Well, first you need a visa. Which probably requires a job or student-status. You haven't applied for that. I expect you'll also need a passport, which you still haven't applied for even though I've been reminding you for months. I mean, jeeze, you can get a passport photo at freakin' WALMART. So really it's just that you can't be bothered to start making progress on it.
I've been curious about the degree to which software patents help or hinder software / computer science innovation. (My money is on 'hinder'.)
However, some people measure innovation via the number of patents issued. NZ's bill might make their developers / computer scientists more productive, while ironically making it harder to convince people of that fact.
I am sure that they are attracting the best graduates of your education system. If NASA cant hire self motivated accomplished scientists then I suggest you hire Chinese Indian or Brazilian scientists, because they want to win unlike you pathetic media celebrity motivated beer, copulating, burger and sport obsessed wimps. Come on, if NASA is crap then your whole country is crap, do you really believe that?
I want someone to mod your post, but I have no idea in which direction or with which tag.
Complete aside: who ever let walnut trees grow over state highways, with high transfer truck traffic, should be shot. Walnuts and windshields do not mix.
I can honestly say this is the first time I've ever observed walnut-car anger.
Good point. What does the law say about the division of responsibility in cases like this?
I.e., if I have a tree that you're allergic to, do you have to suck it up, or to I have to deal with it? Is it based on some under-defined notion of "reasonable" accommodation?
If he is a homeowner, how he protects himself from his surrounding environment is his responsibility.
So if your neighbor sets up a firehose and douses my front door non-stop, it's my fault?
The comlpaint isn't about a level of radiation that naturally originates from his neighbor's yard. It's about radiation that he alleges only comes from his neighbor's yard due to his neighbor's use of WiFi. That's pretty different from your cherry tree analogy, which is a fairly natural and expected source of pollin.
So actually, a better example might be not a cherry tree eminating pollin, but an up-wind neighbor who burns copious amounts of poison ivy.
I suspect that the plaintiff is suffering from some significant mental health issues. Maybe paranoia or hypochondria or something. My guess is that this guy isn't suing because he's a jerk, but because he thinks the issue is real.
Hopefully the suit will be dismissed with a minimum of fuss and expense, and the guy can get the help he probably needs.
Fair enough. But even if the soul exists, free will remains nonsensical.
I think that depends on whether or not the universe is deterministic. Maybe. I haven't had nearly enough education or coffee to speak intelligently on this topic.
Unless you're going to invoke some mythological explanation like a soul, brain structure and chemistry determine all of a person's actions.
Until science offers a completely predictive model of behavior and thoughts, it would be premature to assume that a soul (in the classical definition) does or doesn't exist. Just as there are "God in the gaps" belief patterns, there can also be "science in the gaps" belief patterns.
Assuming that rats and humans are somewhat similar in their responses, this paints a really sickening and embarrassing picture of fat people. Although they are harmed physically by their obesity, they continue at their own detriment. Maybe they really are like the obese rats who continue to eat food in the face of physical pain, when the healthier rats have been scared away.
There might be some other interpretations as well. For example, if the brain chemistry provides such a powerful compulsion, then my sympathy for people in this category goes up, because leaving a donut in the box might be as hard as a coke addict leaving a line on the table.
Or maybe the obese rates are those that had no self-control to start out with. If that's the case, the severe obesity might simply be a visible indicator of a very real character flaw. (Although I have serious questions about the meaning of "moral failure", if brain chemistry determines a person's actions.)
You're very quick to sign me up for these things. How about you show us all how it's done? I don't know your face obviously, but I suspect that it hasn't been shown on the evening news wherever you live, as part of a documentary on effective IP activism. Of course, I could be wrong.
You're also presuming that pursuing this goal is most important thing for someone (in this case, me) to pursue. Without knowing my circumstances you can't possibly know whether or not me spending my life fighting for IP issues maximizes the greater good.
