predominantly scientists who played prominent roles in the Manhattan Project during WW2.
WW2 ended in 1945 and everybody of prominence back then is long dead.
Not sure how that pertains to my answer to your question; but yes, the Manhattan Project (or its precursor) scientists involved in the creation of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists -- Rabinowitch, Szilard, Oppenheimer, Bethe, Urey, etc. -- are gone now, although a few survived until relatively recently (Hans Bethe, for instance, did not pass until 2005).
But even if they were alive, try explaining, why their role in the development of the weapon makes them better experts on matters of foreign policy, military, and psychology, than that of any engineer or a dentist?
Why, in other words, should we value their opinion on how imminent the use of their weapon is over that of an engineer or a dentist?
Do you think, bladesmiths could better predict the imminence of duels, than other contemporaries?
I don't know why you're asking me these questions, since I merely answered the one you posed (about what the basis for the name was), and made no assertions of the sort that your questions seem to imply or defenses of anything the Bulletin has ever published.
The so-called "Doomsday Clock" is undoubtedly the most notorious thing about the Bulletin; but it's a tiny fraction of what they publish and what they argue. In general, and from my experience, the papers/articles published therein which argue for any particular viewpoint on an issue tend to be supported with attempts at logical reasoning built upon a set of claimed evidence. That absolutely does not make any of them right, any more than the many papers that fill scientific journals every week are all correct; and it's completely reasonable to argue that one sees flaws in their reasoning or in the set of facts/axioms/whatever on which their reasoning is based; and I'd be very surprised if any of the principals involved in the publication now, or those who write for it, would argue to the contrary.
the allusion, that the protesters being "atomic scientists" (whatever that means)
What it means is that the folks who founded and originally wrote for/edited/published the journal were predominantly scientists who played prominent roles in the Manhattan Project during WW2.
In terms of Photoshop, for example, there's plenty of free software/alternatives that you can use for viewing your data.
Perhaps not anymore. The OP seems to be suggesting that they're moving to a cloud storage paradigm where you no longer have local access to the files, in which case you can't easily (or perhaps, eventually, at all) pass them to GIMP or whatever else.
Haiku yours is not
The point missed by you it was
It was a joke. Whoosh.
For what it's worth, your post isn't a haiku either. Nor was the original "Linus Haiku". A haiku need not have a 5-7-5 syllable structure; and a 5-7-5 syllable structure does not make something a haiku. Haiku require a cutting word (kireji), and carry imagery of the natural world.
For what we pay them, we're not going to get that kind of bravery.
As a country, we could pay cops a lot more money and get recruits who you'd actually *want* to be a cop. But as a country we value entertainment more than having competent police (or teachers), so we pay cops (and teachers) small money, and so those professions don't attract the best possible recruits.
See, I think it's wrong not to help people who have been wiped out by a disaster. But the corollary to that (in my mind) is that I think it's stupid to settle people where they are likely to be wiped out if there is a disaster. That only makes it more disastrous.
But the implicit assumption you're making in this case is that all these flooded houses in Houston were likely to experience a flood like this. Likely over what sort of time scale? As others have noted multiple times, there is no historical precedent at all for what happened. It makes perfect sense to criticize re-building in a place that has repeatedly flooded. But we're talking about places that have never, ever flooded in recorded history. Any estimate of the likelihood of something like this happening would have been absurdly small -- non-zero, yes, but absurdly small. So if you're using the criterion that one shouldn't live in a place where the likelihood of a flood is non-zero, then the earlier complaint remains: the same argument can be made of every other type of disaster, and there's no place on the entire planet one can live.
Absolutely. The one I was quite frustrated about was when the VERY useful (for me, anyway) Usenet archive DejaNews got folded into Google Groups and then made useless. Searching for old Usenet posts now is harder than it was, and most old content appears to have gone unavailable.
I don't expect that Google will care one bit about the complaints of posters here; but it's a little bit of comfort to hear other people expressing the same feelings I have.
I'm sure there are people out there who like these changes, but I cannot imagine why. What they describe as a "cleaner" interface is, for me, too homogenous. What they got rid of to make it "cleaner" was, for me, useful content. Scrolling around it now is actively unpleasant.
Google News has been my homepage on all platforms for years. Now, I'm looking for a new site to use as my homepage.
In response to these events, WikiLeaks has tweeted "Trump's National Security Advisor Michael Flynn resigns after destabilization campaign by US spies, Democrats, press."
"Third. What kind of idiot doesn't back up their stuff?"
What kind of idiot doesn't RTFA they're complaining about? He *did* back up his stuff; that's how he was able to recover his stuff. The blog post was informational, for folks who don't know about this issue.
