The theory that I exist could be proven by meeting me. The scope is relatively small and the theory easily provable (unless you decide to get metaphysical and play at Descartes game, anyway)...
The theory of organic matter being present before planet formation, however, is larger in scope than a single element. The whole universe, which we can't even figure out where it ends, if it ends, if it is expanding, if so, how fast, etc... so it could very well be an ever-widening scope... potentially infinite elements.
IMHO, Your comparison isn't just apples to oranges... it is comparing prokaryotes to automatic transmissions.
I have to agree... with the internet expanding exponentially and more and more collaborative tools being concocted... there is a point at which there becomes just too much information out there...
Sure, you can find something on anything, but the lines of truth blur in the presence of so much information... and valid opinions and ideas become easier to overlook...
I don't know, there are definate upsides, it is easier to communicate with people who I couldn't keep in close touch with, but in the old days, they would have just slipped away... and one day wondered 'I wonder how mister_llah is doing?'... and then they would call me... now... they will know, and won't call, the curiousity is sated....
Plus there is something to be said for face to face conversation and *whoa* physical contact... *shrug*
This could mean good things for the gamer guys... but something tells me that the author (whose photo looks rather mousey)... won't be as lucky as others...
Regardless of that, if we can't observe more than a few, the support a find gives to the theory is so miniscule that it seems ridiculous to mention it.
Anyway, that's all I have to say on the thread (barring any drastically new developments)... cheers:)
Difficult to prove? If it can't be physically manipulated and observed and tested... it can't be proven. Given the scope of the universe... I'd say you can't prove it.
One (or even ten) cases will still lend only weak support, given this aforementioned 'scope of the universe'...
Video games are entertainment, they're not real, there is no clear link between the games and violence enacted in the really real world...
Children should not be purchasing these games, like children should not be purchasing cigarettes... vendors who sell games illegally... should pay fines similar to vendors who sell cigarettes illegally. This makes sense.... and games aren't even a threat to our lives... like obesity, cancer, or criminal violence using assault rifles...
We ban guns that aren't reasonable to be used for sport. Chances are you won't go deer hunting with an AK-47... we ban them because their use is almost implied in their title... *assault* rifles...
Stupid people blame McDonalds for obesity... but they eat there so often, whose fault is it? If you ate burgers all the time at home, you'd get just as fat there.
Marlboro, hell, there is a warning on the box that could only be more obvious if they said "If you smoke this, you will die"......
The fact people smoke knowing it is bad for them... should pretty much imply a waiver of a right to sue.
Eating anything high in fat every day will make you fat. People can control what they eat. If they can't, they should seek counseling, but suing a resturaunt for serving them? People who do this should waive their right to BREATHE.
I got nothing on the ban against assault rifles. I rather agree with it.
I guess when your theories aren't even remotely provable (since we can't exactly fly around the universe and run tests on the present, much less on the past)... you take what you can get, but it just seems to be rather ridiculous to me.
Practical space technology and findings interest me, but stuff like this... not so much. We'll get there, sure, we'll figure it out... and this kind of almost wild speculation, as it seems to me, might make good science fiction, but I'll stick to what we can test and prove.
Don't get me wrong, I dream as much as the next guy, but there is a clear dividing line that should be erected between hard science and speculation (even educated speculation)...
Here's a thought, instead of blaming the companies that make legitemate software, maybe we should blame the vendors who sell it inappropriately, or even... I don't know... the PARENTS?
This is like banning cars because people get into accidents, or banning sitting because people fall out of their chairs.... and this, my friends, is why I am an occasional misanthrope.
Right, so what we have is a possible single case scenario, but there is no evidence of when those aminos may have come from (could have been carried from another location)... there are just so many variables, that I can't see how this would be anything but a very weak connection.
""" The detection supports the widely held theory that many of the molecular building blocks of life were present in the solar system even before planets formed, thus assisting the initial formation of complex organic molecules and the start of life itself. """
Wait, so finding organic molecules around a planet supports this how? Can we tell the age of those particles, or that stellar nursery? If we are to believe a lightning strike can create life from amino acids and things of this nature... why would this support that conclusion in particular?
Maybe I'm missing the point. Perhaps someone can explain things to me?
I realize they did the Peacekeeper Wars, but it all felt so rushed...
It was like the Serenity movie as the "cap" to Firefly... cramming a year or two of plot into a few hours doesn't really feel good as an ending, ya know?
