It's not adequate to know that the layer is 4 inches thick if we don't know the area the layer covers. If it's a square mile, who cares? If it's 100 square miles, it may have some practical significance. Alarmist articles like this are irresponsible.
Emory did a profoundly stupid thing. The prosecutor and probably the police acted in a manner either stupid or malevolent, or both.
Why would a person not think before faking evidence of creating a crime?
Just think of the possibilities. Make a fake video of yourself robbing a bank, preferably one that was recently robbed. Or committing the murder of someone who died recently. Or setting on fire a building that recently burned down?
Why not just test the strength of this rope by tying a loop around your neck, tossing the other end over a rafter...
Texas has a sales tax over 6%. Looking at your article, it seems that a large part of Texas's problem is social welfare programs. It is ironic that you chose the word "working", it's precisely those who don't work that are "society"'s problem.
In the 1950's, Connecticut had no income tax and a sales tax of only 3%, and had no budget problem. High taxes aren't needed to keep a place pleasant and civil, high taxes encourage people to try to grab some of the booty rather than work.
The problem with emigration is that it is less practical than freeing a single state. There are two choices, move to an established country or establish a new one. Most established countries are less free, have near-impossible entry conditions, or have other significant disadvantages. Starting a new country is difficult because there are too many existing nasty countries that would be all too happy to steal everything from a new country not yet able to defend itself.
At least in the US, when pneumonia is listed as the cause of death, it is usually bogus. A feeble oldster has a heart attack or stroke, is admitted to a hospital in terrible condition, gets a lung infection and dies. The cause of death is pneumonia?
Most deaths in old age are the result of cumulative damage, and even if the physician puts 6 causes on the death certificate (not uncommon), how many are considered in the statistics?
It depends on what you like and what you're good at. I found history to be very difficult, enormous amounts of reading and memorization, and not much pattern or logic to hold things together. English lit is far worse. Math and many parts of science require much less reading and everything makes sense; what makes them difficult is that the concepts are harder to understand and you have to be able to actually use them.
High salaries are only marginally helpful because government schools are inherently corrupt. Teachers need a profit motive that gives them an incentive to teach effectively.
My junior high had a mandatory science fair every year (circa 1963). This was just a waste of effort for a lot of kids, there was no point in having them participate. Some responded appropriately by doing a slipshod job. Doing science isn't for everyone. People with neither the ability nor the interest should at most take a course in science equivalent to "music appreciation" in music. Teach them how cool things work and how to recognize fraud, don't force them into something they can't do or hate.
Criticism need not be rude. You can say the project is crude, the conclusions wrong or not warranted by the evidence, the underlying assumptions in error, etc.. You can say "If you're not willing to put years of effort into doing this sort of thing better, you should choose another type of work for your profession."
However, it will require more electrons to break the bandgap.
There's some marginal validity to that claim for bipolar transistors, but modern digital ICs make very little use of bipolars.
FETs are adjusted by doping levels to be off when no voltage is applied, and more conductive as voltage is raised (NFETs). As long as the bandgap is in a useful range so that doping can bring the device near conductivity, bigger bandgap will not increase the required voltage. (Bandgap falls with temperature, which is one factor that limits a semiconductor's maximum usable temperature.) What is important is the ultimate conductivity of the material, how well it can be turned off, and how small the voltage between one and the other is (more accurately, how much charge per unit area is required). I've looked at several news stories on this "breakthrough", and none of them address this directly or any of the many other issues that face a potentially useful semiconductor.
When I was young I'd get a rash from wearing jeans for a week. It wasn't from bacteria, just from the dirt a kid picks up playing. Our idiot family doctor diagnosed it as psoriasis.
The same motion detection that video compression uses to reduce data rates could be used to interpolate as many frames as you wish between two existing frames. Goodbye stutter. As software projects go, it's not even a particularly difficult job.
The public may soon find out that their favorite celebrity, politician or employer doesn't feel responsible to contribute financially to the commonwealth at the expense of privacy
Nope, no bias here. No consideration is necessary of the viewpoint that taxation is theft at gunpoint from legally disarmed victims. No thought of property rights, nor of punishing the producers who make modern life possible.
The fact that items purchased at a garage sale are exempt from taxes is an example of avoiding taxes. That it is a legal way to avoid taxes does not mean it isn't a way to avoid taxes.
The IRS does not agree that a cashless black market is (legally) exempt from taxation.
