If I am going to bring legal action against someone, I am not going to go borrow money from them first - especially if I can't pay it back.
I take it you've never heard the expression, "If you owe the bank a grand, its your problem, if you owe the bank ten million, its the bank's problem"?
The amount of money the US owes China is less an expression of need for a loan as it is a display of contempt for their ability to ever claim it back.
Now I know there are a lot of people who have watched too many Jet Li movies and believe China is an ancient culture, vastly superior to anything in the west, and they produced gunpowder and a wide array of different inventions long before the west. Well here's the news: that culture is long dead, crushed by Mao's revolutionaries, and replaced by the grey faceless totalitarian military rule of a small group of people terrified that china was going to fragment or be taken over by western powers.
The Chinese that I know, and there are many, I even speak a good deal of Cantonese, are so completely and utterly brainwashed by their upbringing that they will accept no criticism of their country, nor any discussion. China is the world to them, and there is no other, merely unwashed barbarians at the gates. This nationalism is artificial and fostered by their government to enforce their rule. There can be no discussion or debate with them; there is no truth but what the government says.
The laws of other countries mean little to them. They feel they can break the law with impunity, since the worst that can happen is they can be sent back to China, and they never integrate into the local community, since they feel they will ultimately end up being the leaders of that community, one way or the other. They are busily patting each other on the back and looking forward to the day when China is the next empire.
Well they got one thing right, there are barbarians at the gates... Just not their gates...
Another limitation is that humans in the industrialized nations have more or less driven out natural selection.
You are confusing biological evolution with social systems. The removal of "natural" (what is that anyway, should we deny all medicines, housing, and civilisation to a few generations just to clear out the gene pool? And in this society, who do you think will triumph and propagate their genes, the brutes or the intellectuals?) selection does not harm humanity; if anything it broadens the gene pool and increases the chance of beneficial mutations which might lead to any one of a number of positive effects.
Also your sweeping characterisation of the stupid as being born that way smacks very much of a particularily nasty type of eugenics, as does your pinning of "highly intellectual" people. I am aware that there are more than a few people of low intelligence who are genetically built that way, but I would say these are in the vast minority. Much of this has to do with environment rather than their genes.
don't reproduce often because of social factors
And what is this? Did you ever stop to think that the same social factors might inversely apply to the less fortunate among us? It is well known that in times of war, plague, or other stressful times, the rate of population growth increases. By applying this on the micro- or individual scale, you can easily see why those who feel pressured or are in fact most pressured would "breed" first and faster.
Although it would make life very simple for a certain type of mindset to identify a "stupid" gene and assign lesser rights to these lesser beings, things just aren't that easy.
Okay, lets clarify things a bit here. If you read my first post, you will note I said I did not condone prisons or the behaviour encouraged in prisons. I most assuredly do not, and I think there should be a better alternative. Claiming I am a sadist does not lend any weight to your arguments either, and is basically an ad-hominem attack, one based not upon my arguments but upon my assumed personality. Now thats out of the way...
By your links there, I am just not seeing what you are getting at. One claims that prison reforms were instituted by a member of the judiciary, but these did not have much effect. This implies that there was a general lack of co-operation. Another appears to be bemoaning the prison system generally. Yet another seems to be a receipt from a blacksmith for shackles (which are still used in today's prisons by the way, and I have in fact seen prisoners brought to court in leg, arm, hand, and neck shackles, a few even all at once), and the next is an account of disease in old prisons. We can cure prisoners of such things fairly easily now, and do so, to keep them healthy. I fail to see how that denies my point; healthy prisoners can better appreciate their conditions. Moving right along, we have a long, rambling article with no single point, and the last one is from a penal reform group. This is a laudable goal and worthy (from a small group of people hardly representative of society as a whole), but to give you a quote from their own summary...
The supremacy of imprisonment as a way of dealing with offending behaviour shows no signs of abating.
And yes the attitude I point out is not new, nor is it in any way enlightened. But to repeat myself, I do not espouse such an attitude nor claim it as my own. Don't infer things about me by my discussion, if you would be so kind.
It's also telling that you point out that it is against "modern sensibilities". There's a good reason for that...
