Humans that live like most dogs do in fact need that much attention.
The typical human living in an area that is poor enough to never use toilet paper has multiple parasites living in it. Often the human gets it by eating whatever food is in front of it.
Now, some dogs do in fact only eat gourmet meals. But quite a few eat anything they can - including things that used to be in their body but are no longer.
I am not saying the Vet you saw was not pulling a fast one on you.
But there is at least a chance he was being a good vet.
Or you could just
* Perfect the technology to create magic spells.
Most of the crap you think is easy to do is literally hundreds, if not thousands of years in the future. You see small tiny problems when the core issues are far larger.
Mankind is a communicating/tool using species. Those two skills are our essential features. They are how we live and why we are who we are.
Using those two main facts, we need two:
Communicate with machines in space (already doing) as opposed to going there.
Create tools to modify our environment as opposed to modifying ourselves. That is, create pseudo gravity, and block radiation, etc., not change ourselves as radically as you think we need to.
Failing those things, the easiest way to change our selves is not through radical surgery, but genetically. Genetically engineering people that can survive in space would be very hard, but still far easier than the radical changes you are discussing
I see two distinct issues. First of all, if his training works, than that just means the tests were never really that effective. You can't 'train' to beat an "Hepatitis" test, but you can train to beat an "Are you Christian test?"
But more importantly, one of the problem with Lie detectors is that certain methodologies are more effective (not perfect) than others.
In particular, "confirmation tests" (Confirmation example: the victim was shot in the face, so you ask did you shoot them in the arm, did you shoot them in the belly, did you shoot them in the face.) are far better than "fishing expeditions." (Fishing example: Have you ever committed a felony? Have you ever made a deal with a foreign power.)
But those tests are not always possible. You can't do a confirmation test unless you are investigating a specific crime that you know happened.
So one of the things the Lie Detector people do is use studies done on "Confirmation" tests to show how accurate a "Lie Detector" is and then use it for a Fishing Expedition.
From me it's not the lack of rules, instead it's stopping a concerted attempt to prevent the kids from having fun.
Basically, adults are taught that play is bad. Whether it is kids with toy guns, video games, or anything else.
Play is GOOD for you.
Note, this also applies to marriage. If you don't play with your spouse, you won't stay married.
When it comes to 3d printing, the big news will be the printer that can mix different METALS and plastics.
Frankly, plastics don't have the valuable electrical properties that we need for truly innovative design.
Show me a printer that can actually print itself - complete with electric motors and wires - rather than one that can print 'the non-electrical parts of itself'.
I, May of 2000, President Clinton unscrambled GPS for civilian usage.
I always wondered why he did this. To create the GPS industry? I don't think so. Instead I think it was with the full knowledge that in a short time, the NSA could track people using it.
We have an 'open' office space.
There is a scene in the movie where the hero finally gets fed up with his cubicle's stupidity and disassembles his cubicle wall. You see the bosses situated the hero's cubicle next to a window but with the cube wall BLOCKING the window.
I used to have a nice cubicle with a great window behind me so I could look outside. But they recently moved me to a worse cubicle. But I can't really complain. The guy behind me has a cubicle next to the window.
Guess how they put his cubicle....
No, it is not load bearing - he has three walls around him, one blocking a window for no reason except the total stupidity and bureaucratic rules.
If I were him I would go to our boss and tell them "Look, I like my job, and I hope you like my work. But I need to know:
1) Is this a joke? Because it's in bad taste.
2) Am I being punished? If so, what can I do to fix the situation.
3) Did no one comment on the situation before I did? Am I really the first person to notice this?
4) Is there any possibility of taking down that temporary wall in the next oh say, week?
I don't know whether to feel sorry for him or laugh.
I found my current girlfriend on OK Cupid.
I basically ignore their match potential numbers.
Instead I paid extra and concentrated on women that had personality scores that were close to me on things that mattered.
That worked acceptably well for me.
OK Cupid offers MULTIPLE ways to filter people. If one of their method was too granular, he could have used another.
You can filter by specific their match formula, specific questions you find OR creeate yourself, their personality categories.
1) Categorize women into 7 categories. That looks to me to be valuable, but the article did not discuss all 7 categories. It ignored the only interesting thing this guy did!
2) Set up multiple profiles and use machines to initiate action with thousands of potential women.
3) Went on hundreds of dates in a relatively short amount of time.
His 'success' was statistically insignificant AND totally unrelated to his math. Anyone that goes on hundreds of dates and find the right woman.
You want to impress me? Have the algorithm pick 5 women and have them all be very interested in you. Picking 100's of women with lots of failed dates is just a NORMAL DATING LIFE.
The article in question does NOT claim to electrolytically split water into hydrogen and oxygen.
They do NOT need a magic battery and do NOT need a small compressor.
Instead the object claims to filter out dissolved gasses - oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide.
However, as some people have pointed out, the item in question does need an impossible LARGE pump to pull in enough water containing dissolved gasses for a human being to breathe. Or you you could swim along at incredibly dangerous speeds. Either way, it seems unlikely.
