They just don't want to admit that video games do NOT encourage violence. So they find a bunch of people predisposed to violence, then note that after they play video games they become violent.
Cripes man, will they ever admit they were WRONG
You left out the THIRD sort of "Identity Theft". Illegal aliens are the largest growing criminals that commit "Identity Theft". They borrow your name/social security number to obtain ID, but do not in any way attempt to steal money from you.
Getting someone to change their mind is extremely difficult, which is why Texas is trying to teach lies.
But the honest truth is that truth (and by implication, science) is better at convincing the undecided then lies (and by implication any religious beliefs claiming to be science).
People are not filming and recording you walk down the street (at least not all controlled by a single company, not in america). All the information in one place makes it easy to abuse. If you do a search you can easily find tales of IRS agents abusing their authority to look up info on celebrities, political candidates, and even their ex-wives.
When you record, then people can use it later and yes they can eliminate the anonymousity later.
But there are already addons like Noscript and Ghostery to stop Google from getting quite so thorough a record of you.
Of course, chances are your ISP will still have a good record, but at least it is not one single company controlling all that privacy for everyone. Which severely limits the abuse potential
The fact that Amazon wants to be able to reach inside your kindle and remove things, even things you put notes in sort of destroys the value of the Kindle as an academic tool.
Because despite the name, the World wasn't at war. Lots of countries were neutral.
More importantly, the entire world was not undergoing overpopulation.
Your belief that overpopulation is universal is out right WRONG. India and China are MUCH MUCH more overpopulated than say the USA is. Yes, all countries have it to some degree but if you can't tell the difference between what is a minor problem in Japan (population actually decreasing) and India, then you need to back to High School.
Germany and Japan were the clear aggressors. Germany lost a huge percentage of their population, particularly their BREEDING population. WWII effectively handled Germany's overpopulation problem.
And disease IS a great natural way to control population. Why? Because medicine is not natural. It is an artificial way for mankind to prevent disease from killing people By your own admitance it used to work better. Again I repeat, disease is a great natural way to control population. P.S. As antibiotics become less and less usefulness, and as diseases continue to breed in higher population centers and as mankind becomes more and more a monoculture (fewer barriers to disease tranmsittance such as uncrossable oceans), disease is again becoming a real issue.
Good luck with your education.
Russian deaths - 14%. Repeat, 14%. Germany lost somewhere between 7.7 and 10%.
So if you want to cut your population, War sounds like a great, well focused method that ONLY affects your own country and or the people they kill.
P.S. It is true that disease is another natural population control.
Your response is invalid. You look at a short term issue and ignore the long term solution. The people that die in a war are dead permanently and they will not have children. When the war is over, those that lived return to farming. The destruction of fields is FAR less than the number of people killed and is temporary, not permanent.
As for the rather inane concept that resources diverted toward the military impair food production, you demonstrate a rather significant ignorance. Amateurs talk military strategy, professionals talk logisitcs (i.e. making sure the military gets fed).
First of all, note I am a liberal.
Second of all, you were the victim of a liberal falacy - that "fighting never solved anything".
In the 60s this falacy was popular. In modern times it has become much less popular, because as you discovered, fighting DOES solve things.
Please note that the most common problem that can be easily solved by violence is overpopulation. The solution is not the 'nicest' one, but violence (war in particular) is EXTREMELY effective in solving overpopulation.
For example if you have too twice as many people as you can feed (fammine), why if you go to war with your neighbor and both of you kill 1/2 your population, you no longer have the famine. Also note that even if you 'lose' the war, you still solve the problem of overpopulation (famine).
The reason we have too many of these websites is quite simple - the existing versions suck. For example Facebook steals information/privacy (even info they previously contracted as never being given out). Dating web sites work great - for model types. But for the rest of us they suck.
There ARE no legal implications. Citizens are NOT required to prevent other citizens from engaging in crimes, nor are they required to detect/or even watch out for it. If someone leaves a wifi open, then no one can tell if a crime has been done and that does NOT mean the person that left the wifi open committed a crime.
Lets up the status even more. How about a public library that offers free wifi?
