Columbus was an idiot. He only dicovered America because it was where he thought Japan would be. He was told repeatedly that he was using a faulty calculation of the Earth's size and that a voyage to Japan was impossible for a ship of that era (it was) but struck lucky. He was not a great explorer - he was a buffoon with a vicious streak.
New scientist publishes an article "debunking" global warming scepticism in which they say it's a "myth" that polar bear numbers are not declining. They claim polar bear numbers really are declining.
A sceptic points to another article about reliable research that found polar bear numbers are rising in at least one specific (and very large) area.
True believer claims "we can't know for certain either way", it's still possible numbers are declining in other areas.
What a convincing argument - if that's really the best you can do give up now. Remember the old burden of proof (hint: it's why we don't believe in unicorns).
True the US gave the UK massive amounts of money - which we've just finished paying back! And the US was quite open about the fact that the Marshall plan was principally about making sure the US had a decent market it could sell to.
The UK government knew they'd lose and refused to put the EU consititution to the vote. They actually had the cheek to admit they wouldn't have a referendum until the "time was right" (ie. when they could win). Fuck them though, the time will never be right - the people aren't as naive as they used to be. Of course in the end they'll find some way they think they can cheat, and sneak it through against our will.
This is one of the problems with party politics - all the major parties in the UK are pro-europe. So what's a voter to do?
It's also an interesting exercise to talk to people from the generation who actually got to vote in the original UK referendum on entry into the common market and see if you can find anybody who'll admit to voting for it. Of course it's only anecdotal but it does make you wonder if that referendum was "straight".
I wouldn't feel too confident about having access to higher technology. Historically, civilisations have been overrun by less advanced invaders pretty frequently.
Copyright infringement isn't legal in Sweden however PirateBay doesn't contain any copyright material. US law might be twisted enough to consider a hyperlink illegal if the linked to file contains copyright material but apparently (and I admit there is some doubt) Swedish law is a little more sane.
It does matter that it's "just a number" and does change the issue because it becomes impossible to know what is ok and what's not.
For example would the square root (3640917314083012466.760454263) be illegal as well - what about the cube root, or a list of prime factors, or it's square, or it's integer multiples - just how many numbers are you prepared to outlaw?
A) Kicking the crap out of a bunch of camel jockeys armed with Russian hand me downs is one thing, but starting a fight with China, I don't think so! Bullies are cowards by nature - they don't pick on people big enough to fight back.
B) China is an oil importer not an oil exporter - there's no gravy for the big companies and consequently no kickbacks for the politicians.
C) China is a nuclear power, even Bush ain't crazy enough to pick a fight with a nuclear power.
I suggest you look at http://www.planecrashinfo.com/rates.htm - note that the extreme limits of the distribution are 0 - 7 and the vast majority are either 0 or 1.
One or two accidents would make a huge difference to the rating of most of these airlines, certainly it would knock the leaders out of top spot easily enough.
For stability and processing power to the penny you'd be hard put to beat an IBM mainframe or 390. Now that might be overkill for what you need but if you're a company that does needs big processing power it's competitive.
Crashes are infrequent enough that individual airlines can easily drift way off the average. I don't think it carries much significance that currently this or that airline has a better or worse record.
A great example of why it makes sense to avoid using MS operating systems - if you have problems with Linux you can move over to AIX without too much difficulty. If you're having problems with AIX move your apps to BSD. Problems with BSD try Solaris.
I just think that for a large scale mining operation you're going to need people to deal with unexpected mechanical problems etc - it's an industry that's notoriously hard on equipment.
As for He-3, I don't think fusion is as far away as you seem to believe and although no-one knows for sure its widely believed that there are very substantial quantities in the lunar regolith.
It is good to see everyone has a positive attitude for space exploration. I must assume that, in your opinion, there is no good reason to go to Mars or the Moon?
In general I have a very negative opinion of *manned* space exploration. It's pointless to send people to explore Mars when robots can do it for a fraction of the price.
However the moon is another matter - it might be worth sending people there to mine Helium 3.
However this really is an amazing and very important discovery. It looks like this planet could support life (unlike Mars) and if it can there's a very good chance it does. If it does support life it might be possible to pick up signs of this - for example an oxygen rich atmosphere, wouldn't that be incredible!
Shame it's at least a 40 year round trip - I can't imagine anybody volunteering to spend most of their life travelling to visit a planet covered in bacterial gloop.
This is a typical Europhile apologising for the fact that the EU is ruled by a cabal of unaccountable oligarchs. All this talk about balancing acts and compromise is irrelevant distraction form the simple truth that the Council of Ministers has final authority and makes all the real decisions. OK so the governments who appoint these "Ministers" are elected but that does not make the process democratic.
Slashdot Mirror
Columbus was an idiot. He only dicovered America because it was where he thought Japan would be. He was told repeatedly that he was using a faulty calculation of the Earth's size and that a voyage to Japan was impossible for a ship of that era (it was) but struck lucky. He was not a great explorer - he was a buffoon with a vicious streak.
I thought #21 was particularly unconvincing. To paraphrase:
Yes it does appear (from shrinking polar caps) that Mars is warming up *but*,
a) It could be due to natural variation unrelated to global warming.
b) If it is global warming it could be due to some factor which wouldn't affect Earth.
OK they're reasonable points but they hardly amount to a conclusive "debunking" like they claim.
Let's recap shall we.
