Actually, reading the article, it looks as though it was a bit of an inside job with Orazio Lembo paying off upper level bank employees. I think if everyone who banks at a bank that does a poor job of security simply takes their money out and goes with a different bank, perhaps a small, local one which often has better interest rates anyway, they would quickly change their practices. Sure, you would be giving up the convenience of tons of ATM locations. But compared with the inconvenience of having your idenity and bank account owned, I think having only a few available and free ATM locations is minor.
From my understanding, China tends to set strict boundaries on some things and make sure they have solid bureaucratic control over others. For example, you can protest government corruption, but you cannot protest for an overthrow or even overhaul of the current government. As for religion, most are not outlawed (except of course for groups like Falong Gong), but they do place restrictions on religious practices and require just about everything to be registered.
Basically, there is a lot that needs to change over time, but it is not nearly as bad as during the Cultural Revolution when the government was trying to completely wipe out religion and even any other ideas that went against the basic Maoist style of Communism.
So, I would think that blogging would ultimately be the same as everything else right now. I believe it will be allowed, but controlled within a particular structure. All China needs now is some elite hackers who can be a bit of an annoyance, but not so much that they cause the government to shut everything down.
Well, Lucas seems to follow this model pretty well, too:-). "Really, we do need to see the redone versions of movies we saw 25 years ago! And the next new Star Wars film really will be better!"
"Fellow members of the American Senate, hear me! Shall we continue to give hand-out after hand-out to the rich? Or shall we aspire to a more noble purpose and draft decent legislation for the poor? How does the Senate vote?"
To truly appreciate Shatner's "acting" you should see the old Outer Limits episode "Cold Hands, Warm Heart". It shows Shatner's pre-Kirk ham acting in all its glorious ignimony.
Of course, I think the best thing Shatner ever did was a "book-on-tape" of the first chapter of Foundation and a somewhat obscure (to me at least) but nonetheless wonderful short story called "Mimsy Were the Borogoves".
Nah, Patrick Stewart is definitely a much better actor with the guy who plays Sisco (can't remember his name, my geek card will now be temporarily suspended) at a good second place. Shatner only lives off of poking fun at his own campy style.
Actually, this isn't exactly true. The American patent system is the unique in that it is the only system that tries to grant a patent based on who first invented, rather who first filed (which is how everyone else does it IIRC).
The only catch is that you have to perform "due diligence" so that, if the other inventor publishes something more than a year before you file, you are still screwed.
I'm pretty sure this is how it works, but I'm going from memory. If anyone cares to correct me, please do.
Ah, but you see, this means there are "gaps" in gravitational theory, which is why those so-called scientists can't make up their minds. All these "gravitists" in the gravitational community are just spouting nonsense and can't see through the obvious flaws in this whole "gravitation" theory (which is just a theory, after all) and are trying to cover up over mountains of contradicting evidence. So, I guess this gap in the theory just proves that gravity doesn't really exist.
The only real reason that a religion would do this is because it doesn't take God at his word.
It seems as though you are accepting the fundamentalist position of a strict, literalistic reading of a translation of scripture as being the only possible position. It is only in the last couple of centuries in the U.S. that this has been so, and it is due to a particular brand of Christianity that has grown up in the U.S. It is not that people have never taken Genesis as a strictly literal account, but the whole purpose behind Genesis was to show in a story the relationship between God and Mankind. It is how ancient people wrote and was not meant to be taken so literally.
In the case of the RCC, God is actually a problem for the church in that he represents competition for Pope and Magisterium alike.
What the hell are you talking about? You really don't know anything about Catholicism, do you? If God were a problem for the Church and it was simply some sort of base power struggle, I don't think the Church would even exist anymore.
Despite this, Joseph Ratzinger AKA Pope Benedict XVI has already clarified the RCC position on evolution, and not in a direction you'd like.
I think you are probably just reading what you want to hear into what he says. The Church's position on evolution has been quite clear. And about Ratzinger, remember that "Conservative" Catholic is not even close to the same thing as "Conservative" American. John Paul II was a conservative Catholic, but he would certainly not be considered a conservative in the American sense, except on the issue of abortion.
By making a few clever guesses based on minimal knowledge of the ongoing power struggles within the RCC, I predicted Ratzinger's papacy at least three years ago.
Next time you make "predictions" like this, it would be nice if you tell the rest of us.
Either way, evolution is not a simple scientific principle. It is an hypothesis which rides over the top of contradicting evidence with an awesome indifference.
What contradicting evidence? Again, you are usually talking about precise phenomenology, which as I mentioned in my previous post is akin to having to correct the precise understanding of gravity. The basic scientific principle is quite sound despite your blustering.
