So, we have another Obama Era rule that never applied for a single day of Obama's eight years in Office?
Might have been harder to just toss the Rule on the ash-heap of history if it had been effect already, as opposed to being something that wouldn't inconvenience the Obama White House in any way....
Wait till Trumpcare fails. There's a reason they won't even tell their own Senators what is in it.
Hmm..."We'll have to pass it to find out what's in it"...where HAVE I heard that before?
IOW, so what else is new, other than which Party is trying to pass some sort of health-insurance reform without telling anyone what they're actually voting for?
What it wasn't was high-powered. Alas, a 5.56 is NOT high-powered. It's a glorified.22.
Hell, an AK isn't especially high-powered either. 7.62x39 is roughly comparable to a.30-30.
A.223 isn't legal to use on deer (it's considered too weak for a reliable one-shot kill), and 7.62x39 isn't considered useful for deer except in dense enough cover that you can shoot at quite short range....
For high powered, I look to my Ruger #1.30-06. Of course, it's a single-shot (think modernized version of a Sharps Rifle from the Civil War), but it's high powered....
it is also not racist to call black people 'Sambo' or to refer to Jews as 'Yids'?
I live in the Deep South (theoretically, at least, the Heart of Racism in America). And I haven't EVER heard someone refer to a black man as "Sambo" or Jews as "Yids".
Given that very few people want to kill themselves in any given year, false positives can be approximated as 10-20% of the general population wanting to do themselves in in the next two years.
So, it'll show around 50M Americans wanting to do themselves in. Which, given the last general election, might not be too far out, I suppose....
The odds of it being from an intelligent source, are REALLY fucking low.
Just curious, but how did you determine the odds of it being from an intelligent source?
And is "REALLY fucking low" more or less than 0.000000001? And in either case, how were the odds determined?
If they were gonna send us something, they'd probably send something with more bits
I'm assuming you have evidence that what we got wasn't the edge of a message that was pointed this way for a comparatively short time by blind chance while sending a much longer message to someone else?
Myself, I tend to assume that absent any evidence, there's no point in deciding what something is or isn't. Aliens, a comet, whatever. We didn't know before, we don't know now. Included among the "don't know's" is the probability it was aliens....
Hmm, normal blood pressure is lt. 120mm Hg / lt. 80mm Hg.
So, we're talking a 4% error, which will only matter if you're within that 4% of a breakpoint.
Can't see this as a really big deal. I expect my blood glucose widget has a similar (if not larger) error factor, which might mean that I take an extra unit of Humalog (or take a unit less than I should) from time to time. Won't kill me....
Not being signed up to a treaty which (was signed illegally by the last President[1])
Two things:
1) It's not a treaty. A treaty must be ratified by the Senate to be in force.
2) It wasn't signed illegally. It was an Executive Agreement, which is binding on the Executive branch of our government for as long as the Chief Executive says so.
Okay, THREE things.
3) Trump dumping the Agreement doesn't actually render it void just now. Technically, it actually can't be dumped till it takes effect. Which is in 2020 (yes, the agreement everyone is getting excited about does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for another three years). What Trump has effectively done is give three years warning that he's not going to do what is required by the agreement (note that what is required is to set some goal to reach by 2025, then in 2025, set a more restrictive goal to reach by 2030. Note that the agreement doesn't actually require any party to actually KEEP their promises).
Note also that the next President can change his mind and do what is required by the Agreement if he/she/it wants to. Or not. And the one after that can ignore it if he/she/it wants.
What's needed is a Treaty! Which has to be ratified by the Senate, but which is effectively an extension of the Constitution.
Two, the pollution this agreement deals with is the sort that has an affect on a global scale, hence the need for a global agreement.
2A, this agreement requires nothing be done before 2020 (Yes, Obama signed onto something that wouldn't actually take effect till the end of Hillary's/Trump's first term).
2B, The $100B/year that it is projected to cost is a myth. India alone needs almost twice that, according to India's government.
2C, guess who was expected to pay for the whole thing?
Millennials being this poor is a bad omen for the future economy, and prices will fall accordingly.
Assuming more or less normal birthrates, better than half of the "millenials" are under 25. I daresay that most current homeowners didn't have the wherewithal to buy a home when they were 25 or younger. I sure didn't. And yet, here I am, a homeowner. And have owned my home free and clear since nine years after I signed the mortgage agreement....
There was a time when execution was a very real possibility for treason.
Of course, none of the people mentioned were actually convicted of treason, so how is this relevant? There was a time when you could be stoned for witchcraft, and none of them were stoned either....
