which is not to say the two are closely correlated. There could be any number of people who are completely honest and never curse, but you would expect that of the people who do curse , there is a higher percentage of those who are not concerned about how other people react to their words. Of coarse my experience is that education also plays a factor because more educated people can generally find more effective ways of expressing themselves than by using profanity, perhaps only resorting to profanity when it most effectively communicates their message to a target audience.
Hipsterism sure, but I don't buy it that tapes are popular for any kind of economic reasons. Seriously you can create your own CD's for no more and maybe less then tapes.
biometrics in general are a fine second layer of authentication, they should not be a primary level of authentication for 2 reasons. 1) they are generally not horribly hard to fake. 2) once someone has figured out how to fake your biometric data it isn't like you can change it.
Since Roman times there have been 3 ways to 'establish trust' Something you have, something you know, something you are. So the best anyone can do is this something you know( password or pin) tied to something you have ( smart device, smart card,token) and used to authentic something you are ( biometric,retena, iris, fingerprint).
I for one would support a law that made it illegal to use your total control of one product to force people to buy another. Oh wait. seems like there is something like that already. Too bad it will probably never be applied.
The only reason for that is that people keep buying it the way the want to sell it. If no one buys the old model and team revenue suffers sooner or later they will change their licensing to match.
Do we get to push our laws into foreign countries? Yes, all the time. We arrested Manual Noriega who was the dictator of his own country from drug trafficking in his own country. We arrested a Russian citizen for break the U.S. DMCA in a way required by Russian law (when he landed in the United states for a conference). We try to force our laws to be enforced all over the world all the time.
If so, can foreign countries start enforcing their laws in our country? Believe me they try. That is in some ways the point of the U.N. and international treaties etc. Do U.S. companies honor Russian and Chinese copyright? Many other examples here.
More to the point, Russia wants to force any company doing business in Russia to host it's Russian data in Russia so it can enforce Russian laws related to Russian data without having to push it's laws into other countries. Pretty smart, even if it is a pain for internet companies. The intern is a jurisdictional nightmare, sooner or later the powers that be will find effective ways to adapt to it, this , although technically ugly does solve a lot of problems. Now any transaction with a Russian citizen is a transaction that takes place in Russia.
The final purpose of all law is to create a 'better' society, where better is the usually the hotly disputed point. So one of the 'unbalances' of current especially United States copy write laws is between what is commonly considered 'fair use' and what actually and legally is 'fair use'. Digital technology only adds a layer of complication to that.
Since action begins with citizens thinking and understanding I'd like to encourage everyone here to think about some questions. I will try not to be too leading or interject my own opinions too heavily in doing so, forgive me if I fail.
Given that : The reason copy write law exists at all is to provide income for the generators of content that they would not have without such laws.
There seems to be a general consensus that without such laws the quality and availability of useful works will suffer. ( How true is that? for which types of works?)
What is the proper balance between product and income? How much income per hour/ per work is fair? Should copy writes be transferable to family after the death of the creator? What if the creator is a corporation? How does that server the purpose of the society and the law. How do you mitigate the ability to control society through media by maintaining copy write on the songs, phrases, memes etc that become part of the daily culture by the nature of popular art?
Sorry for repeating this I replied to something by accident but really did want to garner opinions , not just make a response.
The final purpose of all law is to create a 'better' society, where better is the usually the hotly disputed point. So one of the 'unbalances' of current especially United States copy write laws is between what is commonly considered 'fair use' and what actually and legally is 'fair use'. Digital technology only adds a layer of complication to that.
Since action begins with citizens thinking and understanding I'd like to encourage everyone here to think about some questions. I will try not to be too leading or interject my own opinions too heavily in doing so, forgive me if I fail.
Given that : The reason copy write law exists at all is to provide income for the generators of content that they would not have without such laws.
There seems to be a general consensus that without such laws the quality and availability of useful works will suffer. ( How true is that? for which types of works?)
What is the proper balance between product and income? How much income per hour/ per work is fair? Should copy writes be transferable to family after the death of the creator? What if the creator is a corporation? How does that server the purpose of the society and the law. How do you mitigate the ability to control society through media by maintaining copy write on the songs, phrases, memes etc that become part of the daily culture by the nature of popular art?
why would anyone associate 'African' with race, it is a content? you are designating a specific population. Would you be being racist if you said Europeans have a higher rate of depression then Australians?