Oh give me a break. You do realize that history, including medieval history, is a complicated subject and not the overly simplistic thing you are trying to present, don't you? For example, there was not nearly as much separation of Church and State in those times as today, althought that was actually the original goal. In a world ruled by kings and emperors, it was thought best that the Church should be in one sphere while kings and emperors held the reins of government.
Anyway, a lot of things like Bruno or Galileo occured due to a lot of complex issues, including some arrogance in the Church, but also because heresy was considered the same as treason, especially in kingdoms like Spain that had just had centuries-long conflicts with the Moors.
You also have other factors such as the effect of the Black Plague on the whole European politics. Before the Black Plague, Dante could have a Hindu in Heaven in one of the Cantos of Paradiso. After the Black Plague, people like Galileo ran into problems, not just from the Church, but from the academia as well, like the professor who refused to look through Galileo's telescope to see the planets for himself.
And then you have the simple fact that people are always people, narrow and bigotted and always certain that they are right.
Anyway, my whole point behind all of this is not about specific details, but simply about the fact that history is far more complex than you and a lot of people on/. are making it out to be. I just get sick and tired of the simplistic college-freshman "oh-look-at-me-I'm-an-atheist-so-I-must-be-smart" kind of explanation.
Way to take everything completely out of context. Go back and actually read my post and the parent post. The post I replied to (was it yours, AC?) was trying to make the case that, because some of the precise phenomenologies had not been quite understood, it means that all of evolution is nonsense. Evolution works by the frequencies of different genes and gene sequences changing due to changing external conditions.
When I said, "this is how evolution works, moron," I was clearly referring to the description in the article.
Anyway, you're clearly just a troll who only wants to play stupid word games instead of trying to understand what is clearly written.
I don't know why you think the "evolutionary community" (whatever that is) believes predators to be more evolved. Perhaps you should try to read up on actual evolutionary science instead of babbling about things you clearly know nothing about.
Um, this is how evolution works, moron. This is simply a specific detail about evolutionary history - not principle - which has not been completely understood. The reason why it has not been completely understood is because this has only recently been discovered.
For example, if gravitational physicists were to discover a new particular bit of gravitational phenomenology, such as what has happened with the Voyager probes (IIRC), it simply means that some more time is needed to study and determine what is going on. Perhaps, such as in the case of Voyager, our precise model of gravitational forces will be updated (not thrown out). It does not mean that gravity does not exist! There is no great holy book from the prophet Darwin or the prophet Newton.
Also, there is no such thing as an "evolutionist" any more than there are "quantumists" or "gravitists". This is simply one of the common ridiculous babblings by you raving fundamentalists to make it seem like everyone else is as insane as you all are. You try to make it seem as though evolution==atheism, which is not even remotely true. Most other religions and most forms of Christianity (including mine, Catholicism) accept evolution as a simple scientific principle.
This is basically the same point I made a long time ago. The whole formula of life + X number of years, whatever non-negative value X may be, is inherently unfair to people who die younger. The only fair system is to provide a copyright for a specific number of years, preferably a reasonable one like the 20 year term for patents. Then, there is no ambiguity and noone has to worry about when exactly the author died to see if they can use passages from a book or publish their own "classics" copy.
The point is that there is this little thing called due process that they are not following and apparently have no intention of following. They are using a debt collection agency without properly obtaining reasonable proof that a debt is owed. Which is what the GP poster is saying.
Check out what the CIA did in South America the past couple decades to get a clue.
Well, there is no need to be rude. I actually agree you with, but I was simply trying to stay on topic. Actually, you make a good point since, when the natural result such activities in South America, among others, come to fruition, whoever is in charge will act surprised, apply some token patches for what has already been screwed up, and use the situation as yet another excuse (in addition to the Teutonic Menace (WWI), Communism, drugs, terrorism) to make a brazen power grab.
Activities such as this that have occurred in the past, are occurring now, and will assuredly occur in the future, create all the new real and imagined enemies that are needed to distract and scare the living daylights out of everyone. Coupled with an increasingly a-historical and apathetic public, this becomes a rather easy thing to do.
Seriously though, it seems to me that the other big problem is that all that government is doing with all the excessive airline regulations is trying to fight the war we just lost. Instead of figuring out what is the best way to deal with the overall threat, the governement simply tries to handle what has already been screwed up and tries to apply makeshift patches to the holes.
One of the biggest blunders generals tend to make is to try to fight the last war instead of the war they are actually in, such as some of the generals in World War One who were still using tactics from musket-and-cannon wars like the Crimean War. This is basically what is happening now with the TSA regulations.
Wasn't he trying to transmit it through the ground, not through the air?
Actually, you are right, now I remember. He was trying to transmit through the ground at his lab in Colorado. The other idea he had was not transmission through the ordinary air, but through the rarified air in the stratosphere, since it is supposed to be a good conductor at certain frequencies.
