"and not continue on its way around to the other side of a magnet?"
Yes! That's why it's called 'monopole'. It behaves like electric charge, but with respect to magnetic field. For example, moving monopoles create _electric fields_ with closed lines.
And impossibility of monopoles is not a fact. In fact, (pun intended) it's long been known that monopoles can exist within the framework of classic electrodynamics.
An interesting fact: existence of even one monopole in the Universe forces _all_ electric charges to be quantized. But all electric charges ARE quantized.
I wear glasses, and one of my eyes is significantly worse than the other one (I also sometimes use contact lenses, but I really like glasses).
If it's impossible to correct vision in one of your eyes, then it sucks to be you. But most people still can use 3D-glasses with contact lenses or regular glasses.
And the central bank is just another semi-autonomous branch of government. It's not private (though it does use private banks) but that's nothing by itself.
IRS is another example - it can outsource collection of debts and auditing to private agencies.
But the good course of action is not to blindly deny obvious, but instead fight against corruption. For example, carbon tax is more "corruption-resistant".
However, authors linked to these think-tanks were repeatedly shown to misrepresent facts and just outright lie. Also, almost nothing goes through 'official' publication channels - we don't see many anti-AGW science papers.
So it does cast a shadow on the whole "anti-AGW" movement.
IPv6 can happily coexist with IPv4 (well, almost).
For example, I'm writing this from a dual-stack IPv4/IPv6 machine, which has world-reachable IPv6 address with ipsec used to confine dangerous services only to trusted clients. I also have a notebook which runs mobile IPv6 and transparently switches from wired to wireless connections. I also have several Windows machines which happily interoperate with my Linux machines (using ipsec and everything).
My only problem? Lack of native IPv6 transit from my provider, I have to use IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnels.
So if you're betting on a global conspiracy, then which one is more plausible: 1) Thousands of scientists nearly unanimously coming to conclusion of AGW. 2) Several tens of writers (mostly NOT climate-scientists) funded by money directly linked to fossil fuels. ?
"So now you are making more assumptions about what I wrote, unsupported by the actual text of my comments? Please point out the post of mine in this thread where I used the word "handgun". "
Because handguns are the main point of difference between European and USA laws. It's legal to own semiautomatic "hunting rifles" in Europe, so it's a non-issue.
"I don't have to use my handgun. I've got a Mini-14 and M-1 Garand for that scenario."
Most people don't have them even in the USA. So it's a moot point.
"The handgun is primarily useful against thugs of the more mundane (criminal) variety and as a last resort in a pitched battle. The only advantage to the handgun is that it's easy to carry around with you. Rather hard to conceal the AK for the trip to the grocery store. "
If you need a gun to go to a grocery store, than you have BIG problems.
"As an American male between the age of 17 and 45 I'm already a member of the militia:)"
"The US is a Federated Republic. As originally laid down it was never imagined that the Federal Government would get involved in everything from gun control to the welfare state. Why should I believe that a Federated World Government wouldn't be subject to the same mission creep and erosion of personal liberty?"
Simple. Local governments are good at screwing things and running to the federal government for help. This allows federal government to gather strength, eventually reaching a balance.
USA began as a de-facto confederation, so strengthening of federal government is more pronounced there. A lot of other countries have already reached the balance.
"Do you believe that people have the right to defend themselves (self-defense) when confronted with someone who doesn't share our enlightened morality? If the answer is yes then why don't they have the right to have access to the tools that enable them to defend themselves effectively? "
Mostly because guns are useless for this purpose?
"A gun is an equalizer. Nothing more, nothing less. Few of us geeks here on/. would be capable of prevailing in a fight against a hardened criminal who spent the last ten years in prison pumping iron. Put a gun in your hands and the odds change considerably."
A fairy tale. As I've said in another post, guns are mostly useless in a real warfare. They are also mostly useless at preventing crime - good police departments help much better.
In fact, let me ask you a question. Do you remember stories about 80-year-old grandma shooting robbers with her Magnum?
"There's also the argument that an armed population provides deterrence against external aggression. Switzerland is the best known example"
Switzerland is a poor example. It was not invaded only because invading it gave nothing to Hitler. In itself, invading Switzerland was easy, however Switzerland threatened to destroy bridges and tunnels in case of attack. And Switzerland government also agreed to transfer goods in sealed train cars.
Had Hitler won, the Switzerland would have fallen in one month.