That being said, it is kind of a misnomer, it seems like there should be better ways of accurately speaking about genetic profiles that are tied to specific geographic origins. After all I there are quite a few 3rd and 4th generation African's of European descent.
Race is an entirely made up construct , it just doesn't exist and the sooner everyone starts acting that way the better off we will all be.
What exists are these things, Culture ( sometimes confused with race), Genetic traits ( skin, eye and hair color) also sometimes confused with race, but each of the genetic traits can be inherited independently and there are people who are 'culturally' more African then many people with black skin and there are many people with black skin who have less association with Africa then 3rd generation Irish/Americans have with Ireland.
Does "Atheism/Catholicism / choose-your-ism is wrong/ ignorant" count as hate speech? How about 'we need to take action against 'entity of your choice'? What about people with demographic xyz are more likely too?
The problem with any law impinging on freedom of speech is that it will inversely be used by those in power to diminish or reduce counter opinion. Think of all those 'hateful' anti-Obama/ anti-trump people out there?
Should freedom of speech be determined by who is in power or who runs the company?
interesting. Still it would presumably raise their cost substantially if every phone was running voip through tor and every computer also running tor possible with additional software added for further security. You can of coarse install virtual machines with fake hardware ID's that would help and hard drive encryption with 2 passwords 1 that decrypts 1 that auto deletes . A lot of creativity and energy could be expended to help shore up infrastructure from intrusion if there was enough demand. Of coarse you still have the 'we require you to give us the key' type laws, but that is why you build a booby trapped house with keys that are known only to the people communicating.
Religious folks have been claiming for years that they help people feel more loved. That prayer can help you feel better and to form a bond with god. Also, they claim has been made for many years that part of the reason we experience that feeling is because we were created for relationship with God.
So nice to see some scientific confirmation that praying and loving feel good.
UK consumers begin requiring strong encryption end to end on all their electronic communications from all products they purchase, beginning a new 'no snoopers' movement that seeps the country as the 'in vogue' political cause.
The problem is a question of faith? What justifies faith. What type of evidence is enough to give one faith. Faith is 'the belief in things not yet observed' a conjecture based on available evidence.
I find it ironic, that some have faith in cryogenics given the evidence for any possible success is certainly no better and in many ways much less then the evidence for a omnipotent creator who will resurrect your body at a future date.
So , this is a problem caused by poor design and or manufacturing so that the device does not perform as advertised, but rather then issue a recall or repair this under warranty the manufacturer is expecting people to pay out of pocket to fix it? So , answer is , never buy from them again.
Once, news agencies at least pretended to be interested in the facts. However, now profit and ratings are more important then responsible journalism. Now the news companies must compete with twitter and blogs. Of course there used to be a lot more chance of monetary loss for inaccurately reporting facts, but most of that was gutted in court because the big networks tried to use it to shut down bloggers. Maybe it is time to bring some of it back.
Feeling old that I remember the days when networks were expected to give equal voice to opposing opinion if they presented anything other then plain facts.
Anybody thinking about if they would like 70 year old Donald Trump to die should consider if they REALLY prefer Mike Pence, who is twice the conservative that Trump ever was.
I'd like to see a presidential candidate that was : Tech Savvy. Pro-environment. Pro-life. Pro-small business anti-multinational conglomerate. Pro-states rights Pro-immigration and Pro-immigrant. Anti-torcher , Anti-war. Pro-military, pro-police, pro-civil rights, pro-black lives matter. Not Anti-Muslim just anti-terrorist. And willing to stop shoving all kinds of liberals or conservative agenda's down the throats of people who don't want them.
But the democrats didn't give me that one nor the republicans so I had to pick someone less then optimal. The internet won't be destroyed, maybe less useful, or useful in different ways. Still a few of the things on that list ranked as more important then net neutrality to me.
Let me first provide a bit of context. I'm no fan of fossil fuels or being dependent on them. Even IF they are not messing up the atmosphere as some are apt to claim, they are not a renewable resource and sooner or later we are going to run out of them , how much later again a point of debate but nobody debates it will happen. To me it make sense to find a way to do something better 'just in case' most the majority of scientist who study climate happen to be correct AND because why be dependent on a limited resource that you might be able to use in other ways if you don't have to.
