Why are we modding up "I don't understand conservation of energy"? The only kinetic energy weapon that could sort of replace nuclear bombs would be bombardment with large asteroids, which no one currently has the capability to do and if they did would take ages to arrive. The kinetic rods would make great orbital armor or bunker piercing weapons, but there's no way they'll replace nuclear weapons.
Congratulations on discovering that dehydration leads to very rapid weight loss. I hope you weren't under the impression that losing weight makes you healthy -- weight is merely a proxy measure indicating a good balance of fat to muscle and also correlating to exercise, if applied to the average person. While you can cheat the proxy by dehydration, doing so is probably less healthy than losing weight via amputation. Point being, unless your objective was to change the number a scale shows when you step on it, next time focus on increasing your health rather than going for the most effective way to alter the proxy.
And ad blocking. Don't even get me started. So many ad blockers are so proud of what they do, like it's some badge of honor to block.
Of course we're proud. What do you think we are, stupid? Who wants to sacrifice bandwidth so as to have a gaping security hole that occasionally installs malware directly via exploits, frequently contains deceptive warnings which actually link to malware, and at best are noisy or flashy distractions from the page itself? And then the pop-ups, pop-unders, redirects, phishing scams, etc. Things have gotten so nasty that Adblock Plus more effective for securing your computer than the so called "security software", and as a bonus it doesn't even eat all your processor and blocks ads besides.
And the worst is that the advent of ad-supported web pages has slowly pushed people away from producing quality content as a contribution to the world, and towards producing SEO or clickbait content (or perhaps the latter hides the former).
You mean the War on Drugs was a complete waste of time and money and ruined millions of peoples' lives for no reason, while funneling billions of dollars a year to ruthless criminal warlords in South America?
No, it was complete waste of time and money and ruined millions of peoples' lives for the purpose or reducing freedom and privacy, while funneling billions of dollars a year to black ops funding, police department funding, and ruthless criminals everywhere.
A sufficient time delay before the information becomes public would solve most or all of the problem with compromising investigations. What's the real reason?
There's also the question of whose dime this caffeine nap is on: the employee, or the employer.
Each has an opinion and it's probably not the same opinion.
If an employer allows proper rest breaks, they do it on their own dime. If the employer doesn't allow proper rest breaks, it's still on their dime only in a way beancounters have more trouble counting.
In this case, there's also the question of where to nap -- not too many employers would like to replace office/factory space with a bed. I suspect only "live at the office" tech companies will do this, both as they already have so many perks and because they will benefit more from better employee concentration.
How about a rule that after n years, they must either hand it over to the proper storage facility, or grind it up and airdrop it over the idiots who keep preventing anyone from building a proper storage facility.
I bet everyone ignores the fact that the best-supported Intelligent Design theory is the one where the Intelligent Designer is the laws of nature. None of the other versions make any predictions, only offer explanations (because they can never say that this is how the designer must have done things.)
My pet peeve is people who think science is about "truth" or "explanation", when it really is about prediction. Something that gives the best "explanations" is the worst scientifically since things with the most explanatory power have the least predictive power.
Extreme libertarianism is currently the law of the land in Darfur and Afghanistan. It's not working out well for those places.
Kind of hard to claim its libertarian if you can be put to death for rejecting Islam.
Extreme Capitalism was the law of the land in America before early in the 20th century. It didn't work well for America.
Were they buying and selling laws on the open market? If not, then it wasn't extreme capitalism.
Extreme Socialism would be, what, communism? We tried communism in a few places and yeah, it didn't work very well, but better than maybe I would have predicted.
Communism would be one form of extreme socialism, however it was never tried. (Not to be confused with people claiming it was tried)
No, what I'm saying is where is the log of which times the Google cars were driving autonomously and which times the professional drivers took control? If the drivers took control every 5 minutes, then it would be pretty much irrelevant how many total miles the cars logged autonomously.
