I don't know if "most of us" oppose it. On the whole, there's a lot of people on slashdot who are like "whatever it's harmless". They bother me almost more than the threateners, because at some level, they consider themselves moderates rather than enablers.
Half of it's supposed academic writings in this supposed economic journal are editorials about how unfair the media is to conservatives. Now, that kind of writing, in moderation and in an appropriately academic framing can fit within the model of a good journal. I don't mean to say "Journals can't have editorial". But half, with a message-based push is past the point of credibility.
Take this piece as an example. It sort of adopts the tone of an academic writing, but is clearly out of place in an "economic" journal. It'd be a perfectly reasonable piece I'd disagree with on a number of points in a newspaper editorial, but what the fuck does it have to do with economics?
On the other hand, higher education is good for you as a person.
There's definitely something a little iffy about the notion that an education is something that prepares you for a job. I'm a programmer who got a degree in computer science, which falls into what you described, but my college education also included "well rounding" in things like arts, economics, foreign cultures, philosophy, and the like that I feel was essential to being a good citizen in non-financial respects.
There's just something odd about cutting off there and going "hey, you're good now." Cutting off at high school, or cutting the liberal arts part out of my education to make it a more job oriented experience would have left me in a much worse place to take on the world. I see it as odd when we go around advocating doing that to as many people as possible.
Part of it is just how a college education is historically tied to being upper class, and some latent classism on my part("how could THOSE PEOPLE manage without my education"), but I also feel that it's good for society as a whole to have as many people as are willing and able to complete a degree university do so, regardless of their job prospects.
We already have mind control capabilities of varying levels effectiveness. Pharmacological mind control, that we use quite effectively to control the symptoms of mental illness. Manipulative mind control that have been researched to hell and back for the sake of advertisement, down to small percentage changes in apparent mood from different colors of logos. Or bog standard brainwashing techniques that have existed from the beginning of time used by cults and schools and religions and multi-level-marketting schemes.
What you're perceiving is some arbitrarily electronic or arbitrarily precise level of mind control. Just because what we have now doesn't look super-duper sci-fi doesn't mean it's not another person controlling your mind. You've just internalized it as something you can ignore or resist.
Apparently, yes. Gluten is a specific plant protein, it's not present in organic semiconductors. Which by the way, also contain no nucleic acids, thus are also not GMOs.
Ikanreed-Honestly answering "humorous" rhetorical questions since whenever my regdate was
You're talking about the same Europe where people have actually been put on trial for 2 different genocides, which is the only continent where anyone has ever done that?
Because, I'm pretty sure that they threw Milosevic in jail until the day he died. And Nuremberg didn't go great for the Nazis either.
Hm. I made a pretty inaccurate statement there. I was going to go on about the end of the article and how they were talking about how it might be a sting and the coins are still in the governments' position. But then I realized that was pointlessly defensive and the simpler reality is that I was wrong.
So how does that wrongness interplay with the rest of what I was saying? I'm not sure.
Well, I mean only a few years before that was the fucking savings and loan crisis. Those idealized halcyon days should probably exist before we talk about how we have abandoned their principals. If you know me, you'll know I'm no fan of imaginary free market solutions to systemic problems, but the past was just as rife with pointless deregulation as today.
Naw, we totally talk have lots to say about black holes not being real or whatever.
It's just that this seems like a very narrow look into some particle physics development work, which, while important, doesn't shine a particularly broad light on the universe as a whole.
Despite combining qualities usually thought to annihilate each other—matter and antimatter—the Majorana fermion is surprisingly stable; rather than being destructive, the conflicting properties render the particle neutral so that it interacts very weakly with its environment. This aloofness has spurred scientists to search for ways to engineer the Majorana into materials, which could provide a much more stable way of encoding quantum information, and thus a new basis for quantum computing.
That's what the article says. I don't quite get it, but maybe the math is more elegant than the English representation?
This article hasn't gotten any meaningful comments yet. I'm not sure there's a lot to say about it. It's sure a particle alright. And it can only exist in superconductors, apparently, because it would annihilate with other instances of itself, if not contained.
The "security that used to be" was air gaps and manual processing of almost everything. It's the same security as living 2 miles from your neighbors before cars were invented.
A. That's not a conflict of interest. The prosecutors are always supposed to represent the state's interest. It'd be like saying "conflict of interest because the defendant is paying his lawyer". It's kinda silly. B. Once you're in a federal case, you're fucked as far as money goes. They're going to dump tons of money of proving your guilt. There is never a money shortage for prosecuting a federal case. If you're going to be accused of breaking a law in the US, be accused of breaking a local law. C. Like it or not, the bitcoins represent evidence. Seizing evidence is par for course in any criminal case.
The internet, by its nature, invites all the complexities of international law. It used to be you wouldn't have to worry about that unless you were near a border, on board a plane, or running a multinational corporation. Now it's a problem for everyone. People commit fraudulent crimes from places where they happen to be legal or unenforced, and every different way of doing things invites a new loophole.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if "most of us" oppose it. On the whole, there's a lot of people on slashdot who are like "whatever it's harmless". They bother me almost more than the threateners, because at some level, they consider themselves moderates rather than enablers.
"If you've done something to trigger my just world fallacy, maybe you deserve it"
I brought up black holes because it was a recent example that raised interesting questions, not because only astrophysics counts.
I raise an objection. You just changed the world from having an unsolved problem to having a solved one.
Half of it's supposed academic writings in this supposed economic journal are editorials about how unfair the media is to conservatives. Now, that kind of writing, in moderation and in an appropriately academic framing can fit within the model of a good journal. I don't mean to say "Journals can't have editorial". But half, with a message-based push is past the point of credibility.
