Science requires an explanation that doesn't involve "Magic". In fact, you could say that the entire purpose of science is to debunk magic ("Q:Why does this stick burn? A: Magic), and replace it with well-understood and tested principles. In my opinion, no scientist is more alive than when existing well-understood and tested principles are overturned - see heliocentrism, relativity, quantum mechanics, dark matter/energy. A student who critically studied evolution and was able to overturn it, within the principles of science, would be celebrated as Copernicus, Einstein, Heisenberg, or whoever formulates an answer to dark energy or matter.
Creationism, however, is completely outside the principles of science. Its fundamental principle is that "magic" - whether Yahweh, Jehovah, Zeus, Thetans, or name-your-favorite-god - created man through an unknown and unknowable process, ranging from "in his own image" to "sneezed and set in motion the entirety of the cosmos with the intended end result of creating Man".
Questions of "how" or "why" end up at "because "magic" made it so". Sure you can push back the edges - "Why is the universe expanding?" "Because "magic" made it so" - but at it's heart, it's either anti-science ("here are questions you cannot ask
I live in Phoenix. The only solar hot water heaters you see around here were put up 20 years ago when the politicians handed out rebates for installing them. Now, they're simply roof decorations. This, in an area where 20' of copper pipe on the roof is probably a good enough hot water heater 6 months of the year.
I have an electric hot water heater. The developer created a very nice niche for it - inside the air-conditioned portion of the house. So, any heat leakage from it needs to be carried away by my electric Air Conditioner.
I have an electric clothes dryer. In a very nice niche inside the air-conditioned portion of the house. So, for 8 months of the year, I use electricity to run the air conditioner to cool the air in my house, which then gets run into the dryer which uses a lot of electricity to heat it back up, and exhausts it outside - which draws more hot air back inside my house.
Antibiotics are frequently and routinely used for minor scrapes and cuts. We just usually use a topical antibiotic, such as Bacitracin, rather than an oral antibiotic.
Not in my house. Do you people really spend your time squirting or smearing that crap on you and your kids every time there's a minor skin injury? Do you really carry it with you every time you leave the house, in fear that you'll scratch yourself on a random bit of nature?
Reminds me of Douglas Adams' telephone sanitizers.
The last time I took a blood test to my GP (ordered by my dermatologist) she said "Hmm, I don't normally order that test. Let me go look it up and see what these results mean". The five minutes that she took to do the research, and the three minutes she took to explain it to me, were insufficient; five minutes more on my own with Google after the appointment gave me a much greater understanding of the result, the meaning, and the next steps.
So, yes, I do have the knowledge to do that. And the wisdom to get my results from the NIH, Scripps, Harvard, etc. medical websites rather than someplace frequented by watchers of Oprah and followers of Jenny McCarthy.
I didn't bother to count; maybe 200 in that list? Heavily tilted towards drug detection and STDs, but still a pretty good variety.
Why would I make an appointment with my doctor for 4 weeks from now, drive over, get a referral to a testing center, drive over, get stuck and drained, drive home, make another appointment for 4 weeks to get the results, drive over, and have someone read me results with no background info, when I could go to Walgreens, walk out with the results 10 minutes later, and spend 20 minutes on Google finding out what they really mean?
I would say that the fact that I can get results from Walgreens changes everything.
I don't know where you live, but in the US your comment would be simply wrong.
Having grown up in the LA basin in the 70's, and going back there on a regular basis now, I can safely say that there is significantly less air pollution now than there was then. Open dumping of toxic chemicals in places like the Stringfellow Acid Pits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stringfellow_Acid_Pits) is no longer tolerated. Rivers are no longer used as open cesspools or convenient dumps for industrial chemical processes. Landfills are now designed to catch and remove all leachate.
I would guess that we release more CO2 these days than we did then, and due to coal-burning perhaps more mercury and radiation (although shutting down atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons certainly helped on the radiation front). But the environmental movements of the 60's and 70's were vastly more successful than your comment gives them credit for.
If you'd like to see the difference, visit any major US city and note the quantity and kinds of pollution you see. Then go visit any major Chinese city and do the same.
