So they "may be", which also means "may not be". Yeah, that pretty much covers the possibilities.
And "linked to" not "a known and important cause of". Because linked could even all sorts of things, not just causation -- in that direction. It could mean that cancer causes people to eat ultra-processed food, long before the cancer is detectable.
I wouldn't place any bets on that being how things shake out, ultimately. But "linked to" does include that, and a lot of other things, not just the conclusion people jump to.
Erlich was not apprised of the effects of monoculture. So?
Ehrlich was unaware of basic economics. There's a lot of that going around. After he lost a bet to Julian Simon, he learned some. At least, he learned enough to not put his money where his mouth is.
They weren't able to (or didn't think to) look at discussion of the legislation by the legislators, to discover the intended meaning?
Or by those who provided the bill's language in the first place, if it was the relevant industry or union?
After all, sometimes legislators don't write legislation, they just introduce it.
Which isn't necessarily bad. Well-intended public-spirited people or organizations supply legislators with "model legislation" that is intended to serve the public interest. And some of it is good, rather than to boss or rob one group of people for the material or emotional benefit of another group of people.
Of course it was. Purely to put down a counterrevolutionary rebellion. Stalin shed copious tears over having to do it.
And you notice how abso-fucking-lutely wrong Paul Ehrlich and others like him were about famine in the 20th century? It sure wasn't Fidel Castro and Leonid Brezhnev that kept that particular disaster from happening.
The original statistic cited was, I believe, the number of people deliberately killed by the USSR, Communist China, and a few smaller mass murdering Communist countries. Not wartime deaths. The firebombing of Dresden was done by the Allies, you know.
Nazi mass murders get all the attention, for some reason. It's as though Communism didn't even exist.
And since you mentioned food, there was Stalin's planned famine. That one should count.
When we know how to do it with software, it quits being AI, and starts being called by the name of the specific method of doing that thing.
Usually.
Some years back somebody designed an antenna with a certain characteristic, using a genetic algorithm. (I don't recall the characteristics sought. Omnidirectionality. Effectiveness over a wide range of frequencies. Whatever.) The genetic algorithm generated a bunch of semi-random designs, simulated the performance of each, culled out the worst, then generated a new set of semi-random designs from parts of the survivors to start the cycle over again. When the best design in a generation was good enough, it stopped.
The electrical engineers built an actual antenna according to the best design. It worked very well. And when they studied at the design -- which, if I recall correctly, looked like a randomly twisted paperclip -- they didn't really understand how it worked. (If I don't recall it correctly, the target may have been some sort of electrical circuit -- amplifier, low-pass filter, etc -- and the screwball designs were agglomerations of resistors, capacitors, etc., semi-randomly picked and connected.)
Was that genetic algorithm "AI"? If it could design other things, reliably, that'd be cool. That I haven't heard anything more about it, it might be a "one hit wonder", barely more successful than the Rolamite or the Rovac. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rola...https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rova...
Evolution produced ball-and-socket joints, which work in an obvious way. It also produced wrist and ankle joints, which just look like a jumble of odd-shaped rocks that more or less fit together. But somehow, they work.
Oscar Gordon said that a corpse that's been rotting in the jungle in a "police action" smells just as bad as one rotting in a jungle in a war. Or words to that effect.
The book was good. I'm pretty sure it's been optioned for a movie. Given how "The Martian" turned out, the book may have been optioned even before completion. I have a vague memory of learning that. (IMDB says it's kinda underway: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt68... Has directors (2), anyway.)
The movie would have some action, and a few twists. Should have a kick-ass female lead. Will need someone who can act, is plausibly Middle-Eastern in appearance and play a teenager / very young adult. (I forget which.)
Because some people think there is one thing called "feminism", and if you're opposed to some of the zanier things advanced by some people who are called feminist you are not a feminist and you are an advocate of sexual assault.
I'd hoped that would be clear, but apparently not.
No sure where you get strange ideas like that from, but in any case the argument here is that human beings shouldn't have to put up with being grabbed by the genitalia or otherwise sexually assaulted.
There's the feminism that thinks women should have the same rights as men, that people shouldn't be sexually assaulted. If men can open bank accounts but women can't. that law is bad. Rape is wrong. (Amazingly, people who are not feminists are also oppose to rape. Yes, it's true!.) Things like that.
There's the feminism that thinks society ought to be remade because men have been bad in the past and made society bad.
There's the feminism that thinks that any differences between male and female, of any age, other than the incredibly obvious, are cultural inventions, and ought to be stamped out.
The people holding those last two views overlap so much, maybe they should consider one.
