Blocking radioactivity isn't hard. I'm sure if the terrorists were going to deploy a dirty bomb they'd encase it in lead, that would make these detectors pretty useless, so let's forget the false negatives, what about the false positives?
Agreed. Who cares if it's easy to get an A as a history major? What's that degree going to let you do? Sure, you can teach history, but people's lives don't depend on you. Engineers have to learn difficult shit because if we just get passed through college like most of the other disciplines then people's lives could be in danger. I don't want to drive on a bridge which was designed by some asshole who didn't know the difference between an integral and a derivative.
Yes, I do mean billions of years. About four billion. And I wasn't aware of any such studies on coal seams that would be developed in days or months, instead of centuries or millenia. To be fair, I don't really follow geology, but the amount that I am familiar with, tectonic plates, and continental drift. From all the evidence I've read about, Pangaea is about a quarter of a billion years old, and gave way to the continents we're familiar with today, but as I stated, Geology isn't a big priority in my reading.
Would you be kind enough to supply a source to these studies on coal seams that could be formed in such short amounts of time? I'm an atheist, I have no faith of any sort. Blind or otherwise, but I'm more than willing to put stock in well documented research which can explain the world and the universe better than a current theory. After all, science is as much about being wrong as being right. Isaac Newton's theories on gravity fall to pieces at higher speeds than we're normally familiar with, but that doesn't make them pretty good approximations. They're wrong, but still pretty close.
That sounds reasonable, but the post I was referring to didn't seem to imply that methane would have been as big a deal as molecular oxygen, and I would disagree that molecular oxygen would be completely meaningless by itself. I'd be more interested in liquid water than either oxygen or the so called "organic molecules".
The first lifeforms on our own planet didn't use O2 for respiration. It took a very, very, very long time for the Earth's original atmosphere to be converted to the 70% nitrogen, 20% oxygen atmosphere we're comfortable breathing now. Even today we have a very popular organism that doesn't require O2 to function, and the wonderful result of lacking O2 is ethanol.
Liquid water is the smoking gun for life forms, and maybe some serious carbon.
Those are mostly the same preferences that I have, and unless somebody bumped up "baby boomer" to the early 80's, you shouldn't assume great music is only confined to the generation that produced it.
I hear that Bach guy's stuff is still pretty popular.
STP is a little too picky. Our refrigeration techniques would make super conductors common if we could find a super conductor that operated at a temperature where the Celsius scale is non-negative.
What's so bad about being offended?
If we have a right to not be offended, then my rights are being violated right now, because I'm offended that my country was "founded on freedom" yet I cannot exercise my freedom of speech over a radio.
Sure it's a flawed idea, because if the FCC's authority to regulate content were to disappear, we still wouldn't be hearing naughty language all the time on the radio, advertisers like to censor content too. Also, the FCC's regulations on obscenity are lifted between 10 pm and 6 am.
I'd still be offended if the government censored radio between 3:30 am and 3:31 am. Why? Many of you anti-freedom people get your inspiration from a book of some sort, and I get mine from a piece of parchment that's on display at the National Archives.
As a judge, I'm assuming a judge in the United States, are you not required to read the Constitution and make an oath to obey it to the best of your ability?
How are you able to read "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech/B" and still think that the FCC, which is granted authority by Congress, isn't violating it?
Lest we forget, gun control is what caused the first shots to be fired during the Revolution. American armories were being raided by the British Army in the towns of Lexington and Concorde, and we wacky Americans defended our rights with brute force.
While I agree that BioShock was inspired by Objectivism, I don't think it casts Objectivism in a negative light, but shows that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Even in the middle of the ocean, in a utopia, some asshole can come along fuck everything up to acquire more power.
I work at Wal-Mart, and the only "sign" in the back of the store that would qualify is a big poster that has Sam Walton's picture on it, and in big letters it has the words "The Boss" or something along those lines, then the text under the title goes on to explain how important the customers are, blah blah blah.