Population of France and the USSR were also armed at that point. Made no difference.
"If none of those arguments hold water with you then I don't know what to say other than why do I have to prove that my rights are "necessary"? A Chinese person might argue that the right to free speech isn't "necessary". Many countries get along without it. I don't think we want to emulate them though."
I think, we can agree to check only the most successful countries - fairly large countries, with a big enough population and good enough quality of life. If you use this criterion, then you'll notice that almost all successful countries (with very few exceptions like Saudi Arabia) have freedom of speech, jury trials, etc. So we CAN make a case that these freedoms are necessary.
Slashdot Mirror
"At least CCTV can't read my passport and credit cards."
Yet.
Same here. I was usually bored to death by the school.
Until I got transfered to a special school for gifted children, where the material was presented at much quicker pace and at much more depth.
Just imagine: math textbooks with problems that you can't just solve right away!
"and not continue on its way around to the other side of a magnet?"
Yes! That's why it's called 'monopole'. It behaves like electric charge, but with respect to magnetic field. For example, moving monopoles create _electric fields_ with closed lines.
And impossibility of monopoles is not a fact. In fact, (pun intended) it's long been known that monopoles can exist within the framework of classic electrodynamics.
An interesting fact: existence of even one monopole in the Universe forces _all_ electric charges to be quantized. But all electric charges ARE quantized.
I wear glasses, and one of my eyes is significantly worse than the other one (I also sometimes use contact lenses, but I really like glasses).
If it's impossible to correct vision in one of your eyes, then it sucks to be you. But most people still can use 3D-glasses with contact lenses or regular glasses.
Try glasses or contact lenses.
WTF???
Can you provide quotes? CDT is _pure_ _shit_ in indexing.
And MSVS 2010 uses EDG for _online_ error checking and code completion: http://developers.slashdot.org/story/09/06/05/1956211/First-Look-At-Visual-Studio-2010-Beta-1?art_pos=1
There's nothing that is even close to that in OpenSource IDEs.
It was expertsexchange.com (without the hyphen) for several years. Can't imagine why they have changed that.
"Don't know. Quite a few have been."
Bullshit. Most of fundamental computer science work has been done before 90-s (advent of widespread software patents).
Besides, Europe doesn't have software patents. Don't see the lack of innovations there, though.
No.
cyberax@devsrv:/usr/lib/mozilla/plugins$ file libflashplayer.so
libflashplayer.so: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped
It's a pure 64-bit library. I don't even HAVE ia32-libs installed on my computer.
You've probably had remnants of old 32-bit nspluginwrapper which f**ed everything up. Native 64-bit Flash works without any problems at all.
The Federal Reserve _is_ an autonomous entity within the federal government - read the Federal Reserve Act.
Also, in a lot of other countries local Central Banks are also independent within the government.
No, there is a native 64-bit plugin on Linux: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/
It doesn't use 32-bit libraries and works just fine. I don't remember it crashing at all.
And the central bank is just another semi-autonomous branch of government. It's not private (though it does use private banks) but that's nothing by itself.
IRS is another example - it can outsource collection of debts and auditing to private agencies.
There's a nice list of independent agencies in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_agencies_of_the_United_States_government
Newsflash!
Breaking news:
The Supreme Court is now a private entity, since it's not a part of the government.
Check the facts: Federal Reserve is *not* private...
No.
But the good course of action is not to blindly deny obvious, but instead fight against corruption. For example, carbon tax is more "corruption-resistant".
PS3 might already support IPv6. Or it might be one patch away.
So? Of course, carbon trading will attract corruption.
That doesn't mean global warming is not real.
"And some scientists"???
Nearly ALL climate scientists agree on AGW. As an "ex-climate scientist" I take offense.
Moreover, nearly _ALL_ scientists agree on AGW - http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/index.html So this is a dictionary definition of 'consensus'.
But certainly, Fox News commentator knows better, right?
Nothing in itself.
However, authors linked to these think-tanks were repeatedly shown to misrepresent facts and just outright lie. Also, almost nothing goes through 'official' publication channels - we don't see many anti-AGW science papers.
So it does cast a shadow on the whole "anti-AGW" movement.
IPv6 can happily coexist with IPv4 (well, almost).