So was Gandhi. Imagine if all of the great leaders in this world had simply said that?
For every Ghandi, there are probably tens of thousands of would-be Ghandis that effect little or not significant change.
Also, one reason leaders like Ghandi are effective is because there's a sizable number of other people who have the same sensibilities, and are just waiting for a leader to organize them. Part of my despair about the U.S. is that the majority of persons here seems to place little value on the rule of law (including adherence to the national constitution) or prosecuting those who commit torture. And those who do care, who tend to end up in the Libertarian and Democratic parties (respectively), have demonstrated that they're completely ineffectual on these matters.
So I stick by my conclusion. The combination of life being so short, and the odds of my being effective here are so low, that I'd rather just live out my days in a country that doesn't cheer-on torture.
Not only would it help the world, but you'd be able to stay home and it wouldn't suck.
I'm one person out of ~309 million. For all practical purposes, I have no capacity to fight this zeitgeist.
Clean up your yard.
It sounds like you're blaming this on entirely the U.S. While I do hate the U.S.'s role in exporting antisocial policies, I'd like to point out that other countries are free to not adopt them.
Also consider that having a highly productive members of society "vote with their feat" can be influential as well.
If you listened more carefully to the broadcast, you'd have noticed that they explicitly said that it is a very, very subtle and very, very faint way of trying to convince somebody. I.e., you're not going to convince somebody who has some legal objections to a law. But you might get to sway somebody who is really on the fence over it... in which case it is similar to "If you vote with us, you'll get to go home tonight instead of continue to sit in this jury box."
I think you're only arguing about a quantitative difference, not a qualitative one. And your second example, regarding juries, is nearly as troubling to me; the only difference being that the SCOTUS decisions usually have broader impact.
If a Justice is really that on the fence about a decision, he can always abstain.
The sheer amount of 5-4 decisions on the court should indicate that the court makes political decisions, and not merely informed, unbiased interpretations of law.
There's other evidence for that conclusion as well. On NPR a few weeks ago, there was an interview with some guy who studies the SCOTUS. He claimed that there have been numerous times that a Chief Justice bribed other Justices, who were on the fence, to rule the way he wanted them to, by offering to them the privilege of authoring the majority opinion in the ruling.
I that's true, I for one would like to see all Justices who engage in such a transaction hanged for treason.
Slashdot Mirror
In these two sequels, it will be the House of Representatives and the Senate buildings that get vaporized. In 3D.
This will shatter all revenue records.
Oh jeeze, are you going on about this again?
Well, first you need a visa. Which probably requires a job or student-status. You haven't applied for that. I expect you'll also need a passport, which you still haven't applied for even though I've been reminding you for months. I mean, jeeze, you can get a passport photo at freakin' WALMART. So really it's just that you can't be bothered to start making progress on it.
Oh, and your mom called.
I've been curious about the degree to which software patents help or hinder software / computer science innovation. (My money is on 'hinder'.)
However, some people measure innovation via the number of patents issued. NZ's bill might make their developers / computer scientists more productive, while ironically making it harder to convince people of that fact.
I want someone to mod your post, but I have no idea in which direction or with which tag.
I've heard a lot of rumors in recent years about poor technical abilities at NASA. I wonder if this is primarily meant to give NASA some street cred.
Nut that there's anything wrong with that...
I can honestly say this is the first time I've ever observed walnut-car anger.
Good point. What does the law say about the division of responsibility in cases like this?
I.e., if I have a tree that you're allergic to, do you have to suck it up, or to I have to deal with it? Is it based on some under-defined notion of "reasonable" accommodation?
So if your neighbor sets up a firehose and douses my front door non-stop, it's my fault?
The comlpaint isn't about a level of radiation that naturally originates from his neighbor's yard. It's about radiation that he alleges only comes from his neighbor's yard due to his neighbor's use of WiFi. That's pretty different from your cherry tree analogy, which is a fairly natural and expected source of pollin.
