Anyone who subscribes to the idea of "hate speech" or "hate crimes" is a brainless animal. Free speech is free speech. Crime is crime.
Tacking on "hate" to either is just political manipulation of our sense of justice and our rationality in general.
Thank you. This, people. ^^^
This is all that needs be said regarding TFS/A.
"Hate speech" is a political tool to silence ideas some people on the Left don't like and to punish those who dare utter such.
It has no place in a free and open society. The whole underpinning of the FA/FS are non sequiturs as there is no such thing as "hate speech" in a free and open society.
Uh, I remember growing up thinking the hole in the ozone was going to make going outside impossible. But government enacted laws and we actually solved the problem. On a global scale.
Apples and oranges. They are two totally separate problems and at widely disparate scales. One is a rare gas that was relatively easy to control as we were the main source. The other makes up a large percentage of our atmosphere and has many sources including most life, many sources we are not even aware of yet, like the magma plume recently discovered under the Antarctic which is causing polar ice to melt at a higher rate and not AGW as previously thought.
In order to make a meaningful prediction, one must have data from a sufficiently-high percentage of the total number of meaningful variables, and to know that, one must know with some precision how many meaningful variables exist for the given subject. Further, both the number of meaningful variables and the measurements of those variables must have a high certainty.
Ask climate scientists to give you a solid number of how many meaningful variables there are in the Earth's climate system. Ask them how many of that total are included in their models.
Go ahead, I'll wait.
If they cannot give numbers with a relatively low window of error and fairly high certainty, then their predictions are almost meaningless. You may as well rely on the Farmer's Almanac.
Sucks to be you. Here in Europe, it's vanishingly rare for a crazy person to be able to get hold of a gun.
I'm sure that's a great comfort to the victims and their families of the Bataclan concert attack, that you don't consider the heavily-armed attackers "crazy".
People (mainly politicians and the business elite) carry on like the Paris climate agreement is a really strong step towards preventing climate change and we just need to ramp things up a bit more. But we're actually really really far away from having solved it.
They've known it was a practical impossibility from the start. They know that humans will do the same thing they've done every other time climate (or other major events/conditions) change. They will adapt.
Meanwhile, said politicians and others with wealth & power will use it as scare-mongering to drive the public in the direction they want to further their own political/ideological agendas increase their own wealth and power.
The discussion should be centering around adaptation to changing climate, not attempts to somehow 'lock in' current climate, as if that were possible.
Not by any halfway sane and rational analysis. In fact it was very far from it. Sure, he gave rational and fact-based arguments (i.e. "valid" arguments) for some things that a specific faction of the population does not want to hear, but it is you giving propaganda-lies as a non-factual response. The truth hurts and many people cannot deal with it. You are just one more example of that.
To Progressives and other collectivists pushing identity politics, truth is a WMD and writing truth where others may read it as Damore did is a WMD attack. Pointing out that men and women naturally tend in general to have different likes and preferences is anathema to the gender-nazis pushing the 'patriarchy' meme, and threatens its fundamental underpinnings. It's no surprise they react violently
Wouldn't it be such a great world if none of the countless "crazy shooters" could get a gun to shoot with?
That would be so awesome
Not only awesome, but also about as likely as it would be for unicorns with HRC's face to fly out of Trump's ass on national TV (though admittedly a 'priceless' moment).
It's also impossible in the US here in the real world, where 4-plus decades of the War On (some) Drugs has proven we can't keep anything out of the US that people in the US are willing to pay for, regardless of any law.
That's not even mentioning how easy it is to make guns, or simply steal them from police and military armories, etc.
Fantasies are nice, but they don't make for sane policies in the real world. Ignoring this fact costs innocent lives.
From TFS: "New TVs will be necessary, and broadcasters will need to transmit both ATSC 2.0 (the current standard) for 3 to 5 years before turning off the older system."
Granted, 3-5 years may not exactly be "almost nearly obsolete" depending on how you define it, but somewhere around a $4K investment should, to many people's way of thinking, last longer than their kid's goldfish.
