and the fact that a 13-year-old is fully literate in the drug culture.
I don't think you can say that he is "fully literate in the drug culture" because he writes about waiting for an ounce of weed and huffing freon. He probably learned much more than that from the drug "education" he received in school.
If the drug component is even to be considered, then the story reads as anti-drug. I'd certainly say that people getting high and going on killing rampages doesn't paint such a positive image of drug use.
Either way, this kid is messed for life now. He will never again trust an authority figure.
Good that he learned his lesson.
There is no reason to tell children to trust teachers or other school officials. I have not found them to be any more trustworthy than the average person, and I think that many others share my sentiment.
There is no reason to trust random people any more than you absolutely have to. You certainly shouldn't teach children to trust people just because of their job.
Neither am I, but upping the power for this sort of study is not going to accurately simulate longer exposure to weaker waves.
Consider the extreme example - a microwave oven damages (or, changes through heating, "damage" is a subjective term) its contents because the microwaves will heat them faster than the heat dissipates. So they get continually hotter up to a point. You can't simulate 5 hours of exposure to 1 watt of microwaves by exposing something to 36 seconds of 500 watts. If you don't believe me, leave a cellphone on for an hour (adjust depending on cellphone power) inside a rat's cage, make sure the rat is OK, and then put it in a microwave oven for 36 seconds. I guarantee that this will cause all sorts of terrible medical problems for the rat.
I sure wish I could find the study. The wired article says: Next, half of the rats were exposed to microwaves similar to those emitted by mobile phones. That tells me nothing. What does "similar" mean? I suspect that it means the same wavelength and a vastly higher power. (considering how seriously the rats were affected) If so, this study isn't much use in gauging the dangers of cellphones. With a cellphone, the power is low enough that the heat it adds to your head dissipates about as fast as it's being added, and you don't increase the temperature of your brain significantly. I wonder how hot the brains of these rats got.
Most of the comments have complained that this boy got a 100% for this story. That's a good observation, and I think that most of us would have failed the assignment if we turned in garbage like that. But I have seen teachers give preferential treatment when grading students who usually do poorly (due to unintelligence or laziness). Perhaps this story was so much better than the average for this student that she felt it warranted a 100%. Either as encouragement, or because she felt it was the best he could do.
The above is not meant as a defense of our school systems, just a possible explanation. I can't imagine someone not failing an essay that poorly written, after about the 3rd grade. The teacher must have felt she had some justification for it.
Now that that's out of the way - my real concern is, what charge was this boy arrested on? I don't see anything in that essay that even remotely seems like a threat. Is it because he's a minor that he was arrested without breaking any law?
5668989 describes a ridiculous scheme of storing dates with the decade digit is hex, with '0-'5 for a-f. I can't conceive of why this would be useful, the patent is probably supposed to be a joke. This also is not even similar to what is described in the news.com article, although that doesn't mean much - how can I trust the article if it doesn't include the most basic information to check up on it (the patent number).
It doesn't mention Bruce Dickens or McDonnell Douglas, but 5806063 does. And it seems to describe the windowing technique from the news.com article.
I'd say it's fairly certain that 5806063 is the correct patent.
And I'd also say, that although I'm used to it, it's disgusting that the news.com story didn't include the patent number. It would have been trivial to do so, and would have been useful for the readers. I can only assume that they purposely didn't do it, to keep people from getting in the habit of checking up on what they are told.
Well, from the perspective of someone who's never voted...
My vote doesn't count. I never like the major candidates. Anyone I wanted to win would have no chance whatsoever of winning. The only effect my vote would have is that they could say they got some tiny fraction of a percentage more of the vote. I consider that to be worthless. I also reject arguments that if everyone thought or didn't think how I feel that things would be somehow different. I can't sway how any substantial portion of people would decide to vote.
Even if I did play the game of selecting the lesser of the two evils, or if someone I did like at least a little bit won, it wouldn't matter. The US government is hopelessly corrupt (yes, many others are far, far worse). I don't see any way to change it, and I'd rather just not think about it (courage to accept the things I cannot change, perhaps). I don't consider it to make any difference which particular politician votes yes on bad laws.
And because of that, it's not worth my effort, or my time. My time is the most valuable thing I have.
If voting became virtually effortless, I'd probably start. And I'm sure you're right, most people would not want someone like me to vote. If there were any chance of it happening, those in power would be terrified of everyone who thinks like I do voting in the same way. (But it's hopeless, we've already given up).
