Hate to shoot down my own post, but on rereading, I noticed that the IPs are described as different corners of Ireland, something which would have made me suspect an older person or small group, and if this was set up by a teen, suggests they made some serious efforts at obfuscation. Given that point, I don't think the locations would support moving part of the investigation into the real world. Still, you can get a little useful info from the facts, for example, I'd expect anyone routing through proxies would probably also pick some that crossed international borders (a real pro would tailor proxies to give a misleading impression, but the semi-skilled always pick exotic (to them) proxy locations whether it's actually useful or not), so any person trying to follow a trail there could probably justify proceeding from the assumption that the 'troll' was still physically local.
Plus, the article describes having three IP numbers, one of which was a private address. That suggests the other two were associated with public locations, i.e. coffieshops, schools, or libraries. I don't know that much about how it's set up in particular parts of Ireland, but in the US, those are usually fixed IPs, plus, if one of them was a school, wouldn't that be a pretty good clue about which member of the home was most likely? Suppose, for example, the two fixed IPS were within a few blocks of each other, one was a school, one was an internet enabled cafe, and the timing fit school hours and such?
I'd figure getting from there to connecting the private IP with an address (and doing it, as the article says, legally) is the challenge, and there are some likely techniques already mentioned, but depending on just what the public IPS are, you might start off with a pretty good guess of the age group of the 'troll', whether they walked or drove from location a to b at certain times, and other such things. The fixed IPs alone might be enough to do some detective work in the physical realm, plus they certainly would help confirm whatever you narrowed it down to. There are probably 500,000 people who could do it with the 'legally' stipulation, and millions without that part.
I really can't see how you can equate extremism with mental illness without coming to the conclusion we are already in the asylum and there are more of them than us.
Yes, but there are times when it feels like that is exactly the case. I have an acquaintance (I'll call him Nutcase A) who has swung far into the Teaparty side of politics. Now I'm not claiming anybody else at the last rally he attended is particularly mentally ill, but this guy has, for just one example, gotten so down on some people for letting their kids watch PBS that he has explained to a group of us how all those European travel shows are fake because the Russians tore up those European countries so bad they don't really look like that. A couple of people present with me drew him out on this point, and he now apparently genuinely believes that World War 2 was the US against Russia, that Russia conquered Europe as far as Italy and France, making them all Socialists, held that territory until the 80s, and that those countries weren't freed until Reagan won the cold war. By him, the Germans were on our side during WW2 until the Commies overran them. The Berlin wall enclosed all of Commie Europe, up the Atlantic seacoast. It's like he listened to some Limbaugh and Coulter descriptions of Hitler being a leftist because the Nazis were National Socialists and took that argument to heart so sincerely that he had to re-write fifty years of history to be consistant with it.
Oh, and Clifford the Big Red Dog is particularly a commie plot to indoctinate the youth of America. I know this guy passed at least a normal high school history class once, but it's like he's now rewritten it all in his mind, and everything he seems to believe is being filtered through an incredibly and increasingly warped version of right libertarian philosophy.
What your comment made me think of is that his example has made me ask other people on the Tea Party side about their nutcases, and there's a strong tendency for those people to claim there aren't any people like that guy attending their rallys and speaking at their town halls. I know some of these people have met Nutcase A, and in a couple of cases, have heard him say at least something totally whackjob. I was there when those cases happened. Even if Nutcase A is 1 in 1,000 and there's a lot more reasonable people making up the bulk of the group, I'm finding it harder and harder to believe those other people are not in some weird state of denial, deliberately or delusionally pretending they don't have any Nutcase A's at all around. And, I'm wondering about what else they are in denial over. When somebody claiming affiliation with the American right says, for example, that they haven't seen any signs the dislike of president Obama is racially motivated, I wonder if they have just ignored hearing a dozen rants and a hundred racial slurs at their last meeting - wondering if they start out thinking in each incident that those people aren't really the core of their group, and five minutes later have turned it into "that didn't happen at all - we aren't like that, so I didn't hear what I heard.". When people appear to be standing right next to some ranting and raving 'crazy people', and swearing they didn't hear anything crazy, yes, you start figuring the whole group is part of the illness.
Aside from the people who feel this is a free speech issue where Nakoula was really arrested for making the film, no matter what else he did, there are at least two perfectly ligitimate reasons why he can be charged with probation violations:
1. He's been using aliases to do this - that's usually specifically prohibited by the terms of probation. The normal right to use an alias for non-fraudulent purposes does not usually apply while a person is on probation, so if he's got typical restrictions, the state does not have to prove he had some sort of fraudulent intent. They can void his probation automatically, although that doesn't stop them from also bringing charges if they are willing to try and prove the alias did entail fraudulent intent.
