This belief that you have to vote for the lesser of two evils needs to end. Vote 3rd party. Vote independent. Write someone in.
But then you're wasting your vote, or so the DemoPublican party would like you to think. It only really matters if you live in one of the few states where you don't already know which candidate the rest of your state will vote for. So in most states it doesn't actually matter.
Me, I see the tiniest bit of sense in it. Suppose for example, a website links to a full-length, high-rez version of Pirates of the Caribbean on an external website. Whenever it is taken down, they switch the link to another external website hosting the same content. Even though they're just linking to someone else's infringing content and not infringing themselves, I'd consider it to be basically an accomplice to the infringer.
However, there's no good way to prevent that without massive collateral damage -- if everyone is required to verify that their links are (and remain) free of infringing content, it would kill the web -- but if it is necessary to prove intent to link to infringing content, prosecution will be effectively non-existent. I imagine the EU is going for the middle ground of making it illegal but seldom prosecuted unless you piss off the wrong people.
It may be worth discussing, but there's only one way this sort of thing is going to go. The discussion is whether it's a good idea to try to slow it down, or perhaps to make sure the right people get there first/that the "right" edits are made first.
You know what they say, when genetically engineered geniuses/supersoldiers are outlawed, only outlaws will have genetically engineered geniuses/supersoldiers.
We do not have the wisdom, let alone the knowledge, to be directly editing out genome.
As it turns out, we also don't have the wisdom nor knowledge to stop people from editing their genomes. The potential rewards are just too great, and unless someone edits out our tendency to take large risks for personal gain, someone is going to do it.
To be fair, we also invented nuclear weapons, globalization with the resulting spread of invasive species and deadly diseases, electricity and the burning of unprecedented amounts of carbon, environmentally unfriendly farming methods, and are in the process of causing what is likely to be the largest mass extinction in history. In the near future we might also create humanity-destroying AI or bioweapons.
Of course, nature invented supervolcanos, planet-ending meteors, supernovas, and various such things as could show us how to properly destroy a planet. Without us humans who will eventually leave this planet for safer rocks, life on earth would be doomed to destruction over the next few billion years.
While it's a nice thought to say that everyone is equal, in reality some are stronger, some are smarter, some are more persistent, some are more creative, some are more empathic, some are more willing to take risks to improve their condition... and what is even less fair, some of that you can't change much beyond what you were born with. Of course, with more advanced technology it may be possible for people to choose whatever genetics they want for themselves, or at least for their children. But then, some people just don't want that sort of responsibility.
dogs in the United States that hunt the unique chemical compounds emitted from flash drives, memory cards, cell phones, iPads and other similar devices.
Now the police have no excuse to avoid helping out with lost/stolen cell phones. (Ha ha, just kidding, no profit in doing that).
To speed up the lines, perform cavity searches on everyone and thoroughly toss their luggage. Sure, it'll take longer per person, but not only will security be more thorough but just announce the new policy and watch the lines disappear.
The majority of people believe in an invisible friend in the sky.
And is that being stupid? I mean, they're wrong, but the vast majority of people are wrong about all kinds of things, particularly as displayed in optimism and overconfidence. (In fact, religion is a subset of optimism and overconfidence.) And yet, though many studies show cynical depressed people tend to be more accurate than happy optimists, I wouldn't call them smarter.
People are irrational, but smart irrational people can deal with their irrationality (often by using irrational means).
I bet she could save a whole lot of money on lawyers if she bought some drones and had them hover around his property until he either shot one or went insane.
the European Commission "is planning reforms that would allow media outlets to request payment from search engines such as Google, for publishing snippets of their content in search results."
In unrelated news, search engines are planning to encourage media outlets to provide payment to include snippets of their content in search results.
1) Trump suggests that Russian hackers find the missing emails for us. 2) Major hack attributed to Russians. 3) ??? 4) FBI finds thousands of Hillary's missing emails.
Slashdot Mirror
if they think I'm downgrading to Windows 10.
This belief that you have to vote for the lesser of two evils needs to end. Vote 3rd party. Vote independent. Write someone in.
But then you're wasting your vote, or so the DemoPublican party would like you to think. It only really matters if you live in one of the few states where you don't already know which candidate the rest of your state will vote for. So in most states it doesn't actually matter.