That being said, all these decisions come with real human costs. One example is that the typical cap and spend strategies many people support may the ability to raise fertilizes prices to a level that will cause mass starvation in impoverished countries ( a lot of fertilizer is from natural gas a process that produces C02).
Other 'green' strategies are bound to fall square on the shoulders of consumers as well, replacing power plants creating new infrastructure , replacing vehicles , all cost money ( and energy ) and resources. The complexity of the problem of breaking global dependence on fossil fuels in a carbon negative way may be one of the greatest challenges to human engineering.
So for those who may be more able then myself: Where are the conversion kits so that we can convert our exist vehicles to electric ? Where is the way of fast charging or exchanging batteries so we can repower these vehicles in minutes rather then hours? Where are the affordable batteries / solar panels/ green power alternative or any other technology that can be paid for by the average builder without raising the prices of homes out of reach for most people ?
We need these things to be as affordable and functionally equivalent to the technology they replace or we can expect great resistance in widespread adoption.
All of this assumes of coarse it is possible to continue or modern technological lifestyle in a carbon neutral fashion. Does we currently expend more power then we are able to take in from the sun without killing the plants?
so, how many mutations per day/year does the average non smoker accumulate in the same tissues? aka How far is this from the baseline ? Increased risk would after all be a function of the difference between the baseline mutations and the change caused by the factor being studied. I suspect the assumption that NO mutation occurs without tobacco would be a serious error, or at least require some serious proof.
The article says the trick to this battery is to anodize the components in a 'household chemical' but it doesn't say which one. They type and strength of the oxide formed would of coarse be quite different depending on which chemical. If I'm not mistaken.
The definition of anodize you used seems to be consistent on the internet but ammonization can be done with a specific chemical. I just want to know which one. Normally you would get iron oxide, but you might not if the metal was immersed in something else.
So I coin toss could predict it with 50% accuracy. How well can a human being perform the same task? Not sure that 20% better then a coin toss makes your AI very intelligent. Of coarse I'm sure it is just the beginning of a lot of cool work.
Slashdot Mirror
which is not to say the two are closely correlated. There could be any number of people who are completely honest and never curse, but you would expect that of the people who do curse , there is a higher percentage of those who are not concerned about how other people react to their words. Of coarse my experience is that education also plays a factor because more educated people can generally find more effective ways of expressing themselves than by using profanity, perhaps only resorting to profanity when it most effectively communicates their message to a target audience.
Hipsterism sure, but I don't buy it that tapes are popular for any kind of economic reasons. Seriously you can create your own CD's for no more and maybe less then tapes.
biometrics in general are a fine second layer of authentication, they should not be a primary level of authentication for 2 reasons.
1) they are generally not horribly hard to fake.
2) once someone has figured out how to fake your biometric data it isn't like you can change it.
Since Roman times there have been 3 ways to 'establish trust' Something you have, something you know, something you are. ,token) and used to authentic something you are ( biometric,retena, iris, fingerprint).
So the best anyone can do is this something you know( password or pin) tied to something you have ( smart device, smart card
I for one would support a law that made it illegal to use your total control of one product to force people to buy another. Oh wait. seems like there is something like that already. Too bad it will probably never be applied.
The only reason for that is that people keep buying it the way the want to sell it. If no one buys the old model and team revenue suffers sooner or later they will change their licensing to match.
Do we get to push our laws into foreign countries?
Yes, all the time. We arrested Manual Noriega who was the dictator of his own country from drug trafficking in his own country.
We arrested a Russian citizen for break the U.S. DMCA in a way required by Russian law (when he landed in the United states for a conference).
We try to force our laws to be enforced all over the world all the time.
If so, can foreign countries start enforcing their laws in our country?
Believe me they try. That is in some ways the point of the U.N. and international treaties etc.
Do U.S. companies honor Russian and Chinese copyright? Many other examples here.
More to the point, Russia wants to force any company doing business in Russia to host it's Russian data in Russia so it can enforce Russian laws related to Russian data without having to push it's laws into other countries. Pretty smart, even if it is a pain for internet companies. The intern is a jurisdictional nightmare, sooner or later the powers that be will find effective ways to adapt to it, this , although technically ugly does solve a lot of problems. Now any transaction with a Russian citizen is a transaction that takes place in Russia.
Is all the data in Google Play and Apple app store about Russians stored on servers in Russia?
The final purpose of all law is to create a 'better' society, where better is the usually the hotly disputed point.
