It is funny to compare the financial damage in this case with the restitution costs paid out by the oil companies - their negligence harmed thousands of people for several years, blighted an entire eco-system and the court awarded 500 million after 20 years. In this case, the "damage" due to an everyday person sharing songs unknowingly, is $2250... Thats some justice!
If more than half the people have already been infected, how do we decide who is actually infected then?!!! Isn't it better to be infected now, just so that one can actually function in the society? Man such a scheme would be so insidious... reminds me of a fable - An evil witch poisons the well in Happy kingdom to get back at the Good King when he is out on a hunting trip... All the people in the happy kingdom go mad after they drink the poisoned water. What does the king do on his return? He takes a drink from the same well just to be able to rule again!
I think the importance of this breakthrough lies not in the knowledge that the patient gains, but the usefulness of this information to researchers. By diagnosing and studying the animals with alzheimers syndrome, researchers will have a clearer idea of the usefulness of various treatments.
Well, you have to look much more closely to the overall consumption of resources. Granted that the rate of increase of consumption of oil is high for developing nations like China and India, but so are their populations. If you look at resource use per person, people in developed countries use far more stuff than those in the third world countries (10 times more energy if i remember right). I think there are easy ways to bring it down. THere are already reports like this in Hindi (and twenty seven oher languages spoken in India). The main problem is to reign the exploding popultion.
I agree that you cant' just slap all the blam on the developed countries, but they do have to accept major part of it because: (1) people here do lead extravagant lifestyles (as compared to a developing nation) (2) with their wealth, technologies, and a literate and well 0ff population, it will be easier to bring about a change.
Actually, cattle grazing saplings is a big problem, and can be single-handedly responsible from forrests growing back. i think it is a good reason for stopping the cows from grazing them. once they go out of reach (for the cows), its not a problem any more.
have you thought about the weight of nuclear waste that is generated by this? its not just the stuff tht goes into the reactor, but all the stuff around it, which will amount to thousands of tonnes of construction material. i am guessing a giant rocket will take a few tonnes a time... so you are tlaking about 1000 liftoffs multiplying whatever risk associated with each lift off.
then theres all the coolant (heavy water)... thuosands of tonnes of that... its a crazy idea. until we come up with a way to dispose of the waste that has a half-life of thousands of years, i dont see this as a wise plan.
on the bright side, i hope they stop building the three gorges dam...
Hmmm... I think your hypothesis if it can be called that is vague. The moment you include "wrong" in the statement, you introduce morals and become subjective. Also, murder can has several connotations. Killing for a "cause" (even capital punishment) is accepted in some societies, but the same is still a murder in others. Then you demand that the proof should be based on facts. Before I begin, you say you have two invites, and then say the first three "correct" proofs get them;) Anyway...
the only way in which the cocept of murder can be given an objective treatment is through evolutionary biology. Its the natural selection principle. A society or even a group of individuals living in loose co-operation will not survive if they kill each other. its only going to hurt everybodys chances of survival, and hence their chances of reproduction. thus, a murderous group will leave behind fewer descendents than say a harmoniously co-existing people. That is why it is considered a "sin" in almost all civilizations. Legitimizing murder means dooming the society. thats the only reason it has been deemed wrong.
(Please note that there isnt a gene for murderous tendencies... its the outcome of various behavioral processes. it may well act on the level of social behaviour rather than at the gene level.)
Hope this is correct;) my email address is my slashdot nickname at yahoo.com.
Scientists never get too old... they get pragmatic.
Manned space exploration makes for a very romantic endeavour, but with no concrete goal in sight, there's little benefit in it *AT THIS POINT*... sure, you find a compelling reason such as multicellular life forms on mars, and we can prepare for a journey to mars. but as things stand now, its a pipe dream. A lot more research needs to be done before we can make the human body to withstand extended space duration.
Finally, we have to come to terms with *FINITE* resources for scientific research. There are many more worthy problems in science to spend trillions of dollars on, which will have tremendous impact on our civilization... Space exploration will be a very bad scinetifc investment at this time in our history thats all.
