GP has a extreme view but his argument is valid as reduction to absurdity. And why indeed not just have them executed? In fact, let's all be honest here and burn them at the stake, because that's what sex offenders actually are in the view of the frothing masses: modern day witches.
And let's not forget Yugoslavia, where while every avenue of diplomacy was being exhausted, genocidal monsters were laughing all the way to the mass graves. Sometimes diplomacy itself is unethical.
Also, had we given a shit about Africa and Africans, we would have engaged ourselves in Rwanda and Congo.
I may have misunderstood the findings, but the rate that these bacteria evolve sounds an awful lot like data to support the theory of punctuated equilibrium. I would sure like to hear fellow/.'s opinions about this, rather than the same old creationist metadiscussion that we have every single time there's an article about evolution up.
Have you considered that dieting just isn't the way to go? What you need is probably a shift in lifestyle and eating habits. It's a fact, like your link indicates, that crash diets just don't work in the long term. Almost any dietist will tell you that slow and steady is the one thing that actually works. It sucks, but if you want it bad enough, it's doable. Better, anyway, than convincing yourself that your problem is unsolvable and striking out at anyone who dares to tell you otherwise.
Tell me a single fact that we know *for sure*. There is only ever probability, and the probability that we'll get wiped out from above within say, the next thousand years, is so small that it makes sense to bank on it.
A much bigger issue is whether we as a species will commit suicide.
No, that's not the point. The point is the same as the saying, "You can measure a person by how he treats people he doesn't have to be nice to". I say that it makes a pretty good measure to how advanced a civilization is and how far it has come from its primitive origins.
I would mod you up if I had points. Instead, I'll leave you this quote from Eve Curie:
We discovered that peace at any price is no peace at all. We discovered that life at any price has no value whatever; that life is nothing without the privileges, the prides, the rights, the joys which make it worth living, and also worth giving. And we also discovered that there is something more hideous, more atrocious than war or than death; and that is to live in fear.
Wow dude, that's a pretty bleak outlook. Those who are chosen to reproduce from an evolutionary standpoint are those with the best ability to survive. And the reason why we geeks have brains that are like this is because being smart is an important fitness parameter.
Also, blaming it on evolution is only half the answer and a pretty weak one IMHO. Natural selection didn't create skyscrapers and sonnets, societies did.
Having value and being able to communicate that fact is what attract women. The assholes are good at communicating value. But those who are the happiest in their relationships are probably not the assholes. It's just the people who have become good at something and also good at communicating it.
If you have had many failed relationships, and find yourself frustrated over the fact that they never seem to pan out, maybe it's time to look if you're doing it wrong from a strategic perspective.
The double slit experiment works fine with single electrons as well. As for an explanation, well there's still a debate about that. We understand how it works, we just aren't really clear about why.
Only in a Newtonian system. The subjective distance between you and the singularity would shrink from your frame of reference due to Lorentz contraction. If you counted out the seconds compared to the same distance from the black holes' frame of reference, you would believe that you were travelling at c.
But taking only data from any frame one of reference, you only approach c asymptotically.
The whole theory of relativity is based on the observed fact that light travels at c when observed from any frame of reference. This implies that only light(or other massless particles) can travel at the speed of light.
I'm sure someone can explain this in more understandable terms, but I can say that if we assume that objects can travel at c we open up a whole can of mathematical impossibilities which downright disproves the assumption.
A photon is not subjected to the flow of time at all since it travels at the speed of light, and thus has a time dilation factor of infinity compared with any other frame of reference.
So pity not the photon, for even an eternity is less than a moment to it.
I'll take your NYTimes article and raise you a Financial Times editorial.
The dumbest thing the democrats have done so far in this campaign is focus on Palin. What the hell happened to the issue-driven debate? This was really the time for Obama&Co to shine, so if they botch the whole deal because they chose to make the election a question of character, which is the republicans' favorite playing ground, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.
My songs are all still there, but all the ratings I gave them are gone.
A few years back, I was stupid enough to let it "consolidate" my music library, inadvertently and irrevocably destroying my carefully crafted file structure and making about 10,000 new directories on my HD.
The disappointments iTunes have given me over the years are actually the main reason I haven't gone Mac. It boggles the mind how iTunes can be such a bloated program and not have any of the basic features one would expect from it.
Well, the ships aren't actually going anywhere, so what's so bad about using an itinerant power source like wind, or maybe solar?
Another idea I like is the possibility for making these moving coral reefs. A single piece of flotsam can sustain biomass five times its own weight on the open sea. There's a definite possibility that these could help out with more than just the problem of global warming.
Before you start calling me names, Mr. Coward, maybe you should consider what that money went to. My guess is, primarily research and development.
Do you think Seattle would buy more toilets if it was a success? Do you think that if they bought, say, 100 toilets, they would still be paying a million a pop?
Now unfortunately, it turns out that these units weren't as cheap to maintain as they were supposed to be. Well, that's tough, but unless you're the kind of jackass who believes that backwards rationalization is a valid line of argumentation, you couldn't know that until it had been tried out.
And if it *had* worked, you might be seeing these all over the world in a few years time.
That information isn't going to land on your lap. Knowing what to do is part of the project. In fact, that is the point of GP's plan, part C.). I think the task should be earlier though, before B.) So yes, make the appropriations now!
Slashdot Mirror
GP has a extreme view but his argument is valid as reduction to absurdity. And why indeed not just have them executed? In fact, let's all be honest here and burn them at the stake, because that's what sex offenders actually are in the view of the frothing masses: modern day witches.
And let's not forget Yugoslavia, where while every avenue of diplomacy was being exhausted, genocidal monsters were laughing all the way to the mass graves. Sometimes diplomacy itself is unethical.