I have no feeling of civic duty. At least I don't think I do. As far as I can recall, I've only heard it used as a reason one should vote. I don't know what the term is supposed to mean (I could guess, but that's worthless) - noone ever told me, I've never had to use it in a sentence, and when I look it on www.dictionary.com, I get this vague definition:
civic duty n : the responsibilities of a citizen [syn: civic responsibility]
So I look up civic responsibility:
civic responsibility n : the responsibilities of a citizen [syn: civic duty]
I don't think you read it too carefully at all: 1211.101 Applicability. The provisions of this part apply to all NASA manned and unmanned space missions...
I could dismiss this whole controversy as a tempest in a teacup if the above passage contained the word "only", so as to read: "The provisions of this part apply only to all NASA manned and unmanned space missions..." However, it does not contain that one little word which would have made such a big difference. If the government was suddenly faced with the accomplished fact of an undeniable overt E.T. visitation, this regulation could therefore, be construed as being applicable to all space missions, NASA or non NASA, whether of terrestrial or extra-terrestrial origin. As it stands, this law is applicable to UFO contact. The meaning would have to be stretched, but the built-in loophole does exist.
I agree with that paragraph. If you read it at all carefully, you would have remembered that paragraph, and said something about it.
Just because they purposely worded the law in a confusing manner doesn't change what they would have been able to do with it.
I know Rob can't personally verify every story before he posts it.
It takes hardly any time to look up a law. This would be the simplest type of story to investigate. He should do at least some research before posting a story.
It is an interesting story, however, because this law did exist for some time. A good example of how the government feels they should treat us.
The abysmal lack of public transportation in most of the USA forces the people to give it's hard-earned dollars to GM, FORD, EXXON, FIRESTONE & companies..
I don't even know how to begin explaining the difference. So I will just repeat myself.
My problem is that the government is forcing people to give money to *one* *specific* *company*. That is far more insidious. For transportation, there are many choices. You can buy your car, your fuel, your tires from a variety of companies. You can even make your own bicycle and ride that around. And the government rarely requires that you travel. It's bad when the government does, but it's not one thousandth as bad as the government requiring that you give money to Microsoft.
My concern is the same as if voting over the net were possible, but would only work with Windows. And that's even an entirely reasonable scenereo - you might have to run a Windows executable, or it might be web based and Windows-only for any of the dozens of reasons existing Windows-only websites exist.
But this wouldn't be profiteering. People would still have a choice of drinking water or finding a store that hasn't raised the prices.
This whole discussion is moot since Coke has said they don't actually have plans to do this. But my main concern would be areas such as public schools where vending machines can have essentially a monopoly on providing drinking water. (if the tapwater is no good, and students are confined to the campus by barbed wire and armed guards).
Whoa. Your government is basically requiring that you give money to Microsoft or do an unreasonably excessive amount of work to avoid that. (substantially more work than the people who have given the money to MS)
Insidious. I can't believe that there isn't a huge public outcry about this. But really, I'm sure that there are ways in which the US does this as well.
Probably everyone in the world who pays taxes gives some portion of it to MS. At least I havn't yet come across a situation where the government is trying to force me to directly give money to MS.
Unfortunately, I think that if the US government started only using open source software, all that would do is give it more free money to have more power and harm its own people more.
However, it may be a subset of a larger category of statements: that any nutritious food will help your short term memory for events that occur after eating.
I suspect that memory was increased not by the nutrition, but by simply eating at all. The subjects had fasted all night. If I'm hungry, I can't think at all - if I'm working late, hunger is always what sends me home.
The story about this study is typical of the way in which the media corrupts medical studies. It's important to completely ignore what the media says about any study, and read it for yourself. If you havn't done that, you're probably getting an incorrect view.
What's sad is that this story wasn't really poor journalism, it was better than average journalism. Despite the headline being an outright lie, and the deceptiveness of much of the story. At least the story did tell the truth in a roundabout sort of way.
If this isn't offtopic... You may also find it interesting that bananas and turkey help your mood, they contain the same chemical as the drug prozac.
Sorry, that's not true.
They do both increase the availability of the neurotransmitter serotonin. Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft are in a class of drug called SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors). The selective means that they are selective for serotonin. Reuptake is essentially the neuron re-absorbing serotonin that it had released. Knowing that, the acronym is self-explanatory.
