Becoming anti-science is only another step along the "this discipline is too hard for me to study, therefore anyone who does understand it is an elitist snob" mentality that is growing in this country.
First they came for the mathematicians, and I did not speak out--
because I did not like math;
Then they came for the theoretical economists, and I did not speak out--
because I did not understand economics;
Then they came for the engineers, and I did not speak out--
because I did not believe engineering was a true science;
Then they came for the scientists, and I did not speak out--
because I did not like my science teacher;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
It's my understanding that a promise to donate to a charity can be enforceable. No show of reliance on the part of the charity is necessary. He made a promise to donate based on the consideration of the production of the game.
Restatement of Contracts section 90 (2): A charitable subscription or a marriage settlement is binding without proof that the promise induced action or forbearance.
This story from News-Medical.Net discusses a link between computer use and eye problem. Unfortunately it doesn't mention if the study took into account the type of monitor used.
"The test revealed that 522 (5.1%) employees had visual field abnormalities. And there appeared to be a significant link between these and heavy computer use among those with either long or short sight, collectively known as "refractive errors."
The full text is from the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health and can be found here for subscribers.
So maybe I'm not really familiar with the true value of ham radio operators in situations like this -- can anyone give a more informed picture? Do they just serve to carry random individual messages of "I'm ok", until the military/relief authorities arrive and set up a real command communications network?
This is a legitmate question, but the answer is in the article if you are familiar with ham radio "terms of art." In the article there are references to "helping to handle emergency traffic" and also "pitching in to handle emergency and health-and-welfare traffic." Emergency traffic and health-and-welfare traffic are terms describing two very different types of disaster communication.
There are four general categories of disaster messages which have the following precedence:
1. Emergency traffic. This includes messages relating to the immediate protection of life or propery. For example, coordinating the delivery of medical supplies or personnel; dispatching emergency services; relaying vital information for disaster response.
2. Priority traffic. Generally not as time sensitive as emergency traffic. 3. Health-and-welfare traffic is the type of messages which you reference where a survivor wants to get word out relatives that they are ok.
4. Routine. Non-related communications
So, the fact that the article specifies that they handled "emergency and health-and-welfare" means that they did more than handle "I'm ok" messages. There's an additional clue when the article says that "[o]ur control center was inside the prime minister's official house in his operational room." This indicates that it is very likely that they were handling critical messages until regular communications could be set up.
Amateur Radio has similar roles around the U.S. and the world in official government emergency response plans. I am part of a volunteer emergency communications team for a major metropolitan area in the U.S. We have our own area and equipment in the city emergency operations center. In the event of a disaster, we become the relay through which all information/reports for 911-type dispatching will come. We form the link to the county and state emergency operations centers, and provide other radio-based services as well. We are offically affiliated with the police department. There are other groups affiliated with relief organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvation Army which provide more health-and-welfare type traffic than our group, but they also handle critical relief-related communications for their organizations. Ham radio is involved in all levels of disaster response communications from the most important to the least.
In addition to what other posters have said, check out Centaur Forge. They've got tons of books and videos as well as anvils, hammers, forges and all kinds of other equipment necessary for all sorts of smithing.
If someone sincerely believes that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his Prophet, that is enough to make him a Muslim.
Um, no. I someone believes there is no god but God, and Jesus is His son, that is not enough to make him a Catholic, either. A person who believes in Allah and His prophet Mohammed could be of Babist or Baha'i faith -- whom many muslims would (and have) kill. No, a religious faith has teachings which its followers are expected to believe and follow. If you don't follow those teachings, you aren't really a member of the faith, even if you say over and over that you are.
You might want to assume that religious devotion can only have positive effects on devotees, but that would be a very bad assumption. Sure, you can make any assumption you want for your model, but having bad assumptions doesn't make for a very good model.
Re:keep it anonymous and private.
on
Privacy in the Woods?
·
· Score: 1, Informative
I agree that it needs to be voluntary and add that it would only work on that basis.
First, how are you going to accomplish the tracking? If you just put out a sensor you're going to get hits for more that just people, you'll get a blip for every rat, field mouse, deer, raccoon, dog, coyote, et cetera that crosses your sensor.