And never ever call a scientist of this stature too old after reading an article in a popular magazine... it jsut show that you are too young and immature (not to get too personal)...
hmmm... so are you saying that the decision of a 12 or 15 year old to do caocaine is a well thought out decision? Is it EVER going to get to any good? then why not pre-empt the possibility? i think thats a good case for pre-emptive war on drugs to use the cvurrent lingo;)
I understand the principle, but i think an exception can be made for this particular case. the thing is drugs are a total waste of everything... i think we would be better off without these things (I am talking about the addictive ones, and not marijuana.... i dont think thats addictive).
this is totally in the wrong direction. I would think a right leaning person would actually like this idea. afterall, drug use has absolutely no positive impact on the society. its a drain in terms of treatment centers, associated crime and smuggling etc. i am not against milder drugs, but things like heroine and cocaine are evil. they make vegetables out of human beings. So, why not get to the root of the problem? these chemicals dont have any good effect on the humna body. So, just get rid of the possibility.
About vaccinating babies: drug use in teen-agers is not a well-informed choice anyway... they are lured by various means, and the decision to do drugs can hardly ever be said a well-educated decision. if they make it mandatory to adults, you have a point. but, i am all for something like this. recreational drugs indeed.
From gmail help:
Not at the moment, but Google believes in helping people access information whenever and however they want to do so. In the future you will be able to access Gmail messages from non-Gmail accounts for free or at a nominal fee.
This is totally unbelievable: the photographer is not doing this for the sake of art, he has been contracted to take pictures of a private event. I have myself indulged quite a bit in nature photography and have sold my prints for commercial use (calendars and greeting cards). I obviously keep the copyrights in that case, and sell the photos only for a particular use. But if someone hired me to shoot a private event, then I am not sure what I would get by keeping the negatives and not offering them to the customer. I can see the commercial aspect of it: once you give away the negatives/originals, there is no more need for the photographer for future reprints. Reasons like low-quality prints "tarnishing" someone's reputation is total bs.
then again, this is just a hobby for me. but i don't think i would want to make my customers pay through the nose just because I can... guess i learnt something from Mr. Clinton;)
while i respect your decision to examine these accusations on a case by case basis, i dont see whats so non-partisan about the white house either. many of their actions, policies (i am sticking with the environmental/science issues only) have been either based on religious prejudices as you point out or pure monetary considerations. the scientists have a proven method, and they can back up their statements (or accusations) through peer-reviewed data, and not some work done by government agencies, which can and HAVE been pressurized by the government. so, you can either be very careful and take the accusations case by case, while the government abuses the environment with its policies or actually listen to the scientists. they have nothing to gain from this (leaving aside political agenda)...
aha, so the bush administration shoves loads of hogwash down the throat of the ameriacan public about WMD, torture policy, Iraq/al-qaida links and that is quite alright! this documentary has several flaws, but its not about the documentary. its about the subject of it... why cant anyone talk about that? Is he supposed to put orange alerts for parts that are meant to be satirical as opposed to being serious? gosh.
hey you can't compare the iraq war to windoze/linux arguments. There can and will be arguments about which operating system is superior. but when you are talking about invading another country and killing people, you better be sure that there are no doubts about your arguement for doing so... This is not a trivial issue.
No spending on gas, you get fertilizer + milk + meat... I hate to see all these lawn mowers burning gas and doing something totally unnecessary... I am gonna buy myself a herd of cows, and wander around the town, offering lawn-mowing services.
can these people stop wasting resources like this? can't they come up with anything more creative? come on, why waste so many post-its for some foolish surprise? the same thing with all the balloons... GROW UP! these people must be stripped and have their behinds whipped for irresponsible use of resources.
Man! i dont know why i watch cartoon network so much, but i think it has some potential! i watched an episode last week in which Dexter was actually performing this very same experiment! only different being, he finds a virus-boy band!
i guess i am a loser;)
i always wonder how these people first decide the estimated lifetime of these probes? i mean is the factor of safety huge or something? literally everything that they throw into the space, if it survives the unit conversion mistakes made by the designers, outlives its expected short lifetime.
i guess they keep their estimates VERY conservative... you can then celebrate once the probe/rover outlives your estimates!
have you looked at the list? now go look at the spin-offs from educational institutes, research done at a fraction of the cost... this is plain ridiculous. pool cleaning system? give me a break!
this isn't only about global warning, but many other things such as lead poisoning. so, even if we leave global warming aside, of which none of us can 100% claim the truth, i think there is enough substance to the report to actually start worrying about the trend.
people concerned about global warming aren't trying to "fight" climate change, they just want to make sure that we dont accelerate it. and yes one comet is all it takes to wipe out life, that doesnt mean that we should stop our efforts to prevent degradation of the environment
and how does on "prove" that they are trustworthy or not? are you going to find all the facts on your own? have you bothered to read the report before saying that they are biased and untrustworthy? why are you so biased against it though? if you are expressing your opinion, why don;t you let them express theirs? they aren't asking you to join them, they simply stated why they are concerned with this administration. read the damned report.
