I'd say that anyone credulous enough to believe in homeopathy has mostly themselves to blame (and they'll ignore that the government as well as scientists say it is useless).
It does make a good placebo, though. Note that placebos work best when they are believed in, described as potent, or cost more -- so it is quite reasonable for a doctor to prescribe a homeopathic medicine for someone with a cold who insists on being prescribed something (better than giving them antibiotics as a placebo).
Let me be the first (seriously, the first despite so many other assholes who already posted) to congratulate them on this discovery. Sadly, I'm quite sure this is not a cure since I don't see how it would affect infected cells, but at least it can prevent the spread both within the body and transmission to other people.
What if the population of those who believe in reproducing like bunnies, increases faster than the resulting children can be convinced to abandon their father's ways?
"IF". Hasn't happened yet.
Neither has +4 C global warming. Neither have you died of old age. Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean that it won't nor that we're not already headed in that direction.
I'd agree except this has been fixed in the developed world with universal negative population growth among populations around longer than second generation immigrant. You keep talking about how people can't stop having kids... but they have
But is that sustainable? What if the population of those who believe in reproducing like bunnies, increases faster than the resulting children can be convinced to abandon their father's ways?
CEOs are paid to ignore the future and may be fired and replaced if they do not. Because their metric of success is profits this quarter and not profits 10 years from now, and to maximize profits today it is necessary to sacrifice future potential. While they are also incentivized to increase future profits, that means little vs the risk of being fired for incompetence (then good luck getting another CEO job, the company's profits are public record so they will know why, and the next CEO will be credited for any increase in the future).
So I think a small group of humans probably can survive most predicted and predictable calamities.
Let's see... 1) Sun going red giant in next billion years, melting the planet. 2) Hostile or uncaring superhuman AI 3) Overly effective bioweapon (after maybe 100 years of exponential improvements in genetics/protein folding) 4) Nuclear war, especially after several dozen other countries get nuclear weapons then rising tension causes them to get a lot more, followed by attacks on each others' bunkers.
As if America wasn't in enough trouble, now you want to cut one of our primary exports, where foreigners pay good money to be influenced by us and are glad of the privilege?
The foreigner who moves to your land is to be treated as an equal and welcomed as a citizen and a brother. That's the biblical decree on immigration.
Yes they treated foreigners much better than other places did, but not as equals, despite elsewhere saying the same law applied to both foreigners and Israelites.
Deuteronomy 23:3 No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation.
19 Do not charge a fellow Israelite interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a fellow Israelite, so that the Lord your God may bless you in everything you put your hand to in the land you are entering to possess.
An antivirus may not protect against a new attack, but it sure can reduce the value of an existing exploit (thus increasing R&D costs for script kiddies while reducing their profits). Though it is rather amusing how some "antivirus" comes bundled with, or is itself, malware -- but much less amusing that it is legal.
Fine by me. If they can pull this off, we'll have some decent mass-production going on in the satellites and rockets departments, the prices of all things space will go way down.
And we can always send up a scavenger satellite to repair/deorbit/gather the dead satellites. And if all else fails, 4000 pieces of space junk isn't really that much; space is big, bigger than most people can imagine. Might be problematic if a few of them smash up, but then the smaller pieces will de-orbit that much quicker.
Just because a computer is out-of-the-box new, doesn't mean it can't contain malware -- and in fact a lot of people here will tell you that many new computers come with malware embedded at the OS level. Before it was limited to certain countries or companies, like a recent case where the manufacturer installed malware to intercept ads and replace them with their own, and to forge security certificates so they could do it with secure websites. Now the OS itself shows symptoms of malware, which will make it much harder to identify non-OS malware.
Of course, and anti-virus won't remove that, and providing fake services to people who don't know any better is a nasty thing to do. And with the blessing of the managers and CEO too, although they'd never admit it (they're just pushing hard and rewarding success).
No they can't. The users decide whether Twitter is allowed to do something, and Twitter is under obligation via their shareholders to behave themselves. Don't tell people they have to bend over and take it just because you agree with restricting freedom of speech website by website.
You don't have the right to pretty much anything on twitter, a private service offered for free use. They can decide on their policy for the use of their service.
They certainly think they can, and technically from a legal standpoint they are right. But in reality the users decide whether or not Twitter is allowed to do something and the shareholders won't stand for anything that pisses off too many users.
