Migration of individual animals and species due to changes in the climate isn't a new thing. The earth is not static, it evolves and has cycles, so it's a long shot (not to say junk science) to claim it corroborates theories on a specific cause of those climate changes.
It's still moderately interesting but how come this is considered a bigger science story than this?
Isn't it time we all realize that outsourcing is mostly a buzzword? For sure it's a buzzword that cost people their jobs but what is new about that? "Synergies" anyone? (The buzzword which cost me my job). It's the same old PHB bullshit and costs the shareholders losses in the long term.
The PHB eagerness for outsourcing has already begun to bite their ass and the tide is slowly turning into a more balanced view of the real cost of outsourcing for the company. Companies with PHB's are grossly inefficient anyway and doomed in the end no matter what (just because it has "worked" for 50 years doesn't meant it will do so for 50 more).
Just another small bump in the development of the truly global economy. More and more people realize that the PHB's are the problem, as an alternative to PHB's look at the way SAS.com works http://www.sas.com/corporate/worklife/.
Interesting, but I still think it would be considered vote-rigging and thus illegal. Then again it probably has to be significant/widespread before anyone takes legal action - I'm sure that if 25% of the voters "exhanged votes" it would become a hot potato in the media and a discussion on legality would appear. Then again I don't think 25% of the voters are stupid enough to actually do this without an absolute certainty that whoever they traded with keeps their promise, and the only way to do that is to break the "sanctity" of voting privacy (at this point it is definetly illegal).
It's not an indication of intelligence at all (haha, but seriously it isn't).
It is an indication of her (lack of) knowledge about mars, human spaceflight, and "current" news regarding the same topics.
I have no idea if she's democrat, republican or independent so I claim objectivity! I'm pretty sure she got voted in on other topics than space exploration though (sincerely hope so):)
Damned right, I've always failed to see any reason why these "initiatives" wont get grossly abused. How can any of the participants know that the deal is honoured? And please do not answer "trust in human dignity" etc. because that is not knowing.
And how does these schemes deal with individual votes not having the same impact in different states? I can imagine 1 Kerry being worth 2.3 Naders etc.
On the other hand I think this kind of vote trading would be highly illegal in europe for the same reasons and might be so in the US as well. So maybe all these people are achieving (at least if they get popular) is to get the election judged fraudulent by the OSCE? Or another intervention by the courts on behalf of the top two? Or maybe this time it will be the FBI?
And can someone please explain how this does anything at all for election reform? The electoral college doesn't care who's third most popular in the different states, heck they (most of them anyway) don't even care who's second most popular!
You're not overlooking it, they don't. Know the feeling far too well:S as an extremely long shot you might find it if you can navigate straight to it using the back button (at least this works in Mozilla, but you need that unbroken page/tab history otherwise I'm not too sure it will work but you could still try any History you have).
And yes making the title in your Recent Sumbissions part a link to your proposed story seems like an easy fix they should implement (I'm fairly new here and not sure exactly where one would suggest such a thing) but I doubt they'll do it (increased complexity with no real gain for them) and we might as well save ourselves the effort.
Sorry my apologies, I either misread you or posted to the wrong parent (probably the first).
I agree with you and it's good to see the story getting at least some circulation out there (I live in Norway and we got our share of fallout as well). As far as I am concerned this story is just yet another example of how clueless general media is (and how easy it is to become clueless because of them). Btw Zbigniew's paper and pebble reactors has made me change from being anti to pro nuclear.
I don't think it got accepted by anyone else either. Slashdot seems to choose a bit strangely when it comes to news. From the topic we're in right now (the "nothing new news" variety) it would be tempting to jump at a conclusion but I'll give the editors the benefit of the doubt that they're not complete morons, after all there is good stuff on this site too.
Anyway, do what I did and publish the story yourself as a journal entry. Then link to it as your slashdot homepage or in your sig and if anyone gets the story accepted later you can always post a "meta first post". A lot less people will see it but at least it's there.
Amen to that, any company (or individual, or government department) really serious about security practices physical seperation (when possible) with a strictly controlled, non-constant, individual data transfer across the physical gap (ie. no network interconnection, even for a limited amount of time) in addition to using all "ordinary" security measures. Not too many companies so far but I've seen some do it.
