While correct that it works, it's a horrible and method that should be shunned. A campaign is not supposed to be about marketing, it's supposed to be about voting someone into office that will look out for the citizens best interests. You simply don't get that by voting for people based on fast-food type advertizing and giving away phones. Marketing gets you what we have for a President and House currently (and all the way back to the 70s), which has not been working very well.
I'm really stumped on this one. New cars are coming out with all kinds of distractions, like web browsing and now this. If we all had cars that drove themselves I would not mind. I can't see how this will result in anything different than people texting and driving. A few will use it as suggested (step by step GPS), but a few will crash into innocent people while updating Facebook or browsing the web.
Haha, you are funny in a very sad way. Nothing I said is factually incorrect, but somehow you just know facts to be incorrect. Understanding basic science to you is not simply incorrect, but requires a person to get help.
If you are happy living in your imaginary world, don't expect others to join you. Go back to Fox News where your delusion is safe!
Oooh, are you going to tell me that science is wrong because your daddy can beat my daddy up or something next? You can't really be that intellectually _and_ emotionally challenged on/. can you?
Shock horror, there's some elements in the atmosphere. Obviously they must have come there from chemical additives to jet exhaust for the purpose of weather modification! It's a ludicrous leap of logic and makes me ashamed to be in the same society as you.
And it is impossible to determine what normal values are to see if things become abnormal under certain circumstances? Okay, maybe you skipped every science class through school. I think it more likely that your irrational point of view, that a normal can never established, is laughable.
HAARP is a radio transmitter for studying ionospheric communications. If you can't see the difference then you really are beyond hope.
And how exactly do they study the impact the ionosphere? Are you telling me that these are like magic ground based sensors that use some really cool reverse osmosis to determine what is happening? Maybe you should read HAARP's own web site and figure out that they heat up particles in the ionosphere.
So the real answer is that it's possible to use HAARP in conjunction with seeding to get huge impact on weather. Or are you ignorant enough to claim that radio waves that can reach the ionosphere simply can't reach lower levels of the jet stream?
As mentioned, I'm not claiming every conspiracy is correct. I'm claiming that the potential for weather modification exists, which means the potential for abuse exists. If you assume that weather modification would never be used to harm people, then your assumption has no basis in historical reality. If you assume that weather modification is impossible, you are denying proven science (and we are not even talking High School level science here.).
My point was, and is, that the potential is there for weather modification. These programs are top secret, so wee are ignorant to everything except for what we can prove study. Motives behind these missions can't be known while they are top secret, nor do we know the potential impact. You believing, like the author, that weather modification would only be used for a greater good holds exactly the same weight as the person that believes that it's a satanic order out to kill everyone. How many times does the US Government need to make people guinea pigs before you start to catch on?
So there is nothing in my statements you can pinpoint as you claimed "wide-eyed lunacy", you just "think" it's all wrong?
I'll give you a clue though - what's the total amount of thermal energy in the atmosphere compared to the amount that HAARP can put out?
The energy of HAARP is enough to create a false Aurora Borealis, which you can find on HAARPs own home page. That is quite a bit of energy. Now if you take that same energy and heat up the front end of a storm system what happens to the storm system?
Personally, I find it laughable that people deny facts in order to support the delusion. I don't assume that lucifarians are manipulating the weather, I don't assume the US Government is doing it to starve people in Cambodia, or anything else you wish to invent about my thoughts. I point out the reality that it is possible to use something like HAARP to manipulate weather. Hell, it does not even take HAARP to manipulate weather. We have used simple chemicals to extreme effect. If cloud seeding works without HAARP, what can it do when those chemicals are excited and heated? It should only take Junior High level physics and chemistry knowledge to begin to ask that question.
You mean the mentions of the two items in the subject of the article and the article itself? Wholly Shit! If you are lost that easily you have some serious mental issues. I don't expect that people actually read articles mind you, but I commented on the 2 things mentioned in the subject.
This article reeks of poisoning the well. China has modified the weather publicly. Russia has modified the weather publicly. To claim that it's impossible is pretty damn idiotic! If you are not suspicious as to why the most allegedly advanced society in the world claims it can't do it you really should get off the medication.
