In my country, the conviction is erased from the book after some time. Is it different in the USA? Should a 11 month term in a juvenile facility taint a man for the rest of his life?
Go ahead. People are aware of the problem you've described. It still does not change the fact that we are able to apply methodically QM to the real world and describe the world quite accurately, earning real dollars in the process.
Instead of spending time on Slashdot calling BS things which are not, sit on your ass and try to come up with a decent theory of quantum measurement.
A website "How to strike an European city" is not a means of two-way communication which could be observed. It's a way of gaining followers and giving them basic training in a cheapest way possible. Observing those websites won't give any new information to British intelligence, since they already know how one could plant a bomb in the Metro. Or, the designers of the website also know it is publicly available and could be observed, and won't include any information which should not fall into Western intelligence officers' ears. All they care is to reach those young frustrated males which are prime species for suicide bombings, and teach them a few things. Making this a little harder for them is a good policy. Protesting against that in the name of free speech is plain absurd, it's like complaining that the British government did not allow Nazi propaganda in the newspapers during WW II.
T-34 was not a German tank, it was a Soviet one. About the jet fighters -- the idea of jet drive was not new (rockets were known earlier) and somebody would do it in a matter of time. V2 rockets were militarily nonimportant.
The Germans, though misguided in their science, were leaps and bounds ahead of us during World War 2, discovering new things at an astounding rate simply because they told their scientists that they didn't care, they just wanted it done, and they wanted it done yesterday.
It's not true. Tell me one are in which German science of the Nazi age was ahead of the rest of the world. Experiments done in the death camps carry no scientific value, just because they're not repeatable -- you can't do it again and check if Dr Mendele was not fudging the figures. If you know about any medical treatment which was based on these results, please tell me. The reality is, science needs ethics (not politics). Germans let the ethics go and managed to create such bizarre "advancements" like Hueckel's bison.
So the most unethical regime in the history of mankind (IMHO) created the best science, enhancing what we knew in hundreds of different fields, pushing everyone else to the limit. Remember, it was actually German scientists who won us World War 2.
Bullshit. The Germans expelled their best physicists, rendering themselves unable to construct the atomic bomb (assuming they would have enough uranium...). Those Germans who fled to the West were good because they were... good, not because they were permitted to carry out unethical research. And it were not only Germans who helped the Allies to win the war: Polish and British mathematicians broke the Enigma, Brits invented the best radar then available, Polish officer invented the first practical mine detector , Americans invented long before the war mass production of machinery and outperformed both Japan and Germany, etc. etc. German physicists like Einstein were very important for the atomic bomb, but it was also done by people like Silard and Feynman, and Oppenheimer.
Female ferrets easily reach over one pound. Mine weighs about 1 kilogram, that is ca 2 pounds. Many ferrets are greyish, or brown. Nobody could hold a ferret for long in hands (they're too lively), so Da Vinci would have to paint from memory. Apart from that, I agree it is a ferret on that painting.
Of course this is a dogma, or rather an axiom. But science is open about its axioms, while creationists present their axioms as something which might be proven. It's not their ideas which piss me off, it's their dishonesty.
Einstein did not disprove Newtonian mechanics. He showed they work only in a limited (but very broad) range of physical situations, and showed how to extend physics beyond that case.
Are you mad? The question whether "God designed evolution" is totally out outside of science. It's a matter of faith, not knowledge. The only academic activity when you can seriously consider this is philosophy.
I'm a physicist and I believe in God. I believe that God created the world with the evolution, etc so that there would be a man in this world. I require no proof for that and neither do I expect science to provide me with any. In fact, I'd look very suspiciously at anyone pretending to have such "proof". It's my religion, not my science.
Google can do it only if it provides a service useful enough for people to feed it with the data you claim they 'disturbingly' collect. If you don't want to feed them this data, don't use Google scholar. There are other options, also online, many of them need to be paid for (and Google is free).
Who said I do? I'm only asking for some constructive criticism from people who criticise the measures proposed by British police. I really don't see what's the big deal. If the police may have the right to search your house and browse through your banking history, why shouldn't it have the right to decrypt your files? Obstructing this decryption by withholding the key is like obstructing the search of your house. Granted, I can imagine abuse: that's why we should have independent judges controlling what police does.
Anyway, you're an A/C but the only person who delivered a sane response to my post. Depressing...
Slashdot Mirror
He's probably insane and should have medical treatment. Putting him in the prison sounds pretty stupid to me.
In my country, the conviction is erased from the book after some time. Is it different in the USA? Should a 11 month term in a juvenile facility taint a man for the rest of his life?
1. Tides -- may be stronger or weaker. 2. Variations in the Earth's gravitational field.
Changing the humidity, microstructure (i.e., how porous it is) and the mineral contents.
Go ahead. People are aware of the problem you've described. It still does not change the fact that we are able to apply methodically QM to the real world and describe the world quite accurately, earning real dollars in the process.