What this means is even if we find some means of restoration that is 100 times as potent at cooling the planet as CO2 is in warming it, the task is incomprehensibly huge.
No. No it isn't. There's a few individuals who could personally afford to send us back into an ice age. Just to give a couple examples,
According to estimates by the Council on Foreign Relations, "one kilogram of well placed sulfur in the stratosphere would roughly offset the warming effect of several hundred thousand kilograms of carbon dioxide."
Recent research has expanded this constant to "106 C: 16 N: 1 P:.001 Fe" signifying that in iron deficient conditions each atom of iron can fix 106,000 atoms of carbon,[34] or on a mass basis, each kilogram of iron can fix 83,000 kg of carbon dioxide.
But they have side effects. And perhaps they have side effects that won't become apparent until we try them on a large scale.
It's even more extreme than that. Google's cars have driven a combined 700,000 miles with only two incidents. One involved a crash while under human control, and the other was the Google car being rear-ended while stopped at a light. That's a phenomenal record. Source
It would be a phenomenal record if it was 700,000 straight, uninterrupted miles. How phenomenal a record is it when there's two professional drivers babysitting it at all times? I've yet to see the logs of timestamps when the divers took control, so until then I see no reason for treating this as anything other than two professional drivers driving 700,000 miles.
Well bad news, we've been fucking with it heavily for a couple hundred years with no plan whatsoever, and we're still mostly acting like it's no big deal.
No, we've done very little to purposely change the environment (and nothing at the global scale). Our various industries all give us guaranteed benefits (though not necessarily net benefit), and the effects on the environment are a side-effect, and comparatively small. If we decide to intentionally target the global environment, the effects could be much bigger.
I'm not saying climate engineering is a bad idea, but keep in mind that people are arrogant and overconfident. Test everything, even if it means going slowly. We don't have a backup planet in case there's a mistake, and we really can afford to wait decades before implementing these measures.
So you've discovered that extremist Libertarianism would be bad. Guess what? Extreme Capitalism and extreme Socialism are also bad. And none of the three have ever happened, because people just aren't that stupid.
How many want to take up a bet when the next 'troublesome' protest gets targeted with the kill switch... in the name of public safety, of course....
No no no... it'll be an "accident". They just wanted to kill the phone of this one guy who was really a threat, and accidentally bricked and wiped the phones of all the protestors totally without meaning to.
You're part of the problem. Again, I'll ask you -- How many billions of headlines per day do you hear about censorship in China? The Streisand Effect will not protect your rights after you give them up.
"but it also reduces the public's access to information"
A) What information does it supposedly reduce? I'm pretty sure you can tell me that something happened without showing me a video. Did you know that there was a 3 car pileup on route 3? Why no I don't because I haven't seen a video of it!
It's a video. It's a lot harder to lie or twist or exaggerate an event that is on video, so it is of value as trustworthy information. (Not to be confused with how it is much easier to lie or confuse with in-person, video, or audio, than with text)
B) Removing the video caused the information to proliferate more due to the Streisand Effect. I literally hadn't heard about the incident until all the fuss was raised about the removal of the video.
Each time censorship happens, less and less fuss will be made about it. How many billions of headlines per day do you hear about censorship in China?
If it is the brain stealing calories that slows development, how come when you feed a child a high-calorie diet he becomes a fat child rather than a young adult?
How about this: if we took only three years (or less!) to reach adulthood like some animals, you'd have toddler with an adult body. I'm pretty sure it's actually an advantage that our young are easily restrained. It's actually rather common for more intelligent creatures to take longer to mature. Taking longer to prune the excess synaptic connections seems to allow for greater learning at the cost of slower development. In the case of humans, we're also born with an especially undeveloped brain and a squishy skull, for which your mother is probably grateful.
Slashdot Mirror
Why are we modding up "I don't understand conservation of energy"? The only kinetic energy weapon that could sort of replace nuclear bombs would be bombardment with large asteroids, which no one currently has the capability to do and if they did would take ages to arrive. The kinetic rods would make great orbital armor or bunker piercing weapons, but there's no way they'll replace nuclear weapons.