Second, if you have people wear something like an RFID tag that checks in with a proximity sensor, then anyone who doesn't want to be tracked will simply remove the tag or stay off the trails where the sensors are.
Third, how do you protect people from abusive system users? For example, a voyeuristic ranger checking up on a young couple to spy on them later, or a stalker-type tracking down lone individuals or a thief who checks to see where the person with the cool gear is camping that night.
In order to help in search and rescue, you've got have id tags that map back to a particular person unless you've got almost no people coming to your location. To prevent abuses, you'd probably have to log the information back to some state parks & recreation or fish & wildlife server so that local people can only access the information if someone is reported missing. But then you've got the whole issue of the state collecting centralized data about its citizens.
I don't think it's a great idea other than on a voluntary basis.
SCO will sue BayStar for tortious interference and SCO stock with surge to $15 per share. SCO executives will sell many more shares according to their "preplanned schedule," raking in a few million more bucks for themselves.
There are many valid security reasons not to allow personal technology use in a work environment. Some have been touched on by other posters.
Cell phone communications are relatively easy to eavesdrop upon. Are your email alerts being sent and received in an encrypted format? Unlikely since few phones support encrypted mail. A hacker could gain much valuable information on your company network simply by intercepting your email alerts sent to your phone. The same is true for work-related voice conversation with your cell phone. Camera equipped phones are an additional, if different, problem.
Are you keeping your phone physically secure? If someone steals you phone, will he/she now be able to receive your vital email alerts?
Of course, it would take a determined hacker to do the above things. But if your company is concerned with security, then their cell phone ban is not at all far-fetched. If they are merely concerned with people yakking about private matters on their phones all day, then maybe you can get them to change the policy.
I don't agree with this law. The interlock is too dangerous. There are times when starting a car drunk is the lesser of two evils which should be allowed.
Examples:
Billy and Jane drive out to secluded beach and start drinking.
1) Billy decides to rape Jane. Jane realizes Billy's intentions are bad, but is unable to start the car and get away. Jane is raped.
2) Jane is injured climbing a pretty beach cliff and needs urgent medical care. Billy is unable to start the car. Jane dies.
3) Billy and Jane see a powerboat pulling up to the beach full of al Queda terrorist drug-running suicide bombers. They are unable to drive the car to report to authorities. They are gunned down on the beach. The city of Portland is nuked and the city of Seattle is stoned.
These are all situations where I would/could forgive the danger of driving after having too much to drink. Sure, the situations could have been avoided, but I don't agree that all potentially hazardous situations should be avoided.
"Finally, McBride responded to a report that Novell Inc. was still pursuing its own copyright claims on Unix. "Novell is desperate," McBride said. "SCO has produced documents that say we own the Unix copyrights. Let me be real clear: SCO acquired all rights for Unix and UnixWare, includes copyrights. We see this as a fraudulent notice." McBride added that SCO sees Novell as being "all hat, no cattle." from eweek
Well, if that's not the pot calling the kettle black... They really are a joke.
Well, what happened is that Darl is claiming profitability anyway:
"For the entire fiscal year 2003, SCO reported net income to common stockholders of $5.3 million, or $0.34 per diluted common share, reversing a net loss of $24.9 million, or $1.93 per diluted common share, in fiscal 2002. McBride claims that this marks the first time that the company has been profitable on a full-year basis." See eweek
I guess the $9 million in lawyer fees doesn't count toward being profitable or not.
Well, what happened is that Darl is claiming profitability anyway:
"For the entire fiscal year 2003, SCO reported net income to common stockholders of $5.3 million, or $0.34 per diluted common share, reversing a net loss of $24.9 million, or $1.93 per diluted common share, in fiscal 2002. McBride claims that this marks the first time that the company has been profitable on a full-year basis." See eweek
I guess the $9 million in lawyer fees doesn't count toward being profitable or not.
