"For the first hundred years of cinema, when images were captured on celluloid and processed photochemically, disregard for black skin and its subtle shadings was inscribed in the technology itself, from how film-stock emulsions and light meters were calibrated, to the models used as standards for adjusting color and tone.'
I don't have the time for this dreck but I find it amusing that the suggestion is film was designed to make white people look good, it must really suck to be black and see conspiracy everywhere.
This is the power of marketing "parental concern", the energy behind a mothers (parents) concern for his/her offspring generally out weighs "common sense" leading to poor choices for her child.
Or women could be made "obsolete" (whatever that means). Because if I have the tech readily available to "artificially create" to produce "Superior Sperm" (whatever that means) then it's not to much of a stretch that I could also use an "artificial womb" or artificial surrogate.
In any case, it's always amusing when people begin to question the way Mother Nature designed things. (yes I am aware that my writing implies a conscious effort on Natures part and clashes with my latter comment.) As though somehow Man could do it better, think about it, we arose from a perfect system only to question it, and there in lies the seed of failure that we sow so often. It is difficult for me to escape the human centric view espoused by the failed religions of Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam, if I have ever escaped it. But like Spinoza, I too believe that Nature (God as Spinoza defined) is perfect (in the sense that it follows the laws that govern), it had to be, that only Man is flawed and therefore interprets Nature as wrong or failed.
While it's nice to have the tech, I have to wonder again about abuses. It seems (to me) nothing can be celebrated without also considering who will be abusing the system.
The 5 yo doesn't grasp the implications of her DNA being documented (if any) and I doubt the mother could even if you explained it to her, she sees only her daughters health. That's why marketing people choose to sell things of a dubious nature using "parental concern".
There was an article earlier about people with the tendency to see the negative in any given situation, that's me to the tee. I have to factor that attitude into all my important decisions.
So am I a genetic worry wart over non-issues or does anyone else feel like "DNA testing" and "obamacare" will some how wind up being abused or as a tool of oppression or segregation?
I'm not saying "don't ever do these things" I just feel beset with the constant feeling that those in power will manipulate and monetize *EVERYTHING*, which leads to the state of "we can't have nice things".
"Stagnant health spending combined with ever rising costs and demand mean the NHS is facing"
Increased demand = stagnant spending?
This plan in the US will be the most expensive and intrusive plan ever put into effect, it's really chilling when you read through it, how ripe it is for abuse can only lead to one conclusion, it was meant to be abused.
I've noticed one news site that only allows log in via "verified" Facebook accounts, if you really care about topics like privacy, security, then you would close your Facebook account.
Which means nothing to me, the students aren't auditing it, you can't be certain that they gave them the *complete* code and you're suggesting that because the *government* has access to the code I shoudl be more trusting?
Is this sort of delusional behavior typical of all Windows users? All it takes is 1 second of thought to see your comments are absurd.
Slashdot Mirror
Can you research something biological that's censored?
it does, apparently you never took basic biology, the bacteria in your poop is more than toxic enough.
There is nothing complicated about it , your comment is nothing more than an ignorant dismissal.
"For the first hundred years of cinema, when images were captured on celluloid and processed photochemically, disregard for black skin and its subtle shadings was inscribed in the technology itself, from how film-stock emulsions and light meters were calibrated, to the models used as standards for adjusting color and tone.'
I don't have the time for this dreck but I find it amusing that the suggestion is film was designed to make white people look good, it must really suck to be black and see conspiracy everywhere.
"this needs serious levels of equipment and expertise"
Not really it can be done at home for far less then you might imagine, getting a human that understands it is only marginally difficult.
A petri dish, incubator, spray bottle and a sample of feces, isolate the bad bugs add to spray bottle go to town at the market.
Censorship never is.
Science has a tendency to correct it's self, creationism does not, you see that's the trap of religion, in order to be valid it must remain unchanged.
Because if you change it.... =)
Only the most duplicitous, violent, brutal, and greedy species won out, and here we are today.
