Time out. Sorry, I hate subject lines that say "Occam's Razor". It is not "simpler" to speculate that accident and disease were more causal than diet. You can make that case in the body of your comment, that the death from bad diet would show up as hospitals eliminated disease and accident. But diet, e.g. starvation and malnutrition, does suffice quite well in establishing shorter lifespans in nations with the lowest of such, and is not less "Occamish". Applyng lex parsimoniae to select between two competing theories makes sense AFTER you have made your case, not in your subject line, unless it's really blatantly obvious to the point of being funny. Now I'm not defending the social commentary appended to the post you criticize - that modern western diets are bad. The more one can avoid simple dangers in early life, whether accidents or starvation, the more one can face problems one would not otherwise have lived to see, such as menopause, hearing loss, and serial cliches.
We may be at the top of the curve, if the total solar irradiance is levelling off from its recent decade-highs. http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/data/tsi_data.htm Then again, the total solar irradiance hasn't been levelling for enough time to draw that conclusion, the sun may just continue to keep getting hotter and hotter, as it has the past 50 years. Which will lead to more and more air conditioning, which is peak energy demand, creating carbon. So both sides will be right, it will be caused by natural forces and man made forces, and we'll all be happy in our sweatdeathbeds.
Hmmm.. Sounds like what happened to performers when radio and gramophone made city crooners available world-wide. Which led to super-rich performers (for the first time), which led to anti-piracy laws, trademark extensions, PirateBay torrents, and Russell Crowe and Lindsey Lohan occupying our newspaper headlines. Now I see, TED and Khan Academy must be stopped, or math-teacher paparazzi headlines and SOPA laws for homework will inevitably follow.
I'm more concerned with how Apple has snatched the headline. I have no idea what brand of telephone Russell Crowe threw at the head of the concierge in NY in 2005, nor did I think its brand had something to do with the court ruling the phone was a weapon. This appears to be a case of product-placement inside of real crimes.
The reports of the death of business cards may be exaggerated. The cost and production of the cards is lower then ever, via online printers. And the evidence presented here of their death - that a young guy thinks that bankers passing them are "lame" - is not indicative of the success of the non-business-card holder. Another trend hyperbolically expressed as an inevitable outcome on/.
There are more stories like this out there. The "e-Waste Hoax" of Africa allowed dictators for years to seize working and repairable computers (the only ones Africans could afford), and created a crackdown with actual arrests. The UN spent two years trying to find out just how bad it was... and found out it wasn't bad at all. The imports were 85% reused, and 80% of the junk at African dumps was used for a decade before being finally tossed out by African consumers themselves. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11000554-ewaste-recycling-hoax-ngo-basel-action-network-profits-from-racist-images Unfortunately, African geeks and techs don't have the pull to get major media to rewrite / retell / retract the story.
I was suspicious of Daisey's story when I heard it on This American Life (which is not NPR, but American Public Media, btw), as I'd seen earlier coverage on Financial Times with video http://retroworks.blogspot.com/2012/03/odm-opportunity-is-in-wind_04.html The video looks pretty fair, and it was nothing like the textile factories and other really tough places to work in China. The work is boring, but people do it to save money to buy a house and then go home after a couple of years.
You know, I was composing something a little bit snarky. Slashdot snarky, not complete troll. And I read this and followed the link before I hit the "post" command, and want to thank you for saving me from unintended troll-dom. Thanks, dude or m'am. I can imagine my son dying for something and people not knowing I'm his dad.
Having evolved to chew through solid rock... They bored into the earth, and have evolved to make sustainable life energy in the heat below the earth's mantle... What's that noise?... Come closer to the campfire.
FTA "Note: In order to protect their personal data, some individuals who are concerned with their privacy strategically invalidate their personal identifies by disclosing bogus information. They have an incentive do do so given that the detection probability is low and the consequences of such information disclosure are not negative"...."Information disclosed by participants is not checked for accuracy. In particular, where individuals are asked for sensitive perrsonal data that cannot be verified, results could be biased".
In the accompanying footnote, "In Germany, almost every fourth internet user stated that h/she has given false information on the internet in the past".
I actually read some of the PDF report. The entire world falls into two groups: Those that provided the information, and those that did not. Am I the only person in the world who provides false information in return for $.065? Or does the study disclose, by not having data on how many provided false information, that it had no control for false information?
