They don't need an enemy, they just need a distraction.>
But they haven't needed anything on this this. The crime happened 7 years ago and was unsolved, and would have remained unsolved like the Tylenol murders. Why stir things up again?
The deliberate killing of a head of state, an abortionist, the president of a multi-national corporation, or even the guy down the street isn't terrorism unless the true target of your attack is someone other than your victim.
Abortion doctors are targeted in part to scare other people away from providing abortions, so that should count as terrorism.
The equation "weight_change = calories_eaten - calories_burned" is obviously correct (it's basic physics)
No, actually, it's not basic physics; it's a statement of biochemistry, and it's not at all simple. Basic physics tells you this: the mass you take in -- the food and drink -- minus the mass you excrete every day, equals your weight gain. The calories burned have roughly zero effect on your mass; unless you're a nuclear weapon, the amount of mass you're converting directly to energy is minuscule. (When you burn wood to get fire, the ash + smoke is near-identical in mass to the original wood.)
I'm not saying the your equation is false, but there's a huge amount of uncertainty in the calories_burned value because of differing metabolisms, so it's not nearly as obvious and useful as people think.
Actually, if I remember it right, Lucius totally effed up. The accountant only said that he knew that Wayne Enterprises had created the Batmobile; he hadn't necessarily concluded that Wayne was Batman! Obviously the script doesn't realize this. Or maybe I heard it wrong.
This has been done in America as well. This guy, author of Mindless Eating, opened up a restaurant that really only existed in order to perform this kind of experiment. ISTR that the patrons were informed as to the general nature of the place, but the food was good enough that they came anyway.
Almost none of what you say applies to the Presidential election, though, since you have to find a slate of electors -- as in "Electoral Vote" -- to put on the ballot, so there can't be a write-in candidate.
After all, you look up in the sky and see the Moon and it's obviously flat and round - you only ever see one face of it.
That's only once you've realized that "those dots and disks in the sky" are the same kind of entity as "the entire world in which we live", which is non-obvious.
Re:%75 as effective as a prescription 3% the price
on
Science vs. Homeopathy
·
· Score: 1
There's an old science joke that a triple-blind experiment is when the patient doesn't know what he's been given, the doctor doesn't know what's he giving out, and the researcher doesn't know what he's doing.
I was doing a summer program in Brooklyn many years ago, and some of the people were having trouble with their Fortran declarations because the compiler wouldn't accept INTERGER. Sounds like a joke, but true.
Tony went to see Junior for a specific reason: he was looking for some stash of money Junior had hidden somewhere. That's why he's pissed off that Junior's memory is gone.
You may well be right about that video, since you saw it and I didn't...but DO NOT mess with a dog's genitals, even if it's your family pet. That's one strong defensive instinct you're messing with there. So the mom was probably right to freak out, regardless.
What I meant was, surprise amongst surprises, no Democrat has ever found voting irregularities in races they lost.
And the same for the Republicans, which is as surprising as the fact that professional atheletes never point out fouls by their own team that the refs have missed.
Provide any hint of evidence of anyone suggesting that a Democrat winning was caused by voting irregularities in a recent election.
Sure: the Republicans challenged the last gubernatorial election in the state of Washington for seven months.
The loser, of course, can't challenge on the misunderstood-ballot theory, because it implies that her support base is statistically more likely do do something stupid than her opponent's.
No; if the ballot is confusing, or easy to miss, it could be that, say, 20% of votes don't register, for both sides. Out of 18000 votes, suppose it would have gone 10000 to 8000 Democratic. Now you've lost 2000 Democratic votes but only 1600 Republican votes, handling the Republican a 400-vote advantage. If the rest of the district is closer that that - and hey, it was! -- that swings the victory.
Currently, due to prior efforts by Congress and corporations to enforce some sort of "ban" online gambling, all I have to do is go to Central Coin (which purports to be facilitator for online privacy in purchases, or some such whatnot; I've never seen a merchant other than gaming sites that uses their services), deposit some money into the account (and pay some fairly small fee, roughly double ATM transaction fees) and then go to Poker Stars to withdraw that money from CC and deposit to Poker Stars. Whole thing takes roughly 45 seconds.
With my online sportsbook/casino at SportsInteraction, it's even easier. I fire up the client interface (casino) or browser (sportsbook), and I can deposit money into my Firepay account and transfer it into my SI account all on one screen. So, short of getting IPs from the gaming merchants themselves (not likely), blocking traffic to specific IPs at the ISP level (more likely, still isn't going to happen), banning the use of online third party money handlers (least likely), or taking my computer, I really fail to see how they propose to stop me.
It's the stuff in bold that would do it. If you can tell that one of these agencies is only used for transferring money into gambling sites, so can the government. And they can put those places on a list and forbid wire transfers and/or EFTs to and from them.
I don't see the difference between "You've lost nothing" and "it's ok", and I stand by my opinion that his claim is incoherent. (Unless it's supposed to be a roundabout way of saying that copyright is nothing, I suppose.)
