Why shouldn't a news organization be able to promote other avenues for viewers to receive or submit content to their service? I see no logical difference between "Visit us at CNN.com" and "Visit our Twitter page at twitter.com/CNN" other than the second is an outside service rather than an internal service. It's not a "hidden advertising" issue if the first is allowed, which AFAICT, it is.
He's a moron because he thought my point was about patent law in the US and not cross pollination. Just look at his post for evidence of that.
I was also plenty wrong on the actual biology of the situation if my original post in this tree was taken as a thought on potatoes in particular, rather than a general statement about GM crops.
You're a moron; it's a point that is relevant (to some degree) because the situation in the US would not exist if it were not so easy for GM and non-GM crops to cross pollinate. There's also a big difference between artificial selection and GM; we don't know all the consequences of genetically altering an organism, but we can basically see them when selecting over generations.
You can't just "not buy it", or "not grow it". There's a big issue here in the states with Monsanto and their GM crops being cross pollinated into smaller, local farmers fields. Monsanto can go to court, then force the farmers to pay for the right to grow those crops that now contain their gene.
While not 100% relevant in and of itself, it emphasizes how easily cross pollination can occur, and how it's a huge problem to plant a GM crop anywhere near a non-GM crop and keep there from being cross contamination
The argument against GMO is that it's not just a natural selection process aided along by humans who see the end result of those genetics before choosing the next step, it's that we're taking genes and modifying them without knowing the exact changes made. We can make many permutations of the potato via GM, and have no idea what they'll end up as. However, if we go and use the traditional methods, we see exactly what we're getting, and know to a greater extent that there aren't unintended consequences.
I think the Monsanto situation could be easily resolved by making them responsible for not allowing the spread of the pollen, rather than making the private farmers responsible for pollen getting into their area.
I went in for an interview there a while ago, and they emphasize that cell phone contracts are such a large portion of their sales, that selling plans takes precedence over anything else.
Google can probably tell without doing that. I can only imagine that they'd just see if Superuser or any of the other root programs were installed on the phone they'd know. They could probably also look for the changes to the phone's config.
I really meant, is there an reason, or is it just an attempt to live with an old paradigm despite a better method being available? I see no benefit to using windows over tabs (and plenty of detriments), especially when all it takes is to drag a tab out to get a window.
One is a global statement about whether or not a Mac can get a virus, while the other is about whether or not a machine is infected. They're two separate issues.
I wouldn't be driving much over 85, if at all, if the limit were that high to be honest. I feel comfortable doing 80-85 on the NJ Turnpike (I95) as-is; setting the speed limit at 85 isn't going to change that.
Slashdot Mirror
I imagine you could use a PayGo contract with this, and any other device...
The "terrorists" then fought for secular freedom for everyone. The terrorists now fight for religious oppression of those who are not Muslim or male.
Why shouldn't a news organization be able to promote other avenues for viewers to receive or submit content to their service? I see no logical difference between "Visit us at CNN.com" and "Visit our Twitter page at twitter.com/CNN" other than the second is an outside service rather than an internal service. It's not a "hidden advertising" issue if the first is allowed, which AFAICT, it is.
I think we should be honest that they're not Nazis, and work to prevent them from becoming the SS.
He's a moron because he thought my point was about patent law in the US and not cross pollination. Just look at his post for evidence of that.
I was also plenty wrong on the actual biology of the situation if my original post in this tree was taken as a thought on potatoes in particular, rather than a general statement about GM crops.
Knowing only after the experiment of planting a bunch out in an open field isn't a very good option.
It's a state university, not an in-state school. It could very well be that he went out of state.
You're a moron; it's a point that is relevant (to some degree) because the situation in the US would not exist if it were not so easy for GM and non-GM crops to cross pollinate. There's also a big difference between artificial selection and GM; we don't know all the consequences of genetically altering an organism, but we can basically see them when selecting over generations.
You can't just "not buy it", or "not grow it". There's a big issue here in the states with Monsanto and their GM crops being cross pollinated into smaller, local farmers fields. Monsanto can go to court, then force the farmers to pay for the right to grow those crops that now contain their gene.
While not 100% relevant in and of itself, it emphasizes how easily cross pollination can occur, and how it's a huge problem to plant a GM crop anywhere near a non-GM crop and keep there from being cross contamination
The argument against GMO is that it's not just a natural selection process aided along by humans who see the end result of those genetics before choosing the next step, it's that we're taking genes and modifying them without knowing the exact changes made. We can make many permutations of the potato via GM, and have no idea what they'll end up as. However, if we go and use the traditional methods, we see exactly what we're getting, and know to a greater extent that there aren't unintended consequences.
I think the Monsanto situation could be easily resolved by making them responsible for not allowing the spread of the pollen, rather than making the private farmers responsible for pollen getting into their area.
Agreed, but who even says this field was within any appreciable distance of a regular potato field (and thus posed any risk of contamination)?
I'd take accurate and on the borderline of plagiarized over horribly inaccurate and original writing.
I went in for an interview there a while ago, and they emphasize that cell phone contracts are such a large portion of their sales, that selling plans takes precedence over anything else.
It's about one of the most successful (monetarily) modern nerds going off the deep end.
Enough stories about CM lately? I think we need more.
Just buy a pivot display. There's tons on Newegg, and you'll get much more vertical space that way than you could even before the 16:10 craze hit.
Google can probably tell without doing that. I can only imagine that they'd just see if Superuser or any of the other root programs were installed on the phone they'd know. They could probably also look for the changes to the phone's config.
Patent and copyright are two very different beasts....
I really meant, is there an reason, or is it just an attempt to live with an old paradigm despite a better method being available? I see no benefit to using windows over tabs (and plenty of detriments), especially when all it takes is to drag a tab out to get a window.
One is a global statement about whether or not a Mac can get a virus, while the other is about whether or not a machine is infected. They're two separate issues.
Just wondering, why do you insist on using new windows instead of tabs?
You left out the " because they think it's worth something." at the end of that last line. Nobody gives a shit about BitCoin.
The level of slashvertisement on these things is seriously getting retarded. Stop publishing this crap!
I wouldn't be driving much over 85, if at all, if the limit were that high to be honest. I feel comfortable doing 80-85 on the NJ Turnpike (I95) as-is; setting the speed limit at 85 isn't going to change that.