It's possible to be opposed to sexual assault and stupid laws about who can deliver the mail and such, and still not buy into the notion that men and women, except for a few unfortunately necessary biological differences, are exactly the same and that men are awful.
Yeah, that's an exaggeration of most feminists of the latter sort. But feminists who don't differentiate themselves from the lunatics and the merely confused, out of a sense of solidarity or out of fear, diminish the effect of their own efforts.
Wanker. I'd rather have good NHS British dentistry than the holywood style crap in the US. And how's the dentistry in the flyover states, redneck?
While mocking someone for perpetuating an incorrect stereotype, you do exactly the same exact thing.
I don't think you are a very nice person. Or a very thoughtful one.
You are aware that not everyone in the flyover states makes and consumes meth, right? We have indoor plumbing and award-winning symphony orchestras, and other signs of civilization.
But don't feel too bad. You aren't alone.
Many of our own journalists were totally surprised the year two Missouri teams were in the World Series, and they discovered, while visiting St. Louis and Kansas City, those amazing facts, and others like them. And felt compelled to comment on them.
Some of them even traveled the 240 miles between the two by car, and discovered the people in between could form complete sentences.
I don't know whether to be appalled by this post, or applaud it.
After careful calculations, examined and verified by 3 independent accounting firms, I've concluded the correct response is golf clap, non-sarcastically.
Slashdot Mirror
Not. Communists can't even control the prices in their own countries. Take a peek at Venezuela, for instance.
So they "may be", which also means "may not be". Yeah, that pretty much covers the possibilities.
And "linked to" not "a known and important cause of". Because linked could even all sorts of things, not just causation -- in that direction. It could mean that cancer causes people to eat ultra-processed food, long before the cancer is detectable.
I wouldn't place any bets on that being how things shake out, ultimately. But "linked to" does include that, and a lot of other things, not just the conclusion people jump to.
"Tampering" equals "advertising"?
Good to know.
In a command economy, when more people want what you want, it makes it harder to get it.
In a market economy, when more people want what you want, it makes it easier to get.
Eventually. Waiting for the ramp-up can be a drag, sometimes.
But it sure beats the hell out of fighting or pleading to get it. And is even better still than fighting or pleading, and not getting it.
Now, why is it I haven't upgraded to Windows 10? Oh, yeah, stuff like this.
Do you own a cheese-burning stove? Is that why you tried to light it? What's wrong with burning wood? I'm dreadfully confused.
Erlich was not apprised of the effects of monoculture. So?
Ehrlich was unaware of basic economics. There's a lot of that going around. After he lost a bet to Julian Simon, he learned some. At least, he learned enough to not put his money where his mouth is.
Capitalists are killing 12K / year.
(See what I mean?)
A source for this claim?
They weren't able to (or didn't think to) look at discussion of the legislation by the legislators, to discover the intended meaning?
Or by those who provided the bill's language in the first place, if it was the relevant industry or union?
After all, sometimes legislators don't write legislation, they just introduce it.
Which isn't necessarily bad. Well-intended public-spirited people or organizations supply legislators with "model legislation" that is intended to serve the public interest. And some of it is good, rather than to boss or rob one group of people for the material or emotional benefit of another group of people.
So, if carbon emissions are reduced or somehow mitigated, global warming will be reversed, and the land area of those island groups will get smaller?
Science Barbie says: "Science is hard."
They weren't able to (or didn't think to) look at discussion of the legislation by the legislators, to discover the intended meaning?
Or by those who provided the bill's language in the first place, if it was the relevant industry or union?
After all, sometimes legislators don't write legislation, they just introduce it. Which isn't necessarily bad.
Well-intended public-spirited people or organizations do supply legislators with model legislation that is intended to serve the public interest.
And some of it actually does, rather than boss or rob one group of people for the material or emotional benefit of another group of people.
Of course it was. Purely to put down a counterrevolutionary rebellion. Stalin shed copious tears over having to do it.
And you notice how abso-fucking-lutely wrong Paul Ehrlich and others like him were about famine in the 20th century? It sure wasn't Fidel Castro and Leonid Brezhnev that kept that particular disaster from happening.
Redundancy is always good
Redundancy is always good
The original statistic cited was, I believe, the number of people deliberately killed by the USSR, Communist China, and a few smaller mass murdering Communist countries. Not wartime deaths. The firebombing of Dresden was done by the Allies, you know.
Nazi mass murders get all the attention, for some reason. It's as though Communism didn't even exist.
And since you mentioned food, there was Stalin's planned famine. That one should count.
But not North Korea's. That was unplanned.
Mobile goalpost. Exactly.
When we know how to do it with software, it quits being AI, and starts being called by the name of the specific method of doing that thing.
Usually.