2. Reckless endangerment - His actors were placed in danger, and they are much more identifiable than he is as a producer, so their danger is actually greater than his (That may have changed due to all the publicity, but at the time of his actions, it was undeniably true, and that's the timeframe a court would have to consider). If he took steps to protect himself, but did not warn the actors of what sort of risks they were about to take on his behalf, that proves he had knowledge to elevate his actions to a felony level. So even if he trys to claim that his use of aliases was for the legitimate reason of protecting himself from Muslem retaliation, he demonstrates depraved indifference to the consequences of his actions with regard to his innocent employees. He really can't offer evidence to even mitigate the severity of sentencing on the one charge without simultaniously giving the state evidence to use on the other charge. His probation officer does not have to wait until the state decides to charge Nakoula criminally to act, either - he can bring the man in and ask just about any questions he chooses and all those answers become testemony admissible later if there is a court case filed. He can void the man's probation for conduct that doesn't rise to the level of new charges as well.
Hell, Win 98 SE handled it pretty well, though again not as automatic. I used 3rd party software to get more transparancy effects on 98, but didn't bother with it for multiple monitor configuration. Admittedly, I was only running 3 monitors and never tested it to see if it could really handle the promised 9.
That line of thinking goes both ways. If somebody working at the National Endowment for the Arts, or OSHA or NOAA, is amoral or immoral and has a personal grudge against you, they can screw with you, but they aren't carrying firearms in their line of duty, so there's really nothing they can do to you that you can't try to petition the courts to fix afterwards. If someone in the military, FBI, DEA or BATF is similarly corrupt, venial and abusive, you had better hope your widow lives to seek some kind of justice for your corpse, because that's about the best you'll get. How does keeping the government focused on your tight list of legitimate uses for force protect you from abuses by the agencys of force? It seems to be a libertarian position that the way to keep the FBI from screwing with the average citizen is to close down the Dept of Education and not to restrain the FBI directly, and somehow the FBI will take the hint. I'm just not seeing it. There's parts of the government that have force projection capabilities internal to their mission, and parts that don't, and trying to shut down all the parts that don't because they may get help from the weaponous parts, but not worring about what those weaponized parts might do directly - how does that work out again? Is the CIA only a possible problem if somebody at the GAO activates it on a US citizen, and not if the CIA is targeting US citizens on its own?
Onion routing and similar by the big dogs relies on there being lots of other users of such systems. If only a few Western government sponsored spies were using a Tor-like system in a place such as Iran, then the local authorities would be willing to devote a lot of their resources to trying to catch those few people. Devoting those same sort of resources to catching 10,000 people who turn out to be just trying to get locally illegal porn or pirate music to maybe get one spy OTOH is terribly wasteful. The Iranian government does not want to spend that many resources on prosecuting very minor crimes by the thousands or even millions just to get an occasional real spy, just like the United States would not want to conduct house to house searches of the entirity of New York City to catch one bank robber, or set up constantly relocating roadside stops every five miles all over every interstate highway and stop all commercial truck traffic, just to nab the occasional drunk.
The problem here is, the Intelligence agencies that developed Onion routing knew there had to be a lot of trivially illegal, semi-legal and fully legal traffic to hide their uses, and in some cases, they actually spread information to aid that civilian development (as in your example of the US Navy). So, either laws against these systems will not pass because the government people proposing them will be called aside to explain why they shouldn't, or the laws will pass, but all the international Intelligence players will know those countries that passed them have switched to something else and hope to make it harder for the lagging countries to continue to use these methods by encouraging international adoption. Put more simply, if a law against onion routing software was actually passed in the US, it would prove the CIA, etc. were no longer relying on onion routing software, and everybody else's intelligence depts. would know this. But frequently proposing such laws only to have them come to nothing, leaves other people's agencies wondering just what the hell they are dealing with.
This video shows 16 waves of occupation and conquest across the region we now call the middle east (I'm counting the classical Roman and Byzantine empires as a single wave to get that number). Interestingly, the Crusades are very low on the damage list in terms of either land area or total death and distruction wrought. (Not that they didn't try). The Ottoman empire ranks much higher, but would definitely fall well below the top three waves on area. Since it was later in the game, the damage in terms of population is another story, and it might well rank third by some estimates. Probably the Mongols would be number 1 overall. They fall in the middle era in this schema, when avarage populations were lower, but they were so damned big they probably killed raped, or enslaved more people in total than any others, as well as being the clear leaders by geographical area. Since populations have generally risen with modern times however, the European Colonial era may have been the most grevious, simply because there were more civilians to be rolled over and slaughtered in these more modern times.
Science proceeds from a baseline assumption that a natural explanation of each phenomenon studied is possible, but that does not prove that all natural phenomena can be explained by science - it's a working assumption working scientists have to start from before they begin applying the methods of science. There can be no proof possible within the scientific method of either this assumption or whether a particular given phenomenon is explainable in advance of actually explaining it. (See Sir Karl Popper, Jose Ortega y Gasset, and Thomas Kuhn for the arguments on this point, and definitely learn and understand the application of Godel's second great theorem to the limitations of the scientific method.). (But to put it straightforwardly, the only way to prove the whole universe can be explained naturally is to complete a Unified Field theory or Grand theory of Everything, not just to say string theory looks like it's the right track). You are advancing a faith based claim for the primacy of science and its supernatural power to prove all true but logically and mathematically unprovable contentions about the natural world, and so whether you think you are an Atheist or not, YOU have a religion.
