And the appropriate response to the Soviet Union would be "You're right, we have civil rights issues. Racism is terrible, and we'll try to fix these issues." And to our credit, we have come a long way. In addition, we should respond "Hey guys, quit invading other countries!" (never mind the fact that the US continues to invade countries to this day...)
In this case, again, we should take a good look at the criticisms and not ignore them because of the messenger. Maybe we are doing a bad job of preserving internet freedoms, and should work to fix them. Maybe China is also doing a bad job.
Plenty of people have studied it. The rough answer is that 40% of Russians are much much better off, and 60% of Russians are worse off financially. Overall, this amounts to a net gain, but it isn't evenly spread. Crime is higher today than it was in the Soviet Union. There is more freedom of speech today than there was before. You don't have to look very hard to find these numbers - don't take my word for it, do the research.
The paper is in Arxiv, and has not been peer-reviewed. They refer to Craig Venter as "G. Vinter." I won't hold my breath until these results are replicated by third parties.
Usually no, except that the teachers' unions do such an amazing job at preventing any sort of information getting out, and at preventing the establishment of any merit-based pay system, that there is no way to incentivize better teaching. This is a last resort to get the ball rolling. Better teachers should get paid more, period, and we should know who they are. Once they start teaching at the correct level, then you can argue it doesn't matter which teacher you have since they are all adequate, and therefore shouldn't publish the data anymore. Clearly in this school that's not the case.
It doesn't matter what the damage is, just measure the emissions. We can assume damage is proportional to emissions. We also know that riding a train is better than driving a car. So raise the tax on emissions enough to make people ride trains instead of driving cars in these densely populated regions.
Send a bunch of encrypted e-mails containing questionable content and see if anyone comes knocking at your door. And be sure to not send any questionable content unencrypted, or to give any other reasons for them to show up.
Some of the brain is encoded in our genomes, and some is encoded in our environment. That means starting with the environment of the womb, which we already are nowhere close to understanding in detail. Then there is environment outside the womb, which is different for everyone and changes every second as well. To give a concrete example, DNA does not encode what happens to a brain when you add alcohol to a fetal environment. And that's just one tiny molecule. What about all the other potential inputs? Modeling the brain might very well be possible, but you can't just reduce it to a compressed genome.
Then there's the other problem, which is that not all parts of the genome carry the same informational load. Truth be told, we don't know how to quantify the information in a given DNA sequence. Some appears to be filler ("junk," aka we don't know what it does yet), some is silenced, some is read in both directions, some serves a structural purpose for shaping the chromosome itself, etc. The amount of repetitive DNA in human genomes is really high, so of course it will compress down. But our genomes aren't just messages that can be reduced to Shannon-level snippets - we might know the message, but we don't know who receives it.
How about we start with viruses first, since they have the most compact genomes? Put a viral genome in a simulated cell environment and see what pops out. Oh wait, that's really hard! Sorry Kurzweil, but you're not going to be immortal.
We fucked up and didn't get Bin Laden, this war is all but over now anyways. At least Obama has given some hint that we won't have armies waging war indefinitely in the Middle-East.
In essence, we've created a system that always has a labor surplus leading to lower wages (or no wages) for everyone -- from the low skilled workers in the textile industry, to highly educated people in technical fields.
No, not for everyone. Just for the wealthier nations. Worldwide, developing nations are catching up rapidly and benefiting tremendously from the new jobs available, and their standard of living is rising. That's the global part of globalization - they are part of the same labor force, and part of the same seesaw. The United States are essentially destined to stagnate (or just slow down) in terms of economic growth until the rest of the world catches up, unless we pull out the rug from developing countries and resort to colonial strategies and protectionism (neither of which is that likely).
It's not short-hand, it's laziness at the least. More likely is that it reveals a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of biology on the part of the author.
I agree that you should have the right to anonymity. I also think, though, that you are not in a free society if you *must* act anonymously at all times. I have a Facebook account and have been able to exercise that right with no negative repercussions yet.
We used to. The White House doesn't belong to the President, it belongs to the people. We allow him to use it when we elect him, and that's why the President has to leave after his term is over.
But there is no reason every decent sized school needs to be graduating even 20 theater majors a year.
We NEED to be focusing more on vocational training. The world needs ditch diggers.
I wish I could go back to my high school and give a swift cock punch to my guidance counselor that told me I couldn't take welding because I was college bound.
You're a little confused. We need people to learn what they want to learn, not what someone else tells them to. Let the theater majors take theater, and let others take welding if they want to. Or both.