And I'm pretty sure that most people think that free speech trumps the "right not to be offended" or the "right to control other people's speech", even if they're not as vocal about it for now.
I'm no expert, but if the representative on the phone promises something that makes it an oral contract, and could potentially supersede the written contract and especially any EULA. For example, if they specifically asked whether the contract meant 38 concurrent users vs 38 installs and they were told it was concurrent users. Of course, proving it in court is a different story.
There may have been a few WMDs, it's always hard to get rid of everything, but they got rid of the vast majority. Not 100%, but imagine how many weapons would mysteriously disappear were the US to be forced to destroy all their weapons; people would patriotically hide them or hide them for sale later. Not to mention general incompetence, like the CDC losing vials of anthrax or smallpox.
We in American buy far more products from China than China does of our products.
Doesn't mean we won't hurt more than them. Eg if an easily replaceable employee earns less wages than his employer earns profit off his work, then while the employer would lose more than the employee the day he quit, the next day he'd have a replacement while the employee would still have no job (and perhaps a bad reference). To what proportion do we depend on China vs what proportion does China depend on the US?
Trade isn't a zero sum game -- it is an overall win. However, that doesn't mean it is a win for everyone (although it could be made so via careful redistribution, in theory but not in practice). Trade is a win because some countries are better than others at certain things and transportation is easy enough that we can trade what we're good at for what they're good at. It's not a win for everyone because, for example, factory workers might lose their jobs while sellers of Chinese goods earn lots of money and buyers of Chinese goods save a little.
However, there's also the additional complication of a continual trade deficit, which is roughly equivalent to living off your savings while looking for a new job. It's nice that it's an option, but we can't keep that up forever.
Slashdot Mirror
I would say the announcement itself is an ad containing fake news.
I'd say that anyone credulous enough to believe in homeopathy has mostly themselves to blame (and they'll ignore that the government as well as scientists say it is useless).
It does make a good placebo, though. Note that placebos work best when they are believed in, described as potent, or cost more -- so it is quite reasonable for a doctor to prescribe a homeopathic medicine for someone with a cold who insists on being prescribed something (better than giving them antibiotics as a placebo).
Inquiring minds (who can't be bothered to read the summary) want to know.
Let me be the first (seriously, the first despite so many other assholes who already posted) to congratulate them on this discovery. Sadly, I'm quite sure this is not a cure since I don't see how it would affect infected cells, but at least it can prevent the spread both within the body and transmission to other people.
What if the population of those who believe in reproducing like bunnies, increases faster than the resulting children can be convinced to abandon their father's ways?
"IF". Hasn't happened yet.
Neither has +4 C global warming. Neither have you died of old age. Just because something hasn't happened yet doesn't mean that it won't nor that we're not already headed in that direction.
I'd agree except this has been fixed in the developed world with universal negative population growth among populations around longer than second generation immigrant. You keep talking about how people can't stop having kids... but they have
But is that sustainable? What if the population of those who believe in reproducing like bunnies, increases faster than the resulting children can be convinced to abandon their father's ways?
CEOs are paid to ignore the future and may be fired and replaced if they do not. Because their metric of success is profits this quarter and not profits 10 years from now, and to maximize profits today it is necessary to sacrifice future potential. While they are also incentivized to increase future profits, that means little vs the risk of being fired for incompetence (then good luck getting another CEO job, the company's profits are public record so they will know why, and the next CEO will be credited for any increase in the future).
So I think a small group of humans probably can survive most predicted and predictable calamities.
Let's see...
1) Sun going red giant in next billion years, melting the planet.
2) Hostile or uncaring superhuman AI
3) Overly effective bioweapon (after maybe 100 years of exponential improvements in genetics/protein folding)
4) Nuclear war, especially after several dozen other countries get nuclear weapons then rising tension causes them to get a lot more, followed by attacks on each others' bunkers.
Yeah, no. Take responsibility for being a selfish fucking asshole instead of blaming the government.
The problem isn't that he is a selfish asshole. The problem is that the government is paying him to act like a selfish asshole.
As if America wasn't in enough trouble, now you want to cut one of our primary exports, where foreigners pay good money to be influenced by us and are glad of the privilege?
The foreigner who moves to your land is to be treated as an equal and welcomed as a citizen and a brother. That's the biblical decree on immigration.
