That made me wonder how our President might fare as an RPG character:
Name: George W. Bush Race: Republican Class: Rogue Charisma: 14 Constitution: 16 (affected by generous workout and vacation schedule) Dexterity: 12 Intelligence: 9 (the level at which diction becomes impaired) Wisdom: 8 Alignment: Lawful Evil Feats: Deflect Criticism, Blame Previous Administration, Appeal to Base
Cannot cast Empathy or Listen (negatively affected by race: Republican)
Try the AlternaTIFF plug-in for viewing TIFF images in Mozilla/Netscape browsers. It is free but requires registration (name, company, e-mail address). Seems to work OK.
But doesn't that just add more fuel to the fire? One of the unforeseen consequences of foreign aid to the developing world is that it has fuelled population growth (more food and medicine, lower infant mortality, etc.) Unless we junk the idea that large families are a good idea, population will simply increase to take advantage of whatever resources we can haul in from off-planet.
We need to find a stable point where the human population can be supported without destroying the environment. Elsewhere in this thread it was suggest that the growth will level off at around 8 billion people - that seems manageable.
The solutions are political, not technological. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for exploiting the resources of space, but it won't help us here on Earth if we continue growing the population past the breaking point.
Heh! You must've been the Beethoven of web designers:)
Re:Space travel - no kidding
on
10 Technologies MIA
·
· Score: 4, Informative
The idea of expanding into space is good for many reasons, but reducing population pressure is not one of them. The number of new persons born each year will easily outstrip any conceivable launch capability, even if there were somewhere for people to go.
We must reduce population growth, and the best way to do that is to grant more political power to women, especially in developing countries (where in many cases, they are considered chattel). There's a good article on Wikipedia discussing the theory of demographic transition and how it affects population, and how giving women more economic and political control naturally reduces the birth rate. Of course access to contraception and (gasp!) abortion is important as well.
I agree that the "what, me worry?" approach will not help, and unfortunately that is the one adopted by most of our political leaders. No one wants to tell people to stop having kids. In a few countries with declining populations citizens are actually encouraged to accelerate the birth rate!
I agree the network should be open to all, but I believe the telephone network in the U.S. was privately financed and supported by revenue from ratepayers, not taxpayers. Of course the Bell telephone company had a valuable government monopoly, but in return they had to provide universal service and were heavily regulated.
Stupidity? No. Inattention, perhaps. I'm certain that many intelligent people fail to read the entire contract for minor items like a magazine subscription.
I'd say if the subscriber is guilty of anything, it is having an excess of trust. There was a time (not too long ago) when in dealing with a large, well established company one could be reasonably secure in the knowledge that they would NOT take advantage of "fine print" clauses like this one, which are obviously designed to squeeze out a few dollars from people who didn't read the contract. Now it appears that taking advantage of the customer has become a common practice, so that we do have to read the several pages of fine print in every commercial transaction. That's a pretty sad state of affairs, wouldn't you agree?
So no, we do not have "only ourselves to blame". The short sighted greed of unethical people is also part of the problem.
Humans seem to have this built-in response to de-humanize another ethnic group, comparing them to animals, in order to go to war against them.
There is a good, albeit unpalatable, explanation for the genocide of other ethnic groups: genetic self interest. IIRC Dawkins makes a good case for this in The Selfish Gene.
Well it seems that the METHOD TO IMPROVE PERI-ANAL HYGIENE was rejected. From the report:
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Evans '259.
Claim 1 is drawn to a method for improving peri-anal hygiene comprising the steps of providing and dispensing a gel onto a sheet of toilet paper, applying the gel to an anal area using the paper as an applicator and wiping the area with a a dry sheet of toilet paper to dry the area of any residual moisture. The gel is viscous enough to rest for several seconds on the paper without causing noticeable disintegration thereof.
IANAPL so I could be wrong, but it appears that this application was denied because some other genius had already patented a method for improving peri-anal hygiene. And they say America can no longer innovate!
We're still waiting for the inventor who can figure out a method of finding one's anus with both hands...
every individual and corporation ought to act like we really do believe in the values that we profess
"Values" and "morality" apply only to the beliefs and actions of human beings. Corporations, despite the pablum served up by their PR departments, have only one aim: to make money for their shareholders. They support democracy when it helps them achieve this goal - when it gets in the way (as in China) they abandon their support and suffer no moral qualms.
Individual managers and employees have their own values which may lead them to disagree with the actions of the company. In privately held companies the owners have the power to refuse to engage in unethical behavior, even when it is do the financial detriment of the company to do so. But public companies ultimately must perform in the marketplace, where morality does not exist, so companies that hesitate to do the wrong thing are ultimately weeded out.
American companies (and French, and German etc.) have for years worked with anti-democratic regimes around the world. Microsoft is certainly nothing new. Corporations are amoral by nature, and we should not expect them to act they way a human being would.
America has a history of shenanigans happening at local precincts back when ballots were counted by precinct workers. The move to count ballots at a central location was supposed to help reduce fraud.
Regarding the media, the reason pleasing them is important is that the candidates have all rented hotel ballrooms for their victory parties, and they are anxiously awaiting the results. If they aren't in before the late evening news, all those VIPs have to stand around looking stupid. Which makes them angry, and thus when they are finally voted into office, they go looking for the guy in charge of elections to find out why the #&$* it took so long to count the vote?