At the largest universities, men's football, men's basketball, and men's hockey make money. At smaller universities, some or all of those 3 lose money. All other mens' sports lose money. All womens' sports, except University of Connecticut basketball (and maybe 1 or 2 others) lose money. For all sports programs that lose money, participants should pay user fees.
Another problem, though, is that these sports teams reach semi-professional levels while shafting most of the participants. They aren't paid, and they don't really get an education (everyone knows the idea of a student-athlete is largely a farce). An exceedingly small number of college athletes go on to make big money in the pros.
You run some tests. Take Car X. Give it Y gallons of gasoline. Run it Z miles. You know the energy stored in Y gallons (simple chemical formulas and calorimetry experiments). It doesn't matter that it's not 100% efficient, as you can still calculate how many joules were "used up" to move the car over the distance. You can do the same with electric cars, except you're measuring Kwh or some similar unit of energy consumption.
I just wish we would move away from miles / gallon and towards miles / joule or km / joule. Imperial or American gallons? etc. etc. This is particularly important when more cars run on electricity only, or if you want to compare gasoline with diesel and ethanol.
Had the article said "may add support for OpenGL 3.0" instead of "may use OpenGL 3.0" then it would have been more obvious that they weren't getting rid of the fallbacks.
OK, then let's just look at the Northeast megalopolis, which has roughly 50 million people on 2% of the US territory. You'll still find that broadband rates and penetration are not competitive.
Food in the United States is all heavily subsidized. This comes in various forms, such as subsidies for corn, soybeans, sugar, cotton etc. We also have relatively cheap gasoline. In some cases, agribusiness gets paid to not grow certain crops so as to not alter the price too much. It's one of the reasons why we are today an obese nation - food is cheap and plentiful in our country. Were we to take away the subsidies, we would have the ability to spend our money elsewhere, or not, but prices at the supermarket would increase.
Slashdot Mirror
And the appropriate response to the Soviet Union would be "You're right, we have civil rights issues. Racism is terrible, and we'll try to fix these issues." And to our credit, we have come a long way. In addition, we should respond "Hey guys, quit invading other countries!" (never mind the fact that the US continues to invade countries to this day...)
In this case, again, we should take a good look at the criticisms and not ignore them because of the messenger. Maybe we are doing a bad job of preserving internet freedoms, and should work to fix them. Maybe China is also doing a bad job.
Plenty of people have studied it. The rough answer is that 40% of Russians are much much better off, and 60% of Russians are worse off financially. Overall, this amounts to a net gain, but it isn't evenly spread. Crime is higher today than it was in the Soviet Union. There is more freedom of speech today than there was before. You don't have to look very hard to find these numbers - don't take my word for it, do the research.
The paper is in Arxiv, and has not been peer-reviewed. They refer to Craig Venter as "G. Vinter." I won't hold my breath until these results are replicated by third parties.
Usually no, except that the teachers' unions do such an amazing job at preventing any sort of information getting out, and at preventing the establishment of any merit-based pay system, that there is no way to incentivize better teaching. This is a last resort to get the ball rolling. Better teachers should get paid more, period, and we should know who they are. Once they start teaching at the correct level, then you can argue it doesn't matter which teacher you have since they are all adequate, and therefore shouldn't publish the data anymore. Clearly in this school that's not the case.
It doesn't matter what the damage is, just measure the emissions. We can assume damage is proportional to emissions. We also know that riding a train is better than driving a car. So raise the tax on emissions enough to make people ride trains instead of driving cars in these densely populated regions.
Cut subsidies for all forms of transportation. Then, tax in proportion to carbon emissions. Trains win in every densely populated region, hands down.
Send a bunch of encrypted e-mails containing questionable content and see if anyone comes knocking at your door. And be sure to not send any questionable content unencrypted, or to give any other reasons for them to show up.
Some of the brain is encoded in our genomes, and some is encoded in our environment. That means starting with the environment of the womb, which we already are nowhere close to understanding in detail. Then there is environment outside the womb, which is different for everyone and changes every second as well. To give a concrete example, DNA does not encode what happens to a brain when you add alcohol to a fetal environment. And that's just one tiny molecule. What about all the other potential inputs? Modeling the brain might very well be possible, but you can't just reduce it to a compressed genome.