The fact that the plans for chemtrails and weather modification are not given does not make science study disappear. We know things are happening and we can measure them. Aluminum and Barium in the atmosphere has been shown to be true by numerous scientific studies. Those metals are measurable in plants and soil which has also been measured. The underlying "why" is not seen because it's all "top-secret" but that does not make the metals disappear.
This idiot thinks that their "why" is better than someone else' "why". While everything is buried in "top-secret" files nobody knows. How about petitioning the Government to open up instead of claiming it's all for the greater good without any evidence? If we don't open things up, that speculation that it's all for the greater good has identical credibility to the guy who believes it's for nefarious purposes.
Then we get to the outright lies in this article. "HAARP does not and cannot control the weather. " Wait a minute there non-scientist! If the stated goals of exciting and heating particles and atoms in the ionosphere, and we know that they can do that, how does that not give someone the ability to control weather? What happens to air that is heated and cooled? Water that's heated and cooled? Come now, someone has to have had junior high level physics and chemistry and can see how outrageous that claim is. If their argument is based on a lie, the rest of the summaries are worth nothing.
Are you really trying to claim that you must trust that the Government is "good" and "innocent" when proof is absent? Do you know how many people were called "crazy conspiracy theorists" that were warning people about the Government trying to entrap MLK? Then we read about COINTELPRO and Operation Mocking Bird later, and find out they were correct. Do you know how many people said that the Government was poisoning people in St. Louis and were called "Crazy Conspiracy Nuts" just to find out later the US Government was dumping radioactive isotopes on them? NOTE: I'm not bothering to provide links to COINTELPRO, it's too easy to find.
Those are two very easy examples out of thousands! If you read what architects and engineers ask about 9/11 you will find many very high quality questions.
I agree that counting Google hits is not a way to measure the truth, but if you actually read some of the content you should be questioning what people tell you.
It's a much more complex fix which will basically cause an upheaval in all major current world powers in terms of throwing out politicians. What most people are not looking at with the Snowden leak is that the NSA and Germany were very clearly working hand in hand, sharing data on people that someone didn't like. The same can be said about the US and UK, and the US and France, and the US and Spain, etc.. etc... What makes you believe that those connections are simply bi-directional? There is a lot of anecdotal evidence which should make you question how deep this rabbit hole really goes.
In many cases, the targets were people that did not agree with the politics in either country. Look at how effectively the US and Germany have shut down any and all political dissent. Media won't touch protesters except to mention the "unpatriotic criminals", police show up in mass at rallies and protests, protesters are detained harassed at the orders of higher ups. If it's illegal for the US to spy on citizens, how did they know an impromptu rally was happening in a certain location? The obvious answer is that someone else provided them data because that was a legal loophole.
It's not just the US that needs to consider removing the political class and going back to what Socrates said when he defined the Republic. That change is needed very much globally. In case you didn't read Plato's "The Republic" Socrates was very clear than in order for a Government to serve the people, the people and government should never allow a Political class. Duties of Representation need to be shared among community members, not held by people willing to leach off of society.
I don't agree, mainframes were IaaS, SaaS, and PaaS all in one. You could control every aspect of the computer at a very fine grained level. I'm thinking you are looking at a very narrow view of a mainframe to think them as only SaaS platforms.
This is the answer we have been telling people to keep ever since... well, always!! Businesses dropped common sense for price. Second on the list was usability, and last was security if it was thought about at all. While that would not have protected "Free" email accounts from being tapped so easily, it would have prevented the corporate espionage that the US has allegedly been involved in. Go ahead and Google search "nsa spying corporate espionage" if you want citation, you will find more links than you can read this week.
Third world countries may be able to plead ignorance, or perhaps being duped by various Governments and their agencies. The US, EU, UK, China, Russia, etc.. should all know better but chose to ignore people that work in the field.
The situation with copyright is probably going to stay shitty for a while longer (before, I think, eventually reverting to the historical norm of no special protection from individual copying), but I do have some hope that the patent situation will improve because of how seriously it is impinging innovation.
I'm a realist, and have no such hope, at least not while we have a Political class of people holding nearly every political and judicial office. Big players that can afford it have think tanks doing nothing but submitting patents on "ideas" and legal teams figuring out how to make them pass the poor process we have for patent review.
The only way it changes, is to get rid of the Political class. Since the same class controls media and manipulates the public, it will take quite a bit to fix it. I'm referring to a revolt or military coup in the US as the likely change. The corruption is so entrenched it's hard to see any other method working.
