I would assume there are already rules about medical info collected on children.
I don't know where you come from, but I've been in two countries and two states where the schools have yearly or other scheduled checkups where the kids are given a rough checkup by nurses and stuff. Mine have included eye exams and weight/height checks, as well as more embarrassing stuff like lice checks. I'm pretty sure heart and blood pressure tests were included, and I think at least one involved urine exam, too.
I don't see what the big deal about having basic heart monitoring info is.
"So if animals aren't self-aware, wouldn't that mean that they don't have souls or feel pain?"
I can't speak on the issue of 'souls', but animals do actually feel pain. Neither training or animal experiments with conditioning would be possible if animals were not able to feel pain or pleasure, and have enough faculties to remember what behavior led to that.
I think you are following the ideas of Descartes, who thought that rationality and self-awareness were a prerequisite to other mental faculties. Modern science does not really follow that line of thought. See Pavlov and other research into animal behavior.
I am still disappointed that a teacher could not point that out, however:P
I'm just sayin', it's already encoded in various laws as well as media that "hacking" is a term for unauthorized computer access. Some may still accept using it for "tinkering", but it's clear that the majority of usage is for unauthorized access.
"Hacking" means "unauthorized access to computers/other technology" in common usage and nowadays actual law. Get over it, the "Hacking = tinkering" thing was lost in the '90s.
For a second there I thought people were being sent to jail over P2P:P
I suppose the submitter is French, so it can be excused, but in America when we refer to "three strikes you're out" legislation, it usually refers to criminal laws that say repeat offenders of regular(non-copyright) crimes get a very severe sentence after the third offense. The term itself comes from baseball, but when people talk about "three strikes laws" it's almost always about violent crime.
In this case, it seems the story is about copyright/file-sharing law removing internet access? It's a very different thing than the American "three strikes" laws, so while the name is literally accurate, in the future you might want to clarify that you're talking about copyright law and removing internet access.
If you're going to nitpick, do it right. "English writer" can mean "person who writes in English" just as "English speaker" usually means "person who speaks English".
Too bad the trolling/ignorant summary runined this discussion. However it's based partly on fact.
It's common knowledge among pilots that Boeing planes generally cater to pilot's wishes for control more than Airbus, but that has more to do with company attitudes rather than country.
From this article on the crash of US Airways 1549 (an Airbus 320) and the history behind Airbus:
a charismatic French test and fighter pilot named Bernard Ziegler, now retired, who must stand as one of the great engineers of our time. He was (and is) despised within the French airline-pilots' union, because he openly discussed designing an airplane so easy to fly and crash-resistant that it would be nearly pilot-proof. He did not say "idiot-proof," but his attitude was undiplomatic in a country where pilots still wear their uniforms proudly, and it was also unwise, because, as the record has repeatedly shown, if you emphasize to pilots that they are flying a safe design, they will go to great lengths to prove you wrong. In any case, Ziegler had to live under police protection because emotions grew so strong.
So clearly, the French take the idea of pilot control just as seriously as Americans do, but Airbus opted to go a different route. I have no idea what the other American and French companies (some now defunct) like Lockheed, Aerospatiale, etc are like.
Can you(or someone else) explain what the point of container formats is?
I mean, either your player can decode the codec or not. Why not just have different file extentions for each codec? At least with codec file extentions, I can tell at a glance what software I need to play a file. With containers like.mkv or.qt or.wmv, I've had problems in the past when I found out a file I thought I had 'the software to play it' turns out not to have the right codec.
Having a player that can understand the container doesn't help at all when the codec isn't understood, so again, what's the point of container formats? (insert Seinfeld shrug here)
>I may be grossly misinformed but that is how the question sounds to me.
You are. The question is clearly asking about normal users, which is NOT uber-leet production $$$$ systems.
> My questions to the early adopters of ext4 are about whether the patches have performed as expected. What is your overall feeling about ext4? Do you think is solid enough for most users to trust it with their data? Did you find any significant performance improvements compared to ext3? Is there any incentive to move to ext4, other than sheer curiosity?
I see no problem with migrating a desktop to a different FS out of sheer curiosity, as long as one backs up one's personal data beforehand.
Don't let the title fool you, the body of the text makes no reference to 'production systems' and it is likely something inserted by the editors.