Indeed there is a reason. I wouldn't go so far as to call it good, however.
You include things like safety-hemlet laws and gambling laws?
Yes, laws for protection from the stupidity of others or your own stupidity, under threat of retribution, all serve to focus the mind on obeying the law.
No, it's the primary effect. It's "revenge" that's the secondary effect.
Okay lets get this straight here, we aren't talking about effects. You are talking about the reasoning behind the law, I am talking about the basic structure of the law. Let me ask you, if society was so bent on serving its best interests, wouldn't it make more sense to try to rehabilitate criminals as much as possible and turn them into productive members of society? The point isn't even debatable on any level. Of course it makes more sense. But thats not how it is. Your argument has nothing to offer by way of explanation, mine is the occams razor result.
You seem to think that the only reason violent crime could go down is if we take out harsher revenge on people
Can you point out to me exactly where I said or even implied that? Once again, don't seek to give me attributes I don't posess. It might make you feel better about berating me, but it couldn't be farther from the truth, and it weakens your argument.
That makes no sense
Correct, and yet it is still the current state of affairs, despite the many brilliant minds involved in both the creation and enforcement of laws. Why do you think that is? Please note that the people in the best position to change the laws are often those who have first hand experience in the mechanics of he law at every level, lawyers who become judges and public servants. Violent crime is met with harsh punishment. I am not saying thats the best way to deal with it, yet again, I am merely pointing out that it is, and why it is.
No, it's because, plain and simple, nobody gives a shit about prisoners
It's not iPods or laptops we should be thinking about when it comes to these batteries, its exoskeletons and robots. Who can forget Arnie's 10-year nuclear battery in T2? Once these become commonplace, and I am sure that they will, nuclear boogeymen notwithstanding, one of the major hurdles in large scale robotics production is bypassed.
Heck, while we're at it, why not slip a rack of them into your car? I could do with not having to stop at a gas station for 10 years! Aeroplanes, helicopters even might be limited by the weight of these things, but assuming no shortage of materials, you could put one of these batteries into every home, and run your house from it! The possibilities are endless...
You have to take a pretty narrow reading of "law", and use a pretty wide definition of "revenge", to make things as simple as that.
Actually, it is as simple as that. It may not suit modern sensibilities to see it in those terms, but the underlying foundation of all laws and structures of law is revenge, or rather to take the mandate for revenge out of the hands of individuals and put it in the hands of the leaders.
It is about a system of protecting a given society's interests.
This is a secondary effect, a symptom or knock-on effect rather than cause. That is merely the threat of vengeance acting as a deterrent to potential criminals.
Current prison conditions make rehabilitation much, much harder - and for relatively little gain.
Have you ever wondered why this glaringly obvious fact has escaped the attention of law and policy makers for so long?
Its because they aren't meant to rehabilitate, they are meant to punish. If someone robs your house, steals your car, or beats up your grandmother, wouldn't you love to have a chat with that guy in the company of a heavy implement and a half an hour of privacy? Of course you would. And then his family and friends come after you, and yours go after them, and we have anarchy. Instead, you get the satisfaction of knowing that he is trapped with violent thugs who will do the beating for you. Prison guards know it, police know it, judges know it. Thats why you will never see prison reform, or a more humane / intelligent method of dealing with criminals.
Prisons are hell because thats the way society likes it.
Actually in a way, I rather envy these up and coming third world states as they begin to make their presence felt. They have few advantages in the global economy, but its like the Russians; they had the best mathemeticians in the world because all you needed to learn it was a pen and paper. Well all you need to learn software, graphic design, or any of the many related fields is a computer, and they are getting cheaper by the week.
These countries have a chance to learn from the mistakes made by the western world (in particular America and its crippling IP laws), so I wouldn't call it a process of catching up, more a process of cherry picking the best ideas and choosing their own divergent path.