Ha ha, just serious. The truth of my first statement is the reason I left the legal profession. It has nothing to do with conspiracy theories and everything to do with various parties' desires to be on the golf course by three rather than, god forbid, spend some time figuring out the truth. Truth is inconvenient and time consuming.
I am glad that you recognize it for what it is -- a "legal system." There are many who still mistakenly call it a "justice system" which it no longer is.
The vehicle is designed as a guess at what transportation in the year 2025 might look like.
This is very interesting considering that this vehicle was first conceptualized in 1957 by none-other than Dr. Seuss. All the Whos down in Whoville rode these unibikes. I am surprised and shocked that there are no attributions listed in the article.
Sadly, I once determined that I couldn't call someone because I couldn't find their phone number via the One True Source of All Truth and Knowledge. Imagine my amazement to be told later "we're in the phonebook." The whaa?
Slashdot Mirror
First they came for the mathematicians, and I did not speak out--
because I did not like math;
Then they came for the theoretical economists, and I did not speak out--
because I did not understand economics;
Then they came for the engineers, and I did not speak out--
because I did not believe engineering was a true science;
Then they came for the scientists, and I did not speak out--
because I did not like my science teacher;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
Restatement of Contracts section 90 (2): A charitable subscription or a marriage settlement is binding without proof that the promise induced action or forbearance.
"The test revealed that 522 (5.1%) employees had visual field abnormalities. And there appeared to be a significant link between these and heavy computer use among those with either long or short sight, collectively known as "refractive errors." The full text is from the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health and can be found here for subscribers.
This is a legitmate question, but the answer is in the article if you are familiar with ham radio "terms of art." In the article there are references to "helping to handle emergency traffic" and also "pitching in to handle emergency and health-and-welfare traffic." Emergency traffic and health-and-welfare traffic are terms describing two very different types of disaster communication.
There are four general categories of disaster messages which have the following precedence:
1. Emergency traffic. This includes messages relating to the immediate protection of life or propery. For example, coordinating the delivery of medical supplies or personnel; dispatching emergency services; relaying vital information for disaster response.
2. Priority traffic. Generally not as time sensitive as emergency traffic.
3. Health-and-welfare traffic is the type of messages which you reference where a survivor wants to get word out relatives that they are ok.
4. Routine. Non-related communications
So, the fact that the article specifies that they handled "emergency and health-and-welfare" means that they did more than handle "I'm ok" messages. There's an additional clue when the article says that "[o]ur control center was inside the prime minister's official house in his operational room." This indicates that it is very likely that they were handling critical messages until regular communications could be set up.
Amateur Radio has similar roles around the U.S. and the world in official government emergency response plans. I am part of a volunteer emergency communications team for a major metropolitan area in the U.S. We have our own area and equipment in the city emergency operations center. In the event of a disaster, we become the relay through which all information/reports for 911-type dispatching will come. We form the link to the county and state emergency operations centers, and provide other radio-based services as well. We are offically affiliated with the police department. There are other groups affiliated with relief organizations like the Red Cross and the Salvation Army which provide more health-and-welfare type traffic than our group, but they also handle critical relief-related communications for their organizations. Ham radio is involved in all levels of disaster response communications from the most important to the least.
In addition to what other posters have said, check out Centaur Forge. They've got tons of books and videos as well as anvils, hammers, forges and all kinds of other equipment necessary for all sorts of smithing.
I always loved my erector set. I don't know about these new-fangled sets, but maybe they'd be ok.
Fellatio isn't, but I'd say the cigar stuff is.
If someone sincerely believes that there is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his Prophet, that is enough to make him a Muslim.
Um, no. I someone believes there is no god but God, and Jesus is His son, that is not enough to make him a Catholic, either. A person who believes in Allah and His prophet Mohammed could be of Babist or Baha'i faith -- whom many muslims would (and have) kill. No, a religious faith has teachings which its followers are expected to believe and follow. If you don't follow those teachings, you aren't really a member of the faith, even if you say over and over that you are.
You might want to assume that religious devotion can only have positive effects on devotees, but that would be a very bad assumption. Sure, you can make any assumption you want for your model, but having bad assumptions doesn't make for a very good model.