Congratulations on discovering that dehydration leads to very rapid weight loss. I hope you weren't under the impression that losing weight makes you healthy -- weight is merely a proxy measure indicating a good balance of fat to muscle and also correlating to exercise, if applied to the average person. While you can cheat the proxy by dehydration, doing so is probably less healthy than losing weight via amputation. Point being, unless your objective was to change the number a scale shows when you step on it, next time focus on increasing your health rather than going for the most effective way to alter the proxy.
And ad blocking. Don't even get me started. So many ad blockers are so proud of what they do, like it's some badge of honor to block.
Of course we're proud. What do you think we are, stupid? Who wants to sacrifice bandwidth so as to have a gaping security hole that occasionally installs malware directly via exploits, frequently contains deceptive warnings which actually link to malware, and at best are noisy or flashy distractions from the page itself? And then the pop-ups, pop-unders, redirects, phishing scams, etc. Things have gotten so nasty that Adblock Plus more effective for securing your computer than the so called "security software", and as a bonus it doesn't even eat all your processor and blocks ads besides.
And the worst is that the advent of ad-supported web pages has slowly pushed people away from producing quality content as a contribution to the world, and towards producing SEO or clickbait content (or perhaps the latter hides the former).
You mean the War on Drugs was a complete waste of time and money and ruined millions of peoples' lives for no reason, while funneling billions of dollars a year to ruthless criminal warlords in South America?
No, it was complete waste of time and money and ruined millions of peoples' lives for the purpose or reducing freedom and privacy, while funneling billions of dollars a year to black ops funding, police department funding, and ruthless criminals everywhere.
A sufficient time delay before the information becomes public would solve most or all of the problem with compromising investigations. What's the real reason?
There's also the question of whose dime this caffeine nap is on: the employee, or the employer.
Each has an opinion and it's probably not the same opinion.
If an employer allows proper rest breaks, they do it on their own dime. If the employer doesn't allow proper rest breaks, it's still on their dime only in a way beancounters have more trouble counting.
In this case, there's also the question of where to nap -- not too many employers would like to replace office/factory space with a bed. I suspect only "live at the office" tech companies will do this, both as they already have so many perks and because they will benefit more from better employee concentration.
This is something we saw coming, at least since the incident with Crimea. What plans were made for this? Or are they all pretending to be surprised?
These creatures take to land like a fish takes to water.
"Smile for the camera, sir!"
How about a rule that after n years, they must either hand it over to the proper storage facility, or grind it up and airdrop it over the idiots who keep preventing anyone from building a proper storage facility.
I bet everyone ignores the fact that the best-supported Intelligent Design theory is the one where the Intelligent Designer is the laws of nature. None of the other versions make any predictions, only offer explanations (because they can never say that this is how the designer must have done things.)
My pet peeve is people who think science is about "truth" or "explanation", when it really is about prediction. Something that gives the best "explanations" is the worst scientifically since things with the most explanatory power have the least predictive power.
Extreme libertarianism is currently the law of the land in Darfur and Afghanistan. It's not working out well for those places.
Kind of hard to claim its libertarian if you can be put to death for rejecting Islam.
Extreme Capitalism was the law of the land in America before early in the 20th century. It didn't work well for America.
Were they buying and selling laws on the open market? If not, then it wasn't extreme capitalism.
Extreme Socialism would be, what, communism? We tried communism in a few places and yeah, it didn't work very well, but better than maybe I would have predicted.
Communism would be one form of extreme socialism, however it was never tried. (Not to be confused with people claiming it was tried)
No, what I'm saying is where is the log of which times the Google cars were driving autonomously and which times the professional drivers took control? If the drivers took control every 5 minutes, then it would be pretty much irrelevant how many total miles the cars logged autonomously.
