However, it also means that the shareholders who aren't part of the lawsuit end up paying for the damages awarded to the shareholders who are. Which could be very profitable for those litigating shareholders, not to mention their attorneys.
Explain how "Consciousness evolved in much simpler animals" is "woo-woo" or "magical thinking".
Everything else evolved from simpler animals, why not consciousness? Believing otherwise is as "woo woo" as it gets.
People throw this term "consciousness" around as if they know what it referred to
That's because "consciousness", like every other word in English, has multiple meanings. When a philosopher says "consciousness is ubiquitous" and when a doctor says "the patient regained consciousness", those are two different things. The OP article is largely using the second meaning.
No, you have invented an ordinary radio receiver, where "radio receiver" is basically any conductor. Of course each receiver reduces the energy available to other receivers, but to a negligible extent.
What's new is that the UW technology does not depend on having a powered RF transmitter built into the reader. In fact, both the transmitter and the reader are both completely unpowered.
I'm sure you had an interesting experience, one that may not have a simple explanation. But, unless you can reproduce that experience in such a way that I can study it (rather than take your word for it), your story will have to remain just that - a story.
And, there is no need to find an explanation for a story. There are an unlimited number of them already.
Those assumptions were made on previous experiences I've had with non-religious people who seem to desperately need to insert God in to the conversation at every opportunity.
Nobody is suggesting offence except you.
Just perusing narcc's previous posts will show that this is what he always does: avoids reason by taking offence, or imagining offense in others.
This is the mark of a truly irrational person.
You're absolutely correct. People talk of producing artificial clones that are exact genetic copies of the original organism, but this has never been done. The cloning process is rife with transcription errors. These so-called clones may look the same as the original, but there are always differences. That's why these "clones" nearly always have significantly shorter life spans than the original organism.
The plaintiffs are perfectly free to create a "cloned quarter horse" (ACQHA?) registry. There's no reason that the AQHA should have to do the registration.
Not to mention, after a certain point, many folks would start to speculate on what else was happening during the cloning process....as in genetic manipulation. That's just the nature of folks that aren't educated/knowledgeable in that area of science.
You seem to be suggesting that genetic manipulation of the clones is not a reasonable concern. How do you know that?
Even if it isn't a realistic concern now, how do you know it will remain that way?
That's because it is their own registry. Doesn't every organization have a "monopoly" on their own registry? Doesn't every club have a "monopoly" on determining who is a member, and who isn't?
The "writing on the wall" being that customers loved these products, but you didn't. Like anybody cares. People like you represent a microscopic fraction of the market for music players, smart phones and tablets.
You can't be sure of that. Since the government designed the card, they could easily implement a backdoor to have the card output the private key on command.
That still leaves the problem of someone saying "I am sjames, and my public key is XXXXXXXXX". To which you respond "No it isn't, I'm sjames and my public key is YYYYYYYYYYYY".
Who to believe?
Slashdot Mirror
The machine is definitely not going to be cheap.
However, it also means that the shareholders who aren't part of the lawsuit end up paying for the damages awarded to the shareholders who are.
Which could be very profitable for those litigating shareholders, not to mention their attorneys.
Explain how "Consciousness evolved in much simpler animals" is "woo-woo" or "magical thinking".
Everything else evolved from simpler animals, why not consciousness?
Believing otherwise is as "woo woo" as it gets.
That's because "consciousness", like every other word in English, has multiple meanings.
When a philosopher says "consciousness is ubiquitous" and when a doctor says "the patient regained consciousness", those are two different things. The OP article is largely using the second meaning.
Well, to be fair, a sledgehammer to a radio can severely impact the sound coming out of it.
Often for the better (talk, country, etc.)
She didn't.
Well, some energy must be absorbed by the receiver, but it is in the range of nanowatts.
No, you have invented an ordinary radio receiver, where "radio receiver" is basically any conductor. Of course each receiver reduces the energy available to other receivers, but to a negligible extent.
What's new is that the UW technology does not depend on having a powered RF transmitter built into the reader. In fact, both the transmitter and the reader are both completely unpowered.
No. Random noise is the exact opposite of information.
I'm sure you had an interesting experience, one that may not have a simple explanation.
But, unless you can reproduce that experience in such a way that I can study it (rather than take your word for it), your story will have to remain just that - a story.
And, there is no need to find an explanation for a story. There are an unlimited number of them already.
Which gstoddart most certainly didn't.
Nobody is suggesting offence except you.
Just perusing narcc's previous posts will show that this is what he always does: avoids reason by taking offence, or imagining offense in others.
This is the mark of a truly irrational person.
You're absolutely correct.
People talk of producing artificial clones that are exact genetic copies of the original organism, but this has never been done. The cloning process is rife with transcription errors.
These so-called clones may look the same as the original, but there are always differences. That's why these "clones" nearly always have significantly shorter life spans than the original organism.
The plaintiffs are perfectly free to create a "cloned quarter horse" (ACQHA?) registry. There's no reason that the AQHA should have to do the registration.
Talk about reading comprehension. jklovanc is agreeing with you, obviously!
Unlike people, horses do not have civil rights.
You seem to be suggesting that genetic manipulation of the clones is not a reasonable concern. How do you know that?
Even if it isn't a realistic concern now, how do you know it will remain that way?
That's because it is their own registry. Doesn't every organization have a "monopoly" on their own registry? Doesn't every club have a "monopoly" on determining who is a member, and who isn't?
The "writing on the wall" being that customers loved these products, but you didn't.
Like anybody cares. People like you represent a microscopic fraction of the market for music players, smart phones and tablets.
Bottom line:
Are you sober? And I mean not drinking alcohol, at all.
If so, for how long?
Too bad: we need an antibiotic that will get rid of funds managers.
You can't be sure of that. Since the government designed the card, they could easily implement a backdoor to have the card output the private key on command.
That still leaves the problem of someone saying "I am sjames, and my public key is XXXXXXXXX". To which you respond "No it isn't, I'm sjames and my public key is YYYYYYYYYYYY".
Who to believe?
And she was the perfect foil for the Doctor.