Instead of spending time on Slashdot calling BS things which are not, sit on your ass and try to come up with a decent theory of quantum measurement.
Actually, this is shown to physics students in labs.
A website "How to strike an European city" is not a means of two-way communication which could be observed. It's a way of gaining followers and giving them basic training in a cheapest way possible. Observing those websites won't give any new information to British intelligence, since they already know how one could plant a bomb in the Metro. Or, the designers of the website also know it is publicly available and could be observed, and won't include any information which should not fall into Western intelligence officers' ears. All they care is to reach those young frustrated males which are prime species for suicide bombings, and teach them a few things. Making this a little harder for them is a good policy. Protesting against that in the name of free speech is plain absurd, it's like complaining that the British government did not allow Nazi propaganda in the newspapers during WW II.
"Ironically, the most readily available sources of accurate online information on bomb-making are the websites of the radical American militia."
T-34 was not a German tank, it was a Soviet one. About the jet fighters -- the idea of jet drive was not new (rockets were known earlier) and somebody would do it in a matter of time. V2 rockets were militarily nonimportant.
The Germans, though misguided in their science, were leaps and bounds ahead of us during World War 2, discovering new things at an astounding rate simply because they told their scientists that they didn't care, they just wanted it done, and they wanted it done yesterday.
It's not true. Tell me one are in which German science of the Nazi age was ahead of the rest of the world. Experiments done in the death camps carry no scientific value, just because they're not repeatable -- you can't do it again and check if Dr Mendele was not fudging the figures. If you know about any medical treatment which was based on these results, please tell me. The reality is, science needs ethics (not politics). Germans let the ethics go and managed to create such bizarre "advancements" like Hueckel's bison.
So the most unethical regime in the history of mankind (IMHO) created the best science, enhancing what we knew in hundreds of different fields, pushing everyone else to the limit. Remember, it was actually German scientists who won us World War 2.
Bullshit. The Germans expelled their best physicists, rendering themselves unable to construct the atomic bomb (assuming they would have enough uranium...). Those Germans who fled to the West were good because they were... good, not because they were permitted to carry out unethical research. And it were not only Germans who helped the Allies to win the war: Polish and British mathematicians broke the Enigma, Brits invented the best radar then available, Polish officer invented the first practical mine detector , Americans invented long before the war mass production of machinery and outperformed both Japan and Germany, etc. etc. German physicists like Einstein were very important for the atomic bomb, but it was also done by people like Silard and Feynman, and Oppenheimer.
Bloody Jews... they can't spend a day without desecrating the Holy Communion^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^^Hkilling a Palestinian.
Maybe because the GUI is one of the things Microsoft has done right in XP? Sometimes there is not so many ways to make something work right.
Female ferrets easily reach over one pound. Mine weighs about 1 kilogram, that is ca 2 pounds. Many ferrets are greyish, or brown. Nobody could hold a ferret for long in hands (they're too lively), so Da Vinci would have to paint from memory. Apart from that, I agree it is a ferret on that painting.
The title says it's an ermine, but is REALLY is a ferret. Just look at it.
"Intelligent Design guys AND the scientific atheists"
Why the opposition? I'm not an atheist but I'm certainly not an ID guy.
We know the Universe is ca 13 billion years old. Quite a lot of time for improbable events to happen.
Of course this is a dogma, or rather an axiom. But science is open about its axioms, while creationists present their axioms as something which might be proven. It's not their ideas which piss me off, it's their dishonesty.
Einstein did not disprove Newtonian mechanics. He showed they work only in a limited (but very broad) range of physical situations, and showed how to extend physics beyond that case.
Are you mad? The question whether "God designed evolution" is totally out outside of science. It's a matter of faith, not knowledge. The only academic activity when you can seriously consider this is philosophy.
I'm a physicist and I believe in God. I believe that God created the world with the evolution, etc so that there would be a man in this world. I require no proof for that and neither do I expect science to provide me with any. In fact, I'd look very suspiciously at anyone pretending to have such "proof". It's my religion, not my science.
I don't want to depress you, but here in Poland it is routine that politicians disclose their personal wealth every year.
Mod the parent up.
Many journals expect you to pay for viewing their content. Yes, I also think paying $20 for one article is extortion.
Google can do it only if it provides a service useful enough for people to feed it with the data you claim they 'disturbingly' collect. If you don't want to feed them this data, don't use Google scholar. There are other options, also online, many of them need to be paid for (and Google is free).
It's as simple as that.
It's different being killed in a natural disaster and being murdered,
Who said I do? I'm only asking for some constructive criticism from people who criticise the measures proposed by British police. I really don't see what's the big deal. If the police may have the right to search your house and browse through your banking history, why shouldn't it have the right to decrypt your files? Obstructing this decryption by withholding the key is like obstructing the search of your house. Granted, I can imagine abuse: that's why we should have independent judges controlling what police does.
Anyway, you're an A/C but the only person who delivered a sane response to my post. Depressing...