It is a risk management issue. We know there is a risk of global warming. We know it can potentially bring massive (earth altering amounts) losses if unmitigated. The question is do we wait uninsured, or do we consider an insurance policy of some sort.
To give you a car analogy, the situation is a bit like driving in a thick fog with high speed. You know that there may be obstacles ahead of you. You know it will be deadly if you hit one. You know you'll have a very short time to react when you clearly see one. What is smarter to do, slow down until the fog clears, or keep pressing the accelerator just because you enjoy high speed?
There is only one way to be sure, but unfortunately it isn't available to us. Outer Space Treaty prohibits deployment of nuclear weapons in orbit. But the scientific evidence seems to at least strongly imply that the problem exists and may not be entirely harmless.
It isn't nearly as simple as you imagine it to be. Organized sports are a show business that has to consistently deliver extraordinary performances in order to attract coach potatoes and sponsors. The people who get into sports are attracted by the promise of fame and money, but this only goes to very few lucky ones.
Unfortunately, all who try are young, immature and quite often unaware of the consequences of the drugs they are using and the real costs they face. Many are lead into all this druggery by the coaches, peer pressure, etc. By the time they get the experience and maturity to be able to make a good decision it is already too late.
I've lost a friend to this kind of "sport". Heart attack at 29. Very moral.
Wait. It isn't moral when the government says something, but it is moral when a human being is fed hormones and drugs so that the sponsors can peddle the next tennis shoe to a million voyeurs in front of all those TVs?
Americans contributed very little to the defeat of the Axis.
In terms of cannon fodder, that is true, most came from the Soviet Union, Europe and the colonies of certain European powers. However, the US provided very significant amount of equipment, without which the Soviets would have probably lost, and who knows what would have happened then.
Of course, the assistance wasn't free, and the US got a lot in exchange, but to say the contribution was insignificant is not correct.
As for the nukes, they were used to so much to break Japan (who were pleading for a surrender since at least early 1945), as to stop the Russians from taking over Asia, which they tried to do in earnest after the war in Europe ended.
Depends on the distribution. I'd venture a guess that if the process of distribution creates large asymmetries, more people will be cheated and that will create a stronger perception of the "system" being dishonest and more drive for aggression. If the process removes asymmetries, and people are able to deal with each other honestly, then that source of conflict would be resolved, and one will have to only deal with the various historical and accidental biases. Which may be very significant;)
In the absence of change in circumstances, it is quite obvious that areas of conflict will have more conflict. TFA doesn't say enough about the methodology for one to be able to estimate how valuable it is.
On the other hand, yet another good thing about the Wikileak emerges. Were those data hidden by the secrecy wall, this research would not have been available to the NATO forces over there. Is secrecy really productive? Was the leak good or bad? Are the costly measures to make future leaks less likely a good investment?
True of all doom weaponry in most sci-fi movies. It has to look good on screen, not to be scientifically plausible. The audience of the star wars movies are the 7-14 y.o. children, after all.
If you have a good business that generates revenues, it is better to rely on it, rather than hope that 419 scams and "get rich quick" schemes will work for you.
The differences between GS and that Nigerian scammer are the better writing talent and the better government protection that one of them is using.
You're trying too hard not to get the point, so I'll make it even harder.
Opensource is great, because since Doom2 was opensourced, the game has improved a lot.
I can enjoy nicer effects and shooting ugly 3D monsters instead of ugly sprites. The icing on the cake are the mnemonic commands, which allow me to enjoy fully those rare moments when I have time for the game without having to look things up or do even more complicated things like "making or using a trainer", whatever that is.
No, it is not useless, and let me show you why. The only game which I really like and still play is Doom2. Since I play it just to shoot monsters, and I play it once every two years, I like to have unlimited ammo. Ages ago, when I was playing the purchased copy, I had to keep a sheet of paper with the cheat codes, so that I can look em up when necessary.
These days, I play the Risen3D clone. Not only am I able to enjoy shooting at ugly 3D monsters, but I don't have to remember codes, because the game is now opensource and some nice soul has extended it with a graphical console which lets me to set the god mode with commands.
Now, again, how do I switch from Chieftan to Emperor in Civ I?
No, it isn't. Copyright is a government monopoly, which is theoretically, given to authors
a) for a limited time
b) with the express goal to promote creativity
It is not morally correct to break this rationale, yet it has already been broken by the copyright holders many times. Unfortunately, corrective action has not happened, because the economic incentives happen to be asymmetrically distributed. The large harm the violations by the copyright holders have caused is spread over many people, while the huge benefits have accrued to very few, who make a lot of extra profits and engage in all sorts of rent-seeking activities that extend and defend the violations of the original agreement.
Slashdot Mirror
It is a risk management issue. We know there is a risk of global warming. We know it can potentially bring massive (earth altering amounts) losses if unmitigated. The question is do we wait uninsured, or do we consider an insurance policy of some sort.
To give you a car analogy, the situation is a bit like driving in a thick fog with high speed. You know that there may be obstacles ahead of you. You know it will be deadly if you hit one. You know you'll have a very short time to react when you clearly see one. What is smarter to do, slow down until the fog clears, or keep pressing the accelerator just because you enjoy high speed?