I expect the next large IT advances to come from places like India - once it becomes obvious to them that they have a clear run at parity, with much more advanced nations, they will invest many more of their resources into it. In fact, unhindered by IP law, they may well become vastly superior in terms of IT.
the company prohibits outside relationships that could interfere with work
Christ I hope the pay was worth it... Seriously though, leaving aside the utterly atrocious intrusion on your privacy and the consequent ill effects on your health and well being, how would they track something like that? If you come into work less than chipper, how do they know you don't have a hangover, or your dog just got run over or something? What, have they got mandatory psychological reviews and drug testing on a weekly basis? The corporate control culture can be taken too far, and it sounds like one PHB has the emporer syndrome something wicked:D I bet he strangles people just by raising his hand and breathing heavily too...
Oh and the very best of luck with the working out; one of the slashdot sages put it best, I think... That shit ain't easy!:D
Three words: Remote Military Applications. The benefits of this technology to the military stretch far beyond normal and even ultra secret communications; they could remotely control battle robots, or even properly equipped tanks, without fear of interference or subversion. This is especially interesting considering the latest drones in use by the US military.
You can find a lot of people to fight your wars, but they are expensive to train, unreliable, and to gain experience they need to risk serious injury or death. On the other hand, you can mass produce battle robots to extremely precise specifications, and control them safely from a command bunker many kilometers away with this technology.
Law isn't about rehabilitation, unfortunately. The law is, quite simply put, a system of codified, organised revenge. It began with Hammurabi and the earliest civilsations; in order to prevent blood feuds and duels in the street, the king or high priest was declared to be the sole distributor of revenge. When two parties had a dispute, the king would decide who was at fault, and exact revenge sufficient to satisfy the injured party, no more and no less.
So, if you are wondering why prisons are the harsh, brutal, violent places that they are, remember they are society's implements of vengeance. The inmates have (purportedly) injured some part of society, now society is going to make them pay according to the rules and guidelines laid down by experience and practise.
I'm not condoning it or saying it is the best method to deal with criminals, just explaining exactly why it is all that it is.
Its been said that the only constant is change, but weighed against that, not all change is for the better. On the whole, I have to say that if you were to view these advances from a purely scientific perspective, obviously what has been achieved is remarkable and laudable.
On the other hand, you have to ask yourself just how far we can and will go, and what effect this will have on various societies. What repercussions will this have on cross-species diseases? What purpose will these chimeras serve?
One place they will certainly find uses will be in menial and domestic tasks. A low intelligence, geneered for obedience servant. In other words, a slave race. The next question of course, is would that be a bad thing? Any worse than say, a household dog?
And lets not forget the obvious military applications. Depending on your personal perspective, it may be a good or bad thing to have a race of creatures bred purely to fight our wars for us. Personally I am in favour of having them, because the sad truth is that if "we" don't, "they" will, and the only time tested method to ensure peace is a balance of powers. And realistically folks, its only a matter of time
So is it scary? Right now, no. In the longer term, its downright terrifying.
I think you are confusing phenotypes with societal pressures here. If you think all or a majority of women wouldn't be interested in seeing naked photos of men, you might be right; for a fairly restricted set of women, in particular in western society.
Sexual attitudes vary greatly from culture to culture. What mught be repugnant to a western woman might be perfectly acceptable to asian women, for example most asian women tend to find very mature men (age 50+) more attractive than the musclebound teenage types.
Human sexuality generally is more of a mental attitude than a hardwired instinct. Porn likewise depends on the situation. If there is a guy that is living on an oil rig, then yes porn is not only acceptable, but very beneficial.
But if there is someone that comes into contact with women regularily, he would be much better off trying to find a regular partner. Porn in this case is an illusion that will be an unhealthy burden in normal social interactions.
Basically my point is there are no hard and fast rules or sweeping generalisations that can be made for what attracts men or women. It might make life easier to see it like that, but that doesn't neccessarily make it so.
i could just as easily assert that evolutionists are trying to push there [sic] 'agenda' of faithlessness onto me.
Petunia, they just don't care. You can believe what you like, and no biologist will denounce you. However, when you start to represent your beliefs as facts, thats when things get a bit rocky for you.
Because, you see, scientists are reporters and interpreters of facts. They are not the last spasms of a dying cultural cul-de-sac, nor are they the strutting wannabe creators of their own cults of personality, the tribal knee-jerk.