There was, and remains, only one reason for Social Security: political power for Democrats. Everything else is window dressing.
The idea that there was a significant number of old people working (and that their retirement would make way for youth and increase the "vigour" of industry is simply laughable, and an example of the falacy that the size of the economic pie is static.
To a large extent, modern philosophy is a closed club of people who willingly misrepresent Objectivism. Some drop the context of her statements, others are so wrapped up in their own belief systems that they seem not to understand what Rand wrote. They don't use her as contributive because they see her as an opponent.
I'll admit that there are problems, some words defined in a peculiar manner and then used in a manner that seems to include the more widely understood meaning. In particular, "Ayn Rand defines 'value' as 'that which one acts to gain and/or keep.'" (Objectivism, The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, p.208). This definition ignores the aspect of the word "value" that refers to the actual worth of something, as in "food is of value to keeping animals alive."
Induction has long been regarded as an unsolved philosophical problem. Since induction is required to get from nowhere to knowledge (unless the information pixies fill your mind with understanding), it's important to solve this problem. If this book advances the art of induction, it's accomplished a significant good. And "This smells more like an attempt to rehabilitate Ayn Rand as a genuine philosophical contribution than a book on logic." is a cheap shot.
If you give a lot of attention to those among Rand's critics who were previously close to her, it seems that they were rejected for narrow and frivolous reasons. However, if you look closely at their subsequent actions and statements, many became strange or outlandish in a manner only vaguely suggested by their explanation for their departures from Rand. Still, I have to give some credence to the claims that she was too picky. However, given the nastiness of many attacks on her, it's no surprise that she was alert to potential problems among her associates.
I attended a series of lectures promoted by Rand's organization, given (if memory serves) by Alan Blumenthal, on the subject of music. Among the many subjects covered, there was some discussion of the moral, political, and mental properties of music, sometimes backed up by examples. On the other hand, he repeated the proverbial "There's no accounting for taste."
There was the book Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology...
That there was no further systematic explication beyond an "introduction", though, is telling
Yup, and it left me wanting more. But there's only so much a person can do in a lifetime.
"Pragmatic" (practical) depends largely on what it is you are attempting to practice, and thus is not a form of guidance without first determining what is good. And viewing the middle of all ranges as being good is obviously falacious. The middle between bad and good is not good.
Your rant on lassez-faire can only be achieved by ignoring the fact that laissez-faire is derived from property rights. Property rights take priority, and if you see abuses coming out of laissez-faire, it's because property rights are being violated. Laissez-faire is mainly useful as a guideline for pointing out the damage caused by excessive government, it is not a full philosophical statement of the proper extent of government because it is not fundamental enough. For similar reasons, Rand vehemently rejected libertarianism.
The best places on earth are where rights are respected and enforced. Most places that fail to uphold rights do so by excessive government activity, not meager government activity. Rand was right to focus where the big problem was and continues to be, and also to point out that bad businessmen are happy to use government to abuse others.
Physics is a branch of science badly in need of good philosophy, because so many bad conclusions for use in daily life come from defective understanding of physics. Think moral relativism from relativity.
Physics is the proper place to look for the merit of a particular philosophy, precisely because it is difficult. It isn't correct to conclude that something's right because it passes the easy tests.
Physics is also the home of truly stupid statements like "the outcome of an experiment doesn't exist until it's observed." Bad philosophy.
There are several ways to conceptualize reality which Rand discusses, not just idealism (which you clearly don't understand) and nominalism. Some of these include a purported superior plane of existence which earthly objects imitate, aspire to, or are shadows of, etc.. Rand also acknowledged the existence of border cases in concept formation, so your claim of rigidity is wrong. However, she supported Occam's razor; so the explanation that, without contradiction, covered all known evidence, is the best explanation.
If you're healthy, behave in a healthy manner, and have good heredity, you're a fool to buy insurance.
Basically, there are only three reasons to buy insurance. 1) You know something the insurance company doesn't (so you're out to defraud it). 2) You're being forced to buy insurance. 3) You're a coward.
WE have a DUTY? You can take you WE and shove it where the sun doesn't shine, I'm not you and I don't accept any part of your warped morality. The word DUTY refers to nothing in reality, it is a phantasm used by people who want to steal my life.
Slashdot Mirror
Couldn't NASA just rent the Martian Maggot for the round trip? Does Marvin have exclusive rights to the vehicle?