But assuming it is my responsibilitiy to detect/prevent/record the internet crimes of strangers in my area to allow the government to prosecute them, does that mean I am also legally required to put camers up all around my property to detect/prevent/record NON-internet related crimes?
Moron judges should be fired, regardless of which country they are from.
Does anyone know of a good WIRELESS version?
I am looking for wireless keyboard with some kind of track ball/pad/pointy thing built in. Silly to have two items (wireless keyboard plus a wireless mouse). That is just asking for the mouse to get lost, lose it's power, etc.
1. Buy a smallish, cheap digital camera that has good resolution and a USB connection.
2. Buy a tripod.
3. Attach camera to tripod, attach camera via USB cord to computer.
Speech recognition is a form of higher intelligence.
Intelligence is basically composed of pattern recognition, with two general categories. One) Specific pattern recognition is logic, math, etc. It requires incredibally exact matches. Yes or no. 1.0, not 1.00001. Computers are very very good at that.
Two) General pattern recognition is creativity, art appreciation, and our capacity to invent. It requires people to ignore a ton of irrelevant data and instea focus on only one aspect of identity, recognizing it despite the large amounts of irrelevant data. That tree kind of looks like a face, that falling object is like all other falling objects. Computers have always been very very BAD at this. Humans do it much much better than animals, but even a monkey is better at general pattern recognition than a computer is.
I am sure that we can make computers slightly better at speech recognition - enough to recognize all of a limited set of comand words like print, attach, email, open, run. Individual programs would have to include codes for their names and specific commands. But I think it will take a true Artificial Intelligence to recognize speech as well as a human. In fact, I would make that my Turing Test. I would also add that I don't think an intelligence built using current theory could become a true Artificial Intelligence. We would need to design a computer that is a non-determenistic device -one that does not rely soley on pure mathematical logic, but is itself based on an entirely new design. No I can't describe it - because if I could I would build one and be rich.
Zero technical information. The obvious question is HOW does device create electricity from sunlight. Is the dye just a booster, or does it actuallly create the electricity?
They need a better writer, one who has some curiosity and perhaps a science degree.
Your statement would make sense except for the fact that:
1. legal contracts have proliferated. You sign one with pretty much any service - including phone service which truthfully is a necessity - you can't obtain police, fire or medical aid in an emergency without it.
2. The companies have specifically tried to make them hard to understand. The entire concept of "fine print" is proof of this. I am very intelligent, work for a law firm, but also know that I will NOT understand everything in any of the standard contracts. If you think you do, then you are either WRONG or a lawyer.
The problem is your basic assumption. That someone of basic intelligence can understand a contract. Judges have already ruled that that is NOT the case. I am legislating for clarity, simplicity, and to prevent a practice that's currently exists solely to commit fraud.
Yes, much harder. Recently people have taken to claiming the most horrendous things are 'legal' due to technicalities. To quote Scalia who thinks that "Torture is not punishment so it does not count as 'cruel and unusual punishment'"
People claim that 'policy' makes something legal, despite the clear fact that something is policy just makes it a WORSE crime, it doesn't make it legal.
I don't deny that slippery slopes happen, I deny that the ARGUMENT is usually valid. People resort to the slippery slope argument most often when they are totally wrong.
They says things like "If we outlaw fully automatic weapons, someday we will outlaw handguns" which of course ignores the existence of the 2nd amendment, the NRA, hunters, and a huge portion of the citizens love of guns. There is a real reason to outlaw fully automatic weapons, because they lack the usefulness in the legal activities of hunting and are ore useful as a weapon of terror than of defense.)
Or "If we let gays marry, whats to stop people from marrying cats, dogs, corporations, or even their truck." Obviously misunderstanding that the difference between a man and a woman is rather slight while the difference between people and animals, organizations and vehicles is substantial.
Or the "If we let the government torture terrorists, they will torture citizens." Again, ignoring the many protections offered to citizens that are not offered to citizens.
In used to dislike slippery slope arguments. They usually start by claiming A, even though is neccessary, should not be done because it will lead to Z. This ignores the fact that B-Y exist and we have a lot of precendents about NOT doing them, all of which prevent Z from being considered.
