Does Le Monde, the Nation, the Telegraph, or Der Spiegel, amongst others, count?
Le Monde is ok, I don't read the Nation, but I wouldn't exactly call Spiegel a high-brow newspaper.
You might be interested in Die Zeit, Frankfurter Allgemeine, or Neue Zürcher Zeitung.
If you think that Le Monde, Le Figaro, or the Nation do not have an open political bias, you are not reading closely. Since you imply that you are European, you obviously know that some papers are "the Establishment" papers, some are the "Communist" papers, some "the Liberal" papers, etc.
Well, of course there are newspapers which are explicitely representing certain positions or even political parties. But you must also notice that there are newspapers, although they carry opinion pieces (which are explicitely marked as such though), try to be as neutral as possible. NZZ and Die Zeit are two of those.
Are you kidding me? European newspapers don't even try to pretend to be objective and non-partisan. Either you are a total dupe that swallows the Kool-Aid because it conveniently fits your worldview, or you are a total ass.
Interesting. Do you actually live in Europe, or are you at least reading some of our newspapers? If not, you're totally uninformed, or you got this opinion by reading one of YOUR newspapers. Anyway, as a European citizen, I can't approve your statement, and rest assured, others won't too.
Again, perhaps you haven't been keeping up with the news...
Muahahahaa, hey guy, you really just made my day. You mean your lie-infested, one-sided, governmental news? Dude, you should really start once to read normal high-brow newspapers, instead of that sensationalist boulevard shit, only caring about high print run.
Or better yet, buy some European newspapers, we got a quite more balanced view of the world (which btw. does not only consist of the US, Afghanistan, Iraq and the Iran!).
Brilliant. Suggesting to beat each other up in order to adjust your moods. But hey, what am I complaining, all this beating must have made your brains so kaputt that you can't even think of better ways of balancing your tempers anymore. I guess the next thing you're posting about is that people should use AV software to protect them from DDOS attacks.
Yeah, you're definitely one of the smart ones. Oh, and don't miss tomorrow's backyard shooting, it's "just for balancing the moods"...
So you're saying that "survival of the fittest" is a valid model, despite your own counterexample of unfit drivers making babies and therefore showing that the concept only applies in extreme cases ?
Yes, because of its application in a situation in which a species or part of a species is under great pressure, it IS a valid model.
Note that I did not say anything about if it should be applied to economy though.
No, what happens is that better adapted beings tend to pass their genes to more offspring than less-well adapted ones, so the genes that make their owner better adapted tend to increase their frequency in the population over time. This in means that the population tends to change over time. Given two separate populations, they may change into different directions, eventually accumulating enough genetic differences that they may be classified as different species.
You seem to forget about punctuated equilibrium. Although continuous mutations happen, it's rather that a certain mutation making somebody better fit its environment is only spread if the species is put under above average pressure.
...(not to mention the resemblance the cutthroat model of marketplace has for "survival of the fittest"; let's not give free-market fundamentalists a chance to use a comparison between their absurd oversimplification of economy to an absurd oversimplification of evolution as ammunition).
And yet, the model of "survival of the fittest" is still valid.
In fact, you are talking about it yourself. See your first paragraph. Yes, we aren't suited to sit during the whole day through, or drive cars, etc. But this is not enough to put us under such pressure that only people who have a specific mutation for being good drivers survive. For such a mutation to take off, a huge part of the population must get killed behind the wheel, such that there are far more people breeding which sport s uch a mutation compared to the amount of people breeding who haven't.
They need to be brought down to their knees begging for forgiveness. Because they only listen to force, it's force we shall give them. Their backs MUST be broken into submission. As I've stated before, victory is the only path to peace.
Yeah, you're so right boy! Let's go kick their ass. Let's break loose a war against the complete middle east, no, even better, against the whole world, just in case some of those fuckers might have escaped. Yes, kill them all!! A third world war is going to bring peace for sure!!!
Sorry, but sometimes I just can't believe it how many people there are who still think that war is the answer! Do they really think that people will calm down when you start to go kill them? Well, maybe yes, but not until they're all dead!
Hate is not produced 'out of the blue'. There are underlying reasons. C'mon, we're on/., a place where engineers and tech savvy people gather. Ask yourself, what would an engineer do? Would an engineer rather fight the symptoms than the cause? And hey, everyone who just said 'symptoms', turn in your geek card at the counter.
Therefore, let's fight the cause. Analyse what made those terrorists so angry. Analyse why they thought that a terror attack would be the best and most direct means to solve their problems. Why did they not take the political route? Maybe because they can't raise their voice because they are overpowered by some major political forces?
Whatever you do, rest assured that starting WWIII is NOT the correct answer to peace on earth!