That has a very narrow window of opportunity - basically, from the time the machine is serviced (cash removed and added) until the next time it's serviced. As soon as the money counting room notices your counterfeit bill, countermeasures will begin to be developed. The machine will be replaced and sent for analysis, firmware will get reflashed, ports will get sealed up.
This is a great hack if your intent is to hire a large number of people to pass counterfeit bills at many machines in the same day, as a one-time hack. You could collect millions and pay out hundreds of thousands. Not a bad approach - but it requires a fairly large organization. Likelihood of long-term success (think not going to a federal PMITA prison (they have those in Europe, don't they?)): low.
Look, Obama isn't involved here. Congress is the legislative body(s). Until they pass a bill and send it to the White House, they haven't done their job.
If Obama is vetoing bill after bill, and Congress can't override, then it's time for the Congress and the White House to confer and compromise. That's not the case right now. If the Congress was doing their job, Obama would be just another asshole with an opinion (although, surely, an asshole with a "bully pulpit"). Placing responsibility for this mess on the President is simply another tactic by the lunatic fringe to deflect blame from their actions.
Like the Americans at IBM that spent a billion dollars building a useless air traffic control system (http://www.baselinemag.com/c/a/Projects-Processes/The-Ugly-History-of-Tool-Development-at-the-FAA/) ten years ago? Surely most of the team flew at one time or another, and didn't want planes running into each other....and they were still unable to make a usable system.
Well, you can run an ICE just fine by pouring gas down the intake manifold. When I was younger and stupider, I did that with my ancient Oldsmobile. Yes, it required a bit of subtlety, but not as much as you'd expect.
Carburetors got quite complex because people expected perfect engine response, at all throttle settings, at environmental conditions ranging from startup at 10,000 feet in the winter to running below sea level at 120 degrees F in the summer, and the government expected minimal emissions in all those situations. But, basic though inefficient operation can be accomplished with a straw and a gas reservoir.
we're just short of losing the Southwest to Mexico.
Really? Living in the heart of the southwest, this is the first I've heard of that. Guess I should brush up my high school Spanish and read the Mexican constitution one of these days then, eh?
Being as there is a deterministic hardware state machine that successfully executes the instruction sequence that you're interested in disassembling, I'd have to disagree with your assertion that "not all programs can be successfully dis-assembled.". If the processor can execute it, the code can be disassembled.
Relationships don't have to be violent to be terribly degrading... Seventh grade doesn't have to be violent to be terribly degrading.... Work doesn't have to be violent to be terribly degrading...
If "terribly degrading" is your definition of rape, it's a crime far more prevalent than ever before thought.
How soon we forget Jose Padilla. No, he didn't go to Gitmo, but did get arrested in the US and was held in military custody for 3 years while being subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques", all because Pres. Bush called him a name - "enemy combatant". And multiple federal courts held that this was both legal and constitutional. Because the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal, this is currently the law of the land.
Exactly correct, and why I hate the concept of drones (or other pilotless aircraft) in our airspace - they violate that prime directive of VFR flying, "See and be seen". An RPV or drone simply can't scan the sky for other aircraft, and frankly have a lot less to lose from not seeing another aircraft than a manned plane.
However, the diet was also important for creating the right conditions for the lean twin's bacteria to flourish. A bacterial obesity therapy seems unlikely to work alongside a a diet of greasy burgers.
Having read TFA, there is precisely zero evidence to support this statement. Simply a restatement of the current mythology surrounding diet and weight.
There is no ambiguity in the USB spec, and Sarah has an incorrect interpretation. The spec requires that the host provide at least 10 ms of recovery time coming out of suspend; a device is required to be able to communicate after this minimum time. Any device which isn't ready for communications after 10 ms of resume recovery time is broken. A host is permitted to provide more than this, but isn't required to.
So, yes, it's perfectly valid for the host to blindly attempt to communicate with the device after 10 ms - presuming that the host KNOWS precisely when the recovery period began. If the host requested that the bus resume, set a timer for 10 ms, and then tried talking, the HOST is at fault because it didn't check with the hardware as to when the resume period began. I think the 17 ms that they reference in the article is related to this - there is a delay between the request to resume the bus and the actual time that the hardware does resume the bus, so they were trying to talk with devices before the 10 ms period was up.