Right! When authorities stop one group from seeking higher education, they are seeking to gain twofold. They keep some people dumber, and they also make the other groups that can still get that higher education feel like insiders whom they hope will become more prone to reject criticism from the outgroup. The people who are still allowed to seek higher education may also come to fear they too can be cut off from the success it helps produce if they don't go along with the government. If it continues long enough, nobody in the outgroup has the credentials of success and status and so they become more subject to ad hom attacks as well - as in who cares about the opinions of a bunch of people who never finished college?
Controlling authorites can genuinely hate the chosen outgroup, or genuinely believe they are inferior, but they don't have to. In the US in the late 60s, it could well be argued that at least most of the effort to keep blacks out of higher education was motivated by hatred and belief in their fundamental inferiority, but the US also had a lot of fundamental hostility between the people rich enough to go to college and get deferments from the draft, and the ones who couldn't avoid the draft that way. This helped create the environment for Kent State and other such state actions, but the people who gave the orders there were ultimately much more of the classes which could afford college for their own kids, and they were generally oblivious to any implications there was a class struggle issue in the minds of the guardsmen who carried out those orders. Yet no one consiously set up the draft laws to create tension between diferent economic classes, and very few in authority realized there was a hair trigger factor built into these confrontations until after it happened a few times.
My state (Tennessee) has now set things up so student IDs usually don't work as a form of picture ID (The law requires a fixed address and both an issue and expiration date - on campus housing is legally a temporary address and so may not fit the technical definition of fixed, and many schools don't put an issue or expiration date on their IDs). The same problem exists for most employee IDs (as many don't have at least one of either issue or expiration dates), and photo IDs for Military Retirees (particularly unfair as the disabled veterans IDs used at VA clinics don't have an expiration date, but some other military retirement cards do). I still have an old Green military ID, but commissioned officer IDs from that time were set up with no expiration date shown (because the Geneva Convention category on the back never expires as a legal indicator, and If we ever lose a war and the occupying force actually giives a damn about the convention, it stays a legal proof), so I couldn't use that, but If I had an enlisted ID that hadn't expired, it would probably work. It's more than a little disturbing to me that the state wrote a law about IDs without taking into account why some of them do or don't use all the lines the state thinks are needed to prevent voter fraud, and thinks its laws can override the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Geneva convention (or never gave a damn one way or another). I don't see how issue and expiration dates affect proving who someone is for voting purposes. You CAN use a concealed carry permit, as that has all the necessary lines.
What about: you're noticing it more because Fox does it more? There's been several studies, notably from Columbia School of Journalism, where Fox scored very poorly on an objective metric. For example, Fox was compared to various TV and print sources, from the Wall Street Journal to Al Jazeera, on a single standard - whether they got the titles and discriptors of their quoted source people and interview subjects right - that is, if they said somebody was a Psychiatrist, did that person actually have that degree, or was it maybe in Psychology or Sociology instead - If they said somebody was a retired Colonel in the US Air Force, was that person actually in long enough to retire, and did they make that rank, and so on. Did they call the Third Assistant Dean of Women's Studies at Stamford, the Dean of English at Stanford? Fox scored very low on that study (incidentally, NPR did better than PRI, but the top of the list was the BBC, which beat both the WSJ and the Christian Science Monitor). The range was very broad, with the top institutions getting these details right about 98-99% of the time, and yet Fox was one of only two news sources which had a week where they were actually wrong more often than right on that particular metric. The other one was the aforementioned Al Jazeera.
You can probably find most of the studies that involve Fox by using the search function built into this page: http://www.cjr.org/ (Columbia Journalism Review), although some papers may not be indexed, and I won't be at all surprised if many of the primary sources are paywalled. If they are, I hope some person with access from within the University system can help with more info. The general feud that has developed between Fox anf the CSJ is well known, and I'm not claiming either side is completely free of biases, but some things stand out - I remember the attribution accredations study because it confined itself to a particular metric that was as well defined as most metrics in the hard sciences.
Glass and water, yes, but bottle tops are thin steel, and cans are aluminum. Starting from the most common isotope of Iron (which is about 90% of all the iron in the normal environment), one extra neutron captured gives an isotope with a half-life of roughly a couple of days. For aluminum, having the most stable isotope capture either 1 or 2 neutrons gives it a half-life of respectively 2 or 6 minutes. Military exposure recommendations are to assume aluminum in fallouts will be back to close to background rates in less than three days. That's a lot of half-lives at 6 min each, so Al will initially be a major source of the total radiation dose, but it's contribution will fall off much faster than the fallout overall becomes non-radioactive. You can take the proportionate decay rates and conclude that Iron won't contribute 1/1000th of the dose in the same quantities, but won't get back to near background level dose for thousands of times as long. So, for the first 37.8 hours, you should drink from bottles, and after that, switch to cans. *
* This is not a real recommendation. Real fallout will not just include neutron activated metals found naturally in whatever got nuked, but bomb material daughter products, and some of these may be very exotic isotopes, so real fallout should (but won't) come with a YMMV warning. If you are in a real fallout zone, knowing whether the soil of the target area was Al dominant minerals or not will probably not be of any use to you.
