That sounds good. Those kids are going to be more likely to grow up to be contributing members of society. You must be from a blue area of the country.
Obama and friends have been trying to make Internet service regulated as a utility for several years now, but of course, the Republicans have stopped that so that they can continue to get their bribes.
See, that's the thing. He hasn't made "horribly, horrible policy". He didn't start any unnecessary wars. He didn't significantly take away the rights of regular people. He didn't increase taxes on poor people. He didn't embarrass the US. So, for somebody to say that he has made "horrible, horrible" policy, says that that person is either a racist, or a moron.
People simply don't care. In all honesty, most people's lives aren't interesting or important enough to be worth anything to anybody, anyway. Harvest their data, try to sell them (more) crap they don't need, and that's about it.
You gave a list of problems that don't fall under the umbrella of General Relativity, or do, but are problems that require more computational power than we have right now. General Relativity, is, by and large, understood at this point.
General relativity is very different than particle physics. That's why Einstein chose to ignore it. We have a unified theory of Newtonian physics, just not a theory that takes into account subatomic particles and the way they behave.
No. Climate change and income inequality are easily provable by science. We're talking about grown-up things that are much more difficult, if impossible to prove.
It is certainly new. We weren't able to prove germs existed until we had powerful enough microscopes. We'll need to be able to time travel to prove some of the next hypothesis in physics. I think that there's a significant difference between not having powerful enough equipment to measure things, and not having the ability to travel through time/travel to alternate universes. That's the point. Science may have come to the point where further experimental knowledge is, quite literally, impossible.
General physics is more or less solved. It makes sense. Sure, they could work on turbulence more, but it''s not going to tell us anything else about the nature of reality. It's just going to require more computing power.
Quantum physics isn't reductionist, it's the basic building blocks of our universe, and it doesn't make sense. I don't think it's fair to call it "reductionist" at all.
I don't know what "Division I" is, but quantum physics isn't a game, or something to sell books. It's the nature of our reality, and as we understand it, it doesn't make sense. That's pretty awesome!
Super interesting idea. Article summary missed the point. The point is: We may not be able to determine the nature of the universe as it relates to quantum particles, experimentally. Are the ideas any less valid, if we can't prove them experimentally (by, say, going back in time, or visiting alternate realities)?
Boy, that's got to be something a whole two masochists would want to do. Take the worst part of Linux and run it in Windows! Wow! I think I'd rather put toothpicks under my fingernails.
Slashdot Mirror
That sounds good. Those kids are going to be more likely to grow up to be contributing members of society. You must be from a blue area of the country.
Obama and friends have been trying to make Internet service regulated as a utility for several years now, but of course, the Republicans have stopped that so that they can continue to get their bribes.
Use cash. Shop locally. Quit whining.
See, that's the thing. He hasn't made "horribly, horrible policy". He didn't start any unnecessary wars. He didn't significantly take away the rights of regular people. He didn't increase taxes on poor people. He didn't embarrass the US. So, for somebody to say that he has made "horrible, horrible" policy, says that that person is either a racist, or a moron.
People simply don't care. In all honesty, most people's lives aren't interesting or important enough to be worth anything to anybody, anyway. Harvest their data, try to sell them (more) crap they don't need, and that's about it.
The number of deaths resulting from accidents *far* outweighs the number of "self-defense" uses.
Ooops.
If the police ignore people selling untaxed cigarettes, then all cigarettes will be sold untaxed
You're right. That shouldn't happen. The police should continue to murder people who don't give the government their rightful cut.
Thanks Christ you're not a cop. It sounds like you need to seek some professional help.
So then, an itch or a sneeze should also be a death sentence according to your logic, huh?
Your reasoning for not collecting all of the guns in the US is because people might get hurt while collecting them? That makes no sense, whatsoever.
Hey make-believe armchair cop, how about not pulling your gun out every time you see a black person?
You gave a list of problems that don't fall under the umbrella of General Relativity, or do, but are problems that require more computational power than we have right now. General Relativity, is, by and large, understood at this point.
That's your opinion. I very, VERY rarely mod AC's up, because usually, posting as AC doesn't create quality conversations.
General relativity is very different than particle physics. That's why Einstein chose to ignore it. We have a unified theory of Newtonian physics, just not a theory that takes into account subatomic particles and the way they behave.
No. Climate change and income inequality are easily provable by science. We're talking about grown-up things that are much more difficult, if impossible to prove.
It is certainly new. We weren't able to prove germs existed until we had powerful enough microscopes. We'll need to be able to time travel to prove some of the next hypothesis in physics. I think that there's a significant difference between not having powerful enough equipment to measure things, and not having the ability to travel through time/travel to alternate universes. That's the point. Science may have come to the point where further experimental knowledge is, quite literally, impossible.
General physics is more or less solved. It makes sense. Sure, they could work on turbulence more, but it''s not going to tell us anything else about the nature of reality. It's just going to require more computing power.
Quantum physics isn't reductionist, it's the basic building blocks of our universe, and it doesn't make sense. I don't think it's fair to call it "reductionist" at all.
I don't know what "Division I" is, but quantum physics isn't a game, or something to sell books. It's the nature of our reality, and as we understand it, it doesn't make sense. That's pretty awesome!
Super interesting idea. Article summary missed the point. The point is: We may not be able to determine the nature of the universe as it relates to quantum particles, experimentally. Are the ideas any less valid, if we can't prove them experimentally (by, say, going back in time, or visiting alternate realities)?
You didn't RTFA, obviously. You might want to try that. It's super interesting, and brings up an important point that you obviously missed.
If you're concerned about tracking, just install the Ghostery extension. It takes care of this.
Boy, that's got to be something a whole two masochists would want to do. Take the worst part of Linux and run it in Windows! Wow! I think I'd rather put toothpicks under my fingernails.
... which is essentially a corrupt theocracy. I'd gladly live in a society run by rational ideas over what we have now.
I'm not a cryptographer, so I just have to use common sense. Common sense says that for-profit companies exist to generate income.