If I infringe your copyright you still have copyright. You have lost nothing.
That's a strange statement, since the meaning of copyright is "the right to prevent people from making copies". If I infringe your rights, it's ok, because you still have your rights?
Tradesports is of the opinion that North Korea did not launch a test missile that left their airspace on July 4th, by the way. At least that's how they resolved the bets. Way too much information on the fiasco here
It is tyranny by majority all over again. Instead of focusing campaign advertising on populous states, the new era of campaigning will focus in on populous cities. Instead of New York and California it will be New York City and LA.
To repeat an earlier poster's point: you have to get a sense of the numbers. New York City plus LA is about 12 million people. We've got about 300 million nationwide. (Those are all raw population numbers, not voters.) See the list here; even if you imagine that all city people vote one way and all the others vote Republican, you'll see that for the Democrat to win the raw vote, he'd have to be getting people in San Atonio, Oklahmoa City, Omaha, and the like.
But to go back to the best comment on the thread: if you're worried about tyranny of the majority, why is tyranny of the minority supposed to be any better? Unless there's something wrong with those people in the cities, I mean.
Ugh, if this gets implented we won't be the United States of America anymore. We'd be the United States of California and New York.
But if this were to go through, there wouldn't be the stereotypical California and New York, in the sense that you're worrying about. There are huge Republican parts of both states, and those votes would get combined with Republican votes in all the other states, and the totals would be pretty close to 50-50, if the last two elections are any guide. You're imagining some ghostly power of the big states that wouldn't be there any more.
I was talking to one of them and said "I've never gotten two weeks' notice that I was getting fired, or laid off, and I know very few people that have."
Neither have I, but...you/they probably got 2 weeks' severance, which should be all you care about. In theory, that's your notice; it's just that the employers mostly want you to go away as soon as they tell you that you're not pals any more. When you suddenly quit, though, the employer would like a little overlap so they can hand off your work to someone else (assuming we're talking about Slashdotty-like jobs here).
So it's not quite as asymmetric in that respect as you're painting it.
Well, it was in response to the Centos guy telling him, twice, to find someone "computer literate" to fix the problem, so the Tuttle guy isn't the one who brought the term into the conversation.
They made up non-existent police powers for themselves and started trying to enforce rules that they had just made up. That sounds like the kind of people we absolutely, zero-tolerance should throw out of law enforcement.
Slashdot Mirror
They don't need an enemy, they just need a distraction.>
But they haven't needed anything on this this. The crime happened 7 years ago and was unsolved, and would have remained unsolved like the Tylenol murders. Why stir things up again?
The deliberate killing of a head of state, an abortionist, the president of a multi-national corporation, or even the guy down the street isn't terrorism unless the true target of your attack is someone other than your victim.
Abortion doctors are targeted in part to scare other people away from providing abortions, so that should count as terrorism.
The equation "weight_change = calories_eaten - calories_burned" is obviously correct (it's basic physics)
No, actually, it's not basic physics; it's a statement of biochemistry, and it's not at all simple. Basic physics tells you this: the mass you take in -- the food and drink -- minus the mass you excrete every day, equals your weight gain. The calories burned have roughly zero effect on your mass; unless you're a nuclear weapon, the amount of mass you're converting directly to energy is minuscule. (When you burn wood to get fire, the ash + smoke is near-identical in mass to the original wood.)
I'm not saying the your equation is false, but there's a huge amount of uncertainty in the calories_burned value because of differing metabolisms, so it's not nearly as obvious and useful as people think.
Actually, if I remember it right, Lucius totally effed up. The accountant only said that he knew that Wayne Enterprises had created the Batmobile; he hadn't necessarily concluded that Wayne was Batman! Obviously the script doesn't realize this. Or maybe I heard it wrong.
Stop making up words.
Your friend,
Someone From The USA Who Has Never Heard of Pokies, Two-Up, or Cow-Cockies
This has been done in America as well. This guy, author of Mindless Eating , opened up a restaurant that really only existed in order to perform this kind of experiment. ISTR that the patrons were informed as to the general nature of the place, but the food was good enough that they came anyway.
Almost none of what you say applies to the Presidential election, though, since you have to find a slate of electors -- as in "Electoral Vote" -- to put on the ballot, so there can't be a write-in candidate.
After all, you look up in the sky and see the Moon and it's obviously flat and round - you only ever see one face of it.
That's only once you've realized that "those dots and disks in the sky" are the same kind of entity as "the entire world in which we live", which is non-obvious.
There's an old science joke that a triple-blind experiment is when the patient doesn't know what he's been given, the doctor doesn't know what's he giving out, and the researcher doesn't know what he's doing.
I was doing a summer program in Brooklyn many years ago, and some of the people were having trouble with their Fortran declarations because the compiler wouldn't accept INTERGER. Sounds like a joke, but true.
Tony went to see Junior for a specific reason: he was looking for some stash of money Junior had hidden somewhere. That's why he's pissed off that Junior's memory is gone.