If it's KDE 4 and Dolphin, shouldn't you say Kubuntu? I've got the same issue, although I've just gotten used to hitting the F5 for reload. I can confirm that a variety of external programs that change or create files still result in Dolphin not updating, i.e. I see it when using Dolphin to create files and folders, or even using cat from the command line, or after deleting files I've just burned using the file management available internally in K3B, and so on.
Gibralter has ruthless secret sex polution from their massive police? What are they hiding, that the rock had a slippage a few years back and doesn't exactly match the Mutual of Omaha logo anymore?
And just why can the company raise rates after tethering becomes manditory again? They're already charging all they can, by your own claims. How do they keep customers who don't want or simply can't afford the extra feature? Will these people just come up with more money from somewhere to pay for the extra feature they don't want? Then the company could have been charging them more for the features they wanted all along, because they will pay more now to get what is, for them, for the same set of features they wanted all along, so the company wasn't doing what you claimed. Your position seems to be based on them charging all they can (but not really), and only switching to charging all they can (and this time, we mean it) when they have to keep a promise they made to be given a monopoly on a limited commodity by the government.
What if you define 'impossible' as any event that has a probabilty of less than unity in the entire lifetime of the universe? Or to bring a little more precision into it, for many unlikely events we couid instead say "during the portion of the universe's lifetime that enthropy is low enough there is enough energy differential for that event to happen at all." Any event that doesn't happen at least once in the whole of space and during all the time that the energy differential available is great enough to power such an event is thus an impossible event. That's pretty much a binary definition, based around the concept of unity, and while it's complex, it fits one of our 'common sense' intuitions - that something either happens at least once, or not at all.
As a variation though, we could include a fudge factor, some number between unity and zero, and say below that chance in the whole lifetime of the universe and all the space therein, we're confident it's utterly impossible. That fudge factor would address not knowing everything about quantum fluctuations and other such things that might occasionally produce very unlikely events in ways we don't entriely understand. Of course, such a fudge factor would be non-binary - we'd be saying the point where something becomes impossible IS somewhere between 1 and 0. But we'd be doing it somewhat like the five sigma rule in scientific discovery, saying that we've calcuated the chance to a level where we might as well believe it's simply flat out true, just as we calculate the chances for more probable events such as particle emissions and transformations.
Ssshhh... You're supposed to forget about all that and enjoy the virtual simulation of ancient times you're currently emeshed in until the proximity alarm wakes us.
Most material objects we want to measure fall into a range where a meter long bit of one, or a cubic meter of one, is very unlikely to have a mass expressed in mere grams. For every person who measures, say, the mass of water in a cubic meter of cloud, or something else where the answer is on the order of grams or tens of grams, there are probably about 10,000 measurements and calculations being made where the answer is likely to be in the multiple Kg. range.
Plus, when the French developed the metric system, a whole lot of the exceptions were totally unknown to them. Modern scientists may be calculating the mass of a cubic meter of dwarf star matter, or how many atoms are in a cubic meter of interstellar space, but the inventors of the metric system probably had no idea at all that the system would need to be extended to such purposes. They did know the system was supposed to be useful for such common calculations as designing a modern sewer system, figuring out how many truckloads of dirt needed to be hauled away from a construction site by both the maximum volume and maximum load weight per truck, or inventorying a bin of bolts by sample methods, and other such commonplace tasks.
The very fact that so many people use the abreviation mks, or that both of us recognize it easily, says that the fundamental units, before prefixes, are poorly chosen for compatability. If the base units came up frequently together in measurement and calculation,.people would have stuck to using those base units together in the common name, and mks would sound odd.
There's no point in bring up a limitation such as threats against the president, as so many people are actually OK with freedom of speech being limited in that way. To reach the undecided, the uninformed, and any share of those people who have 'good hearts' but not a lot of on the street political education, you need to mention a limit more people would disagree with, such as the loss of freedom to carry more than $500 cash while travelling. My own favorite is, "if America is the land of the free, why do we have such a high perecentage of people in prison?" For people who appreciate numbers and hard facts, try "Why are there 17 different civilan agencies that have agents trained to used assault rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers, and Claymore Mines? ". Try putting things in a context that involves the person you're speaking to. For example, it's amazing how many older people rethink their position on the Fed acting against medical marijuana dispensaries in CA, when they find out the avarage person considering marijuana for pain is about their age, and often wants it for a common disease of people their age (There's quite a number of medical pot users who have lost a foot or leg to type 2 diabetes, and want relief from phantom limb pain. Mention that to a 50 year old pro drug war conservative who has type 2 and fears they might be in the same situation some day, and watch the cognative dissonance at work.).
Slashdot Mirror
Must be the first time you've seen it - Yes it's funny to those who know of the Time Cube site - Once. But it's getting stale.
