the idea that big pharma somehow encourages illness is a stupid myth. there is never going to be any shortage of sick or injured people, so they don't need to do anything to keep the supply up.
i'm not a doctor, but i'd say the problem is that kidney transplant is a risky surgery on a healthy patient let alone someone being ravaged by MRSA. it'd probably kill them.
no wait, this is where you learn how truely perfect global warming religion is - in some place, hotter will mean it gets colder!!!!. SEE THE UNDENIABLE TRUTH!!!
it reminds me of how religous people claim god controls everything and is all knowing and loving, but when something bad happens it's our fault or the devils fault...
your the one claiming god exists, it's up to you to prove his existence. that's how it works, you make the claim, you provide the proof. otherwise i can just say "aliens stole my lunch money", and claim victory when you fail to prove me wrong.
there's nothing setting god apart from a fairy tale in the eyes of someone demanding proof of his existence, the both lack any physical evidence.
you sir have hit the nail on the head. there is often very little science on both sides this debate. a lot of the ranting reminds me of an emotional 13yo girl screaming about how we have to save the world.
1. there was no incident, it merely states it was a congressmen's opinion that they were lucky. there is nothing from anyone with any credentials in that article making an informed statement that the fuel would have gone critical.
2. the NRC merely marked documents containing sensitive information about the production of nuclear fuel as offical use only, the incident still recieved a full investigation and had congress over sight. pretty fucking far from a cover up as you try to claim.
lastly i would like to remind you that this is the ny times, and nothing sells papes like "omgz almost nuclear disaster"
i think the problem with anti nuclear people like you, is that they can't assess the risk in any rational way. you all go straight to never-going-to-happen-except-in-theory scenario
i think the real concern government has about the digital age is the population working out just how much information about them is out there, and getting angry about it where before finding out requried going down to a court house....
so what you are saying, is they are like every over industry and government department ever? i can find examples of all of them lieing,poor managment, poor maintenance and not fixing problems until forced.
though your last point should be marked as flame bait because it's completely untrue. care to show me an instance of a western run nuclear plant that put nuclear waste in someones backyard where it leaked? oh right you can't, because they put them deep under ground in them middle of no where, in geologically stable areas in multiple casings which can't leak.
please, they won't shut it down. it's just another government department flapping it's wings about a technicality. "director of nuclear safety" sounds like every other safety job i've ever seen in the resources sector. paper pushing, meetings and nothing concrete. a directors job would consist of nothing more then managing the lower rank safety staff and communicating with the government department, having them on leave won't actually effect the safety of the plant at all - that's all down to the engineers and tech's that run it.
I watched a tv show on some guy that spent 40 years developing a test for relativity (giroscope in a satillite)- i do get that it's a tested theory, it was bending my brain bannana a little thinking in terms of biological age.
that's correct, but it still illustrates my point that windows server is capable of extremely high uptimes. anyone claimnig windows can't do 99.999% is a lier.
is the speed you move at really related to biological aging though? i've always been dubious of this assertion, just because my mass is moving faster in relation to everything else why would my cells stop multiplying, and hence aging.(if we could get around them being crush by the force of accelerating to near light speed). it'd be very interesting to see any kind of testing of the effects of relativity on biology.
why do we know the reverse wouldn't be true? if you wizzed someone off for 70 years at light speed, the.0001 of a second it would seem to them wouldn't age them instantly? i'm genunily interested.
listen here, i can't see why you are wasting money on a whole 20mb. all i need for my BBS connection is my 2400bps modem. i get pages of text (in colour!) in mere minutes! after all it's all anyone should need - do you think you NEED all that HD streaming video, itunes, web applications, email, pictures......
the ISP shouldn't be required outside of a court order to monitor anything. if you were to try hunt down even a fraction of p2p users you'd have to have 100's of people working at it, turning up to court dates, collecting evidence.
why the fuck should iinet (and by extension it's customers) have to foot that cost just to protect the film industries clients? fuck their IP, i don't get to DEMAND the local council provide free security and install an alarm free of charge in my house because someone might steal my property, just because the local council provides the footpath theives walk on.
all i can do is lol. if the court found in favour of all these things, how does AFACT explain the need to appeal?
