Depends on what you call it. No one bats an eye about "cellulose" as a "non-nutritive filler" (a.k.a. sawdust), so if you have the right name, irradiated foods should also be accepted.
Oh, there's a good plan. Vote for someone in a primary that you don't want to win, in the assumption that he's so bad that the person you do want to win slips right in.
If you're going to cross the aisle in a primary, you're a moron if you support the worst candidate from your own perspective. There's a chance they'll be the candidate in the general and then win. Ask the "anyone but Hillary" camp in the Republican party circa 2008 what they think about this plan.
If anything, I suspect that this actually increases the other party's chances of winning in the first place. If you're a democrat, would you rather run against a fully-differentiated Republican or a "Democat-lite" Republican?
Hah, you think people are choosing to filter their news?
More like, expressing a slight preference for certain links causes search engines and advertising to shift in that direction, feeding back to form the bubble. Eventually you're just not even presented information from outside the bubble. Our only hope is that big data is as incompetent implementing the results bubble as Netflix is and people start to get wise to it when they are only presented with a list of two-dozen or so items they've already seen any more.
Also, that no one gets the idea of deliberately manipulating the bubble to try to influence behavior on a mass scale (like Facebook already has done.. crap..)
The lockdown didn't seem to hamper his movement at all, so I'd guess the risk was the same either way. They would've found him sooner, though, as people would've been at the marina sooner and noticed something was amiss sooner, so in that sense the risk would've been less, as he would've spent less time not in custody.
Think about the message: "Any time a couple people shoot up a building, everybody's civil liberties and due process are forfeit for the next few days (months? years? )."
Does that sound like a reasonable response and a good idea?
That's what they did in Boston after the marathon bombing. To an even greater degree, even, as they basically house-arrested all of the residents of Watertown for over 24 hours. I have not heard or read very much outrage over the government's response, despite the fact that they only caught the suspect after the curfew was lifted and as pretty much a direct result of the curfew being lifted.
Except that the plan is very similar to that of gerrymandering and telecom companies' regional "gentleman's agreements". Before the merger, there are two companies whose products overlap and therefore are currently in competition. After the merger there will be three companies whose products don't overlap, reducing competition in each of their product areas.
But I guess credit cards are becoming more commonplace (damned as I see someone buying lousy cup of coffee for $1.25
Yeah, so? You should be able to make small purchases with them, because the real costs to provide the service are 1) reliably communicate an almost vanishingly small amount of data over a vast network that is mostly used for streaming video, 2) production of the cards themselves.
Why should you have to carry cash around and make change and carry that any more if you don't want to? Because some people don't get finances and will overspend, therefore all uses of credit cards are irresponsible?
Are there a significant number of hobbyists in this position? I'm skeptical of the idea that you can have an enjoyable hobby designing and building electronic circuits for things without designing your own circuits.
With all the services now that can etch or mill a one-off PCB design from circuit CAD files, PCB etching isn't really for electronics hobbyists any more anyway. It's really more of an art project now.
This is a temporary solution, because people buy a second car if they really need to use it everyday. I guess the only solution is to avoid building with too many stories, which in turn concentrate everyone in a few neighborhoods
Wouldn't that reduce the need for cars, as the whole city would be concentrated, so people would be living closer to work, possibly even within walking distance, but at the very least improving the economics of city transit? Perhaps a solution is to enforce minimum height (or areal density) restrictions.
This is marginally better than our current method of funding public transit, but really public transit should not be funded on the back of private transit. If such a funding scheme works correctly, people will switch from private vehicles to public transit, thus lowering the funds available even as ridership sees ever new highs.
Public transit funding ought to come from rider fees and, if subsidy is desired to keep the rider fees low, from general taxation.
The capitalists already have a solution for that problem, as it comes up very often, for instance, when picking investments based on information that is little more than current stock price, recent earnings, and historical dividend.
The answer has been to distribute your investment across multiple investments. Possibly weighted a bit towards the most profitable, but re-balancing periodically to prevent having too much exposure to risk in any single place.
My local farms don't grow bananas, and although they are pretty much all boutique farms and vinyards, they still have multiple varieties of most of the crops they sell. If agriculture in general is not doing this then one wonders what we have the USDA for, anyway.
With autonomous cars, the train actually has a chance of achieving it's 2x 1-lane capacity (noting that heavily traveled freeways are currently 2-4-lanes per direction of travel, though...) because people can take an autonomous car from their home to the train station, and then from the train station to their destination - the high cost of taxis rides isn't to support to the cost of the vehicle and its support, it's mostly supporting the cost to support the control system (a.k.a. the driver)
not refreshing pages is the killer feature of the tons-of-tabs workflow:
It seems every browser decided to re-load all the page resources when you hit the back button (or.. trigger javascript events that end up requiring this?). This takes a bunch of time and also loses your position on the page. If you just want to peek at a link or two (say.. when reading slashdot...), it's much easier to open those links in tabs, read them in the order they finish loading, and then go back to the original page that hopefully hasn't helpfully auto-refreshed and lost your place.