The other flaw in the contract is that it only prevents citizens from spying on citizens. There is no mention of governments spying on citizens in either direction. So if Engineer John Doe spies on Scientist Jargon Spiegeldorf, it's a crime. If either Government agency spies on either person, it's not covered by the agreement.
Insanity of the US controlling al Qaeda? Sorry, but if you provide funding and weapons then you are in a sense controlling them. The policy makers in the US Capital know damn well that the majority of the FSA rebels are al Qaeda. They also knew that a majority of those rebels in Libya were from al Qaeda. So while they may not have directed the actual movements of the troops, we don't know how much the US Government directed them. You think we just gave them guns and money and said "fuck it, do what ever the hell you want with this"?.
Seems like we agree that it should not happen. I blame the shitty way the USPTO is handling things on the people with money bribing officials into and in offices, and the populace being both dumb enough to let it happen and fooled into believing there is nothing wrong with it. I read a speech given in the 1800s regarding copyright law, and it is astounding that the same arguments then are still around today. Not because Copyrights and Patents are good for Society, but because it makes a select few people a shitload of money.
I don't agree and simply think we "accept" people's will to hold power instead of arguing with basic logic. Let me give a few examples. A pressure gauge was patented as a hardware invention. Other gauges, such as a Speedometer, went through similar patents. When we create a software patent for a gauge we are not creating anything new, we are making a representation of a prior physical device that was previously patented. This doubles the duration of a patent in practice, ensuring monopolization for twice the intended duration. We have seed sorting machines and vegetable sorting machines that were patented. In software, we implement various methods of sorting which mimic what we have previously allowed to be patented. Nearly everything we have in software is an adaptation of something we have done in hardware.
To me, the logic is simple. Software patents were initially denied because almost all software patents are re-implementations of what we have allowed patents for in physical machinery.
I think this is easier to dismiss with prior art. Translations exist, and have existed for thousands of years in both written and oral traditions. Software translations have also been written for decades. What Billy is trying to claim is that he wants to patent a translation. If you translate to a summary, it is still a translation. If you translate an unknown title to a current equivalent, it's still a translation.
I have to add that an algorithm is math and math is not supposed to be patentable. There should be no concession on this rule, yet people continue to kow-tow to people who believe that they should own _everything_ and charge you rent.
Different propaganda is not better propaganda, but it's always hard to see through our own delusions. The boards of the BBC answer to the same people Murdoch's companies do. One of those people gets paid to sit on her old wrinkled ass and collect 35 million pounds a year from her UK serfs. Her kids live in luxury too, though at least one of them tries to behave like a citizen.
Are you implying that Fox, CNN, NBC, ABC, The NY Post, the AP, or any of the other entertainment^W News in the US is not propaganda? We need to get "News" from somewhere. I think its wise to try and teach people to recognize and find facts in propaganda, and look for the agendas. The Ostrich can bury it's head in the sand, but still gets eaten.
Almost, but not quite. Change the analogy to being where Obama and every Police agency in the USA has access to the diary. Yeah yeah, we all know the "if you have nothing to hide it's no big deal" fallacy. But we all _do_ have things to hide. We have uncomfortable thoughts, we have disagreements with relatives and friends, and many other things that could easily be misunderstood viewing select statements without context.
I can easily imagine Hillary Clinton's diary saying "I was so mad at Bill I wanted to kill him!". I think that would be a reasonable thing for her to write on many occasions. An FBI agent not knowing the persons involved or circumstances may wish to investigate a potential homicide being planned. The other party in control of DHS may wish to use her obviously violent statement against her when she tries to run for office. The CIA director may want a nice fat cash bonus and threaten to release her diary to get it.
We have known for thousands of years that this type of information is very powerful. This is why our founding fathers made sure to list privacy as a basic human right in the 4th amendment of the Constitution.
I was not attempting to absolve a person for a crime and apologize if I was not clear. I was pointing out that society bears at least some responsibility for the causes of many crimes. It is difficult to make the claim that a person is fully responsible when they have few options.