But what I have seen happening with regards to internet privacy is a clear, real slippery slope. Mainly because of two factors:
A. Is NOT and never has been neccessary. (I.e. if they can get a warrant to read my my snail-mail, they can surely get one to read my email.)
B. Unlike the past centurey, technology now moves so quickly that lawmakers, judges and lawyers often are in the position of making judgments about things that they don't understand. So the slippery slope starts to be a real issue as they are forced to use less and less similar reference points as precedent instead.
Slashdot Mirror
They just don't want to admit that video games do NOT encourage violence. So they find a bunch of people predisposed to violence, then note that after they play video games they become violent. Cripes man, will they ever admit they were WRONG
True, but rather obvious. That is why Idientity Theft is a crime, as opposed to simply chargning people with regular theft.
You left out the THIRD sort of "Identity Theft". Illegal aliens are the largest growing criminals that commit "Identity Theft". They borrow your name/social security number to obtain ID, but do not in any way attempt to steal money from you.
Getting someone to change their mind is extremely difficult, which is why Texas is trying to teach lies. But the honest truth is that truth (and by implication, science) is better at convincing the undecided then lies (and by implication any religious beliefs claiming to be science).
People are not filming and recording you walk down the street (at least not all controlled by a single company, not in america). All the information in one place makes it easy to abuse. If you do a search you can easily find tales of IRS agents abusing their authority to look up info on celebrities, political candidates, and even their ex-wives. When you record, then people can use it later and yes they can eliminate the anonymousity later. But there are already addons like Noscript and Ghostery to stop Google from getting quite so thorough a record of you. Of course, chances are your ISP will still have a good record, but at least it is not one single company controlling all that privacy for everyone. Which severely limits the abuse potential
The fact that Amazon wants to be able to reach inside your kindle and remove things, even things you put notes in sort of destroys the value of the Kindle as an academic tool.
then they should use the ACTUAL letters. SHITAKE only without the extra 3 letters that time time and mushroom spores add.
Because despite the name, the World wasn't at war. Lots of countries were neutral. More importantly, the entire world was not undergoing overpopulation. Your belief that overpopulation is universal is out right WRONG. India and China are MUCH MUCH more overpopulated than say the USA is. Yes, all countries have it to some degree but if you can't tell the difference between what is a minor problem in Japan (population actually decreasing) and India, then you need to back to High School. Germany and Japan were the clear aggressors. Germany lost a huge percentage of their population, particularly their BREEDING population. WWII effectively handled Germany's overpopulation problem. And disease IS a great natural way to control population. Why? Because medicine is not natural. It is an artificial way for mankind to prevent disease from killing people By your own admitance it used to work better. Again I repeat, disease is a great natural way to control population. P.S. As antibiotics become less and less usefulness, and as diseases continue to breed in higher population centers and as mankind becomes more and more a monoculture (fewer barriers to disease tranmsittance such as uncrossable oceans), disease is again becoming a real issue. Good luck with your education.
Russian deaths - 14%. Repeat, 14%. Germany lost somewhere between 7.7 and 10%. So if you want to cut your population, War sounds like a great, well focused method that ONLY affects your own country and or the people they kill.
P.S. It is true that disease is another natural population control.
As for the rather inane concept that resources diverted toward the military impair food production, you demonstrate a rather significant ignorance. Amateurs talk military strategy, professionals talk logisitcs (i.e. making sure the military gets fed).
For example if you have too twice as many people as you can feed (fammine), why if you go to war with your neighbor and both of you kill 1/2 your population, you no longer have the famine. Also note that even if you 'lose' the war, you still solve the problem of overpopulation (famine).
The reason we have too many of these websites is quite simple - the existing versions suck. For example Facebook steals information/privacy (even info they previously contracted as never being given out). Dating web sites work great - for model types. But for the rest of us they suck.
Thank you. I think I will take your advice and buy the logitech wireless touchpad version
There ARE no legal implications. Citizens are NOT required to prevent other citizens from engaging in crimes, nor are they required to detect/or even watch out for it. If someone leaves a wifi open, then no one can tell if a crime has been done and that does NOT mean the person that left the wifi open committed a crime.