Also, in retail environments such as this, it's considered better for a cashier to be short in their register than having too much. Extra money in the register means a customer got fucked over, and that's a big no-no.
I'm not sure if these nuisance lawsuits are civil or criminal. If they were civil, then he would have to pay the legal fees of the other side if they won. That's how it works in Florida, the loser has to pay the winner's legal fees.
That might be the only reason Thompson is still doing this shit in Florida, so he can claim extravagant fees and get a big check if he won. Last I heard the Florida bar was already on the path of disbaring him.
Like he won't try to "block the release" of the game if he weren't parodied in the game. He's just looking for a new reason that might not fall under the "freedom of speech because art is expression" kind of thing.
Cingular bought AT&T's failing mobile division a few years ago.
Then, just before the iPhone was released, AT&T bought Cingular and turned it into their new mobile division.
Another question is: is this appropriate? I can truly understand that the politicians don't want to promote violence in games, but it's one thing to not like something and a complete other thing to ban/censor something.
I can't think of a single war which was declared, and troops sent on the behalf of, a politician. A politician's sole purpose is to take as much power away from the people who put him or her there and take it for him or herself. At least, that's what the politicians of the world think their job is.
Over the past 20 years violent crime in the United States has been on the decline.
Over that same time frame, we've seen the invention of violent video games, and the "moral" outrage that has come up as a result of those games.
If violent video games caused people to be more violent, don't you think the trend for violence would have started going back up after DooM and its many clones came out?
Slashdot Mirror
Blocking radioactivity isn't hard. I'm sure if the terrorists were going to deploy a dirty bomb they'd encase it in lead, that would make these detectors pretty useless, so let's forget the false negatives, what about the false positives?
Agreed. Who cares if it's easy to get an A as a history major? What's that degree going to let you do? Sure, you can teach history, but people's lives don't depend on you. Engineers have to learn difficult shit because if we just get passed through college like most of the other disciplines then people's lives could be in danger. I don't want to drive on a bridge which was designed by some asshole who didn't know the difference between an integral and a derivative.
Yes, I do mean billions of years. About four billion. And I wasn't aware of any such studies on coal seams that would be developed in days or months, instead of centuries or millenia. To be fair, I don't really follow geology, but the amount that I am familiar with, tectonic plates, and continental drift. From all the evidence I've read about, Pangaea is about a quarter of a billion years old, and gave way to the continents we're familiar with today, but as I stated, Geology isn't a big priority in my reading.
Would you be kind enough to supply a source to these studies on coal seams that could be formed in such short amounts of time? I'm an atheist, I have no faith of any sort. Blind or otherwise, but I'm more than willing to put stock in well documented research which can explain the world and the universe better than a current theory. After all, science is as much about being wrong as being right. Isaac Newton's theories on gravity fall to pieces at higher speeds than we're normally familiar with, but that doesn't make them pretty good approximations. They're wrong, but still pretty close.
That sounds reasonable, but the post I was referring to didn't seem to imply that methane would have been as big a deal as molecular oxygen, and I would disagree that molecular oxygen would be completely meaningless by itself. I'd be more interested in liquid water than either oxygen or the so called "organic molecules".
The first lifeforms on our own planet didn't use O2 for respiration. It took a very, very, very long time for the Earth's original atmosphere to be converted to the 70% nitrogen, 20% oxygen atmosphere we're comfortable breathing now. Even today we have a very popular organism that doesn't require O2 to function, and the wonderful result of lacking O2 is ethanol.
Liquid water is the smoking gun for life forms, and maybe some serious carbon.
Those are mostly the same preferences that I have, and unless somebody bumped up "baby boomer" to the early 80's, you shouldn't assume great music is only confined to the generation that produced it.
I hear that Bach guy's stuff is still pretty popular.
STP is a little too picky. Our refrigeration techniques would make super conductors common if we could find a super conductor that operated at a temperature where the Celsius scale is non-negative.