First, how are you going to accomplish the tracking? If you just put out a sensor you're going to get hits for more that just people, you'll get a blip for every rat, field mouse, deer, raccoon, dog, coyote, et cetera that crosses your sensor.
Second, if you have people wear something like an RFID tag that checks in with a proximity sensor, then anyone who doesn't want to be tracked will simply remove the tag or stay off the trails where the sensors are.
Third, how do you protect people from abusive system users? For example, a voyeuristic ranger checking up on a young couple to spy on them later, or a stalker-type tracking down lone individuals or a thief who checks to see where the person with the cool gear is camping that night.
In order to help in search and rescue, you've got have id tags that map back to a particular person unless you've got almost no people coming to your location. To prevent abuses, you'd probably have to log the information back to some state parks & recreation or fish & wildlife server so that local people can only access the information if someone is reported missing. But then you've got the whole issue of the state collecting centralized data about its citizens.
I don't think it's a great idea other than on a voluntary basis.
SCO will sue BayStar for tortious interference and SCO stock with surge to $15 per share. SCO executives will sell many more shares according to their "preplanned schedule," raking in a few million more bucks for themselves.
Cell phone communications are relatively easy to eavesdrop upon. Are your email alerts being sent and received in an encrypted format? Unlikely since few phones support encrypted mail. A hacker could gain much valuable information on your company network simply by intercepting your email alerts sent to your phone. The same is true for work-related voice conversation with your cell phone. Camera equipped phones are an additional, if different, problem.
Are you keeping your phone physically secure? If someone steals you phone, will he/she now be able to receive your vital email alerts?
Of course, it would take a determined hacker to do the above things. But if your company is concerned with security, then their cell phone ban is not at all far-fetched. If they are merely concerned with people yakking about private matters on their phones all day, then maybe you can get them to change the policy.
Examples:
Billy and Jane drive out to secluded beach and start drinking.
1) Billy decides to rape Jane. Jane realizes Billy's intentions are bad, but is unable to start the car and get away. Jane is raped.
2) Jane is injured climbing a pretty beach cliff and needs urgent medical care. Billy is unable to start the car. Jane dies.
3) Billy and Jane see a powerboat pulling up to the beach full of al Queda terrorist drug-running suicide bombers. They are unable to drive the car to report to authorities. They are gunned down on the beach. The city of Portland is nuked and the city of Seattle is stoned.
These are all situations where I would/could forgive the danger of driving after having too much to drink. Sure, the situations could have been avoided, but I don't agree that all potentially hazardous situations should be avoided.
Well, if that's not the pot calling the kettle black... They really are a joke.
I guess the $9 million in lawyer fees doesn't count toward being profitable or not.
Well, what happened is that Darl is claiming profitability anyway: "For the entire fiscal year 2003, SCO reported net income to common stockholders of $5.3 million, or $0.34 per diluted common share, reversing a net loss of $24.9 million, or $1.93 per diluted common share, in fiscal 2002. McBride claims that this marks the first time that the company has been profitable on a full-year basis." See eweek I guess the $9 million in lawyer fees doesn't count toward being profitable or not.
Ha ha, just serious. The truth of my first statement is the reason I left the legal profession. It has nothing to do with conspiracy theories and everything to do with various parties' desires to be on the golf course by three rather than, god forbid, spend some time figuring out the truth. Truth is inconvenient and time consuming.
I believe that should be "to whom are you going to speak it?"
I am glad that you recognize it for what it is -- a "legal system." There are many who still mistakenly call it a "justice system" which it no longer is.
The vehicle is designed as a guess at what transportation in the year 2025 might look like.
This is very interesting considering that this vehicle was first conceptualized in 1957 by none-other than Dr. Seuss. All the Whos down in Whoville rode these unibikes. I am surprised and shocked that there are no attributions listed in the article.
Of course if they lose, they still get the $1 million plus up to 400,000 shares of stock.
Sadly, I once determined that I couldn't call someone because I couldn't find their phone number via the One True Source of All Truth and Knowledge. Imagine my amazement to be told later "we're in the phonebook." The whaa?