However most governmental systems seem to not do this well enough or be able to... North Korea (or any other cybercombatant) wont hack personal webpages or the mom'n'pop shop, they'll hack the power distribution grid, big corporate databases to introduce fiscal instability (this seems to be the weakest link as physically seperating it defeats its purpose and is basically the same method of operation as Osama Bin Laden but by different means; a "quick way" to manipulate markets for enormous gains), gridlock choice network areas (routers, DNS, DDoS) and similar unless they're just snooping.
The North Korean "crackers" are probably closer to scriptkiddies though, but it's not something one wants to underestimate (some kiddies learn).
Taking photographs of demonstrators is an intimidation tactic
I might have read you wrong but a statement like that puts you right in the middle of the small groups of people who don't think any system (usually exempt your/their own) should be able to protect themselves. They feign not to realize (or comprehend) that the state does so at the behest of most of us (you might want to call us "them" or something else more omnious sounding suiting your worldview, we're the majority).
In case you don't know it taking pictures of police officers (undercover or not) is a typical method of violent fringe groups in europe (communists, nazis and other types of facists) as well as organised crime (overlapping categories but I doubt you'll agree to that, at least said groups certainly dont).
Sure it's intimidating but it's a lot better than the "shoot-on-sight" alternative the groups being monitored usually end up advocating. Get real, they (and possibly you) are not convincing anyone otherwise but the most feebleminded and luckily for the rest of us those end up being a disadvantage to the "causes".
Police in europe also take pictures of already known persons and whoever seems to act as leaders and instigators in larger demonstrations held on less controvercial topics for information/intelligence gathering and because most of these demonstrations are usually exploited by the fringe groups for networking, legitamacy and recruitment (all of which are very well suited by a demonstrations which usually by it's nature comprises of people willing to abandon individuality for at least the duration of the demonstration).
but those children born the old-fashioned way are likely going to be disadvantaged
Maybe but maybe not, it might be more likely that they will be treasured for their inherent genetic variety, not to speak of their uniqueness and "purity". Gentic variety is one of the priceless treasures of this world and keeping it all in a tube decreases the net variety over time as it is static and not free to evolve naturally. Prized for their value as objects of knowledge as the genetically "streamlined" suffer a boomerang of (at this point) incomprehensible diseases etc. caused by the human hubris in believing they figured out complex, million years old, self-engineering code by looking at only the first few layers of complexity and interdependence in genes. It's not even a strech of the imagination (if one believes genetic engineering will become massively popular) that the "purebloods" will become the ruling class.
As a thought experiment compare genetic monoculture to operating system monoculture... single point of failure anyone?
Remember that the human brain (and more importantly what goes on inside it) is much more important to human society than someone being able to have no (normal) diseases, live to 250 as a pleasureseeking consumer, while being able to run at 60 kmph.
Or maybe, in a different scenario, science discovers the complex interdependency of the genetic code to a large enough extent that it becomes painfully obvious that there really isn't that much one can change radically without paying for it in some other part of the code...
And all this begs the belief that we really are nothing but biological machines, something science is ill fit to confirm or deny unless in 35600 they finally find that they cannot possibly explain the ghost after all (GiTS reference) due to it not having an empirical nature.
You know what? If certain groups of christians hadn't cried wolf about 666 with regular intervals all my life (and they surely didn't start when I was born) I might be inclined to say "sure, that seems similar enough". But since you (as usual) happily quote your favourite snippets from a book that almost didn't get included in the bible in the first place, effectively dooming yourself (if you believe in the validity of said book) to damnation by breaking what is explicitly stated in said book (if you dont get what I'm talking about try reading it all and pay special attention at the end) I'll just say "no way", ignore it and put my faith in God directly and not books, organisations, people, or false idols (for example the notion of Jesus as god).
And while I'm on a rant what kind of faith has a god pittyful enough to have the followers try to scare people into belief? No thank you, that's not my God.
Condescending, despising rant over, now I'll be able to continue to respect your right to believe whatever you like.
As for RFID it can go fuck itself as well. No way it will become the only possibility for purchases (just like credit cards didn't become the only way).
Oh and if anybody made me out to be a atheist/agnostic liberal democrat from reading this they couldn't be more wrong, I'm a very religious, pro Bush individualist with a libertarian sheen. People who think for themselves become complex people and not part of the "plastic dummies mob".
This is very subjective and not intended as a flamebait - vote for what you think is best.
I'm european (and pro Bush) and writing this as Nader surprised me. I though he was a bit more "grass-root" conservative but at least the answers to the questions here shot down that notion (not that I think he or any of the others answered themselves). I imagine he would fit pretty well for all subscribing to a "Michael Moore"-like view of the world, and any europeans voting for radical socialist parties or european "green" parties (which is mostly "reformed" ex-communists imo).