" make personal data collection and targeted ads possible."
You can go F yourself right there and then.
Thankfully I stopped watching TV about a decade and a half ago so I won't have to go 'cold turkey' like some people I know who watch TV anytime they aren't actively doing something that would preclude it. A friend just spent around $3.5-$4K for this huge, curved, super-high-resolution/4K-blah-blah-blah monster "smart" TV that takes up an entire side of a not-small living room. I told him "you should have asked me to help research it for you first", as he knows I'm far, far more tech-savvy and usually does ask with most "tech" things, but he got excited at the store and made an impulse buy.
Not sure I want to be the one to tell him it's already nearly obsolete. He's still in shock about the privacy issues with such an "always listening/watching smart-TV" that I both told him and emailed him links to relevant information about.
In the normal world, vast numbers of people are pushed into reliance on proprietary options because it does what they need it to do, and the FOSS options often do not.
What FOSS fails at that keeps many if not most away is interoperability with proprietary software, and that's largely intentional on the part of proprietary software vendors to hamper competition from FOSS and keep what they fear hogtied, assisted by government that also fears software that they can't simply backdoor or otherwise compromise conveniently in central locations like large software corporations. Without proprietary software, many if not most of the NSA/Five-Eyes domestic spying programs revealed by Snowden could not exist.
I'm delighted to see that my post received 100% positive moderation (I know, now some joker will mod it down). It shows that there is common ground here across a wide political/ideological spectrum on this topic.
We *do* have common ground beyond 'Party'! Can't we drop the labels and 'tribal mentality' dividing us and unite on this and similar issues for our mutual benefit? I'd love to see a grasssroots movement form to abolish the TSA (along with 'Homeland Security' in a perfect world, but one step at a time. I mean, holy crap! How damned Orwellian/Authoritarian can government agency/department-naming get, FFS!?).
Everything he has ever done has been about his personal wealth. That hasn't changed just became he also seeks ways to do that which make him *appear* to be a philanthropist of some kind.
If the default state is Gates not helping any groups, causes, or creating/funding new things, why is it a problem if he makes a profit when he voluntarily chooses to use his wealth & position to do so? And, if he's helping/creating wouldn't that 'profit' be simply mitigating the costs of helping, as surely many if not most of Gates' various projects don't see black ink on the ledgers, ever.
Of course, the devil's in the details so more & more-specific data is needed, but I don't see a problem on general principle.
I mean, the guy doesn't have to bother in the first place. At all. With anyone or anything for the most part. Not with that much money. He could seclude himself in a "Dr. Evil Headquarters" in some dormant volcano somewhere Howard-Hughes-style with truckloads of blow and hot-and-cold running hookers and have it all, including his wealth, "blow up" when he died without helping anyone.
Because the only two possibilities are total absence of security and the insanity we have now?
The older ones among us might remember a time when you could actually use planes for a faster transport from A to B than... well, by now pretty much any other form of transportation. You'd put down your bag to be x-rayed, you'd go through a metal detector and you'd be done. And, lo and behold, the amount of planes that were bombed or otherwise "terrorized" was pretty much on par with today.
Locked cockpit doors made the TSA's mission obsolete for all practical intents and purposes. That's why they've tried to expand to train stations and buses, and even post offices and other locations under the VIPR program.
I remember back when you could smoke on a flight, and you were also trusted with steak knives to eat your in-flight dinner with.
It's easier and more profitable for the government to punish us than do the hard work of solving real problems.
And I'm sure Gates has considered the water issue. In fact, he may have bought it because of that - with climate changing, the real issue IS going to be access to water. (We are relatively fortunate in North America as we have almost half of the world's reserve of freshwater).
Perhaps Gates already *has* AI (or has used his money/power for either/or bribes/research to find out) and it looked at climate change and predicted, as the Sahara has been similarly predicted, that it will become "green". Maybe not rain forest levels or tropical/sub-tropical ranges, but dramatically higher average rainfall averages than current.