The device is perfectly within the spec if it ignores communications prior to 10 ms, or if it responds to them - it has complete flexibility. After 10 ms, however, it MUST be ready to communicate.
In the SPEC, devices are required to treat it as a maximum and the host is required to treat it as a minimum. Any device which isn't ready for communications after 10 ms are broken, and any host that attempts communications before 10 ms is broken. This isn't an area of the spec that's in any way vague.
Not if the hardware is composed of a microprocessor, and the hardware holds the CPU in reset for 2 ms waiting for the crystal to stabilize before letting it run.
The 10 ms is for the DEVICE to get it's shit together. Coming out of suspend, the host starts sending SOF's, and must not send anything else to the device for 10 ms. The DEVICE is required to be ready for communications from the host after this 10 ms period.
No need to be an "avowed atheist", whatever that is. You simply have to be unable to agree to their "Statement of Religious principle" on your application, and/or be unable to agree with the Scout Oath: "On my honor I will do my best To do my duty to God and my country". You don't have to be in active opposition to religion to be unwelcome - you simply have to be a man of principles who won't swear to something you don't believe in. Agnostic, Atheist, violent anti-religious nutcase, all are equally unwelcome if they aren't silent about their lack of faith.
I've had leaders counsel me to "just sign the papers, nobody checks". But I ask them, if the oath was reversed and asked you to swear that you DIDN'T believe in GOD, and WOULDN'T perform any service to God in your life outside Scouts, would you take it?
Slashdot Mirror
Not really.
Science requires an explanation that doesn't involve "Magic". In fact, you could say that the entire purpose of science is to debunk magic ("Q:Why does this stick burn? A: Magic), and replace it with well-understood and tested principles. In my opinion, no scientist is more alive than when existing well-understood and tested principles are overturned - see heliocentrism, relativity, quantum mechanics, dark matter/energy. A student who critically studied evolution and was able to overturn it, within the principles of science, would be celebrated as Copernicus, Einstein, Heisenberg, or whoever formulates an answer to dark energy or matter.
Creationism, however, is completely outside the principles of science. Its fundamental principle is that "magic" - whether Yahweh, Jehovah, Zeus, Thetans, or name-your-favorite-god - created man through an unknown and unknowable process, ranging from "in his own image" to "sneezed and set in motion the entirety of the cosmos with the intended end result of creating Man".
Questions of "how" or "why" end up at "because "magic" made it so". Sure you can push back the edges - "Why is the universe expanding?" "Because "magic" made it so" - but at it's heart, it's either anti-science ("here are questions you cannot ask
I find this very bizarre.
I live in Phoenix. The only solar hot water heaters you see around here were put up 20 years ago when the politicians handed out rebates for installing them. Now, they're simply roof decorations. This, in an area where 20' of copper pipe on the roof is probably a good enough hot water heater 6 months of the year.
I have an electric hot water heater. The developer created a very nice niche for it - inside the air-conditioned portion of the house. So, any heat leakage from it needs to be carried away by my electric Air Conditioner.
I have an electric clothes dryer. In a very nice niche inside the air-conditioned portion of the house. So, for 8 months of the year, I use electricity to run the air conditioner to cool the air in my house, which then gets run into the dryer which uses a lot of electricity to heat it back up, and exhausts it outside - which draws more hot air back inside my house.
Don't talk to me about bizarre.
Well I drive an electric car and I don't want my tax dollars subsidizing your gasoline!
while you continue to subsidize the roads and bridges I drive on with your gasoline taxes.
That is how you intended to finish the sentence, isn't it?
Antibiotics are frequently and routinely used for minor scrapes and cuts. We just usually use a topical antibiotic, such as Bacitracin, rather than an oral antibiotic.
Not in my house. Do you people really spend your time squirting or smearing that crap on you and your kids every time there's a minor skin injury? Do you really carry it with you every time you leave the house, in fear that you'll scratch yourself on a random bit of nature?
Reminds me of Douglas Adams' telephone sanitizers.