Correct. IPad-ica Britannica should be much better, since the paper ones people could only buy once or twice a lifetime, and could never stay up to date.
No, it is not a "bogus article", and the WTO is not "ordering any country to sell anything at what it determines" is a fair price. WTO is a free trade agreement. China signed it.
As such, WTO has rules which parties agree to abide by in return for protection of their own exports. WTO does not charge China with having a monopoly, but with using government rulings (environmental laws) to manipulate markets. There are rules in WTO which allow a country to limit exports of raw materials, but doing so in order to manipulate prices is against WTO rules. China doesn't have to BE in the WTO (Iran is not), and if they don't WANT to abide by the WTO ruling they can leave WTO. Or, they can live with / suffer the sanctions, as others have. But if you are in WTO and use it, you have to play by the rules.
I'm not anti-China, and the USA deserves WTO sanctions for its agricultural subsidies. But whoever "modded up" this post doesn't understand WTO agreements. If you agree to follow WTO rules, you get unique market access to sell your products, but you also agree to sanctions if you use government to replace tariffs you've agreed not to use with "bogus" traffic laws, pollution laws, registration laws, or other "non-tariff barriers", or cut off the Japanese because you want to take over their electronics markets.
Well, if believing in intelligent design is not enough to get you fired, believing that you were fired because you believe in intelligent design, and telling people that, is probably evidence of other factors that could get you fired from NASA.
I would have thought it terribly uncommon. But if Insurance companies have ad campaigns about it, I'm positive it's even less common than I thought. Isn't the whole point of insurance to sell you flood damage in the desert, fire damage in the swamp?
The protein that crawls into your mouth while you sleep. Then you can find financing from USA fast food chains. ( http://tinyurl.com/2aj732 ) Otherwise, not very marketable.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, these days it is usually humanity. Human population and consumption rates per capita are like a big fat lazy comet.
Time out. Sorry, I hate subject lines that say "Occam's Razor". It is not "simpler" to speculate that accident and disease were more causal than diet. You can make that case in the body of your comment, that the death from bad diet would show up as hospitals eliminated disease and accident. But diet, e.g. starvation and malnutrition, does suffice quite well in establishing shorter lifespans in nations with the lowest of such, and is not less "Occamish". Applyng lex parsimoniae to select between two competing theories makes sense AFTER you have made your case, not in your subject line, unless it's really blatantly obvious to the point of being funny. Now I'm not defending the social commentary appended to the post you criticize - that modern western diets are bad. The more one can avoid simple dangers in early life, whether accidents or starvation, the more one can face problems one would not otherwise have lived to see, such as menopause, hearing loss, and serial cliches.
C*O*P*S was social media too
We were evicted from our cardboard box. Had to go live in a hole in the ground.
We may be at the top of the curve, if the total solar irradiance is levelling off from its recent decade-highs. http://lasp.colorado.edu/sorce/data/tsi_data.htm Then again, the total solar irradiance hasn't been levelling for enough time to draw that conclusion, the sun may just continue to keep getting hotter and hotter, as it has the past 50 years. Which will lead to more and more air conditioning, which is peak energy demand, creating carbon. So both sides will be right, it will be caused by natural forces and man made forces, and we'll all be happy in our sweatdeathbeds.
Hmmm.. Sounds like what happened to performers when radio and gramophone made city crooners available world-wide. Which led to super-rich performers (for the first time), which led to anti-piracy laws, trademark extensions, PirateBay torrents, and Russell Crowe and Lindsey Lohan occupying our newspaper headlines. Now I see, TED and Khan Academy must be stopped, or math-teacher paparazzi headlines and SOPA laws for homework will inevitably follow.
I'm more concerned with how Apple has snatched the headline. I have no idea what brand of telephone Russell Crowe threw at the head of the concierge in NY in 2005, nor did I think its brand had something to do with the court ruling the phone was a weapon. This appears to be a case of product-placement inside of real crimes.
The irony is that I know virtually nothing about him.
The reports of the death of business cards may be exaggerated. The cost and production of the cards is lower then ever, via online printers. And the evidence presented here of their death - that a young guy thinks that bankers passing them are "lame" - is not indicative of the success of the non-business-card holder. Another trend hyperbolically expressed as an inevitable outcome on /.