Slashdot Mirror
While correct that it works, it's a horrible and method that should be shunned. A campaign is not supposed to be about marketing, it's supposed to be about voting someone into office that will look out for the citizens best interests. You simply don't get that by voting for people based on fast-food type advertizing and giving away phones. Marketing gets you what we have for a President and House currently (and all the way back to the 70s), which has not been working very well.
I'm really stumped on this one. New cars are coming out with all kinds of distractions, like web browsing and now this. If we all had cars that drove themselves I would not mind. I can't see how this will result in anything different than people texting and driving. A few will use it as suggested (step by step GPS), but a few will crash into innocent people while updating Facebook or browsing the web.
Haha, you are funny in a very sad way. Nothing I said is factually incorrect, but somehow you just know facts to be incorrect. Understanding basic science to you is not simply incorrect, but requires a person to get help.
If you are happy living in your imaginary world, don't expect others to join you. Go back to Fox News where your delusion is safe!
Oooh, are you going to tell me that science is wrong because your daddy can beat my daddy up or something next? You can't really be that intellectually _and_ emotionally challenged on /. can you?
Shock horror, there's some elements in the atmosphere. Obviously they must have come there from chemical additives to jet exhaust for the purpose of weather modification! It's a ludicrous leap of logic and makes me ashamed to be in the same society as you.
And it is impossible to determine what normal values are to see if things become abnormal under certain circumstances? Okay, maybe you skipped every science class through school. I think it more likely that your irrational point of view, that a normal can never established, is laughable.
HAARP is a radio transmitter for studying ionospheric communications. If you can't see the difference then you really are beyond hope.
And how exactly do they study the impact the ionosphere? Are you telling me that these are like magic ground based sensors that use some really cool reverse osmosis to determine what is happening? Maybe you should read HAARP's own web site and figure out that they heat up particles in the ionosphere.
So the real answer is that it's possible to use HAARP in conjunction with seeding to get huge impact on weather. Or are you ignorant enough to claim that radio waves that can reach the ionosphere simply can't reach lower levels of the jet stream?
As mentioned, I'm not claiming every conspiracy is correct. I'm claiming that the potential for weather modification exists, which means the potential for abuse exists. If you assume that weather modification would never be used to harm people, then your assumption has no basis in historical reality. If you assume that weather modification is impossible, you are denying proven science (and we are not even talking High School level science here.).
My point was, and is, that the potential is there for weather modification. These programs are top secret, so wee are ignorant to everything except for what we can prove study. Motives behind these missions can't be known while they are top secret, nor do we know the potential impact. You believing, like the author, that weather modification would only be used for a greater good holds exactly the same weight as the person that believes that it's a satanic order out to kill everyone. How many times does the US Government need to make people guinea pigs before you start to catch on?
Is English your second language? If not, how would you conclude that "do not expect" is the same thing as a refusal?
So there is nothing in my statements you can pinpoint as you claimed "wide-eyed lunacy", you just "think" it's all wrong?
I'll give you a clue though - what's the total amount of thermal energy in the atmosphere compared to the amount that HAARP can put out?
The energy of HAARP is enough to create a false Aurora Borealis, which you can find on HAARPs own home page. That is quite a bit of energy. Now if you take that same energy and heat up the front end of a storm system what happens to the storm system?
Personally, I find it laughable that people deny facts in order to support the delusion. I don't assume that lucifarians are manipulating the weather, I don't assume the US Government is doing it to starve people in Cambodia, or anything else you wish to invent about my thoughts. I point out the reality that it is possible to use something like HAARP to manipulate weather. Hell, it does not even take HAARP to manipulate weather. We have used simple chemicals to extreme effect. If cloud seeding works without HAARP, what can it do when those chemicals are excited and heated? It should only take Junior High level physics and chemistry knowledge to begin to ask that question.
You mean the mentions of the two items in the subject of the article and the article itself? Wholly Shit! If you are lost that easily you have some serious mental issues. I don't expect that people actually read articles mind you, but I commented on the 2 things mentioned in the subject.
Oh please enlightened one, show me where I have provided any wide-eyed lunacy.
This article reeks of poisoning the well. China has modified the weather publicly. Russia has modified the weather publicly. To claim that it's impossible is pretty damn idiotic! If you are not suspicious as to why the most allegedly advanced society in the world claims it can't do it you really should get off the medication.