Hate to shoot down my own post, but on rereading, I noticed that the IPs are described as different corners of Ireland, something which would have made me suspect an older person or small group, and if this was set up by a teen, suggests they made some serious efforts at obfuscation. Given that point, I don't think the locations would support moving part of the investigation into the real world. Still, you can get a little useful info from the facts, for example, I'd expect anyone routing through proxies would probably also pick some that crossed international borders (a real pro would tailor proxies to give a misleading impression, but the semi-skilled always pick exotic (to them) proxy locations whether it's actually useful or not), so any person trying to follow a trail there could probably justify proceeding from the assumption that the 'troll' was still physically local.
Plus, the article describes having three IP numbers, one of which was a private address. That suggests the other two were associated with public locations, i.e. coffieshops, schools, or libraries. I don't know that much about how it's set up in particular parts of Ireland, but in the US, those are usually fixed IPs, plus, if one of them was a school, wouldn't that be a pretty good clue about which member of the home was most likely? Suppose, for example, the two fixed IPS were within a few blocks of each other, one was a school, one was an internet enabled cafe, and the timing fit school hours and such?
I'd figure getting from there to connecting the private IP with an address (and doing it, as the article says, legally) is the challenge, and there are some likely techniques already mentioned, but depending on just what the public IPS are, you might start off with a pretty good guess of the age group of the 'troll', whether they walked or drove from location a to b at certain times, and other such things. The fixed IPs alone might be enough to do some detective work in the physical realm, plus they certainly would help confirm whatever you narrowed it down to. There are probably 500,000 people who could do it with the 'legally' stipulation, and millions without that part.
I really can't see how you can equate extremism with mental illness without coming to the conclusion we are already in the asylum and there are more of them than us.
Yes, but there are times when it feels like that is exactly the case. I have an acquaintance (I'll call him Nutcase A) who has swung far into the Teaparty side of politics. Now I'm not claiming anybody else at the last rally he attended is particularly mentally ill, but this guy has, for just one example, gotten so down on some people for letting their kids watch PBS that he has explained to a group of us how all those European travel shows are fake because the Russians tore up those European countries so bad they don't really look like that. A couple of people present with me drew him out on this point, and he now apparently genuinely believes that World War 2 was the US against Russia, that Russia conquered Europe as far as Italy and France, making them all Socialists, held that territory until the 80s, and that those countries weren't freed until Reagan won the cold war. By him, the Germans were on our side during WW2 until the Commies overran them. The Berlin wall enclosed all of Commie Europe, up the Atlantic seacoast. It's like he listened to some Limbaugh and Coulter descriptions of Hitler being a leftist because the Nazis were National Socialists and took that argument to heart so sincerely that he had to re-write fifty years of history to be consistant with it.
Oh, and Clifford the Big Red Dog is particularly a commie plot to indoctinate the youth of America. I know this guy passed at least a normal high school history class once, but it's like he's now rewritten it all in his mind, and everything he seems to believe is being filtered through an incredibly and increasingly warped version of right libertarian philosophy.
What your comment made me think of is that his example has made me ask other people on the Tea Party side about their nutcases, and there's a strong tendency for those people to claim there aren't any people like that guy attending their rallys and speaking at their town halls. I know some of these people have met Nutcase A, and in a couple of cases, have heard him say at least something totally whackjob. I was there when those cases happened. Even if Nutcase A is 1 in 1,000 and there's a lot more reasonable people making up the bulk of the group, I'm finding it harder and harder to believe those other people are not in some weird state of denial, deliberately or delusionally pretending they don't have any Nutcase A's at all around. And, I'm wondering about what else they are in denial over. When somebody claiming affiliation with the American right says, for example, that they haven't seen any signs the dislike of president Obama is racially motivated, I wonder if they have just ignored hearing a dozen rants and a hundred racial slurs at their last meeting - wondering if they start out thinking in each incident that those people aren't really the core of their group, and five minutes later have turned it into "that didn't happen at all - we aren't like that, so I didn't hear what I heard.". When people appear to be standing right next to some ranting and raving 'crazy people', and swearing they didn't hear anything crazy, yes, you start figuring the whole group is part of the illness.
Aside from the people who feel this is a free speech issue where Nakoula was really arrested for making the film, no matter what else he did, there are at least two perfectly ligitimate reasons why he can be charged with probation violations:
1. He's been using aliases to do this - that's usually specifically prohibited by the terms of probation. The normal right to use an alias for non-fraudulent purposes does not usually apply while a person is on probation, so if he's got typical restrictions, the state does not have to prove he had some sort of fraudulent intent. They can void his probation automatically, although that doesn't stop them from also bringing charges if they are willing to try and prove the alias did entail fraudulent intent.
2. Reckless endangerment - His actors were placed in danger, and they are much more identifiable than he is as a producer, so their danger is actually greater than his (That may have changed due to all the publicity, but at the time of his actions, it was undeniably true, and that's the timeframe a court would have to consider). If he took steps to protect himself, but did not warn the actors of what sort of risks they were about to take on his behalf, that proves he had knowledge to elevate his actions to a felony level. So even if he trys to claim that his use of aliases was for the legitimate reason of protecting himself from Muslem retaliation, he demonstrates depraved indifference to the consequences of his actions with regard to his innocent employees. He really can't offer evidence to even mitigate the severity of sentencing on the one charge without simultaniously giving the state evidence to use on the other charge. His probation officer does not have to wait until the state decides to charge Nakoula criminally to act, either - he can bring the man in and ask just about any questions he chooses and all those answers become testemony admissible later if there is a court case filed. He can void the man's probation for conduct that doesn't rise to the level of new charges as well.