Bananas and turkey contain relatively high amounts of L-Tryptophan, which the body uses to make serotonin. It used to be possible to buy L-Tryptophan, but it is banned by the FDA to prevent it from competing with the SSRIs and decreasing the profits of the pharmaceutical companies. There is a substitute for it, however, which is probably more effective anyway - 5-HTP (5-Hydroxy-L-Tryptophan). It will be difficult for the FDA to ban 5-HTP because of a 1994 law preventing them from regulating dietary supplements.
BTW, did you know that the entire population of the world could fit comfortably into an area the size of Texas with room to spare?
Hm, let's do a little math. http://www.governor.state.tx.us/Texas/facts_figure s.html says the area of texas is "261,914 square miles." 6*10^9 people/261914 sq miles is 22908 people/sq mile, or 36 people per acre, or 14.5 people per hectare, or 113 m^2 per person. Seems it depends on your opinion of comfort.
Interesting. In all the "evil" Id games, you are on the "good" side, fighting evil. In the Christian game, you're able to play the evil side, and fight goodness.
Why does it seem unlikely that the media will ever mention this the next time they talk about how evil Quake is and how great this Christian game is.
Then, in the course of conversation, she tells me she has Multiple Sclerosis. It doesn't weird me out, so she tells me about an attack she had recently, very candidly, very honestly. Now, however, I'm questioning my attraction to her because I have this mental image of me in my 40's, helping her use the toilet. So what do I do? Here's possibly the most interesting person I've met in the last 5 years.
Don't think so far ahead. No matter how wonderful she seems, you should realize that it's highly unlikely that the relationship will last anywhere near that long.
I think it's typical, it's how I treat geek girls, and it's one of the reasons I like to be around them. You're the first I've heard complain, every other time I have heard a girl talk about how they're considered "just one of the guys", they consider it quite positive.
Don't think of it as being considered an oddity, or a guy in a woman's body. Think of it as being regarded as highly as a male could possibly think of a female.
I think part of it can be compared to a couple who are both doctors. If one comes home, and the spouse asks "How was your day?", would you really want them telling you they would've done a different procedure, or made a different diagnosis?
Rather than just agreeing with me because they don't understand what I'm talking about? Or pretending to listen because they don't even care? Or me having to make up something to talk about that they will care about? I rarely can talk about my day at work with a non-geek girl. Even when it's something simple, it would take too much explaining, and they won't appreciate it.
I like to talk to people, and I don't like repeating conversations. When you've both run out of stories from your life, all that's left is new ones from day to day. It helps to share enough interests that you can continue having good conversations.
Slashdot Mirror
But does anyone else find it scary that these experiences are available to this child?
That he writes about people doing drugs and then going completely insane? It seems like he's just repeating what he was taught in school about drugs.
I don't think you can say that he is "fully literate in the drug culture" because he writes about waiting for an ounce of weed and huffing freon. He probably learned much more than that from the drug "education" he received in school.
If the drug component is even to be considered, then the story reads as anti-drug. I'd certainly say that people getting high and going on killing rampages doesn't paint such a positive image of drug use.
Indeed, most (all? perhaps it's part of the criteria to be considered an inhalant) do.
This is not to say that it's safe to inhale freon. Oxygen deprivation can kill.
Like the AC said, stick to the illegal drugs.
Good that he learned his lesson.
There is no reason to tell children to trust teachers or other school officials. I have not found them to be any more trustworthy than the average person, and I think that many others share my sentiment.
There is no reason to trust random people any more than you absolutely have to. You certainly shouldn't teach children to trust people just because of their job.
Neither am I, but upping the power for this sort of study is not going to accurately simulate longer exposure to weaker waves.
Consider the extreme example - a microwave oven damages (or, changes through heating, "damage" is a subjective term) its contents because the microwaves will heat them faster than the heat dissipates. So they get continually hotter up to a point. You can't simulate 5 hours of exposure to 1 watt of microwaves by exposing something to 36 seconds of 500 watts. If you don't believe me, leave a cellphone on for an hour (adjust depending on cellphone power) inside a rat's cage, make sure the rat is OK, and then put it in a microwave oven for 36 seconds. I guarantee that this will cause all sorts of terrible medical problems for the rat.
I sure wish I could find the study. The wired article says:
Next, half of the rats were exposed to microwaves similar to those emitted by mobile phones.
That tells me nothing. What does "similar" mean? I suspect that it means the same wavelength and a vastly higher power. (considering how seriously the rats were affected) If so, this study isn't much use in gauging the dangers of cellphones. With a cellphone, the power is low enough that the heat it adds to your head dissipates about as fast as it's being added, and you don't increase the temperature of your brain significantly. I wonder how hot the brains of these rats got.