So one of the 'unbalances' of current especially United States copy write laws is between what is commonly considered 'fair use' and what actually and legally is 'fair use'. Digital technology only adds a layer of complication to that.
Since action begins with citizens thinking and understanding I'd like to encourage everyone here to think about some questions. I will try not to be too leading or interject my own opinions too heavily in doing so, forgive me if I fail.
Given that : The reason copy write law exists at all is to provide income for the generators of content that they would not have without such laws.
There seems to be a general consensus that without such laws the quality and availability of useful works will suffer. ( How true is that? for which types of works?)
What is the proper balance between product and income?
How much income per hour/ per work is fair?
Should copy writes be transferable to family after the death of the creator?
What if the creator is a corporation?
How does that server the purpose of the society and the law.
How do you mitigate the ability to control society through media by maintaining copy write on the songs, phrases, memes etc that become part of the daily culture by the nature of popular art?
Sorry for repeating this I replied to something by accident but really did want to garner opinions , not just make a response.
The final purpose of all law is to create a 'better' society, where better is the usually the hotly disputed point.
So one of the 'unbalances' of current especially United States copy write laws is between what is commonly considered 'fair use' and what actually and legally is 'fair use'. Digital technology only adds a layer of complication to that.
Since action begins with citizens thinking and understanding I'd like to encourage everyone here to think about some questions. I will try not to be too leading or interject my own opinions too heavily in doing so, forgive me if I fail.
Given that : The reason copy write law exists at all is to provide income for the generators of content that they would not have without such laws.
There seems to be a general consensus that without such laws the quality and availability of useful works will suffer. ( How true is that? for which types of works?)
What is the proper balance between product and income?
How much income per hour/ per work is fair?
Should copy writes be transferable to family after the death of the creator?
What if the creator is a corporation?
How does that server the purpose of the society and the law.
How do you mitigate the ability to control society through media by maintaining copy write on the songs, phrases, memes etc that become part of the daily culture by the nature of popular art?
why would anyone associate 'African' with race, it is a content? you are designating a specific population. Would you be being racist if you said Europeans have a higher rate of depression then Australians?
That being said, it is kind of a misnomer, it seems like there should be better ways of accurately speaking about genetic profiles that are tied to specific geographic origins. After all I there are quite a few 3rd and 4th generation African's of European descent.
Race is an entirely made up construct , it just doesn't exist and the sooner everyone starts acting that way the better off we will all be.
What exists are these things, Culture ( sometimes confused with race), Genetic traits ( skin, eye and hair color) also sometimes confused with race, but each of the genetic traits can be inherited independently and there are people who are 'culturally' more African then many people with black skin and there are many people with black skin who have less association with Africa then 3rd generation Irish/Americans have with Ireland.
Does "Atheism/Catholicism / choose-your-ism is wrong/ ignorant" count as hate speech?
How about 'we need to take action against 'entity of your choice'?
What about people with demographic xyz are more likely too?
The problem with any law impinging on freedom of speech is that it will inversely be used by those in power to diminish or reduce counter opinion.
Think of all those 'hateful' anti-Obama/ anti-trump people out there?
Should freedom of speech be determined by who is in power or who runs the company?
I think advocating hate speech laws is hateful.
interesting. Still it would presumably raise their cost substantially if every phone was running voip through tor and every computer also running tor possible with additional software added for further security. You can of coarse install virtual machines with fake hardware ID's that would help and hard drive encryption with 2 passwords 1 that decrypts 1 that auto deletes . A lot of creativity and energy could be expended to help shore up infrastructure from intrusion if there was enough demand. Of coarse you still have the 'we require you to give us the key' type laws, but that is why you build a booby trapped house with keys that are known only to the people communicating.
Religious folks have been claiming for years that they help people feel more loved. That prayer can help you feel better and to form a bond with god. Also, they claim has been made for many years that part of the reason we experience that feeling is because we were created for relationship with God.
So nice to see some scientific confirmation that praying and loving feel good.
UK consumers begin requiring strong encryption end to end on all their electronic communications from all products they purchase, beginning a new 'no snoopers' movement that seeps the country as the 'in vogue' political cause.
The problem is a question of faith? What justifies faith. What type of evidence is enough to give one faith. Faith is 'the belief in things not yet observed' a conjecture based on available evidence.