Hell, Win 98 SE handled it pretty well, though again not as automatic. I used 3rd party software to get more transparancy effects on 98, but didn't bother with it for multiple monitor configuration. Admittedly, I was only running 3 monitors and never tested it to see if it could really handle the promised 9.
... for as long as we've been at war with them, which is always, this week ...
That line of thinking goes both ways. If somebody working at the National Endowment for the Arts, or OSHA or NOAA, is amoral or immoral and has a personal grudge against you, they can screw with you, but they aren't carrying firearms in their line of duty, so there's really nothing they can do to you that you can't try to petition the courts to fix afterwards. If someone in the military, FBI, DEA or BATF is similarly corrupt, venial and abusive, you had better hope your widow lives to seek some kind of justice for your corpse, because that's about the best you'll get. How does keeping the government focused on your tight list of legitimate uses for force protect you from abuses by the agencys of force? It seems to be a libertarian position that the way to keep the FBI from screwing with the average citizen is to close down the Dept of Education and not to restrain the FBI directly, and somehow the FBI will take the hint. I'm just not seeing it. There's parts of the government that have force projection capabilities internal to their mission, and parts that don't, and trying to shut down all the parts that don't because they may get help from the weaponous parts, but not worring about what those weaponized parts might do directly - how does that work out again? Is the CIA only a possible problem if somebody at the GAO activates it on a US citizen, and not if the CIA is targeting US citizens on its own?
I'm a Trotskyite, you insensitive clod! (Not really!)
Onion routing and similar by the big dogs relies on there being lots of other users of such systems. If only a few Western government sponsored spies were using a Tor-like system in a place such as Iran, then the local authorities would be willing to devote a lot of their resources to trying to catch those few people. Devoting those same sort of resources to catching 10,000 people who turn out to be just trying to get locally illegal porn or pirate music to maybe get one spy OTOH is terribly wasteful. The Iranian government does not want to spend that many resources on prosecuting very minor crimes by the thousands or even millions just to get an occasional real spy, just like the United States would not want to conduct house to house searches of the entirity of New York City to catch one bank robber, or set up constantly relocating roadside stops every five miles all over every interstate highway and stop all commercial truck traffic, just to nab the occasional drunk.
The problem here is, the Intelligence agencies that developed Onion routing knew there had to be a lot of trivially illegal, semi-legal and fully legal traffic to hide their uses, and in some cases, they actually spread information to aid that civilian development (as in your example of the US Navy). So, either laws against these systems will not pass because the government people proposing them will be called aside to explain why they shouldn't, or the laws will pass, but all the international Intelligence players will know those countries that passed them have switched to something else and hope to make it harder for the lagging countries to continue to use these methods by encouraging international adoption. Put more simply, if a law against onion routing software was actually passed in the US, it would prove the CIA, etc. were no longer relying on onion routing software, and everybody else's intelligence depts. would know this. But frequently proposing such laws only to have them come to nothing, leaves other people's agencies wondering just what the hell they are dealing with.
There's a lot more than two sides to this particular story.
Ty this: http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/imperial-history.html
This video shows 16 waves of occupation and conquest across the region we now call the middle east (I'm counting the classical Roman and Byzantine empires as a single wave to get that number). Interestingly, the Crusades are very low on the damage list in terms of either land area or total death and distruction wrought. (Not that they didn't try). The Ottoman empire ranks much higher, but would definitely fall well below the top three waves on area. Since it was later in the game, the damage in terms of population is another story, and it might well rank third by some estimates. Probably the Mongols would be number 1 overall. They fall in the middle era in this schema, when avarage populations were lower, but they were so damned big they probably killed raped, or enslaved more people in total than any others, as well as being the clear leaders by geographical area. Since populations have generally risen with modern times however, the European Colonial era may have been the most grevious, simply because there were more civilians to be rolled over and slaughtered in these more modern times.
Science proceeds from a baseline assumption that a natural explanation of each phenomenon studied is possible, but that does not prove that all natural phenomena can be explained by science - it's a working assumption working scientists have to start from before they begin applying the methods of science. There can be no proof possible within the scientific method of either this assumption or whether a particular given phenomenon is explainable in advance of actually explaining it. (See Sir Karl Popper, Jose Ortega y Gasset, and Thomas Kuhn for the arguments on this point, and definitely learn and understand the application of Godel's second great theorem to the limitations of the scientific method.). (But to put it straightforwardly, the only way to prove the whole universe can be explained naturally is to complete a Unified Field theory or Grand theory of Everything, not just to say string theory looks like it's the right track). You are advancing a faith based claim for the primacy of science and its supernatural power to prove all true but logically and mathematically unprovable contentions about the natural world, and so whether you think you are an Atheist or not, YOU have a religion.