You didn't read the article, did you? He *did* back up his shit; that's how he was able to recover from what Apple did. The blog post was informational, for people who might not have realized what could happen.
That is how iCloud music library works. It uploads your files and stores them. If there is a match, you can download a high quality version. If not, it stores your original version. You can download your music at any time, permanently. Nothing has been deleted or 'stolen'.
Did you actually RTFA? He *couldn't* download a copy of rare alternate versions he had; those are gone, replaced with the standard version of tracks, because the band and song names are the same. Nor could he download his own music, the music he wrote and performed and recorded himself, in the full WAV 16 bit/44.1k form he had it in -- only in a lossy format, because Apple converted the WAVs to a lossy format and threw them away.
First, take your meds and calm down.
Second . ..reread the summary. The summary author wrote: "It begs the question whether or not piracy is truly killing the movie business." That phrasing clearly demonstrates that the term is used in the incorrect form (as the equivalent of "raises the question").
HTH.
Yeah, yeah, I know, the meaning of words and phrases change over time, grammar nazi, blah blah blah. But the simple fact is that there are LOTS of other phrases that mean what you're trying to say when you misuse "begs the question" and that are thus available to you; but there's no other succinct phrase in English that means what "begs the question" actually means. Re-purposing that phrase weakens the language: it takes away the only useful expression for one concept, and allocates it to something that already has a number of different simple ways to be expressed.
Specifically, the original poster writes: " Intriguingly, the BICEP team has yet to flat-out deny this."
However, the very first link quotes one of the PIs for BICEP by saying: "As for Falkowski's suggestion in his blog that the BICEP has admitted to making a mistake, Pryke says that "is totally false." The BICEP team will not be revising or retracting its work, which it posted to the arXiv preprint server, Pryke says: "We stand by our paper.""
The/. editors didn't actually look at the submission before approving it. Yeah, yeah, I know.
Slashdot Mirror
This sucks.
I think of roblimo from a time when I really loved /. And I think of him and Hemos and Taco as much of why.
Blah.
I recently said to my phone, "OK, Google, is it supposed to rain today? When you answer, keep in mind that you got this question wrong yesterday."
To my surprise, it replied with a list of links to alternative digital assistants I could install.
Yeah. I don't remember 2005 either, but that's *because* I'm old.
Meanwhile, I just decided I'm *more* likely to go there.
WW2 ended in 1945 and everybody of prominence back then is long dead.
Not sure how that pertains to my answer to your question; but yes, the Manhattan Project (or its precursor) scientists involved in the creation of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists -- Rabinowitch, Szilard, Oppenheimer, Bethe, Urey, etc. -- are gone now, although a few survived until relatively recently (Hans Bethe, for instance, did not pass until 2005).
But even if they were alive, try explaining, why their role in the development of the weapon makes them better experts on matters of foreign policy, military, and psychology, than that of any engineer or a dentist?
Why, in other words, should we value their opinion on how imminent the use of their weapon is over that of an engineer or a dentist?
Do you think, bladesmiths could better predict the imminence of duels, than other contemporaries?
I don't know why you're asking me these questions, since I merely answered the one you posed (about what the basis for the name was), and made no assertions of the sort that your questions seem to imply or defenses of anything the Bulletin has ever published.
The so-called "Doomsday Clock" is undoubtedly the most notorious thing about the Bulletin; but it's a tiny fraction of what they publish and what they argue. In general, and from my experience, the papers/articles published therein which argue for any particular viewpoint on an issue tend to be supported with attempts at logical reasoning built upon a set of claimed evidence. That absolutely does not make any of them right, any more than the many papers that fill scientific journals every week are all correct; and it's completely reasonable to argue that one sees flaws in their reasoning or in the set of facts/axioms/whatever on which their reasoning is based; and I'd be very surprised if any of the principals involved in the publication now, or those who write for it, would argue to the contrary.
the allusion, that the protesters being "atomic scientists" (whatever that means)
What it means is that the folks who founded and originally wrote for/edited/published the journal were predominantly scientists who played prominent roles in the Manhattan Project during WW2.
In terms of Photoshop, for example, there's plenty of free software/alternatives that you can use for viewing your data.
Perhaps not anymore. The OP seems to be suggesting that they're moving to a cloud storage paradigm where you no longer have local access to the files, in which case you can't easily (or perhaps, eventually, at all) pass them to GIMP or whatever else.
Haiku yours is not The point missed by you it was It was a joke. Whoosh.
For what it's worth, your post isn't a haiku either. Nor was the original "Linus Haiku". A haiku need not have a 5-7-5 syllable structure; and a 5-7-5 syllable structure does not make something a haiku. Haiku require a cutting word (kireji), and carry imagery of the natural world.