That trick you talk about sounds dangerous, and I've never been in a metal shop, so what happens to the washer as the rod heats up?
Oh? What about last time?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.C.C._v._Pacifica_Foundationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F.C.C._v._Pacifica_Foundation
What's so bad about being offended? If we have a right to not be offended, then my rights are being violated right now, because I'm offended that my country was "founded on freedom" yet I cannot exercise my freedom of speech over a radio. Sure it's a flawed idea, because if the FCC's authority to regulate content were to disappear, we still wouldn't be hearing naughty language all the time on the radio, advertisers like to censor content too. Also, the FCC's regulations on obscenity are lifted between 10 pm and 6 am. I'd still be offended if the government censored radio between 3:30 am and 3:31 am. Why? Many of you anti-freedom people get your inspiration from a book of some sort, and I get mine from a piece of parchment that's on display at the National Archives.
Lenny bruce once said, "If you take away the ability to say 'fuck' you take away the ability to say 'fuck the government'."
As a judge, I'm assuming a judge in the United States, are you not required to read the Constitution and make an oath to obey it to the best of your ability?
How are you able to read "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech/B" and still think that the FCC, which is granted authority by Congress, isn't violating it?
I don't think Nintendo has to use Brawl to sell Wiis, the last time I saw one available in a store was the day I bought mine.
No, you just described a virus. Cancer is caused by a mutation in a healthy cell from damaged DNA which causes the cell to replicated unchecked.
Lest we forget, gun control is what caused the first shots to be fired during the Revolution. American armories were being raided by the British Army in the towns of Lexington and Concorde, and we wacky Americans defended our rights with brute force.
While I disgree with what Congress is doing, you're implying that the patent owner has an option to disallow Congress to buy the patent.
If they use eminent domain, then you have no choice in the matter, you make the sale and take the money, or you go to jail.
While I agree that BioShock was inspired by Objectivism, I don't think it casts Objectivism in a negative light, but shows that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Even in the middle of the ocean, in a utopia, some asshole can come along fuck everything up to acquire more power.
We've still got Spore...
I work at Wal-Mart, and the only "sign" in the back of the store that would qualify is a big poster that has Sam Walton's picture on it, and in big letters it has the words "The Boss" or something along those lines, then the text under the title goes on to explain how important the customers are, blah blah blah.
Also, in retail environments such as this, it's considered better for a cashier to be short in their register than having too much. Extra money in the register means a customer got fucked over, and that's a big no-no.
But the right to freedom of speech existed long before the concept of copyright.
I'm not sure if these nuisance lawsuits are civil or criminal. If they were civil, then he would have to pay the legal fees of the other side if they won. That's how it works in Florida, the loser has to pay the winner's legal fees.
That might be the only reason Thompson is still doing this shit in Florida, so he can claim extravagant fees and get a big check if he won. Last I heard the Florida bar was already on the path of disbaring him.
Like he won't try to "block the release" of the game if he weren't parodied in the game. He's just looking for a new reason that might not fall under the "freedom of speech because art is expression" kind of thing.
Cingular bought AT&T's failing mobile division a few years ago. Then, just before the iPhone was released, AT&T bought Cingular and turned it into their new mobile division.
Another question is: is this appropriate? I can truly understand that the politicians don't want to promote violence in games, but it's one thing to not like something and a complete other thing to ban/censor something.
I can't think of a single war which was declared, and troops sent on the behalf of, a politician. A politician's sole purpose is to take as much power away from the people who put him or her there and take it for him or herself. At least, that's what the politicians of the world think their job is.
Over the past 20 years violent crime in the United States has been on the decline. Over that same time frame, we've seen the invention of violent video games, and the "moral" outrage that has come up as a result of those games. If violent video games caused people to be more violent, don't you think the trend for violence would have started going back up after DooM and its many clones came out?