Keeping websites going after your death is going to be difficult. I doubt whether my own relatives would be up to the task. A website is not like a book, which once printed is preserved for years.
For a website perhaps what is needed is to join a collective dedicated to preserving the sites of its deceased members.
It would be a good thing if all businesses started to worry about 5% lost opportunity. It would mean the end of products and services designed for Microsoft Windows only.
You could only have "true freedom of speech" if all humans gave up for good the idea of trying to repress those who would say something that they don't want heard.
This doesn't just apply to governments, obviously, since you can be just as easily repressed by a corporation through lawsuits, a criminal organisation through a gun or perhaps by a religion through a fanatic (as Theo van Gogh discovered) or through social pressure.
So freedom is not so much something you obtain by right, but something you grant to others through tolerance.
While we are waiting for this true freedom of speech to arrive, anonymous communication will still be needed.
Is the speed of light not somehow involved with this? I.e., a particle with zero rest mass must travel at the speed of light, and a particle with non-zero rest mass must travel at less than the speed of light? Otherwise the equations explode?.
So is saying that neutrinos have non-zero rest mass the same as saying they travel slower than the speed of light?
I wonder if some time in the future will be a major part of the typical interview process. Discussing a person's online presence, web sites, postings on sites like Slashdot, etc.
Somebody with a lack of any online presence that they are willing to identify may then be taken as somebody who either a) never uses the net or never has anything to say b) has a lot to hide.
It applies to the minor situations too. You won't lose at much all in one go, but it will add up over time. Lottery tickets and cigarettes are good examples.
The point of open source is not that you PERSONALLY can look at the source to find problems (although you can if you like).
In theory, yes. But since nobody PERSONALLY has to look at the source, hardly anybody will actually bother. Most just run the Windows binary installer, or "apt-get" and equivalents.
However it doesn't make sense to me to associate those inventions from Arabs, Persians, Ottomans,... to some religion, especially as these articles do not seem to cover other culture and civilization aspects and influences at all.
I agree, it seems the same as describing all European inventions as "Christian". I don't think studying Islam will help much if you want to improve your success as an inventor.
What about deleting copied files? Will the two cancel each other out?
Probably not, but you may be able to serve the jail time for the two offenses concurrently. So you may as well do both and get the second offense for free.
This also applies to any other things you may like to do at the same time, which are likely to carry lower sentences, such as drunk driving, drug dealing, kidnapping, murder, etc.
there are probably already more than enough reports made by nervous bankers to put you away for quite a while.
Surely a long list of transfers isn't enough to prove money laundering? There are plenty of legitimate reasons to transfer money, such as chasing the best interest rates, buying and selling on the stockmarket, taking advantage of exchange rate movements etc.
I reluctantly concede the point about the "proprietary Apple stuff".
However I still think "standard" is a meaningless word, in practice. I'd never use a product or specification just because it was "standard", I'd instead look for something that was widely supported with multiple independent implementations, and preferably available for anyone else to implement without licence fees or documentation costs. The fact that it's Microsoft or Apple's standard, or even an ISO standard, means little to me.
"You are typing on a computer and using a global network all developed from military programs. More modern examples are GPS, various materials, (eg. kevlar, teflon) and a host of stuff that you take for granted everyday."
I don't deny that such spin-offs exist, but I say they could have been developed far more efficiently from a non-military research program which had such things as its primary purpose.
I object to it because there's a genuine shortage of human intelligence and plenty of more pressing or interesting problems that people could be paid to work on.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's very clever. It allows you to create life, the universe and everything without even needing to exist.
For a website perhaps what is needed is to join a collective dedicated to preserving the sites of its deceased members.
It would be a good thing if all businesses started to worry about 5% lost opportunity. It would mean the end of products and services designed for Microsoft Windows only.
This doesn't just apply to governments, obviously, since you can be just as easily repressed by a corporation through lawsuits, a criminal organisation through a gun or perhaps by a religion through a fanatic (as Theo van Gogh discovered) or through social pressure.
So freedom is not so much something you obtain by right, but something you grant to others through tolerance.
While we are waiting for this true freedom of speech to arrive, anonymous communication will still be needed.
So is saying that neutrinos have non-zero rest mass the same as saying they travel slower than the speed of light?
Haven't they ceded sovereignty by joining or becoming assimilated by the USA?
For that matter I don't think any state has successfully withdrawn from USA, suggesting that it's not exactly a voluntary union.
Somebody with a lack of any online presence that they are willing to identify may then be taken as somebody who either a) never uses the net or never has anything to say b) has a lot to hide.
An orgy isn't illegal, as far as I know, even in the USA. So an orgy may be a perfectly reasonable suggestion.
After reading the article, I'm too scared to by real estate in Second Life or some MMORPG online.
It applies to the minor situations too. You won't lose at much all in one go, but it will add up over time. Lottery tickets and cigarettes are good examples.
That's the mistake we all made. It's not fair to laugh at Mr. Tanner.
I'm puzzled at how they manage to get hold of so much money in the first place. I suppose they borrow it.
Great point, and I would take it further, and suggest the well-established companies will rip you off half the time too.
In theory, yes. But since nobody PERSONALLY has to look at the source, hardly anybody will actually bother. Most just run the Windows binary installer, or "apt-get" and equivalents.
I agree, it seems the same as describing all European inventions as "Christian". I don't think studying Islam will help much if you want to improve your success as an inventor.
Probably not, but you may be able to serve the jail time for the two offenses concurrently. So you may as well do both and get the second offense for free.
This also applies to any other things you may like to do at the same time, which are likely to carry lower sentences, such as drunk driving, drug dealing, kidnapping, murder, etc.
Or possibly greater than 7.2 million but less than 720 million.
This implies at least 10 million but less than 100 million.
Note the odd claim in the Wikipedia article about .cat:
ICANN has expressly prohibited the use of the .cat domain for pages about cats, unless they are written in Catalan or concerning Catalan culture.
Surely a long list of transfers isn't enough to prove money laundering? There are plenty of legitimate reasons to transfer money, such as chasing the best interest rates, buying and selling on the stockmarket, taking advantage of exchange rate movements etc.
However I still think "standard" is a meaningless word, in practice. I'd never use a product or specification just because it was "standard", I'd instead look for something that was widely supported with multiple independent implementations, and preferably available for anyone else to implement without licence fees or documentation costs. The fact that it's Microsoft or Apple's standard, or even an ISO standard, means little to me.
At least it's better than that proprietary Apple stuff though eh.
I don't deny that such spin-offs exist, but I say they could have been developed far more efficiently from a non-military research program which had such things as its primary purpose.
I object to it because there's a genuine shortage of human intelligence and plenty of more pressing or interesting problems that people could be paid to work on.
A case in practice is the introduction of software patents in the USA. Has this led to any increase in genuine software research?