All you need is for a couple of those tabs to also have links you want to peek at and you can expand to a couple dozen tabs pretty quickly.
Unnecessary, time-consuming page loads have trained users to manually cache pages by leaving them open in tabs.
Morons. They'll ruin peoples lives, likely based on some moron that saw Minority Report and thought it was a Good Idea.
The surprising thing, to me, was that the people making the movie and TV show seemed to really think it was a good idea. They didn't think they were making a dystopian cautionary tale, they thought they were making a clever crime story set in an actually desirable future.
n both places, only about half of those who enter actually graduate, which tells you that many people who enter university shouldn't have gone in the first place.
Is that what that tells you? Do you have some kind of test you can do to know in advance which half a student belongs to? Are you sure that the people who drop out didn't benefit from their time despite not earning a degree?
That is a good point, and in the age of smartphones, we should be able to solve this finally: require food to be labeled with a bar or QR code assigned by the FDA or USDA (whoever is the appropriate regulator), which will be used by independent information brokers and inspectors maintaining a database of all of the information about all of the items. The databases themselves should be curated for correctness, but no valid information should be disallowed. The appropriate regulator should make available inspection information on each product, indexed by the same codes.
With unlimited "packaging space" available, GM products, for instance, should be able to include why the product was GM'd and what benefits or harmful traits it is proven to express.
I suspect people will be more willing to buy genetically modified foods that are more nutritious than their "natural counterparts" and will probably also be happy to save money on foods that have been modified to have higher yields and be less costly to produce.
Slashdot Mirror
Depends on what you call it. No one bats an eye about "cellulose" as a "non-nutritive filler" (a.k.a. sawdust), so if you have the right name, irradiated foods should also be accepted.
How about something like, "Photon Pasteurized"
Oh, there's a good plan. Vote for someone in a primary that you don't want to win, in the assumption that he's so bad that the person you do want to win slips right in.
If you're going to cross the aisle in a primary, you're a moron if you support the worst candidate from your own perspective. There's a chance they'll be the candidate in the general and then win. Ask the "anyone but Hillary" camp in the Republican party circa 2008 what they think about this plan.
If anything, I suspect that this actually increases the other party's chances of winning in the first place. If you're a democrat, would you rather run against a fully-differentiated Republican or a "Democat-lite" Republican?
When was the last time a passenger jet design was constructed, sold, and delivered to customers without ever having been flown by a test pilot?
Hah, you think people are choosing to filter their news?
More like, expressing a slight preference for certain links causes search engines and advertising to shift in that direction, feeding back to form the bubble. Eventually you're just not even presented information from outside the bubble. Our only hope is that big data is as incompetent implementing the results bubble as Netflix is and people start to get wise to it when they are only presented with a list of two-dozen or so items they've already seen any more.
Also, that no one gets the idea of deliberately manipulating the bubble to try to influence behavior on a mass scale (like Facebook already has done.. crap..)
The lockdown didn't seem to hamper his movement at all, so I'd guess the risk was the same either way. They would've found him sooner, though, as people would've been at the marina sooner and noticed something was amiss sooner, so in that sense the risk would've been less, as he would've spent less time not in custody.
Why should they need to all be in one place?
Based on the signatories' examples, I'd say taking frequent Jet-trips to conferences is definitely well within the allowable activities.
Seriously.. they couldn't teleconference this one? Are they trying to send the message that it's all bullshit?
Think about the message: "Any time a couple people shoot up a building, everybody's civil liberties and due process are forfeit for the next few days (months? years? )."
Does that sound like a reasonable response and a good idea?
That's what they did in Boston after the marathon bombing. To an even greater degree, even, as they basically house-arrested all of the residents of Watertown for over 24 hours. I have not heard or read very much outrage over the government's response, despite the fact that they only caught the suspect after the curfew was lifted and as pretty much a direct result of the curfew being lifted.
Does the smoke affect your neighbor in any way?
Perhaps your neighbor is asthmatic or sensitive to smoke or was trying to star-gaze that night or just doesn't like the smell of smoke.
Of course your fire impacts your neighbor if its products escape your property.
Except that the plan is very similar to that of gerrymandering and telecom companies' regional "gentleman's agreements". Before the merger, there are two companies whose products overlap and therefore are currently in competition. After the merger there will be three companies whose products don't overlap, reducing competition in each of their product areas.