The fact that the plans for chemtrails and weather modification are not given does not make science study disappear. We know things are happening and we can measure them. Aluminum and Barium in the atmosphere has been shown to be true by numerous scientific studies. Those metals are measurable in plants and soil which has also been measured. The underlying "why" is not seen because it's all "top-secret" but that does not make the metals disappear.
This idiot thinks that their "why" is better than someone else' "why". While everything is buried in "top-secret" files nobody knows. How about petitioning the Government to open up instead of claiming it's all for the greater good without any evidence? If we don't open things up, that speculation that it's all for the greater good has identical credibility to the guy who believes it's for nefarious purposes.
Then we get to the outright lies in this article. "HAARP does not and cannot control the weather. " Wait a minute there non-scientist! If the stated goals of exciting and heating particles and atoms in the ionosphere, and we know that they can do that, how does that not give someone the ability to control weather? What happens to air that is heated and cooled? Water that's heated and cooled? Come now, someone has to have had junior high level physics and chemistry and can see how outrageous that claim is. If their argument is based on a lie, the rest of the summaries are worth nothing.
Are you really trying to claim that you must trust that the Government is "good" and "innocent" when proof is absent? Do you know how many people were called "crazy conspiracy theorists" that were warning people about the Government trying to entrap MLK? Then we read about COINTELPRO and Operation Mocking Bird later, and find out they were correct. Do you know how many people said that the Government was poisoning people in St. Louis and were called "Crazy Conspiracy Nuts" just to find out later the US Government was dumping radioactive isotopes on them? NOTE: I'm not bothering to provide links to COINTELPRO, it's too easy to find.
Those are two very easy examples out of thousands! If you read what architects and engineers ask about 9/11 you will find many very high quality questions.
I agree that counting Google hits is not a way to measure the truth, but if you actually read some of the content you should be questioning what people tell you.
It's a much more complex fix which will basically cause an upheaval in all major current world powers in terms of throwing out politicians. What most people are not looking at with the Snowden leak is that the NSA and Germany were very clearly working hand in hand, sharing data on people that someone didn't like. The same can be said about the US and UK, and the US and France, and the US and Spain, etc.. etc... What makes you believe that those connections are simply bi-directional? There is a lot of anecdotal evidence which should make you question how deep this rabbit hole really goes.
In many cases, the targets were people that did not agree with the politics in either country. Look at how effectively the US and Germany have shut down any and all political dissent. Media won't touch protesters except to mention the "unpatriotic criminals", police show up in mass at rallies and protests, protesters are detained harassed at the orders of higher ups. If it's illegal for the US to spy on citizens, how did they know an impromptu rally was happening in a certain location? The obvious answer is that someone else provided them data because that was a legal loophole.
It's not just the US that needs to consider removing the political class and going back to what Socrates said when he defined the Republic. That change is needed very much globally. In case you didn't read Plato's "The Republic" Socrates was very clear than in order for a Government to serve the people, the people and government should never allow a Political class. Duties of Representation need to be shared among community members, not held by people willing to leach off of society.
I don't agree, mainframes were IaaS, SaaS, and PaaS all in one. You could control every aspect of the computer at a very fine grained level. I'm thinking you are looking at a very narrow view of a mainframe to think them as only SaaS platforms.
This is the answer we have been telling people to keep ever since... well, always!! Businesses dropped common sense for price. Second on the list was usability, and last was security if it was thought about at all. While that would not have protected "Free" email accounts from being tapped so easily, it would have prevented the corporate espionage that the US has allegedly been involved in. Go ahead and Google search "nsa spying corporate espionage" if you want citation, you will find more links than you can read this week.
Third world countries may be able to plead ignorance, or perhaps being duped by various Governments and their agencies. The US, EU, UK, China, Russia, etc.. should all know better but chose to ignore people that work in the field.
The situation with copyright is probably going to stay shitty for a while longer (before, I think, eventually reverting to the historical norm of no special protection from individual copying), but I do have some hope that the patent situation will improve because of how seriously it is impinging innovation.
I'm a realist, and have no such hope, at least not while we have a Political class of people holding nearly every political and judicial office. Big players that can afford it have think tanks doing nothing but submitting patents on "ideas" and legal teams figuring out how to make them pass the poor process we have for patent review.