It did not claim to use electrolysis like in your science fair project. It claims to filter dissolved gasses from water - oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dixoide, etc.
As such they were not creating pure 02 and did not have your issues.
Whether they can actually get enough dissolved gasses with a small enough pump is another question.
You think the item uses electricity to break apart the H20, obtaining the Oxygen and throwing away the Hydrogen.
That is not what it claims to do.
Instead, they claim to filter the water, removing dissolved gasses, that include oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, etc. These dissolved gasses are what fish breathe, fish do NOT break down the water into hydrogen and oxygen.
As for the other, non-oxygen gasses dissolved in the water, we need that as well. Trying to breathe pure oxygen is not a good idea.
Most children already do it the other way around - they say "incandescent bulbs - WHAT were we THINKING?
They make no sense and CFL's make a ton of sense.
Simple way to tell who's right and who's wrong - look at which side is lying. CFL side repeatedly tells the truth, while the incandescent people repeatedly lie about things like price and pollution.
I am shocked someone can ignore other people's argument entirely, and instead lie and say "they are outlawing it because they don't 'like it'.
We outlawed tungsten bulbs because they are:
1) expensive as hell on a per year basis.
2) expensive as hell on a per watt basis.
3) expensive as hell on a pollution basis.
4) we had cheaper technology on all 3 basis, but some people were too stupid to do the math and so in love with minimal difference in light quality they were willing to make up a ton of lies about pollution, cost, etc. etc.
You also forgot that tungsten bulbs have not been 30 cents in quite a while. As for his point, it only stands if you can't do math or know anything about pollition.
You were never required to replace bulbs immediately. If they lasted forever, you could keep them.
As such, there was NO possibility of saving money by continuing to used the expensive (on both a cost per watt, and a cost per year basis) tungsten bulbs that last a short time with the far cheaper CFL.
1) Among other things, small things add up, so YES, you do need to replace all the little bulbs you rarely use. And over the course of their life, they would be cheaper. It is not a waste, it is a wise investment that saves you money over a period of 10 years - even if you rarely used the bulb.
2) as the law did not require replacement You could continue to use existing bulbs.
3) Dimmer bulbs were NEVER on the 'replace' list, just normal ones. You could have kept your fans along with the dimmer bulbs.
With the Peachy Printer 3d printer costing less than $100 US, we need a 3d scanner for less than $200.
It should not be that much more expensive to make a scanner. Typically you just need to use a rotating drip table, a laser, and a camera. Slowly drip milk into the table, eventually covers the object. As the milk covers the object, the camera records the laser's reflection. Works pretty well with the right software.
Slashdot Mirror
The typical human living in an area that is poor enough to never use toilet paper has multiple parasites living in it. Often the human gets it by eating whatever food is in front of it.
Now, some dogs do in fact only eat gourmet meals. But quite a few eat anything they can - including things that used to be in their body but are no longer.
I am not saying the Vet you saw was not pulling a fast one on you.
But there is at least a chance he was being a good vet.
Most of the crap you think is easy to do is literally hundreds, if not thousands of years in the future. You see small tiny problems when the core issues are far larger.
Mankind is a communicating/tool using species. Those two skills are our essential features. They are how we live and why we are who we are.
Using those two main facts, we need two:
Communicate with machines in space (already doing) as opposed to going there.
Create tools to modify our environment as opposed to modifying ourselves. That is, create pseudo gravity, and block radiation, etc., not change ourselves as radically as you think we need to.
Failing those things, the easiest way to change our selves is not through radical surgery, but genetically. Genetically engineering people that can survive in space would be very hard, but still far easier than the radical changes you are discussing
But more importantly, one of the problem with Lie detectors is that certain methodologies are more effective (not perfect) than others.
In particular, "confirmation tests" (Confirmation example: the victim was shot in the face, so you ask did you shoot them in the arm, did you shoot them in the belly, did you shoot them in the face.) are far better than "fishing expeditions." (Fishing example: Have you ever committed a felony? Have you ever made a deal with a foreign power.)
But those tests are not always possible. You can't do a confirmation test unless you are investigating a specific crime that you know happened.
So one of the things the Lie Detector people do is use studies done on "Confirmation" tests to show how accurate a "Lie Detector" is and then use it for a Fishing Expedition.
From me it's not the lack of rules, instead it's stopping a concerted attempt to prevent the kids from having fun. Basically, adults are taught that play is bad. Whether it is kids with toy guns, video games, or anything else. Play is GOOD for you. Note, this also applies to marriage. If you don't play with your spouse, you won't stay married.
Frankly, plastics don't have the valuable electrical properties that we need for truly innovative design.
Show me a printer that can actually print itself - complete with electric motors and wires - rather than one that can print 'the non-electrical parts of itself'.
THAT would be impressive.
I always wondered why he did this. To create the GPS industry? I don't think so. Instead I think it was with the full knowledge that in a short time, the NSA could track people using it.