I wonder how today's societies would react to the modern day equivalent of one of these plagues.
Did they factor in other vectors? Birds, weather, insects etc.
"there's nothing we can do to plan or decide which percentage he will be in"
So is the doctor saying don't bother considering the worst and planning for it? Or am I out of context with that assumption.
Because personally I find modern doctors to be little better than technicians, with truncated skill sets.
This is the power of marketing "parental concern", the energy behind a mothers (parents) concern for his/her offspring generally out weighs "common sense" leading to poor choices for her child.
But it's all done in good faith right?
Or women could be made "obsolete" (whatever that means).
Because if I have the tech readily available to "artificially create" to produce "Superior Sperm" (whatever that means) then it's not to much of a stretch that I could also use an "artificial womb" or artificial surrogate.
In any case, it's always amusing when people begin to question the way Mother Nature designed things. (yes I am aware that my writing implies a conscious effort on Natures part and clashes with my latter comment.)
As though somehow Man could do it better, think about it, we arose from a perfect system only to question it, and there in lies the seed of failure that we sow so often.
It is difficult for me to escape the human centric view espoused by the failed religions of Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam, if I have ever escaped it.
But like Spinoza, I too believe that Nature (God as Spinoza defined) is perfect (in the sense that it follows the laws that govern), it had to be, that only Man is flawed and therefore interprets Nature as wrong or failed.
While it's nice to have the tech, I have to wonder again about abuses.
It seems (to me) nothing can be celebrated without also considering who will be abusing the system.
The 5 yo doesn't grasp the implications of her DNA being documented (if any) and I doubt the mother could even if you explained it to her, she sees only her daughters health.
That's why marketing people choose to sell things of a dubious nature using "parental concern".
There was an article earlier about people with the tendency to see the negative in any given situation, that's me to the tee.
I have to factor that attitude into all my important decisions.
So am I a genetic worry wart over non-issues or does anyone else feel like "DNA testing" and "obamacare" will some how wind up being abused or as a tool of oppression or segregation?
I'm not saying "don't ever do these things" I just feel beset with the constant feeling that those in power will manipulate and monetize *EVERYTHING*, which leads to the state of "we can't have nice things".
Grow dope and mine Bitcoins, fuck the feds.
Both here in the US and there in the UK.
"Stagnant health spending combined with ever rising costs and demand mean the NHS is facing"
Increased demand = stagnant spending?
This plan in the US will be the most expensive and intrusive plan ever put into effect, it's really chilling when you read through it, how ripe it is for abuse can only lead to one conclusion, it was meant to be abused.
I've noticed one news site that only allows log in via "verified" Facebook accounts, if you really care about topics like privacy, security, then you would close your Facebook account.
That the NSA gets first crack at zero day should tell us something.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130614/02110223467/microsoft-said-to-give-zero-day-exploits-to-us-government-before-it-patches-them.shtml
"reliable encryption and privacy" can not be attained on a OS that was designed to be penetrated.
Which means nothing to me, the students aren't auditing it, you can't be certain that they gave them the *complete* code and you're suggesting that because the *government* has access to the code I shoudl be more trusting?
Is this sort of delusional behavior typical of all Windows users? All it takes is 1 second of thought to see your comments are absurd.
XP was easier for the consumer.
It's been too long and I can't recall, but I think 2k had NT issues with drivers and various other things.
I mean they all do right?
But XP from the start was just easier to use IMO.
I didn't forget it, it just didn't work with the theme.
That's my point, you get a cookie.
What would that do for me? You actually think anyone can read through that code and catch everything?
Look at the company fronting it, Oracle, is that a name you trust?
You spew someone else's words with a venom such that you appear, for all intent and purpose, to be a little more than a cartoon of a person.
"displaying selected info on a bank of giant monitors"
Yeah I'm familiar with the OPD, this is a giant joke, the only monitors these over payed buffoons will be looking at are their phones.