Take this piece as an example. It sort of adopts the tone of an academic writing, but is clearly out of place in an "economic" journal. It'd be a perfectly reasonable piece I'd disagree with on a number of points in a newspaper editorial, but what the fuck does it have to do with economics?
This is not honest analysis. Not even remotely.
I don't mean that it's the only way to do things, just that cutting it out for people who want it might be short-sighted.
On the other hand, higher education is good for you as a person.
There's definitely something a little iffy about the notion that an education is something that prepares you for a job. I'm a programmer who got a degree in computer science, which falls into what you described, but my college education also included "well rounding" in things like arts, economics, foreign cultures, philosophy, and the like that I feel was essential to being a good citizen in non-financial respects.
There's just something odd about cutting off there and going "hey, you're good now." Cutting off at high school, or cutting the liberal arts part out of my education to make it a more job oriented experience would have left me in a much worse place to take on the world. I see it as odd when we go around advocating doing that to as many people as possible.
Part of it is just how a college education is historically tied to being upper class, and some latent classism on my part("how could THOSE PEOPLE manage without my education"), but I also feel that it's good for society as a whole to have as many people as are willing and able to complete a degree university do so, regardless of their job prospects.
Derp. Those are both also already possible to a degree.
It's not pedantry to point out that your imagined "profound" changes in technology are, at best, minor, gradual changes.
We already have mind control capabilities of varying levels effectiveness. Pharmacological mind control, that we use quite effectively to control the symptoms of mental illness. Manipulative mind control that have been researched to hell and back for the sake of advertisement, down to small percentage changes in apparent mood from different colors of logos. Or bog standard brainwashing techniques that have existed from the beginning of time used by cults and schools and religions and multi-level-marketting schemes.
What you're perceiving is some arbitrarily electronic or arbitrarily precise level of mind control. Just because what we have now doesn't look super-duper sci-fi doesn't mean it's not another person controlling your mind. You've just internalized it as something you can ignore or resist.
I know you're not being serious, but it's rich people and almost unpaid slaves.
Apparently, yes. Gluten is a specific plant protein, it's not present in organic semiconductors. Which by the way, also contain no nucleic acids, thus are also not GMOs.
Ikanreed-Honestly answering "humorous" rhetorical questions since whenever my regdate was
Why do we always conflate "not perfect" with "completely incomparably bad".
I'm just saying that Europe has actually demonstrated a history of attempting to punish institutional mass murder on some occasions.
You're talking about the same Europe where people have actually been put on trial for 2 different genocides, which is the only continent where anyone has ever done that?
Because, I'm pretty sure that they threw Milosevic in jail until the day he died. And Nuremberg didn't go great for the Nazis either.
Hm. I made a pretty inaccurate statement there. I was going to go on about the end of the article and how they were talking about how it might be a sting and the coins are still in the governments' position. But then I realized that was pointlessly defensive and the simpler reality is that I was wrong.
So how does that wrongness interplay with the rest of what I was saying? I'm not sure.
Well, I mean only a few years before that was the fucking savings and loan crisis. Those idealized halcyon days should probably exist before we talk about how we have abandoned their principals. If you know me, you'll know I'm no fan of imaginary free market solutions to systemic problems, but the past was just as rife with pointless deregulation as today.
Naw, we totally talk have lots to say about black holes not being real or whatever.
It's just that this seems like a very narrow look into some particle physics development work, which, while important, doesn't shine a particularly broad light on the universe as a whole.
Despite combining qualities usually thought to annihilate each other—matter and antimatter—the Majorana fermion is surprisingly stable; rather than being destructive, the conflicting properties render the particle neutral so that it interacts very weakly with its environment. This aloofness has spurred scientists to search for ways to engineer the Majorana into materials, which could provide a much more stable way of encoding quantum information, and thus a new basis for quantum computing.
That's what the article says. I don't quite get it, but maybe the math is more elegant than the English representation?
This article hasn't gotten any meaningful comments yet. I'm not sure there's a lot to say about it. It's sure a particle alright. And it can only exist in superconductors, apparently, because it would annihilate with other instances of itself, if not contained.
And it validates an 80 year theory?
I don't know what else there is.
I'm wary of your "in the past" statement. When exactly in the past do you mean?
Oh, the selling part is made up wholesale by Virtucon. I guess I missed that part.
The "security that used to be" was air gaps and manual processing of almost everything. It's the same security as living 2 miles from your neighbors before cars were invented.
Yeah, sorry. That's even more accurate, but what's relevant in this case is that it has to be provable(like any other criminal charge).
A. That's not a conflict of interest. The prosecutors are always supposed to represent the state's interest. It'd be like saying "conflict of interest because the defendant is paying his lawyer". It's kinda silly.
B. Once you're in a federal case, you're fucked as far as money goes. They're going to dump tons of money of proving your guilt. There is never a money shortage for prosecuting a federal case. If you're going to be accused of breaking a law in the US, be accused of breaking a local law.
C. Like it or not, the bitcoins represent evidence. Seizing evidence is par for course in any criminal case.
No. Perjury is saying demonstrably false things in court. Failing to provide evidence for your points is merely a justification for acquittal.
Our options are limited.
The internet, by its nature, invites all the complexities of international law. It used to be you wouldn't have to worry about that unless you were near a border, on board a plane, or running a multinational corporation. Now it's a problem for everyone. People commit fraudulent crimes from places where they happen to be legal or unenforced, and every different way of doing things invites a new loophole.