I wouldn't vote for him but it will be interesting to see how many will. He's obviously much further away from the Republicans than the Democrats are, and his retoric reminds me of your garden variety communist. I've allways thought american politics could benefit from a third party but reading some of Naders stuff I'm reconsidering that notion as it only seems to make politics even more of an unintelligent dogfight of "each their own definitions and solutions" rather than pragmatic cooperation and common analysis.
This was probably all no news for the rest of you but I'm stil slightly disappointed and shocked. Sorry if I just stated the obvious:)
AC wrote: were you just advocating the circumvention of a copyright protection mechanism?
No not really, I was trying to point out the ridiculousness of much of (if not all) DRM in the first place:
as long as "something" in the end is visual on a screen, audible through a soundcard/speakers, or any other such combination you can think of, then the DRM will always be fairly easy to circumvent. DRMed text just makes the point even more obvious.
In addition, changing format for personal use is deemed fair use by the law at least where I live (Norway) - ie. I don't mind Microsoft spending lots of money on loosing a legal battle with me:)
Yup you got it. It might sound strange to us because we're in love with computers but paper and post-it notes are actually more efficient in most of these situations. This is partly because both the referring document(s) and the document(s) to find usually are going to be submitted in paper.
Slashdot Mirror
Migration of individual animals and species due to changes in the climate isn't a new thing. The earth is not static, it evolves and has cycles, so it's a long shot (not to say junk science) to claim it corroborates theories on a specific cause of those climate changes.
/. really that broken?
It's still moderately interesting but how come this is considered a bigger science story than this?
Is
Isn't it time we all realize that outsourcing is mostly a buzzword? For sure it's a buzzword that cost people their jobs but what is new about that? "Synergies" anyone? (The buzzword which cost me my job). It's the same old PHB bullshit and costs the shareholders losses in the long term.
The PHB eagerness for outsourcing has already begun to bite their ass and the tide is slowly turning into a more balanced view of the real cost of outsourcing for the company. Companies with PHB's are grossly inefficient anyway and doomed in the end no matter what (just because it has "worked" for 50 years doesn't meant it will do so for 50 more).
Just another small bump in the development of the truly global economy. More and more people realize that the PHB's are the problem, as an alternative to PHB's look at the way SAS.com works http://www.sas.com/corporate/worklife/.
Interesting, but I still think it would be considered vote-rigging and thus illegal. Then again it probably has to be significant/widespread before anyone takes legal action - I'm sure that if 25% of the voters "exhanged votes" it would become a hot potato in the media and a discussion on legality would appear. Then again I don't think 25% of the voters are stupid enough to actually do this without an absolute certainty that whoever they traded with keeps their promise, and the only way to do that is to break the "sanctity" of voting privacy (at this point it is definetly illegal).
It's not an indication of intelligence at all (haha, but seriously it isn't).
:)
It is an indication of her (lack of) knowledge about mars, human spaceflight, and "current" news regarding the same topics.
I have no idea if she's democrat, republican or independent so I claim objectivity! I'm pretty sure she got voted in on other topics than space exploration though (sincerely hope so)
Damned right, I've always failed to see any reason why these "initiatives" wont get grossly abused. How can any of the participants know that the deal is honoured? And please do not answer "trust in human dignity" etc. because that is not knowing.
And how does these schemes deal with individual votes not having the same impact in different states? I can imagine 1 Kerry being worth 2.3 Naders etc.
On the other hand I think this kind of vote trading would be highly illegal in europe for the same reasons and might be so in the US as well. So maybe all these people are achieving (at least if they get popular) is to get the election judged fraudulent by the OSCE? Or another intervention by the courts on behalf of the top two? Or maybe this time it will be the FBI?
And can someone please explain how this does anything at all for election reform? The electoral college doesn't care who's third most popular in the different states, heck they (most of them anyway) don't even care who's second most popular!
You're not overlooking it, they don't. Know the feeling far too well :S as an extremely long shot you might find it if you can navigate straight to it using the back button (at least this works in Mozilla, but you need that unbroken page/tab history otherwise I'm not too sure it will work but you could still try any History you have).
;)
And yes making the title in your Recent Sumbissions part a link to your proposed story seems like an easy fix they should implement (I'm fairly new here and not sure exactly where one would suggest such a thing) but I doubt they'll do it (increased complexity with no real gain for them) and we might as well save ourselves the effort.