The last time I took a blood test to my GP (ordered by my dermatologist) she said "Hmm, I don't normally order that test. Let me go look it up and see what these results mean". The five minutes that she took to do the research, and the three minutes she took to explain it to me, were insufficient; five minutes more on my own with Google after the appointment gave me a much greater understanding of the result, the meaning, and the next steps.
So, yes, I do have the knowledge to do that. And the wisdom to get my results from the NIH, Scripps, Harvard, etc. medical websites rather than someplace frequented by watchers of Oprah and followers of Jenny McCarthy.
What test are you taking?
http://www.theranos.com/test-menu?ref=our_solution
I imagine that Walgreens is going to run only a few tests - cholesterol, pregnancy, HIV antibody.
Well, it looks like a few more than that:
http://www.theranos.com/test-menu?ref=our_solution
I didn't bother to count; maybe 200 in that list? Heavily tilted towards drug detection and STDs, but still a pretty good variety.
Why would I make an appointment with my doctor for 4 weeks from now, drive over, get a referral to a testing center, drive over, get stuck and drained, drive home, make another appointment for 4 weeks to get the results, drive over, and have someone read me results with no background info, when I could go to Walgreens, walk out with the results 10 minutes later, and spend 20 minutes on Google finding out what they really mean?
I would say that the fact that I can get results from Walgreens changes everything.
I don't know where you live, but in the US your comment would be simply wrong.
Having grown up in the LA basin in the 70's, and going back there on a regular basis now, I can safely say that there is significantly less air pollution now than there was then. Open dumping of toxic chemicals in places like the Stringfellow Acid Pits (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stringfellow_Acid_Pits) is no longer tolerated. Rivers are no longer used as open cesspools or convenient dumps for industrial chemical processes. Landfills are now designed to catch and remove all leachate.
I would guess that we release more CO2 these days than we did then, and due to coal-burning perhaps more mercury and radiation (although shutting down atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons certainly helped on the radiation front). But the environmental movements of the 60's and 70's were vastly more successful than your comment gives them credit for.
If you'd like to see the difference, visit any major US city and note the quantity and kinds of pollution you see. Then go visit any major Chinese city and do the same.
That has a very narrow window of opportunity - basically, from the time the machine is serviced (cash removed and added) until the next time it's serviced. As soon as the money counting room notices your counterfeit bill, countermeasures will begin to be developed. The machine will be replaced and sent for analysis, firmware will get reflashed, ports will get sealed up.
This is a great hack if your intent is to hire a large number of people to pass counterfeit bills at many machines in the same day, as a one-time hack. You could collect millions and pay out hundreds of thousands. Not a bad approach - but it requires a fairly large organization. Likelihood of long-term success (think not going to a federal PMITA prison (they have those in Europe, don't they?)): low.
Look, Obama isn't involved here. Congress is the legislative body(s). Until they pass a bill and send it to the White House, they haven't done their job.
If Obama is vetoing bill after bill, and Congress can't override, then it's time for the Congress and the White House to confer and compromise. That's not the case right now. If the Congress was doing their job, Obama would be just another asshole with an opinion (although, surely, an asshole with a "bully pulpit"). Placing responsibility for this mess on the President is simply another tactic by the lunatic fringe to deflect blame from their actions.
Like the Americans at IBM that spent a billion dollars building a useless air traffic control system (http://www.baselinemag.com/c/a/Projects-Processes/The-Ugly-History-of-Tool-Development-at-the-FAA/) ten years ago? Surely most of the team flew at one time or another, and didn't want planes running into each other....and they were still unable to make a usable system.
Well, you can run an ICE just fine by pouring gas down the intake manifold. When I was younger and stupider, I did that with my ancient Oldsmobile. Yes, it required a bit of subtlety, but not as much as you'd expect.
Carburetors got quite complex because people expected perfect engine response, at all throttle settings, at environmental conditions ranging from startup at 10,000 feet in the winter to running below sea level at 120 degrees F in the summer, and the government expected minimal emissions in all those situations. But, basic though inefficient operation can be accomplished with a straw and a gas reservoir.
we're just short of losing the Southwest to Mexico.
Really? Living in the heart of the southwest, this is the first I've heard of that. Guess I should brush up my high school Spanish and read the Mexican constitution one of these days then, eh?