Our culture and society is built on facts. If you want to believe the world is flat, feel free to do so. thats another advantage of our society. But be ready for the sniggers when you try to sell it to astronauts.
They aren't mocking you. They just feel sorry for you.
This seems to be an extension of the general tech-upgrade that the UAE are going through right now. For example, (not sure if/. covered this one), they are using robot camel jockeys, it seems in an effort to stop children being kidnapped or purchased for use as jockeys. Likewise, one of my clients sells real estate in Dubai, and you should see the level of technology in one of their apartments... unreal.
Still, the parallels between this and for example Japanese culture are interesting; once a society reaches a certain level of affluence, the integration of hi-tech seems to become not just accepted, but in fact the norm.
Whats fascinating about this whole debate is that there is "creationISM" and evolution, not evolutionISM. This indicates that the creationists are more demagogues with an agenda, a need to convice their audience by force of personality and rhetorical dogma that by reasoned debate.
"Evolutionists" are in fact Biologists, a field which has contributed more to the well being of the human race in its short existance than religion has ever done.
Even more interesting, to the storm of noise and thunder coming from the creationism camp, the only noise coming from the Biologist's camp (not slashdot) is...
Did you look at the team members and board of directors in the "about meetup" section? They are going to need to pull in a heck of a lot of money to keep all of those people gainfully employed. You could probably set up and run the whole operation with one manager and a couple of designers, maybe an external accountant contacted once a year to do up the wages.
I wouldn't deny anyone providing a valuable service the right to make money from that service, but their operation is waaay too bloated to stay afloat. Dot bomb, anyone?
Funny, I thought you mentioned it first... eh maybe I was mistaken.
China, knowing that by 2030 india is predicted to pass them in population, knows they have to act.
Oops, no I'm not... Oh and in terms of precision, how do you think the current administration is influencing the statistical predictions of its departments?
Never to stir up fear and resentment towards foreigners!
If I was an ISP, and I'm not far off one as it turns out, and such a letter was handed to me, the first thing I would do is pen a rather impolite (but non libelous) return message. Next, I would institute an investigation into the racketeering practises of not just the RIAA but their paymasters. And finally, I would employ a private detective to get me as much information as he could legally get on each and every one of the marketing execs, middlemen, and indeed artists responsible for the RIAA.
Ah its good to know the CIA has perfected crystal ball technolgies. Or perhaps they have just taken a shortcut, and are drawing conclusions from tea leaves? Statistical analysis of populations over a period of 30 years in the future is about as efficient as global climatology right now...
This whole story makes no sense... aren't lasers mostly light, whether in the visible spectrum or invisible spectrum? If so, how exactly is this light piercing the outer crunchy bits of the fruit fly, and targetting specific neurons?
If you wanted to use this on humans, you would have considerably more flesh, blood, and bone to work through, not to mention the fact that the neurons might not be conveniently located on the surface of the brain, so you might have to drill through a whole lot more. Is that smoke I smell?
Yes, I am aware that certain forms of light radiation can pass through the body, but anything affecting neurons is probably going to affect anything else in the way also. On the whole, this story smells like BS, or more likely the wet dream of one of GW's contemporaries.
Western Europe plus the United States will only be 9% of the global population. With emerging economies, it is forecasted that we westerners are supposed to become quite obsolete.
Er, where did you get this statistic from? As far as I know, Europe amounts to over half a billion people, and the US has a third of a billion. By the time the EU folds in Russia, and it will happen, by 2030 I would be surprised if the EU and US did not add up to well in excess of a billion people. And thats today, 2005. Over the next thirty years it will increase; contrary to popular opinion, western populations are still rising, with one or two exceptions.
And whatever about the US, the EU certainly isn't sitting on its ass with regard to innovation and improving education.
Is the global population going to be 10 billion by 2030?
You could put the whole power plant down there however, assuming you could overcome the engineering challenges of pressure, heat and semi molten rock. Then you could just have power cables sending the electricity straight back up. Not easy, but doable.
Slashdot Mirror
If I am going to bring legal action against someone, I am not going to go borrow money from them first - especially if I can't pay it back.
I take it you've never heard the expression, "If you owe the bank a grand, its your problem, if you owe the bank ten million, its the bank's problem"?