I'm not sure what the fundamental flaw in his understanding was, though. It might have to do with the fact that the resonance frequency of materials is hard to keep constant unless it is some easily controlled system like the power transmission lines we use, or standard circuit components.
I think this is probably caused by a mix-up of two real stories. The first was that Tesla invented AC power generation, which Edison tried to suppress through some very nasty means. The second was that Tesla was working on and had a theory for the wireless transmission of power through the upper atmosphere and was attempting to get it to work in his lab in Colorado. I don't think he ever got it to work completely, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, reading the article, it looks as though it was a bit of an inside job with Orazio Lembo paying off upper level bank employees. I think if everyone who banks at a bank that does a poor job of security simply takes their money out and goes with a different bank, perhaps a small, local one which often has better interest rates anyway, they would quickly change their practices. Sure, you would be giving up the convenience of tons of ATM locations. But compared with the inconvenience of having your idenity and bank account owned, I think having only a few available and free ATM locations is minor.
Basically, there is a lot that needs to change over time, but it is not nearly as bad as during the Cultural Revolution when the government was trying to completely wipe out religion and even any other ideas that went against the basic Maoist style of Communism.
So, I would think that blogging would ultimately be the same as everything else right now. I believe it will be allowed, but controlled within a particular structure. All China needs now is some elite hackers who can be a bit of an annoyance, but not so much that they cause the government to shut everything down.
Funny, I heard it was supposed to be called Indiana Jones and the Lost Colostomy Bag.
Well, Lucas seems to follow this model pretty well, too :-). "Really, we do need to see the redone versions of movies we saw 25 years ago! And the next new Star Wars film really will be better!"
[in unison] "F**k the poor!"
"Good!"
Of course, I think the best thing Shatner ever did was a "book-on-tape" of the first chapter of Foundation and a somewhat obscure (to me at least) but nonetheless wonderful short story called "Mimsy Were the Borogoves".
Nah, Patrick Stewart is definitely a much better actor with the guy who plays Sisco (can't remember his name, my geek card will now be temporarily suspended) at a good second place. Shatner only lives off of poking fun at his own campy style.
The only catch is that you have to perform "due diligence" so that, if the other inventor publishes something more than a year before you file, you are still screwed.
I'm pretty sure this is how it works, but I'm going from memory. If anyone cares to correct me, please do.
[BTW, for the sarcastically impaired, :-)]
Mama neutron star will be telling the Black Hole how many hours she was in labor for the rest of her life...
It seems as though you are accepting the fundamentalist position of a strict, literalistic reading of a translation of scripture as being the only possible position. It is only in the last couple of centuries in the U.S. that this has been so, and it is due to a particular brand of Christianity that has grown up in the U.S. It is not that people have never taken Genesis as a strictly literal account, but the whole purpose behind Genesis was to show in a story the relationship between God and Mankind. It is how ancient people wrote and was not meant to be taken so literally.
In the case of the RCC, God is actually a problem for the church in that he represents competition for Pope and Magisterium alike.
What the hell are you talking about? You really don't know anything about Catholicism, do you? If God were a problem for the Church and it was simply some sort of base power struggle, I don't think the Church would even exist anymore.
Despite this, Joseph Ratzinger AKA Pope Benedict XVI has already clarified the RCC position on evolution, and not in a direction you'd like.
I think you are probably just reading what you want to hear into what he says. The Church's position on evolution has been quite clear. And about Ratzinger, remember that "Conservative" Catholic is not even close to the same thing as "Conservative" American. John Paul II was a conservative Catholic, but he would certainly not be considered a conservative in the American sense, except on the issue of abortion.
By making a few clever guesses based on minimal knowledge of the ongoing power struggles within the RCC, I predicted Ratzinger's papacy at least three years ago.
Next time you make "predictions" like this, it would be nice if you tell the rest of us.
Either way, evolution is not a simple scientific principle. It is an hypothesis which rides over the top of contradicting evidence with an awesome indifference.
What contradicting evidence? Again, you are usually talking about precise phenomenology, which as I mentioned in my previous post is akin to having to correct the precise understanding of gravity. The basic scientific principle is quite sound despite your blustering.
Anyway, a lot of things like Bruno or Galileo occured due to a lot of complex issues, including some arrogance in the Church, but also because heresy was considered the same as treason, especially in kingdoms like Spain that had just had centuries-long conflicts with the Moors.
You also have other factors such as the effect of the Black Plague on the whole European politics. Before the Black Plague, Dante could have a Hindu in Heaven in one of the Cantos of Paradiso. After the Black Plague, people like Galileo ran into problems, not just from the Church, but from the academia as well, like the professor who refused to look through Galileo's telescope to see the planets for himself.