Right! When authorities stop one group from seeking higher education, they are seeking to gain twofold. They keep some people dumber, and they also make the other groups that can still get that higher education feel like insiders whom they hope will become more prone to reject criticism from the outgroup. The people who are still allowed to seek higher education may also come to fear they too can be cut off from the success it helps produce if they don't go along with the government. If it continues long enough, nobody in the outgroup has the credentials of success and status and so they become more subject to ad hom attacks as well - as in who cares about the opinions of a bunch of people who never finished college?
Controlling authorites can genuinely hate the chosen outgroup, or genuinely believe they are inferior, but they don't have to. In the US in the late 60s, it could well be argued that at least most of the effort to keep blacks out of higher education was motivated by hatred and belief in their fundamental inferiority, but the US also had a lot of fundamental hostility between the people rich enough to go to college and get deferments from the draft, and the ones who couldn't avoid the draft that way. This helped create the environment for Kent State and other such state actions, but the people who gave the orders there were ultimately much more of the classes which could afford college for their own kids, and they were generally oblivious to any implications there was a class struggle issue in the minds of the guardsmen who carried out those orders. Yet no one consiously set up the draft laws to create tension between diferent economic classes, and very few in authority realized there was a hair trigger factor built into these confrontations until after it happened a few times.
My state (Tennessee) has now set things up so student IDs usually don't work as a form of picture ID (The law requires a fixed address and both an issue and expiration date - on campus housing is legally a temporary address and so may not fit the technical definition of fixed, and many schools don't put an issue or expiration date on their IDs). The same problem exists for most employee IDs (as many don't have at least one of either issue or expiration dates), and photo IDs for Military Retirees (particularly unfair as the disabled veterans IDs used at VA clinics don't have an expiration date, but some other military retirement cards do). I still have an old Green military ID, but commissioned officer IDs from that time were set up with no expiration date shown (because the Geneva Convention category on the back never expires as a legal indicator, and If we ever lose a war and the occupying force actually giives a damn about the convention, it stays a legal proof), so I couldn't use that, but If I had an enlisted ID that hadn't expired, it would probably work. It's more than a little disturbing to me that the state wrote a law about IDs without taking into account why some of them do or don't use all the lines the state thinks are needed to prevent voter fraud, and thinks its laws can override the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Geneva convention (or never gave a damn one way or another). I don't see how issue and expiration dates affect proving who someone is for voting purposes. You CAN use a concealed carry permit, as that has all the necessary lines.
What about: you're noticing it more because Fox does it more? There's been several studies, notably from Columbia School of Journalism, where Fox scored very poorly on an objective metric. For example, Fox was compared to various TV and print sources, from the Wall Street Journal to Al Jazeera, on a single standard - whether they got the titles and discriptors of their quoted source people and interview subjects right - that is, if they said somebody was a Psychiatrist, did that person actually have that degree, or was it maybe in Psychology or Sociology instead - If they said somebody was a retired Colonel in the US Air Force, was that person actually in long enough to retire, and did they make that rank, and so on. Did they call the Third Assistant Dean of Women's Studies at Stamford, the Dean of English at Stanford? Fox scored very low on that study (incidentally, NPR did better than PRI, but the top of the list was the BBC, which beat both the WSJ and the Christian Science Monitor). The range was very broad, with the top institutions getting these details right about 98-99% of the time, and yet Fox was one of only two news sources which had a week where they were actually wrong more often than right on that particular metric. The other one was the aforementioned Al Jazeera.
You can probably find most of the studies that involve Fox by using the search function built into this page: http://www.cjr.org/ (Columbia Journalism Review), although some papers may not be indexed, and I won't be at all surprised if many of the primary sources are paywalled. If they are, I hope some person with access from within the University system can help with more info. The general feud that has developed between Fox anf the CSJ is well known, and I'm not claiming either side is completely free of biases, but some things stand out - I remember the attribution accredations study because it confined itself to a particular metric that was as well defined as most metrics in the hard sciences.
Glass and water, yes, but bottle tops are thin steel, and cans are aluminum. Starting from the most common isotope of Iron (which is about 90% of all the iron in the normal environment), one extra neutron captured gives an isotope with a half-life of roughly a couple of days. For aluminum, having the most stable isotope capture either 1 or 2 neutrons gives it a half-life of respectively 2 or 6 minutes. Military exposure recommendations are to assume aluminum in fallouts will be back to close to background rates in less than three days. That's a lot of half-lives at 6 min each, so Al will initially be a major source of the total radiation dose, but it's contribution will fall off much faster than the fallout overall becomes non-radioactive. You can take the proportionate decay rates and conclude that Iron won't contribute 1/1000th of the dose in the same quantities, but won't get back to near background level dose for thousands of times as long. So, for the first 37.8 hours, you should drink from bottles, and after that, switch to cans. *
* This is not a real recommendation. Real fallout will not just include neutron activated metals found naturally in whatever got nuked, but bomb material daughter products, and some of these may be very exotic isotopes, so real fallout should (but won't) come with a YMMV warning. If you are in a real fallout zone, knowing whether the soil of the target area was Al dominant minerals or not will probably not be of any use to you.