The amount of money the US owes China is less an expression of need for a loan as it is a display of contempt for their ability to ever claim it back.
Now I know there are a lot of people who have watched too many Jet Li movies and believe China is an ancient culture, vastly superior to anything in the west, and they produced gunpowder and a wide array of different inventions long before the west. Well here's the news: that culture is long dead, crushed by Mao's revolutionaries, and replaced by the grey faceless totalitarian military rule of a small group of people terrified that china was going to fragment or be taken over by western powers.
The Chinese that I know, and there are many, I even speak a good deal of Cantonese, are so completely and utterly brainwashed by their upbringing that they will accept no criticism of their country, nor any discussion. China is the world to them, and there is no other, merely unwashed barbarians at the gates. This nationalism is artificial and fostered by their government to enforce their rule. There can be no discussion or debate with them; there is no truth but what the government says.
The laws of other countries mean little to them. They feel they can break the law with impunity, since the worst that can happen is they can be sent back to China, and they never integrate into the local community, since they feel they will ultimately end up being the leaders of that community, one way or the other. They are busily patting each other on the back and looking forward to the day when China is the next empire.
Well they got one thing right, there are barbarians at the gates... Just not their gates...
Another limitation is that humans in the industrialized nations have more or less driven out natural selection.
You are confusing biological evolution with social systems. The removal of "natural" (what is that anyway, should we deny all medicines, housing, and civilisation to a few generations just to clear out the gene pool? And in this society, who do you think will triumph and propagate their genes, the brutes or the intellectuals?) selection does not harm humanity; if anything it broadens the gene pool and increases the chance of beneficial mutations which might lead to any one of a number of positive effects.
Also your sweeping characterisation of the stupid as being born that way smacks very much of a particularily nasty type of eugenics, as does your pinning of "highly intellectual" people. I am aware that there are more than a few people of low intelligence who are genetically built that way, but I would say these are in the vast minority. Much of this has to do with environment rather than their genes.
don't reproduce often because of social factors
And what is this? Did you ever stop to think that the same social factors might inversely apply to the less fortunate among us? It is well known that in times of war, plague, or other stressful times, the rate of population growth increases. By applying this on the micro- or individual scale, you can easily see why those who feel pressured or are in fact most pressured would "breed" first and faster.
Although it would make life very simple for a certain type of mindset to identify a "stupid" gene and assign lesser rights to these lesser beings, things just aren't that easy.
Ah yeah, I can live with that.
Okay, lets clarify things a bit here. If you read my first post, you will note I said I did not condone prisons or the behaviour encouraged in prisons. I most assuredly do not, and I think there should be a better alternative. Claiming I am a sadist does not lend any weight to your arguments either, and is basically an ad-hominem attack, one based not upon my arguments but upon my assumed personality. Now thats out of the way...
By your links there, I am just not seeing what you are getting at. One claims that prison reforms were instituted by a member of the judiciary, but these did not have much effect. This implies that there was a general lack of co-operation. Another appears to be bemoaning the prison system generally. Yet another seems to be a receipt from a blacksmith for shackles (which are still used in today's prisons by the way, and I have in fact seen prisoners brought to court in leg, arm, hand, and neck shackles, a few even all at once), and the next is an account of disease in old prisons. We can cure prisoners of such things fairly easily now, and do so, to keep them healthy. I fail to see how that denies my point; healthy prisoners can better appreciate their conditions. Moving right along, we have a long, rambling article with no single point, and the last one is from a penal reform group. This is a laudable goal and worthy (from a small group of people hardly representative of society as a whole), but to give you a quote from their own summary...
The supremacy of imprisonment as a way of dealing with offending behaviour shows no signs of abating.
And yes the attitude I point out is not new, nor is it in any way enlightened. But to repeat myself, I do not espouse such an attitude nor claim it as my own. Don't infer things about me by my discussion, if you would be so kind.
It's also telling that you point out that it is against "modern sensibilities". There's a good reason for that...
Indeed there is a reason. I wouldn't go so far as to call it good, however.
You include things like safety-hemlet laws and gambling laws?