These are closer to senryu than haiku.
Horseshit. I know you want to cover for your bud, but they're both murderers.
As a country, we could pay cops a lot more money and get recruits who you'd actually *want* to be a cop. But as a country we value entertainment more than having competent police (or teachers), so we pay cops (and teachers) small money, and so those professions don't attract the best possible recruits.
See, I think it's wrong not to help people who have been wiped out by a disaster. But the corollary to that (in my mind) is that I think it's stupid to settle people where they are likely to be wiped out if there is a disaster. That only makes it more disastrous.
But the implicit assumption you're making in this case is that all these flooded houses in Houston were likely to experience a flood like this. Likely over what sort of time scale? As others have noted multiple times, there is no historical precedent at all for what happened. It makes perfect sense to criticize re-building in a place that has repeatedly flooded. But we're talking about places that have never, ever flooded in recorded history. Any estimate of the likelihood of something like this happening would have been absurdly small -- non-zero, yes, but absurdly small. So if you're using the criterion that one shouldn't live in a place where the likelihood of a flood is non-zero, then the earlier complaint remains: the same argument can be made of every other type of disaster, and there's no place on the entire planet one can live.
Absolutely. The one I was quite frustrated about was when the VERY useful (for me, anyway) Usenet archive DejaNews got folded into Google Groups and then made useless. Searching for old Usenet posts now is harder than it was, and most old content appears to have gone unavailable.
I don't expect that Google will care one bit about the complaints of posters here; but it's a little bit of comfort to hear other people expressing the same feelings I have. I'm sure there are people out there who like these changes, but I cannot imagine why. What they describe as a "cleaner" interface is, for me, too homogenous. What they got rid of to make it "cleaner" was, for me, useful content. Scrolling around it now is actively unpleasant. Google News has been my homepage on all platforms for years. Now, I'm looking for a new site to use as my homepage.
In response to these events, WikiLeaks has tweeted "Trump's National Security Advisor Michael Flynn resigns after destabilization campaign by US spies, Democrats, press."
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/...
Wow. WikiLeaks has become a completely, utterly, totally different animal from what they were when they started out.
Yeah, I read the summary and assumed they were women. Mea culpa. My point to the parent post stands, though.
Cool story, bro. But what it has to do with revealing the identities of two teenage Saudi rape victims, I don't know.
Yeah, that's definitely how it works in Saudi Arabia, where the women in question live.
What kind of idiot doesn't RTFA they're complaining about? He *did* back up his stuff; that's how he was able to recover his stuff. The blog post was informational, for folks who don't know about this issue.
You didn't read the article, did you? He *did* back up his shit; that's how he was able to recover from what Apple did. The blog post was informational, for people who might not have realized what could happen.
Yeah. I still buy CDs; and I rip them to FLACs for when I can't play the CDs any more.
That is how iCloud music library works. It uploads your files and stores them. If there is a match, you can download a high quality version. If not, it stores your original version. You can download your music at any time, permanently. Nothing has been deleted or 'stolen'.
Did you actually RTFA? He *couldn't* download a copy of rare alternate versions he had; those are gone, replaced with the standard version of tracks, because the band and song names are the same. Nor could he download his own music, the music he wrote and performed and recorded himself, in the full WAV 16 bit/44.1k form he had it in -- only in a lossy format, because Apple converted the WAVs to a lossy format and threw them away.
First, take your meds and calm down. Second . . .reread the summary. The summary author wrote: "It begs the question whether or not piracy is truly killing the movie business." That phrasing clearly demonstrates that the term is used in the incorrect form (as the equivalent of "raises the question").
HTH.
Yeah, yeah, I know, the meaning of words and phrases change over time, grammar nazi, blah blah blah. But the simple fact is that there are LOTS of other phrases that mean what you're trying to say when you misuse "begs the question" and that are thus available to you; but there's no other succinct phrase in English that means what "begs the question" actually means. Re-purposing that phrase weakens the language: it takes away the only useful expression for one concept, and allocates it to something that already has a number of different simple ways to be expressed.
I'd mod you up if I could.
Specifically, the original poster writes: " Intriguingly, the BICEP team has yet to flat-out deny this."
However, the very first link quotes one of the PIs for BICEP by saying: "As for Falkowski's suggestion in his blog that the BICEP has admitted to making a mistake, Pryke says that "is totally false." The BICEP team will not be revising or retracting its work, which it posted to the arXiv preprint server, Pryke says: "We stand by our paper.""
The /. editors didn't actually look at the submission before approving it. Yeah, yeah, I know.