Next time you'll copy it before submitting
Sorry my apologies, I either misread you or posted to the wrong parent (probably the first).
I agree with you and it's good to see the story getting at least some circulation out there (I live in Norway and we got our share of fallout as well). As far as I am concerned this story is just yet another example of how clueless general media is (and how easy it is to become clueless because of them). Btw Zbigniew's paper and pebble reactors has made me change from being anti to pro nuclear.
Couldn't agree more (on all you said), and welcome to /. (I see it was your first comment).
I don't think it got accepted by anyone else either. Slashdot seems to choose a bit strangely when it comes to news. From the topic we're in right now (the "nothing new news" variety) it would be tempting to jump at a conclusion but I'll give the editors the benefit of the doubt that they're not complete morons, after all there is good stuff on this site too.
Anyway, do what I did and publish the story yourself as a journal entry. Then link to it as your slashdot homepage or in your sig and if anyone gets the story accepted later you can always post a "meta first post". A lot less people will see it but at least it's there.
You conniving something!
:)
There are almost no trees on Iceland!
Mod parent funny
Aaah...
:)
Thank you very much
Amen to that, any company (or individual, or government department) really serious about security practices physical seperation (when possible) with a strictly controlled, non-constant, individual data transfer across the physical gap (ie. no network interconnection, even for a limited amount of time) in addition to using all "ordinary" security measures. Not too many companies so far but I've seen some do it.
However most governmental systems seem to not do this well enough or be able to... North Korea (or any other cybercombatant) wont hack personal webpages or the mom'n'pop shop, they'll hack the power distribution grid, big corporate databases to introduce fiscal instability (this seems to be the weakest link as physically seperating it defeats its purpose and is basically the same method of operation as Osama Bin Laden but by different means; a "quick way" to manipulate markets for enormous gains), gridlock choice network areas (routers, DNS, DDoS) and similar unless they're just snooping.
The North Korean "crackers" are probably closer to scriptkiddies though, but it's not something one wants to underestimate (some kiddies learn).
Taking photographs of demonstrators is an intimidation tactic
I might have read you wrong but a statement like that puts you right in the middle of the small groups of people who don't think any system (usually exempt your/their own) should be able to protect themselves. They feign not to realize (or comprehend) that the state does so at the behest of most of us (you might want to call us "them" or something else more omnious sounding suiting your worldview, we're the majority).
In case you don't know it taking pictures of police officers (undercover or not) is a typical method of violent fringe groups in europe (communists, nazis and other types of facists) as well as organised crime (overlapping categories but I doubt you'll agree to that, at least said groups certainly dont).
Sure it's intimidating but it's a lot better than the "shoot-on-sight" alternative the groups being monitored usually end up advocating. Get real, they (and possibly you) are not convincing anyone otherwise but the most feebleminded and luckily for the rest of us those end up being a disadvantage to the "causes".
Police in europe also take pictures of already known persons and whoever seems to act as leaders and instigators in larger demonstrations held on less controvercial topics for information/intelligence gathering and because most of these demonstrations are usually exploited by the fringe groups for networking, legitamacy and recruitment (all of which are very well suited by a demonstrations which usually by it's nature comprises of people willing to abandon individuality for at least the duration of the demonstration).
"My mother is a testtube and my father a knife"
l ltext.html
:)
(couldn't find this searching the book at Amazon, it might have been part of a preface, introduction or similar)
The full book legally readable for free here:
http://somaweb.org/w/sub/Brave%20New%20World%20fu
Enjoy!
there are plenty of asocial, poorly paid high iq people
/.'ers (at least me - ok ok I know the IQ part is debatable hehe) :)
hehe you just described almost all
As for GM foods being prefectly harmless that depends on point of view of what harmless entails.
but those children born the old-fashioned way are likely going to be disadvantaged
Maybe but maybe not, it might be more likely that they will be treasured for their inherent genetic variety, not to speak of their uniqueness and "purity". Gentic variety is one of the priceless treasures of this world and keeping it all in a tube decreases the net variety over time as it is static and not free to evolve naturally. Prized for their value as objects of knowledge as the genetically "streamlined" suffer a boomerang of (at this point) incomprehensible diseases etc. caused by the human hubris in believing they figured out complex, million years old, self-engineering code by looking at only the first few layers of complexity and interdependence in genes. It's not even a strech of the imagination (if one believes genetic engineering will become massively popular) that the "purebloods" will become the ruling class.