Maybe Gates (or his estate/successors) will become even richer selling excess rain water to California/LA, etc, while simultaneously reaping profit and accolades for helping to mitigate dangerous flooding in the newly-verdant Arizona by already having significant rain collecting/flood control technology, systems, and infrastructure already in place!
To my understanding, velocities of non-C particles are always in context (ie, relative) to an observer. Thus you don't need to accelerate the baryons at all, they're already traveling close to the speed of light relative to some other speedy observer -- who may or may not exist.
That would necessarily be in relation to the particle's space-time fabric within which it and the 'observer(s)' exist. Everything and everyone outside of that space-time fabric 'bubble' around the particles created by relativistic effects are the 'observers'.
Interesting relativistic space-time discussion. However, in all honesty, I was making a 'chicken/egg' jest in that it would take the power of a quark-fusion reactor to accelerate baryons fast enough to create a quark-fusion reactor requiring accelerating significant masses of baryons to relativistic speeds.
Or, could it be that...purely in jest...I unwittingly unlocked the secret to quark-fusion, ushering-in Mankind's "Golden Age" of cheap/clean power and interstellar travel/colonization?
They were hesitant about publishing this because of the threat of making a Q-Bomb out of it, but they said that the Baryon's didn't last long enough to create a chain reaction. But I'm sure someone will figure out how to make them last longer also.
That's simple; Accelerate all the baryons you plan to fuse to a significant fraction of C large enough to produce sufficient time-dilation effects.
Of course, to achieve that kind of velocity you'll need large scale quark-fusion levels of energy.
You might want to check your facts here the networking capabilities you're referring to on Intel chipsets is only in the corporate configurations. The consumer based version of the ME does not have a networking stack so there is nothing to remotely control on these configurations.
You don't know that. Nobody but a limited subset within Intel knows if that's actually true or not.
It's a giant freaking security hole with largely unknown properties, therefor nearly impossible for end users to reliably mitigate. Nobody concerned at all with information security should ever run US-made CPUs or commercial operating systems (win/mac). US TLAs have poisoned the well with American hardware and commercial OSes.
Last time I checked a company cannot clear someone of criminal wrong doing. These execs need to be looked at by the Justice department.
The Feds are part of the problem as they (both parties) are more corrupt than who you're asking them to prosecute. If you have enough wealth & power then what happens is along the lines of what we've seen occur in recent history
"...found no criminal intent..."..."no reasonable prosecutor would...bring charges..."
Since government touches almost everything, a corrupt government means corruption everywhere.
Since when is social engineering not one of the valid reasons to collect tax in the US?
Since Sep. 17th, 1787.
Taxation for the purpose of social engineering is not a power granted to the US federal government. If a power is not listed in the US Constitution as being a federal power then it does not exist. No law or Act passed by Congress, judgement by 9 black-robed political appointees, nor Executive Order can grant the federal government powers that are not set out in the US Constitution. Only a Constitutional Amendment can grant (or remove) federal powers.
Don't do this and don't do that. 'Cause we know what's best for you and we're gonna pass laws that make you conform. Nanny,. nanny boo boo! Hell, by the time we're done, you'll serve prison time.
Thus sayeth the Nanny State.
There are additional motivations for restricting Ecigs, among which are the threat they pose to tobacco tax revenues, and strong lobbying by big tobacco and their sock puppets against Ecigs.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who subscribes to the idea of "hate speech" or "hate crimes" is a brainless animal.
Free speech is free speech.
Crime is crime.
Tacking on "hate" to either is just political manipulation of our sense of justice and our rationality in general.
Thank you. This, people. ^^^
This is all that needs be said regarding TFS/A.
"Hate speech" is a political tool to silence ideas some people on the Left don't like and to punish those who dare utter such.
It has no place in a free and open society. The whole underpinning of the FA/FS are non sequiturs as there is no such thing as "hate speech" in a free and open society.
Strat
Just an "Overrated" moderation, no rebuttal?
Oh, that's right! Slashdot doesn't have a "hurts my fantasy worldview with facts" moderation option.
LMAO!