But yeah, whoo smartass. All it takes is a smartass attitude to get +5 Insightful these days.
Oh, yes. There was one math professor I had (Mr. Samardar) who the kids in class would make a game out of trying to guess where he was from. He was darker-skinned than most white people but not really 'dark', and his accent was light and sounded kind of European(to me, at least). Popular guesses included Egypt and Peru.
Now I just looked him up, it seems he was the chair of the local Iranian-American Association. So there's at least one person who couldn't easily be profiled by looks.
Add to that the fact that Latin Americans can range from very European-looking to very native-looking, and you have a lot of chances of misjudgement.
And speaking as an Asian, people from my country often think I'm from another country(because of my clothes or hairstyle, I think), and I know Asians in the US who have been mistaken for Native American.
There is no "outer space" region code, obviously. One simply switches the region code (or swap the disk in another player) each time the shuttle crosses over to a different region.
FWIW, they do have Discovery Channel in Japan, including Dirty Jobs (and Future Weapons, and American Chopper). I am in Japan atm, they have it on cable with both Japanese and English audio, though I haven't watched that particular show here.
No idea if it's going to change people's attitudes here. I don't know if it makes Americans more likely to do those jobs, either.
>In the UK, the people running red-light cameras aren't corrupt,
Hahaha... it's this kind of attitude that brings about corruption and abuse. "It can't happen here!"
And I'm tired of this arrogance of the UK/Euros towards the US that is usually undeserved. See the handling of the KC-X tanker contract vs. the Eurofighter Saudi export deals.
If you are an actual lawyer, then can you please explain why you don't do it like the US does, REQUIRE THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE GUILT, NOT REQUIRE THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE INNOCENCE?
It seems to me the UK system treats the original article of defamation as being of equal weight as a legal accusation, such that it must be proven in court like a prosecutor's case.
Why do you have a system that places the burden of proof on the defendant?
I only did a quick scan of the article, but it sounds like the author is blaming only some recent developments in UK law, but not the underlying system of UK law.
The basic thing that's wrong with UK libel law is that the burden of proof is on the defendant. The defendant must prove that the published article isn't libelous, whereas in the US the prosecution must prove that the article is libelous. In the UK the defamatory article is assumed to be wrong unless the defendant proves it true, whereas in the US the article is assumed to be true unless the prosecution proves it false. And then the US prosecutor would have to prove that it was maliciously false, that the defendant knew it to be false. Welcome to Soviet Britain, where defendant is guilty until proven innocent!
UK law in libel was designed to protect the powerful against 'false' accusations in the press, where US law was designed to protect the press in publishing accusations. See John Peter Zenger
I think this shows the problem with Slashdiots who try to push Linux.
What is PR?
Public. Relations.
So apparently, we're supposed to ignore the message the group puts out to the public regarding its own product, and instead read Slashdot/Planet KDE/digg for news morsels instead. Because that's what a REAL nerd does, and by golly, if you don't know the difference between a.0 and a stable release, you have no business trying to use our beloved software!
And this isn't even a case of an obscure technical issue being glossed over, they took a well understood norm (X.0 means it's a final release, after release candidates and alphas/betas), gave it their own definition, and declined to explain it in their press releases - you know, the thing that's supposed to explain to the uninitiated what the product is? But yeah, that's just PR, REAL nerds don't do PR, right? Public relations? What's that?
This is why Linux is still behind Apple and even MS.
Slashdot Mirror
I would assume there are already rules about medical info collected on children.
I don't know where you come from, but I've been in two countries and two states where the schools have yearly or other scheduled checkups where the kids are given a rough checkup by nurses and stuff. Mine have included eye exams and weight/height checks, as well as more embarrassing stuff like lice checks. I'm pretty sure heart and blood pressure tests were included, and I think at least one involved urine exam, too.
I don't see what the big deal about having basic heart monitoring info is.
[quote]JAXA, Japan's version of NASA[/quote]
Would it have killed you to write "Japan's space agency"?
What next, "The bullet train, Japan's version of Amtrak", "2chan, Japan's version of 4chan"?
Yet you're perfectly ok with people being able to allow knives, which are infinitely more dangerous? Glad I don't like in the U.K.