Your suggestions as to what I could have said sound rather, how shall we say... common sense... not helpful... not really proactive.
They wouldn't post their question to Ask Slashdot if they weren't looking for more than just those simple regurgitations that they probably already figured out.
Might as well suggest an interoffice memo warning them.
Those suggestions aren't helpful at all because if you are in IT, you've already figured those ones out.
I made my suggestions because it was unlikely that someone would have posted them. There are other benefits to locking down the registry aside from just protecting their system stray webnasties, such as keeping employees from loading games on their computer and such.
There is nothing dramatic, I used no FUD, so I don't know why you'd be so snide... ah well, like it or leave it, the suggestion is Offtopic'ed, it can't "hurt" anyone.
Well, if we are going to make one to replace Google, we should follow the trend of ridiculous naming (as Yahoo and Google have set the precident)...
Here is a list of a few suggestions: Burglecut [the unlikable mayor from Willow]... fun name, and catchy Flomizzle [nonsense word] Jimbert [a combination of two names, see if you can guess which two]
Slashdot Mirror
The theory that I exist could be proven by meeting me. The scope is relatively small and the theory easily provable (unless you decide to get metaphysical and play at Descartes game, anyway) ...
The theory of organic matter being present before planet formation, however, is larger in scope than a single element. The whole universe, which we can't even figure out where it ends, if it ends, if it is expanding, if so, how fast, etc... so it could very well be an ever-widening scope... potentially infinite elements.
IMHO, Your comparison isn't just apples to oranges... it is comparing prokaryotes to automatic transmissions.
I have to agree... with the internet expanding exponentially and more and more collaborative tools being concocted... there is a point at which there becomes just too much information out there...
... and then they would call me... now... they will know, and won't call, the curiousity is sated....
Sure, you can find something on anything, but the lines of truth blur in the presence of so much information... and valid opinions and ideas become easier to overlook...
I don't know, there are definate upsides, it is easier to communicate with people who I couldn't keep in close touch with, but in the old days, they would have just slipped away... and one day wondered 'I wonder how mister_llah is doing?'
Plus there is something to be said for face to face conversation and *whoa* physical contact... *shrug*
This could mean good things for the gamer guys... but something tells me that the author (whose photo looks rather mousey) ... won't be as lucky as others...
Poor guy!
Regardless of that, if we can't observe more than a few, the support a find gives to the theory is so miniscule that it seems ridiculous to mention it.
... cheers :)
Anyway, that's all I have to say on the thread (barring any drastically new developments)
Difficult to prove? If it can't be physically manipulated and observed and tested... it can't be proven. Given the scope of the universe... I'd say you can't prove it.
One (or even ten) cases will still lend only weak support, given this aforementioned 'scope of the universe'...
Do you see what I am saying?
As relating to bans and sue happy Americans...
... and games aren't even a threat to our lives... like obesity, cancer, or criminal violence using assault rifles...
Video games are entertainment, they're not real, there is no clear link between the games and violence enacted in the really real world...
Children should not be purchasing these games, like children should not be purchasing cigarettes... vendors who sell games illegally... should pay fines similar to vendors who sell cigarettes illegally. This makes sense.
It's ricockulous.
We ban guns that aren't reasonable to be used for sport. Chances are you won't go deer hunting with an AK-47... we ban them because their use is almost implied in their title... *assault* rifles...
...
Stupid people blame McDonalds for obesity... but they eat there so often, whose fault is it? If you ate burgers all the time at home, you'd get just as fat there.
Marlboro, hell, there is a warning on the box that could only be more obvious if they said "If you smoke this, you will die"...
The fact people smoke knowing it is bad for them... should pretty much imply a waiver of a right to sue.
Eating anything high in fat every day will make you fat. People can control what they eat. If they can't, they should seek counseling, but suing a resturaunt for serving them? People who do this should waive their right to BREATHE.
I got nothing on the ban against assault rifles. I rather agree with it.
I guess when your theories aren't even remotely provable (since we can't exactly fly around the universe and run tests on the present, much less on the past)... you take what you can get, but it just seems to be rather ridiculous to me.
Practical space technology and findings interest me, but stuff like this... not so much. We'll get there, sure, we'll figure it out... and this kind of almost wild speculation, as it seems to me, might make good science fiction, but I'll stick to what we can test and prove.
Don't get me wrong, I dream as much as the next guy, but there is a clear dividing line that should be erected between hard science and speculation (even educated speculation)...