Strat
Uh, I remember growing up thinking the hole in the ozone was going to make going outside impossible. But government enacted laws and we actually solved the problem. On a global scale.
Apples and oranges. They are two totally separate problems and at widely disparate scales. One is a rare gas that was relatively easy to control as we were the main source. The other makes up a large percentage of our atmosphere and has many sources including most life, many sources we are not even aware of yet, like the magma plume recently discovered under the Antarctic which is causing polar ice to melt at a higher rate and not AGW as previously thought.
In order to make a meaningful prediction, one must have data from a sufficiently-high percentage of the total number of meaningful variables, and to know that, one must know with some precision how many meaningful variables exist for the given subject. Further, both the number of meaningful variables and the measurements of those variables must have a high certainty.
Ask climate scientists to give you a solid number of how many meaningful variables there are in the Earth's climate system. Ask them how many of that total are included in their models.
Go ahead, I'll wait.
If they cannot give numbers with a relatively low window of error and fairly high certainty, then their predictions are almost meaningless. You may as well rely on the Farmer's Almanac.
Strat
Sucks to be you. Here in Europe, it's vanishingly rare for a crazy person to be able to get hold of a gun.
I'm sure that's a great comfort to the victims and their families of the Bataclan concert attack, that you don't consider the heavily-armed attackers "crazy".
Strat
People (mainly politicians and the business elite) carry on like the Paris climate agreement is a really strong step towards preventing climate change and we just need to ramp things up a bit more. But we're actually really really far away from having solved it.
They've known it was a practical impossibility from the start. They know that humans will do the same thing they've done every other time climate (or other major events/conditions) change. They will adapt.
Meanwhile, said politicians and others with wealth & power will use it as scare-mongering to drive the public in the direction they want to further their own political/ideological agendas increase their own wealth and power.
The discussion should be centering around adaptation to changing climate, not attempts to somehow 'lock in' current climate, as if that were possible.
Strat
Not by any halfway sane and rational analysis. In fact it was very far from it. Sure, he gave rational and fact-based arguments (i.e. "valid" arguments) for some things that a specific faction of the population does not want to hear, but it is you giving propaganda-lies as a non-factual response. The truth hurts and many people cannot deal with it. You are just one more example of that.
To Progressives and other collectivists pushing identity politics, truth is a WMD and writing truth where others may read it as Damore did is a WMD attack. Pointing out that men and women naturally tend in general to have different likes and preferences is anathema to the gender-nazis pushing the 'patriarchy' meme, and threatens its fundamental underpinnings. It's no surprise they react violently
Strat
Wouldn't it be such a great world if none of the countless "crazy shooters" could get a gun to shoot with?
That would be so awesome
Not only awesome, but also about as likely as it would be for unicorns with HRC's face to fly out of Trump's ass on national TV (though admittedly a 'priceless' moment).
It's also impossible in the US here in the real world, where 4-plus decades of the War On (some) Drugs has proven we can't keep anything out of the US that people in the US are willing to pay for, regardless of any law.
That's not even mentioning how easy it is to make guns, or simply steal them from police and military armories, etc.
Fantasies are nice, but they don't make for sane policies in the real world. Ignoring this fact costs innocent lives.
Strat
I don't get it. How is his TV nearly obsolete?
From TFS: "New TVs will be necessary, and broadcasters will need to transmit both ATSC 2.0 (the current standard) for 3 to 5 years before turning off the older system."
Granted, 3-5 years may not exactly be "almost nearly obsolete" depending on how you define it, but somewhere around a $4K investment should, to many people's way of thinking, last longer than their kid's goldfish.
Strat
" make personal data collection and targeted ads possible."
You can go F yourself right there and then.
Thankfully I stopped watching TV about a decade and a half ago so I won't have to go 'cold turkey' like some people I know who watch TV anytime they aren't actively doing something that would preclude it. A friend just spent around $3.5-$4K for this huge, curved, super-high-resolution/4K-blah-blah-blah monster "smart" TV that takes up an entire side of a not-small living room. I told him "you should have asked me to help research it for you first", as he knows I'm far, far more tech-savvy and usually does ask with most "tech" things, but he got excited at the store and made an impulse buy.