As a matter of fact, Britain is in fact enacting 'knife control'.
British Medical Experts Campaign for Long, Pointy Knife Control
Britain Cracks Down on Knives After 11th Teen Is Slain in London
War on Knives
Statistics on Knife Crime in Britain
Just try googling for "knife control in britain" and you'll find lots of stories on the subject.
"So if animals aren't self-aware, wouldn't that mean that they don't have souls or feel pain?"
I can't speak on the issue of 'souls', but animals do actually feel pain. Neither training or animal experiments with conditioning would be possible if animals were not able to feel pain or pleasure, and have enough faculties to remember what behavior led to that.
:P
I think you are following the ideas of Descartes, who thought that rationality and self-awareness were a prerequisite to other mental faculties. Modern science does not really follow that line of thought. See Pavlov and other research into animal behavior.
I am still disappointed that a teacher could not point that out, however
I wonder what the reaction in Holland would have been if the woman was wearing an Islamic headscarf.
Must I point out my Slashdot ID #, Mr. Six-Digit?
I'm just sayin', it's already encoded in various laws as well as media that "hacking" is a term for unauthorized computer access. Some may still accept using it for "tinkering", but it's clear that the majority of usage is for unauthorized access.
"Hacking" means "unauthorized access to computers/other technology" in common usage and nowadays actual law. Get over it, the "Hacking = tinkering" thing was lost in the '90s.
For a second there I thought people were being sent to jail over P2P :P
I suppose the submitter is French, so it can be excused, but in America when we refer to "three strikes you're out" legislation, it usually refers to criminal laws that say repeat offenders of regular(non-copyright) crimes get a very severe sentence after the third offense. The term itself comes from baseball, but when people talk about "three strikes laws" it's almost always about violent crime.
In this case, it seems the story is about copyright/file-sharing law removing internet access? It's a very different thing than the American "three strikes" laws, so while the name is literally accurate, in the future you might want to clarify that you're talking about copyright law and removing internet access.
If you're going to nitpick, do it right. "English writer" can mean "person who writes in English" just as "English speaker" usually means "person who speaks English".
Too bad the trolling/ignorant summary runined this discussion. However it's based partly on fact. It's common knowledge among pilots that Boeing planes generally cater to pilot's wishes for control more than Airbus, but that has more to do with company attitudes rather than country. From this article on the crash of US Airways 1549 (an Airbus 320) and the history behind Airbus: a charismatic French test and fighter pilot named Bernard Ziegler, now retired, who must stand as one of the great engineers of our time. He was (and is) despised within the French airline-pilots' union, because he openly discussed designing an airplane so easy to fly and crash-resistant that it would be nearly pilot-proof. He did not say "idiot-proof," but his attitude was undiplomatic in a country where pilots still wear their uniforms proudly, and it was also unwise, because, as the record has repeatedly shown, if you emphasize to pilots that they are flying a safe design, they will go to great lengths to prove you wrong. In any case, Ziegler had to live under police protection because emotions grew so strong. So clearly, the French take the idea of pilot control just as seriously as Americans do, but Airbus opted to go a different route. I have no idea what the other American and French companies (some now defunct) like Lockheed, Aerospatiale, etc are like.
>in the second case, it would be the visitors setting the agenda,
brb reinstalling X-Com
Okay, I am totally not trolling.
Can you(or someone else) explain what the point of container formats is?
I mean, either your player can decode the codec or not. Why not just have different file extentions for each codec? At least with codec file extentions, I can tell at a glance what software I need to play a file. With containers like .mkv or .qt or .wmv, I've had problems in the past when I found out a file I thought I had 'the software to play it' turns out not to have the right codec.
Having a player that can understand the container doesn't help at all when the codec isn't understood, so again, what's the point of container formats? (insert Seinfeld shrug here)
Hey, he's the one who started flinging the insults, bro.
>I may be grossly misinformed but that is how the question sounds to me.
You are. The question is clearly asking about normal users, which is NOT uber-leet production $$$$ systems.
> My questions to the early adopters of ext4 are about whether the patches have performed as expected. What is your overall feeling about ext4? Do you think is solid enough for most users to trust it with their data? Did you find any significant performance improvements compared to ext3? Is there any incentive to move to ext4, other than sheer curiosity?