New scientist publishes an article "debunking" global warming scepticism in which they say it's a "myth" that polar bear numbers are not declining. They claim polar bear numbers really are declining.
A sceptic points to another article about reliable research that found polar bear numbers are rising in at least one specific (and very large) area.
True believer claims "we can't know for certain either way", it's still possible numbers are declining in other areas.
What a convincing argument - if that's really the best you can do give up now. Remember the old burden of proof (hint: it's why we don't believe in unicorns).
Agreed, I should have been more precise.
"spending massive amounts of money to rebuild"
True the US gave the UK massive amounts of money - which we've just finished paying back! And the US was quite open about the fact that the Marshall plan was principally about making sure the US had a decent market it could sell to.
The UK government knew they'd lose and refused to put the EU consititution to the vote. They actually had the cheek to admit they wouldn't have a referendum until the "time was right" (ie. when they could win). Fuck them though, the time will never be right - the people aren't as naive as they used to be. Of course in the end they'll find some way they think they can cheat, and sneak it through against our will.
This is one of the problems with party politics - all the major parties in the UK are pro-europe. So what's a voter to do?
It's also an interesting exercise to talk to people from the generation who actually got to vote in the original UK referendum on entry into the common market and see if you can find anybody who'll admit to voting for it. Of course it's only anecdotal but it does make you wonder if that referendum was "straight".
I wouldn't feel too confident about having access to higher technology. Historically, civilisations have been overrun by less advanced invaders pretty frequently.
Beware of geeks bearing gifts?
Copyright infringement isn't legal in Sweden however PirateBay doesn't contain any copyright material. US law might be twisted enough to consider a hyperlink illegal if the linked to file contains copyright material but apparently (and I admit there is some doubt) Swedish law is a little more sane.
It does matter that it's "just a number" and does change the issue because it becomes impossible to know what is ok and what's not.
For example would the square root (3640917314083012466.760454263) be illegal as well - what about the cube root, or a list of prime factors, or it's square, or it's integer multiples - just how many numbers are you prepared to outlaw?
If one didn't know better one might naively assume the odds are exactly:
0 to 1
13,256,278,887,989,457,651,018,865,901,401,704,64
A) Kicking the crap out of a bunch of camel jockeys armed with Russian hand me downs is one thing, but starting a fight with China, I don't think so! Bullies are cowards by nature - they don't pick on people big enough to fight back.
B) China is an oil importer not an oil exporter - there's no gravy for the big companies and consequently no kickbacks for the politicians.
C) China is a nuclear power, even Bush ain't crazy enough to pick a fight with a nuclear power.
Chances of the US attacking China: 0%
like Qantas, whose rating would be dramatically impacted by a single accident
Which is pretty much what I said in the first place.
PS. your posts seem to contain a lot of latent aggression - you might want to talk to your school counsellor about it.
Congratulations! Way to show your arrogance...
I suggest you look at http://www.planecrashinfo.com/rates.htm - note that the extreme limits of the distribution are 0 - 7 and the vast majority are either 0 or 1.
One or two accidents would make a huge difference to the rating of most of these airlines, certainly it would knock the leaders out of top spot easily enough.
For stability and processing power to the penny you'd be hard put to beat an IBM mainframe or 390. Now that might be overkill for what you need but if you're a company that does needs big processing power it's competitive.
Crashes are infrequent enough that individual airlines can easily drift way off the average. I don't think it carries much significance that currently this or that airline has a better or worse record.
A great example of why it makes sense to avoid using MS operating systems - if you have problems with Linux you can move over to AIX without too much difficulty. If you're having problems with AIX move your apps to BSD. Problems with BSD try Solaris.
Having problems with Windows . . . you're fscked!
If it was a Microsoft product the governmental system would have blue screened years ago.
Sorry - I don't need to allow for relativity much (or in fact ever) in my day to day life and didn't think about this but yes you're quite right.
I just think that for a large scale mining operation you're going to need people to deal with unexpected mechanical problems etc - it's an industry that's notoriously hard on equipment.
As for He-3, I don't think fusion is as far away as you seem to believe and although no-one knows for sure its widely believed that there are very substantial quantities in the lunar regolith.
Organic cell structures usually contain water and as you point out water is incompressible (more or less) so how would they get crushed?
It is good to see everyone has a positive attitude for space exploration. I must assume that, in your opinion, there is no good reason to go to Mars or the Moon?
In general I have a very negative opinion of *manned* space exploration. It's pointless to send people to explore Mars when robots can do it for a fraction of the price.
However the moon is another matter - it might be worth sending people there to mine Helium 3.
However this really is an amazing and very important discovery. It looks like this planet could support life (unlike Mars) and if it can there's a very good chance it does. If it does support life it might be possible to pick up signs of this - for example an oxygen rich atmosphere, wouldn't that be incredible!
Shame it's at least a 40 year round trip - I can't imagine anybody volunteering to spend most of their life travelling to visit a planet covered in bacterial gloop.
The CoM chose to accept the recommendation of the EU Parliament on the software patent directive, it was under no obligation to do so.
Nobody, well nobody but an Americaon, would seriously present the US as a model of how a democracy should be organised.
This is a typical Europhile apologising for the fact that the EU is ruled by a cabal of unaccountable oligarchs. All this talk about balancing acts and compromise is irrelevant distraction form the simple truth that the Council of Ministers has final authority and makes all the real decisions. OK so the governments who appoint these "Ministers" are elected but that does not make the process democratic.