It's not adequate to know that the layer is 4 inches thick if we don't know the area the layer covers. If it's a square mile, who cares? If it's 100 square miles, it may have some practical significance. Alarmist articles like this are irresponsible.
Emory did a profoundly stupid thing. The prosecutor and probably the police acted in a manner either stupid or malevolent, or both.
Why would a person not think before faking evidence of creating a crime?
Just think of the possibilities. Make a fake video of yourself robbing a bank, preferably one that was recently robbed. Or committing the murder of someone who died recently. Or setting on fire a building that recently burned down?
Why not just test the strength of this rope by tying a loop around your neck, tossing the other end over a rafter...
Texas has a sales tax over 6%. Looking at your article, it seems that a large part of Texas's problem is social welfare programs. It is ironic that you chose the word "working", it's precisely those who don't work that are "society"'s problem.
In the 1950's, Connecticut had no income tax and a sales tax of only 3%, and had no budget problem. High taxes aren't needed to keep a place pleasant and civil, high taxes encourage people to try to grab some of the booty rather than work.
The problem with emigration is that it is less practical than freeing a single state. There are two choices, move to an established country or establish a new one. Most established countries are less free, have near-impossible entry conditions, or have other significant disadvantages. Starting a new country is difficult because there are too many existing nasty countries that would be all too happy to steal everything from a new country not yet able to defend itself.
Labor unions have a history of extortion, bribery, arson, murder, and a host of other nasty behaviors.
Such as picket lines.
Opposing labor unions is a sign of bravery, civility and free thinking.
At least in the US, when pneumonia is listed as the cause of death, it is usually bogus. A feeble oldster has a heart attack or stroke, is admitted to a hospital in terrible condition, gets a lung infection and dies. The cause of death is pneumonia?
Most deaths in old age are the result of cumulative damage, and even if the physician puts 6 causes on the death certificate (not uncommon), how many are considered in the statistics?
It depends on what you like and what you're good at. I found history to be very difficult, enormous amounts of reading and memorization, and not much pattern or logic to hold things together. English lit is far worse. Math and many parts of science require much less reading and everything makes sense; what makes them difficult is that the concepts are harder to understand and you have to be able to actually use them.
High salaries are only marginally helpful because government schools are inherently corrupt. Teachers need a profit motive that gives them an incentive to teach effectively.
My junior high had a mandatory science fair every year (circa 1963). This was just a waste of effort for a lot of kids, there was no point in having them participate. Some responded appropriately by doing a slipshod job. Doing science isn't for everyone. People with neither the ability nor the interest should at most take a course in science equivalent to "music appreciation" in music. Teach them how cool things work and how to recognize fraud, don't force them into something they can't do or hate.
Criticism need not be rude. You can say the project is crude, the conclusions wrong or not warranted by the evidence, the underlying assumptions in error, etc.. You can say "If you're not willing to put years of effort into doing this sort of thing better, you should choose another type of work for your profession."
There's some marginal validity to that claim for bipolar transistors, but modern digital ICs make very little use of bipolars.
FETs are adjusted by doping levels to be off when no voltage is applied, and more conductive as voltage is raised (NFETs). As long as the bandgap is in a useful range so that doping can bring the device near conductivity, bigger bandgap will not increase the required voltage. (Bandgap falls with temperature, which is one factor that limits a semiconductor's maximum usable temperature.) What is important is the ultimate conductivity of the material, how well it can be turned off, and how small the voltage between one and the other is (more accurately, how much charge per unit area is required). I've looked at several news stories on this "breakthrough", and none of them address this directly or any of the many other issues that face a potentially useful semiconductor.
When I was young I'd get a rash from wearing jeans for a week. It wasn't from bacteria, just from the dirt a kid picks up playing. Our idiot family doctor diagnosed it as psoriasis.
For me, this is all valuable functionality, some of which is used tens of times daily.
The same motion detection that video compression uses to reduce data rates could be used to interpolate as many frames as you wish between two existing frames. Goodbye stutter. As software projects go, it's not even a particularly difficult job.
Nope, no bias here. No consideration is necessary of the viewpoint that taxation is theft at gunpoint from legally disarmed victims. No thought of property rights, nor of punishing the producers who make modern life possible.
The fact that items purchased at a garage sale are exempt from taxes is an example of avoiding taxes. That it is a legal way to avoid taxes does not mean it isn't a way to avoid taxes.