You might want to check out either the video or book version of "Sharpe's Waterloo".
If it's KDE 4 and Dolphin, shouldn't you say Kubuntu? I've got the same issue, although I've just gotten used to hitting the F5 for reload. I can confirm that a variety of external programs that change or create files still result in Dolphin not updating, i.e. I see it when using Dolphin to create files and folders, or even using cat from the command line, or after deleting files I've just burned using the file management available internally in K3B, and so on.
Gibralter has ruthless secret sex polution from their massive police? What are they hiding, that the rock had a slippage a few years back and doesn't exactly match the Mutual of Omaha logo anymore?
And just why can the company raise rates after tethering becomes manditory again?
They're already charging all they can, by your own claims. How do they keep customers who don't want or simply can't afford the extra feature? Will these people just come up with more money from somewhere to pay for the extra feature they don't want? Then the company could have been charging them more for the features they wanted all along, because they will pay more now to get what is, for them, for the same set of features they wanted all along, so the company wasn't doing what you claimed. Your position seems to be based on them charging all they can (but not really), and only switching to charging all they can (and this time, we mean it) when they have to keep a promise they made to be given a monopoly on a limited commodity by the government.
What if you define 'impossible' as any event that has a probabilty of less than unity in the entire lifetime of the universe? Or to bring a little more precision into it, for many unlikely events we couid instead say "during the portion of the universe's lifetime that enthropy is low enough there is enough energy differential for that event to happen at all." Any event that doesn't happen at least once in the whole of space and during all the time that the energy differential available is great enough to power such an event is thus an impossible event. That's pretty much a binary definition, based around the concept of unity, and while it's complex, it fits one of our 'common sense' intuitions - that something either happens at least once, or not at all.
As a variation though, we could include a fudge factor, some number between unity and zero, and say below that chance in the whole lifetime of the universe and all the space therein, we're confident it's utterly impossible. That fudge factor would address not knowing everything about quantum fluctuations and other such things that might occasionally produce very unlikely events in ways we don't entriely understand. Of course, such a fudge factor would be non-binary - we'd be saying the point where something becomes impossible IS somewhere between 1 and 0. But we'd be doing it somewhat like the five sigma rule in scientific discovery, saying that we've calcuated the chance to a level where we might as well believe it's simply flat out true, just as we calculate the chances for more probable events such as particle emissions and transformations.
Ssshhh... You're supposed to forget about all that and enjoy the virtual simulation of ancient times you're currently emeshed in until the proximity alarm wakes us.
Schrodinger's Triple Martini - until you drink it you don't know if it's made with an olive or lemon peel, gin or vodka, and shaken or stirred.
Most material objects we want to measure fall into a range where a meter long bit of one, or a cubic meter of one, is very unlikely to have a mass expressed in mere grams. For every person who measures, say, the mass of water in a cubic meter of cloud, or something else where the answer is on the order of grams or tens of grams, there are probably about 10,000 measurements and calculations being made where the answer is likely to be in the multiple Kg. range.
Plus, when the French developed the metric system, a whole lot of the exceptions were totally unknown to them. Modern scientists may be calculating the mass of a cubic meter of dwarf star matter, or how many atoms are in a cubic meter of interstellar space, but the inventors of the metric system probably had no idea at all that the system would need to be extended to such purposes. They did know the system was supposed to be useful for such common calculations as designing a modern sewer system, figuring out how many truckloads of dirt needed to be hauled away from a construction site by both the maximum volume and maximum load weight per truck, or inventorying a bin of bolts by sample methods, and other such commonplace tasks.
The very fact that so many people use the abreviation mks, or that both of us recognize it easily, says that the fundamental units, before prefixes, are poorly chosen for compatability. If the base units came up frequently together in measurement and calculation,.people would have stuck to using those base units together in the common name, and mks would sound odd.
There's no point in bring up a limitation such as threats against the president, as so many people are actually OK with freedom of speech being limited in that way. To reach the undecided, the uninformed, and any share of those people who have 'good hearts' but not a lot of on the street political education, you need to mention a limit more people would disagree with, such as the loss of freedom to carry more than $500 cash while travelling. My own favorite is, "if America is the land of the free, why do we have such a high perecentage of people in prison?" For people who appreciate numbers and hard facts, try "Why are there 17 different civilan agencies that have agents trained to used assault rifles, machine guns, grenade launchers, and Claymore Mines? ". Try putting things in a context that involves the person you're speaking to. For example, it's amazing how many older people rethink their position on the Fed acting against medical marijuana dispensaries in CA, when they find out the avarage person considering marijuana for pain is about their age, and often wants it for a common disease of people their age (There's quite a number of medical pot users who have lost a foot or leg to type 2 diabetes, and want relief from phantom limb pain. Mention that to a 50 year old pro drug war conservative who has type 2 and fears they might be in the same situation some day, and watch the cognative dissonance at work.).