Slashdot Mirror
It is funny to compare the financial damage in this case with the restitution costs paid out by the oil companies - their negligence harmed thousands of people for several years, blighted an entire eco-system and the court awarded 500 million after 20 years. In this case, the "damage" due to an everyday person sharing songs unknowingly, is $2250... Thats some justice!
If more than half the people have already been infected, how do we decide who is actually infected then?!!! Isn't it better to be infected now, just so that one can actually function in the society? Man such a scheme would be so insidious... reminds me of a fable - An evil witch poisons the well in Happy kingdom to get back at the Good King when he is out on a hunting trip... All the people in the happy kingdom go mad after they drink the poisoned water. What does the king do on his return? He takes a drink from the same well just to be able to rule again!
absolutely... Bender is Marvin with Zaphod's personality...
I think the importance of this breakthrough lies not in the knowledge that the patient gains, but the usefulness of this information to researchers. By diagnosing and studying the animals with alzheimers syndrome, researchers will have a clearer idea of the usefulness of various treatments.
Well, you have to look much more closely to the overall consumption of resources. Granted that the rate of increase of consumption of oil is high for developing nations like China and India, but so are their populations. If you look at resource use per person, people in developed countries use far more stuff than those in the third world countries (10 times more energy if i remember right). I think there are easy ways to bring it down. THere are already reports like this in Hindi (and twenty seven oher languages spoken in India). The main problem is to reign the exploding popultion. I agree that you cant' just slap all the blam on the developed countries, but they do have to accept major part of it because: (1) people here do lead extravagant lifestyles (as compared to a developing nation) (2) with their wealth, technologies, and a literate and well 0ff population, it will be easier to bring about a change.
Actually, cattle grazing saplings is a big problem, and can be single-handedly responsible from forrests growing back. i think it is a good reason for stopping the cows from grazing them. once they go out of reach (for the cows), its not a problem any more.
have you thought about the weight of nuclear waste that is generated by this? its not just the stuff tht goes into the reactor, but all the stuff around it, which will amount to thousands of tonnes of construction material. i am guessing a giant rocket will take a few tonnes a time... so you are tlaking about 1000 liftoffs multiplying whatever risk associated with each lift off. then theres all the coolant (heavy water)... thuosands of tonnes of that... its a crazy idea. until we come up with a way to dispose of the waste that has a half-life of thousands of years, i dont see this as a wise plan. on the bright side, i hope they stop building the three gorges dam...
the only way in which the cocept of murder can be given an objective treatment is through evolutionary biology. Its the natural selection principle. A society or even a group of individuals living in loose co-operation will not survive if they kill each other. its only going to hurt everybodys chances of survival, and hence their chances of reproduction. thus, a murderous group will leave behind fewer descendents than say a harmoniously co-existing people. That is why it is considered a "sin" in almost all civilizations. Legitimizing murder means dooming the society. thats the only reason it has been deemed wrong.
(Please note that there isnt a gene for murderous tendencies... its the outcome of various behavioral processes. it may well act on the level of social behaviour rather than at the gene level.)
Hope this is correct ;) my email address is my slashdot nickname at yahoo.com.
Scientists never get too old... they get pragmatic. Manned space exploration makes for a very romantic endeavour, but with no concrete goal in sight, there's little benefit in it *AT THIS POINT*... sure, you find a compelling reason such as multicellular life forms on mars, and we can prepare for a journey to mars. but as things stand now, its a pipe dream. A lot more research needs to be done before we can make the human body to withstand extended space duration. Finally, we have to come to terms with *FINITE* resources for scientific research. There are many more worthy problems in science to spend trillions of dollars on, which will have tremendous impact on our civilization... Space exploration will be a very bad scinetifc investment at this time in our history thats all. And never ever call a scientist of this stature too old after reading an article in a popular magazine... it jsut show that you are too young and immature (not to get too personal)...
hmmm... so are you saying that the decision of a 12 or 15 year old to do caocaine is a well thought out decision? Is it EVER going to get to any good? then why not pre-empt the possibility? i think thats a good case for pre-emptive war on drugs to use the cvurrent lingo ;)
I understand the principle, but i think an exception can be made for this particular case. the thing is drugs are a total waste of everything... i think we would be better off without these things (I am talking about the addictive ones, and not marijuana.... i dont think thats addictive).
this is totally in the wrong direction. I would think a right leaning person would actually like this idea. afterall, drug use has absolutely no positive impact on the society. its a drain in terms of treatment centers, associated crime and smuggling etc. i am not against milder drugs, but things like heroine and cocaine are evil. they make vegetables out of human beings. So, why not get to the root of the problem? these chemicals dont have any good effect on the humna body. So, just get rid of the possibility. About vaccinating babies: drug use in teen-agers is not a well-informed choice anyway... they are lured by various means, and the decision to do drugs can hardly ever be said a well-educated decision. if they make it mandatory to adults, you have a point. but, i am all for something like this. recreational drugs indeed.