We have an 'open' office space. There is a scene in the movie where the hero finally gets fed up with his cubicle's stupidity and disassembles his cubicle wall. You see the bosses situated the hero's cubicle next to a window but with the cube wall BLOCKING the window. I used to have a nice cubicle with a great window behind me so I could look outside. But they recently moved me to a worse cubicle. But I can't really complain. The guy behind me has a cubicle next to the window. Guess how they put his cubicle.... No, it is not load bearing - he has three walls around him, one blocking a window for no reason except the total stupidity and bureaucratic rules. If I were him I would go to our boss and tell them "Look, I like my job, and I hope you like my work. But I need to know: 1) Is this a joke? Because it's in bad taste. 2) Am I being punished? If so, what can I do to fix the situation. 3) Did no one comment on the situation before I did? Am I really the first person to notice this? 4) Is there any possibility of taking down that temporary wall in the next oh say, week? I don't know whether to feel sorry for him or laugh.
I found my current girlfriend on OK Cupid. I basically ignore their match potential numbers. Instead I paid extra and concentrated on women that had personality scores that were close to me on things that mattered. That worked acceptably well for me.
If you don't know HTML, PHP, and javascript, then you should learn them.
OK Cupid offers MULTIPLE ways to filter people. If one of their method was too granular, he could have used another. You can filter by specific their match formula, specific questions you find OR creeate yourself, their personality categories.
You go on 88 dates, all pre-screened for normal things and you should find someone.
1) Categorize women into 7 categories. That looks to me to be valuable, but the article did not discuss all 7 categories. It ignored the only interesting thing this guy did!
2) Set up multiple profiles and use machines to initiate action with thousands of potential women.
3) Went on hundreds of dates in a relatively short amount of time.
His 'success' was statistically insignificant AND totally unrelated to his math. Anyone that goes on hundreds of dates and find the right woman.
You want to impress me? Have the algorithm pick 5 women and have them all be very interested in you. Picking 100's of women with lots of failed dates is just a NORMAL DATING LIFE.
Actually the article was about finding ways to build weapons because we already use 3d printing to build medical devices cheaply.
http://3dprintingindustry.com/medical/
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/02/robohand-how-cheap-3d-printers-built-a-replacement-hand-for-a-five-year-old-boy/
You can hide a truecrypt data file in an apparently blank USB. No way to tell that it's not empty unless you know the password.
TELL US THE PASSWORD FOR THIS BLANK USB OR WE WILL JAIL YOU!
It's not entirely unfeasible, it just means aquaman can bring his friends along on long trips underwater.
Instead the object claims to filter out dissolved gasses - oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide.
However, as some people have pointed out, the item in question does need an impossible LARGE pump to pull in enough water containing dissolved gasses for a human being to breathe. Or you you could swim along at incredibly dangerous speeds. Either way, it seems unlikely.
As such they were not creating pure 02 and did not have your issues.
Whether they can actually get enough dissolved gasses with a small enough pump is another question.
That is not what it claims to do.
Instead, they claim to filter the water, removing dissolved gasses, that include oxygen, carbon, nitrogen, etc. These dissolved gasses are what fish breathe, fish do NOT break down the water into hydrogen and oxygen.
As for the other, non-oxygen gasses dissolved in the water, we need that as well. Trying to breathe pure oxygen is not a good idea.
Most children already do it the other way around - they say "incandescent bulbs - WHAT were we THINKING?
They make no sense and CFL's make a ton of sense.
Simple way to tell who's right and who's wrong - look at which side is lying. CFL side repeatedly tells the truth, while the incandescent people repeatedly lie about things like price and pollution.
We outlawed tungsten bulbs because they are:
1) expensive as hell on a per year basis.
2) expensive as hell on a per watt basis.
3) expensive as hell on a pollution basis.
4) we had cheaper technology on all 3 basis, but some people were too stupid to do the math and so in love with minimal difference in light quality they were willing to make up a ton of lies about pollution, cost, etc. etc.
You also forgot that tungsten bulbs have not been 30 cents in quite a while. As for his point, it only stands if you can't do math or know anything about pollition.
As such, there was NO possibility of saving money by continuing to used the expensive (on both a cost per watt, and a cost per year basis) tungsten bulbs that last a short time with the far cheaper CFL.
1) Among other things, small things add up, so YES, you do need to replace all the little bulbs you rarely use. And over the course of their life, they would be cheaper. It is not a waste, it is a wise investment that saves you money over a period of 10 years - even if you rarely used the bulb. 2) as the law did not require replacement You could continue to use existing bulbs. 3) Dimmer bulbs were NEVER on the 'replace' list, just normal ones. You could have kept your fans along with the dimmer bulbs.
Because 100 CFL contain less noxious poisons then 1 mercury thermometer.
As for breakdowns, your information is similarly out-dated. Unless of course you are using 50 year old CFLs.
Your ignorance is shocking.
It should not be that much more expensive to make a scanner. Typically you just need to use a rotating drip table, a laser, and a camera. Slowly drip milk into the table, eventually covers the object. As the milk covers the object, the camera records the laser's reflection. Works pretty well with the right software.