There is only one way to be sure, but unfortunately it isn't available to us. Outer Space Treaty prohibits deployment of nuclear weapons in orbit. But the scientific evidence seems to at least strongly imply that the problem exists and may not be entirely harmless.
Read their mission statement, smartypants.
It isn't nearly as simple as you imagine it to be. Organized sports are a show business that has to consistently deliver extraordinary performances in order to attract coach potatoes and sponsors. The people who get into sports are attracted by the promise of fame and money, but this only goes to very few lucky ones.
Unfortunately, all who try are young, immature and quite often unaware of the consequences of the drugs they are using and the real costs they face. Many are lead into all this druggery by the coaches, peer pressure, etc. By the time they get the experience and maturity to be able to make a good decision it is already too late.
I've lost a friend to this kind of "sport". Heart attack at 29. Very moral.
Sport is when you go out and do it, not when you watch in from behind that bucket of potato chips or popcorn. Well, at least in my world.
Wait. It isn't moral when the government says something, but it is moral when a human being is fed hormones and drugs so that the sponsors can peddle the next tennis shoe to a million voyeurs in front of all those TVs?
You have some morals you can be proud of.
The point of sport is exercising your body for the fun and health benefits. What is the point to kill yourself with drugs and supplements?
Nothing good at all. The Swiss and their nutty Muesli serials should be banned forever.
They screw the bolt until it breaks and then go back a quarter turn.
Apparently, it was a one-time device and not intended for repeated use.
They just came back to Europe a few hours ago, if you have not noticed. With a working bomb, too.
Americans contributed very little to the defeat of the Axis.
In terms of cannon fodder, that is true, most came from the Soviet Union, Europe and the colonies of certain European powers. However, the US provided very significant amount of equipment, without which the Soviets would have probably lost, and who knows what would have happened then.
Of course, the assistance wasn't free, and the US got a lot in exchange, but to say the contribution was insignificant is not correct.
As for the nukes, they were used to so much to break Japan (who were pleading for a surrender since at least early 1945), as to stop the Russians from taking over Asia, which they tried to do in earnest after the war in Europe ended.
Thanks.
Depends on the distribution. I'd venture a guess that if the process of distribution creates large asymmetries, more people will be cheated and that will create a stronger perception of the "system" being dishonest and more drive for aggression. If the process removes asymmetries, and people are able to deal with each other honestly, then that source of conflict would be resolved, and one will have to only deal with the various historical and accidental biases. Which may be very significant ;)
In the absence of change in circumstances, it is quite obvious that areas of conflict will have more conflict. TFA doesn't say enough about the methodology for one to be able to estimate how valuable it is.
On the other hand, yet another good thing about the Wikileak emerges. Were those data hidden by the secrecy wall, this research would not have been available to the NATO forces over there. Is secrecy really productive? Was the leak good or bad? Are the costly measures to make future leaks less likely a good investment?
Thanks.
True of all doom weaponry in most sci-fi movies. It has to look good on screen, not to be scientifically plausible. The audience of the star wars movies are the 7-14 y.o. children, after all.
But that is not due to nuclear reactions in the core, as would be the case with a star. And it is too small to even be a brown dwarf.
If you have a good business that generates revenues, it is better to rely on it, rather than hope that 419 scams and "get rich quick" schemes will work for you.
The differences between GS and that Nigerian scammer are the better writing talent and the better government protection that one of them is using.
True, we should sell astronaut positions, not hire for them. And pray those who line up and buy them can do the job.
You're trying too hard not to get the point, so I'll make it even harder.
Opensource is great, because since Doom2 was opensourced, the game has improved a lot.
I can enjoy nicer effects and shooting ugly 3D monsters instead of ugly sprites. The icing on the cake are the mnemonic commands, which allow me to enjoy fully those rare moments when I have time for the game without having to look things up or do even more complicated things like "making or using a trainer", whatever that is.
Cheers,
You could say this is a part of promoting creativity. Standing on shoulders of giants, great artists steal, etc.
No, it is not useless, and let me show you why. The only game which I really like and still play is Doom2. Since I play it just to shoot monsters, and I play it once every two years, I like to have unlimited ammo. Ages ago, when I was playing the purchased copy, I had to keep a sheet of paper with the cheat codes, so that I can look em up when necessary.
These days, I play the Risen3D clone. Not only am I able to enjoy shooting at ugly 3D monsters, but I don't have to remember codes, because the game is now opensource and some nice soul has extended it with a graphical console which lets me to set the god mode with commands.
Now, again, how do I switch from Chieftan to Emperor in Civ I?
Yes, I do. Assuming I just downloaded it, I don't think you'll be able to close source it on me.
More to the point, how does one turn the god mode on?
Copyright is an agreement
No, it isn't. Copyright is a government monopoly, which is theoretically, given to authors
It is not morally correct to break this rationale, yet it has already been broken by the copyright holders many times. Unfortunately, corrective action has not happened, because the economic incentives happen to be asymmetrically distributed. The large harm the violations by the copyright holders have caused is spread over many people, while the huge benefits have accrued to very few, who make a lot of extra profits and engage in all sorts of rent-seeking activities that extend and defend the violations of the original agreement.