Most of the comments have complained that this boy got a 100% for this story. That's a good observation, and I think that most of us would have failed the assignment if we turned in garbage like that. But I have seen teachers give preferential treatment when grading students who usually do poorly (due to unintelligence or laziness). Perhaps this story was so much better than the average for this student that she felt it warranted a 100%. Either as encouragement, or because she felt it was the best he could do.
The above is not meant as a defense of our school systems, just a possible explanation. I can't imagine someone not failing an essay that poorly written, after about the 3rd grade. The teacher must have felt she had some justification for it.
Now that that's out of the way - my real concern is, what charge was this boy arrested on? I don't see anything in that essay that even remotely seems like a threat. Is it because he's a minor that he was arrested without breaking any law?
You mean off of the planet? Ouch.
That's a great idea. Give a corrupt government agency even *more* money.
5668989 describes a ridiculous scheme of storing dates with the decade digit is hex, with '0-'5 for a-f. I can't conceive of why this would be useful, the patent is probably supposed to be a joke. This also is not even similar to what is described in the news.com article, although that doesn't mean much - how can I trust the article if it doesn't include the most basic information to check up on it (the patent number).
It doesn't mention Bruce Dickens or McDonnell Douglas, but 5806063 does. And it seems to describe the windowing technique from the news.com article.
I'd say it's fairly certain that 5806063 is the correct patent.
And I'd also say, that although I'm used to it, it's disgusting that the news.com story didn't include the patent number. It would have been trivial to do so, and would have been useful for the readers. I can only assume that they purposely didn't do it, to keep people from getting in the habit of checking up on what they are told.
Well, from the perspective of someone who's never voted...
My vote doesn't count. I never like the major candidates. Anyone I wanted to win would have no chance whatsoever of winning. The only effect my vote would have is that they could say they got some tiny fraction of a percentage more of the vote. I consider that to be worthless. I also reject arguments that if everyone thought or didn't think how I feel that things would be somehow different. I can't sway how any substantial portion of people would decide to vote.
Even if I did play the game of selecting the lesser of the two evils, or if someone I did like at least a little bit won, it wouldn't matter. The US government is hopelessly corrupt (yes, many others are far, far worse). I don't see any way to change it, and I'd rather just not think about it (courage to accept the things I cannot change, perhaps). I don't consider it to make any difference which particular politician votes yes on bad laws.
And because of that, it's not worth my effort, or my time. My time is the most valuable thing I have.
If voting became virtually effortless, I'd probably start. And I'm sure you're right, most people would not want someone like me to vote. If there were any chance of it happening, those in power would be terrified of everyone who thinks like I do voting in the same way. (But it's hopeless, we've already given up).
I have no feeling of civic duty. At least I don't think I do. As far as I can recall, I've only heard it used as a reason one should vote. I don't know what the term is supposed to mean (I could guess, but that's worthless) - noone ever told me, I've never had to use it in a sentence, and when I look it on www.dictionary.com, I get this vague definition:
civic duty n : the responsibilities of a citizen [syn: civic responsibility]
So I look up civic responsibility:
civic responsibility n : the responsibilities of a citizen [syn: civic duty]
Sigh. How useful.
1211.101 Applicability. The provisions of this part apply to all NASA manned and unmanned space missions...
I could dismiss this whole controversy as a tempest in a teacup if the above passage contained the word "only", so as to read: "The provisions of this part
apply only to all NASA manned and unmanned space missions..." However, it does not contain that one little word which would have made such a big
difference. If the government was suddenly faced with the accomplished fact of an undeniable overt E.T. visitation, this regulation could therefore, be
construed as being applicable to all space missions, NASA or non NASA, whether of terrestrial or extra-terrestrial origin. As it stands, this law is
applicable to UFO contact. The meaning would have to be stretched, but the built-in loophole does exist.
I agree with that paragraph. If you read it at all carefully, you would have remembered that paragraph, and said something about it.
Just because they purposely worded the law in a confusing manner doesn't change what they would have been able to do with it.
It takes hardly any time to look up a law. This would be the simplest type of story to investigate. He should do at least some research before posting a story.
It is an interesting story, however, because this law did exist for some time. A good example of how the government feels they should treat us.
hard-earned dollars to GM, FORD, EXXON, FIRESTONE & companies..