What this means is even if we find some means of restoration that is 100 times as potent at cooling the planet as CO2 is in warming it, the task is incomprehensibly huge.
No. No it isn't. There's a few individuals who could personally afford to send us back into an ice age. Just to give a couple examples,
According to estimates by the Council on Foreign Relations, "one kilogram of well placed sulfur in the stratosphere would roughly offset the warming effect of several hundred thousand kilograms of carbon dioxide."
Recent research has expanded this constant to "106 C: 16 N: 1 P: .001 Fe" signifying that in iron deficient conditions each atom of iron can fix 106,000 atoms of carbon,[34] or on a mass basis, each kilogram of iron can fix 83,000 kg of carbon dioxide.
But they have side effects. And perhaps they have side effects that won't become apparent until we try them on a large scale.
It's even more extreme than that. Google's cars have driven a combined 700,000 miles with only two incidents. One involved a crash while under human control, and the other was the Google car being rear-ended while stopped at a light. That's a phenomenal record. Source
It would be a phenomenal record if it was 700,000 straight, uninterrupted miles. How phenomenal a record is it when there's two professional drivers babysitting it at all times? I've yet to see the logs of timestamps when the divers took control, so until then I see no reason for treating this as anything other than two professional drivers driving 700,000 miles.
Well bad news, we've been fucking with it heavily for a couple hundred years with no plan whatsoever, and we're still mostly acting like it's no big deal.
No, we've done very little to purposely change the environment (and nothing at the global scale). Our various industries all give us guaranteed benefits (though not necessarily net benefit), and the effects on the environment are a side-effect, and comparatively small. If we decide to intentionally target the global environment, the effects could be much bigger.
I'm not saying climate engineering is a bad idea, but keep in mind that people are arrogant and overconfident. Test everything, even if it means going slowly. We don't have a backup planet in case there's a mistake, and we really can afford to wait decades before implementing these measures.
How many billions of headlines per day do you hear about censorship in China?
So long as they don't accidentally break some important system that they forgot to account for, I'm all for it.
So you've discovered that extremist Libertarianism would be bad. Guess what? Extreme Capitalism and extreme Socialism are also bad. And none of the three have ever happened, because people just aren't that stupid.
How many want to take up a bet when the next 'troublesome' protest gets targeted with the kill switch... in the name of public safety, of course....
No no no... it'll be an "accident". They just wanted to kill the phone of this one guy who was really a threat, and accidentally bricked and wiped the phones of all the protestors totally without meaning to.
You're part of the problem. Again, I'll ask you -- How many billions of headlines per day do you hear about censorship in China? The Streisand Effect will not protect your rights after you give them up.
A) What information does it supposedly reduce? I'm pretty sure you can tell me that something happened without showing me a video. Did you know that there was a 3 car pileup on route 3? Why no I don't because I haven't seen a video of it!
It's a video. It's a lot harder to lie or twist or exaggerate an event that is on video, so it is of value as trustworthy information.
(Not to be confused with how it is much easier to lie or confuse with in-person, video, or audio, than with text)
B) Removing the video caused the information to proliferate more due to the Streisand Effect. I literally hadn't heard about the incident until all the fuss was raised about the removal of the video.
Each time censorship happens, less and less fuss will be made about it. How many billions of headlines per day do you hear about censorship in China?
Proof that God hates tree-huggers.
I know another place where there is a lot of click-bait links and summaries.
If it is the brain stealing calories that slows development, how come when you feed a child a high-calorie diet he becomes a fat child rather than a young adult?
How about this: if we took only three years (or less!) to reach adulthood like some animals, you'd have toddler with an adult body. I'm pretty sure it's actually an advantage that our young are easily restrained. It's actually rather common for more intelligent creatures to take longer to mature. Taking longer to prune the excess synaptic connections seems to allow for greater learning at the cost of slower development. In the case of humans, we're also born with an especially undeveloped brain and a squishy skull, for which your mother is probably grateful.