Is Jimmy Carter really the bar we want to set?
Has he said that about the Fed? I notice that there is a lot of reading-into the things he says by both supporters and detractors.
But I guess credit cards are becoming more commonplace (damned as I see someone buying lousy cup of coffee for $1.25
Yeah, so? You should be able to make small purchases with them, because the real costs to provide the service are 1) reliably communicate an almost vanishingly small amount of data over a vast network that is mostly used for streaming video, 2) production of the cards themselves.
Why should you have to carry cash around and make change and carry that any more if you don't want to? Because some people don't get finances and will overspend, therefore all uses of credit cards are irresponsible?
Are there a significant number of hobbyists in this position? I'm skeptical of the idea that you can have an enjoyable hobby designing and building electronic circuits for things without designing your own circuits.
With all the services now that can etch or mill a one-off PCB design from circuit CAD files, PCB etching isn't really for electronics hobbyists any more anyway. It's really more of an art project now.
It's actually even easier than that. Just reserve some fraction of the tickets to sell at the door. It works for Apple...
This is a temporary solution, because people buy a second car if they really need to use it everyday. I guess the only solution is to avoid building with too many stories, which in turn concentrate everyone in a few neighborhoods
Wouldn't that reduce the need for cars, as the whole city would be concentrated, so people would be living closer to work, possibly even within walking distance, but at the very least improving the economics of city transit? Perhaps a solution is to enforce minimum height (or areal density) restrictions.
This is marginally better than our current method of funding public transit, but really public transit should not be funded on the back of private transit. If such a funding scheme works correctly, people will switch from private vehicles to public transit, thus lowering the funds available even as ridership sees ever new highs.
Public transit funding ought to come from rider fees and, if subsidy is desired to keep the rider fees low, from general taxation.
The capitalists already have a solution for that problem, as it comes up very often, for instance, when picking investments based on information that is little more than current stock price, recent earnings, and historical dividend.
The answer has been to distribute your investment across multiple investments. Possibly weighted a bit towards the most profitable, but re-balancing periodically to prevent having too much exposure to risk in any single place.
My local farms don't grow bananas, and although they are pretty much all boutique farms and vinyards, they still have multiple varieties of most of the crops they sell. If agriculture in general is not doing this then one wonders what we have the USDA for, anyway.
With autonomous cars, the train actually has a chance of achieving it's 2x 1-lane capacity (noting that heavily traveled freeways are currently 2-4-lanes per direction of travel, though...) because people can take an autonomous car from their home to the train station, and then from the train station to their destination - the high cost of taxis rides isn't to support to the cost of the vehicle and its support, it's mostly supporting the cost to support the control system (a.k.a. the driver)
not refreshing pages is the killer feature of the tons-of-tabs workflow:
It seems every browser decided to re-load all the page resources when you hit the back button (or.. trigger javascript events that end up requiring this?). This takes a bunch of time and also loses your position on the page. If you just want to peek at a link or two (say.. when reading slashdot...), it's much easier to open those links in tabs, read them in the order they finish loading, and then go back to the original page that hopefully hasn't helpfully auto-refreshed and lost your place.
All you need is for a couple of those tabs to also have links you want to peek at and you can expand to a couple dozen tabs pretty quickly.
Unnecessary, time-consuming page loads have trained users to manually cache pages by leaving them open in tabs.
Morons. They'll ruin peoples lives, likely based on some moron that saw Minority Report and thought it was a Good Idea.
The surprising thing, to me, was that the people making the movie and TV show seemed to really think it was a good idea. They didn't think they were making a dystopian cautionary tale, they thought they were making a clever crime story set in an actually desirable future.
n both places, only about half of those who enter actually graduate, which tells you that many people who enter university shouldn't have gone in the first place.
Is that what that tells you? Do you have some kind of test you can do to know in advance which half a student belongs to? Are you sure that the people who drop out didn't benefit from their time despite not earning a degree?
What's this father-son bullshit he's talking about? In 1-3, does even a single male character have a son? Do any of the kids have fathers?
That is a good point, and in the age of smartphones, we should be able to solve this finally: require food to be labeled with a bar or QR code assigned by the FDA or USDA (whoever is the appropriate regulator), which will be used by independent information brokers and inspectors maintaining a database of all of the information about all of the items. The databases themselves should be curated for correctness, but no valid information should be disallowed. The appropriate regulator should make available inspection information on each product, indexed by the same codes.
With unlimited "packaging space" available, GM products, for instance, should be able to include why the product was GM'd and what benefits or harmful traits it is proven to express.
I suspect people will be more willing to buy genetically modified foods that are more nutritious than their "natural counterparts" and will probably also be happy to save money on foods that have been modified to have higher yields and be less costly to produce.