I don't even know how to begin explaining the difference. So I will just repeat myself.
My problem is that the government is forcing people to give money to *one* *specific* *company*. That is far more insidious. For transportation, there are many choices. You can buy your car, your fuel, your tires from a variety of companies. You can even make your own bicycle and ride that around. And the government rarely requires that you travel. It's bad when the government does, but it's not one thousandth as bad as the government requiring that you give money to Microsoft.
My concern is the same as if voting over the net were possible, but would only work with Windows. And that's even an entirely reasonable scenereo - you might have to run a Windows executable, or it might be web based and Windows-only for any of the dozens of reasons existing Windows-only websites exist.
choice of drinking water or finding a store that hasn't raised the prices.
This whole discussion is moot since Coke has said they don't actually have plans to do this. But my main concern would be areas such as public schools where vending machines can have essentially a monopoly on providing drinking water. (if the tapwater is no good, and students are confined to the campus by barbed wire and armed guards).
Whoa. Your government is basically requiring that you give money to Microsoft or do an unreasonably excessive amount of work to avoid that. (substantially more work than the people who have given the money to MS)
Insidious. I can't believe that there isn't a huge public outcry about this. But really, I'm sure that there are ways in which the US does this as well.
Probably everyone in the world who pays taxes gives some portion of it to MS. At least I havn't yet come across a situation where the government is trying to force me to directly give money to MS.
Unfortunately, I think that if the US government started only using open source software, all that would do is give it more free money to have more power and harm its own people more.
I suspect that memory was increased not by the nutrition, but by simply eating at all. The subjects had fasted all night. If I'm hungry, I can't think at all - if I'm working late, hunger is always what sends me home.
The story about this study is typical of the way in which the media corrupts medical studies. It's important to completely ignore what the media says about any study, and read it for yourself. If you havn't done that, you're probably getting an incorrect view.
What's sad is that this story wasn't really poor journalism, it was better than average journalism. Despite the headline being an outright lie, and the deceptiveness of much of the story. At least the story did tell the truth in a roundabout sort of way.
Sorry, that's not true.
They do both increase the availability of the neurotransmitter serotonin. Prozac, Paxil, and Zoloft are in a class of drug called SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors). The selective means that they are selective for serotonin. Reuptake is essentially the neuron re-absorbing serotonin that it had released. Knowing that, the acronym is self-explanatory.
Bananas and turkey contain relatively high amounts of L-Tryptophan, which the body uses to make serotonin. It used to be possible to buy L-Tryptophan, but it is banned by the FDA to prevent it from competing with the SSRIs and decreasing the profits of the pharmaceutical companies. There is a substitute for it, however, which is probably more effective anyway - 5-HTP (5-Hydroxy-L-Tryptophan). It will be difficult for the FDA to ban 5-HTP because of a 1994 law preventing them from regulating dietary supplements.
Hm, let's do a little math. http://www.governor.state.tx.us/Texas/facts_figure s.html says the area of texas is "261,914 square miles." 6*10^9 people/261914 sq miles is 22908 people/sq mile, or 36 people per acre, or 14.5 people per hectare, or 113 m^2 per person. Seems it depends on your opinion of comfort.
Interesting. In all the "evil" Id games, you are on the "good" side, fighting evil. In the Christian game, you're able to play the evil side, and fight goodness.
Why does it seem unlikely that the media will ever mention this the next time they talk about how evil Quake is and how great this Christian game is.
Don't think so far ahead. No matter how wonderful she seems, you should realize that it's highly unlikely that the relationship will last anywhere near that long.
I think it's typical, it's how I treat geek girls, and it's one of the reasons I like to be around them. You're the first I've heard complain, every other time I have heard a girl talk about how they're considered "just one of the guys", they consider it quite positive.
Don't think of it as being considered an oddity, or a guy in a woman's body. Think of it as being regarded as highly as a male could possibly think of a female.
Rather than just agreeing with me because they don't understand what I'm talking about? Or pretending to listen because they don't even care? Or me having to make up something to talk about that they will care about? I rarely can talk about my day at work with a non-geek girl. Even when it's something simple, it would take too much explaining, and they won't appreciate it.
I like to talk to people, and I don't like repeating conversations. When you've both run out of stories from your life, all that's left is new ones from day to day. It helps to share enough interests that you can continue having good conversations.
female flirtation behavior, which might be endearing to a bi-punk-chick
Excellent, I'll keep that in mind. That's exactly my type of girl.