Yes they treated foreigners much better than other places did, but not as equals, despite elsewhere saying the same law applied to both foreigners and Israelites.
Deuteronomy 23:3 No Ammonite or Moabite or any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation.
19 Do not charge a fellow Israelite interest, whether on money or food or anything else that may earn interest. 20 You may charge a foreigner interest, but not a fellow Israelite, so that the Lord your God may bless you in everything you put your hand to in the land you are entering to possess.
An antivirus may not protect against a new attack, but it sure can reduce the value of an existing exploit (thus increasing R&D costs for script kiddies while reducing their profits). Though it is rather amusing how some "antivirus" comes bundled with, or is itself, malware -- but much less amusing that it is legal.
Fine by me. If they can pull this off, we'll have some decent mass-production going on in the satellites and rockets departments, the prices of all things space will go way down.
And we can always send up a scavenger satellite to repair/deorbit/gather the dead satellites. And if all else fails, 4000 pieces of space junk isn't really that much; space is big, bigger than most people can imagine. Might be problematic if a few of them smash up, but then the smaller pieces will de-orbit that much quicker.
News for nerds, 40 years ago celebrity gossip.
The computers were out of the box new.
Just because a computer is out-of-the-box new, doesn't mean it can't contain malware -- and in fact a lot of people here will tell you that many new computers come with malware embedded at the OS level. Before it was limited to certain countries or companies, like a recent case where the manufacturer installed malware to intercept ads and replace them with their own, and to forge security certificates so they could do it with secure websites. Now the OS itself shows symptoms of malware, which will make it much harder to identify non-OS malware.
Of course, and anti-virus won't remove that, and providing fake services to people who don't know any better is a nasty thing to do. And with the blessing of the managers and CEO too, although they'd never admit it (they're just pushing hard and rewarding success).
Where's that guy who's sig predicted that Windows would one day be a Linux distro?
No they can't. The users decide whether Twitter is allowed to do something, and Twitter is under obligation via their shareholders to behave themselves. Don't tell people they have to bend over and take it just because you agree with restricting freedom of speech website by website.
You don't have the right to pretty much anything on twitter, a private service offered for free use. They can decide on their policy for the use of their service.
They certainly think they can, and technically from a legal standpoint they are right. But in reality the users decide whether or not Twitter is allowed to do something and the shareholders won't stand for anything that pisses off too many users.
And I'm pretty sure that most people think that free speech trumps the "right not to be offended" or the "right to control other people's speech", even if they're not as vocal about it for now.
I'm no expert, but if the representative on the phone promises something that makes it an oral contract, and could potentially supersede the written contract and especially any EULA. For example, if they specifically asked whether the contract meant 38 concurrent users vs 38 installs and they were told it was concurrent users. Of course, proving it in court is a different story.
There may have been a few WMDs, it's always hard to get rid of everything, but they got rid of the vast majority. Not 100%, but imagine how many weapons would mysteriously disappear were the US to be forced to destroy all their weapons; people would patriotically hide them or hide them for sale later. Not to mention general incompetence, like the CDC losing vials of anthrax or smallpox.
We in American buy far more products from China than China does of our products.
Doesn't mean we won't hurt more than them. Eg if an easily replaceable employee earns less wages than his employer earns profit off his work, then while the employer would lose more than the employee the day he quit, the next day he'd have a replacement while the employee would still have no job (and perhaps a bad reference). To what proportion do we depend on China vs what proportion does China depend on the US?
Trade isn't a zero sum game -- it is an overall win. However, that doesn't mean it is a win for everyone (although it could be made so via careful redistribution, in theory but not in practice). Trade is a win because some countries are better than others at certain things and transportation is easy enough that we can trade what we're good at for what they're good at. It's not a win for everyone because, for example, factory workers might lose their jobs while sellers of Chinese goods earn lots of money and buyers of Chinese goods save a little.
However, there's also the additional complication of a continual trade deficit, which is roughly equivalent to living off your savings while looking for a new job. It's nice that it's an option, but we can't keep that up forever.
Windows 10 is so secure that I haven't had any security problems with it and don't expect to until Windows 7 won't run.
Well, it would certainly be interesting if they passed a law saying that the generation that voted for a bill gets to pay the resulting taxes.
I expect some coolly rational discussion in a warm friendly atmosphere.