We do need some methods to keep, false, untrue, misinformed, and faked information from propagating.
I'm curious - who do you think should get to decide what is "false, untrue, misinformed, and fakes information"?
And whatever leads you to think that whomever you chose to make those decisions will always do as intended? As opposed, to letting, say, their own opinions replace the truth?
Myself, I've always been in favour of Free Speech, and don't really want to replace it with a Board of Censorship (operating with the BEST OF INTENTIONS, mind you! The BEST!!!)....
No I'm saying that extraordinary claims require actual proof. Just because we cannot yet conclusively rule out that it is an "alien mega-structure" doesn't mean we should be favoring that as the likely explanation.
Luckily, noone is suggesting that "aliens" are the "likely explanation". Merely a "possible explanation".
One "possible explanation", mind you. Out of more than one. And as we eliminate "possible explanations", we'll eventually reach the point of "well, it's either this one thing that's left (comets, aliens, whatever) or we have not a clue what's going on over there. Let's go look."
1. Is there life, elsewhere in the universe? Given basic chemistry, and the known fact (well actually, exceptionally well-supported theory) that abiogenesis occured one one planet (i.e. Earth), the likelihood of it arising elsewhere is close to 1.0.
2. If there IS life elsewhere, has it evolved to intelligence? Unknown, and too little data from the one case we have (Earth) to generalize.
So, given that life evolved on one planet, the likelihood of it evolving elsewhere is close to 1.0, but given that it evolved intelligence on one planet, the likelihood of it evolving intelligence elsewhere is impossible to generalize?
Chances of cancer from same? Zero. Three times the allowed limits (unless they've changed the limits a lot since I was paying attention 30 years ago) is less than one chest X-Ray....
Now, if they'd sustained that level for a whole year, that might be an issue. But a one-time, short-term exposure only three times the limit? Meaningless....
When your so called democracy has paid high-speed lanes, what do you expect from your Internet service?
Well, given that you can get Gbit internet some places if you're willing to pay more for the connection, I'm not sure I'm seeing much difference really.
Except that lack of Net Neutrality laws will allow ISPs and such to be sued for the content they prioritize/deprioritize. That's what this is all about, ultimately. Net Neutrality protects ISPs from (some) lawsuits. It won't after this change goes through. If it goes through.
Slashdot Mirror
So, we have another Obama Era rule that never applied for a single day of Obama's eight years in Office?
Might have been harder to just toss the Rule on the ash-heap of history if it had been effect already, as opposed to being something that wouldn't inconvenience the Obama White House in any way....
Umm, are you really dumb enough to think that greed came along in the '50s or later? If so, I've got a bridge to sell you cheap.
Hmm..."We'll have to pass it to find out what's in it"...where HAVE I heard that before?
IOW, so what else is new, other than which Party is trying to pass some sort of health-insurance reform without telling anyone what they're actually voting for?
While a mathematical model that says stars are born in pairs is interesting. it is NOT evidence of anything...
Well, it's evidence that that's how the model works, but it's not evidence of anything in the Real World (tm)....
Umm, yes and no.
His gun was semi-auto.
What it wasn't was high-powered. Alas, a 5.56 is NOT high-powered. It's a glorified .22.
Hell, an AK isn't especially high-powered either. 7.62x39 is roughly comparable to a .30-30.
A .223 isn't legal to use on deer (it's considered too weak for a reliable one-shot kill), and 7.62x39 isn't considered useful for deer except in dense enough cover that you can shoot at quite short range....
For high powered, I look to my Ruger #1 .30-06. Of course, it's a single-shot (think modernized version of a Sharps Rifle from the Civil War), but it's high powered....
Sounds like Fake News to me....
I live in the Deep South (theoretically, at least, the Heart of Racism in America). And I haven't EVER heard someone refer to a black man as "Sambo" or Jews as "Yids".
Not once, ever.
Try "would've". Or "would have".
Given that very few people want to kill themselves in any given year, false positives can be approximated as 10-20% of the general population wanting to do themselves in in the next two years.
So, it'll show around 50M Americans wanting to do themselves in. Which, given the last general election, might not be too far out, I suppose....
Just curious, but how did you determine the odds of it being from an intelligent source?
And is "REALLY fucking low" more or less than 0.000000001? And in either case, how were the odds determined?
I'm assuming you have evidence that what we got wasn't the edge of a message that was pointed this way for a comparatively short time by blind chance while sending a much longer message to someone else?