Here's a thought, instead of blaming the companies that make legitemate software, maybe we should blame the vendors who sell it inappropriately, or even... I don't know... the PARENTS?
... and this, my friends, is why I am an occasional misanthrope.
This is like banning cars because people get into accidents, or banning sitting because people fall out of their chairs.
Right, but the support is so incredibly weak, why even mention it?
... and many other things.
That's like saying that because some unknown substance glows, it supports that it is radioactive, because other radioactive things glow.
It also supports that it is a lightbulb.
And also that it is hot...
*taps the subject*
Just imagine if you saw the actual spectrograph!
oh... you were inspired.
*runs off*
Right, so what we have is a possible single case scenario, but there is no evidence of when those aminos may have come from (could have been carried from another location) ... there are just so many variables, that I can't see how this would be anything but a very weak connection.
"""
The detection supports the widely held theory that many of the molecular building blocks of life were present in the solar system even before planets formed, thus assisting the initial formation of complex organic molecules and the start of life itself.
"""
Wait, so finding organic molecules around a planet supports this how? Can we tell the age of those particles, or that stellar nursery? If we are to believe a lightning strike can create life from amino acids and things of this nature... why would this support that conclusion in particular?
Maybe I'm missing the point. Perhaps someone can explain things to me?
I find myself strangely hoping that someone gives you some insightful karma for this...
These spectrograms! Artists can infer a lot from them, just look at that fine picture that they extrapolated from the data [for planet forming]
.O.
Since they took care of the latter half of the article, I figure I'll cover for the former.
Here is an ASCII artist's impression of what the organic material might look like, circling that sun-like star!
Evil empires everywhere, the market share clumps, competition lessens!
Darth Seagate.... riiiise!
"Say, Terrence, do you know what my space suit smells like?"
PFFFBBBBLLLT!
I realize they did the Peacekeeper Wars, but it all felt so rushed...
It was like the Serenity movie as the "cap" to Firefly... cramming a year or two of plot into a few hours doesn't really feel good as an ending, ya know?
Your suggestions as to what I could have said sound rather, how shall we say... common sense... not helpful... not really proactive.
They wouldn't post their question to Ask Slashdot if they weren't looking for more than just those simple regurgitations that they probably already figured out.
Might as well suggest an interoffice memo warning them.
Those suggestions aren't helpful at all because if you are in IT, you've already figured those ones out.
I made my suggestions because it was unlikely that someone would have posted them. There are other benefits to locking down the registry aside from just protecting their system stray webnasties, such as keeping employees from loading games on their computer and such.
There is nothing dramatic, I used no FUD, so I don't know why you'd be so snide... ah well, like it or leave it, the suggestion is Offtopic'ed, it can't "hurt" anyone.
Cheers!
I have to say, this is a relief, if it actually happens, there may be hope that Arrested Development, too, may be saved from the fires!
... :/
Too bad it doesn't seem to work for sci-fi (see also: Firefly, Farscape)
The ask slashdot was on web vulnerabilities/phishing attacks.
Some malware/spyware that may be included in a linked to site... these things may need certain rights to modify certain elements of the registry.
I'm assuming you are the mod who modded -1 Overrated... if you really thought I was 'Offtopic', wouldn't that have been the better choice?
Regardless, it is on topic, with regards to the question... since you seem incapable of reading the actual Ask Slashdot question... here it is...
"""
As an IT professional, what efforts should our corporate IT department be making to proactively to eliminate these vulnerabilities?"
"""
As you can see, this would be a PROACTIVE measure... cheers!
Restricting user's access rights to their own machine is an obvious preventative step.
The Windows registry is a powerful tool for controlling what people can do to screw up a machine (sadly it isn't really well documented)...
It isn't a miracle cure, nothing is... but it's a good idea.
Call it Zbbt-achu!
If I had not posted, I would have modded you up, but I'm glad you posted the search.yahoo.com link...
I actually did not know there was a search-only part of Yahoo, when Google starts with their ads I will have to switch to that!
Thanks!
Well, if we are going to make one to replace Google, we should follow the trend of ridiculous naming (as Yahoo and Google have set the precident)...
... fun name, and catchy
Here is a list of a few suggestions:
Burglecut [the unlikable mayor from Willow]
Flomizzle [nonsense word]
Jimbert [a combination of two names, see if you can guess which two]
^_^