could make my computer even faster with a little risk and careful effort.
But then the prices of components began to fall and I stopped overclocking new rigs 2004. Why? Because a normal $30 heatsink was barely enough to keep some of the hotter processors cool without overclocking... and I was not willing to risk losing my processor for a few more FPS in Counter-Strike or whatever I was playing that month.
Fast-forward to now, I still leave my main computer on 24/7, but as a career-person, I need to save more (house, retirement, vacations to placate the lady) and spend less on utilities. I also have less time to clean the dust out of computer cases that effectively had hoovers for cooling. So where I used to go for a balance of cost, heat, and overclockability, I now look at cost, heat, and power consumption. I now take pride in being able to comfortably play modern games (though not at max settings) on a rig supported by a 260 watt power supply. I have no guilt leaving that on overnight.
Note: I never got into water-cooling. I never had the space or disposable income to mess around with the kit or the risk.
Background: I have had multiple conversations about "athletic endeavors". I have settled on the following taxonomy.
***Athletic Competitions*** --- Competitions requiring athletes to physically demonstrate their athletic and applicable mental capabilities (often to their fullest extent).
Races (human-powered): Running, Cycling, Rowing, etc.
Sports (directly competitive scoring): Basketball, Football, etc.
Sports (indirectly competitive scoring): Hammer-throw
Athletic Competitions (subjective scoring): Gymnastics
***Non-Athletic Competitions*** -- Competitions that may or may not require athleticism for general health/well-being, but do not require the fullest extent of athletic performance in competition.
Races (non-human-powered): NASCAR, Formula 1, Horse Racing, Yacht Racing, etc.
Non-Athletic Competition: Sharpshooting, Competitive Drum Corp, Jazz Dance
Non-Athletic Game: Board games, Gambling
Many will undoubtedly argue that "you need to be in great physical shape to be a formula 1 driver" or the "formula 1 drivers are athletes", and that may be true, but in the end, formula 1 is a competition of technology, not human capability.
Back on topic, I think that football is best without the aid of computers at the sidelines. The sport is supposed to be a competition of team power, coordination, and thinking capability. Computers on the sideline dilute the need for thinking capability. The ability to judge the probability of a defensive formation working well against an offensive play is a measure of human decision-making skills based on the ability to "feel out a game" or even do his/her own math. If computers are allowed on the sidelines, then we may as well start prepping the cyborg football league.
This post is more inciteful than insightful.
(1) A 12-mile radius is NOTHING compared to all the intentional disaster areas (nuclear *weapon* testing underground, on ground, and over water) or all the major landfills or holes in the ozone. Those are the damages we "accept" as part of our way of life. Fukushima's failure was not a guaranteed result of running the plant, but a RISK that only existed due genuine natural cataclysm that was fought with decades old technology (when much better is available now). Ya, I'd call that a win. By the way, how do you think an oil refinery or a coal mine would have fared in that same situation?
(2) The maximum *allowed* radiation dose for an American nuclear worker is nothing to sneeze at when compared to a school bus driver, but then again, it's not deadly or else it wouldn't be allowed. People wouldn't work at nuclear power plants if they had good reason to believe that they would develop various cancers as a direct result. It's a heightened risk (one cannot deny that, mathematically), but it's by no means a death sentence nor does it guarantee a lesser quality of life.
(3) 30% less electricity for any metropolitan area can be spell doom. But it didn't in Japan. For the Japanese, it's an opportunity to innovate. To remodel. To rethink ways. I wouldn't be surprised if more low-power-consumption tech comes out of Japan due to this disaster and the world as a whole benefits.
Summary: *ALL* non-region-specific (solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric) power systems can fail due to cataclysm. Some fail before the stations even get the fuel (oil spills, coal mine collapses). None but nuclear have so many safe guards, even at the 1960s tech level, that can respond to such a major disaster with so little loss of life.
Such is insurance. The first part of their job is to convince you that you may need a large sum of money in the future to recover from an otherwise unforeseen cataclysm.
The second part of their job is to convince you that you are a massive risk and must pay larger fees because, let's face it, you're going to be using their services more than others.
The last part of their job is to resist paying out in the case of a cataclysm because they have proof that you were a much higher risk that you originally stated and that lack of disclosure invalidates your relationship with the insurance company. Of course, they will have known all the risks ahead of time, but if you don't state them, they'll hold it against you.
Social media sites are means for insurance companies to find these unstated risks and use them against you later. It does or will happen. Accept it. Now, change your social media habits accordingly.
LOL -- Give it another shot, Tiger. ;)
But it should be made SO EASY and the benefits made SO VISIBLE that peer pressure alone would compel people to participate.
The same goes for recycling.
Here's the problem, though. You CAN'T call the man a quack without the research otherwise you're being just as non-scientific. Instead, check out the post further down by the Anonymous Coward. He links to clinicaltrials.gov and I'll link to a deeper source: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=burzynski&show_down=Y#down
Also note that you and I, through our taxes, pay for many, MANY experiments most of which provide no benefit aside from the "all results are good in science" aspect.
Sometimes you gotta get all James Randi with this stuff. Throw down the money for the challenge that way the people get destroyed and start harming other people. Ya, I'm willing to throw in for that.