Myself, I tend to assume that absent any evidence, there's no point in deciding what something is or isn't. Aliens, a comet, whatever. We didn't know before, we don't know now. Included among the "don't know's" is the probability it was aliens....
And a -4% error won't put you into 'doctor takes action" mode.
Or are you seriously suggesting that ALL errors will be on the side of "OMG - blood pressure meds for life!!!"?
Or that your doctor is going to panic over one reading? C'mon, doctors aren't as stupid as all that....
Hmm, normal blood pressure is lt. 120mm Hg / lt. 80mm Hg.
So, we're talking a 4% error, which will only matter if you're within that 4% of a breakpoint.
Can't see this as a really big deal. I expect my blood glucose widget has a similar (if not larger) error factor, which might mean that I take an extra unit of Humalog (or take a unit less than I should) from time to time. Won't kill me....
Two things:
1) It's not a treaty. A treaty must be ratified by the Senate to be in force.
2) It wasn't signed illegally. It was an Executive Agreement, which is binding on the Executive branch of our government for as long as the Chief Executive says so.
Okay, THREE things.
3) Trump dumping the Agreement doesn't actually render it void just now. Technically, it actually can't be dumped till it takes effect. Which is in 2020 (yes, the agreement everyone is getting excited about does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for another three years). What Trump has effectively done is give three years warning that he's not going to do what is required by the agreement (note that what is required is to set some goal to reach by 2025, then in 2025, set a more restrictive goal to reach by 2030. Note that the agreement doesn't actually require any party to actually KEEP their promises).
Note also that the next President can change his mind and do what is required by the Agreement if he/she/it wants to. Or not. And the one after that can ignore it if he/she/it wants.
What's needed is a Treaty! Which has to be ratified by the Senate, but which is effectively an extension of the Constitution.
You might want to look up the definition of Treason in the Constitution.
Note that "disagreeing with an Anonymous Coward" isn't included....
2A, this agreement requires nothing be done before 2020 (Yes, Obama signed onto something that wouldn't actually take effect till the end of Hillary's/Trump's first term).
2B, The $100B/year that it is projected to cost is a myth. India alone needs almost twice that, according to India's government.
2C, guess who was expected to pay for the whole thing?
Assuming more or less normal birthrates, better than half of the "millenials" are under 25. I daresay that most current homeowners didn't have the wherewithal to buy a home when they were 25 or younger. I sure didn't. And yet, here I am, a homeowner. And have owned my home free and clear since nine years after I signed the mortgage agreement....
So, just curious - what would YOU give up?
Of course, none of the people mentioned were actually convicted of treason, so how is this relevant? There was a time when you could be stoned for witchcraft, and none of them were stoned either....
I'm curious - who do you think should get to decide what is "false, untrue, misinformed, and fakes information"?
And whatever leads you to think that whomever you chose to make those decisions will always do as intended? As opposed, to letting, say, their own opinions replace the truth?
Myself, I've always been in favour of Free Speech, and don't really want to replace it with a Board of Censorship (operating with the BEST OF INTENTIONS, mind you! The BEST!!!)....
Well, it obviously didn't teach you to spell. Or write grammatically.
"could've done", perhaps.
But "could of did"? Nope.
Luckily, noone is suggesting that "aliens" are the "likely explanation". Merely a "possible explanation".
One "possible explanation", mind you. Out of more than one. And as we eliminate "possible explanations", we'll eventually reach the point of "well, it's either this one thing that's left (comets, aliens, whatever) or we have not a clue what's going on over there. Let's go look."
So, given that life evolved on one planet, the likelihood of it evolving elsewhere is close to 1.0, but given that it evolved intelligence on one planet, the likelihood of it evolving intelligence elsewhere is impossible to generalize?
Why the inconsistency?
Three times the allowed limits. Hmmm....
Chances of cancer from same? Zero. Three times the allowed limits (unless they've changed the limits a lot since I was paying attention 30 years ago) is less than one chest X-Ray....
Now, if they'd sustained that level for a whole year, that might be an issue. But a one-time, short-term exposure only three times the limit? Meaningless....
Well, given that you can get Gbit internet some places if you're willing to pay more for the connection, I'm not sure I'm seeing much difference really.
Except that lack of Net Neutrality laws will allow ISPs and such to be sued for the content they prioritize/deprioritize. That's what this is all about, ultimately. Net Neutrality protects ISPs from (some) lawsuits. It won't after this change goes through. If it goes through.
4. Your inability to spell "click-bait".