Not sure I want to be the one to tell him it's already nearly obsolete. He's still in shock about the privacy issues with such an "always listening/watching smart-TV" that I both told him and emailed him links to relevant information about.
Strat
In the normal world, vast numbers of people are pushed into reliance on proprietary options because it does what they need it to do, and the FOSS options often do not.
What FOSS fails at that keeps many if not most away is interoperability with proprietary software, and that's largely intentional on the part of proprietary software vendors to hamper competition from FOSS and keep what they fear hogtied, assisted by government that also fears software that they can't simply backdoor or otherwise compromise conveniently in central locations like large software corporations. Without proprietary software, many if not most of the NSA/Five-Eyes domestic spying programs revealed by Snowden could not exist.
Strat
I feel safe knowing the quality of the personnel that spy on us and can have anyone they wish killed by a drone strike without a trial.
FTFY
Strat
I'm delighted to see that my post received 100% positive moderation (I know, now some joker will mod it down). It shows that there is common ground here across a wide political/ideological spectrum on this topic.
We *do* have common ground beyond 'Party'! Can't we drop the labels and 'tribal mentality' dividing us and unite on this and similar issues for our mutual benefit? I'd love to see a grasssroots movement form to abolish the TSA (along with 'Homeland Security' in a perfect world, but one step at a time. I mean, holy crap! How damned Orwellian/Authoritarian can government agency/department-naming get, FFS!?).
Strat
Everything he has ever done has been about his personal wealth. That hasn't changed just became he also seeks ways to do that which make him *appear* to be a philanthropist of some kind.
If the default state is Gates not helping any groups, causes, or creating/funding new things, why is it a problem if he makes a profit when he voluntarily chooses to use his wealth & position to do so? And, if he's helping/creating wouldn't that 'profit' be simply mitigating the costs of helping, as surely many if not most of Gates' various projects don't see black ink on the ledgers, ever.
Of course, the devil's in the details so more & more-specific data is needed, but I don't see a problem on general principle.
I mean, the guy doesn't have to bother in the first place. At all. With anyone or anything for the most part. Not with that much money. He could seclude himself in a "Dr. Evil Headquarters" in some dormant volcano somewhere Howard-Hughes-style with truckloads of blow and hot-and-cold running hookers and have it all, including his wealth, "blow up" when he died without helping anyone.
Strat
Because the only two possibilities are total absence of security and the insanity we have now?
The older ones among us might remember a time when you could actually use planes for a faster transport from A to B than ... well, by now pretty much any other form of transportation. You'd put down your bag to be x-rayed, you'd go through a metal detector and you'd be done. And, lo and behold, the amount of planes that were bombed or otherwise "terrorized" was pretty much on par with today.
Locked cockpit doors made the TSA's mission obsolete for all practical intents and purposes. That's why they've tried to expand to train stations and buses, and even post offices and other locations under the VIPR program.
I remember back when you could smoke on a flight, and you were also trusted with steak knives to eat your in-flight dinner with.
It's easier and more profitable for the government to punish us than do the hard work of solving real problems.
Strat
And I'm sure Gates has considered the water issue. In fact, he may have bought it because of that - with climate changing, the real issue IS going to be access to water. (We are relatively fortunate in North America as we have almost half of the world's reserve of freshwater).
Perhaps Gates already *has* AI (or has used his money/power for either/or bribes/research to find out) and it looked at climate change and predicted, as the Sahara has been similarly predicted, that it will become "green". Maybe not rain forest levels or tropical/sub-tropical ranges, but dramatically higher average rainfall averages than current.
Maybe Gates (or his estate/successors) will become even richer selling excess rain water to California/LA, etc, while simultaneously reaping profit and accolades for helping to mitigate dangerous flooding in the newly-verdant Arizona by already having significant rain collecting/flood control technology, systems, and infrastructure already in place!
Strat
Wow...Slashdot completely lost my hypertext quotes.
Or maybe they simply entered a different space-time 'bubble'.