Interesting. So, according to you, before 9/11 there must have been a terrorist attack at least every 5 years in the US. Oooh, there wasn't? But, but, but, how could this be? I mean, it's because of the Bush administration that there are no more terrorist attacks!!! So how does the fact that there were no frequent attacks before 9/11 fit your argument that it was the Bush administration which saved the US from attacks?
On a side note, where I live, we had no terrorist attacks since decades. And that's in a country with a -- from your point of view -- extremely leftist government (and yes, we're a true democracy).
Oh c'mon, how to understand is this?!! Kids who build their own machines are l33t. Further, h4x0rs are l33t. By the virtue of transitivity, people building their own boxen are l33t h4x0rs.
All's not lost yet! Let's have a look at the directive. First of all, the member states of the EU have to devise new laws on how to implement the directive in their own legislations; the deadline is September 15, 2007. According to article 15.3, the application of the directive can be postponed until March 15, 2009. 16 member states have already declared to postpone according to article 15.3.
Second, regarding access to the data:
"Member States shall adopt measures to ensure that data retained in accordance with this Directive are provided only to the competent national authorities in specific cases and in accordance with national law. The procedures to be followed and the conditions to be fulfilled in order to gain access to retained data in
accordance with necessity and proportionality requirements shall
be defined by each Member State in its national law, subject to the
relevant provisions of European Union law or public international
law, and in particular the ECHR as interpreted by the European
Court of Human Rights."
Further, there are chances that the EU directive may not be compatible with the basic rights granted in some of the member states.
Have you ever thought about how these things are constructed? The antennas are not built to radiate vertically down through the building, but at a slight angle towards the ground. So actually, if you are directly below the tower, there would be very little radiation. Chances are, the people in the building are actually outside the radiation angle since the tower sits on top of their building.
I mean, giving advice like that is fine, but unless you give us more information on how to set it up, you're basically just saying, "I'm so 1337 I know how to do this, and if you don't know how to do this you're not 1337 enough, newb!"
Well, so, because I had an ok day today, I'll let you in in one of the best kept secrets of 1337n3ss: 1337 people use a little-known tool called Google. Actually, I am quite worried now that I've told you.
Sorry to break it to you, Businees Week, but we've got such a system here since pre-2000. Exactly as described!
Though in the early days, you were given a key to open a box at the parking space, which in turn contained the car keys. Nowadays, you are handed out a near-range wireless SmartCard which you use to open the car and activate it (there's some in-car computer). This new system has been implemented at around 2001. And it's nation-wide. (For the curious, it's www.mobility.ch).
Slashdot Mirror
You might be interested in Die Zeit, Frankfurter Allgemeine, or Neue Zürcher Zeitung.
Well, of course there are newspapers which are explicitely representing certain positions or even political parties. But you must also notice that there are newspapers, although they carry opinion pieces (which are explicitely marked as such though), try to be as neutral as possible. NZZ and Die Zeit are two of those.Muahahahaa, hey guy, you really just made my day. You mean your lie-infested, one-sided, governmental news? Dude, you should really start once to read normal high-brow newspapers, instead of that sensationalist boulevard shit, only caring about high print run.
Or better yet, buy some European newspapers, we got a quite more balanced view of the world (which btw. does not only consist of the US, Afghanistan, Iraq and the Iran!).
Yeah, you're definitely one of the smart ones. Oh, and don't miss tomorrow's backyard shooting, it's "just for balancing the moods"...
Note that I did not say anything about if it should be applied to economy though.
Sorry, but sometimes I just can't believe it how many people there are who still think that war is the answer! Do they really think that people will calm down when you start to go kill them? Well, maybe yes, but not until they're all dead!
Hate is not produced 'out of the blue'. There are underlying reasons. C'mon, we're on /., a place where engineers and tech savvy people gather. Ask yourself, what would an engineer do? Would an engineer rather fight the symptoms than the cause? And hey, everyone who just said 'symptoms', turn in your geek card at the counter.
Therefore, let's fight the cause. Analyse what made those terrorists so angry. Analyse why they thought that a terror attack would be the best and most direct means to solve their problems. Why did they not take the political route? Maybe because they can't raise their voice because they are overpowered by some major political forces?
Whatever you do, rest assured that starting WWIII is NOT the correct answer to peace on earth!
On a side note, where I live, we had no terrorist attacks since decades. And that's in a country with a -- from your point of view -- extremely leftist government (and yes, we're a true democracy).
Second, regarding access to the data:
Further, there are chances that the EU directive may not be compatible with the basic rights granted in some of the member states.Though in the early days, you were given a key to open a box at the parking space, which in turn contained the car keys. Nowadays, you are handed out a near-range wireless SmartCard which you use to open the car and activate it (there's some in-car computer). This new system has been implemented at around 2001. And it's nation-wide. (For the curious, it's www.mobility.ch).