Me, I see the tiniest bit of sense in it. Suppose for example, a website links to a full-length, high-rez version of Pirates of the Caribbean on an external website. Whenever it is taken down, they switch the link to another external website hosting the same content. Even though they're just linking to someone else's infringing content and not infringing themselves, I'd consider it to be basically an accomplice to the infringer.
However, there's no good way to prevent that without massive collateral damage -- if everyone is required to verify that their links are (and remain) free of infringing content, it would kill the web -- but if it is necessary to prove intent to link to infringing content, prosecution will be effectively non-existent. I imagine the EU is going for the middle ground of making it illegal but seldom prosecuted unless you piss off the wrong people.
It may be worth discussing, but there's only one way this sort of thing is going to go. The discussion is whether it's a good idea to try to slow it down, or perhaps to make sure the right people get there first/that the "right" edits are made first.
You know what they say, when genetically engineered geniuses/supersoldiers are outlawed, only outlaws will have genetically engineered geniuses/supersoldiers.
We do not have the wisdom, let alone the knowledge, to be directly editing out genome.
As it turns out, we also don't have the wisdom nor knowledge to stop people from editing their genomes. The potential rewards are just too great, and unless someone edits out our tendency to take large risks for personal gain, someone is going to do it.
To be fair, we also invented nuclear weapons, globalization with the resulting spread of invasive species and deadly diseases, electricity and the burning of unprecedented amounts of carbon, environmentally unfriendly farming methods, and are in the process of causing what is likely to be the largest mass extinction in history. In the near future we might also create humanity-destroying AI or bioweapons.
Of course, nature invented supervolcanos, planet-ending meteors, supernovas, and various such things as could show us how to properly destroy a planet. Without us humans who will eventually leave this planet for safer rocks, life on earth would be doomed to destruction over the next few billion years.
While it's a nice thought to say that everyone is equal, in reality some are stronger, some are smarter, some are more persistent, some are more creative, some are more empathic, some are more willing to take risks to improve their condition... and what is even less fair, some of that you can't change much beyond what you were born with. Of course, with more advanced technology it may be possible for people to choose whatever genetics they want for themselves, or at least for their children. But then, some people just don't want that sort of responsibility.
dogs in the United States that hunt the unique chemical compounds emitted from flash drives, memory cards, cell phones, iPads and other similar devices.
Now the police have no excuse to avoid helping out with lost/stolen cell phones. (Ha ha, just kidding, no profit in doing that).
Spridningskollen offered to settle for around $233?
To speed up the lines, perform cavity searches on everyone and thoroughly toss their luggage. Sure, it'll take longer per person, but not only will security be more thorough but just announce the new policy and watch the lines disappear.
They can't be too ecologically important. Besides, we have plenty of lawyers and politicians to fill the bloodsucker vacancy.
The majority of people believe in an invisible friend in the sky.
And is that being stupid? I mean, they're wrong, but the vast majority of people are wrong about all kinds of things, particularly as displayed in optimism and overconfidence. (In fact, religion is a subset of optimism and overconfidence.) And yet, though many studies show cynical depressed people tend to be more accurate than happy optimists, I wouldn't call them smarter.
People are irrational, but smart irrational people can deal with their irrationality (often by using irrational means).
Some of them are even dumb enough to think that "average" and "median" are the same thing.
And some are even too dumb to know that in a normal distribution, they are.
Imagine the stupidity of the average person -- then realize that half of them are dumber than that.
Is it trespassing if you drive a hovercraft?
I bet she could save a whole lot of money on lawyers if she bought some drones and had them hover around his property until he either shot one or went insane.
"Youngman told Ars that she had just returned from church one Sunday morning and was cleaning her two shotguns -- .410 and a .20 gauge -- on her porch"
Yeesh.
Uh, "Cleanliness is next to Godliness."
on Facebook.
More beautiful than average, and more extreme in one trait or another.
the European Commission "is planning reforms that would allow media outlets to request payment from search engines such as Google, for publishing snippets of their content in search results."
In unrelated news, search engines are planning to encourage media outlets to provide payment to include snippets of their content in search results.
for introverts and extroverts.
I thought she wiped the server with a towel?
birth control is effective birth control.
Bah! Computers are effective birth control.
punish mobile sites that use interstitials.
Those ads, they're not Google's ads. They need to die.
Can't be too hard to find the emails.
1) Trump suggests that Russian hackers find the missing emails for us.
2) Major hack attributed to Russians.
3) ???
4) FBI finds thousands of Hillary's missing emails.