That's Jim Emerson's take; he's the "editor" of RogerEbert.suntimes.com and has an associated blog at that site.
You may well be right about that video, since you saw it and I didn't...but DO NOT mess with a dog's genitals, even if it's your family pet. That's one strong defensive instinct you're messing with there. So the mom was probably right to freak out, regardless.
What I meant was, surprise amongst surprises, no Democrat has ever found voting irregularities in races they lost.
And the same for the Republicans, which is as surprising as the fact that professional atheletes never point out fouls by their own team that the refs have missed.
Provide any hint of evidence of anyone suggesting that a Democrat winning was caused by voting irregularities in a recent election.
Sure: the Republicans challenged the last gubernatorial election in the state of Washington for seven months.
The loser, of course, can't challenge on the misunderstood-ballot theory, because it implies that her support base is statistically more likely do do something stupid than her opponent's.
No; if the ballot is confusing, or easy to miss, it could be that, say, 20% of votes don't register, for both sides. Out of 18000 votes, suppose it would have gone 10000 to 8000 Democratic. Now you've lost 2000 Democratic votes but only 1600 Republican votes, handling the Republican a 400-vote advantage. If the rest of the district is closer that that - and hey, it was! -- that swings the victory.
Because they remember it from their youth?
Currently, due to prior efforts by Congress and corporations to enforce some sort of "ban" online gambling, all I have to do is go to Central Coin (which purports to be facilitator for online privacy in purchases, or some such whatnot; I've never seen a merchant other than gaming sites that uses their services), deposit some money into the account (and pay some fairly small fee, roughly double ATM transaction fees) and then go to Poker Stars to withdraw that money from CC and deposit to Poker Stars. Whole thing takes roughly 45 seconds.
With my online sportsbook/casino at SportsInteraction, it's even easier. I fire up the client interface (casino) or browser (sportsbook), and I can deposit money into my Firepay account and transfer it into my SI account all on one screen. So, short of getting IPs from the gaming merchants themselves (not likely), blocking traffic to specific IPs at the ISP level (more likely, still isn't going to happen), banning the use of online third party money handlers (least likely), or taking my computer, I really fail to see how they propose to stop me.
It's the stuff in bold that would do it. If you can tell that one of these agencies is only used for transferring money into gambling sites, so can the government. And they can put those places on a list and forbid wire transfers and/or EFTs to and from them.
I don't see the difference between "You've lost nothing" and "it's ok", and I stand by my opinion that his claim is incoherent. (Unless it's supposed to be a roundabout way of saying that copyright is nothing, I suppose.)
If I infringe your copyright you still have copyright. You have lost nothing.
That's a strange statement, since the meaning of copyright is "the right to prevent people from making copies". If I infringe your rights, it's ok, because you still have your rights?
Tradesports is of the opinion that North Korea did not launch a test missile that left their airspace on July 4th, by the way. At least that's how they resolved the bets. Way too much information on the fiasco here
It is tyranny by majority all over again. Instead of focusing campaign advertising on populous states, the new era of campaigning will focus in on populous cities. Instead of New York and California it will be New York City and LA.
To repeat an earlier poster's point: you have to get a sense of the numbers. New York City plus LA is about 12 million people. We've got about 300 million nationwide. (Those are all raw population numbers, not voters.) See the list here; even if you imagine that all city people vote one way and all the others vote Republican, you'll see that for the Democrat to win the raw vote, he'd have to be getting people in San Atonio, Oklahmoa City, Omaha, and the like.
But to go back to the best comment on the thread: if you're worried about tyranny of the majority, why is tyranny of the minority supposed to be any better? Unless there's something wrong with those people in the cities, I mean.
Ugh, if this gets implented we won't be the United States of America anymore. We'd be the United States of California and New York.
But if this were to go through, there wouldn't be the stereotypical California and New York, in the sense that you're worrying about. There are huge Republican parts of both states, and those votes would get combined with Republican votes in all the other states, and the totals would be pretty close to 50-50, if the last two elections are any guide. You're imagining some ghostly power of the big states that wouldn't be there any more.
I was talking to one of them and said "I've never gotten two weeks' notice that I was getting fired, or laid off, and I know very few people that have."
Neither have I, but...you/they probably got 2 weeks' severance, which should be all you care about. In theory, that's your notice; it's just that the employers mostly want you to go away as soon as they tell you that you're not pals any more. When you suddenly quit, though, the employer would like a little overlap so they can hand off your work to someone else (assuming we're talking about Slashdotty-like jobs here).
So it's not quite as asymmetric in that respect as you're painting it.
Well, it was in response to the Centos guy telling him, twice, to find someone "computer literate" to fix the problem, so the Tuttle guy isn't the one who brought the term into the conversation.
You don't fire people over something this minor.
They made up non-existent police powers for themselves and started trying to enforce rules that they had just made up. That sounds like the kind of people we absolutely, zero-tolerance should throw out of law enforcement.