As a thought experiment compare genetic monoculture to operating system monoculture... single point of failure anyone?
Remember that the human brain (and more importantly what goes on inside it) is much more important to human society than someone being able to have no (normal) diseases, live to 250 as a pleasureseeking consumer, while being able to run at 60 kmph.
Or maybe, in a different scenario, science discovers the complex interdependency of the genetic code to a large enough extent that it becomes painfully obvious that there really isn't that much one can change radically without paying for it in some other part of the code...
And all this begs the belief that we really are nothing but biological machines, something science is ill fit to confirm or deny unless in 35600 they finally find that they cannot possibly explain the ghost after all (GiTS reference) due to it not having an empirical nature.
Who knows?
Excuse my rant.
You know what? If certain groups of christians hadn't cried wolf about 666 with regular intervals all my life (and they surely didn't start when I was born) I might be inclined to say "sure, that seems similar enough". But since you (as usual) happily quote your favourite snippets from a book that almost didn't get included in the bible in the first place, effectively dooming yourself (if you believe in the validity of said book) to damnation by breaking what is explicitly stated in said book (if you dont get what I'm talking about try reading it all and pay special attention at the end) I'll just say "no way", ignore it and put my faith in God directly and not books, organisations, people, or false idols (for example the notion of Jesus as god).
And while I'm on a rant what kind of faith has a god pittyful enough to have the followers try to scare people into belief? No thank you, that's not my God.
Condescending, despising rant over, now I'll be able to continue to respect your right to believe whatever you like.
As for RFID it can go fuck itself as well. No way it will become the only possibility for purchases (just like credit cards didn't become the only way).
Oh and if anybody made me out to be a atheist/agnostic liberal democrat from reading this they couldn't be more wrong, I'm a very religious, pro Bush individualist with a libertarian sheen. People who think for themselves become complex people and not part of the "plastic dummies mob".
This is very subjective and not intended as a flamebait - vote for what you think is best.
:)
I'm european (and pro Bush) and writing this as Nader surprised me. I though he was a bit more "grass-root" conservative but at least the answers to the questions here shot down that notion (not that I think he or any of the others answered themselves). I imagine he would fit pretty well for all subscribing to a "Michael Moore"-like view of the world, and any europeans voting for radical socialist parties or european "green" parties (which is mostly "reformed" ex-communists imo).
I wouldn't vote for him but it will be interesting to see how many will. He's obviously much further away from the Republicans than the Democrats are, and his retoric reminds me of your garden variety communist. I've allways thought american politics could benefit from a third party but reading some of Naders stuff I'm reconsidering that notion as it only seems to make politics even more of an unintelligent dogfight of "each their own definitions and solutions" rather than pragmatic cooperation and common analysis.
This was probably all no news for the rest of you but I'm stil slightly disappointed and shocked. Sorry if I just stated the obvious
Just got to say completely OT that your sig is brilliant (and I'm not even christian but then again maybe you aren't either) :)
On topic I welcome our new OSS-friendly patent-wielding overlords, the more the better.
AC wrote:
:)
were you just advocating the circumvention of a copyright protection mechanism?
No not really, I was trying to point out the ridiculousness of much of (if not all) DRM in the first place:
as long as "something" in the end is visual on a screen, audible through a soundcard/speakers, or any other such combination you can think of, then the DRM will always be fairly easy to circumvent. DRMed text just makes the point even more obvious.
In addition, changing format for personal use is deemed fair use by the law at least where I live (Norway) - ie. I don't mind Microsoft spending lots of money on loosing a legal battle with me
Afaik all bacteria reproduce asexually (apologies to anyone getting their hopes up) ;)
/.'ers will probably find cloning inside their tummies more fascinating than sex...
Then again most
It's mostly text and can be printed right? And then later (if anyone cares enough to do it) scanned into non-DRM documents...
So much for DRM lol
...symbiotic relationship (yes yes I know, you can all say "I've got a relationship" now)
Nothing to see here folks, move along
And can you inform us of exactly why people oppose pebble reactors? Other than the exaggerated fear factor?
:)
Also you might find this journal entry enlightening
Yup you got it. It might sound strange to us because we're in love with computers but paper and post-it notes are actually more efficient in most of these situations. This is partly because both the referring document(s) and the document(s) to find usually are going to be submitted in paper.