the thing that's really pissed AFACT off is that they were ordered to pay iinet's costs to the tune of some 400k. guess there's no chance they will take this opportunity to reflect on the fact THEY are in the wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
the idea that big pharma somehow encourages illness is a stupid myth. there is never going to be any shortage of sick or injured people, so they don't need to do anything to keep the supply up.
i'm not a doctor, but i'd say the problem is that kidney transplant is a risky surgery on a healthy patient let alone someone being ravaged by MRSA. it'd probably kill them.
it reminds me of how religous people claim god controls everything and is all knowing and loving, but when something bad happens it's our fault or the devils fault...
there's nothing setting god apart from a fairy tale in the eyes of someone demanding proof of his existence, the both lack any physical evidence.
wasn't their an international report of some kind that stated the sea ice would be gone by 2035? oops...
question. would you have called einstient a denier when he questioned newtonian mechanics?
you sir have hit the nail on the head. there is often very little science on both sides this debate. a lot of the ranting reminds me of an emotional 13yo girl screaming about how we have to save the world.
1. there was no incident, it merely states it was a congressmen's opinion that they were lucky. there is nothing from anyone with any credentials in that article making an informed statement that the fuel would have gone critical.
2. the NRC merely marked documents containing sensitive information about the production of nuclear fuel as offical use only, the incident still recieved a full investigation and had congress over sight. pretty fucking far from a cover up as you try to claim.
lastly i would like to remind you that this is the ny times, and nothing sells papes like "omgz almost nuclear disaster"
i think the problem with anti nuclear people like you, is that they can't assess the risk in any rational way. you all go straight to never-going-to-happen-except-in-theory scenario
i think the real concern government has about the digital age is the population working out just how much information about them is out there, and getting angry about it where before finding out requried going down to a court house....
though your last point should be marked as flame bait because it's completely untrue. care to show me an instance of a western run nuclear plant that put nuclear waste in someones backyard where it leaked? oh right you can't, because they put them deep under ground in them middle of no where, in geologically stable areas in multiple casings which can't leak.
please, they won't shut it down. it's just another government department flapping it's wings about a technicality. "director of nuclear safety" sounds like every other safety job i've ever seen in the resources sector. paper pushing, meetings and nothing concrete. a directors job would consist of nothing more then managing the lower rank safety staff and communicating with the government department, having them on leave won't actually effect the safety of the plant at all - that's all down to the engineers and tech's that run it.
I watched a tv show on some guy that spent 40 years developing a test for relativity (giroscope in a satillite)- i do get that it's a tested theory, it was bending my brain bannana a little thinking in terms of biological age.
oh please use your brain. how were they forcing them to not sell XP? by not selling it to them in the first place!!!!
so in other words you can't time travel and live forever, it would just seem like forever to everyone not time traveling?
that's correct, but it still illustrates my point that windows server is capable of extremely high uptimes. anyone claimnig windows can't do 99.999% is a lier.
the top 8 uptimes on netcraft are windows you fool. http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html
90+ uptime for free is useless if the OS can't fill your requirements.
why do we know the reverse wouldn't be true? if you wizzed someone off for 70 years at light speed, the .0001 of a second it would seem to them wouldn't age them instantly? i'm genunily interested.
next i bet you are going to explain about how unicorns and ewoks are best friends.
good god your right!!! fuck quickly turn off your pc, the radiation comming off it is slowly COOKING YOU!!!!
now we to can have those nut bag baptists. they can wave signs infront of the zoo stating "thank god for aids" and "aids kills gay animals"
listen here, i can't see why you are wasting money on a whole 20mb. all i need for my BBS connection is my 2400bps modem. i get pages of text (in colour!) in mere minutes! after all it's all anyone should need - do you think you NEED all that HD streaming video, itunes, web applications, email, pictures......
why the fuck should iinet (and by extension it's customers) have to foot that cost just to protect the film industries clients? fuck their IP, i don't get to DEMAND the local council provide free security and install an alarm free of charge in my house because someone might steal my property, just because the local council provides the footpath theives walk on.
the thing that's really pissed AFACT off is that they were ordered to pay iinet's costs to the tune of some 400k. guess there's no chance they will take this opportunity to reflect on the fact THEY are in the wrong.