And then you have the simple fact that people are always people, narrow and bigotted and always certain that they are right.
Anyway, my whole point behind all of this is not about specific details, but simply about the fact that history is far more complex than you and a lot of people on /. are making it out to be. I just get sick and tired of the simplistic college-freshman "oh-look-at-me-I'm-an-atheist-so-I-must-be-smart" kind of explanation.
When I said, "this is how evolution works, moron," I was clearly referring to the description in the article.
Anyway, you're clearly just a troll who only wants to play stupid word games instead of trying to understand what is clearly written.
I don't know why you think the "evolutionary community" (whatever that is) believes predators to be more evolved. Perhaps you should try to read up on actual evolutionary science instead of babbling about things you clearly know nothing about.
For example, if gravitational physicists were to discover a new particular bit of gravitational phenomenology, such as what has happened with the Voyager probes (IIRC), it simply means that some more time is needed to study and determine what is going on. Perhaps, such as in the case of Voyager, our precise model of gravitational forces will be updated (not thrown out). It does not mean that gravity does not exist! There is no great holy book from the prophet Darwin or the prophet Newton.
Also, there is no such thing as an "evolutionist" any more than there are "quantumists" or "gravitists". This is simply one of the common ridiculous babblings by you raving fundamentalists to make it seem like everyone else is as insane as you all are. You try to make it seem as though evolution==atheism, which is not even remotely true. Most other religions and most forms of Christianity (including mine, Catholicism) accept evolution as a simple scientific principle.
M$ Works??? Who the hell uses M$ Works anymore?
And I take it that you plan to keep reminding him anonymously?
Spock: "Jim, we're dying."
Kirk: "Let us die!"
It's not like they have any intrinsic value, after all.
Wait, you can't eliminate the humans! The mice would be furious!
This is basically the same point I made a long time ago. The whole formula of life + X number of years, whatever non-negative value X may be, is inherently unfair to people who die younger. The only fair system is to provide a copyright for a specific number of years, preferably a reasonable one like the 20 year term for patents. Then, there is no ambiguity and noone has to worry about when exactly the author died to see if they can use passages from a book or publish their own "classics" copy.
Unless you are the US Government, of course.
Or, to put it another way...
US Gov: "You can't judge me with the law! I am the Law!"
The point is that there is this little thing called due process that they are not following and apparently have no intention of following. They are using a debt collection agency without properly obtaining reasonable proof that a debt is owed. Which is what the GP poster is saying.
Um, my cousin is in a mixed Catholic-Protestant marraige. I have known plenty of people in mixed Catholic-Buddhist or Catholic-Hindu marriages.
As for "same race", I'm white and my wife isn't, which has never been a problem in the Catholic Church.
Try learning about something before you blather like this...
Well, there is no need to be rude. I actually agree you with, but I was simply trying to stay on topic. Actually, you make a good point since, when the natural result such activities in South America, among others, come to fruition, whoever is in charge will act surprised, apply some token patches for what has already been screwed up, and use the situation as yet another excuse (in addition to the Teutonic Menace (WWI), Communism, drugs, terrorism) to make a brazen power grab.
Activities such as this that have occurred in the past, are occurring now, and will assuredly occur in the future, create all the new real and imagined enemies that are needed to distract and scare the living daylights out of everyone. Coupled with an increasingly a-historical and apathetic public, this becomes a rather easy thing to do.
True, but that is going off on a tangent ;).
Seriously though, it seems to me that the other big problem is that all that government is doing with all the excessive airline regulations is trying to fight the war we just lost. Instead of figuring out what is the best way to deal with the overall threat, the governement simply tries to handle what has already been screwed up and tries to apply makeshift patches to the holes.
One of the biggest blunders generals tend to make is to try to fight the last war instead of the war they are actually in, such as some of the generals in World War One who were still using tactics from musket-and-cannon wars like the Crimean War. This is basically what is happening now with the TSA regulations.
Actually, you are right, now I remember. He was trying to transmit through the ground at his lab in Colorado. The other idea he had was not transmission through the ordinary air, but through the rarified air in the stratosphere, since it is supposed to be a good conductor at certain frequencies.
I'm not sure what the fundamental flaw in his understanding was, though. It might have to do with the fact that the resonance frequency of materials is hard to keep constant unless it is some easily controlled system like the power transmission lines we use, or standard circuit components.
I think this is probably caused by a mix-up of two real stories. The first was that Tesla invented AC power generation, which Edison tried to suppress through some very nasty means. The second was that Tesla was working on and had a theory for the wireless transmission of power through the upper atmosphere and was attempting to get it to work in his lab in Colorado. I don't think he ever got it to work completely, though.