Yes, laws for protection from the stupidity of others or your own stupidity, under threat of retribution, all serve to focus the mind on obeying the law.
No, it's the primary effect. It's "revenge" that's the secondary effect.
Okay lets get this straight here, we aren't talking about effects. You are talking about the reasoning behind the law, I am talking about the basic structure of the law. Let me ask you, if society was so bent on serving its best interests, wouldn't it make more sense to try to rehabilitate criminals as much as possible and turn them into productive members of society? The point isn't even debatable on any level. Of course it makes more sense. But thats not how it is. Your argument has nothing to offer by way of explanation, mine is the occams razor result.
You seem to think that the only reason violent crime could go down is if we take out harsher revenge on people
Can you point out to me exactly where I said or even implied that? Once again, don't seek to give me attributes I don't posess. It might make you feel better about berating me, but it couldn't be farther from the truth, and it weakens your argument.
That makes no sense
Correct, and yet it is still the current state of affairs, despite the many brilliant minds involved in both the creation and enforcement of laws. Why do you think that is? Please note that the people in the best position to change the laws are often those who have first hand experience in the mechanics of he law at every level, lawyers who become judges and public servants. Violent crime is met with harsh punishment. I am not saying thats the best way to deal with it, yet again, I am merely pointing out that it is, and why it is.
No, it's because, plain and simple, nobody gives a shit about prisoners
If nobody cared about prisoners,
It's not iPods or laptops we should be thinking about when it comes to these batteries, its exoskeletons and robots. Who can forget Arnie's 10-year nuclear battery in T2? Once these become commonplace, and I am sure that they will, nuclear boogeymen notwithstanding, one of the major hurdles in large scale robotics production is bypassed.
Heck, while we're at it, why not slip a rack of them into your car? I could do with not having to stop at a gas station for 10 years! Aeroplanes, helicopters even might be limited by the weight of these things, but assuming no shortage of materials, you could put one of these batteries into every home, and run your house from it! The possibilities are endless...
You have to take a pretty narrow reading of "law", and use a pretty wide definition of "revenge", to make things as simple as that.
Actually, it is as simple as that. It may not suit modern sensibilities to see it in those terms, but the underlying foundation of all laws and structures of law is revenge, or rather to take the mandate for revenge out of the hands of individuals and put it in the hands of the leaders.
It is about a system of protecting a given society's interests.
This is a secondary effect, a symptom or knock-on effect rather than cause. That is merely the threat of vengeance acting as a deterrent to potential criminals.
Current prison conditions make rehabilitation much, much harder - and for relatively little gain.
Have you ever wondered why this glaringly obvious fact has escaped the attention of law and policy makers for so long? Its because they aren't meant to rehabilitate, they are meant to punish. If someone robs your house, steals your car, or beats up your grandmother, wouldn't you love to have a chat with that guy in the company of a heavy implement and a half an hour of privacy? Of course you would. And then his family and friends come after you, and yours go after them, and we have anarchy. Instead, you get the satisfaction of knowing that he is trapped with violent thugs who will do the beating for you. Prison guards know it, police know it, judges know it. Thats why you will never see prison reform, or a more humane / intelligent method of dealing with criminals.
Prisons are hell because thats the way society likes it.
Actually in a way, I rather envy these up and coming third world states as they begin to make their presence felt. They have few advantages in the global economy, but its like the Russians; they had the best mathemeticians in the world because all you needed to learn it was a pen and paper. Well all you need to learn software, graphic design, or any of the many related fields is a computer, and they are getting cheaper by the week.
These countries have a chance to learn from the mistakes made by the western world (in particular America and its crippling IP laws), so I wouldn't call it a process of catching up, more a process of cherry picking the best ideas and choosing their own divergent path.
I expect the next large IT advances to come from places like India - once it becomes obvious to them that they have a clear run at parity, with much more advanced nations, they will invest many more of their resources into it. In fact, unhindered by IP law, they may well become vastly superior in terms of IT.
the company prohibits outside relationships that could interfere with work
:D I bet he strangles people just by raising his hand and breathing heavily too...