Also, had we given a shit about Africa and Africans, we would have engaged ourselves in Rwanda and Congo.
I may have misunderstood the findings, but the rate that these bacteria evolve sounds an awful lot like data to support the theory of punctuated equilibrium. I would sure like to hear fellow /.'s opinions about this, rather than the same old creationist metadiscussion that we have every single time there's an article about evolution up.
Have you considered that dieting just isn't the way to go? What you need is probably a shift in lifestyle and eating habits. It's a fact, like your link indicates, that crash diets just don't work in the long term. Almost any dietist will tell you that slow and steady is the one thing that actually works. It sucks, but if you want it bad enough, it's doable. Better, anyway, than convincing yourself that your problem is unsolvable and striking out at anyone who dares to tell you otherwise.
Tell me a single fact that we know *for sure*. There is only ever probability, and the probability that we'll get wiped out from above within say, the next thousand years, is so small that it makes sense to bank on it.
A much bigger issue is whether we as a species will commit suicide.
Because it's good at it.
No, that's not the point. The point is the same as the saying, "You can measure a person by how he treats people he doesn't have to be nice to". I say that it makes a pretty good measure to how advanced a civilization is and how far it has come from its primitive origins.
I would mod you up if I had points. Instead, I'll leave you this quote from Eve Curie:
We discovered that peace at any price is no peace at all. We discovered that life at any price has no value whatever; that life is nothing without the privileges, the prides, the rights, the joys which make it worth living, and also worth giving. And we also discovered that there is something more hideous, more atrocious than war or than death; and that is to live in fear.
A chemist, a physicist and a mathematician are stranded on a desert island, and all they have is a can of beans.
Wait, is this a hypothetical situation, or is it something we should prepare for what with the credit crunch?
Wow dude, that's a pretty bleak outlook. Those who are chosen to reproduce from an evolutionary standpoint are those with the best ability to survive. And the reason why we geeks have brains that are like this is because being smart is an important fitness parameter.
Also, blaming it on evolution is only half the answer and a pretty weak one IMHO. Natural selection didn't create skyscrapers and sonnets, societies did.
Having value and being able to communicate that fact is what attract women. The assholes are good at communicating value. But those who are the happiest in their relationships are probably not the assholes. It's just the people who have become good at something and also good at communicating it.
If you have had many failed relationships, and find yourself frustrated over the fact that they never seem to pan out, maybe it's time to look if you're doing it wrong from a strategic perspective.
The double slit experiment works fine with single electrons as well. As for an explanation, well there's still a debate about that. We understand how it works, we just aren't really clear about why.
Only in a Newtonian system. The subjective distance between you and the singularity would shrink from your frame of reference due to Lorentz contraction. If you counted out the seconds compared to the same distance from the black holes' frame of reference, you would believe that you were travelling at c.
But taking only data from any frame one of reference, you only approach c asymptotically.
The whole theory of relativity is based on the observed fact that light travels at c when observed from any frame of reference. This implies that only light(or other massless particles) can travel at the speed of light.
I'm sure someone can explain this in more understandable terms, but I can say that if we assume that objects can travel at c we open up a whole can of mathematical impossibilities which downright disproves the assumption.
A photon is not subjected to the flow of time at all since it travels at the speed of light, and thus has a time dilation factor of infinity compared with any other frame of reference.
So pity not the photon, for even an eternity is less than a moment to it.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Especially on point 4.
I'll take your NYTimes article and raise you a Financial Times editorial.
The dumbest thing the democrats have done so far in this campaign is focus on Palin. What the hell happened to the issue-driven debate? This was really the time for Obama&Co to shine, so if they botch the whole deal because they chose to make the election a question of character, which is the republicans' favorite playing ground, they'll have no one to blame but themselves.
Get back on topic!
My songs are all still there, but all the ratings I gave them are gone.
A few years back, I was stupid enough to let it "consolidate" my music library, inadvertently and irrevocably destroying my carefully crafted file structure and making about 10,000 new directories on my HD.
The disappointments iTunes have given me over the years are actually the main reason I haven't gone Mac. It boggles the mind how iTunes can be such a bloated program and not have any of the basic features one would expect from it.
Well, the ships aren't actually going anywhere, so what's so bad about using an itinerant power source like wind, or maybe solar?
Another idea I like is the possibility for making these moving coral reefs. A single piece of flotsam can sustain biomass five times its own weight on the open sea. There's a definite possibility that these could help out with more than just the problem of global warming.
I salute your 19th century soapbox rant about the 21st century! You sir, are the epitomy of human evolution!
Sergey Solyanik just left because the colleagues never referred to him as the cool Sergey.
Before you start calling me names, Mr. Coward, maybe you should consider what that money went to. My guess is, primarily research and development.
Do you think Seattle would buy more toilets if it was a success? Do you think that if they bought, say, 100 toilets, they would still be paying a million a pop?
Now unfortunately, it turns out that these units weren't as cheap to maintain as they were supposed to be. Well, that's tough, but unless you're the kind of jackass who believes that backwards rationalization is a valid line of argumentation, you couldn't know that until it had been tried out.
And if it *had* worked, you might be seeing these all over the world in a few years time.
That sucks, but this is how progress works. You can't know if something will pan out in advance, because there are too many variables.
And if it had been a massive success, $5M would have been pocket change compared to the convenience and cost effectiveness of full automation.
So, the question is; what's so trollish about this parent?
I suppose that depends on whether you have a very deep-seated belief in Santa Claus
Commercial interests aren't afraid of using viral marketing, why should politicians?
And that is what we call a false dichotomy.
That information isn't going to land on your lap. Knowing what to do is part of the project. In fact, that is the point of GP's plan, part C.). I think the task should be earlier though, before B.)
So yes, make the appropriations now!