I find it ironic, that some have faith in cryogenics given the evidence for any possible success is certainly no better and in many ways much less then the evidence for a omnipotent creator who will resurrect your body at a future date.
So , this is a problem caused by poor design and or manufacturing so that the device does not perform as advertised, but rather then issue a recall or repair this under warranty the manufacturer is expecting people to pay out of pocket to fix it?
So , answer is , never buy from them again.
Once, news agencies at least pretended to be interested in the facts. However, now profit and ratings are more important then responsible journalism. Now the news companies must compete with twitter and blogs. Of course there used to be a lot more chance of monetary loss for inaccurately reporting facts, but most of that was gutted in court because the big networks tried to use it to shut down bloggers. Maybe it is time to bring some of it back.
Feeling old that I remember the days when networks were expected to give equal voice to opposing opinion if they presented anything other then plain facts.
Anybody thinking about if they would like 70 year old Donald Trump to die should consider if they REALLY prefer Mike Pence, who is twice the conservative that Trump ever was.
I'd like to see a presidential candidate that was :
Tech Savvy.
Pro-environment.
Pro-life.
Pro-small business anti-multinational conglomerate.
Pro-states rights
Pro-immigration and Pro-immigrant.
Anti-torcher , Anti-war. Pro-military, pro-police, pro-civil rights, pro-black lives matter.
Not Anti-Muslim just anti-terrorist.
And willing to stop shoving all kinds of liberals or conservative agenda's down the throats of people who don't want them.
But the democrats didn't give me that one nor the republicans so I had to pick someone less then optimal. The internet won't be destroyed, maybe less useful, or useful in different ways. Still a few of the things on that list ranked as more important then net neutrality to me.
Let me first provide a bit of context. I'm no fan of fossil fuels or being dependent on them. Even IF they are not messing up the atmosphere as some are apt to claim, they are not a renewable resource and sooner or later we are going to run out of them , how much later again a point of debate but nobody debates it will happen. To me it make sense to find a way to do something better 'just in case' most the majority of scientist who study climate happen to be correct AND because why be dependent on a limited resource that you might be able to use in other ways if you don't have to.
That being said, all these decisions come with real human costs. One example is that the typical cap and spend strategies many people support may the ability to raise fertilizes prices to a level that will cause mass starvation in impoverished countries ( a lot of fertilizer is from natural gas a process that produces C02).
Other 'green' strategies are bound to fall square on the shoulders of consumers as well, replacing power plants creating new infrastructure , replacing vehicles , all cost money ( and energy ) and resources. The complexity of the problem of breaking global dependence on fossil fuels in a carbon negative way may be one of the greatest challenges to human engineering.
So for those who may be more able then myself:
Where are the conversion kits so that we can convert our exist vehicles to electric ?
Where is the way of fast charging or exchanging batteries so we can repower these vehicles in minutes rather then hours?
Where are the affordable batteries / solar panels/ green power alternative or any other technology that can be paid for by the average builder without raising the prices of homes
out of reach for most people ?
We need these things to be as affordable and functionally equivalent to the technology they replace or we can expect great resistance in widespread adoption.
All of this assumes of coarse it is possible to continue or modern technological lifestyle in a carbon neutral fashion. Does we currently expend more power then we are able to take in from the sun without killing the plants?
so, how many mutations per day/year does the average non smoker accumulate in the same tissues?
aka How far is this from the baseline ?
Increased risk would after all be a function of the difference between the baseline mutations and the change caused by the factor being studied. I suspect the assumption that NO mutation occurs without tobacco would be a serious error, or at least require some serious proof.
The article says the trick to this battery is to anodize the components in a 'household chemical' but it doesn't say which one. They type and strength of the oxide formed would of coarse be quite different depending on which chemical. If I'm not mistaken.
The definition of anodize you used seems to be consistent on the internet but ammonization can be done with a specific chemical. I just want to know which one. Normally you would get iron oxide, but you might not if the metal was immersed in something else.
Ok, this is cool I want to try it. Does anyone have the details from the paper behind the pay wall?
This would be fun to do with my daughter.
So I coin toss could predict it with 50% accuracy. How well can a human being perform the same task? Not sure that 20% better then a coin toss makes your AI very intelligent. Of coarse I'm sure it is just the beginning of a lot of cool work.
Until you have found something worth dying for , you have never really loved, If you have not loved, you haven't really lived either.