Some years back somebody designed an antenna with a certain characteristic, using a genetic algorithm. (I don't recall the characteristics sought. Omnidirectionality. Effectiveness over a wide range of frequencies. Whatever.) The genetic algorithm generated a bunch of semi-random designs, simulated the performance of each, culled out the worst, then generated a new set of semi-random designs from parts of the survivors to start the cycle over again. When the best design in a generation was good enough, it stopped.
The electrical engineers built an actual antenna according to the best design. It worked very well. And when they studied at the design -- which, if I recall correctly, looked like a randomly twisted paperclip -- they didn't really understand how it worked. (If I don't recall it correctly, the target may have been some sort of electrical circuit -- amplifier, low-pass filter, etc -- and the screwball designs were agglomerations of resistors, capacitors, etc., semi-randomly picked and connected.)
Was that genetic algorithm "AI"? If it could design other things, reliably, that'd be cool. That I haven't heard anything more about it, it might be a "one hit wonder", barely more successful than the Rolamite or the Rovac. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rola... https://duckduckgo.com/?q=rova...
Evolution produced ball-and-socket joints, which work in an obvious way. It also produced wrist and ankle joints, which just look like a jumble of odd-shaped rocks that more or less fit together. But somehow, they work.
This is good news, because 10,000 people will no longer be exploited by Foxconn. Right? That is how it works, no?
Long ways until they reach 100 million (and counting)
If you're going to bring in facts -- worse yet, numbers -- I'm leaving. They have no place in online discussions.
To extend the alliteration, that should have been "hydrogen bombs".
Oscar Gordon said that a corpse that's been rotting in the jungle in a "police action" smells just as bad as one rotting in a jungle in a war. Or words to that effect.
This will likely get you to the actual line. http://duckduckgo.com/?q=glory...
The book was good. I'm pretty sure it's been optioned for a movie. Given how "The Martian" turned out, the book may have been optioned even before completion. I have a vague memory of learning that. (IMDB says it's kinda underway: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt68... Has directors (2), anyway.)
The movie would have some action, and a few twists. Should have a kick-ass female lead. Will need someone who can act, is plausibly Middle-Eastern in appearance and play a teenager / very young adult. (I forget which.)
Good book. Trailers for the movie look good too. And I hear the director is pretty good.
Because some people think there is one thing called "feminism", and if you're opposed to some of the zanier things advanced by some people who are called feminist you are not a feminist and you are an advocate of sexual assault.
I'd hoped that would be clear, but apparently not.
There are two kinds of feminism. At least.
No sure where you get strange ideas like that from, but in any case the argument here is that human beings shouldn't have to put up with being grabbed by the genitalia or otherwise sexually assaulted.
There's the feminism that thinks women should have the same rights as men, that people shouldn't be sexually assaulted. If men can open bank accounts but women can't. that law is bad. Rape is wrong. (Amazingly, people who are not feminists are also oppose to rape. Yes, it's true!.) Things like that.
There's the feminism that thinks society ought to be remade because men have been bad in the past and made society bad.
There's the feminism that thinks that any differences between male and female, of any age, other than the incredibly obvious, are cultural inventions, and ought to be stamped out.
The people holding those last two views overlap so much, maybe they should consider one.
It's possible to be opposed to sexual assault and stupid laws about who can deliver the mail and such, and still not buy into the notion that men and women, except for a few unfortunately necessary biological differences, are exactly the same and that men are awful.
Yeah, that's an exaggeration of most feminists of the latter sort. But feminists who don't differentiate themselves from the lunatics and the merely confused, out of a sense of solidarity or out of fear, diminish the effect of their own efforts.
Wanker. I'd rather have good NHS British dentistry than the holywood style crap in the US. And how's the dentistry in the flyover states, redneck?
While mocking someone for perpetuating an incorrect stereotype, you do exactly the same exact thing.
I don't think you are a very nice person. Or a very thoughtful one.
You are aware that not everyone in the flyover states makes and consumes meth, right? We have indoor plumbing and award-winning symphony orchestras, and other signs of civilization.
But don't feel too bad. You aren't alone.
Many of our own journalists were totally surprised the year two Missouri teams were in the World Series, and they discovered, while visiting St. Louis and Kansas City, those amazing facts, and others like them. And felt compelled to comment on them.
Some of them even traveled the 240 miles between the two by car, and discovered the people in between could form complete sentences.
I'm thinking it was not the code.
I'm thinking it was an authoritarian regime not being entirely good at oppression.
Oh, well. As they say, you can't make an omelet without breaking heads.
I don't know whether to be appalled by this post, or applaud it.
After careful calculations, examined and verified by 3 independent accounting firms, I've concluded the correct response is golf clap, non-sarcastically.