So actually, a better example might be not a cherry tree eminating pollin, but an up-wind neighbor who burns copious amounts of poison ivy.
I suspect that the plaintiff is suffering from some significant mental health issues. Maybe paranoia or hypochondria or something. My guess is that this guy isn't suing because he's a jerk, but because he thinks the issue is real.
Hopefully the suit will be dismissed with a minimum of fuss and expense, and the guy can get the help he probably needs.
I think that depends on whether or not the universe is deterministic. Maybe. I haven't had nearly enough education or coffee to speak intelligently on this topic.
So his kid may have to go through life with an arbitrarily bad name, because it will help this guy's career and/or home town?
I wonder what other kinds of crap this guy is going to pull over the next 18 years. Poor kid.
Jury's out. I'm waiting for a scientific model that perfectly predicts human thoughts and behaviors. It would be premature for me to decide otherwise.
Until science offers a completely predictive model of behavior and thoughts, it would be premature to assume that a soul (in the classical definition) does or doesn't exist. Just as there are "God in the gaps" belief patterns, there can also be "science in the gaps" belief patterns.
There might be some other interpretations as well. For example, if the brain chemistry provides such a powerful compulsion, then my sympathy for people in this category goes up, because leaving a donut in the box might be as hard as a coke addict leaving a line on the table.
Or maybe the obese rates are those that had no self-control to start out with. If that's the case, the severe obesity might simply be a visible indicator of a very real character flaw. (Although I have serious questions about the meaning of "moral failure", if brain chemistry determines a person's actions.)
At the risk of sounding like a knuckle-dragging mouth-breather, I find strict languages much more intuitive.
If you post an anonymized version of your resume, I'll be happy to see if there's anything obviously wrong with it.
You're very quick to sign me up for these things. How about you show us all how it's done? I don't know your face obviously, but I suspect that it hasn't been shown on the evening news wherever you live, as part of a documentary on effective IP activism. Of course, I could be wrong.
You're also presuming that pursuing this goal is most important thing for someone (in this case, me) to pursue. Without knowing my circumstances you can't possibly know whether or not me spending my life fighting for IP issues maximizes the greater good.
That's all I have to say on the topic.
For every Ghandi, there are probably tens of thousands of would-be Ghandis that effect little or not significant change.
Also, one reason leaders like Ghandi are effective is because there's a sizable number of other people who have the same sensibilities, and are just waiting for a leader to organize them. Part of my despair about the U.S. is that the majority of persons here seems to place little value on the rule of law (including adherence to the national constitution) or prosecuting those who commit torture. And those who do care, who tend to end up in the Libertarian and Democratic parties (respectively), have demonstrated that they're completely ineffectual on these matters.
So I stick by my conclusion. The combination of life being so short, and the odds of my being effective here are so low, that I'd rather just live out my days in a country that doesn't cheer-on torture.
I'm one person out of ~309 million. For all practical purposes, I have no capacity to fight this zeitgeist.
It sounds like you're blaming this on entirely the U.S. While I do hate the U.S.'s role in exporting antisocial policies, I'd like to point out that other countries are free to not adopt them.
Also consider that having a highly productive members of society "vote with their feat" can be influential as well.
I'm guessing New York.
I think you're only arguing about a quantitative difference, not a qualitative one. And your second example, regarding juries, is nearly as troubling to me; the only difference being that the SCOTUS decisions usually have broader impact.
If a Justice is really that on the fence about a decision, he can always abstain.
When electorates stop voting in narcissistic psychopaths and megalomaniacs?
There's other evidence for that conclusion as well. On NPR a few weeks ago, there was an interview with some guy who studies the SCOTUS. He claimed that there have been numerous times that a Chief Justice bribed other Justices, who were on the fence, to rule the way he wanted them to, by offering to them the privilege of authoring the majority opinion in the ruling.
I that's true, I for one would like to see all Justices who engage in such a transaction hanged for treason.