The IRS does not agree that a cashless black market is (legally) exempt from taxation.
No, this was September 2008, the time that Barney Frank nearly crashed the world economy.
There was, and remains, only one reason for Social Security: political power for Democrats. Everything else is window dressing.
The idea that there was a significant number of old people working (and that their retirement would make way for youth and increase the "vigour" of industry is simply laughable, and an example of the falacy that the size of the economic pie is static.
Causing problems and pain results in more complexity than not doing so, therefor ...
To a large extent, modern philosophy is a closed club of people who willingly misrepresent Objectivism. Some drop the context of her statements, others are so wrapped up in their own belief systems that they seem not to understand what Rand wrote. They don't use her as contributive because they see her as an opponent.
I'll admit that there are problems, some words defined in a peculiar manner and then used in a manner that seems to include the more widely understood meaning. In particular, "Ayn Rand defines 'value' as 'that which one acts to gain and/or keep.'" (Objectivism, The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, p.208). This definition ignores the aspect of the word "value" that refers to the actual worth of something, as in "food is of value to keeping animals alive."
Induction has long been regarded as an unsolved philosophical problem. Since induction is required to get from nowhere to knowledge (unless the information pixies fill your mind with understanding), it's important to solve this problem. If this book advances the art of induction, it's accomplished a significant good. And "This smells more like an attempt to rehabilitate Ayn Rand as a genuine philosophical contribution than a book on logic." is a cheap shot.
If you give a lot of attention to those among Rand's critics who were previously close to her, it seems that they were rejected for narrow and frivolous reasons. However, if you look closely at their subsequent actions and statements, many became strange or outlandish in a manner only vaguely suggested by their explanation for their departures from Rand. Still, I have to give some credence to the claims that she was too picky. However, given the nastiness of many attacks on her, it's no surprise that she was alert to potential problems among her associates.
I attended a series of lectures promoted by Rand's organization, given (if memory serves) by Alan Blumenthal, on the subject of music. Among the many subjects covered, there was some discussion of the moral, political, and mental properties of music, sometimes backed up by examples. On the other hand, he repeated the proverbial "There's no accounting for taste."
Yup, and it left me wanting more. But there's only so much a person can do in a lifetime.
"Pragmatic" (practical) depends largely on what it is you are attempting to practice, and thus is not a form of guidance without first determining what is good. And viewing the middle of all ranges as being good is obviously falacious. The middle between bad and good is not good.
Your rant on lassez-faire can only be achieved by ignoring the fact that laissez-faire is derived from property rights. Property rights take priority, and if you see abuses coming out of laissez-faire, it's because property rights are being violated. Laissez-faire is mainly useful as a guideline for pointing out the damage caused by excessive government, it is not a full philosophical statement of the proper extent of government because it is not fundamental enough. For similar reasons, Rand vehemently rejected libertarianism.
The best places on earth are where rights are respected and enforced. Most places that fail to uphold rights do so by excessive government activity, not meager government activity. Rand was right to focus where the big problem was and continues to be, and also to point out that bad businessmen are happy to use government to abuse others.
Physics is a branch of science badly in need of good philosophy, because so many bad conclusions for use in daily life come from defective understanding of physics. Think moral relativism from relativity.
Physics is the proper place to look for the merit of a particular philosophy, precisely because it is difficult. It isn't correct to conclude that something's right because it passes the easy tests.
Physics is also the home of truly stupid statements like "the outcome of an experiment doesn't exist until it's observed." Bad philosophy.
There are several ways to conceptualize reality which Rand discusses, not just idealism (which you clearly don't understand) and nominalism. Some of these include a purported superior plane of existence which earthly objects imitate, aspire to, or are shadows of, etc.. Rand also acknowledged the existence of border cases in concept formation, so your claim of rigidity is wrong. However, she supported Occam's razor; so the explanation that, without contradiction, covered all known evidence, is the best explanation.
If you're healthy, behave in a healthy manner, and have good heredity, you're a fool to buy insurance.
Basically, there are only three reasons to buy insurance. 1) You know something the insurance company doesn't (so you're out to defraud it). 2) You're being forced to buy insurance. 3) You're a coward.
WE have a DUTY? You can take you WE and shove it where the sun doesn't shine, I'm not you and I don't accept any part of your warped morality. The word DUTY refers to nothing in reality, it is a phantasm used by people who want to steal my life.