Probably chilling with my MIA unmatched socks.
Strat
To my understanding, velocities of non-C particles are always in context (ie, relative) to an observer. Thus you don't need to accelerate the baryons at all, they're already traveling close to the speed of light relative to some other speedy observer -- who may or may not exist.
That would necessarily be in relation to the particle's space-time fabric within which it and the 'observer(s)' exist. Everything and everyone outside of that space-time fabric 'bubble' around the particles created by relativistic effects are the 'observers'.
Interesting relativistic space-time discussion. However, in all honesty, I was making a 'chicken/egg' jest in that it would take the power of a quark-fusion reactor to accelerate baryons fast enough to create a quark-fusion reactor requiring accelerating significant masses of baryons to relativistic speeds.
Or, could it be that...purely in jest...I unwittingly unlocked the secret to quark-fusion, ushering-in Mankind's "Golden Age" of cheap/clean power and interstellar travel/colonization?
Crap! I hope they don't blame me!
Strat
They were hesitant about publishing this because of the threat of making a Q-Bomb out of it, but they said that the Baryon's didn't last long enough to create a chain reaction.
But I'm sure someone will figure out how to make them last longer also.
That's simple; Accelerate all the baryons you plan to fuse to a significant fraction of C large enough to produce sufficient time-dilation effects.
Of course, to achieve that kind of velocity you'll need large scale quark-fusion levels of energy.
Strat
You might want to check your facts here the networking capabilities you're referring to on Intel chipsets is only in the corporate configurations. The consumer based version of the ME does not have a networking stack so there is nothing to remotely control on these configurations.
You don't know that. Nobody but a limited subset within Intel knows if that's actually true or not.
It's a giant freaking security hole with largely unknown properties, therefor nearly impossible for end users to reliably mitigate. Nobody concerned at all with information security should ever run US-made CPUs or commercial operating systems (win/mac). US TLAs have poisoned the well with American hardware and commercial OSes.
Strat
Last time I checked a company cannot clear someone of criminal wrong doing. These execs need to be looked at by the Justice department.
The Feds are part of the problem as they (both parties) are more corrupt than who you're asking them to prosecute. If you have enough wealth & power then what happens is along the lines of what we've seen occur in recent history
"...found no criminal intent..."..."no reasonable prosecutor would...bring charges..."
Since government touches almost everything, a corrupt government means corruption everywhere.
Strat
Since when is social engineering not one of the valid reasons to collect tax in the US?
Since Sep. 17th, 1787.
Taxation for the purpose of social engineering is not a power granted to the US federal government. If a power is not listed in the US Constitution as being a federal power then it does not exist. No law or Act passed by Congress, judgement by 9 black-robed political appointees, nor Executive Order can grant the federal government powers that are not set out in the US Constitution. Only a Constitutional Amendment can grant (or remove) federal powers.
Strat
Duh! Duh! Duh! =)
NSA wants into our shit
Do-DUH Do-DUH
Now it's leaked and hackers pwn it
All the do-DUH day!
Gonna leak all night
Gonna leak all day
NSA leaks and breaks our shit
All the do-DUH day!
Strat
Don't do this and don't do that. 'Cause we know what's best for you and we're gonna pass laws that make you conform. Nanny,. nanny boo boo! Hell, by the time we're done, you'll serve prison time.
Thus sayeth the Nanny State.
There are additional motivations for restricting Ecigs, among which are the threat they pose to tobacco tax revenues, and strong lobbying by big tobacco and their sock puppets against Ecigs.
Always follow the money.
Strat
suffix is regressive
Gah! *Prefix!*
Maybe AI can add an edit-post function to /.
When are F-Cigarettes coming out?
F-Cigarettes were the previous model, suffix is regressive. It's also conveniently an acronym; 'F' as in 'Fire' like real cigs use.
Looking forward to using the "C-Cigs??...Where??" come-back line after those come out.
D-Cigs...I'm sorry, just Nope.
B-Cigs reportedly do show some positive reactions among males in studies, however....
Strat