For example, I'm writing this from a dual-stack IPv4/IPv6 machine, which has world-reachable IPv6 address with ipsec used to confine dangerous services only to trusted clients. I also have a notebook which runs mobile IPv6 and transparently switches from wired to wireless connections. I also have several Windows machines which happily interoperate with my Linux machines (using ipsec and everything).
My only problem? Lack of native IPv6 transit from my provider, I have to use IPv6-in-IPv4 tunnels.
There can't be a trial on a scientific theory. No "ifs", "ands" and "buts".
First, any scientific theory must be judged only by accuracy of its predictions.
Second, notice how this court is not about "AGW denialism". So it's a-priory biased.
What is 'Global Warming' crowd you're speaking of?
It's not like climate science consist of two scientists who decided to agree that there's a global warming.
On the other hand, 'No Global Warming' crowd is really a crowd - _almost_ _all_ anti-AGW publications can be traced to a few conservative "think-tanks": http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/2008/06/ninety_percent_of_enviro_skept.php
So if you're betting on a global conspiracy, then which one is more plausible:
1) Thousands of scientists nearly unanimously coming to conclusion of AGW.
2) Several tens of writers (mostly NOT climate-scientists) funded by money directly linked to fossil fuels.
?
"So now you are making more assumptions about what I wrote, unsupported by the actual text of my comments? Please point out the post of mine in this thread where I used the word "handgun". "
Because handguns are the main point of difference between European and USA laws. It's legal to own semiautomatic "hunting rifles" in Europe, so it's a non-issue.
"I don't have to use my handgun. I've got a Mini-14 and M-1 Garand for that scenario."
Most people don't have them even in the USA. So it's a moot point.
"The handgun is primarily useful against thugs of the more mundane (criminal) variety and as a last resort in a pitched battle. The only advantage to the handgun is that it's easy to carry around with you. Rather hard to conceal the AK for the trip to the grocery store. "
If you need a gun to go to a grocery store, than you have BIG problems.
"As an American male between the age of 17 and 45 I'm already a member of the militia :)"
Just wait for the next civil war then :)
Germany has a form of trial by jury: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_trial#Germany
Most other countries have it too (in different forms, sure), so it still supports my point.
"Russia? Only death penalty cases."
That's wrong. Russia has no death penalty and trial by jury is available for most criminal cases (except terrorism).
"The US is a Federated Republic. As originally laid down it was never imagined that the Federal Government would get involved in everything from gun control to the welfare state. Why should I believe that a Federated World Government wouldn't be subject to the same mission creep and erosion of personal liberty?"
Simple. Local governments are good at screwing things and running to the federal government for help. This allows federal government to gather
strength, eventually reaching a balance.
USA began as a de-facto confederation, so strengthening of federal government is more pronounced there. A lot of other countries have already reached the balance.
"Do you believe that people have the right to defend themselves (self-defense) when confronted with someone who doesn't share our enlightened morality? If the answer is yes then why don't they have the right to have access to the tools that enable them to defend themselves effectively? "
Mostly because guns are useless for this purpose?
"A gun is an equalizer. Nothing more, nothing less. Few of us geeks here on /. would be capable of prevailing in a fight against a hardened criminal who spent the last ten years in prison pumping iron. Put a gun in your hands and the odds change considerably."
A fairy tale. As I've said in another post, guns are mostly useless in a real warfare. They are also mostly useless at preventing crime - good police departments help much better.
In fact, let me ask you a question. Do you remember stories about 80-year-old grandma shooting robbers with her Magnum?
"There's also the argument that an armed population provides deterrence against external aggression. Switzerland is the best known example"
Switzerland is a poor example. It was not invaded only because invading it gave nothing to Hitler. In itself, invading Switzerland was easy, however Switzerland threatened to destroy bridges and tunnels in case of attack. And Switzerland government also agreed to transfer goods in sealed train cars.
Had Hitler won, the Switzerland would have fallen in one month.
Population of France and the USSR were also armed at that point. Made no difference.
"If none of those arguments hold water with you then I don't know what to say other than why do I have to prove that my rights are "necessary"? A Chinese person might argue that the right to free speech isn't "necessary". Many countries get along without it. I don't think we want to emulate them though."
I think, we can agree to check only the most successful countries - fairly large countries, with a big enough population and good enough quality of life. If you use this criterion, then you'll notice that almost all successful countries (with very few exceptions like Saudi Arabia) have freedom of speech, jury trials, etc. So we CAN make a case that these freedoms are necessary.
Not so with gun control.