There are more stories like this out there. The "e-Waste Hoax" of Africa allowed dictators for years to seize working and repairable computers (the only ones Africans could afford), and created a crackdown with actual arrests. The UN spent two years trying to find out just how bad it was... and found out it wasn't bad at all. The imports were 85% reused, and 80% of the junk at African dumps was used for a decade before being finally tossed out by African consumers themselves. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11000554-ewaste-recycling-hoax-ngo-basel-action-network-profits-from-racist-images Unfortunately, African geeks and techs don't have the pull to get major media to rewrite / retell / retract the story.
I was suspicious of Daisey's story when I heard it on This American Life (which is not NPR, but American Public Media, btw), as I'd seen earlier coverage on Financial Times with video http://retroworks.blogspot.com/2012/03/odm-opportunity-is-in-wind_04.html The video looks pretty fair, and it was nothing like the textile factories and other really tough places to work in China. The work is boring, but people do it to save money to buy a house and then go home after a couple of years.
You know, I was composing something a little bit snarky. Slashdot snarky, not complete troll. And I read this and followed the link before I hit the "post" command, and want to thank you for saving me from unintended troll-dom. Thanks, dude or m'am. I can imagine my son dying for something and people not knowing I'm his dad.
Having evolved to chew through solid rock... They bored into the earth, and have evolved to make sustainable life energy in the heat below the earth's mantle... What's that noise?... Come closer to the campfire.
Just wondering, maybe it will pay for itself in avoided sewage costs.
FTA "Note: In order to protect their personal data, some individuals who are concerned with their privacy strategically invalidate their personal identifies by disclosing bogus information. They have an incentive do do so given that the detection probability is low and the consequences of such information disclosure are not negative"...."Information disclosed by participants is not checked for accuracy. In particular, where individuals are asked for sensitive perrsonal data that cannot be verified, results could be biased".
In the accompanying footnote, "In Germany, almost every fourth internet user stated that h/she has given false information on the internet in the past".
I actually read some of the PDF report. The entire world falls into two groups: Those that provided the information, and those that did not. Am I the only person in the world who provides false information in return for $.065? Or does the study disclose, by not having data on how many provided false information, that it had no control for false information?
Also quality.
Except it's a WHITE triangle, just in front of the sun! Oh wait... it's the "play" button on youtube video. Nevermind.
Correct. IPad-ica Britannica should be much better, since the paper ones people could only buy once or twice a lifetime, and could never stay up to date.
No, it is not a "bogus article", and the WTO is not "ordering any country to sell anything at what it determines" is a fair price. WTO is a free trade agreement. China signed it.
As such, WTO has rules which parties agree to abide by in return for protection of their own exports. WTO does not charge China with having a monopoly, but with using government rulings (environmental laws) to manipulate markets. There are rules in WTO which allow a country to limit exports of raw materials, but doing so in order to manipulate prices is against WTO rules. China doesn't have to BE in the WTO (Iran is not), and if they don't WANT to abide by the WTO ruling they can leave WTO. Or, they can live with / suffer the sanctions, as others have. But if you are in WTO and use it, you have to play by the rules.
I'm not anti-China, and the USA deserves WTO sanctions for its agricultural subsidies. But whoever "modded up" this post doesn't understand WTO agreements. If you agree to follow WTO rules, you get unique market access to sell your products, but you also agree to sanctions if you use government to replace tariffs you've agreed not to use with "bogus" traffic laws, pollution laws, registration laws, or other "non-tariff barriers", or cut off the Japanese because you want to take over their electronics markets.
"Watch me pull a rabbit outta my hat!"
"But that trick never works!"
"This Time, for sure!!! PRESTO!"
This was actually the Taliban in Afghanistan, nothing like Tunisia, but it does remind me of how Islamic justice doesn't necessarily need to get the (anonymous) perpetrator in order to declare justice. http://slashdot.org/slashdot-it.pl?op=discuss&id=2589110&smallembed=1
Well, if believing in intelligent design is not enough to get you fired, believing that you were fired because you believe in intelligent design, and telling people that, is probably evidence of other factors that could get you fired from NASA.
I would have thought it terribly uncommon. But if Insurance companies have ad campaigns about it, I'm positive it's even less common than I thought. Isn't the whole point of insurance to sell you flood damage in the desert, fire damage in the swamp?
The protein that crawls into your mouth while you sleep. Then you can find financing from USA fast food chains. ( http://tinyurl.com/2aj732 ) Otherwise, not very marketable.