Then there's the other problem, which is that not all parts of the genome carry the same informational load. Truth be told, we don't know how to quantify the information in a given DNA sequence. Some appears to be filler ("junk," aka we don't know what it does yet), some is silenced, some is read in both directions, some serves a structural purpose for shaping the chromosome itself, etc. The amount of repetitive DNA in human genomes is really high, so of course it will compress down. But our genomes aren't just messages that can be reduced to Shannon-level snippets - we might know the message, but we don't know who receives it.
How about we start with viruses first, since they have the most compact genomes? Put a viral genome in a simulated cell environment and see what pops out. Oh wait, that's really hard! Sorry Kurzweil, but you're not going to be immortal.
That's funny, I hear that's what the people on the other side said too, except possibly in another language.
Mark Twain put it quite eloquently in The War Prayer.
We fucked up and didn't get Bin Laden, this war is all but over now anyways. At least Obama has given some hint that we won't have armies waging war indefinitely in the Middle-East.
In essence, we've created a system that always has a labor surplus leading to lower wages (or no wages) for everyone -- from the low skilled workers in the textile industry, to highly educated people in technical fields.
No, not for everyone. Just for the wealthier nations. Worldwide, developing nations are catching up rapidly and benefiting tremendously from the new jobs available, and their standard of living is rising. That's the global part of globalization - they are part of the same labor force, and part of the same seesaw. The United States are essentially destined to stagnate (or just slow down) in terms of economic growth until the rest of the world catches up, unless we pull out the rug from developing countries and resort to colonial strategies and protectionism (neither of which is that likely).
It's not short-hand, it's laziness at the least. More likely is that it reveals a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of biology on the part of the author.
I agree that you should have the right to anonymity. I also think, though, that you are not in a free society if you *must* act anonymously at all times. I have a Facebook account and have been able to exercise that right with no negative repercussions yet.
We used to. The White House doesn't belong to the President, it belongs to the people. We allow him to use it when we elect him, and that's why the President has to leave after his term is over.
But there is no reason every decent sized school needs to be graduating even 20 theater majors a year.
We NEED to be focusing more on vocational training. The world needs ditch diggers.
I wish I could go back to my high school and give a swift cock punch to my guidance counselor that told me I couldn't take welding because I was college bound.
You're a little confused. We need people to learn what they want to learn, not what someone else tells them to. Let the theater majors take theater, and let others take welding if they want to. Or both.
At the largest universities, men's football, men's basketball, and men's hockey make money. At smaller universities, some or all of those 3 lose money. All other mens' sports lose money. All womens' sports, except University of Connecticut basketball (and maybe 1 or 2 others) lose money. For all sports programs that lose money, participants should pay user fees.
Another problem, though, is that these sports teams reach semi-professional levels while shafting most of the participants. They aren't paid, and they don't really get an education (everyone knows the idea of a student-athlete is largely a farce). An exceedingly small number of college athletes go on to make big money in the pros.
A good read: http://www.john-martens.com/universities/college_sports_intro.html
You run some tests. Take Car X. Give it Y gallons of gasoline. Run it Z miles. You know the energy stored in Y gallons (simple chemical formulas and calorimetry experiments). It doesn't matter that it's not 100% efficient, as you can still calculate how many joules were "used up" to move the car over the distance. You can do the same with electric cars, except you're measuring Kwh or some similar unit of energy consumption.
I just wish we would move away from miles / gallon and towards miles / joule or km / joule. Imperial or American gallons? etc. etc. This is particularly important when more cars run on electricity only, or if you want to compare gasoline with diesel and ethanol.
Had the article said "may add support for OpenGL 3.0" instead of "may use OpenGL 3.0" then it would have been more obvious that they weren't getting rid of the fallbacks.
The problem in your example has nothing to do with allowing giving up your organs and everything to do with old-fashioned crime and thugs.
Only Texas has that 'right' due to the peculiar way it joined the US.
Texas gave up that right subsequent to the Civil War.
Short answer: because someone in the telecom industry doesn't get a bigger bonus.
OK, then let's just look at the Northeast megalopolis, which has roughly 50 million people on 2% of the US territory. You'll still find that broadband rates and penetration are not competitive.
Mod parent +1, Tragic.
Food in the United States is all heavily subsidized. This comes in various forms, such as subsidies for corn, soybeans, sugar, cotton etc. We also have relatively cheap gasoline. In some cases, agribusiness gets paid to not grow certain crops so as to not alter the price too much. It's one of the reasons why we are today an obese nation - food is cheap and plentiful in our country. Were we to take away the subsidies, we would have the ability to spend our money elsewhere, or not, but prices at the supermarket would increase.