Being as there is a deterministic hardware state machine that successfully executes the instruction sequence that you're interested in disassembling, I'd have to disagree with your assertion that "not all programs can be successfully dis-assembled.". If the processor can execute it, the code can be disassembled.
Relationships don't have to be violent to be terribly degrading...
Seventh grade doesn't have to be violent to be terribly degrading....
Work doesn't have to be violent to be terribly degrading...
If "terribly degrading" is your definition of rape, it's a crime far more prevalent than ever before thought.
There's so much stupid surrounding this that it hurts my brain...
Well, as an expert in the field, I have to say that you've taken way too many internet postings as gospel.
This contest will be won quickly and easily. /frank
How soon we forget Jose Padilla. No, he didn't go to Gitmo, but did get arrested in the US and was held in military custody for 3 years while being subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques", all because Pres. Bush called him a name - "enemy combatant". And multiple federal courts held that this was both legal and constitutional. Because the Supreme Court declined to hear his appeal, this is currently the law of the land.
Exactly correct, and why I hate the concept of drones (or other pilotless aircraft) in our airspace - they violate that prime directive of VFR flying, "See and be seen". An RPV or drone simply can't scan the sky for other aircraft, and frankly have a lot less to lose from not seeing another aircraft than a manned plane.
However, the diet was also important for creating the right conditions for the lean twin's bacteria to flourish. A bacterial obesity therapy seems unlikely to work alongside a a diet of greasy burgers.
Having read TFA, there is precisely zero evidence to support this statement. Simply a restatement of the current mythology surrounding diet and weight.
I'm just waiting for screening checkpoints along interstate highways every 20-50 miles or so. That ought to make life real fun.
Haven't traveled the highways around the Mexican border recently, have you?
So, when does this technique get declared illegal, like all drug-based methods of altering mental states (other than alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine)?
There is no ambiguity in the USB spec, and Sarah has an incorrect interpretation. The spec requires that the host provide at least 10 ms of recovery time coming out of suspend; a device is required to be able to communicate after this minimum time. Any device which isn't ready for communications after 10 ms of resume recovery time is broken. A host is permitted to provide more than this, but isn't required to.
So, yes, it's perfectly valid for the host to blindly attempt to communicate with the device after 10 ms - presuming that the host KNOWS precisely when the recovery period began. If the host requested that the bus resume, set a timer for 10 ms, and then tried talking, the HOST is at fault because it didn't check with the hardware as to when the resume period began. I think the 17 ms that they reference in the article is related to this - there is a delay between the request to resume the bus and the actual time that the hardware does resume the bus, so they were trying to talk with devices before the 10 ms period was up.
The device is perfectly within the spec if it ignores communications prior to 10 ms, or if it responds to them - it has complete flexibility. After 10 ms, however, it MUST be ready to communicate.
In the SPEC, devices are required to treat it as a maximum and the host is required to treat it as a minimum. Any device which isn't ready for communications after 10 ms are broken, and any host that attempts communications before 10 ms is broken. This isn't an area of the spec that's in any way vague.
And 10ms is forever in hardware.
Not if the hardware is composed of a microprocessor, and the hardware holds the CPU in reset for 2 ms waiting for the crystal to stabilize before letting it run.
The 10 ms is for the DEVICE to get it's shit together. Coming out of suspend, the host starts sending SOF's, and must not send anything else to the device for 10 ms. The DEVICE is required to be ready for communications from the host after this 10 ms period.
No need to be an "avowed atheist", whatever that is. You simply have to be unable to agree to their "Statement of Religious principle" on your application, and/or be unable to agree with the Scout Oath: "On my honor I will do my best To do my duty to God and my country". You don't have to be in active opposition to religion to be unwelcome - you simply have to be a man of principles who won't swear to something you don't believe in. Agnostic, Atheist, violent anti-religious nutcase, all are equally unwelcome if they aren't silent about their lack of faith.
I've had leaders counsel me to "just sign the papers, nobody checks". But I ask them, if the oath was reversed and asked you to swear that you DIDN'T believe in GOD, and WOULDN'T perform any service to God in your life outside Scouts, would you take it?