What we need are a bunch of succesful, reasonably well paying jobs that explicitedly state no college degree required.
Lets up the status even more. How about a public library that offers free wifi?
But assuming it is my responsibilitiy to detect/prevent/record the internet crimes of strangers in my area to allow the government to prosecute them, does that mean I am also legally required to put camers up all around my property to detect/prevent/record NON-internet related crimes?
Moron judges should be fired, regardless of which country they are from.
Does anyone know of a good WIRELESS version? I am looking for wireless keyboard with some kind of track ball/pad/pointy thing built in. Silly to have two items (wireless keyboard plus a wireless mouse). That is just asking for the mouse to get lost, lose it's power, etc.
1. Buy a smallish, cheap digital camera that has good resolution and a USB connection. 2. Buy a tripod. 3. Attach camera to tripod, attach camera via USB cord to computer.
Intelligence is basically composed of pattern recognition, with two general categories. One) Specific pattern recognition is logic, math, etc. It requires incredibally exact matches. Yes or no. 1.0, not 1.00001. Computers are very very good at that.
Two) General pattern recognition is creativity, art appreciation, and our capacity to invent. It requires people to ignore a ton of irrelevant data and instea focus on only one aspect of identity, recognizing it despite the large amounts of irrelevant data. That tree kind of looks like a face, that falling object is like all other falling objects. Computers have always been very very BAD at this. Humans do it much much better than animals, but even a monkey is better at general pattern recognition than a computer is.
I am sure that we can make computers slightly better at speech recognition - enough to recognize all of a limited set of comand words like print, attach, email, open, run. Individual programs would have to include codes for their names and specific commands. But I think it will take a true Artificial Intelligence to recognize speech as well as a human. In fact, I would make that my Turing Test. I would also add that I don't think an intelligence built using current theory could become a true Artificial Intelligence. We would need to design a computer that is a non-determenistic device -one that does not rely soley on pure mathematical logic, but is itself based on an entirely new design. No I can't describe it - because if I could I would build one and be rich.
Zero technical information. The obvious question is HOW does device create electricity from sunlight. Is the dye just a booster, or does it actuallly create the electricity? They need a better writer, one who has some curiosity and perhaps a science degree.
1. legal contracts have proliferated. You sign one with pretty much any service - including phone service which truthfully is a necessity - you can't obtain police, fire or medical aid in an emergency without it.
2. The companies have specifically tried to make them hard to understand. The entire concept of "fine print" is proof of this. I am very intelligent, work for a law firm, but also know that I will NOT understand everything in any of the standard contracts. If you think you do, then you are either WRONG or a lawyer.
The problem is your basic assumption. That someone of basic intelligence can understand a contract. Judges have already ruled that that is NOT the case. I am legislating for clarity, simplicity, and to prevent a practice that's currently exists solely to commit fraud.
Yes, much harder. Recently people have taken to claiming the most horrendous things are 'legal' due to technicalities. To quote Scalia who thinks that "Torture is not punishment so it does not count as 'cruel and unusual punishment'" People claim that 'policy' makes something legal, despite the clear fact that something is policy just makes it a WORSE crime, it doesn't make it legal.
Or "If we let gays marry, whats to stop people from marrying cats, dogs, corporations, or even their truck." Obviously misunderstanding that the difference between a man and a woman is rather slight while the difference between people and animals, organizations and vehicles is substantial.
Or the "If we let the government torture terrorists, they will torture citizens." Again, ignoring the many protections offered to citizens that are not offered to citizens.
Is that it makes their bosses etc. have a lot harder time claimingthat no law was broken and that everything they did was legal.
But what I have seen happening with regards to internet privacy is a clear, real slippery slope. Mainly because of two factors:
A. Is NOT and never has been neccessary. (I.e. if they can get a warrant to read my my snail-mail, they can surely get one to read my email.)
B. Unlike the past centurey, technology now moves so quickly that lawmakers, judges and lawyers often are in the position of making judgments about things that they don't understand. So the slippery slope starts to be a real issue as they are forced to use less and less similar reference points as precedent instead.