Voter history only tells you that a person voted in a particular election. It most certainly does not track who voted for what.
BTW there is a feature called "courtesy credit" in some jurisdictions where you can be credited with voting merely by signing the list, it is not necessary for you to actually cast a ballot. Who would do this? Politicians, who want to be able to say they voted in every election.
Slashdot Mirror
2. Let company infrastructure rot
3. Rehire IT department
Dogbert, is that you?
Scotty, I don't care HOW you do it, just BEAM ME UP!
Umm, is that you Boss? Gee, I didn't know you read Slashdot!
"We'll get to the video of your departed loved one in just a moment, but first, here is a brief message from our sponsor!"
Hey! No need to get personal.
That work for you?
Next time I'll be sure to use Latin instead of English.
Try the AlternaTIFF plug-in for viewing TIFF images in Mozilla/Netscape browsers. It is free but requires registration (name, company, e-mail address). Seems to work OK.
Come on admit it, you took this phrase from an episode of Star Trek, didn't you?
Plasma conduits, intertial dampers, blah blah blah. You aren't fooling anybody.
You mean IT'S NOT??? Holy crap!
That does it. From now on I'm not commenting code! And I'm switching from COBOL to APL!
We need to find a stable point where the human population can be supported without destroying the environment. Elsewhere in this thread it was suggest that the growth will level off at around 8 billion people - that seems manageable.
The solutions are political, not technological. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for exploiting the resources of space, but it won't help us here on Earth if we continue growing the population past the breaking point.
Heh! You must've been the Beethoven of web designers :)
We must reduce population growth, and the best way to do that is to grant more political power to women, especially in developing countries (where in many cases, they are considered chattel). There's a good article on Wikipedia discussing the theory of demographic transition and how it affects population, and how giving women more economic and political control naturally reduces the birth rate. Of course access to contraception and (gasp!) abortion is important as well.
I agree that the "what, me worry?" approach will not help, and unfortunately that is the one adopted by most of our political leaders. No one wants to tell people to stop having kids. In a few countries with declining populations citizens are actually encouraged to accelerate the birth rate!
Have we already forgotten the tag?
... (shudders at the memory of scarlet text marquees scrolling on lime green backgrounds)
C',mon, it wasn't all daffodils and kittens back then
I agree the network should be open to all, but I believe the telephone network in the U.S. was privately financed and supported by revenue from ratepayers, not taxpayers. Of course the Bell telephone company had a valuable government monopoly, but in return they had to provide universal service and were heavily regulated.
Bruce Willis and his crack team of swimming pool cleaners are used to dealing with filthy algae infestations, but can they clean THE WHOLE PLANET?!?
don't miss ... Algaegeddon!
Then the headline would be "Ridges have Ruffles!"
I'd say if the subscriber is guilty of anything, it is having an excess of trust. There was a time (not too long ago) when in dealing with a large, well established company one could be reasonably secure in the knowledge that they would NOT take advantage of "fine print" clauses like this one, which are obviously designed to squeeze out a few dollars from people who didn't read the contract. Now it appears that taking advantage of the customer has become a common practice, so that we do have to read the several pages of fine print in every commercial transaction. That's a pretty sad state of affairs, wouldn't you agree?
So no, we do not have "only ourselves to blame". The short sighted greed of unethical people is also part of the problem.
Wrote that yourself, did you George? :)
There is a good, albeit unpalatable, explanation for the genocide of other ethnic groups: genetic self interest. IIRC Dawkins makes a good case for this in The Selfish Gene.
IANAPL so I could be wrong, but it appears that this application was denied because some other genius had already patented a method for improving peri-anal hygiene. And they say America can no longer innovate!
We're still waiting for the inventor who can figure out a method of finding one's anus with both hands...
"Values" and "morality" apply only to the beliefs and actions of human beings. Corporations, despite the pablum served up by their PR departments, have only one aim: to make money for their shareholders. They support democracy when it helps them achieve this goal - when it gets in the way (as in China) they abandon their support and suffer no moral qualms.
Individual managers and employees have their own values which may lead them to disagree with the actions of the company. In privately held companies the owners have the power to refuse to engage in unethical behavior, even when it is do the financial detriment of the company to do so. But public companies ultimately must perform in the marketplace, where morality does not exist, so companies that hesitate to do the wrong thing are ultimately weeded out.
American companies (and French, and German etc.) have for years worked with anti-democratic regimes around the world. Microsoft is certainly nothing new. Corporations are amoral by nature, and we should not expect them to act they way a human being would.
Regarding the media, the reason pleasing them is important is that the candidates have all rented hotel ballrooms for their victory parties, and they are anxiously awaiting the results. If they aren't in before the late evening news, all those VIPs have to stand around looking stupid. Which makes them angry, and thus when they are finally voted into office, they go looking for the guy in charge of elections to find out why the #&$* it took so long to count the vote?
BTW there is a feature called "courtesy credit" in some jurisdictions where you can be credited with voting merely by signing the list, it is not necessary for you to actually cast a ballot. Who would do this? Politicians, who want to be able to say they voted in every election.