The only way it changes, is to get rid of the Political class. Since the same class controls media and manipulates the public, it will take quite a bit to fix it. I'm referring to a revolt or military coup in the US as the likely change. The corruption is so entrenched it's hard to see any other method working.
The other flaw in the contract is that it only prevents citizens from spying on citizens. There is no mention of governments spying on citizens in either direction. So if Engineer John Doe spies on Scientist Jargon Spiegeldorf, it's a crime. If either Government agency spies on either person, it's not covered by the agreement.
Insanity of the US controlling al Qaeda? Sorry, but if you provide funding and weapons then you are in a sense controlling them. The policy makers in the US Capital know damn well that the majority of the FSA rebels are al Qaeda. They also knew that a majority of those rebels in Libya were from al Qaeda. So while they may not have directed the actual movements of the troops, we don't know how much the US Government directed them. You think we just gave them guns and money and said "fuck it, do what ever the hell you want with this"?.
Lacking knowledge is not insanity.
Seems like we agree that it should not happen. I blame the shitty way the USPTO is handling things on the people with money bribing officials into and in offices, and the populace being both dumb enough to let it happen and fooled into believing there is nothing wrong with it. I read a speech given in the 1800s regarding copyright law, and it is astounding that the same arguments then are still around today. Not because Copyrights and Patents are good for Society, but because it makes a select few people a shitload of money.
I don't agree and simply think we "accept" people's will to hold power instead of arguing with basic logic. Let me give a few examples. A pressure gauge was patented as a hardware invention. Other gauges, such as a Speedometer, went through similar patents. When we create a software patent for a gauge we are not creating anything new, we are making a representation of a prior physical device that was previously patented. This doubles the duration of a patent in practice, ensuring monopolization for twice the intended duration. We have seed sorting machines and vegetable sorting machines that were patented. In software, we implement various methods of sorting which mimic what we have previously allowed to be patented. Nearly everything we have in software is an adaptation of something we have done in hardware.
To me, the logic is simple. Software patents were initially denied because almost all software patents are re-implementations of what we have allowed patents for in physical machinery.
I think this is easier to dismiss with prior art. Translations exist, and have existed for thousands of years in both written and oral traditions. Software translations have also been written for decades. What Billy is trying to claim is that he wants to patent a translation. If you translate to a summary, it is still a translation. If you translate an unknown title to a current equivalent, it's still a translation.
I have to add that an algorithm is math and math is not supposed to be patentable. There should be no concession on this rule, yet people continue to kow-tow to people who believe that they should own _everything_ and charge you rent.
Different propaganda is not better propaganda, but it's always hard to see through our own delusions. The boards of the BBC answer to the same people Murdoch's companies do. One of those people gets paid to sit on her old wrinkled ass and collect 35 million pounds a year from her UK serfs. Her kids live in luxury too, though at least one of them tries to behave like a citizen.
The BBC frequently runs AP stories just like Fox. I think world wide they have more and better reporters, but those people are not often published.
Are you implying that Fox, CNN, NBC, ABC, The NY Post, the AP, or any of the other entertainment^W News in the US is not propaganda? We need to get "News" from somewhere. I think its wise to try and teach people to recognize and find facts in propaganda, and look for the agendas. The Ostrich can bury it's head in the sand, but still gets eaten.
Almost, but not quite. Change the analogy to being where Obama and every Police agency in the USA has access to the diary. Yeah yeah, we all know the "if you have nothing to hide it's no big deal" fallacy. But we all _do_ have things to hide. We have uncomfortable thoughts, we have disagreements with relatives and friends, and many other things that could easily be misunderstood viewing select statements without context.
I can easily imagine Hillary Clinton's diary saying "I was so mad at Bill I wanted to kill him!". I think that would be a reasonable thing for her to write on many occasions. An FBI agent not knowing the persons involved or circumstances may wish to investigate a potential homicide being planned. The other party in control of DHS may wish to use her obviously violent statement against her when she tries to run for office. The CIA director may want a nice fat cash bonus and threaten to release her diary to get it.
We have known for thousands of years that this type of information is very powerful. This is why our founding fathers made sure to list privacy as a basic human right in the 4th amendment of the Constitution.
I was not attempting to absolve a person for a crime and apologize if I was not clear. I was pointing out that society bears at least some responsibility for the causes of many crimes. It is difficult to make the claim that a person is fully responsible when they have few options.