From gmail help: Not at the moment, but Google believes in helping people access information whenever and however they want to do so. In the future you will be able to access Gmail messages from non-Gmail accounts for free or at a nominal fee.
This is totally unbelievable: the photographer is not doing this for the sake of art, he has been contracted to take pictures of a private event. I have myself indulged quite a bit in nature photography and have sold my prints for commercial use (calendars and greeting cards). I obviously keep the copyrights in that case, and sell the photos only for a particular use. But if someone hired me to shoot a private event, then I am not sure what I would get by keeping the negatives and not offering them to the customer. I can see the commercial aspect of it: once you give away the negatives/originals, there is no more need for the photographer for future reprints. Reasons like low-quality prints "tarnishing" someone's reputation is total bs. then again, this is just a hobby for me. but i don't think i would want to make my customers pay through the nose just because I can... guess i learnt something from Mr. Clinton ;)
while i respect your decision to examine these accusations on a case by case basis, i dont see whats so non-partisan about the white house either. many of their actions, policies (i am sticking with the environmental/science issues only) have been either based on religious prejudices as you point out or pure monetary considerations. the scientists have a proven method, and they can back up their statements (or accusations) through peer-reviewed data, and not some work done by government agencies, which can and HAVE been pressurized by the government. so, you can either be very careful and take the accusations case by case, while the government abuses the environment with its policies or actually listen to the scientists. they have nothing to gain from this (leaving aside political agenda)...
aha, so the bush administration shoves loads of hogwash down the throat of the ameriacan public about WMD, torture policy, Iraq/al-qaida links and that is quite alright! this documentary has several flaws, but its not about the documentary. its about the subject of it... why cant anyone talk about that? Is he supposed to put orange alerts for parts that are meant to be satirical as opposed to being serious? gosh.
hey you can't compare the iraq war to windoze/linux arguments. There can and will be arguments about which operating system is superior. but when you are talking about invading another country and killing people, you better be sure that there are no doubts about your arguement for doing so... This is not a trivial issue.
No spending on gas, you get fertilizer + milk + meat... I hate to see all these lawn mowers burning gas and doing something totally unnecessary... I am gonna buy myself a herd of cows, and wander around the town, offering lawn-mowing services.
can these people stop wasting resources like this? can't they come up with anything more creative? come on, why waste so many post-its for some foolish surprise? the same thing with all the balloons... GROW UP! these people must be stripped and have their behinds whipped for irresponsible use of resources.
Man! i dont know why i watch cartoon network so much, but i think it has some potential! i watched an episode last week in which Dexter was actually performing this very same experiment! only different being, he finds a virus-boy band! i guess i am a loser ;)
i always wonder how these people first decide the estimated lifetime of these probes? i mean is the factor of safety huge or something? literally everything that they throw into the space, if it survives the unit conversion mistakes made by the designers, outlives its expected short lifetime. i guess they keep their estimates VERY conservative... you can then celebrate once the probe/rover outlives your estimates!
have you looked at the list? now go look at the spin-offs from educational institutes, research done at a fraction of the cost... this is plain ridiculous. pool cleaning system? give me a break!
this isn't only about global warning, but many other things such as lead poisoning. so, even if we leave global warming aside, of which none of us can 100% claim the truth, i think there is enough substance to the report to actually start worrying about the trend.
people concerned about global warming aren't trying to "fight" climate change, they just want to make sure that we dont accelerate it. and yes one comet is all it takes to wipe out life, that doesnt mean that we should stop our efforts to prevent degradation of the environment
and how does on "prove" that they are trustworthy or not? are you going to find all the facts on your own? have you bothered to read the report before saying that they are biased and untrustworthy? why are you so biased against it though? if you are expressing your opinion, why don;t you let them express theirs? they aren't asking you to join them, they simply stated why they are concerned with this administration. read the damned report.