:D
Christ I hope the pay was worth it... Seriously though, leaving aside the utterly atrocious intrusion on your privacy and the consequent ill effects on your health and well being, how would they track something like that? If you come into work less than chipper, how do they know you don't have a hangover, or your dog just got run over or something? What, have they got mandatory psychological reviews and drug testing on a weekly basis? The corporate control culture can be taken too far, and it sounds like one PHB has the emporer syndrome something wicked
Oh and the very best of luck with the working out; one of the slashdot sages put it best, I think... That shit ain't easy!
Three words: Remote Military Applications. The benefits of this technology to the military stretch far beyond normal and even ultra secret communications; they could remotely control battle robots, or even properly equipped tanks, without fear of interference or subversion. This is especially interesting considering the latest drones in use by the US military.
You can find a lot of people to fight your wars, but they are expensive to train, unreliable, and to gain experience they need to risk serious injury or death. On the other hand, you can mass produce battle robots to extremely precise specifications, and control them safely from a command bunker many kilometers away with this technology.
Law isn't about rehabilitation, unfortunately. The law is, quite simply put, a system of codified, organised revenge. It began with Hammurabi and the earliest civilsations; in order to prevent blood feuds and duels in the street, the king or high priest was declared to be the sole distributor of revenge. When two parties had a dispute, the king would decide who was at fault, and exact revenge sufficient to satisfy the injured party, no more and no less.
So, if you are wondering why prisons are the harsh, brutal, violent places that they are, remember they are society's implements of vengeance. The inmates have (purportedly) injured some part of society, now society is going to make them pay according to the rules and guidelines laid down by experience and practise.
I'm not condoning it or saying it is the best method to deal with criminals, just explaining exactly why it is all that it is.
Its been said that the only constant is change, but weighed against that, not all change is for the better. On the whole, I have to say that if you were to view these advances from a purely scientific perspective, obviously what has been achieved is remarkable and laudable.
On the other hand, you have to ask yourself just how far we can and will go, and what effect this will have on various societies. What repercussions will this have on cross-species diseases? What purpose will these chimeras serve?
One place they will certainly find uses will be in menial and domestic tasks. A low intelligence, geneered for obedience servant. In other words, a slave race. The next question of course, is would that be a bad thing? Any worse than say, a household dog?
And lets not forget the obvious military applications. Depending on your personal perspective, it may be a good or bad thing to have a race of creatures bred purely to fight our wars for us. Personally I am in favour of having them, because the sad truth is that if "we" don't, "they" will, and the only time tested method to ensure peace is a balance of powers. And realistically folks, its only a matter of time
So is it scary? Right now, no. In the longer term, its downright terrifying.
what it means to be a TRUE American.
Surely you mean, a true human being...
Theres a pretty decent summary of phishing and other types of attacks here, written for the ordinary (but interested) Joe...
I think you are confusing phenotypes with societal pressures here. If you think all or a majority of women wouldn't be interested in seeing naked photos of men, you might be right; for a fairly restricted set of women, in particular in western society. Sexual attitudes vary greatly from culture to culture. What mught be repugnant to a western woman might be perfectly acceptable to asian women, for example most asian women tend to find very mature men (age 50+) more attractive than the musclebound teenage types.
Human sexuality generally is more of a mental attitude than a hardwired instinct. Porn likewise depends on the situation. If there is a guy that is living on an oil rig, then yes porn is not only acceptable, but very beneficial. But if there is someone that comes into contact with women regularily, he would be much better off trying to find a regular partner. Porn in this case is an illusion that will be an unhealthy burden in normal social interactions.
Basically my point is there are no hard and fast rules or sweeping generalisations that can be made for what attracts men or women. It might make life easier to see it like that, but that doesn't neccessarily make it so.
i could just as easily assert that evolutionists are trying to push there [sic] 'agenda' of faithlessness onto me.
Petunia, they just don't care. You can believe what you like, and no biologist will denounce you. However, when you start to represent your beliefs as facts, thats when things get a bit rocky for you.
Because, you see, scientists are reporters and interpreters of facts. They are not the last spasms of a dying cultural cul-de-sac, nor are they the strutting wannabe creators of their own cults of personality, the tribal knee-jerk.