I see no problem with migrating a desktop to a different FS out of sheer curiosity, as long as one backs up one's personal data beforehand.
Don't let the title fool you, the body of the text makes no reference to 'production systems' and it is likely something inserted by the editors.
But yeah, whoo smartass. All it takes is a smartass attitude to get +5 Insightful these days.
I've been running ext4 on my system and everything's fi
More importantly, if they ARE in the country illegally, wouldn't this convince them to stay instead of risk getting caught?
Am I the only one who actually thinks about how people will react to/get around laws that are proposed?
Oh, yes. There was one math professor I had (Mr. Samardar) who the kids in class would make a game out of trying to guess where he was from. He was darker-skinned than most white people but not really 'dark', and his accent was light and sounded kind of European(to me, at least). Popular guesses included Egypt and Peru.
Now I just looked him up, it seems he was the chair of the local Iranian-American Association. So there's at least one person who couldn't easily be profiled by looks.
Add to that the fact that Latin Americans can range from very European-looking to very native-looking, and you have a lot of chances of misjudgement.
And speaking as an Asian, people from my country often think I'm from another country(because of my clothes or hairstyle, I think), and I know Asians in the US who have been mistaken for Native American.
There is no "outer space" region code, obviously. One simply switches the region code (or swap the disk in another player) each time the shuttle crosses over to a different region.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DVD_region_code
(on a more serious note, it seems there is a special region code for international venues such as aircraft)
FWIW, they do have Discovery Channel in Japan, including Dirty Jobs (and Future Weapons, and American Chopper). I am in Japan atm, they have it on cable with both Japanese and English audio, though I haven't watched that particular show here.
No idea if it's going to change people's attitudes here. I don't know if it makes Americans more likely to do those jobs, either.
page here:
http://japan.discovery.com/series/index.php?sid=779
That explains why my webpage got hit with an SQL injection attack consisting of unintellible goos and gaas.
>In the UK, the people running red-light cameras aren't corrupt,
Hahaha... it's this kind of attitude that brings about corruption and abuse. "It can't happen here!"
And I'm tired of this arrogance of the UK/Euros towards the US that is usually undeserved. See the handling of the KC-X tanker contract vs. the Eurofighter Saudi export deals.
There is criminal libel law, though yes, most libel actions are civil.
But hey, thanks for adding nothing of value to the discussion!
If you are an actual lawyer, then can you please explain why you don't do it like the US does, REQUIRE THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE GUILT, NOT REQUIRE THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE INNOCENCE?
It seems to me the UK system treats the original article of defamation as being of equal weight as a legal accusation, such that it must be proven in court like a prosecutor's case.
Why do you have a system that places the burden of proof on the defendant?
I only did a quick scan of the article, but it sounds like the author is blaming only some recent developments in UK law, but not the underlying system of UK law.
The basic thing that's wrong with UK libel law is that the burden of proof is on the defendant. The defendant must prove that the published article isn't libelous, whereas in the US the prosecution must prove that the article is libelous. In the UK the defamatory article is assumed to be wrong unless the defendant proves it true, whereas in the US the article is assumed to be true unless the prosecution proves it false. And then the US prosecutor would have to prove that it was maliciously false, that the defendant knew it to be false. Welcome to Soviet Britain, where defendant is guilty until proven innocent!
UK law in libel was designed to protect the powerful against 'false' accusations in the press, where US law was designed to protect the press in publishing accusations. See John Peter Zenger
I think this shows the problem with Slashdiots who try to push Linux.
What is PR?
Public. Relations.
So apparently, we're supposed to ignore the message the group puts out to the public regarding its own product, and instead read Slashdot/Planet KDE/digg for news morsels instead. Because that's what a REAL nerd does, and by golly, if you don't know the difference between a .0 and a stable release, you have no business trying to use our beloved software!
And this isn't even a case of an obscure technical issue being glossed over, they took a well understood norm (X.0 means it's a final release, after release candidates and alphas/betas), gave it their own definition, and declined to explain it in their press releases - you know, the thing that's supposed to explain to the uninitiated what the product is? But yeah, that's just PR, REAL nerds don't do PR, right? Public relations? What's that?
This is why Linux is still behind Apple and even MS.
Go back to Slackware. Please.