Our culture and society is built on facts. If you want to believe the world is flat, feel free to do so. thats another advantage of our society. But be ready for the sniggers when you try to sell it to astronauts.
They aren't mocking you. They just feel sorry for you.
This seems to be an extension of the general tech-upgrade that the UAE are going through right now. For example, (not sure if /. covered this one), they are using robot camel jockeys, it seems in an effort to stop children being kidnapped or purchased for use as jockeys. Likewise, one of my clients sells real estate in Dubai, and you should see the level of technology in one of their apartments... unreal.
Still, the parallels between this and for example Japanese culture are interesting; once a society reaches a certain level of affluence, the integration of hi-tech seems to become not just accepted, but in fact the norm.
Whats fascinating about this whole debate is that there is "creationISM" and evolution, not evolutionISM. This indicates that the creationists are more demagogues with an agenda, a need to convice their audience by force of personality and rhetorical dogma that by reasoned debate.
"Evolutionists" are in fact Biologists, a field which has contributed more to the well being of the human race in its short existance than religion has ever done.
Even more interesting, to the storm of noise and thunder coming from the creationism camp, the only noise coming from the Biologist's camp (not slashdot) is...
Silence...
And the occasional snigger.
In one corner
A silent hall, dry echoes
The dark man claps
Did you look at the team members and board of directors in the "about meetup" section? They are going to need to pull in a heck of a lot of money to keep all of those people gainfully employed. You could probably set up and run the whole operation with one manager and a couple of designers, maybe an external accountant contacted once a year to do up the wages.
I wouldn't deny anyone providing a valuable service the right to make money from that service, but their operation is waaay too bloated to stay afloat. Dot bomb, anyone?
Funny, I thought you mentioned it first... eh maybe I was mistaken.
China, knowing that by 2030 india is predicted to pass them in population, knows they have to act.
Oops, no I'm not... Oh and in terms of precision, how do you think the current administration is influencing the statistical predictions of its departments?
Never to stir up fear and resentment towards foreigners!
=)
If I was an ISP, and I'm not far off one as it turns out, and such a letter was handed to me, the first thing I would do is pen a rather impolite (but non libelous) return message. Next, I would institute an investigation into the racketeering practises of not just the RIAA but their paymasters. And finally, I would employ a private detective to get me as much information as he could legally get on each and every one of the marketing execs, middlemen, and indeed artists responsible for the RIAA.
Hookers and coke on Friday night? Oh, jolly!
Ah its good to know the CIA has perfected crystal ball technolgies. Or perhaps they have just taken a shortcut, and are drawing conclusions from tea leaves? Statistical analysis of populations over a period of 30 years in the future is about as efficient as global climatology right now...
=)
This whole story makes no sense... aren't lasers mostly light, whether in the visible spectrum or invisible spectrum? If so, how exactly is this light piercing the outer crunchy bits of the fruit fly, and targetting specific neurons?
If you wanted to use this on humans, you would have considerably more flesh, blood, and bone to work through, not to mention the fact that the neurons might not be conveniently located on the surface of the brain, so you might have to drill through a whole lot more. Is that smoke I smell?
Yes, I am aware that certain forms of light radiation can pass through the body, but anything affecting neurons is probably going to affect anything else in the way also. On the whole, this story smells like BS, or more likely the wet dream of one of GW's contemporaries.
Western Europe plus the United States will only be 9% of the global population. With emerging economies, it is forecasted that we westerners are supposed to become quite obsolete.
Er, where did you get this statistic from? As far as I know, Europe amounts to over half a billion people, and the US has a third of a billion. By the time the EU folds in Russia, and it will happen, by 2030 I would be surprised if the EU and US did not add up to well in excess of a billion people. And thats today, 2005. Over the next thirty years it will increase; contrary to popular opinion, western populations are still rising, with one or two exceptions.
And whatever about the US, the EU certainly isn't sitting on its ass with regard to innovation and improving education.
Is the global population going to be 10 billion by 2030?
You could put the whole power plant down there however, assuming you could overcome the engineering challenges of pressure, heat and semi molten rock. Then you could just have power cables sending the electricity straight back up. Not easy, but doable.